# Skylake-X/Kaby Lake-X Combined Discussion



## schoolofmonkey

Instead of chatting in other threads like Broadwell-E, I thought I'd start a thread where everything can be put.

Myself I'm looking at getting the 7820x, still undecided on motherboard though.
I was looking at the Strix, but the current reviews aren't promising, same with the Prime Deluxe.

And yet MSI are leading the pack with the Carbon Pro's benchmark performances.

A few reviews:
7900x
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/intel-core-i9-7900x-processor-review,1.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-7900x-skylake-x,5092.html




https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/intel_i9_7900x_skylake-x_review/1

Motherboards:
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/asus-x299-prime-deluxe-review,1.html
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/msi-x299-gaming-pro-carbon-ac-review,1.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/asus-prime-x299-deluxe-motherboard,5095.html

The one thing I love seeing is how the 7800x, 7820x and 7900x are killing the current top tier Ryzen 7 CPU's.

But it seems everyone agrees that Intel did rush this launch a little..


----------



## Jbravo33

Preordered 7740x and going with rampage apex when that's avaialable. Every intention on upgrading at least to the 12. a lot of people saying it was rushed due to ryzen. But I'm not so sure this pic is from a year and a half ago. Seems to be right on time. Other thread got cleaned ?


----------



## Artah

I wanted to preorder a CPU but none of the motherboards I'm considering is going to be released yet. I'm looking at EVGA dark and RVIE or Apex.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I wanted to preorder a CPU but none of the motherboards I'm considering is going to be released yet. I'm looking at EVGA dark and RVIE or Apex.


Same thing I'm running into. I want the RVIE or the Apex. I hate when I'm willing to hand my money over, but have to wait for availability.


----------



## TahoeDust

Pre-ordered a 7820x and Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 7. Hopefully they will be here by next Wednesday. The rest of the build is in the sig rig.


----------



## Jbravo33

7900x review OC3D aka tiny tommy L


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> 7900x review OC3D aka tiny tommy L


I also wanted a 7980xe but I was going to temp get a 7900x


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Kaby Lake X i7-7740X DELIDDED Benchmarks


----------



## tistou77

Maybe a 12 cores for me


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Maybe a 12 cores for me


I'm looking for longevity and reliability.
Been through 3 systems in at months where my wife is still on her 4790k bought from release.

The 5820k/MSI Gaming 7 I bought was flaky and a poor overclocker.
The 6900k/Strix kept killing itself and the 7700k I have now just doesn't have the grunt I'm used to since running HEDT machine..









I had planned on keeping the 6900k but when 3 CPU's and 3 Strix's died one after another I gave up on x99.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I wanted to preorder a CPU but none of the motherboards I'm considering is going to be released yet. I'm looking at EVGA dark and RVIE or Apex.


These are my two choices also with a i9-7980ex. I am very happy with what I have now so I don't mind wIting.


----------



## TheFallenDeity

Very happy to join the X299 masterrace ?

I ordered the i7-7820X and ASRock X299 Taichi. Should get it by next wed-thu.


----------



## GXTCHA

Most likely will be going with the 7820x or 7900x and an R6 APEX.

Kind of pissed the APEX won't have a 10G LAN built in but whatever. The R6 EXTREME is a bit flashy/gimmicky for me.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Most likely will be going with the 7820x or 7900x and an R6 APEX.
> 
> Kind of pissed the APEX won't have a 10G LAN built in but whatever. The R6 EXTREME is a bit flashy/gimmicky for me.


that's my beef with apex the 10Gb LAN. On one hand I can overclock higher with Apex and in another long term I can have 10Gb LAN.


----------



## Gadfly

Any reviews on the ROG board yet?


----------



## SpeedyIV

I am liking the Prime X299-Deluxe which has Dual Gigabit LAN ports, 802.11AD WIFI, and the Thunderbolt EX-III card, (though I had dismal results with that card in my X99-Deluxe II), but that baby is almost $500. I have not seen pricing on the ROG version yet.

As for CPU, I would go with the 7900X as I refuse to buy another 28-lane CPU. So an upgrade to the X299 platform means $500+ for a MOBO, $1K for the CPU, and then $400 for G.Skill F4-3200C14Q-32GTZ or similar. Plus a new AIO or custom loop to cool the beast. So probably a $2.5K to $3k build by the time accessories are added.

There are 4 things holding me back (actually 5 if you consider money).

1 - Having to buy a 10-core CPU to get 44 PCIe lanes.
2 - Intel VROC non-sense. I am NOT going to buy Intel SSDs to set up a RAID array.
3 - TIM instead of Solder on the IHS.
4 - Thread-Ripper, though the jury is WAY out on that one.

WHY does Intel not do everything the way I think it should be?


----------



## Gadfly

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> I am liking the Prime X299-Deluxe which has Dual Gigabit LAN ports, 802.11AD WIFI, and the Thunderbolt EX-III card, (though I had dismal results with that card in my X99-Deluxe II), but that baby is almost $500. I have not seen pricing on the ROG version yet.
> 
> As for CPU, I would go with the 7900X as I refuse to buy another 28-lane CPU. So an upgrade to the X299 platform means $500+ for a MOBO, $1K for the CPU, and then $400 for G.Skill F4-3200C14Q-32GTZ or similar. Plus a new AIO or custom loop to cool the beast. So probably a $2.5K to $3k build by the time accessories are added.
> 
> There are 4 things holding me back (actually 5 if you consider money).
> 
> 1 - Having to buy a 10-core CPU to get 44 PCIe lanes.
> 2 - Intel VROC non-sense. I am NOT going to buy Intel SSDs to set up a RAID array.
> 3 - TIM instead of Solder on the IHS.
> 4 - Thread-Ripper, though the jury is WAY out on that one.
> 
> WHY does Intel not do everything the way I think it should be?


I hear you.

but then again, even the 8 core CPU is a nice middle ground. It has more PCI lanes than an 1800x, quad channel memory, and I with a delid and even just an AIO it looks like they reach upto 5ghz.


----------



## schoolofmonkey




----------



## hotrod717

Anyone have a ETA on Asus x299 Apex?? I really hate the idea buying a chip and not having a mobo available to use it in. Also, this new release has killed any resale value on a lot of the x chips.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> that's my beef with apex the 10Gb LAN. On one hand I can overclock higher with Apex and in another long term I can have 10Gb LAN.


They come out in August / July respectively I think.


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> They come out in August / July respectively I think.


August? Where did you read that?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> Anyone have a ETA on Asus x299 Apex?? I really hate the idea buying a chip and not having a mobo available to use it in. Also, this new release has killed any resale value on a lot of the x chips.


http://www.overclock.net/t/1510328/asus-x99-motherboard-series-official-support-thread-north-american-users-only/15500_100#post_26184076


----------



## icecpu

Need help picking a cpu
Will 7740X bottleneck m2 samsung 960 pro? I only use 1 graphic card and m2 for OS. Will I still get max speed for m2 960 Pro? Or I have to get cpu with higher pci express lane?


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hotrod717*
> 
> Anyone have a ETA on Asus x299 Apex?? I really hate the idea buying a chip and not having a mobo available to use it in. Also, this new release has killed any resale value on a lot of the x chips.


ASUS rep told me @ a vendor show they would be released mid July for both APEX & EXTREME.

That was in May so things may have changed since then.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> ASUS rep told me @ a vendor show they would be released mid July for both APEX & EXTREME.
> 
> That was in May so things may have changed since then.


This actually stopped me from buying a chip and will hold off for now. I don't want to buy a temp motherboard knowing that I will just sell it off.


----------



## Falkentyne

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *icecpu*
> 
> Need help picking a cpu
> Will 7740X bottleneck m2 samsung 960 pro? I only use 1 graphic card and m2 for OS. Will I still get max speed for m2 960 Pro? Or I have to get cpu with higher pci express lane?


Whoa there.
Stop worrying about lanes.
Needing more than 28 lanes is only for people that want to use mulitple video cards. This issue doesn't affect people using single video cards.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Falkentyne*
> 
> Whoa there.
> Stop worrying about lanes.
> Needing more than 28 lanes is only for people that want to use mulitple video cards. This issue doesn't affect people using single video cards.


Besides if you do run two video cards at x8 each that's only 16 total and the loss is very low if at all depending on resolution.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> This actually stopped me from buying a chip and will hold off for now. I don't want to buy a temp motherboard knowing that I will just sell it off.


Same boat I'm in. I've no interest in buying another board right now. The extra time will be nice to see what kind of OC's people are getting from retail chips and how much of an impact a delid has.


----------



## Jpmboy

Only thing that's gonna "blow my skirt up" is significantly more cores.. like 18.


----------



## yoshpop

Newegg shipped my 7820x Friday, so that will arrive Tuesday. Unfortunately my Gigabyte Gaming 3 won't ship untill tomorrow, so I'll be waiting till either Wednesday or Thursday to fire it up. Very excited to try out this platform.


----------



## Talon2016

My dilemma is that I am not currently unhappy with my X99/5820K build. It's served me well for over 2 years and I don't notice a single hiccup. My main reason for wanting to upgrade is that my main use has always been gaming, and the X99 series was meant for so much more. I figured at the time I may as well just make the jump to DDR4, and figured more cores would future proof me. I think I bid right on both of those as I think I could easily hang on for a few more years.

My 5820K is a good chip, and I've been running 4.5Ghz pretty much non-stop on it for that time at just 1.25v. I've gone all the way up to 4.7Ghz on it, but never tested for stability. It was around 1.27v, but again no idea if it was stable.

I am about to pull the trigger on another 6-core 7800x and an MSI SLI Plus board via newegg. Looks like it would be here Wednesday with overnight shipping. I could sell off my 5820K and X99X Fatality board for a decent price and make my upgrade fairly cheap.

Do you guys think it is worth it? I think I should get a nice boost in games with the IPC and clock speed gains.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

I'm still tossing up to whether to use custom water (EK G360 Kit) or a AIO.

Tinytomlogan was getting 72c with [email protected] on a 7820x using a H100i..


----------



## Jbravo33

Anyone get confirmation on shipping yet? Preordered last week amazon and still no shipping confirmation.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Anyone get confirmation on shipping yet? Preordered last week amazon and still no shipping confirmation.


I've been on chat with them this morning on their site and twitter and they are saying they are OOS. I pre-ordered a 7900x within minutes of the listing going up so I know not many people beat me. They dont have an ETA or anything and have been less than helpful.

They did the same thing with my Ryzen pre-order so I'm probably done buying launch stuff from them, even if they allow you to return.


----------



## BroPhilip

my 7820x will be here today with the motherboard scheduled for this Thursday. Pre-ordered from Newegg night of release. Processor shipped last Friday and MB on Monday


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> I've been on chat with them this morning on their site and twitter and they are saying they are OOS. I pre-ordered a 7900x within minutes of the listing going up so I know not many people beat me. They dont have an ETA or anything and have been less than helpful.
> 
> They did the same thing with my Ryzen pre-order so I'm probably done buying launch stuff from them, even if they allow you to return.


Same here. I preordered 7740 minutes after they were up. Pretty disappointing

Speaking of 7900x






Monster! Finally some proper watercooling. If I didn't have plans for at least the 12 I would have hopped on the 7900x and delid.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Anyone get confirmation on shipping yet? Preordered last week amazon and still no shipping confirmation.


I pre-ordered a Gigabyte Aorus G7 board from them. They just updated estimated delivery to July 4th...even though no one delivers on 4th of July. They can't seem to get hardware pre-ordered together. I cancelled my order with them and ordered one from Newegg. They came into stock late last night.

My 7820x I ordered from B&H shipped Monday and will be here Wednesday. They are becoming one of my favorite retailers.


----------



## BroPhilip

Just got here!


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> 
> 
> Just got here!


Sick. Motherboard?


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Sick. Motherboard?


AORUS 9 should be here tomorrow or Thursday


----------



## Zurv

Well.. no Apex yet.. so i'll just wait. I'll get the highest core count that is out when asus releases the goods









I'm really looking forward to OC'n these chips. I use an external rad that can cool 2800 watts of heat so.. hot chips are fine with me


----------



## darealist

Anyone have update from Amazon? Mine isn't going anywhere...


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> Well.. no Apex yet.. so i'll just wait. I'll get the highest core count that is out when asus releases the goods
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm really looking forward to OC'n these chips. I use an external rad that can cool 2800 watts of heat so.. hot chips are fine with me


nice what are u using to cool? im thinking about this, since my x299 will be on a bench for a while.
http://www.aquatuning.us/water-cooling/kits-und-systems/external-kits/21360/alphacool-eiswand-360-cpu-black?c=6461

anyone familiar with this? any good?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> Well.. no Apex yet.. so i'll just wait. I'll get the highest core count that is out when asus releases the goods
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm really looking forward to OC'n these chips. I use an external rad that can cool 2800 watts of heat so.. hot chips are fine with me


good move. The Apex should be a great board. expect late July early August. Lol - what rad system is that? GiGant?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> nice what are u using to cool? im thinking about this, since my x299 will be on a bench for a while.
> http://www.aquatuning.us/water-cooling/kits-und-systems/external-kits/21360/alphacool-eiswand-360-cpu-black?c=6461
> 
> anyone familiar with this? any good?


I use two external systems. An Aquacomputer 720XT, and on another rig, an Aquacomputer GiGant 1680. The 1680 basically can keep any rig tamed with a single 180mm Fan.








The 720XT is an exceptional piece... quality engineering wth 2x360 rads. The 1680 is 4x420 rads.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darealist*
> 
> Anyone have update from Amazon? Mine isn't going anywhere...


My chip shipped about 2 hours ago, but my board is mia.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> god move. The Apex should be a great board. expect late July early August. Lol - what rad system is that? GiGant?


No love for the Strix this time around ether, Don't blame you








I'm still not 100% sure what board to get either.
Was going custom water this time around, still not sure to get the delidded 7820x from Silicon lottery or just a retail chip.

Won't ask you about MSI stuff.

Saw the post from Der8auer:
Quote:


> Today the X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC tested and at 4.6 GHz, Prime26.6 (non AVX!) At 1.25 volts thrown the voltage converter after about 10 minutes.
> 
> In the X299 SLI Plus I would not make any bigger hopes.
> 
> Edit: I wonder what the test at their reviews. Only Cinebench and Pifast? This is a joke then.
> 
> Edit2: Although I have only a very gentle airflow over the voltage converter, but when I consider that one has in the case over 30 ° C air temperature then I do not like it.


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> god move. The Apex should be a great board. expect late July early August. Lol - what rad system is that? GiGant?
> I use two external systems. An Aquacomputer 720XT, and on another rig, an Aquacomputer GiGant 1680. The 1680 basically can keep any rig tamed with a single 180mm Fan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 720XT is an exceptional piece... quality engineering wth 2x360 rads. The 1680 is 4x420 rads.


with that 720 u doing cpu and gpu? i was thinking about chiller, but i want to keep it quiet and not too cluttered around desk so not going that route. just checked dimensions on 720 about 38.5 inches which could work in my situation. have u ever tried throwin it out a window in the winter? haha. where i wanna set it up it would take 30 seconds to toss it outside and still be within 3.5 feet from bench


----------



## evrae

7800x in hand! But Gigabyte Gaming 3 mobo won't be here until Friday it looks like.

do you guys think quad channel memory will make a worthwhile difference, or am i good with 2x8GB of DDR4 3200?


----------



## thebski

Can't wait until the R6E and R6A are out. I'm curious what they will be priced at and reviews comparing the two. I'm certainly not an extreme overclocker, but I like the fact the Apex only has 4 DIMMs and loses some of the gimmicky features of the Extreme. I loved the Rampage IV Formula for only having 4 DIMM slots. There's something about not populating all the slots that drives me bonkers. It would be pretty cool if the Apex also featured 10G LAN, though.


----------



## TahoeDust

7820x scheduled for delivery tomorrow. Aorus Gaming 7 has shipped and is scheduled for Thursday.


----------



## TheFallenDeity

7820X and MSI Carbon coming today.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> No love for the Strix this time around ether, Don't blame you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm still not 100% sure what board to get either.
> Was going custom water this time around, still not sure to get the delidded 7820x from Silicon lottery or just a retail chip.
> 
> Won't ask you about MSI stuff.
> 
> Saw the post from Der8auer:


Damn. Where did Der8auer post that?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Damn. Where did Der8auer post that?


Original post:
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f139/intel-skylake-x-kaby-lake-x-oc-laberthread-lga2066-1164913-15.html#post25638218

This is his post about the MSI Carbon Pro's problem
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f139/intel-skylake-x-kaby-lake-x-oc-laberthread-lga2066-1164913-17.html#post25640274


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> god move. The Apex should be a great board. expect late July early August. Lol - what rad system is that? GiGant?
> I use two external systems. An Aquacomputer 720XT, and on another rig, an Aquacomputer GiGant 1680. The 1680 basically can keep any rig tamed with a single 180mm Fan.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 720XT is an exceptional piece... quality engineering wth 2x360 rads. The 1680 is 4x420 rads.


I've been using these on my systems:
http://koolance.com/erm-3k3ua-liquid-cooling-system-aluminum
(it seems it is 2700 watts)

My systems have a lot of headroom now because i'm not running 4 way SLI anymore. (darn you nvidia!)








with the x6950 and 2 titan X (2016 pascal) i'm running the fans @ 5%.

They are a nice fit too for a HTPC setup too.


----------



## ManyThreads

Hi Guys,

I pre-ordered an ASUS TUF Mk1 (looked at the Mk2 but it didn't have as good of a VRM) to go along with my 7820K. I plan on doing the best OC I can with a NH-D15 - I keep looking at reviews and it keeps up with all but the biggest water coolers and even then it's close. Any reason not to like this board? Am I right in assuming it has a very robust VRM? The only other one in the same price category is the Strix, and the rest are cheaper. I like Asus boards and have had good luck with them in the past. The only thing I could think of is the M2 SSD fan being a potential failure point, but the warranty is 5 years.

Or should I just buy a Ryzen 1700 and upgrade to Ryzen v2 when it comes? Haha. Decisions, decisions.


----------



## czin125

https://bbs.io-tech.fi/threads/intel-kaby-lake-lga-1151-z270-kellotukset-kokemukset.6251/page-23#post-464532
An older board was able to clock the same with lower voltage
https://bbs.io-tech.fi/threads/intel-kaby-lake-lga-1151-z270-kellotukset-kokemukset.6251/page-27#post-553168
A watercooled 7700K at 5400mhz, 1.36v

Only thing holding back the 7900X is the power delivery and the heat, right? By any chance the R6A or OCF capable of doing 5300mhz at something close to that 7700K? The 7900X managed 5000mhz 1.28v on an AIO ( voltage requirement should drop a bit with a gigantic radiator setup ).


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Hi Guys,
> 
> I pre-ordered an ASUS TUF Mk1 (looked at the Mk2 but it didn't have as good of a VRM) to go along with my 7820K. I plan on doing the best OC I can with a NH-D15 - I keep looking at reviews and it keeps up with all but the biggest water coolers and even then it's close. Any reason not to like this board? Am I right in assuming it has a very robust VRM? The only other one in the same price category is the Strix, and the rest are cheaper. I like Asus boards and have had good luck with them in the past. The only thing I could think of is the M2 SSD fan being a potential failure point, but the warranty is 5 years.
> 
> Or should I just buy a Ryzen 1700 and upgrade to Ryzen v2 when it comes? Haha. Decisions, decisions.


I don't think the TUF Mark 1 is built with heavy oc'ing in mind.

It does have a 8 and 4 pin cpu power connector though not sure about the VRM. Since they aren't naming them then I can only assume they're nothing special.

Would of been nice to get some reviews. This is the board I ended up going with. For me, I'm not worried about hardcore oc'ing and just want a solid, well built, reliable mobo. Kind of what they're going after with the TUF Mark 1.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I don't think the TUF Mark 1 is built with heavy oc'ing in mind.
> 
> It does have a 8 and 4 pin cpu power connector though not sure about the VRM. Since they aren't naming them then I can only assume they're nothing special.
> 
> Would of been nice to get some reviews. This is the board I ended up going with. For me, I'm not worried about hardcore oc'ing and just want a solid, well built, reliable mobo. Kind of what they're going after with the TUF Mark 1.


Thanks.

I see Asus' website says the Mk1 has a digital 8+2 power design and the Mk2 has a digital 7+1 power design, so I assume the Mk 1 has better OC ability. It's also possible I am misunderstanding that.

I found this link helpful:

https://www.asus.com/ca-en/Product-Compare/?products=j4qTRJGV3gah8xP2,ItH9TPzhXexDnavt&b=0

Asus specifically advertises them as an "overclocking design" but who knows what that amounts to.

This thread says 40A:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1632665/intel-x299-socket-2066-vrm-thread/0_100

I too am going for stability, but I did want to do a mild OC on the 7820x (like 4.5-4.6 on all cores instead of just the Turbo 3.0). Hopefully that isn't too taxing on the mobo.

If I have to go to a more expensive board to get a VRM capable of a good OC then I am SOL I guess. These are $450 in Canada and I can't afford the $600+ boards. I can afford a Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 3 but I am not sure it's a better board than the TUF 1 and I think Asus' BIOS support is better.


----------



## TahoeDust

Some of the stuff Der8auer has been posting about VRMs cooking in his testing is a little scary.


----------



## yoshpop

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> I see Asus' website says the Mk1 has a digital 8+2 power design and the Mk2 has a digital 7+1 power design, so I assume the Mk 1 has better OC ability. It's also possible I am misunderstanding that.
> 
> I found this link helpful:
> 
> https://www.asus.com/ca-en/Product-Compare/?products=j4qTRJGV3gah8xP2,ItH9TPzhXexDnavt&b=0
> 
> Asus specifically advertises them as an "overclocking design" but who knows what that amounts to.
> 
> This thread says 40A:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1632665/intel-x299-socket-2066-vrm-thread/0_100
> 
> I too am going for stability, but I did want to do a mild OC on the 7820x (like 4.5-4.6 on all cores instead of just the Turbo 3.0). Hopefully that isn't too taxing on the mobo.
> 
> If I have to go to a more expensive board to get a VRM capable of a good OC then I am SOL I guess. These are $450 in Canada and I can't afford the $600+ boards. I can afford a Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 3 but I am not sure it's a better board than the TUF 1 and I think Asus' BIOS support is better.


der8auer had this to say about the Gaming 3 "I've just tested the Gigabyte X299 Aorus Gaming 3 and at 4.3 GHz with 1.15V I already measured 105°C at the backside of the voltage regulators... You can guess what the temperature will be with 4.5 GHz at 1.25V or even higher overclocking."

I currently have the Gaming 3 arriving tomorrow. At this point I'm not sure if I should try my luck or send it back. Luckily there's a Gaming 7 nearby at Micro Center but I'm not sure if that will fair any better. Has anyone else tried the Auros series? I'm also contemplating returning the board and my 7820x back to newegg and wait for another platform.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yoshpop*
> 
> der8auer had this to say about the Gaming 3 "I've just tested the Gigabyte X299 Aorus Gaming 3 and at 4.3 GHz with 1.15V I already measured 105°C at the backside of the voltage regulators... You can guess what the temperature will be with 4.5 GHz at 1.25V or even higher overclocking."
> 
> I currently have the Gaming 3 arriving tomorrow. At this point I'm not sure if I should try my luck or send it back. Luckily there's a Gaming 7 nearby at Micro Center but I'm not sure if that will fair any better. Has anyone else tried the Auros series? I'm also contemplating returning the board and my 7820x back to newegg and wait for another platform.


Ouch! Hopefully that isn't a theme across all these boards.


----------



## Norlig

Where can I get ahold of a skylake X delid tool, or designs for getting one 3D printed?


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yoshpop*
> 
> der8auer had this to say about the Gaming 3 "I've just tested the Gigabyte X299 Aorus Gaming 3 and at 4.3 GHz with 1.15V I already measured 105°C at the backside of the voltage regulators... You can guess what the temperature will be with 4.5 GHz at 1.25V or even higher overclocking."
> 
> I currently have the Gaming 3 arriving tomorrow. At this point I'm not sure if I should try my luck or send it back. Luckily there's a Gaming 7 nearby at Micro Center but I'm not sure if that will fair any better. Has anyone else tried the Auros series? I'm also contemplating returning the board and my 7820x back to newegg and wait for another platform.


The 7 and 9 have an extra heat pipe and spreader behind the io panel and a plate on the back of the vrms. If that'll help much I don't know my 9 will be here on Thursday


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> The 7 and 9 have an extra heat pipe and spreader behind the io panel and a plate on the back of the vrms. If that'll help much I don't know my 9 will be here on Thursday


The 7 and 9 also have 2 x 8 pin and the 3 only had a single 8 pin. Not sure if that makes a difference...


----------



## ManyThreads

I was doing some reading today and is it true that enabling XMP on RAM raises your BCLK? I don't think I would want my CPU and PCI slots being affected by my RAM. Am I misunderstanding something or is the only way to avoid this running native maximum MHz support on the RAM?

How do boards without BCLK modifiers use RAM above native MHz?

I haven't run into this before and I'm hoping it wont be a problem for my build.

Thanks!


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> I was doing some reading today and is it true that enabling XMP on RAM raises your BCLK? I don't think I would want my CPU and PCI slots being affected by my RAM. Am I misunderstanding something or is the only way to avoid this running native maximum MHz support on the RAM?
> 
> How do boards without BCLK modifiers use RAM above native MHz?
> 
> I haven't run into this before and I'm hoping it wont be a problem for my build.
> 
> Thanks!


When overclocking ram to a unsupported frequency it may change the BCLK with XMP. Try manually setting the timings and voltage.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> with that 720 u doing cpu and gpu? i was thinking about chiller, but i want to keep it quiet and not too cluttered around desk so not going that route. just checked dimensions on 720 about 38.5 inches which could work in my situation. have u ever tried throwin it out a window in the winter? haha. where i wanna set it up it would take 30 seconds to toss it outside and still be within 3.5 feet from bench


Yes, the 720 is cooling (right now) a 4960X(@4.8) and a 295x2 which generates more heat than any 2 pascal cards I have (TXPs or TXps). Yeah, it's an old card but the DP performance helps with some work flow. TGhe 720 is a very quiet unit and - no joke - has been on and running for like close to 4 years now. I did add a boost pump (DCC 1T) since the built in pump in my version had a 32' rise to the first cooling block. Flow is over 140 l/h thu 6mm Plug-n-connect fittings (basically the PC version of Shark-Bite pipe fittings). If you use QDCs, putting the unit outside is easy. What I like about external units, is it's simple to change over to any rig or an upgrade. If you want sub ambient, you need a chiller tho...








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> I've been using these on my systems:
> http://koolance.com/erm-3k3ua-liquid-cooling-system-aluminum
> (it seems it is 2700 watts)
> 
> My systems have a lot of headroom now because i'm not running 4 way SLI anymore. (darn you nvidia!)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> with the x6950 and 2 titan X (2016 pascal) i'm running the fans @ 5%.
> They are a nice fit too for a HTPC setup too.


Speaking of chillers









Yeah - those are excellent units! .. and probably much quieter than the EK-800.








Do you really need 4-way? Single 4K/60 panel? Check into Silicon Lottery's warranty on SLK-X delids, 1 year even on the 7980X (I'm in for one too)

Anyway, I tend to "collect" waaay to many parts and rigs (and other non-computer crap), so external units are really handy in that regard. Notice anything familiar in these pics?


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!












That glass Corsair case is one I put together for my nephew (he does not know that yet). ASUS Apex, 5.3/4.8 7700K (1.328V vcore), 3866 c16 on the ram, and a 2189 capable 1080 (benches over 2200. An ASUS "Turbo" model with bitspower LED block. He likes Lights. Fine for 1080 or 1440 games he plays.

(ps: the flowers add a nice touch.







)


----------



## tistou77

https://www.techpowerup.com/234744/intel-x299-platform-called-a-vrm-disaster-by-overclocker-der8auer


----------



## rt123

So is this gonna be the owners club??


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/234744/intel-x299-platform-called-a-vrm-disaster-by-overclocker-der8auer


there are a few caveats with that report... but yeah, the early boards may need more active vrm cooling. ROG boards are a month or so out.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> So is this gonna be the owners club??


owner's "discussing".


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> there are a few caveats with that report... but yeah, the early boards may need more active vrm cooling. ROG boards are a month or so out.
> [


Hoping that the ROG Extreme and APEX will not have this defect


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> there are a few caveats with that report... but yeah, the early boards may need more active vrm cooling. ROG boards are a month or so out.
> owner's "discussing".


I can change the name if you want


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> New review on overclocking the 7900x with a custom loop:


Not bad, 4.7GHz 10core/20threads maxing at 74C and NOT even delidded. I'd imagine a delid and repaste with a liquid metal might reduce around another 10C.


----------



## TahoeDust

I got my 7820x yesterday and my Gigabyte Aorus 7 is out for delivery. Hopefully tonight I will get to start pushing this thing and see what thermals are really all about.


----------



## Jbravo33

Still no delivery on amazon for 7740x. Kind of annoying but seeing no board doesn't really matter at this point. Local microcenter has 7900 and gaming 7 but board is more important so until apex I'm playing the waiting game. Look forward to see builds in this thread.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> owner's "discussing".


How many did you order?


----------



## BroPhilip

Running clean install now. 7820x and Aorus 9


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Running clean install now. 7820x and Aorus 9


Let's see some stuff


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> Let's see some stuff


----------



## BroPhilip

I have a 30 day return policy on the MB so I'm going to test out the temps on the vrms and see if it's effectively cooling l.


----------



## yoshpop

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> I have a 30 day return policy on the MB so I'm going to test out the temps on the vrms and see if it's effectively cooling l.


I'm eager to see your results. I just got my Gaming 7 from Micro Center so I'll be trying that out tonight with a 7820x.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yoshpop*
> 
> I'm eager to see your results. I just got my Gaming 7 from Micro Center so I'll be trying that out tonight with a 7820x.


It would be great to compare as i have the same cpu. I'm running a 360 aio. Did yours come with the thermal probes as well. I'm thinking of placing one on the vrm heatsink


----------



## yoshpop

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> It would be great to compare as i have the same cpu. I'm running a 360 aio. Did yours come with the thermal probes as well. I'm thinking of placing one on the vrm heatsink


Nice, I just checked and have two as well. Yea that's a great idea to place one there. We'll definitely have some different results, as I need to use a Noctua D15 for the time being. I'm not sure if it will even fit.


----------



## TahoeDust

Well...hello there....


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I can change the name if you want


it's your thread bro. Call it what you want.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> How many did you order?


none... gonna wait for the 18 core! (may get something to plug into the Apex 6 until that SKU launches







)


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Well...hello there....


I got the same board. I'm usually Asus to the bone, but Micro Center only had the Gaming 7 and an Asus Prime x299 board that was way too undercooled in the VRM section for me so I went with Gigabyte. I'm pretty impressed with the board quality wise. Throwing it and a 7900X in the rig now and then putting the loop back together.


----------



## BroPhilip

My first run of Cinebench with 4.4 on all 8 cores... Aorus 9 and 7820x


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> My first run of Cinebench with 4.4 on all 8 cores... Aorus 9 and 7820x[/QUOTE]
> 
> What cooling are you running?


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> What cooling are you running?


Im using a Fractal s36.... Its a 360 AIO


----------



## TahoeDust

VERY quick and dirty OC just to get a taste before heading out to dinner..

4.5GHz on all 8 cores @ 1.15v



Been running prime for 5 minutes after with max temp in the low 70s.


----------



## BroPhilip

Running Prime for over 5 min at a 4.4oc on all cores. Temps of the CPU get pretty warm.... If you look at EC_TEMP1 it is a thermal probe that I placed directly in the fin of the VRM cooler and it maxed at 37c.... I vrm problems here


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Im using a Fractal s36.... Its a 360 AIO


Ah ok, I've got a Kraken x62 lined up for mine, they are about equal from what I see in reviews.
So now I know what temps I'm looking at.

I was going for a Carbine Air 740 as well, so the Kraken would be mounted as intake as well as bottom intake fans, so plenty of airflow.

As for the motherboard it seems people are turning to the Gigabyte AORUS Gaming 7 or 9.
To be honest, I like the look of them over the current Asus stuff (not so much the Apex or Extreme..lol)

I had my heart set on something from Asus, but man has Gigabyte picked up their game..


----------



## BroPhilip

This is Prime with 4.5

I think 4.6 might be max and im running on Auto Voltages. The vrms are perfectly cool with almost 300w going through them


----------



## BroPhilip

cinebench at 4.5 no temps over 60c...... only prime really heats up the cpu


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> 
> 
> cinebench at 4.5 no temps over 60c...... only prime really heats up the cpu


Prime always heats up intel cpu's.

Would be interested in seeing how RealBench does.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Prime always heats up intel cpu's.
> 
> Would be interested in seeing how RealBench does.


I'll try it but I'm running out of testing time for tonight


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> I'll try it but I'm running out of testing time for tonight


Get the new toy only have time to stress test it. lol.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> I'll try it but I'm running out of testing time for tonight


Ok one last question.
What power supply are you using?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> 
> 
> My first run of Cinebench with 4.4 on all 8 cores... Aorus 9 and 7820x


Very nice!


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Ok one last question.
> What power supply are you using?


It's a 1000w evga g3


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> It's a 1000w evga g3


I'm a little worried my Corsair HXi850 Platinum won't cut it.
My wife has the same PSU as you in hers, I guess I could swap them, but hers is 2 years old.


----------



## BroPhilip

Cinebench at 4.6 on 7820x

This is with dual channel memory at 2400 (haven't oced the mem yet)


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I'm a little worried my Corsair HXi850 Platinum won't cut it.
> My wife has the same PSU as you in hers, I guess I could swap them, but hers is 2 years old.


I'm glad i went with the 1000w


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Cinebench at 4.6 on 7820x
> 
> This is with dual channel memory at 2400 (haven't oced the mem yet)


----------



## TahoeDust

7820x running 4.8GHz @ 1.205v with 3200 Quad Channel. This thing is nasty.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 7820x running 4.8GHz @ 1.205v with 3200 Quad Channel. This thing is nasty.


Sweet


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 7820x running 4.8GHz @ 1.205v with 3200 Quad Channel. This thing is nasty.


Temps


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 7820x running 4.8GHz @ 1.205v with 3200 Quad Channel. This thing is nasty.


That voltage is crazy low. Isn't that even lower than 7700K?

Can you do some game benches with the mesh clocked up and down? I think you'd be the first one to do so


----------



## Kana Chan

Is that 4x4 or 4x8 or 8x4 or 8x8? Cache OC?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana Chan*
> 
> Is that 4x4 or 4x8 or 8x4 or 8x8?


All 8 cores with hyperthreading enabled.


----------



## BroPhilip

Beatcha at 4.8 same voltage



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 7820x running 4.8GHz @ 1.205v with 3200 Quad Channel. This thing is nasty.


----------



## BroPhilip

duplicate


----------



## TahoeDust

I'm firing up prime to see what the temps are going to be. I have AVX offset set to 5.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I'm firing up prime to see what the temps are going to be. I have AVX offset set to 5.


----------



## TahoeDust

20 minutes of prime "Blend" with voltage in bios setting; 1.22v, 4.8Ghz on all cores, AVX offset "5". Max temp was on core 2 at 87*



Questions:

Why when I run something like Cinebench does voltage go up to 1.273v? Also, look at the max core speeds. Core 2 shows that at one point it hit 5351MHz .

I am going to run realbench and see what it looks like.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 20 minutes of prime "Blend" with voltage in bios setting; 1.22v, 4.8Ghz on all cores, AVX offset "5". Max temp was on core 2 at 87*
> 
> 
> 
> Questions:
> 
> Why when I run something like Cinebench does voltage go up to 1.273v? Also, look at the max core speeds. Core 2 shows that at one point it hit 5351MHz .
> 
> I am going to run realbench and see what it looks like.


I've had issues with voltage readings as well


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 20 minutes of prime "Blend" with voltage in bios setting; 1.22v, 4.8Ghz on all cores, AVX offset "5". Max temp was on core 2 at 87*
> 
> 
> 
> Questions:
> 
> Why when I run something like Cinebench does voltage go up to 1.273v? Also, look at the max core speeds. Core 2 shows that at one point it hit 5351MHz .
> 
> I am going to run realbench and see what it looks like.


Damn its been awhile since I oc'ed manually but is there a setting for voltage drop? Like a compensation? Could be what's going on.


----------



## mouacyk

Man, really wanna pull a YOLO on 7820x or 7900x this time around.


----------



## BroPhilip

On my Prime Temps I was running "Small FFT" not "Blend" so it really spiked my temps out the roof... lol


----------



## schoolofmonkey

I think I may have ruffed @Nosaer feathers.
Some nice inboxes there mate.

All because of a statement:
"The one thing I love seeing is how the 7800x, 7820x and 7900x are killing the current top tier Ryzen 7 CPU's."
Quote:


> "The one thing I love seeing is how the 7800x, 7820x and 7900x are killing the current top tier Ryzen 7 CPU's."
> 
> you should be happy ryzen is being competitive with intel. I understand you need intel destory AMD to validate your long term purchase decisions.
> 
> But be glad that AMD is putting pressure on intel
> 
> let me change your statement
> 
> " I'm happy with intels performance resopnse to AMD's Ryzen, though the release could have some to be desired. Hopefully AMD can offer competition to Skylake-X to pressure Intel into offerering better products in the future, because compitition is great!


Then got a nice little warning from someone who has been a member a shorter time than me:
Quote:


> not going to look up your lifes history to understand that you may have been over reacted when you made that statement. it's not something we need right now in the community. just take care with statements like that. we don't need fan boys on either side and stuff like that just validate people of that ilk.


Man Ryzen is a leap forward for AMD, and very impressive for that matter, but come on if you had a problem speak openly and not with nasty inboxes.

Intel and it's supporters have annoyed a few people.


----------



## BroPhilip

The division on ultra settings
7820x 4.7oc
Gtx 1070
Gpu usage 95%
Cpu usage 34%


----------



## Kana Chan

1920x1080 or 2560*1440?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> The division on ultra settings
> 7820x 4.7oc
> Gtx 1070
> Gpu usage 95%
> Gpu usage 34%


I just found this picture from The Division looking for some benchmarks. For some reason did not have any benchmarks saved. =/


----------



## TahoeDust

4.7GHz looks like it is going to be a comfortable initial 24/7 OC in the low 1.2X voltage settings. I am still learning the Gigabyte bios. One thing that I have found odd is that it is taking more volts to be stable in Realbench than in Prime95.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> The division on ultra settings
> 7820x 4.7oc
> Gtx 1070
> Gpu usage 95%
> Cpu usage 34%


What's your mesh clock set to? Does it affect game benchmark results?


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana Chan*
> 
> 1920x1080 or 2560*1440?


1080


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> What's your mesh clock set to? Does it affect game benchmark results?


It is set to auto... I haven't played with it


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 4.7GHz looks like it is going to be a comfortable initial 24/7 OC in the low 1.2X voltage settings. I am still learning the Gigabyte bios. One thing that I have found odd is that it is taking more volts to be stable in Realbench than in Prime95.


Realbench might not be all AVX. AFAIK Skylake X multiplier offsets only apply if a specific core is running AVX. There also might be instabilities transitioning between the power states, since it won't be all AVX all the time.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> It is set to auto... I haven't played with it


Try running this program before and after playing with it. I wanna know how the core interconnect speed affects performance









https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intelr-memory-latency-checker

Just run mlc.exe in PowerShell or command prompt in admin mode.


----------



## BroPhilip

Same here 4.7GHz seems to be a good spot to sit at. I'm running 1.22v and stable in all benchmark test. After ten min of Realbench my VRM temps were only 38c



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 4.7GHz looks like it is going to be a comfortable initial 24/7 OC in the low 1.2X voltage settings. I am still learning the Gigabyte bios. One thing that I have found odd is that it is taking more volts to be stable in Realbench than in Prime95.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> Try running this program before and after playing with it. I wanna know how the core interconnect speed affects performance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intelr-memory-latency-checker
> 
> Just run mlc.exe in PowerShell or command prompt in admin mode.


I will play with it tomorrow...It is getting too late and my eyes are blurring lol


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> Try running this program before and after playing with it. I wanna know how the core interconnect speed affects performance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intelr-memory-latency-checker
> 
> Just run mlc.exe in PowerShell or command prompt in admin mode.


I will play with it tomorrow...It is late and my eyes are blurring ....lol


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> I will play with it tomorrow...It is late and my eyes are blurring ....lol


Can see that, double post.

Nothing worse when you run out of steam playing with the new toy.


----------



## TahoeDust

It seems like I have somehow lost the ability to control the voltage? No matter what I set it at it wants to run at 1.273v if I set the clocks to 4.7GHz. Everywhere I look it seems to read that, so I don't think it is a matter of a program reporting incorrectly.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> It seems like I have somehow lost the ability to control the voltage? No matter what I set it at it wants to run at 1.273v if I set the clocks to 4.7GHz. Everywhere I look it seems to read that, so I don't think it is a matter of a program reporting incorrectly.


Is there a bios setting for Loadline Calibration / LLC?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Is there a bios setting for Loadline Calibration / LLC?


Yes, but I have not touched it. Actually it would appear that I can raise voltage, but not lower it. If I set it to 1.3v, it goes there. If I set it at anything under 1.273, it goes to 1.273.


----------



## Chargeit

Might want to play with lowering your LLC some if you want to try and run at lower voltage.

Have to admit that I haven't oc'ed in awhile so it's not very fresh on my mind. Also, LLC is there to help with system stability so that's worth considering. Worth playing with it some and see if you can bring the system down to the voltages you want to run. Though you may not be able to pull the clocks at as low of voltage as you thought at first.


----------



## TahoeDust

Well...it only seems to want to dictate it's own volts if I set the core speeds individually.

Back to stability/temp testing 4.7GHz at 1.225v.


----------



## Kana Chan

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/whos-buying-skylake-x-you-may-now-change-your-vote.2504706/page-32#post-38960334
Uncore at 3200mhz

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/whos-buying-skylake-x-you-may-now-change-your-vote.2504706/page-31#post-38959913
Uncore at 2400mhz


----------



## xarot

Holy hell these chips run HOT. Quick run of 20 minutes P95 28.5 (AVX+FMT3 disabled). Over 1.25 V is too much for WC already when pushing clocks and running Prime. Need to test more in the evening.

Custom water cooling 360+480mm on GT AP-15s, EK Supremacy EVO with D5 pump. 4.5 GHz on a 10 core is a decent clock anyway.


----------



## Removed1

If there is any PLL voltage setting, try to downvolt it a bit.
Test stability, rinse and repeat.
You could may able to lower the T° of a few °.


----------



## DualCpuUser

I chose the i9-7900x and MSI Carbon Pro AC Arrives tomorrow and it should be running 2 hrs after that. -Ron


----------



## TahoeDust

Whatever voltage grimlin I was fighting is back. Not sure what is going on. Clearing cmos or reflashing bios does not fix it. It is like it guesses at required voltage, than will not let me set it below that. Both times before it started happening, I was in the bios and suddenly lost video.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Whatever voltage grimlin I was fighting is back. Not sure what is going on. Clearing cmos or reflashing bios does not fix it. It is like it guesses at required voltage, than will not let me set it below that. Both times before it started happening, I was in the bios and suddenly lost video.


Might be worth sending an email to Gigabyte mentioning what you're experiencing.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Might be worth sending an email to Gigabyte mentioning what you're experiencing.


Ok Gigabyte off the cards for you now too









Man why is it so hard to pick a board.
Oh BTW the TUF Mark 1 VRM heat sink is not covered by the plastic armor, Asus emailed me back before.


----------



## rjeftw

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I think I may have ruffed @Nosaer feathers.
> Some nice inboxes there mate.
> 
> All because of a statement:
> "The one thing I love seeing is how the 7800x, 7820x and 7900x are killing the current top tier Ryzen 7 CPU's."
> Then got a nice little warning from someone who has been a member a shorter time than me:
> Man Ryzen is a leap forward for AMD, and very impressive for that matter, but come on if you had a problem speak openly and not with nasty inboxes.
> 
> Intel and it's supporters have annoyed a few people.


No idea why people are giving you guys ****; Ryzen is good for what it is. Giving a little bit more life to the CPU market. I bought into, well because I just wanted to try something new and I have no complaints currently. Hope AMD can keep pushing for more competition; its good for everyone that way.

Seeing everyone's initial benches make me want to buy one to play around with one!


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rjeftw*
> 
> No idea why people are giving you guys ****; Ryzen is good for what it is. Giving a little bit more life to the CPU market. I bought into, well because I just wanted to try something new and I have no complaints currently. Hope AMD can keep pushing for more competition; its good for everyone that way.
> 
> Seeing everyone's initial benches make me want to buy one to play around with one!


Like I said, I give AMD a pat on the back for Ryzen, it added competition to the marketplace.
But honestly when I said I'm glad it's beating Ryzen I meant it in the way that it will make AMD work harder to innovate more which in turn will make Intel do the same.
Plus it would of been a serious beat down to Intel if it didn't









The market has been stale for a long time now with 2 - 5% increase, Ryzen shook that up.









I may prefer Intel now, but Ryzen most defiantly has it's place.


----------



## Timur Born

Is there any difference between the Asus Prime X299-A vs. ROG Strix X299-E other than the former lacking the ADD_HEADER and the latter lacking the TB_HEADER? The Strix is considerably more expensive for what seems to be the very same feature set (minus TB add-in option)?!


----------



## Digitalwolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> Is there any difference between the Asus Prime X299-A vs. ROG Strix X299-E other than the former lacking the ADD_HEADER and the latter lacking the TB_HEADER? The Strix is considerably more expensive for what seems to be the very same feature set (minus TB add-in option)?!


Price difference is probably related to the Wireless on the Strix vs the Prime-A not having it (I guess).


----------



## Timur Born

For the Crosshair 6 Hero the price difference between WIFI vs. non WIFI is only 20 EUR, the difference between the STRIX and PRIME is 60 EUR.


----------



## BroPhilip

Anyone else having problems with voltage reporting in Windows reporting really off? I think its an issue with the software not knowing how to read the new chips. If not what program are you using?


----------



## Kimir

Try using Aida64, if it doesn't show the voltage right, report it to the dev. Aida is the best and updated really often.


----------



## czin125

360*120mm^2 for moderate OC for the 7900X

560*140mm^2 is approximately 1.81x larger than a 360*120mm^2 radiator ( You also get more fans and more powerful fans too )

7980XE = 1.80 x 7900X in core count. For moderate OC, you'll probably need at least 560*140mm^2.


----------



## Digitalwolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Anyone else having problems with voltage reporting in Windows reporting really off? I think its an issue with the software not knowing how to read the new chips. If not what program are you using?


I've seen it discussed in some of the review videos... I'm using HWInfo and when I changed my voltage for my OC... the reported "vcore" is showing as some stupidly low number... but the VID seems to have changed to what I actually set *.*...


----------



## BroPhilip

I am running AIDA64 as suggested and the CPU VID is showing the correct voltage for the cores as set in bios 1.22v with small fluctuations....but the CPU core is showing a high number like 1.8v....

Then all of a sudden it all reading correctly lol.... Go Figure
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> Try using Aida64, if it doesn't show the voltage right, report it to the dev. Aida is the best and updated really often.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Digitalwolf*
> 
> I've seen it discussed in some of the review videos... I'm using HWInfo and when I changed my voltage for my OC... the reported "vcore" is showing as some stupidly low number... but the VID seems to have changed to what I actually set *.*...


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> It seems like I have somehow lost the ability to control the voltage? No matter what I set it at it wants to run at 1.273v if I set the clocks to 4.7GHz. Everywhere I look it seems to read that, so I don't think it is a matter of a program reporting incorrectly.


Mine is set to 1.22v and the max mine is pushing is 1.22v something might be wrong with the reporting I was having that issue


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> 360*120mm^2 for moderate OC for the 7900X
> 
> 560*140mm^2 is approximately 1.81x larger than a 360*120mm^2 radiator ( You also get more fans and more powerful fans too )
> 
> 7980XE = 1.80 x 7900X in core count. For moderate OC, you'll probably need at least 560*140mm^2.


Radiator space alone won't do much, the actual area of the die on the CPU is so small so cooling it will not be that efficient. Also add the poor TIM into the equation.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> I am running AIDA64 as suggested and the CPU VID is showing the correct voltage for the cores as set in bios 1.22v with small fluctuations....but the CPU core is showing a high number like 1.8v....
> 
> Then all of a sudden it all reading correctly lol.... Go Figure


CPU Core is most probably the CPU Input Voltage which is around 1.8 to 1.9 volts depending on setting and OC. Programs like CPU-Z then report the VID.

I think AIDA reports CPU Input as "VRM" or something.


----------



## rjeftw

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Like I said, I give AMD a pat on the back for Ryzen, it added competition to the marketplace.
> But honestly when I said I'm glad it's beating Ryzen I meant it in the way that it will make AMD work harder to innovate more which in turn will make Intel do the same.
> Plus it would of been a serious beat down to Intel if it didn't
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The market has been stale for a long time now with 2 - 5% increase, Ryzen shook that up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I may prefer Intel now, but Ryzen most defiantly has it's place.


Its pretty great, feels like its been an eternity since the last time there was some innovation happening. I myself am hoping the APUs do something interesting for laptops. I will be poking in this thread from time to time... but from the looks of the reviews I might wanna invest in a water setup before jumping in this haha.


----------



## SsXxX

so this thread gonna be the official owners club?


----------



## opt33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> 360*120mm^2 for moderate OC for the 7900X
> 
> 560*140mm^2 is approximately 1.81x larger than a 360*120mm^2 radiator ( You also get more fans and more powerful fans too )
> 
> 7980XE = 1.80 x 7900X in core count. For moderate OC, you'll probably need at least 560*140mm^2.


Even if cpu is consuming 300 watts, a 360 rad can keep delta air to water at 7C with 1200 rpm fans, ie water temps will be 7C above ambient temps. When benching and actually consuming 300-350 watts, most run fans faster ie 1800 rpm fans will keep delta T at 5C with that load. So that 5C is all you can lower from there with more radiator space. 420 rad would be reasonable, beyond that gains will reach diminishing returns.

The temp problem will be delta from core temp to ihs because intel chose not to use solder. Running prime 28.5 with ambient at 20C and load temps 85C, the water temp may only be 27C with a 360 rad, with a temp gradient from core to your cooling block of 55C and the only way to lower that is delid and replace with liquid metal.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Regarding water cooling, is it definitive that 240mm AIO would be 100 percent insufficient for 7900x? I kinda consider getting it, but i have Corsair H105 (with fancy Fractal Design Venturi 12cm fans instead of the default ones) and no way i am going to spend more money on 360 AIO or custom cooling, as i have H105 less than a year  Not to mention the CPU and board will be 1300~1500 EUROs anyway and i am not printing money, sadly.

If its a definitive no go, i guess i will wait for 7920x and hope its gonna be soldered.


----------



## BroPhilip

Rise if the Tomb Raider.
4.6ghz 1.22v with 7820x
GTX 1070 2025mhz

(Better than my 6600k lol)


----------



## czin125

What was it before? 6600K doesn't have HT either.


----------



## Ikarusflug

Could someone test the 7820x please with a 240-280 Radiator AIO? Would be very kind.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ikarusflug*
> 
> Could someone test the 7820x please with a 240-280 Radiator AIO? Would be very kind.


Same plea for 7900x 

It just went to down in price from 1020 to 960 EUROs over here, guess its down to currency fluctuations.... anyway still a lot, but its very tempting.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ikarusflug*
> 
> Could someone test the 7820x please with a 240-280 Radiator AIO? Would be very kind.


Mine is a 360 aio, from the reviews it was only a 2-3c difference


----------



## xioros

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> 360*120mm^2 for moderate OC for the 7900X
> 
> 560*140mm^2 is approximately 1.81x larger than a 360*120mm^2 radiator ( You also get more fans and more powerful fans too )
> 
> 7980XE = 1.80 x 7900X in core count. For moderate OC, you'll probably need at least 560*140mm^2.


Wrong. A 360 probably cools it to about the same temps. Your water will likely be more or less the same temp (slightly higher maybe), but the heat will be trapped on the die because of pigeon poo. It's not a matter of getting the heat out of your water (more rad space), but it's about getting the heat from the die to the IHS (unless Intel actually solders those chips).


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Ok Gigabyte off the cards for you now too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Man why is it so hard to pick a board.
> Oh BTW the TUF Mark 1 VRM heat sink is not covered by the plastic armor, Asus emailed me back before.


Nice. Good hearing that.


----------



## MunneY

Aight.... im in here! Well i will be when my board arrives...


----------



## SsXxX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> If its a definitive no go, i guess i will wait for 7920x and hope its gonna be soldered.


i too think of waiting for 7920x on the hope of it be soldered, any guess guys do u think it might be?


----------



## Raghar

So folk obligatory question. Can someone try to run this benchmark to find if Skylake-X has Dolphin gate? http://delroth.net/Dolphin-Benchmark.7z
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9483/intel-skylake-review-6700k-6600k-ddr4-ddr3-ipc-6th-generation/9 This page has very nice cross CPU IPC tests, and anandtech is using some Dolphin v5, but nobody reran all these IPC test on v5, so it's not really comparable.

Threadripper would highly likely have Dophingate. (because it's dependent on L1 cache, I'm currious if 4x larger L2 didn't make things better. And if there is only one L2 or 256 KB + 768 KB.)


----------



## Norlig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> For the Crosshair 6 Hero the price difference between WIFI vs. non WIFI is only 20 EUR, the difference between the STRIX and PRIME is 60 EUR.


It's also got a better sound chip and more components on the sound part


----------



## mouacyk

Check out the professional efficiency scores vs Ryzen:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=skylakex-thermal-pow&num=1

For anyone needing absolute performance, Skylake-x really is the best out there right now. Just select the motherboard carefully, so it can handle the high power draw.


----------



## Chargeit

Got my TUF Mark 1 in. Was supposed to come Monday but came early.

Now just to wait until I can order my delided 7820x from Silicon Lottery and I'll be good to go.


----------



## TahoeDust

I still have no idea what is going on with the voltage issue I am having. For the first few hours everything was working fine. I was able to set the voltage and clock speed. HWMonitor and the bios were both showing the correct voltage as it had been set. At some point as I had been adjusting clocks and voltage I lost the ability to control voltage when demanding a set clock speed. For instance, when I set my CPU clock to 4.7GHz and the voltage to 1.225, it gives me a voltage of 1.273. If I change it to 1.3v, it gives me 1.3v. So, I can run a voltage higher, but not lower. I thought maybe it was as bios/motherboard issue, so I actually swapped out to another Aorus G7 I had...somehow I ended up with two...lol. Unfortunately the problem persists. Is it possible something happened to the CPU itself?


----------



## Chargeit

I still think it's something compensating voltage. I doubt anything is wrong with your cpu. Wait and see what others with the same board has to say. I wouldn't be surprised to hear people having the same problem.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I still have no idea what is going on with the voltage issue I am having. For the first few hours everything was working fine. I was able to set the voltage and clock speed. HWMonitor and the bios were both showing the correct voltage as it had been set. At some point as I had been adjusting clocks and voltage I lost the ability to control voltage when demanding a set clock speed. For instance, when I set my CPU clock to 4.7GHz and the voltage to 1.225, it gives me a voltage of 1.273. If I change it to 1.3v, it gives me 1.3v. So, I can run a voltage higher, but not lower. I thought maybe it was as bios/motherboard issue, so I actually swapped out to another Aorus G7 I had...somehow I ended up with two...lol. Unfortunately the problem persists. Is it possible something happened to the CPU itself?


Is that manual voltage or some offset? Manual should always override VID I guess.


----------



## Timur Born

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Norlig*
> 
> It's also got a better sound chip and more components on the sound part


Both use the Realtek® ALC S1220A, maybe - just maybe - the gain stages ("amplifier") of the Stix are a bit better, plus four extra capacitors (surely not worth an extra 40 EUR). Once you connect that to powered speakers or any amplifier that uses a three-prong power-plug it will not matter anymore, because of all the noise coming from the motherboards ground-lines (especially VRM noise from both the MB and especially graphic-card).


----------



## Captain4W

Picking up my i9 in an hour still can't decide on a mobo. I'd love to delid it and change to liquid metal before I run it; does anyone know when the delidding tool for the x series will be out?


----------



## xarot

Which program can display cache voltage? AI Suite doesn't seem to work at all for me (I had it previously and now uninstalling and reinstalling doesn't work either).


----------



## Norlig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> Both use the Realtek® ALC S1220A, maybe - just maybe - the gain stages ("amplifier") of the Stix are a bit better, plus four extra capacitors (surely not worth an extra 40 EUR). Once you connect that to powered speakers or any amplifier that uses a three-prong power-plug it will not matter anymore, because of all the noise coming from the motherboards ground-lines (especially VRM noise from both the MB and especially graphic-card).


If you go to the Asus webpage and click on the little compare check box on both motherboards you can compare their specs.
https://www.asus.com/ROG-Republic-Of-Gamers/ROG-STRIX-X299-E-GAMING/
https://www.asus.com/Motherboards/PRIME-X299-A/

As far as I can tell.

the ROG board supports 4133Mhz memory and the Prime has 4000Mhz,
It does have a different Audio "Design"
ROG: SupremeFX 8-Channel High Definition Audio CODEC S1220A
Prime: Realtek® ALC S1220A 8-Channel High Definition Audio CODEC

the ROG board has ROG exclusive features, though some seems to only be cosmetic.

the ROG comes with more accessories.

Other than that, I do not know.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Is that manual voltage or some offset? Manual should always override VID I guess.


It is doing it when voltage is manually set. I can not find any VID settings. I miss my ASUS bios







....lol


----------



## TahoeDust

I'm about to throw this turd out the window. Very frustrated. I do know both times, right before it stopped obeying my voltage commands, I was attempting to enter the bios and the machine locked up. After that, no ability to lower voltage.

When are the Asus ROG boards available?...lol


----------



## TahoeDust

With it being this way on two different boards and no one else having the issue, could i possibly be the chip? Can a chip dictate voltage in anyway? That is not possible right?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I still think it's something compensating voltage. I doubt anything is wrong with your cpu. Wait and see what others with the same board has to say. I wouldn't be surprised to hear people having the same problem.


Was Asus telling the truth about the VRM heatsink?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> With it being this way on two different boards and no one else having the issue, could i possibly be the chip? Can a chip dictate voltage in anyway? That is not possible right?


How long is your return window?

People are just starting to get their boards and cpu's. Might take awhile before there are enough people with the same setup to say what's normal.

As long as you have a fair return window I'd sit back and wait for others to come in with their experiences.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Was Asus telling the truth about the VRM heatsink?


I haven't removed the mobo from the box yet but I did touch it through the plastic and it felt like I was touching metal.

The box has good weight to it too. Seems solid.


----------



## Captain4W

Got it, now to figure out how to delid.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> With it being this way on two different boards and no one else having the issue, could i possibly be the chip? Can a chip dictate voltage in anyway? That is not possible right?


My gigabyte board is running perfect....even setting voltages.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Captain4W*
> 
> Got it, now to figure out how to delid.


Unless it's a watercooling hassle, I'd recommend testing it for pre-delid temps.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Was Asus telling the truth about the VRM heatsink?


I had time to take the mobo out...

It's plastic. There's a metal heatsink under it. Don't know what they're thinking about that.

Pretty much take the mark 2 and then cover it with plastic.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I had time to take the mobo out...
> 
> It's plastic. There's a metal heatsink under it. Don't know what they're thinking about that.
> 
> Pretty much take the mark 2 and then cover it with plastic.


So they were confused (I'm being polite).

What were they thinking, how the hell are you going to get any airflow over the vrm heat sink if there's plastic covering it.
Maybe using one of those Cryorig A80 Hybrid Liquid Cooler which have a fan on the CPU block.

You'll have to let me know what the temps are like when you set it up, I'm not ordering my stuff until the 11th anyway.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> My gigabyte board is running perfect....even setting voltages.


I know. That is part of the frustration. I guess I should have stepped up for the "9".


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> How long is your return window?
> 
> People are just starting to get their boards and cpu's. Might take awhile before there are enough people with the same setup to say what's normal.
> 
> As long as you have a fair return window I'd sit back and wait for others to come in with their experiences.


Well, the one from Newegg is going back ASAP. The other is from Amazon...their return policy is very liberal.

I guess I will just rock it at 1.273v until either it is fixed or the ROG boards come out.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> So they were confused (I'm being polite).
> 
> What were they thinking, how the hell are you going to get any airflow over the vrm heat sink if there's plastic covering it.
> Maybe using one of those Cryorig A80 Hybrid Liquid Cooler which have a fan on the CPU block.
> 
> You'll have to let me know what the temps are like when you set it up, I'm not ordering my stuff until the 11th anyway.


Yeah I'll see how it goes. Is annoying that they said metal though there "is" metal there. It's just under plastic tat. lol.

Would be less annoying if there was a clear and easy way to remove it. I'm not sure it can be removed without taking other parts off.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Well, the one from Newegg is going back ASAP. The other is from Amazon...their return policy is very liberal.
> 
> I guess I will just rock it at 1.273v until either it is fixed or the ROG boards come out.


Yeah Amazon is great about returns. Newegg is not as clean of an experience. Also takes a long time to get your refund.

I'm kind of figuring with my board if I end up hating it I can return it or just change it out later. Will say it does have a nice heft to it and seems well made.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah I'll see how it goes. Is annoying that they said metal though there "is" metal there. It's just under plastic tat. lol.
> 
> Would be less annoying if there was a clear and easy way to remove it. I'm not sure it can be removed without taking other parts off.
> Yeah Amazon is great about returns. Newegg is not as clean of an experience. Also takes a long time to get your refund.
> 
> I'm kind of figuring with my board if I end up hating it I can return it or just change it out later. Will say it does have a nice heft to it and seems well made.


Which board did you end up getting? I am pretty tempted to scoop up a Asus Deluxe.


----------



## done12many2

Well, at just over 4.7 GHz, my 7900X is clobbering my 5960X at 4.9 GHz as expected. I'm still trying to figure out the Gigabyte BIOS. Definitely not as nice as Asus' BIOS.

7900X @ 4.75 GHz with 3600 XMP set. 2598cb multi / 209cb single



5960X @ 4.9 GHz with memory/cache OC'd/tweaked. 2001cb multi / 200cb single


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Which board did you end up getting? I am pretty tempted to scoop up a Asus Deluxe.


I went with the TUF Mark 1. Though I'm ordering my chip from Silicon lottery so still waiting on that.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I went with the TUF Mark 1. Though I'm ordering my chip from Silicon lottery so still waiting on that.


I'm hoping they start delidding sent in chips. If not I will figure out another way. I'm about 4-5 beers away from ordering the Deluxe.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I'm hoping they start delidding sent in chips. If not I will figure out another way. I'm about 4-5 beers away from ordering the Deluxe.


They said it's planned though you know how that goes.

Never drink and online shop.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> They said it's planned though you know how that goes.
> 
> Never drink and online shop.


How do you think I ended up with two Aorus 7 boards?...lol


----------



## TahoeDust

Someone (not me) needs to get ambitious and start a legit owners thread.


----------



## evrae

My 7800x build is up and running, but a rear case fan is not working. Oddly enough the BIOS will show the fan's RPMs if I push it around with my finger.

Guess I'll get a new fan.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Someone (not me) needs to get ambitious and start a legit owners thread.


I could change the thread name, but I've got no idea what to do from there


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Well, at just over 4.7 GHz, my 7900X is clobbering my 5960X at 4.9 GHz as expected. I'm still trying to figure out the Gigabyte BIOS. Definitely not as nice as Asus' BIOS.
> 
> 7900X @ 4.75 GHz with 3600 XMP set. 2598cb multi / 209cb single


NB clock at 2400mhz? Try upping it to 4000mhz?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> How do you think I ended up with two Aorus 7 boards?...lol


I am interested in seeing the results of the Aorus 7 and the Tuf Mark 1.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I know. That is part of the frustration. I guess I should have stepped up for the "9".


It was the latest bios in the support page.... I agree I like the layout of Asus bios better but I'm getting used to it. It seems to be one well built board


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> NB clock at 2400mhz? Try upping it to 4000mhz?


I'm messing with that now. I have no idea what's safe cache voltage on Skylake-X. Default is 2400 MHz at .9v and I'm at 3200 MHz at 1v right now.


----------



## Exilon

Welp, I said I was going to wait for Coffee Lake, but my Z87 motherboard decided for me by breaking a bunch of its USB ports.

Picked up a 7800X/Asus X299-A.



Motherboard night light looks nice, I guess. It stays on using standby power even when the machine is powered off.


Boosted 4.0 all core stock due to motherboard shenanigans, but I haven't tried to push the core higher yet.

I've been messing with the cache stuff, did some quick benchmarks with out of the box stock, XMP, and XMP + 3.2 mesh clock.



Looks like fast memory and uncore/cache overclocking is on the menu.


----------



## Gettz8488

Got a question to ask some of you. My parts get here Monday 7800X asus rog,gtx 1080. wondering if a 750W power supply is enough for this setup? Also my psu only has 1 8pin connector. Second question is what CPU cooler does well for a moderate OC I have a noctua d15 ATM do I need a Aio or is it enough? Any insight is greatly appreciated


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I'm messing with that now. I have no idea what's safe cache voltage on Skylake-X. Default is 2400 MHz at .9v and I'm at 3200 MHz at 1v right now.


Could you do a test of 3600mhz CL15

NB clock at 2400mhz -> 2800mhz -> 3200mhz in aida64? and then 3600mhz-> 4000mhz if possible? Would be interesting to see what latency can be achieved with increasing it.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Could you do a test of 3600mhz CL15
> 
> NB clock at 2400mhz -> 2800mhz -> 3200mhz in aida64? and then 3600mhz-> 4000mhz if possible? Would be interesting to see what latency can be achieved with increasing it.


2400 -> 3200 had a 10ns decrease in memory latency for me.

But it was negatively affecting core overclock potential. Still working out what voltages are what. I don't think Asus adaptive cache voltage works at all.

Edit:
Holy crap, physical core voltages and multipliers


----------



## schoolofmonkey

So what psu's everyone using.
Still a little concerned the HX850i Platnium won't be enough for the 7820x and a GTX1080..

I know I sound like a broken record, but I just did the numbers


----------



## Exilon

I'm using a 750W Seasonic (Titanium), though supplies are rated for DC output so the efficiency rating doesn't technically matter.

I'm only seeing 500W from the wall with 7800X and a power modded 1080 Ti in Overwatch (my highest power game)

850W should be perfectly fine, just set a turbo power limit in BIOS if you're concerned about AVX loads blowing your power budget.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> 850W should be perfectly fine, just set a turbo power limit in BIOS if you're concerned about AVX loads blowing your power budget.


Yeah I generally set the AVX lower.
I'm not looking for huge clocks, maybe 4.3Ghz on all cores, I know it turbo boost to 4.3Ghz on 2 cores normally, but I'm not looking for the big numbers.

Oh I will be added a GTX1080ti down the road.


----------



## SsXxX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Well, at just over 4.7 GHz, my 7900X is clobbering my 5960X at 4.9 GHz as expected. I'm still trying to figure out the Gigabyte BIOS. Definitely not as nice as Asus' BIOS.
> 
> 7900X @ 4.75 GHz with 3600 XMP set. 2598cb multi / 209cb single
> 
> 
> 
> 5960X @ 4.9 GHz with memory/cache OC'd/tweaked. 2001cb multi / 200cb single


wow, you got some nice clocks on both your skylake-x and haswell-e, knocking on wood









*nevertheless back to your skylake-x rocking 4.75ghz, can you share your volts; temps and what cooler are u using?
also is it 100% stable? if so how what did u use to figure out its stability and for how many hours?*


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> So what psu's everyone using.
> Still a little concerned the HX850i Platnium won't be enough for the 7820x and a GTX1080..
> 
> I know I sound like a broken record, but I just did the numbers


I have a EVGA 8502 Supernova G2 pushing a 7820x running 4.7GHzwith a 1080ti. I have a Kill-a-watt meter and the highest I have seen at the wall gaming and benchmarking is 525w.


----------



## SsXxX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Got a question to ask some of you. My parts get here Monday 7800X asus rog,gtx 1080. wondering if a 750W power supply is enough for this setup? Also my psu only has 1 8pin connector. Second question is what CPU cooler does well for a moderate OC I have a noctua d15 ATM do I need a Aio or is it enough? Any insight is greatly appreciated


psu is plenty enough, as for the cooler; well it depends how ambitious you are with your oc, but generally those chips are hot and a good aio is not a bad idea


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I have a EVGA 8502 Supernova G2 pushing a 7820x running 4.7GHzwith a 1080ti. I have a Kill-a-watt meter and the highest I have seen at the wall gaming and benchmarking is 525w.


And you're pushing higher than I'll go.
I guess if I do run into any issues my wife has a eVGA 1000w Supernova G2 in her machine, it's 2 years old though, but I'm sure eVGA made them to last


----------



## SsXxX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> And you're pushing higher than I'll go.
> I guess if I do run into any issues my wife has a eVGA 1000w Supernova G2 in her machine, it's 2 years old though, but I'm sure eVGA made them to last


with your clocks and cpu of choice 850watts is plenty


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> 2400 -> 3200 had a 10ns decrease in memory latency for me.
> 
> But it was negatively affecting core overclock potential. Still working out what voltages are what. I don't think Asus adaptive cache voltage works at all.
> 
> Edit:
> Holy crap, physical core voltages and multipliers


Did the power draw go up significantly with the increase in NB clock? Also what ram settings on both tests? Did the Core voltage need any increase with that too?


----------



## SsXxX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Well, the one from Newegg is going back ASAP. The other is from Amazon...their return policy is very liberal.
> 
> I guess I will just rock it at 1.273v until either it is fixed or the ROG boards come out.


I have been following up with your voltage issue .... had similar issue with my haswell 4770k which was on a gigabyte board too few years ago; i remember it was fixed down the road with a bios update, why not contact gigabyte support?

in any case i can see u got a pretty decent oc here at 4.7, what are your temps and what cooler do u use?

and then if your temps are acceptable and the voltage is within the maximum recommended/safe limit (i don't know what that is so if somebody would enlighten us) then why not use that volts and see if u can push higher clocks


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Did the power draw go up significantly with the increase in NB clock? Also what ram settings on both tests? Did the Core voltage need any increase with that too?


Putting NB clock to 3200 made it impossible to hit 4.3 stable with core. I think the voltage settings are messed up when I clock up the NB at all. Looking at XTU, touching the NB clock changes the voltage policy of the cache.

I'm at 4.8 with NB at default 2400, but 2400 has a huge IPC penalty. I'm going to finish stress testing at [email protected] and then go back to pushing NB.

7800X is actually easier to cool than my old Haswell quad. Much bigger die with disabled cores acts like an internal heat-spreader, but [email protected] is at the limit of the TIM under the IHS. I'm probably not even going to delid this thing unless I get really bored and want to hit 5 GHz with more voltage.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SsXxX*
> 
> I have been following up with your voltage issue .... had similar issue with my haswell 4770k which was on a gigabyte board too few years ago; i remember it was fixed down the road with a bios update, why not contact gigabyte support?
> 
> in any case i can see u got a pretty decent oc here at 4.7, what are your temps and what cooler do u use?
> 
> and then if your temps are acceptable and the voltage is within the maximum recommended/safe limit (i don't know what that is so if somebody would enlighten us) then why not use that volts and see if u can push higher clocks


With the voltage stuck at 1.273 temps are fine for gaming and normal use. I gamed for a 5 hours tonight and the temps never got above the mid 60s. They get higher than I am comfortable with in stress/torture tests. It is just frustrating because I know it is stable at 1.23v and I can not get it to run there.. I guess I can try to bump the clocks up some and see if it is stable.


----------



## SsXxX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> Putting NB clock to 3200 made it impossible to hit 4.3 stable with core. I think the voltage settings are messed up when I clock up the NB at all. Looking at XTU, touching the NB clock changes the voltage policy of the cache.
> 
> I'm at 4.8 with NB at default 2400, but 2400 has a huge IPC penalty. I'm going to finish stress testing at [email protected] and then go back to pushing NB.
> 
> 7800X is actually easier to cool than my old Haswell quad. Much bigger die with disabled cores acts like an internal heat-spreader, but [email protected] is at the limit of the TIM under the IHS. I'm probably not even going to delid this thing unless I get really bored and want to hit 5 GHz with more voltage.


what are your temps with [email protected]? what cooler?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SsXxX*
> 
> wow, you got some nice clocks on both your skylake-x and haswell-e, knocking on wood
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *nevertheless back to your skylake-x rocking 4.75ghz, can you share your volts; temps and what cooler are u using?
> also is it 100% stable? if so how what did u use to figure out its stability and for how many hours?*


Thanks bud. I just got done running Cinebench R15 at 4.8 GHz at 1.24v resulted in a 2716cb multi with a 216cb single. Max core temp is 80c with package temp in the low 80s. Those are temps with a R15 load. I'm on a custom loop for cooling. Despite the fact that it will run back to back Cinebench runs at that speed/voltage, I do not consider it "stable". A bit more Vcore would be required to reach RealBench type stability. That'll have to wait for a delid. I hope that helps.


----------



## SsXxX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Thanks bud. I just got done running Cinebench R15 at 4.8 GHz at 1.24v resulted in a 2716cb multi with a 216cb single. Max core temp is 80c with package temp in the low 80s. Those are temps with a R15 load. I'm on a custom loop for cooling. Despite the fact that it will run back to back Cinebench runs at that speed/voltage, I do not consider it "stable". A bit more Vcore would be required to reach RealBench type stability. That'll have to wait for a delid. I hope that helps.


thanks for the reply









keep us updated with your benchs, volts and stability


----------



## czin125

Ram 3600mhz 15-15-15-30 450 1T
NB clock at 3200mhz
Core at 4800mhz
2716 CB for 10C/20T and possibly ~2170 CB for 8C/16T
~2820ish at 5000mhz Core? and maybe even a bit more with 4000+ NB clock + ram?

Nice score

http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?t=170998
If he were to drop the mhz to 4800 from 6016 and upped core count to 10 from 8, he'd only get ~2666ish? Lower NB/ram settings?


----------



## xarot

Where do you keep getting those golden chips, my 7900X needs 1.32 to even boot into Windows at 4.8.


----------



## Captain4W

So what's the consensus for the best mobo right now for a 7900x? I was thinking about the Gaming 9 but I'm just not sure.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SsXxX*
> 
> what are your temps with [email protected]? what cooler?


Custom loop with ~30 liquid temp. I was hitting 80C in Cinebench with [email protected] I bumped it down to [email protected] to give a buffer for 24/7 usage. Will need to delid for >1.3V imo.

Cache seems stable at 3 GHz, instant blue screen at 3.2 with the core clocked up









Now to find which knobs need to be turned for 3.2 cache speed...


----------



## schoolofmonkey

No you guys re right.

On overclock3d.net the review on the 7900x, overclocked it has the total power draw of around 400w with a GTX1080ti.
Funny thing is the 7820x overclocked uses 2 more watts, but I'm sure that's within a margin of error.

https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/intel_i9_7900x_skylake-x_review/16

So yeah I'm guessing the HX850i will cut it


----------



## Exilon

Asus adaptive voltage for cache is hosed. It must not be providing the extra voltage because when I use offset or manual 1.3V it runs fine at 3.2GHz.

2.4 -> 3.2 added about 20W of power, but everything got much faster so I can't isolate the cache power from the total CPU power.


----------



## FlanK3r

1.3v is still to much for 24/7 stable setup and 7900x. I think 1.25 is the real limit with very good AIO or decent liquid without delid. 1.2v for aircoolers as NHD14 etc.


----------



## SsXxX

I see some of u guys playing with uncore speed, but does it even matter or improve your score?

as far as I can tell its pretty useless in haswell-e adding about 0.1%-1% benchmark score at absolute max but zero real life benefit, infact it adds heat; power draw and negatively affects stability


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SsXxX*
> 
> I see some of u guys playing with uncore speed, but does it even matter or improve your score?
> 
> as far as I can tell its pretty useless in haswell-e adding about 0.1%-1% benchmark score at absolute max but zero real life benefit, infact it adds heat; power draw and negatively affects stability


A few pages back, I posted my results. This is _just_ from uncore overclocking.



Mind you though, that this was on gaming benches that were underperforming on Skylake X, so the large % increase is just catching up to where it's supposed to be.


----------



## SsXxX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> A few pages back, I posted my results. This is _just_ from uncore overclocking.
> 
> 
> 
> Mind you though, that this was on gaming benches that were underperforming on Skylake X, so the large % increase is just catching up to where it's supposed to be.


wow! so uncore really matters here it seems unlike x99, I'm not that much happy to know tbh as this will only make stabilizing harder and will raise voltage and power draw requirements

but the real question on why does it have an effect on skylake-x but not on previous gens. hmm . . . maybe intel new mesh design adds latency so that's why uncore overclocking helps? who knows


----------



## Exilon

It's a different memory system design, so things working differently isn't that strange. The mesh speed being bumped up 2.4->3.0 GHz reduces mesh latency by 10ns which is pretty big, and it seems to be fairly cheap. I just had to figure out which knob controlled the mesh voltage.


----------



## SsXxX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> It's a different memory system design, so things working differently isn't that strange. The mesh speed being bumped up 2.4->3.0 GHz reduces mesh latency by 10ns which is pretty big, and it seems to be fairly cheap. I just had to figure out which knob controlled the mesh voltage.


great, then keep updating and informing us on the matter, like which volt knob to increase and by how much, and what effects would mesh overclocking have on heat and stability, also to what extent does mesh overclocking scales well before it starts to give diminishing returns performance-wise

thanks a lot to u and to all other early adopters participating here and benefiting us all, I'm gonna join u guys when the rampage 6 extreme or apex comes out

and hey guys I think this SHOULD be the official owners thread, should it not?


----------



## Timur Born

I would speculate that the absence of an inclusive L3 cache would make core-to-core access (get data from other core's L2) more common. Thus mesh performance becomes more important, because for games that made good use of L3 in the past there's more data transmitted on the mesh than what was going on in the former ring.

All speculation based on what I understood so far, of course.









Does mesh/uncore frequency affect memory latency?


----------



## SsXxX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timur Born*
> 
> I would speculate that the absence of an inclusive L3 cache would make core-to-core access (get data from other core's L2) more common. Thus mesh performance becomes more important, because for games that made good use of L3 in the past there's more data transmitted on the mesh than what was going on in the former ring.
> 
> All speculation based on what I understood so far, of course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does mesh/uncore frequency affect memory latency?


i believe it should have nothing to do with ram latency.


----------



## Digitalwolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> Asus adaptive voltage for cache is hosed. It must not be providing the extra voltage because when I use offset or manual 1.3V it runs fine at 3.2GHz.
> 
> 2.4 -> 3.2 added about 20W of power, but everything got much faster so I can't isolate the cache power from the total CPU power.


The place I ordered from didn't have the Asus I wanted so I got an MSI Carbon Pro.

I will add that on MSI Adaptive works fine when I am just setting the CPU voltage. When I add in the Cache things are not ok suddenly. Using offset or Manual voltage just like on your board... everything is back to working as expected.

On another note...

Hwinfo64 has been mostly working. When I clock cache it won't repot my FSB properly and shows it at 96 instead of 100. It also reports core speed relative to having a 96.0 FSB.... So a 45x Multi shows as 43xx MHz as an example.

CPUz in comparison will show FSB 100.00 etc

Setting Cache back to Auto and Hwinfo64 shows the FSB properly etc once again.

Benchmarks show a small gain with the cache clocked (I'm messing with 3200 atm)... so it does seem that everything is actually working regardless of what software monitoring reports.


----------



## golanbendor

So I bought the 7820X and an ASUS X299 TUF Mark 1. I am planning do a midst OC to 4.6-4.7. I already have A corsair RMi750 and
My GPU is a single 1080 TI.

Will my PSU be suffice for this build? or maybe should I not OC to the CPU to be safe?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *golanbendor*
> 
> So I bought the 7820X and an ASUS X299 TUF Mark 1. I am planning do a midst OC to 4.6-4.7. I already have A corsair RMi750 and
> My GPU is a single 1080 TI.
> 
> Will my PSU be suffice for this build? or maybe should I not OC to the CPU to be safe?


You should be fine.

I suggest to everyone who wants to know what kind of power their system uses to get something like this,

https://www.amazon.com/P3-P4400-Electricity-Usage-Monitor/dp/B00009MDBU

You might be surprised how little power a system really uses.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SsXxX*
> 
> thanks for the reply
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> keep us updated with your benchs, volts and stability


You're welcome and I will.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Ram 3600mhz 15-15-15-30 450 1T
> NB clock at 3200mhz
> Core at 4800mhz
> 2716 CB for 10C/20T and possibly ~2170 CB for 8C/16T
> ~2820ish at 5000mhz Core? and maybe even a bit more with 4000+ NB clock + ram?
> 
> Nice score
> 
> http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?t=170998
> If he were to drop the mhz to 4800 from 6016 and upped core count to 10 from 8, he'd only get ~2666ish? Lower NB/ram settings?


Yeah, if scaling remains perfect, 2800 + in R15 should happen right before 5 GHz. I'm not sure how high the cache will go, but I can tell you that I figured out that I was able to run cache at 3200 MHz using the stock .9v.

I'm beyond impressed with these chips.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Where do you keep getting those golden chips, my 7900X needs 1.32 to even boot into Windows at 4.8.


Were you talking to me? If so, I'm sure there are even better out there and I hope so.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> Asus adaptive voltage for cache is hosed. It must not be providing the extra voltage because when I use offset or manual 1.3V it runs fine at 3.2GHz.
> 
> 2.4 -> 3.2 added about 20W of power, but everything got much faster so I can't isolate the cache power from the total CPU power.


Adaptive voltage for cache has always been hosed on Asus HEDT boards. With HWE and BWE on my Asus board, I could only use offset.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I have a EVGA 8502 Supernova G2 pushing a 7820x running 4.7GHzwith a 1080ti. I have a Kill-a-watt meter and the highest I have seen at the wall gaming and benchmarking is 525w.


Have you tested running avx? I got a 750W cutting it close


----------



## Gettz8488

Does anyone know if I have to connect the 8pin and the 4 pin in the new x299 mobo? My
Psu only has one 8 pin connector


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> And you're pushing higher than I'll go.
> I guess if I do run into any issues my wife has a eVGA 1000w Supernova G2 in her machine, it's 2 years old though, but I'm sure eVGA made them to last


His numbers line up.

When I tested my rig (980ti at the time) I topped out at 420w running Furmark. Most other stress testing I did was 320w - 380w. I figured a 7820x/1080ti to top out around 550w.

No way a quality 850w psu will have issues with a 7820x/1080ti. Maybe if you're pushing LN2 or something crazy.


----------



## czin125

What radiator setup is being used for your 7900X?






He has a 7820X at 5ghz on the MSI Gaming Pro Carbon ( not delidded yet ) with highest core at 74C being cooled by a Mora3 with 4x180mm fans. A delidded 7900X at 5ghz on the X299 Apex + 280mm AIO reached 90C+.


----------



## icecpu

If I get 7740X with 16 PCI express lane, can I use just one 1080ti and one M2 nvme 960 pro ? Will I have any problem ? or performance penalty ?


----------



## opt33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> What radiator setup is being used for your 7900X?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He has a 7820X at 5ghz on the MSI Gaming Pro Carbon ( not delidded yet ) with highest core at 74C being cooled by a Mora3 with 4x180mm fans. A delidded 7900X at 5ghz on the X299 Apex + 280mm AIO reached 90C+.


The 7820x is running hwbot prime benchmark (not high wattage load) on 8core cpu, drawing below 180W per screenshot of wattage in that video. The 7900x at 5ghz on youtube is running prime 95 (much higher load) on 10 cores which is much higher wattage.

I personally would have 360 or 420 rad for skylake x so I could run low fan speeds and still have water only ~7C over ambient stressing, though normal use way lower than that, beyond that rads are not going to help more than that 7C delta air to water.


----------



## Gettz8488

Have you guys heard the rumor on 2066v2? If this is true I'm done with intel. A new version socket for the 12core and up X series. I went with the 7800x waiting for the 12 core chip


----------



## czin125

2011v3 can support 18-22 cores

why would the 2066 socket not be able to support 18C on 14nm?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> 2011v3 can support 18-22 cores
> 
> why would the 2066 socket not be able to support 18C on 14nm?


No idea supposedly because of the higher 200 watt tdp on the higher core chips. Which makes no sense since we see some sockets pulling 400 watts when overclocked on 2066. Bits and chips posted about it and so did segment next just a rumor


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> No idea supposedly because of the higher 200 watt tdp on the higher core chips. Which makes no sense since we see some sockets pulling 400 watts when overclocked on 2066. Bits and chips posted about it and so did segment next just a rumor


Click bait.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Click bait.


Someone posted on intel Reddit that's where I saw it.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SsXxX*
> 
> i believe it should have nothing to do with ram latency.


Nope, that's not correct.

Upping mesh speed from 2400 to 3200 decreased memory latency by 10ns (15%), L3 latency by 4ns (17%), and L2-L2 ping times to by 10 ns (20%)


----------



## shapin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Have you guys heard the rumor on 2066v2? If this is true I'm done with intel. A new version socket for the 12core and up X series. I went with the 7800x waiting for the 12 core chip


We will finally see an 8+4 mobos?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shapin*
> 
> We will finally see an 8+4 mobos?


What? My x299 board is 8+8.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shapin*
> 
> We will finally see an 8+4 mobos?


Yeah they already have 8+4 and 8+8 mobo's. Though you need to watch out because they do have single 8 pin boards.

The TUF Mark 1 I got is 8+4.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> What? My x299 board is 8+8.


Speaking of which mine is 8+4 do I need to have both plugged in? Or just a single 8 is fine


----------



## SsXxX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> Nope, that's not correct.
> 
> Upping mesh speed from 2400 to 3200 decreased memory latency by 10ns (15%), L3 latency by 4ns (17%), and L2-L2 ping times to by 10 ns (20%)


ops, guess I have to retune my haswell-e optimized mentality then


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Speaking of which mine is 8+4 do I need to have both plugged in? Or just a single 8 is fine


Contact your mobo manufacturer and ask. Though I'd want all connections being powered myself.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> Custom loop with ~30 liquid temp. I was hitting 80C in Cinebench with [email protected] I bumped it down to [email protected] to give a buffer for 24/7 usage. Will need to delid for >1.3V imo.
> 
> Cache seems stable at 3 GHz, instant blue screen at 3.2 with the core clocked up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now to find which knobs need to be turned for 3.2 cache speed...


Interesting that we've lost so much uncore frequency top end... HW was 4.3-4.5, BW was 3.7.

It wasn't super critical for many applications, but large memory, random access applications saw proportional speedups on HW and BW.

This new arch is trying to "smarter" with more local and less shared cache, so I can see how its overall performance might be more sensitive (as the lower bound of performance is defined by the behavior/speed when you "miss").

It also means that we might start seeing lumpier performance improvement for any given application from generation to generation. The more "down the middle" your app is, the better it will perform. The more of an outlier your use-case is in terms of misses and inter-core communication, the more likely you may see less or no improvement.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> It also means that we might start seeing lumpier performance improvement for any given application from generation to generation. The more "down the middle" your app is, the better it will perform. The more of an outlier your use-case is in terms of misses and inter-core communication, the more likely you may see less or no improvement.


Application performance looks fine across the board. The only lumpy parts I've seen are gaming graphics benchmarks. More draw call heavy (Civ, Total War), the worse it is. I think there's an optimization opportunity in the graphics drivers.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Have you guys heard the rumor on 2066v2? If this is true I'm done with intel. A new version socket for the 12core and up X series. I went with the 7800x waiting for the 12 core chip


Just a rumor: https://www.evga.com/support/manuals/files/142-SX-E297.pdf look at page 35 for the tested CPU's EVGA FTW board. CPU's all the way up to 7980ex socket 2066.







They could come out with a new batch of CPU's at a later date like they did with Broadwell-E.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Just a rumor: https://www.evga.com/support/manuals/files/142-SX-E297.pdf look at page 35 for the tested CPU's EVGA FTW board. CPU's all the way up to 7980ex socket 2066.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They could come out with a new batch of CPU's at a later date like they did with Broadwell-E.


Nice find m8 ? What do you think are the chances of next gen hedt being on x299 as well?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Speaking of which mine is 8+4 do I need to have both plugged in? Or just a single 8 is fine


Noticed this,






You should be good using only one 8 pin. Assuming the psu is up to the task.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Noticed this,
> 
> You should be good using only one 8 pin. Assuming the psu is up to the task.


TTL said he even tested it with a HX750i, so I guess my HX850i will be fine









Still not sure about the TUF Mark 1's plastic covered heatsink though.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> TTL said he even tested it with a HX750i, so I guess my HX850i will be fine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still not sure about the TUF Mark 1's plastic covered heatsink though.


I've got an 850w psu and had no concern about it handling this setup. Systems don't use as much power as people think they do. Tell you that wattage meter was a good investment helped put my mind at ease.

Yeah I'm not happy about that though I'll see how it ends up. Really just wish they made it so it could be removed easily. From what I saw it would require disassembling the entire armor to take it off and may void warranty.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Nice find m8 ? What do you think are the chances of next gen hedt being on x299 as well?


Pretty good. There will probably be a second gen board with some new goodies like Broadwell.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I've got an 850w psu and had no concern about it handling this setup. Systems don't use as much power as people think they do. Tell you that wattage meter was a good investment helped put my mind at ease.
> 
> Yeah I'm not happy about that though I'll see how it ends up. Really just wish they made it so it could be removed easily. From what I saw it would require disassembling the entire armor to take it off and may void warranty.


This is what I was thinking about until I hear about the TUF's vrms.
I was impressed with the Strix after seeing that video, still don't like the fan header layout though.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> Application performance looks fine across the board. The only lumpy parts I've seen are gaming graphics benchmarks. More draw call heavy (Civ, Total War), the worse it is. I think there's an optimization opportunity in the graphics drivers.


It depends on why they are lumpy... It's possible that some of the games are running into the sort of issues I'm wondering about (large memory image, random access, cache breaking).

They've made a clear shift from L3 to L2, but then off-set some of the implications with the mesh vs the ring, so.... we shall see. The usual raft of apps eople benchmark aren't really sufficient to answer this question conclusively.


----------



## Chargeit

I'm about to break. OutletPC has 7820x up for order. Silicon Lottery said they're not likely to be ready for release tomorrow. I can order the 7820x and a H115i for about the price I'd pay for just a delided 7820x binned decent. Could always pick up a skylake x deliding tool when they become available.

I don't know guys. What do ya'll think? Hell, I don't even want to oc my chip. Maybe, 4.5 if I do.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'm about to break. OutletPC has 7820x up for order. Silicon Lottery said they're not likely to be ready for release tomorrow. I can order the 7820x and a H115i for about the price I'd pay for just a delided 7820x binned decent. Could always pick up a skylake x deliding tool when they become available.
> 
> I don't know guys. What do ya'll think? Hell, I don't even want to oc my chip. Maybe, 4.5 if I do.


If you have no plans to push things too hard, I'd just order the CPU and AIO and call it a day.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> If you have no plans to push things too hard, I'd just order the CPU and AIO and call it a day.


Think you're right. I don't like the idea of binning and I don't mind buying a deliding tool and doing it myself if I want better temps.

Really wanted to go the Silicon Lottery route but man I'm ready to get my hands on one now.

*I ordered the 7820x... Now to figure out if I want the H115i or H110i. From what I can tell they're mostly the same but one fits smaller boards also. Is the $25 premium worth the asking price for what's functionally the same cooler.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Think you're right. I don't like the idea of binning and I don't mind buying a deliding tool and doing it myself if I want better temps.
> 
> Really wanted to go the Silicon Lottery route but man I'm ready to get my hands on one now.
> 
> *I ordered the 7820x... Now to figure out if I want the H115i or H110i. From what I can tell they're mostly the same but one fits smaller boards also. Is the $25 premium worth the asking price for what's functionally the same cooler.


I can't tell you much about the H110i, but I can tell you that I was more than impressed with the H115i when I had one on a test bench. Super loud at max fan speed, but those fans could push a great deal of air through the rad.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I can't tell you much about the H110i, but I can tell you that I was more than impressed with the H115i when I had one on a test bench. Super loud at max fan speed, but those fans could push a great deal of air through the rad.


I think they're pretty much the same but the way the H115i tubing connect means it works with a wider range of mobo.

Think I'm just going to go with the H115i since it's newer. By this point is seems silly to worry over $25. Though, money is money.

*I'm trying find one of my fans. My fractal case fans. The case came with 2, and I bought 2. I'm using 2, found 1 and know I have another somewhere. Might be out in storage.


----------



## TahoeDust

I can tell you first hand a H115i will have zero problem cooling a 7820x at 4.5. I'm just thinking I will send my 7820x to Silicon Lottery when that service is offered, or buy a tool and do it myself.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I can tell you first hand a H115i will have zero problem cooling a 7820x at 4.5. I'm just thinking I will send my 7820x to Silicon Lottery when that service is offered, or buy a tool and do it myself.


I ordered the H115i. You know I've already got $1600 or so into the upgrade. $25 extra for a newer designed cooler won't be the tipping point.









Yeah I don't mind deliding the chip myself with a deliding tool. If I feel the need I'll pick one up or send it in.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I ordered the H115i. You know I've already got $1600 or so into the upgrade. $25 extra for a newer designed cooler won't be the tipping point.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I don't mind deliding the chip myself with a deliding tool. If I feel the need I'll pick one up or send it in.


I went with a Kraken x62.
The reason, I've completely changed my mind about the whole build, yes in that short of time.

Asus x299 Prime Deluxe
Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB White
Some While Mag lev fans
All in a black Air 740.

So the Kraken will complement the little RGB on the Prime


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I went with a Kraken x62.
> The reason, I've completely changed my mind about the whole build, yes in that short of time.
> 
> Asus x299 Prime Deluxe
> Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB White
> Some While Mag lev fans
> All in a black Air 740.
> 
> So the Kraken will complement the little RGB on the Prime


Nice. White and black builds works out well.


----------



## xarot

Anyone yet have an idea how to read cache voltage on Asus boards? If I set it manually, I can read it in HWMonitor. But if I use auto or offset, I am shooting in the dark because it only shows the offset value so it could be anything say from 1v or 1.5V...AISuite III doesn't read it neither the UEFI.

Also, any ideas how to test the "per core OC"? I tried running Prime threads by setting affinity to 2 "CPUs" in Windows but no, that didn't boost my 7900X CPU to 4.5 GHz at stock. I would like to set a bunch of cores to 4.6 and the rest to 4.3 but verify stability too.


----------



## renx

I don't know this fellow and I hope his numbers are good. Isn't this ryzen getting a spank?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> I don't know this fellow and I hope his numbers are good. Isn't this ryzen getting a spank?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Yes in every benchmark, the 7820x stock is flogging the 1800x overclocked.
I just watched one of his other video's where his Ryzen system corrupted his Trident Z RGB kit and he had to use a Intel system to fix it


----------



## aDyerSituation

Oh god those gaming benchmarks. I'm glad I didn't go with Ryzen after all.
Underclocked vs max overclock and still getting spanked.


----------



## yoshpop

Alright, I am finally setup! This 7820x kicks my 1700 @ 4GHz ass. I'm more than pleased so far with the performance. The only thing I've done to the frequency so far is increase the ring to 3GHz and set all cores to boost to 4.5GHz. I have 2 sets of G Skill (3600 and 4200) running well together at 4000 18-18-18-38 with no problems. I'm using a H110i with Noctua fans for the time being; I've seen temps as high as 80C when running Cinebench (scored 2002). CPU-Z reports vcore at 1.8, I'm assuming it's a bug since HWInfo reports 1.2.

https://valid.x86.fr/3act8d


----------



## Xeq54

Well i got kinda unlucky. Got 7820x and MSI gaming M7. Put it together turned on and .... nada... just lits up fans spin up and no post. Just 00 on the display with the cpu fail led on.

The mobo behaves the same with or without the cpu in it. (No bent pins, tried without ram, checked cpu power cable pins for power)

I still suspect the mobo is dead and will be replacing it later today coz, i do not think the cpu can be dead, has that ever happened ? Or should I try replacing the cpu first ?


----------



## aDyerSituation

I'd try motherboard first since those are highly more likely to be DOA than a cpu


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xeq54*
> 
> Well i got kinda unlucky. Got 7820x and MSI gaming M7. Put it together turned on and .... nada... just lits up fans spin up and no post. Just 00 on the display with the cpu fail led on.
> 
> The mobo behaves the same with or without the cpu in it. (No bent pins, tried without ram, checked cpu power cable pins for power)
> 
> I still suspect the mobo is dead and will be replacing it later today coz, i do not think the cpu can be dead, has that ever happened ? Or should I try replacing the cpu first ?


I've seen a couple of these happen on intel Reddit supposedly bios flashback fixed it for them. Flash to the newest bios.


----------



## czin125

7% - 8% Single threaded if he kept the Core at 3600 vs 3600 according to the video above.

How does Skylake-X perform if you were to do the following?

NB Clock at 3600mhz
Ram at 3600 CL18 ( loose timings ) to CL16

Core mhz at 1000 / 1500 / 2000 / 2500 / 3000 / 3500 / 4000 ( just to match the R7 1700 at 4000mhz + 3600mhz CL18-CL16 )


----------



## SsXxX

thought this might be of interest


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> I don't know this fellow and I hope his numbers are good. Isn't this ryzen getting a spank?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Yeah towards the end of that video he mentions the 7820x beating Ryzen by at least 20 - 30% then says it isn't worth the premium?







Guess he's trying to appease the angry masses right now.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Yes in every benchmark, the 7820x stock is flogging the 1800x overclocked.
> I just watched one of his other video's where his Ryzen system corrupted his Trident Z RGB kit and he had to use a Intel system to fix it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Now that's funny.








.
.


----------



## Xeq54

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> I've seen a couple of these happen on intel Reddit supposedly bios flashback fixed it for them. Flash to the newest bios.


Care sharing a link to that thread ? Could be useful, though I am getting the board swapped in 2 hours.

Thanks.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xeq54*
> 
> Care sharing a link to that thread ? Could be useful, though I am getting the board swapped in 2 hours.
> 
> Thanks.


Somewhere deep in Reddit I'll try. But there was a guy with the msi pro carbon saying it was DoA then someone told him he had same issue and a flash to new bios fixed it and it fixed it for the original poster as well and a few others. I think it's an msi thing


----------



## Gettz8488

Can anyone with a watt.m reader tell me how much power the CPU is pulling running avx curious as wether my 750 will be fine for an OC with a 1080 7800x


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Can anyone with a watt.m reader tell me how much power the CPU is pulling running avx curious as wether my 750 will be fine for an OC with a 1080 7800x


Depending on the mobo, there is also an avx offset to keep TDP down.


----------



## jyuixi

Hi everyone and thank you all for the benchmarks and info you are providing us.

Im about to buy a 7820x and my main concern is if my cooler solution is enought to keep temps stable:

I have 2 rads 360 low profile (nexxos ST30 and Blackice Nemesis GTS) and one 1080ti in the loop too. I wish to OC it at 4.6-4.7 for a 24/7 but I dont discard pushing it further if the cooling solution is Enough. Im not going to buy it delidded or is not in my plans nowadays. I'll go for an Asus Prime Deluxe mobo.

Thanks for the answers.


----------



## snoopie

User from Hardwareluxx:

CPU: I7 7820X @ 4.7Ghz / 1.220 Volt
Mobo: Gigabyte X299 Aorus Gaming 9

Prime 95
8k 225-230 W
12k 209-223 W
96k 190-193 W
128k 246-250 W
1344. 170-171 W

The VRM Section on his Mobo is arround 90 degree Celsius.

Link:
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f139/intel-skylake-x-kaby-lake-x-oc-laberthread-lga2066-1164913-32.html#post25651490

Post: #788 and #790


----------



## EarlyAdopter

Got my 7820x setup on a Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 9 motherboard yesterday. For cooling I'm using a Corsair h100i v2 240mm AIO with Conductonaut for thermal paste between chip and cooler. No deliddeding.

I'm able to overclock to 4.6Ghz on all 8 cores at 1.20V, with 1-2 core boost to 4.8Ghz. Temperatures max out on Prime95 v26.6 (non AVX) around 88C to 90C. AIDA64 stress and other loads are more reasonable, 70C to 80C. HWINFO shows CPU power around 220W.

Oh yeah, and VRMs on the Gigabyte Aorus 9 max out around 80C with no direct airflow, just a positive pressure case and two 120mm exhaust fans right above the top VRM cooler exhausting the case through the AIO radiator. It's clear Gigabyte designed this motherboard well for OC. No bling obstructing airflow on the VRM cooler, and double the VRM cooling surface thanks to a headpipe and a second cooler by the I/O shield.

I'm seriously loving this motherboard and CPU! I suspect I have even more OC potential if I had room for a larger AIO or was inclined to do a custom water loop.

EDIT: Lol. While I was typing this out Snoopie reported on someone else with this same setup with very similar results. Nice to see the consistency.


----------



## Chargeit

So what kind of temps are ya'll getting doing other things? Such as gaming or work related tasks?

See a lot about prime95 but honestly I haven't touched my system with Prime95 since I moved to Haswell since it's a heat generating monster that doesn't reflect my real world usage. Don't plan on changing that for x299.

How about RealBench? Seems like that test get temps similar to what you can expect in real usage.

80c - 90c on VRM still sounds pretty toasty.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Can anyone with a watt.m reader tell me how much power the CPU is pulling running avx curious as wether my 750 will be fine for an OC with a 1080 7800x


I've been running a variety of AVX and AVX512 tests on a 7900X with 360 rad (no delid). Motherboard is the AORUS Gaming 7. PSU is 850W.

After increasing the TDP limit to 400W, I have to say that I'm unable to sustain:

An AVX load above 4.2 GHz without temps going 90C+.
An optimized AVX512 load above 3.8 GHz without temps going 90C+.
While I don't have a meter to measure it directly, the TDP limit seems pretty well enforced.

When running a normal or AVX load and the TDP limit is exceeded, the processor throttles the frequency.
When running an AVX512 load and the TDP limit is exceeded, the processor disables half the AVX512*. (Presumably by turning off the dedicated FMA unit, though I can't confirm if this is the exact mechanism by which it works.)
*When this "AVX512 throttling" happens, the clock speed of the processor stays the same. So you won't notice it except for a drop in temperature, power draw, and AVX512 performance.

So if you set your TDP limit appropriately, it will "find a way" to throttle it so it stays under that. Therefore you can use that TDP limit to budget your PSU. The more you give it, the more performance you get.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> So what kind of temps are ya'll getting doing other things? Such as gaming or work related tasks?
> 
> See a lot about prime95 but honestly I haven't touched my system with Prime95 since I moved to Haswell since it's a heat generating monster that doesn't reflect my real world usage. Don't plan on changing that for x299.
> 
> How about RealBench? Seems like that test get temps similar to what you can expect in real usage.
> 
> 80c - 90c on VRM still sounds pretty toasty.


I gamed while streaming for a about 5 hours yesterday @ 1.273v and 4.7GHz. My max temp was mid 70s. Real bench 15min test heats it up to ~84*. I know this chip is stable at less voltage (fighting mobo grimlin), so as soon as I get that figured out it should run even cooler.

BTW. With a 1080ti and this chip, I can play PUBG and stream at 3440x1440 and keep a solid 60-80 fps with the game completely maxed out.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I've been running a variety of AVX and AVX512 tests on a 7900X with 360 rad (no delid). Motherboard is the AORUS Gaming 7. PSU is 850W.
> 
> After increasing the TDP limit to 400W, I have to say that I'm unable to sustain:
> 
> An AVX load above 4.2 GHz without temps going 90C+.
> An optimized AVX512 load above 3.8 GHz without temps going 90C+.
> While I don't have a meter to measure it directly, the TDP limit seems pretty well enforced.
> 
> When running a normal or AVX load and the TDP limit is exceeded, the processor throttles the frequency.
> When running an AVX512 load and the TDP limit is exceeded, the processor disables half the AVX512*. (Presumably by turning off the dedicated FMA unit, though I can't confirm if this is the exact mechanism by which it works.)
> *When this "AVX512 throttling" happens, the clock speed of the processor stays the same. So you won't notice it except for a drop in temperature, power draw, and AVX512 performance.
> 
> So if you set your TDP limit appropriately, it will "find a way" to throttle it so it stays under that. Therefore you can use that TDP limit to budget your PSU. The more you give it, the more performance you get.


hmm I think I understood what you're saying. I should be fine at 759 in other words?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I gamed while streaming for a about 5 hours yesterday @ 1.273v and 4.7GHz. My max temp was mid 70s. Real bench 15min test heats it up to ~84*. I know this chip is stable at less voltage (fighting mobo grimlin), so as soon as I get that figured out it should run even cooler.
> 
> BTW. With a 1080ti and this chip, I can play PUBG and stream at 3440x1440 and keep a solid 60-80 fps with the game completely maxed out.


Cool. Not too bad I guess. Yeah I think I might work more towards pulling down voltage then increasing it.


----------



## zornyan

those ryzen benches are terrible, unable to sustain 60fps as a minimum in some titles?


----------



## evrae

Got my 7800x to 4.3 Ghz @ 1.1v, and ran AID64 stress for 15 minutes and max temp was 79. Is this a decent reading? New to overclocking and just aiming to do a moderate one. I'm on a Noctua U12s.

Scoring 1416 on the Cinebench R15 currently.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evrae*
> 
> Got my 7800x to 4.3 Ghz @ 1.1v, and ran AID64 stress for 15 minutes and max temp was 79. Is this a decent reading? New to overclocking and just aiming to do a moderate one. I'm on a Noctua U12s.
> 
> Scoring 1416 on the Cinebench R15 currently.


Sounds high.

Might need to step your cooling up. These skylake x cpu's is a lot for a single fan air cooler to deal with. I'd look into 280mm aio such as the H110i. Just make sure you can fit it in your case.


----------



## TahoeDust

Well...I started the RMA on my Gigabyte board and just ordered a Asus Prime Deluxe. Asus was my gut instinct from the beginning, I should have stuck with it.


----------



## TheFallenDeity

7820X. 4.7GHz all 8 cores @1.25v. Cinebench score - 2012. Still working on voltage as I think I can get it a bit lower. (I have my CPU set at 4.4 at 1.15 for daily usage.) Max temp was 70, all cores at 2-3c variance, 67-70, with VRM at 43.


----------



## Xeq54

Well I swapped mobo and I am finally online with 7820x and Gaming M7 mobo.

I got a full custom water loop.

I am currently sitting at the following settings, stable:

4600mhz all cores
3000mhz ring
1,15v

The cpu is averaging at 66-72 degrees across cores.
Cinebench score is around 2000

So far I am surprised. Positively suprised. (I switched over from Kaby)


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xeq54*
> 
> Well I swapped mobo and I am finally online with 7820x and Gaming M7 mobo.
> 
> I got a full custom water loop.
> 
> I am currently sitting at the following settings, stable:
> 
> 4600mhz all cores
> 3000mhz ring
> 1,15v
> 
> The cpu is averaging at 66-72 degrees across cores.
> Cinebench score is around 2000
> 
> So far I am surprised. Positively suprised. (I switched over from Kaby)


What's the Gaming M7 like?
I'm just so up in the air with what motherboard to get at the moment.

There's a couple I like the look of, but I got burnt once before with the x99 Strix, stupid board looked good but kept killing CPU's.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evrae*
> 
> Got my 7800x to 4.3 Ghz @ 1.1v, and ran AID64 stress for 15 minutes and max temp was 79. Is this a decent reading? New to overclocking and just aiming to do a moderate one. I'm on a Noctua U12s.
> 
> Scoring 1416 on the Cinebench R15 currently.


7800x 6 core @ 4,8ghz 1.28v. Ek watercooling. MAx 71C on core, and VRM is max 42









4,9 ghz is easy to boot into windows, but impossible to get stable in Cinebench etc Avx benchmarks. Tried 1.4v too,


----------



## MunneY

Welp,

My X299 Taichi appears to be DOA.... Off to a great start! LOL. Now I get to deal with neweggs awful return policy.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Welp,
> 
> My X299 Taichi appears to be DOA.... Off to a great start! LOL. Now I get to deal with neweggs awful return policy.


That is a bummer. What makes Newegg's return policy so awful? I am returning a X299 Aorus Gaming 7 that I could not get to apply voltage correctly. I just went online went through the return junk and printed a label.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> I don't know this fellow and I hope his numbers are good. Isn't this ryzen getting a spank?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Look a followup


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Look a followup


Seen. lol
It seems like people get touchy, but I didn't really care about his opinion.
With his same numbers, I come to a much different conclusion.
20-30% between high end cpus is a big difference. The FX was probably 35% slower than a older i7, and was considered almost as garbage.
Of course Ryzen is cheaper. We all know that, right?


----------



## evrae

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Sounds high.
> 
> Might need to step your cooling up. These skylake x cpu's is a lot for a single fan air cooler to deal with. I'd look into 280mm aio such as the H110i. Just make sure you can fit it in your case.


Thanks for the suggestion. Also just learning that AID64 with FPU Stress testing enabled is an extreme test. Woops!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> 7800x 6 core @ 4,8ghz 1.28v. Ek watercooling. MAx 71C on core, and VRM is max 42
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4,9 ghz is easy to boot into windows, but impossible to get stable in Cinebench etc Avx benchmarks. Tried 1.4v too,


Very nice!

I realized I was running a very taxing benchmark that stresses FPU. Using more realistic loads I'm sitting on 4.5 GHz @ 1.14v on air cooling (Noctua U12s). ~75-77 degrees during heavy usage.

In Cinebench R15 I'm looking at 1474 cb for mulitcore and 195 cb for single-core.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> Seen. lol
> It seems like people get touchy, but I didn't really care about his opinion.
> With his same numbers, I come to a much different conclusion.
> 20-30% between high end cpus is a big difference. The FX was probably 35% slower than a older i7, and was considered almost as garbage.
> Of course Ryzen is cheaper. We all know that, right?


You know I walked into my local electronics store to buy a TV a few years ago, I looked at 2 models a LG and their house brand.
So I asked the sales guy what's different, his responce was "You get what you pay for".

Kind of fitting in this case if you ask me, Ryzen will do the job for the money, it's impressive, but the Skylake-X cpu's will do it a little better with less hassles


----------



## 4ofus

So I'm looking to upgrade my old I7-3820 x79 system and I'm torn between the 7820x and the 7900x. The system is primarily for gaming @4k but I plan to start streaming and lite video editing. Also add VR at some point.

Think it's worth spending the extra $400 to go with the 7900x?


----------



## BroPhilip

90 is really kind of high for the VRM at the most I have seen the temp readout from the vrm sensor hit 60 with 1.23v and around 4.8ghz. I'm running the Aorus 9 as well
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *snoopie*
> 
> User from Hardwareluxx:
> 
> CPU: I7 7820X @ 4.7Ghz / 1.220 Volt
> Mobo: Gigabyte X299 Aorus Gaming 9
> 
> Prime 95
> 8k 225-230 W
> 12k 209-223 W
> 96k 190-193 W
> 128k 246-250 W
> 1344. 170-171 W
> 
> The VRM Section on his Mobo is arround 90 degree Celsius.
> 
> Link:
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f139/intel-skylake-x-kaby-lake-x-oc-laberthread-lga2066-1164913-32.html#post25651490
> 
> Post: #788 and #790


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EarlyAdopter*
> 
> Got my 7820x setup on a Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 9 motherboard yesterday. For cooling I'm using a Corsair h100i v2 240mm AIO with Conductonaut for thermal paste between chip and cooler. No deliddeding.
> 
> I'm able to overclock to 4.6Ghz on all 8 cores at 1.20V, with 1-2 core boost to 4.8Ghz. Temperatures max out on Prime95 v26.6 (non AVX) around 88C to 90C. AIDA64 stress and other loads are more reasonable, 70C to 80C. HWINFO shows CPU power around 220W.
> 
> Oh yeah, and VRMs on the Gigabyte Aorus 9 max out around 80C with no direct airflow, just a positive pressure case and two 120mm exhaust fans right above the top VRM cooler exhausting the case through the AIO radiator. It's clear Gigabyte designed this motherboard well for OC. No bling obstructing airflow on the VRM cooler, and double the VRM cooling surface thanks to a headpipe and a second cooler by the I/O shield.
> 
> I'm seriously loving this motherboard and CPU! I suspect I have even more OC potential if I had room for a larger AIO or was inclined to do a custom water loop.
> 
> EDIT: Lol. While I was typing this out Snoopie reported on someone else with this same setup with very similar results. Nice to see the consistency.


----------



## BroPhilip

So to all the 7820x owners out there what is your best 24/7 overclock?

Mine seems to like 4.7ghz I can pass cinebench with 4.8 at 1.22v but will fail at real bench and I am being conservative with my voltages.
I am still looking for my lowest voltage for 4.7 right now I'm stable at 1.18v

Setup
7820x
Fractal S36 AIO
Gigabyte Aorus 9
Evga 1000w G3
16gb crucial ballistic sport (dual channel for now until ram upgrade)


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> Seen. lol
> It seems like people get touchy, but I didn't really care about his opinion.
> With his same numbers, I come to a much different conclusion.
> 20-30% between high end cpus is a big difference. The FX was probably 35% slower than a older i7, and was considered almost as garbage.
> Of course Ryzen is cheaper. We all know that, right?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> You know I walked into my local electronics store to buy a TV a few years ago, I looked at 2 models a LG and their house brand.
> So I asked the sales guy what's different, his responce was "You get what you pay for".
> 
> Kind of fitting in this case if you ask me, Ryzen will do the job for the money, it's impressive, but the Skylake-X cpu's will do it a little better with less hassles


It's funny he used one of my comments about 20 - 30% being a nice upgrade and people buying Titan xp for a 6% gain.

You know, I keep hearing value but "IMO", I'm going use this platform for 4 or 5 years as a main system. I'll then use it as a back up rig for however long, maybe put my ol'lady on it. I just don't see the reason to cheap out on something that I'm going use day in, day out for half a decade and beyond.

Of course I understand why someone would go Ryzen. It offers great value. Just for me, I'll pay a little extra to give myself peace of mind knowing I got the best I could with what I was spending. I'll get more value out of that then I would saving a few hundred dollars.

And yeah. You get what you pay for.


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> It's funny he used one of my comments about 20 - 30% being a nice upgrade and people buying Titan xp for a 6% gain.
> 
> You know, I keep hearing value but "IMO", I'm going use this platform for 4 or 5 years as a main system. I'll then use it as a back up rig for however long, maybe put my ol'lady on it. I just don't see the reason to cheap out on something that I'm going use day in, day out for half a decade and beyond.
> 
> Of course I understand why someone would go Ryzen. It offers great value. Just for me, I'll pay a little extra to give myself peace of mind knowing I got the best I could with what I was spending. I'll get more value out of that then I would saving a few hundred dollars.
> 
> And yeah. You get what you pay for.


100% agreed. Besides, people tend to get obsessive over price/performance ratios, as if they were talking about consumables that they have to replace each week or month.
But in real, an extra $400 represents a 20% of the whole $2000 build.

And that is meant to be used for several years. (at least in my case)

Also, just as AM4 has improved during the last four months, I expect this to improve as well.
So being this much faster right from the first day...


----------



## Chargeit

Yeah I can't wait to see what x299 is doing in a few months.


----------



## allikat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> 100% agreed. Besides, people tend to get obsessive over price/performance ratios, as if they were talking about consumables that they have to replace each week or month.
> But in real, an extra $400 represents a 20% of the whole $2000 build.
> 
> And that is meant to be used for several years. (at least in my case)
> 
> Also, just as AM4 has improved during the last four months, I expect this to improve as well.
> So being this much faster right from the first day...


You have a good point. But not all of us can afford a $2000 build. Mine came in around half that cost, and I'm happy with what I got. I'm just glad Intel has enough competition now to really push itself forwards and give you guys with the $2000+ budgets something really awesome to play with.


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *allikat*
> 
> You have a good point. But not all of us can afford a $2000 build. Mine came in around half that cost, and I'm happy with what I got. I'm just glad Intel has enough competition now to really push itself forwards and give you guys with the $2000+ budgets something really awesome to play with.


And that's perfectly fine, and yours is a beautiful build.
I'm only against the "fudamentalist" opinions, such as "what is intel thinking", "X299 is DOA due to price", "AMD wins haha" etc.
I think there's a place for everything. If X299 was cheaper, AMD would be dead, then?
One of them needs to be dead?
Sure, intel could do better and do some things better, such as soldering their cpus, reducing the price even a little bit more, etc.


----------



## allikat

The only thing that needs to die is the rampant tribalism. Like it or not, Intel NEEDS AMD as a competitor, we've all seen the past few years where they weren't. The slow, steady almost insignificant IPC and clock speed improvements, the tiny difference between generations, the socket changes for the hell of it. With competition in the market that can actually rival them on some level, Intel can't hold back any more and keep their lead. They have to push out better products, or they'll lose entire market segments to AMD. This is good. Better Intel chips and boards means AMD needs to aim higher to compete too. This is a win for everyone. You guys get some really awesome Skylake X chips (we'll skip the *** of KBL-X) and I'm sure they're taking the competition seriously.

My only *** is the dual channel chips on a quad channel platform, that's the dumbest idea Intel has had in a long time. Dropping chips onto a high end platform that cut off half the features? Those chips are an abomination on such a powerful platform.
X299 is the right price for the performance it offers now, time will tell if that needs to come down when Threadripper releases.

AMD knocking on the door can only do good things for Intel buyers, like soldered heatspreaders and more powerful chips up and down the line.


----------



## xarot

The Strix UEFI seems to be quite a bit bugged regarding to sleep. When resuming from sleep, manual Vcore voltage is ignored as well as the fan profile. Manual voltage was resetted to CPU VID.

Also, getting quite a bit of sudden black screens in Windows particularly when doing nothing. I think we are going to see a few UEFI updates (I hope).

A bit disappointed that my 7900X is a lemon. I could use the ITP and hope for a better CPU. Although the ITP is $79 (I don't see € there).

I only tested old P95 so far, 1.205 V for 4.5 all cores and 4.6 is already around 1.26~1.27V. 4.7 is around 1.32 territory even for CB. But not going to use anything less than good ol' Prime95 with AVX/FMA3 disabled.









With my 6950X I thought that hey...maybe I'll get a rid of my custom loop because it really didn't need high end WC. Then, Skylake-X upgrade and not even custom loop can tame the temps.









So, it's been a rough ride so far and my BW-E setup was perfect. According to reviews often even faster in games.


----------



## czin125

There is a TR9 1950FX available with 4.2ghz rampage boost available in a month or two for an alternative option.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/2510#post_26098099
How would a 7740K perform with something similar or higher in games? Most tests are 5000mhz Core and stock NB clock and 3200 CL14 for the 7700K.


----------



## Xeq54

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> What's the Gaming M7 like?
> I'm just so up in the air with what motherboard to get at the moment.
> 
> There's a couple I like the look of, but I got burnt once before with the x99 Strix, stupid board looked good but kept killing CPU's.


Cant complain so far, other than the fact that the first M7 was DOA







But that could happen with any brand.

The bios seems to be fine and have not experienced any glitches/bugs so far. No issues with XMP or memory either.

I had MSI with my X99 build, switched to Asus for KBL and now I am back with MSI for SKLX and that pretty much speaks for itself







I do prefer MSI UEFI compared to Asus so that was a big factor in my current decision. And if you are not in for fancy leds, you can get the AC carbon, which is basically the same board without leds for a lot less.

Edit and it looks pretty dope: https://ibb.co/kbFMFF


----------



## zornyan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> There is a TR9 1950FX available with 4.2ghz rampage boost available in a month or two for an alternative option.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1621347/kaby-lake-overclocking-guide-with-statistics/2510#post_26098099
> How would a 7740K perform with something similar or higher in games? Most tests are 5000mhz Core and stock NB clock and 3200 CL14 for the 7700K.


I very much doubt threadripper will clock to 4.2ghz, it's two r7s stitched together and they struggle to hit 4ghz as it is, more common clocks is 3.8ghz on all cores.


----------



## Jpmboy

AMD is not competing from performance perspective. Price is their hook.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> The Strix UEFI seems to be quite a bit bugged regarding to sleep. When resuming from sleep, manual Vcore voltage is ignored as well as the fan profile. Manual voltage was resetted to CPU VID.
> 
> Also, getting quite a bit of sudden black screens in Windows particularly when doing nothing. I think we are going to see a few UEFI updates (I hope).
> 
> A bit disappointed that my 7900X is a lemon. I could use the ITP and hope for a better CPU. Although the ITP is $79 (I don't see € there).
> 
> I only tested old P95 so far, 1.205 V for 4.5 all cores and 4.6 is already around 1.26~1.27V. 4.7 is around 1.32 territory even for CB. But not going to use anything less than good ol' Prime95 with AVX/FMA3 disabled.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With my 6950X I thought that hey...maybe I'll get a rid of my custom loop because it really didn't need high end WC. Then, Skylake-X upgrade and not even custom loop can tame the temps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, it's been a rough ride so far and my BW-E setup was perfect. According to reviews often even faster in games.


This is precisely why I am waiting not only for 18 cores but to see how this platform shapes up don't want to beta test. Thanks for this information.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xeq54*
> 
> Cant complain so far, other than the fact that the first M7 was DOA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But that could happen with any brand.
> 
> The bios seems to be fine and have not experienced any glitches/bugs so far. No issues with XMP or memory either.
> 
> I had MSI with my X99 build, switched to Asus for KBL and now I am back with MSI for SKLX and that pretty much speaks for itself
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do prefer MSI UEFI compared to Asus so that was a big factor in my current decision. And if you are not in for fancy leds, you can get the AC carbon, which is basically the same board without leds for a lot less.
> 
> Edit and it looks pretty dope: https://ibb.co/kbFMFF


I really like my MSI. I am looking at the EVGA Dark or ASUS Apex. I wish MSI had a similar board I would go that route.


----------



## TheFallenDeity

I have the MSI Carbon X299 and the board is solid. Not overdone with RGB but just a nice touch. Very stable. It's hard to believe how stable it is for such an early platform. I'd think I've been on it for a year now or something. It's my first time with an MSI board and so far I like it the best over Asus Z97, Gigabyte Z170X.


----------



## MarkPost

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> AMD is not competing from performance perspective. Price is their hook.


well TR will smoke Skylake-X in MT tasks. Not in games though. But it's not intended to be a game platform anyways (SKL-X isnt either)


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> This is what I was thinking about until I hear about the TUF's vrms.
> I was impressed with the Strix after seeing that video, still don't like the fan header layout though.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Sigh ... I swore I wouldn't be looking at this thread for a while ...

I'm not a gamer nor need wi-fi so was looking at the Asus TUF mark 1 or 2. What did you hear about / didn't like about the TUF's VRMs?

Edit: make that the TUF 1 or 2 ....


----------



## ManyThreads

What are you guys' thoughts of using a Noctua NH-D15 instead of something like the H110i? Every review I can find shows them performing about the same, with the Noctua being quieter In fact I can't find any review that shows an AIO beating the NH-D15 by more than a couple degrees, and some don't even cool as well as the NH-D15. On top of that I was thinking you could set it up so the fans could also help cool the VRMs.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Sigh ... I swore I wouldn't be looking at this thread for a while ...
> 
> I'm not a gamer nor need wi-fi so was looking at the Asus TUF mark 1. What did you hear about / didn't like about the TUF's VRMs?
> 
> Edit: make that the TUF 1 ....


There's a plastic shroud over the vrm. This is a concern since there are some reports of overheating vrm.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> What are you guys' thoughts of using a Noctua NH-D15 instead of something like the H110i? Every review I can find shows them performing about the same, with the Noctua being quieter In fact I can't find any review that shows an AIO beating the NH-D15 by more than a couple degrees, and some don't even cool as well as the NH-D15. On top of that I was thinking you could set it up so the fans could also help cool the VRMs.


Question is how does the NH-D15 hold up to higher tdp/heat output. These chips are going put out some heat.


----------



## Norlig

Anyone with a overclocked CPU want to start up AIDA64 (30 day trial) and check their VRM Temps under load?

My Asus Prime X299-A has a dedicated VRM sensor.










I have the CPU running at 1.5Ghz with a intel 1155 cooler and a 40mm fan placed loosely ontop., as I am waiting on my own Cooler to arrive.
should be here tomorrow.


----------



## Jisuu

Hey guys, any way to monitor voltage in Windows on a 7820x? Mine reports 1.737 constantly in CPU-Z (Aorus Gaming 9), with no tweaking. I sort of want to mess with my voltage offsets. Cheers!


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jisuu*
> 
> Hey guys, any way to monitor voltage in Windows on a 7820x? Mine reports 1.737 constantly in CPU-Z (Aorus Gaming 9), with no tweaking. I sort of want to mess with my voltage offsets. Cheers!


Have you tried AIDA64?

www.aida64.com


----------



## evrae

My Gigabyte Gaming 3 isn't showing VRM.


----------



## yoshpop

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jisuu*
> 
> Hey guys, any way to monitor voltage in Windows on a 7820x? Mine reports 1.737 constantly in CPU-Z (Aorus Gaming 9), with no tweaking. I sort of want to mess with my voltage offsets. Cheers!


Download HWInfo and look at the VID for each core. There you will see the correct voltages. I believe the voltage that CPU-Z reports is the VRIN value. I have the same problem on my Gaming 7 board.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Norlig*
> 
> Anyone with a overclocked CPU want to start up AIDA64 (30 day trial) and check their VRM Temps under load?
> 
> My Asus Prime X299-A has a dedicated VRM sensor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have the CPU running at 1.5Ghz with a intel 1155 cooler and a 40mm fan placed loosely ontop., as I am waiting on my own Cooler to arrive.
> should be here tomorrow.


The max my vrm has hit as I posted before on a Aorus 9 is 60c with 4.8 oc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jisuu*
> 
> Hey guys, any way to monitor voltage in Windows on a 7820x? Mine reports 1.737 constantly in CPU-Z (Aorus Gaming 9), with no tweaking. I sort of want to mess with my voltage offsets. Cheers!


I use aida64 and look at the cpuvid it shows accuate core voltage. I have the same board. I think it is showing total cpu voltage not just core voltage


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> The max my vrm has hit as I posted before on a Aorus 9 is 60c with 4.8 oc
> I use aida64 and look at the cpuvid it shows accuate core voltage. I have the same board. I think it is showing total cpu voltage not just core voltage


The Aorus 7 should be similar right?


----------



## Jisuu

Both AIDA and HWInfo worked, thanks guys.








I've not messed with a CPU since 2012 when I got my 3930k... not the best, but stable 4.3GHz until I swapped it out for this.
Seems like I can get my 7820x to 4.5GHz at 1.2vcore with 75c max temp on a Kraken x62, this is fun! Shame 6 out of 8 SATA ports are DOA on this board and I have to get it replaced.









Now to figure out how to overclock my 4266MHz DDR4... never had to look into it back in the day with my 1600MHz DDR3


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> The Aorus 7 should be similar right?


Yes they are almost identical except audio and backplate. My has been rock solid so far. First gigabyte MB i have bought since the late 90's early 2000 range


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Yes they are almost identical except audio and backplate. My has been rock solid so far. First gigabyte MB i have bought since the late 90's early 2000 range


I usually stay away from Gigabyte but I am willing to give them one last try. Those temps are impressive.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jisuu*
> 
> Both AIDA and HWInfo worked, thanks guys.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've not messed with a CPU since 2012 when I got my 3930k... not the best, but stable 4.3GHz until I swapped it out for this.
> Seems like I can get my 7820x to 4.5GHz at 1.2vcore with 75c max temp on a Kraken x62, this is fun! Shame 6 out of 8 SATA ports are DOA on this board and I have to get it replaced.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now to figure out how to overclock my 4266MHz DDR4... never had to look into it back in the day with my 1600MHz DDR3


You might be able to get a little higher clock. Mine is at 4.7 stable with just 1.18v and I'm still pushing down the voltage and haven't hit the floor yet


----------



## BroPhilip

Mistake


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jisuu*
> 
> Both AIDA and HWInfo worked, thanks guys.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've not messed with a CPU since 2012 when I got my 3930k... not the best, but stable 4.3GHz until I swapped it out for this.
> Seems like I can get my 7820x to 4.5GHz at 1.2vcore with 75c max temp on a Kraken x62, this is fun! Shame 6 out of 8 SATA ports are DOA on this board and I have to get it replaced.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now to figure out how to overclock my 4266MHz DDR4... never had to look into it back in the day with my 1600MHz DDR3


On the sata ports are you using an m.2? If so if you are using the one that accesses the chipset it will kill part of the sata ports for pcie lanes...


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I usually stay away from Gigabyte but I am willing to give them one last try. Those temps are impressive.


I have been impressed only thing is navigating a new bios format


----------



## Jisuu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> On the sata ports are you using an m.2? If so if you are using the one that accesses the chipset it will kill part of the sata ports for pcie lanes...


Ah! I am using 2 m.2's... Christ, if that's the reason I'll probably just go hang myself on an RGB LED strip...


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jisuu*
> 
> Ah! I am using 2 m.2's... Christ, if that's the reason I'll probably just go hang myself on an RGB LED strip...












Interesting result in API overhead test, 4.8 GHz 4790K vs 4.7 7800X



This is probably part of why games aren't scaling like applications. The graphics driver itself probably isn't optimized for the new memory structure.

Also, disable PCIe link state power management in BIOS or OS (depending on which one you set). It's chunking 5% off of my Firestrike score.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jisuu*
> 
> Ah! I am using 2 m.2's... Christ, if that's the reason I'll probably just go hang myself on an RGB LED strip...


Glad I could save you from lost play time....lol. Mine has 3 m.2 ports and some use the cpu lanes some use chipset lanes which they have to pull from somewhere.


----------



## czin125

Do an Aida64 with that 4266mhz ram using 2400mhz NB clock and 2800 / 3200 / 3600+ if you can?


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jisuu*
> 
> Ah! I am using 2 m.2's... Christ, if that's the reason I'll probably just go hang myself on an RGB LED strip...


Here's how mine work.


----------



## Jisuu

Should have "RTFM", thanks for being so pleasant about my obvious newbieness. Time to go and tinker!


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evrae*
> 
> My Gigabyte Gaming 3 isn't showing VRM.


It's showing up in adia64 under sensors


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jisuu*
> 
> Should have "RTFM", thanks for being so pleasant about my obvious newbieness. Time to go and tinker!


No problem!


----------



## Chargeit

Ah crap.

My 7820x shipped. I got tracking that's marked as "First-Class Package Service" yet I paid for Priority. Now, I'm not so worried about getting the thing super quick but its been my experience that the less time a package spends in shipping the better your chances of it not getting lost.

I've had a few first class packages end up "MIA" over the years. Enough to make the idea of a $600 cpu being shipped first class scary.

Man, I envy those of you who have Micro centers nearby. Dealing with everything through the mail is stressful.


----------



## Nizzen

Testing Dualchannel memory on x299, while waiting for my 4x4 kit









g.skill 3600c15 2x8GB:


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Testing Dualchannel memory on x299, while waiting for my 4x4 kit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> g.skill 3600c15 2x8GB:


Nice, that's probably the lowest memory latency I've seen on Skylake X.

Can you run the 3dmark API overhead test?


----------



## MunneY

Okay... so my chip is DEFINITELY going to have to be delidded....

Under ROG Realbench my chip is stable at 4.7ghz 1.22v, but i have 1 core that runs to 102c which is definitely too hot to run. I can't fathom how its generating so much heat with so little volts.

Asrock x299 Taichi
7900x
32GB of 2400mhz Gskill ripjawz @2800mhz


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Okay... so my chip is DEFINITELY going to have to be delidded....
> 
> Under ROG Realbench my chip is stable at 4.7ghz 1.22v, but i have 1 core that runs to 102c which is definitely too hot to run. I can't fathom how its generating so much heat with so little volts.
> 
> Asrock x299 Taichi
> 7900x
> 32GB of 2400mhz Gskill ripjawz @2800mhz


AIO or actual water?


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> AIO or actual water?


actual water. DDC pump, EK Supremacy Evo, 480mm Aquacomputer radiator.

It should be MASSIVE overkill. I might try a repaste and see what happens.


----------



## Raghar

105C in mere Realbench, on 480 mm radiator? That's quite hot. Direct a fan at the socket for additional cooling.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> actual water. DDC pump, EK Supremacy Evo, 480mm Aquacomputer radiator.
> 
> It should be MASSIVE overkill. I might try a repaste and see what happens.


Yeah that doesn't seem right at all. Maybe Intel forgot the TIM on your cpu lol


----------



## Nizzen

Farcry Primal benchmark;

Ryzen 1800x @ 4,1 ghz 3600 c16-15-15-15 max OC : 70 min - 102 average -122 max fps
7800x 4,8ghz 4000c19 80 min - 115 average - 135 max fps
7800x 4,8ghz 4000c15-15-15-15 86 min - 117 average - 138 max fps

Looks like my 7800x 6 core IS killing my Ryzen


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Farcry Primal benchmark;
> 
> Ryzen 1800x @ 4,1 ghz 3600 c16-15-15-15 max OC : 70 min - 102 average -122 max fps
> 7800x 4,8ghz 4000c19 80 min - 115 average - 135 max fps
> 7800x 4,8ghz 4000c15-15-15-15 86 min - 117 average - 138 max fps
> 
> Looks like my 7800x 6 core IS killing my Ryzen


what ram kit is that?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> what ram kit is that?


G.skill 3600 c15


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Farcry Primal benchmark;
> 
> Ryzen 1800x @ 4,1 ghz 3600 c16-15-15-15 max OC : 70 min - 102 average -122 max fps
> 7800x 4,8ghz 4000c19 80 min - 115 average - 135 max fps
> 7800x 4,8ghz 4000c15-15-15-15 86 min - 117 average - 138 max fps
> 
> Looks like my 7800x 6 core IS killing my Ryzen


Do you have GTA:V to bench?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> G.skill 3600 c15


dang and you got it stable at 4000 c15?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Do you have GTA:V to bench?


Not on the Benchtable.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> dang and you got it stable at 4000 c15?


Passes all the benchmarks i tried. 3dmark timespy cpu, bf1 multiplayer, aida stresstest and some other games.

Looks like an good sample


----------



## MunneY

Yeah, I repasted and it still pushes the temps up.. I'm not sure what Im gonna do. Either wait on SiliconLottery or I can try and delid it myself.


----------



## ManyThreads

Can anyone comment on the KILLER LAN the Gigabyte boards use? I started to look into it but most of what I find is negative press about it, both on forums and professional reviews, and people asking how to get rid of it.


----------



## TahoeDust

Figured out the deal with the Voltage I was having. For some reason every time I was setting the manual voltage it was changing the adaptive voltage control to "Auto" which apparently means "Enabled". By manually setting it to "Disabled", it is holding the set voltage. Only downside is that now it is not lowering voltage when idling. If I enable Adaptive voltage, it will run a higher voltage than being commanded.

I already ordered a Asus Prime Deluxe, so I am still switching to that later this week. I just much prefer the Asus bios.

Right now I am finally back to doing so stability/temp testing at 1.225v.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Okay... so my chip is DEFINITELY going to have to be delidded....
> 
> Under ROG Realbench my chip is stable at 4.7ghz 1.22v, but i have 1 core that runs to 102c which is definitely too hot to run. *I can't fathom how its generating so much heat with so little volts.*
> 
> Asrock x299 Taichi
> 7900x
> 32GB of 2400mhz Gskill ripjawz @2800mhz


It's not generating heat more than normal... It's insulating heat, as a result of the heat not transferring fast enough from the die to the IHS. The solution is a delid to reduce or eliminate the gap and replace the non-optimal TIM used -- good luck.


----------



## Nizzen

Sm961 nvme 1TB m.2. Over 1 year old


----------



## 000000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Farcry Primal benchmark;
> 
> Ryzen 1800x @ 4,1 ghz 3600 c16-15-15-15 max OC : 70 min - 102 average -122 max fps
> 7800x 4,8ghz 4000c19 80 min - 115 average - 135 max fps
> 7800x 4,8ghz 4000c15-15-15-15 86 min - 117 average - 138 max fps
> 
> Looks like my 7800x 6 core IS killing my Ryzen


HT OFF the result of the above will be.


----------



## Gettz8488

Having trouble trying to overclock my 7800x don't know what setting to change on asus x299 strix I see turbo ratio for all cores but that's it


----------



## TahoeDust

Alright. I can call my 7820x completely stable at 4.7GHz on 1.225v. Cooling is a H115i with push/pull Noiseblocker 140mm fans. RAM is Corsair 3200MHz running stock 16-18-18-36 timing. Mesh was set to 3200MHz.

Here are the real world numbers...

In Cinebench it scored 2035cb in Multi thread and 204cb Single Core. The hottest core was #1 hitting 72c.



In Geekbench it scored 33189 Multicore and 5831 Single-core. The hottest core was #3 and #7 both hitting 67c.










In Realbench for 15 minute test the hottest core was #3. It hit 78c.



In Prime with AVX in a 20 minute test the hottest core was #2. It hit 88c. AVX offset was -500MHz) Personally I consider Prime with AVX a very unrealistic usage scenarios for me, so I am OK with this.



AIDA Cache and Memory looks like this...



Just for ****s and gigs here are some 3D benches with a 1080ti FTW3...

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13034422


http://www.3dmark.com/spy/2015990


----------



## aDyerSituation

Looking good! You think you can go even higher than that? Your temps seem in check.


----------



## Norlig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Can anyone comment on the KILLER LAN the Gigabyte boards use? I started to look into it but most of what I find is negative press about it, both on forums and professional reviews, and people asking how to get rid of it.


I've only had issues with it as well.

Tried doing the driver hack too.

Returned the am3+ socket board I had on my htpc and got a enterprise Intel pci-e network card for my NAS.

it would not perform at specs, even got less than 10 Mbit speed from it, put cable in laptop and got full Lan speed.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Looking good! You think you can go even higher than that? Your temps seem in check.


Maybe...I certainly plan on finding out. I will probably see what kind of voltage it will take to get 4.8GHz stable tomorrow...if possible.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Maybe...I certainly plan on finding out. I will probably see what kind of voltage it will take to get 4.8GHz stable tomorrow...if possible.


Good luck! I'm personally waiting on more motherboard reviews and one more paycheck before I pull the trigger. I plan on getting the highest binned chip I can as well from Silicon Lottery.
I'm shooting for 5ghz, but will take 4.8. Glad to see yours is doing so well without being delidded. Gives me hope


----------



## Mysticial

I was gonna say to give it another week or so for the AVX512 capable stress-tests to come out. But that should only matter for the Core i9s.

FWIW, AVX512-intensive code seems to be hitting hard thermal limits on my 7900X. 3.8GHz will hit temperature throttling at 95C with 360 rad no delid and stock voltages. At 4 GHz, thermal throttling kicks in and everything slows to a crawl.

Silicon Lottery thinks this is a problem with all the Gigabyte X299 motherboards. But he hasn't run any AVX512 tests yet.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Alright. I can call my 7820x completely stable at 4.7GHz on 1.225v. Cooling is a H115i with push/pull Noiseblocker 140mm fans. RAM is Corsair 3200MHz running stock 16-18-18-36 timing. Mesh was set to 3200MHz.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Here are the real world numbers...
> 
> In Cinebench it scored 2035cb in Multi thread and 204cb Single Core. The hottest core was #1 hitting 72c.
> 
> 
> 
> In Realbench for 15 minute test the hottest core was #3. It hit 78c.
> 
> 
> 
> In Prime with AVX in a 20 minute test the hottest core was #2. It hit 88c. AVX offset was -500MHz) Personally I consider Prime with AVX a very unrealistic usage scenarios for me, so I am OK with this.
> 
> 
> 
> AIDA Cache and Memory looks like this...
> 
> 
> 
> Just for ****s and gigs here are some 3D benches with a 1080ti FTW3...
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13034422
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/spy/2015990


Not sure I'd call 15 minutes of RealBench stress completely stable ... try 2 hours


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Norlig*
> 
> I've only had issues with it as well.
> 
> Tried doing the driver hack too.
> 
> Returned the am3+ socket board I had on my htpc and got a enterprise Intel pci-e network card for my NAS.
> 
> it would not perform at specs, even got less than 10 Mbit speed from it, put cable in laptop and got full Lan speed.


Thanks - looks like I will avoid those and just stick with my original plan for an ASUS board. Hopefully the TUF1 turns out OK.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Not sure I'd call 15 minutes of RealBench stress completely stable ... try 2 hours


Yeah...that is a fair statement. my personal standard for stability is really 12 hrs in Prime non AVX. That is what I have my 2700k dialed in at 5GHz. I'll get this one there. Just for you I will run an hour in Realbench in a few minutes while I hit the gym.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Yeah...that is a fair statement. my personal standard for stability is really 12 hrs in Prime non AVX. That is what I have my 2700k dialed in at 5GHz. I'll get this one there. Just for you I will run an hour in Realbench in a few minutes while I hit the gym.


Don't sweat too much


----------



## TahoeDust

BTW. The VRM only ht 63* during the testing.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> BTW. The VRM only ht 63* during the testing.


Oh noes, that fire hazard


----------



## Gettz8488

Can anyone help me out with overclocking? I'm an semi experienced overclocked but I have literally never seen this amount of settings I can't find where to change my cpu ratio on asus board. Do I need to change settings to sync cores or ? How do I change my cpu ratio


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Can anyone help me out with overclocking? I'm an semi experienced overclocked but I have literally never seen this amount of settings I can't find where to change my cpu ratio on asus board. Do I need to change settings to sync cores or ? How do I change my cpu ratio


There's a few options on controlling core turbo frequency:

1) Sync cores = Set all cores to the same frequency
2) By usage = Set frequency based on # of threads active on a core and # of cores active
3) By core = Set voltage and turbo frequency individually for each core.

#1 is the simplest.
#2 and #3 is for people who have good firmware and way too much time to tweak.

I can see #3 being really nice for finding "golden" cores. No need to set frequency based on the worst core any more.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> There's a few options on controlling core turbo frequency:
> 
> 1) Sync cores = Set all cores to the same frequency
> 2) By usage = Set frequency based on # of threads active on a core and # of cores active
> 3) By core = Set voltage and turbo frequency individually for each core.
> 
> #1 is the simplest.
> #2 and #3 is for people who have good firmware and way too much time to tweak.
> 
> I can see #3 being really nice for finding "golden" cores. No need to set frequency based on the worst core any more.


if I sync all cores will the pstates still be saved meaning they will downclock n stuff?


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> There's a few options on controlling core turbo frequency:
> 
> 1) Sync cores = Set all cores to the same frequency
> 2) By usage = Set frequency based on # of threads active on a core and # of cores active
> 3) By core = Set voltage and turbo frequency individually for each core.
> 
> #1 is the simplest.
> #2 and #3 is for people who have good firmware and way too much time to tweak.
> 
> I can see #3 being really nice for finding "golden" cores. No need to set frequency based on the worst core any more.


3 is good for controlling those cores that like to heat up to much. Of my 8 cores two will hit low 80c while the rest all in the 60 an low 70s.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> if I sync all cores will the pstates still be saved meaning they will downclock n stuff?


Yeah, they'll do utilization based downclocks unless you turn that stuff off in BIOS.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Farcry Primal benchmark;
> 
> Ryzen 1800x @ 4,1 ghz 3600 c16-15-15-15 max OC : 70 min - 102 average -122 max fps
> 7800x 4,8ghz 4000c19 80 min - 115 average - 135 max fps
> 7800x 4,8ghz 4000c15-15-15-15 86 min - 117 average - 138 max fps
> 
> Looks like my 7800x 6 core IS killing my Ryzen


NB Clock? Stock = 2400mhz

Is the gpu maxed out or can it still go up? Nice ram that you have.


----------



## Gettz8488

Can anyone give me a quick run down on setting turbo ratio and limits on asus mobo? Really lost seeing as I can't input 4.5 for example on ratio for a 4.5 boost. Anyone know which are the vrm temps under hwinfo?


----------



## Gettz8488

messed up my last post


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Can anyone give me a quick run down on setting turbo ratio and limits on asus mobo? Really lost seeing as I can't input 4.5 for example on ratio for a 4.5 boost. Anyone know which are the vrm temps under hwinfo?


The ratios are multipliers on base clock, which is 100 MHz. So to get 4.5 GHz you need 45 multiplier.


----------



## Gettz8488

Theres 2 settings for each core though i think It's Ratio Limit and another Setting don't want to restart until i figure it out. Did you do All core OC? if you did what settings did you use


----------



## curseddiamond

just set up my new ASUS Prime Deluxe x299 motherboard and my i9-7900x

currently set to 4.5 ghz and runs at 79c under the AIDA64 stress test

waiting until G.Skill drops the quad channel 4133 Trident RBG to see what this sucker will do

IMG_20170703_2032291.jpg 2579k .jpg file


----------



## Norlig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Figured out the deal with the Voltage I was having. For some reason every time I was setting the manual voltage it was changing the adaptive voltage control to "Auto" which apparently means "Enabled". By manually setting it to "Disabled", it is holding the set voltage. Only downside is that now it is not lowering voltage when idling. If I enable Adaptive voltage, it will run a higher voltage than being commanded.
> 
> I already ordered a Asus Prime Deluxe, so I am still switching to that later this week. I just much prefer the Asus bios.
> 
> Right now I am finally back to doing so stability/temp testing at 1.225v.


Note: My Asus prime x299-a has a jumper on the lower right corner for "CPU_OV". In the manual it mentions that it allows for more voltage during overclocking.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> NB Clock? Stock = 2400mhz
> 
> Is the gpu maxed out or can it still go up? Nice ram that you have.


Nb is 3000mhz.

Stock gpu 1080ti gigabyte. Boosting to 1950mhz.

Max on gpu is 2020 lol, so no need for oc this sucker.


----------



## scabpl

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> just set up my new ASUS Prime Deluxe x299 motherboard and my i9-7900x
> 
> currently set to 4.5 ghz and runs at 79c under the AIDA64 stress test
> 
> waiting until G.Skill drops the quad channel 4133 Trident RBG to see what this sucker will do
> 
> IMG_20170703_2032291.jpg 2579k .jpg file


VRM temp? I think about the same motherboard.


----------



## Xeq54

Anyone with a MSI x299 board who has tried out the adaptive voltage option so you keep power saving features (downclock and undervolt) when idle ? I have an issue with it. No matter what I set eg. 1,14v the real voltage in load is always 1,22 - 1,24 when I boot into win. I can cool it no problem, but I need about 1,13v for stability at 4,6ghz so running at 1,2+ is a waste right now.

Also, is there anyone who has tried some serious ring OC ? I am at 3200 with stock voltages, but I am unable to boot with 3400. I am not sure what voltages to touch. Tried increasing ring voltage but that did not help. Which voltages help with Ring(uncore) OC on this platform ?

We should maybe create a thread for pure x299 oc discussion to keep things clean


----------



## FeDoK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Max on gpu is 2020 lol, so no need for oc this sucker.


I think he was asking whether you were GPU bottlenecked during these tests.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xeq54*
> 
> Also, is there anyone who has tried some serious ring OC ? I am at 3200 with stock voltages, but I am unable to boot with 3400. I am not sure what voltages to touch. Tried increasing ring voltage but that did not help. Which voltages help with Ring(uncore) OC on this platform ?
> 
> We should maybe create a thread for pure x299 oc discussion to keep things clean


I've also tried to exceed 3200, but no go. I'm not sure there's much a benefit to going past 3000 though.

Run this at 3000 and 3200 in admin mode (it needs to send commands to CPU to disable prefetcher), and see if you get any lower latencies on L2<->L2 and system RAM

https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intelr-memory-latency-checker

Basically start cmd as admin and run mlc.exe without any arguments. It'll run a full suite of latency and bandwidth tests.

You'll want to restart after running it as well, to re-enable the prefetcher.


----------



## ttnuagmada

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> 560*140mm^2 is approximately 1.81x larger than a 360*120mm^2 radiator ( You also get more fans and more powerful fans too )
> 
> 7980XE = 1.80 x 7900X in core count. For moderate OC, you'll probably need at least 560*140mm^2.


Rad size isn't the limiting factor for CPU temps, heat transfer is. CPU dies are small and run high clocks and thus have a small surface area when compared to a GPU with similar power consumption. Combine that with poor heat transfer between the core and the IHS due to TIM, and this is why there is a much larger temperature delta between water and CPU temps when compared to a GPU. In terms of radiator cooling capacity, a 7900X shouldn't need anymore rad space than a GP102. The key to getting better CPU temps would be optimizing heat transfer from the core to the block, which means deliding and something like CLU or Thermal Grizzley Conductonaut between both the core and IHS, and IHS and CPU block.


----------



## Exilon

Depends on your dT budget, yeah? Unfortunately using TIM under the IHS has made it all but useless for one of its original purposes of spreading the thermal energy, so the job of cooling the CPU is that much harder.

For example:
Idle at 30C, throttle at 95C so you have a budgeted temperature delta of 65C.

Under overclocked 300W load, the gradient from die to liquid is, what, 50C? To keep a 5C buffer, you'd need to have enough at least dissipation to prevent the liquid from rising 10C. For a slim rad like the 280GTS, that's going to be 2K RPM fans in push which is nothing to sneeze at.

A 300W large GPU would have a gradient of just ~10C between the die and liquid, giving way more room for liquid temperature rise under load. You could let the liquid rise 20C without issue and only hit 60C under load, halving the rad space or fan speed needed.


----------



## ttnuagmada

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> Depends on your dT budget, yeah? Unfortunately using TIM under the IHS has made it all but useless for one of its original purposes of spreading the thermal energy, so the job of cooling the CPU is that much harder.
> 
> For example:
> Idle at 30C, throttle at 95C so you have a budgeted temperature delta of 65C.
> 
> Under overclocked load, the gradient from die to liquid is, what, 50C? To keep a 5C buffer, you'd need to have enough at least dissipation to prevent the liquid from rising 10C.
> 
> An GPU would have a gradient of just ~10C between the die and liquid, giving way more room for liquid temperature rise under load.


Well, i was assuming a 10C dT. 2 560 rads could cool that CPU and a couple of 1080 ti's to a 10C delta T with moderate fan speeds, much less the CPU by itself. 2 360 rads should make it easy to get a 5C delta T on one of these CPU's. Jumping to dual 560's would give you like maybe an extra 2C of headroom.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> The Strix UEFI seems to be quite a bit bugged regarding to sleep. When resuming from sleep, manual Vcore voltage is ignored as well as the fan profile. Manual voltage was resetted to CPU VID.
> 
> Also, getting quite a bit of sudden black screens in Windows particularly when doing nothing. I think we are going to see a few UEFI updates (I hope).
> 
> A bit disappointed that my 7900X is a lemon. I could use the ITP and hope for a better CPU. Although the ITP is $79 (I don't see € there).
> 
> I only tested old P95 so far, 1.205 V for 4.5 all cores and 4.6 is already around 1.26~1.27V. 4.7 is around 1.32 territory even for CB. But not going to use anything less than good ol' Prime95 with AVX/FMA3 disabled.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With my 6950X I thought that hey...maybe I'll get a rid of my custom loop because it really didn't need high end WC. Then, Skylake-X upgrade and not even custom loop can tame the temps.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, it's been a rough ride so far and my BW-E setup was perfect. According to reviews often even faster in games.











Skyalke-x has the same temp issue as kaby lake, need to be delidded or it will degrade fast due to high temperature when overclocked.
Games take advantage much more from L3 cashe than the L2 cache, the mesh architecture design of skylake-x is more for cpu's sever, this is why BW-E is faster in games due to lower latency between CPU cores and better L3 cache


----------



## Xeq54

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skyalke-x has the same temp issue as kaby lake, need to be delidded or it will degrade fast due to high temperature when overclocked.
> Games take advantage much more from L3 cashe than the L2 cache, the mesh architecture design of skylake-x is more for cpu's sever, this is why BW-E is faster in games due to lower latency between CPU cores and better L3 cache


I switched to SKLX from Kaby lake. And I must say that the TIM here is for sure a better quality material than on KBL. Surely not solder level heat transfer but much better. My KBL was shooting to 90s with mild oc without delid. My 7820x is staying under 72degrees C with room temp around 26 degrees C at 4,6ghz. I have the same water loop setup, so that means the heat transfer ability of the thermal solution on this cpu must be better. At least on the 8 core, delid is not a must for solid OC results.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

My [email protected] 4.3 max temp during games or any non stress test is 40 degree max under AIO cooler.
if I had the skylake-x, I will delidded it IF it is not dangerous, and have piece in mind for my CPU temperature, I think with such tools like the one created by der8auer, it is not dangerous, but again nothing is guaranteed and delidded a 600$ or 1000$ CPU needs a brave heart.
now the question is, how much a high temperature will affect the degradation speed of an overclocked skylake-x CPU.

https://www.google.fr/search?q=der8auer+DDM-X+(Delid+Die+Mate+X)&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiTpJfdsu_UAhVL5xoKHdc6CxgQ_AUIBigB&biw=1231&bih=602#imgrc=xZDnzBdkhh-yJM:&spf=1499163363302


----------



## Menta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Xeq54*
> 
> I switched to SKLX from Kaby lake. And I must say that the TIM here is for sure a better quality material than on KBL. Surely not solder level heat transfer but much better. My KBL was shooting to 90s with mild oc without delid. My 7820x is staying under 72degrees C with room temp around 26 degrees C at 4,6ghz. I have the same water loop setup, so that means the heat transfer ability of the thermal solution on this cpu must be better. At least on the 8 core, delid is not a must for solid OC results.


Lets see if that will hold, i remember testing my 7700k when i bought it and it did not heat up as fast, then i retested like two months in and saw huge temperatures difference, decided to delide.


----------



## BroPhilip

Question? On my temp readout in aida64 I have my core temps 0-7 and package temp and a cpu temp. This last one is not listed in hwmonitor under cpu but is in tbe other temp section but it seems to be the one that the gigabyte program sees as the main cpu temp....

The main question is it is a little erratic in behavior typically running much lower than the cores 0-7. Sometimes as low as 9c. Also this morning after leaving on overnight it reported a spike of 101c. But all the cores 0-7 only had a max temp of around 30c. I changed my fan curve more aggressive as the MB seems to use this temp for fan control. Anyone else having this issue. Could explain some of the high temps if fans are not ramping up as quick as this temp is reading lower than the actual cores..... I also had two monitors last night but it seems to be the same with only hwmonitor open


----------



## czin125

What if you added a koolance HXP-193 + a second loop with the radiator in a different room? Wouldn't that help a lot too?





92C in XTU by this German fellow

Core at 4900mhz ( Not delidded yet )
NB clock at 3300mhz
32GB Ram at 3733mhz 10-10-10-28 128 1T

He previously ran Core at 5000mhz, NB clock at 3000mhz, 16GB Ram at 3200mhz 16-16-16-36 631 2T ( 74C in a different benchmark )


----------



## Gettz8488

Haven't tested much but got mine running at 4.5 at 1.2 volts first try haven't done anything else to it of right now but so far stable for the past 24 hours


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> What if you added a koolance HXP-193 + a second loop with the radiator in a different room? Wouldn't that help a lot too?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 92C in XTU by this German fellow
> 
> Core at 4900mhz ( Not delidded yet )
> NB clock at 3300mhz
> 32GB Ram at 3733mhz 10-10-10-28 128 1T
> 
> He previously ran Core at 5000mhz, NB clock at 3000mhz, 16GB Ram at 3200mhz 16-16-16-36 631 2T ( 74C in a different benchmark )


Cpu-z says cl 10 even with cl19









Aida64 beta repport right


----------



## Removed1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wimpzilla*
> 
> If there is any PLL voltage setting, try to downvolt it a bit.
> Test stability, rinse and repeat.
> You could may able to lower the T° of a few °.


I repost this maybe it could be useful to someone willing to try.

Will not replace a soldered die but still able to lower T° under high oc.

On KB you could downvolt from 1.2v to 1.15v, with 2-4° gain!


----------



## BroPhilip

Anyone else having this issue it seems my master cpu temp is 10c lower than my package temp...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Question? On my temp readout in aida64 I have my core temps 0-7 and package temp and a cpu temp. This last one is not listed in hwmonitor under cpu but is in tbe other temp section but it seems to be the one that the gigabyte program sees as the main cpu temp....
> 
> The main question is it is a little erratic in behavior typically running much lower than the cores 0-7. Sometimes as low as 9c. Also this morning after leaving on overnight it reported a spike of 101c. But all the cores 0-7 only had a max temp of around 30c. I changed my fan curve more aggressive as the MB seems to use this temp for fan control. Anyone else having this issue. Could explain some of the high temps if fans are not ramping up as quick as this temp is reading lower than the actual cores..... I also had two monitors last night but it seems to be the same with only hwmonitor open


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Anyone else having this issue it seems my master cpu temp is 10c lower than my package temp...


Using Aida in several boards my CPU temp has always been different from core temps. CPU temp is higher during low use and lower than most during high use. It's the nature of the sensor placement. The package is always noticeably higher.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Using Aida in several boards my CPU temp has always been different from core temps. CPU temp is higher during low use and lower than most during high use. It's the nature of the sensor placement. The package is always noticeably higher.


The issue is the cpu temp is sitting 10c lower than ambient temp. If package is at 24c The main cpu will be around 14c. The core and package temps seem spot on but it's the master cpu that is off


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> The issue is the cpu temp is sitting 10c lower than ambient temp. If package is at 24c The main cpu will be around 14c. The core and package temps seem spot on but it's the master cpu that is off


Could have something to do with your cooling and case airflow. If you placed your setup in your sig it would help with these questions.


----------



## BroPhilip

Evga dg-87 case
Fractal s36 AIO
Aorus 9 x299 me
7820x cpu


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Could have something to do with your cooling and case airflow. If you placed your setup in your sig it would help with these questions.


Evga dg-87 case
Fractal s36 AIO
Aorus 9 x299 me
7820x cpu


----------



## Nizzen




----------



## Norlig

Any comments on this?








http://www.overclock.net/t/1633698/going-all-the-way-through-the-socket-mounting-holes-on-x299/


----------



## Nizzen

Farcry Primal benchmark:

Ryzen 4.1ghz 3600c15 70 min - 102 average -122 max fps

7800x 4,8ghz 4000c19 DC 80 min - 115 average - 135 max fps
7800x 4,8ghz 4000c15 DC 86 min - 117 average - 138 max fps

7800x 4,8ghz 4000c19 QC 83 min - 117 average - 139 max fps
7800x 4,8ghz 4000c17 QC 88 min - 119 average - 140 max fps
7800x 4,8ghz 4000c15 QC 88 min - 119 average - 140 max fps

7800x stock 2133c15 QC 63 min - 99 average - 121 max fps


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Norlig*
> 
> Any comments on this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1633698/going-all-the-way-through-the-socket-mounting-holes-on-x299/


But why though?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Farcry Primal benchmark:
> 
> Ryzen 4.1ghz 3600c15 70 min - 102 average -122 max fps
> 
> 7800x 4,8ghz 4000c19 DC 80 min - 115 average - 135 max fps
> 7800x 4,8ghz 4000c15 DC 86 min - 117 average - 138 max fps
> 
> 7800x 4,8ghz 4000c19 QC 83 min - 117 average - 139 max fps
> 7800x 4,8ghz 4000c17 QC 88 min - 119 average - 140 max fps
> 7800x 4,8ghz 4000c15 QC 88 min - 119 average - 140 max fps
> 
> 7800x stock 2133c15 QC 63 min - 99 average - 121 max fps


Really interesting. Can you test it at 3200c16? I kicked around going 4000+, but was not sure it would be worth it. What exact kit are you using to go 4000c15?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*


Oddly enough, your 4000 MHz configuration is performing a bit worse than my 3600 MHz config. Have you tested stability at 4000 MHz?


----------



## Norlig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> But why though?


/Shrug , I read in an old Thread about mounting an EK block, that the intructions included going through that piece of Plastic, and I felt it would be mounted best by doing that too


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Oddly enough, your 4000 MHz configuration is performing a bit worse than my 3600 MHz config. Have you tested stability at 4000 MHz?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


That's because you're using a 10 core chip, he's using a 6 core.


----------



## Jisuu

Anyone had any luck applying RAM voltages on a Gigabyte x299 Gaming 9 on bios 6a? Mine seems to read 1.2v no matter what.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> That's because you're using a 10 core chip, he's using a 6 core.


Is latency higher with a 6 core?


----------



## MunneY

Okay, well here is where I'm at right now. These core temp deltas are absurd.


----------



## mouacyk

They're finally here!


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Okay, well here is where I'm at right now. These core temp deltas are absurd.


I'm almost convinced that each core has its own VID. Maybe you can try per-core overclocking to keep the temperatures in check.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> I'm almost convinced that each core has its own VID. Maybe you can try per-core overclocking to keep the temperatures in check.


Whats even weirder, is that under aida64 and realbench the temps are LOWER than cinebench LOL. I think I'm gonna keep it here until I can delid it.


----------



## ssateneth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Ah crap.
> 
> My 7820x shipped. I got tracking that's marked as "First-Class Package Service" yet I paid for Priority. Now, I'm not so worried about getting the thing super quick but its been my experience that the less time a package spends in shipping the better your chances of it not getting lost.
> 
> I've had a few first class packages end up "MIA" over the years. Enough to make the idea of a $600 cpu being shipped first class scary.
> 
> Man, I envy those of you who have Micro centers nearby. Dealing with everything through the mail is stressful.


I dunno, I've only had good experience with USPS first class parcel. 2 day delivery from california to wisconsin! Why even bother paying for priority at that rate?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Ah crap.
> 
> My 7820x shipped. I got tracking that's marked as "First-Class Package Service" yet I paid for Priority. Now, I'm not so worried about getting the thing super quick but its been my experience that the less time a package spends in shipping the better your chances of it not getting lost.
> 
> I've had a few first class packages end up "MIA" over the years. Enough to make the idea of a $600 cpu being shipped first class scary.
> 
> Man, I envy those of you who have Micro centers nearby. Dealing with everything through the mail is stressful.


Who did you end up ordering from?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssateneth*
> 
> I dunno, I've only had good experience with USPS first class parcel. 2 day delivery from california to wisconsin! Why even bother paying for priority at that rate?


Thought First class was 1-5 days. Though in my experience first class takes longer then priority. I've had more stuff lost shipped first class. I'm in NC.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Who did you end up ordering from?


Saw a 7820x up on Outlet PC on Sunday and ordered from them. Should be here on the 6th.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Saw a 7820x up on Outlet PC on Sunday and ordered from them. Should be here on the 6th.


Nice. I think you are going to be pretty happy with it. I know I am. 8 potent cores running ~4.7GHz is no joke. And the CPU and VRM temp fear mongering was overblown from my personal experience.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Nice. I think you are going to be pretty happy with it. I know I am. 8 potent cores running ~4.7GHz is no joke. And the CPU and VRM temp fear mongering was overblown from my personal experience.


I can't wait to test mine out. If temps are an issue I'll buy a delidding tool when they become available. Though, any oc I'd do would be light. I'm not overly concerned.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Is latency higher with a 6 core?


No, but overall utilization of the IMC drops a little... This was true of BWE and HWE before it.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> No, but overall utilization of the IMC drops a little... This was true of BWE and HWE before it.


Thanks! +1


----------



## ELIAS-EH

So skylake-x is so much slower than BWE in gaming!

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/964-6/piledriver-zen-broadwell-e-skylake-x-3-ghz.html

They put RYZEN, BWE, and SKYLAKE-X at 3Ghz

I am sure, SKYLAKE-X is based on a CPU server.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> So skylake-x is so much slower than BWE in gaming!
> 
> http://www.hardware.fr/articles/964-6/piledriver-zen-broadwell-e-skylake-x-3-ghz.html
> 
> They put RYZEN, BWE, and SKYLAKE-X at 3Ghz
> 
> I am sure, SKYLAKE-X is based on a CPU server.


Your conclusion does not match their data:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *them*
> Skylake-X à 3 GHz est en moyenne 12.7% plus lent que Broadwell-E dans les jeux.


So, at a fixed 3GHz clock skylake-X is 12.7% faster than BWE in games (specifically)

However, SKLX appears to consistently produce clock rates approximately that same percentage higher than BWE.

As such SKYLX is producing similar game performance, but superior all-around performance at a lower price. As I've said a few times in this thread, SKYLX's new approach to cache _should_ disrupt the status quo a little when it comes to large memory image, multi-core applications. How exactly it will change it, we don't fully understand, but they have DEFINITELY changed the equations there.

There's no question that a decent chunk of SKL-X's advantage is pure clock-rate, but it brings that in ways BWE cannot, so....


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> So skylake-x is so much slower than BWE in gaming!
> 
> http://www.hardware.fr/articles/964-6/piledriver-zen-broadwell-e-skylake-x-3-ghz.html
> 
> They put RYZEN, BWE, and SKYLAKE-X at 3Ghz
> 
> I am sure, SKYLAKE-X is based on a CPU server.


Those gaming benchmarks are flawed. It's either their motherboard early bios, or whatever.
And it's not a server chip.
Besides is not meant to be used at 3Ghz. Gaming will end up being faster than the 7700K.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> Those gaming benchmarks are flawed. It's either their motherboard early bios, or whatever.
> And it's not a server chip.
> Besides is not meant to be used at 3Ghz. Gaming will end up being faster than the 7700K.


As above, it may not be a flawed test, but rather a specific reader drawing a flawed conclusion from the data.

We've seen more than a couple of "hiccups" in SKL-X gaming performance increase living up to its "overall" performance increase.

People have been dismissing that as "bios" or MB related, but I have a sneaking suspicion its inherent to the new cache structure. That said, its far from fatal as it lowers the second derivtative of performance (the increase in performance improvement) not actual performance delta/improvement over prior generations or competing chips...

I'm still waiting for 18 cores, so... watching the data closely...

If I can have a chip that brings the 4.5GHz+ for gaming on ~8 cores and 4+ for all-core turbo, then I will have it... it will be mine... If not, then they will struggle to beat my current rig for those (high-core-count) purposes...


----------



## Chargeit

Translated they do say Skylake x is 12% slower at 3Ghz.
Quote:


> Que dire... Oui vous ne rêvez pas, Skylake-X à 3 GHz est en moyenne 12.7% plus lent que Broadwell-E dans les jeux.


Translated,
Quote:


> What to say ... Yes you do not dream, Skylake-X at 3 GHz is on average 12.7% slower than Broadwell-E in games.


Would like to see them test at higher clocks. All platforms tested should hit 4Ghz. Basically scaling.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Translated they do say Skylake x is 12% slower at 3Ghz.
> Translated,
> Would like to see them test at higher clocks. All platforms tested should hit 4Ghz. Basically scaling.


More importantly, test all platforms OC'd to their 24/7 limit on the same cooling solution.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

"plus lent" in French means slower not faster


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Translated they do say Skylake x is 12% slower at 3Ghz.
> Translated,
> Would like to see them test at higher clocks. All platforms tested should hit 4Ghz. Basically scaling.


I doubt hardware.fr overclocked the mesh. Also, GPU drivers need optimizing for the new cache structure.



-20% driver API performance (4.7 Skylake should beat 4.8 Ghz Haswell by >5%) at same clock speeds is a big regression.


----------



## renx

Again. This is just week-1 inconsistencies. Ryzen still shows these kind of things, even after 4 months.
Some people will show you how Ryzen is 8% slower than the 7700K on gaming, some other people will show Ryzen as a 20% slower gaming cpu.
I've seen Skylake-X beating Ryzen by a wide margin, already. So it should do more or less the same to Broadwell-E.
Hardware.fr results are different from other results and comments.


----------



## xarot

Referring to above discussion about BW-E and SK-X in gaming, I have tried to figure out why my Skylake-X is a tad slower in Fire Strike Ultra with two Strix 1080 TI's in SLI when 7900X is clocked at 4.5 GHz and my 6950X was clocked at 4.2 GHz.

Anyone else that could do a comparison?

Also I am having major problems getting SLI to even scale outside 3DMark. Either SLI support has taken a nosedive in a few months, I have a game/driver problem or something is holding SLI back on my X299 platform. Eager to hear from other experiences, but I don't recall seeing this problem on X99.

Cinebench shows improvement on SK-X.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Referring to above discussion about BW-E and SK-X in gaming, I have tried to figure out why my Skylake-X is a tad slower in Fire Strike Ultra with two Strix 1080 TI's in SLI when 7900X is clocked at 4.5 GHz and my 6950X was clocked at 4.2 GHz.
> 
> Anyone else that could do a comparison?
> 
> Also I am having major problems getting SLI to even scale outside 3DMark. Either SLI support has taken a nosedive in a few months, I have a game/driver problem or something is holding SLI back on my X299 platform. Eager to hear from other experiences, but I don't recall seeing this problem on X99.
> 
> Cinebench shows improvement on SK-X.


Maybe the pci-e slot 2 is x8 eletrical vs using 2x16 with BW-e? Hbm sli bridge?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Is latency higher with a 6 core?


Cache is much bigger on 10core, he is using 200mhz higher NB. Secondary memorytimings is maybe tighter?


----------



## ELIAS-EH

I bought my new X99 STRIX from ASUS to replace my old MSI X99 pro carbon
but I am confused about the drivers on ASUS website (this is the first time that I bought ASUS motherboard)

there are many chipset drivers, Intel management engine interface drivers, audio driver .....
can someone tell me which one to choose, there are utility and driver, and different driver version.
regards


----------



## Removed1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> Again. This is just week-1 inconsistencies. Ryzen still shows these kind of things, even after 4 months.
> Some people will show you how Ryzen is 8% slower than the 7700K on gaming, some other people will show Ryzen as a 20% slower gaming cpu.
> I've seen Skylake-X beating Ryzen by a wide margin, already. So it should do more or less the same to Broadwell-E.
> Hardware.fr results are different from other results and comments.


Well Hardware.fr is a well known tech site, their gpu reviewer got hired by amd, leave any bias aside please, was just to point out their are relevant from long time into the hardware reviews.
It usually output good review in line with what the product actually is.
It is good to really know the real IPC without clocks, but on overall clocks/performances are the selling standard for intel as is the performance/$ is the amd one.

What they point out is the different cache architecture that impact a bit on gaming like on rizen platform. Nothing that could not be patched and implemented by bios. At the end of the day the clocks bring the balance in favor of SKX.


----------



## artins90

Well guys, time to say goodbye to my 2500k.
I found a cheap MSI 299 SLI PLUS and I decided to go all in with a 7820x.
Initially my intention was to wait until Coffee Lake to get a 6 core mainstream i7 but then I thought, thinkering with my PC and gaming are my only hobbies and Coffee Lake is going be only 6 cores, on top of that probably the IPC won't improve beyond 10%, they still need to fit a GPU in there somehow.
All of a sudden the steeper extreme platform prices stopped bothering me and I went for it, it should take them between 4 and 6 days for to ship everything.
The only thing that worries me like crazy right now is that I have an almost brand new Corsair RM 750X that I picked up to replace my old CX 550 that died 2 months ago after 4 years of service.
Do you think 750W will be enough to feed a 7820x + 340W GTX 970 (modded bios, it used to throttle up to 320W)?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Okay, well here is where I'm at right now. These core temp deltas are absurd.


that's a daaum fast cpu bro!


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Is latency higher with a 6 core?


Try disabling the extra cores and run NB clock at 3000mhz.


----------



## ManyThreads

Has anyone seen a 7820X with a Noctua NH-D15 yet? I really don't want to buy a water cooler if I don't have to, and every test I see has the NH-D15 equal, better, or within a couple degrees C of coolers like the H110i that most people seem to buy. I am also told the NH-D15 can easily deal with ~300W of heat. Still, I would love to see some real world results. I was also thinking the "pull" fan could be directed towards the VRM for a little extra help. I was hoping to get 4.5-4.6 out of an OC.


----------



## Kimir

If you ask me what would I choose between H110i and NH-D15, I'd pick the Noctua everytime.
I have the NH-D14, wanted to switch to watercooling and went with H110 on my 3930K, the Noctua was doing a better job. In the end I ditched the H110 on my dad PC (with a CPU non overclocked) and went full real watercooling on that rig. I still kept the NH-D14, was useful to test my 5960X before I get all the watercooling gear I needed.


----------



## Chargeit

Amazon shipped my H115i in its box. No packaging. I haven't see something like that outside of a case or monitor.

*Amazon is overnighting me a replacement. They offered $20 if I kept it but it isn't woth $20 to chance having problems with the thing. Can't believe it was shipped without packaging. Least they're fixing it. My cpu doesn't come in until tomorrow anyway.


----------



## evrae

I have a Noctua U12s pulling it's weight on the 7800x @ 4.5 Ghz. Would need to go water if I wanted more, but I'm happy where it's at.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

to conclude
OC BWE has same gaming performance as OC SKX.
BWE better cache architecture for gaming and SKX higher OC clock.
nice intel, they change the name only.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evrae*
> 
> I have a Noctua U12s pulling it's weight on the 7800x @ 4.5 Ghz. Would need to go water if I wanted more, but I'm happy where it's at.


That is encouraging - thank you. How are your temps under load? Since the NH-D15 is a much larger cooler with a second fan, I would think it would do a similar job on the 7820X.

Did you need a special mounting kit or is the included Intel kit good?


----------



## evrae

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> That is encouraging - thank you. How are your temps under load? Since the NH-D15 is a much larger cooler with a second fan, I would think it would do a similar job on the 7820X.
> 
> Did you need a special mounting kit or is the included Intel kit good?


Under heavy load it maxes at 77c. Typical use is mid 60s.

Noctua's 2011 kit fits the new 2066 the same, no issues.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evrae*
> 
> Under heavy load it maxes at 77c. Typical use is mid 60s.
> 
> Noctua's 2011 kit fits the new 2066 the same, no issues.


That's perfect, thanks. I think I am definitely going to try it out. Worst case scenario I'm out $100 and move to a big AIO, but I really don't want to since I build my PC's almost silent.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> That's because you're using a 10 core chip, he's using a 6 core.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> No, but overall utilization of the IMC drops a little... This was true of BWE and HWE before it.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Cache is much bigger on 10core, he is using 200mhz higher NB. Secondary memorytimings is maybe tighter?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Try disabling the extra cores and run NB clock at 3000mhz.


I definitely agree that our secondary timings are different, which is why I originally stated that I was surprised that his 4000 MHz _configuration_ was slower. When I saw that he tweaked primaries, I assumed he did secondaries as well. I would think that @Nizzen could pull off ~40ns range latency with a set like that (I know I want to be there







) I'm simply suggesting that there's some slack left in the configuration.

As far as core count and cache speed, I reran with 4 cores disabled and cache speed matched to 3000 MHz. Read/copy throughput dropped a bit, but everything else looks the same? The only variable that remains is cache size and I can't do anything about that.





Stock DRAM / VCCIO / VCCSA voltages for the stability testing below.


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Amazon shipped my H115i in its box. No packaging. I haven't see something like that outside of a case or monitor.
> 
> *Amazon is overnighting me a replacement. They offered $20 if I kept it but it isn't woth $20 to chance having problems with the thing. Can't believe it was shipped without packaging. Least they're fixing it. My cpu doesn't come in until tomorrow anyway.


They've shipped my RMi 1000 just like that. There must be something about corsair..
I remember selecting that new amazon box for the first time. Perhaps that box shouldn't be selected.
I didn't return it, but the PSU works like a charm anyway.
I'd actually take the $20 and keep the cooler, if the box is not damaged, that is.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> They've shipped my RMi 1000 just like that. There must be something about corsair..
> I didn't return it, but the PSU works like a charm anyway.
> I'd actually take the $20 and keep the cooler, if the box is not damaged, that is.


Corsair's aio packaging is far superior to anything you will get from Amazon. I'd rather them spare me another $&@?!ing box to dispose of.

It's fine. If it isn't fine amazons packaging wouldn't have saved it from Ace Ventura delivery service.


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Corsair's aio packaging is far superior to anything you will get from Amazon. I'd rather them spare me another $&@?!ing box to dispose of.
> 
> It's fine. If it isn't fine amazons packaging wouldn't have saved it from Ace Ventura delivery service.


Pretty much, yes. I've noticed the package is tough, and the PSU was right in the middle, surrounded by a lot of protection material.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> They've shipped my RMi 1000 just like that. There must be something about corsair..
> I remember selecting that new amazon box for the first time. Perhaps that box shouldn't be selected.
> I didn't return it, but the PSU works like a charm anyway.
> I'd actually take the $20 and keep the cooler, if the box is not damaged, that is.


Saving $20 isn't worth me having this not work once installed or leaking and taking out my pc.

It's in good condition but I'm not chancing it. They need to ship it in a proper shipping container.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that's a daaum fast cpu bro!


Yeah it'll be really fast when the delid tools show up!!!! I also need to grab some faster ram


----------



## Gettz8488

Question for anyone with a h115i Does it shorten lifespan of the pump to run it in performance mode? corsair link only has 2 settings quiet and performance for pump. quiet runs it at the minimum and performance at max but i see temps drop around 6-8C with pump at max


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Question for anyone with a h115i Does it shorten lifespan of the pump to run it in performance mode? corsair link only has 2 settings quiet and performance for pump. quiet runs it at the minimum and performance at max but i see temps drop around 6-8C with pump at max


No clue. I have never run mine on anything but performance.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Maybe the pci-e slot 2 is x8 eletrical vs using 2x16 with BW-e? Hbm sli bridge?


It reports x16 for both slots on X299, it was the same on BW-E (since I put my Intel 750 PCIe card into PCIe 2.0 on X99).

Bridge is HBM, yes. PSU is AX1500i.

Do you still have BW-E too to test?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> It reports x16 for both slots on X299, it was the same on BW-E (since I put my Intel 750 PCIe card into PCIe 2.0 on X99).
> 
> Bridge is HBM, yes. PSU is AX1500i.
> 
> Do you still have BW-E too to test?


Yes, I will do som testing in the next days


----------



## Jbravo33

Finally took delivery. Pointless seeing as no time frame when boards I want will be available. Delid in the meantime.


----------



## TahoeDust

I am just now figuring out how to get the voltage offset to work how I want with my Gigabyte board. Coming from Asus, I have had some learning to do. The good new is, that now with the voltage no longer pinned at 1.235, the 7820x actually looks to be running a good bit cooler. *I am 20 minutes into Prime 95 "Standard Blend" with AVX and my hottest core has been 79c. 9c cooler than it was with fixed voltage. It is actually spending much of it's time at 1.133v*, which I would assume is because of the AVX offset lowering clocks.

I am going to let it run for a full hour and see how high the temps will climb. Then on to realbench.


----------



## Menta

X299 VRM Disaster - UPDATE (en)


----------



## TahoeDust

Prime95 with AVX "Standard Blend" 1-hour temp results with voltage offset working correctly. Hottest core hit 81*...not bad for a AIO



Running realbench now


----------



## Menta

Great work from der8auer, catching all this and taking the time to explain in depth, X299 clearly needs some work


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> Great work from der8auer, catching all this and taking the time to explain in depth, X299 clearly needs some work


It's actually a buzz kill. CPU from hell and VRM BBQ grill, etc.


----------



## DNMock

Prelim testing on Aorous 9 board has VRM at 68 C and CPU at 63 C (custom loop on block) at 4.5 ghz during a 30 min Aida64 test.

Will get back when I crank it up a few notches.

started high on voltage btw at 1.3v


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DNMock*
> 
> Prelim testing on Aorous 9 board has VRM at 68 C and CPU at 63 C (custom loop on block) at 4.5 ghz during a 30 min Aida64 test.
> 
> Will get back when I crank it up a few notches.
> 
> started high on voltage btw at 1.3v


which cpu?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DNMock*
> 
> Prelim testing on Aorous 9 board has VRM at 68 C and CPU at 63 C (custom loop on block) at 4.5 ghz during a 30 min Aida64 test.
> 
> Will get back when I crank it up a few notches.
> 
> started high on voltage btw at 1.3v


I've got zero throttling going on with my Gaming 7 as well.

Big difference in cooling between the Gaming 3 that he chose to use for his video and the VRM cooling on the Gaming 7 and Gaming 9.

I've had cheap boards on previous platforms that would throttle once the VRM got really hot due to cheap VRM cooling. Nothing new. He's just made a topic of it.





4.9 GHz Cinebench R15 run with a 7900X on a non cheap motherboard.


----------



## rockstar1237

Was just thinking the same thing my dude, I notice that the gaming 7 and gaming 9 both have heat pipes leading to the rear IO for greater surface area.
Would be intreresting if we could get some tests on the gaming 7 / 9 and see the differences with that heat pipe.

The Asus Extreme and Apex which arent out yet both seem to have this heatpipe, tho reports seem to be they are redesigning the heatsink. Tho for me these 2 boards are kind of out of the question as they both are running E-ATX which is a massive pain in the ass.


----------



## czin125

CB 2778 almost 3000
Core at 4900
NB at 3300
32GB Ram at 3600 15-15-15-30 400 1T

Now that your timings are lower and NB was raised, what do you get in aida for latency?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I've got zero throttling going on with my Gaming 7 as well.
> 
> Big difference in cooling between the Gaming 3 that he chose to use for his video and the VRM cooling on the Gaming 7 and Gaming 9.
> 
> I've had cheap boards on previous platforms that would throttle once the VRM got really hot due to cheap VRM cooling. Nothing new. He's just made a topic of it.


You say cheap, but the Asus x299 Prime costs the same as the Gigabyte Gaming 7, but the Prime's heatsink is exactly like the Strix, small and only 1 row.

With the new information coming to light what do we do with it, kinda left all but the 2 Gigabyte boards worth buying.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rockstar1237*
> 
> Was just thinking the same thing my dude, I notice that the gaming 7 and gaming 9 both have heat pipes leading to the rear IO for greater surface area.
> Would be intreresting if we could get some tests on the gaming 7 / 9 and see the differences with that heat pipe.
> 
> The Asus Extreme and Apex which arent out yet both seem to have this heatpipe, tho reports seem to be they are redesigning the heatsink. Tho for me these 2 boards are kind of out of the question as they both are running E-ATX which is a massive pain in the ass.


Well bud, using better boards doesn't allow for the use of attention grabbing titles such as "X299 VRM Disaster" so I doubt we'll ever hear another word of it with regards to testing the boards that most of us will actually use.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> You say cheap, but the Asus x299 Prime costs the same as the Gigabyte Gaming 7, but the Prime's heatsink is exactly like the Strix, small and only 1 row.
> 
> With the new information coming to light what do we do with it, kinda left all but the 2 Gigabyte boards worth buying.


Relative to its own line, the Prime is cheap.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> CB 2778 almost 3000
> Core at 4900
> NB at 3300
> 32GB Ram at 3600 15-15-15-30 400 1T
> 
> Now that your timings are lower and NB was raised, what do you get in aida for latency?


Those weren't the same timings used for our previous conversation. After running that particular Cinebench run, I started actually working on memory. I just set those timings quickly for that particular run. They were far from stable.


----------



## DNMock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> which cpu?


7900x


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Well bud, using better boards doesn't allow for the use of attention grabbing titles such as "X299 VRM Disaster" so I doubt we'll ever hear another word of it with regards to testing the boards that most of us will actually use.
> Relative to it's own line, the Prime is cheap.


It's the most expensive at the moment...









Looks like I'll be shelving the idea of a TUF Mark 1 and grabbing a AORUS Gaming 9 for piece of mind


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> It's the most expensive at the moment...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like I'll be shelving the idea of a TUF Mark 1 and grabbing a AORUS Gaming 9 for piece of mind


The Gaming 7 and Gaming 9 use the exact same cooling configuration on the VRM.

As a matter of fact, the only thing different between the two is that the Gaming 9 has a built-in audio amplifier and 2 more M.2 heatsink covers for a total of 3. The Gaming 7 only comes with 1 M.2 heatsink cover. The gaming 7 still has a total of 3 M.2 slots in the exact same locations, but 2 are left uncovered.

You could save a bit of money going with the Gaming 7 if you don't need those features.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> The Gaming 7 and Gaming 9 use the exact same cooling configuration on the VRM.
> 
> As a matter of fact, the only thing different between the two is that the Gaming 9 has a built-in audio amplifier and 2 more M.2 heatsink covers for a total of 3. The Gaming 7 only comes with 1 M.2 heatsink cover. The gaming 7 still has a total of 3 M.2 slots in the exact same locations, but 2 are left uncovered.
> 
> You could save a bit of money going with the Gaming 7 if you don't need those features.


I was going to run 2 M.2 NVMe drives, my current one 950 Pro and a new 960 Evo, it was going to be a dual boot Windows/Linux system.
The uncovered m.2 slots are right near the GPU unless you can move the lower one to another connector as the bottom one would get a lot of cooling anyway









Actually if I drop the extra 960 Evo, and just use the 950 Pro, go the Gaming 7 I can still afford the GTX1080ti, sweet









The Gigabyte board will look odd in my ROG case though, my son will be annoyed when I pull off the custom ROG vinyl he printed for it..


----------



## rockstar1237

I'm not too sure if the gaming 7 has the backplate like the gaming 9 has, Interesting to see if it actually has any extra cooling effects from the rear of the board.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Aren't gigabyte boards having issues with AVX at the moment? Thought I read that somewhere here.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I was going to run 2 M.2 NVMe drives, my current one 950 Pro and a new 960 Evo, it was going to be a dual boot Windows/Linux system.
> The uncovered m.2 slots are right near the GPU unless you can move the lower one to another connector as the bottom one would get a lot of cooling anyway
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually if I drop the extra 960 Evo, and just use the 950 Pro, go the Gaming 7 I can still afford the GTX1080ti, sweet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Gigabyte board will look odd in my ROG case though, my son will be annoyed when I pull off the custom ROG vinyl he printed for it..


I run a 960 Pro installed in the lower slot with heatsink and a 950 Pro installed in the middle slot without a heatsink and I don't have any throttling issues with either. Admittedly, I'm not transferring 500 GB sized files, but they don't throttle at all during extended drive benchmarks or anything.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rockstar1237*
> 
> I'm not too sure if the gaming 7 has the backplate like the gaming 9 has, Interesting to see if it actually has any extra cooling effects from the rear of the board.


Good call. No backplate on the Gaming 7. Would be interesting to know if that helps.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Aren't gigabyte boards having issues with AVX at the moment? Thought I read that somewhere here.


I was having an issue with completely disabling AVX offset as it was doing it automatically by default. I'd love to tell you which setting I changed to completely remove the offset, but I can't remember and the problem is gone now. Other than that, AVX is fine.

Gigabyte's BIOS is not very user friendly. I definitely prefer Asus BIOS for sure.


----------



## Mysticial

I have my system running with the Gaming 7 since Friday. A few things I'd like to mention:

I never was able to overheat the VRMs. They usually stayed below 70C.
The auto settings don't seem to apply the AVX and AVX512 offsets when they are needed the most. Putting a single-threaded AVX512 task on the system will crash it when it schedules it on the weaker of the "preferred cores" and turbos up to 4.5 GHz. But they are consistent once you manually set them. It's just the auto settings that are messed up.
When overclocked, the board has major "phantom throttling" issues where the performance and IPC drops drastically without a drop in clock speed. Some of the throttling is due to power limits and maxing out the power limits helps a little bit. But it's not possible to completely avoid the phantom throttling. Silicon Lottery has noticed the same thing and for this reason alone, he cannot use the gigabyte boards to do his binning.
In fact, the phantom throttling is so severe that I found it very difficult to overheat my chip. It kicks in long before the chip gets too hot.
I've only noticed the phantom throttling with AVX512 code and it starts at around 3.9 GHz. I haven't tried pushing the clocks on normal code. But Silicon Lottery (among others) is noticing it at the 4.7+ GHz range for normal applications/benchmarks as well.

Because of this "phantom throttling", it's very easy to get your chip to run at 5.0 GHz on air and have it pass a stress test and not overheat. While CPUz shows it as 5.0 GHz the whole time, in reality, the chip is throttling the IPC and is running at less than half speed. For example: http://forum.hwbot.org/showpost.php?p=490856&postcount=7

To summarize: You will be very happy if you don't pay attention to the actual performance you are getting. And you will be mad if you do.

I hope all of this can be fixed with a BIOS update. Throttling is ok as long as:

I know when it happens.
I can control it. (disable it)
Currently #1 is not met on any X299 motherboards. The current Gigabyte boards don't satisfy #2.


----------



## BroPhilip

This is what I have been screaming. I get using the available boards from Asus and Msi but why not get the top board from Gigabyte. If I was a Gigabyte rep I would be at his door, giving him free Aorus 9 board
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I've got zero throttling going on with my Gaming 7 as well.
> 
> Big difference in cooling between the Gaming 3 that he chose to use for his video and the VRM cooling on the Gaming 7 and Gaming 9.
> 
> I've had cheap boards on previous platforms that would throttle once the VRM got really hot due to cheap VRM cooling. Nothing new. He's just made a topic of it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.9 GHz Cinebench R15 run with a 7900X on a non cheap motherboard.


----------



## rockstar1237

For those on the Gaming 7, you guys all on the F7a Bios?

Just wondering if there any was improvements or not,

http://www.gigabyte.com.au/Motherboard/X299-AORUS-Gaming-7-rev-10#support-dl


----------



## aDyerSituation

Choosing a motherboard has become quite a mess for me.
Most the boards I was considering only come with 1x 8 pin which appear to be a problem
On top of that, still have little clue on which boards have solid VRM cooling(besides gaming 7 & 9)

I just don't get how there aren't more reviews out for these boards yet. The ones that are out fail to mention any VRM temps or throttling under load.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rockstar1237*
> 
> For those on the Gaming 7, you guys all on the F7a Bios?
> 
> Just wondering if there any was improvements or not,
> 
> http://www.gigabyte.com.au/Motherboard/X299-AORUS-Gaming-7-rev-10#support-dl


Yes, I upgraded to F7a before I even installed an OS.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Choosing a motherboard has become quite a mess for me.
> Most the boards I was considering only come with 1x 8 pin which appear to be a problem
> On top of that, still have little clue on which boards have solid VRM cooling(besides gaming 7 & 9)
> 
> I just don't get how there aren't more reviews out for these boards yet. The ones that are out fail to mention any VRM temps or throttling under load.


They don't mention the vrm problem because it's only come to light.
Not to mention all these sites want to be first and overlook the fine details.

Over here barely any x299 are in stock and there's no cpus until the 11th.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> They don't mention the vrm problem because it's only come to light.
> Not to mention all these sites want to be first and overlook the fine details.
> 
> Over here barely any x299 are in stock and there's no cpus until the 11th.


that's something that should be tested regardless IMO


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I have my system running with the Gaming 7 since Friday. A few things I'd like to mention:
> 
> In fact, the phantom throttling is so severe that I found it very difficult to overheat my chip. It kicks in long before the chip gets too hot.
> I've only noticed the phantom throttling with AVX512 code and it starts at around 3.9 GHz. I haven't tried pushing the clocks on normal code. But Silicon Lottery (among others) is noticing it at the 4.7+ GHz range for normal applications/benchmarks as well.
> 
> ...
> 
> Currently #1 is not met on any X299 motherboards. The current Gigabyte boards don't satisfy #2.


What does HWInfo say under Performance Limit Reasons field in the sensor screen when it starts throttling? I'd expect that to at least show turbo attenuation.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> that's something that should be tested regardless IMO


Most reviewers just pop the CPU in and maybe touch the core multiplier for a overclocking page. Unless they delid and mess with the VR current limits, they'll throttle long before hitting the VRM temperature issues.


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Choosing a motherboard has become quite a mess for me.
> Most the boards I was considering only come with 1x 8 pin which appear to be a problem
> On top of that, still have little clue on which boards have solid VRM cooling(besides gaming 7 & 9)
> 
> I just don't get how there aren't more reviews out for these boards yet. The ones that are out fail to mention any VRM temps or throttling under load.


Not to mention the only Asus boards that are coming next month are only E-ATX boards, which for the most of us wont fit in any cases that we prefer.

Not sure if MSI have any more boards coming, tho none of theirs have any extra cooling for VRM, just the same old crappola, and same with Asrock.
EVGA only has 1 board with better VRM cooling, the FTW-K which has a heatpipe go down the right side of the VRM shared with a heatsink with the chipset.

So far all I can see is,
Gaming 7 / 9 (standard ATX)
EVGA FTW-K (E-ATX Board)
Asus Apex (E-ATX Board)
Asus Extreme (E-ATX Board)

Gigabyte seem to be the only company, with boards even close for the next 6 months that have "more" VRM cooling and remain in the standard ATX form factor.
Heres hoping you boys get a Bios update to solve some OC issues,
Very close to pulling the trigger on my new system


----------



## Mysticial

der8auer's latest video discusses the "phantom throttling". Including the weirdness with Gigabyte boards. I'm gonna try his suggestion when I get the chance. (the box is busy right now)


----------



## Chargeit

I think people need to watch der8auer's latest video explaining why he gets the results he does. Has to do with increasing the temp at which the cpu throttles and the current percentage.

Basically the reason you're not seeing the temps he's seeing is because there's throttling happening and power limits being hit. Removed these limits and you're likely to see some vrm temp issues.

Maybe should of taken some notes from the video.

*Yeah, the same as the post above.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I think people need to watch der8auer's latest video explaining why he gets the results he does. Has to do with increasing the temp at which the cpu throttles and the current percentage.
> 
> Basically the reason you're not seeing the temps he's seeing is because there's throttling happening and power limits being hit. Removed these limits and you're likely to see some vrm temp issues.
> 
> Maybe should of taken some notes from the video.
> 
> *Yeah, the same as the post above.


I'm interested in your results with the Tuf Mark 1.
Got a sneaking suspicion it's going to be the same and throttle like the other same tier boards.


----------



## BroPhilip

Something is really weird with tech reviewers not even touching x299. It's like they are trying to prove a point or flex their muscles toward intel. Only reviews I have seen basicly say the 4 core parts on x299 are stupid and nothing else about the rest of the platform. Only TTL has been really trying it seems....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Choosing a motherboard has become quite a mess for me.
> Most the boards I was considering only come with 1x 8 pin which appear to be a problem
> On top of that, still have little clue on which boards have solid VRM cooling(besides gaming 7 & 9)
> 
> I just don't get how there aren't more reviews out for these boards yet. The ones that are out fail to mention any VRM temps or throttling under load.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I'm interested in your results with the Tuf Mark 1.
> Got a sneaking suspicion it's going to be the same and throttle like the other same tier boards.


I'll be honest I'm sitting here considering returning the mark 1 before I waste my time installing it and waiting on the Rampage or Apex.


----------



## TahoeDust

Maybe the throttling is there for a reason? I mean even race cars have rev limiters...


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'll be honest I'm sitting here considering returning the mark 1 before I waste my time installing it and waiting on the Rampage or Apex.


Looks like a safe bet, seems as thou if you want to do some serious OCing, going to need anything that has extra VRM cooling, be it gig's 7/9 boards or asus' extreme / apex. Out of interest, what case would you put the Extreme / Apex in if you did go that route, I cant really find an E-ATX case i like, closest thing is the Evolv, but alas Asus EATX is too big...slightly


----------



## TahoeDust

My only complaint with my Gigabyte board is in the BIOS. I want to run offset voltage, but to get the right max voltage at 4.7GHz, I have to run a negative offset. This is apparently causing failure to boot issues, I would assume because the voltage is too low when it is clocked down at startup.


----------



## TahoeDust

Do you guys thing that the Prime Deluxe would be enough to overclock my 7820x to 4.7-4.8GHz? I have a Gigabyte 7, but really prefer the Asus BIOS.


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Maybe the throttling is there for a reason? I mean even race cars have rev limiters...


Too true, and based on some of the Performance you boys have posted, this thing screams in pretty much every application known to man.

I kinda get fed up seeing the Ryzen / threadripper memes, sometimes people do like paying to have the best, and its not a tangible, intel branding best, its a, these are the fastest CPUs money can buy....
Some people buy a 1070, and thats cool, and some people buy a 7700k and thats cool too, some of us want at 1080TI with a 8 core highest IPC available processor, just so happens Intel holds that crown.

Personally, i've found spending the extra has always yielded me a happy camper

I got my 3930k back at the end of 2011, and its still rocking 4.5 solid, its whats making me so indecisive on upgrading.


----------



## BroPhilip

This is odd.. I have my voltage set at 1.18 and 4.7ghz and it doesn't go over the voltage I set.... I do agree the bios is not as good as ASUS. Have you tried setting it through the intel XTU? I have played with it aliitle. Not quite sure how well it does
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> My only complaint with my Gigabyte board is in the BIOS. I want to run offset voltage, but to get the right max voltage at 4.7GHz, I have to run a negative offset. This is apparently causing failure to boot issues, I would assume because the voltage is too low when it is clocked down at startup.


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Do you guys thing that the Prime Deluxe would be enough to overclock my 7820x to 4.7-4.8GHz? I have a Gigabyte 7, but really prefer the Asus BIOS.


2bh, it looks like your better sticking with ur 7, on the Prime you might be able to boot and CPU-Z may show the OC but as in De8eurs vid, it might just be running at half mask and reporting wrong with the stealth throttling.

Giga will update the bios and iron out the kinks, but for the moment, looks like your still running with the best thats available, no one else is selling any boards that have the extra surface area for the VRM's

Edit: If you were really wanting the Asus Bios tho, IMO your best bet is to wait for the Extreme / Apex boards coming, both will have the proper cooling on the VRMs, just need to get u a E-ATX case and you'll be chillin


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> This is odd.. I have my voltage set at 1.18 and 4.7ghz and it doesn't go over the voltage I set.... I do agree the bios is not as good as ASUS. Have you tried setting it through the intel XTU? I have played with it aliitle. Not quite sure how well it does


I can set it to a fixed voltage and it keeps it. I want to set the offset voltage so that it hits 1.235v max and drops appropriately at idle. To get the 1.235 max voltage, I have to enter -.038v in the voltage offset. This is due to the fact when I set 4.7GHz the board demands 1.273v by default. Unfortunately this means at startup the voltage is so low, it will not boot 90% of the time.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Maybe the throttling is there for a reason? I mean even race cars have rev limiters...


ASUS did warn us that Prime95 on Haswell-E 5960X pulling 400W through the CPU can blow up the FIVR.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rockstar1237*
> 
> 2bh, it looks like your better sticking with ur 7, on the Prime you might be able to boot and CPU-Z may show the OC but as in De8eurs vid, it might just be running at half mask and reporting wrong with the stealth throttling.
> 
> Giga will update the bios and iron out the kinks, but for the moment, looks like your still running with the best thats available, no one else is selling any boards that have the extra surface area for the VRM's
> 
> Edit: If you were really wanting the Asus Bios tho, IMO your best bet is to wait for the Extreme / Apex boards coming, both will have the proper cooling on the VRMs, just need to get u a E-ATX case and you'll be chillin


I would wait for the Apex or Extreme, but my return window on the Gigabyte 7 will be gone by then. I'm torn.


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I would wait for the Apex or Extreme, but my return window on the Gigabyte 7 will be gone by then. I'm torn.


How much longer you got on your return window?

Maybe wait for the last day or so on your return window and hope that Giga have a new Bios out that fixes the voltage memes. I honestly think its just a matter of when, but then you'd be waiting till mid/late august before you can get ur hands on an extreme, and something tells me they are going to be in limited supply from Asus.
If by then aswell could always sell ur Gbt second hand at a small loss, if your still not sold on the board and really want the Asus.

And hopefully the cost isnt rediculous, im sure they are going to be demanding a spicy meatball for their Oled display memes on the Rear IO

Out of interest, anyone else really dislike the ROG logos just under the CPU? I always find it a masssssive pain in the ass to push the pcie lever down and remove my gfx card, specially now with massive triple slot coolers.


----------



## Menta

Up to 8 core these issues wont be too bad and like he said depends on OC and some specific situations or trying to pull every ounce of that the hardware has to offer.

I would bet on good cooling maybe find a way to put some active cooling in the VRM zone. A simple fan.blowing some air will help, maybe the back fan blowing air inside the case. just a thought.

wait for some bios fixes and check those power limitations


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> What does HWInfo say under Performance Limit Reasons field in the sensor screen when it starts throttling? I'd expect that to at least show turbo attenuation.
> Most reviewers just pop the CPU in and maybe touch the core multiplier for a overclocking page. Unless they delid and mess with the VR current limits, they'll throttle long before hitting the VRM temperature issues.


I haven't checked. But I'll take a look the next time I tweak the settings.


----------



## Jbravo33

an info on delid tool yet?


----------



## DNMock

Can vouch for phantom throttling. Multiplier set to 48, but as I watch the core AIDA 64 built in CPUID, it bounces from 44 to 47 multiplier on the chip. Still the temps are well within reasonable range barely cracking 60 C on water.

Tried enabling all the turbo's to 48 multiplier and disabling all the setting and forcing a 48 multiplier and no luck either way.

Already rolling over 1.3 volts on the CPU, don't feeling like pushing my luck until the kinks are worked out.

As a plus note, Even using a laser thermometer, the VRM stay nice and cool in the 50 to 60 range.

I feel like this phantom throttling issue is a bios problem, and will be rectified in the near future, at least I hope. If not, I'll try playing with the BLK see is that gets me better results.


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DNMock*
> 
> Can vouch for phantom throttling. Multiplier set to 48, but as I watch the core AIDA 64 built in CPUID, it bounces from 44 to 47 multiplier on the chip. Still the temps are well within reasonable range barely cracking 60 C on water.
> 
> Tried enabling all the turbo's to 48 multiplier and disabling all the setting and forcing a 48 multiplier and no luck either way.
> 
> Already rolling over 1.3 volts on the CPU, don't feeling like pushing my luck until the kinks are worked out.
> 
> As a plus note, Even using a laser thermometer, the VRM stay nice and cool in the 50 to 60 range.


Which mobo u got again my dude?

Edit: Nvm, see u got the Gaming 9, looks at tho the added surface area working out well there for GBT


----------



## DNMock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rockstar1237*
> 
> Which mobo u got again my dude?


Aorous 9


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DNMock*
> 
> Can vouch for phantom throttling. Multiplier set to 48, but as I watch the core AIDA 64 built in CPUID, it bounces from 44 to 47 multiplier on the chip. Still the temps are well within reasonable range barely cracking 60 C on water.
> 
> Tried enabling all the turbo's to 48 multiplier and disabling all the setting and forcing a 48 multiplier and no luck either way.
> 
> Already rolling over 1.3 volts on the CPU, don't feeling like pushing my luck until the kinks are worked out.
> 
> As a plus note, Even using a laser thermometer, the VRM stay nice and cool in the 50 to 60 range.
> 
> I feel like this phantom throttling issue is a bios problem, and will be rectified in the near future, at least I hope. If not, I'll try playing with the BLK see is that gets me better results.


Which chip and which board? Are you sure it is not just AVX offset kicking in and out?


----------



## DNMock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Which chip and which board? Are you sure it is not just AVX offset kicking in and out?


7900X, and to be honest I'm not entirely sure, just got it fired up yesterday and got home this evening and started tweaking. just running Aida64 stress test on CPU


----------



## DNMock

Here is a HWinfo screen from a run a moment ago to show what I'm referencing


----------



## curseddiamond

bounces between mid 60s to low 70s


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'll be honest I'm sitting here considering returning the mark 1 before I waste my time installing it and waiting on the Rampage or Apex.


You could with the TUF Mark 1 mount a 40mm fan across the waterblock/AIO pump and the plastic cover over the VRM's so you'd get direct airflow going across the VRMs.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DNMock*
> 
> Here is a HWinfo screen from a run a moment ago to show what I'm referencing


That's not phantom throttling, that's the base clock being read out at 96 MHz instead of 100 MHz. I sometimes saw it on my board, but don't know what was causing the HWInfo read out to be different from CPU-Z/Task Manager.

Try setting BCLK to 100.0?

Any throttling should show up under "Performance Limit Reasons" under HWinfo.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

This is CPU throttling due to VRM issue on X299 platform

Der8auer upload an updated video for the VRM disaster on x299






https://www.techpowerup.com/234922/update-on-the-intel-x299-platform-vrm-disaster


----------



## rockstar1237

@DNMock and @Jbravo, could you maybe try this or u already done it? out of interest

GIGABYTE seems to have some kind of "VCCIN throttle" that kicks in randomly if left on auto


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rockstar1237*
> 
> @DNMock and @Jbravo, could you maybe try this or u already done it? out of interest
> 
> GIGABYTE seems to have some kind of "VCCIN throttle" that kicks in randomly if left on auto


It almost feels as though that "VCCIN throttle" is actually a vdroop of the VCCIN that causes the processor to throttle because the voltage is too low to feed the chip. We need someone qualified to investigate this further.


----------



## rockstar1237

Some very interesting stuff, I wonder if we pop a line over to reddit/r/gigabytegaming if we can get GBTBrian to ask some engineers on any input. He's been pretty good in the past with GPUs and such


----------



## Norlig

I took no chances.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

nice cooling


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Norlig*
> 
> I took no chances.


I take it to mean your surgery didn't kill the motherboard?


----------



## Norlig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> I take it to mean your surgery didn't kill the motherboard?


haha, alive and well


----------



## ELIAS-EH

I think that cooling X299 VRM is mandatory for overclock


----------



## aDyerSituation

Looks like I'm going Gigabyte boys


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Looks like I'm going Gigabyte boys


Seems to be the same for me too first Gigabyte board ever..
Oh well I like a challenge, I've had MSI, Asrock and Asus so far (Asus the board of choice)...


----------



## rockstar1237

Think i'll be getting a gaming 9 as well,
Its bewildering to me that there is basically no reviews on them. Over here in Australia they are readily available, tho the processors don't go on sale till next week, but you wouldn't think that would stop any tech journos.

There's been something very interesting with this launch, this time around, as a lot of people have said, only a very few journos have gone the extra mile, such as TTL. The coverage IMO has definitely been overshadowed by the 4 core offerings on the same platform, but I don't personally see how that diminishes how good the platform is.

The asus foruma Z270 board here in Aus is about $700, with the gaming 9 only $850, $150 more, or the 7 which is like $50 more. The 7800x is only $100 more than a 7700k, for an extra 2 cores and the latest platform (not that im trying to convince you boys).
It's just somewhat frustrating that we cant even get reviews on all current available motherboards, because people "in the industry" are happy to just throw the platform under the bus to appease the AMD masses.

Give it 6 months, and I can see a whole bunch of them cracking, "oh im just using the intel 18 core x299 processor cause I'm a content creator, but i got it from intel so I'll use it, but its not for the masses like you guys"

I will speculate on one thing tho, what do you boys think the chances are that the 12, 16 and 18 core variances will be soldered rather than TIM'd?
The only confirmation we have on TIM is for the 10 core samples used / distributed at computex, but we've also seen an 18 core running in real-time, all be it on stage.

For my own personal build, I have been thinking of just getting a 7820x, but if the 12 core + would happen to be soldered, I might just be happy to pony up a bit extra


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rockstar1237*
> 
> ....lots of text...


Where you buying yours from, I'm getting my stuff from Scorptec.
I was going to go Asus original (GTX1080ti Strix, Strix-E), but now I'm going with the Gigabyte I'm going to go all in and get the Gigabyte AORUS X GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Xtreme Edition so it matches the Gaming 9









Here's a couple of reviews:
https://www.back2gaming.com/reviews/b2g-hardware/hw-components/cpu-mobo/gigabyte-x299-aorus-gaming-9-motherboard-review/
https://www.eteknix.com/gigabyte-aorus-gaming-9-x299-motherboard-review/

Can't find any others.

A lot of motherboard are in stock now, but like you said it's just the damn CPU's we're waiting on


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Where you buying yours from, I'm getting my stuff from Scorptec.
> I was going to go Asus original (GTX1080ti Strix, Strix-E), but now I'm going with the Gigabyte I'm going to go all in and get the Gigabyte AORUS X GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Xtreme Edition so it matches the Gaming 9
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a couple of reviews:
> https://www.back2gaming.com/reviews/b2g-hardware/hw-components/cpu-mobo/gigabyte-x299-aorus-gaming-9-motherboard-review/
> https://www.eteknix.com/gigabyte-aorus-gaming-9-x299-motherboard-review/
> 
> Can't find any others.
> 
> A lot of motherboard are in stock now, but like you said it's just the damn CPU's we're waiting on


Funnily enough I have a couple things added from PC Case Gear and a few from scorptec aswell.
I've got the Aorus 1080 TI Extreme, you wont be dissapointed, it really is a beast of a card. My case and old 800d, doesnt have stellar airflow or anything, but I never exceed 70 degrees (about 80-90% fan speed, even when I got the heater pumping! (in canberra, so **** does get frosty if you dont pump the heating :







)
Mine OC's to a stable 2050 on the core with 5900 on memory.

I'm kind of lucky 2bh that the processors havnt been in stock, or my impatient self would have already ordered







, I too was leaning more to the Strix just for the Asus Bios, they really are amazing to work with, but gigabyte have just been killing it lately, now with all we know.

BTW, the 1080ti extreme comes with a 4 year warranty and I just had a look, the mobos come with 3, so I think we'll be set for a good chunk of time:thumb:

Here's a wishlist I've had together for a little while of the build im planning for it if your interested,

https://www.pccasegear.com/wish_lists/665252/2017

Basically was going to run the X62 in Push Pull on the front of the case, move the 3 front fans - 2 to the top and 1 on the rear.

Had a look at doing some hardline stuff, but the headaches I went through when I put my 3930k under water (algae in the pump, eventually killed the pump, and the scrubbing of the blocks....), kinda turned me off for a longggg time.
Plus putting my gpu under water is just a pain, im one of THOSE people that seem to have to upgrade each GPU gen, atm im stuck in the TI cycle

Edit: That review you linked realllly is starting to push me over the edge for buying this system haha


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rockstar1237*
> 
> @DNMock and @Jbravo, could you maybe try this or u already done it? out of interest
> 
> GIGABYTE seems to have some kind of "VCCIN throttle" that kicks in randomly if left on auto


No board yet just CPU lol. Tempted to grab anything but wouldn't be accomplishing anything. Waiting for apex vi, extreme or evga.


----------



## Norlig

Any Reason why the Turbo is now on constantly after Overclocking?

I have Turbo Multiplier at 49 and Voltage at + Offset (still testing it) , and it stays at 4.9Ghz on all cores all the time, even when I am just idling on the desktop.


----------



## rockstar1237

@TahoeDust You got a gaming 7 yeah my dude
You able to see if theres any diff / throttle with ur OC with "VCCIN throttle" that kicks in randomly if left on auto - if theres a setting to turn auto off?


----------



## ELIAS-EH

Watch this, really x299 platform is a failure, a lot of cpu throttling, watch how you can identify it.


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watch this, really x299 platform is a failure, a lot of cpu throttling, watch how you can identify it.


u seen the benches? failure doesn't come into it at all....

Bad implementation by mobo manufactures on SOME boards for the VRM...which affects top tier OCing (mostly delidded stuff as you'll thermal limit anyway)
And none of this testing has been done on the Mobos that do have proper VRM cooling...Gaming 7 / 9 and the upcoming asus boards.

It's really interesting, do you generally buy into fake news?

All new platforms have issues like this, and it will happen in the future...no doubt about it.

Nearly everyone on here that has recieved their kit has OC'd to 4.7ghz, and shown noticible imrpovments in cinebench and other benchmarks, thus their OC is still actually.....OCing.

If your failure is, people bought cheap boards with inadequate VRM cooling because they want to delid and OC to the max, they are still within their return period, and should swap it out for a gaming 7 / 9 or wait for evga / asus upcoming boards.

If indeed, every review sample and everyones kit on here has been throttling (i dont think you fully understand the throttling hes reffering to and the upper limits being pushed) then you can expect their #'s to greatly increase when the new Bios' appear that fix said issues.

Also, for the people that did buy boards with ****ty VRM heatsinks, pushing a 7900x to 5gig, tho possible, will need two things. A) be delidded . B) not using an AIO.

B) is super important here my dude, because adding a VRM waterblock is extremely easy...so i dont see the HEDT users having any issue at all 2bh.

Perhaps the fanboyism of AMD has gotten to you, everyone loves competition, everyone loves lower prices....and everyone loves the best.
x299 currently is the fastest IPC topping 7700k in most test scenarios with more cores... and a good 30% faster than any current AMD counterpart.

Check out Vega hype before you mention threadripper too, the hype of things seem to always turn people around.

If you want the best and have the money to spend, x299 is where you spend it.


----------



## Norlig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Norlig*
> 
> Any Reason why the Turbo is now on constantly after Overclocking?
> 
> I have Turbo Multiplier at 49 and Voltage at + Offset (still testing it) , and it stays at 4.9Ghz on all cores all the time, even when I am just idling on the desktop.


Nevermind,

I had Balanced power plan active, but for some reason the minimum processor State was at 100%


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Norlig*
> 
> Nevermind,
> 
> I had Balanced power plan active, but for some reason the minimum processor State was at 100%


Nice 1!! Whats you max temp at 4.9?


----------



## Norlig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rockstar1237*
> 
> Nice 1!! Whats you max temp at 4.9?


Unstable at the moment,

Dropped down to 4.8Ghz right now, Max Temps at 94'C on hottest core and 86'C on coldest core.
(22'C ambient)

CPU Definately needs Delidding.


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Norlig*
> 
> Unstable at the moment,
> 
> Dropped down to 4.8Ghz right now, Max Temps at 94'C on hottest core and 86'C on coldest core.
> (22'C ambient)
> 
> CPU Definately needs Delidding.


For sure, I have a feeling in a month or so we'll see some pretty decent bios releases that should help with some temps aswell, seems like 4.6 is around the best with an AIO and 4.7-4.8 with a full loop and no delid.

These things under LN2 will be insane, some power hungry beasts


----------



## ELIAS-EH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rockstar1237*
> 
> u seen the benches? failure doesn't come into it at all....
> 
> Bad implementation by mobo manufactures on SOME boards for the VRM...which affects top tier OCing (mostly delidded stuff as you'll thermal limit anyway)
> And none of this testing has been done on the Mobos that do have proper VRM cooling...Gaming 7 / 9 and the upcoming asus boards.
> 
> It's really interesting, do you generally buy into fake news?
> 
> All new platforms have issues like this, and it will happen in the future...no doubt about it.
> 
> Nearly everyone on here that has recieved their kit has OC'd to 4.7ghz, and shown noticible imrpovments in cinebench and other benchmarks, thus their OC is still actually.....OCing.
> 
> If your failure is, people bought cheap boards with inadequate VRM cooling because they want to delid and OC to the max, they are still within their return period, and should swap it out for a gaming 7 / 9 or wait for evga / asus upcoming boards.
> 
> If indeed, every review sample and everyones kit on here has been throttling (i dont think you fully understand the throttling hes reffering to and the upper limits being pushed) then you can expect their #'s to greatly increase when the new Bios' appear that fix said issues.
> 
> Also, for the people that did buy boards with ****ty VRM heatsinks, pushing a 7900x to 5gig, tho possible, will need two things. A) be delidded . B) not using an AIO.
> 
> B) is super important here my dude, because adding a VRM waterblock is extremely easy...so i dont see the HEDT users having any issue at all 2bh.
> 
> Perhaps the fanboyism of AMD has gotten to you, everyone loves competition, everyone loves lower prices....and everyone loves the best.
> x299 currently is the fastest IPC topping 7700k in most test scenarios with more cores... and a good 30% faster than any current AMD counterpart.
> 
> Check out Vega hype before you mention threadripper too, the hype of things seem to always turn people around.
> 
> If you want the best and have the money to spend, x299 is where you spend it.


Sry but i am not an amd fanboy, I forgot to tell you that i have a 6900k with asus x99 strix.


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> Sry but i am not an amd fanboy, I forgot to tell you that i have a 6900k with asus x99 strix.


Yet EVERY post you make is about how bad this launch is and how terrible these CPUs are.

Please go away, go troll something else.


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> Sry but i am not an amd fanboy, I forgot to tell you that i have a 6900k with asus x99 strix.


Thats good, I never understand why people limit themselves based on "brand loyalty"

You want the best, buy the best, the end.

Have a check through this thread, we've managed to find some mobos that should be fine with Debaurs VRM throttling as they have added heatpipes with expanded surface area. The cheaper mobos just have a single heatsink stuck on top, def not enough surface area as he explains in the vid.

Unfortunately he hasnt tested any boards that have the heatpipe from the VRM, the boys on here seem to have some good results from them, understandably so giving its over double the surface area of what is on offer from the boards that dont have it.

Some tweaks to bios settings will need to happen, thats a given with every new chipset launch, but IMO things are looking pretty promising for the chipset.

I cannot wait to see the crazy bugger on here that will pop off on an 18 core and insta-delid, that will be one rocking build









Just to add to that, back at computex, I believe there were multiple people that were able to get the 4 core CPU on x299 to over 7ghz on LN2, with these same boards.
We will see some amazing numbers come from the extreme top end on this platform, can mark my words on that


----------



## pluke the 2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rockstar1237*
> 
> Thats good, I never understand why people limit themselves based on "brand loyalty"
> 
> You want the best, buy the best, the end.
> 
> Have a check through this thread, we've managed to find some mobos that should be fine with Debaurs VRM throttling as they have added heatpipes with expanded surface area. The cheaper mobos just have a single heatsink stuck on top, def not enough surface area as he explains in the vid.
> 
> Unfortunately he hasnt tested any boards that have the heatpipe from the VRM, the boys on here seem to have some good results from them, understandably so giving its over double the surface area of what is on offer from the boards that dont have it.
> 
> Some tweaks to bios settings will need to happen, thats a given with every new chipset launch, but IMO things are looking pretty promising for the chipset.
> 
> I cannot wait to see the crazy bugger on here that will pop off on an 18 core and insta-delid, that will be one rocking build
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just to add to that, back at computex, I believe there were multiple people that were able to get the 4 core CPU on x299 to over 7ghz on LN2, with these same boards.
> We will see some amazing numbers come from the extreme top end on this platform, can mark my words on that


This socket the x299s are on, will coffee lake be using it? Doubtful right??


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pluke the 2*
> 
> This socket the x299s are on, will coffee lake be using it? Doubtful right??


From everything I've seen Coffee Lake will be on 1151-2 or something weird like that.
Guaranteed 6 core for the i7.
But im not sure where your going with it, the mainstream and HEDT sockets have always been different, if its a quip at intel for adding a 4 core varient to a HEDT socket, i agree, shouldnt have done it (tho somehow the price of it is less than the 7700k here lol) but doesn't diminish the beauty of the high end....

If you were to make the argument along the lines of...oh i dunno, intel had to not use solder and instead use TIM because they wanted to use their current manufacturing process they use on the 4 core Kaby's and just want to have 1 production line or somthing, then I could see there being more of a scandal, mainly because the mainstream shouldnt ever come into what the socket represents and is targeted for.

But from all indications, having a 4 core that exists on a HEDT socket doesnt appear to be having any adverse effects on the higher end processors, at least in performance numbers


----------



## epc1

Hello all,

Sorry for breaking in with a noob question.

I have the i9 7900x along with the aorus gaming 9. All i want to do initially is
to have all ten cores running at a constant frequency even if it's at stock 3.3GHz.

At stock settings the multiplier keeps changing between 12 and 40+. I've
managed to set it to run constantly at 33 but only one core is running at
the desired frequency.

Could someone help me to set them all running at 3.3GHz? Or point
me in the right direction?

So far I've disabled EIST, C1E, Intel Speed Shift Technology, and C6/C7 State Support.
and it can't get all ten cores at 3.3GHz.

My power supply is Seasonic Prime 750W
Bios version is F6a which seems to be the latest.

Thanks in advance


----------



## Menta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epc1*
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> Sorry for breaking in with a noob question.
> 
> I have the i9 7900x along with the aorus gaming 9. All i want to do initially is
> to have all ten cores running at a constant frequency even if it's at stock 3.3GHz.
> 
> At stock settings the multiplier keeps changing between 12 and 40+. I've
> managed to set it to run constantly at 33 but only one core is running at
> the desired frequency.
> 
> Could someone help me to set them all running at 3.3GHz? Or point
> me in the right direction?
> 
> So far I've disabled EIST, C1E, Intel Speed Shift Technology, and C6/C7 State Support.
> and it can't get all ten cores at 3.3GHz.
> 
> My power supply is Seasonic Prime 750W
> 
> Thanks in advance


Set 33 on all cores in bios and set windows power plan cpu min to 100%


----------



## epc1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> Set 33 on all cores in bios and set windows power plan cpu min to 100%


In BIOS the only option that allows me to adjust the core ration individually is
the Turbo ratio and i have it set to 33 as well.

I've adjusted the windtows power setting but still only one core running at Stock


----------



## Chargeit

Did anyone test der8auer's settings?

He says,

Increase Tj max to 105c. Default is 94c. If you don't delid your cpu you'll hit 94c easy and throttle. This would result in lower VRM temps because the cpu is temp throttling.

Asus - Disable SVIE
Gigabyte - Increase CPU Current Cap to 140%

Gigabyte - VCCN - increase to 1.9 (default is auto, might be causing the "phantom drops")

Sensor reading for VRM temps can be off depending on where the sensor is located. Asus puts their sensors in the middle of the VRM, some on the edge.

Prime 95 settings, (He runs Prime95 and Furmark at the same time, I think, or he's just saying he does it at work)


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!











FTT size - Small Ftt 12k/96k/8k - Massive power draw

Still trying to figure out if I want to change this board out. Though I' m not sure people are properly reproducing der8auer's testing conditions to have accurate results.


----------



## ManyThreads

So does the Killer LAN and the "phantom throttling" not discouraging you guys from switching from ASUS to Gigabyte? I'm still waiting for the TUF1 but those were the two things that seemed to be deal breakers on the Gigabyte just looking around on forums.


----------



## ManyThreads

Outstanding post here from elmor that would likely be of interest to most people here:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1632665/intel-x299-socket-2066-vrm-thread/100_100#post_26207987


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> So does the Killer LAN and the "phantom throttling" not discouraging you guys from switching from ASUS to Gigabyte? I'm still waiting for the TUF1 but those were the two things that seemed to be deal breakers on the Gigabyte just looking around on forums.


The Gigabyte boards (at least the 7 and 9) have two LANs. One is Killer and the other is Intel. I'm using the Intel one and I'm not installing the Killer LAN drivers.

Tonight, I'm gonna test out the VCCIN fix for the phantom throttling.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> The Gigabyte boards (at least the 7 and 9) have two LANs. One is Killer and the other is Intel. I'm using the Intel one and I'm not installing the Killer LAN drivers.
> 
> Tonight, I'm gonna test out the VCCIN fix for the phantom throttling.


That's great, thanks - I didn't think it had an Intel LAN also. I guess that solves that problem since I never need 2 LANs.


----------



## Menta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epc1*
> 
> In BIOS the only option that allows me to adjust the core ration individually is
> the Turbo ratio and i have it set to 33 as well.
> 
> I've adjusted the windtows power setting but still only one core running at Stock


Check BCLK 100% and what OC OPTIONS you have, dont really Know Auros Bios, but check Per core overclock, manual OC, XMP..
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Did anyone test der8auer's settings?
> 
> He says,
> 
> Increase Tj max to 105c. Default is 94c. If you don't delid your cpu you'll hit 94c easy and throttle. This would result in lower VRM temps because the cpu is temp throttling.
> 
> Asus - Disable SVIE
> Gigabyte - Increase CPU Current Cap to 140%
> 
> Gigabyte - VCCN - increase to 1.9 (default is auto, might be causing the "phantom drops")


----------



## Gettz8488

Anyone know where i can find my vrm temps? i'm having seriously trouble locating them with hw info Asus strix board.


----------



## Menta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Anyone know where i can find my vrm temps? i'm having seriously trouble locating them with hw info Asus strix board.


Check Aida 64 HW monitor, AI SUITE by Asus will have it if the sensor exists


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> Check Aida 64 HW monitor, AI SUITE by Asus will have it if the sensor exists


Aida has my mobo temp stuck at 30C Hwinfo has all mobo temps lock meaning they aren't changing just weird how are ppl checking temps


----------



## Menta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Aida has my mobo temp stuck at 30C Hwinfo has all mobo temps lock meaning they aren't changing just weird how are ppl checking temps


Try AI Suite


----------



## epc1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> Check BCLK 100% and what OC OPTIONS you have, dont really Know Auros Bios, but check Per core overclock, manual OC, XMP..


Thanks! Will check them out


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> The Gigabyte boards (at least the 7 and 9) have two LANs. One is Killer and the other is Intel. I'm using the Intel one and I'm not installing the Killer LAN drivers.
> 
> Tonight, I'm gonna test out the VCCIN fix for the phantom throttling.


I use the Intel NIC as well.

So I tested out my Gaming 7 last night. I increased CPU TDP and current limits to 400 in BIOS and loaded up some Prime95 small FFTs (48K) and let that run for just over 15 minutes. I ran the CPU at 4.6 GHz with just short of 1.2v VCore.

Zero throttling and no "phantom throttling". The CPU sure did get hot and the VRM even increased VCCIN voltage while doing what it needed to in order to maintain the load. It definitely did not decrease any.

During this testing I hit roughly 600w from the wall which cycled normally as Prime cycled.

I then hit it with some Linpack, which peaked at 617 watts from the wall. I had to lower clock speed to 4 GHz in order to keep the CPU thermals down enough to test, but once again, no throttling.

Peak VRM temp during any of this testing was 80c WITHOUT any active cooling. Just normal case air flow.

As I suspected, the VRM cooling and power delivery on the Gaming 7 and Gaming 9 are completely fine. Obviously there are issues with the Gaming 3 as der8auer demonstrated, but it's going to be a non-issue for most mid to high-end boards.

Obviously consideration needs to be given to the fact that I have 2 water pumps and 25 120mm fans running through a Titanium rated PSU for the wall readings provided.

I hope this helps some of the Gigabyte guys out.

**as an additional note, peak CPU power draw reported by HWinfo64 was 397w so you may not want to rely on that







**


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I use the Intel NIC as well.
> 
> So I tested out my Gaming 7 last night. I increased CPU TDP and current limits to 400 in BIOS and loaded up some Prime95 small FFTs (48K) and let that run for just over 15 minutes. I ran the CPU at 4.6 GHz with just short of 1.2v VCore.
> 
> Zero throttling and no "phantom throttling". The CPU sure did get hot and the VRM even increased VCCIN voltage while doing what it needed to in order to maintain the load. It definitely did not decrease any.


Interesting. You didn't manually increase the VCCIN? And BIOS F7a?

I'm gonna try the VCCIN fix tonight to see if it fixes the AVX512 phantom throttling that I get.
I'm also gonna be releasing y-cruncher v0.7.3 tonight which will have the AVX512 support.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> So does the Killer LAN and the "phantom throttling" not discouraging you guys from switching from ASUS to Gigabyte? I'm still waiting for the TUF1 but those were the two things that seemed to be deal breakers on the Gigabyte just looking around on forums.


I haven't been able to reproduce the phantom throttling for one but I'm only running a 7820x at 4.7. Also it has both the intel and killer lan ports. If you don't want killer lan just use the intel port like I do. I would rather have multiple options than to be stuck with one or the other


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Interesting. You didn't manually increase the VCCIN? And BIOS F7a?
> 
> I'm gonna try the VCCIN fix tonight to see if it fixes the AVX512 phantom throttling that I get.
> I'm also gonna be releasing y-cruncher v0.7.3 tonight which will have the AVX512 support.


No, the VCCIN increase that you see in my screen shot is LLC doing it's work. Idle VCCIN measured in Windows is 1.788v and under load it increased as high as 1.896v. At no time did I have either CPU clock speed or power drop indicating unseen throttling.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> No, the VCCIN increase that you see in my screen shot is LLC doing it's work. Idle VCCIN measured in Windows is 1.788v and under load it increased as high as 1.896v. At no time did I have either CPU clock speed or power drop indicating unseen throttling.


Ah so you turned on LLC? That's something I haven't touched at all in my settings yet. Add that to my list of things to try tonight.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> I haven't been able to reproduce the phantom throttling for one but I'm only running a 7820x at 4.7. Also it has both the intel and killer lan ports. If you don't want killer lan just use the intel port like I do. I would rather have multiple options than to be stuck with one or the other


Well thats good news.

And now I see there is a bundle deal with the 7820X and Arous 7 that makes it within $50 CAD of the TUF Mark1. Ahhh why is this so hard haha. Maybe I should just try something new and get the GA7 - nobody seems to be having temp issues with it, but I do like the 5 year warranty on the TUF and ASUS BIOS is probably better.

The Gigabyte has no backplate either, right?


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I then hit it with some Linpack, which peaked at 617 watts from the wall. I had to lower clock speed to 4 GHz in order to keep the CPU thermals down enough to test, but once again, no throttling.
> 
> Peak VRM temp during any of this testing was 80c WITHOUT any active cooling. Just normal case air flow.
> 
> As I suspected, the VRM cooling and power delivery on the Gaming 7 and Gaming 9 are completely fine. Obviously there are issues with the Gaming 3 as der8auer demonstrated, but it's going to be a non-issue for most mid to high-end boards.


Man, I'd be scared of blowing up the CPU at ~500W input. You guys have guts.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Ah so you turned on LLC? That's something I haven't touched at all in my settings yet. Add that to my list of things to try tonight.


LLC would help by reducing the current output required by the motherboard VRMs.


----------



## TahoeDust

I also have not been able to get my Gig 7 to Throttle. I have been trying all morning. My only complaint, is I can't get offset voltage to work correctly. Hopefully they will get that worked out in Bios updates. Is there really anything wrong with running a constant 1.23Xv?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> Man, I'd be scared of blowing up the CPU at ~500W input. You guys have guts.
> LLC would help by reducing the current output required by the motherboard VRMs.


Yeah, I don't make a regular habit of doing so at all, but in order to know, someone has to do it.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> During this testing I hit roughly 600w from the wall which cycled normally as Prime cycled.


110V? How large was PFC?

Also normally, this things are tested with LLC disabled to see how large drop VCCIN would have.
Quote:


> I then hit it with some Linpack, which peaked at 617 watts from the wall. *I had to lower clock speed to 4 GHz in order to keep the CPU thermals down enough to test*


That's actually bad.

This means it might have problems with running at rated frequency for 7 years. 14/7. Considering it's CPU some wants for hybrid usage, gaming/workstation, that doesn't look like it could satisfy getting reason for anything less than 8 core, when mainstream would get 6-core, and likely much cheaper.

Quote:


> As I suspected, the VRM cooling and power delivery on the Gaming 7 and Gaming 9 are completely fine. Obviously there are issues with the Gaming 3 as der8auer demonstrated, but it's going to be a non-issue for most mid to high-end boards.


I wouldn't call it fine, but I'm used to boards like RIVE, or X79 WS-E. Or Z170 ranger.
Quote:


> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Actually I doubt that would help them. They should release gaming 5 for price of gaming 3, and gaming 7 for price of gaming 5, and earn money by sold volume rather than market segregation. (artificial segregation to the boot)

It's just similar situation like when Asus released RIV BE, Asus thought people would use only 22 nm CPUs with it, thus they can cheap out on VRM cooling, and design it for lower power target. As a consequence it created bit problems with high end heavily overclocked 32 nm CPUs and with speciality builds which like when heat it spread on larger surface.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I also have not been able to get my Gig 7 to Throttle. I have been trying all morning. My only complaint, is I can't get offset voltage to work correctly. Hopefully they will get that worked out in Bios updates. Is there really anything wrong with running a constant 1.23Xv?


You should use adaptive for CPU core voltage and offset for Cashe / Ring voltage. Running manual voltage can degrade the processor over time.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> 110V? How large was PFC?
> 
> Also normally, this things are tested with LLC disabled to see how large drop VCCIN would have.


110v and you'll have to clarify PFC for me.

It was done in the manner in order to try to replicate the issue being discussed in the video.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> That's actually bad.
> 
> This means it might have problems with running at rated frequency for 7 years. 14/7. Considering it's CPU some wants for hybrid usage, gaming/workstation, that doesn't look like it could satisfy getting reason for anything less than 8 core, when mainstream would get 6-core, and likely much cheaper.


It's actually just fine. The Linpack load that I was placing on the CPU was beyond anything that we'll see in the real employment of these CPUs. Using that as a standard for the basis of your statement isn't very realistic.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> 110v and you'll have to clarify PFC for me.
> 
> It was done in the manner in order to try to replicate the issue being discussed in the video.
> It's actually just fine. The Linpack load that I was placing on the CPU was beyond anything that we'll see in the real employment of these CPUs. Using that as a standard for the basis of your statement isn't very realistic.


If you're using the very latest Linpack from Intel, I believe it has AVX512. That would explain why you're being forced down to 4.0 GHz. I'm stuck at 3.8 GHz with AVX512 due to the phantom throttling - which is in the same ballpark.


----------



## tistou77

My PC consumes 400W (6950X @4.4ghz, 1070 SC) with Realbench, Aida64
Skylake-X seems to consume much more


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> My PC consumes 400W (6950X @4.4ghz, 1070 SC) with Realbench, Aida64
> Skylake-X seems to consume much more


People who buy the 7900k can use the $700 they saved over the 6950x to pay for the extra power used.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> People who buy the 7900k can use the $700 they saved over the 6950x to pay for the extra power used.


See also motherboard prices








It seems that it can go up to + $700 (Rampage VI Extreme for example, mail received from newegg for approximate prices)


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> See also motherboard prices
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It seems that it can go up to + $700 (Rampage VI Extreme for example, mail received from newegg for approximate prices)


7900x + $700 mobo is covered under the cost of just the 6950x. Sounds like a deal in comparison.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> My PC consumes 400W (6950X @4.4ghz, 1070 SC) with Realbench, Aida64
> Skylake-X seems to consume much more


The 7900X can also do a little more work.

Trade off is more power to do more work. Not that big of a deal for me.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> The 7900X can also do a little more work.
> 
> Trade off is more power to do more work. Not that big of a deal for me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


1.82v for 4.9


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> 110v and you'll have to clarify PFC for me.
> 
> It was done in the manner in order to try to replicate the issue being discussed in the video.


I seen game doing the same power load as Furmark, and some application are similarly power hungry as linpack. Considering temperatures above 73 C are decent reason for underclocking the CPU to get into power limits...

PFC means power factor correction. It's typically shown on wattmeters to give better info about power consumption.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> [/SPOILER]
> 
> 1.82v for 4.9


It's a Gigabyte mother board. The voltage you are looking at is VCCIN not VCore. VCore was 1.25v.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> It's a Gigabyte mother board. The voltage you are looking at is VCCIN not VCore. VCore was 1.25v.


Aa ok


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> I seen game doing the same power load as Furmark, and some application are similarly power hungry as linpack. Considering temperatures above 73 C are decent reason for underclocking the CPU to get into power limits...


Thanks for sharing. Which applications are you using that load a CPU as much as Linpack? I'm all about putting a CPU to work, which is why I ask.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> If you're using the very latest Linpack from Intel, I believe it has AVX512. That would explain why you're being forced down to 4.0 GHz. I'm stuck at 3.8 GHz with AVX512 due to the phantom throttling - which is in the same ballpark.


2017.2.017 is what I used. I see the newer 2017.3.017, but haven't tried it. Let me know man.

Just for clarification, I wasn't forced or throttled down to 4 GHz. I set it at 4 GHz prior to running the test as I knew it was going to be too hot. I'm glad I did. While it didn't get as hot as my P95 test at 4.6 GHz, it did hit 83c after 10 workers were completed. I'd say 4 GHz is about as far as I'd be willing to go with this particular test.


----------



## Menta




----------



## tistou77

wrong topic


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> The 7900X can also do a little more work.
> 
> Trade off is more power to do more work. Not that big of a deal for me.


Nice! Could you please run Fire Strike Ultra and post physics score at that clock? Very curious


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> The 7900X can also do a little more work.
> 
> Trade off is more power to do more work. Not that big of a deal for me.


What kind of setup are you using for cooling and what temps are you getting with 4.9 @ 1.25? Have you passed any stability tests and if so, what were max thermals? Is the chip delidded?

Thanks!


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Well thats good news.
> 
> And now I see there is a bundle deal with the 7820X and Arous 7 that makes it within $50 CAD of the TUF Mark1. Ahhh why is this so hard haha. Maybe I should just try something new and get the GA7 - nobody seems to be having temp issues with it, but I do like the 5 year warranty on the TUF and ASUS BIOS is probably better.
> 
> The Gigabyte has no backplate either, right?


The 9 has backplate


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Nice! Could you please run Fire Strike Ultra and post physics score at that clock? Very curious


Thank you. I was messing around with Fire Strike yesterday at 4.8 GHz, but I can't say that I was pushing things too hard so please keep that in mind.



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> What kind of setup are you using for cooling and what temps are you getting with 4.9 @ 1.25? Have you passed any stability tests and if so, what were max thermals? Is the chip delidded?
> 
> Thanks!


Cooling is 5 x 360mm rads. The CPU is not delidded yet. I have not stress tested 4.9 GHz because I know better than to call that a daily usable clock speed (at least until delidded). 4.8 GHz will run RealBench stress test with 80c on package temp in a 25c ambient.

As a heads up to fellow Skylake-X owners, I talked to der8auer and he said that the DDM-X is already in production and to expect availability in approximately 4 weeks.


----------



## richiec77

Appears the whole VRM issue seems to boil down to trying to run FULL AVX load at 4.5-4.6GHz on the processors. That's most likely the reason for the 380-400W power consumption.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Thank you. I was messing around with Fire Strike yesterday at 4.8 GHz, but I can't say that I was pushing things too hard so please keep that in mind.
> 
> Cooling is 5 x 360mm rads. The CPU is not delidded yet. I have not stress tested 4.9 GHz because I know better than to call that a daily usable clock speed (at least until delidded). 4.8 GHz will run RealBench stress test with 80c on package temp in a 25c ambient.
> 
> As a heads up to fellow Skylake-X owners, I talked to der8auer and he said that the DDM-X is already in production and to expect availability in approximately 4 weeks.


Thanks for the details! 5x360mm is a lot of rad space... I'm not sure I've got the dedication to run that kind of setup to hit those clocks on a 24/7 basis. I am looking at delidding a chip but if that's the kind of setup I'll need, I may never make it.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Thanks for the details! 5x360mm is a lot of rad space... I'm not sure I've got the dedication to run that kind of setup to hit those clocks on a 24/7 basis. I am looking at delidding a chip but if that's the kind of setup I'll need, I may never make it.


Dilidding is going to be a much better mod than a huge water loop. You'll gain more from delidding itself. Delidding and a large loop is even better, but once again, most of the gains are in the delid itself.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Dilidding is going to be a much better mod than a huge water loop. You'll gain more from delidding itself. Delidding and a large loop is even better, but once again, most of the gains are in the delid itself.


Makes sense to me. I'll see how things go over the next couple weeks and report back. Thanks again for the detailed information.


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I use the Intel NIC as well.
> 
> So I tested out my Gaming 7 last night. I increased CPU TDP and current limits to 400 in BIOS and loaded up some Prime95 small FFTs (48K) and let that run for just over 15 minutes. I ran the CPU at 4.6 GHz with just short of 1.2v VCore.
> 
> Zero throttling and no "phantom throttling". The CPU sure did get hot and the VRM even increased VCCIN voltage while doing what it needed to in order to maintain the load. It definitely did not decrease any.
> 
> During this testing I hit roughly 600w from the wall which cycled normally as Prime cycled.
> 
> I then hit it with some Linpack, which peaked at 617 watts from the wall. I had to lower clock speed to 4 GHz in order to keep the CPU thermals down enough to test, but once again, no throttling.
> 
> Peak VRM temp during any of this testing was 80c WITHOUT any active cooling. Just normal case air flow.
> 
> As I suspected, the VRM cooling and power delivery on the Gaming 7 and Gaming 9 are completely fine. Obviously there are issues with the Gaming 3 as der8auer demonstrated, but it's going to be a non-issue for most mid to high-end boards.
> 
> Obviously consideration needs to be given to the fact that I have 2 water pumps and 25 120mm fans running through a Titanium rated PSU for the wall readings provided.
> 
> I hope this helps some of the Gigabyte guys out.
> 
> **as an additional note, peak CPU power draw reported by HWinfo64 was 397w so you may not want to rely on that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> **


That is some awesome work my dude!!!
Look like we were right about the VRM surface area for the 7/9 having a big effect on the VRM temps.

Those poor guys that thought only a few hours ago that the platform wasn't worth a damn, no throttles and VRM temps tamed, bring on the delids to push forward to that sweet 5gig mark!!


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Still trying to figure out if I want to change this board out. Though I' m not sure people are properly reproducing der8auer's testing conditions to have accurate results.


I'm still waiting to see if you can reproduce it









Would be nice to save some money on the board seeing we won't be overclocking that much...


----------



## TahoeDust

I think I am going to install and test the Prime Deluxe tomorrow. I really want to believe that the VRM setup will be enough to handle a 7820x @ 4.7GHz.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I think I am going to install and test the Prime Deluxe tomorrow. I really want to believe that the VRM setup will be enough to handle a 7820x @ 4.7GHz.


I'm sure it will be fine.


----------



## Jpmboy

no soup for me until the Apex launches.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> People who buy the 7900k can use the $700 they saved over the 6950x to pay for the extra power used.


will I save power when I replace my 2 year old 6950X with an 18 core?


----------



## rt123




----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*


hey man - you gonna be at that OC meet Stefan(?) funsoul put together?


----------



## rt123

Of Course.








I was there last year too.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I think I am going to install and test the Prime Deluxe tomorrow. I really want to believe that the VRM setup will be enough to handle a 7820x @ 4.7GHz.


Geez I'd be happy with a board that could do 4.3/4.5Ghz all cores on a 7820x without any problems.
I'm not one for huge overclocks, just a all core little over stock.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> no soup for me until the Apex launches.


The Apex is calling my name. The BIOS on this Gigabyte board is driving me mad with simple navigation.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> will I save power when I replace my 2 year old 6950X with an 18 core?


The sky will be falling all over again with power, heat and whatever else talk when that launches.


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> The Apex is calling my name. The BIOS on this Gigabyte board is driving me mad with simple navigation.
> The sky will be falling all over again with power, heat and whatever else talk when that launches.


I just wish it wasnt E-ATX







, any idea what case u might use or you do open bench?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rockstar1237*
> 
> I just wish it wasnt E-ATX
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , any idea what case u might use or you do open bench?


My x299 has been moved to my Caselabs S8 w/ pedestal and my x99 was moved to my Caselabs SM8.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Of Course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was there last year too.


great! . I can stop in on saturday - sunday to NYC for my sister's BD party with the wife.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> The Apex is calling my name. The BIOS on this Gigabyte board is driving me mad with simple navigation.
> The sky will be falling all over again with power, heat and whatever else talk when that launches.


Giga boards are very good, but yeah, the bios always takes some "practice".








APEX is end of july/ early august AFAIK.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rockstar1237*
> 
> I just wish it wasnt E-ATX
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , any idea what case u might use or you do open bench?


my z270 APEX fits beautifully in the corsair 570x just check the measurements on both part's specs. E-ATX is not listed for this case, but it fits fine w/ a custom loop.


----------



## rockstar1237

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> great! . I can stop in on saturday - sunday to NYC for my sister's BD party with the wife.
> Giga boards are very good, but yeah, the bios always takes some "practice".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> APEX is end of july/ early august AFAIK.
> my z270 APEX fits beautifully in the corsair 570x just check the measurements on both part's specs. E-ATX is not listed for this case, but it fits fine w/ a custom loop.


Exactly the case I wanna get aswel!!

Looks like it might be an apex for me


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rockstar1237*
> 
> Exactly the case I wanna get aswel!!
> 
> Looks like it might be an apex for me


Make note of all of the quick disconnects in @Jpmboy's loop in that particular rig. His parts don't spend much time getting to know their neighbors.


----------



## BroPhilip

Just for fun 4.9 at 1.27v. Have only adjusted the core clocks and only with dual channel ram at 2600


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> great! . I can stop in on saturday - sunday to NYC for my sister's BD party with the wife.


Looking forward to meeting you there.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> No, the VCCIN increase that you see in my screen shot is LLC doing it's work. Idle VCCIN measured in Windows is 1.788v and under load it increased as high as 1.896v. At no time did I have either CPU clock speed or power drop indicating unseen throttling.


I just tested this. Both LLC and increasing the VRIN/VCCIN had the effect of insta-shutting down the system under all-core AVX512 load. Previously, it would phantom throttle.
So I *think* it worked. It's just that I have some other thermal protection in place that's forcing it to shut down.

And this only happens at 4.0 GHz. At 3.9 GHz it runs fine. Temps will touch on the high 80s though.


----------



## Chargeit

Got my system up and running.

Had to ditch my hdd to make room for front mounting my H115i. Had all my programs already downloaded on the hdd for the upgrade. Oh well.









My 2 kits of ram 8x4gb (32gb) work perfect at their xmp of 3200. Was a little concerned that they wouldn't play nicely together but I really wanted all 8 dimms full.

So far everything is looking good. System is snappy and everything sounds good. Getting some things installed and would like to get a benchmark or two in tonight.


----------



## Hawkeye360

Can the 7820x be used with air cooling? I've not read much about that. I am going to build a new PC soon, and have been looking at Skylake-X.

Also read that the 7900x needs at least an AIO. Is that mostly true? Air cooling off the table?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Got my system up and running.
> 
> Had to ditch my hdd to make room for front mounting my H115i. Had all my programs already downloaded on the hdd for the upgrade. Oh well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My 2 kits of ram 8x4gb (32gb) work perfect at their xmp of 3200. Was a little concerned that they wouldn't play nicely together but I really wanted all 8 dimms full.
> 
> So far everything is looking good. System is snappy and everything sounds good. Getting some things installed and would like to get a benchmark or two in tonight.


So far sounds good.
I still really do have my heart set on the TUF Mark 1, even dug out my little fan.

From Tom's video unless you're doing some serious overclocking and running prime95 you're fine.
Even raja said the TUF's VRM heatsinks are fine as it has a backplate too..


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I just tested this. Both LLC and increasing the VRIN/VCCIN had the effect of insta-shutting down the system under all-core AVX512 load. Previously, it would phantom throttle.
> So I *think* it worked. It's just that I have some other thermal protection in place that's forcing it to shut down.
> 
> And this only happens at 4.0 GHz. At 3.9 GHz it runs fine. Temps will touch on the high 80s though.


That's great that you're making progress man.

The fact that it's hard powering off definitely indicates that you are hitting some limit that you haven't lifted or you are pushing cache too hard with too little voltage. Try running 3.9 GHz with less fan speed to see if you can trigger the shut down again at a known good clock speed. If you get it hot enough and it's indeed a thermal limit set in BIOS, it should do the same thing that 4.0 GHz is doing. Just throwing ideas out there.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Make note of all of the quick disconnects in @Jpmboy's loop in that particular rig. His parts don't spend much time getting to know their neighbors.


lol - these parts may stay together for a while. [email protected]/5.0 w/ 3866c16 is really very snappy. Might replace my day driver 4960X with it... maybe, but transferring all the files and apps is just too much to think about.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hawkeye360*
> 
> Can the 7820x be used with air cooling? I've not read much about that. I am going to build a new PC soon, and have been looking at Skylake-X.
> 
> Also read that the 7900x needs at least an AIO. Is that mostly true? Air cooling off the table?


10 core ~200W cpu on air? yeah - air is out, and AIOs are not that much better (if at all) than an NH-D14.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> So far sounds good.
> I still really do have my heart set on the TUF Mark 1, even dug out my little fan.
> 
> From Tom's video unless you're doing some serious overclocking and running prime95 you're fine.
> Even raja said the TUF's VRM heatsinks are fine as it has a backplate too..


Yeah I'm not too worried about it. Not for my usage.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> That's great that you're making progress man.
> 
> The fact that it's hard powering off definitely indicates that you are hitting some limit that you haven't lifted or you are pushing cache too hard with too little voltage. Try running 3.9 GHz with less fan speed to see if you can trigger the shut down again at a known good clock speed. If you get it hot enough and it's indeed a thermal limit set in BIOS, it should do the same thing that 4.0 GHz is doing. Just throwing ideas out there.


It isn't quite a hard power off. It powers off and then turns back on into the BIOS. When I set a TDP offset, I was able to delay the power-off a bit on one of the lighter AVX512 loads. But it still went off. Single-threaded AVX512 runs fine as high as 4.3 GHz. (I haven't tried going any higher.)

Initially I suspected that it's the instantaneous "burst" of power draw upon entering the AVX512 that's spiking the temps too high. But that theory went out the door when I disabled the fan control on both the radiator and the pump and set them to full power and it still powered off on all-core AVX512.

There is one thermal protection that I haven't disabled. And it's one I'm very hesitant to disable since it's so vague.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah I'm not too worried about it. Not for my usage.


Sounds like we're pretty much the same with usage and overclocking there.
AVX will be set to 4Ghz, CPU's a 4.3Ghz, I never touch the cache, didn't see much benefit on my x99 rig.

I am eyeing off the MSI GTX1080Ti SEA HAWK X now so that I know it'll be cool and all that hot GPU air is going out the back through the RAD...


----------



## opt33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> It isn't quite a hard power off. It powers off and then turns back on into the BIOS. When I set a TDP offset, I was able to delay the power-off a bit on one of the lighter AVX512 loads. But it still went off. Single-threaded AVX512 runs fine as high as 4.3 GHz. (I haven't tried going any higher.)
> 
> Initially I suspected that it's the instantaneous "burst" of power draw upon entering the AVX512 that's spiking the temps too high. But that theory went out the door when I disabled the fan control on both the radiator and the pump and set them to full power and it still powered off on all-core AVX512.
> 
> There is one thermal protection that I haven't disabled. And it's one I'm very hesitant to disable since it's so vague.


You have cpu vcore current protection set to extreme or whatever highest setting? on my previous gigabyte board, running prime 95 with avx would cause an orderly shutdown at stock settings, until increased "cpu vrin current protection' form stock auto setting to atleast 1 higher setting. But even at highest setting of extreme, if ran prime 95 with avx at too high of an overclock, it would do an orderly shutdown,... wasnt planning on running prime with high OC, but was just testing limits. But in past GB boards hitting temp limits would throttle, hitting current limits caused orderly shutdowns.


----------



## TahoeDust

Has anyone with one of the Gigabyte boards successfully set up their OC using offset voltage?


----------



## Exilon

Agreed, it's most likely a ICCmax protection or VRM current limit.


----------



## Hawkeye360

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 10 core ~200W cpu on air? yeah - air is out, and AIOs are not that much better (if at all) than an NH-D14.


Yeah I kinda thought as much. I'm not about to invest in a custom loop setup so I guess a 7900x is out. Oh well.

Would I be able to use an air cooler with the 7820x?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *opt33*
> 
> You have cpu vcore current protection set to extreme or whatever highest setting? on my previous gigabyte board, running prime 95 with avx would cause an orderly shutdown at stock settings, until increased "cpu vrin current protection' form stock auto setting to atleast 1 higher setting. But even at highest setting of extreme, if ran prime 95 with avx at too high of an overclock, it would do an orderly shutdown,... wasnt planning on running prime with high OC, but was just testing limits. But in past GB boards hitting temp limits would throttle, hitting current limits caused orderly shutdowns.


I have had some orderly shutdowns today while running Prime95 @4.7GHz and Current protection set to auto. I just changed it to "Extreme" and am going to give it a run. Thanks for posting that.
""


----------



## BroPhilip

Give an update after you test it....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I have had some orderly shutdowns today while running Prime95 @4.7GHz and Current protection set to auto. I just changed it to "Extreme" and am going to give it a run. Thanks for posting that.
> ""


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Give an update after you test it....


Wowzers. That unleashed the beast and when AVX512 kicked in, it sent temps into the stratosphere. Prime was running 15c+ hotter and I was pulling 50w+ more power. I think playing with Prime95 at that kind of current is going to have to wait for a delid.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Wowzers. That unleashed the beast and when AVX512 kicked in, it sent temps into the stratosphere. Prime was running 15c+ hotter and I was pulling 50w+ more power. I think playing with Prime95 at that kind of current is going to have to wait for a delid.


Are you sure it's AVX512? Or just the small FFTs that happen to fit in cache?

Which Prime95 test are you running? Because it doesn't support AVX512 for the FFT tests yet. But it does for trial factoring.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Are you sure it's AVX512? Or just the small FFTs that happen to fit in cache?
> 
> Which Prime95 test are you running? Because it doesn't support AVX512 for the FFT tests yet. But it does for trial factoring.


Must be just the small FFTs. Either way. Too hot for me and unrealistic for my usage. I really like pushing my machine, but turning off all those safeties, and running Prime95 like that just seems like Hardware Abuse.

I am running Realbench right now to see how it does. When it is done, I'll check Prime95 version. I am pretty sure it is v28.10


----------



## Mysticial

Well, if it's anyone here is familiar with the y-cruncher benchmark and stress test, I've just released version 0.7.3 which has support for AVX512.

And you are now free to submit these AVX512 enabled benchmarks to HWBOT.

I will note that because of various inefficiencies (including a memory bottleneck), neither the computations nor the stress-tester will be able to put a very high load on the AVX512. If you want maximum heat output, run the BBP benchmark (option 4) and set the offset to 100,000,000,000 or higher.


----------



## Vlada011

This thermal paste completely shocked me. I expect everything only not that.
I had solid i7-3770K nice for OC and stable on 4.8GHz and i7-5820K is not bad sample at all but it's much easier with i7-5820K. From Air temperature on AIO you see better heat transfer and you clearly have impression that more expensive cooling will give you 20-30C better temps.
With i7-3770K was not that case, half of heat stay inside trapped and influence on max temps.

One of reason to moving to Intel Xtreme platform was because I don;t need iGPU and because I will deal with heat much easier with better cooling.
Temperatures no matter on much bigger power consumption and more cores are better.
Why they done that... Damn that was bad move.
I don't want to open processor, I want perfect product unchanged.
What to do with delided processor, people who bought used processor later usually want perfect original condition because huge number of people don't even OC, they set Turbo and use processor.

Comparing best possible thermal paste on market installed under perfectly condition and more than 50% of people will not done that or will need to several times reinstall and install IHS and CPU... and flux solder I think that thermal paste is inferior to at least 50-60%.That's not same simply.

I think motherboard manufacturer should design some kind of CPU guard and people to install cooler directly on die, because half of them will not back IHS perfectly and air will stay inside or they will install less or more thermal paste than need. Cooler on die is risky but at least than we could talk about best heat transfer.
Deliding is pain.


----------



## Chargeit

Did a stock run of RealBench,



Runs pretty cool at stock. So far. I need to check what bios I'm running. Make sure I'm on the newest one.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Did a stock run of RealBench,
> 
> 
> 
> Runs pretty cool at stock. So far. I need to check what bios I'm running. Make sure I'm on the newest one.


Awesome man! I'm glad you are up and running.


----------



## Chargeit

Yeah need to mess around with things.

Here's a stock run of cinebench r15.



Multi core seems kind of low.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah need to mess around with things.
> 
> Here's a stock run of cinebench r15.
> 9
> 
> 
> Multi core seems kind of low.


It's well above a stock 6900k.
I'll post up a screenshot of mine for you.

How's the vrm temps.


----------



## Chargeit

I'm using HwMonitor right now and VRM aren't showing up. Will need to get something else to monitor temps. Also need to get tuf detective up and running.

I ran the Realbench stress test and I'm getting Luxmark crashes. I have the same results at both stock and xmp ram profile. Anyone has this issue?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'm using HwMonitor right now and VRM aren't showing up. Will need to get something else to monitor temps. Also need to get tuf detective up and running.
> 
> I ran the Realbench stress test and I'm getting Luxmark crashes. I have the same results at both stock and xmp ram profile. Anyone has this issue?


Is your GPU overclocked? I have had Luxmark crash when my GPU was overclocked high in the past.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Is your GPU overclocked? I have had Luxmark crash when my GPU was overclocked high in the past.


It's set to factory oc. I'll lower it to default and see if that helps.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I ran the Realbench stress test and I'm getting Luxmark crashes. I have the same results at both stock and xmp ram profile. Anyone has this issue?


I got that with my factory overclocked GTX980ti Hybrid, lowering it to stock stopped it.

My old Cinebench scores.
the 1600's was it at stock, the 1700's are 4.3/4.4Ghz overclock, the highest was a 4.4Ghz core and a 3.5Ghz cache overclock, it wasn't stable enough to run anything else.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'm using HwMonitor right now and VRM aren't showing up. Will need to get something else to monitor temps. Also need to get tuf detective up and running.


The VRMs were showing on my X299-A but unlabeled. I had to let it heat soak in stress test and then immediately boot into UEFI to see which generic temperature read out was closest to the VRM readout.

Try installing the ASUS AI Suite 3 software suite. It's a bunch of bloat but it had the VRM temperature read out for me when I installed it real quick (and then removed it).


----------



## Chargeit

I lowered from OC mode to gaming mode and it crashed 12 min in vs 3 - 4 before. Going to test out debug mode and see if running it as a normal 1080 ti helps.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> The VRMs were showing on my X299-A but unlabeled. I had to let it heat soak in stress test and then immediately boot into UEFI to see which generic temperature read out was closest to the VRM readout.
> 
> Try installing the ASUS AI Suite 3 software suite. It's a bunch of bloat but it had the VRM temperature read out for me when I installed it real quick (and then removed it).


The only temps showing up for me in HWmonitor are for the cpu cores. I'll have to test that AI suit see what I get.


----------



## Chargeit

Ok. Ran it again with my GPU set to debug mode (default 1080 ti) and it passed 15 min.

Going to reset, go into bios and set my ram back to 3200 and test again.









*And no, I don't consider 15 min stable but got to start somewhere.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *opt33*
> 
> You have cpu vcore current protection set to extreme or whatever highest setting? on my previous gigabyte board, running prime 95 with avx would cause an orderly shutdown at stock settings, until increased "cpu vrin current protection' form stock auto setting to atleast 1 higher setting. But even at highest setting of extreme, if ran prime 95 with avx at too high of an overclock, it would do an orderly shutdown,... wasnt planning on running prime with high OC, but was just testing limits. But in past GB boards hitting temp limits would throttle, hitting current limits caused orderly shutdowns.


Bingo! That did it for me. These settings let me run AVX512 @ 4.0 GHz without a hard shutdown:

"CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration" set to low.
"CPU VCore Current Protection" set to medium.
Both "Power Limit TDP (Watts)" set to 400W.
When I increased the settings to this, my benchmarks improved slightly at the same 4.0 GHz. Which meant there was still some phantom throttling before:

"CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration" set to medium.
"CPU VCore Current Protection" set to high.
Both "Power Limit TDP (Watts)" set to 400W.
I'm not actually going to run these settings 24/7 since the temperatures push >90C. But it does mean that we've solved the "Gigabyte Throttling Problem", and I'm able to reach my temperature limit (without delid).


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Bingo! That did it for me. These settings let me run AVX512 @ 4.0 GHz without a hard shutdown:


Did you see any ICCMax or PL4 throttling in Performance Limit Reasons on HWInfo? VCore Current Protection sounds like it messes with that limit in particular.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Exilon*
> 
> Did you see any ICCMax or PL4 throttling in Performance Limit Reasons on HWInfo? VCore Current Protection sounds like it messes with that limit in particular.


I actually did not. Even when I intentionally set it back to settings that were known to cause the throttling. Where is that notification supposed to show up?


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I actually did not. Even when I intentionally set it back to settings that were known to cause the throttling. Where is that notification supposed to show up?


There should be a section named "Performance Limit Reasons" and then there'll be a long list of "IA: $REASON" rows where the reason is like PROCHOT, Thermal Event, VR Thermal Alert, Electrical Design Point (ICCmax, PL4, SVID, DDR RAPL), and etc.

ICCMax is supposed to be set by the motherboard firmware to tell the CPU how much current it's allowed to pull.


----------



## Chargeit

I set my ram back to 3200, gpu to debug mode and it crashed again about 11 min in.

I decided to test something different.

I left my ram at 3200. Set my gpu to the max factory oc. I then shut off Afterburner and HWmonitor. I set RealBench to run max ram (32gb) and 30 min.

It passed,



Going to run an hour tomorrow and see if it's still stable without running Afterburner. For now it's time to get ready for bed..


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I set my ram back to 3200, gpu to debug mode and it crashed again about 11 min in.
> 
> I decided to test something different.
> I left my ram at 3200. Set my gpu to the max factory oc. I then shut off Afterburner and HWmonitor. I set RealBench to run max ram (32gb) and 30 min.
> It passed,
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Going to run an hour tomorrow and see if it's still stable without running Afterburner. For now it's time to get ready for bed..


Oh you should of said you had Afterburner running to start with, that crashes Realbench every time for me, overclocked or not...
I find HWiFO64 a bit better than HWMonitor, but each to their own.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Oh you should of said you had Afterburner running to start with, that crashes Realbench every time for me, overclocked or not...
> I find HWiFO64 a bit better than HWMonitor, but each to their own.


Yeah its been a while since I benched for stability. Forgot how much AB get in the way of things.

My CB score improved some too.



Ok, I need to get sleep.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah its been a while since I benched for stability. Forgot how much AB get in the way of things.
> 
> My CB score improved some too.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, I need to get sleep.


Did you see the 6900k scores I posted?

I reckon if you put a 4.3Ghz all core overclock on that 7820x it'll beat the 6900k scores.


----------



## DNMock

Ok, finally found myself a nice little safe zone I believe with 7900X with the Aorous 9 Mobo:

x47 multiplier
1.23 volts
TDP 350
VCCIN 1.9

As of right now the Aorous doesn't seem to be a huge fan of altering the BCLK on the CPU....

Puts me at low 80's after a 30 min stress test on Real Bench, Laughs at traditional AIDA64 stress test

However, whenever I try and run prime95 for some reason this is all I hear coming from my system at those settings just before it reboots itself:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DNMock*
> 
> Ok, finally found myself a nice little safe zone I believe with 7900X with the Aorous 9 Mobo:
> 
> x47 multiplier
> 1.23 volts
> TDP 350
> VCCIN 1.9
> 
> As of right now the Aorous doesn't seem to be a huge fan of altering the BCLK on the CPU....
> 
> Puts me at low 80's after a 30 min stress test on Real Bench, Laughs at traditional AIDA64 stress test
> 
> However, whenever I try and run prime95 for some reason this is all I hear coming from my system at those settings just before it reboots itself:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


You're not the first to hit this: http://www.overclock.net/t/1632870/skylake-x-kaby-lake-x-combined-discussion/660#post_26209535

Increase your current limits. Set "CPU VCore Current Protection" to high or extreme. Though if you're gonna try prime95, I recommend you start from a lower clock and work your way up. I have no idea how much prime95 will pull at 4.7 GHz especially with AVX.


----------



## DNMock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> You're not the first to hit this: http://www.overclock.net/t/1632870/skylake-x-kaby-lake-x-combined-discussion/660#post_26209535
> 
> Increase your current limits. Set "CPU VCore Current Protection" to high or extreme. Though if you're gonna try prime95, I recommend you start from a lower clock and work your way up. I have no idea how much prime95 will pull at 4.7 GHz especially with AVX.


I'm not too worried about it to be honest. Split my time on Photoshop/Gimp/Autocad, (







not autodesk







) and gaming/surfing.

I did crank the protection up to extreme for my testing purposes, Prime95 still just shook it's head showing me how disappointed it was in me before walking away. I think gotta drop it down to 4.0 or so to succeed in prime.



Here are some cinebench numbers I just cobbled together for those curious

edit: And a realbench benchmark for fun:



edit: I get the stock clock speeds listed instead of the O/C but i haven't the slightest why cinebench thinks I would use that abomination windows 8


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DNMock*
> 
> I'm not too worried about it to be honest. Split my time on Photoshop/Gimp/Autocad, (
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not autodesk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) and gaming/surfing.
> 
> I did crank the protection up to extreme for my testing purposes, Prime95 still just shook it's head showing me how disappointed it was in me before walking away. I think gotta drop it down to 4.0 or so to succeed in prime.
> 
> 
> 
> Here are some cinebench numbers I just cobbled together for those curious


You should be getting around 2550 or so in CB at 4.7 GHz (if that run was at 4.7







). I am getting ~2500 at 4.6.

I listed my parts up for sale, the i9-7900X and Strix mobo. I had enough tuning on this platform and there were more negatives for me than positives. I am going back to 6950X and RVE10 mobo. Let's see what happens when those 18-cores hit the shelves and the Rampage VI Extreme mobo too.


----------



## DNMock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> You should be getting around 2550 or so in CB at 4.7 GHz (if that run was at 4.7
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). I am getting ~2500 at 4.6.
> 
> I listed my parts up for sale, the i9-7900X and Strix mobo. I had enough tuning on this platform and there were more negatives for me than positives. I am going back to 6950X and RVE10 mobo. Let's see what happens when those 18-cores hit the shelves and the Rampage VI Extreme mobo too.


weird, I double checked it, and that's what I'm pulling:



Dunno how much effect RAM speeds or uncore has to do with cinebench scores, Haven't started tweaking on those yet. but either way, strange


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DNMock*
> 
> weird, I double checked it, and that's what I'm pulling:
> 
> 
> 
> Dunno how much effect RAM speeds or uncore has to do with cinebench scores, Haven't started tweaking on those yet. but either way, strange


At least uncore brings a little bit of performance in CB. Try 2.7 GHz. Now I am unsure if mine was set to 2.7 GHz automatically.


----------



## tistou77

The uncore behaves how with Skylake-X ?
With Haswell-E, it was easy to 4.5ghz, Broadwell-E limited to 3.8ghz (see 3.9)

Thanks


----------



## Vlada011

Someone should check performance of i7-6900K on 4.3GHz and 4.0GHz Cache and same for i7-7820X.

Yes Uncore go pretty easy on Haswell-E. I increased from 2400 to 4000MHz and add only 50mV 1150 to 1200V. I'm not sure that even that is necessary. I set 1200V and 4.0Ghz and she work stable and I didn't bother to change more because that's pretty high Uncore and my CPU Frequency is very close.

It' would be nice if Cache OC good on Skylake-X299 and improve memory performance as on Haswell-X99


----------



## alex1990

hi everyone!

I have 7900x @4.6 Ghz and Msi x299 gaming pro carbon bios ver 110/
Please help, how i can increase TDP on this board?? this is first MSI mb for me//









In HWinfo a saw limit on "ia max turbo limit - yes" - ho i can disable this?


----------



## kenny0048

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Thank you. I was messing around with Fire Strike yesterday at 4.8 GHz, but I can't say that I was pushing things too hard so please keep that in mind.
> 
> 
> Cooling is 5 x 360mm rads. The CPU is not delidded yet. I have not stress tested 4.9 GHz because I know better than to call that a daily usable clock speed (at least until delidded). 4.8 GHz will run RealBench stress test with 80c on package temp in a 25c ambient.
> 
> As a heads up to fellow Skylake-X owners, I talked to der8auer and he said that the DDM-X is already in production and to expect availability in approximately 4 weeks.


Hello
I want to know the thickness of the radiator, Which radiator are you using?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Did you see the 6900k scores I posted?
> 
> I reckon if you put a 4.3Ghz all core overclock on that 7820x it'll beat the 6900k scores.


I did. I plan on playing with OC'ing some tonight. Would really like 4.5 as long as I can keep it cool with my H115i set to quiet mode.

Still need to get something to monitor VRM. Exilon said ASUS AI Suite 3 gives him readouts for vrm. Might have to install that while messing with oc'ing.

HWiFO64 has more function but I always found it a little on the heavy side which is why I normally run HWmonitor. I'll give it a download tonight for use while oc'ing.

*If anyone is looking for something to clean the hell out of their grommets then you should try "Krud Kutter". Used some of it on a case I sold and on my current case and it gets those parts that like to get grey with dust looking new. Just make sure to test the stuff before covering your pc in it.









http://www.homedepot.com/p/Krud-Kutter-32-oz-Original-Concentrate-Cleaner-Degreaser-KK3212/203396788


----------



## dboythagr8

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - these parts may stay together for a while. [email protected]/5.0 w/ 3866c16 is really very snappy. Might replace my day driver 4960X with it... maybe, but transferring all the files and apps is just too much to think about.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10 core ~200W cpu on air? yeah - air is out, and AIOs are not that much better (if at all) than an NH-D14.


So you shouldn't buy a 7900x unless you have a custom loop? That sounds a bit hyperbolic? Obviously you shouldn't run a 7900x on something like a hyper 212+, but 240/280 aio coolers aren't "enough"?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DNMock*
> 
> I'm not too worried about it to be honest. Split my time on Photoshop/Gimp/Autocad, (
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> not autodesk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) and gaming/surfing.
> I did crank the protection up to extreme for my testing purposes, Prime95 still just shook it's head showing me how disappointed it was in me before walking away. I think gotta drop it down to 4.0 or so to succeed in prime.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are some cinebench numbers I just cobbled together for those curious
> edit: And a realbench benchmark for fun:
> 
> edit: I get the stock clock speeds listed instead of the O/C but i haven't the slightest why cinebench thinks I would use that abomination windows 8


either Intel has some magic in the IPC, or that Image Processing score is bugged.








that said.. nice cpu bro!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dboythagr8*
> 
> So you shouldn't buy a 7900x unless you have a custom loop? That sounds a bit hyperbolic? Obviously you shouldn't run a 7900x on something like a hyper 212+, but 240/280 aio coolers aren't "enough"?


Hyperbolic? Wut? No, you can buy a 7900 and cool it any way you choose... but don;t expect much more from an AIO/CLC compared to the NH-D14 air cooler (a degree or 2 at steady-state). Seemed like you wanted to stay on air, so... hence recommending the NH-D14.
In either case, controlling temps will require a modest OC limit. And yeah... custom water is the best way to go, and if done correctly, it's about the same cost as a top AIO.


----------



## alex1990

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Also I am having major problems getting SLI to even scale outside 3DMark. Either SLI support has taken a nosedive in a few months, I have a game/driver problem or something is holding SLI back on my X299 platform. Eager to hear from other experiences, but I don't recall seeing this problem on X99.
> 
> Cinebench shows improvement on SK-X.


I have some problem!! Only Hitman and Deus Ex give me 99% loads for cards (1080 sli hb bridge). Pls, send river feedback to NV. I already do.


----------



## dboythagr8

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> either Intel has some magic in the IPC, or that Image Processing score is bugged.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that said.. nice cpu bro!
> Hyperbolic? Wut? No, you can buy a 7900 and cool it any way you choose... but don;t expect much more from an AIO/CLC compared to the NH-D14 air cooler (a degree or 2 at steady-state). Seemed like you wanted to stay on air, so... hence recommending the NH-D14.
> In either case, controlling temps will require a modest OC limit. And yeah... custom water is the best way to go, and if done correctly, it's about the same cost as a top AIO.


Tubing, fittings, blocks, rads, liquid etc the same as a AIO? No way. Or are you referring to the likes of Swiftech and not Corsair and others?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kenny0048*
> 
> Hello
> I want to know the thickness of the radiator, Which radiator are you using?


I'm using 5 EK PE 360 rads which are 40mm thick rads.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dboythagr8*
> 
> Tubing, fittings, blocks, rads, liquid etc the same as a AIO? No way. Or are you referring to the likes of Swiftech and not Corsair and others?


you can pick up a 360 rad for $50, pump for the same, res for $25, plain "home-depot" tubing for $10 (works fine), simple fittings for a few bucks.. and a cp[u block for $50 and 3 cheap 120 fans for a few bucks. For under $200 you have a cooling system that is waay better than any AIO.
Check the OCN market place for used gear, you can find some great buys there.


----------



## dboythagr8

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you can pick up a 360 rad for $50, pump for the same, res for $25, plain "home-depot" tubing for $10 (works fine), simple fittings for a few bucks.. and a cp[u block for $50 and 3 cheap 120 fans for a few bucks. For under $200 you have a cooling system that is waay better than any AIO.
> Check the OCN market place for used gear, you can find some great buys there.


Interesting.

Just thought about it. In my head when I've considered a custom loop, I've considered my GPU as well. I've never thought about just the CPU which would obviously be cheaper.


----------



## opt33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Must be just the small FFTs. Either way. Too hot for me and unrealistic for my usage. I really like pushing my machine, but turning off all those safeties, and running Prime95 like that just seems like Hardware Abuse.
> 
> I am running Realbench right now to see how it does. When it is done, I'll check Prime95 version. I am pretty sure it is v28.10


agreed... even broadwell-e with solder, I only run prime 95 on custom blend (ram usage) and change ffts to 512 and higher, eliminating all small ffts below 512. Equivalent for rapid stability testing without damaging cpu from pulling too much unrealistic current/temps via small ffts.

I had my broadwell e stable for an hour as above, then added .02v for buffer since only ran an hour (+.02v since in 20 years of using prime the difference between 1 hour stable and 24 hrs stable has always been within .02v on my cpus). Im going to test skylake x same way, though maybe with prime 27.7 (no fma3) instead of 28 and again use buffer. I never see bsods/instability on my builds since I always use a buffer after prime.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dboythagr8*
> 
> Interesting.
> 
> Just thought about it. In my head when I've considered a custom loop, I've considered my GPU as well. I've never thought about just the CPU which would obviously be cheaper.


for example:


----------



## Chargeit

Ran Realbench again for a 2 hour run. Got to 90 min and decided to stop. Going to call it stable at stock. Afterburner was the reason for crashing at stock in realbench.

Oh, luckily I replaced my H100i. When I took it out of my system I noticed the tubing at the rad were splitting pretty bad. Wondering if there's some kind of interior tubing because I'm surprised my H100i didn't spring a leak. The H100i still has over a year of warranty. Thinking of sending it in on an RMA.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alex1990*
> 
> I have some problem!! Only Hitman and Deus Ex give me 99% loads for cards (1080 sli hb bridge). Pls, send river feedback to NV. I already do.


Thanks for sharing. Which mobo? Are you using bundled bridge?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you can pick up a 360 rad for $50, pump for the same, res for $25, plain "home-depot" tubing for $10 (works fine), simple fittings for a few bucks.. and a cp[u block for $50 and 3 cheap 120 fans for a few bucks. For under $200 you have a cooling system that is waay better than any AIO.
> Check the OCN market place for used gear, you can find some great buys there.


Than any AIO? My Predator 360 AIO is cooling my CPU and GPU and look as these temps 31c max room temperature at 76f.


----------



## alex1990

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Thanks for sharing. Which mobo? Are you using bundled bridge?


Msi Gaming Carbon Pro// Yes, use bridge from package


----------



## Menta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I set my ram back to 3200, gpu to debug mode and it crashed again about 11 min in.
> 
> I decided to test something different.
> 
> I left my ram at 3200. Set my gpu to the max factory oc. I then shut off Afterburner and HWmonitor. I set RealBench to run max ram (32gb) and 30 min.
> 
> It passed,
> 
> 
> 
> Going to run an hour tomorrow and see if it's still stable without running Afterburner. For now it's time to get ready for bed..


Looking good







check Ai suite for VRM temps will be following up on X299 user experience


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> That's because you're using a 10 core chip, he's using a 6 core.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> No, but overall utilization of the IMC drops a little... This was true of BWE and HWE before it.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Cache is much bigger on 10core, he is using 200mhz higher NB. Secondary memorytimings is maybe tighter?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Try disabling the extra cores and run NB clock at 3000mhz.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I definitely agree that our secondary timings are different, which is why I originally stated that I was surprised that his 4000 MHz _configuration_ was slower. When I saw that he tweaked primaries, I assumed he did secondaries as well. I would think that @Nizzen could pull off ~40ns range latency with a set like that (I know I want to be there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) I'm simply suggesting that there's some slack left in the configuration.
> 
> As far as core count and cache speed, I reran with 4 cores disabled and cache speed matched to 3000 MHz. Read/copy throughput dropped a bit, but everything else looks the same? The only variable that remains is cache size and I can't do anything about that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stock DRAM / VCCIO / VCCSA voltages for the stability testing below.


I picked up the same kit that @done12many2 is running. I am getting VERY similar performance paired with my 7820x. It looks like like the performance difference is not because of his 10-core.


----------



## Vlada011

i7-6950X will stay right choice until new socket.
With 40 PCI-E lanes, easy overclocking to 4.3GHz, without thermal paste give opportunity to owners of X99 to enjoy in almost same performance as X299 platform.
i7-6900K as well. Owners of i7-6900K are in even advantage compare to owners of i7-6950X.
Because i7-6900K have more PCI-E lanes and no thermal paste compare to i7-7820X.
I would like to see them on same clock. Everything, memory on 3200MHz, copy, read, write. CPU single, multi threaded performance.

When I talk that X99 will stay long time competitive to new models more than Z170 people decide to go with i7-6700K.
It's not same if you need to replace CPU and pay 500-600$, or if you need to pay new processor and 500$ for new motherboard.
OK i9-7900X. He is great, but for owners of 6 and 8 cores models Haswell-E and Broadwell-E I don't know how good choice is replacing whole platform except upgrade to 10 cores.
Special if they could bought used Broadwell-E. That's good and for people who want to save money and others who want newest platform for any cost.
i7-6900K could hold single graphic card, dedicate sound card and two M.2. One onboard and other with adapter to use 4 PCI-E lanes from CPU.
If board have independent x4 PCI-E slot and x1 PCI-E slot as Rampage V Edition 10 than situation is even better, than maybe could be installed SLI x16 and two M.2.
Sound card use PCI-E lanes from PCH. USB 3.1 as well I think.


----------



## elelunicy

For those who overclocked the mesh to 3.2ghz or higher, what's your ring/uncore voltage at? Mine is unstable at 1.0v and I'm wondering if I should up it higher.


----------



## TahoeDust

Stable at 3200MHz Mesh with the "Auto" setting. It says it is giving it .900v.


----------



## alex1990

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elelunicy*
> 
> For those who overclocked the mesh to 3.2ghz or higher, what's your ring/uncore voltage at? Mine is unstable at 1.0v and I'm wondering if I should up it higher.


3200 @1.050 on my system

http://rgho.st/6vKsRg2Tb.view


----------



## Norlig

Is 1541 in Cinebench R15 good for Multithreaded 7800x?
getting 205 in single threaded.


----------



## Norlig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alex1990*
> 
> 3200 @1.050 on my system
> 
> http://rgho.st/6vKsRg2Tb.view


What do you use to check uncore/cache voltage?

I got mine at 3200Mhz at Auto in bios.
But my Asus Bios has both Cache and Uncore voltage settings, not sure which to change if I want to go higher


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menta*
> 
> Looking good
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> check Ai suite for VRM temps will be following up on X299 user experience


Ugh, damned that Ai suit isn't bloat ware. Even installed Java. Makes me feel kind of dirty.









I ran 15min of RealBench at stock. VRM temp stabilized at 62c.

*The VRM sensor for this board is called Vcore(Top ). That's for the sensor right in the middle of the vrm.


----------



## TahoeDust

Broke 2100 with my little 8 core at 4.7GHz....


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Broke 2100 with my little 8 core at 4.7GHz....


Making use of that nice memory performance. Congrats! That's a nice score for 4.7 GHz. My 5960X took 4.9 GHz just to hit 2001cb.


----------



## dboythagr8

I've found AI Suite to be really useful for temps and controlling the fans on my RIVBE. Just kind of sits in the background until I need to tune something or view temps.


----------



## artins90

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Broke 2100 with my little 8 core at 4.7GHz....


My 7820x will be shipped next week and I also ordered a similar aio to yours, what kind of temperatures do you get at 4.7Ghz ?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artins90*
> 
> My 7820x will be shipped next week and I also ordered a similar aio to yours, what kind of temperatures do you get at 4.7Ghz ?


http://www.overclock.net/t/1632870/skylake-x-kaby-lake-x-combined-discussion/380#post_26202535


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dboythagr8*
> 
> I've found AI Suite to be really useful for temps and controlling the fans on my RIVBE. Just kind of sits in the background until I need to tune something or view temps.


Yeah I agree. It seems like a good program but Java kills it for me.









I'm going for an oc.

Running realbench 1 hour at,

4.5
1.150v

6 min in and I'm at 68c on the VRM and max 77c cpu. See where this takes me.

If this passes I'm going to lower the voltage. I personally want 4.5 on all cores at as low of voltage as possible.

*20 min in and VRM seem to of settled in at 73c. CPU max 77c. I'm using the TUF detective to monitor the VRM right now. I'd give it a delta of 10 since it's off for cpu temps.

*30 min in VRM 74c cpu max 77c. Think I'm going to stop the test and drop voltage down to 1.125v.

4.5
1.125v

See how it goes.

System crash. Oh well. Move back up to 1.140v and try again.

4.5
1.140v

Ran realbench but forgot to set it for 1 hour. Ran 15 min and passed. =/ Going to run again for at least 1 hour.

Ran Cinebench R15 at above settings,
CPU = 1964
Single = 196

Came back in to a system crash. =/


----------



## DNMock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> either Intel has some magic in the IPC, or that Image Processing score is bugged.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that said.. nice cpu bro!


Haha, holy crap, it was late and I didn't even take the time to look at the numbers. I'm just gonna say Intel sent me a top-secret joint military project chip on accident and call it a day








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah I agree. It seems like a good program but Java kills it for me.


It's great until you try and uninstall it. I've had less trouble cleaning viruses off PC's at the office than trying to remove AISuite


----------



## kenny0048

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I'm using 5 EK PE 360 rads which are 40mm thick rads.


You did a good job
thanks bro


----------



## BroPhilip

What processor are using? That is a hot vrm temp for such low voltage....

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah I agree. It seems like a good program but Java kills it for me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm going for an oc.
> 
> Running realbench 1 hour at,
> 
> 4.5
> 1.150v
> 
> 6 min in and I'm at 68c on the VRM and max 77c cpu. See where this takes me.
> 
> If this passes I'm going to lower the voltage. I personally want 4.5 on all cores at as low of voltage as possible.
> 
> *20 min in and VRM seem to of settled in at 73c. CPU max 77c. I'm using the TUF detective to monitor the VRM right now. I'd give it a delta of 10 since it's off for cpu temps.
> 
> *30 min in VRM 74c cpu max 77c. Think I'm going to stop the test and drop voltage down to 1.125v.
> 
> 4.5
> 1.125v
> 
> See how it goes.
> 
> System crash. Oh well. Move back up to 1.140v and try again.
> 
> 4.5
> 1.140v
> 
> Ran realbench but forgot to set it for 1 hour. Ran 15 min and passed. =/ Going to run again for at least 1 hour.
> 
> Ran Cinebench R15 at above settings,
> CPU = 1964
> Single = 196
> 
> Came back in to a system crash. =/


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> What processor are using? That is a hot vrm temp for such low voltage....


7820x.

The voltage is steady with the settings I'm currently using. No drops or fluctuations.

I'm also going off the middle VRM sensor. If I go off the outer most sensor then it's 64c.


----------



## BroPhilip

The max I have seen is low 60c and that was at 1.22v and 4.7oc. I'm now running 1.18 at 4.7 and it will just barely hit 60c
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> 7820x.
> 
> The voltage is steady with the settings I'm currently using. No drops or fluctuations.


----------



## TahoeDust

My Asus Prime Deluxe arrived today. I am going to install it in the morning and see what the VRM temps are compared to my Gaming 7.


----------



## Artah

Just got mine today too. Can you test on stock? I only have a 120mm AIO to test with until tomorrow I'll have a 360mm. Also let me know where you are measuring or using hwinfo and what version. Thanks.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> The max I have seen is low 60c and that was at 1.22v and 4.7oc. I'm now running 1.18 at 4.7 and it will just barely hit 60c


Not sure. I wonder where the sensor placement is on the gaming boards. Remember Der8auer said something about some brands having sensors in the middle of the vrm and some on the sides. This board has sensors on both the middle and side of the vrm. The reading off my side sensor is 10c cooler then the middle sensor.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Not sure. I wonder where the sensor placement is on the gaming boards. Remember Der8auer said something about some brands having sensors in the middle of the vrm and some on the sides. This board has sensors on both the middle and side of the vrm. The reading off my side sensor is 10c cooler then the middle sensor.


Are you reading the sensors in the Asus software?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Are you reading the sensors in the Asus software?


I'm using the TUF detective. I'm not sure how accurate it is which is why I mentioned a delta of 10.


----------



## BroPhilip

It could be....what is your package voltage? Running prime95 with small fft is the only thing that will max out my voltage. I ran it for 5 min at 4.3ghz and my package max wattage was 250-280w And I hit 63c on vrm. It bakes the cpu though I hit in the mid 90s. I believe that most will deffinantly hit the thermal limit before vrm maxes out. It didn't throttle though even with a few cores hitting uper 90s. The worst part is the delta between cores with about a 20c spread.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Not sure. I wonder where the sensor placement is on the gaming boards. Remember Der8auer said something about some brands having sensors in the middle of the vrm and some on the sides. This board has sensors on both the middle and side of the vrm. The reading off my side sensor is 10c cooler then the middle sensor.


----------



## scabpl

I have a question to the owners of the asus x299 deluxe motherboard.
The lcd screen (livedash) of my motherboard has a lot of scratches.
Is there a protective film?

*EDIT*

OK, never mind.
There is a protective film, but to remove it I must remove the plastic cover.


----------



## Menta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Ugh, damned that Ai suit isn't bloat ware. Even installed Java. Makes me feel kind of dirty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I ran 15min of RealBench at stock. VRM temp stabilized at 62c.
> 
> *The VRM sensor for this board is called Vcore(Top ). That's for the sensor right in the middle of the vrm.


I dont java installed i think or the process is blocked at startup, good for controlling fans does a really good job there.

edit: i have java installed


----------



## TahoeDust

x299 Deluxe is DOA. Gives a "4F Check CPU" code. Troubleshot for about and hour...Bios flashback, reseated CPU, reseated memory, tried different memory configurations, etc. Reinstalled the Aorus Gaming 7...chip is fine.

Disappointing. Must be a sign to stick with Gigabyte this time.


----------



## Chargeit

I'll call my oc gta v stable. Just pulled about 4 hours with my friend without issue.

I took a screen shot of my HWMonitor screen. Max temps are in the upper 40's - 50's though while in game I was seeing mostly 30's - 40's. Wouldn't say the game was putting much stress on the cpu. VRM was 44c. These temps are better then what I got on my stock 4790k/H100i.

Clock is 45 on all cores. The max/min clock is glitched.


----------



## Norlig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> x299 Deluxe is DOA. Gives a "4F Check CPU" code. Troubleshot for about and hour...Bios flashback, reseated CPU, reseated memory, tried different memory configurations, etc. Reinstalled the Aorus Gaming 7...chip is fine.
> 
> Disappointing. Must be a sign to stick with Gigabyte this time.


I had the same error on my Asus Prime X299-A , 4F says: "DXE IPL Is Started" in my Manual though.

I was able to boot after putting the updated Bios on a flash drive and flash it with the Easy Flash button.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Norlig*
> 
> I had the same error on my Asus Prime X299-A , 4F says: "DXE IPL Is Started" in my Manual though.
> 
> I was able to boot after putting the updated Bios on a flash drive and flash it with the Easy Flash button.


Hmmm...I tried that and was not successful The Easy Flash button would blink three times, go solid, and never turn off. Maybe I will get ambitious and try again tomorrow.


----------



## Norlig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Hmmm...I tried that and was not successful The Easy Flash button would blink three times, go solid, and never turn off. Maybe I will get ambitious and try again tomorrow.


Did you rename the Bios .cap file to "X299D.cap" ? (I renamed my file to "X299A.cap" and had it on a FAT32 USB drive)

If you kept it the name it was, then it will do like you mention.

guide for X99 here, but steps are the same, just different file name: http://event.asus.com/2012/mb/USB_BIOS_Flashback_GUIDE/

See notes in the bottomn


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Norlig*
> 
> Did you rename the Bios .cap file to "X299D.cap" ? (I renamed my file to "X299A.cap"
> 
> If you kept it the name it was, then it will do like you mention.
> 
> guide for X99 here, but steps are the same, just different file name: http://event.asus.com/2012/mb/USB_BIOS_Flashback_GUIDE/


Yes. I renamed it. The only thing I saw in the manual is that it recommended using a usb 2.0 drive. I am not even sure I can dig one of those up.


----------



## Norlig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Yes. I renamed it. The only thing I saw in the manual is that it recommended using a usb 2.0 drive. I am not even sure I can dig one of those up.


I expect you already checked the manual for it?








page 2-15 - 2.2 Bios Update Utility
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus Manual*
> 
> We recommend you to use a USB 2.0 storage device to save the latest BIOS version for better compatibility and stability


USB FlashBack port is the bottomn most USB 2.0 port.


----------



## st3roids1

Hello all , i asked in a seperate thread in general and ill ask it here again.

do these issues like throttling or vrm heat ( although not mass reproduced so it might be something else ) etc happen on stock clocks or only when overclocked ?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st3roids1*
> 
> Hello all , i asked in a seperate thread in general and ill ask it here again.
> 
> do these issues like throttling or vrm heat ( although not mass reproduced so it might be something else ) etc happen on stock clocks or only when overclocked ?


Shouldn't happen at stock unless you have very poor case airflow.

Should be able to oc some without worrying about it. The main reason he got the results he did was because he increased the temp limit that the cpu throttles at, delided the cpu, then oc'ed fairly heavy (some other things also that I don't remember off hand). He did a follow up video to it.






This can depend on the usage. If your normal use does indeed mimic stress tests then maybe you'd want a fan on the vrm. I know oc'ed to 45 @ 1.150v (w/adaptive more like 1.184v max) running a H115i in quiet mode last night playing gta 5 my cpu ran much cooler(max 54c, more like 30's - low 40's ultra cool) then my stock 4790k/h100i and the vrm maxed out at 44c.

Any problems with x299 have been greatly exaggerated from what I'm seeing.


----------



## st3roids1

cheers m8 , yes i have come the same conclusion my self , under ridiculously conditions some issues may arise but i just had to clear this out


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st3roids1*
> 
> cheers m8 , yes i have come the same conclusion my self , under ridiculously conditions some issues may arise but i just had to clear this out


Yeah. The funny thing being he says that with a fan on the vrm they don't overheat meaning they do function as heatsinks.

Though it is clear that manufacturers currently design heatsink for looks over function. Hopefully the response to der8auers video will make them reconsider that in the future.


----------



## TahoeDust

Is there anyone out there with a 7820x and Gigabyte board running an overclock using offset voltage? In order to run the proper voltage at my overclock, I need to run ~-.035cv offset due to the demanded 1.273v when setting 4.7GHz . When I set that offset, save the bios, and continue into windows, everything works fine. When I go to restart the machine, I get a failure to boot.


----------



## TahoeDust

There is a new Beta BIOS for the Gigabyte board on the Gigabyte forum. It fixed my offset voltage restart issue! Woot!

http://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/1425/x299-beta-bios-thread


----------



## BroPhilip

Yea!!!! For progress.










Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> There is a new Beta BIOS for the Gigabyte board on the Gigabyte forum. It fixed my offset voltage restart issue! Woot!
> 
> http://forum.gigabyte.us/thread/1425/x299-beta-bios-thread


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Yea!!!! For progress.


Yay indeed. This was the only issue I was having with this board. Surprisingly, I am really pleased with it...for now.


----------



## BroPhilip

I have really liked it and the only limits I have had has been thermal from the processor. 4.7 at 1.18v has been the sweet spot with a 4 to 5 avx offset. I used the thermal paste that came pre applied with the AIO. I am going to upgrade it to a better solution as I think that it was not wide enough for the 2066 chip. I'm getting a pretty good delta of 20c between the hottest and coolest cores.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Yay indeed. This was the only issue I was having with this board. Surprisingly, I am really pleased with it...for now.


----------



## rt123

Let's get the party started


----------



## artins90

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Let's get the party started


A user on the MSI forums reported that on that board, the LED on the heatsinks is not configurable using mystic light. Non configurable RGB is not a big deal but I would really like to know more about this board, there is only 1 review on Hexus.net, more feedback on how it performs would be much appreciated.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Just bought these babies:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232472

hopefully I can make use of them soon


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Just bought these babies:
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232472
> 
> hopefully I can make use of them soon


Did you get two kits?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Did you get two kits?


nah. I might though later. I don't mind losing quad channel.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Let's get the party started


That's a lot of cores









Just be careful to clear CMOS when switching from Kaby Lake-X to Skylake-X or vice versa as it can kill the CPU: http://www.anandtech.com/show/11550/the-intel-skylakex-review-core-i9-7900x-i7-7820x-and-i7-7800x-tested/7
Quote:


> When we started testing for this review, the main instructions we were given was that when changing between Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X processors, be sure to remove AC power and hold the reset BIOS button for 30 seconds. This comes down to an issue with supporting both sets of CPUs at once: Skylake-X features some form of integrated voltage regulator (somewhat like the FIVR on Broadwell), whereas Kaby Lake-X is more motherboard controlled. As a result, some of the voltages going in to the CPU, if configured incorrectly, can cause damage. This is where I say I broke a CPU: our Kaby Lake-X Core i7 died on the test bed. We are told that in the future there should be a way to switch between the two without having this issue, but there are some other issues as well.


----------



## Nackles

7800x will arrive Tuesday and MSI gaming pro carbon ac on Wednesday. Coming from 2500k since 2011.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nackles*
> 
> 7800x will arrive Tuesday and MSI gaming pro carbon ac on Wednesday. Coming from 2500k since 2011.


Wow that should be a really nice upgrade! I love my MSI Carbon.


----------



## Zurv

i was waiting for the Apex and more cores.. but i have no self control








now i have to wait for Wednesday








I got the gigabyte x299 aorus gaming 9 and the 7900x (EDIT: oops.. type-o)


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> i was waiting for the Apex and more cores.. but i have no self control
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> now i have to wait for Wednesday
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got the gigabyte x299 aorus gaming 9 and the 9800x


9800x?

7900x maybe?


----------



## MarkPost

guys do you think a 550W PSU (Silverstone Platinum) will be enough to handle a 7800x? GC isnt a problem because it will be just a R7 250... thanks!


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MarkPost*
> 
> guys do you think a 550W PSU (Silverstone Platinum) will be enough to handle a 7800x? GC isnt a problem because it will be just a R7 250... thanks!


Shouldn't be a problem unless the psu is defective.


----------



## MarkPost

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Shouldn't be a problem unless the psu is defective.


thanks. PSU is almost new and installed right now with an oced 2600K (4.5) rig. Works nicely


----------



## Zurv

any doing the Optane thingy? All my HDs are NVMe.. so.. i'm assuming i'd gain little adding Optane, right?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> any doing the Optane thingy? All my HDs are NVMe.. so.. i'm assuming i'd gain little adding Optane, right?


We are waiting for Intel Optane 900p







Or Intel Optane P4800x for the hardcore fans


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I definitely agree that our secondary timings are different, which is why I originally stated that I was surprised that his 4000 MHz _configuration_ was slower. When I saw that he tweaked primaries, I assumed he did secondaries as well. I would think that @Nizzen could pull off ~40ns range latency with a set like that (I know I want to be there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) I'm simply suggesting that there's some slack left in the configuration.
> 
> As far as core count and cache speed, I reran with 4 cores disabled and cache speed matched to 3000 MHz. Read/copy throughput dropped a bit, but everything else looks the same? The only variable that remains is cache size and I can't do anything about that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stock DRAM / VCCIO / VCCSA voltages for the stability testing below.


I found out what was wrong: I was running 3 Dimm. One is dead







Did not notice it


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> I found out what was wrong: I was running 3 Dimm. One is dead
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did not notice it


Ohh, that would not help things...









Glad you found it, as I mentioned some difference is expected, but good thing you kept digging.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> I found out what was wrong: I was running 3 Dimm. One is dead
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did not notice it


Nice! I mean that sucks, but at least you know what the problem is. Core count and cache size came no where close to explaining the deficit that I noticed in your results considering the RAM that you are using. A dead stick though, now that makes sense.









Are you still within the return window with the retailer on that set or will you have to RMA with G.Skill? If you have the option, exchange it via the retailer.

I just recently RMA'd a set with G.Skill and the process was a lot worse than I expected having dealt with many other companies' RMA processes. In the end, G.Skill took care of me, but the process start to finish was just over 3 weeks long. In comparison, a RMA with Intel can be as short as 24 hours if you opt for the cross shipping option.

**I should add that before you return or RMA, make sure the stick is indeed dead and that the XMP or whatever tweaks you have going aren't causing a channel to drop. Best way to test is to run the memory at default speeds (No XMP). If you test them one at a time or they happen to all show up once you set memory to default, then the XMP or your particular overclock is causing the channel to fall off. That's one of the reasons why I was asking if you ran a stability test on them back when all of this came up.

Good luck bud.


----------



## Clukos

@done12many2 that's an awesome AIDA64 run









I think the 6950x capped at 80-90 read/write? That's a very nice boost by comparison! And yeah G.SKill RMA sucks if you have to go through that.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> @done12many2 that's an awesome AIDA64 run
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the 6950x capped at 80-90 read/write?


Thanks bud. Yeah, that seemed to be the cap based on what I've seen in the Intel stability thread here on OCN.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> That's a very nice boost by comparison! And yeah G.SKill RMA sucks if you have to go through that.


Best thing about it is I'm running stock DRAM voltage and VCCIO / VCCSA are both running well below stock voltage. The IMC on Skylake-X seems like a champ!


----------



## Clukos

Yup looks like it, 3600-4000 quad channel is seriously impressive. Broadwell-E could barely break the 3200 barrier.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Yup looks like it, 3600-4000 quad channel is seriously impressive. Broadwell-E could barely break the 3200 barrier.


You mean 3400 ...


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> You mean 3400 ...


I was going to write 3466 initially but I've seen people struggling with 3200 and tight timings so I thought 3200 is a bit more realistic


----------



## Nackles

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Wow that should be a really nice upgrade! I love my MSI Carbon.


I hope so. I am a little nervous going to MSI. All I have ever used is Asus, but I don't get too carried away with overclocking so I should be fine with something new.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nackles*
> 
> I hope so. I am a little nervous going to MSI. All I have ever used is Asus, but I don't get too carried away with overclocking so I should be fine with something new.


You'll have no problem with MSI, I was using a MSI board with x99 Haswell-E (From only owning Asus), when Broadwell-E dropped I went with the ROG Strix and honestly I wish I had stuck with the x99 Gaming 7.

It's a little different in the BIOS mainly the LLC naming but all in all they are a solid board.


----------



## Artah

If you have a7900x and asus prime x299 deluxe can you check what voltage you are getting with default settings loaded please. Also if you know how I can change the display from showing VCCIN to core voltage would be a bonus, thanks









Edit: Found the live dash software, I had trouble seeing it because the utilities download page would only show 2-3 items and that was further down. Had to do a highlight and drag down then I seen the other software to download. Not sure if it's my browser or the website but I tried it in IE11 and chrome.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nackles*
> 
> I hope so. I am a little nervous going to MSI. All I have ever used is Asus, but I don't get too carried away with overclocking so I should be fine with something new.


You will like the board. If you have any questions go here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1511496/official-msi-x99s-a-motherboard-owners-club


----------



## postem

Hi ppl, im considering getting a 7820x, despite lower lane count.

I cant find consistent reviews of 7820x, basically only 7900x, so considering how the plataform is power hungry, gonna thrown some questions if anyone has info or experience on the chip.

1. Considering lower core count vs 7900x, it would probably draw less current. Someone has any idea of how much wattage or current it typically draws around 4.6 - 4.7 @ 1.2v ?
2. Considering i will get it dellided or gonna delid myself with a tool, it would be feasible to run around 4.6-4.7 on H110i without hurricane settings?
3. Considering mobos around 300-400$ what seen to be the best offer? Im considering Asrock, with 13 power phases, its has a nice price, the only drawback is only one extra 8pin, but im not considering to draw 300W+ if the cpu can remain stable with that on the target frequency.

I know in typical usage it will remain much more cooler, basically gaming and a bunch of vms.

Thanks


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> Hi ppl, im considering getting a 7820x, despite lower lane count.
> 
> I cant find consistent reviews of 7820x, basically only 7900x, so considering how the plataform is power hungry, gonna thrown some questions if anyone has info or experience on the chip.
> 
> 1. Considering lower core count vs 7900x, it would probably draw less current. Someone has any idea of how much wattage or current it typically draws around 4.6 - 4.7 @ 1.2v ?
> 2. Considering i will get it dellided or gonna delid myself with a tool, it would be feasible to run around 4.6-4.7 on H110i without hurricane settings?
> 3. Considering mobos around 300-400$ what seen to be the best offer? Im considering Asrock, with 13 power phases, its has a nice price, the only drawback is only one extra 8pin, but im not considering to draw 300W+ if the cpu can remain stable with that on the target frequency.
> 
> I know in typical usage it will remain much more cooler, basically gaming and a bunch of vms.
> 
> Thanks


Hey, I currently have the 7820x

1, my power draw at 4.7 in real bench is around 200w with a 1.18v I could push 4.8 but not worth the trade off to performance. However with Prime95 I can push 280w but the temps are high (upper 90s) but if you delid it might not be an issue. I run with a offset of 4 for avx and at 4.3 I pull almost 230w....

2. I'm not delided but I run with a AIO (Fractal s36) and my temps with real bench float between upper 60 and mid 70s

3. GET MORE THAN AN 8 PIN...unless you don't plan to upgrade cpu


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Hey, I currently have the 7820x
> 
> 1, my power draw at 4.7 in real bench is around 200w with a 1.18v I could push 4.8 but not worth the trade off to performance. However with Prime95 I can push 280w but the temps are high (upper 90s) but if you delid it might not be an issue. *I run with a offset of 4 for avx and at 4.3 I pull almost 230w....*
> 
> 2. I'm not delided but I run with a AIO (Fractal s36) and my temps with real bench float between upper 60 and mid 70s
> 
> 3. GET MORE THAN AN 8 PIN...unless you don't plan to upgrade cpu


Have you figured out how to completely disable AVX offset?

I've been trying for days on my Gaming 7, but no luck. If I run 4.5 GHz multi core enhancement, I can get all cores to run at the full clock speed of 4.5 GHz, but anything above that automatically triggers an automatic offset. The best that I can do for 4.6 GHz or higher is to manually set the AVX offset to 1, which results in a 100 MHz offset when AVX is detected. If I leave AVX offset on auto, the offset is even more aggressive. At 4.5 GHz, clocks speeds hold with no offset.

Can anyone else with another brand board confirm that they can completely disable AVX offset above 4.5 GHz? Thanks in advance.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Have you figured out how to completely disable AVX offset?
> 
> I've been trying for days on my Gaming 7, but no luck. If I run 4.5 GHz multi core enhancement, I can get all cores to run at the full clock speed of 4.5 GHz, but anything above that automatically triggers an automatic offset. The best that I can do for 4.6 GHz or higher is to manually set the AVX offset to 1, which results in a 100 MHz offset when AVX is detected. If I leave AVX offset on auto, the offset is even more aggressive. At 4.5 GHz, clocks speeds hold with no offset.
> 
> Can anyone else with another brand board confirm that they can completely disable AVX offset above 4.5 GHz? Thanks in advance.


Same here. I also have the Gaming 7, and when I want to test AVX/AVX512 at a specific frequency, I need to set the base turbo 1x higher and set the AVX/AVX512 offsets to 1. If you leave then on auto they do random crap in some random inconsistent manner.

The thing that concerns me is that no AVX and AVX512 offset is applied at stock settings. So it tries to run 4.0 GHz on all cores even if it's AVX512. And it will single-core boost to 4.5 GHz even on AVX512. And at least one of the cores on my 7900X cannot handle AVX512 @ 4.5 GHz at the stock voltages. So I got a number of crashes when I was first testing the system immediately after building it.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Dumb question.
You don't have to worry so much about AVX512 with the 7820x do you?


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Hey, I currently have the 7820x
> 
> 1, my power draw at 4.7 in real bench is around 200w with a 1.18v I could push 4.8 but not worth the trade off to performance. However with Prime95 I can push 280w but the temps are high (upper 90s) but if you delid it might not be an issue. I run with a offset of 4 for avx and at 4.3 I pull almost 230w....
> 
> 2. I'm not delided but I run with a AIO (Fractal s36) and my temps with real bench float between upper 60 and mid 70s
> 
> 3. GET MORE THAN AN 8 PIN...unless you don't plan to upgrade cpu


Hi thanks. What mobo are you using?
So even on AIO on 4.7 you are getting between 60-70? Thats is real good. If i recap when i b4 delided my 7700K it was around the same temps and voltages i was getting on around 4.7.

How are you measuring wattage? Hwinfo?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Dumb question.
> You don't have to worry so much about AVX512 with the 7820x do you?


You *shouldn't* need to. But there's an ES 7800X that shows full-throughput AVX512.

In short, we still don't know if the 7800X and 7820X have the full AVX512. It's perfectly understandable if Intel enabled them last moment as part of a way to combat Ryzen.

Anyone here with a retail 7800X or 7820X willing to run a quick benchmark to determine if it has the full AVX512?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> You *shouldn't* need to. But there's an ES 7800X that shows full-throughput AVX512.
> 
> In short, we still don't know if the 7800X and 7820X have the full AVX512. It's perfectly understandable if Intel enabled them last moment as part of a way to combat Ryzen.
> 
> Anyone here with a retail 7800X or 7820X willing to run a quick benchmark to determine if it has the full AVX512?


Thanks for that.
I would run a test but mine hasn't turned up yet...


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Have you figured out how to completely disable AVX offset?
> 
> I've been trying for days on my Gaming 7, but no luck. If I run 4.5 GHz multi core enhancement, I can get all cores to run at the full clock speed of 4.5 GHz, but anything above that automatically triggers an automatic offset. The best that I can do for 4.6 GHz or higher is to manually set the AVX offset to 1, which results in a 100 MHz offset when AVX is detected. If I leave AVX offset on auto, the offset is even more aggressive. At 4.5 GHz, clocks speeds hold with no offset.
> 
> Can anyone else with another brand board confirm that they can completely disable AVX offset above 4.5 GHz? Thanks in advance.


I have not tried running it at full avx at 4.7 the temps are crazy so if there is a bug i don't know. I also test avx with small FFT for worst case scenario. Temps are great at blended

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> Hi thanks. What mobo are you using?
> So even on AIO on 4.7 you are getting between 60-70? Thats is real good. If i recap when i b4 delided my 7700K it was around the same temps and voltages i was getting on around 4.7.
> 
> How are you measuring wattage? Hwinfo?


Np...Im running the Aorus 9 MB. I have been real pleased with it so far. I have been using HWinfo64, Aida64 and HWMonitor. (not at the same time of course) and they have been consistant across all three


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Anyone here with a retail 7800X or 7820X willing to run a quick benchmark to determine if it has the full AVX512?


What program are you using to bench it?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> What program are you using to bench it?


This: https://github.com/Mysticial/Flops/tree/master/version3/binaries-windows
Specifically, the "2017-SkylakePurley.exe" binary.

And just to give myself a bit of credibility before I ask someone to run a binary off the internet:

I wrote that benchmark. The source code is in that GitHub repo.
It's the same program that found the Ryzen FMA bug.
I asked these guys on HWBOT to test it.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> This: https://github.com/Mysticial/Flops/tree/master/version3/binaries-windows
> Specifically, the "2017-SkylakePurley.exe" binary.
> 
> And just to give myself a bit of credibility before I ask someone to run a binary off the internet:
> 
> I wrote that benchmark. The source code is in that GitHub repo.
> It's the same program that found the Ryzen FMA bug.
> I asked these guys on HWBOT to test it.


What clock should I try to limit heat and is there any other bench for avx512 other than your binary?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> What clock should I try to limit heat and is there any other bench for avx512 other than your binary?


I would say 3.5 GHz is the safest. It doesn't need to be fast. Just a fixed speed so I can compare the theoretical numbers with the actual ones.

The test I'm interested in is the very last one: "Double-Precision - 512-bit AVX512 - Fused Multiply Add"

For the 7820X @ 3.5 GHz:

~896 GFLOPs means it's full throughput.
~448 GFLOPs means it's half throughput
This is what the output looks like on my 7900X @ 4.0 GHz.

The temperatures hit 90C when I ran that.


----------



## yoshpop

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Same here. I also have the Gaming 7, and when I want to test AVX/AVX512 at a specific frequency, I need to set the base turbo 1x higher and set the AVX/AVX512 offsets to 1. If you leave then on auto they do random crap in some random inconsistent manner.
> 
> The thing that concerns me is that no AVX and AVX512 offset is applied at stock settings. So it tries to run 4.0 GHz on all cores even if it's AVX512. And it will single-core boost to 4.5 GHz even on AVX512. And at least one of the cores on my 7900X cannot handle AVX512 @ 4.5 GHz at the stock voltages. So I got a number of crashes when I was first testing the system immediately after building it.


I am in the same position. I have to run mine at 46x to get 4.5GHz when AVX is detected and offset at 1. I wish I could set it to 0. With the F5 bios it doesn't downclock at all for AVX, but all the newer ones do. What temps are you getting with your 7820x? I've tried a couple different thermal pastes and reseating my H110i; getting low 80s in AIDA stress test and mid 90s in prime95. Not sure if it's par for the course or high when comparing to others.


----------



## DNMock

Just a quick heads up for Aorus9 owners, using the Aorus 7 beta bios instead of the 9. Didn't realize it but I derped up and installed that on my system a couple days ago, just swapped to the appropriate one and my previous speeds that were stable on realbench no BSOD me on windows boot...


----------



## tistou77

The 7920X will be less efficient in single core than the 7900X ??

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-7920X-vs-Intel-Core-i9-7900X/m278103vsm233971

And you have what score with your 7900X ?

http://www.userbenchmark.com/?redirFrom=userbenchmark.com&


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> The 7920X will be less efficient in single core than the 7900X ??
> 
> http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i9-7920X-vs-Intel-Core-i9-7900X/m278103vsm233971
> 
> And you have what score with your 7900X ?
> 
> http://www.userbenchmark.com/?redirFrom=userbenchmark.com&


I don't trust this kind of website.
Anyway, the cores should be the same so performance should be the same single core wise, all boils down to frequency and current limit.


----------



## AdamK47

<--- This weirdo just placed an order for a MSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC, 16GB TridentZ DDR4 4266, and a 7740X. I hear it does 5GHz easier than the 7700K. We shall see.


----------



## Hatnim

I have been playing around with a 7800x (Silicon Lottery delidded, binned 4.9) in the following environment.

- ASUS STRIX X299-E Gaming (bios 0402)
- Noctua NH-D15S: double fans (the second is a Noctua 120mm fan)
- Phanteks LUXE: 1 front 200mm fan, 1 rear 140mm fan, and 2 top 140mm fan (all Phanteks)
- EVGA 1080 FTW2
- EVGA 650 P2

I realized that my PSU has no second CPU connector. Currently my STRIX is operating with one 8-pin connection. I decided not to pull too much for a while. I am waiting for the shipping of Seasonic Titanium 850w.

My goal is to find some points where 7800x is stable with a moderate OC under high-level air cooling. Below is some observation in which some of you might be interested.

1. LinX under stock setting
- LinX 0.7.2 (5 times) with a 32gb problem size
- Stock Turbo clock is 4.0. It runs at 1.10v
- My chip passed the loop.
- Max core temp was 87C. The temp difference between cores was around 12C.

My opinion is that non-OC 7800x seems pretty usable under air cooling. I think it will pass LinX without delidding.

2. 4.5ghz (no AVX offset)
- I personally use a long-time (4 - 5 hours) 4K x265 encoding to test overclock stability. It has served my purpose very well since it is the most demanding job in my computer usage while heavily using AVX. If it passes, I lower the core voltage, and vice versa. After finding a spot, I use the setting until I find some program crashes - I increase the core voltage at that time.
- My chip ran no issues with 1.20v core voltage.
- Max core temp is 78C. The temp difference between cores was still around 12C.

I am now testing 4.6ghz with 1.20v. I think I will push my system further after I put another 4-pin into my board. I think 4.8 at 1.25v with offset -2 is achievable on my system.

I welcome any suggestions. Will update results as I find.


----------



## Exilon

8 pin is good for up to 300W. Just make sure the connector is seated snugly, and set a TDP limit of 250W in BIOS, and you're good to go. The CPU will automatically throttle if it runs above your 250W limit for too long.


----------



## Betroz

Is it just me who thinks that 87C load during a LinX run for the 6-core 7800X at *stock speed* is crazy hot!? (like Hatnim posted over here) Okay it is air cooling after all, but the Noctua D15S is a good cooler. Sure LinX stresses the CPU far, far more than any game or regular program, but still crazy hot these Skylake-X chips!


----------



## xarot

Been playing around some more with my 7900X and yeah, it seems it's the lowest bin of the silicon lottery. I fired up RealBench yesterday and I need 1.24 V Vcore for only 4.5 GHz on all cores and cache on AUTO (which is then 2.7 GHz on Asus board). It's tough to run Prime95 or RB with that voltage, even in Realbench the hottest core will go to *96c* on *custom water*. Old Prime95 seemed to run at around 1.205 V.

As an owner I can say that Intel really dropped the ball with these chips. There is no way the 12-18 core models would use thermal paste, because that just won't work at all.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> I don't trust this kind of website.
> Anyway, the cores should be the same so performance should be the same single core wise, all boils down to frequency and current limit.


The 7920X will have a lower clock / boost than the 7900X, maybe that


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Been playing around some more with my 7900X and yeah, it seems it's the lowest bin of the silicon lottery. I fired up RealBench yesterday and I need 1.24 V Vcore for only 4.5 GHz on all cores and cache on AUTO (which is then 2.7 GHz on Asus board). It's tough to run Prime95 or RB with that voltage, even in Realbench the hottest core will go to *96c* on *custom water*. Old Prime95 seemed to run at around 1.205 V.
> 
> As an owner I can say that Intel really dropped the ball with these chips. There is no way the 12-18 core models would use thermal paste, because that just won't work at all.


Maybe go with a binned 7820x if you don't need the 2 extra cores. Less power consumption and better overclock probably. I agree on the IHS front, Intel really dropped the ball with Skylake-X when it comes to cooling, they are essentially saying "Want OC? No warranty







" to consumers.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Maybe go with a binned 7820x if you don't need the 2 extra cores. Less power consumption and better overclock probably. I agree on the IHS front, Intel really dropped the ball with Skylake-X when it comes to cooling, they are essentially saying "Want OC? No warranty
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> " to consumers.


Yeah, that could work. But I think I'll go back to 6950X/X99 for now, enjoy the summer and check back when the HCC chips release.


----------



## Betroz

Anyone seen this : The Skylake-X Mess Explored: Thermal Paste And Runaway Power ?


----------



## alex1990

Guys, I want to change my h105 to EK-KIT G240. Will this be appropriate? Now I'm faced with the problem that when running any heavy application with 100% load (Cinebench for example), the CPU temperature jumps to 83 -90 in the first seconds. Can a new kit take the heat off faster?
I wont delided my 7900x (4.7 Ghz)


----------



## ottoore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> Is it just me who thinks that 87C load during a LinX run for the 6-core 7800X at *stock speed* is crazy hot!? (like Hatnim posted over here) Okay it is air cooling after all, but the Noctua D15S is a good cooler. Sure LinX stresses the CPU far, far more than any game or regular program, but still crazy hot these Skylake-X chips!


Linx 0.7.2 uses avx512 instructions.


----------



## xTesla1856

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alex1990*
> 
> Guys, I want to change my h105 to EK-KIT G240. Will this be appropriate? Now I'm faced with the problem that when running any heavy application with 100% load (Cinebench for example), the CPU temperature jumps to 83 -90 in the first seconds. Can a new kit take the heat off faster?
> I wont delided my 7900x (4.7 Ghz)


I wouldn't bother with the G-Kit. IMO, if you're going water go full custom and get more rad space. Going from 240 to 240 makes no sense IMO.


----------



## Digitalwolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ottoore*
> 
> Linx 0.7.2 uses avx512 instructions.


Can you imagine if that wasn't a Delid chip that had the paste replaced. When the test started someone over the horizon would see a bright flash... followed by a mushroom cloud.


----------



## ottoore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Digitalwolf*
> 
> Can you imagine if that wasn't a Delid chip that had the paste replaced. When the test started someone over the horizon would see a bright flash... followed by a mushroom cloud.












Lots of throttling in that case.


----------



## curseddiamond

SuperPI32M.png 38k .png file


IntelXTU2433.png 66k .png file


aida64cachememory4.7.jpg 130k .jpg file
Current update on my OC performance benchmarks on my i9-7900x.
CPU: i9-7900x 4.7 GHz @ 1.25 voltz uncore 3.1 GHz
MB: ASUS Prime x299 Deluxe
Memory: Trident Z RBG 3200 with 14 lat
GPU: EVGA 1080 ti FTW3 (x2 in SLI)
CPU Cooler - Swiftech X240 - Prestige
CPU-Z Bench
https://valid.x86.fr/zh0qwf
Multi: 6,458
Single: 545
Intel XTU: 2,433
Geek Bench 4:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3378774
Single Core: 5,812
Multi Core: 37,253
Compute
OpenCL: 233,787
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/compute/910367
Cuda: 243,339
https://browser.geekbench.com/user/124365
Geekbench 3:
http://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/8402155
Single: 4,484
Multi: 42,448
Cinebench 15:
OpenGL: 148.68 fps
CPU
Multi: 2,560
Single: 208
SuperPosition Benchmark 1080 Medium : 22,238


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xTesla1856*
> 
> I wouldn't bother with the G-Kit. IMO, if you're going water go full custom and get more rad space. Going from 240 to 240 makes no sense IMO.


At some point it won't matter how much rad space you have you need to keep water at 20c or less (that means below room) due to the extremely poor thermal transfer of Tim/know gap on IHS/die. As tom hardware noted, 70 kelvin of delta between water and die.

Even with safe delid kits I'm not risking it's safe to buy from SL.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> The 7920X will have a lower clock / boost than the 7900X, maybe that


Probably there is no way they can up 2 cores with Tim and keep up with heat.

All this thing about Tim on hedt lead me to some conclusions.
It was a rushed release because of threadripper, but production was already in place probably.
Cost of soldering isn't that much, but it's possible they have some % of die loss with soldering, so cost wise, considering price drop make sense.

Cores 14 to 18 are just a new thing not expected, they were literally announced after tr announcement. These chips will have lower frequency and will probably have solder. Since they aren't made of the same die (lcc) I would be they are very specific binned xeons rebadged to allow better frequency than xeons, but at higher frequencies these will be a thermal monster.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> Probably there is no way they can up 2 cores with Tim and keep up with heat.
> 
> All this thing about Tim on hedt lead me to some conclusions.
> It was a rushed release because of threadripper, but production was already in place probably.
> Cost of soldering isn't that much, but it's possible they have some % of die loss with soldering, so cost wise, considering price drop make sense.
> 
> Cores 14 to 18 are just a new thing not expected, they were literally announced after tr announcement. These chips will have lower frequency and will probably have solder. Since they aren't made of the same die (lcc) I would be they are very specific binned xeons rebadged to allow better frequency than xeons, but at higher frequencies these will be a thermal monster.


They likely don't have to be re-binned to allow "better frequency than xeon". The Xeon binning ends up finding chips that should OC well. They seem to result in chips that run well on lower voltages which often, though not always, results in more overhead for OC if the TDP is not a big concern.

As we've seen with v3 xeons, its quite clear that you can run at or near 4.0GHz on 50%+ of the total cores of even a Haswell HCC die if the VRM and thermals are dealt with. SKL has consistently shown similar or greater ability to clock than HW.

That is with 18 cores, you can run 10 @ ~4.0GHz (3.8GHz with a BCLK OC) under full load. With 11-18 core load, it drops to 3.4-3.6 (depending on BLK OC), but again we are limited by "locked" chips (though TDP is starting to get "fun" at those levels, temps are very manageable even on HW chips).

I agree with your guess that the 14/16/18 will likely be ripped off the xeon fab line so may be very different beasts both in form and function. They certainly DO NOT have to be soldered by virtue of doing so, as they have to be put on a 2066 interposer vs the "purely" (higher pin count) 6-channel memory platform of gold/platnum xeons.


----------



## TahoeDust

So...it looks like the 7800x and 7820x both have full AVX512 support...not just the 7900x as was originally believed.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I'm thinking about stepping down to a 7800x and getting a 240hz monitor with the money saved.







decisions


----------



## Gadfly

double


----------



## Gadfly

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> VERY quick and dirty OC just to get a taste before heading out to dinner..
> 
> 4.5GHz on all 8 cores @ 1.15v
> 
> 
> 
> Been running prime for 5 minutes after with max temp in the low 70s.


\

Here is my Ryzen 1800x @ 4.15ghz on all 8:


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gadfly*
> 
> \
> 
> Here is my Ryzen 1800x @ 4.15ghz on all 8:


Cool.


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Cool.


sick dude! sucks playing the waiting game but im holding out till apex/extreme get released.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> sick dude! sucks playing the waiting game but im holding out till apex/extreme get released.


Not a bad move. I did not have the patience. I figured when the apex/extreme gets released, if it is drool worthy, I can still make the move and just take the hit of selling the Gigabyte board. Honestly the ~$100 loss will get lost in the shuffle in this build.


----------



## Gadfly

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Cool.


Awesome! I have some serioyslt high hopes for x299. What are your specs?

I am really looking forward to the 16 core parts on the apex/extreme MB.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gadfly*
> 
> \
> 
> Here is my Ryzen 1800x @ 4.15ghz on all 8:


That's actually a fantastic score for a Ryzen chip. I've never seen one that high on ambient. Most are high 1700s to 1800 with 8 cores. Very impressive. What's the voltage and cooling method? Congrats on a rare one for sure.


----------



## Gadfly

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> That's actually a fantastic score for a Ryzen chip. I've never seen one that high on ambient. Most are high 1700s to 1800 with 8 cores. Very impressive. What's the voltage and cooling method? Congrats on a rare one for sure.


1.395v custom loop water.


----------



## pantsaregood

Does anyone have any recommendations for a motherboard to push an i7-7820X with? I know the X299 Apex is coming out, but I unfortunately need to stick to ATX instead of EATX. I'm looking at the Asus Prime X299 Deluxe since it has a slightly better VRM than the X299-A.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> Does anyone have any recommendations for a motherboard to push an i7-7820X with? I know the X299 Apex is coming out, but I unfortunately need to stick to ATX instead of EATX. I'm looking at the Asus Prime X299 Deluxe since it has a slightly better VRM than the X299-A.


Personally I like the Taichi.

I'm hoping the OC Formula comes out soon because that's supposedly ATX


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Personally I like the Taichi.
> 
> I'm hoping the OC Formula comes out soon because that's supposedly ATX


Does the absence of an additional 4 or 8 pin connector not cause issues with overclocking?

Also, how are Asrock boards these days? I know they initially started as a "budget" brand, then around the LGA 1155 era they began moving into the midrange and high-end. The only issue I've had with my Z77 Extreme4 (replaced a dead Gigabyte GA-Z68-D3-B3) is that the VRM is analog and the PCB is a bit thin.


----------



## Rammler

I have a 7900x delidded on a Prime A Mainboard with custom watercooling ( 2x 480 rad and 1x 240 rad). So expected much from the 7900x. Got disapppinted unfortunatly. 4600mhz with 1.2 is running although i hit 82 degree in aida fpu test. Everything over 4600mhz makes the pc restart. I dont know what it is. Ecen 4700mhz with samr 1.2v restarts immediatly. I put phase controll to extreme and 140% power on bios.


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> I have a 7900x delidded on a Prime A Mainboard with custom watercooling ( 2x 480 rad and 1x 240 rad). So expected much from the 7900x. Got disapppinted unfortunatly. 4600mhz with 1.2 is running although i hit 82 degree in aida fpu test. Everything over 4600mhz makes the pc restart. I dont know what it is. Ecen 4700mhz with samr 1.2v restarts immediatly. I put phase controll to extreme and 140% power on bios.


Too hot VRM? Tweak the voltage settings more?


----------



## EarlyAdopter

Rammler, 1.20V is typically only good for 4.6Ghz. You'll need to bump up core voltage to 1.25V to have a hope of pushing 8/10 core multipliers over 46x.


----------



## Rammler

I tried even higher voltage. 1,35v did not make a difference. the computer restarts immediatly on FPU bench in aida or prime.
i mentioned 1.2v because i find it awkward that the pc still restarts with the same voltage. just putting 4700mhz to 4600 with same voltage and everythin is fine. so its not a voltage issue.
i cant get 4700 or higher without getting restarts.

temps on vrm are okay. 85 degree with 1.2v. 1.25 and i am hitting 93 degree. but asus boards are one with the crappiest cooler i think.

And i read a lot of people hitting 3000mhz uncore? is that the limit? what voltage do u need for it?


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> I tried even higher voltage. 1,35v did not make a difference. the computer restarts immediatly on FPU bench in aida or prime.
> i mentioned 1.2v because i find it awkward that the pc still restarts with the same voltage. just putting 4700mhz to 4600 with same voltage and everythin is fine. so its not a voltage issue.
> i cant get 4700 or higher without getting restarts.
> 
> temps on vrm are okay. 85 degree with 1.2v. 1.25 and i am hitting 93 degree. but asus boards are one with the crappiest cooler i think.
> 
> And i read a lot of people hitting 3000mhz uncore? is that the limit? what voltage do u need for it?


I think AIDA FPU might use AVX instructions and which version of Prime did you try? Try setting AVX multipliers down if you haven't already.


----------



## Rammler

Yeah Cinebench is working for example. but what is the problem with avx?
i mean why should a certain clock not work even on same voltage? or even higher voltage?
even 1.4v doesnt work for 4700 all core in fpu test. 1.15 also makes a restart of the pc. i tested 1.15v to test heat problems. there is no way 1.15 will force a restart immediatly when 1.2v with 4600 is working. do any of u guys experience the same?


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> i mean why should a certain clock not work even on same voltage? or even higher voltage?


Different workload, AVX loads require more power, making the system unstable under these loads. One example would be why does a computer work just fine overclocked at idle/desktop usage and crash during cinebench? Different workload scenario.


----------



## Rammler

maybe i have a bad chip that cant run 4700 on avx. even at all costs. would be interessting if other peoples chip can run aida fpu or prime with 4700+

but a restart is a weird thing. i mean crashing is okay. but restart? sounds like a power problem or heat. but restarting instantly doesnt sound like heat. does the prime x299 a have a power limit before it shuts down?


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> but a restart is a weird thing. i mean crashing is okay. but restart? sounds like a power problem or heat. but restarting instantly doesnt sound like heat. does the prime x299 a have a power limit before it shuts down?


Sounds like over-current protection to me. But I'm not sure how that works with x299.


----------



## Digitalwolf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> maybe i have a bad chip that cant run 4700 on avx. even at all costs. would be interessting if other peoples chip can run aida fpu or prime with 4700+
> 
> but a restart is a weird thing. i mean crashing is okay. but restart? sounds like a power problem or heat. but restarting instantly doesnt sound like heat. does the prime x299 a have a power limit before it shuts down?


You mentioned that yours is delidded. If you look at chips like SL is selling they all have:

-3 AVX Offset
-5 AVX512 Offset

As an example of settings. I don't think you have a "bad chip" if it simply can't run AVX on all cores @ 4.7. Outside of having a binned 5.0Ghz or higher chip.


----------



## Rammler

possibly. but dont know how to disable this in the bios. will do some more tests when i am back home


----------



## Rammler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Digitalwolf*
> 
> You mentioned that yours is delidded. If you look at chips like SL is selling they all have:
> 
> -3 AVX Offset
> -5 AVX512 Offset
> 
> As an example of settings. I don't think you have a "bad chip" if it simply can't run AVX on all cores @ 4.7. Outside of having a binned 5.0Ghz or higher chip.


yeah saw that as well on their page. but again, would be interesting to hear if others can run it on higher than 4.6 in fpu or prime. but again: i dont think its the chip itself. there is a powerissue.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> yeah saw that as well on their page. but again, would be interesting to hear if others can run it on higher than 4.6 in fpu or prime. but again: i dont think its the chip itself. there is a powerissue.


Let my just say that if you try to run AVX on those frequencies the power consumption will skyrocket and voltage requirements per multiplier change change dramatically with AVX enabled. That's really why we have AVX and AVX512 multipliers today in the UEFI to be able to run higher frequency in lighter tasks and lower frequency in AVX tasks. I doubt any chip could run AVX at 4.7 GHz unless cooled with LN2.

You can disable AVX and FMA3 instructions from Prime95, see undoc file in P95 folder.


----------



## Mr.Cigar

Has anyone successfully debunked the myth of cpu pll oc?
I just tried it and got approx 20* drop.
It seems everyone got the same result undervolting it.
How strange?


----------



## CuewarsTaner

Hi. I am the one who starts the Gigabyte X299 AORUS Thread. Now I find this thread and this is also amazing.

All in all, I am in!!! I am here.

My board is Gigabyte AORUS gaming 7 and my CPU is 7900X.

I made a playlist of stressing my 7900X with Prime95 small FFTs. All videos will be recorded showing the sensor information including voltage, frequency, temperature and power consumption.

Check my post and you will find it.

My first video was uploaded. It's 10cores @4.0(x43 - 3AVX).


----------



## opt33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> maybe i have a bad chip that cant run 4700 on avx. even at all costs. would be interessting if other peoples chip can run aida fpu or prime with 4700+
> 
> but a restart is a weird thing. i mean crashing is okay. but restart? sounds like a power problem or heat. but restarting instantly doesnt sound like heat. does the prime x299 a have a power limit before it shuts down?


If you have a gigabyte board you need to set cpu vcore current protection to something other than auto, ie like turbo, extreme, etc. If its another board, may have another name, but orderly restarts are from hitting overcurrent protection.


----------



## Rammler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CuewarsTaner*
> 
> Hi. I am the one who starts the Gigabyte X299 AORUS Thread. Now I find this thread and this is also amazing.
> 
> All in all, I am in!!! I am here.
> 
> My board is Gigabyte AORUS gaming 7 and my CPU is 7900X.
> 
> I made a playlist of stressing my 7900X with Prime95 small FFTs. All videos will be recorded showing the sensor information including voltage, frequency, temperature and power consumption.
> 
> Check my post and you will find it.
> 
> My first video was uploaded. It's 10cores @4.0(x43 - 3AVX).


ehm where is the video?


----------



## CuewarsTaner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> ehm where is the video?


Check my post history pls. Or you can find it on youtube. Youtube search key word: 7900X stress test


----------



## Rammler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *opt33*
> 
> If you have a gigabyte board you need to set cpu vcore current protection to something other than auto, ie like turbo, extreme, etc. If its another board, may have another name, but orderly restarts are from hitting overcurrent protection.


its an asus x299 a. i dont have any setting like this i think. but i will look again later.


----------



## Rammler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CuewarsTaner*
> 
> Check my post history pls. Or you can find it on youtube. Youtube search key word: 7900X stress test


u have like 1.05v for 4gh and still hitting 87 degree? u dont have delidded your cpu i guess?


----------



## CuewarsTaner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> u have like 1.05v for 4gh and still hitting 87 degree? u dont have delidded your cpu i guess?


Right. I haven't delidded my CPU yet. I was planning to ship it to Silicon Lottery to help me delid it. Or do you know how to delid this LGA2066 cpu? Any tool can be used?


----------



## Rammler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CuewarsTaner*
> 
> Right. I haven't delidded my CPU yet. I was planning to ship it to Silicon Lottery to help me delid it. Or do you know how to delid this LGA2066 cpu? Any tool can be used?


i am from germany and a german overclocker "Der 8auer" is selling DDM-X tools to delidd skylake x and kabylake x. but i think sale starts end of july. i ordered a pre delidded cpu from a german store caseking.de. so i did not delidd it myself. when i heard that skylake x has a lot more stuff on the board than brodwell e and is way harder to delidd i decided to buy a pre delidded this round


----------



## CuewarsTaner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> i am from germany and a german overclocker "Der 8auer" is selling DDM-X tools to delidd skylake x and kabylake x. but i think sale starts end of july. i ordered a pre delidded cpu from a german store caseking.de. so i did not delidd it myself. when i heard that skylake x has a lot more stuff on the board than brodwell e and is way harder to delidd i decided to buy a pre delidded this round


Same. I know the guy and I went to the pre-order site. It says DDM-X will start selling on 8/31/2017. Another delid tool is Delid Master. This is newly made in Japan. It will only be available in Japan website and not providing international shipping, which is a bad news.

There is someone running the Silicon Lottery that sells pre-delidded cpu and do cpu delid service for people. But I didn't know it until I came to the forum. It's unfortunate for me.


----------



## Rammler

SL is a good site. but as a european i have to pay a lot of taxes when shipping outside eu. so only delidding gets way more expensive for me than for US-citizen who can just ship it inside USA. i would not recommend delidding without a tool this time. 8auer already explained that the new board of the chip is tricky.


----------



## curseddiamond

I have my uncore set to 31 and running it at 1.2v.

i can run at 32 for gaming and daily driving but it becomes more unstable during benchmarking.

Cinebench passes but it crashes during realbench or prime95


----------



## Zurv

sooo many lies!







amazon you told me the 10 core would be in stock on Monday. But it still isn't in! (that is what i get for saving $49 and getting it from directly from amazon and not another seller.)
sooo.. i'm looking at the gaming 9 and ram.. just sitting here. The good news is the GF and dog don't have to lock themselves in the bedroom. They know that new system, water, OC'n, etc normally end we me yelling and killing $1000s in equipment.







haha

(grumble) i hate redoing the bridge between video cards (leaking from them is normally what kills stuff.) I'm 2 spaced now and i need to use a 3 space one for gaming 9. One of the reasons i like the WS mobos is i can do SLI in any slot if feel like.

Looking at the gaming 9 it reminds me that I've not used a ATX mobo in a long time. They are soo small!


----------



## CuewarsTaner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> I have my uncore set to 31 and running it at 1.2v.
> 
> i can run at 32 for gaming and daily driving but it becomes more unstable during benchmarking.
> 
> Cinebench passes but it crashes during realbench or prime95


That's under expectation and it makes sense.

For my system, the auto voltage for Mesh/LLC(Uncore) Clock @3.2GHz is about 1.200V. Then I set it to 1.3V and increase Mesh/LLC Clock(Uncore) to 3.3GHz. The result from this is that my computer can pass UEFI boot successfully but immediately get bluescreen when going into Windows User Login Page.

So my conclusion is, 3.2GHz is the limit for 7900X's Uncore Clock. We should keep it @ about 3.0GHz.

If you load the default setting (stock setting) from your BIOS, you will know the default Mesh Clock is 2.4GHz. You can do [0.6+0.2]GHz Clock Speed Overclocking for the 7900X, which is not bad. It's a 25%-34% Mesh Clock improvement.


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CuewarsTaner*
> 
> That's under expectation and it makes sense.
> 
> For my system, the auto voltage for Mesh/LLC(Uncore) Clock @3.2GHz is about 1.200V. Then I set it to 1.3V and increase Mesh/LLC Clock(Uncore) to 3.3GHz. The result from this is that my computer can pass UEFI boot successfully but immediately get bluescreen when going into Windows User Login Page.
> 
> So my conclusion is, 3.2GHz is the limit for 7900X's Uncore Clock. We should keep it @ about 3.0GHz.
> 
> If you load the default setting (stock setting) from your BIOS, you will know the default Mesh Clock is 2.4GHz. You can do [0.6+0.2]GHz Clock Speed Overclocking for the 7900X, which is not bad. It's a 25%-34% Mesh Clock improvement.


For now I am keeping mine at 3.1GHz as I continue to tinker with the set up as I want to get it to point that I feel I can install my custom loop from EK and forget about it. I believe that your statement of running at 3.0GHz will in the end be correct for long term stability. the BIOS for all manufactures seem a little rushed just like they were for the Ryzen launch and we may get better versions soon.

As there are no real memory kits released by the vendors that really push the systems yet, we may go through the Ryzen memory issues as well once those 4000 plus quad channel kits start rolling from G.Skill and Corsair.

I am also running a Prime Deluxe and may switch over to the Rampage VI once it drops as well.

on a side note, I had to unplug my monitors from my UPS, 1500 volt 900 watt from Cyber, as it was getting overloaded from the power draw from running all these bench marks, lol. according to output display on it, when I was doing some Super Position bench marking I was pulling just under 1100w from the wall. It said enough and blew its fuse.


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> i am from germany and a german overclocker "Der 8auer" is selling DDM-X tools to delidd skylake x and kabylake x. but i think sale starts end of july. i ordered a pre delidded cpu from a german store caseking.de. so i did not delidd it myself. when i heard that skylake x has a lot more stuff on the board than brodwell e and is way harder to delidd i decided to buy a pre delidded this round


Caseking has delidded Skylake-X now?

Edit: Yes, apparently. I couldn't find them, because they aren't binned. At least not yet.

https://www.caseking.de/en/intel-core-i7-7820x-3-6-ghz-skylake-x-sockel-2066-delidded-tray-cpbu-139.html

https://www.caseking.de/en/intel-core-i9-7900x-3-3-ghz-skylake-x-sockel-2066-delidded-tray-cpbu-140.html

That's... tempting.


----------



## Nizzen




----------



## Rammler

Did anyone tested 3d mark firestrike with 7900x? The Benchmark always crashes on cpu test at the same point.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> Did anyone tested 3d mark firestrike with 7900x? The Benchmark always crashes on cpu test at the same point.


I am getting "canceled by user"









Taichi x299 and 7900x

3dmark can't find the cpu either


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> Did anyone tested 3d mark firestrike with 7900x? The Benchmark always crashes on cpu test at the same point.


Runs fine with 7820x. Maybe it can't take all that 7900x power.


----------



## Nizzen

Installed newest Intel inf chipset drivers: Worked









http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13104867

Stock gpu


----------



## Rammler

Isolated physics test works. But in a run with demo it doesnt. Maybe stability issue,

Edit: updated 3dmark. working now


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> Caseking has delidded Skylake-X now?
> 
> Edit: Yes, apparently. I couldn't find them, because they aren't binned. At least not yet.
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/intel-core-i7-7820x-3-6-ghz-skylake-x-sockel-2066-delidded-tray-cpbu-139.html
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/intel-core-i9-7900x-3-3-ghz-skylake-x-sockel-2066-delidded-tray-cpbu-140.html
> 
> That's... tempting.


I think it's very likely they are selling all the poor chips through here first, before they start offering binned ones.


----------



## Rammler

Isolated physics test works. But in a rub
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> I think it's very likely they are selling all the poor chips through here first, before they start offering binned ones.


Nope. caseking is a very fair shop. they would never sell bad chips for purpose. and my pre delidded cpu runs 4700 @ 1,235v. so i dont think its a bad one.

and another cool thing is u get 2 years warranty for the delidded cpu. a big bonus.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Anyone know why gaming benches are all over the place? Much like Ryzen. I'm seeing 7700k beat the lineup in gaming by about 10% even with same clocks, and others I see them be about even.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Anyone know why gaming benches are all over the place? Much like Ryzen. I'm seeing 7700k beat the lineup in gaming by about 10% even with same clocks, and others I see them be about even.


No telling. I've benched 3 games @ 3440x1440,

Wildlands - 82 fps 4790k, 80 fps 7820x (different drivers and gpu limited so margin of error)

Warhammer - Forget the fps but it was crazy low in dx11 (the benchmark stuttered). DX12 was lower but not as bad as dx11. This game is know to have problems with x299 right now so I wasn't too surprised..

The Division - I gained 1 fps in dx11 and dx12 over my 4790k. Different drivers, gpu limited, margin of error.

One thing I'm noticing is the games I'm playing don't seem to ping threads/cores evenly. I'm not sure what's up with that but on my 4790k it seemed like most games pinged all the cores evenly since moving to windows 10. Really wish I would of taken some cpu usage numbers before the upgrade now.

Other then that games are running very smooth for me. It's noticeable that games aren't close to taxing my system resources with the new setup. The 7820x is total overkill.


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> I think it's very likely they are selling all the poor chips through here first, before they start offering binned ones.


They engrave der8auers name on the IHS together with the guaranteed clock speed on the pre tested CPUs, so my guess is that they simply aren't prepared to guarantee a specific OC yet without more testing.

A guaranteed OC on a 7820X with a silver IHS is REALLY tempting.. This would be build just keeps getting more and more expensive.


----------



## Artah

Finally got my test bench liquid cooler and I think I have a good chip at 5GHz with 1.291v core and 1.93v VCCIn LLC7. Passed XTU and validated with CPU-Z. I'm actually posting this from that same computer. https://valid.x86.fr/v54xjr

I didn't have issues going from 4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8/4.9 but I hit a big wall at 5.0.

I need to do more testing but it's way late. I'll let you guys know if I fry the chip erm get more time to test and make adjustments.



Adding this because a few have asked for it, not sure yet if this matters for this generation of chips. Batch# L717B223 Malaysia


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Finally got my test bench liquid cooler and I think I have a good chip at 5GHz with 1.291v core and 1.93v VCCIn LLC7. Passed XTU and validated with CPU-Z. I'm actually posting this from that same computer. https://valid.x86.fr/v54xjr
> 
> I didn't have issues going from 4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8/4.9 but I hit a big wall at 5.0.
> 
> I need to do more testing but it's way late. I'll let you guys know if I fry the chip erm get more time to test and make adjustments.


I'm a little confused by your screenshot. So 4.7GHz through the XTU benchmark? But settings are showing a -5 AVX offset and -7 AVX512 offset?


----------



## CuewarsTaner

*Hi guys. I am here to share my system and explain some simple setup and settings.*

We are not going to discuss the temperature and power consumption here. We only talk about the best-stable performance it can bring for overclocking.

*Memory Controller :*
I am sure that X299 is better than X99 in memory controller part. For most X299 boards, we are able to reach quad-channel 3600+ frequency and even overclock the memory speed beyond the XMP suggested frequency if the memory chips are like Samsung B-DIE.

For my build 7900X + AORUS Gaming7 + G.Skill F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR. I am able to run my memory @3733MHz with 16-16-16-36-1T timing, which is 133MHz higher than the suggested XMP frequency.

*CPU Mesh/LLC(Uncore) Clock:*
One thing we need know is the importance of Mesh Clock. Mesh clock is like another core frequency(clock). It controls the performance of Uncore parts like Cache, Latency and Memory Stability. For my board, the stock Mesh Frequency is 2.4GHz, which is not bad. I figured out that 3.2GHz is the highest clock speed we can reach without very aggressive overclocking setup(someone may be lucky to get 3.3GHz).
Bringing the Mesh Clock to 3.2GHz may cause lower stability compared to 2.4GHz-3.0GHz. If you want to run your 7900X or 7820X for a long term, it's better to set it under or equal to 3.0GHz. For those overclock lovers, 3.1GHz is a very good suggestion for Mesh Clock. Personally I don't recommend running it @3.2GHz for 24/7 use.
Keep in mind that increasing Mesh Clock will also increase power consumption and temperature. Pick a Mesh Clock you like after testing!

*CPU Core Frequency:*
As you know, it is a disaster. I don't want to talk about it anymore. Pick the best frequency of your specific processor. Don't bring it to 10 cores aggressive frequency if you don't delid your CPU.
(Set per core limit may help you get something like [email protected] and [email protected] This is good for gaming since some games only love two cores).
Edited by CuewarsTaner - Today at 1:19 am


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> I'm a little confused by your screenshot. So 4.7GHz through the XTU benchmark? But settings are showing a -5 AVX offset and -7 AVX512 offset?


I uploaded the wrong screenshot and can't find the one that I wanted to upload. I made a new one and corrected the original post. It's late, going to overclock my pillow.


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I uploaded the wrong screenshot and can't find the one that I wanted to upload. I made a new one and corrected the original post. It's late, going to overclock my pillow.


Ah, the XTU "stress test." It's a start, but I think even Google chrome might be more stressful than that.







Try P95 26.6 small FFTs


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CuewarsTaner*
> 
> *Hi guys. I am here to share my system and explain some simple setup and settings.*
> 
> We are not going to discuss the temperature and power consumption here. We only talk about the best-stable performance it can bring for overclocking.
> 
> *Memory Controller :*
> I am sure that X299 is better than X99 in memory controller part. For most X299 boards, we are able to reach quad-channel 3600+ frequency and even overclock the memory speed beyond the XMP suggested frequency if the memory chips are like Samsung B-DIE.
> 
> For my build 7900X + AORUS Gaming7 + G.Skill F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR. I am able to run my memory @3733MHz with 16-16-16-36-1T timing, which is 133MHz higher than the suggested XMP frequency.
> 
> *CPU Mesh/LLC(Uncore) Clock:*
> One thing we need know is the importance of Mesh Clock. Mesh clock is like another core frequency(clock). It controls the performance of Uncore parts like Cache, Latency and Memory Stability. For my board, the stock Mesh Frequency is 2.4GHz, which is not bad. I figured out that 3.2GHz is the highest clock speed we can reach without very aggressive overclocking setup(someone may be lucky to get 3.3GHz).
> Bringing the Mesh Clock to 3.2GHz may cause lower stability compared to 2.4GHz-3.0GHz. If you want to run your 7900X or 7820X for a long term, it's better to set it under or equal to 3.0GHz. For those overclock lovers, 3.1GHz is a very good suggestion for Mesh Clock. Personally I don't recommend running it @3.2GHz for 24/7 use.
> Keep in mind that increasing Mesh Clock will also increase power consumption and temperature. Pick a Mesh Clock you like after testing!
> 
> *CPU Core Frequency:*
> As you know, it is a disaster. I don't want to talk about it anymore. Pick the best frequency of your specific processor. Don't bring it to 10 cores aggressive frequency if you don't delid your CPU.
> (Set per core limit may help you get something like [email protected] and [email protected] This is good for gaming since some games only love two cores).
> Edited by CuewarsTaner - Today at 1:19 am


On my 7800x and 7900x, 4000 cl15 mhz is easy







using 4x 4266 g.skill


----------



## Rammler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Finally got my test bench liquid cooler and I think I have a good chip at 5GHz with 1.291v core and 1.93v VCCIn LLC7. Passed XTU and validated with CPU-Z. I'm actually posting this from that same computer. https://valid.x86.fr/v54xjr
> 
> I didn't have issues going from 4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8/4.9 but I hit a big wall at 5.0.
> 
> I need to do more testing but it's way late. I'll let you guys know if I fry the chip erm get more time to test and make adjustments.


wow pretty impressive. even 8auer with his pre tested 7900x needed at least 1.32v for 5ghz.
unfortunatly there are not enough infos and tests out there to get a clear picture abut what to expect from a typicall 7900x.
as far as i can see the common 7900x can reach 4.6-4.8 ghz with 1.2-1.25v.

did u test prime95 and aida fpu test? is it stable under avx load? dont know what board u are using but it could limit the powerdraw in heavy load with 1.3v. as far as i can see my asus x299 prime a can deliver maximum of 260watts thorugh vrm before locking up because of heat. even 8auer found that issue.


----------



## Nizzen

Testing memory:

7900x @ 4600

4000mhz memory @ cl15-15-15-35-2t


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I uploaded the wrong screenshot and can't find the one that I wanted to upload. I made a new one and corrected the original post. It's late, going to overclock my pillow.


I strongly advise against it. High pillow temps are the worst!


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Testing memory:
> 
> 7900x @ 4600
> 
> 4000mhz memory @ cl15-15-15-35-2t


Wow, the L3 is really slow - much slower than Haswell-E. This might explain some of the performance issues I've been noticing on Skylake X.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Wow, the L3 is really slow - much slower than Haswell-E. This might explain some of the performance issues I've been noticing on Skylake X.


Maybe....

Tested Farcy Primal benchmark:

7900x 4,8ghz 4000 QC cl17 81 min - 124 average - 147 max fps.

7900x @ 4600mhz 4000 QC CL15-15-15-35-2t trfc 300 - 89 min - 135 average - 161 max fps









Skylake X want some memorylove









Using G.skill 4x 8GB 4266 cl19, Asrock Taichi x299 MB 1x 1080ti stock


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Testing memory:
> 
> 7900x @ 4600
> 
> 4000mhz memory @ cl15-15-15-35-2t


I've seen some screens where write (and maybe copy) are at ~100GS/s with a lower memory frequency
Is this due to other optimization ? Cache ?

What VDRAM for 4000 C17 and 4000 C15 ?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> I've seen some screens where write (and maybe copy) are at ~100GS/s with a lower memory frequency
> Is this due to other optimization ? Cache ?
> 
> What VDRAM for 4000 C17 and 4000 C15 ?


I'm getting 96GB/s write with my 7800x 6core @ 4800mhz and 4000cl15 memory on MSI Tomahawk MB. Looks like Bios issues









Looking forward to Asus x299 Apex


----------



## Nizzen




----------



## Rammler

my 7900x is fully stable at 1.235v with 4.7 ghz. but 4.8 is only possible with 1.295v. even though i can run this in cinebench with maxtemps of 91 degree, in fpu test or prime i am hitting 100 degree very soon. so its not worth it imo. i think 4.7 ghz is the natural border of this chip. and on 1.23v its not that bad. due to the delidding temps are also never exceeding 75 degree in cinebench and prime or fpu test are always under 85 degree.

what do you think about 1.4v on memory? is it too much? i have read that the memory controller can handle even up 1.45v on 24/7 with skylake-x


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> I've seen some screens where write (and maybe copy) are at ~100GS/s with a lower memory frequency
> Is this due to other optimization ? Cache ?
> 
> What VDRAM for 4000 C17 and 4000 C15 ?


This is a TridentZ 4x8 3200 c14 kit running at 3800 MHz with tweaks. The IMC on these Skylake-X CPUs definitely allow this set to go further than it ever has. Hopefully I can push more out of it.



Here's a quick spot check on stability as I was hunting for stable memory tweaks. Finally broke into 49.x ns range on this one.


----------



## czin125

Try 4133 CL16 +NB clock at 3000mhz and 2800mhz

vs 4000 CL15 +NB clock at 3000mhz and 2800mhz to see how ram/NB scale? The latter should be faster probably.


----------



## Nizzen

Looks like Gigabyte is the best today!


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> This is a TridentZ 4x8 3200 c14 kit running at 3800 MHz with tweaks. The IMC on these Skylake-X CPUs definitely allow this set to go further than it ever has. Hopefully I can push more out of it.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a quick spot check on stability as I was hunting for stable memory tweaks. Finally broke into 49.x ns range on this one.


what are your tweaks om the RAM?

I also have this same kit


----------



## Timmaigh!

Is there anyone over here in possesion of 7900x, trying to cool it just with regular 240mm/280mm AiO, something from Corsair...or everyone with that CPU and custom loop?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> wow pretty impressive. even 8auer with his pre tested 7900x needed at least 1.32v for 5ghz.
> unfortunatly there are not enough infos and tests out there to get a clear picture abut what to expect from a typicall 7900x.
> as far as i can see the common 7900x can reach 4.6-4.8 ghz with 1.2-1.25v.
> 
> did u test prime95 and aida fpu test? is it stable under avx load? dont know what board u are using but it could limit the powerdraw in heavy load with 1.3v. as far as i can see my asus x299 prime a can deliver maximum of 260watts thorugh vrm before locking up because of heat. even 8auer found that issue.


I'll do more testing once I get more time and test everything on it. I did hook it up to a wall meter and I was seeing it pull 368-370 watts on full load. I have AVX/AVX-512 pounded way down to -5 and -7. I was almost sure LLC7 was going to melt the VRMs on full load but the temps were not bad at all probably because of the 120mm fan I put in front of it. I feel like I was starting to hit the wall at 4.8GHz and tougher at 4.9 then barely at 5-0. It's devil's canyon all over again.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Is there anyone over here in possesion of 7900x, trying to cool it just with regular 240mm/280mm AiO, something from Corsair...or everyone with that CPU and custom loop?


Initially I was cooling my chip with a Silverstone 120mm until my new Aquaduct 720XT came in and it was running just fine at 4.5GHz. Depends on what you're doing with it.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Initially I was cooling my chip with a Silverstone 120mm until my new Aquaduct 720XT came in and it was running just fine at 4.5GHz. Depends on what you're doing with it.


Thanks. What vcore you needed to run it at that frequency?

I still consider buying it and 4,5, even 4,4 would be just fine with me, if its sustainable without thermal throttling at normal temps (not 85 and more) in regular workloads, by that i mean usual browsing, gaming, 3D rendering... and not LinkPack or Prime95.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Thanks. What vcore you needed to run it at that frequency?
> 
> I still consider buying it and 4,5, even 4,4 would be just fine with me, if its sustainable without thermal throttling at normal temps (not 85 and more) in regular workloads, by that i mean usual browsing, gaming, 3D rendering... and not LinkPack or Prime95.


I would have to work my way down because I went to 1.225 right off the bat with VCCIN 1.920 with LLC5 and overclocked it until I got to 4.5 then to 4.7 after I got the big cooler installed. This would depend on your chip/motherboard though but I can find the minimum voltages for 4.5v on what I have with an hour of Realbench.


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Is there anyone over here in possesion of 7900x, trying to cool it just with regular 240mm/280mm AiO, something from Corsair...or everyone with that CPU and custom loop?


I am running a Swiftech H240-x2 Prestige all in one cooler and currently stable at 4.7GHz and working my way to 4.8 to see if it can handle that load but it might be just a little to much to ask of it.

hit around 75c on lighter bench marking and low to mid 80s on AIDA 64 or Realbench. it will not handle Prime95 above 4.6GHz or it gives up, lol


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> ...it will not handle Prime95 above 4.6GHz or it gives up, lol


I know how this goes.

I am done using Prime95 as my stability tests. For my usage case, I will NEVER heat up a processor like it does. 2 hours in Realbench, 2 hours in AIDA64, and 2 hours in OCCT is good enough for me.

I hit ~80c in those at 4.7GHz 1.24v. I am going to get it delidded next week and then go for 4.8GHz or 4.9GHz. I think it is going to take a pretty good bump in voltage.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I know how this goes.
> 
> I am done using Prime95 as my stability tests. For my usage case, I will NEVER heat up a processor like it does. 2 hours in Realbench, 2 hours in AIDA64, and 2 hours in OCCT is good enough for me.
> 
> I hit ~80c in those at 4.7GHz 1.24v. I am going to get it delidded next week and then go for 4.8GHz or 4.9GHz. I think it is going to take a pretty good bump in voltage.


Not talking to you specifically, but it brings up the same point.

The more people I see complaining about how Prime95 with AVX is unrealistic (which is true), the more I wanna see what happens when someone with a 4.5+ GHz overclock runs an AVX512 stress-test without setting an AVX512 offset. (either intentionally or unintentionally)

Right now, y-cruncher with AVX512 will cause a 7900X to pull *300W at only 4.0 GHz*. That's enough to hit power/current throttling on most boards as well as temperature throttling (95C) if not delided.

Which is why I keep arguing that those AVX and AVX512 offsets are important. Chances are you won't know that a program uses AVX(512) until it does. Hypothetically, if your favorite video encoder gets an AVX512 update and you're clocked at 4.7 GHz with no offset, your system is gonna feel it. This is also why I'm somewhat upset that Gigabyte decided to disable the AVX/AVX512 offsets by default. They clearly hadn't tested it under AVX512 when they made that decision since it will throttle and crash at stock settings.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Not talking to you specifically, but it brings up the same point.
> 
> The more people I see complaining about how Prime95 with AVX is unrealistic (which is true), the more I wanna see what happens when someone with a 4.5+ GHz overclock runs an AVX512 stress-test without setting an AVX512 offset. (either intentionally or unintentionally)
> 
> Right now, y-cruncher with AVX512 will cause a 7900X to pull *300W at only 4.0 GHz*. That's enough to hit power/current throttling on most boards as well as temperature throttling (95C) if not delided.
> 
> Which is why I keep arguing that those AVX and AVX512 offsets are important. Chances are you won't know that a program uses AVX(512) until it does. Hypothetically, if your favorite video encoder gets an AVX512 update and you're clocked at 4.7 GHz with no offset, your system is gonna feel it. This is also why I'm somewhat upset that Gigabyte decided to disable the AVX/AVX512 offsets by default. They clearly hadn't tested it under AVX512 when they made that decision since it will throttle and crash at stock settings.


I agree completely. When overclocking there is nothing wrong with setting a big AVX/AVX512 offset. 4.0GHz running AVX512 is monstrous computing power.


----------



## EarlyAdopter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I agree completely. When overclocking there is nothing wrong with setting a big AVX/AVX512 offset. 4.0GHz running AVX512 is monstrous computing power.


Running an AVX workload basically turns your CPU into a GPU, and no one is running a GPU at >4.0Ghz.


----------



## Exilon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Which is why I keep arguing that those AVX and AVX512 offsets are important. Chances are you won't know that a program uses AVX(512) until it does. Hypothetically, if your favorite video encoder gets an AVX512 update and you're clocked at 4.7 GHz with no offset, your system is gonna feel it. This is also why I'm somewhat upset that Gigabyte decided to disable the AVX/AVX512 offsets by default. They clearly hadn't tested it under AVX512 when they made that decision since it will throttle and crash at stock settings.


The problem with high AVX512 offsets is that most programs won't be able to really hammer the 512b port like dedicated stress tests. I'd say the offsets should be set to be stable for typical AVX usage cases, and then use long-term/short-term turbo power limits to pull in the extreme cases.


----------



## alex1990

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Is there anyone over here in possesion of 7900x, trying to cool it just with regular 240mm/280mm AiO, something from Corsair...or everyone with that CPU and custom loop?


I have 7900x @ 4.7 and Corsair h105 with Noctua nf-f12 and.. its bad.I got 92C in Realbench or another stress test.
When EK going sell monoblock for x299 i go buy custom water


----------



## xarot

So time to ask again...anyone else have issues with SLI scaling?

https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/1017324/sli/x299-low-sli-scaling-and-bugs/
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I know how this goes.
> 
> I am done using Prime95 as my stability tests. For my usage case, I will NEVER heat up a processor like it does. 2 hours in Realbench, 2 hours in AIDA64, and 2 hours in OCCT is good enough for me.
> 
> I hit ~80c in those at 4.7GHz 1.24v. I am going to get it delidded next week and then go for 4.8GHz or 4.9GHz. I think it is going to take a pretty good bump in voltage.


Hmm...for me, Realbench heats up to almost the same levels as P95 (with AVX/FMA3 support disabled). At least on 7900X.


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> So time to ask again...anyone else have issues with SLI scaling?
> 
> https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/1017324/sli/x299-low-sli-scaling-and-bugs/
> Hmm...for me, Realbench heats up to almost the same levels as P95 (with AVX/FMA3 support disabled). At least on 7900X.


Realbench gets warmer than I would like but prime 95 goes right to throttling my system


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> Realbench gets warmer than I would like but prime 95 goes right to throttling my system


Realbench is a very realistic 100% load scenario whereas Prime95 AVX is not. You don't _have_ to run Prime95 AVX for stress testing, it's just that people like to run it as a worst worst worst case scenario (that actually never happens in 99.9% of use cases).


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Realbench is a very realistic 100% load scenario whereas Prime95 AVX is not. You don't _have_ to run Prime95 AVX for stress testing, it's just that people like to run it as a worst worst worst case scenario (that actually never happens in 99.9% of use cases).


Buuut you can disable AVX and FMA3 from new Prime95 versions. Or just use 26.6


----------



## opt33

prime for me isnt about worst case scenario, it is speed and efficiency in finding unstable overclocks. Often prime will crash an unusable overclock in minutes versus an hour or longer with another program.

But agree, if using prime either run it within specs of cpu via below, or use a different stress test.

-omit small ffts (much higher current/temps yet no better at finding instability). Or use OCCT:CPU which is Prime 95 with avx with small ffts omitted

-disable fma3 or use version 27 if further needed to keep temps/current within specs.

-as Xarot said disable both fma3/avx or use version 26 if needed to keep temps/current within specs

Or use another program if dont want to customize prime for modern cpus or use OCCT (prime 95 already customized). Nothing wrong with realbench, prime (if use within cpu specs), OCCT:cpu (which is prime 95 already customized for modern cpus), or others....just have to mind the pluses and minuses of each and cpu specs.


----------



## curseddiamond

I agree that Prime is pretty much a level of stress that I have never put my rig under except when I run Prime.

I use my system to Game and do editing of photos and videos. I occasionally do some CAD work for my job at home as well.

As this is a new platform and it is about learning what this new system is capable of I am kicking the tires as hard as I can right now. I am now stable as high as 4.8GHz and will probable back it down and start working on seeing how far I can take the memory out.

I have reached as far as 4.9Ghz on my overclock and still am only hitting the mid 80s on temps when doing the bench runs i am making on an AIO. I think that with the delidding and a custom loop the system could easily run at 5Ghz maybe even 5.1GHz.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> I am running a Swiftech H240-x2 Prestige all in one cooler and currently stable at 4.7GHz and working my way to 4.8 to see if it can handle that load but it might be just a little to much to ask of it.
> 
> hit around 75c on lighter bench marking and low to mid 80s on AIDA 64 or Realbench. it will not handle Prime95 above 4.6GHz or it gives up, lol


Thank you! I assume that Switech AiO, although 240mm only, is fairly superior to my Corsair H105?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alex1990*
> 
> I have 7900x @ 4.7 and Corsair h105 with Noctua nf-f12 and.. its bad.I got 92C in Realbench or another stress test.
> When EK going sell monoblock for x299 i go buy custom water


Thanks for the info. You have the same pump as i do, i just have Fractal design Venturi fans on it instead of Noctuas... anyway, i am not surprised you get it over 90C with 4,7Ghz overclock, its pretty in line with all the reviews. I assume you needed to up the vcore to get there fairly significantly, to 1,2-1,25V?

I am interested how much volts is needed to get to 4,4Ghz and 4,5Ghz to be Realbench stable and what are the temps at that voltage/frequency? I have read in local review (czech PCtuning) that 4,4 is doable even on stock voltage (1,1V), but i wonder if thats a norm or some abberation/lucky strike with that particular chip tested. While you still have that H105 and wait for that EK block, could you please give it a try and test your sample at those clocks and voltages (1,1V-1,15V max)? Obviously i am interested in temps too.

Thank you


----------



## Rammler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> I agree that Prime is pretty much a level of stress that I have never put my rig under except when I run Prime.
> 
> I use my system to Game and do editing of photos and videos. I occasionally do some CAD work for my job at home as well.
> 
> As this is a new platform and it is about learning what this new system is capable of I am kicking the tires as hard as I can right now. I am now stable as high as 4.8GHz and will probable back it down and start working on seeing how far I can take the memory out.
> 
> I have reached as far as 4.9Ghz on my overclock and still am only hitting the mid 80s on temps when doing the bench runs i am making on an AIO. I think that with the delidding and a custom loop the system could easily run at 5Ghz maybe even 5.1GHz.


4.9 Ghz and only hitting mid 80s on an Aio? When ur not using 1.2v there is no way for me this is possible. Or what benches are u running? Mine is delidded and with 1.3v on 4.8 ghz i reach 90 degree with a custom waterloop in cinebench. Aida and prime is instantly in the 100 degree.are using the fpu test in prime? What voltage are u using


----------



## Rammler

I am also wondering why i hit 90 degree after 3 min in prime 95 26.6 and 1344fft although i have a big custom Watercooling and delidded chip. Can somebody test prime 95 version 26.6 with 1344ft and look how hot his chip gets with 1.3v?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Finally got my test bench liquid cooler and I think I have a good chip at 5GHz with 1.291v core and 1.93v VCCIn LLC7. Passed XTU and validated with CPU-Z. I'm actually posting this from that same computer. https://valid.x86.fr/v54xjr
> I didn't have issues going from 4.5/4.6/4.7/4.8/4.9 but I hit a big wall at 5.0.
> I need to do more testing but it's way late. I'll let you guys know if I fry the chip erm get more time to test and make adjustments.
> 
> Adding this because a few have asked for it, not sure yet if this matters for this generation of chips. Batch# L717B223 Malaysia


nice cpu... keep the avx offsets where they are until you know you can control the heat with lower offsets. Also, make sure your EPS power connectors are up to snuff.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Testing memory:
> 7900x @ 4600
> 4000mhz memory @ cl15-15-15-35-2t


looks good but there are some fouled secondary timings that are borking the write and copy bandwidth. they should be well above 90K - but you know this.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Not talking to you specifically, but it brings up the same point.
> The more people I see complaining about how Prime95 with AVX is unrealistic (which is true), the more I wanna see what happens when someone with a 4.5+ GHz overclock runs an AVX512 stress-test without setting an AVX512 offset. (either intentionally or unintentionally)
> Right now, y-cruncher with AVX512 will cause a 7900X to pull *300W at only 4.0 GHz*. That's enough to hit power/current throttling on most boards as well as temperature throttling (95C) if not delided.
> *Which is why I keep arguing that those AVX and AVX512 offsets are important.* Chances are you won't know that a program uses AVX(512) until it does. Hypothetically, if your favorite video encoder gets an AVX512 update and you're clocked at 4.7 GHz with no offset, your system is gonna feel it. This is also why I'm somewhat upset that Gigabyte decided to disable the AVX/AVX512 offsets by default. They clearly hadn't tested it under AVX512 when they made that decision since it will throttle and crash at stock settings.


^^ This. Again - make sure the EPS power connectors are up to the job. A Corsair 1200 or 1500 AXi. JohnyGuru is expanding on the comments made in an early article w/ de8auer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Realbench is a very realistic 100% load scenario whereas Prime95 AVX is not. Y*ou don't have to run Prime95 AVX for stress testing,* it's just that people like to run it as a worst worst worst case scenario (that actually never happens in 99.9% of use cases).


.. frankly, you should not run p95 full bore on these chips unless you want to run a 500MHz lower OC than you otherwise could. (that's why the AVX offsets are available).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Buuut you can disable AVX and FMA3 from new Prime95 versions. Or just use 26.6


and when disabled, p95 is absolutely not worth using, except to say the rig passes p95. x264 or x265 will not run as a power virus yet still work the architecture and substructures plenty while using AVX. These are not 4 core mainstream chip. with 8 or more cores, just delete p95 from the rig and put it in the pile of dead dinosaurs.


----------



## Chargeit

I stopped using P95 when Haswell released and it would drive the temps to insane levels. RealBench works for my usage. I find that if I can pass 2 hours of RealBench then my system is stable for what I do. I'm good with that.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I stopped using P95 when Haswell released and it would drive the temps to insane levels. RealBench works for my usage. I find that if I can pass 2 hours of RealBench then my system is stable for what I do. I'm good with that.


yeah - same here. basically, after sandy 4 cores, p95 became meaningless.. or worse, misleading.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> sooo many lies!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> amazon you told me the 10 core would be in stock on Monday. But it still isn't in! (that is what i get for saving $49 and getting it from directly from amazon and not another seller.)
> sooo.. i'm looking at the gaming 9 and ram.. just sitting here. The good news is the GF and dog don't have to lock themselves in the bedroom. They know that new system, water, OC'n, etc normally end we me yelling and killing $1000s in equipment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> haha
> 
> (grumble) i hate redoing the bridge between video cards (leaking from them is normally what kills stuff.) I'm 2 spaced now and i need to use a 3 space one for gaming 9. One of the reasons i like the WS mobos is i can do SLI in any slot if feel like.
> 
> Looking at the gaming 9 it reminds me that I've not used a ATX mobo in a long time. They are soo small!


good board, but gigabyte bios?


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ^^ This. Again - make sure the EPS power connectors are up to the job. A Corsair 1200 or 1500 AXi.


Are you saying a 1000W like the HX1000 isn't sufficient? That's kind of worrying.. That's what I am (was?) planning on.


----------



## Mysticial

It's worth mentioning that on these chips, we're basically doing 3 overclocks at once. Since each type of work-load (scalar, AVX. AVX512) has a different operating frequency. So whatever settings you choose and with whatever offsets, you may want to run 3 sets of stress-tests (scalar, AVX, AVX512) to make sure all of them are stable at their desired frequencies.

So passing any one stress-test does not guarantee that you pass all the others. I presume the most common approach is that people will push the scalar frequency as high as possible and set massive AVX/AVX512 offsets that drop them well below 4.0 GHz because they simply don't care about them.

While you can pick the frequencies at which to run each type of work-load, there currently isn't a way to pick different voltages for different work-loads aside from relying on adaptive voltages (which don't give you very fine-grained control).


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - same here. basically, after sandy 4 cores, p95 became meaningless.. or worse, misleading.
> good board, but gigabyte bios?


The first of many mobos







I sadly still don't have a CPU yet. Most likely i'll still pick up the Apex (and the maybe a WS, if they make one)


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> good board, but gigabyte bios?


I actually just returned my Gigabyte Gaming 7 yesterday. Everything on the board was great, but the BIOS was enough for me to justify the wait for the Apex. I found myself making a great deal more senseless mistakes with the Gigabyte BIOS simply because everything was buried a bit deeper within different sections.


----------



## czin125

There's this delid tool that seems large enough to let you use a heat gun while sliding the IHS ( could be used on soldered cpus too? )


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Thank you! I assume that Switech AiO, although 240mm only, is fairly superior to my Corsair H105?
> Thanks for the info. You have the same pump as i do, i just have Fractal design Venturi fans on it instead of Noctuas... anyway, i am not surprised you get it over 90C with 4,7Ghz overclock, its pretty in line with all the reviews. I assume you needed to up the vcore to get there fairly significantly, to 1,2-1,25V?
> 
> I am interested how much volts is needed to get to 4,4Ghz and 4,5Ghz to be Realbench stable and what are the temps at that voltage/frequency? I have read in local review (czech PCtuning) that 4,4 is doable even on stock voltage (1,1V), but i wonder if thats a norm or some abberation/lucky strike with that particular chip tested. While you still have that H105 and wait for that EK block, could you please give it a try and test your sample at those clocks and voltages (1,1V-1,15V max)? Obviously i am interested in temps too.
> 
> Thank you


the h240 x-2 is actually a 280 mm AIO, I know it seems like it should be a 240 but their coding of 240 means 2 140 mm fans. Per a lot of reviews on the H240 it is the best AIO on the market. It is expandable as well. you could easily cool your GPU with it. You would just need to add extra coolant, extra lines, and a block for the GPU.

For 4.8GHz I am running a 1.25 volt VCore for the benches I am running. CineBench 15, GeekBench 4, Super Prime 32M, Realbench, SuperPosition, Firestrike Ultra, TimeSpy, AIDA 64, Passmark, OCCT, Intel XTU, and the CPU bench from CPUZ.

the only ones were temps get mid 80s are AIDA 64 stress Test, OCCT, passmark, and Intel XTU. for the rest it is mid 70s to around 82. for the graphics benches it usually goes no higher than the mid 60s.

from my testing so far, the 7900x is better than the 6950x on work tasks but the 6950x is better at graphic tasks. this may change over time but so far my work related tasks are 10-15% better than my 6950x was and it is 10-15% slower in graphics related tasks.


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> from my testing so far, the 7900x is better than the 6950x on work tasks but the 6950x is better at graphic tasks. this may change over time but so far my work related tasks are 10-15% better than my 6950x was and it is 10-15% slower in graphics related tasks.


What was the clock on your 6950X?


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> Are you saying a 1000W like the HX1000 isn't sufficient? That's kind of worrying.. That's what I am (was?) planning on.


during my benches I am seeing over 1000 watts being pulled from the wall.

I am running an EVGA P2 1200 Supernova and it is being used a lot harder than I would like.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EarlyAdopter*
> 
> from my testing so far, the 7900x is better than the 6950x on work tasks but the 6950x is better at graphic tasks. this may change over time but so far my work related tasks are 10-15% better than my 6950x was and it is 10-15% slower in graphics related tasks.


Can you quantify "graphic tasks"?

What is the relative memory footprint of the "graphic tasks" vs your other "computes"?

I've had a sneaking suspicion the new cache architecture is going to hurt some very specific types of computes, but those happen to be what I do frequently. Specifically large memory image frequent cache miss applications.

Haven't been able to tease out the effect of the mesh on thread-to-thread mixed in with that "large memory image frequent cache miss" scenario.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> during my benches I am seeing over 1000 watts being pulled from the wall.
> 
> I am running an EVGA P2 1200 Supernova and it is being used a lot harder than I would like.


I can easily pull 850-900W from the wall with 2x1080ti and a 4.4 6950x just gaming.

We had a moment there where big PSUs seemed pointless, but that has passed for now... Supposedly 7 and 10nm are going to change that but I'll see it when I believe it. So far the die shrinks have resulted in higher die counts per wafer, but we are still seeing volts, watts and joules that look like 22nm chips owing to the larger caches and clock rates. Given the change in gate shapes the "feature size" shrink has taken on a markedly different character than the "good old days" where halving the feature size meant the gate was half as "big" and took that much less total area/volume and corresponding power.


----------



## Rammler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> the h240 x-2 is actually a 280 mm AIO, I know it seems like it should be a 240 but their coding of 240 means 2 140 mm fans. Per a lot of reviews on the H240 it is the best AIO on the market. It is expandable as well. you could easily cool your GPU with it. You would just need to add extra coolant, extra lines, and a block for the GPU.
> 
> For 4.8GHz I am running a 1.25 volt VCore for the benches I am running. CineBench 15, GeekBench 4, Super Prime 32M, Realbench, SuperPosition, Firestrike Ultra, TimeSpy, AIDA 64, Passmark, OCCT, Intel XTU, and the CPU bench from CPUZ.
> 
> the only ones were temps get mid 80s are AIDA 64 stress Test, OCCT, passmark, and Intel XTU. for the rest it is mid 70s to around 82. for the graphics benches it usually goes no higher than the mid 60s.
> 
> from my testing so far, the 7900x is better than the 6950x on work tasks but the 6950x is better at graphic tasks. this may change over time but so far my work related tasks are 10-15% better than my 6950x was and it is 10-15% slower in graphics related tasks.


are u using fpu stress test in aida?
that is an avx test i think.


----------



## Chargeit

With my current oc settings, 45 all cores @ 1.183v (w/adaptive) and stock gpu oc I'm seeing about 450w - 460w after 5 min in realbench.

I'd test longer but it's 97f out here and my ac starts taking a beating on these hot days.

*Tested using a P3 wattage meter at the wall.

https://www.amazon.com/P3-P4400-Electricity-Usage-Monitor/dp/B00009MDBU/ref=pd_lpo_vtph_469_bs_tr_t_2?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=7YA8M46SJM85QSS07TG4


----------



## Rammler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> With my current oc settings, 45 all cores @ 1.183v (w/adaptive) and stock gpu oc I'm seeing about 450w - 460w after 5 min in realbench.
> 
> I'd test longer but it's 97f out here and my ac starts taking a beating on these hot days.
> 
> *Tested using a P3 wattage meter at the wall.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/P3-P4400-Electricity-Usage-Monitor/dp/B00009MDBU/ref=pd_lpo_vtph_469_bs_tr_t_2?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=7YA8M46SJM85QSS07TG4


460w with under 1.2v is quiet a lot. i think for 24/7 i personally would never go over 1.25v.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> 460w with under 1.2v is quiet a lot. i think for 24/7 i personally would never go over 1.25v.


Yeah but that's putting the system under 100% stress. Not something I'm going to do often. It was idling lower then my 4790k/980ti did. 84w vs 90w.

*Hell, my 4790k/980ti was able to pull 420w running Furmark at the wall stock. Don't remember the realbench numbers sadly.


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> It's worth mentioning that on these chips, we're basically doing 3 overclocks at once. Since each type of work-load (scalar, AVX. AVX512) has a different operating frequency. So whatever settings you choose and with whatever offsets, you may want to run 3 sets of stress-tests (scalar, AVX, AVX512) to make sure all of them are stable at their desired frequencies.
> 
> So passing any one stress-test does not guarantee that you pass all the others. I presume the most common approach is that people will push the scalar frequency as high as possible and set massive AVX/AVX512 offsets that drop them well below 4.0 GHz because they simply don't care about them.
> 
> *While you can pick the frequencies at which to run each type of work-load, there currently isn't a way to pick different voltages for different work-loads aside from relying on adaptive voltages (which don't give you very fine-grained control).*


I think this is where ASUS' Thermal Control Tool comes in handy to set the desired clocks and voltages based on work load.


----------



## Removed1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's this delid tool that seems large enough to let you use a heat gun while sliding the IHS ( could be used on soldered cpus too? )


I would not advice to use a heat gun when deliding a SKX.
In this video he is using a hair dryer, to heat a bit the glue.
A heat gun heat from 150° to 500°, not the same than a hair dryer.
If you allow the whole package to reach high t° while deliding you could harm your cpu.
So it is ok to heat the glue a bit, but not use a heat gun, even at the lowest power, imo.

There is other techniques to delid a soldered cpu.


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> What was the clock on your 6950X?


I reached a stable overclock of 4.3 on my 6950x.

I could run it at 4.4 but it wasn't worth the increased temps for the little gain it got me.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I stopped using P95 when Haswell released and it would drive the temps to insane levels. RealBench works for my usage. I find that if I can pass 2 hours of RealBench then my system is stable for what I do. I'm good with that.


Each of us have their own method of verifying stability. Personally, I would fire up Realbench every now and then but in the past I've seen it crash in a few other occasions than instability in my systems, and in the end I always seem to go with Prime95 with disabled instructions depending on what I want to test to verify the overclock is stable enough for my personal usage.


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Can you quantify "graphic tasks"?
> 
> What is the relative memory footprint of the "graphic tasks" vs your other "computes"?
> 
> I've had a sneaking suspicion the new cache architecture is going to hurt some very specific types of computes, but those happen to be what I do frequently. Specifically large memory image frequent cache miss applications.
> 
> Haven't been able to tease out the effect of the mesh on thread-to-thread mixed in with that "large memory image frequent cache miss" scenario.


, CUIDA

direct x11 or 12 based games. OpenGL format, CUDA based tasks all seem to be currently weaker than my 6950x was.

if I am working in Adobe or resolve the 7900x is faster


----------



## ManyThreads

Picking up my 7820X and TUF1 today. Have a few OC'ing questions hopefully someone here can help:

1) Can anyone give me some rough starting point numbers for a 4.5-4.6 OC? Maybe 1.8v or 1.2v? Would rather not mess with BCLK.

2) Can I just OC the all-core turbo, so it will idle at a much lower frequency?

3) What happens to turbo boost 3.0 when you OC?

4) How do I change the North bridge to 3200Mhz? Seems to be the thing to do.

Cooler is a NH-D15.

Thank you! Very excited to start tweaking.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Picking up my 7820X and TUF1 today. Have a few OC'ing questions hopefully someone here can help:


Quote:


> 1) Can anyone give me some rough starting point numbers for a 4.5-4.6 OC? Maybe 1.8v or 1.2v? Would rather not mess with BCLK.


I hope you don't mean 1.8v for the vcore. You'll melt the chip without LN2.
Quote:


> 2) Can I just OC the all-core turbo, so it will idle at a much lower frequency?


Yes.
Quote:


> 3) What happens to turbo boost 3.0 when you OC?


There's nothing particularly special about Turbo Boost 3.0.

The default turbo boost limit for 1-2 cores is 45x GHz. Additionally, there are per-core limits of 43x for all cores and 45x for the two "preferred" cores.
The maximum speed that a core is allowed to boost to is the smaller of the global turbo limit (45x) and the per-core limit (43x or 45x).

On a non-preferred core, it won't boost above 43x. On a preferred core, it boosts to 45x.

The part of the Turbo Boost 3.0 that requires OS support is that the BIOS needs to communicate with the OS and tell it which two cores are the "preferred" cores. That way the OS knows to put single-threaded tasks onto those two cores so they can boost to 45x.

When you overclock, you have full control over all these turbo limits - including the per-core limits. If you decide to set everything to 45x, then Turbo Boost 3.0 is moot.
Quote:


> 4) How do I change the North bridge to 3200Mhz? Seems to be the thing to do.


It's just another multiplier setting in the BIOS.


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> are u using fpu stress test in aida?
> that is an avx test i think.


I mainly use the default bench that stresses the cpu, memory, and cache


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Picking up my 7820X and TUF1 today. Have a few OC'ing questions hopefully someone here can help:
> 
> 1) Can anyone give me some rough starting point numbers for a 4.5-4.6 OC? Maybe 1.8v or 1.2v? Would rather not mess with BCLK.
> 
> 2) Can I just OC the all-core turbo, so it will idle at a much lower frequency?
> 
> 3) What happens to turbo boost 3.0 when you OC?
> 
> 4) How do I change the North bridge to 3200Mhz? Seems to be the thing to do.
> 
> Cooler is a NH-D15.
> 
> Thank you! Very excited to start tweaking.


Here are the settings I use,

Advanced Mode,

Sync all cores
45 multiplier
CPU Core Voltage - Manual Mode -> CPU Core Voltage Override -> 1.150

This runs the cpu at a steady 1.150 volts.The above settings have passed over an hour of RealBench with max system ram set.

After stress testing and find that 1.150v was stable for me I switched to,

Sync all cores
45
CPU Core Voltage -> Adaptive Mode -> Offset Mode Sign (-) -> CPU Core Voltage Offset "0.100" (I have 0.120 but 0.100 might be more stable) -> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.150

With the above the voltage maxes at 1.183v but it also lowers when the system is under low stress so it's better for 24/7 use.


----------



## ManyThreads

Thank you Mysticial and Chargeit.

Sorry I meant 1.18v, not 1.8v as I wrote above!!

So that adaptive OC, is the voltage floor set at 1.15 in your example? If it's stable at 1.15, why raise the ceiling to 1.183v? Not sure I understand the reason you set a higher voltage cap but didn't increase clock speed if it was already stable at 1.15v.

Right now I have a 3770K and I believe when idling it drops to 1.6Ghz and a low voltage - I assume I can set the same sort of scenario with SKL-X for power savings.

I think I'll be happy with 4.5-4.6 on all cores - I don't want to do anything too crazy and I didn't buy a massive water cooler.

If I use XMP for my RAM will that change BCLCK? I don't want to mess with that. I assume I can just manually key in 1.35v and 3200Mhz (Trident Z 3200Mhz 32gb quad channel kit).

Thanks again - very helpful.


----------



## Chargeit

With the offset set for a target of 1.150v the voltage drops too low under low stress.

*To hit 1.150v with adaptive and the settings above set your offset from 0.100v to 0.120v.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> Are you saying a 1000W like the HX1000 isn't sufficient? That's kind of worrying.. That's what I am (was?) planning on.


it's less the total power rating, which would if exceeded just OCP, it the +12V line count on the EPS connectors and the amps on that rail. I recall JG complaining that de8auer used the wrong PSU.
edit: found it
may only be an issue with "colorful" PSus.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> The first of many mobos
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I sadly still don't have a CPU yet. Most likely i'll still pick up the Apex (and the maybe a WS, if they make one)


ya never know.. you might really like the G9. It should be very good board.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I actually just returned my Gigabyte Gaming 7 yesterday. Everything on the board was great, but the BIOS was enough for me to justify the wait for the Apex. I found myself making a great deal more senseless mistakes with the Gigabyte BIOS simply because everything was buried a bit deeper within different sections.


yeah - never mind the menu structure, I don't understand why these companies can;t even use the same nomenclature for the same settings.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> during my benches I am seeing over 1000 watts being pulled from the wall.
> I am running an EVGA P2 1200 Supernova and it is being used a lot harder than I would like.


A couple of big GPUs, and a core count >8 all of a sudden 1200W is cutting it close. I tend to want to operate PSUs at less than 80% of rated output. Hey, when I was running 3 overclocked and waaay overvolted 780Ti Kingpins, I had a 1200 and a 1500 running the rig.









anyway - I'm gonna keep trying to hold off for the 18 core.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> anyway - I'm gonna keep trying to hold off for the 18 core.


Tears in our collective beers, but we avoid the beta-version VRMs right?









I've moved over to my xeon rig to hold a place for the 18 core for now as by the numbers that machine is as good as I am going to get via any option including threadripper. Unless of course TR somehow OCs much better than the 1800x (which is not expected to be the case) - I can beat its single and multi core scores and then have 2 of them with my current setup.

If the XE looks like the 6154 (xeon that does all 18 cores @ 3.7), then the real hard decisions come... two of those puppies would be a noticeable upgrade and make it a tough call between a dual system of those and a single XE in a desktop rig. XE OC and MB pricing will help decide.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> , CUIDA
> 
> direct x11 or 12 based games. OpenGL format, CUDA based tasks all seem to be currently weaker than my 6950x was.
> 
> if I am working in Adobe or resolve the 7900x is faster


That is surprising... CUDA isn't usually sensitive at all to anything but memory throughput and PCIe throughput...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Tears in our collective beers, but we avoid the beta-version VRMs right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've moved over to my xeon rig to hold a place for the 18 core for now as by the numbers that machine is as good as I am going to get via any option including threadripper. Unless of course TR somehow OCs much better than the 1800x (which is not expected to be the case) - I can beat its single and multi core scores and then have 2 of them with my current setup.
> 
> If the XE looks like the 6154 (xeon that does all 18 cores @ 3.7), then the real hard decisions come... two of those puppies would be a noticeable upgrade and make it a tough call between a dual system of those and a single XE in a desktop rig. XE OC and MB pricing will help decide.


Eh, if I understand your use scenario, it would be really hard to justify one XE vs 2 xeons... but you're a creative guy.









(folding this month?)


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Eh, if I understand your use scenario, it would be really hard to justify one XE vs 2 xeons... but you're a creative guy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (folding this month?)


As usual, I've wrecked my cluster to configure things for testing (things and stuff), so I'm not setup to do that... Will do some after summer though.

Yeah, its hard to justify 2K for one vs the ability to plop 2 on a board... I do like those GHz for lower core-count apps though...


----------



## ZeroC00L

With all of these articles and videos about the X299 platform having poor parts to remove heat from the VRM, and complaints about severe heat when overclocking the i9-7900X, I'm starting to doubt going with Skylake-X for my next build in the coming months. Can someone tell me otherwise?


----------



## wingman99

What real world applications benefit with a 10 core VS i7 7700k?


----------



## st3roids1

If you want serious oc forget it with skylake x

But even if you dont their performance disappoints , their price to performance even more.

also 7740 and 7800x cant really be consider hedt unless you wanna joke about it.

7820x start to pack soem tech turbo 2 avx etc but again their performance cant justify their price. If add motherboard prices are going through the roof.

Meanwhile i hate to bring this but 1600x now sells for 200 dollars , i mean common , why would someone get the 7800x for 400 dollars for a 5-10% more performance and 100 to 200 dollars xtra for motherboard half the features cannot use.


----------



## ZeroC00L

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What real world applications benefit with a 10 core VS i7 7700k?


I do a lot of animation work, plus I stream the work I am making sometimes.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st3roids1*
> 
> If you want serious oc forget it with skylake x
> 
> But even if you dont their performance disappoints , their price to performance even more.
> 
> also 7740 and 7800x cant really be consider hedt unless you wanna joke about it.
> 
> 7820x start to pack soem tech turbo 2 avx etc but again their performance cant justify their price. If add motherboard prices are going through the roof.
> 
> Meanwhile i hate to bring this but 1600x now sells for 200 dollars , i mean common , why would someone get the 7800x for 400 dollars for a 5-10% more performance and 100 to 200 dollars xtra for motherboard half the features cannot use.


So... I waited this whole time for Skylake-X, and now I should turn my focus to AMD? Sigh... I really wanted to do some serious overclocking and get it to 4.5GHz. There is really no hope with the temperature issues, huh?


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZeroC00L*
> 
> I do a lot of animation work, plus I stream the work I am making sometimes.
> So... I waited this whole time for Skylake-X, and now I should turn my focus to AMD? Sigh... I really wanted to do some serious overclocking and get it to 4.5GHz. There is really no hope with the temperature issues, huh?


There aren't temperature issues at 4.5GHz, which is practically stock. I think the problems for this platform were from unrealistic expectations of getting to throw 1.4V into these chips like their mainstream counterparts.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZeroC00L*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What real world applications benefit with a 10 core VS i7 7700k?
> 
> 
> 
> I do a lot of animation work, plus I stream the work I am making sometimes.
Click to expand...

How much time do you save with a 10 core VS i7 7700k?


----------



## TahoeDust

Someone needs to do some real deal VRM testing with a 7900x and a Gigabyte 7/9. I have seen the videos of the updated Apex VRM cooling design, and I don't see how it is any better than what GIgabyte has done from the beginning.


----------



## BroPhilip

I have really been disappointed by the reviewers. Ttl has been sitting on a Aorus 7 since before launch....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Someone needs to do some real deal VRM testing with a 7900x and a Gigabyte 7/9. I have seen the videos of the updated Apex VRM cooling design, and I don't see how it is any better than what GIgabyte has done from the beginning.


----------



## EarlyAdopter

It's almost as if all the reviewers are intentionally holding back from using the launch boards with adequate VRM cooling, the Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 7 and 9, to make this a story about Intel when it's really a story about poor motherboard designs.

I've overclocked my 7820x on a Gigabyte Aorus 9 motherboard to 4.6Ghz on all 8 cores, boosting to 4.8Ghz on 2 core loads, on only 1.20V. Cinebench draws 215W at the package and benches out at 2009. Prime95 small FFT with AVX pulls 260W at the package. My VRMs max out at 70C.

This is a big ado about nothing. Just buy a motherboard with decent VRM heat sinks if you're going to overclock.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EarlyAdopter*
> 
> It's almost as if all the reviewers are intentionally holding back from using the launch boards with adequate VRM cooling, the Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 7 and 9, to make this a story about Intel when it's really a story about poor motherboard designs.
> 
> I've overclocked my 7820x on a Gigabyte Aorus 9 motherboard to 4.6Ghz on all 8 cores, boosting to 4.8Ghz on 2 core loads, on only 1.20V. Cinebench draws 215W at the package and benches out at 2009. Prime95 small FFT with AVX pulls 260W at the package. My VRMs max out at 70C.
> 
> This is a big ado about nothing. Just buy a motherboard with decent VRM heat sinks if you're going to overclock.


Now add 2 more cores of power (these issues are being discussed on 10core parts) and your conspiracy theory dies a horrible death. Particularly because there are chips with 12, 14, 16 and 18 cores coming down the pipe.

IIRC, Der8aur specifically began his observations of the sinks on the first batch of X299 as "heat insulation devices" referencing the Gigabyte 7 Aorus specifically, so....

It's a fixable problem, but it requires surface area and airflow on components that are increasingly neglected in both when it comes to case design and water cooling setups these days.


----------



## Chargeit

Der8auer also disabled a lot of built in fail safes (cpu and vrm throttling limits) and other options in the bios to get the system to push the vrm as hard as it did. Basically you have to follow his steps in order to get the mobo to run to the point of over heating the vrm. However, his steps are the steps that allow the cpu to truly run at the clocks it's pushing. From what I watched. I didn't make a list of every step since I'm not personally interested in replicating them.

All these mobo's kind of have vrm overheating issues if you set the bios up correctly without adding vrm cooling. Though, least it seems like with dedicated vrm cooling the vrms do keep cool from what he said.


----------



## Mysticial

FWIW, I have the Gaming 7. And I was unable to get the VRMs anywhere near throttling while pulling a constant 300W for 10 min. straight.

I couldn't go above 300W since I hit temperature throttling on the CPU (95C).


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> FWIW, I have the Gaming 7. And I was unable to get the VRMs anywhere near throttling while pulling a constant 300W for 10 min. straight.
> 
> I couldn't go above 300W since I hit temperature throttling on the CPU (95C).


Did you follow the instructions he laid out?






Also his cpu is delided.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> FWIW, I have the Gaming 7. And I was unable to get the VRMs anywhere near throttling while pulling a constant 300W for 10 min. straight.
> 
> I couldn't go above 300W since I hit temperature throttling on the CPU (95C).


How do you like the Gigabyte Gaming 7?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> IIRC, Der8aur specifically began his observations of the sinks on the first batch of X299 as "heat insulation devices" referencing the Gigabyte 7 Aorus specifically, so....


He used the Gaming 3 in his "x299 VRM Disaster" video. The Gaming 3 uses a much smaller VRM cooler than the Gaming 7 and Gaming 9 motherboards. All of the VRM coolers used on the motherboards in his video used a single heatsink with no additional heat pipes or heatsink like the revised Asus Apex, Gaming 7 and Gaming 9 have.


----------



## EarlyAdopter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Now add 2 more cores of power (these issues are being discussed on 10core parts) and your conspiracy theory dies a horrible death. Particularly because there are chips with 12, 14, 16 and 18 cores coming down the pipe.
> 
> IIRC, Der8aur specifically began his observations of the sinks on the first batch of X299 as "heat insulation devices" referencing the Gigabyte 7 Aorus specifically, so....
> 
> It's a fixable problem, but it requires surface area and airflow on components that are increasingly neglected in both when it comes to case design and water cooling setups these days.


You do not recall correctly. Der8aur began this with a Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 3 (and an Asus Prime Deluxe), which only have a single VRM heatsink. The Gigabyte 7 and 9 have dual heatpipe connected VRM heatsinks.

I'm water cooling with no direct airflow on the VRM heatsinks on my Gaming 9 and having no issues with heat there at all.

The 10 core parts draw only ~20W more, so maybe 280W, 300W if you push the core voltage. Reality is you should expect slightly lower overclocks with more cores anyhow, so 4.5Ghz on 10 core loads as opposed to 4.6Ghz on 8 core loads, which will also keep the power draw capped. I'd expect the larger core counts to scale down accordingly.

The nice thing is with Turbo Boost 3.0 you can set multipliers based on the number of cores loaded, so even a 16 core, which realisticly might only do 4.2Ghz on all cores loaded, could still boost to 4.8Ghz on lightly threaded apps.

What we are seeing is a bunch of launch motherboards that have a VRM cooling design that can't handle Skylake-X overclocked power loads, which range from 260-300W, and two that can. Again, the frustrating thing is _all_ of the reviews have used the boards that can't.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Did you follow the instructions he laid out?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also his cpu is delided.


Not entirely applicable because I have the Gaming 7 and not the Gaming 3.

Admittedly, I haven't delided and I couldn't go above 300W. But I did disable all power and VRM throttling and I can verify there's no throttling because the performance is as expected for the clock frequencies I was at. And the most I ever got the VRMs up to was around 80C.

I'm not entirely sure how to extrapolate 300W / 80C to 360W / ??C on the VRMs. But I doubt pulling an extra 60W will push the VRMs into the 110C if it's only 80C @ 300W.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> How do you like the Gigabyte Gaming 7?


Initially I had reservations with it because of the phantom throttling problem. But since der8auer solve that, I love this board now:

Overclockable.
RGB from top to bottom.
Heatsink pipe to alleviate the VRM problem.
Double 8-pin to solve the power delivery problem.
My only grip right now is the BIOS and the fact that Gigabyte decided to disable the AVX/AVX512 offsets by default. (which leads to throttling and instability at stock settings) But this problem is easily solved by setting them manually.


----------



## EarlyAdopter

I should also add the only way you can push Skylake-X to 280-300W is running AVX512 loads with the negative AVX multipliers disabled. AVX loads are supposed to down clock the cores 300-500Mhz, but Der8aur disables those to push power draw to the max. So do I, but then again I have VRM cooling that can handle it (and CPU cooling that can just barely handle it  ).


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EarlyAdopter*
> 
> I should also add the only way you can push Skylake-X to 280-300W is running AVX512 loads with the negative AVX multipliers disabled. AVX loads are supposed to down clock the cores 300-500Mhz, but Der8aur disables those to push power draw to the max. So do I, but then again I have VRM cooling that can handle it.


You can push the 7900X to 300W by:

Prime95 AVX small FFTs @ 4.3 - 4.4 GHz
y-cruncher AVX512 computation or BBP @ 4.0 GHz
These frequencies are the actual operating frequencies under said load. So it's after applying whatever offset you choose.

I haven't pushed the clocks high enough to see what's needed to make scalar code pull 300W.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EarlyAdopter*
> 
> You do not recall correctly. Der8aur began this with a Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 3 (and an Asus Prime Deluxe), which only have a single VRM heatsink. The Gigabyte 7 and 9 have dual heatpipe connected VRM heatsinks.
> 
> I'm water cooling with no direct airflow on the VRM heatsinks on my Gaming 9 and having no issues with heat there at all.
> 
> The 10 core parts draw only ~20W more, so maybe 280W, 300W if you push the core voltage. Reality is you should expect slightly lower overclocks with more cores anyhow, so 4.5Ghz on 10 core loads as opposed to 4.6Ghz on 8 core loads, which will also keep the power draw capped. I'd expect the larger core counts to scale down accordingly.
> 
> The nice thing is with Turbo Boost 3.0 you can set multipliers based on the number of cores loaded, so even a 16 core, which realisticly might only do 4.2Ghz on all cores loaded, could still boost to 4.8Ghz on lightly threaded apps.
> 
> What we are seeing is a bunch of launch motherboards that have a VRM cooling design that can't handle Skylake-X overclocked power loads, which range from 260-300W, and two that can. Again, the frustrating thing is _all_ of the reviews have used the boards that can't.


Agreed.

I used the Gaming 7 with the 7900x and had absolutely no issues with VRM temps under the absolute heaviest of loads, which included some runs resulting in 600+ watts from the wall (pumps, fans and system) running LinX and Prime95. I posted a few pages back. VRM temps without active cooling peaked at 80c.

Use cheaper boards (relative to brand line) and you're likely to have issues. This is nothing new for any platform. All of a sudden it's a problem because problems with x299 make for popular videos right now.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> I used the Gaming 7 with the 7900x and had absolutely no issues with VRM temps under the absolute heaviest of loads, which included some runs resulting in 600+ watts from the wall (pumps, fans and system) running LinX and Prime95. I posted a few pages back. VRM temps without active cooling peaked in the low 80s.
> 
> Use cheaper boards (relative to brand line) and you're likely to have issues. This is nothing new for any platform. All of a sudden it's a problem because. Problems with x299 make for popular videos right now.


The latest CoreTemp and HWMonitor can give you the CPU power draw readout directly. So you won't have to measure from the wall and estimate what all the other components draw.


----------



## EarlyAdopter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> You can push the 7900X to 300W by:
> 
> Prime95 AVX small FFTs @ 4.3 - 4.4 GHz
> y-cruncher AVX512 computation or BBP @ 4.0 GHz
> These frequencies are the actual operating frequencies under said load. So it's after applying whatever offset you choose.
> 
> I haven't pushed the clocks high enough to see what's needed to make scalar code pull 300W.


What core voltages are you running? Peak, after any adaptive offset.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> The latest CoreTemp and HWMonitor can give you the CPU power draw readout directly. So you won't have to measure from the wall and estimate what all the other components draw.


I can assure you that you don't want to make a habit of trusting those readings. They can be way off especially when switching from manual to adaptive on Asus boards.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EarlyAdopter*
> 
> What core voltages are you running? Peak, after any adaptive offset.


I left the voltages at stock.

For the AVX512 @ 4.0 GHz, it was 1.150 adaptive. I didn't record what it was for Prime @ 4.3 GHz.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Did you follow the instructions he laid out?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also his cpu is delided.
> 
> 
> 
> Not entirely applicable because I have the Gaming 7 and not the Gaming 3.
> 
> Admittedly, I haven't delided and I couldn't go above 300W. But I did disable all power and VRM throttling and I can verify there's no throttling because the performance is as expected for the clock frequencies I was at. And the most I ever got the VRMs up to was around 80C.
> 
> I'm not entirely sure how to extrapolate 300W / 80C to 360W / ??C on the VRMs. But I doubt pulling an extra 60W will push the VRMs into the 110C if it's only 80C @ 300W.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> How do you like the Gigabyte Gaming 7?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Initially I had reservations with it because of the phantom throttling problem. But since der8auer solve that, I love this board now:
> 
> Overclockable.
> RGB from top to bottom.
> Heatsink pipe to alleviate the VRM problem.
> Double 8-pin to solve the power delivery problem.
> My only grip right now is the BIOS and the fact that Gigabyte decided to disable the AVX/AVX512 offsets by default. (which leads to throttling and instability at stock settings) But this problem is easily solved by setting them manually.
Click to expand...

What do you mean Gigabyte decided to disable the AVX/AVX512 offsets by default? do other motherboards have it on and do you have two settings to enable?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I can assure you that you don't want to make a habit of trusting those readings. They can be way off especially when switching from manual to adaptive on Asus boards.


I actually haven't had any issues with this in the past (Haswell, Haswell-E). Is it wrong because it's slow to update? Or it is wrong because it's calculating it wrong?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What do you mean Gigabyte decided to disable the AVX/AVX512 offsets by default? do other motherboards have it on and do you have two settings to enable?


See: http://www.overclock.net/t/1633978/gigabyte-x299-overclocking-thread/40#post_26217981

The auto settings on the Gigabyte boards apply zero offset for both AVX and AVX512 in most cases. Because of this, it tries to run AVX512 at 4.0 GHz all cores - which either pulls 300W, throttles, or hard-shutdowns depending on which limits you've lifted (if any).


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What do you mean Gigabyte decided to disable the AVX/AVX512 offsets by default? do other motherboards have it on and do you have two settings to enable?


On a Gigabyte board, if you set Multi Core Enhancement which boosts all core to 4.5 GHz, there will be no AVX or AVX-512 offset at all unless you manually set it.

The funny thing is that if you manually adjust your CPU multipliers at all, you can't turn AVX or AVX-512 off completely. The best you can do is reduce the offset to 1 which eauals and 100 MHz offset.

They got that backwards if you ask me.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> On a Gigabyte board, if you set Multi Core Enhancement which boosts all core to 4.5 GHz, there will be no AVX or AVX-512 offset at all unless you manually set it.
> 
> The funny thing is that if you manually adjust your CPU multipliers at all, you can't turn AVX or AVX-512 off completely. The best you can do is reduce the offset to 1 which eauals and 100 MHz offset.
> 
> They got that backwards if you ask me.


I cringe at the thought of AVX512 @ 4.5 GHz on all cores. I wouldn't be surprised if it's gonna need DICE or LN2.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I actually haven't had any issues with this in the past (Haswell, Haswell-E). Is it wrong because it's slow to update? Or it is wrong because it's calculating it wrong?
> See: http://www.overclock.net/t/1633978/gigabyte-x299-overclocking-thread/40#post_26217981


http://www.overclock.net/t/1632870/skylake-x-kaby-lake-x-combined-discussion/500_100#post_26208200

Check out my post about it a few pages back. While I was drawing high 500s and low 600s from the wall during some Prime95 and LinX testing, reported power at the package in HWinfo64 was approximately 350 to 400w peaks. I doubt that my water pumps, fans and the rest of the system consumed 200 to 250w under those loads.

I can't tell you why it's wrong, but it has never been something I've trusted through many platforms now to included HWE and z270. Best guess is that its a rough approximation at best, but at times it can be completely inaccurate. As I mentioned previously, if you change from manual to adaptive on Asus boards, even with the exact some voltage observed under load, the power draw reported by HWinfo64 will differ dramatically between the two setting. This while power at the wall remains the same.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I cringe at the thought of AVX512 @ 4.5 GHz on all cores. I wouldn't be surprised if it's gonna need DICE or LN2.


Agreed. Even at 4 GHz with the 7900X, I hit 617w at the wall running LinX. I ended up dropping it to 3.5 GHz just to finish the testing I was doing.


----------



## wingman99

I don't wan't AVX offset because chrome uses AVX. What is the point of programmers using AVX in programs then detuning CPU clock speed to slow down the program?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't wan't AVX offset because chrome uses AVX. What is the point of programmers using AVX in programs then detuning CPU clock speed to slow down the program?


I don't use offset either, which is why I didn't like Gigabyte's AVX offset rules for x299. By default there is no offset, but when manually overclocking, you can't get rid if it 100%. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

I've since returned the board and I'm waiting on the Apex to release. It's a shame because if it weren't for the BIOS design and the AVX stuff, I found their board to be extremely high quality. I literally like everything about it, but the BIOS layout.


----------



## done12many2

double


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't wan't AVX offset because chrome uses AVX. What is the point of programmers using AVX in programs then detuning CPU clock speed to slow down the program?


The speedup you get from AVX is supposed to be much larger than what you lose from the offset. (In the ideal case, 2x speedup for using AVX at the cost of only ~5% loss in clock speed.)

And where I work, this does complicate things for us. If you want to use AVX, either you use it enough to offset the drop, or you don't use it at all.

The problem is that current compilers suck at vectorizing code (have always sucked, and will continue to suck in the near future). So if the compiler vectorizes only a tiny thing that brings negligible speedup, it will impact the performance for the rest of the program. Unfortunately, these heuristics were implemented before the AVX offset became a thing.

So most high-quality AVX/AVX512 code is done manually.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I've since returned the board and I'm waiting on the Apex to release. It's a shame because if it weren't for the BIOS design and the AVX stuff, I found their board to be extremely high quality. I literally like everything about it, but the BIOS layout.


Any specific reason you are going for the Apex instead of the Rampage Extreme? Afaik the Apex is a stripped down mobo made specifically for overclocking on LN2, while the Rampage Extreme has more features. Both have revised VRM heatsinks.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't wan't AVX offset because chrome uses AVX. What is the point of programmers using AVX in programs then detuning CPU clock speed to slow down the program?
> 
> 
> 
> The speedup you get from AVX is supposed to be much larger than what you lose from the offset. (In the ideal case, 2x speedup for using AVX at the cost of only ~5% loss in clock speed.)
> 
> And where I work, this does complicate things for us. If you want to use AVX, either you use it enough to offset the drop, or you don't use it at all.
> 
> The problem is that current compilers suck at vectorizing code (have always sucked, and will continue to suck in the near future). So if the compiler vectorizes only a tiny thing that brings negligible speedup, it will impact the performance for the rest of the program. Unfortunately, these heuristics were implemented before the AVX offset became a thing.
> 
> So most high-quality AVX/AVX512 code is done manually.
Click to expand...

Isn't it physics, the same amount of work being done at the same time creates the same amount of heat with processor?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Any specific reason you are going for the Apex instead of the Rampage Extreme? Afaik the Apex is a stripped down mobo made specifically for overclocking on LN2, while the Rampage Extreme has more features. Both have revised VRM heatsinks.


The Apex isn't just for LN2 and other cold cooling. The Apex specifically uses 4 memory DIMM slots for better trace routing. This will yield better memory OC results. It also has 2 x DIMM2 slots for use with 2 x NVMe M.2 SSDs per DIMM2 slot. 2 will route to the CPU while the other 2 are routed to the chipset. PCIe slot and memory DIMM on/off switches and a great deal more manual type stuff that I want.

I know for sure that I won't use 8 DIMM slots so the memory stuff is what I like best about the Apex. The rest is just icing on the cake to include it's stripped down look.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Isn't it physics, the same amount of work being done at the same time creates the same amount of heat with processor?


Not quite. The total amount of "useful" work may be the same, but the amount of overhead isn't.

For each instruction that gets executed, it needs to be: (a dumbed down version)

Loaded from memory.
Decoded.
Dependencies resolved.
Issued to an execution unit
Executed.
Output written back to desired locations.
Retired.
This is a lot of overhead and usually takes up much more power than execution of the instruction itself.

AVX lets you double the amount of "useful work" you do for each instruction. AVX512 doubles that again.

A suitable analogy is why do shipping companies ship packages in large trucks across the country instead of using lots of smaller (and faster) cars? While a truck is slower, it gets a lot more work done and is more fuel efficient.

Taking the analogy even further, a GPU is like a freight train. Extremely efficient at moving large volumes of stuff. But it can only go where there are tracks and is therefore not suitable for getting everywhere.

Getting back to the overclocking side of things. There is another benefit. Power consumption is proportional to (frequency * voltage^2).

Being able to get more work done at a lower frequency lets you drop the voltage which has quadratic gains on power consumption.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Isn't it physics, the same amount of work being done at the same time creates the same amount of heat with processor?
> 
> 
> 
> Not quite. The total amount of "useful" work may be the same, but the amount of overhead isn't.
> 
> For each instruction that gets executed, it needs to be: (a dumbed down version)
> 
> Loaded from memory.
> Decoded.
> Dependencies resolved.
> Issued to an execution unit
> Executed.
> Output written back to desired locations.
> Retired.
> This is a lot of overhead and usually takes up much more power than execution of the instruction itself.
> 
> AVX lets you double the amount of "useful work" you do for each instruction. AVX512 doubles that again.
> 
> A suitable analogy is why do shipping companies ship packages in large trucks across the country instead of using lots of smaller (and faster) cars? While a truck is slower, it gets a lot more work done and is more fuel efficient.
> 
> Taking the analogy even further, a GPU is like a freight train. Extremely efficient at moving large volumes of stuff. But it can only go where there are tracks and is therefore not suitable for getting everywhere.
> 
> Getting back to the overclocking side of things. There is another benefit. Power consumption is proportional to (frequency * voltage^2).
> 
> Being able to get more work done at a lower frequency lets you drop the voltage which has quadratic gains on power consumption.
Click to expand...

Your analogy of the truck is good. However I think of the highway as the processor clock speed and when that is slowed from 4.5GHz to 4.0GHz with AVX offset the useful work decreases for what you gain 256 bit AVX with 64bit execution.


----------



## tistou77

I thought I saw the max Cache possible was at 3.1, 3.2ghz
But I saw a screen at 3.9ghz (7900X and EVGA Micro)


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> The Apex isn't just for LN2 and other cold cooling. The Apex specifically uses 4 memory DIMM slots for better trace routing. This will yield better memory OC results. It also has 2 x DIMM2 slots for use with 2 x NVMe M.2 SSDs per DIMM2 slot. 2 will route to the CPU while the other 2 are routed to the chipset. PCIe slot and memory DIMM on/off switches and a great deal more manual type stuff that I want.
> 
> I know for sure that I won't use 8 DIMM slots so the memory stuff is what I like best about the Apex. The rest is just icing on the cake to include it's stripped down look.


Thanks for explaining, and yeah that makes sense if you are not going to use the extra memory


----------



## Rammler

Mainboard prices are rediculous at the moment. The Rampage 5 extreme was buyable for 350 euro in europe. That was the Price for absolute high end x99 board. Thats just one generation before x299. Now 350 euro is the price for Newcomer boards like strix.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> Mainboard prices are rediculous at the moment. The Rampage 5 extreme was buyable for 350 euro in europe. That was the Price for absolute high end x99 board. Thats just one generation before x299. Now 350 euro is the price for Newcomer boards like strix.


It's the early adopter tax imho. Wait it out till both TR and the x299 lineup are -relatively- bug free if you have a x99 system already. Then you can choose whatever suits your needs at cheaper prices


----------



## pantsaregood

Does anyone know if there's an ETA on the ASRock X299 OC Formula? Looks like it may be decent for overclocking. I'd go with the Rampage Extreme or Apex, but I can't fit either in my case without cutting my case up.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> The Apex isn't just for LN2 and other cold cooling. The Apex specifically uses 4 memory DIMM slots for better trace routing. This will yield better memory OC results. It also has 2 x DIMM2 slots for use with 2 x NVMe M.2 SSDs per DIMM2 slot. 2 will route to the CPU while the other 2 are routed to the chipset. PCIe slot and memory DIMM on/off switches and a great deal more manual type stuff that I want.
> 
> I know for sure that I won't use 8 DIMM slots so the memory stuff is what I like best about the Apex. The rest is just icing on the cake to include it's stripped down look.


For me Apex is beautiful. I used to like msi looks but this time it looks pathetic, a hedt board instead of decent heatsinks now have lgb plastic covered heatsinks it's a joke.

Apex looks awesome. I don't know prices on us, but it's bizarre prices I'm Brazil made Apex z270 almost same price as asrock top offers.

I still want slx, will not get it unless tr is superior.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EarlyAdopter*
> 
> It's almost as if all the reviewers are intentionally holding back from using the launch boards with adequate VRM cooling, the Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 7 and 9, to make this a story about Intel when it's really a story about poor motherboard designs.
> 
> I've overclocked my 7820x on a Gigabyte Aorus 9 motherboard to 4.6Ghz on all 8 cores, boosting to 4.8Ghz on 2 core loads, on only 1.20V. Cinebench draws 215W at the package and benches out at 2009. Prime95 small FFT with AVX pulls 260W at the package. My VRMs max out at 70C.
> 
> This is a big ado about nothing. Just buy a motherboard with decent VRM heat sinks if you're going to overclock.


There is reasons for this.
On your setup you will not find overheat, but use a 10 cores + 4.6ghz avx prime you end up overheating.

The real issue is how Mobo manufacturing is catering solo to the gaming crowd with rgbs and transformer mancjildren like. We used to have nice vrms and heatsinks not a while ago.

Even my z170 asrock have dual heatsink and heatpipe. I hate this basic x99 design copied over to x299 with only a block of aluminum over vrms and some bizarre plastic coverings.


----------



## postem

It's not a bad product, by far, CPU can manage incredible high frequencies, 8 cores performance is on par with 6950 in several scenarios.
What botter me on this release is lack of solder and the l2/l3 rearranged. It might prove better on future but I don't know if they just increased l2 but making l3 slower and smaller.
Right now some loads can be slower on slx than on broadwell due to this.


----------



## TahoeDust

Mine runs 4.7GHz at 1.24v all day everyday. I am using a 280mm AIO cooler. In stress tests temps hit mid 80s and VRM his mid 70s. Gaming hours on ends temps don't get out of the 50s.
I am booting from two m.2 drives in raid 0 without any kind of special intel "Key". All the "Sky is falling" sensationalized articles are just that in my first hand experience. Yes it is expensive and yes it is power hungry. If someone is ok with that, the performance is pretty stunning.

I wish I could compare my performance to a 7700k in gaming, but I don't have one. I can tell you that the benchmarks I can run show that it would be a good comparison. With a good set of RAM and the Mesh running 3200Mhz the AIDA bench is very close to the 7700k, even in L3 Cache latency. Clock for clock single core Cinebench is equal or better than the 7700k.





Voltage in CPU-z is not reported correctly. Actual voltage is 1.244v.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> What is the mess? Mine runs 4.7GHz at 1.24v all day everyday. I am using a 280mm AIO cooler. In stress tests temps hit mid 80s and VRM his mid 70s. Gaming hours on ends temps don't get out of the 50s.
> I am booting from two m.2 drives in raid 0 without any kind of special intel "Key". All the "Sky is falling" sensationalized articles are just that in my first hand experience. Yes it is expensive and yes it is power hungry. If someone is ok with that, the performance is pretty stunning.
> 
> I wish I could compare my performance to a 7700k in gaming, but I don't have one. I can tell you that the benchmarks I can run show that it would be a good comparison. With a good set of RAM and the Mesh running 3200Mhz the AIDA bench is very close to the 7700k, even in L3 Cache latency. Clock for clock single core Cinebench is equal or Voltage in CPU-z is not reported correctly. Actual voltage is 1.244v.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Very nice scores! can't wait until the 12 to 18 core CPU are available with the Asus Apex and EVGA Darks boards.


----------



## Rammler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> What is the mess? Mine runs 4.7GHz at 1.24v all day everyday. I am using a 280mm AIO cooler. In stress tests temps hit mid 80s and VRM his mid 70s. Gaming hours on ends temps don't get out of the 50s.
> I am booting from two m.2 drives in raid 0 without any kind of special intel "Key". All the "Sky is falling" sensationalized articles are just that in my first hand experience. Yes it is expensive and yes it is power hungry. If someone is ok with that, the performance is pretty stunning.
> 
> I wish I could compare my performance to a 7700k in gaming, but I don't have one. I can tell you that the benchmarks I can run show that it would be a good comparison. With a good set of RAM and the Mesh running 3200Mhz the AIDA bench is very close to the 7700k, even in L3 Cache latency. Clock for clock single core Cinebench is equal or better than the 7700k.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Voltage in CPU-z is not reported correctly. Actual voltage is 1.244v.


i think in games the 7900x is pretty bad. according to some benchmarks on youtube and forums the 7700k wins there nearly every time with a huge gap. but the main purpose of the 7900x is not gaming though.
i wait for the time when intel relaeses quad channel memory and 32 lanes for sli in midrange platform.....


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> i think in games the 7900x is pretty bad. according to some benchmarks on youtube and forums the 7700k wins there nearly every time with a huge gap. but the main purpose of the 7900x is not gaming though.
> i wait for the time when intel relaeses quad channel memory and 32 lanes for sli in midrange platform.....


Yeah you have to add in something in the background like streaming for these higher core count cpu's to start showing their worth "in games". I tested my 7820x using steam broadcast while gaming and watching the stream on my backup rig. The game played smoothly @ 60fps while having no problems streaming in high quality 1080p. Was pretty sweet.


----------



## elelunicy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> i think in games the 7900x is pretty bad. according to some benchmarks on youtube and forums the 7700k wins there nearly every time with a huge gap. but the main purpose of the 7900x is not gaming though.
> i wait for the time when intel relaeses quad channel memory and 32 lanes for sli in midrange platform.....


The low performance in some games is mostly caused by the new mesh design, which can be remedied by overclocking the mesh and pairing with fast RAM. It's not a "mess" due to platform immaturity or bios issues; it's just how those chips are inherently designed.

Not to mention not every game is sensitive to the increased latency. Computerbase.de tested 8 games and on average the 7900x actually beats the 7700k in 99th framerates (and they tested with the mesh at stock frequency).


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elelunicy*
> 
> The low performance in some games is mostly caused by the new mesh design, which can be remedied by overclocking the mesh and pairing with fast RAM.


Exactly. That's why I wish I had a 7700k to compare my 7820x to. With the RAM and mesh setting I am running, I bet it would be a pretty different outcome than what most charts are showing.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> With a good set of RAM and the Mesh running 3200Mhz the AIDA bench is very close to the 7700k, even in L3 Cache latency.


That is not true, the 7700k has L3 latency between 9-11ns at worst. Not to mention the L3 performance is better across the board, and I think that's the main differentiation between the two and why Kaby Lake performs better in games, they seem to prefer L3 better than L2 cache for whatever reason. But you don't buy HEDT just for games anyway.


----------



## CrazyElf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EarlyAdopter*
> 
> You do not recall correctly. Der8aur began this with a Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 3 (and an Asus Prime Deluxe), which only have a single VRM heatsink. The Gigabyte 7 and 9 have dual heatpipe connected VRM heatsinks.
> 
> I'm water cooling with no direct airflow on the VRM heatsinks on my Gaming 9 and having no issues with heat there at all.
> 
> The 10 core parts draw only ~20W more, so maybe 280W, 300W if you push the core voltage. Reality is you should expect slightly lower overclocks with more cores anyhow, so 4.5Ghz on 10 core loads as opposed to 4.6Ghz on 8 core loads, which will also keep the power draw capped. I'd expect the larger core counts to scale down accordingly.
> 
> The nice thing is with Turbo Boost 3.0 you can set multipliers based on the number of cores loaded, so even a 16 core, which realisticly might only do 4.2Ghz on all cores loaded, could still boost to 4.8Ghz on lightly threaded apps.
> 
> What we are seeing is a bunch of launch motherboards that have a VRM cooling design that can't handle Skylake-X overclocked power loads, which range from 260-300W, and two that can. Again, the frustrating thing is _all_ of the reviews have used the boards that can't.


I think that the 18 core will likely see a penalty.

Is that 20W more overall or 20W more clock for clock though? I would expect a relatively linear scale with clocks. If so, the 18 core will be drawing 80% more current or so at any given clock.

It's also a larger die. Take for example Haswell:


4790k could typically go between 4.7 too 4.9 GHz, with a few golden chips at 5.0 GHz
5960X was 300 MHz less at 4.4 to 4.6 GHz, and a few golden chips could go to 4.7 GHz (4% according to Silicon Lottery)
SO I'd imagine that the larger MCC dies would go anoher 300 MHz less.
That's REalbench stable too - so total stability would mean few hundred MHz less across the board.

So the 18 core might run 300 MHz less.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - same here. basically, after sandy 4 cores, p95 became meaningless.. or worse, misleading.
> good board, but gigabyte bios?


Depends on if you want total stability.

For gaming, it's fine to use RealBench. For work that is error sensitive, Linpack with Intel Math Library is a must (can be with something like OCCT, LinX, etc), along with 2 other tests, a test of the Uncore (often Prime95 Large FFTs), and then a test of the Uncore (HCI Memtest or perhaps several hours of StressAppTest). I personally would not feel comfortable with RealBench for work.

For real work, if there is any crash in OCCT, then I'm afraid your overclock is not 100% stable. There's nothing misleading about it. A stress test is exactly that - it's designed to stress a CPU to the limit to find out of it can take it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blameless*
> 
> 100% stability is something that is impossible to prove.
> This is flatly false.
> 
> *Because it does something once, or for a few dozen hours, does not even begin to suggest it will be capable of the same act each and every time it's called on, for as long as it's called on to do it. Test something for a short period then putting it into use at the test settings is practically begging for issues.
> *If you have an engine that is not safe to run for an hour at 5500 rpm, it's probably a gamble to run for protracted periods at 5000rpm. If you never tested it above 5000rpm you'd never have good reason to suspect it was safe for 5000rpm unless you did nothing but test it for the bulk of it's life.
> 
> Parts are tested well beyond their ratings for their ratings to be determined.
> 
> You do not proof artillery with standard propellant loads, you fire a 125-150% load a few times, inspect it for damage, then, provided you find none, consider it safe for 100% loads. To do less means you are murdering gun crews when one of your artillery pieces explodes during normal use.
> 
> You do not sell rope rated for 500 pounds if even 1 in 100 samples failed at 500 pounds test. Maybe if only one failed at 700 pounds you'd call it a 500 pound rope.
> 
> The main point of all of this is that if you test beyond normal use, you can be more sure of reliable normal use, with acceptably short periods of testing.


A stress test is not meant to be realistic. It's meant to push something to its limits. I mean for games, if you BSOD it is annoying to go to the last save (ok multiplayer would be worse I guess), but for work ... that could cost a lot of time and money.

I mean failing a stress test doesn't mean your, say, encoding will fail, but it does mean that the most stressful applications can crash your OC.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> it's less the total power rating, which would if exceeded just OCP, it the +12V line count on the EPS connectors and the amps on that rail. I recall JG complaining that de8auer used the wrong PSU.
> edit: found it
> may only be an issue with "colorful" PSus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ya never know.. you might really like the G9. It should be very good board.
> yeah - never mind the menu structure, I don't understand why these companies can;t even use the same nomenclature for the same settings.
> A couple of big GPUs, and a core count >8 all of a sudden 1200W is cutting it close. I tend to want to operate PSUs at less than 80% of rated output. Hey, when I was running 3 overclocked and waaay overvolted 780Ti Kingpins, I had a 1200 and a 1500 running the rig.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> anyway - I'm gonna keep trying to hold off for the 18 core.


An interesting question will be how far the 18 core can go. It may be quite a bit more than the 300W actually.

If you check out Intel's datasheet:
https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/6th-gen-x-series-datasheet-vol-1.pdf

pmax (Package Max) on page 49 is 297W. It cannot sustain it for very long before throttling.

A 4.8 GHz 7900X @ 1.4V is already pushing against this limit and causing shutdowns. As it exceeds the 297W limit, it throttles down. Note the cyan line that tracks the VCCIN voltage: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/-intel-skylake-x-overclocking-thermal-issues,5117-4.html and http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-7900x-skylake-x,5092-10.html

 

IF the package is not increased for the 18 core past the 297W limit, then it will be limited too. It might be as low as 4.2 GHz and probably less with AVX intensive work.

That's going to be a limit even if you delid ... and risk a $2000 USD CPU.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elelunicy*
> 
> The low performance in some games is mostly caused by the new mesh design, which can be remedied by overclocking the mesh and pairing with fast RAM. It's not a "mess" due to platform immaturity or bios issues; it's just how those chips are inherently designed.
> 
> Not to mention not every game is sensitive to the increased latency. Computerbase.de tested 8 games and on average the 7900x actually beats the 7700k in 99th framerates (and they tested with the mesh at stock frequency).
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Agree the mesh is slower: https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-10-core-Skylake-X-Processor-Review/Thread-Thread-Latency-and-



To be honest, it may have better to stick with the "ring" design for the LCC design and then only use the new mesh for the high end design.

Note AMD - inside the CCX is very fast, but outside is slow. Off die for Threadripper and Epyc is likely worse. Off socket of course will be even worse.

Overclocking the mesh is useful for sure. It's likely on AMD - it's not the faster RAM, but rather the faster Infinity Fabric speeds that causes the extra performance. There's a problem though:

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CuewarsTaner*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> *Hi guys. I am here to share my system and explain some simple setup and settings.*
> 
> We are not going to discuss the temperature and power consumption here. We only talk about the best-stable performance it can bring for overclocking.
> 
> *Memory Controller :*
> 
> I am sure that X299 is better than X99 in memory controller part. For most X299 boards, we are able to reach quad-channel 3600+ frequency and even overclock the memory speed beyond the XMP suggested frequency if the memory chips are like Samsung B-DIE.
> 
> For my build 7900X + AORUS Gaming7 + G.Skill F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR. I am able to run my memory @3733MHz with 16-16-16-36-1T timing, which is 133MHz higher than the suggested XMP frequency.
> 
> 
> 
> *CPU Mesh/LLC(Uncore) Clock:*
> One thing we need know is the importance of Mesh Clock. Mesh clock is like another core frequency(clock). It controls the performance of Uncore parts like Cache, Latency and Memory Stability. For my board, the stock Mesh Frequency is 2.4GHz, which is not bad. I figured out that 3.2GHz is the highest clock speed we can reach without very aggressive overclocking setup(someone may be lucky to get 3.3GHz).
> Bringing the Mesh Clock to 3.2GHz may cause lower stability compared to 2.4GHz-3.0GHz. If you want to run your 7900X or 7820X for a long term, it's better to set it under or equal to 3.0GHz. For those overclock lovers, 3.1GHz is a very good suggestion for Mesh Clock. Personally I don't recommend running it @3.2GHz for 24/7 use.
> Keep in mind that increasing Mesh Clock will also increase power consumption and temperature. Pick a Mesh Clock you like after testing!
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> *CPU Core Frequency:*
> As you know, it is a disaster. I don't want to talk about it anymore. Pick the best frequency of your specific processor. Don't bring it to 10 cores aggressive frequency if you don't delid your CPU.
> (Set per core limit may help you get something like [email protected] and [email protected] This is good for gaming since some games only love two cores).
> Edited by CuewarsTaner - Today at 1:19 am


Mesh overclocking will also increase power consumption and temps - already a limit, so OCing the mesh may mean a bit less headroom for the cores themselves.

One thing I don't see is a "vMesh" kind of like Ring Voltage in Haswell.

Here's what's on the X299 Gigbayte Gaming 9 (https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjW9tnkh4zVAhVqyoMKHenvAn0QFggnMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdownload.gigabyte.asia%2FFileList%2FManual%2Fmb_manual_ga-x299-aorus-gaming-9_e.pdf&usg=AFQjCNH_ZIedOcHL5QngbqGUVvqKmTstqw): CPU Vcore/CPU VCCSA/CPU VCCIO/DRAM Channel A/B Voltage/DRAM Channel C/D Voltage (Note)/DDRVpp A/B/DDRVpp C/D (Note)/+3.3V/+5V/PCH Core/+12V

Edit: Just checked MSI X299 XPower too - they call Mesh, the RIng Ratio still, but no voltage:
https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/support/X299-XPOWER-GAMING-AC.html#down-manual

That may limit the mesh overclocks as well. There is also nothing like the "OC socket" on X99 that allowed more aggressive Uncore OCs.

OT, but in AMD, I would like to be able to overclock the Fabric independently of RAM.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> Now, I know this is *overclock*.net, but I would like to take a moment to put forth my complaints regarding how hard it is to get X299 boards to run at stock. On my ASUS PRIME X299-A, I had to make the following changes in BIOS to get the system running at Intel's actual specifications.
> 
> 
> ASUS Multicore Enhancement: Default -> Disabled (4.5 GHz out-of-box OC...)
> CPU Core Ratio: By Core Usage -> Auto (enable power limits)
> CPU SVID Support: Auto -> Enabled (really enable power limits...)
> In addition, using the XMP tuner causes the BIOS to ignore the SVID setting and always disable the power readout. To work around this, I had to manually enter my DRAM timings. It is ridiculous that the user should have to change multiple BIOS settings to get a "stock" system to actually run according to the official specifications.
> 
> Perhaps some of you are wondering why anyone would ever want the system power consumption to be limited (insert "fake TDP" comments here). Since the original Turbo Boost processor, it has been the case that only the base frequency is guaranteed to fall within Intel's quoted TDP. For client processors, not even this is guaranteed in AVX (or AVX-512) loads. Instead, it is the *normal operation* of Intel CPUs to control TDP by modulating frequency. If you ever run Intel XTU on a laptop, you will see this happening as the turbo frequency is adjusted according to the load.
> 
> At this point, I am sure many of you are ready to quip some witty remark about HEDT being "high end," and question why I would care about power consumption on a desktop system. For illustration, let us consider some workloads that could be run at "stock" frequencies, absent any power limits. It was incorrectly claimed in this thread that the stock AVX/AVX-512 offsets are 3 and 5; they are actually 4 and 7 (3.6 GHz in AVX, no turbo in AVX-512). At these max turbo frequencies and with DDR4-3200 DRAM, Prime95 8K FFT was able to consume 175 W at the package (self-reported), and Intel MKL Benchmark was able to draw *200 W*. The obvious implication is that a user with a 140 W cooling solution, e.g. a LGA-2011/2066 tower cooler, would run into instant thermal throttling at a "stock" configuration.
> 
> On the other hand, if you think about all those reviews out there claiming the 7900X draws over 300 W in "stock" and put two and two together...


You're not the only one. I share the same thoughts. Yes, these are overclockable boards, but they should by default run at stock until the user says to overclock.

The offsets of 3 and 5 for AVX/AVX512 originally came from Silicon Lottery. And he admitted in an email to me that he wasn't entirely sure if those are the correct offsets. But the point isn't the value of the offsets themselves, but rather the fact that they are being set to zero by default.


----------



## Chargeit

I'm trying to take my cpu to 46. Sadly didn't do it at the 1.184 w/adaptive 45 did. I'm testing out 1.2v. I'm about 20 min in. I kind of wish I had set my H115i to a higher fan profile because I've already reached 86c at one point and 79c on the VRM.

Man, even going to buy a delidding tool or send this puppy in cause damned if it can't get hot.

Got a little over an hour. Max temp 86c (ran lower but I guess the fan had to kick in better) and 80c on vrm. Much more and I'd need some kind of direct cooling for the vrm. Not really a surprise since the boards vrm have plastic over it. Time to optimize then test the rig and see if it's stable.

one thing like like is there's only a 10c difference between my hottest "86c" and coolest core "76c" max temp. Used the stock thermal paste that came with the H115i meaning good coverage.

*Things x299 owners say, "86c isn't too bad".


----------



## BroPhilip

What board are you using?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'm trying to take my cpu to 46. Sadly didn't do it at the 1.184 w/adaptive 45 did. I'm testing out 1.2v. I'm about 20 min in. I kind of wish I had set my H115i to a higher fan profile because I've already reached 86c at one point and 79c on the VRM.
> 
> Man, even going to buy a delidding tool or send this puppy in cause damned if it can't get hot.
> 
> Got a little over an hour. Max temp 86c (ran lower but I guess the fan had to kick in better) and 80c on vrm. Much more and I'd need some kind of direct cooling for the vrm. Not really a surprise since the boards vrm have plastic over it. Time to optimize then test the rig and see if it's stable.
> 
> one thing like like is there's only a 10c difference between my hottest "86c" and coolest core "76c" max temp. Used the stock thermal paste that came with the H115i meaning good coverage.
> 
> *Things x299 owners say, "86c isn't too bad".


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> What board are you using?


TUF Mark 1. Damned plastic on the VRM.


----------



## Artah

Can someone upload a pic of a real bench test using the latest? I wanted to compare notes. This is what I got at 4.9GHz 1.291v thanks.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> TUF Mark 1. Damned plastic on the VRM.


Told you VRM fan, the APEX includes one now








I'll show you when I get my stuff in how it can look....


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Told you VRM fan, the APEX includes one now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll show you when I get my stuff in how it can look....


It isn't a problem during normal use. Just when stress testing it gets hot. Though not hot enough to throttle so not a huge deal with current settings.

Got my system set up for 46 @ 1.201 w/adaptive atm. Might target a slightly higher voltage to help insure stability.


----------



## OneCosmic

What is the default voltage for uncore/cache on skylake-X? Also what voltage do you guys use to get uncore/cache to 3GHz? Seems like my 7800X is a pretty good overclocker, i am running 4.8GHz 1.2V stable, didn't try more yet.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## OneCosmic

What kind of error do you usually get with too high uncore frequency or too low uncore voltage?


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## djgar

Use the Aida stress test in cache only mode - two hours and you're cache stable.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> What is the mess? Mine runs 4.7GHz at 1.24v all day everyday. I am using a 280mm AIO cooler. In stress tests temps hit mid 80s and VRM his mid 70s. Gaming hours on ends temps don't get out of the 50s.
> I am booting from two m.2 drives in raid 0 without any kind of special intel "Key". All the "Sky is falling" sensationalized articles are just that in my first hand experience. Yes it is expensive and yes it is power hungry. If someone is ok with that, the performance is pretty stunning.
> 
> I wish I could compare my performance to a 7700k in gaming, but I don't have one. I can tell you that the benchmarks I can run show that it would be a good comparison. With a good set of RAM and the Mesh running 3200Mhz the AIDA bench is very close to the 7700k, even in L3 Cache latency. Clock for clock single core Cinebench is equal or better than the 7700k.
> 
> Voltage in CPU-z is not reported correctly. Actual voltage is 1.244v.


Nice to see that, this is one im probably getting. What are your Mobo and you delided or you are just using it regular?
About mesh overclock, there is any issue about? I mean, it probably add to heat, but its good and stable once you set it? 3200 is the recommended set, or beyond that it becomes unstable or useless?
Also what times and frequency your RAM? From my previous experiences with intel HEDT, frequencies will not be the most important, since you have already a lot of bandwidth on 4 channels but timings are a decisive factor to reduce latency.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> i think in games the 7900x is pretty bad. according to some benchmarks on youtube and forums the 7700k wins there nearly every time with a huge gap. but the main purpose of the 7900x is not gaming though.
> i wait for the time when intel relaeses quad channel memory and 32 lanes for sli in midrange platform.....


Intel probably isnt going to release a mainstream with 32 PCIe. When PCI4 is released, it will double troughput, but it actually dont matter, check the numbers on puget system review due 16/16 and 8/8.
Im currently with 2x 1080s and its working very well on 8/8, it cant saturate the bus enough.

Regarding gaming, several reviews found that p states were the responsible for the majority of gaming issues. So if you already overclock, it shouldnt pose much of an issue. Some minor problems related to the mesh and l3.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah you have to add in something in the background like streaming for these higher core count cpu's to start showing their worth "in games". I tested my 7820x using steam broadcast while gaming and watching the stream on my backup rig. The game played smoothly @ 60fps while having no problems streaming in high quality 1080p. Was pretty sweet.


Some games already demand +4 cores to get top performance. As more and more people push towards 144+hz, you need beefier CPUs to handle higher hz on displays. BF1 is a good example, you will be able to sustain 144hz in multiplayer with a 4+ cores cpus. Also think about higher lower frames, less stutter.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> Rants aside, I have some observations regarding the memory and cache performance of Skylake-X.
> 
> I have two sets of G.SKILL Ripjaws V 2x16 GB kits. With the default XMP timings and uncore frequency, AIDA64 reported 76.2 ns memory latency, similar to many reviews. With the uncore overclocked to 3 GHz (+50 mV), the latency was 71.6 ns. However, when I improved the timings to 15-16-16-34 CR1, the memory latency dropped to 64 ns. This should not be possible, since the memory timings were only improved by ~6%, yet the memory latency, not all of which is attributable to CAS latency, decreased by 10%. I also relaxed my timings to JEDEC DDR4-2666 (CL19, 19-19-19), yet the latency only increased to 80 ns. In other words, increasing DRAM latency by 26% increased system latency by 5%, yet decreasing DRAM latency by 6% decreased system latency by 10%.
> 
> Normally, I would think something was wrong with my setup, but I see many posters here showing off AIDA64 memory latencies under 60 ns (as low as 54 ns). For those here with fast DRAM, *can you post how AIDA64 responds as you adjust timings* from stock/JEDEC to your OC timings?
> 
> On the subject of bandwidth, I was shocked when the reviews came out showing L3 bandwidth in the low 100 GB/s range. Considering that Skylake-SP's 6x DDR4-2666 can deliver over 100 GB/s of bandwidth, it would be quite surprising for the L3 to be slower than main memory. In order to evaluate this, I wrote a simple application (link provided) to study L3 bandwidth under various access patterns. The most significant finding was that L3 bandwidth when each core is accessing a different buffer is much lower than the bandwidth when each core is accessing a common buffer.
> 
> Results with stock 2.4 GHz uncore:
> 
> Main memory (AIDA64): 82 GB/s
> Non-shared read:
> 200 GB/s @ 1.25 MB/core
> 125 GB/s @ 2 MB/core (1 MB L2 + 1 MB L3)
> 
> Shared read:
> 236 GB/s @ 5 MB buffer
> 156 GB/s @ 12 MB buffer
> 
> It could be that the non-inclusive cache architecture of Skylake-X/SP is susceptible to some kind of conflict in certain access patterns. Anyone curious can download the testing program below (warning: AVX) and post their results. It is open-source in case of concerns about viruses.
> 
> Memory bandwidth tester: https://www.sendspace.com/file/xk0ass (source code)
> Usage: membench86 --sharing [PRIVATE,SHARED,OVERLAPPED] --buffer-size [size in kB] --avx


This looks interesting.
Someone recently from intel is advising coders to treat groups of cores as different NUMA entities, probably due to limitations in mesh. The funny part of it is that it with mesh we go full circle back to the new AMD arch on Zepellin cores / Infitine fabric.
SLX arch is directly related to SLX Xeon. Mesh sound good on paper, but for LCC wouldnt the ring still be a better option?


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> According to the Anandtech article(?), the sub-NUMA clustering mode did not make a big difference in latency (which is expected, mesh scales _O(sqrt(N))_). Compared to the previous generation of die partitioning (cluster-on-die), it is almost superfluous. I think what my test results actually show is the drawback of the non-inclusive (i.e. victim) cache. As lines from the back of the buffer enter L2 from L3, a line from the front of the buffer is evicted to L3, causing some kind of traffic multiplication. In the shared mode, the L2 lines already in L3, since every core is reading the same data.
> 
> As for why the LCC die uses a mesh instead of a ring, it is because Intel only produces one die layout (for XCC), and produces smaller SKUs by cutting it. From Intel's point of view, there is little reason to put special effort into the bottom SKUs, given their low selling prices and volume. Most datacenter customers are going to be buying from the top of stack, since that is what offers the best perf/W and consolidation (particularly DRAM).
> 
> EDIT: Also, the findings I shared actually show the opposite of the behavior on Zen. If you try to read a shared buffer exceeding the size of a Zen CCX's L3, you will get abysmal performance. On the other hand, Intel's L3 works better when you share data...


I didnt get any zen to play with. So far as i read, if you increase memory frequency it should improve due to Infinite fabric being tied to RAM speed. Dont know about EPYC/TR, it seen they are increasing IF speed.

Numbers below, 7700K, cache 42x. 12MB obviously goes into memory then it drop performance. Do you have X99 numbers to compare?


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> Those numbers match what I see on my Haswell E3-1230v3 (just upgraded). On client processors, the access pattern makes no difference in read bandwidth. I do have access to a E5-2600v3 workstation, but unfortunately it does not run Windows.
> 
> P.S. On Zen, increasing the fabric clock will of course raise bandwidth, but it will never achieve local performance.
> 
> Edit: You will not get full bandwidth if the cache is full. Try 1.75 MB private buffer vs. 7 MB shared buffer.


Have you tried same measure on Zen? Just curious.
1,75 private buffer around 160 gb/s, i have another load running on, but small.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> According to the Anandtech article(?), the sub-NUMA clustering mode did not make a big difference in latency (which is expected, mesh scales _O(sqrt(N))_). Compared to the previous generation of die partitioning (cluster-on-die), it is almost superfluous. I think what my test results actually show is the drawback of the non-inclusive (i.e. victim) cache. As lines from the back of the buffer enter L2 from L3, a line from the front of the buffer is evicted to L3, causing some kind of traffic multiplication. In the shared mode, the L2 lines are already in L3, since every core is reading the same data.
> 
> As for why the LCC die uses a mesh instead of a ring, it is because Intel only produces one die layout (for XCC), and produces smaller SKUs by cutting it. From Intel's point of view, there is little reason to put special effort into the bottom SKUs, given their low selling prices and volume. Most datacenter customers are going to be buying from the top of stack, since that is what offers the best perf/W and consolidation (particularly DRAM).


There have been a few hints that, as you suggest, the mesh was gone for the benefit of the higher core count SKUs and/or even beyond that. Basically consolidating with Phi architecture to scale out to 100's and 1000's of cores.

So, its a "win" architecturally if it performs roughly on par with the ring at the < 16 core level.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

I was thinking about the power usage of the 7820x.
Now I just monitored power usage of my [email protected], total system usage running Realbench was 146w without a GPU installed.

(Good old Corsair i PSU's)


I'm curious what the 7820x/GTX1080ti will be like once all my stuff gets here.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Finally ordered a 7820x from SL and ordered a Gaming 7. Pretty excited


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> What is the mess? Mine runs 4.7GHz at 1.24v all day everyday. I am using a 280mm AIO cooler. In stress tests temps hit mid 80s and VRM his mid 70s. Gaming hours on ends temps don't get out of the 50s.
> I am booting from two m.2 drives in raid 0 without any kind of special intel "Key". All the "Sky is falling" sensationalized articles are just that in my first hand experience. Yes it is expensive and yes it is power hungry. If someone is ok with that, the performance is pretty stunning.
> 
> I wish I could compare my performance to a 7700k in gaming, but I don't have one. I can tell you that the benchmarks I can run show that it would be a good comparison. With a good set of RAM and the Mesh running 3200Mhz the AIDA bench is very close to the 7700k, even in L3 Cache latency. Clock for clock single core Cinebench is equal or better than the 7700k.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Voltage in CPU-z is not reported correctly. Actual voltage is 1.244v.


What's new in your CPU?
You are running a 28 lanes CPU with decreased avx capability on a less mature platform. I don't see the improvements over previous generations. Better IPC with worse cache speed is even pointless.

AMD is far superior at this point.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> What's new in your CPU?
> You are running a 28 lanes CPU with decreased avx capability on a less mature platform. I don't see the improvements over previous generations. Better IPC with worse cache speed is even pointless.
> 
> AMD is far superior at this point.


There aren't not any threadripper released at this moment to compare so no we don't know.

Slx is a improvement in several scenarios, and cache structure isn't necessarily bad but changed. All l2 increase is welcome,however the penalty was making l3 non inclusive and smaller.

Ryzen l3 off ccx wasn't that great, but if tr makes l3 on other die even slower or ties 2 memory channels to each die, then it don't look that great.

Amd look solid all around, but when you need certain specific memory or cache loads that will cross ccx and worse, dies, it could be bad if they can't up if speed.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> Slx is a improvement in several scenarios,


can you list those several scenarios please?
it arrives three years later than Haswell-E 5960X, it costs 400€ less but is has nearly pretty identical performance, it has more problems on VRMs,
it isn't as good as Haswell-E for SLI + PCIe SSDs due to lanes limitations.

Three years for this?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I was thinking about the power usage of the 7820x.
> Now I just monitored power usage of my [email protected], total system usage running Realbench was 146w without a GPU installed.
> 
> (Good old Corsair i PSU's)
> 
> 
> I'm curious what the 7820x/GTX1080ti will be like once all my stuff gets here.


I tested my 7820x + 1080 ti power draw at the wall Yesterday.

The 7820x was set to 45 on all cores 1.183v w/adaptive. The 1080 ti is left at stock. Running Realbench stress tests, max system ram it topped out at 460w from the wall after 5 min. I stopped the test here since it was 97f outside and I didn't want to heat my computer room up too much.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> What's new in your CPU?
> You are running a 28 lanes CPU with decreased avx capability on a less mature platform. I don't see the improvements over previous generations. Better IPC with worse cache speed is even pointless.
> 
> AMD is far superior at this point.


Better performance is better.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> can you list those several scenarios please?
> it arrives three years later than Haswell-E 5960X, it costs 400€ less but is has nearly pretty identical performance, it has more problems on VRMs,
> it isn't as good as Haswell-E for SLI + PCIe SSDs due to lanes limitations.
> 
> Three years for this?


If you don't like it, don't buy it









I like it, and I bougt it. 7900x is better than my 6900k when both is overclocked. 7900x stock sux









4800mhz core, 4000 cl15 memory and 3.1ghz "uncore" , and it is fun


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> can you list those several scenarios please?
> it arrives three years later than Haswell-E 5960X, it costs 400€ less but is has nearly pretty identical performance, it has more problems on VRMs,
> it isn't as good as Haswell-E for SLI + PCIe SSDs due to lanes limitations.
> 
> Three years for this?


Certainly we can say intel wasnt pressed to deliver consistent peformance increase until Ryzen. Ryzen really brought 8 cores and 6 cores to the masses so kudos for that.

Rendering, encoding, it seen 7820 is already topping 6950.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11550/the-intel-skylakex-review-core-i9-7900x-i7-7820x-and-i7-7800x-tested/11
http://www.anandtech.com/show/11550/the-intel-skylakex-review-core-i9-7900x-i7-7820x-and-i7-7800x-tested/13

PCIe lanes wise, intel is always forcing to upsell, but is this the real reason to force 7900x if you want full 44 lanes or its due limitation on the way mesh/io is implemented?
Intel didnt explained, so like solder, i believe is to force purchasing of more costly SKUs.

On 44 lanes it should be pretty enough for 2 x 16 + at least 3 pcie NVM. For sli really, it still dont seen to make a difference running x8/x8 vs x16/x16 now, unless you go by extreme resolutions.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

M
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Better performance is better.
> If you don't like it, don't buy it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like it, and I bougt it. 7900x is better than my 6900k when both is overclocked. 7900x stock sux
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4800mhz core, 4000 cl15 memory and 3.1ghz "uncore" , and it is fun


No you are wrong ?

http://digiworthy.com/2017/07/11/intel-skylake-x-gaming-broadwell-e/

And the high temperature in cpu cores and motherboard VRM will cause a very fast degradation in OC ?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> M
> No you are wrong ?
> 
> http://digiworthy.com/2017/07/11/intel-skylake-x-gaming-broadwell-e/
> 
> And the high temperature in cpu cores and motherboard VRM will cause a very fast degradation in OC ?


You assume and believe...







I know, because I have the cpu's


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> M
> No you are wrong ?
> 
> http://digiworthy.com/2017/07/11/intel-skylake-x-gaming-broadwell-e/
> 
> And the high temperature in cpu cores and motherboard VRM will cause a very fast degradation in OC ?


I wouldnt use a 10 core chip for gaming, at least not with the objective of having highest performance possible, knowing majority of titles is frequency bound.

Anyway, if you can keep the cpu on a tolerable level, around 70s i dont think its that bad or it will induce degradation any fast. VRMs on other side, if you keep running it 24/7 at 90-100C will degrade much faster, but taking that info, i bet the majority of users will not be hammering p95 AVX or any high stressful AVXs instructions 24/7


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> M
> No you are wrong ?
> 
> http://digiworthy.com/2017/07/11/intel-skylake-x-gaming-broadwell-e/
> 
> And the high temperature in cpu cores and motherboard VRM will cause a very fast degradation in OC ?


Oh no!!! My computer is burning up!!!


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Oh no!!! My computer is burning up!!!


My 7900x @ 4800mhz was 61c max after 1 houre in BF1 Mp


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Oh no!!! My computer is burning up!!!


Nice it's delided? What frequency?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> My 7900x @ 4800mhz was 61c max after 1 houre in BF1 Mp


Yeah my gaming results have been really low temps. I mean, the thing at 46 runs the same temps as my stock 4790k did. At 45 it runs cooler then my stock 4790k did.

The above picture is just from normal use. No gaming or stress tests. If stress testing it can get pretty hot.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> Nice it's delided? What frequency?


No, not delidded. 45 on all cores right now though I've tested up to 46 and it isn't bad.

That's just normal use. Nothing stressful. Stress testing and it will get hot. Of course.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah my gaming results have been really low temps. I mean, the thing at 46 runs the same temps as my stock 4790k did. At 45 it runs cooler then my stock 4790k did.
> 
> The above picture is just from normal use. No gaming or stress tests. If stress testing it can get pretty hot.


Im still targeting 7820x 4700mhz. Still dont know if i will manage to run it without deliding.
Gaming still is a low load on a 8/10 chip, it will stay a lot underused.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> Im still targeting 7820x 4700mhz. Still dont know if i will manage to run it without deliding.
> Gaming still is a low load on a 8/10 chip, it will stay a lot underused.


Gaming runs very cool. At 45 1.183v w/adaptive I'm running in the 30's and 40's. With it set to 46 1.210v w/adaptive it's running 30's and topping out in the 50's gaming. I mean, it runs cooler then my stock 4790k did in games because it isn't stressed that bad.

If you start really putting work on it it will heat up but for most of us who are going to use the system for general use, gaming, some multitasking it isn't going to run at temps anywhere near what it does stress testing.

Stress testing realbench I topped out at 80c @ 45 1.150v on the core (once the fan kicked up it settled in in the 70's). @46 1.200v it maxed 85c 86c and settled in the 70's. The VRM topped out around 80c stress testing.

While gaming/normal use my vrm top out at 47c. When just doing light usage I'm running 33c on the vrm right now. The VRM on this mobo are not well cooled since it's a TUF Mark 1 with plastic over the vrm.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Gaming runs very cool. At 45 1.183v w/adaptive I'm running in the 30's and 40's. With it set to 46 1.210v w/adaptive it's running 30's and topping out in the 50's gaming. I mean, it runs cooler then my stock 4790k did in games because it isn't stressed that bad.
> 
> If you start really putting work on it it will heat up but for most of us who are going to use the system for general use, gaming, some multitasking it isn't going to run at temps anywhere near what it does stress testing.
> 
> Stress testing realbench I topped out at 80c @ 45 1.150v on the core (once the fan kicked up it settled in in the 70's). @46 1.200v it maxed 85c 86c and settled in the 70's. The VRM topped out around 80c stress testing.
> 
> While gaming/normal use my vrm top out at 47c. When just doing light usage I'm running 33c on the vrm right now. The VRM on this mobo are not well cooled since it's a TUF Mark 1 with plastic over the vrm.


It surprises me adaptive works now as intended. I tried several times with adaptive on Haswell / skylake / kabylake, it never worked as should adaptive on z97 and z170. Everytime i settled for a fixed voltage. Now i need to await the time to retails start to sell on brazil, its like we are on moon things take a lot to come here.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> It surprises me adaptive works now as intended. I tried several times with adaptive on Haswell / skylake / kabylake, it never worked as should adaptive on z97 and z170. Everytime i settled for a fixed voltage. Now i need to await the time to retails start to sell on brazil, its like we are on moon things take a lot to come here.


It can be tricky getting set up correctly. Here, I made notes of my 46 oc last night. I stress tested at 1.2v.

For adaptive I wanted to target around 1.2v with a little extra just to insure voltage didn't go too low and crash under low stress use. These are my offset values and results once in windows.

Offset negative (trying to target around 1.210v or so)

0.000 = 1.273v
0.100 = 1.183v
0.090 = 1.190v
0.080 = 1.191v
0.070 = 1.194v
0.065 = 1.199v
0.063 = 1.201v
0.062 = 1.212v (the value I ended up using)
0.061 = didn't test
0.060 = 1.223v

*Additional Turbo Mode CPU core voltage was set to 1.200v


----------



## Jbravo33

Since board im interested in won't be out for another month or so I went along today and decided to take my 7740x and build a pc for my nephew who wants nothing more in this world than to have a gaming pc. I think he should be good for a very long time. Starting the build now and will try to get it up and running in a couple hours and see how this CPU performs. I been on this thread since day one and don't remember any other 7740 so will keep updating as I go.


----------



## Removed1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> can you list those several scenarios please?
> it arrives three years later than Haswell-E 5960X, it costs 400€ less but is has nearly pretty identical performance, it has more problems on VRMs,
> it isn't as good as Haswell-E for SLI + PCIe SSDs due to lanes limitations.
> 
> Three years for this?


You are right unfortunately, but it is the intel trend for many years now, so nothing really shocking from intel point of view.

SKX is an improvement over the previous generations but with some cost.
For example, all intel work addressed to power consumption get vaporized by these cpu.
There is an improvement but you don't see it clearly because these cpu are pushed already quite a lot, to give to the consumer the same performances of a quad core gaming into productivity tasks.
In few words you could do both on SKX, but with some downsides as the thermals and the overall platform price.

On overall it depend of your usage. Some task will not bother the cpu, some others will transform it into a nuclear fusion core along the motherboard.

The best advice before getting this cpu is to focus on which task the cpu will run, if you are a gamer don't bother with thermal etc, follow what is wrote in general.
If you are a prosumer, check before how the cpu behave with the load and plan your platform cooling accordingly to avoid bad thermal surprises.
To avoid to keep the cpu and vrm above the 80° mark for long run.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wimpzilla*
> 
> You are right unfortunately, but it is the intel trend for many years now, so nothing really shocking from intel point of view.
> 
> SKX is an improvement over the previous generations but with some cost.
> For example, all intel work addressed to power consumption get vaporized by these cpu.
> There is an improvement but you don't see it clearly because these cpu are pushed already quite a lot, to give to the consumer the same performances of a quad core gaming into productivity tasks.
> In few words you could do both on SKX, but with some downsides as the thermals and the overall platform price.
> 
> On overall it depend of your usage. Some task will not bother the cpu, some others will transform it into a nuclear fusion core along the motherboard.
> 
> The best advice before getting this cpu is to focus on which task the cpu will run, if you are a gamer don't bother with thermal etc, follow what is wrote in general.
> If you are a prosumer, check before how the cpu behave with the load and plan your platform cooling accordingly to avoid bad thermal surprises.
> To avoid to keep the cpu and vrm above the 80° mark for long run.


Im still interested in knowing what kind of performance Threadripper will bring in. Obviously Single thread will be lower, but considering 12 cores @ 4ghz for 800$, for some loads it could prove intereresting. Im just wondering how much mobos will cost, considering +4K pins for cpu, also VM performance.


----------



## Removed1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> Im still interested in knowing what kind of performance Threadripper will bring in. Obviously Single thread will be lower, but considering 12 cores @ 4ghz for 800$, for some loads it could prove intereresting. Im just wondering how much mobos will cost, considering +4K pins for cpu, also VM performance.


I asked some time ago about amd mobo price for TR and the conclusion was that it will not be cheap, no so far from X299 platform. Because of complicates pcb traces.

Where you need single thread IPC and clocks intel is king.
If you need high multi thread performances amd offer a good performance price solution. Since the intel price do not reflect the performances gain against amd.
But to be honest intel is the king, if your concern is pure performances only, when you begin to consider other things, it depend.
Each user will find his happiness if he spend 5min to get some basic knowledge about the actual hardware.
That is good at the end for everyone.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wimpzilla*
> 
> I asked some time ago about amd mobo price for TR and the conclusion was that it will not be cheap, no so far from X299 platform. Because of complicates pcb traces.
> 
> Where you need single thread IPC and clocks intel is king.
> If you need high multi thread performances amd offer a good performance price solution. Since the intel price do not reflect the performances gain against amd.
> But to be honest intel is the king, if your concern is pure performances only, when you begin to consider other things, it depend.
> Each user will find his happiness if he spend 5min to get some basic knowledge about the actual hardware.
> That is good at the end for everyone.


Im wondering if coffee lake will release this year and be compatible with z170. If so and clocks are somewhat equivalent to 7800x probably I'm going to get this one and wait till Q4 2018 for better offerings.

Anyway not one knows when next Intel hedt revision is coming? With tick tock out I have no idea on futher Intel roadmaps, I guess even Intel board isn't sure what is coming next.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> Im wondering if coffee lake will release this year and be compatible with z170. If so and clocks are somewhat equivalent to 7800x probably I'm going to get this one and wait till Q4 2018 for better offerings.
> 
> Anyway not one knows when next Intel hedt revision is coming? With tick tock out I have no idea on futher Intel roadmaps, I guess even Intel board isn't sure what is coming next.


Typically year later. Why do you ask? With HEDT it's not about new stuff. It's more about stuff like soldered CPUs, or quad channel, or 40 PCI-E lanes directly from CPU. Or few extra cores.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Typically year later. Why do you ask? With HEDT it's not about new stuff. It's more about stuff like soldered CPUs, or quad channel, or 40 PCI-E lanes directly from CPU. Or few extra cores.


Except from extra cores, all other reasons you put on hedt are crippled or absent. The hedt market is probably the thinnest for Intel behind servers and mainstream, but users a lot vocal about it. Still bugs me why Intel out of greed decided to not solder chips.


----------



## MarkPost

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Oh no!!! My computer is burning up!!!


Do you think those ~23ºC are accurate? whats your room temp? 10ºC?


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MarkPost*
> 
> Do you think those ~23ºC are accurate? whats your room temp? 10ºC?


Lol I remember first bios on z170 reporting below room temps for skylake.
Afaik below certain tenps the readings are inconsistent.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> Except from extra cores, all other reasons you put on hedt are crippled or absent. The hedt market is probably the thinnest for Intel behind servers and mainstream, but users a lot vocal about it. Still bugs me why Intel out of greed decided to not solder chips.


And 6-core mainstream Coffeelake CPUs are behind corner.

In PC HW field, there is no luxury. Seems some companies talked themselves into believing they can sell some stuff as a luxury, and now they are facing consequences. (Mainly talking about Motherboard manufacturers. But Intel isn't without flaw either.)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MarkPost*
> 
> Do you think those ~23ºC are accurate? whats your room temp? 10ºC?


I think SSD temperatures would tell his room temperature fairly accurately. (When I was on W7, I read temperatures of my two secondary HDDs as a room thermometer. They were typically powered down, because there is my game and anime backup collection. W10 keeps them running in low power mode, for some reason.)

CPU 22 C (but I'm currently on 6600K), coolest HDD 26 C.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MarkPost*
> 
> Do you think those ~23ºC are accurate? whats your room temp? 10ºC?


I keep my ac set to 70f or 21c. Even if the readings are off some it means it's cool enough under low stress that it's under its sensors threshold. I'm good with that.

Here, I just turned my computer on.


----------



## MarkPost

Temps reported are obviously wrong. With 21ºC room temp, there is no way with AIO a ~23ºC CPU even idle. Its phisically impossible.

Add 10ºC to that


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MarkPost*
> 
> Temps reported are obviously wrong. With 21ºC room temp, there is no way with AIO a ~23ºC CPU even idle. Its phisically impossible.
> 
> Add 10ºC to that


I'd look more at the 30c the gpu and ssd's are reporting.

Though I don't see how this matters since it's so low that the sensors screw up.


----------



## ManyThreads

Can anyone tell me how to overclock the NorthBridge on the TUF MK 1? I assume I just set it to 3200Mhz and call it a day? No risks? Never done a NB OC before. Thanks!


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Can anyone tell me how to overclock the NorthBridge on the TUF MK 1? I assume I just set it to 3200Mhz and call it a day? No risks? Never done a NB OC before. Thanks!


Not sure since I haven't messed with it yet but you'll find Asus bios is pretty consistent between Haswell and Skylake x. I'd look up some Z87/z97/z170/z270/x99 asus oc'ing guides since you won't find much for x299 atm.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Not sure since I haven't messed with it yet but you'll find Asus bios is pretty consistent between Haswell and Skylake x. I'd look up some Z87/z97/z170/z270/x99 asus oc'ing guides since you won't find much for x299 atm.


Thanks for answering so many of my questions! I'll try find an older guide.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> In the BIOS, it is listed as "cache frequency" on my X299-A. There is also an "uncore frequency," but I am not sure what the difference is. Being able to reach 3.2 GHz is far from guaranteed. Instead of going straight to BIOS, I would use XTU to adjust the frequency one multiplier at a time from Windows. You will need to overvolt to get past ~2.8 GHz. My 7900X needs a +50 mV offset to reach 3.0 GHz, and I was unable to reach 3.2 GHz at any voltage.


Thanks. I think it only runs at 800Mhz or something stock, so if I can just bump it up to 2.5Ghz or so without any other changes, even that seems like a pretty big increase.


----------



## TahoeDust

It runs at 2.4GHz stock.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> It runs at 2.4GHz stock.


Weird, something might have been defective in one of the info programs I was using then. It said North Bridge was 800 Mhz, unless maybe that was idle, and it can go up to 2.4 GHz.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> The uncore has dynamic frequency, just like the main core. Under TDP throttling scenarios (i.e. 140 W limit), the processor power logic will preferentially throttle the uncore frequency to maintain a higher core frequency. Even a slight overclock from 2.4 GHz to 2.8 GHz gives a solid improvement in L3 bandwidth and latency, assuming your power limits are disabled.


Cool - thank you. I will definitely be bumping that up when I am comfortable with how to do so.


----------



## tabbycph

Anyone else with a 7900X overclocked to 5.0 GHz ?

Im running 7900X OC 5.0 GHz, delided from caseking, 1.35 volt. Gigabyte gaming 9 board.

Here im running prime95 26.6 fpu smallFTF and its pulling 400 watt, bios set to 450 watt.


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabbycph*
> 
> Anyone else with a 7900X overclocked to 5.0 GHz ?
> 
> Im running 7900X OC 5.0 GHz, delided from caseking, 1.35 volt. Gigabyte gaming 9 board.
> 
> Here im running prime95 26.6 fpu smallFTF and its pulling 400 watt, bios set to 450 watt.


That's hot potato.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabbycph*
> 
> Anyone else with a 7900X overclocked to 5.0 GHz ?
> 
> Im running 7900X OC 5.0 GHz, delided from caseking, 1.35 volt. Gigabyte gaming 9 board.
> 
> Here im running prime95 26.6 fpu smallFTF and its pulling 400 watt, bios set to 450 watt.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> That's hot potato.


That's the problem I have, the chip is not crashing but it's on fire. I don't have a delided chip.


----------



## djgar

I'm waiting for freezer cases to start proliferating ...


----------



## tabbycph

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> That's the problem I have, the chip is not crashing but it's on fire. I don't have a delided chip.


I forgot, im running full custom water, dual pump and 1x3+2x2 rads, plus a PHOBYA XTREME SUPERNOVA 1260 rad, all with fans.

First pic pumps 30% speed:


and 2' pic, full pump speed:


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabbycph*
> 
> I forgot, im running full custom water, dual pump and 1x3+2x2 rads, plus a PHOBYA XTREME SUPERNOVA 1260 rad, all with fans.
> 
> First pic pumps 30% speed:
> 
> 
> and 2' pic, full pump speed:


Well, there goes any hope of me running a delidded 7900x @ 5.0ghz on an AIO. Perhaps its a poor bin. Some of the SL chips are pulling 4.8 @ 1.225v...


----------



## Mysticial

Part of the reason why these chips are on fire is because there are no other bottlenecks. So there's nothing getting in the way of overclocking until it sets on fire.

Ryzen hits a wall at 4 GHz.
Skylake/Kaby Lake non-HEDT can reach around 5 GHz. But they only have 4 cores.
Sandy Bridge was vcore limited to around 4.7 - 5.0 GHz. Going higher meant pushing the vcore above 1.4v which led to fast degradation.
But we can all agree that the pigeon poop over soldier was definitely a dick move on Intel's part given that the thermals *are* the bottleneck on Skylake X.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Well, there goes any hope of me running a delidded 7900x @ 5.0ghz on an AIO. Perhaps its a poor bin. Some of the SL chips are pulling 4.8 @ 1.225v...


5G @ 1.35V is not a poor bin at all. Especially on a 7900X.


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Not sure since I haven't messed with it yet but you'll find Asus bios is pretty consistent between Haswell and Skylake x. I'd look up some Z87/z97/z170/z270/x99 asus oc'ing guides since you won't find much for x299 atm.


I can run the cache at 3.2 at 1.25v but it adds a little to much to the temps overall.

I have settled in at 3.1 at 1.2 v.

one thing I have noticed so far with my 7900x is it likes a high cache overclock and a high memory overclock.

my 3200 (14) G.Skill Trident Z RBG is now set to 3800 (19) and system preforms much better overall.

I am eager to try the coming G.Skill 4000 Trident Z RBG Quad channel kits whenever G.skill gets around to actually releasing them.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> With the offset set for a target of 1.150v the voltage drops too low under low stress.
> 
> *To hit 1.150v with adaptive and the settings above set your offset from 0.100v to 0.120v.


I started overclocking, I just set the voltage manually to 1.18v and 4.5Ghz on all cores seems to be no problem. I'd like to start dropping that down a bit to generate less heat.

If it's also stable at 1.15v, could I not just leave it there? That seems pretty low to me, which I wouldn't think would hurt the CPU. Or is it better to play with the offsets like you've done?

What about just using the adaptive mobo voltage option, is that a big no-no? I don't read about it too much so I assume it isn't ideal.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabbycph*
> 
> I forgot, im running full custom water, dual pump and 1x3+2x2 rads, plus a PHOBYA XTREME SUPERNOVA 1260 rad, all with fans.
> 
> First pic pumps 30% speed:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and 2' pic, full pump speed:


I have 11x140mm dual D5 pumps in my rig but not about to dismantle that thing with an Asus Prime X299 Deluxe board, I'm waiting it out for Apex or EVGA Dark because I want to run 5GHz+ on my 7900X. Going to delid my cpu while waiting around for the Apex for good measures. Initially I was going to wait for the 7980XE but I changed my mind for now, maybe later I'll get that modified Xeon CPU...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> I can run the cache at 3.2 at 1.25v but it adds a little to much to the temps overall.
> 
> I have settled in at 3.1 at 1.2 v.
> 
> one thing I have noticed so far with my 7900x is it likes a high cache overclock and a high memory overclock.
> 
> my 3200 (14) G.Skill Trident Z RBG is now set to 3800 (19) and system preforms much better overall.
> 
> I am eager to try the coming G.Skill 4000 Trident Z RBG Quad channel kits whenever G.skill gets around to actually releasing them.


What timing are you using on the memory and voltage at 1.35v?


----------



## tabbycph

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> I can run the cache at 3.2 at 1.25v but it adds a little to much to the temps overall.
> 
> I have settled in at 3.1 at 1.2 v.
> 
> one thing I have noticed so far with my 7900x is it likes a high cache overclock and a high memory overclock.
> 
> my 3200 (14) G.Skill Trident Z RBG is now set to 3800 (19) and system preforms much better overall.
> 
> I am eager to try the coming G.Skill 4000 Trident Z RBG Quad channel kits whenever G.skill gets around to actually releasing them.


Im running my cache at 3.2 at 0.9 volt


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> 5G @ 1.35V is not a poor bin at all. Especially on a 7900X.


Fair enough.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> I started overclocking, I just set the voltage manually to 1.18v and 4.5Ghz on all cores seems to be no problem. I'd like to start dropping that down a bit to generate less heat.
> 
> If it's also stable at 1.15v, could I not just leave it there? That seems pretty low to me, which I wouldn't think would hurt the CPU. Or is it better to play with the offsets like you've done?
> 
> What about just using the adaptive mobo voltage option, is that a big no-no? I don't read about it too much so I assume it isn't ideal.


Yeah I'd try for 1.150v manual and see if that's stable. Once you figure out if it's stable or not then I'd set it up for adaptive. I'm not sure how these voltage translate from one set up to the next but I've found for me,

Adaptive mode
Offset mode sign = - (For me it's negative because I need to subtract from the max voltage listed in windows with adaptive enabled at default value)

Offset Voltage (Listed as offset value / Max voltage listed in windows)
0.110 = 1.154v
0.105 = 1.159v
0.104 = 1.170v

Additional Turbo CPU core voltage = 1.150v (the voltage you stability tested for)

The reason people don't like adaptive is because they're leaving the offset at default which leads to big voltage spikes. If you set your own offset then you won't get the voltage spikes.


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I have 11x140mm dual D5 pumps in my rig but not about to dismantle that thing with an Asus Prime X299 Deluxe board, I'm waiting it out for Apex or EVGA Dark because I want to run 5GHz+ on my 7900X. Going to delid my cpu while waiting around for the Apex for good measures. Initially I was going to wait for the 7980XE but I changed my mind for now, maybe later I'll get that modified Xeon CPU...
> What timing are you using on the memory and voltage at 1.35v?


Got the timings from done12many2 on this board. once set to new timings the memory trained itself on one boot for each increase. I then backed off to 1.38v and have complete stability on them tested memTest with 500% coverage and the sticks stayed below 50c

I did try for 4000MHz but could not get the memory to post no matter what i did with timings or volts. but an increase from 3200MHz to 3800Mhz is pretty impressive to me.

when testing in SuperPI 32m the increase in speed on the memory but lowering of the timings still produced better results overall at the same CPU overclock. shaved from 8% to as much as 20% on the over all time to complete the calculations.

Saw an increase in my CineBench scores from the low 2500 to a current high of 2640 on the same CPU settings.

Saw an increase in my GeekBench scores as well with my current best overall run https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3420058

16-16-16-31-1T were my primaries. I trained the set at 3600 MHz and then increased the clock speed on the RAM to 3800 MHz.

DRAM voltage: 1.38v for all channels
Training voltage: 1.4v for all channels

tRFC = 350
tREFI = 30000


----------



## BroPhilip

What is your vrm temps at that load?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabbycph*
> 
> Anyone else with a 7900X overclocked to 5.0 GHz ?
> 
> Im running 7900X OC 5.0 GHz, delided from caseking, 1.35 volt. Gigabyte gaming 9 board.
> 
> Here im running prime95 26.6 fpu smallFTF and its pulling 400 watt, bios set to 450 watt.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah I'd try for 1.150v manual and see if that's stable. Once you figure out if it's stable or not then I'd set it up for adaptive. I'm not sure how these voltage translate from one set up to the next but I've found for me,
> 
> Adaptive mode
> Offset mode sign = - (For me it's negative because I need to subtract from the max voltage listed in windows with adaptive enabled at default value)
> 
> Offset Voltage (Listed as offset value / Max voltage listed in windows)
> 0.110 = 1.154v
> 0.105 = 1.159v
> 0.104 = 1.170v
> 
> Additional Turbo CPU core voltage = 1.150v (the voltage you stability tested for)
> 
> The reason people don't like adaptive is because they're leaving the offset at default which leads to big voltage spikes. If you set your own offset then you won't get the voltage spikes.


That's great, thank you - I will give this a try tonight.

After that, I'll just need to figure out why my M2 SSD is under performing so much on the read side of things - about 1000 MB/s slower than it should be (sorry for the horrid photos):


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> Got the timings from done12many2 on this board. once set to new timings the memory trained itself on one boot for each increase. I then backed off to 1.38v and have complete stability on them tested memTest with 500% coverage and the sticks stayed below 50c
> 
> I did try for 4000MHz but could not get the memory to post no matter what i did with timings or volts. but an increase from 3200MHz to 3800Mhz is pretty impressive to me.
> 
> when testing in SuperPI 32m the increase in speed on the memory but lowering of the timings still produced better results overall at the same CPU overclock. shaved from 8% to as much as 20% on the over all time to complete the calculations.
> 
> Saw an increase in my CineBench scores from the low 2500 to a current high of 2640 on the same CPU settings.
> 
> Saw an increase in my GeekBench scores as well with my current best overall run https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3420058
> 
> 16-16-16-31-1T were my primaries. I trained the set at 3600 MHz and then increased the clock speed on the RAM to 3800 MHz.
> 
> DRAM voltage: 1.38v for all channels
> Training voltage: 1.4v for all channels
> 
> tRFC = 350
> tREFI = 30000


Thanks for posting that. One more question that I missed, which motherboard?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> That's great, thank you - I will give this a try tonight.
> 
> After that, I'll just need to figure out why my M2 SSD is under performing so much on the read side of things - about 1000 MB/s slower than it should be:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Did you check if it's overheating? That read is around what I get on Samsung NVMe 950pro, which ones do you have?


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah I'd try for 1.150v manual and see if that's stable. Once you figure out if it's stable or not then I'd set it up for adaptive. I'm not sure how these voltage translate from one set up to the next but I've found for me,
> 
> Adaptive mode
> Offset mode sign = - (For me it's negative because I need to subtract from the max voltage listed in windows with adaptive enabled at default value)
> 
> Offset Voltage (Listed as offset value / Max voltage listed in windows)
> 0.110 = 1.154v
> 0.105 = 1.159v
> 0.104 = 1.170v
> 
> Additional Turbo CPU core voltage = 1.150v (the voltage you stability tested for)
> 
> The reason people don't like adaptive is because they're leaving the offset at default which leads to big voltage spikes. If you set your own offset then you won't get the voltage spikes.


Hello

The behavior of adaptive voltage mode is the same on this platform as has been on previous platforms. The single difference on this platform seems to be the default voltage is based on the favorite core requiring the most voltage. This voltage cannot be set lower then the default programmed by Intel by using the Additional Turbo CPU Core Voltage field only. Doing so and then also using an offset voltage is the same as choosing the offset mode.


----------



## BroPhilip

Can I get some help ocing my ram? Never been that big into it like with cpu. I'm running a corsair vengeance 3200. I increased it to 3400 and was stable but in going to 3600 it kept losing one of the sticks of ram and would read 8gb and not 16gb....


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> That's great, thank you - I will give this a try tonight.
> 
> After that, I'll just need to figure out why my M2 SSD is under performing so much on the read side of things - about 1000 MB/s slower than it should be:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Cool. I hope that helps. Adaptive is really easy once you get the basics of it. My suggestion while looking for an offset is to keep a pen and paper nearby and keep a organized list of everything you test.

I still haven't had the opportunity to look into that. Always something.


----------



## tabbycph

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> What is your vrm temps at that load?


5 GHz, cache 3.2 Ghz:


and 5 GHz cache 2.4 GHz:


Theres about 35 watt different between 2.4 and 3.2 GHz cache.

Vrm temps are very very high, from 50 to 115 celcius in 2 min time, then its throtle, i will try with a fan later, and see if it goes down, so it wont throtle.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> The behavior of adaptive voltage mode is the same on this platform as has been on previous platforms. The single difference on this platform seems to be the default voltage is based on the favorite core requiring the most voltage. This voltage cannot be set lower then the default programmed by Intel by using the Additional Turbo CPU Core Voltage field only. Doing so and then also using an offset voltage is the same as choosing the offset mode.


I noticed it defaulted to 1.273v at both 1.150v and 1.200v. So guessing that 1.273v is default programmed by intel.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Thanks for posting that. One more question that I missed, which motherboard?
> Did you check if it's overheating? That read is around what I get on Samsung NVMe 950pro, which ones do you have?


I don't think it's getting hot - I have an ASUS TUF MK1 so it has a dedicated fan for the PCH & M2 area, plus a M2 heatsink. HWMonitor, if it's accurate, says the SSD doesn't get above 34C or so during benchmarks. I have the newest 960 Pro 512GB.

I have no idea why it's so slow - maybe there is a BIOS update coming that will fix it, or maybe there is still something I don't understand.

It's running through the dedicated PCH M2 slot on the mobo (where I assume most people run them), not a separate PCI-E expansion card - I wouldn't think that would slow it down this much though.


----------



## wingman99

Is Skylake X using 14+nm processes?


----------



## BroPhilip

Thanks. Couldn't read pic on my phone lol.... it would be interesting to test what the max wattage is before the vrms spike in temp to throttling lvl. I know it would be a lot of testing but it would help to know what it's true limit is....I have never been able to push that much voltage as I hit the thermal ceiling on my cpu a long time before the vrms
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabbycph*
> 
> 5 GHz, cache 3.2 Ghz:
> 
> 
> and 5 GHz cache 2.4 GHz:
> 
> 
> Theres about 35 watt different between 2.4 and 3.2 GHz cache.
> 
> Vrm temps are very very high, from 50 to 115 celcius in 2 min time, then its throtle, i will try with a fan later, and see if it goes down, so it wont throtle.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> I don't think it's getting hot - I have an ASUS TUF MK1 so it has a dedicated fan for the PCH & M2 area, plus a M2 heatsink. HWMonitor, if it's accurate, says the SSD doesn't get above 34C or so during benchmarks. I have the newest 960 Pro 512GB.
> 
> I have no idea why it's so slow - maybe there is a BIOS update coming that will fix it, or maybe there is still something I don't understand.
> 
> It's running through the dedicated PCH M2 slot on the mobo (where I assume most people run them), not a separate PCI-E expansion card - I wouldn't think that would slow it down this much though.


The heatsink for the PCH is physically connected to the M.2? The Asus Prime X299 Deluxe it's connected which blows my mind because they end up heating each other. Did you try reloading the NVMe windows driver? Also did you make sure you are using 4x lanes?


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> That's great, thank you - I will give this a try tonight.
> 
> After that, I'll just need to figure out why my M2 SSD is under performing so much on the read side of things - about 1000 MB/s slower than it should be (sorry for the horrid photos):


I have the same issue with my X99 setup for whatever reason, the Samsung Magician shows about half the expected read speed and random IOPS on my 950Pro. Meanwhile, write speeds are totally inline with expected numbers. I was not really able to figure it out, whats going on, so ultimately i just stopped caring, LOL. Its not the SSD which may me feel the computer is not fast enough anyway, its the damn regular HDDs, which i still keep my data on.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> The heatsink for the PCH is physically connected to the M.2? The Asus Prime X299 Deluxe it's connected which blows my mind because they end up heating each other. Did you try reloading the NVMe windows driver? Also did you make sure you are using 4x lanes?


I am not sure if they are connected - the 'armor' kind of covers everything up. There is a fan over the PCH which also blows air over the M2 slot and Asus claims up 25C temperature reduction. Regardless, HWMonitor tells me it runs in the mid 30C range which I assume is fine (if that is a correct reading). I will check again with the TUF Detective tonight for another source. You can see here:

https://www.asus.com/ca-en/Motherboards/TUF-X299-MARK-1/

I am not sure how to tell if it's using 4X lanes - is there an easy way to check? I think Magician might tell me actually, I can check if it does when I get home.

Someone on another forum said the reason was because I was using the mobo's M2 slot and not a separate, dedicated, PCI-E M2 expansion card. That seemed odd to me because I imagine 99% of people are using the mobo slots (and what good are they if they can't even come close to the speeds of standard M2 drives?), but I could be wrong.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> I have the same issue with my X99 setup for whatever reason, the Samsung Magician shows about half the expected read speed and random IOPS on my 950Pro. Meanwhile, write speeds are totally inline with expected numbers. I was not really able to figure it out, whats going on, so ultimately i just stopped caring, LOL. Its not the SSD which may me feel the computer is not fast enough anyway, its the damn regular HDDs, which i still keep my data on.


Yeah at the end of the day I guess ~2500 MB/s is still ~5 times faster than a SATAIII SSD haha, so it's hard to complain. I did pay a considerable premium for the 960 PRO though due to it's higher speeds than the EVO, so that is primarily why I am disappointed.

Can't wait for the day that 1-2TB++ SSD's are somewhat reasonable in price to use as storage.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Yeah at the end of the day I guess ~2500 MB/s is still ~5 times faster than a SATAIII SSD haha, so it's hard to complain. I did pay a considerable premium for the 960 PRO though due to it's higher speeds than the EVO, so that is primarily why I am disappointed.
> 
> Can't wait for the day that 1-2TB++ SSD's are somewhat reasonable in price to use as storage.


Hi.

I don't know if this applies to X299 but I put a 512GB 960 Pro in my X99-Deluxe II and was getting around specified max speeds. Then I went in and did a mild everyday overclock to 4.3GHz. After, I noticed my 960Pro was getting much lower numbers - Sequential Read and Write. Someone else on this forum had the same thing happen and tracked it down to Base Clock. In the process of my overclocking, Base Clock ended up set to Auto instead of a typed in value (100). That caused the M.2 plugged into the MOBO M.2 port to slow down. I went back into my BIOS and set Base Clock to 100 and my 960Pro went right back up to where it should be. I have no idea why, or if this is a bug particular to the X99-Deluxe II, or the version of firmware I am running, but it worked. Check your Base Clock setting and if it's on Auto, type in the value you want, reboot, then check your 960Pro again.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Hi.
> 
> I don't know if this applies to X299 but I put a 512GB 960 Pro in my X99-Deluxe II and was getting around specified max speeds. Then I went in and did a mild everyday overclock to 4.3GHz. After, I noticed my 960Pro was getting much lower numbers - Sequential Read and Write. Someone else on this forum had the same thing happen and tracked it down to Base Clock. In the process of my overclocking, Base Clock ended up set to Auto instead of a typed in value (100). That caused the M.2 plugged into the MOBO M.2 port to slow down. I went back into my BIOS and set Base Clock to 100 and my 960Pro went right back up to where it should be. I have no idea why, or if this is a bug particular to the X99-Deluxe II, or the version of firmware I am running, but it worked. Check your Base Clock setting and if it's on Auto, type in the value you want, reboot, then check your 960Pro again.


Thank you, I will make sure that is not the issue. I did do my testing at bone-stock though, but I did not see what the BCLK was doing - I assume it was 100.0 but I can't be sure.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> In the BIOS, it is listed as "cache frequency" on my X299-A. There is also an "uncore frequency," but I am not sure what the difference is. Being able to reach 3.2 GHz is far from guaranteed. Instead of going straight to BIOS, I would use XTU to adjust the frequency one multiplier at a time from Windows. You will need to overvolt to get past ~2.8 GHz. My 7900X needs a +50 mV offset to reach 3.0 GHz, and I was unable to reach 3.2 GHz at any voltage.


I was wondering what is that about it's no true north bridge oc since north bridge doesn't exist for ages, it's mesh? So you have now different settings for cache and mesh/nb?


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Thank you, I will make sure that is not the issue. I did do my testing at bone-stock though, but I did not see what the BCLK was doing - I assume it was 100.0 but I can't be sure.


'

Well Bone Stock on my X99-Deluxe II BIOS puts Base Clock to Auto. I did not think it would be an issue as Auto would have set Base Clock to 100 anyway (I think). Again, I have no idea at all why this would slow down the M.2 lanes but it absolutely did. Good Luck!


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> '
> 
> Well Bone Stock on my X99-Deluxe II BIOS puts Base Clock to Auto. I did not think it would be an issue as Auto would have set Base Clock to 100 anyway (I think). Again, I have no idea at all why this would slow down the M.2 lanes but it absolutely did. Good Luck!


BCLK screws with PCI lanes - I don't fully understand it but I know that much haha. I will hard-code my BCLK at 100 and run the test again just to rule it out. Thanks.


----------



## TahoeDust

I sent my 7820x off to Silicon Lottery to be delidded today. Hopefully I will get it back to the end of the week. Moved my 1080ti to my backup 2700k rig. That thing is still pretty snappy at 4.8GHz.


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> I don't think it's getting hot - I have an ASUS TUF MK1 so it has a dedicated fan for the PCH & M2 area, plus a M2 heatsink. HWMonitor, if it's accurate, says the SSD doesn't get above 34C or so during benchmarks. I have the newest 960 Pro 512GB.
> 
> I have no idea why it's so slow - maybe there is a BIOS update coming that will fix it, or maybe there is still something I don't understand.
> 
> It's running through the dedicated PCH M2 slot on the mobo (where I assume most people run them), not a separate PCI-E expansion card - I wouldn't think that would slow it down this much though.


I am also looking into this issue as I am getting lower performance out of my 960 EVO on the Prime Deluxe then I did on my x99 Godlike Gaming Carbon. not quite as much as you are reporting nut still a significant number. My temps are always low or at least being reported to be low from all sensors or programs reporting against the sensors.

I hope it is just a BIOS or driver related fix to be coming soon. AS this is a new platform there will be things that will get better as we go on both of the BIOS and Drivers once all vendors actually get the time they needed originally to get the platform up to snuff.

one reason I am glad that both the Apex and Rampage boards have not been released is they seem to be taking more time to get them right.


----------



## DNMock

For folks running higher core clock speeds in the 4.7 to 5.0 ghz range, what are you guys putting your AVX offset to?

I can run stable all day on realbench @ 4.8 ghz, but even with a 10x offset on AVX and AVX512 which should put both down to 3.8 ghz for those task, when running prime or XTU it's instant reboot the second I hit the stress test or benchmark button.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZeroC00L*
> 
> I do a lot of animation work, plus I stream the work I am making sometimes.
> So... I waited this whole time for Skylake-X, and now I should turn my focus to AMD? Sigh... I really wanted to do some serious overclocking and get it to 4.5GHz. There is really no hope with the temperature issues, huh?


additional cores will help any application that uses them... it's that simple. 4K and 8K video encoding benefit in a major way, as does any multicore compute load.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> The latest CoreTemp and HWMonitor can give you the CPU power draw readout directly. So you won't have to measure from the wall and estimate what all the other components draw.


these can be affected by various bios settings, the ideal way is to use a clampo meter on the EPS, but simply using a kill-a-watt meter and comparing idle vs load is surprisingly accurate.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> The Apex isn't just for LN2 and other cold cooling. The Apex specifically uses 4 memory DIMM slots for better trace routing. This will yield better memory OC results. It also has 2 x DIMM2 slots for use with 2 x NVMe M.2 SSDs per DIMM2 slot. 2 will route to the CPU while the other 2 are routed to the chipset. PCIe slot and memory DIMM on/off switches and a great deal more manual type stuff that I want.
> 
> *I know for sure that I won't use 8 DIMM slots so the memory stuff is what I like best about the Apex*. The rest is just icing on the cake to include it's stripped down look.


I agree - I'm running 8x8GB on my R5E-10/6950X (at 3400c13). I rarely load it to even 75% (with pageing off too). 4x8GB on the APEX will cover any use. Funny thing is, so many folks load their rigs up with memory and then don;t set the system up properly to use it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elelunicy*
> 
> The low performance in some games is mostly caused by the new mesh design, which can be remedied by overclocking the mesh and pairing with fast RAM. It's not a "mess" due to platform immaturity or bios issues; it's just how those chips are inherently designed.
> 
> Not to mention not every game is sensitive to the increased latency. Computerbase.de tested 8 games and on average the 7900x actually beats the 7700k in 99th framerates (and they tested with the mesh at stock frequency).


1080P. at 1400P and higher this 6950X advantage (even with clocks adjusted for IPC) is nominal, if any at all.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CrazyElf*
> 
> I think that the 18 core will likely see a penalty.
> 
> Is that 20W more overall or 20W more clock for clock though? I would expect a relatively linear scale with clocks. If so, the 18 core will be drawing 80% more current or so at any given clock.
> 
> *So the 18 core might run 300 MHz less.
> Depends on if you want total stability.*
> 
> For gaming, it's fine to use RealBench. For work that is error sensitive, Linpack with Intel Math Library is a must (can be with something like OCCT, LinX, etc), along with 2 other tests, a test of the Uncore (often Prime95 Large FFTs), and then a test of the Uncore (HCI Memtest or perhaps several hours of StressAppTest). *I personally would not feel comfortable with RealBench for work.
> *
> For real work, if there is any crash in OCCT, then I'm afraid your overclock is not 100% stable. There's nothing misleading about it. A stress test is exactly that - it's designed to stress a CPU to the limit to find out of it can take it.
> A stress test is not meant to be realistic. It's meant to push something to its limits. I mean for games, if you BSOD it is annoying to go to the last save (ok multiplayer would be worse I guess), but for work ... that could cost a lot of time and money.
> 
> I mean failing a stress test doesn't mean your, say, encoding will fail, but it does mean that the most stressful applications can crash your OC.
> *An interesting question will be how far the 18 core can go*. It may be quite a bit more than the 300W actually.
> 
> If you check out Intel's datasheet:
> https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/6th-gen-x-series-datasheet-vol-1.pdf
> 
> pmax (Package Max) on page 49 is 297W. It cannot sustain it for very long before throttling.
> 
> [snip].


all overclock stability is conditional.. and as a matter of fact.. so is stock. If you are really doing heavy compute and "require" linpac, p95 etc stability,.. well, you buying the wrong class chip if error tolerance is low. even the most thoroughly tested OC will have checksum mismatches that are masked from the desktop user. If you want error mitigation, stay on a desktop, if you want error-free (like for a millsec trading machine) get the right equipment.








.. and lastly I'll find out as soon as the 7980xe launches.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Can someone upload a pic of a real bench test using the latest? I wanted to compare notes. This is what I got at 4.9GHz 1.291v thanks.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DNMock*
> 
> For folks running higher core clock speeds in the 4.7 to 5.0 ghz range, what are you guys putting your AVX offset to?
> 
> I can run stable all day on realbench @ 4.8 ghz, but even with a 10x offset on AVX and AVX512 which should put both down to 3.8 ghz for those task, when running prime or XTU it's instant reboot the second I hit the stress test or benchmark button.


damn bud, that looks to be a nice chip you got there. if the rig is just doing a restart with XTUI - first make sure you have the XTU that's updated for SKL-X , and then check the power settings in bios. That sounds like an OCP event.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabbycph*
> 
> Anyone else with a 7900X overclocked to 5.0 GHz ?
> 
> Im running 7900X OC 5.0 GHz, delided from caseking, 1.35 volt. Gigabyte gaming 9 board.
> 
> Here im running prime95 26.6 fpu smallFTF and its pulling 400 watt, bios set to 450 watt.


I can run 5.0 but it's too hot, I'm sending my chip in to SL for a delid. Also I'm not using the best cooling for my bench, I'm sure my rig will eat it up but before I dismantle the thing I might as well delid besides I'm hoping for Apex to be released and dismantle my rig for it instead.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DNMock*
> 
> For folks running higher core clock speeds in the 4.7 to 5.0 ghz range, what are you guys putting your AVX offset to?
> 
> I can run stable all day on realbench @ 4.8 ghz, but even with a 10x offset on AVX and AVX512 which should put both down to 3.8 ghz for those task, when running prime or XTU it's instant reboot the second I hit the stress test or benchmark button.


I had it set to -5 AVX and -7 AVX512 and I pass XTU but the temps get destroyed with Realbench. I'll try -10 when I get my chip back. By the way I was using LLC7 and had to increase VCCIN to 1.93v.


----------



## ManyThreads

OK I got TUF Detective all fired up and made some discoveries, some good, some possibly bad.

I set voltage to 1.15v and at least after some preliminary testing (multiple Cinebench runs and several minutes of CPUZ stress test) all is good. VRM temps max out around 40C, CPU doesn't get much hotter than 65C or so according to HW monitor. Cooler is a NH-D15 so I'm on air.

I do have some questions though.

1) My voltage (V core) is set to 1.15v, and my bios splash screen says that also. Why does TUF Detective show "CPU Input: 1.952V". This is very worrisome - is there any chance I am feeding my CPU 1.95v?

2) During stress testing, HW monitor showed the cores bouncing around in the 60-65C range maximum, TUF Detective shows 54.0C - which do I trust? That is a very significant difference.

3) My Q-Fan control is driving me absolutely bonkers. My CPU Fan control is good, but my case/chassis fans have a mind of their own. I have them set to basically idle until temps go above 50-60C, and EVERY time I click on something and the CPU does even the slightest bit of work, they ramp right up and become loud. They are constantly going from low to high RPM back to low over and over again. Do I maybe have a faulty temperature sensor or something? There is no way my case temperature jumps to 50-60C the instant I click on google chrome or open a basic program - HW monitor and TUF Detective don't show temps anywhere near that high, but the case fans jump to their high temp. curve setting at the drop of a hat. It's annoying the crap out of me since I've tried to make a silent build! I guess I could lock them at a fixed RPM but that is not what I want.

EDIT: It's honestly ridiculous - I clicked "submit" on this post and the fans kicked into high gear briefly.

4) I confirmed base clock is indeed set to 100.0 and my SSD is still under-performing, I'll have to continue investigating.

Thanks again for everyone's help.


----------



## Chargeit

1. I think the voltage it's showing is the start up voltage.

2. The TUF detective uses the mobo sensors. You'll notice things like the PCI-E slot for your gpu will be well under what the gpu really is running.

3. I set all custom fan curves for my case fans in bios. Best off using the fan settings under "advanced mode -> Monitoring -> Qfan -> Case fans?" (something like that, it's under monitoring towards the bottom). You can set what the case fans are based off of. For instance I base my case fans off my gpu since my H100i H115i is a front intake. You can also set temps, speeds, things like that. There are settings for 3 different levels. Remember that the gpu goes off the mobo sensors so it takes a while for it to hit say 50c.


----------



## DNMock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> damn bud, that looks to be a nice chip you got there. if the rig is just doing a restart with XTUI - first make sure you have the XTU that's updated for SKL-X , and then check the power settings in bios. That sounds like an OCP event.


Found my problem, bug in the F6F bios for Aorus 9 boards where having multicore performance enabled causes the Offsets to be reset to 0

Effectively trying to run an AVX512 benchmark at 4.8 ghz lol


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> OK I got TUF Detective all fired up and made some discoveries, some good, some possibly bad.
> 
> I set voltage to 1.15v and at least after some preliminary testing (multiple Cinebench runs and several minutes of CPUZ stress test) all is good. VRM temps max out around 40C, CPU doesn't get much hotter than 65C or so according to HW monitor. Cooler is a NH-D15 so I'm on air.
> 
> I do have some questions though.
> 
> 1) My voltage (V core) is set to 1.15v, and my bios splash screen says that also. Why does TUF Detective show "CPU Input: 1.952V". This is very worrisome - is there any chance I am feeding my CPU 1.95v?
> 
> 2) During stress testing, HW monitor showed the cores bouncing around in the 60-65C range maximum, TUF Detective shows 54.0C - which do I trust? That is a very significant difference.
> 
> 
> 3) My Q-Fan control is driving me absolutely bonkers. My CPU Fan control is good, but my case/chassis fans have a mind of their own. I have them set to basically idle until temps go above 50-60C, and EVERY time I click on something and the CPU does even the slightest bit of work, they ramp right up and become loud. They are constantly going from low to high RPM back to low over and over again. Do I maybe have a faulty temperature sensor or something? There is no way my case temperature jumps to 50-60C the instant I click on google chrome or open a basic program - HW monitor and TUF Detective don't show temps anywhere near that high, but the case fans jump to their high temp. curve setting at the drop of a hat. It's annoying the crap out of me since I've tried to make a silent build! I guess I could lock them at a fixed RPM but that is not what I want.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: It's honestly ridiculous - I clicked "submit" on this post and the fans kicked into high gear briefly.
> 
> 4) I confirmed base clock is indeed set to 100.0 and my SSD is still under-performing, I'll have to continue investigating.
> 
> Thanks again for everyone's help
> 
> 
> .


Ok, for the fans I check out my bios.

Its,

"Advanced Mode" Monitor -> Q-Fan Configuration -> Chassis Fans Configuration

To give an example I'll list what I use for chassis fan 1.

*Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control -* Auto
*Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source -* PCIE-1 (My gpu)
*Chassis Fan 1 Step Up -* 12 sec (step up/down will stop the fans from throttling up and down constantly)
*Chassis Fan 1 Step Down -* 25 sec
*Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit -* 200 RPM (The default)
*Chassis Fan 1 Profile -* Manual

*Chassis Fan 1 Upper Temperature -* 45 (remember, this is based off the mobo sensors and not the reading at the gpu so it will hit say 70c/75c before it will hit 50c at the sensor)
*Chassis Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) -* 100 (some fans I set lower, depends on location)
*Chassis Fan 1 Middle Temperature -* 42
*Chassis Fan 1 Middle Duty Cycle (%) -* 80
*Chassis Fan 1 Lower Temperature -* 40
*Chassis Fan 1 Lower Duty Cycle (%) -* 60 (60% fan speed is the lowest for dc powered fans. PWM fans can be set lower)

*Chassis Fan 1 Allow Fan Stop -* Disabled (if you want the fan to turn off under the lower temp then set this to enabled)

I played around with it some and I felt like a close temp range worked the best for my setup. Remember the gpu readings and the mobo pcie readings will be off. I'd hit 70c+ on the gpu and still be in the 40c's on my PCIe sensor which is why I set mine so low.


----------



## djgar

I found my Samsung 950 Pro will go from 2200 to 1600 when I OC above 4500 ...


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Ok, for the fans I check out my bios.
> 
> Its,
> 
> "Advanced Mode" Monitor -> Q-Fan Configuration -> Chassis Fans Configuration
> 
> To give an example I'll list what I use for chassis fan 1.
> 
> *Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control -* Auto
> *Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source -* PCIE-1 (My gpu)
> *Chassis Fan 1 Step Up -* 12 sec (step up/down will stop the fans from throttling up and down constantly)
> *Chassis Fan 1 Step Down -* 25 sec
> *Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit -* 200 RPM (The default)
> *Chassis Fan 1 Profile -* Manual
> 
> *Chassis Fan 1 Upper Temperature -* 45 (remember, this is based off the mobo sensors and not the reading at the gpu so it will hit say 70c/75c before it will hit 50c at the sensor)
> *Chassis Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) -* 100 (some fans I set lower, depends on location)
> *Chassis Fan 1 Middle Temperature -* 42
> *Chassis Fan 1 Middle Duty Cycle (%) -* 80
> *Chassis Fan 1 Lower Temperature -* 40
> *Chassis Fan 1 Lower Duty Cycle (%) -* 60 (60% fan speed is the lowest for dc powered fans. PWM fans can be set lower)
> 
> *Chassis Fan 1 Allow Fan Stop -* Disabled (if you want the fan to turn off under the lower temp then set this to enabled)
> 
> I played around with it some and I felt like a close temp range worked the best for my setup. Remember the gpu readings and the mobo pcie readings will be off. I'd hit 70c+ on the gpu and still be in the 40c's on my PCIe sensor which is why I set mine so low.


Thank you - sounds like there is another level to the options I have not found yet.

This does raise another question though - absolutely nothing in my PC is anywhere near 50C, let alone 40C, not the CPU, not the GPU - nothing. Why does the most basic task kick the fans to max speed? What sensor could it possibly be reading with a temperature so high? If I move a slider in Photoshop, open Chrome, or even hit "submit" on this post, the fans speed up. It's absolutely ridiculous how sensitive they are. What sensor could possibly be spiking to 40-50C by hitting the submit button on a post?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Thank you - sounds like there is another level to the options I have not found yet.
> 
> This does raise another question though - absolutely nothing in my PC is anywhere near 50C, let alone 40C, not the CPU, not the GPU - nothing. Why does the most basic task kick the fans to max speed? What sensor could it possibly be reading with a temperature so high? If I move a slider in Photoshop, open Chrome, or even hit "submit" on this post, the fans speed up. It's absolutely ridiculous how sensitive they are. What sensor could possibly be spiking to 40-50C by hitting the submit button on a post?


Are you sure it's the case fans? The M.2 fan is set very aggressive at default and being small it can be really loud. It should be listed at the bottom of the list I mentioned above as "PCH Fan". You can also see the fan listed under the TUF detective PCH fan.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Are you sure it's the case fans? The M.2 fan is set very aggressive at default and being small it can be really loud. It should be listed at the bottom of the list I mentioned above as "PCH Fan". You can also see the fan listed under the TUF detective PCH fan.


Yeah I'm 100% sure. The PCH fan is separate in the Fan Control, it's always humming away around 2500 RPM and I can't really hear it. I haven't touched the curve on that one.

It's Case fan's 3 (rear exhaust), 4 (front intake), and 5 (front intake). I can put my hand back there and it's definitely them that are spinning up. The rear exhaust fan seems to be the worst of the 3. I just finished my work so I will be able to reboot soon and check some of the options you showed me.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Are you sure it's the case fans? The M.2 fan is set very aggressive at default and being small it can be really loud. It should be listed at the bottom of the list I mentioned above as "PCH Fan". You can also see the fan listed under the TUF detective PCH fan.


OK they were all set to read off the CPU - that answers my question. I still can't explain why they responded to temperature spikes not seen by HW Monitor or TUF Detective, but they are behaving now. Thank you for pointing me in that direction!


----------



## tangente

New user and new owner here! I have ASUS Prime X299-Deluxe with i7-7820X and now I am also struggling with fans! At default it behaves like yours: they are either idle or run ot 1200 RPM+, constantly starting or stopping when CPU temp rises a little bit. I tried to tune it with ASUS built-in Fan Tuning but I guess it is bugged. In UEFI BIOS it look normal but AI Suite III mess with all those fan curves completely. Moreover AI Suite does not detect Extension Fans connected via Extension Fan Card (UEFI can see it and can control them). I tested it with both DC and PWM with not much success. Maybe PWM is even worse with scaling! I will try what you people suggest here with manual settings.

Regarding M.2 speed. I have Samsung 960 Pro 512GB. I have tried it in PCH and over adapter in PCIe connected to CPU, all with different base clocks. It seems that high base clock result in lower speed of SSD. And of course when you put SSD directly on CPU lines it is faster but not much. Now I am running at stock with SSD in PCIe CPU via adapter and have 3236 MB/s read and 2002 MB/s write. In either way both SSD and PCH gets really hot so it seems like a nonsense put it together under that small heatsink without direct air flow.

One last note, I have tried quick OC with manual 1.15V @4.6 and it was stable in Realbench for 8 hours so I guess I could go a little higher than that. My cooling is Alphacool Eisbaer 360.


----------



## tabbycph

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Thanks. Couldn't read pic on my phone lol.... it would be interesting to test what the max wattage is before the vrms spike in temp to throttling lvl. I know it would be a lot of testing but it would help to know what it's true limit is....I have never been able to push that much voltage as I hit the thermal ceiling on my cpu a long time before the vrms


I will test and find out.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> 1) My voltage (V core) is set to 1.15v, and my bios splash screen says that also. Why does TUF Detective show "CPU Input: 1.952V". This is very worrisome - is there any chance I am feeding my CPU 1.95v?


Hello

CPU VCORE and Input voltage are different voltages.


----------



## alex1990

Anyone with MSI M& ACK try new beta bios 1.21 with new 7900x microcode (30/06/2017) ??


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DNMock*
> 
> Found my problem, bug in the F6F bios for Aorus 9 boards where having multicore performance enabled causes the Offsets to be reset to 0
> 
> Effectively trying to run an AVX512 benchmark at 4.8 ghz lol


lol - yeah, that'll do it.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> CPU VCORE and Input voltage are different voltages.


Thank you! That puts my mind at ease. Weird that TUF Detective doesn't even show vcore.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tangente*
> 
> New user and new owner here! I have ASUS Prime X299-Deluxe with i7-7820X and now I am also struggling with fans! At default it behaves like yours: they are either idle or run ot 1200 RPM+, constantly starting or stopping when CPU temp rises a little bit. I tried to tune it with ASUS built-in Fan Tuning but I guess it is bugged. In UEFI BIOS it look normal but AI Suite III mess with all those fan curves completely. Moreover AI Suite does not detect Extension Fans connected via Extension Fan Card (UEFI can see it and can control them). I tested it with both DC and PWM with not much success. Maybe PWM is even worse with scaling! I will try what you people suggest here with manual settings.
> 
> Regarding M.2 speed. I have Samsung 960 Pro 512GB. I have tried it in PCH and over adapter in PCIe connected to CPU, all with different base clocks. It seems that high base clock result in lower speed of SSD. And of course when you put SSD directly on CPU lines it is faster but not much. Now I am running at stock with SSD in PCIe CPU via adapter and have 3236 MB/s read and 2002 MB/s write. In either way both SSD and PCH gets really hot so it seems like a nonsense put it together under that small heatsink without direct air flow.
> 
> One last note, I have tried quick OC with manual 1.15V @4.6 and it was stable in Realbench for 8 hours so I guess I could go a little higher than that. My cooling is Alphacool Eisbaer 360.


The default source for temperature is the CPU, change it to something else - that fixed it for me. It's not bugged but it is a totally stupid default setting. I don't know where the sensor is, but my fans would spike even when the CPU was not at the temperature the fans were supposed to increase speed at. The setting is a little difficult to find, but refer to Chargeit's post on the previous page.

I do however have a new problem - I set all my fans to read the mobo temp and all fans have the exact same curve. At idle, two run at 600 RPM, one runs at 1000 RPM. This shouldn't be so difficult! Haha. I'm tempted to just run flat curves on everything and call it a day because this is so annoying. I'll try out some new sensors I guess, but I also want a sensor that is accurate, not one that stays cool or hot all the time because that defeats the purpose.

Thanks for your data point on the OC - I might try 4.6 as well at 1.15v, I'm currently still at 4.5. I'm on air with a NH-D15 though so my cooling is only equivalent to a 240mm AIO.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> The default source for temperature is the CPU, change it to something else - that fixed it for me. It's not bugged but it is a totally stupid default setting. I don't know where the sensor is, but my fans would spike even when the CPU was not at the temperature the fans were supposed to increase speed at. The setting is a little difficult to find, but refer to Chargeit's post on the previous page.
> 
> 
> 
> I do however have a new problem - I set all my fans to read the mobo temp and all fans have the exact same curve. At idle, two run at 600 RPM, one runs at 1000 RPM. This shouldn't be so difficult! Haha. I'm tempted to just run flat curves on everything and call it a day because this is so annoying. I'll try out some new sensors I guess, but I also want a sensor that is accurate, not one that stays cool or hot all the time because that defeats the purpose.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for your data point on the OC - I might try 4.6 as well at 1.15v, I'm currently still at 4.5. I'm on air with a NH-D15 though so my cooling is only equivalent to a 240mm AIO.


Are they the same fans? If you have a few fans that top out at say 2,000 rpm then their 60% rpm would be 1,200 rpm. A fan with a max of 1,000 rpm set to 60% would lower to 600 rpm.

I have all the same fans for my case so they all behave similar within tolerance.

*For the sensor, you just have to figure out how the sensor behaves. For instance I know my gpu will hit 70c+ while my pcie sensors still read 45c so I adjust for that.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Are they the same fans? If you have a few fans that top out at say 2,000 rpm then their 60% rpm would be 1,200 rpm. A fan with a max of 1,000 rpm set to 60% would lower to 600 rpm.
> 
> I have all the same fans for my case so they all behave similar within tolerance.
> 
> *For the sensor, you just have to figure out how the sensor behaves. For instance I know my gpu will hit 70c+ while my pcie sensors still read 45c so I adjust for that.


Yeah they are all identical Corsair ML140 Pro's. When they were linked to the CPU temp, they were annoying but at least they ran at the same speed.

I think I just need to find a better sensor to to go off of, maybe the VRM or PCH if those are options.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Yeah they are all identical Corsair ML140 Pro's. When they were linked to the CPU temp, they were annoying but at least they ran at the same speed.
> 
> I think I just need to find a better sensor to to go off of, maybe the VRM or PCH if those are options.


So those are pwm not dc. Make sure you have them all set for pwm and not dc.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835181109


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> So those are pwm not dc. Make sure you have them all set for pwm and not dc.
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835181109


Yup - all set to PWM. I believe they are working as they should, I think the issue is the mobo. If I am using the same sensor source for all 3 fans, they should all behave the same or very close to the same. Almost double the RPM though is just weird. I'll try a different sensor when I get home today, and also adjust the curve to reflect what that particular area's temperature is like so that my fans still speed up under heavy load. I wonder how many people don't even know about these issues (like me yesterday), and have their fans running totally spastic for years.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Yup - all set to PWM. I believe they are working as they should, I think the issue is the mobo. If I am using the same sensor source for all 3 fans, they should all behave the same or very close to the same. Almost double the RPM though is just weird. I'll try a different sensor when I get home today, and also adjust the curve to reflect what that particular area's temperature is like so that my fans still speed up under heavy load. I wonder how many people don't even know about these issues (like me yesterday), and have their fans running totally spastic for years.


Sounds like a plan.

For the longest time I'd of tossed a manual fan controller in my rig and called it a day. End up with more wiring but tends to be easy to just adjust fans as you want them. Though once you get bios based fan controls set up they can work well.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Sounds like a plan.
> 
> For the longest time I'd of tossed a manual fan controller in my rig and called it a day. End up with more wiring but tends to be easy to just adjust fans as you want them. Though once you get bios based fan controls set up they can work well.


My backup plan is to just set manual RPMs through the mobo, or flat fan curves, but I hope it doesn't come to that.

CPU fans are working as intended thankfully.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> My backup plan is to just set manual RPMs through the mobo, or flat fan curves, but I hope it doesn't come to that.
> 
> CPU fans are working as intended thankfully.


You know what. I forgot about this.

When I first hooked up my case fans I accidentally plugged my #2 fan into the bottom water pump header. Make sure you're plugged into the right header. I think this made the fan run higher rpm then my other fans.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> You know what. I forgot about this.
> 
> When I first hooked up my case fans I accidentally plugged my #2 fan into the bottom water pump header. Make sure you're plugged into the right header. I think this made the fan run higher rpm then my other fans.


The mobo tells me what fans are active, so unless it is falsely reporting their locations and RPMs, I think I am OK there. It also makes sense which fans it tells me are running (CPU, CPU OPT, Case 3, Case 4, and Case 5). I'll double check everything but I am 99% sure they are in correctly.


----------



## Gettz8488

Can some of you tell me what a cache overclock is looking like? Not really sure what to shoot for and I don't know what voltage to use either


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> 1) My voltage (V core) is set to 1.15v, and my bios splash screen says that also. Why does TUF Detective show "CPU Input: 1.952V". This is very worrisome - is there any chance I am feeding my CPU 1.95v?.


You are definitely injecting 1.95v into your CPU, I think a little high because I usually use around 1.92v but that is normal. As Praz mentioned that's a different voltage from Vcore which it feeds from/takes from the input voltage A.K.A. VCCIN. I would Lock that down lower unless you absolutely need it. I set mine at 1.93v on my new CPU because I'm overclocking to very high frequencies. It's usually less than 1.9v if you load default settings, you can see this on the bios of your TUF motherboard.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Can some of you tell me what a cache overclock is looking like? Not really sure what to shoot for and I don't know what voltage to use either


I thought I saw someone on this thread use 1.2v @ 3.2GHz uncore.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> You know what. I forgot about this.
> 
> When I first hooked up my case fans I accidentally plugged my #2 fan into the bottom water pump header. Make sure you're plugged into the right header. I think this made the fan run higher rpm then my other fans.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Other than the CPU fan, it doesn't usually matter which fan header you use as long as you set it up properly, preferably in the BIOS (I avoid any OS-based MB control and set the Q-Fan curves manually). I use the Water Pump header for a set of case fans (pump is connected directly to the PS 12v). I tend to use cable placement to determine which header to use, and AIDA OSD panel tells me what's going on with them. Works great for me.


----------



## Gettz8488

Is there a way i can check cache voltage through software? and i don't know if overclocked it correctly i set my max cpu cache ratio to 32 for 3200 then i set the cache ratio voltage on manual to 1.0 is this okay or do i need to tweak another setting? Also what is the default voltage for cache ratio? i want to set it to adaptive but don't know where its defaulted


----------



## djgar

AIDA64 is excellent ...


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> You are definitely injecting 1.95v into your CPU, I think a little high because I usually use around 1.92v but that is normal. As Praz mentioned that's a different voltage from Vcore which it feeds from/takes from the input voltage A.K.A. VCCIN. I would Lock that down lower unless you absolutely need it. I set mine at 1.93v on my new CPU because I'm overclocking to very high frequencies. It's usually less than 1.9v if you load default settings, you can see this on the bios of your TUF motherboard.
> I thought I saw someone on this thread use 1.2v @ 3.2GHz uncore.


Thanks, I'll have to look for that once I get some of these other things sorted out. I assume it's a minor issue that doesn't need immediate attention as long as I'm not cooking my CPU with 1.95v and vcore is actually the 1.15v.


----------



## Gettz8488

Are people using adaptive voltage or manual for cache overclock? I can run 3.1 ghz on 1050 manual but crashes if I try to use adaptive unless I'm setting it wrong


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Thanks, I'll have to look for that once I get some of these other things sorted out. I assume it's a minor issue that doesn't need immediate attention as long as I'm not cooking my CPU with 1.95v and vcore is actually the 1.15v.


I set my cpu input voltage to 1.9v and it's working well at my two tested oc's of 45 and 46.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Are people using adaptive voltage or manual for cache overclock? I can run 3.1 ghz on 1050 manual but crashes if I try to use adaptive unless I'm setting it wrong


I use adaptive for core voltage and offset for cashe / ring voltage.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I use adaptive for core voltage and offset for cashe / ring voltage.


Awesome is there a default vaultage you base your offset on? Not really sure if to go + or -


----------



## Gettz8488

So for some reason i can't get hwinfo to report correct VCORE it reports 0.994 constantly cpu z does the same and aida has my cpu Core voltage stuck at 1.9 which i don't believe is possible i'm getting VID Voltages reported correctly should i go by that?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> So for some reason i can't get hwinfo to report correct VCORE it reports 0.994 constantly cpu z does the same and aida has my cpu Core voltage stuck at 1.9 which i don't believe is possible i'm getting VID Voltages reported correctly should i go by that?


Newest beta?
https://www.aida64.com/downloads/NDkwNjRiNGU=


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Awesome is there a default vaultage you base your offset on? Not really sure if to go + or -


I would try +.20 to start with and go 10 mv increments from that point. When you look at you bios that will read the voltage at idle. You need to be able to read your voltage when you are stress testing your system. Watch your temps. Note you need to get your core voltage and memory stable before overclocking cashe / ring.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Newest beta?
> https://www.aida64.com/downloads/NDkwNjRiNGU=


Just tried it it's also reporting 0.9 so weird hwinfo reports my vid correctly which is 1.2 underload but i'm not sure if i can go by that


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I would try +.20 to start with and go 10 mv increments from that point. When you look at you bios that will read the voltage at idle. You need to be able to read your voltage when you are stress testing your system. Watch your temps. Note you need to get your core voltage and memory stable before overclocking cashe / ring.


I got both core and memory stable i also got my cache stable but i'm not sure how to correctly set the offset voltage to 1050 on a x299 strix


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Are people using adaptive voltage or manual for cache overclock? I can run 3.1 ghz on 1050 manual but crashes if I try to use adaptive unless I'm setting it wrong


At least in x99 adaptive for cache never worked , offset worked fine.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> I got both core and memory stable i also got my cache stable but i'm not sure how to correctly set the offset voltage to 1050 on a x299 strix


Example: if you set your voltage to 1.050v and offset + .001mv it will give you 1.051v. If you set your voltage to 1.050 and offset - .001mv you will get 1.049v.


----------



## Baasha

When is the 18-core 7980X coming out?


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I set my cpu input voltage to 1.9v and it's working well at my two tested oc's of 45 and 46.


Interesting - I will try dropping mine too then. Everything like that helps with the heat I imagine.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Baasha*
> 
> When is the 18-core 7980X coming out?


Later this year (October time-frame) was the last credible mention.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Baasha*
> 
> When is the 18-core 7980X coming out?


Intel will launch the 12-core Core i9-7920X, the 14-core Core i9-7940X, the 16-core Core i9-7960X, and the 18-core Core i9-7980XE from August through October, with exact dates and pricing to be disclosed later. I am waiting on the i9-7980xe also and the ASUS X299 Apex or the EVGA X299 Dark.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Example: if you set your voltage to 1.050v and offset + .001mv it will give you 1.051v. If you set your voltage to 1.050 and offset - .001mv
> you will get 1.049v.


Once i set it to offset mode it doesn't let me set any voltage it just lets me add the offset but with no base voltage so it's like im going in blind


----------



## DNMock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I would try +.20 to start with and go 10 mv increments from that point. When you look at you bios that will read the voltage at idle. You need to be able to read your voltage when you are stress testing your system. Watch your temps. Note you need to get your core voltage and memory stable before overclocking cashe / ring.


I've fought with mine forever and for the life of me I can't get it to go up over a multiplier of 30. Stable at the base voltage at 30x and even throwing +.32 on the offset didn't even allow me to go to 31x stable.

Honestly I feel like I can get the CPU and RAM to run stable at higher clocks than I'm running now, but that stupid Cache is just dead set on not moving.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Once i set it to offset mode it doesn't let me set any voltage it just lets me add the offset but with no base voltage so it's like im going in blind


If you are using a Gigabyte board (not sure about Asus or ASRock but if you set the voltage from AUTO to NORMAL it locks in the auto voltage for the weakest core and the offset is just how much more voltage will be added in turbo mode.

Basically you can just add the two together to see what your voltage will be at when under load.


----------



## tistou77

The adaptive mode for the cache still does not work on the X299 ?


----------



## DNMock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> The adaptive mode for the cache still does not work on the X299 ?


I think Cache is somehow still locked as if it were a non-K CPU for some reason.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Once i set it to offset mode it doesn't let me set any voltage it just lets me add the offset but with no base voltage so it's like im going in blind


So when you set Cashe voltage to Offset and Offset Mode Sign to + you don't have a Additional CPU Voltage line?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> The adaptive mode for the cache still does not work on the X299 ?


Adaptive does not work for Cashe problem with Intel microcode. You have to use manual or offset.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> So when you set Cashe voltage to Offset and Offset Mode Sign to + you don't have a Additional CPU Voltage line?


I set voltage mode to offset then I set to + then it lets me input the offset but nowhere does it show me what the base voltage is so idk if I input 0.020 wether that means it's at 1.020 or something else


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> I set voltage mode to offset then I set to + then it lets me input the offset but nowhere does it show me what the base voltage is so idk if I input 0.020 weather that means it's at 1.020 or something else


I have a MSI board so mine is a little bit different. On your board the UEFI is setting the base voltage and adding 20mv to that voltage. You might try asking @jpmboy this question he is a expert on ASUS boards.







I need to learn more about the ASUS UEFI because I will probably get the ASUS Apex this go around.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DNMock*
> 
> I've fought with mine forever and for the life of me I can't get it to go up over a multiplier of 30. Stable at the base voltage at 30x and even throwing +.32 on the offset didn't even allow me to go to 31x stable.
> 
> Honestly I feel like I can get the CPU and RAM to run stable at higher clocks than I'm running now, but that stupid Cache is just dead set on not moving.
> If you are using a Gigabyte board (not sure about Asus or ASRock but if you set the voltage from AUTO to NORMAL it locks in the auto voltage for the weakest core and the offset is just how much more voltage will be added in turbo mode.
> 
> Basically you can just add the two together to see what your voltage will be at when under load.


Try using manual to see what voltage is needed to stabilize your cashe overclock. Then you can set your offset for 24/7 OC. Remember you may need to increase your core and CPU input (VCCIN) voltage to stabilized your system when overclocking cashe. For CPU input voltage try 0.45v above core to start than increase in small increments (10mv).


----------



## tabbycph

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Thanks. Couldn't read pic on my phone lol.... it would be interesting to test what the max wattage is before the vrms spike in temp to throttling lvl. I know it would be a lot of testing but it would help to know what it's true limit is....I have never been able to push that much voltage as I hit the thermal ceiling on my cpu a long time before the vrms


Here it is:
Spec:
Gigabyte Aurous Gaming 9
Bios voltage advance setting, CPU loadline cal: Extreme and CPU vcore protection:extreme
7900X delided
64 GB Corsair 3000 Mhz memory
Custom water, dual pump and ekwb supremehf block.

Test setting:
Room temp 22 celcius.
Prime95 26.6 smallFTF
Prime95 run until max temp/watt and then 30 min cool down, before next test.



The vrm has a limit at 115 celcius and then begins to throttling. At 4.8 GHz 1.25 volt, it takes 20 min to get to 115 celcius and then just throttles down to 114 celcius and then up again, thats whiteout major throttling.So i think the limit is between 290 and 335 watt.

Enjoy, let me know if I shall do the same whit AVX.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Once i set it to offset mode it doesn't let me set any voltage it just lets me add the offset but with no base voltage so it's like im going in blind


I found this I think it will help! If not reach out to @jpmboy


----------



## DNMock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Try using manual to see what voltage is needed to stabilize your cashe overclock. Then you can set your offset for 24/7 OC. Remember you may need to increase your core and CPU input (VCCIN) voltage to stabilized your system when overclocking cashe. For CPU input voltage try 0.45v above core to start than increase in small increments (10mv).


Sad part is I've upped all those with optimized default clock speeds to higher numbers than those.

Also tried loading some bios profiles on listed on the Gigabyte forums. BSOD...

My CPU just seems to hate Cache overclocking for some reason. Probably an obscure setting in the BIOS (using the newest BETA bios that has several bugs in it).

As an aside CPU clocks like a champ. a little tweaking and I might be able to have a comfortable 4.9 ghz 24/7 there.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Baasha*
> 
> When is the 18-core 7980X coming out?


not soon enough.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Once i set it to offset mode it doesn't let me set any voltage it just lets me add the offset but with no base voltage so it's like im going in blind


use the default cache vid as the base for adding an offset voltage. YGPM
use AID64 to see what the load ache voltage is once in windows.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> The adaptive mode for the cache still does not work on the X299 ?


if there's no turbo multis for cache, how's adaptive gonna work ?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not soon enough.


On the bright side, it gives the MB vendors some time to re-work VRMs for the 500W they need to provide.


----------



## Gettz8488

Curious if anyone can answer this question. On my x299 strix i set syn all cores too 4.5 ghz at 1.2 V been working fine for days i disabled svid and set cpu current capability to 140%. Now for some reason if i disable turbo boost in cpu power management my cpu will only do its base 3.5 is this normal? i remember i would always disable turbo and just manually set it and it would load at the set ghz.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Curious if anyone can answer this question. On my x299 strix i set syn all cores too 4.5 ghz at 1.2 V been working fine for days i disabled svid and set cpu current capability to 140%. Now for some reason if i disable turbo boost in cpu power management my cpu will only do its base 3.5 is this normal? i remember i would always disable turbo and just manually set it and it would load at the set ghz.


Are you using AVX/AVX512 on your tests and have an AVX offset? The CPU will down clock to your offset soon as it starts to process AVX. Let's say have the multiplier to 50x and you have AVX set to Negative 15 then the highest your CPU will run is 3.5GHz soon as it starts to process video encoding tests.


----------



## Rammler

for 4.8 ghz i need 1.32v. for 4.7ghz only 1.235. i wonder if its a good chip or a bad chip. so few oc results to compare to atm. :-(


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Example: if you set your voltage to 1.050v and offset + .001mv it will give you 1.051v. If you set your voltage to 1.050 and offset - .001mv
> you will get 1.049v.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once i set it to offset mode it doesn't let me set any voltage it just lets me add the offset but with no base voltage so it's like im going in blind
Click to expand...

Do you have a Gigabyte motherboard? If you do +0.000v is stock voltage anything you add goes above that +.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabbycph*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Thanks. Couldn't read pic on my phone lol.... it would be interesting to test what the max wattage is before the vrms spike in temp to throttling lvl. I know it would be a lot of testing but it would help to know what it's true limit is....I have never been able to push that much voltage as I hit the thermal ceiling on my cpu a long time before the vrms
> 
> 
> 
> Here it is:
> Spec:
> Gigabyte Aurous Gaming 9
> Bios voltage advance setting, CPU loadline cal: Extreme and CPU vcore protection:extreme
> 7900X delided
> 64 GB Corsair 3000 Mhz memory
> Custom water, dual pump and ekwb supremehf block.
> 
> Test setting:
> Room temp 22 celcius.
> Prime95 26.6 smallFTF
> Prime95 run until max temp/watt and then 30 min cool down, before next test.
> 
> 
> 
> The vrm has a limit at 115 celcius and then begins to throttling. At 4.8 GHz 1.25 volt, it takes 20 min to get to 115 celcius and then just throttles down to 114 celcius and then up again, thats whiteout major throttling.So i think the limit is between 290 and 335 watt.
> 
> Enjoy, let me know if I shall do the same whit AVX.
Click to expand...

So with that knowledge what do you intend to leave the overclock at?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Are you using AVX/AVX512 on your tests and have an AVX offset? The CPU will down clock to your offset soon as it starts to process AVX. Let's say have the multiplier to 50x and you have AVX set to Negative 15 then the highest your CPU will run is 3.5GHz soon as it starts to process video encoding tests.


I'm not using an avx offset its just stuck at 3.5 base if i disable turbo even while idle. Everything works perfectly fine if I have turbo enabled but my target is 4.6 in bios it sits at 3.5 with turbo enabled but 4.6 once windows loads and everything works normally if I disable turbo mode even if I set 4.6 just stayes 3.5


----------



## tabbycph2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> So with that knowledge what do you intend to leave the overclock at?


At 5 GHz.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Do you have a Gigabyte motherboard? If you do +0.000v is stock voltage anything you add goes above that +.


I got the asus x299 strix if I open hwmonitor at default cache voltage it says offset +0.000 if I put for example +0.040 it will show that in hw monitor but it doesn't show me what the default I'm running at tvh it doesn't matter as long as I get it stable but I don't want to overvolt it is all.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> I'm not using an avx offset its just stuck at 3.5 base if i disable turbo even while idle. Everything works perfectly fine if I have turbo enabled but my target is 4.6 in bios it sits at 3.5 with turbo enabled but 4.6 once windows loads and everything works normally if I disable turbo mode even if I set 4.6 just stayes 3.5


Did you get you cashe offset working? leave Turbo Mod enabled better single core performance.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> I got the asus x299 strix if I open hwmonitor at default cache voltage it says offset +0.000 if I put for example +0.040 it will show that in hw monitor but it doesn't show me what the default I'm running at tvh it doesn't matter as long as I get it stable but I don't want to overvolt it is all.


Hello

Cache voltage, like CPU core voltage, is processor dependent. With that said using a 7820X with the STRIX I have set up here 0.090V offset results in approximately 1.0V total cache voltage.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Cache voltage, like CPU core voltage, is processor dependent. With that said using a 7820X with the STRIX I have set up here 0.090V offset results in approximately 1.0V total cache voltage.


I have the 7800x with the strix anyway I can accurately set the offset voltage.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> I have the 7800x with the strix anyway I can accurately set the offset voltage.


Hello

If this is the case then where is the problem?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> If this is the case then where is the problem?


Sorry I was asking if there is an accurate way of knowing what my voltage will be once I add offset


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Sorry I was asking if there is an accurate way of knowing what my voltage will be once I add offset


Hello

Default for the CPU I have here is roughly 0.910V (1.0V - 0.090V). That gives you a close number to work from.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Default for the CPU I have here is roughly 0.910V (1.0V - 0.090V). That gives you a close number to work from.


How were you able to find that out? I'm not sure that's the case with mine since I set my offset at 0.040 at 3.0ghz mesh and it was stable


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabbycph2*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> So with that knowledge what do you intend to leave the overclock at?
> 
> 
> 
> At 5 GHz.
Click to expand...

Wow 5 GHz 24/7 is great.







Any AVX offset?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Do you have a Gigabyte motherboard? If you do +0.000v is stock voltage anything you add goes above that +.
> 
> 
> 
> I got the asus x299 strix if I open hwmonitor at default cache voltage it says offset +0.000 if I put for example +0.040 it will show that in hw monitor but it doesn't show me what the default I'm running at tvh it doesn't matter as long as I get it stable but I don't want to overvolt it is all.
Click to expand...

Then how do you know what the Vcore is running at?


----------



## TahoeDust

What is the highest voltage that can be safely run on the mesh? I have my mesh voltage set to auto and the mesh frequency set to 3200MHz. It has been 100% stable. I don't remember what voltage it was commanding/running. My chip is away being dellided, so I can't check right now.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Then how do you know what the Vcore is running at?


Well my Vcore shows on software hwmonitor shows VID as does Aida for some reason though Aida is showing Cpucore value at 0.9 so does hwinfo and cpuz I'm guessing this is a big or the sensor is messed up HWInfo reports the VID correctly under load which is 1.2 but Vcore is 0.9 on all software for some reason


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Then how do you know what the Vcore is running at?
> 
> 
> 
> Well my Vcore shows on software hwmonitor shows VID as does Aida for some reason though Aida is showing Cpucore value at 0.9 so does hwinfo and cpuz I'm guessing this is a big or the sensor is messed up HWInfo reports the VID correctly under load which is 1.2 but Vcore is 0.9 on all software for some reason
Click to expand...

Does the motherboard have software you can use for reading Vcore? I would not go off VID unless it changes with Vcore settings.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Does the motherboard have software you can use for reading Vcore? I would not go off VID unless it changes with Vcore settings.


It's the asus x299 Strix E it has asus ai suite but it also reports the Voltage at 1.2 under load


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Curious if anyone can answer this question. On my x299 strix i set syn all cores too 4.5 ghz at 1.2 V been working fine for days *i disabled svid* and set cpu current capability to 140%. Now for some reason if i disable turbo boost in cpu power management my cpu will only do its base 3.5 is this normal? i remember i would always disable turbo and just manually set it and it would load at the set ghz.


keep cpu svid on auto unless you are using full manual override where you want to disable cpu-VR communication.
If you disable turbo in bios, you disable all turbo multipliers, so yes, the max frq will be based off the highest non-turbo multiplier. This is okay when using a very high BCLK (or strap). Otherwise leave turbo boost Enabled/Auto
ps: you got Praz helping you... he's the best.


----------



## BroPhilip

Oh snap..... Overachiever, so much data. You are awesome.

What case are you using to test and how much air flow does it have?
Also are you running a mesh overclock. I upped my to 3ghz with my clock set at 4.7 at 1.18v and even with a 5 offset I am cooking my cpu. Floating right at 100c with 290w using small ftf. before the mesh oc temps were pretty good. After a couple of min my vrm was at 67c. I killed the test because of temps but at 170w consistant my vrm levels out at 58 - 60c.

I would love to see your results with avx and what clocks you can sustain.
Now for the big question are you happy with the Aorus 9 vrm performance?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabbycph*
> 
> Here it is:
> Spec:
> Gigabyte Aurous Gaming 9
> Bios voltage advance setting, CPU loadline cal: Extreme and CPU vcore protection:extreme
> 7900X delided
> 64 GB Corsair 3000 Mhz memory
> Custom water, dual pump and ekwb supremehf block.
> 
> Test setting:
> Room temp 22 celcius.
> Prime95 26.6 smallFTF
> Prime95 run until max temp/watt and then 30 min cool down, before next test.
> 
> 
> 
> The vrm has a limit at 115 celcius and then begins to throttling. At 4.8 GHz 1.25 volt, it takes 20 min to get to 115 celcius and then just throttles down to 114 celcius and then up again, thats whiteout major throttling.So i think the limit is between 290 and 335 watt.
> 
> Enjoy, let me know if I shall do the same whit AVX.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Does the motherboard have software you can use for reading Vcore? I would not go off VID unless it changes with Vcore settings.
> 
> 
> 
> It's the asus x299 Strix E it has asus ai suite but it also reports the Voltage at 1.2 under load
Click to expand...

Does asus ai suite read the Vcore voltage or VID?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Default for the CPU I have here is roughly 0.910V (1.0V - 0.090V). That gives you a close number to work from.


hey Praz, are you running 2x 3600c15 kits on the strix?
I've been looking at *these* for x299... lol, only if I can turn the light bar off tho.


----------



## pantsaregood

Has anyone had any issues with the X299 Taichi providing enough power for overclocking? It looks like a nice board overall, but the single 8-pin connector makes me skeptical.


----------



## Menthol

Are single sided dimms still the preferred modules on X299? Hopefully the new Gskill kits are released soon 8X8GB or 4X8 4000mhz, the all black dimms


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Does asus ai suite read the Vcore voltage or VID?


It's reading the VID


----------



## Gettz8488

Anyone else with the strix E able to read there Vcore in software?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Does asus ai suite read the Vcore voltage or VID?
> 
> 
> 
> It's reading the VID
Click to expand...

When you change the Vcore does the VID change under load?
Just wondering if the software is actually reading Vcore however shows VID?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> When you change the Vcore does the VID change under load?
> Just wondering if the software is actually reading Vcore however shows VID?


if I change my core voltage you mean? Yes the vid chances for example if I run stock settings my vid stays at around 0.9-1.050 VID when I overclock i set my voltage at 1.2 and the vid is also 1.2 under load the Vid also downvolting when pc is idle or using pstates. My Vcore readings stay the same though 0.998 on almost everything which is impossible seeing as I'm running 4.7 ghz and getting a 1450+ score on cinebench


----------



## ManyThreads

I'm at 4.6 Ghz now on 1.15v and I set the CPU input voltage to 1.92. Doesn't go over 60C in the CPU-Z Stress test, and doesn't go over 80C in Cinebench. TUF Detective CPU temps are always lower than HWMonitor termps but both seem OK. Pretty happy with that so far. Not sure if I'll try for 4.7, I might - think I can get that at 1.15v?. Now I need to figure out how to OC the NorthBridge.

I cannot figure out this damn fan though. Here is how it's set up:

Case fan #3 - Rear exhaust
Case fan #4 - Front intake
Case fan #5 - Front intake

I set them all to identical curves, and identical temperature sources. I tried the CPU and motherboard as power sources. Fan #4 still has a mind of it's own, usually running double or more the RPM of the others under load, and almost double under idle (900 RPM when the others are doing 500 RPM). Can anyone think of a reason why this one fan would not be getting the same info as the others? I double checked everything - they are all on PWM, they are all on the identical custom curve, and they all have the same temperature sensor sources. I'm stumped.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> if I change my core voltage you mean? Yes the vid chances for example if I run stock settings my vid stays at around 0.9-1.050 VID when I overclock i set my voltage at 1.2 and the vid is also 1.2 under load the Vid also downvolting when pc is idle or using pstates. My Vcore readings stay the same though 0.998 on almost everything which is impossible seeing as I'm running 4.7 ghz and getting a 1450+ score on cinebench


Sounds like it is reporting your vcore as VID.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Sounds like it is reporting your vcore as VID.


I hope that's the case since everyone is saying not to go on ViD but it's the only reporting anything.


----------



## Gettz8488

Completely off topic as well do you guys think x299 will be supported on the next line of HEDT chips? I believe x99 had a few


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Completely off topic as well do you guys think x299 will be supported on the next line of HEDT chips? I believe x99 had a few


Yes, we should see Cascade Lake-X on X299 (14nm++)


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> Yes, we should see Cascade Lake-X on X299 (14nm++)


Isn't cascade lake Going to be a Xeon? Either way I'm glad to hear it just with amd having support on the x370 until Atleast 2020 I was kind of hoping intel would Atleast match it on x299


----------



## Gettz8488

So just to try and get some peace of mind how likely is it that my vid in hwmonitor and HWInfo is actually my Vcore? The vid rapidly changes with downclocking and under load. It can go from 0.7 vaults while idle to the max of 1.2 under load should I assume that this is my Vcore? Since I can't get any Vcore readings anywhere else. HWInfo Aida hwmonitor cpu z all report 0.9 Vcore which is not possible since it would have crashed under load. They all however report the vid and it's fluctuations correctly even asus ai suite. Also on cinebench with a 4.6 overclock my temps don't hit 70C


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> So just to try and get some peace of mind how likely is it that my vid in hwmonitor and HWInfo is actually my Vcore? The vid rapidly changes with downclocking and under load. It can go from 0.7 vaults while idle to the max of 1.2 under load should I assume that this is my Vcore? Since I can't get any Vcore readings anywhere else. HWInfo Aida hwmonitor cpu z all report 0.9 Vcore which is not possible since it would have crashed under load. They all however report the vid and it's fluctuations correctly even asus ai suite. Also on cinebench with a 4.6 overclock my temps don't hit 70C


If your VID was 1.2V, your system would likely completely fail to boot. Conversely, if your VCore was 1.8-1.9V, your system would either immediately shut down from overheating or your CPU would just fry.

Either the 1.2V figure is your VCore or your VID is just flat out failing to report properly.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> If your VID was 1.2V, your system would likely completely fail to boot. Conversely, if your VCore was 1.8-1.9V, your system would either immediately shut down from overheating or your CPU would just fry.
> 
> Either the 1.2V figure is your VCore or your VID is just flat out failing to report properly.


Thanks for the reply. Not sure I understand why would I have a failed boot if my VID is 1.2 but I don't get any failed boots so far. I do understand however that at 1.9 vaults I would be over heating. What I'm trying to do is find what my Vcore is underload and the only reading that's reporting for me is VID which does change when I change bios settings for example at stock my VID will top off at 1.050 vaults and at idle it sits around 0.7 now with my overclock and my voltage at 1.2 it tops off at 1.2 the vid reading is constantly changing it's value as if it were reporting Vcore. I'm not 100% certain but isn't the VID supposed to report a single value?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> So just to try and get some peace of mind how likely is it that my vid in hwmonitor and HWInfo is actually my Vcore? The vid rapidly changes with downclocking and under load. It can go from 0.7 vaults while idle to the max of 1.2 under load should I assume that this is my Vcore? Since I can't get any Vcore readings anywhere else. HWInfo Aida hwmonitor cpu z all report 0.9 Vcore which is not possible since it would have crashed under load. They all however report the vid and it's fluctuations correctly even asus ai suite. Also on cinebench with a 4.6 overclock my temps don't hit 70C


Try fixed Vcore and see if the VID goes up and down under load. If it does that is VID.


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Thanks for the reply. Not sure I understand why would I have a failed boot if my VID is 1.2 but I don't get any failed boots so far. I do understand however that at 1.9 vaults I would be over heating. What I'm trying to do is find what my Vcore is underload and the only reading that's reporting for me is VID which does change when I change bios settings for example at stock my VID will top off at 1.050 vaults and at idle it sits around 0.7 now with my overclock and my voltage at 1.2 it tops off at 1.2 the vid reading is constantly changing it's value as if it were reporting Vcore. I'm not 100% certain but isn't the VID supposed to report a single value?


Sorry, I was thinking of VCCIN.

VID is what your CPU is requesting from the VRM. VCore is VID plus any offset and Vdroop involved.

VID doesn't report a single value.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> If your VID was 1.2V, your system would likely completely fail to boot. Conversely, if your VCore was 1.8-1.9V, your system would either immediately shut down from overheating or your CPU would just fry.
> 
> Either the 1.2V figure is your VCore or your VID is just flat out failing to report properly.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the reply. Not sure I understand why would I have a failed boot if my VID is 1.2 but I don't get any failed boots so far. I do understand however that at 1.9 vaults I would be over heating. What I'm trying to do is find what my Vcore is underload and the only reading that's reporting for me is VID which does change when I change bios settings for example at stock my VID will top off at 1.050 vaults and at idle it sits around 0.7 now with my overclock and my voltage at 1.2 it tops off at 1.2 the vid reading is constantly changing it's value as if it were reporting Vcore. I'm not 100% certain but isn't the VID supposed to report a single value?
Click to expand...

VID is (Voltage identification digital) The CPU sends a voltage signal amount to the VRM for Vcore.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> Sorry, I was thinking of VCCIN.
> 
> VID is what your CPU is requesting from the VRM. VCore is VID plus any offset and Vdroop involved.
> 
> VID doesn't report a single value.


That's alright. And I always thought it did since I only looked at Vcore. Since
All software I use is reporting Vcore at 0.994-0.998 what should I do to get an actual reading or should I not be worried because it shouldn't be to far from my
Vid?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> VID is (Voltage identification digital) it sends a voltage signal amount to the VRM for Vcore.


yea I just read on up on what it is. Is it possible that my Vcore is reporting as vid though? Because my Vcore on all software is at 0.9 under load other then Aida 64 where it's at 1.98 which is impossible as well


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Try fixed Vcore and see if the VID goes up and down under load. If it does that is VID.


Will do tomorrow if it stays stays fixed would that mean it's my Vcore and not vid? And if it fluctuates it means it's my vid?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Try fixed Vcore and see if the VID goes up and down under load. If it does that is VID.
> 
> 
> 
> Will do tomorrow if it stays stays fixed would that mean it's my Vcore and not vid? And if it fluctuates it means it's my vid?
Click to expand...

Yes. The Fixed vcore should droop a little with LLC on Auto. However it should not drop to 0.7 volts while idle.


----------



## pantsaregood

No.

VCore and VID can both fluctuate.

VID is what your CPU requests.
VCore is what is delivered to your CPU.

If you set a fixed VCore, you're likely also fixing your VID.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> No.
> 
> VCore and VID can both fluctuate.
> 
> VID is what your CPU requests.
> VCore is what is delivered to your CPU.
> 
> If you set a fixed VCore, you're likely also fixing your VID.


Not on my Intel, VID still changes with Fixed Vcore.


----------



## Jbravo33

Can someone with an msi board explain to me why when messing with bios I ended up booting with a higher res but smaller msi logo during post instead of a lower resolution full screen image post. Anyhow I can't seem to get back the smaller but sharper post image. Please help. Trying to finish up this rig for my nephew. Just wish I knew what I did to get that screen.
X299 msi tomahawk ac
7740x

Edit: further searching says it's the splash screen. It randomly changed to a lot cleaner one then I set to load defaults on bios trying to overclock and now it's back to the original crappy one.


----------



## tabbycph

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Oh snap..... Overachiever, so much data. You are awesome.
> 
> What case are you using to test and how much air flow does it have?
> Also are you running a mesh overclock. I upped my to 3ghz with my clock set at 4.7 at 1.18v and even with a 5 offset I am cooking my cpu. Floating right at 100c with 290w using small ftf. before the mesh oc temps were pretty good. After a couple of min my vrm was at 67c. I killed the test because of temps but at 170w consistant my vrm levels out at 58 - 60c.
> 
> I would love to see your results with avx and what clocks you can sustain.
> Now for the big question are you happy with the Aorus 9 vrm performance?


A corsair 900D, the side is open, the fans in the top and side is running very low and dosn't make a alot of airflow.


Dont mind the mes.

I will try and make test with avx.

No im not happy with vrm headsink, I wish they very big and much better, I wonder what will happen, when the 12 and 18 cores come.


----------



## BroPhilip

I have really been struggling with it as well, I am in the last 10 days of my return period and am contemplating sending it back and getting the Asus rampage. I really like the board and the audio but I do want to upgrade in the future and I am afraid of it not being enough...

ALSO, have you been reading the discussion in the gigabyte x299 thread.. .

http://www.overclock.net/t/1633978/gigabyte-x299-overclocking-thread/90#post_26232681

It appears as the gaming 9 can only handle 32 pcie lanes with sli. Making it an 8x-16x-8x while both the 7 and 3 can do 16x-16x-8x. This has been confirmed by the gigabyte rep. ?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabbycph*
> 
> A corsair 900D, the side is open, the fans in the top and side is running very low and dosn't make a alot of airflow.
> 
> 
> Dont mind the mes.
> 
> I will try and make test with avx.
> 
> No im not happy with vrm headsink, I wish they very big and much better, I wonder what will happen, when the 12 and 18 cores come.


----------



## BroPhilip

New video showing the new heat sink on the rampage extreme...


----------



## Gettz8488

Anyone having trouble getting Vcore readings on x299 strix? No software is reporting it for me


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Anyone having trouble getting Vcore readings on x299 strix? No software is reporting it for me


7 july Aida 64 beta?

https://www.aida64.com/downloads/NDkwNjRiNGU=


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> hey Praz, are you running 2x 3600c15 kits on the strix?
> I've been looking at *these* for x299... lol, only if I can turn the light bar off tho.


Hello

Yes 2 3600C15 kits. Why not buy the same without the LEDs?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Anyone having trouble getting Vcore readings on x299 strix? No software is reporting it for me


Hello

All software I have used reports VCORE fine with the STRIX.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Yes 2 3600C15 kits. Why not buy the same without the LEDs?
> Hello
> 
> All software I have used reports VCORE fine with the STRIX.


Could I have messed up a bios setting? All software is reporting my vid correctly. But Vcore in hwinfo is 0.9 in Aida it's 1.98 using the new beta version it's 0.9 all this is under load any idea to what may be able to do?


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> VID is (Voltage identification digital) The CPU sends a voltage signal amount to the VRM for Vcore.


Hello

Actual VCORE is supplied by the IVR. The amount if voltage supplied to the processor from the VRM is dictated by the VCCIN setting.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Could I have messed up a bios setting? All software is reporting my vid correctly. But Vcore in hwinfo is 0.9 in Aida it's 1.98 using the new beta version it's 0.9 all this is under load any idea to what may be able to do?


Hello

Match the voltage value shown in CPU-Z to your other software. Software that displays voltage for each core will show differences as each core uses an internal offset in addition to the external value set.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> hey Praz, are you running 2x 3600c15 kits on the strix?
> I've been looking at *these* for x299... lol, only if I can turn the light bar off tho.


Why not the same in 4000 C18 ?








I tested them (not RGB) and they are worse than the 3600 C15 (require more voltage for same frequencies / timings)


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Actual VCORE is supplied by the IVR. The amount if voltage supplied to the processor from the VRM is dictated by the VCCIN setting.
> Hello
> 
> Match the voltage value shown in CPU-Z to your other software. Software that displays voltage for each core will show differences as each core uses an internal offset in addition to the external value set.


Sorry praz not exactly as familiar with things as you are so not sure I understand. My cpu z voltage is at 0.992-8 at all times even under load all other software reports the same for Vcore which is not possible seeing as it hasn't crashed when stress it. However in HWInfo the vid for each core is reported each has a different voltage depending on the load is that what u mean?


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Sorry praz not exactly as familiar with things as you are so not sure I understand. My cpu z voltage is at 0.992-8 at all times even under load all other software reports the same for Vcore which is not possible seeing as it hasn't crashed when stress it. However in HWInfo the vid for each core is reported each has a different voltage depending on the load is that what u mean?


Hello

Not sure where the issue could be if that is what you are seeing in CPU-Z. Check the screenshot below.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Not sure where the issue could be if that is what you are seeing in CPU-Z. Check the screenshot below.


 I took a few screens of my bios setting and my software monitoring. Idk why they report my core voltage as that not sure if you can see the pics clearly


----------



## djgar

You can use F12 in the BIOS to save the BIOS screen.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Can someone with an msi board explain to me why when messing with bios I ended up booting with a higher res but smaller msi logo during post instead of a lower resolution full screen image post. Anyhow I can't seem to get back the smaller but sharper post image. Please help. Trying to finish up this rig for my nephew. Just wish I knew what I did to get that screen.
> X299 msi tomahawk ac
> 7740x
> 
> Edit: further searching says it's the splash screen. It randomly changed to a lot cleaner one then I set to load defaults on bios trying to overclock and now it's back to the original crappy one.


Try to disable CSM if possible in UEFI.


----------



## Gettz8488

Can it be that I have my adaptive voltage set up wrong? I have cpu core voltage at 0.001 and my additional turbo offset at 1.200 but it's been working completely fine


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Try to disable CSM if possible in UEFI.


that worked THX U!


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Can it be that I have my adaptive voltage set up wrong? I have cpu core voltage at 0.001 and my additional turbo offset at 1.200 but it's been working completely fine


Extreme Tweaker Mode:
CPU Core Voltage: Adaptive
Offset Sign: +
CPU Core Voltage Offset: Auto
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage: 1.200


----------



## ManyThreads

Can anyone point me to a step by step guide to a safe, modest OC on the cache/NB for Asus boards? Mine idles at 800MHz and goes up to 2000MHz, so I am assuming I can continue to let it idle at 800, and raise it's 'turbo' frequency similar to OC'in a CPU. I looked around for older X99 guides thinking they would be the same but didn't get very far.


----------



## Gettz8488

So after messing with the settings I think I found the problem. It seems that the software is reporting my Vcore as if it were running at the base 3.5 ghz the bios does the same since when I'm in bios my clocks are at 3.5 base.

1. My question now is am I overclocking correctly? I have Xmp on bclk is at 100. I have sync all cores at 4.6 and adaptive voltage at 1.2 any other settings I should be touching or?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> I have really been struggling with it as well, I am in the last 10 days of my return period and am contemplating sending it back and getting the Asus rampage. I really like the board and the audio but I do want to upgrade in the future and I am afraid of it not being enough...
> 
> ALSO, have you been reading the discussion in the gigabyte x299 thread.. .
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1633978/gigabyte-x299-overclocking-thread/90#post_26232681
> 
> It appears as the gaming 9 can only handle 32 pcie lanes with sli. Making it an 8x-16x-8x while both the 7 and 3 can do 16x-16x-8x. This has been confirmed by the gigabyte rep. ?
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *tabbycph*
> 
> A corsair 900D, the side is open, the fans in the top and side is running very low and dosn't make a alot of airflow.
> 
> 
> Dont mind the mes.
> 
> I will try and make test with avx.
> 
> No im not happy with vrm headsink, I wish they very big and much better, I wonder what will happen, when the 12 and 18 cores come.
Click to expand...

You can run 16/16/4.


----------



## Gettz8488

Here is a screen shot of my software monitoring tools running cinebench with a manual voltage of 1.150. Can anyone explain the discrepencies? 0.998 vcore at 4.6 ghz is just not possible i can't find the core voltage actually driving me nuts. The ViD on all software is 1.150 it's the only one reporting what i imput in bios


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Here is a screen shot of my software monitoring tools running cinebench. Can anyone explain the discrepencies? 0.998 vcore at 4.6 ghz is just not possible i can't find the core voltage actually driving me nuts.


I can't directly answer your question, but I think some of the HW monitors are buggy. HWMonitor occasionally shows spikes to 5-6 GHz on my PC, and I can't believe that is actually happening.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> I can't directly answer your question, but I think some of the HW monitors are buggy. HWMonitor occasionally shows spikes to 5-6 GHz on my PC, and I can't believe that is actually happening.


I'm more worried that I'm secretly overvolting since I can't read my Vcore. Not really sure what to do so far I've been the only one having this issue I set my adaptive voltage to 1.150 running at 4.6 and it's working I find that a bit to hard to believe that at 1.150 it's hitting that


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> You can run 16/16/4.


Jerk..... lol

Yeah and the 4 is through the chipset and not cpu....I am already shipping it back. Don't like paying an extra 100$ to lose 8 pcie lanes lol


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> I'm more worried that I'm secretly overvolting since I can't read my Vcore. Not really sure what to do so far I've been the only one having this issue I set my adaptive voltage to 1.150 running at 4.6 and it's working I find that a bit to hard to believe that at 1.150 it's hitting that


It could just be a good chip. My runs 4.7 at 1.18 all day long and rocksolid


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> It could just be a good chip. My runs 4.7 at 1.18 all day long and rocksolid


That's good to hear. still worried about finding my vcore under load no software reports more then 0.9 it only reported 1.0 when increased my llc to 4


----------



## KCDC

I'll be building a system for a fellow designer fairly soon. Was going to build a copy of my x99 system in sig, but decided on skylake-x due to the price vs performance comparison.

Going with the 7820, STRIX X299-E, Trident Z 32 GB 3200 CL16, 960 EVO 1TB.

Corsair H115i, AX1200i and dual 980Ti's from my old rig. One waterforce and one windforce.

Anyone have the strix board yet? How do you like it? Hows the 7820 in the real world? People are freaking over the VRM heat, but that is only an issue with heavy overclocking, right? He doesn't want to overclock heavily. I will probably do something very minor that keeps the voltage on auto. What's the highest OC someones had with all auto voltage? Preferably with the 7820.

This will be primarily for DCC, CPU/GPU simulation/rendering and VFX, some gaming. (Maya, Real Flow, Cinema 4D, After Effects, etc) Looking forward to posting bench results once it all shows up!


----------



## Gettz8488

Is it normal for the VID to rapidly keep changing as my system idles and clocks up? i feel like somehow my Mobo is reporting vcore as VID seeing as my vcore is stuck at 0.9 at all times


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KCDC*
> 
> I'll be building a system for a fellow designer fairly soon. Was going to build a copy of my x99 system in sig, but decided on skylake-x due to the price vs performance comparison.
> 
> Going with the 7820, STRIX X299-E, Trident Z 32 GB 3200 CL16, 960 EVO 1TB.
> 
> Corsair H115i, AX1200i and dual 980Ti's from my old rig. One waterforce and one windforce.
> 
> Anyone have the strix board yet? How do you like it? Hows the 7820 in the real world? People are freaking over the VRM heat, but that is only an issue with heavy overclocking, right? He doesn't want to overclock heavily. I will probably do something very minor that keeps the voltage on auto. What's the highest OC someones had with all auto voltage? Preferably with the 7820.
> 
> This will be primarily for DCC, CPU/GPU simulation/rendering and VFX, some gaming. (Maya, Real Flow, Cinema 4D, After Effects, etc) Looking forward to posting bench results once it all shows up!


I have the 7820X on a ASUS TUF MK1 mobo and I'm on an air cooler (NH-D15).

Currently I'm at 4.6Ghz @ 1.15v core and 1.92 CPU input voltage. Highest CPU temp I have seen during Cinebench is 80C as reported by HWMonitor, and 74C reported by the TUF Detective. Auto voltage was giving it higher voltages. Leaving CPU-Z Stress test on for a while CPU temps don't go above 60C HWMonitor / 54C TUF Detective.

Highest VRM temperature I have seen (top or bottom sensor) is in the 50-55C range.

Outside of benchmarks, I don't see the CPU hit more than about 50-55C while doing work in Photoshop, etc.

Idle temps are 23-25C (I'm in a fairly cool basement).

Other than Q-Fan driving me insane I am very happy with everything so far.

I haven't done any crazy stress testing with AVX or Prime95 since that is simply nowhere near I will ever use the PC.


----------



## KCDC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> I have the 7820X on a ASUS TUF MK1 mobo and I'm on an air cooler (NH-D15).
> 
> Currently I'm at 4.6Ghz @ 1.15v core and 1.92 CPU input voltage. Highest CPU temp I have seen during Cinebench is 80C as reported by HWMonitor, and 74C reported by the TUF Detective. Auto voltage was giving it higher voltages. Leaving CPU-Z Stress test on for a while CPU temps don't go above 60C HWMonitor / 54C TUF Detective.
> 
> Highest VRM temperature I have seen (top or bottom sensor) is in the 50-55C range.
> 
> Outside of benchmarks, I don't see the CPU hit more than about 50-55C while doing work in Photoshop, etc.
> 
> Idle temps are 23-25C (I'm in a fairly cool basement).
> 
> Other than Q-Fan driving me insane I am very happy with everything so far.
> 
> I haven't done any crazy stress testing with AVX or Prime95 since that is simply nowhere near I will ever use the PC.


Nice thanks for the info, I'll probably start the OC there and see how it works when rendering.


----------



## Steve R

I've already got my 7820x @ 4.8, after seeing hardware unboxed video I wonder if I should have went i7 7700k as it was getting way more fps then the i7 7800x and sometimes 30-40% more. In his video overclocking the mesh to 3.0 ghz and using 3.2mhz ram barely improved the fps on the i7 7800x. I use a 144hz 1440p screen and got gtx 1080 ti.


----------



## Gettz8488

Here are the screen shots of Asus ai suite3 Core Voltage under load. @jpmboy @praz Since the ViD on all software line up with my ai suite should i assume that this is actually my vcore? since my vcore seems to be stuck at 0.9 on all software underload.


----------



## KCDC

It will be mostly for design and rendering work, so 4.8 sounds awesome! Not concerned about gaming for this specific build.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Yes 2 3600C15 kits. Why not buy the same without the LEDs?
> Hello
> 
> All software I have used reports VCORE fine with the STRIX.


Praz, I can't find the RGB version of the C15/3600 is it from newegg also? that link does not take me there.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are the screen shots of Asus ai suite3 Core Voltage under load. @jpmboy @praz Since the ViD on all software line up with my ai suite should i assume that this is actually my vcore? since my vcore seems to be stuck at 0.9 on all software underload.


Is the VID stable when you set LLC high and manual Vcore? if it is that would be Vcore.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I've yet to find a 3600 cl15 Trident Z kit in anything but the silver and red design.

I'm not sure any other ones exist.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> *Are single sided dimms still the preferred modules on X299*? Hopefully the new Gskill kits are released soon 8X8GB or 4X8 4000mhz, the all black dimms


good question... i think we're all just carrying forward the ddr4 "capabilities" from previous gen.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> if I change my core voltage you mean? Yes the vid chances for example if I run stock settings my vid stays at around 0.9-1.050 VID when I overclock i set my voltage at 1.2 and the vid is also 1.2 under load the Vid also downvolting when pc is idle or using pstates. My Vcore readings stay the same though 0.998 on almost everything which is impossible seeing as I'm running 4.7 ghz and getting a 1450+ score on cinebench


VID will move through the vid stack as frequency changes. So... at any fixed frequency the VID should be constant. Vcore will change depending on what method of voltage control you are using.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Yes 2 3600C15 kits. Why not buy the same without the LEDs?
> Hello
> 
> All software I have used reports VCORE fine with the STRIX.


just picked up 2 more 3600c15 kits. If/when new gen sticks come out for x299, the 3600c15s move easily. I mean, in testing about a dozen ddr4 kits, the 3600c15s seem to be the best bin so far (better than my 4266 c19 kit ! )
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Why not the same in 4000 C18 ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I tested them (not RGB) and they are worse than the 3600 C15 (require more voltage for same frequencies / timings)


^^ yeah as of today, the 3600c15 are likely the best chance for a kit with "range".








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Can it be that I have my adaptive voltage set up wrong? I have cpu core voltage at 0.001 and my additional turbo offset at 1.200 but it's been working completely fine


try putting offset to Auto and be sure to have cpu svid on Auto or enabled.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Steve R*
> 
> I've already got my 7820x @ 4.8, after seeing hardware unboxed video I wonder if I should have went i7 7*700k as it was getting way more fps then the i7 7800x* and sometimes 30-40% more. In his video overclocking the mesh to 3.0 ghz and using 3.2mhz ram barely improved the fps on the i7 7800x. I use a 144hz 1440p screen and got gtx 1080 ti.


I'm not surprised by this . The 7700K is a great gaming cpu. 4 cores at 5.0+ is hard to beat especially with SKL's IPC.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are the screen shots of Asus ai suite3 Core Voltage under load. @jpmboy @praz Since the ViD on all software line up with my ai suite should i assume that this is actually my vcore? since my vcore seems to be stuck at 0.9 on all software underload.


Have you set up a manual vcore to determine the voltage setting in bios needed for that frequency (should be the first thing we do on a new platform)? And on an ASUS board, use a middle LLC value, not high LLC numbers.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are the screen shots of Asus ai suite3 Core Voltage under load. @jpmboy @praz Since the ViD on all software line up with my ai suite should i assume that this is actually my vcore? since my vcore seems to be stuck at 0.9 on all software underload.


Hello

Idle and load for comparison.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Idle and load for comparison.



 Here are the screens idle and then one underload. Should i assume that this is correct vcore? Notice how my cpuz voltage stayed the same not sure why, also just noticed that the max TDP is 122 for my 7800x which is falso this chip is a 140 tdp rating


----------



## Gettz8488

@jpmboy Yes 1.150 is what is needed to run 4.6. My llc is on auto. should i change it? the point of the screens is to show you guys what i'm seeing on vcore voltages. is the ai suite correct on the voltage? Notice how under load my cpu z does not change its voltage hwinfo reports the ViD but if scroll down to vcore under my asus x299 it shows same thing cpuz does


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> VID is (Voltage identification digital) The CPU sends a voltage signal amount to the VRM for Vcore.
> 
> 
> 
> Hello
> 
> Actual VCORE is supplied by the IVR. The amount if voltage supplied to the processor from the VRM is dictated by the VCCIN setting.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I forgot the Skylake X uses a integrated Voltage regulator that regulates the voltage by it self from the supplied motherboard VRM voltage. Does everyone else have a Vcore reading that works correctly?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Thanks, I forgot the Skylake X uses a integrated Voltage regulator that regulates the voltage by it self from the supplied motherboard VRM voltage. Does everyone else have a Vcore reading that works correctly?


Does that mean that My vid is my actual vcore then?


----------



## Jbravo33

So my nephews pc that I built is done. Specs are 7740-msi tomahawk ac-16gb trident @3000-1080ti sc hybrid-960 evo 256gb-1tb wd black-krakenx42-evga750-corsair 460rgb.
Got it stable @ 5GHz with 1.255. Not sure why but when I'm in windows the bus which is set to 100 in bios. goes to 100.4 when in windows. Any ideas?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Thanks, I forgot the Skylake X uses a integrated Voltage regulator that regulates the voltage by it self from the supplied motherboard VRM voltage. Does everyone else have a Vcore reading that works correctly?
> 
> 
> 
> Does that mean that My vid is my actual vcore then?
Click to expand...

What it means is both the VID and Vcore readings come from the processor. On the older X99 the Vcore came from the VRM on the motherboard. So now things are switched around and the trouble your having shows it. In the past I have seen people with some haswell CPUs with FIVR fully intergrated Voltage regulators with your same problem, they could only read VID and not the actual Vcore on some motherboards.

Does the VID change when you set manual Voltage higher with LLC medium and you don't change clock speed? If it is VID it will change with clock speed, load, and idle. Vcore change only does not change VID. When you test things post the VID numbers you get and what you did to get the numbers so we can tell.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What it means is both the VID and Vcore readings come from the processor. On the older X99 the Vcore came from the VRM on the motherboard. So now things are switched around and the trouble your having shows it. In the past I have seen people with some haswell CPUs with FIVR fully intergrated Voltage regulators with your same problem, they could only read VID and not the actual Vcore on some motherboards.
> 
> Does the VID change when you set manual Voltage higher with LLC medium and you don't change clock speed? If it is VID it will change with clock speed, load, and idle. Vcore change only does not change VID. When you test things post the VID numbers you get and what you did to get the numbers so we can tell.


i tested this early i set it to manual 1.2 Vaul
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What it means is both the VID and Vcore readings come from the processor. On the older X99 the Vcore came from the VRM on the motherboard. So now things are switched around and the trouble your having shows it. In the past I have seen people with some haswell CPUs with FIVR fully intergrated Voltage regulators with your same problem, they could only read VID and not the actual Vcore on some motherboards.
> 
> Does the VID change when you set manual Voltage higher with LLC medium and you don't change clock speed? If it is VID it will change with clock speed, load, and idle. Vcore change only does not change VID. When you test things post the VID numbers you get and what you did to get the numbers so we can tell.


 Here are my number with Core Voltage set to manual 1.150 it does not change depending on load it just stayed the same wether it's on idle or load. when it's on manual voltage does that means it's not representative of my vcore? Note my core voltage on cpuz stays the same wether i increase voltage or lower.

Tested in stock setting in stock settings my VID is 1.050 and fluctuates so changing my core voltage seems to be changing my vid as well


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What it means is both the VID and Vcore readings come from the processor. On the older X99 the Vcore came from the VRM on the motherboard. So now things are switched around and the trouble your having shows it. In the past I have seen people with some haswell CPUs with FIVR fully intergrated Voltage regulators with your same problem, they could only read VID and not the actual Vcore on some motherboards.
> 
> Does the VID change when you set manual Voltage higher with LLC medium and you don't change clock speed? If it is VID it will change with clock speed, load, and idle. Vcore change only does not change VID. When you test things post the VID numbers you get and what you did to get the numbers so we can tell.
> 
> 
> 
> i tested this early i set it to manual 1.2 Vaul
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What it means is both the VID and Vcore readings come from the processor. On the older X99 the Vcore came from the VRM on the motherboard. So now things are switched around and the trouble your having shows it. In the past I have seen people with some haswell CPUs with FIVR fully intergrated Voltage regulators with your same problem, they could only read VID and not the actual Vcore on some motherboards.
> 
> Does the VID change when you set manual Voltage higher with LLC medium and you don't change clock speed? If it is VID it will change with clock speed, load, and idle. Vcore change only does not change VID. When you test things post the VID numbers you get and what you did to get the numbers so we can tell.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Here are my number with Core Voltage set to manual 1.150 it does not change depending on load it just stayed the same wether it's on idle or load. when it's on manual voltage does that means it's not representative of my vcore? Note my core voltage on cpuz stays the same wether i increase voltage or lower.
> 
> Tested in stock setting in stock settings my VID is 1.050 and fluctuates so changing my core voltage seems to be changing my vid as well
Click to expand...

From your information it looks like the VID reporting from software is actually the Vcore instead. Try setting the voltage to 1.3v and see what VID shows that is possibly the Vcore.

Manual voltage is fixed Vcore. Fixed Vcore does not use VID for calibration on voltage. Stock voltage uses VID for Vcore, that is why the voltage gose up and down with load and idle.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> From your information it looks like the VID reporting from software is actually the Vcore instead. Try setting the voltage to 1.3v and see what VID shows that is possibly the Vcore.
> 
> Manual voltage is fixed Vcore. Fixed Vcore does not use VID for calibration on voltage. Stock voltage uses VID for Vcore, that is why the voltage gose up and down with load and idle.


If i set it to 1.3 manual my vid also becomes 1.3 and stays there it only fluctuates if i use adaptive voltage. but it changes to 1.3 regardless of manual or adaptive


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> From your information it looks like the VID reporting from software is actually the Vcore instead. Try setting the voltage to 1.3v and see what VID shows that is possibly the Vcore.
> 
> Manual voltage is fixed Vcore. Fixed Vcore does not use VID for calibration on voltage. Stock voltage uses VID for Vcore, that is why the voltage gose up and down with load and idle.
> 
> 
> 
> If i set it to 1.3 manual my vid also becomes 1.3 and stays there it only fluctuates if i use adaptive voltage. but it changes to 1.3 regardless of manual or adaptive
Click to expand...

Good your done testing, VID is Vcore for you, sweet.







When you look at VID it is actually VCore.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Good your done testing, VID is Vcore for you, sweet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When you look at VID it is actually VCore.


Thank you so much i've been scratching my head lately about it


----------



## aDyerSituation

Finally got it setup! For the most part. Still need to test XMP and overclock, but dang does this thing glow!
It actually looks a lot more clean in person, I was surprised. Still, think I'm going to leave the led's off as I sleep right next to it LOL


----------



## carlhil2

I hope the wait for the 7960x isn't too long. what are the max safe voltage for SKL-X?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Finally got it setup! For the most part. Still need to test XMP and overclock, but dang does this thing glow!
> It actually looks a lot more clean in person, I was surprised. Still, think I'm going to leave the led's off as I sleep right next to it LOL


Nice. Yeah they always look cleaner in person. Seems like taking pictures always makes every wire in the rig stand out. Though that picture came out nice.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Finally got it setup! For the most part. Still need to test XMP and overclock, but dang does this thing glow!
> It actually looks a lot more clean in person, I was surprised. Still, think I'm going to leave the led's off as I sleep right next to it LOL
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Hello

What's with the memory placement?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> What's with the memory placement?


He got a dual kit of 4266 ram.


----------



## Kimir

He said placement, ie A1 B1 C1 D1 slots.
As there seems to be 2 on the right and none on the left.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> He said placement, ie A1 B1 C1 D1 slots.
> As there seems to be 2 on the right and none on the left.


Here's what his mobo manual calls for. From what I can tell his ram is in the correct slots for his mobo dual stick setup. It's different then what my Asus calls for.

For dual kit you need ram in DDR4_2_1C and DDR4_1_1D


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> He got a dual kit of 4266 ram.


Hello

2 modules really? I guess some things will never make sense to me.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> 2 modules really? I guess some things will never make sense to me.


You get what you can get at the time...high speed ram is expensive. No judgement here ✌


----------



## artins90

Guys I am problems with ram placement too on my MSI x299 SLI.

According to the manual I need to place my 2 sticks in slots A1 and C1, which I did.
However, at every boot the bios reminds me that the memory placement is wrong and that I should switch slots.
On top of that, the names of the slot reported by the bios don't match with the names on the manual.
Should I trust the bios or the manual?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> good question... i think we're all just carrying forward the ddr4 "capabilities" from previous gen.
> VID will move through the vid stack as frequency changes. So... at any fixed frequency the VID should be constant. Vcore will change depending on what method of voltage control you are using.
> just picked up 2 more 3600c15 kits. If/when new gen sticks come out for x299, the 3600c15s move easily. I mean, in testing about a dozen ddr4 kits, the 3600c15s seem to be the best bin so far (better than my 4266 c19 kit ! )
> ^^ yeah as of today, the 3600c15 are likely the best chance for a kit with "range".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> try putting offset to Auto and be sure to have cpu svid on Auto or enabled.
> I'm not surprised by this . The 7700K is a great gaming cpu. 4 cores at 5.0+ is hard to beat especially with SKL's IPC.
> Have you set up a manual vcore to determine the voltage setting in bios needed for that frequency (should be the first thing we do on a new platform)? And on an ASUS board, use a middle LLC value, not high LLC numbers.


is this the kits you guys bought? I can't find the RGB version. F4-3600C15D-16GTZ


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artins90*
> 
> Guys I am problems with ram placement too on my MSI x299 SLI.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> According to the manual I need to place my 2 sticks in slots A1 and C1, which I did.
> However, at every boot the bios reminds me that the memory placement is wrong and that I should switch slots.
> On top of that, the names of the slot reported by the bios don't match with the names on the manual.
> Should I trust the bios or the manual?


That's wonky.

I'd listen to the bios and send an email to msi asking about it.


----------



## ManyThreads

I still cannot figure out this damn fan issue. Maybe it will help to illustrate it to people - the curve is set to not increase speed until 50C is reached on the VCORE TOP sensor, and this is what I get - it's now running at almost three times the speed of the others when it shouldn't have increased it's speed at all:

Case Fan 4 is the rogue one (front intake, top). All case fans have IDENTICAL settings and curves:




It does vary it's speed, and occasionally runs at the proper speed when the computer is ice cold and freshly started up, so I know it isn't stuck at a particular speed. It behaves as if it isn't communicating with the the temperature sensor correctly.

Doesn't matter what other temperature sensors I link it to, it always has similar behavior, preemptively increasing it's speed before the set temperature is reached. The other 2 fans on the identical curves and temperature sensors always behave.


----------



## Chargeit

Have you tested the fan on a different header?


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Have you tested the fan on a different header?


No, I had it professionally built and everything is extremely nicely routed and zip-tied away. It would be a major pain to swap headers. If the header is the issue then I'd need to RMA my mobo anyway which would be even worse. I agree it would be a good troubleshooting step, but it is my last resort. I just need to make sure I have ruled out absolutely everything else.

The other issue I am having is that my 960 PRO SSD still only runs at 2/3 speed through the PCH. Elmor said he'd look into it but I never did see him post anywhere, so maybe he just hasn't got around to it yet. If these boards can't even handle close to max speed of a mainstream SSD through the PCH in the dedicated M2 slots, that would be quite surprising to me. I confirmed it's running on PCI Gen 3 X 4 and never gets hotter than about 37C.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> No, I had it professionally built and everything is extremely nicely routed and zip-tied away. It would be a major pain to swap headers. If the header is the issue then I'd need to RMA my mobo anyway which would be even worse. I agree it would be a good troubleshooting step, but it is my last resort. I just need to make sure I have ruled out absolutely everything else.
> 
> The other issue I am having is that my 960 PRO SSD still only runs at 2/3 speed through the PCH. Elmor said he'd look into it but I never did see him post anywhere, so maybe he just hasn't got around to it yet. If these boards can't even handle close to max speed of a mainstream SSD through the PCH in the dedicated M2 slots, that would be quite surprising to me. I confirmed it's running on PCI Gen 3 X 4 and never gets hotter than about 37C.


Had it built? Come'on man.









You could get an extension and test out if it works with another header.

https://www.amazon.com/extension-cable-Black-Sleeving-FC44PWM-12BKS/dp/B0055OLY88

*Looking at your fan list you should have a fan header free right under the #4 header. The #1 header.

*I marked the two headers with red.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Had it built? Come'on man.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You could get an extension and test out if it works with another header.
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/extension-cable-Black-Sleeving-FC44PWM-12BKS/dp/B0055OLY88
> 
> *Looking at your fan list you should have a fan header free right under the #4 header. The #1 header.


I've built my own computers before, but the cost for the shop to individually test all the hardware, mount the CPU, build it, install windows, get all the drivers, and be liable for any screw ups was worth the extremely low cost in my opinion, especially on a $4000 build. I think it only cost me $50 or so, and I got to use it a few days sooner than if I did it all myself.

Hmm, maybe I will see if it's easy enough to try another header with an extension cable, good idea. Regardless I will be pissed if my fan header is defective, I REALLY do not want to RMA my mobo.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> I've built my own computers before, but the cost for the shop to individually test all the hardware, mount the CPU, build it, and be liable for any screw ups was worth the extremely low cost in my opinion, especially on a $4000 build. I think it only cost me $50 or so, and I got to use it a few days sooner than if I did it all myself.
> 
> Hmm, maybe I will see if it's easy enough to try another header with an extension cable, good idea. Regardless I will be pissed if my fan header is defective, I REALLY do not want to RMA my mobo.


Could also try just unplugging. Turning on the computer. Then turning back off and plugging the fan back in. Maybe it just needs a reset? Worth a try.

I don't blame you. I always think I enjoy building my rig until I get down to doing it. Though, I like knowing how everything is set up. Make it easier to make adjustments in the future.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could also try just unplugging. Turning on the computer. Then turning back off and plugging the fan back in. Maybe it just needs a reset? Worth a try.
> 
> I don't blame you. I always think I enjoy building my rig until I get down to doing it. Though, I like knowing how everything is set up. Make it easier to make adjustments in the future.


I can try that too, it would be easy enough.

Yeah I am so picky about stuff like that. I wanted to know what method they used for applying the thermal compound, etc. haha - I was probably a very annoying customer.

First thing I did after I got it was pull out the manual and make sure everything was in properly, like the RAM in the proper slots for quad channel, that the RAM was running at the proper 3200 speed, both power connectors were attached to the mobo, USB headers to for the case hooked up properly, checked fan directions, etc. It was all good though, the guy who built it did a really great job.


----------



## Chargeit

Also, could test one of the other fans in that header. Could be a problem with the fan.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> You get what you can get at the time...high speed ram is expensive. No judgement here ✌


Correct. This was my thought process. I have never used more that 13gb in total so I figured I would just get this kit for now and get more down the road.

I agree though it looks a little..off. But I am OCD like that. I am having trouble getting the ram to run at anything but 2133. Going to play with it later tonight but using the XMP profile I insta-crash in real bench

Also the bios for the board is the worst I have ever used.


----------



## Gettz8488

Anyone know of a way to check cache voltage underload for the 7800x? Can't seem to find it


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Anyone know of a way to check cache voltage underload for the 7800x? Can't seem to find it


I would like to know too - I still cannot find out how to raise the turbo frequency on the cache and it's probably in the same place.


----------



## KCDC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Correct. This was my thought process. I have never used more that 13gb in total so I figured I would just get this kit for now and get more down the road.
> 
> I agree though it looks a little..off. But I am OCD like that. I am having trouble getting the ram to run at anything but 2133. Going to play with it later tonight but using the XMP profile I insta-crash in real bench
> 
> Also the bios for the board is the worst I have ever used.


You can mix kits on x299? I've always read to stay away from mixing on x99, even if it's the same model kit. If so, that would help this build down the road.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KCDC*
> 
> You can mix kits on x299? I've always read to stay away from mixing on x99, even if it's the same model kit. If so, that would help this build down the road.


It should work, albeit with a little bit of tweaking probably. .

The memory controller is supposedly really strong on X299, but so far I am not having any luck with just one kit


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Anyone know of a way to check cache voltage underload for the 7800x? Can't seem to find it


Try Aida64.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KCDC*
> 
> You can mix kits on x299? I've always read to stay away from mixing on x99, even if it's the same model kit. If so, that would help this build down the road.


well I wouldn't say it works really well yet but the fastest memory right now is the 3600/C15 calculated in true latency, it's faster than 4266/C19 except Crucial found here http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/memory-performance-speed-latency does not think so somewhat and states that faster frequency is always faster because the latency have basically stayed the same for a long time now. I don't know about anyone else but for me that's why I would risk it working properly.


----------



## Gettz8488

My OC settings so far

7800x x299 Strix-E

Core clock 4.6ghz all cores
Cpu Voltage - 1.152
Core input Voltage - 1.89 Default was 1.98 Haven't tried to go lower should i?
Cache - 3.0 ghz
Cache Voltage offset +0.025 Having trouble finding out what my voltage is for cache it doesn't show it on any software or on bios. Bios just says standard by cpu.

Any advice? everything seems stable.


----------



## Hatnim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> My OC settings so far
> 
> 7800x x299 Strix-E
> 
> Core clock 4.6ghz all cores
> Cpu Voltage - 1.152
> Core input Voltage - 1.89 Default was 1.98 Haven't tried to go lower should i?
> Cache - 3.0 ghz
> Cache Voltage offset +0.025 Having trouble finding out what my voltage is for cache it doesn't show it on any software or on bios. Bios just says standard by cpu.
> 
> Any advice? everything seems stable.


Mine is working on a similar setting with 1.20v CPU voltage with no AVX offset (AVX512 offset is -4). HWMonitor reports 1.126v for LLC/Mesh voltage when I set it to "Auto" or "Adaptive". You seem to have a very good chip if you are stable with no AVX offset at 1.152 voltage. Mine is delidded and operating under air cooling.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hatnim*
> 
> Mine is working on a similar setting with 1.20v CPU voltage with no AVX offset (AVX512 offset is -4). HWMonitor reports 1.126v for LLC/Mesh voltage when I set it to "Auto" or "Adaptive". You seem to have a very good chip if you are stable with no AVX offset at 1.152 voltage. Mine is delidded and operating under air cooling.


i was stable at 1.150 but I made it 1.152 just to make sure it gets sufficient volts Sorry I didn't mention I don't stress test with avx Prime non avx real bench cine bench and gaming. Stable as a rock on those. No offsets ATM


----------



## artins90

Similar situation here as well 7820x at 1.149v 4.8Ghz.
I was running with the AVX offset disabled but I got quite surprised when I launched one of AIDA's tests, my CPU instantly turned into a nuclear reactor. The CPU went from 33° C to 100+ in less than 3 seconds and the system powered off to prevent damage. I then turned the offset to -8 so 4 GHz but I am still afraid to run that test again. Everything else has been working flawlessly.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artins90*
> 
> Similar situation here as well 7820x at 1.149v 4.8Ghz.
> I was running with the AVX offset disabled but I got quite surprised when I launched one of AIDA's tests, my CPU instantly turned into a nuclear reactor. The CPU went from 33° C to 100+ in less than 3 seconds and the system powered off to prevent damage. I then turned the offset to -8 so 4 GHz but I am still afraid to run that test again. Everything else has been working flawlessly.


Which Aida test? I ran it with everything checked and I barely hit 70C I'm not delidded either


----------



## artins90

I don't recall exactly but was one of the tests below CPU hash, just follow down the list they don't take long.


----------



## Gettz8488

Just ran Prime95 V29.2 for 15min small ftp didn't get passed 85C at 4.6gh 1.152 V


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Just ran Prime95 V29.2 for 15min small ftp didn't get passed 85C at 4.6gh 1.152 V


Way to go.







Glad everything worked out nice build.


----------



## Piospi

I want to buy i9 7900k with 1080Ti in SLI but I don't know which memory to choose? I know that X99 didn't really like faster memory than 3200MHZ. Does fast memory give effects in Skylake-X?

I understand that I also need to take 4x8 for 32GB? It's correct?

I think about G.Skill Trident Z DDR4, 4x8GB, 3866MHz, CL18 (F4-3866C18Q-32GTZ). Good choice? Please help because I'm newbie in RAM


----------



## TahoeDust

***?


__
http://instagr.am/p/BWysDUalr2k%2F/


----------



## alex1990

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> ***?
> 
> 
> __
> http://instagr.am/p/BWysDUalr2k%2F/


And you already checked your cpu?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> ***?
> 
> 
> __
> http://instagr.am/p/BWysDUalr2k%2F/


This guy is a clear fanboy. Go look at his X299 gaming benchmarks and you will see him getting results wayyy lower than everyone else
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Piospi*
> 
> I want to buy i9 7900k with 1080Ti in SLI but I don't know which memory to choose? I know that X99 didn't really like faster memory than 3200MHZ. Does fast memory give effects in Skylake-X?
> 
> I understand that I also need to take 4x8 for 32GB? It's correct?
> 
> I think about G.Skill Trident Z DDR4, 4x8GB, 3866MHz, CL18 (F4-3866C18Q-32GTZ). Good choice? Please help because I'm newbie in RAM


That looks like a great choice. I'd try to make sure it's on the motherboard's support list/qvl. Whichever one you choose that is.


----------



## Kana Chan

__
http://instagr.am/p/BVtwjsuFMHI%2F/
Does the tubing in the bottom left restrict flow with a bend like that?

He's rubbing his hands with glee with an echo.


----------



## Nizzen

Anyone got 4200/4266mhz mem to work with 7800x/7820x/7900x

I can do 4000mhz cl15 on 7800x and 7900x, but 4200 is impossible whatever latency.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Anyone got 4200/4266mhz mem to work with 7800x/7820x/7900x
> 
> I can do 4000mhz cl15 on 7800x and 7900x, but 4200 is impossible whatever latency.


Nope. I seem to be stable at 4000 but 4266 is a no go. Haven't tried anything in between but I'm not 100% sure this is even stable yet.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Nope. I seem to be stable at 4000 but 4266 is a no go. Haven't tried anything in between but I'm not 100% sure this is even stable yet.


4000 quad channel is impressive though, have you run GSAT or HCI Memtest on it yet?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> 4000 quad channel is impressive though, have you run GSAT or HCI Memtest on it yet?


It's not quad channel, just dual.

And no, just short 10-15 minutes runs of Prime 95 Blend and Real bench. My cpu cooler isn't work properly, as at stock speed I will get into the high 80's after 15 minutes of real bench

So I haven't stressed it really hard. I could try a memory test but I don't feel like putting it on a flash drive or whatever.


----------



## Kana Chan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Anyone got 4200/4266mhz mem to work with 7800x/7820x/7900x
> 
> I can do 4000mhz cl15 on 7800x and 7900x, but 4200 is impossible whatever latency.


Is your board rated for 4200? Could be the cpu or ram too.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> It's not quad channel, just dual.
> 
> And no, just short 10-15 minutes runs of Prime 95 Blend and Real bench. My cpu cooler isn't work properly, as at stock speed I will get into the high 80's after 15 minutes of real bench
> 
> So I haven't stressed it really hard. I could try a memory test but I don't feel like putting it on a flash drive or whatever.


You can try HCI mem test or GSAT with Windows and it doesn't put much stress on the CPU (more on the memory and cache) to test for memory stability without frying your CPU









More details here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread

Massive props to @Silent Scone for all that info! He has also included a tutorial on how to install GSAT on a windows 10 system here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1628751/official-amd-ryzen-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana Chan*
> 
> Is your board rated for 4200? Could be the cpu or ram too.


Taichi is rated 4400+ and yes i use quad channel









4266 c19 4x8GB

I do not care about "rated" this is overclock.net


----------



## Kana Chan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Taichi is rated 4400+ and yes i use quad channel
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4266 c19 4x8GB
> 
> I do not care about "rated" this is overclock.net


More cpu or dram voltage or possibly more cooling or delid?


----------



## pantsaregood

What memory multipliers does Skylake-X support?


----------



## Scotty99

7800k vs R5 1600 30 game test:





Dead heat with 7700k ahead of everything, these new architectures really dont like games designed for kaby lake. Wonder how many years til they leap frog.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> What memory multipliers does Skylake-X support?


In Asrock and msi bios I can choose:

.......4000, 4200 and 4266.


----------



## artins90

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 7800k vs R5 1600 30 game test:


I didn't check the video but did they OC the mesh? It can go up to 3100 on most chips.
With ryzen the infinity fabric is tied to ram, you would need 6200 mhz ram to reach 3100 infinity fabric.
While not optimal, I say it's way better than AMD's solution to cut down costs.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artins90*
> 
> I didn't check the video but did they OC the mesh? It can go up to 3100 on most chips.
> With ryzen the infinity fabric is tied to ram, you would need 6200 mhz ram to reach 3100 infinity fabric.
> While not optimal, I say it's way better than AMD's solution to cut down costs.


Not in this video, they did a whole dedicated one for that tho:





Didn't seem to make any difference.


----------



## TheFallenDeity

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> 7800k vs R5 1600 30 game test:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dead heat with 7700k ahead of everything, these new architectures really dont like games designed for kaby lake. Wonder how many years til they leap frog.


Not sure I can take that guy seriously. He's screwy with his numbers. Why is he using a GTX 1050 in some of his tests? That's GPU bound and doesn't reflect the CPU horsepower. Why do some tests have capped framerate? He's skewing the results purposefully.


----------



## aDyerSituation

so tired of this biased hardware unboxed video being plastered everywhere.

His tests do not line up with any other reputable reviewer. He is a clear AMD fanboy.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> so tired of this biased hardware unboxed video being plastered everywhere.
> 
> His tests do not line up with any other reputable reviewer. He is a clear AMD fanboy.


? Every review ive seen of skylake x has it below the 7700k. My point with the post was to show how games are coded to better take advantage of older architectures, this is why ryzen is behind kaby lake as well.

This will change eventually as new games come out, just a matter of when.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> ? Every review ive seen of skylake x has it below the 7700k. My point with the post was to show how games are coded to better take advantage of older architectures, this is why ryzen is behind kaby lake as well.


Every review? From what? Hardware Unboxed? LOL

They are within margin of error clock for clock.




https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/intel_core_i7_7820x_skylake_x_review/16
https://www.techspot.com/review/1433-intel-core-i9-core-i7-skylake-x/page3.html


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Every review? From what? Hardware Unboxed? LOL
> 
> They are within margin of error clock for clock.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/intel_core_i7_7820x_skylake_x_review/16
> https://www.techspot.com/review/1433-intel-core-i9-core-i7-skylake-x/page3.html







Listen to what ryan says, this isnt exclusive to skylake x it is why ryzen is lower than kaby lake as well. Its not that the architecture is somehow inferior, it simply means games are not optimized for them yet.


----------



## opt33

I just hope mesh technology quickly matures with latency improvements so future 8core + cpus dont have same gaming handicap (albeit this currently only exists at 1080p, gpu bound 1440P and up the effect is neglible). I think the only game optimization would involve coding to minimize mesh latency handicap of skylake x. But better way is for intel to improve latency of mesh, which they no doubt well, in future.


----------



## Gettz8488

I can't take the hardware inboxed review seriously he's full of it imo. Every review of the 7820 and 7900x have it near the 7700k in gaming. The 7800x should not be any different especially clocked at 4.7


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> ? Every review ive seen of skylake x has it below the 7700k. My point with the post was to show how games are coded to better take advantage of older architectures, this is why ryzen is behind kaby lake as well.
> 
> This will change eventually as new games come out, just a matter of when.


The 7700k is on top for gaming definitely but there has not been that big a difference. He also did a video where the 1600 and 7800x are match with the 7800x being at 4.7 and ryzen at 3.8. Not possible imo especially since I also have a ryzen 7 at 3.8 and on pubg I maxed out I think it was lime 80-90 fps with my new 7800x it averages around 112 fps goes up to like 130 in houses


----------



## FLCLimax

I'd advise anyone who owns and overclocked a Skylake X to see if they smell smoke and maybe check for damage on the CPU.


__
http://instagr.am/p/BWysDUalr2k%2F/


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> I'd advise anyone who owns and overclocked a Skylake X to see if they smell smoke and maybe check for damage on the CPU.
> 
> 
> __
> http://instagr.am/p/BWysDUalr2k%2F/


Idk how that happened if I'm honest. But I think I may have been a one off thing since people like derauder push things way beyond the limit and nothing yet? As does silicon lottery


----------



## aDyerSituation

seems like agenda pushing to me


----------



## Gettz8488

Has anyone whos overclocked pulled out the cpu? i don't feel like disassembling


----------



## Chargeit

Well, I've ran into a nice problem.

Basically losing system power. I reset everything to stock and even at stock it's doing it. Just ran a stock run of realbench and about 20 min in the system powered down. There was nothing overheating or anything like that.

I have a 500w psu (CX500) laying around I could install in the system to see if the psu is the issue but damned if I feel like playing musical chairs with psu's tonight. Damned annoying. This Seasonic x850 is getting a little on in age but it's not that damned old.


----------



## artins90

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> I'd advise anyone who owns and overclocked a Skylake X to see if they smell smoke and maybe check for damage on the CPU.
> 
> 
> __
> http://instagr.am/p/BWysDUalr2k%2F/


My 7820x is a very good chip, it's stable at 1.150v but I run it at 1.170v at 4.8 Ghz just to be safe. Temps during normal use never go above 80° C, less than 60° C when gaming. I played Overwatch at 120 fps for a couple of hours earlier today and the CPU didn't go past 45 C°, it's cooler than my old 2500k in this scenario.

The only way I can see the situation in the picture you posted happening is with Prime or similar bonkers AVX stress tests, that's one of the reasons why I decided to steer away from them completely.
The only time I got worried about my 7820x so far as been with one of AIDA's short benchmarks before I set the AVX multiplier to -8. The cpu skyrocketed to 100° C in less than 3 seconds shutting the PC down.
Probably the guy who burned his CPU removed or set the thermal and power limits way beyond acceptable limits.

My chip is lucky, it does't even need increasing the power limit, it scores 2100+ points in cinebench while staying under 200W load. Probably the guy from the picture needed quite a lot of voltage or was stupid enough to run Prime without any regard for thermals or power limits. My board allows me to go up to 400 W but I would never even consider doing that given the quality of my chip. Just because someone needs 300+ W to stay stable it doesn't mean you need 300 W too.


----------



## Chargeit

This is how you test a psu.



I'll be damned if I'm going to undo all my wiring if the psu isn't the problem.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Idk how that happened if I'm honest. But I think I may have been a one off thing since people like derauder push things way beyond the limit and nothing yet? As does silicon lottery


If this wasn't a very isolated or unique case, believe they would be already raining hell on Intel.

It remember me the case of warped substrate on Skylake and all bull**** when ppl found out a guy that used a power tool to screw the cooler.

I never saw this happen, clearly it's defective either on die or pins adding resistance or the guy left some residue over contact or pins That acted as resitence.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> This is how you test a psu.
> 
> I'll be damned if I'm going to undo all my wiring if the psu isn't the problem.


Post back what you find out. Sounds Like a PSU issue.


----------



## GXTCHA

For anyone/everyone waiting, the R6 APEX is delayed until mid August.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Post back what you find out. Sounds Like a PSU issue.


I'm currently 25 min into the stress test which is further then I was making it with the other psu. Was crashing around the 20 min mark with the x850.

*I'm now 50 min in and the stress test is going strong. I've had to rma this Seasonic X850 in the past. Hard to believe it's giving me problems again. I thought Seasonic had top end units. The hell?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> For anyone/everyone waiting, the R6 APEX is delayed until mid August.


Thanks for sharing the update. Where did you get the latest information from?


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> For anyone/everyone waiting, the R6 APEX is delayed until mid August.


Not the Extreme though, I hope?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artins90*
> 
> My 7820x is a very good chip, it's stable at 1.150v but I run it at 1.170v at 4.8 Ghz just to be safe. Temps during normal use never go above 80° C, less than 60° C when gaming. I played Overwatch at 120 fps for a couple of hours earlier today and the CPU didn't go past 45 C°, it's cooler than my old 2500k in this scenario.
> 
> The only way I can see the situation in the picture you posted happening is with Prime or similar bonkers AVX stress tests, that's one of the reasons why I decided to steer away from them completely.
> The only time I got worried about my 7820x so far as been with one of AIDA's short benchmarks before I set the AVX multiplier to -8. The cpu skyrocketed to 100° C in less than 3 seconds shutting the PC down.
> Probably the guy who burned his CPU removed or set the thermal and power limits way beyond acceptable limits.
> 
> My chip is lucky, it does't even need increasing the power limit, it scores 2100+ points in cinebench while staying under 200W load. Probably the guy from the picture needed quite a lot of voltage or was stupid enough to run Prime without any regard for thermals or power limits. My board allows me to go up to 400 W but I would never even consider doing that given the quality of my chip. Just because someone needs 300+ W to stay stable it doesn't mean you need 300 W too.


Even then derauder and people like silicon lottery push chips to the absolute limit. if they haven't fried any i doubt something will happen to our chips.


----------



## Chargeit

Ok.

I'm past an hour stress testing with the CX500M hooked up. It's going strong. Looks like the Seasonic X850 is the issue.

I'm going to fully pull the x850, install the cx500m and rma the x850. Not sure I want to mess with the x850 again though and I might end up buying a different psu. Man, always frustrating when you have to undo your wiring. Also don't think oc'ing with cx500m is a good idea so I guess I'll have to sit on that until I get a replacement psu


----------



## Gettz8488

Anyone have any idea on how many cores cascade lake will bring to x299 or if it is even on x299?

Also i'm noticing something odd Windows task manager resource monitor is reporting higher cpu usage than afterburner and hwinfo. sometimes by up to 15% anyone know why or which i should follow?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Post back what you find out. Sounds Like a PSU issue.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm currently 25 min into the stress test which is further then I was making it with the other psu. Was crashing around the 20 min mark with the x850.
> 
> *I'm now 50 min in and the stress test is going strong. I've had to rma this Seasonic X850 in the past. Hard to believe it's giving me problems again. I thought Seasonic had top end units. The hell?
Click to expand...

Glad to here it is going well with the Cosair CX 500. At least you can run the Rig with the PSU you have now.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Ok.
> 
> I'm past an hour stress testing with the CX500M hooked up. It's going strong. Looks like the Seasonic X850 is the issue.
> 
> I'm going to fully pull the x850, install the cx500m and rma the x850. Not sure I want to mess with the x850 again though and I might end up buying a different psu. Man, always frustrating when you have to undo your wiring. Also don't think oc'ing with cx500m is a good idea so I guess I'll have to sit on that until I get a replacement psu


You would probably be fine overclocking so long as you don't run a video card stress test at the same time as the CPU.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Glad to here it is going well with the Cosair CX 500. At least you can run the Rig with the PSU you have now.


Yeah never a bad thing having backups.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> You would probably be fine overclocking so long as you don't run a video card stress test at the same time as the CPU.


Yeah I wouldn't top out the psu with an oc but I'm not that hard up for performance that I need to be oc'ed. I can wait until I get things settled up. Just happy I have spares covered.


----------



## Gettz8488

My core input voltage right now is 1.850 and it's stable as a rock. should i keep trying to go lower? this chip i have is insane i haven't had it crash once no matter the setting i put it at. i haven't done any fiddling because everything i'm throwing at it is working.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> My core input voltage right now is 1.850 and it's stable as a rock. should i keep trying to go lower? this chip i have is insane i haven't had it crash once no matter the setting i put it at. i haven't done any fiddling because everything i'm throwing at it is working.


Core voltage is 1.850v?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Core voltage is 1.850v?


CPU input voltage. I currently have mine set to 1.9v


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> CPU input voltage. I currently have mine set to 1.9v


Yea input voltage mine is 1.850 running like a charm even tried prime for a few min


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Core voltage is 1.850v?
> 
> 
> 
> CPU input voltage. I currently have mine set to 1.9v
Click to expand...

What is CPU input voltage?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is CPU input voltage?


It's the VCCIN voltage I'm not 100% sure how to explain it but I. Relieve it's the amount of volts that go into the vrm


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is CPU input voltage?
> 
> 
> 
> It's the VCCIN voltage I'm not 100% sure how to explain it but I. Relieve it's the amount of volts that go into the vrm
Click to expand...

Ok It's the VCCIN voltage. I know what that is. When you up the VCCIN voltage from the motherboard Voltage regulator module (VRM) it supply's more voltage to the integrated voltage regulator (IVR) in the processor.

What was the stock voltage of the VCCIN?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Ok It's the VCCIN voltage. I know what that is. When you up the VCCIN voltage from the motherboard Voltage regulator module (VRM) it supply's more voltage to the integrated voltage regulator (IVR) in the processor.
> 
> What was the stock voltage of the VCCIN?


Stock on my x299 was 1.98 Atleast according to cpu core on Aida. Which changes when I change the input voltage. Now it's at 1.850


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Ok It's the VCCIN voltage. I know what that is. When you up the VCCIN voltage from the motherboard Voltage regulator module (VRM) it supply's more voltage to the integrated voltage regulator (IVR) in the processor.
> 
> What was the stock voltage of the VCCIN?
> 
> 
> 
> Stock on my x299 was 1.98 Atleast according to cpu core on Aida. Which changes when I change the input voltage. Now it's at 1.850
Click to expand...

You can leave it stock at 1.98v since it's just the supply voltage to the voltage regulator in the processor.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> You can leave it stock at 1.98v since it's just the supply voltage to the voltage regulator in the processor.


For some reason I had like a 2-3 C drop by dropping it and as long as it's stable
No harm in lowering


----------



## DeadSec

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is CPU input voltage?


It is like the main water pipe in a house. If the pressure is to low you won't have water in the rooms.








If your Vccin is to low especially the Vcore and all the other voltages won't be enough to support the system.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Thanks for sharing the update. Where did you get the latest information from?


My company's rep.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> Not the Extreme though, I hope?


Honestly I didn't ask but I'd assume it's the same as the APEX. They were slated to be released at the same time and if they are updating the heat sinks on the APEX, most likely they are doing it on the EXTREME as well.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> My company's rep.
> Honestly I didn't ask but I'd assume it's the same as the APEX. They were slated to be released at the same time and if they are updating the heat sinks on the APEX, most likely they are doing it on the EXTREME as well.


Thanks again.


----------



## czin125

http://www.overclock.net/a/intel-core-i3-vs-core-i5-vs-core-i7-gaming-performance-with-geforce-gtx970

Simulated cores with the old cache configuration yielded up to 10% increase for 5960X -> to G3258

"Based on Linus Tech Tips' results, the simulated Core i5 4670K and real Core i5 4670K have almost the same performance. However, when it comes to the Pentium G3258, the simulated one was about 10% faster than the real one. This is probably caused by the huge difference in L3 cache size, 20 MB vs 2 MB."

A higher end Skylake-X simulating a lower end Skylake-X gains 20%+ vs 10%+.

Maybe the massive L2 helps when paired up with even larger L3?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> You can leave it stock at 1.98v since it's just the supply voltage to the voltage regulator in the processor.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For some reason I had like a 2-3 C drop by dropping it and as long as it's stable
> No harm in lowering
Click to expand...

That sounds good. What is your temperature with RealBench?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That sounds good. What is your temperature with RealBench?


Real bench I haven't tested since I lowered voltage but it didn't go passed 70C should be little less now


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That sounds good. What is your temperature with RealBench?
> 
> 
> 
> Real bench I haven't tested since I lowered voltage but it didn't go passed 70C should be little less now
Click to expand...

That is great. What do you have for cooling, processor, and overclock?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That is great. What do you have for cooling, processor, and overclock?


I have a h115i with 2 noctua 3000rpm fans. They only run at 20% though and once they hit 70C they run at 50%. I'm at 4.6 ghz 1.150 volts. LLC 4, CPU current capability at default 100%. Vccin at 1.850 I think I have a really good chip. I haven't even tried 4.7+ but I haven't had a single crash on me. Every setting I throw at this beast it just takes it. I got these settings first try all of them


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That is great. What do you have for cooling, processor, and overclock?
> 
> 
> 
> I have a h115i with 2 noctua 3000rpm fans. They only run at 20% though and once they hit 70C they run at 50%. I'm at 4.6 ghz 1.150 volts. LLC 4, CPU current capability at default 100%. Vccin at 1.850 I think I have a really good chip. I haven't even tried 4.7+ but I haven't had a single crash on me. Every setting I throw at this beast it just takes it. I got these settings first try all of them
Click to expand...

Sounds like you got lucky with your CHIP.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> I'd advise anyone who owns and overclocked a Skylake X to see if they smell smoke and maybe check for damage on the CPU.
> 
> 
> __
> http://instagr.am/p/BWysDUalr2k%2F/


Since seeing that very attention grabbing Instagram from Steve over at Hardware Unboxing, I got interested in what exact pins were involved. I'm sure Steve would much rather leave that to speculation. The primary contact point that he "burned" was a ground. One of the others was a RSVD pin and the others with much smaller marks were grounds as well. As a matter of fact, the entire area surrounding the contact points on the CPU that he pictured was populated by ground and DDR pins.

I'm confident that he either had a lack of contact pressure with the corresponding pins in the socket possibly due to the pins having less tension from an unknown cause or there was something on the bottom of the CPU that he didn't notice when he installed it. He admitted to wiping it clean before looking any further into to so he could have very well wiped away something preventing good contact.

The fact that he shared it out in the manner that he did makes me highly skeptical of what happened. He didn't provide pictures of the socket until 2 days later. Combine that with his leading influence at the beginning of all of his Skylake-X related videos and you can tell the guy has an agenda.

One thing is for sure, the channel isn't growing fast at all. Doing stuff like this may help boost viewership initially, but it hurts a great deal more in the end.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> seems like agenda pushing to me


Agreed.


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Since seeing that very attention grabbing Instagram from Steve over at Hardware Unboxing, I got interested in what exact pins were involved. I'm sure Steve would much rather leave that to speculation. The primary contact point that he "burned" was a ground. One of the others was a RSVD pin and the others with much smaller marks were grounds as well. As a matter of fact, the entire area surrounding the contact points on the CPU that he pictured was populated by ground and DDR pins.
> 
> I'm confident that he either had a lack of contact pressure with the corresponding pins in the socket possibly due to the pins having less tension from an unknown cause or there was something on the bottom of the CPU that he didn't notice when he installed it. He admitted to wiping it clean before looking any further into to so he could have very well wiped away something preventing good contact.
> 
> The fact that he shared it out in the manner that he did makes me highly skeptical of what happened. He didn't provide pictures of the socket until 2 days later. Combine that with his leading influence at the beginning of all of his Skylake-X related videos and you can tell the guy has an agenda.
> 
> One thing is for sure, the channel isn't growing fast at all. Doing stuff like this may help boost viewership initially, but it hurts a great deal more in the end.
> Agreed.


Ironically, it's just as much agenda pushing to accuse a Youtube channel of the same when reporting on a CPU that looks like a over toasted sandwich after overclocking. Could just be the obvious - That Intel pushed Prescott-X on us to counter AMD without much thought or engineering effort.

I am still waiting for my delidded 7820X. My reaction to his post was "oh noes", not to go looking for the tinfoil hat.

Presumably, Threadripper fans will be all salty and blame the mobo manufacturers, or anyone but AMD, when one of their four billion and ninety four pins gets bent or burned too.

Criticism is due when a product is bad, no matter who made it.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> Ironically, it's just as much agenda pushing to accuse a Youtube channel of the same when reporting on a CPU that looks like a over toasted sandwich after overclocking. Could just be the obvious - That Intel pushed Prescott-X on us to counter AMD without much thought or engineering effort.
> 
> I am still waiting for my delidded 7820X. My reaction to his post was "oh noes", not to go looking for the tinfoil hat.
> 
> Presumably, Threadripper fans will be all salty and blame the mobo manufacturers, or anyone but AMD, when one of their four billion and ninety four pins gets bent or burned too.
> 
> Criticism is due when a product is bad, no matter who made it.


Firstly, welcome to OCN.

Based on your last sentence, I'm left to believe that you feel that you believe that Steve's criticism of x299 / Skylake-X was valid. Perhaps you should adjust fire with your build while you can. You could also risk it as your implying in your post and chance the fact that some of your ground pins may burn up as well. I for one highly doubt it will happen.









I led my post with identifying which pins were "burnt". Not much "tinfoil" to that. Quite simple actually. Look at the pins that he highlighted as burned (hint: he circle them in one of his pictures) and compare them to a LGA 2066 CPU socket pinlist/ballmap.

The rest of my post was a matter of my opinion. He leads his Skylake-X / X299 videos with an impression of dissatisfaction with the platform. I can't say that I am surprised that he is the only known person to experience a burnt up CPU contact on Skylake-X to date.

I think our versions of "tinfoil" differ. Some of us don't skirt around the obvious. We just say what we feel.


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Firstly, welcome to OCN.
> 
> Based on your last sentence, I'm left to believe that you feel that you believe that Steve's criticism of x299 / Skylake-X was valid. Perhaps you should adjust fire with your build while you can. You could also risk it as your implying in your post and chance the fact that some of your ground pins may burn up as well. I for one highly doubt it will happen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I led my post with identifying which pins were "burnt". Not much "tinfoil" to that. Quite simple actually. Look at the pins that he highlighted as burned (hint: he circle them in one of his pictures) and compare them to a LGA 2066 CPU socket pinlist/ballmap.
> 
> The rest of my post was a matter of my opinion. He leads his Skylake-X / X299 videos with an impression of dissatisfaction with the platform. I can't say that I am surprised that he is the only known person to experience a burnt up CPU contact on Skylake-X to date.
> 
> I think our versions of "tinfoil" differ. Some of us don't skirt around the obvious. We just say what we feel.


Pointing out I'm new doesn't invalidate my opinion. Nice try though.

It's not "agenda pushing" just because you didn't like what he reported.

His CPU burned. He took a photo and shared it. You would have done the same.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> Pointing out I'm new doesn't invalidate my opinion. Nice try though.


This is a great spot for your previously used "tinfoil" remark.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> It's not "agenda pushing" just because you didn't like what he reported.
> 
> His CPU burned. He took a photo and shared it. You would have done the same.


Agreed. I also realize that if I as a member of OCN started a couple of threads criticizing a CPU that I later posted pictures of burnt up, my claims of a self-destructing CPU might be met with some skepticism. Simplifying it as you did takes things out of context, which helps your point. I get it.

Unfortunately, we'll never know what happened to his Skylake-X CPU. It was an engineering sample sent to him by ASRock. Intel won't be replacing it as they didn't authorize him to have it to begin with.


----------



## done12many2

.


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> This is a great spot for your previously used "tinfoil" remark.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed. I also realize that if I as a member of OCN started a couple of threads criticizing a CPU that I later posted pictures of burnt up, my claims of a self-destructing CPU might be met with some skepticism. Simplifying it as you did takes things out of context, which helps your point. I get it.
> 
> Unfortunately, we'll never know what happened to his Skylake-X CPU. It was an engineering sample sent to him by ASRock. Intel won't be replacing it as they didn't authorize him to have it to begin with.


Wait, you do realize I neither started the thread, posted the pictures nor took them, right?


----------



## Captain4W

Finally going to order my MoBo... What should I get???


----------



## PCGuy 5960

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Captain4W*
> 
> Finally going to order my MoBo... What should I get???


Get an AORUS Gaming7 or Gaming9. I would recommend the ASUS X299-A or the X299-Deluxe, but their VRM cooling isn't that good :/

EDIT: If you want to wait, I would recommend the ASUS Rampage VI Extreme or Apex


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> Wait, you do realize I neither started the thread, posted the pictures nor took them, right?


Bud, you are trying to shape this into something it isn't.

Once again, you've taken this out of context. I was giving you an example of how it wasn't as simple as you were trying to make it sound. Clarified below. This is obviously going to keep happening so I'll bow out of the conversation.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> Pointing out I'm new doesn't invalidate my opinion. Nice try though.
> 
> It's not "agenda pushing" just because you didn't like what he reported.
> 
> *His CPU burned. He took a photo and shared it. You would have done the same.*


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> *Agreed. I also realize that if I as a member of OCN started a couple of threads criticizing a CPU that I later posted pictures of burnt up, my claims of a self-destructing CPU might be met with some skepticism. Simplifying it as you did takes things out of context, which helps your point. I get it.
> *


----------



## Captain4W

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCGuy 5960*
> 
> Get an AORUS Gaming7 or Gaming9. I would recommend the ASUS X299-A or the X299-Deluxe, but their VRM cooling isn't that good :/
> 
> EDIT: If you want to wait, I would recommend the ASUS Rampage VI Extreme or Apex


Any idea when the Rampage Extreme is due?


----------



## PCGuy 5960

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Captain4W*
> 
> Any idea when the Rampage Extreme is due?


End of August iirc, but I'm not sure


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Captain4W*
> 
> Finally going to order my MoBo... What should I get???


The Gigabyte X299 Aorus Gaming 3 has the same VRM as the Gigabyte X299 Aorus Gaming 7-9. So choose between options of the boards.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The Gigabyte X299 Aorus Gaming 3 has the same VRM as the Gigabyte X299 Aorus Gaming 7-9. So choose between options of the boards.


They are the same VRM, but the VRM coolers are very different. The Gaming 3 uses a single heatsink while the Gaming 7 and Gaming 9 use a dual heatsink / heatpipe configuration. The Gaming 3 is the one that der8auer had VRM temp issues with.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The Gigabyte X299 Aorus Gaming 3 has the same VRM as the Gigabyte X299 Aorus Gaming 7-9. So choose between options of the boards.
> 
> 
> 
> They are the same VRM, but the VRM coolers are very different. The Gaming 3 uses a single heatsink while the Gaming 7 and Gaming 9 use a dual heatsink / heatpipe configuration. The Gaming 3 is the one that der8auer had VRM temp issues with.
Click to expand...

Gigabyte has really gotcha for cost with dual heatsink / heatpipe configuration.


----------



## hodgempls

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> They are the same VRM, but the VRM coolers are very different. The Gaming 3 uses a single heatsink while the Gaming 7 and Gaming 9 use a dual heatsink / heatpipe configuration. The Gaming 3 is the one that der8auer had VRM temp issues with.


The gaming 7 and 9 also have dual 8 pin CPU power supplies while the gaming 3 just has a single 8 pin.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> The gaming 7 and 9 also have dual 8 pin CPU power supplies while the gaming 3 just has a single 8 pin.


Great point.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Gigabyte has really gotcha for cost with dual heatsink / heatpipe configuration.


Agreed.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> Ironically, it's just as much agenda pushing to accuse a Youtube channel of the same when reporting on a CPU that looks like a over toasted sandwich after overclocking. Could just be the obvious - That Intel pushed Prescott-X on us to counter AMD without much thought or engineering effort.
> 
> I am still waiting for my delidded 7820X. My reaction to his post was "oh noes", not to go looking for the tinfoil hat.
> 
> Presumably, Threadripper fans will be all salty and blame the mobo manufacturers, or anyone but AMD, when one of their four billion and ninety four pins gets bent or burned too.
> 
> Criticism is due when a product is bad, no matter who made it.


I think the biggest issue about what he's saying is that he did it at "1.250". Volts. We can all agree that derauder or a site like silicon lottery push their chips much much harder when overclocking. Yet they haven't mentioned a single burnt out chip nor socket.


----------



## BroPhilip

Don't get the 3 it has one 8 pin while the 7 and 9 are 8+8. Also it has much less vrm cooling

If doing sli check the pcie lane allocations.
If going with Kabylake get the 9 the 7 will only run at 8x with a single gfx and 4×4 in sli
If going with Skylake get the 7 as the 9 will will gimp running all three slots to 8x-16x-8x if you use the last slot for anything....they did this to add more kabylake support.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> The Gigabyte X299 Aorus Gaming 3 has the same VRM as the Gigabyte X299 Aorus Gaming 7-9. So choose between options of the boards.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Captain4W*
> 
> Any idea when the Rampage Extreme is due?


----------



## Captain4W

Gigabyte Gaming 9 ordered for my i9-7900x.

Thanks everyone


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> I think the biggest issue about what he's saying is that he did it at "1.250". Volts. We can all agree that derauder or a site like silicon lottery push their chips much much harder when overclocking. Yet they haven't mentioned a single burnt out chip nor socket.


Totally agree. It could even be a fluke. Probably, even. Still worth reporting on though.


----------



## Zurv

Question, is the x7900 that much hotter than the x6950? people keep stressing the heat dump from the x7900... (but i don't recall that much freak out about the x6950.)
i'm still waiting on a back ordered x7900.. should i be making a second loop/split? I have zero heat issues with the x6950 @ 4.5ghz @ v1.35. (also unlike the old days i'm only running 2 cards in SLI.. so not much heat there their. heat is 4 cards in SLI







)

maybe for a AIO.. but i think most people would use a custom setup and a huge rad for stuff like this.


----------



## schoolofmonkey




----------



## schoolofmonkey

This look right?


VRM settings on the TUF Mark 1 if anyone is interested.


----------



## mlambert890

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> Totally agree. It could even be a fluke. Probably, even. Still worth reporting on though.


It's disingenuous and self serving for a *commercial entity* (YouTube channels aren't folk heroes, they're businesses making big money) to "report" on something like this and not *explicitly allow* for the *strong* possibility that they f'd up and it was user error. There is like a 90+% chance that is the case here.

No one in any "modding" community, from cars to PCs to anything *ever* wants to own up to the fact that *they* may have just moronically f'd up. It happens. But their ego won't allow them to admit it, and there is enough hunger for confirmation bias that they get away with it (and profit $$$ in the case of the "pro" modders/reviewers)

I apply the same skepticism I do to big corporations to individuals. It's a much safer bet since the problem *always* starts with human nature. In the big corporation it's simply amplified.

I'd bet money this guy did something stupid that cooked the chip and is either in honest denial himself (NO WAY *I* would EVER cook a chip! I am PC GOD! it MUST be a FAULTY PART!) or, even worse, saw a way to profit from it since there is a huge wave of hate for this platform to ride now (irrational or not)


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Since seeing that very attention grabbing Instagram from Steve over at Hardware Unboxing, I got interested in what exact pins were involved. I'm sure Steve would much rather leave that to speculation. The primary contact point that he "burned" was a ground. One of the others was a RSVD pin and the others with much smaller marks were grounds as well. As a matter of fact, the entire area surrounding the contact points on the CPU that he pictured was populated by ground and DDR pins.
> 
> I'm confident that he either had a lack of contact pressure with the corresponding pins in the socket possibly due to the pins having less tension from an unknown cause or there was something on the bottom of the CPU that he didn't notice when he installed it. He admitted to wiping it clean before looking any further into to so he could have very well wiped away something preventing good contact.
> 
> The fact that he shared it out in the manner that he did makes me highly skeptical of what happened. He didn't provide pictures of the socket until 2 days later. Combine that with his leading influence at the beginning of all of his Skylake-X related videos and you can tell the guy has an agenda.
> 
> One thing is for sure, the channel isn't growing fast at all. Doing stuff like this may help boost viewership initially, but it hurts a great deal more in the end.
> Agreed.


The most misleading thing I see from this Instagram post is he stating "hey I'm just using 1.25v vcore and this happen". This will of course push more biases, when ppl without knowing the platform will throw stones. From my understanding skx have fivr, so the only line entering the die is the vccin, so he could be using 2.5v and we wouldn't know because he just say what vcore he is using, which is worthless.

Skx has it share of issues, but pushing misleading info just for clicks is shameful.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> I think the biggest issue about what he's saying is that he did it at "1.250". Volts. We can all agree that derauder or a site like silicon lottery push their chips much much harder when overclocking. Yet they haven't mentioned a single burnt out chip nor socket.


If what I'm saying is correct, ie, current is only supplied thru the vccin line, he could be pushing 2v on vcore and it only fry the die instead of leaking all over the pins.

I'm betting on debris on or some sort of short. We don't even know the complete voltages he was using, on DDR or any other than vcore. The fact a so called expert throwing vcore alone info for this platform is misleading.


----------



## Raghar

You talk about him like he wouldn't even be willing to change VCCIN. Perhaps he left it on auto, and then either MB applied additional voltage behind scenes without him knowing it, or voltage went lower.

Is that pin really GND? It looked like while there was a proper contact, there was still a LARGE flash. Hiccup on FIVR?


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> You talk about him like he wouldn't even be willing to change VCCIN. Perhaps he left it on auto, and then either MB applied additional voltage behind scenes without him knowing it, or voltage went lower.
> 
> Is that pin really GND? It looked like while there was a proper contact, there was still a LARGE flash. Hiccup on FIVR?


Either he is illiterate on the platform and ignores the existence of fivr or he pushing the news for clicks, because as I said, vcore should be irrelevant on contact pads.

If these are really ground, that is other question, but what would make such current go through ground? It must be really big to burn thru the pad.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> You talk about him like he wouldn't even be willing to change VCCIN. Perhaps he left it on auto, and then either MB applied additional voltage behind scenes without him knowing it, or voltage went lower.
> 
> Is that pin really GND? It looked like while there was a proper contact, there was still a LARGE flash. Hiccup on FIVR?


Ground usually consist of many pins, it's highly unlikely that pin would go first before the other pins for power. I smell rat crap like the ones he forgot to remove under his CPU before powering it on.

Edit, I wanted to add that I have overlocked my 7900X to 5GHz and I don't see any signs of burn marks or anything like that, here's a pic of it.


----------



## Gettz8488

What would you guys say is a dangerious vccin? didn't realize it till after a few days that my vccin was 1.98 at default i dropped it to 1.850 at 4.7 ghz 1.151 vcore should i pull the chip and check?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> What would you guys say is a dangerious vccin? didn't realize it till after a few days that my vccin was 1.98 at default i dropped it to 1.850 at 4.7 ghz 1.151 vcore should i pull the chip and check?


According to the absolute min/max you can inject as much as 2.15v but that may be close to melting the CPU. I wouldn't go past 1.94v if all possible myself. A good number is 1.90-1.92v. Here is the spec sheet if I'm reading it correctly. https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/6th-gen-x-series-datasheet-vol-1.pdf


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> According to the absolute min/max you can inject as much as 2.15v but that may be close to melting the CPU. I wouldn't go past 1.94v if all possible myself. A good number is 1.90-1.92v. Here is the spec sheet if I'm reading it correctly. https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/6th-gen-x-series-datasheet-vol-1.pdf


I should probably take it out and check huh?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> I should probably take it out and check huh?


it should be fine unless you saw some smoke


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> it should be fine unless you saw some smoke


Pulled it out just to be safe everything is A okayy??


----------



## postem

I'm probably going to get a 7820x what Mobo do you recommend?
I really hate rgbs, used to like MSI but now both functionally and style seen horrible. Considering Apex but it should be a complete pricey option.

Also a 850 season gold should be able to sustain 2 1080fes + 7820x around 4.7 GHz?


----------



## hodgempls

Which version of prime95 should we use for stability testing on an overclock with he 7900x?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> Which version of prime95 should we use for stability testing on an overclock with he 7900x?


You can use 28.10 just add CpuSupportsAVX=0 in local.txt and it will disable AVX.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> I'm probably going to get a 7820x what Mobo do you recommend?
> I really hate rgbs, used to like MSI but now both functionally and style seen horrible. Considering Apex but it should be a complete pricey option.
> 
> Also a 850 season gold should be able to sustain 2 1080fes + 7820x around 4.7 GHz?


I got a TUF Mark 1 and honestly it's one of the best board's I've owned on a HEDT platform.
There is a small led in the centre which can be turned off in the BIOS easily.

I've got a good stable 4.5Ghz overclock on my 7620x.

Now it's not a board that will do 4.9 - 5Ghz record breaking overclocks, but I can get 4.6Ghz out of mine it's the CPU thermals that hold me back.


----------



## hodgempls

Finally got my new 7900x rig up an running:

Case: Thermaltake Suppressor F51 w/powersupply cover
MB: Aurus Gaming 7
Cooling: Custom loop (first one) built on the EKWB extreme 360

I have two 200mm intake fans on the top (Thermltake Luna series) and the radiator as outtake. Overclocked to 4.8 @2.225V - see photos. I will try and push it further tomorrow. Temps settle in the high 50's on prime 95 28.1....

7900x4.8.jpg 1658k .jpg file


6818.jpeg 180k .jpeg file


20170724_223142.jpg 3311k .jpg file


----------



## TahoeDust

I got my 7820x back from Silicon Valley today. The delidding netted me at least 10c which intern netted me at least 100MHz. I now get the same temps running 4.8GHz @ 1.285v as I did 4.7GHz @ 1.234v. Max temp was 81c in 2hr Realbench stress test in both cases. Tomorrow I am going to see what kind of voltage it takes to get 4.9GHz stable and if I can keep it cool enough.

4.8GHz maxing at 81c isn't too bad for an AIO.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I got a TUF Mark 1 and honestly it's one of the best board's I've owned on a HEDT platform.
> There is a small led in the centre which can be turned off in the BIOS easily.
> 
> I've got a good stable 4.5Ghz overclock on my 7620x.
> 
> Now it's not a board that will do 4.9 - 5Ghz record breaking overclocks, but I can get 4.6Ghz out of mine it's the CPU thermals that hold me back.


Models still limited here just gigabyte and msi models available.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I got a TUF Mark 1 and honestly it's one of the best board's I've owned on a HEDT platform.
> There is a small led in the centre which can be turned off in the BIOS easily.
> 
> I've got a good stable 4.5Ghz overclock on my 7620x.
> 
> Now it's not a board that will do 4.9 - 5Ghz record breaking overclocks, but I can get 4.6Ghz out of mine it's the CPU thermals that hold me back.


Yeah my TUF Mark 1 has been solid. No complaints.


----------



## hodgempls

Stable at 4.9 @ 1.250V. Temps in the high50's/low60s. Power draw for the CPU was about 185W. I was able to run prime95 for 30 minutes on 4.9 @1.225V but the system locked up when I stopped Prime95. Increased voltage to 1.25V and no issues. Temps do not seem to be an problem with my water loop....Using thermal grizzly kryonoaut paste.

7900x4.9.jpg 1641k .jpg file


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> Stable at 4.9 @ 1.250V. Temps in the high50's/low60s. Power draw for the CPU was about 185W. I was able to run prime95 for 30 minutes on 4.9 @1.225V but the system locked up when I stopped Prime95. Increased voltage to 1.25V and no issues. Temps do not seem to be an problem with my water loop....Using thermal grizzly kryonoaut paste.
> 
> 7900x4.9.jpg 1641k .jpg file


Delidded? Those temps seem crazy low for a 7900x at 4.9.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Delidded? Those temps seem crazy low for a 7900x at 4.9.


Those temps seem to be after 5 minutes ...


----------



## hodgempls

No. I was going to send it to Silicon Lottery but with these temps will keep it as is. The EK-CoolStream XE 360 radiator is kind of a beast for the CPU alone but I was able to pick up the kit for $280 open box at Microcenter.


----------



## hodgempls

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Those temps seem to be after 5 minutes ...


Fair point but the loop was already warm due to previous runs. I will post a 30 minute run when it completes.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> Stable at 4.9 @ 1.250V. Temps in the high50's/low60s. Power draw for the CPU was about 185W. I was able to run prime95 for 30 minutes on 4.9 @1.225V but the system locked up when I stopped Prime95. Increased voltage to 1.25V and no issues. Temps do not seem to be an problem with my water loop....Using thermal grizzly kryonoaut paste.
> 
> 7900x4.9.jpg 1641k .jpg file


If you're only pulling 185W on a 7900X at 4.9 GHz under Prime (with or without AVX), then you're probably phantom throttling. You should be pulling at least 350W.


----------



## hodgempls

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> If you're only pulling 185W on a 7900X at 4.9 GHz under Prime (with or without AVX), then you're probably phantom throttling. You should be pulling at least 350W.


That would seem to make sense given what others are pulling at the same frequency. I checked the wattage with a meter and it seems to confirm what HWINFO is reporting - 185W on the CPU.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> That would seem to make sense given what others are pulling at the same frequency. I checked the wattage with a meter and it seems to confirm what HWINFO is reporting - 185W on the CPU.


You have the same motherboard as I do.







So the instructions in the phantom throttling thread should work for you:

Before you do anything, drop your clock to something safer like 4.0 GHz. Then

Package Power Limit 1+2: 400W
CPU VCore Loadline Calibration = Medium
CPU VCore Current Protection = High
Afterwards, start working your way back up the clock speeds. You'll probably start complaining about your temps at around 4.4 GHz if you haven't delided.


----------



## hodgempls

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> You have the same motherboard as I do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the instructions in the phantom throttling thread should work for you:
> 
> Before you do anything, drop your clock to something safer like 4.0 GHz. Then
> 
> Package Power Limit 1+2: 400W
> CPU VCore Loadline Calibration = Medium
> CPU VCore Current Protection = High
> Afterwards, start working your way back up the clock speeds. You'll probably start complaining about your temps at around 4.4 GHz if you haven't delided.


Thanks. So basically I set the package power limit to 200 from 140 on both 1 and 2?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> Thanks. So basically I set the package power limit to 200 from 140 on both 1 and 2?


I set them both to 400W.


----------



## hodgempls

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I set them both to 400W.


Wow big difference. After applying those settings, temps are now in the 70's @ 4.0 @ 1.2. CPU is using 239 watts now.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> Wow big difference. After applying those settings, temps are now in the 70's @ 4.0 @ 1.2. CPU is using 239 watts now.


Teaching people how to burn their Skylake X processors since July 2017. And you probably won't be the last one!


----------



## tux1989

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Teaching people how to burn their Skylake X processors since July 2017. And you probably won't be the last one!


LOL .Thats a good one


----------



## BroPhilip

So question? MSI Xpower vs waiting till August for the Asus rampage extreme?

Thoughts......


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> So question? MSI Xpower vs waiting till August for the Asus rampage extreme?
> 
> Thoughts......


You ditching your Aorus too? Lol


----------



## BroPhilip

Already sent back....
Sad empty case......
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> You ditching your Aorus too? Lol


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I got my 7820x back from Silicon Valley today. The delidding netted me at least 10c which intern netted me at least 100MHz. I now get the same temps running 4.8GHz @ 1.285v as I did 4.7GHz @ 1.234v. Max temp was 81c in 2hr Realbench stress test in both cases. Tomorrow I am going to see what kind of voltage it takes to get 4.9GHz stable and if I can keep it cool enough.
> 
> 4.8GHz maxing at 81c isn't too bad for an AIO.


What version of RealBench did you test with?


----------



## Jbravo33

Overall very pleased with the outcome of the rig I build my nephew. Swapped the msi tomahawk ac and the trident rgb 3000 for asus rog strix e-gaming and the vengeance rgb 3466. Also changed the kraken x42 for the 62. Overclocked CPU to 5GHz @1.225. Passes realbench 2 hour max temp 83 no offset. 7740 is a snappy little processor. Paired with a stock clocked evga hybrid getting amazing gaming results. PUBG hovers around 95 fps avg 1440 ultra. Cpuz bench 3024/605 multi/single. Timespy just under 10000. Not gonna bother overclocking gpu. All in all happy I went with 7740 when most are calling it a fail







he has upgrade ability which I don't think he will need for years.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What version of RealBench did you test with?


2.54


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> What would you guys say is a dangerious vccin? didn't realize it till after a few days that my vccin was 1.98 at default i dropped it to 1.850 at 4.7 ghz 1.151 vcore should i pull the chip and check?


Standard is roughly 1.8V. Dropping it that low means you have bit weak VRM on your MB. I guess you should stay at 4.5 GHz.


----------



## tabbycph2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Already sent back....
> Sad empty case......


Me too and got a MSI M7 ACK, wow big improvement, the Auros 9 board did not work with my adaptec 8805 raid contrl and always got my x540 pcie 10gb netcard to crash, none of that here on msi.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Standard is roughly 1.8V. Dropping it that low means you have bit weak VRM on your MB. I guess you should stay at 4.5 GHz.


So far it's been solid at 1.850 don't see a reason to increase it I'm at 4.7ghz


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabbycph2*
> 
> Me too and got a MSI M7 ACK, wow big improvement, the Auros 9 board did not work with my adaptec 8805 raid contrl and always got my x540 pcie 10gb netcard to crash, none of that here on msi.


Awesome, i am debating on this or wait for the rampage. Will the msi bios let you set per core speed and voltages like Asus bios will?


----------



## hodgempls

So after the "phantom throttle" fix, my 7900x is hitting mid 80's with a 4.6 overclock @ 1.19V. Power consumption hits 274 watts. I think I will send it in for a delid operation..... Any thoughts on a safe operating temp for this CPU?


----------



## tabbycph2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Awesome, i am debating on this or wait for the rampage. Will the msi bios let you set per core speed and voltages like Asus bios will?


set per core speed yes and but not voltages per core


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabbycph2*
> 
> set per core speed yes and but not voltages per core


I guess for now Asus is going to be king in that department. I know gigabyte would only do per active core. I have one core that is peaking temp so i wanted to be able to throttle that one back and push the rest. I am waiting on vrm temp test for the xpower. I know ttl is going 5o be reviewing one soon.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> I guess for now Asus is going to be king in that department. I know gigabyte would only do per active core. I have one core that is peaking temp so i wanted to be able to throttle that one back and push the rest. I am waiting on vrm temp test for the xpower. I know ttl is going 5o be reviewing one soon.


I want an Asus BIOS in the Gigabyte 7 or 9 board. And I'm probably not the only one...


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I want an Asus BIOS in the Gigabyte 7 or 9 board. And I'm probably not the only one...


Same. Oh well. I think I will like my Strix


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *tabbycph2*
> 
> set per core speed yes and but not voltages per core
> 
> 
> 
> I guess for now Asus is going to be king in that department. I know gigabyte would only do per active core. I have one core that is peaking temp so i wanted to be able to throttle that one back and push the rest. I am waiting on vrm temp test for the xpower. I know ttl is going 5o be reviewing one soon.
Click to expand...

Windows scheduler changes from time to time when running programs heating different cores more. You will be chasing your tail trying to use those options.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> I guess for now Asus is going to be king in that department. I know gigabyte would only do per active core. I have one core that is peaking temp so i wanted to be able to throttle that one back and push the rest. I am waiting on vrm temp test for the xpower. I know ttl is going 5o be reviewing one soon.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Windows scheduler changes from time to time when running programs heating different cores more. You will be chasing your tail trying to use those options.


The Gigabyte boards lets you put caps on each individual core. That's actually how the Turbo Boost 3.0 is implemented. At stock settings, the 8 non-preferred cores on my 7900X are capped at 43x. The other two are capped at 45x.

So you can throttle down specific cores as you wish. The catch is that it's a sub-option that's easier to find accidentally than intentionally.


----------



## Chargeit

I kind of wonder about oc'ing each core. Seems like it would be odd stress testing.

Thinking about testing two core load at 48, 4 core load at 46-47 and 8 core load at 45.

I'm currently set to 45 on all cores.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> So after the "phantom throttle" fix, my 7900x is hitting mid 80's with a 4.6 overclock @ 1.19V. Power consumption hits 274 watts. I think I will send it in for a delid operation..... Any thoughts on a safe operating temp for this CPU?


For stress testing up to 90c is fine. 94c it will throttle to protect the CPU.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I kind of wonder about oc'ing each core. Seems like it would be odd stress testing.
> 
> Thinking about testing two core load at 48, 4 core load at 46-47 and 8 core load at 45.
> 
> I'm currently set to 45 on all cores.


What is even more a waste of time is windows scheduler will rotate the program threads with all cores from 4.5GHz to 4.0GHz.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> I guess for now Asus is going to be king in that department. I know gigabyte would only do per active core. I have one core that is peaking temp so i wanted to be able to throttle that one back and push the rest. I am waiting on vrm temp test for the xpower. I know ttl is going 5o be reviewing one soon.
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Windows scheduler changes from time to time when running programs heating different cores more. You will be chasing your tail trying to use those options.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Gigabyte boards lets you put caps on each individual core. That's actually how the Turbo Boost 3.0 is implemented. At stock settings, the 8 non-preferred cores on my 7900X are capped at 43x. The other two are capped at 45x.
> 
> So you can throttle down specific cores as you wish. The catch is that it's a sub-option that's easier to find accidentally than intentionally.
Click to expand...

Windows Scheduler rotates threads to all cores even if there is only one thread from the program. Try Prme95 no AVX with one thread and take a look at the graph.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I want an Asus BIOS in the Gigabyte 7 or 9 board. And I'm probably not the only one...


That or if Asus would just release the rampage line already.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Windows scheduler changes from time to time when running programs heating different cores more. You will be chasing your tail trying to use those options.


Not completely. In stress testing I have 2 cores that will always run at minimum 10-20c hotter than the rest of the cpu... if I could stress test those to at a lower voltage or lower clock I would have room to push the others a good bit higher. They are always the first to throttle. Core 6 first then core 3. I wish I could find a diagram of where they are located on the die. Really it's just about chasing higher bench scores just for fun to see what it can do with that fine of control.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I want an Asus BIOS in the Gigabyte 7 or 9 board. And I'm probably not the only one...
> 
> 
> 
> That or if Asus would just release the rampage line already.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Windows scheduler changes from time to time when running programs heating different cores more. You will be chasing your tail trying to use those options.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not completely. In stress testing I have 2 cores that will always run at minimum 10-20c hotter than the rest of the cpu... if I could stress test those to at a lower voltage or lower clock I would have room to push the others a good bit higher. They are always the first to throttle. Core 6 first then core 3. I wish I could find a diagram of where they are located on the die. Really it's just about chasing higher bench scores just for fun to see what it can do with that fine of control.
Click to expand...

When I stress test with different programs the peak core temperatures moves to different cores.


----------



## aDyerSituation

If you have a couple cores that are more than ~10c hotter than the others you might want to re-apply the thermal paste. Or maybe it's the pigeon poop under the IHS?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> So after the "phantom throttle" fix, my 7900x is hitting mid 80's with a 4.6 overclock @ 1.19V. Power consumption hits 274 watts. I think I will send it in for a delid operation..... Any thoughts on a safe operating temp for this CPU?


How did you fix the phantom throttle?


----------



## Gettz8488

For those of you with asus boards are you running svid disabled or enabled? it's not making any difference for me.


----------



## hodgempls

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> How did you fix the phantom throttle?


Depends on your MB. But see this thread for more info:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1634045/skylake-x-phantom-throttling


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> Depends on your MB. But see this thread for more info:
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1634045/skylake-x-phantom-throttling


I already had Current cap at 140% and disabling or enabling Svid is not changing anything for me underload i haven't tried it with prime 85 but cinebench gives me the same scores with it enabled or disabled i don't break 65 C cycling cinebench and i don't pass 83C on prime 95 with it enabled or disabled


----------



## tizziano

After many laps I think I have practically configured the equipment:
I7 7820x
Asus Turg Mark 1 (I think it cools better vrm)
Kingston HyperX Predator 3600 32GB 4x8GB CL17
Samsung evo 850 500 Gb
Toshiba 2TB
Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming
Corsair RM850i 850W 80 Plus Gold Modular

I still have to decide the cooling, which for more information I look at I still have many doubts, I am between a noctua NH-D15 and the NZXT kit Kraken X62
Noctua is a little less noisy but with a few degrees more, but of course they are tests done with old platforms, I do not know which would dissipate more amount of heat watching as they usually put these cpu.
Depending on what I pick I will choose the case
PS: Does the temperature of the room affect air cooling more than liquid or is it indifferent?

Thank you


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> I already had Current cap at 140% and disabling or enabling Svid is not changing anything for me underload i haven't tried it with prime 85 but cinebench gives me the same scores with it enabled or disabled i don't break 65 C cycling cinebench and i don't pass 83C on prime 95 with it enabled or disabled


Are you sure you are throttling to begin with?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Are you sure you are throttling to begin with?


I wasn't sure lol was just making sure.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> I wasn't sure lol was just making sure.


That's why this phantom throttling thing is such mess. Since it's not easy to tell whether it's happening or not.

If you suspect that you're throttling under a certain workload, try these two things:

Incrementally decrease the clock speed.
Incrementally reduce the # of threads.
In both cases, pay close attention to the temperatures and the power draw. If *decreasing* the load beyond a certain point causes temps or power draw to spike, then you've just went from throttling to not throttling. You can also go in the other direction and work from low-load to high-load.

If your workload is a benchmark that outputs a score, pay attention to that as well. When you're phantom throttling, the performance can be really really bad.

This of course also assumes that you've locked your clock speed so it isn't constantly fluctuating. That just adds noise to the test.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> If you have a couple cores that are more than ~10c hotter than the others you might want to re-apply the thermal paste. Or maybe it's the pigeon poop under the IHS?


Pigeon poop..... I reapplied and even upgraded my thermal paste


----------



## Silicon Lottery

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Pigeon poop..... I reapplied and even upgraded my thermal paste


Delidding will only sometimes help the large delta between cores. For the most part some cores are just warmer than others. I believe it's a combination of the location of the cores on the CPU die, along with each core having a different amount of leakage.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> That's why this phantom throttling thing is such mess. Since it's not easy to tell whether it's happening or not.
> 
> If you suspect that you're throttling under a certain workload, try these two things:
> 
> Incrementally decrease the clock speed.
> Incrementally reduce the # of threads.
> In both cases, pay close attention to the temperatures and the power draw. If *decreasing* the load beyond a certain point causes temps or power draw to spike, then you've just went from throttling to not throttling. You can also go in the other direction and work from low-load to high-load.
> 
> If your workload is a benchmark that outputs a score, pay attention to that as well. When you're phantom throttling, the performance can be really really bad.
> 
> This of course also assumes that you've locked your clock speed so it isn't constantly fluctuating. That just adds noise to the test.


Yea i honestly don't think i'm throttling power consumption. cinebench scored around 1470+ on my 7800x


----------



## MoonScryer

Hello. So I threw out all the settings I had and started over. I plan to leave the system here baring issue (or someone seeing something I don't).

Couple BIOS pics and the big thing is a laid out HWiNFO.

I've run AIDA64, Realbench 2.54 on this setup for two hour stretches and was doing this half hour run after changing something on my cooling system.

System - Asus X299 Deluxe, 7820x (not delidded), G.Skill TridentZ DDR4-3200C16 sticks, 1080 ti FE at stock plus other things.

Cooling - EK XE360 radiators x2, EK Supremacy and 1080 ti waterblocks. Fan wedged in the hoses of the waterblock pointed at the VRM heatsink (waiting for the EK monoblock)

Basics - 47x multi, SVID Disabled, LLC 4, 140%, cpu -0.025, cache +0.025, input 1.850









My question is on what is in the HWiNFO pic. I was seeing a dip on the FSB to 98Mhz give or take and it would go back up. I was also seeing roughly 75mhz lower on various cores than the multiplier was set before it too would go back up. I suspect this was just HWiNFO not able to update quickly due to the large amount of information it was showing, the Window scheduler running wild and the fact I was stressing the gpu with Realbench. There is a 3rd monitor cropped out.

I don't think I am throttling but would like a 2nd opinion. I was seeing a load of 560-600 watts at the wall depending on what Realbench was going.


----------



## OZrevhead

Has anyone tried the Gaming Pro Carbon or the x299-E Strix? Which has better clocking potential? (Or does either give better results?)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Instead of chatting in other threads like Broadwell-E, I thought I'd start a thread where everything can be put.
> 
> Myself I'm looking at getting the 7820x, still undecided on motherboard though.
> I was looking at the Strix, but the current reviews aren't promising, same with the Prime Deluxe.
> 
> And yet MSI are leading the pack with the Carbon Pro's benchmark performances.


Op what did you get?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OZrevhead*
> 
> Has anyone tried the Gaming Pro Carbon or the x299-E Strix? Which has better clocking potential? (Or does either give better results?)
> Op what did you get?


I got the strix E so far it's good can't say anything about msi


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OZrevhead*
> 
> Has anyone tried the Gaming Pro Carbon or the x299-E Strix? Which has better clocking potential? (Or does either give better results?)
> Op what did you get?


7820x
Asus TUF Mark 1 (Awesome board BTW)
32GB (4x8GB) Corsair Vengeance 3200Mhz

Currently at 4.5Ghz, got game and did 4.6Ghz fine, but the H115i hit it's thermal limit there though..


----------



## OZrevhead

What volts for 4500?


----------



## alex1990

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OZrevhead*
> 
> Has anyone tried the Gaming Pro Carbon or the x299-E Strix? Which has better clocking potential? (Or does either give better results?)
> Op what did you get?


i have Carbon. Very nice mb and my first msi. [email protected] 4.7 1.23 and 32gb 3433 @ 3733 16c 1t..


----------



## OZrevhead

Is there a ranking or overclocking results thread here? If not can we start one?

Im curious to see what batches do best and what clocks people are getting


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OZrevhead*
> 
> Is there a ranking or overclocking results thread here? If not can we start one?
> 
> Im curious to see what batches do best and what clocks people are getting


We can start one, but no one has yet..


----------



## tabbycph2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Awesome, i am debating on this or wait for the rampage. Will the msi bios let you set per core speed and voltages like Asus bios will?


I was thinking about it again, are you sure you can set voltage pr core on asus ? I cant find it in the manuals.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> For those of you with asus boards are you running svid disabled or enabled? it's not making any difference for me.


depends on whether you are using offset/adaptive or manual override. the former need to have the com link between the VR and cpu enabled (so, AUTO or Enabled are the proper setting).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Pigeon poop..... I reapplied and even upgraded my thermal paste


hopefully not to the pigeon poop Intel uses between the die and IHS.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silicon Lottery*
> 
> Delidding will only sometimes help the large delta between cores. For the most part some cores are just warmer than others. I believe it's a combination of the location of the cores on the CPU die, along with each core having a different amount of leakage.


^^ This. And this core deltaT is certainly not unique to SLK-X.









(I'm still waiting on the APEX....)


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silicon Lottery*
> 
> Delidding will only sometimes help the large delta between cores. For the most part some cores are just warmer than others. I believe it's a combination of the location of the cores on the CPU die, along with each core having a different amount of leakage.


I was going more with die placement, it is core 6 and core 3 on my 7820x. I haven't delided and was thinking about sending it in to SL to have it done. Now would probably be a good time as I sent back my MB and am waiting on the Asus Rampage. I have been able to run cinebench at 4.9 but didn't want to push any higher because of temps. I do have a question, if I send it in how long does the replacement paste hold up and do you have to repeat the process?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tizziano*
> 
> After many laps I think I have practically configured the equipment:
> I7 7820x
> Asus Turg Mark 1 (I think it cools better vrm)
> Kingston HyperX Predator 3600 32GB 4x8GB CL17
> Samsung evo 850 500 Gb
> Toshiba 2TB
> Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming
> Corsair RM850i 850W 80 Plus Gold Modular
> 
> I still have to decide the cooling, which for more information I look at I still have many doubts, I am between a noctua NH-D15 and the NZXT kit Kraken X62
> Noctua is a little less noisy but with a few degrees more, but of course they are tests done with old platforms, I do not know which would dissipate more amount of heat watching as they usually put these cpu.
> Depending on what I pick I will choose the case
> PS: Does the temperature of the room affect air cooling more than liquid or is it indifferent?
> 
> Thank you


How much overclocking are you planning to do? If you are doing a lot then I highly recommend liquid. I would say air is more susceptible to ambient temperature and I wouldn't overclock these CPUs at all with air, they definitely run hotter than broadwell.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silicon Lottery*
> 
> Delidding will only sometimes help the large delta between cores. For the most part some cores are just warmer than others. I believe it's a combination of the location of the cores on the CPU die, along with each core having a different amount of leakage.


When you guys delidded my 7900x cpu it made a huge difference on the package temp but I have not compared the actual differences between the cores, I'll have to do that. Still struggling with taming the temps on 5.0GHz though, I'll need to find out how I can run it cooler but it's either 1.291v+ core or 1.95v VCCIN to keep it stable with very high LLC. I have not messed around with VCSA or many other voltages/settings yet.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Pigeon poop..... I reapplied and even upgraded my thermal paste


Make sure you don't tighten the cooler screws too much, that might help. I used to tighten those screws to a point where the block doesn't have flat contact with the IHS, I was under the impression that the cpu frequency is flying with high overclocks, I needed to tie it down hard so it doesn't fly away







.


----------



## tizziano

I don't want to do an aggressive overclok, especially for energy consumption. Maximum 4.4 or 4.3 in all cores or try to fit it to 4.2 all but the coolest cores put them at 4.4 or 4.5 Ghz

Thanks


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tizziano*
> 
> I don't want to do an aggressive overclok, especially for energy consumption. Maximum 4.4 or 4.3 in all cores or try to fit it to 4.2 all but the coolest cores put them at 4.4 or 4.5 Ghz
> 
> Thanks


That defeats the purpose of the chips.....if thats what you are going to do why not save a ton of money with ryzen or broadwell e?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> That defeats the purpose of the chips.....if thats what you are going to do why not save a ton of money with ryzen or broadwell e?


It depends on what that purpose is:

If the purpose is to get the best price/performance, then you're better off with Ryzen. (Unless you want AVX/AVX512.)
If the purpose is to get better performance than all the other alternatives, then Skylake X will do it at stock. No overclock needed.*
If the purpose is to do an aggressive overclock with limited cooling, then no, Skylake X is a terrible choice. You're better off with Broadwell-E.
*This will probably become invalid in a few weeks once Threadripper launches. The exceptions for AVX/AVX512 still apply.


----------



## Gettz8488

Having a weird issue if anyone has any thoughts pls let me know. My cpu usage on windows task manager shows a higher % compared to Afterburner Hwinfo and Hwmonitor. should i follow the data on task manager or the software?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Having a weird issue if anyone has any thoughts pls let me know. My cpu usage on windows task manager shows a higher % compared to Afterburner Hwinfo and Hwmonitor. should i follow the data on task manager or the software?


What happens when you run something that puts all cores to 100%?

In my experience, Task Manager can be wrong once the clocks have been tampered with. But it's still rare.


----------



## EarlyAdopter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Having a weird issue if anyone has any thoughts pls let me know. My cpu usage on windows task manager shows a higher % compared to Afterburner Hwinfo and Hwmonitor. should i follow the data on task manager or the software?


What you're likely seeing is the various apps sampling at different polling intervals. I wouldn't read too much into it.


----------



## tizziano

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> That defeats the purpose of the chips.....if thats what you are going to do why not save a ton of money with ryzen or broadwell e?


My purpose is to have more performance than Ryzen. (From stock already I get it) + a little OC to improve even more the performance and to save time in my daily work

The Broadwell-e option had already contemplated it, but I considered it absurd to buy a platform that is now obsolete, if Intel had lowered prices would be an option. Buying from second hand is not an option for professional work.

Thank you


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *tizziano*
> 
> After many laps I think I have practically configured the equipment:
> I7 7820x
> Asus Turg Mark 1 (I think it cools better vrm)
> Kingston HyperX Predator 3600 32GB 4x8GB CL17
> Samsung evo 850 500 Gb
> Toshiba 2TB
> Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming
> Corsair RM850i 850W 80 Plus Gold Modular
> 
> I still have to decide the cooling, which for more information I look at I still have many doubts, I am between a noctua NH-D15 and the NZXT kit Kraken X62
> Noctua is a little less noisy but with a few degrees more, but of course they are tests done with old platforms, I do not know which would dissipate more amount of heat watching as they usually put these cpu.
> Depending on what I pick I will choose the case
> PS: Does the temperature of the room affect air cooling more than liquid or is it indifferent?
> 
> Thank you
> 
> 
> 
> How much overclocking are you planning to do? If you are doing a lot then I highly recommend liquid. I would say air is more susceptible to ambient temperature and I wouldn't overclock these CPUs at all with air, they definitely run hotter than broadwell.
Click to expand...

Are the skylake x running hotter than broadwwell do to the higher clock speed or IVR? Also does skylake X use 14nm+ process?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Are the skylake x running hotter than broadwwell do to the higher clock speed or IVR? Also does skylake X use 14nm+ process?


Based on what I'm seeing, I think it's about the same. The only difference is the pigeon poop.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Are the skylake x running hotter than broadwwell do to the higher clock speed or IVR? Also does skylake X use 14nm+ process?


it's 14nm. I'm not sure if it's the IVR or the clock speeds but I'm comparing this with my experience in overclocking a 6950X vs 7900X.

We currently have 4 rigs with 4.4GHz 6850Ks with temps that are manageable with liquid cooling and if I go 4.5GHz it can't hang and go into the unstable region. I don't think I can do the same with the skylake-x chips. Going 4.4GHz solid for hours with 100% utilization on air will most likely hurt if that's what you are planning.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Based on what I'm seeing, I think it's about the same. The only difference is the pigeon poop.


Pigeon poop repeal and replace makes a difference for sure but I am seeing a very sharp turn on temp between 4.8/4.9GHz and almost a block wall at 5.0GHz. The 6950X had this behavior at 4.4 to 4.5GHz, the difference is noticeable but then again we're talking about 4.4GHz vs 4.9GHz overclocks.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> depends on whether you are using offset/adaptive or manual override. the former need to have the com link between the VR and cpu enabled (so, AUTO or Enabled are the proper setting).
> hopefully not to the pigeon poop Intel uses between the die and IHS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ^^ This. And this core deltaT is certainly not unique to SLK-X.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (I'm still waiting on the APEX....)


Will it effect me if i have it off using adaptive voltage? i feel like i get less stuttering in game iwth it off could be in my head though


----------



## ckoons1

Does anyone by chance have a cheap socket 1151 cpu I may borrow just long enough to update a bios so that my 7700k processor will work?
Of course I would pay shipping
Thank you


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ckoons1*
> 
> Does anyone by chance have a cheap socket 1151 cpu I may borrow just long enough to update a bios so that my 7700k processor will work?
> Of course I would pay shipping
> Thank you


Are you serious? Go buy a cheap Pentium or something. Nobody is going to send you a cpu to update your bios.


----------



## ckoons1

Done it before.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Are the skylake x running hotter than broadwwell do to the higher clock speed or IVR? Also does skylake X use 14nm+ process?
> 
> 
> 
> it's 14nm.
Click to expand...

I did some looking up and it is 14nm+ http://wccftech.com/intel-core-i9-7900x-review-cpu-gaming-oc-performance/


----------



## aerotracks

Joining the fun









http://abload.de/image.php?img=20170727-043512z4yem.png


----------



## BroPhilip

I saw the boasting about it on the launch event stream they did with Paul from Pauls hardware and bitwit.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tabbycph2*
> 
> I was thinking about it again, are you sure you can set voltage pr core on asus ? I cant find it in the manuals.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ckoons1*
> 
> Does anyone by chance have a cheap socket 1151 cpu I may borrow just long enough to update a bios so that my 7700k processor will work?
> Of course I would pay shipping
> Thank you


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ckoons1*
> 
> Done it before.


if you are looking to flash the formula in your sig (it's a rog board) - you do not need the cpu to flash with Bios flashback. just connect a PSU, load the bios on a fat32 formatted usb stick, - insert it in the flash port (read your manual) power up the PSU and hold the bios flashback button until the bios chip light on the bpard begins to flash.


----------



## Jpmboy

anyone seen this










Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> Joining the fun
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> http://abload.de/image.php?img=20170727-043512z4yem.png


NIce! Quite a bit better than this 6950x @ 4.3/3.7


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> anyone seen this


Maybe the price of the i9-7980xe will go down.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> anyone seen this


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Maybe the price of the i9-7980xe will go down.


daaum, I hope so. 2Gs on a HEDT chip is pushing it.... but yields are gonna be very low.


----------



## KCDC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*


@JpmBoy where did this come from? I wonder what power it's pulling if this is true. I see a render node in my future.


----------



## Scotty99

That was just from AMD:





Assume power consumption in the 180 range at stock.


----------



## KCDC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> That was just from AMD:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Assume power consumption in the 180 range at stock.


Thanks!


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> anyone seen this


Looks like the same results from their Threadripper demo. Pretty beastly for the money.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Maybe the price of the i9-7980xe will go down.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> daaum, I hope so. 2Gs on a HEDT chip is pushing it.... but yields are gonna be very low.


I hope it will go down to like $1,500 USD or less, it's going to be a frankenchip after all, half Xeon, half HEDT and a touch of Skylake because they didn't have specs at computex so they just pulled chips out of thin air and then telling the engineers they need this done by August/Sept make it happen









Well I got close







I maybe I can beat it if I ever get 5GHz more stable.


----------



## TheRedViper

The difference between threadripper and i9s is that you can still game on i9s and get top 5 performance while threadripper is basically a pure workload chip.


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> We better get some improved VRMs then. My 7900X can draw 200 W at default frequencies (stock + no power limit), and it puts my X299-A's VRM above 85 C. Maybe we can get to 250+ W with the TR 1950X without even running AVX.


I wouldn't be terribly concerned with power consumption spiraling out of control. Threadripper isn't going to exceed 4.0 GHz without throwing absolutely absurd voltage at it. Pushing Threadripper is unlikely to break 250W under non-extreme circumstances.


----------



## artins90

Guys I am the only one who gets BCLK drops to as low as 68 Hmz?
I have set it to 100 Mhz fixed (there is an option for dynamic) in the bios but even at idle the clock just won't stay at 100.
I suspect this might be the reason why I am having random stutters in games, do you think a sudden drop of the BCLK clock can affect CPU - GPU communication?
The bios on the MSI x299 SLI PLUS has been a mess so far. The latest official bios has a bug which reports that the ram is installed in the wrong slots, I had to install the beta bios to fix it. One of the fans doesn't respect the fan curve I set it to, some features listed in the manual are not available in the bios, every time you change something in the OC section it loves to switch other settings like C states on it's own, and now I find out that it ignores the BCLK clock I set.


----------



## tabbycph

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> I saw the boasting about it on the launch event stream they did with Paul from Pauls hardware and bitwit.


Can anyone with a Asus x299 board confirm this.


----------



## Silicon Lottery

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> I was going more with die placement, it is core 6 and core 3 on my 7820x. I haven't delided and was thinking about sending it in to SL to have it done. Now would probably be a good time as I sent back my MB and am waiting on the Asus Rampage. I have been able to run cinebench at 4.9 but didn't want to push any higher because of temps. I do have a question, if I send it in how long does the replacement paste hold up and do you have to repeat the process?


We've been selling delidded CPUs for 3 years now, and haven't had anyone report temperature degradation over time. I don't see any reason to suspect you'd need to delid again over the component's typical lifespan. In fact, I just added this to the product page on the site.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> Joining the fun
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://abload.de/image.php?img=20170727-043512z4yem.png


5000mhz Core
3800mhz 13-13-13-28 278 1T 4x8GB?
3300mhz NB clock
Is this delidded or nope? 96C?


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Is this delidded or nope? 96C?


Not delidded and cooled with AIO at 22C ambient


----------



## snef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MoonScryer*
> 
> Hello. So I threw out all the settings I had and started over. I plan to leave the system here baring issue (or someone seeing something I don't).
> 
> Couple BIOS pics and the big thing is a laid out HWiNFO.
> 
> I've run AIDA64, Realbench 2.54 on this setup for two hour stretches and was doing this half hour run after changing something on my cooling system.
> 
> System - Asus X299 Deluxe, 7820x (not delidded), G.Skill TridentZ DDR4-3200C16 sticks, 1080 ti FE at stock plus other things.
> 
> Cooling - EK XE360 radiators x2, EK Supremacy and 1080 ti waterblocks. Fan wedged in the hoses of the waterblock pointed at the VRM heatsink (waiting for the EK monoblock)
> 
> Basics - 47x multi, SVID Disabled, LLC 4, 140%, cpu -0.025, cache +0.025, input 1.850
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


because I'm a noob and don't see any guide to overclock a X299, I use your exact setting on my 7820x and its very stable
now I will try to push it a bit higher and delid it

for now temp after 30 minutes of realbench
80c

around 65c in any game

mine is also is not delided,
Asus Rampage VI Apex
32 Gb Apacer 3200mhz
GTX1080Ti FE


----------



## BroPhilip

You have the Apex?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *snef*
> 
> because I'm a noob and don't see any guide to overclock a X299, I use your exact setting on my 7820x and its very stable
> now I will try to push it a bit higher and delid it
> 
> for now temp after 30 minutes of realbench
> 80c
> 
> around 65c in any game
> 
> mine is also is not delided,
> Asus Rampage VI Apex
> 32 Gb Apacer 3200mhz
> GTX1080Ti FE


----------



## BroPhilip

Nothing like getting on YouTube and seeing dozens of ryzen 3 reviews..... really compared to the number of x299 reviews it's just sad... maybe it's just me, I'm not a fanboy if ryzen had the single core performance I would buy it. I just wish would try to not appear so biased. That's why I like ttl.....


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Looks like the same results from their Threadripper demo. Pretty beastly for the money.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


it is from the amd tube show. I think we're reading the wrong tho. R15 scales nearly linearly with thread count once you get to 12 and higher... and the TRE seems a bit weak to me in that benchmark. That said, it is an AMD home grown run with an es chip no doubt. Only time will tell. I'm very sure Intel's 16 and 18 core parts will do better... but at twice the price. Lol - how about a 2 socket TR board meant for he "prosumer".








... still waiting on a ROG x266 and (ideally) an 18 core.







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I hope it will go *down to like $1,500 USD* or less, it's going to be a frankenchip after all, half Xeon, half HEDT and a touch of Skylake because they didn't have specs at computex so they just pulled chips out of thin air and then telling the engineers they need this done by August/Sept make it happen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well I got close
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I maybe I can beat it if I ever get 5GHz more stable.


lol - that's not gonna happen (unfortunately)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheRedViper*
> 
> The difference between threadripper and i9s is that you can still game on i9s and get top 5 performance while threadripper is basically a pure workload chip.


not sure what leads you to believe that. Sure any cpu with that core count will be great for a production box, but that does not say anything about HEDT performance IMO.


----------



## Mysticial

If anything, I'm half-expecting there to be a shortage of the 7980XE when it launches. Very few people will be able to buy one. And the price will shoot up to something even more stupid.

Intel has already stated that those higher-end chips will be in limited quantity, and if there's that much more demand for the 18-core chip than the 12/14/16 cores even at the currently announced prices, things will probably get ugly.

Given a fixed yield, for every 7980XE that gets produced, there's probably more than one of the 12/14/16 dies that get made? So there's likely to be a huge mismatch/imbalance in supply and demand. There isn't much room to use "server rejects" to fill the void since all 18 cores are already enabled.

Even now, it's difficult to buy the 7800/7820/7900X's because they're completely out of stock almost anywhere - unless you pay a huge mark up.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jpmboy*
> That said, it is an AMD home grown run with an es chip no doubt. Only time will tell. I'm very sure Intel's 16 and 18 core parts will do better... but at twice the price. Lol - how about a 2 socket TR board meant for he "prosumer"


Shut up and take my money...


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *snef*
> 
> mine is also is not delided,
> *Asus Rampage VI Apex*
> 32 Gb Apacer 3200mhz
> GTX1080Ti FE


How? Pics?


----------



## czin125

https://scontent-arn2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/20292647_10203678520960307_3097662273811980704_n.jpg?oh=7a1bcb055507adc9f6b3203ef5bead0e&oe=59F61878

There's a 7900X with all cores enabled running at 62x100mhz ( 6199.92mhz ) on some unknown board.


----------



## snef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> You have the Apex?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> How? Pics?


yep i have the Apex , its a build i did for Asus for the launch of the Apex,

build logs: http://www.overclock.net/t/1630508/sponsored-the-phoenix-asus-special-build/0_50


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> Joining the fun
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://abload.de/image.php?img=20170727-043512z4yem.png
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Can you run Cinebench R15 and see what score you get? I'm just curious in comparison to my chip.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> I was going more with die placement, it is core 6 and core 3 on my 7820x. I haven't delided and was thinking about sending it in to SL to have it done. Now would probably be a good time as I sent back my MB and am waiting on the Asus Rampage. I have been able to run cinebench at 4.9 but didn't want to push any higher because of temps. I do have a question, if I send it in how long does the replacement paste hold up and do you have to repeat the process?


I sent my 7900X to SL and I would highly recommend their service, when I got the CPU I couldn't even tell the difference that it was delidded all I know is that it runs much cooler.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artins90*
> 
> Guys I am the only one who gets BCLK drops to as low as 68 Hmz?
> I have set it to 100 Mhz fixed (there is an option for dynamic) in the bios but even at idle the clock just won't stay at 100.
> I suspect this might be the reason why I am having random stutters in games, do you think a sudden drop of the BCLK clock can affect CPU - GPU communication?
> The bios on the MSI x299 SLI PLUS has been a mess so far. The latest official bios has a bug which reports that the ram is installed in the wrong slots, I had to install the beta bios to fix it. One of the fans doesn't respect the fan curve I set it to, some features listed in the manual are not available in the bios, every time you change something in the OC section it loves to switch other settings like C states on it's own, and now I find out that it ignores the BCLK clock I set.


That is wacky if you are getting 68 if you locked it in for 100MHz, I would contact support or clear CMOS, reflash the BIOS and clear CMOS again and then load defaults maybe?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> If anything, I'm half-expecting there to be a shortage of the 7980XE when it launches. Very few people will be able to buy one. And the price will shoot up to something even more stupid.
> 
> Intel has already stated that those higher-end chips will be in limited quantity, and if there's that much more demand for the 18-core chip than the 12/14/16 cores even at the currently announced prices, things will probably get ugly.
> 
> Given a fixed yield, for every 7980XE that gets produced, there's probably more than one of the 12/14/16 dies that get made? So there's likely to be a huge mismatch/imbalance in supply and demand. There isn't much room to use "server rejects" to fill the void since all 18 cores are already enabled.
> 
> Even now, it's difficult to buy the 7800/7820/7900X's because they're completely out of stock almost anywhere - unless you pay a huge mark up.


I'm on the fence on getting a frankenchip, I just don't see that 18 core going past 2-2.4GHz base clock speed because it's going to be a variant of the Xeon. I'm glad I got the 7900X but I'm still open to getting a 79080XE if it's good, depending on how good of a job they do on those stitches.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *snef*
> 
> yep i have the Apex , its a build i did for Asus for the launch of the Apex,
> 
> build logs: http://www.overclock.net/t/1630508/sponsored-the-phoenix-asus-special-build/0_50
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


/drool so can you mention overclockability experiences or are you still on NDA? Which CPU did you have?


----------



## snef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> /drool so can you mention overclockability experiences or are you still on NDA? Which CPU did you have?


i have no NDA

my CPu is the 7820x and the second have the 7640x but this one is out of interest









im too noob in OC to explain or to know if its good or not
i use setting from previous post in this thread (4.7Ghz)

my cpu is not delide and after some stress test 30 minutes of real bench) it reach 80c

next steps is delid the cpu, and try to search for more info and push it to the limit (the one i cant do hahahah)


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *snef*
> 
> i have no NDA
> 
> my CPu is the 7820x and the second have the 7640x but this one is out of interest
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> im too noob in OC to explain or to know if its good or not
> i use setting from previous post in this thread (4.7Ghz)
> 
> my cpu is not delide and after some stress test 30 minutes of real bench) it reach 80c
> 
> next steps is delid the cpu, and try to search for more info and push it to the limit (the one i cant do hahahah)


Cool, I sent my cpu to SL they did an awesome job.


----------



## MoonScryer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *snef*
> 
> because I'm a noob and don't see any guide to overclock a X299, I use your exact setting on my 7820x and its very stable
> now I will try to push it a bit higher and delid it
> 
> for now temp after 30 minutes of realbench
> 80c
> 
> around 65c in any game
> 
> mine is also is not delided,
> Asus Rampage VI Apex
> 32 Gb Apacer 3200mhz
> GTX1080Ti FE


Happy to of helped. The only changes I've done since is to set the RAM volt and timings manually (just anyway) and reduce the AVX to 7 and AVX512 to 10 mostly so if an AVX load kicks on some random program I don't cook things.

Also love your build with the Apex. I wish mine was half that clean.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MoonScryer*
> 
> Happy to of helped. The only changes I've done since is to set the RAM volt and timings manually (just anyway) and reduce the AVX to 7 and AVX512 to 10 mostly so if an AVX load kicks on some random program I don't cook things.
> 
> Also love your build with the Apex. I wish mine was half that clean.


I did the exact same thing on both AVX versions especially at 4.9GHz on a 7900X the temp sky rockets like I'm welding something on the cpu.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *snef*
> 
> yep i have the Apex , its a build i did for Asus for the launch of the Apex,
> 
> build logs: http://www.overclock.net/t/1630508/sponsored-the-phoenix-asus-special-build/0_50


That is a lovely looking build, props!









You can take screenshots from your BIOS using F12 hotkey (it should be that) and people can walk you through the settings you can use to increase your OC


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Shut up and take my money...


i know right? cancel the lunch breaks and holidays until both companies launch their flagship/halo HEDT cpu!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *snef*
> 
> yep i have the Apex , its a build i did for Asus for the launch of the Apex,
> 
> build logs: http://www.overclock.net/t/1630508/sponsored-the-phoenix-asus-special-build/0_50
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


_Absolutely_ beautiful!! snef,,, but daaum, if I saw a patient with that coolant's color urine, I'd have them admitted.


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Can you run Cinebench R15 and see what score you get? I'm just curious in comparison to my chip.


I can


----------



## aDyerSituation

Nice score. My 7820x is doing 1890ish in Cinebench @ 4.4ghz. Waiting on my cooler to come in so I can push it further.


----------



## Artah

And I thought I made up the word FrankenChip, looks like in 2014 someone made such a thing already. Sorry for the off topic but intel is starting to irritate me towards team red just like team green.

We need an owners database/spreadsheet to get a list of how many people is trying out skylake-x from this board.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/06/18/intel_fpga_custom_chip/


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> I can
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://abload.de/image.php?img=20170727-2332070ikh3.png
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Nice, if we use calculations in cores that's about 2813 translated into 10 cores, I'm only getting around 2600 at 4.9GHz on my 7900X. Must be nice to be able to run 5GHz without melting your CPU


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Nice, if we use calculations in cores that's about 2813 translated into 10 cores, I'm only getting around 2600 at 4.9GHz on my 7900X. Must be nice to be able to run 5GHz without melting your CPU


After owning 6950X staying away from 10 core was a conscious decision









Even little 8 core is trying to burn a hole in my socket at 4.7-4.8.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> After owning 6950X staying away from 10 core was a conscious decision


I hear you there, irritated with intel on dropping lanes on lower core CPUs. It's not like video cards can easily run high res solo these days or I wouldn't mind. I'm using these 16+16+4 lanes right now and need it to fit into the new platform for 16+16+4+4 for X299


----------



## KCDC

Maybe it's too early, but anyone know of a good skylake-x overclocking guide out there like ASUS EdgeUp did with broadwell-e? It explained a lot of the BIOS options available and what were safe-to-extreme parameters. I'll be building my friends 7820 workstation soon and I want it to be a solid build with a decent mid OC that he will never have to tweak or worry about. He is not as savvy as us. A corsair H115i AIO will be used. I'd rather not leave the voltages set to auto as it sounds like the BIOS likes to spike it pretty high based on what I've read in this thread. I'm also gathering the BIOS options are basically the same as B-E, but I do want to be sure about what I set up, since I won't have access to the machine once I build it for him.

I have been trying to scour this thread and have some decent info, just haven't gathered it all into one concise package. I am quite familiar with overclocking Broadwell-E, and it seems like the biggest difference is voltage being lower for SX to get fairly decent OC. For instance, I have to crank mine up to 1.38v to reach 4.4ghz on a B-E 6900k.

If one were to say the biggest things to keep in mind if going from B-E to S-X, what would those be? Appreciate any help from Y'all.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Nice score. My 7820x is doing 1890ish in Cinebench @ 4.4ghz. Waiting on my cooler to come in so I can push it further.


Crank that B up!..


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KCDC*
> 
> If one were to say the biggest things to keep in mind if going from B-E to S-X, what would those be? Appreciate any help from Y'all.


IMO, that would be to make sure you set an AVX512 offset. And do not let AVX512 run at all cores above 4.0 GHz unless you have specifically stress-tested it. Because if you don't, you can easily overload your thermals to dangerous levels.

The reason why I'm singling out the AVX512 is because some motherboards right now (Gigabyte) disable these offsets by default and have "easy overclock" settings that will try to run everything at 4.5 GHz. Attempting to run intensive AVX512 on 10 cores @ 4.5 GHz (either intentionally or unintentionally) on anything less than sub-zero cooling would be insane to dangerous.

The problem is that AVX512 is new and there are very few benchmark/stress-tests that use it. So motherboard manufacturers haven't properly tested their settings under such loads and therefore don't understand how dangerous the AVX512 can be if they put things too far beyond Intel's stock specs.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Crank that B up!..


Oh don't worry I will. But my pump on my cooler is slowly dying and I have to replace this motherboard with the Strix tonight. Build is taking longer than expected









But seriously







at that score. What's your vcore for that? I'm hoping I can at least get to 4.8.


----------



## KCDC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> IMO, that would be to make sure you set an AVX512 offset. And do not let AVX512 run at all cores above 4.0 GHz unless you have specifically stress-tested it. Because if you don't, you can easily overload your thermals to dangerous levels.
> 
> The reason why I'm singling out the AVX512 is because some motherboards right now (Gigabyte) disable these offsets by default and have "easy overclock" settings that will try to run everything at 4.5 GHz. Attempting to run intensive AVX512 on 10 cores @ 4.5 GHz (either intentionally or unintentionally) on anything less than sub-zero cooling would be insane to dangerous.
> 
> The problem is that AVX512 is new and there are very few benchmark/stress-tests that use it. So motherboard manufacturers haven't properly tested their settings under such loads and therefore don't understand how dangerous the AVX512 can be if they put things too far beyond Intel's stock specs.


Safe to say that the offset should be at or around 3.9 just to be safe then. That shouldn't affect any sort of 3D rendering he will be doing. All of his simulation work will be through the GPUs. What even uses AVX512 right now outside of benching? I feel like down the road it will be used for encoding.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Oh don't worry I will. But my pump on my cooler is slowly dying and I have to replace this motherboard with the Strix tonight. Build is taking longer than expected
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But seriously
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> at that score. What's your vcore for that? I'm hoping I can at least get to 4.8.


That is at 1.400v. I only run it at that for benchmarks. My 24/7 overclock is 4.8GHz @ 1.285v. My chip really hits a wall beyond 4.9GHz, hence the extra volts. Temps benching at 5.0 get dicey...with the hottest core hitting 93c on that Cinebench run. Temps at 4.8GHz are very manageable...hottest core hitting 81c during 2hrs of Realbench.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> That is at 1.400v. I only run it at that for benchmarks. My 24/7 overclock is 4.8GHz @ 1.285v. My chip really hits a wall beyond 4.9GHz, hence the extra volts. Temps benching at 5.0 get dicey...with the hottest core hitting 93c on that Cinebench run. Temps at 4.8GHz are very manageable...hottest core hitting 81c during 2hrs of Realbench.


93c at 1.4 in Cine bench? That's a lot cooler than I thought it would be at that voltage LOL

I get 85c at 4.4 1.17 after a run or two. So i'm assuming my cooler is borked as I can't hear the pump at all


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> 93c at 1.4 in Cine bench? That's a lot cooler than I thought it would be at that voltage LOL
> 
> I get 85c at 4.4 1.17 after a run or two. So i'm assuming my cooler is borked as I can't hear the pump at all


I sent my 7820x to Silicon Lottery and had it delidded







....and I am running 4 awesome fans in push/pull on my h115i. That said, 85c sounds way to hot for 1.17v in Cinebench.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I sent my 7820x to Silicon Lottery and had it delidded
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....and I am running 4 awesome fans in push/pull on my h115i. That said, 85c sounds way to hot for 1.17v in Cinebench.


I ordered an EVGA 280 CLC so hopefully that solves my issues.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I ordered an EVGA 280 CLC so hopefully that solves my issues.


Nice. I really like the look of that cooler and am an EVGA fan. If you need more out of it upgrade the fans and go push/pull. I think you will be happy.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Nice. I really like the look of that cooler and am an EVGA fan. If you need more out of it upgrade the fans and go push/pull. I think you will be happy.


Yeah for me it was between that or the H115i and X62. They are pretty much the same coolers with their own style from what I have gathered.
If EK releases a new AIO in the next month or two I might buy it if I'm still not happy.


----------



## Gettz8488

Having a weird issue where after bios screen loads and it's about to start windows loading my screen just goes black like if it doesn't receive input


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Yeah for me it was between that or the H115i and X62. They are pretty much the same coolers with their own style from what I have gathered.
> If EK releases a new AIO in the next month or two I might buy it if I'm still not happy.


Update: I just installed my Strix and now my CPU temps appear to be normal...

I remounted the cooler 3 times on the Gigabyte board. Oh my I am glad I changed.
Going to do more testing to confirm my temps are different but it seems like there is something enabled in the Gigabyte bios by default that made my temps rise


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Yeah for me it was between that or the H115i and X62. They are pretty much the same coolers with their own style from what I have gathered.
> If EK releases a new AIO in the next month or two I might buy it if I'm still not happy.
> 
> 
> 
> Update: I just installed my Strix and now my CPU temps appear to be normal...
> 
> I remounted the cooler 3 times on the Gigabyte board. Oh my I am glad I changed.
> Going to do more testing to confirm my temps are different but it seems like there is something enabled in the Gigabyte bios by default that made my temps rise
Click to expand...

Post pack what what made your temperature rise?


----------



## KCDC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Update: I just installed my Strix and now my CPU temps appear to be normal...
> 
> I remounted the cooler 3 times on the Gigabyte board. Oh my I am glad I changed.
> Going to do more testing to confirm my temps are different but it seems like there is something enabled in the Gigabyte bios by default that made my temps rise


If you find that setting, please let us know what it is!


----------



## aDyerSituation

Sorry to disappoint but I was wrong. Still getting too hot at even stock under real bench, just took longer than before

Also what is the max package temp before throttling and instability? I am hitting 86c at 1.1vcore stock on my package temps in hwmonitor.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Sorry to disappoint but I was wrong. Still getting too hot at even stock under real bench, just took longer than before
> 
> Also what is the max package temp before throttling and instability? I am hitting 86c at 1.1vcore stock on my package temps in hwmonitor.


For the Gigabyte boards:

95C for temperature throttling.
Phantom throttling kicks in at around 260W if you haven't enabled the fixes for that.
I have not been able to achieve VRM throttling since temperature throttling kicks in way before that.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Sorry to disappoint but I was wrong. Still getting too hot at even stock under real bench, just took longer than before
> 
> Also what is the max package temp before throttling and instability? I am hitting 86c at 1.1vcore stock on my package temps in hwmonitor.
> 
> 
> 
> For the Gigabyte boards:
> 
> 95C for temperature throttling.
> Phantom throttling kicks in at around 260W if you haven't enabled the fixes for that.
> I have not been able to achieve VRM throttling since temperature throttling kicks in way before that.
Click to expand...

What is the throttling temperature for ASUS?


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is the throttling temperature for ASUS?


105C for temperature throttling, 300W for current throttling unless you change power capability to 140%.


----------



## OZrevhead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> 105C for temperature throttling, 300W for current throttling unless you change power capability to 140%.


What about for MSI Pro Carbon?


----------



## artins90

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> That is wacky if you are getting 68 if you locked it in for 100MHz, I would contact support or clear CMOS, reflash the BIOS and clear CMOS again and then load defaults maybe?


I figured out what the issue was, I guess either Intel or MSI's C states implementation was way too aggressive.
I have always used up to C2 on my 2500k and I thought I could do the same with the 7820x and this board but that doesn't seem the case.
Even with only C1E enabled, the BLCK clock drops dramatically causing DPC latency issues and random frame drops in games.
The only way to get it to stay at 100mhz is to disable C states altogether, now the lowest it drops to is 99mhz and has peaks of 100.1Mhz, I guess this is a reasonable range.
With a stable BLCK I also noticed an improvement in scores across the board. For power saving, now I rely only on the windows power profile with the min CPU rate set 10% + Speed Step.
The CPU downclocks just fine and there is a difference of only 2-4 Watts when compared to C2 at idle.


----------



## OneCosmic

How lucky am I with my 7800X running at 4.9GHz 1.26V stable? 5GHz at 1.315 wasn't stable, but maybe it wasn't stable because of temperatures? i am on custom water with supremacy evo without delid, but power consumption after 1.275V increases very rapidly.


----------



## DeadSec

How far could you guys reduce the temperatures delidding the CPU?


----------



## OneCosmic

delete


----------



## OneCosmic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> Joining the fun
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://abload.de/image.php?img=20170727-043512z4yem.png


Is this a random 7800X or a pre-binned one?


----------



## Rammler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeadSec*
> 
> How far could you guys reduce the temperatures delidding the CPU?


got mine pre delidded. so no idea. but as far as i can tell it depends more on the chip than the actual delidding. i see people with cooler cpus non delidded than mine delidded on same voltage. and i have a big custom watercooling and they AIO.
anyway i get cinebench first run with 1.24v and 4.7ghz around 78 degree on highest core. most cores around 70 to 75. with 140% and SVID deactivated on ASUS X299 A


----------



## Rammler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OneCosmic*
> 
> Is this a random 7800X or a pre-binned one?


yeah for me he seems to have a VERY good chip. under 1.3v for 5 Ghz is amazing. as i browsed all available skylake x tests on the internet i found most chips need 1,2v for around 4,5-4,7 and 1.3 for 4.8-4.9.


----------



## hrmgamer

Hello everyone

I'm a long time lurker chasing some advice. I'm finally building a system to replace my venerable i7 920.

Use cases: games (ArmA3, Witcher3, BF1, AotS, etc. at 3440x1440), VMs (lots and they are RAM hungry), encoding, and some video editing.

Currently thinking an overclocked 7900 with either an Asus Deluxe or Rampage VI Extreme (if it happens to come out sometime soon), a pair of 1080Ti I luckily got rather cheaply, and a custom water loop.

What I can't seem to find (and this could just be down to my google skills or missing it when I was browsing this thread) is recommendations for overclock friendly RAM in 8 x 16GB configurations. I've seen a few people elsewhere go on about 'making sure they are quad not dual channel kits', because apparently there is some additional binning in quad kits to get them to play nicely together...I can kind of see it, but I can also see it being completely bogus.

The target numbers I have plucked from the air are >=3000MHz, <=C15, but again happy to take advice. I'd like to keep this below $2,000 AU (so about $1,500 US), and was pleasantly surprised to see this on sale Corsair DOMINATOR 3466 C16 4x16GB .

Any advice will be most welcome.

Cheers
HRMGamer


----------



## Gettz8488

Can someone help me out I'm really at a loss of what to do. When I cold boot my pc sometimes doesn't happen all the time. After the bios flash screen right before it gets into the windows load screen my screen goes black. And my screen shows like if it's not receiving input but it was just a second before


----------



## OneCosmic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rammler*
> 
> yeah for me he seems to have a VERY good chip. under 1.3v for 5 Ghz is amazing. as i browsed all available skylake x tests on the internet i found most chips need 1,2v for around 4,5-4,7 and 1.3 for 4.8-4.9.


Mine 7800X can do 4.9GHz 1.26V stable, but can't do 5GHz stable even at 1.315V, i don't want to go much higher without delid, because during cinebench, the warmest core hits 95C.


----------



## hodgempls

Can you tell if your monitor is still receiving a signal from your GPU (i.e. does it turn off or go into low power/sleep mode)? If so, it could be a handshake issue especially if you are using an HDMI cable.


----------



## BroPhilip

How can we have this already on facebook... and no word yet about pricing and availability of the Extreme or Apex. Really......


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is the throttling temperature for ASUS?
> 
> 
> 
> 105C for temperature throttling, 300W for current throttling unless you change power capability to 140%.
Click to expand...

What is the CPU throttling temperature?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> Can you tell if your monitor is still receiving a signal from your GPU (i.e. does it turn off or go into low power/sleep mode)? If so, it could be a handshake issue especially if you are using an HDMI cable.


It goes into sleep mode. The light is blue when the screen is showing me things. But goes orange whenever there's no display and it's sleeping.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hrmgamer*
> 
> Hello everyone
> 
> I'm a long time lurker chasing some advice. I'm finally building a system to replace my venerable i7 920.
> 
> Use cases: games (ArmA3, Witcher3, BF1, AotS, etc. at 3440x1440), VMs (lots and they are RAM hungry), encoding, and some video editing.
> 
> Currently thinking an overclocked 7900 with either an Asus Deluxe or Rampage VI Extreme (if it happens to come out sometime soon), a pair of 1080Ti I luckily got rather cheaply, and a custom water loop.
> 
> What I can't seem to find (and this could just be down to my google skills or missing it when I was browsing this thread) is recommendations for overclock friendly RAM in 8 x 16GB configurations. I've seen a few people elsewhere go on about 'making sure they are quad not dual channel kits', because apparently there is some additional binning in quad kits to get them to play nicely together...I can kind of see it, but I can also see it being completely bogus.
> 
> The target numbers I have plucked from the air are >=3000MHz, <=C15, but again happy to take advice. I'd like to keep this below $2,000 AU (so about $1,500 US), and was pleasantly surprised to see this on sale Corsair DOMINATOR 3466 C16 4x16GB .
> 
> Any advice will be most welcome.
> 
> Cheers
> HRMGamer


If you were not going to OC the memory and if it's costs less then 2x dual channel is fine, it detects my tridentz 2x dual channel as quad channel. Definitely go for at least 4 sticks though so you can have quad, not a huge difference but it may matter a lot later depending on how long you are keeping your system and if the future software will run much better with quad vs dual. Here is some info about dual vs quad comparison, it's not much but on these boards we squeeze out every ounce of performance from our hardware so someone may have a different take/opionion on this.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2982965/components/quad-channel-ram-vs-dual-channel-ram-the-shocking-truth-about-their-performance.html


----------



## OneCosmic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> Can you tell if your monitor is still receiving a signal from your GPU (i.e. does it turn off or go into low power/sleep mode)? If so, it could be a handshake issue especially if you are using an HDMI cable.


Actually i was having the same issue on my previous RVE through DP, on HDMI it worked fine but my LCD could only run at 120Hz through HDMI. After switching MB to the new one ASUS TUF Mark 2 no issues on DP anymore. It was probably the handshake issue.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hrmgamer*
> 
> Hello everyone
> 
> I'm a long time lurker chasing some advice. I'm finally building a system to replace my venerable i7 920.
> 
> Use cases: games (ArmA3, Witcher3, BF1, AotS, etc. at 3440x1440), VMs (lots and they are RAM hungry), encoding, and some video editing.
> 
> Currently thinking an overclocked 7900 with either an Asus Deluxe or Rampage VI Extreme (if it happens to come out sometime soon), a pair of 1080Ti I luckily got rather cheaply, and a custom water loop.
> 
> What I can't seem to find (and this could just be down to my google skills or missing it when I was browsing this thread) is recommendations for overclock friendly RAM in 8 x 16GB configurations. I've seen a few people elsewhere go on about 'making sure they are quad not dual channel kits', because apparently there is some additional binning in quad kits to get them to play nicely together...I can kind of see it, but I can also see it being completely bogus.
> 
> The target numbers I have plucked from the air are >=3000MHz, <=C15, but again happy to take advice. I'd like to keep this below $2,000 AU (so about $1,500 US), and was pleasantly surprised to see this on sale Corsair DOMINATOR 3466 C16 4x16GB .
> 
> Any advice will be most welcome.
> 
> Cheers
> HRMGamer


I just called G.SKILL 1-909-598-6860 to ask about memory 4X in a kit compared to 2X in a kit, then using two kits. He said the kits are tested to work together and they don't guarantee two separate kits working together.









I contacted Corsair 1 (888) 222-4346 and they said the same thing.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I just called G.SKILL 1-909-598-6860 to ask about memory 4X in a kit compared to 2X in a kit, then using two kits. He said the kits are tested to work together and they don't guarantee two separate kits working together.


That's actually why when I build a rig, I get all the ram I'll ever want for it at once. I prefer the single kits since they are tested together. But it's usually fine to buy two smaller kits at the same time in the same order since they'll likely be coming off the same batch anyway.

Using different kits (even if they are the same model) from different places or dates ends to be problematic since manufactures change the die they use. So you might get a Samsung B-die on the first set and then a Hynix or Micron a different set bought at a different place a year later.

Differences like this is probably why 2014-era Corsair LPX sticks did not work at all on both Ryzens I tested across 3 motherboards even though the exact model # was on the QVL for all of them.


----------



## hodgempls

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> It goes into sleep mode. The light is blue when the screen is showing me things. But goes orange whenever there's no display and it's sleeping.


Most likely a handshake issue then. Try a different cable or connection. Also make sure bios and drivers are current.


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> Most likely a handshake issue then. Try a different cable or connection. Also make sure bios and drivers are current.


I'll try it out. The thing is my bios shows up on screen it will show my mobo bios flash screen and then once windows is about to come in is when it goes black. Is that normal for the handshake issue? Also restarting the pc gets it to work


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> That's actually why when I build a rig, I get all the ram I'll ever want for it at once. I prefer the single kits since they are tested together. But it's usually fine to buy two smaller kits at the same time in the same order since they'll likely be coming off the same batch anyway.
> 
> Using different kits (even if they are the same model) from different places or dates ends to be problematic since manufactures change the die they use. So you might get a Samsung B-die on the first set and then a Hynix or Micron a different set bought at a different place a year later.
> 
> Differences like this is probably why 2014-era Corsair LPX sticks did not work at all on both Ryzens I tested across 3 motherboards even though the exact model # was on the QVL for all of them.


I've had luck mixing kits of different brands that were the same speed/timings. I have two 8gb ddr3 1600 9-9-9-24 1.5v kits (2x4gb each) that work perfect together. One kit is Team the other is G.Skill. Ran them together in my ol'ladys rig before I moved her to a 2400 16gb 2x8gb kit.

You're taking your chances by mixing kits but in my cases it has always worked. Wouldn't try it with very fast ram that's pushing the limits of the hardware.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I've had luck mixing kits of different brands that were the same speed/timings. I have two 8gb ddr3 1600 9-9-9-24 1.5v kits (2x4gb each) that work perfect together. One kit is Team the other is G.Skill. Ran them together in my ol'ladys rig before I moved her to a 2400 16gb 2x8gb kit.
> 
> You're taking your chances by mixing kits but in my cases it has always worked. Wouldn't try it with very fast ram that's pushing the limits of the hardware.


Worse case you need to reduce frequency or relax timings


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> How can we have this already on facebook... and no word yet about pricing and availability of the Extreme or Apex. Really......


I know, right? I'm running out of time waiting for the R6E before I have to finish my build in 6 weeks. I also want a monoblock for it, and it's starting to look like I will have to go MSI to make that happen in time.


----------



## hrmgamer

Thanks for the feedback everyone!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> If you were not going to OC the memory


Do you mean running the RAM at it's stated 'OC' speed, e.g. Corsair states 'SPD Speed' vs 'Tested Speed', or do you mean pushing beyond the 'Tested'?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I just called G.SKILL 1-909-598-6860 to ask about memory 4X in a kit compared to 2X in a kit, then using two kits. He said the kits are tested to work together and they don't guarantee two separate kits working together.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I contacted Corsair 1 (888) 222-4346 and they said the same thing.


Wow! Thanks for calling!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> That's actually why when I build a rig, I get all the ram I'll ever want for it at once. I prefer the single kits since they are tested together.


Yeah, that's why I'm looking at buying the full 128GB now. Unfortunately the 128GB kits are few and far between, tends to only be offered in slower binned RAM, and tends to cost quite a bit more than 2x 64GB kits.

The Asus QVL lists the Dominator RAM I was looking at, but only in a 4x16GB configuration. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised given the information you have all stated, but the only way to have a 128GB configuration on the QVL were full 128GB kits, not multiples of 64/32 kits. Should I be worried if I order 2x 64? I don't really mind dialling back the RAM speed a bit from the 'Tested' spec, but I'd be frustrated if it makes a noticeable difference to what I'd be able to achieve with the CPU OC. Anyone played with Dominator RAM in x299 yet?

Thanks again
HRMGamer


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I've had luck mixing kits of different brands that were the same speed/timings. I have two 8gb ddr3 1600 9-9-9-24 1.5v kits (2x4gb each) that work perfect together. One kit is Team the other is G.Skill. Ran them together in my ol'ladys rig before I moved her to a 2400 16gb 2x8gb kit.
> 
> You're taking your chances by mixing kits but in my cases it has always worked. Wouldn't try it with very fast ram that's pushing the limits of the hardware.


I've had absolutely terrible luck with ram. 5 of the 9 builds I've done in the past 10 years have had memory issues. 4/5 in the past 4 years have had issues.

Most of the time the instability isn't obvious. And things work fine under gaming or normal tasks like browsing. But when I put them under workstation loads, they'll cause data corruption maybe once an hour or in some cases as rare as once a week. So it's very slight instability - so slight that they don't usually cause a BSOD. But nonetheless it matters since those are my usecases.

Most of the time, downclocking and relaxing timings doesn't solve the problem, but it does reduce the frequency of it. Fixing it requires getting different memory. These issues I've had have all traced back to IMC instability. So it's not something that ECC ram would've helped if I went the server route.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I test memory with MemTest over night at stock to verify that was working fine. 0 errors, around 700%

My pc was crashing at stock. not sure if it was my temps or what. Got my new cooler today so going to swap that


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I test memory with MemTest over night at stock to verify that was working fine. 0 errors, around 700%
> 
> My pc was crashing at stock. not sure if it was my temps or what. Got my new cooler today so going to swap that


MemTest sucks for detecting IMC instability. It's more useful for stuff like stuck or dead bits in the ram itself. On numerous instances on different computers, I've had MemTest pass overnight only to fail within a minute on Prime95 large FFTs or y-cruncher.


----------



## czin125

X299 Apex


----------



## BroPhilip

As per the norm no new details, no price, no release date. Just more nothing lol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> X299 Apex


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> MemTest sucks for detecting IMC instability. It's more useful for stuff like stuck or dead bits in the ram itself. On numerous instances on different computers, I've had MemTest pass overnight only to fail within a minute on Prime95 large FFTs or y-cruncher.


I haven't tested my ram at stock but I was failing in realbench really quickly with cpu @ 4.0 ghz stock and ram @ 4000 19-19-19-39 timings
I passed this just fine on my gigabyte board. I don't know what's going on


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hrmgamer*
> 
> Thanks for the feedback everyone!
> Do you mean running the RAM at it's stated 'OC' speed, e.g. Corsair states 'SPD Speed' vs 'Tested Speed', or do you mean pushing beyond the 'Tested'?
> Wow! Thanks for calling!
> Yeah, that's why I'm looking at buying the full 128GB now. Unfortunately the 128GB kits are few and far between, tends to only be offered in slower binned RAM, and tends to cost quite a bit more than 2x 64GB kits.
> 
> The Asus QVL lists the Dominator RAM I was looking at, but only in a 4x16GB configuration. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised given the information you have all stated, but the only way to have a 128GB configuration on the QVL were full 128GB kits, not multiples of 64/32 kits. Should I be worried if I order 2x 64? I don't really mind dialling back the RAM speed a bit from the 'Tested' spec, but I'd be frustrated if it makes a noticeable difference to what I'd be able to achieve with the CPU OC. Anyone played with Dominator RAM in x299 yet?
> 
> Thanks again
> HRMGamer


I mean if you push it beyond the XMP rating like if corsair says it runs at 3200MHz and you set it to run n at 3800Hz


----------



## BroPhilip

So there is reporting in the Asus ROG forum by people posting of a $700 price tag on the extreme........


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> So there is reporting in the Asus ROG forum by people posting of a $700 price tag on the extreme........


WOW! I can feel my pockets getting lighter and adding a i9-7980xe I might need a second mortgage.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> So there is reporting in the Asus ROG forum by people posting of a $700 price tag on the extreme........


For both Apex and Extreme? Any release date hints?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> WOW! I can feel my pockets getting lighter and adding a i9-7980xe I might need a second mortgage.


Ouch, I need to get that 3rd Mortgage on my house going.


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> For both Apex and Extreme? Any release date hints?
> Ouch, I need to get that 3rd Mortgage on my house going.


Sometime in August is all they will say. There's also this:

https://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/Asus-ROG-Rampage-VI-Extreme_1175248.html

€621.44 (or $730).. No telling if that's just pre-order tax at this point.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> So there is reporting in the Asus ROG forum by people posting of a $700 price tag on the extreme........












I rarely let price scare me off something I am interested in, but I may just stick with my Gigabyte board.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I rarely let price scare me off something I am interested in, but I may just stick with my Gigabyte board.


Maybe the Prime X299 Deluxe that I have is not that bad after all...


----------



## jbyron

Is it a limitation of HWmonitor and other softwares with this new platform or are my cores actually smashing around from 1.2ghz up to 4.5ghz during benchmark and stresstests?

This is 7820x with Asus X299 TUF Mark 1. Cooled with h115i and stay around 55-65 for the duration of the benchmarks. GPU is Titan X Pascal and PSU is ax1200i (so no power issues I believe).

For instance, I can't pass the 3dmark stresstest, I always get 86% and my core speeds are jumping around rather than holding constant at Turbo 2 or 3.

My i7 3820, once started, would hold its turbo speeds during the demos.


----------



## Zurv

ugh.. about time









I, in the end, for it from newegg. But my amazon order was going to ship Monday. So if you are looking for x7900 you might find some on amazon next week.


ugh.. redoing the video cards bridge is not going to be fun. Those EK bridge always leak when i f with them


----------



## TahoeDust

x299 porn?....


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I rarely let price scare me off something I am interested in, but I may just stick with my Gigabyte board.


Memory and SSDs aren't helping the equation right now. Tough time to build.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Memory and SSDs aren't helping the equation right now. Tough time to build.


No kidding...I was $1100 deep in Ram/Storage before I even ordered the CPU and MOBO.


----------



## Zurv

are these m.2 heatsinks worth it? they don't seem to be in contact with the chips. (i'm using a 2tb 960 pro)


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Memory and SSDs aren't helping the equation right now. Tough time to build.



Ram and SSD prices are high because of the shortage and mobile demand + possible price fixing.
GPU prices are high because of the mining.
Hard Drive GB/$ has stagnated and hasn't kept up with Moore's Law.
Skylake X prices going up and hard to get because of current shortage.
Extremely high demand from having 4 platforms launch this year. (Kaby Lake, Ryzen, Skylake X, Threadripper)
Lately I've been watching the prices of other components like cases and cooling, and those are also going up from all the demand. Now is definitely a crappy time to build a computer.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> are these m.2 heatsinks worth it? they don't seem to be in contact with the chips. (i'm using a 2tb 960 pro)


My Gaming 7 board just came with the lower heatsink. It definitely contacts the chip. I had to pull that m.2 for something the other day and it was literally stuck to the heatsink. Mine are 960 Evo 500gb.


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> My Gaming 7 board just came with the lower heatsink. It definitely contacts the chip. I had to pull that m.2 for something the other day and it was literally stuck to the heatsink. Mine are 960 Evo 500gb.


there are a bunch on the gaming 9. the one between the PCI slots didn't have much contact - and it is long. I used two of the shooter one (that same size as the 960 pro) those had much better contact.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> x299 porn?....


That came out pretty sweet looking.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> That came out pretty sweet looking.


Thanks man. It looks better at night. I may snap some pictures tonight.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Thanks man. It looks better at night. I may snap some pictures tonight.


Post it on PcPartPicker. It deserves to be seen.


----------



## ckoons1

Taken care of. Thanks


----------



## Chargeit

I'm still debating picking up a new ram kit. I returned one of my 16gb 3200 kits planning on picking up a faster kit.

Looking at, (all kits 32gb @ 4x8gb)

RGB 3600 CL 16 (Not a good oc'er from what I read) $430
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?item=N82E16820232492

RGB 3866 CL 18 $492
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232494&ignorebbr=1

Not RGB 4000 CL 18 $512
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232459&ignorebbr=1

I'm not sure what I want to do. All these kits are way overpriced. Would be cool to get rgb but the normal kit is the fastest. I don't really need 32gb system ram but I'd like to move back to 32gb just so I don't have to worry about ram until I decide to upgrade. Really tempted to pull the trigger on one of these kits but they're so damned overpriced that I know it's a bad idea.

First world problems.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Post it on PcPartPicker. It deserves to be seen.


Thanks man.

Jesus...seeing parts list prices add up is brutal. I had avoided doing the math until now.

https://pcpartpicker.com/b/zqRJ7P

I'll add some better pictures when I take them later tonight.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Thanks man.
> 
> Jesus...seeing parts list prices add up is brutal. I had avoided doing the math until now.
> 
> https://pcpartpicker.com/b/zqRJ7P
> 
> I'll add some better pictures when I take them later tonight.


Your fans cost almost as much as my video card lol.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Your fans cost almost as much as my video card lol.


Haha...I kind of have a cooling/noise fetish.


----------



## hodgempls

Just an FYI that the Newegg store on Ebay has a 10% off coupon code and some decent deals on x299 motherboards:

http://stores.ebay.com/newegg/_i.html?_nkw=x299

Use code PCOLLEGE10 for 10% off up to $500. Some decent deals on gtx 1080 and 1080 ti cards as well with this coupon.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> Just an FYI that the Newegg store on Ebay has a 10% off coupon code and some decent deals on x299 motherboards:
> 
> http://stores.ebay.com/newegg/_i.html?_nkw=x299
> 
> Use code PCOLLEGE10 for 10% off up to $500. Some decent deals on gtx 1080 and 1080 ti cards as well with this coupon.


Nice.

Damn, that $430 rgb 3600 cl 16 32gb kit is $387 with that code. Still expensive for ram but I can stomach that much more then spending $430 - $512 on the stuff...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/G-SKILL-TridentZ-RGB-Series-32GB-4-x-8GB-288-Pin-DDR4-SDRAM-DDR4-3600-PC4-288-/292010977367?hash=item43fd35e857

Man, I think I might have to bite.

*I bought it. $387 for that kit right now is just too good too pass up.


----------



## Gettz8488

Alright so I switched from my dvi cable to an hdmi cable still the same problem on cold boots. I turn on the pc the bios flash screen loads everything looks fine. As soon as windows is about to come up my screen goes to hdmi no signal and goes into sleep? Not sure what to do can it be that I need more power? I got a 750 watt psu do I need more power? also don't know if it's normal but my keyboard and mouse rgb lights shut off right before it loads into windows they always come back on but idk if this matters


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Nice.
> 
> Damn, that $430 rgb 3600 cl 16 32gb kit is $387 with that code. Still expensive for ram but I can stomach that much more then spending $430 - $512 on the stuff...
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/G-SKILL-TridentZ-RGB-Series-32GB-4-x-8GB-288-Pin-DDR4-SDRAM-DDR4-3600-PC4-288-/292010977367?hash=item43fd35e857
> 
> Man, I think I might have to bite.
> 
> *I bought it. $387 for that kit right now is just too good too pass up.


That is the kit I am running. It does very nicely with some secondary timing tweeks...


----------



## TahoeDust

More pics....sorry for the whoring. I love this case so much...


----------



## Zurv

this gaming 9 is no fun. the right bank on dimnm slots don't work at all.. nor is it seeing my second video card. replacement time.

CPU also OC's like crap.. much much worse than my 6950.. but it could just that the mobo is screwed up. ASUS HURRY UP WITH THE APEX!

It also has no idea what do to with the tridentz 4266 ram. In the bios it sees the xmp, but by the time it makes it to windows ( it is rocking 2133







)


----------



## aDyerSituation

Welp boys after changing my cooler and my motherboard, my processor temps are still really high and unstable at it's rated bin speed and even stock.

Silicon lottery suggested I RMA it. Not too happy about being without a computer for two weeks or so but I understand mistakes happen!


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Welp boys after changing my cooler and my motherboard, my processor temps are still really high and unstable at it's rated bin speed and even stock.
> 
> Silicon lottery suggested I RMA it. Not too happy about being without a computer for two weeks or so but I understand mistakes happen!


RMA it? As in send it back to Silicon Lottery?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Correct


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Correct


Interesting. If it helps, their turnaround time was excellent when I sent my 7820x in for Delidding. I was only without my SPU for 6 days using their standard shipping.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Memory and SSDs aren't helping the equation right now. Tough time to build.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ram and SSD prices are high because of the shortage and mobile demand + possible price fixing.
> GPU prices are high because of the mining.
> Hard Drive GB/$ has stagnated and hasn't kept up with Moore's Law.
> Skylake X prices going up and hard to get because of current shortage.
> Extremely high demand from having 4 platforms launch this year. (Kaby Lake, Ryzen, Skylake X, Threadripper)
> Lately I've been watching the prices of other components like cases and cooling, and those are also going up from all the demand. Now is definitely a crappy time to build a computer.
Click to expand...

Mobile uses the same chips as SSD and system memory?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Interesting. If it helps, their turnaround time was excellent when I sent my 7820x in for Delidding. I was only without my CPU for 6 days using their standard shipping.


Good to know.

He said that he had another processor of that batch fail so It's not really their fault.


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> More pics....sorry for the whoring. I love this case so much.


really nice man, i like the MB lights they really bring out the interior of case. personally i like the whole rgb and this MB looked a bit too much in pictures when it was just showcasing the board, but in the case


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Mobile uses the same chips as SSD and system memory?


No, but presumably, they share some amount of manufacturing resources. IIRC, there were several articles saying that manufacturers started shifting their production away from DRAM to flash in the middle of 2016 when ram prices were insanely low.

Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the manufacturing process for DRAM and flash to comment on this.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> really nice man, i like the MB lights they really bring out the interior of case. personally i like the whole rgb and this MB looked a bit too much in pictures when it was just showcasing the board, but in the case


Indeed. RGB works best when it's evenly spread out all over the build. And the Gigabyte 7 and 9 boards do this very well.

Here's my build with the Gigabyte 7:


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> really nice man, i like the MB lights they really bring out the interior of case. personally i like the whole rgb and this MB looked a bit too much in pictures when it was just showcasing the board, but in the case


Thanks man. When I bought it, it was for the 8+8 power and heat pipe, but I have grown to really like the RGBs. The lit i/o plate is really nice too.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Thanks man. When I bought it, it was for the 8+8 power and heat pipe, but I have grown to really like the RGBs. The lit i/o plate is really nice too.


The Gigabyte 7/9 boards had too many things going for them that I couldn't possibly pick anything else:

2 x 8-pin
Double VRM sinks via heatpipe
RGB'ed from top to bottom on almost every component.
No ugly shroud that covers the motherboard. (I like to see all the circuitry.)
The only letdown so far is the BIOS. (Which isn't exactly lacking any important features. It's just not very user-friendly.)


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Thanks man. When I bought it, it was for the 8+8 power and heat pipe, but I have grown to really like the RGBs. The lit i/o plate is really nice too.
> 
> 
> 
> The Gigabyte 7/9 boards had too many things going for them that I couldn't possibly pick anything else:
> 
> 2 x 8-pin
> Double VRM sinks via heatpipe
> RGB'ed from top to bottom on almost every component.
> No ugly shroud that covers the motherboard. (I like to see all the circuitry.)
> The only letdown so far is the BIOS.
Click to expand...

I like to see all the circuitry also, I like Gigabyte.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> x299 porn?....


That's a beautiful rig, white/orange/red/cyan go so nice together, not to mention the very clean cable management! +rep


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Be careful with the new 0503 BIOS for the TUF Mark 1, it seriously messed up RAM compatibility.
I couldn't run my Corsair Vengeance 3200Mhz at rated speeds, only 2133Mhz.
Didn't matter if I used XMP or Manual settings.

It's not on the US support page yet but it's on the AU support page at the moment.
Do you know anything about it @[email protected]?


----------



## WeirdBob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> RGB 3600 CL 16 (Not a good oc'er from what I read) $430


Do you have links to the bad oc part? Interested in this kit too, it's supposed to be Samsung b-die. Just a little concerned with the SPD corruption problem on these using aura ( and the premium price :/ )


----------



## Captain4W

Just got my Aorus Gaming 9 in yesterday, so hopefully I'll have it up and going this week. I'm rebuilding half my case, so that's holding me up a little...


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> No, but presumably, they share some amount of manufacturing resources. IIRC, there were several articles saying that manufacturers started shifting their production away from DRAM to flash in the middle of 2016 when ram prices were insanely low.
> 
> Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the manufacturing process for DRAM and flash to comment on this.
> Indeed. RGB works best when it's evenly spread out all over the build. And the Gigabyte 7 and 9 boards do this very well.
> 
> Here's my build with the Gigabyte 7:


Another one! (Khaled voice) lol. Boards really growing on me. I'm trying to be a good little boy patiently waiting on apex/extreme. Y'all making it difficult


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WeirdBob*
> 
> Do you have links to the bad oc part? Interested in this kit too, it's supposed to be Samsung b-die. Just a little concerned with the SPD corruption problem on these using aura ( and the premium price :/ )


I've never seen an article about the bad OC performance and own this kit. I've had no trouble using XMP to hit 3600 @ CL16 in my 7700k rig and they are currently sitting in my x99 rig running at XMP 3200 CL 16.

Please link the article as I'd love to read it. When I finally put together my x299 setup I'll either be pushing this kit to 4000 or looking to pickup a rated kit from gskill.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WeirdBob*
> 
> Do you have links to the bad oc part? Interested in this kit too, it's supposed to be Samsung b-die. Just a little concerned with the SPD corruption problem on these using aura ( and the premium price :/ )


http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/g-skill-tridentz-rgb-ddr4-memory-review,2.html

In the conclusion,

Quote:


> Overclocking wise we fooled around with it a little and you will be limited alright, changing CL from results into crashes. So if you are not an uber enthusiast pro-overclocker, your best bet is to simply use the XMP configured timings


Maybe someone more into oc'ing ram can do more with them.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> I've never seen an article about the bad OC performance and own this kit. I've had no trouble using XMP to hit 3600 @ CL16 in my 7700k rig and they are currently sitting in my x99 rig running at XMP 3200 CL 16.
> 
> Please link the article as I'd love to read it. When I finally put together my x299 setup I'll either be pushing this kit to 4000 or looking to pickup a rated kit from gskill.
> 
> Thanks in advance.


I wouldn't consider running at their xmp oc'ing. Oc'ing is running over what they're rated for to me.

*If you do get them running over spec on your x299 rig please post your numbers. I ordered the kit last night and wouldn't mind running them at 3800 - 4000.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/g-skill-tridentz-rgb-ddr4-memory-review,2.html
> 
> In the conclusion,
> Maybe someone more into oc'ing ram can do more with them.
> 
> I wouldn't consider running at their xmp oc'ing. Oc'ing is running over what they're rated for to me.
> 
> *If you do get them running over spec on your x299 rig please post your numbers. I ordered the kit last night and wouldn't mind running them at 3800 - 4000.


Thanks and fair enough. If I have time to swap kits I'll see if I can make any headway going above 3600.


----------



## OneCosmic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> That is the kit I am running. It does very nicely with some secondary timing tweeks...


I have a G.Skill Ripjaws V Red 2133MHz 4x16GB=64GB (B-DIE )that i run on 3466MHz 16-16-16-36 1T tRFC 300 1.35V, with only 2 sticks it runs 3600MHz stable at the same timings







They costed me about 270 USD already after the RAM prices rise, now talk about RAM price to performance


----------



## ddev

Hi guys! I have i7-7820x with asrock x299 taichi. Using it for few days and have some questions. Will be appreciate for a help.
The first thing ive found, that i have lower 3dmark graphic score(-500 points, comparing with my i7-4930k). I read somewhere that there is an option in bios that can fix it, its like a powerstate of pci-e, and must be turned off, but i cant find this option in my asrock 1.40 bios. Any ideas?
The second thing, i am using not the best ram corsair vengeance cl15 3000, ive oc it with no problems to 3200 with timings 15-17-17-31-cr1. Also im using oc`ed mesh 3200. And here is my pic.


http://imgur.com/uRPbl

 Read and write numbers are too small i think, i saw about 90k read-write with 3200 ram. Does it aida/bios bug or maybe i should check some settings in bios? Can i ask for help with some subtimings for skylake-x?
And the third thing is a powerlimit options. I know that taichi has 200w pl, so what numbers should i add at in PRIMARY PLANE CURRENT LIMIT, LONG DURATION POWER LIMIT, LONG DURATION MAINTAINED, SHORT DURATION POWER LIMIT?


----------



## epc1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> More pics....sorry for the whoring. I love this case so much...


Hello. I have the same board and just noticed you also have the E3 code.

Should I worry if this code constantly appears specially running Linux?

I read the manual for the code description but I don't know what it means.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *epc1*
> 
> Hello. I have the same board and just noticed you also have the E3 code.
> 
> Should I worry if this code constantly appears specially running Linux?
> 
> I read the manual for the code description but I don't know what it means.


The manual says "OS S3 wake vector call"...which supposedly has something to do with a sleep state interruption. I honestly have no idea, and have not noticed any ill effects, but now that you brought it up it will probably occupy my mind to the point of obsession. Thanks...lol


----------



## OZrevhead

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OneCosmic*
> 
> I have a G.Skill Ripjaws V Red 2133MHz 4x16GB=64GB (B-DIE )that i run on 3466MHz 16-16-16-36 1T tRFC 300 1.35V, with only 2 sticks it runs 3600MHz stable at the same timings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They costed me about 270 USD already after the RAM prices rise, now talk about RAM price to performance


Which kit is it exactly?


----------



## OneCosmic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OZrevhead*
> 
> Which kit is it exactly?


This one exactly: https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-2133c15q-64gvr


----------



## Gettz8488

If anyone can give me any advice it would be huge. I'm having this issue with my monitor. After I turn on my pc my screen lights up I see the asus bios screen fine everything is good. But once it's about to load windows the screen goes into sleep mode after it says no hdmi signal. A restart of the pc fixes this any ideas?


----------



## josh103

Quote:


> Be careful with the new 0503 BIOS for the TUF Mark 1, it seriously messed up RAM compatibility.
> I couldn't run my Corsair Vengeance 3200Mhz at rated speeds, only 2133Mhz.
> Didn't matter if I used XMP or Manual settings.


I'm having the same issue with the asus bios 0503 on the tuf mark 2 with a 7800x. My g.skill ripjaws v will no longer run at its default speed of 3000MHz. My system wouldn't post until i lowered it. Xmp and manual do not work. Only thing that does work is setting the ram at a lower speed like 2400MHz would work nothing higher. The bios reports the ram running at 2133 when it is not. Great job asus with this bios update lol.

TUF X299 MARK 2 BIOS 0503
1.improved VGA card compatibility
2.Fixed nVidia TITAN Z SLI issue.
3.improved Kingston DRAM compatibility issue on Intel X-series processors(4 core)
4.improved system stability and performance.

I suspect the third fix messed up memory compatibility with other brands.


----------



## TahoeDust

Well...I guess it is time to give the delidding and AIO a real test. I'm going to give an hour in Prime95 with AVX a try....power limit set to 450w and Current Protection set to extreme and a -500 AVX offsets. This may not be pretty.

Burn baby burn.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *josh103*
> 
> I'm having the same issue with the asus bios 0503 on the tuf mark 2 with a 7800x. My g.skill ripjaws v will on longer run at its default speed of 3000MHz. My system wouldn't post until i lowered it. Xmp and manual do not work. Only thing that does work is setting the ram at a lower speed like 2400MHz would work nothing higher. The bios reports the ram running at 2133 when it is not. Great job asus with this bios update lol.
> 
> TUF X299 MARK 2 BIOS 0503
> 1.improved VGA card compatibility
> 2.Fixed nVidia TITAN Z SLI issue.
> 3.improved Kingston DRAM compatibility issue on Intel X-series processors(4 core)
> 4.improved system stability and performance.
> 
> I suspect the third fix messed up memory compatibility with other brands.


This broke the ram settings on my TUF Mark 1 as well as the Strix-E.
You can't boot with XMP or Auto if trying to go above the 2133Mhz.

@kingofblog Noticed the problem with the ram:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> It looks like 0503 broke something about how the secondary and tertiary timings are acquired (i.e. training). I manually entered the whole page of timings from what 0402 acquired, and I was able to boot with the same DRAM OC that I had previously. I then set one of the secondary timings back to AUTO, and I noticed it got set to a value corresponding to the base DDR4-2133 frequency.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *josh103*
> 
> I'm having the same issue with the asus bios 0503 on the tuf mark 2 with a 7800x. My g.skill ripjaws v will on longer run at its default speed of 3000MHz. My system wouldn't post until i lowered it. Xmp and manual do not work. Only thing that does work is setting the ram at a lower speed like 2400MHz would work nothing higher. The bios reports the ram running at 2133 when it is not. Great job asus with this bios update lol.
> 
> TUF X299 MARK 2 BIOS 0503
> 1.improved VGA card compatibility
> 2.Fixed nVidia TITAN Z SLI issue.
> 3.improved Kingston DRAM compatibility issue on Intel X-series processors(4 core)
> 4.improved system stability and performance.
> 
> I suspect the third fix messed up memory compatibility with other brands.
> 
> 
> 
> This broke the ram settings on my TUF Mark 1 as well as the Strix-E.
> You can't boot with XMP or Auto if trying to go above the 2133Mhz.
> 
> @kingofblog Noticed the problem with the ram:
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> It looks like 0503 broke something about how the secondary and tertiary timings are acquired (i.e. training). I manually entered the whole page of timings from what 0402 acquired, and I was able to boot with the same DRAM OC that I had previously. I then set one of the secondary timings back to AUTO, and I noticed it got set to a value corresponding to the base DDR4-2133 frequency.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Did you try setting Vicco and Vicca?


----------



## Clukos

Gaming 9 VRM analysis:


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Did you try setting Vicco and Vicca?


Yep.
Manually setting the ram timings didn't work either.

I'm interested in seeing if another people have the same problem, but so far here there is 3 of us, 1 can't even use USB Flashback to get the previous 0402 BIOS back.
Using the EZFlash in the BIOS results in a "Invalid BIOS" error when trying to downgrade.

Just a let you know what we've seen so far, but if more people try we have more to send to Asus to let them know.


----------



## TahoeDust

Not bad. It stayed in the 80s. The hottest core hit 89c and VRM maxed at 78c.


----------



## jbyron

These are the results for my systems. All stock settings, I'm not really one to overclock. Though I've seen exactly the same build on 3dmark with scores at 11,000 with just mild overclocks.

The 3820/x79 system I sold off to fund the x299 build.

The 7700 (non-k)/gtx 1080 is my HTPC.


----------



## tizziano

I join the club too:

i7 7820x
Asus Tuf Mark 1
Kingston HyperX Predator 3333 32GB 4x8GB CL16
kraken x62
Toshiba 3T
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB
Gigabyte 1080 gaming 1
Corsair RM850i 850W 80 Plus Gold Modular
Corsair Carbide Air 540

Do you see any problems in this configuration? I chose that case because I liked that the disks and the psu were in a compartment apart from the MB, CPU and graphic, thus obtaining a good airflow. My idea is to mount the kraken radiator on the front side by blowing in air and changing the two fans that it brings to the top by pulling out.
Thank you


----------



## Rammler

According to the livestream from "Der 8auer" (



) the delidded cpus from german store www.caseking.de are NOT the bad chips from the pre testing. the bad chips go to other companies and are never sold in the shop. the delidded cpus are really just delidded without pre testing.


----------



## Sobo

Hi, I also got a 7820X with ASUS X299 TUF Mark 1, but after ironing out all of the quirks I am left with two gripes with it:

1) I put my GTX 1080 in the middle PCIe 3.0 x16 slot (CPU cooler Noctua NH-D15S is kinda big). Trouble is that instead of running at x16 speed, it's only running at x8. I know the perf. impact isn't that huge, but it is triggering me a bit. I looked around in the bios, but haven't found anything useful apart from setting the PCIe speed as in the generation i.e. 1.0 / 2.0 / 3.0. I have 3.0, but I want 16 lanes on my GPU, not 8. Note that I am not using anything else in any of the other PCIe slots, so the CPU should be able to route 16 of its lanes to the GPU, no matter in which slot it is, right? How to achieve that?

I am running my 1080 at ~2025 / 11300Mhz, but my Time Spy GPU score is only 7700 while it should be over 8k. Nothing else running in the background: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/21311682

2) The TUF detective really isn't working for me. The usb stick is in the right port, my phone's BT is on, but I was only able to make it work once after I initially plugged it in, no luck since than. Anyone having more luck than me? It's no a big deal as I consider it a fancy toy rather than something that I would really need, but still...

Other than that I set my 7820X to 4500 core (1.14V) / 3000 cache / 3200Mhz QC RAM (Corsair LPX). Temps are round 55°C when gaming, Prime95 can heat it up to 81°C on the coolest core and 91°C on the warmest one (non-AVX, since I use offset for that anyway), but I'm not really worried as that thing is as unrealistic as it can get.

btw: Realbench and OCCT are using AVX? I noticed my CPU clock was lower when running those, but it certainly wasn't throttling.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> This broke the ram settings on my TUF Mark 1 as well as the Strix-E.
> You can't boot with XMP or Auto if trying to go above the 2133Mhz.
> 
> @kingofblog Noticed the problem with the ram:


Hello

Not using XMP here. 0503 BIOS, 3733MHz memory speed. The first 3 primary timings as well as Command Rate, memory speed/voltage and SA voltage are manually set. All other memory related timings are untouched and left on auto.



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sobo*
> 
> Hi, I also got a 7820X with ASUS X299 TUF Mark 1, but after ironing out all of the quirks I am left with two gripes with it:
> 
> 1) I put my GTX 1080 in the middle PCIe 3.0 x16 slot (CPU cooler Noctua NH-D15S is kinda big). Trouble is that instead of running at x16 speed, it's only running at x8. I know the perf. impact isn't that huge, but it is triggering me a bit. I looked around in the bios, but haven't found anything useful apart from setting the PCIe speed as in the generation i.e. 1.0 / 2.0 / 3.0. I have 3.0, but I want 16 lanes on my GPU, not 8. Note that I am not using anything else in any of the other PCIe slots, so the CPU should be able to route 16 of its lanes to the GPU, no matter in which slot it is, right? How to achieve that?
> 
> I am running my 1080 at ~2025 / 11300Mhz, but my Time Spy GPU score is only 7700 while it should be over 8k. Nothing else running in the background: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/21311682


Hello

This is exactly as stated in the specifications for the board. Assumptions made of lane switching capability seldom work out favorably.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Not using XMP here. 0503 BIOS, 3733MHz memory speed. The first 3 primary timings as well as Command Rate, memory speed/voltage and SA voltage are manually set. All other memory related timings are untouched and left on auto.


I just tested it again, still have the problem, but entering in the secondary timings allows me to post.
But the TUF monitor Dongle stopped working, I can't connect to it.

Update:
Yep, setting all secondary timings back to Auto stops the machine from posting.

Anyone know what this new setting is?

0402


0503


----------



## Sobo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> This is exactly as stated in the specifications for the board. Assumptions made of lane switching capability seldom work out favorably.


Well, to be honest the board's specs don't make any sense. Here's a screenshot from the manual:



What the heck does "N/A" mean? That it doesn't work at all? Nope. So, ASUS literally doesn't know what happens when a single card is connected to PCIe X16_2 slot? So it will never run at x16 speed, unless I swap out my 7820X for the 7900X?


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sobo*
> 
> Well, to be honest the board's specs don't make any sense. Here's a screenshot from the manual:
> 
> 
> 
> What the heck does "N/A" mean? That it doesn't work at all? Nope. So, ASUS literally doesn't know what happens when a single card is connected to PCIe X16_2 slot? So it will never run at x16 speed, unless I swap out my 7820X for the 7900X?


Hello

As I don't have the board here I reference published specs as I would think a person would do considering the purchase of the board. From the product page at ASUS.com


----------



## Norlig

Is the PCB on skylake-X thick enough that a de-lid with a vice would be "relatively" safe?

Or is it equally as thin as the 6000/7000 series LGA1151 CPU's ?


----------



## OneCosmic

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sobo*
> 
> Well, to be honest the board's specs don't make any sense. Here's a screenshot from the manual:
> 
> 
> 
> What the heck does "N/A" mean? That it doesn't work at all? Nope. So, ASUS literally doesn't know what happens when a single card is connected to PCIe X16_2 slot? So it will never run at x16 speed, unless I swap out my 7820X for the 7900X?


Because all OEM are ******* douchebags that doesn't know how to put on some switches to enable full PCIE16X also on other PCIE16X slots when lanes are available... Such ****boys.


----------



## Hawkeye360

What PSU wattage would be recommended for a 7900x system with a 1080ti? Would also have some SSDs, hardrive etc.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hawkeye360*
> 
> What PSU wattage would be recommended for a 7900x system with a 1080ti? Would also have some SSDs, hardrive etc.


1000+ and ideally something quality as well. The 1080 Ti can consume 300+ watts on its own when overclocked, the 7900x can be anywhere from 250 to 400+ depending on the workload.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> This broke the ram settings on my TUF Mark 1 as well as the Strix-E.
> You can't boot with XMP or Auto if trying to go above the 2133Mhz.
> 
> @kingofblog Noticed the problem with the ram:


have you checked the SPD and XMP profiles on the ram kit with thiaphoon or another spd reader? Maybe a corrupted SPD/XMP?


----------



## Hawkeye360

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> 1000+ and ideally something quality as well. The 1080 Ti can consume 300+ watts on its own when overclocked, the 7900x can be anywhere from 250 to 400+ depending on the workload.


I was thinking of the Seasonic Prime Titanium 1000W, but I could go for a 1200W from Seasonic or another brand.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> have you checked the SPD and XMP profiles on the ram kit with thiaphoon or another spd reader? Maybe a corrupted SPD/XMP?


Yup it could be that if you are using the G.Skill RGB stuff, or Aura in general. It seems like it's corrupting the memory SPD, I know I had to flash correct SPD data on mine to make them usable again. Loading corrupted XMP profiles can kill your RAM too, so be careful.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> 1000+ and ideally something quality as well. The 1080 Ti can consume 300+ watts on its own when overclocked, the 7900x can be anywhere from 250 to 400+ depending on the workload.


I'd like to see the situation that a system using a single 1080 ti and 7900x is pulling 700w. No way under 24/7 conditions would such a system pull that kind of wattage without majorly compromising system longevity.


----------



## Hatnim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'd like to see the situation that a system using a single 1080 ti and 7900x is pulling 700w. No way under 24/7 conditions would such a system pull that kind of wattage without majorly compromising system longevity.


I think it might not be unrealistic. My 4.6-4.7 overclocked 7800x at 1.25v (not 7900x) with a single EVGA 1080 FTW2 draws about 450-490w during a loop of 3DMark FireStrike.

I measure the watt at the outlet using Kill A Watt EZ. I had two 27 inch LED monitors, though I don't know how they will consume.


----------



## TahoeDust

The most I have been able to get my 7820x and 1080 ti ftw3 to pull is ~525.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'd like to see the situation that a system using a single 1080 ti and 7900x is pulling 700w. No way under 24/7 conditions would such a system pull that kind of wattage without majorly compromising system longevity.


You have to account for peak power draw when building such a high-end system. Plus, it's not _just_ the CPU and GPU you have to worry about. I'm sure you can probably run that system with a high quality 800 watt PSU but that's on the edge already, ideally you should be in the 40-60% total power draw of your PSU, if you care about efficiency


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'd like to see the situation that a system using a single 1080 ti and 7900x is pulling 700w. No way under 24/7 conditions would such a system pull that kind of wattage without majorly compromising system longevity.


It's not as far-fetched as you think.

When I had my 7900X, I was able to break 600w (system draw at the wall) when testing the CPU alone with Linpack at 4 GHz.

My 5960x with a 1080 Ti SLI will break 1200w in Time Spy with the voltage increased on the CPU and GPUs.

A 7900X can easily exceed the draw that @Clukos pointed out and I don't think that his recommendation was out of line.

If you don't overclock, sure you can get away with less, but who does that?


----------



## Gettz8488

Question for some of you. Does having 2 8gb ram sticks negatively affect my system over having 8x8gb sticks? Wondering if it would make a difference for things like Maxon and gaming


----------



## Chargeit

I don't doubt you can hit it. I doubt you'll run the system at that kind of power draw outside of stress testing without damaging your hardware.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> The most I have been able to get my 7820x and 1080 ti ftw3 to pull is ~525.


Yeah I've seen 470w without getting too crazy with my oc with a 7820x/1080 ti.

Still rma'ing my psu and I've been running on a cx500m for the better part of a week.


----------



## phaseshift

Are there any good guides regarding Skylake X overclocking? Can someone link them please. Trying to push my 7820x and the only thing I've done so far is put the cpu core voltage to manual and set it to 1.15 lol


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phaseshift*
> 
> Are there any good guides regarding Skylake X overclocking? Can someone link them please. Trying to push my 7820x and the only thing I've done so far is put the cpu core voltage to manual and set it to 1.15 lol


Depending on your motherboard I would use the adaptive voltage over manual. For x299 you need to sync all cores and set your clock speeds. I'm set to 4.7ghx 1.150 vcore adaptive llc 5 and optimized on spread spectrum


----------



## cstkl1

Question

Is overvlocking uncore/cache of skylake-x difficult??
Everybody seems to be running it at default 2.4-3ghz..


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hatnim*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'd like to see the situation that a system using a single 1080 ti and 7900x is pulling 700w. No way under 24/7 conditions would such a system pull that kind of wattage without majorly compromising system longevity.
> 
> 
> 
> I think it might not be unrealistic. My 4.6-4.7 overclocked 7800x at 1.25v (not 7900x) with a single EVGA 1080 FTW2 draws about 450-490w during a loop of 3DMark FireStrike.
> 
> I measure the watt at the outlet using Kill A Watt EZ. I had two 27 inch LED monitors, though I don't know how they will consume.
Click to expand...

Typically one 27" monitor draws 21W, 25W.


----------



## BroPhilip

Mine was simple I just up'ed it to 3ghz and left it on the default voltage and was rock stable but also beware it did increase my overall temps a good little bit.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Question
> 
> Is overvlocking uncore/cache of skylake-x difficult??
> Everybody seems to be running it at default 2.4-3ghz..


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Question
> 
> Is overvlocking uncore/cache of skylake-x difficult??
> Everybody seems to be running it at default 2.4-3ghz..


I can't sacrifice my temp headroom for uncore at 4.9GHz so I left it at default even with my SL delided CPU.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'd like to see the situation that a system using a single 1080 ti and 7900x is pulling 700w. No way under 24/7 conditions would such a system pull that kind of wattage without majorly compromising system longevity.
> 
> 
> 
> You have to account for peak power draw when building such a high-end system. Plus, it's not _just_ the CPU and GPU you have to worry about. I'm sure you can probably run that system with a high quality 800 watt PSU but that's on the edge already, ideally you should be in the 40-60% total power draw of your PSU, if you care about efficiency
Click to expand...

New PSU are most efficient 50-80% and were only talking around 3% difference in that range. LINK: http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story4&reid=526


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I don't doubt you can hit it. I doubt you'll run the system at that kind of power draw outside of stress testing without damaging your hardware.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> The most I have been able to get my 7820x and 1080 ti ftw3 to pull is ~525.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I've seen 470w without getting too crazy with my oc with a 7820x/1080 ti.
> 
> Still rma'ing my psu and I've been running on a cx500m for the better part of a week.
Click to expand...

Is that 470w at the wall with the monitor also? How far do you have it overclocked?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Is that 470w at the wall with the monitor also? How far do you have it overclocked?


470w at the wall. Just the tower. 45 on all cores @ 1.170v w/adaptive (I think I had it set to manual 1.150v at the time of testing though not sure), gpu in oc mode but not manually oc'ed. Running Realbench.

I might test more aggressively later but I'm using my cx500m still while my x850 is out on rma.


----------



## Hatnim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Mine was simple I just up'ed it to 3ghz and left it on the default voltage and was rock stable but also beware it did increase my overall temps a good little bit.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I can't sacrifice my temp headroom for uncore at 4.9GHz so I left it at default even with my SL delided CPU.


I observe a 2-3C increase with mesh clocks between 2800-3000. It seems that the CPU requires a bit higher voltages to stabilize. I am running it at 2700 as the board did not increase voltages at the auto setting: no increase in temp.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Is that 470w at the wall with the monitor also? How far do you have it overclocked?
> 
> 
> 
> 470w at the wall. Just the tower. 45 on all cores @ 1.170v w/adaptive (I think I had it set to manual 1.150v at the time of testing though not sure), gpu in oc mode but not manually oc'ed. Running Realbench.
> 
> I might test more aggressively later but I'm using my cx500m still while my x850 is out on rma.
Click to expand...

That is sipping power usage for 4.5GHz overclock and GTX 1080ti.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> That is sipping power usage for 4.5GHz overclock and GTX 1080ti.


Maybe it was limiting itself to stay within tdp. I didn't disable any safety measures in the bios. I'll be more aggressive with it when I get my psu back in. Though I don't plan on running my system like that 24/7. For testing I'll do it though. Would like to see how much power I can force the system to pull.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hatnim*
> 
> I observe a 2-3C increase with mesh clocks between 2800-3000. It seems that the CPU requires a bit higher voltages to stabilize. I am running it at 2700 as the board did not increase voltages at the auto setting: no increase in temp.


Good to know that is may be worth it but at this point I am going to wait for the Apex and Extreme or EVGA dark to really dial in to tuning it more, I'm hoping to hit 5GHz on my cpu without getting throttled.


----------



## phaseshift

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> Depending on your motherboard I would use the adaptive voltage over manual. For x299 you need to sync all cores and set your clock speeds. I'm set to 4.7ghx 1.150 vcore adaptive llc 5 and optimized on spread spectrum


I have the ROG Strix 299-E, I will try adaptive. What Software do you guys use to monitor temps and voltages?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phaseshift*
> 
> I have the ROG Strix 299-E, I will try adaptive. What Software do you guys use to monitor temps and voltages?


I have the same mobo. I use HWInfo hwmonitor and Aida. There's a problem though for voltages since these chips have FIVR my voltage specifically reports are vid instead of Vcore just a heads up


----------



## phaseshift

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gettz8488*
> 
> I have the same mobo. I use HWInfo hwmonitor and Aida. There's a problem though for voltages since these chips have FIVR my voltage specifically reports are vid instead of Vcore just a heads up


Is that why aida and hwinfo64 was showing like 1.9-2.0v!?


----------



## Gettz8488

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phaseshift*
> 
> Is that why aida and hwinfo64 was showing like 1.9-2.0v!?


What they're showing is VCCIN the core input voltage in bios.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Mine was simple I just up'ed it to 3ghz and left it on the default voltage and was rock stable but also beware it did increase my overall temps a good little bit.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I can't sacrifice my temp headroom for uncore at 4.9GHz so I left it at default even with my SL delided CPU.


Hmm but leaving it at 3ghz ....

Question 2. So 5ghz seems to be difficult to hit or even bench..is the voltage jump big??


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Question 2. So 5ghz seems to be difficult to hit or even bench..is the voltage jump big??


In my case the voltage jump just to be able to bench at 5.0 was huge. Rock solid 24/7 stable at 4.8GHz takes 1.285v. Benchmark stable at 5.0GHz takes ~1.425v I can boot and single core bench 5.1GHz at ~1.450v. 5.2GHz will not boot at that voltage and I have not tried any higher.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> In my case the voltage jump just to be able to bench at 5.0 was huge. Rock solid 24/7 stable at 4.8GHz takes 1.285v. Benchmark stable at 5.0GHz takes ~1.425v I can boot and single core bench 5.1GHz at ~1.450v. 5.2GHz will not boot at that voltage and I have not tried any higher.


IOW, the guys on the other thread hoping to run the 7980XE @ 5.0 GHz are absolutely insane.


----------



## phaseshift

What's the max temp for 7820x? How about safe temps?


----------



## aerotracks

Max temp is 105C. They can take the heat


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> IOW, the guys on the other thread hoping to run the 7980XE @ 5.0 GHz are absolutely insane.


I seriously do not see that happening. It would be insane if it somehow did...16 of these cores at 5.0 GHz would threadrip the user's face off.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I seriously do not see that happening. It would be insane if it somehow did...16 of these cores at 5.0 GHz would threadrip the user's face off.


They _might_ if it phantom throttles without them noticing.









I calculated that if 1.4v is sufficient, then running 18 cores @ 5.0 GHz on AVX512 would pull around 1100W. But then someone else was saying that 1.4v is no where near enough. And that 1.55 - 1.60 is more likely what it'll take.

Using 1.6v, that's 1428W. And the chip and/or motherboard isn't going to last very long.

Granted, that's AVX512 so I'm not being entirely realistic. AVX pulls about 30 - 40% less. That brings it back down to about 1 kW - which is still deep in LN2 territory. I haven't done any proper measurements on scalar code to determine how much further it drops for those loads.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Hmm but leaving it at 3ghz ....
> 
> Question 2. So 5ghz seems to be difficult to hit or even bench..is the voltage jump big??


I'm hitting a temp wall at 1.291v 5Gz but at 1.275 4.9GHz it's almost manageable but still hits 93c sometimes. I'm going to wait for Apex/EVGA dark before I mess with it again.


----------



## Jpmboy

idk guys - I may have to get one of these (too). Actual vcore was 1.55V. Lucky_noob at the AMD tech show last week.



@rt123, @hotrod717 i'm pretty sure you guys saw this.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> idk guys - I may have to get one of these (too). Actual vcore was 1.55V. Lucky_noob at the AMD tech show last week.
> 
> 
> 
> @rt123, @hotrod717 i'm pretty sure you guys saw this.


LN2?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> idk guys - I may have to get one of these (too). Actual vcore was 1.55V. Lucky_noob at the AMD tech show last week.
> 
> 
> 
> @rt123, @hotrod717 i'm pretty sure you guys saw this.


I'd like to see some more non-LN2/phase change results of that chip OC'd on a 24/7 voltage. Definitely looks interesting, but its competing with this (which is a 24/7/365 voltage) for me (as is any future i9):



As a practical matter, I'm setting most big-nasty jobs to 18-20 core utilization because that's the sweet spot for clock-speed and software scaling for my application(s). So, despite the ludicrous thread-count the single chip setup that can run all the cores 4Ghz is in the same ball-park.

For reference - here's what happens when you enable 9+9 = 18 cores total on 2 generations back (HW) and run them all at 3.8GHz (I believe the stock TR score was just over 3k):


----------



## phaseshift

https://valid.x86.fr/kwrp9f


----------



## phaseshift

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Not bad. It stayed in the 80s. The hottest core hit 89c and VRM maxed at 78c.


Man you should write a guide! I'm still tweaking with mine but so many options


----------



## Clukos

Delid-Die-Mate X: https://www.caseking.de/der8auer-delid-die-mate-x-fsd8-020.html

Should be up on Amazon in the next few days according to der8auer.


----------



## tistou77

Will it be easier to OC a 7940X (14c) with a TDP of 165W or a 7920X (12c) with a TDP of 140W
The base frequency is higher on the 7940X than the 7920X because of the TDP I guess
And more heating / consumption for the 7940X ?


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Will it be easier to OC a 7940X (14c) with a TDP of 165W or a 7920X (12c) with a TDP of 140W
> The base frequency is higher on the 7940X than the 7920X because of the TDP I guess
> And more heating / consumption for the 7940X ?


Assuming they are binned in the same way the 7920x will be easier to OC, the 7900x will be even easier because it's the best bin (10c die) while the 7920x is the "worst" bin from the 18c die afaik. If you care about OC potential I think the 7900x will be better than the 7940x and 7920x.


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Assuming they are binned in the same way the 7920x will be easier to OC, the 7900x will be even easier because it's the best bin (10c die) while the 7920x is the "worst" bin from the 18c die afaik. If you care about OC potential I think the 7900x will be better than the 7940x and 7920x.


That implies that Intel limits supply on the cheaper SKUs and reserve the good dies for the 7900X, regardless of yields or demand. Do they really do that? Also, more cores means a higher chance at least one of them will be bad, doesn't it?

Looking at Silicon Lottery, it seems like the lower core count SKUs clock just fine.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Assuming they are binned in the same way the 7920x will be easier to OC, the 7900x will be even easier because it's the best bin (10c die) while the 7920x is the "worst" bin from the 18c die afaik. If you care about OC potential I think the 7900x will be better than the 7940x and 7920x.


I wish a "suitable" OC, @4.5 or 4.6ghz (see 4.7ghz) with the least Vcore possible (as everyone I suppose)









Currently I have a 6950X @4.4ghz and it suits me very well
So a 7920X or 7940X even better


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> That implies that Intel limits supply on the cheaper SKUs and reserve the good dies for the 7900X, regardless of demand. Do they really do that? Also, more cores means a higher chance at least one of them will be bad, doesn't it?
> 
> Looking at Silicon Lottery, it seems like the lower core count SKUs clock just fine.


Disabling bad cores in a die doesn't necessarily mean that the rest won't clock high. From my understanding, the higher core parts are primarily limited by cooling and power and not inability to reach high clocks. Although, there is a higher chance of getting a mediocre core the higher you go on the core count.


----------



## BroPhilip

It's finally August.....now bring on the Rampage VI extreme!!!!


----------



## Jbravo33

I preordered.







but still grabbing 7920x and will keep one of the two. Rather play with it myself and then make a decision.


----------



## BroPhilip

Anyone else upset to have pricing and availability of the zenith before the rampage......
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> I preordered.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but still grabbing 7920x and will keep one of the two. Rather play with it myself and then make a decision.


----------



## Clukos

This is the pricing of R6E in Germany: https://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/Asus-ROG-Rampage-VI-Extreme_1175248.html

Should be around the same as the Zenith.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> This is the pricing of R6E in Germany: https://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/Asus-ROG-Rampage-VI-Extreme_1175248.html
> 
> Should be around the same as the Zenith.


that link doesn't work for me in the US for some reason.... what is the price? the zenith is $550.00us


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Disabling bad cores in a die doesn't necessarily mean that the rest won't clock high. From my understanding, the higher core parts are primarily limited by cooling and power and not inability to reach high clocks. Although, there is a higher chance of getting a mediocre core the higher you go on the core count.


They will indeed disable and lower clocks on perfectly good cores if yield his high... If it isn't then they don't.

Like everything in the silicon world, its a probabilistic game... Good old Schrodinger...

They could first seek out dies with 1-N bad cores as their candidates for lower core count SKUs. The same goes for clocks - those chips that require higher voltage for stability get binned for lower clocks.

If yields are high, they could (and have) found themselves with insufficient gimped chips from the fab to satisfy their planned production, in which case, fuses get blown on dies that could otherwise pass for higher SKU parts.

What the proportions of these options end up being, from outside Intel, can only be seen in the aggregate as the broader market buys them and tries them out.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> that link doesn't work for me in the US for some reason.... what is the price? the zenith is $550.00us


526Euro


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> that link doesn't work for me in the US for some reason.... what is the price? the zenith is $550.00us


It's 526 euro, should be somewhere between 500-550 in the US


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> This is the pricing of R6E in Germany: https://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/Asus-ROG-Rampage-VI-Extreme_1175248.html
> 
> Should be around the same as the Zenith.


I got it.... € 526.92 converts to about $622.00us


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> It's 526 euro, should be somewhere between 500-550 in the US


Thanks it looks like we were posting at the same time....


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> idk guys - I may have to get one of these (too). Actual vcore was 1.55V. Lucky_noob at the AMD tech show last week.
> 
> 
> 
> @rt123, @hotrod717 i'm pretty sure you guys saw this.


I was very interest in the 1950x myself, but I discovered some concerns.

None of the boards, to include the big daddy Asus ROG Zenith Extreme support more than (2) x16 slots in addition to the x8 and lower slots at one time. While the 60 + 4 of TR still gives you a slight bump (x16 + x8 + x16 +x8), it's not what I was thinking it would be (x16 + x16 + x16 + x8). I guess that the cost of configuring all those traces is going to be the limitation instead of the CPU itself.


----------



## magnusavr

Just bought a msi x299 tomahawk arctic and a 7800x. Im going for 32GB memory. I'm wondering how much money I should invest in memory?

Prices below is in Norway inc tax.

G Skill tridentz RGB 4x8GB 3600 CL16 for 592 USD. Play it safe with this one?

CMK32GX4M4B3600C16R 4x8GB 3600 cl 16 for 490 USD?

Or just go with cheap 32GB (4x8GB) corsair lpx 3200 cl16 memory (CMK4B3200C16W) for 414 USD?

There is also an option for G.Skill TridentZ DDR4-3200 C14 DC SR - 32GB. Just 463 USD! But its not quad channel (just 2x16GB)...


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnusavr*
> 
> Just bought a msi x299 tomahawk arctic and a 7800x. Im going for 32GB memory. I'm wondering how much money I should invest in memory?
> 
> Prices below is in Norway inc tax.
> 
> G Skill tridentz RGB 4x8GB 3600 CL16 for 592 USD. Play it safe with this one?
> 
> CMK32GX4M4B3600C16R 4x8GB 3600 cl 16 for 490 USD?
> 
> Or just go with cheap 32GB (4x8GB) corsair lpx 3200 cl16 memory (CMK4B3200C16W) for 414 USD?
> 
> There is also an option for G.Skill TridentZ DDR4-3200 C14 DC SR - 32GB. Just 463 USD! But its not quad channel (just 2x16GB)...


Just get the cheapest quad channel 3200+ kit you can IMO


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Hi!

I am getting a 7800X setup.

The CPU and GPU will be under water, can anyone recommend me a decent motherboard for a decent overclock?

I am only planing on using 2x8GB as of now, and only 1 PCI-E device, and that is my GPU.

I am looking at the MSI X299 Tomahawk. Is this a bad choice? I will set up a 120/140mm fan to blow on the VRMs in order to have a active flow of air over the VRMs. That seems to be recommended for most board.

Anyone knows if this batch is decent? L716B466.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Hi!
> 
> I am getting a 7800X setup.
> 
> The CPU and GPU will be under water, can anyone recommend me a decent motherboard for a decent overclock?
> 
> I am only planing on using 2x8GB as of now, and only 1 PCI-E device, and that is my GPU.
> 
> I am looking at the MSI X299 Tomahawk. Is this a bad choice? I will set up a 120/140mm fan to blow on the VRMs in order to have a active flow of air over the VRMs. That seems to be recommended for most board.
> 
> Anyone knows if this batch is decent? L716B466.


With only a 7800X you wont need active cooling. The VRMs tjmax is up to 125c.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> With only a 7800X you wont need active cooling. The VRMs tjmax is up to 125c.


Lovely! I might just do it, you know, better be safe than sorry! But if it is not needed, then I can relax. Thank you!







)


----------



## aerotracks

Some side by side AIDA throughput comparison 7800X / 7820X at same clock and same mem setting (4x8GB SS B-Die)

http://abload.de/image.php?img=20170801-0340006qstm.png http://abload.de/image.php?img=20170802-0056133ysub.png


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> idk guys - I may have to get one of these (too). Actual vcore was 1.55V. Lucky_noob at the AMD tech show last week.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @rt123, @hotrod717 i'm pretty sure you guys saw this.


That is very impressive, that would be as fast as the intel 16c if it performed like the 10c. Another $5K for both toys though, I'll have to throw in the towel and settle for only one. I'm very glad for AMD (competition yay). I wonder what's intel's answer to a CPU that cost only a little over half and performs about the same or better.


----------



## OZrevhead

Have any of you guys been testing daily clocks or gaming clocks? What are you guys getting for low volts clocks?

My 7820x seems to be stable at 4600 1.100v, is this common?


----------



## BroPhilip

Looks like TTL has the Asus zenith extreme in....


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Looks like TTL has the Asus zenith extreme in....


Love how there is still no date on apex or extreme.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Love how there is still no date on apex or extreme.


Most probably the oem supplier delay for da new heatsink.


----------



## jbyron

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OZrevhead*
> 
> Have any of you guys been testing daily clocks or gaming clocks? What are you guys getting for low volts clocks?
> 
> My 7820x seems to be stable at 4600 1.100v, is this common?


My 7820x is stable at 4600 all cores at 1.17v, but the voltage is on "auto" and I suspect I can go lower voltage-wise. I've gamed and benched fine with temps ranging from 75-80 (In Win Infinity, h115i, terrible case for cooling btw)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I'd like to see some more non-LN2/phase change results of that chip OC'd on a 24/7 voltage. Definitely looks interesting, but its competing with this (which is a 24/7/365 voltage) for me (as is any future i9):
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a practical matter, I'm setting most big-nasty jobs to 18-20 core utilization because that's the sweet spot for clock-speed and software scaling for my application(s). So, despite the ludicrous thread-count the single chip setup that can run all the cores 4Ghz is in the same ball-park.
> 
> For reference - here's what happens when you enable 9+9 = 18 cores total on 2 generations back (HW) and run them all at 3.8GHz (I believe the stock TR score was just over 3k):
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


the dual socket rigs will always be the way to go for compute.
Yes, that's LN2. I'm gonna give both a try (TR and 7980xe) - it's that deck-of-cards size TR cpu and socket that I can't resist.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I was very interest in the 1950x myself, but I discovered some concerns.
> 
> None of the boards, to include the big daddy Asus ROG Zenith Extreme support more than (2) x16 slots in addition to the x8 and lower slots at one time. While the 60 + 4 of TR still gives you a slight bump (x16 + x8 + x16 +x8), it's not what I was thinking it would be (x16 + x16 + x16 + x8). I guess that the cost of configuring all those traces is going to be the limitation instead of the CPU itself.


the lane distribution (absent a PLX gate) for GPUs is probably at the ceiling that we're ever gonna see. I think it's up to the Card manuf to solve this puzzle with drivers. Right now, quad works, but scaling is poop. For compute, it does not matter. (and I know you know this







)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> That is very impressive, that would be as fast as the intel 16c if it performed like the 10c. Another $5K for both toys though, I'll have to throw in the towel and settle for only one. I'm very glad for AMD (competition yay). I wonder what's intel's answer to a CPU that cost only a little over half and performs about the same or better.


it is on LN2 and done in a setting where cooking a part is of no consequence. I don't think AMD has the IPC yet (eg, Ryzen 1800x) with the exception of certain workloads. The 7900x is still a great buy in that price range. I just picked up a very expensive new toy, so I'm glad Intel's part is off 'till october.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the dual socket rigs will always be the way to go for compute.


Depends on the compute... with single CPUs getting up to 16,18, and beyond cores... for coherent multi-thread jobs - keeping things on one memory controller and fabric can be of benefit.

Other jobs that that are completely disjointed will just use as many cores as you can give them.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> *idk guys - I may have to get one of these (too)*. Actual vcore was 1.55V. Lucky_noob at the AMD tech show last week.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @rt123, @hotrod717 i'm pretty sure you guys saw this.


Do it.








I was going to as well, but might have to wait a few weeks.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the dual socket rigs will always be the way to go for compute.
> Yes, that's LN2. I'm gonna give both a try (TR and 7980xe) - it's that deck-of-cards size TR cpu and socket that I can't resist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the lane distribution (absent a PLX gate) for GPUs is probably at the ceiling that we're ever gonna see. I think it's up to the Card manuf to solve this puzzle with drivers. Right now, quad works, but scaling is poop. For compute, it does not matter. (and I know you know this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> it is on LN2 and done in a setting where cooking a part is of no consequence. I don't think AMD has the IPC yet (eg, Ryzen 1800x) with the exception of certain workloads. The 7900x is still a great buy in that price range. I just picked up a very expensive new toy, so I'm glad Intel's part is off 'till october.


Expensive new toy, 1080Ti KPE??









Or like a "real" life toy.

Edit:- Also unfortunate I missed you at he meetup. Looks like you came in the morning, while I wasn't there till the afternoon.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I just picked up a very expensive new toy, so I'm glad Intel's part is off 'till october.


Did you pick up one of these?


----------



## Chargeit

Got my new rgb ram installed. It's running off the xmp profile of my other ram at 3200. Odd. Going to restart and get it set up correctly.







Stuff sure is fancy looking.

Starting to kind of feel like I might need to get some rgb lights to hook up around the case.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Got my new rgb ram installed. It's running off the xmp profile of my other ram at 3200. Odd. Going to restart and get it set up correctly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stuff sure is fancy looking.
> 
> Starting to kind of feel like I might need to get some rgb lights to hook up around the case.


I have an 8 x 16GB @ 3300 non-RGB Trident kit that I picked up back in March for only $800. That same kit is now listing for $1400. And as badly as I want an RGB version of it, prices are too insane right now.

The memory and the AIO water block are the only things in my build that _can_ be RGB, but aren't.


----------



## magnusavr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Just get the cheapest quad channel 3200+ kit you can IMO


Thanks for the tip









But went with the expensive GSkill-TridentZ-RGB-DDR4-3600-C16-QC-32GB


----------



## magnusavr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> Some side by side AIDA throughput comparison 7800X / 7820X at same clock and same mem setting (4x8GB SS B-Die)
> 
> http://abload.de/image.php?img=20170801-0340006qstm.png http://abload.de/image.php?img=20170802-0056133ysub.png


Why is there such a difference?

A 7800x limitation or a bios bug?

Just got the Msi x299, 7800x and some expensive 3600 cl16 4x8gb sticks...


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I have an 8 x 16GB @ 3300 non-RGB Trident kit that I picked up back in March for only $800. That same kit is now listing for $1400. And as badly as I want an RGB version of it, prices are too insane right now.
> 
> The memory and the AIO water block are the only things in my build that _can_ be RGB, but aren't.


This kit was $430 but someone posted a code for 10% off Neweggs ebay shop and I had to get them. Paid $387 which isn't great but not as bad as it could be.

Ram prices are jacked. I'm lucky that 32gb is overkill for me because I'd hate to try and buy 64gb or 128gb kits right now.

The 16gb 2400 ddr3 kit I have in my ol'ladys rig right now I paid $64 for back when ram prices were cheap. Now that's the kind of pricing I like to see.

I've never been one for excessive led but with these color controlled rgb led's I'm getting sold.


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnusavr*
> 
> Why is there such a difference?
> 
> A 7800x limitation or a bios bug?
> 
> Just got the Msi x299, 7800x and some expensive 3600 cl16 4x8gb sticks...


That's 7800X limitation, cut down chip has less L3 bandwidth. At least that's where I think bottleneck comes from.

The little SLI Plus performs like a charm, too bad VRM setup is only adequate for 6 and 8 core.

P.S. 3600C17 has traditionally been the best 3600 bin


----------



## hodgempls

I received my 7900x back from Silicon Lottery today for a delid - great service! They received it last Friday and sent it back out on Monday. Temps are much improved and I will post some results later after some more testing. Great value if you want to run your x299 cpu to the max!


----------



## magnusavr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> P.S. 3600C17 has traditionally been the best 3600 bin


Shouldnt the Gskill RGB 3600 cl16 tridentz be better than the cl17 version? The cl16 is also more expensive.

Also the realtime latency is lower on the c16:

16/3600*2000=8,889
17/3600*2000=9,444

Maybe they are the same under the hood.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> P.S. 3600C17 has traditionally been the best 3600 bin


Why would the use better binned stuff on cheaper lesser performing modules?


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Why would the use better binned stuff on cheaper lesser performing modules?


Don't ask me, what I do is bin and observe


----------



## hodgempls

After a Silicon Lottery delid, my 7900x does 4.8 @ 1.20V pulling around 287W. Core temps settle between 70 and 86 on the various cores. CPU package temp hits 92. I am going to try some Thermal Grizzly Conductonoaut (liquid metal) tomorrow on the water block and CPU - I am currently using Kryonaut.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> After a Silicon Lottery delid, my 7900x does 4.8 @ 1.20V pulling around 287W. Core temps settle between 70 and 86 on the various cores. CPU package temp hits 92. I am going to try some Thermal Grizzly Conductonoaut (liquid metal) tomorrow on the water block and CPU - I am currently using Kryonaut.


How much increase in overclock did you gain with deliding?


----------



## hodgempls

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> How much increase in overclock did you gain with deliding?


After I addressed the phantom throttling issue, I stopped at 4.4 GHZ due to temps and sent it in for a delid. I feel comfortable running it at 4.8 now and will see if I can hit 4.9 or 5.0 tomorrow with the the Conductonaut. Its a shame Intel used TIM on this CPU given its potential to overclock.


----------



## mouacyk

With threadripper incoming, are there going to be price drops on 7820x and 7900x?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Do it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was going to as well, but might have to wait a few weeks.
> Expensive new toy, 1080Ti KPE??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or like a "real" life toy.
> 
> Edit:- Also unfortunate I missed you at he meetup. Looks like you came in the morning, while I wasn't there till the afternoon.


yeah, real life toy. I did preorder the TR and ASUS board tho.








guys at the meetup told me you were cleaning out microcenter.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Did you pick up one of these?


lool - no. (911C4S - a day driver







)


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> With threadripper incoming, are there going to be price drops on 7820x and 7900x?


Doubt it. They are still the fastest 8 and 10 core processors out.


----------



## aerotracks

I don't see the 7820X getting a price drop considering the 8 core threadripper will retail in same price bracket


----------



## Scotty99

Its just nuts to me how intel thinks they can sell 7900x for a grand, greedy sob's lol. Do they really think their name branding can make up for that much performance loss to the competition?


----------



## hodgempls

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Its just nuts to me how intel thinks they can sell 7900x for a grand, greedy sob's lol. Do they really think their name branding can make up for that much performance loss to the competition?


I think it will depend on the clock rates the threadrippers can achieve. But hats off to AMD though, competition is good to have in the cpu market again. Now if only RX Vega wasn't such a disappointment.....


----------



## Mysticial

I doubt Intel will be dropping *their* prices. But there might be a bunch of cheap second hand 7900X's flooding the market while everyone dumps them in favor of Threadripper.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> I think it will depend on the clock rates the threadrippers can achieve. But hats off to AMD though, competition is good to have in the cpu market again. Now if only RX Vega wasn't such a disappointment.....


I dont think clockrates matter in this regard, who cares about single thread ipc in games (old ones like WoW etc) and also buys 16 core CPU's? Its all about the multithreaded perforamance in this bracket, and intel fell on their face here compared to what AMD is putting out.


----------



## KCDC

Is it odd to anyone that I'm still waiting on a 7820X? It was Amazon preordered about a month ago. It's the only part I'm still waiting on for this build.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KCDC*
> 
> Is it odd to anyone that I'm still waiting on a 7820X? It was Amazon preordered about a month ago. It's the only part I'm still waiting on for this build.


should ship next week.


----------



## KCDC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> should ship next week.


Hmm..... can't tell if serious or sarcastic........


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KCDC*
> 
> Hmm..... can't tell if serious or sarcastic........


apparently this is when Si Lottery has chips coming it too. so... I'm sure Amazon will have them also.


----------



## KCDC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> apparently this is when Si Lottery has chips coming it too. so... I'm sure Amazon will have them also.


Sweetness, thanks!


----------



## elelunicy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Its just nuts to me how intel thinks they can sell 7900x for a grand, greedy sob's lol. Do they really think their name branding can make up for that much performance loss to the competition?


If Intel drops 7900x's price then no one would be buying the $800 12-core 1920x









10-core 7900x @ 4.8GHz vs 12-core 1920x @ 4GHz. The i9 will win in both multi-thread (at least a few %) and single-thread (20%+ easily), while also having full AVX support and no need to deal with cross CCX latency


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elelunicy*
> 
> If Intel drops 7900x's price then no one would be buying the $800 12-core 1920x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10-core 7900x @ 4.8GHz vs 12-core 1920x @ 4GHz. The i9 will win in both multi-thread (at least a few %) and single-thread (20%+ easily), while also having full AVX support and no need to deal with cross CCX latency


Why are you comparing the 7900x to the 1920x?


----------



## elelunicy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Why are you comparing the 7900x to the 1920x?


Because the 7900x after a price drop would be in the same price range as the 1920x


----------



## Mysticial

Has anyone with the 7900X tried pushing the cache frequencies? I'm reading a few posts of people having trouble going above 3.0 GHz. But I have mine running at 3.2 GHz without any effort at all - not even touching the voltages.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elelunicy*
> 
> Because the 7900x after a price drop would be in the same price range as the 1920x


Cause intel does that.....LOL.

Sorry but that isnt going to happen, the 6900k is still a thousand dollars.


----------



## Scotty99

I can see how someone would covet a 7820x cause of the higher clock rates, but a 16 core threadripper end of lifes a 7900x.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Chargeit

What range are ya'll running your cache? Right now I have mine set min 2.0, max 3.0. I kind of picked the min because it sounded safe. Are you guys setting a min or doing 3.0/3.0?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> I could get to 2.8 GHz without overvolting and 3.0 GHz with +50 mV. Nobody seems to have tried going much further than 3.2 GHz; I saw one user reporting 3.3 GHz.


Interesting...

When I tried 3.3 GHz, it posted, but didn't get past the Windows logo. But 3.2 GHz passed stress-tests. But either way, it seemed too easy to swallow. And it was reflected in the benchmarks as well so it's not like there was any phantom throttling going on either.

I haven't tried bumping the voltages nor do I intend to. I (like everyone else here) have no thermal headroom. I'm running it at 3.0 GHz for now since I want the stability and I don't want to deal with it at the moment.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> What range are ya'll running your cache? Right now I have mine set min 2.0, max 3.0. I kind of picked the min because it sounded safe. Are you guys setting a min or doing 3.0/3.0?


I left my min at default. And only played with the max. So I had it running full range up to 3.2 GHz. And it definitely stayed up there under load.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I left my min at default. And only played with the max. So I had it running full range up to 3.2 GHz. And it definitely stayed up there under load.


I'll have to play with it some. Oc'ing the cpu cache has a very meaningful affect on my Far Cry Primal benchmark. Went from 90 fps (consistent) at 1080p ultra to 103 - 111 depending on the run. Though I benched two times today before and after installing my new ram and both times I pulled 105. So oc'ing the cache seems to help on x299.

I"m not sure why the far cry primal benchmarks seem inconsistent after oc'ing the cache which makes me wonder if forcing 3.0 on the cache would give me higher results every time. Will play with it some more when I get my 850w psu back from rma.


----------



## phaseshift




----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phaseshift*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


That seems really hot for that voltage and overclock. What kind of cooling?


----------



## KCDC

I wonder.. Does adaptive voltage work on the cache freq on x299? x99 is no es bueno, you have to keep it manual. 33 for cache seems safe for 24/7 yes? for a 7820


----------



## OZrevhead

Guys I need some help, I have a 7820x and MSI Gaming Pro Carbon, I have it running stable up to 4700 and it's fine. I can pass benchmarks up to 5ghz but as soon as I hit xtu the screen goes black and the PC reboots, I assume this is over current protection or the like kicking in but where do I find it in the MSI bios? I have tried with and without speedstep, and I tried avx offset but it still does it. Any help would be great.

Why do we need to back down for avx? Is it just to reduce heat? It feels like cheating lol, my lower clocks are fine with no avx offset.


----------



## DeadSec

Because AVX/AVX2 is heating up the cpu. AVX512 is compared to that a burner.
Just try to oc included AVX512 and you will see how fast your cpu is burning. Take LinX 0.72.


----------



## Clukos

Kaby Lake-X only motherboards? https://videocardz.com/71656/x299-kabylake-x-only-motherboards-are-here


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Kaby Lake-X only motherboards? https://videocardz.com/71656/x299-kabylake-x-only-motherboards-are-here


Talk about adding more to the confusion.


----------



## phaseshift

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> That seems really hot for that voltage and overclock. What kind of cooling?


Kraken x62


----------



## CptSpig

IDK if anyone saw the X299 Apex manual is up: https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-RAMPAGE-VI-APEX/HelpDesk_Manual/


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> Talk about adding more to the confusion.


Yeah that doesn't make sense. I can see even more experienced users mixing that up. All x299 mobo should support all x299 cpus. Not sure what they are thinking.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phaseshift*
> 
> Kraken x62


That does seem hot. You should be running in the mid-80's when stress testing 1.184v.

How did you oc? Did you disable any tdp limits? If so that could explain it.

What method did you use for thermal paste? I don't think the pea/dot method is going to get very good coverage. Should try for the 3 line method, You want to make sure these cpu's have full thermal paste coverage.

*X and spread method should also give you good coverage but I always make a mess trying spread.


----------



## phaseshift

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah that doesn't make sense. I can see even more experienced users mixing that up. All x299 mobo should support all x299 cpus. Not sure what they are thinking.
> That does seem hot. You should be running in the mid-80's when stress testing 1.184v.
> 
> How did you oc? Did you disable any tdp limits? If so that could explain it.
> 
> What method did you use for thermal paste? I don't think the pea/dot method is going to get very good coverage. Should try for the 3 line method, You want to make sure these cpu's have full thermal paste coverage.
> 
> *X and spread method should also give you good coverage but I always make a mess trying spread.


Settings:
- Adaptive Voltage
- -3 AVX
- -5 AVX512

pretty much all I did, I had the corsair h110i prior to the kraken which I used grain method and it covered it well. I did have the pump at 80% and fans at 80% for the fans. Fans are at 1300rpm at pump at 2400rpm


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> Talk about adding more to the confusion.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah that doesn't make sense. I can see even more experienced users mixing that up. All x299 mobo should support all x299 cpus. Not sure what they are thinking.


I'm betting they move all overclockable skus to the x299 enthusiast platform. But I could be wrong


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> I'm betting they move all overclockable skus to the x299 enthusiast platform. But I could be wrong


I think they were thinking about it, but I assure you any of their plans are on hold now with the negative press and AMD competition.


----------



## BroPhilip

A new listing for Asus Apex from AUSTRALIA....


----------



## Hatnim

Anyone has an idea about the fluctuation in the Bus Clock of my 7800x on ASUS STRIX? I found that the minimum and maximum Bus Clock hit 98 or 102MHz during a heavy load of several hours (according to HWiNFO64). I believe this happens very instantly - normally the clock stays at 100.0MHz. My concern is particularly on the maximum since it may hurt the stability of overclock at the lowest voltages possible. For example, my 4.7 overclocked 7800x will go up to 4.79 if the base clock hits 102Mhz.

I disabled BCLK Spectrum and CPU Spectrum in the BIOS. Is this normal?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KCDC*
> 
> I wonder.. Does adaptive voltage work on the cache freq on x299? x99 is no es bueno, you have to keep it manual. 33 for cache seems safe for 24/7 yes? for a 7820


Offset cache voltage works on Asus boards for x99 and x299. Adaptive is what doesn't work correctly. Just set it to offset along with the value you need to total what you've determined to be stable and the cache voltage will scale with clockspeed when using the power savings feature.


----------



## BroPhilip

Now we know why the Asus Zenith was completed first it is the review mother board that was sent out in all the Threadripper press kits..... Thanks Asus.....


----------



## rt123

More like AMD didn't have to move the launch date of their platform 2 months ahead to respond to a threat like Intel did.


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Now we know why the Asus Zenith was completed first it is the review mother board that was sent out in all the Threadripper press kits..... Thanks Asus.....


The word on the ROG forums is that the armor on the Rampage has been causing them grief. The Zenith doesn't have any, and also didn't have it's schedule pushed up. They're even throwing September around now..

That said, I am plenty salty about it. I had to abandon my plans to use the R6E for my build because it took so long







.


----------



## phaseshift

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phaseshift*
> 
> Settings:
> - Adaptive Voltage
> - -3 AVX
> - -5 AVX512
> 
> pretty much all I did, I had the corsair h110i prior to the kraken which I used grain method and it covered it well. I did have the pump at 80% and fans at 80% for the fans. Fans are at 1300rpm at pump at 2400rpm


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah that doesn't make sense. I can see even more experienced users mixing that up. All x299 mobo should support all x299 cpus. Not sure what they are thinking.
> That does seem hot. You should be running in the mid-80's when stress testing 1.184v.
> 
> How did you oc? Did you disable any tdp limits? If so that could explain it.
> 
> What method did you use for thermal paste? I don't think the pea/dot method is going to get very good coverage. Should try for the 3 line method, You want to make sure these cpu's have full thermal paste coverage.
> 
> *X and spread method should also give you good coverage but I always make a mess trying spread.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> That seems really hot for that voltage and overclock. What kind of cooling?


Here's a 3+ hour Aida64 test



temps are much lower than realbench


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Now we know why the Asus Zenith was completed first it is the review mother board that was sent out in all the Threadripper press kits..... Thanks Asus.....


It's most definitely not that, hardware revisions after launch take time unfortunately (in this case the VRM cooling). The end product should speak for itself, pretty sure the R6E and the Apex will be in the top 3 best motherboards for the platform, if not the best two


----------



## BroPhilip

I'm not saying that these issues didn't play a big part. But the zenith had active cooling from its showing in computex. I just imagine there was some motivation in having it ready for the press kits as it is a guaranteed way to be the first motherboard reviewed on a new platform.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> It's most definitely not that, hardware revisions after launch take time unfortunately (in this case the VRM cooling). The end product should speak for itself, pretty sure the R6E and the Apex will be in the top 3 best motherboards for the platform, if not the best two


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> The word on the ROG forums is that the armor on the Rampage has been causing them grief. The Zenith doesn't have any, and also didn't have it's schedule pushed up. They're even throwing September around now..
> 
> That said, I am plenty salty about it. I had to abandon my plans to use the R6E for my build because it took so long
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


----------



## Dr Mad

For those who upgraded their setup from X99 to X299, do the 7900X really performs badly in games compared to the 6950X/5960X ?

There are not so much feedbacks on how these CPU behave in games except in some hardware reviews with variable results.

I still don't know if I have to keep Rampage V and get 6950X or change to a new platform which is more future-proof, even if I don't think I'll need more than 10 cores for producing music with Ableton.

Thank you









ps - I play with a Titan X Pascal and Acer X34


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dr Mad*
> 
> For those who upgraded their setup from X99 to X299, do the 7900X really performs badly in games compared to the 6950X/5960X ?
> 
> There are not so much feedbacks on how these CPU behave in games except in some hardware reviews with variable results.
> 
> I still don't know if I have to keep Rampage V and get 6950X or change to a new platform which is more future-proof, even if I don't think I'll need more than 10 cores for producing music with Ableton.
> 
> Thank you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ps - I play with a Titan X Pascal and Acer X34


Here is a i9-7900X gaming benchmarks. https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-10-core-Skylake-X-Processor-Review/1080p-Gaming-Performance-a


----------



## TheFallenDeity

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dr Mad*
> 
> For those who upgraded their setup from X99 to X299, do the 7900X really performs badly in games compared to the 6950X/5960X ?
> 
> There are not so much feedbacks on how these CPU behave in games except in some hardware reviews with variable results.
> 
> I still don't know if I have to keep Rampage V and get 6950X or change to a new platform which is more future-proof, even if I don't think I'll need more than 10 cores for producing music with Ableton.
> 
> Thank you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ps - I play with a Titan X Pascal and Acer X34


Sure. 7900X ongoing testing on PCGamer.
http://www.pcgamer.com/the-ongoing-testing-of-intels-x299-and-i9-7900x/


----------



## TheFallenDeity

Anybody with MSI boards notice the new BIOS update?

Description
*- Improved board explorer function.
- Fix smbios data lose after clear cmos
- Updated microcode.
- Support MFlash Hot Key.*

I wonder what the microcode brings?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Here is a i9-7900X gaming benchmarks. https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-10-core-Skylake-X-Processor-Review/1080p-Gaming-Performance-a


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheFallenDeity*
> 
> Sure. 7900X ongoing testing on PCGamer.
> http://www.pcgamer.com/the-ongoing-testing-of-intels-x299-and-i9-7900x/


Or to summarize, HEDT is probably the wrong platform if the sole purpose is gaming.


----------



## phaseshift




----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dr Mad*
> 
> For those who upgraded their setup from X99 to X299, do the 7900X really performs badly in games compared to the 6950X/5960X ?
> 
> There are not so much feedbacks on how these CPU behave in games except in some hardware reviews with variable results.
> 
> I still don't know if I have to keep Rampage V and get 6950X or change to a new platform which is more future-proof, even if I don't think I'll need more than 10 cores for producing music with Ableton.
> 
> Thank you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ps - I play with a Titan X Pascal and Acer X34







The video that answers your questions.

Best video with comparison to older cpus and also all the cpus on the current x299.

7820x is da buy atm.

The problem i see is just x299 vrm and how long can da board last.


----------



## Lisanderus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dr Mad*
> 
> do the 7900X really performs badly in games compared to the 6950X/5960X ?


Not quite 7900X, but still. Huge test with 30 games.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Urtie*
> 
> The word on the ROG forums is that the armor on the Rampage has been causing them grief. The Zenith doesn't have any, and also didn't have it's schedule pushed up. They're even throwing September around now..
> 
> That said, I am plenty salty about it. I had to abandon my plans to use the R6E for my build because it took so long
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Pcper vid on threadripper said next week right..


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Pcper vid on threadripper said next week right..


??? They commented on the rampage ???


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheFallenDeity*
> 
> Sure. 7900X ongoing testing on PCGamer.
> http://www.pcgamer.com/the-ongoing-testing-of-intels-x299-and-i9-7900x/


They need to put an oc'ed 7700k and 6950x in there.

That's looking like they're trying to sell me something.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> ??? They commented on the rampage ???


Oh thought u meant threadripper launch


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> They need to put an oc'ed 7700k and 6950x in there.
> 
> That's looking like they're trying to sell me something.


How's your TUF going?
Any more tweaking of your overclock?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> How's your TUF going?
> Any more tweaking of your overclock?


My psu is still out on RMA so I haven't messed with my oc more.

Though I did get my sleeved psu cables in.


----------



## phaseshift

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> My psu is still out on RMA so I haven't messed with my oc more.
> 
> Though I did get my sleeved psu cables in.


show moar!


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> My psu is still out on RMA so I haven't messed with my oc more.
> 
> Though I did get my sleeved psu cables in.


Nice. It is such a crazy expensive aesthetic only purchase, but I love them!


----------



## Chargeit

They're just black since black works with about anything.

I bought them because my psu 24 pin was pulling itself loose at the psu. Which is why I've had a few issues with this psu. I was going to buy a new psu but I like how this x850 doesn't have a sticker on the top meaning it's all black and looks good with an exposed psu.

I've made a short video explaining what was wrong with my psu wires. I'm not even sure the psu is defective but I figured I'd send it in in case it took damage from the loose connection. I made the video so I didn't sound crazy talking about loose wires and stuff.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phaseshift*
> 
> Here's a 3+ hour Aida64 test
> 
> 
> 
> temps are much lower than realbench


5.0 @ 1.18v on a 280 AIO seems pretty good to me... Making me jealous, me and my 6900k @ 4.3 w/ 1.2v over here


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phaseshift*
> 
> Here's a 3+ hour Aida64 test
> 
> 
> 
> temps are much lower than realbench


Really only 1.18v? And such low temperatures? Since this is a 7820X instead of the 7900X, I'm not entirely sure what to expect. But could it be phantom throttling?


----------



## phaseshift

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> 5.0 @ 1.18v on a 280 AIO seems pretty good to me... Making me jealous, me and my 6900k @ 4.3 w/ 1.2v over here


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Really only 1.18v? And such low temperatures? Since this is a 7820X instead of the 7900X, I'm not entirely sure what to expect. But could it be phantom throttling?


Here's 4.7ghz with 1+ hour AIDA64 Test



How can you examine if it is phantom throttling?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> 5.0 @ 1.18v on a 280 AIO seems pretty good to me... Making me jealous, me and my 6900k @ 4.3 w/ 1.2v over here


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Really only 1.18v? And such low temperatures? Since this is a 7820X instead of the 7900X, I'm not entirely sure what to expect. But could it be phantom throttling?


I am pretty sure that is set to a 46 multiplier and the higher clock max speeds shown are missreportings. Is this correct @phaseshift? I have seen some crazy max speeds register in software.


----------



## phaseshift

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I am pretty sure that is set to a 46 multiplier and the higher clock max speeds shown are missreportings. Is this correct @phaseshift? I have seen some crazy max speeds register in software.


you are correct the first one was at 46 and the latest one is at 47 same voltage at 1.18v


----------



## TahoeDust

Your overclock is not set
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phaseshift*
> 
> you are correct the first one was at 46 and the latest one is at 47 same voltage at 1.18v


Nice work. Looks like a good chip. Mine was never stable at 4.7 with anything less than 1.235v. Have you tried running real bench at that speed?


----------



## hodgempls

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phaseshift*
> 
> Here's 4.7ghz with 1+ hour AIDA64 Test
> 
> 
> 
> How can you examine if it is phantom throttling?


How many watts is the CPU using?


----------



## phaseshift

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Your overclock is not set
> Nice work. Looks like a good chip. Mine was never stable at 4.7 with anything less than 1.235v. Have you tried running real bench at that speed?


I haven't yet, I might get real close to TJ Max. Really thinking about sucking it up for a couple of days and having Silicon Lottery delid my chip.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> How many watts is the CPU using?


how does one measure?


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phaseshift*
> 
> How can you examine if it is phantom throttling?


Basically, If you haven't changed any over current protection settings it most likely throttles. You'd get better scores, and more stable clocks when overclocked, in benchmarks and such if you increase ocp settings at the expense of heat generation and power draw.


----------



## tizziano

I am already mounting everything, I have the first doubt. My board (Tuf Mark 1) has 2 EPS connectors of 8 and 4 pin, but the PSU (RM850i), only brings one EPS connector of 8 pins, when I in the specifications I watched that it has a double EPS connector. I think that only with the 8-pin can work, but it annoys me not to have it all mounted as I wanted.
Can I buy the 8 to 4 pin cable and connect it from the source to the board?


----------



## OZrevhead

How do I change the power settings on MSI Gaming Pro Carbon? I have seen it on Asus bios but I can't find it in MSI .... My 7820x is about 1.23v for 4700 too. What version of Realbench doesn't use avx? I can pass all benchmarks but realbench 2.54 detects instability at 18minutes in. I have dropped my ram back, bumped all my voltages and it's still the same ... I dropped the cache down one multi and it failed within a minute ...I have no avx offset at 4500, 1.10v and custom water (58c running realbench).

What do you guys reckon?


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *phaseshift*
> 
> you are correct the first one was at 46 and the latest one is at 47 same voltage at 1.18v


Ah ok. Makes sense.

Really hard to keep all these numbers straight with the reporting issues/phantom throttles etc.

I really want to jump on board the bandwagon but am sitting on my hands until the APEX gets released. I should be happy with what I have but the itch is real!


----------



## Artah

I see Microcenter is selling the 7900X for $899.99 USD if you can find stock in your area. It really should be $700 or less in the first place from intel if you ask me.


----------



## hodgempls

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I see Microcenter is selling the 7900X for $899.99 USD if you can find stock in your area. It really should be $700 or less in the first place from intel if you ask me.


Nice find given that stock is pretty low on these. I think we will see a price drop on these once Threadripper is out and benchmarks are released.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I see Microcenter is selling the 7900X for $899.99 USD if you can find stock in your area. It really should be $700 or less in the first place from intel if you ask me.


I think there's two catches to this:








It's not gonna be in stock anywhere.
After taxes, it isn't much better than just ordering out-of-state online.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OZrevhead*
> 
> How do I change the power settings on MSI Gaming Pro Carbon? I have seen it on Asus bios but I can't find it in MSI .... My 7820x is about 1.23v for 4700 too. What version of Realbench doesn't use avx? I can pass all benchmarks but realbench 2.54 detects instability at 18minutes in. I have dropped my ram back, bumped all my voltages and it's still the same ... I dropped the cache down one multi and it failed within a minute ...I have no avx offset at 4500, 1.10v and custom water (58c running realbench).
> 
> What do you guys reckon?


RealBench_v2.43 no AVX.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

XTX360 + XT240 should be plenty for a undervolted 1080Ti and a 7800X? (1950/0.900V on the GPU).


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I see Microcenter is selling the 7900X for $899.99 USD if you can find stock in your area. It really should be $700 or less in the first place from intel if you ask me.
> 
> 
> 
> Nice find given that stock is pretty low on these. I think we will see a price drop on these once Threadripper is out and benchmarks are released.
Click to expand...

Over all the years I have never seen Intel drop prices for any competition. I have seen retailers sales however.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Over all the years I have never seen Intel drop prices for any competition. I have seen retailers sales however.


That's fine, they don't ever drop prices but they will be dropping some customers this round for sure.


----------



## hodgempls

If Intel replaces the TIM with solder on future x299 cpus, Intel has a case to make for higher prices, on similar core counts, VS AMD due to the higher clocks the x299s can achieve. Most Ryzen cpus hit a wall at 3.9 GHZ. It will be interesting to see what the Threadrippers can do but since they are based on Ryzen, I imagine they will top out at similar speeds. Are there scenarios were a 10 core 4.7-4.9 GHZ cpu is better than a 16 core 3.9-4.0 GHZ cpu with lower IPC? I guess time will tell..... Anyhow, I am glad that AMD is back in the CPU game. Competition benefits everyone. Now if only AMD could get their act together on the GPU side of things.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Over all the years I have never seen Intel drop prices for any competition. I have seen retailers sales however.
> 
> 
> 
> That's fine, they don't ever drop prices but they will be dropping some customers this round for sure.
Click to expand...

Here is for wishful thinking that Intel gives a crap about competition. I think Intel and AMD sells processors like Honda's and Fords.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hodgempls*
> 
> Are there scenarios were a 10 core 4.7-4.9 GHZ cpu is better than a 16 core 3.9-4.0 GHZ cpu with lower IPC? I guess time will tell..... Anyhow, I am glad that AMD is back in the CPU game. Competition benefits everyone. Now if only AMD could get their act together on the GPU side of things.


Intel will probably still win on anything that relies heavily on AVX or AVX512. But of course AMD isn't trying to compete in that area. (at least not in the 1st gen Zen)

For example, the benchmark that I maintain (y-cruncher) is showing my 7900X to be about 2.5x faster than my 1800X. Threadripper is not going to overcome that difference.

Likewise, the same benchmark has a 32-core/64-thread Skylake Purley beating a 64-core/128-thread Eypc.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Intel will probably still win on anything that relies heavily on AVX or AVX512. But of course AMD isn't trying to compete in that area. (at least not in the 1st gen Zen)
> 
> For example, the benchmark that I maintain (y-cruncher) is showing my 7900X to be about 2.5x faster than my 1800X. Threadripper is not going to overcome that difference.
> 
> Likewise, the same benchmark has a 32-core/64-thread Skylake Purley beating a 64-core/128-thread Eypc.


I would really like to know if a workload that is coded to take advantage of AVX/2/512 can't be coded to run on a GPU. This is one argument against AVX in general. For example, the waifu2x up-sampling program can process an image in a fraction of the time it takes AVX/2 to complete the same task. With Skylake-X, if you need output, you have to buy a GPU anyway.

With ThreadRipper's offerings, I don't see how Intel can maintain their monopolistic pricing. Skylake-X is an improvement, but still far from reality.


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Be careful with the new 0503 BIOS for the TUF Mark 1, it seriously messed up RAM compatibility.
> I couldn't run my Corsair Vengeance 3200Mhz at rated speeds, only 2133Mhz.
> Didn't matter if I used XMP or Manual settings.
> 
> It's not on the US support page yet but it's on the AU support page at the moment.
> Do you know anything about it @[email protected]?


The Prime Deluxe 0503 BIOS has lowered my stability of my overclock as well.

used to be able to run Cinebench at 4.8 1.28 volts and run the XTU benchmark at 4.8 as well. now just instacrash


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/g-skill-tridentz-rgb-ddr4-memory-review,2.html
> 
> In the conclusion,
> Maybe someone more into oc'ing ram can do more with them.
> 
> I wouldn't consider running at their xmp oc'ing. Oc'ing is running over what they're rated for to me.
> 
> *If you do get them running over spec on your x299 rig please post your numbers. I ordered the kit last night and wouldn't mind running them at 3800 - 4000.


I'm running the 14-14-14-34 3200mhz kit at 16-16-16-31 1T at 38mhz on my prime deluxe and they run great


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> I would really like to know if a workload that is coded to take advantage of AVX/2/512 can't be coded to run on a GPU. This is one argument against AVX in general. For example, the waifu2x up-sampling program can process an image in a fraction of the time it takes AVX/2 to complete the same task. With Skylake-X, if you need output, you have to buy a GPU anyway.
> 
> With ThreadRipper's offerings, I don't see how Intel can maintain their monopolistic pricing. Skylake-X is an improvement, but still far from reality.


Not all workloads unfortunately. For the particular application/benchmark that I work on, there's a number of reasons for it not being suitable for GPU (Amdhal's Law, poor double-precision, poor 64-bit integer), but the biggest one is because it's memory-bound. Right now the AVX2 -> AVX512 scaling is only 10 - 30% because of the memory bottleneck.

If it were optimally written for a GPU, the performance is would be much worse because the PCIe <-> DDR4 bandwidth is only a fraction of CPU <-> DDR4 bandwidth. The data sizes that are involved here are unbounded. Though typically upwards of 10's to 100's of GB. So it's not something that will fit into GPU memory.

GPUs are best for embarrassingly parallel tasks with little to no communication or memory usage. Not everything that vectorizes falls into this category.


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hawkeye360*
> 
> What PSU wattage would be recommended for a 7900x system with a 1080ti? Would also have some SSDs, hardrive etc.


I am running a 7900x on the prime deluxe with 2 1080ti FTW3 in SLI and my rig will pull over 1100 watts from the wall under heavy load. may end up getting a 1500 PSU as I don't like running that close to the limit on my EVGA 1200P2


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Question
> 
> Is overvlocking uncore/cache of skylake-x difficult??
> Everybody seems to be running it at default 2.4-3ghz..


Not difficult just not a lot of room to OC the cache. I run mine at 3.1 at 1.2 volts. 3.2 seems like it the wall for the 7900x


----------



## OZrevhead

Are you guys finding that the 7900x clocks better for same volts over the 7820x?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OZrevhead*
> 
> Are you guys finding that the 7900x clocks better for same volts over the 7820x?


From what I have read it seems people are hitting 4.8 on the 7820x with relative ease. 4.6 seems like a common number I am seeing with the 7900x


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> The Prime Deluxe 0503 BIOS has lowered my stability of my overclock as well.
> 
> used to be able to run Cinebench at 4.8 1.28 volts and run the XTU benchmark at 4.8 as well. now just instacrash


Raja posted a fixed BIOS for the memory problems over here:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1635170/asus-x299-motherboard-series-official-support-thread/100#post_26265776


----------



## ManyThreads

Hi Guys,

Looks like I need some help again.

I updated my TUF MK 1 to BIOS 0503 like an idiot (nothing was wrong with previous BIOS, but I thought it might fix my rogue fan issues).

Anyways, if I change ANYTHING in the BIOS at all, it won't post and fails on the memory test. If I enable XMP - won't post. If I manually set 3200mhz / 1.35V for the RAM - won't post. If I enter my previous OS settings - won't post.

I tried to roll back to the old BIOS using EZ FLASH in the exact same way I successfully updated to 0503, and I get an error message saying it is not a supported file.

My computer is completely F'd unless I leave everything on default/auto with slow RAM and no OC.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Hi Guys,
> 
> Looks like I need some help again.
> 
> I updated my TUF MK 1 to BIOS 0503 like an idiot (nothing was wrong with previous BIOS, but I thought it might fix my rogue fan issues).
> 
> Anyways, if I change ANYTHING in the BIOS at all, it won't post and fails on the memory test. If I enable XMP - won't post. If I manually set 3200mhz / 1.35V for the RAM - won't post. If I enter my previous OS settings - won't post.
> 
> I tried to roll back to the old BIOS using EZ FLASH in the exact same way I successfully updated to 0503, and I get an error message saying it is not a supported file.
> 
> My computer is completely F'd unless I leave everything on default/auto with slow RAM and no OC.


Try using the BIOS from here:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Raja posted a fixed BIOS for the memory problems over here:
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1635170/asus-x299-motherboard-series-official-support-thread/100#post_26265776


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Try using the BIOS from here:


Thanks - sorry I missed that just above my post. I think it worked - I can boot with XMP now set in AI Tweaker...looks like it affects my whole system though and not just the RAM? When it turned it on ti gave me warning about CPU cores and such. Too tired now but I will try re-apply my OC tomorrow.

It did a HARD power off twice, once at the start, and one right before windows right after updating the bios and setting XMP, but it seems to be working after that, and passed my reset test (which previously made it fail).

DO NOT install 0503 if anyone is looking at that. Completely F'd my TUF MK1.


----------



## cgpyos

SOLVED

Note for guys using Autodesk software:
Autodesk Desktop App was eating 5% of processor without any reason, hence it wasn't able to turbo boost properly.



Disabling it made things work as they should.

_____________________________________________________________________
Hey there

Intel Core i7 7820x
BE QUIET! Silent Loop 240 (BW002)
ASUS Prime X299-A
KINGSTON HyperX Predator DDR4 3200MHz 32GB Kit 4x8GB XMP (HX432C16PB3K4/32)
BITFENIX Whisper M 850W



Any ideas how i got that low rankings on stock?

Windows 10 1607, power plan set to "High Performance", XMP @3000mhz 15 17 17

Thanks!


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ManyThreads*
> 
> Thanks - sorry I missed that just above my post. I think it worked - I can boot with XMP now set in AI Tweaker...looks like it affects my whole system though and not just the RAM? When it turned it on ti gave me warning about CPU cores and such. Too tired now but I will try re-apply my OC tomorrow.
> 
> It did a HARD power off twice, once at the start, and one right before windows right after updating the bios and setting XMP, but it seems to be working after that, and passed my reset test (which previously made it fail).
> 
> DO NOT install 0503 if anyone is looking at that. Completely F'd my TUF MK1.


Hello

0503 dose cause issues with less capable memory when the settings are not manually tuned. 0031 was released to address these shortcomings. 0503 provides more performance using plug n' play if the memory modules are up to the task.


----------



## sblantipodi

Coffe Lake is not compatible with X299







this is the Intel Upgrade Path?

They are so ridiculous that I really hope that AMD will break their ass.


----------



## Chargeit

This topic needs to be changed to the owners club so we get less trolls and riffraff.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> Coffe Lake is not compatible with X299
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is the Intel Upgrade Path?
> 
> They are so ridiculous that I really hope that AMD will break their ass.


Why would the enthusiast platform support main stream chips? Have any of the HEDT platforms ever?


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Why would the enthusiast platform support main stream chips? Have any of the HEDT platforms ever?


It's honestly sad to see Kaby Lake-X on x299, Skylake-X should have been its own thing with motherboard vendors targeting only that. I just hope Intel don't repeat the same mistake, I get the intent with the KB-X parts (unrestrained Kaby Lake built for overclocking) but the execution left a lot to be desired.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> This topic needs to be changed to the owners club so we get less trolls and riffraff.


I would, I just don't get the time to keep on top of the listing etc.
Unless someone wants give us a hand with it









I set my AVX back to default (4.5Ghz currently) and even running Realbench 2.54 the temps weren't any different.
AVX512 is still 4Ghz.

After 2 hours of Realbench CPU Package temps settled at 79c with a max of 84c using AVX, with a 500w total power draw.
Wouldn't want to push my luck with Prime95 though, not that I need it..


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> Coffe Lake is not compatible with X299
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is the Intel Upgrade Path?
> 
> They are so ridiculous that I really hope that AMD will break their ass.


U mean coffeelake-x?? It might Be supported in x299...

I am guessing its because they need fivr again so thats y z270 cannot run a coffeelake..


----------



## ssateneth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> U mean coffeelake-x?? It might Be supported in x299...
> 
> I am guessing its because they need fivr again so thats y z270 cannot run a coffeelake..


x299 both supports FIVR (used in the 'big' skylake-X dies) and non-FIVR (used in the smaller KBL-X dies). Part of why some KBL-X CPUs were dying when used after a SKL-X CPU was in the socket prior. But yes, if CFL-X is becomes thing, very likely.


----------



## ManyThreads

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> 0503 dose cause issues with less capable memory when the settings are not manually tuned. 0031 was released to address these shortcomings. 0503 provides more performance using plug n' play if the memory modules are up to the task.


I have Trident Z 3200 Mhz RAM, so I assume that is up to the task, but I am not sure. If I changed literally anything to do with the RAM whatsoever, the system wouldn't post. Manually setting it at 3200 & 1.35v wouldn't post either. 0031 seems to have fixed it but I still need to re-do my OC.

Does 0031 include all the upgrades of 0503 but without the RAM issues? Or is it different yet?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Any links or tips on how to OC Kabylake-X?

I've OCed Haswell/E and Skylake/Kabylake.

I'm on a Tomhawk board. I am also under water. I have set a 120mm fan stripped on so it will blow directly on the VRMs. Should keep the overheating away


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Running 7800X @4800mhz at 1.200V, cache at 1.075V @3000 and VCCIN at 1.850V.

Rest is auto, please let me know if these settings is bad, or if something else important need to be tweaked.

Getting 1570P on Cinebench R15


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> U mean coffeelake-x?? It might Be supported in x299...
> 
> I am guessing its because they need fivr again so thats y z270 cannot run a coffeelake..


it will not be supported.


----------



## BroPhilip

And what is your source for this???? I have heard that it will not be supported on z270 boards but no word on the x299 platform.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> it will not be supported.


----------



## cekim

Chuckle, there are many totally legit reasons to step up to the next chip-set (PCIE 4.0, DMI/PCH poor choices coming back to haunt us, etc...), but all of Intel's process trip-ups, sand-bags and schedule tightenings bring this chip-set up-date at a very bad time for them....

They slowed things down so that their customers became accustomed to certainly more than one generation on a given platform. They raised prices dramatically which then made it much more likely that people would try to squeeze more life out of this component or that.

Then they brought out 270 and 299 and appear ready to dump them after one generation...

They might have gotten away with it too if it weren't for those meddling kids...









(p.s. I say this with a basement full of Intel i7 and xeon chips. My last AMD was a dual-core Athlon). This is just, objectively, a [email protected]#$-up on Intel's part that comes at the bottom of a steep hill, but they were the ones that pushed the rock at the top.


----------



## BroPhilip

Have I missed something. I know the leak of not continuing z270 but why are people saying the x299 is only going to be one generation.....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Chuckle, there are many totally legit reasons to step up to the next chip-set (PCIE 4.0, DMI/PCH poor choices coming back to haunt us, etc...), but all of Intel's process trip-ups, sand-bags and schedule tightenings bring this chip-set up-date at a very bad time for them....
> 
> They slowed things down so that their customers became accustomed to certainly more than one generation on a given platform. They raised prices dramatically which then made it much more likely that people would try to squeeze more life out of this component or that.
> 
> Then they brought out 270 and 299 and appear ready to dump them after one generation...
> 
> They might have gotten away with it too if it weren't for those meddling kids...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (p.s. I say this with a basement full of Intel i7 and xeon chips. My last AMD was a dual-core Athlon). This is just, objectively, a [email protected]#$-up on Intel's part that comes at the bottom of a steep hill, but they were the ones that pushed the rock at the top.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> And what is your source for this???? I have heard that it will not be supported on z270 boards but no word on the x299 platform.


History is my source.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> History is my source.


I mean, history would support the theory of Kaby Lake-X not existing, right? Yet here we are


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> And what is your source for this???? I have heard that it will not be supported on z270 boards but no word on the x299 platform.


Asrock.... not sure why they'd say anything, much less mislead, but.... here you go...
https://www.extremetech.com/computing/253580-asrock-confirms-intels-coffee-lake-cpus-will-require-new-motherboard-socket


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Asrock.... not sure why they'd say anything, much less mislead, but.... here you go...
> https://www.extremetech.com/computing/253580-asrock-confirms-intels-coffee-lake-cpus-will-require-new-motherboard-socket


Once again this is referring to the 1151 socket not the 2066.....


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Once again this is referring to the 1151 socket not the 2066.....


That's not what they said, but admittedly, they said little...

"200 series" sand in response to the 270 question.

Yes, that leaves open the possibility that x299 will persist, I didn't say one way or the other.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> That's not what they said, but admittedly, they said little...
> 
> "200 series" sand in response to the 270 question.
> 
> Yes, that leaves open the possibility that x299 will persist, I didn't say one way or the other.


I see what you are getting at but the question was involving skylake 1151 not the x variant.


----------



## micromarx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Any links or tips on how to OC Kabylake-X?
> 
> I've OCed Haswell/E and Skylake/Kabylake.
> 
> I'm on a Tomhawk board. I am also under water. I have set a 120mm fan stripped on so it will blow directly on the VRMs. Should keep the overheating away


I'm a novice overclocker and was asking this same question myself for skylake-X.

After looking into this I got them impression that no, there aren't any specific guides for this platform just yet but I also don't think that there much that you can do differently for general overclocking between x99 & X299.

If you wanting to do extreme overclocking there might be features only available to X299 platform but I wouldn't know.

Safe voltages will be the same as they are for kabylake/skylake but the thermals (for skylake-x at least) will mostly likely stop you before you have to worry about reaching voltages that will cause CPU degradation.

I used this X99 guide and easily get 4.7 GHz @ 1.23 V on my i7-7820x

I started my own thread recently if you want more info.

If it's better that I contribute to this thread rather than my own someone can let me know


----------



## DeadSec

What about your mesh frequency? Are you going to oc the mesh too?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Yeah, OC mesh too!

I run my 7800X at 4800mhz at 1.240V.

Mesh at 3000 with the voltage at 1.075V.

Everything seems stable. Seems like this chip is decent?

Temps are under 70/around low 70s for gaming (BF1) and/or Cinebench R15/[email protected] Nacl on CPU. I notice that the 1080Ti dump alot of heat, which is making the 7800X run "hot" under gaming". 70'C at 1,250V can't be that bad.

I hit a wall around 4900 mhz. Not even 1.3V would make it stable (1.275V in bios). But I have not tested more, I probably need 1.320-1.340V. I need to delid first.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

My Ryzen 1700 versus my I7 7800X in Battlefield 1, 64 player conquest with a 1080TI 2050/+500 on mem.

I7 7800X 4800/3000: 112.5 fps min - 185.8 fps max - 142.8 fps avg I battlefield 1 - Ultra preset - 64 players conquest on Monte Grappa

R7 1700 3850: 91 fps min - 174 fps max - 115 fps avg - ultra preset - 64 players conquest - Sossions

Memory on both was the same 3200 kit Cl 16-17-17-1T 1.350V. But the Ryzen won't go past 2933, versus the 3200 on the X299.

Both system used the same SSDs, PSU, GPU etc. This was the max stable OC on both.


----------



## cgpyos

Here's my result using "per clock" method with my 7820x, be quiet silent loop 240 and ASUS PRIME-A:

Cinebench scores:


And BIOS config:


I've tracked down which of cores are more heat sensitive then others, and forced them to 4400mhz at lower voltage.


----------



## WeirdBob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cgpyos*
> 
> Here's my result using "per clock" method with my 7820x, be quiet silent loop 240 and ASUS PRIME-A:
> 
> Cinebench scores:
> 
> 
> And BIOS config:
> 
> 
> I've tracked down which of cores are more heat sensitive then others, and forced them to 4400mhz at lower voltage.


Do you use the turboboost 3 drivers to automatically pin single threaded task to the fastest cores? or something else?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cgpyos*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Here's my result using "per clock" method with my 7820x, be quiet silent loop 240 and ASUS PRIME-A:
> 
> Cinebench scores:
> 
> 
> And BIOS config:
> 
> 
> 
> I've tracked down which of cores are more heat sensitive then others, and forced them to 4400mhz at lower voltage.


I'm pretty sure if you look at the turbo boost 3.0 core list your cores are listed from best to worst. Makes me wonder is it better to go off the turbo 3.0 list or which cores are hottest/coolest.


----------



## cgpyos

AFAIK, these CPUs designed that way, that best two cores from the die go in "battle" first. Best cores also marked with * next to core name in BIOS, but only when per core overclocking is enabled.
Also it's good practice to make sure that "choosen" by Intel cores are really best. Just launch system stress test and see if they really are. They should be about 10 degrees colder than worst one (at least that was my case).


----------



## cgpyos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'm pretty sure if you look at the turbo boost 3.0 core list your cores are listed from best to worst. Makes me wonder is it better to go off the turbo 3.0 list or which cores are hottest/coolest.


Yep, you're totally right, but there is review (sadly in Russian) where "Intel Confidential" 7820x CPU's "choosen" cores were considerably worse, than couple of another ones.

Was that Intel's or reviewers mistake, i've decided to make sure for myself that best cores marked correctly









Here's review link:
https://www.overclockers.ua/motherboard/asus-prime-x299-a/


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> My Ryzen 1700 versus my I7 7800X in Battlefield 1, 64 player conquest with a 1080TI 2050/+500 on mem.
> 
> I7 7800X 4800/3000: 112.5 fps min - 185.8 fps max - 142.8 fps avg I battlefield 1 - Ultra preset - 64 players conquest on Monte Grappa
> 
> R7 1700 3850: 91 fps min - 174 fps max - 115 fps avg - ultra preset - 64 players conquest - Sossions
> 
> Memory on both was the same 3200 kit Cl 16-17-17-1T 1.350V. But the Ryzen won't go past 2933, versus the 3200 on the X299.
> 
> Both system used the same SSDs, PSU, GPU etc. This was the max stable OC on both.


You should test some more games!


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cgpyos*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Here's my result using "per clock" method with my 7820x, be quiet silent loop 240 and ASUS PRIME-A:
> 
> Cinebench scores:
> 
> 
> And BIOS config:
> 
> 
> 
> I've tracked down which of cores are more heat sensitive then others, and forced them to 4400mhz at lower voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm pretty sure if you look at the turbo boost 3.0 core list your cores are listed from best to worst. Makes me wonder is it better to go off the turbo 3.0 list or which cores are hottest/coolest.
Click to expand...

Doesn't Windows 10 scheduler run threads on all cores. Have you actually had one or two cores boost higher clock speed then the rest?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Doesn't Windows 10 scheduler run threads on all cores. Have you actually had one or two cores boost higher clock speed then the rest?


If you have the appropriate updates installed and the right BIOS options enabled, Windows will recognize the Turbo 3.0. And it will pin threads to the preferred cores. But I've also noticed that it tends to stop working once I start overclocking. Though I haven't tried to figure out exactly which setting is the one that breaks the Turbo 3.0 recognition in Windows.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Should I just uninstall turbo 3 in Windows if I'm not using it?


----------



## DeadSec

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Yeah, OC mesh too!
> 
> Temps are under 70/around low 70s for gaming (BF1) and/or Cinebench R15/[email protected] Nacl on CPU. I notice that the 1080Ti dump alot of heat, which is making the 7800X run "hot" under gaming". 70'C at 1,250V can't be that bad.
> 
> I hit a wall around 4900 mhz. Not even 1.3V would make it stable (1.275V in bios). But I have not tested more, I probably need 1.320-1.340V. I need to delid first.


Yeah man, you should definitely   the chip


----------



## GreedyMuffin

If this chip was a good OCer I would. From what I can tell. It is avg.

I went down to 4600 at 1.119V.

I am a folder, so wasting energy is not something I like. He he


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> My Ryzen 1700 versus my I7 7800X in Battlefield 1, 64 player conquest with a 1080TI 2050/+500 on mem.
> 
> I7 7800X 4800/3000: 112.5 fps min - 185.8 fps max - 142.8 fps avg I battlefield 1 - Ultra preset - 64 players conquest on Monte Grappa
> 
> R7 1700 3850: 91 fps min - 174 fps max - 115 fps avg - ultra preset - 64 players conquest - Sossions
> 
> Memory on both was the same 3200 kit Cl 16-17-17-1T 1.350V. But the Ryzen won't go past 2933, versus the 3200 on the X299.
> 
> 
> Both system used the same SSDs, PSU, GPU etc. This was the max stable OC on both.


Are you on the most recent bios with the ryzen cpu?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Should I just uninstall turbo 3 in Windows if I'm not using it?


I found it will just reinstall itself. Also some games seem to like turbo boost 3.0.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Doesn't Windows 10 scheduler run threads on all cores. Have you actually had one or two cores boost higher clock speed then the rest?


I have my cores manually oc'ed so no. Though I found that some games seemed to like having turbo boost 3.0 enabled even though they were still hitting the same clocks. Not sure if that's a bios issue or waht though I tested this on bios version 0402. I'm now on bios 0503.


----------



## cekim

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11698/intel-finalizes-skylakex-processor-specifications-18cores-44-ghz-165w-on-september-25th
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Anandtech*
> On the specification side, the higher-end CPUs get a kick up in TDP to 165W to account for more cores and the frequency that these CPUs are running at. The top Core i9-7980XE SKU will have a base frequency of 2.6 GHz but a turbo of 4.2 GHz, and a Favored Core of 4.4 GHz. The turbo will be limited to 2 cores of load, however Intel has not listed the 'all-core turbo' frequencies


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> If you have the appropriate updates installed and the right BIOS options enabled, Windows will recognize the Turbo 3.0. And it will pin threads to the preferred cores. *But I've also noticed that it tends to stop working once I start overclocking.* Though I haven't tried to figure out exactly which setting is the one that breaks the Turbo 3.0 recognition in Windows.


TB3 probably can't work once the max turbo freq exceeds the stock max turbo freq... however, once you know the "better" cores, you can set a per core OC to take advantage of the better ones.


----------



## Mysticial

Detailed Turbo frequencies: http://www.pcgamer.com/full-details-for-intels-core-i9-processor-lineup/


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Detailed Turbo frequencies: http://www.pcgamer.com/full-details-for-intels-core-i9-processor-lineup/


I don't see 2.9GHz... where did that come from?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> I don't see 2.9GHz... where did that come from?


2.9 GHz is the base clock for the 7920X. Those are the turbo speeds.

That's why a lot of us keep saying that the base frequency is kind of useless. It's the all-core turbo that matters.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> 2.9 GHz is the base clock for the 7920X. Those are the turbo speeds.
> 
> That's why a lot of us keep saying that the base frequency is kind of useless. It's the all-core turbo that matters.


and that is still a bit of a TBD based on cooling and VRM wattage, but certainly this latest dump gives us a ball-park.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> and that is still a bit of a TBD based on cooling and VRM wattage, but certainly this latest dump gives us a ball-park.


And based on TB2. About ther same multicore scaling as the 6950X launched with at stock.... but who cares about "stock".


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> And based on TB2. About ther same multicore scaling as the 6950X launched with at stock.... but who cares about "stock".


Yeah, judging by these numbers, provided the MB VRM can bring the noise and the TIM can move the funk to the IHS, It looks like they might have fabbed the chip I asked for...

Bummed by the idea of not having 2 of them on a board. I've quickly become spoiled by VMs here, VMs there, VMs everywhere! Who cares, I have more cores...

If I need all of them at once, I suspend all those VMs and blammo! I get all my cores.

This is how computing should be.









but I can run all those VMs one machine and have a killer 18 core setup for "fewer" threaded jobs.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I guess these: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?item=N82E16820231907 (G.Skill 3600mhz 4x4GB)

Are better than my current Corsair Vengance 3200 2x8GB?

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?item=N82E16820236141

I can get the G.skill cheap used and send my back for a refund. Will end up with a 40 USD leftover..









Or should I just keep my current sticks?


----------



## tistou77

The specifications of the Rampage VI Extreme are released

If no error, I think it will be the Strix or Apex or other brand for me, not want to have the high-end X299 with more USB 3.1 gen1 ports with third-party controllers ASMedia (performance too poor compared to the Intel controller)


----------



## Piospi

Hello. I need help in the RAM choice for my i9 7900X. What is better for gaming? Fast ram or low CL?

G.Skill Trident Z DDR4, 4x8GB, 3600, CL16 (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZSW) CL16-16-16-36 is good choice for my Skylake-X? Or something else?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Piospi*
> 
> Hello. I need help in the RAM choice for my i9 7900X. What is better for gaming? Fast ram or low CL?
> 
> G.Skill Trident Z DDR4, 4x8GB, 3600, CL16 (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZSW) CL16-16-16-36 is good choice for my Skylake-X? Or something else?


That is a good choice. Mhz seem to have more of an impact on gaming than timings, but you still want good timings.

That kit has great timings and speed.


----------



## Piospi

Thank you! to make sure - maybe take that kit - G.Skill Trident Z DDR4, 4x8GB, 4000MHz, CL18? Or not?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Piospi*
> 
> Thank you! to make sure - maybe take that kit - G.Skill Trident Z DDR4, 4x8GB, 4000MHz, CL18? Or not?


Not worth the price premium IMO.

You might be able to get similar speeds out of the 3600 kit with some tweaks.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I can get a G.skill RIpjaw V 3600 used, and return my Corsair 3200 kit? I will end up with 40 USD left, and get 4x4GB instead of the 2x8GB I got now..

Should I do it? Taking advantage of X299's quad-channel on this 7800X.


----------



## Piospi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Not worth the price premium IMO.
> 
> You might be able to get similar speeds out of the 3600 kit with some tweaks.


Thank you!


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I can get a G.skill RIpjaw V 3600 used, and return my Corsair 3200 kit? I will end up with 40 USD left, and get 4x4GB instead of the 2x8GB I got now..
> 
> Should I do it? Taking advantage of X299's quad-channel on this 7800X.


What's the timings of each kit? If it's 3600 cl18 vs 3200 cl16 for instance I wouldn't do that.

But at the same time I feel you. I am using dual channel on my build and I regret that purchase for sure lol. It just looks weird in my motherboard.

Unless you are doing memory intensive tasks I don't think it matters. Quad channel doesn't make a difference in gaming either from what I've seen.

So unless having two sticks just bothers you like it does me I don't think it's worth the hassle.


----------



## cstkl1

Finally manage to get a 7820x. Just came out. Now waiting for ek to ship da monoblock.


----------



## magnusavr

Testing my new system:
7800x
msi x299 tomahawk arctic
GSkill TridentZ RGB 3600 16-16-36-32GB QC
Kraken x62.

Mesh set at 3000 with Auto volt.
Memory XMP 3600 16-16-16-36 1.35v.
Kraken set to mode: Silent.
Windows 10 1703 all latest updates and drivers.
Running Realbench 2.54 stress test with 32GB.

I increased voltage in 0.025 voltage intervals.

4600 1.15v seems stable with short prime 26.6 (no avx) testing and intel xtu. But failed Realbench stress test. 1.175 bluescreen. Needed 1.2v to pass.

4500 Blue screen with 1.125v during stress test. Needed 1.15v to pass Realbench stress test. Max temp 78C

Guess I am settling at 4500 1.15v due to temp. Probably better. Or should I go with 4600 then do some -avx offset?

I guess Realbench is the way to go? So heavy due to handbrake avx? I also belive realbench will ignore avx offset in the bios if I try to set it.

Anyone got a clue how to set offset voltage instead of the locked 1.15v? Never done it.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> What's the timings of each kit? If it's 3600 cl18 vs 3200 cl16 for instance I wouldn't do that.
> 
> But at the same time I feel you. I am using dual channel on my build and I regret that purchase for sure lol. It just looks weird in my motherboard.
> 
> Unless you are doing memory intensive tasks I don't think it matters. Quad channel doesn't make a difference in gaming either from what I've seen.
> 
> So unless having two sticks just bothers you like it does me I don't think it's worth the hassle.


The G.skill is 3600 17-18-18-38 4x4GB.

The Vengance LED is 3200 16-18-18-36 2x8GB.


----------



## OZrevhead

Guys, have any of you found that your 7820x (and possibly other skylake-x) score poorly in time spy and 3D11? I love benching and my 5960x was much stronger in these (7000 physics points in 3D11 and 1000 in time spy). Have any of you found this too? In fire strike my 7820x at daily 4700 beats my maxed 5960x by 500 points, with 300 MHz in reserve.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OZrevhead*
> 
> Guys, have any of you found that your 7820x (and possibly other skylake-x) score poorly in time spy and 3D11? I love benching and my 5960x was much stronger in these (7000 physics points in 3D11 and 1000 in time spy). Have any of you found this too? In fire strike my 7820x at daily 4700 beats my maxed 5960x by 500 points, with 300 MHz in reserve.


Did you check for Skylake X Phantom Throttling LINK: http://www.overclock.net/t/1634045/skylake-x-phantom-throttling


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OZrevhead*
> 
> Guys, have any of you found that your 7820x (and possibly other skylake-x) score poorly in time spy and 3D11? I love benching and my 5960x was much stronger in these (7000 physics points in 3D11 and 1000 in time spy). Have any of you found this too? In fire strike my 7820x at daily 4700 beats my maxed 5960x by 500 points, with 300 MHz in reserve.


What was your exact score in Timespy? Link? Mine scored 11,906 @ 4.7GHz, which seemed about right to me...

http://www.3dmark.com/spy/2035938


----------



## OZrevhead

That seems about what I expected, mine is down for some reason (10800 physics at 4700, cache 3000, ram at 4000-16-16-16-28 1T). My best with my 5960x was 11500 physics. I will link it after I get home from work.










What about 3D11? My 5960x got 24k physics but my 7820x gets 16k... I hardly beat my mates Ryzen 1700 ...


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OZrevhead*
> 
> That seems about what I expected, mine is down for some reason (10800 physics at 4700, cache 3000, ram at 4000-16-16-16-28 1T). My best with my 5960x was 11500 physics. I will link it after I get home from work.


That is definitely weird. What board and what bios? That run was at 4.7GHz, Cache 3200, ram 3600 16-16-16-36 2T.

Here it is at 5.0GHz, Cache 3200, ram 3600 16-16-16-36 1T... CPU was 12,512...
http://www.3dmark.com/spy/2153450


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Ah so my 9800 Time Spy is right for the 7820x at 4.5Ghz.

The run just now got a CPU result of 10806, with 4.5Ghz/3Ghz Cache.
So normal.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/21485890?


----------



## EarlyAdopter

I've got my 7820x running at 4.6/4.7/4.8 (8c/4c/2c) with mesh OC to 3.0Ghz. RAM is DDR4-3200 CL14. With GPU 1080 Ti at stock (100% power, +0/+0):

3DMark Time Spy 10014 (graphics 9843, CPU 11109)
3DMark Firestrike Normal 22631 (graphics 27724, physics 24312)
3DMark Firestrike Ultra 7133 (graphics 7018, physics 23504)
Unigine Superposition 1080p Medium 18210
Unigine Superposition 1080p Extreme 5812
Unigine Superposition 4K Optimized 9247


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EarlyAdopter*
> 
> I've got my 7820x running at 4.6/4.7/4.8 (8c/4c/2c) with mesh OC to 3.0Ghz. RAM is DDR4-3200 CL14. With GPU 1080 Ti at stock (100% power, +0/+0):
> 
> 3DMark Time Spy 10014 (graphics 9843, CPU 11109)
> 3DMark Firestrike Normal 22631 (graphics 27724, physics 24312)
> 3DMark Firestrike Ultra 7133 (graphics 7018, physics 23504)
> Unigine Superposition 1080p Medium 18210
> Unigine Superposition 1080p Extreme 5812
> Unigine Superposition 4K Optimized 9247


Can you post a screenshot of the staggered clock speeds under load?


----------



## TheFallenDeity

@tahoedust

Hey man, what is your Mesh voltage that you're running at 3200? I need to get mine up more. I can get 3000 at stock voltage but if you can share where I should aim for at 3200 that'd be great!


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheFallenDeity*
> 
> @tahoedust
> 
> Hey man, what is your Mesh voltage that you're running at 3200? I need to get mine up more. I can get 3000 at stock voltage but if you can share where I should aim for at 3200 that'd be great!


I left it on Auto and it runs at 1.188v. I am comfortable with my temps, so I have made no attempt at lowering it.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Is 80'C max/on package OK for 24/7?

I am running 4800 at 1.220-1.240V.


----------



## TahoeDust

These Mesh discussions sparked my curiosity about how mesh voltage effects temps. I have good baseline tests with my mesh at 3200 @ 1.188v.
I switched to offset and decreased the voltage to 1.155v. I am running some stability/temp tests now to see a) if it is still stable at this voltage and b) how did it affect overall temps. I'll let Realbench cruise for 2hrs and see what is what.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> These Mesh discussions sparked my curiosity about how mesh voltage effects temps. I have good baseline tests with my mesh at 3200 @ 1.188v.
> I switched to offset and decreased the voltage to 1.155v. I am running some stability/temp tests now to see a) if it is still stable at this voltage and b) how did it affect overall temps. I'll let Realbench cruise for 2hrs and see what is what.


Got me curious on that as well
For ring/uncore on previous cpus gen... best way to test stability was commandline linpack with ht off. Consistency of gflops etc.

Btw has/is anyone here delided their cpu etc
Hopeling to run bare die mount.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Got me curious on that as well
> For ring/uncore on previous cpus gen... best way to test stability was commandline linpack with ht off. Consistency of gflops etc.
> 
> Btw has/is anyone here delided their cpu etc
> Hopeling to run bare die mount.


I sent mine to Silicon Lottery to have it delidded.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I sent mine to Silicon Lottery to have it delidded.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I sent mine to Silicon Lottery to have it delidded.


Too far for me.
Hmm thinking of razor it myself.
But looking at the delided pics seem vice safer n only cam be hammered from one position to avoid those fivr etc.


----------



## EarlyAdopter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Can you post a screenshot of the staggered clock speeds under load?


Sure. Here are 8 core, 3 core, and 1 core workloads running. Note, I didn't do 4 core and 2 core because while those will boost to their 47x and 48x multipliers occasionally, system background processes will kick in on a 5th or 3rd idle core and knock the multipliers back down a notch.

Also, the boost behavior is very workload specific. Cinebench, for example, only boosts to 46x regardless of the number of threads selected. Prime95 v26.6 and AIDA64, I only see 47x max, even with low threadcounts set. Not sure why that's the case with Cinebench (does it use AVX?). In the case of Prime95 I think it has to do with the fact that the Prime95 threads move around a bunch and are very short lived, so don't sustain enough on a single core continuously to boost all the way up to 48x. Luxmark on the otherhand, consistently boosts to 48x. Hope that helps.


----------



## TahoeDust

So....

Lowering mesh voltage by .033v and turning LLC down one notch, lowered max temps in 2hrs of Realbench by *4c* maxing out at 77c. I'm pretty shocked. That is more than I was expecting. I am going to give it two hours of Prime95 with AVX and see what it there. I have a good baseline of the same test run last week.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Too far for me.
> Hmm thinking of razor it myself.
> But looking at the delided pics seem vice safer n only cam be hammered from one position to avoid those fivr etc.


Razor would scare me. If I was doing it myslef, I would buy this...
https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-delid-die-mate-x-fsd8-020.html


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EarlyAdopter*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Can you post a screenshot of the staggered clock speeds under load?
> 
> 
> 
> Sure. Here are 8 core, 3 core, and 1 core workloads running. Note, I didn't do 4 core and 2 core because while those will boost to their 47x and 48x multipliers occasionally, system background processes will kick in on a 5th or 3rd idle core and knock the multipliers back down a notch.
> 
> Also, the boost behavior is very workload specific. Cinebench, for example, only boosts to 46x regardless of the number of threads selected. Prime95 v26.6 and AIDA64, I only see 47x max, even with low threadcounts set. Not sure why that's the case with Cinebench (does it use AVX?). In the case of Prime95 I think it has to do with the fact that the Prime95 threads move around a bunch and are very short lived, so don't sustain enough on a single core continuously to boost all the way up to 48x. Luxmark on the otherhand, consistently boosts to 48x. Hope that helps.
Click to expand...

I don't see the turbo multipliers you set 4.6/4.7/4.8 (8c/4c/2c)?


----------



## EarlyAdopter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't see the turbo multipliers you set 4.6/4.7/4.8 (8c/4c/2c)?


Not sure what you're missing (or what I'm missing?) but the first screen cap showed all 8 cores loaded, which runs the cores at 4.6Ghz (46x multiplier). The second screencap showed 3-4 cores loaded, which boosts those cores to 4.7Ghz (47x). The last screencap showed 1-2 cores loaded, with those cores boosting to 4.8Ghz (48x).

Here is a screencap of the Turboboost settings in my BIOS (Gigabyte Gaming 9). The first column of numbers is what I've set for my overclock. The second column of numbers are the stock, default values.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EarlyAdopter*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't see the turbo multipliers you set 4.6/4.7/4.8 (8c/4c/2c)?
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure what you're missing (or what I'm missing?) but the first screen cap showed all 8 cores loaded, which runs the cores at 4.6Ghz (46x multiplier). The second screencap showed 3-4 cores loaded, which boosts those cores to 4.7Ghz (47x). The last screencap showed 1-2 cores loaded, with those cores boosting to 4.8Ghz (48x).
> 
> Here is a screencap of the Turboboost settings in my BIOS (Gigabyte Gaming 9). The first column of numbers is what I've set for my overclock. The second column of numbers are the stock, default values.
Click to expand...

I see. How did you load the separate cores individually?


----------



## TahoeDust

This is pretty surprising. Look at the difference lowering mesh voltage by .033v (still at 3200MHz) and turning down LLC one notch made in temps. All other setting are the same. As you can see, the core voltage is unchanged, and comparing the average and peak watts, they are almost identical ~1% lower. But look at those temps! Max and average both dropped by *7c*. I really did not think the mesh voltage affected temps this much.

Before lowering LLC and Mesh...


After...


----------



## EarlyAdopter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I don't see the turbo multipliers you set 4.6/4.7/4.8 (8c/4c/2c)?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I see. How did you load the separate cores individually?


To get a 3 core workload, I just set the threadcount to 3 in Prime95 and let Windows steer the threads. In AIDA64 it's a bit trickier as you have to use a bitmask to specify how many and which cores you want to stress.

For 1 core, Luxmark works great as it only runs one thread, which is long-lived and maxes out the core to 100% so it boosts nicely. Again, Windows 10 does a decent job of steering the thread to one of the best cores and leaves it there for a long while.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> This is pretty surprising. Look at the difference lowering mesh voltage by .033v (still at 3200MHz) and turning down LLC one notch made in temps. All other setting are the same. As you can see, the core voltage is unchanged, and comparing the average and peak watts, they are almost identical ~1% lower. But look at those temps! Max and average both dropped by *7c*. I really did not think the mesh voltage affected temps this much.
> 
> Before lowering LLC and Mesh...
> 
> 
> After...


Afaik

Llc should be affecting your vccin/input voltage hence all da voltage on da chip will be affected


----------



## cgpyos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> This is pretty surprising. Look at the difference lowering mesh voltage by .033v (still at 3200MHz) and turning down LLC one notch made in temps. All other setting are the same. As you can see, the core voltage is unchanged, and comparing the average and peak watts, they are almost identical ~1% lower. But look at those temps! Max and average both dropped by *7c*. I really did not think the mesh voltage affected temps this much.
> 
> Before lowering LLC and Mesh...
> 
> 
> After...


hey, where can i find LLC setting in Asus bios? How it should be called?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cgpyos*
> 
> hey, where can i find LLC setting in Asus bios? How it should be called?


Right here:


----------



## Scotty99

Threadripper reviews out Only consumes 35w more power than a 7900x and stays nearly 20c cooler:





Kinda surprising tbh with all those extra cores.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Threadripper reviews out Only consumes 35w more power than a 7900x and stays nearly 20c cooler:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kinda surprising tbh with all those extra cores.


More suprised on dat software to be honest

Looks damn good game mode etc.

Btw since TR are binned ryzens

Doesnt this make ppl getting 1700-1800x & pairing with highend x370 with them praying to da heathen overclocking gods of winning da silicon lottery kindda stupid cause you are getting rejected cpus that couldnt pass threadripper binning??


----------



## Kimir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Threadripper reviews out Only consumes 35w more power than a 7900x and stays nearly 20c cooler:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kinda surprising tbh with all those extra cores.


It's not cooler at all. AMD use offset in temperature. I've read that to get real temperature on the other rizen you have to add 22°c.


----------



## carlhil2




----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*


Errr 5464mb quad channel ram??????


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Someone mentioned that the performance differences in the various battlefield maps varied alot, so new testing and the results are..

I7 7800X, MSI X299 Tomhawk, 2x8GB Corsair Vengance 3200 mhz, 1080Ti, AX1500I, Samsung 840 Pro, Windows 10

R7 1700, X370 Crosshair 6, 2x8GB Corsair Vengance 3200 mhz, 1080Ti, AX1500I, Samsung 840 Pro, Windows 10

I7 7800X: Min FPS 114 - Max FPS 173 - Avg FPS 141 - 64 players Conquest on Soissons - Ultra preset - 1440P

R7 1700: MIN FPS 91 - Max FPS 174 - Avg FPS 115 - 64 players Conquest on Soissons - Ultra preset - 1440P

Ryzen at 3850/2933 on mem - GPU at 2050/+500

SK-X at 4700/3000 and 3200 on mem - GPU at 2050/+500


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Someone mentioned that the performance differences in the various battlefield maps varied alot, so new testing and the results are..
> 
> I7 7800X, MSI X299 Tomhawk, 2x8GB Corsair Vengance 3200 mhz, 1080Ti, AX1500I, Samsung 840 Pro, Windows 10
> 
> R7 1700, X370 Crosshair 6, 2x8GB Corsair Vengance 3200 mhz, 1080Ti, AX1500I, Samsung 840 Pro, Windows 10
> 
> I7 7800X: Min FPS 114 - Max FPS 173 - Avg FPS 141 - 64 players Conquest on Soissons - Ultra preset - 1440P
> 
> R7 1700: MIN FPS 91 - Max FPS 174 - Avg FPS 115 - 64 players Conquest on Soissons - Ultra preset - 1440P
> 
> Ryzen at 3850/2933 on mem - GPU at 2050/+500
> 
> SK-X at 4700/3000 and 3200 on mem - GPU at 2050/+500


Please test on Amiens. That map will chew up any number of cores.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Sadly the Ryzen system is sold. I can still do number on my system if that's wanted.

The numbers were consistent over several maps. So this was not a one time scenario for both systems. The Ryzen system is actually 22-25% behind.


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Errr 5464mb quad channel ram??????


maxmem


----------



## Pandora's Box

Jumping in on Skylake-X

Ordered a 7820X and a Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 9 motherboard.

I was going to go Threadripper 1950X but the gaming performance was a little disappointing to me, and that's what I will primarily be using this build for. The whole gaming mode vs creation mode switching on Threadripper is a huge annoyance factor to me.

I have 2 Samsung 960 Pro 1TB NVMe drives ready to go along with a Thermaltake P3 Case (Red and Tempered Glass Upgrade) along with a Thermaltake Riing 360mm AIO for the CPU. Also have G.SKILL 32GB (4 x 8GB) Ripjaws V (DDR4-3200 @ 14-14-14-34) memory for the build (F4-3200C14Q-32GVK). Will be using the MSI Gaming X 1080 Ti, Samsung 950 Pro 512GB, and EVGA SuperNova T2, 80+ Titanium 1000W PSU from my current build.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*


So, on LN2 you've almost caught up with me:


----------



## cekim

forum is confused... sorry


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Doesnt this make ppl getting 1700-1800x & pairing with highend x370 with them praying to da heathen overclocking gods of winning da silicon lottery kindda stupid cause you are getting rejected cpus that couldnt pass threadripper binning??


I guess you could say the same thing about 7800x/7820x, which are essentially reject 7900xs


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> maxmem


Ah.. da benching tweaks
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> I guess you could say the same thing about 7800x/7820x, which are essentially reject 7900xs


Afaik intel doesnt bin down on skylake X hence da mesh topology hence u dont see disabled cores etc

Amd on ther hand..


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> I guess you could say the same thing about 7800x/7820x, which are essentially reject 7900xs


My 7820x sure does not clock like a binned down chip...


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> I guess you could say the same thing about 7800x/7820x, which are essentially reject 7900xs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My 7820x sure does not clock like a binned down chip...
Click to expand...

Well if the 7800x/7820x uses the same die size as the 7900x there could be non functions parts of the die like cores, so then they bin down for that reason. When the dies are the same size for the different range of processors they cost the same to make and there are different levels of functioning units after production.

Semiconductor manufacturing is an imprecise process, sometimes achieving as low as 30% yield.[2] Defects in manufacturing are not always fatal, however; in many cases it is possible to salvage part of a failed batch of integrated circuits by modifying performance characteristics. For example, by reducing the clock frequency or disabling non-critical parts that are defective, the parts can be sold at a lower price, fulfilling the needs of lower-end market segments.[3][4]

This practice occurs throughout the semiconductor industry on products such as CPUs, RAM, and GPUs.[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_binning


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> My 7820x sure does not clock like a binned down chip...


Yup that's what I've said previously, the remaining cores might actually clock higher than a "full" 7900x, but it still has 2 disabled cores so they _technically_ bin down for 7820x/7800x.


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Yup that's what I've said previously, the remaining cores might actually clock higher than a "full" 7900x, but it still has 2 disabled cores so they _technically_ bin down for 7820x/7800x.


Question is, on fully functional dies do they deactivate the 2/4 of the worst or the best cores to make 7800X/7820X







- or is it completely random.
Tending towards random.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

-delete-


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Ok, I don't know if this is normal because it wasn't on my x99 setup.

With my voltages what I'm finding is I have to set a offset and a Additional Turbo Mode Core Voltage.
If I don't my temps are 10c higher than when I leave the Additional Turbo voltage on Auto

Now the voltages don't read higher on HWiNFO64, but the temps do, I've tested it multiple times.
AVX has to be offset when the Additional Turbo voltage is left at Auto, where I don't if I set a voltage.

This is what I've got set with gives me a Package Temp of 77c with Realbench 2.54 no AVX offset 4.5Ghz/3Ghz Mesh.


Additional Turbo voltage on auto I get 89c unless I offset the AVX.

What am I missing, I have SVID off, setting just the Addition Turbo voltage gives me a voltage of 1.23v not matter what I put in there.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Yup that's what I've said previously, the remaining cores might actually clock higher than a "full" 7900x, but it still has 2 disabled cores so they _technically_ bin down for 7820x/7800x.
> 
> 
> 
> Question is, on fully functional dies do they deactivate the 2/4 of the worst or the best cores to make 7800X/7820X
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - or is it completely random.
> Tending towards random.
Click to expand...

Product binning
Semiconductor manufacturing is an imprecise process, sometimes achieving as low as 30% yield.[2] Defects in manufacturing are not always fatal, however; in many cases it is possible to salvage part of a failed batch of integrated circuits by modifying performance characteristics. For example, by reducing the clock frequency or disabling non-critical parts that are defective, the parts can be sold at a lower price, fulfilling the needs of lower-end market segments.[3][4]

This practice occurs throughout the semiconductor industry on products such as CPUs, RAM, and GPUs.[4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_binning


----------



## Raghar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Product binning
> 
> This practice occurs throughout the semiconductor industry on products such as CPUs, RAM, and GPUs.[4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_binning


Why are you quoting wikipedia? We are there overclocking site full of hillbillies who knows best, we don't need a stinky wikipedia.

If you want to write stuff about intricacies of CPU binning full of examples and facts you obtained in industry, or heard from people who worked in industry and can't spill the beans because it would be violation of work conduct, you are free to write your own two pages of text.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Ok, I don't know if this is normal because it wasn't on my x99 setup.
> 
> With my voltages what I'm finding is I have to set a offset and a Additional Turbo Mode Core Voltage.
> If I don't my temps are 10c higher than when I leave the Additional Turbo voltage on Auto
> 
> Now the voltages don't read higher on HWiNFO64, but the temps do, I've tested it multiple times.
> AVX has to be offset when the Additional Turbo voltage is left at Auto, where I don't if I set a voltage.
> 
> This is what I've got set with gives me a Package Temp of 77c with Realbench 2.54 no AVX offset 4.5Ghz/3Ghz Mesh.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Additional Turbo voltage on auto I get 89c unless I offset the AVX.
> 
> What am I missing, I have SVID off, setting just the Addition Turbo voltage gives me a voltage of 1.23v not matter what I put in there.


In X99 I set offset to auto and Turbo to my high vcore


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> In X99 I set offset to auto and Turbo to my high vcore


Yeah, but mine won't stick.
I set Turbo to 1.090v, I get 1.28v no matter what I do.
Setting the negative offset gets me 1.190v.

Also which CPU Package temp is right?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Does these temp seem high for a stock system with a custom loop..? I have a XTX360, XT240 + D5 pump.

Both CPU and GPU under water and both is folding.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Product binning
> Semiconductor manufacturing is an imprecise process, sometimes achieving as low as 30% yield.[2] Defects in manufacturing are not always fatal, however; in many cases it is possible to salvage part of a failed batch of integrated circuits by modifying performance characteristics. For example, by reducing the clock frequency or disabling non-critical parts that are defective, the parts can be sold at a lower price, fulfilling the needs of lower-end market segments.[3][4]
> 
> This practice occurs throughout the semiconductor industry on products such as CPUs, RAM, and GPUs.[4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_binning


Don't be useless man


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Yeah, but mine won't stick.
> I set Turbo to 1.090v, I get 1.28v no matter what I do.
> Setting the negative offset gets me 1.190v.
> 
> Also which CPU Package temp is right?


Hello

Adaptive voltage cannot be forced to a value lower than default. The word "Additional" in that field is an accurate description of what the setting does.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Yeah, but mine won't stick.
> I set Turbo to 1.090v, I get 1.28v no matter what I do.
> Setting the negative offset gets me 1.190v.
> 
> Also which CPU Package temp is right?


Praz mentioned this and I noticed it in my own tests.

Basically there's a minimal voltage that the system will default to. So the setting for "additional turbo mode cpu core voltage" can be left to auto. Start up windows and see what it's at. If you need less voltage then subtract a negative offset. If you need more voltage you can add a positive offset.

I'm not 100% sure about when you should use additional turbo mode cpu core voltage.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raghar*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Product binning
> 
> This practice occurs throughout the semiconductor industry on products such as CPUs, RAM, and GPUs.[4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_binning
> 
> 
> 
> Why are you quoting wikipedia? We are there overclocking site full of hillbillies who knows best, we don't need a stinky wikipedia.
> 
> If you want to write stuff about intricacies of CPU binning full of examples and facts you obtained in industry, or heard from people who worked in industry and can't spill the beans because it would be violation of work conduct, you are free to write your own two pages of text.
Click to expand...

The reason I quote from Wikipedia it saves me time from regurgitating information that is well known from the begging of semiconductor industry. Do you have a problem with what Wikipedia quotes?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Product binning
> Semiconductor manufacturing is an imprecise process, sometimes achieving as low as 30% yield.[2] Defects in manufacturing are not always fatal, however; in many cases it is possible to salvage part of a failed batch of integrated circuits by modifying performance characteristics. For example, by reducing the clock frequency or disabling non-critical parts that are defective, the parts can be sold at a lower price, fulfilling the needs of lower-end market segments.[3][4]
> 
> This practice occurs throughout the semiconductor industry on products such as CPUs, RAM, and GPUs.[4 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_binning
> 
> 
> 
> Don't be useless man
Click to expand...

People like you are useless quoiting me, at least I do a lot more then you have don for that question.


----------



## TahoeDust

Looks like original findings concerning Mesh voltage and package temps were not repeatable. After repeated tests I have determined the temp difference in lowering mesh voltage and LLC to be 2c. Not terrible, but not earth shattering.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*


Man cores or speed selection is not random, def chosen without method or conscious decision.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Looks like original findings concerning Mesh voltage and package temps were not repeatable. After repeated tests I have determined the temp difference in lowering mesh voltage and LLC to be 2c. Not terrible, but not earth shattering.


On my 7900X for the workloads I was testing, increasing the mesh from 2.4 -> 3.2 without touching voltages led to an increase from 250W -> 300W.. The workload was extremely bottlenecked by the L3 bandwidth. Overclocking the L3 reduced that bottleneck thereby allowing the code to better utilize the core itself - thus a secondary increase in power consumption.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> On my 7900X for the workloads I was testing, increasing the mesh from 2.4 -> 3.2 without touching voltages led to an increase from 250W -> 300W.. The workload was extremely bottlenecked by the L3 bandwidth. Overclocking the L3 reduced that bottleneck thereby allowing the code to better utilize the core itself - thus a secondary increase in power consumption.


Interesting. I did not test temp difference while changing mesh speed, only mesh voltage. From 3.2GHz at 1.188v to 3.2GHz at 1.155v. 1.188v is what was commanded when voltage was set to "Auto".


----------



## TahoeDust

The more I use this platform, the more I get frustrated with the original reviews, both in print and YouTube.

All of the CPU and Temp issues were caused by these guys never bothering to set a reasonable AVX offset. I mean 4.5GHz+ of AVX on 8+ cores is an insane demand. With the AVX offset to limit these chips to ~4.3GHz durring AVX instructions CPU Temps and VRM temps are no issue. _Only_ allowing these chips to run 4.3GHz of full blown AVX is still faster AVX processing than anything at the market.

The memory latency with a little teaking, while still not up to 7700k level, can get to around 72ns Memory and 16ns L3...paired super high bandwidth.

Not to mention that 4.8GHz+ on 8 cores at the kind of IPC this chips have is wickedly fast. Literally like two 7700ks.

I really really wish I could benchmark my machine the way it is currently setup against a 7700k in gaming. If anyone has a 7700k @ ~4.8GHZ with a 1080ti (at stock clock) and knows of some gaming benchmarks we can run, hit me up and we can compare. I bet performance is pretty close.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> The more I use this platform, the more I get frustrated with the original reviews, both in print and YouTube.
> 
> All of the CPU and Temp issues were caused by these guys never bothering to set a reasonable AVX offset. I mean 4.5GHz+ of AVX on 8+ cores is an insane demand. With the AVX offset to limit these chips to ~4.3GHz durring AVX instructions CPU Temps and VRM temps are no issue. _Only_ allowing these chips to run 4.3GHz of full blown AVX is still faster AVX processing than anything at the market.
> 
> The memory latency with a little teaking, while still not up to 7700k level, can get to around 72ns Memory and 16ns L3...paired super high bandwidth.
> 
> Not to mention that 4.8GHz+ on 8 cores at the kind of IPC this chips have is wickedly fast. Literally like two 7700ks.
> 
> I really really wish I could benchmark my machine the way it is currently setup against a 7700k in gaming. If anyone has a 7700k @ ~4.8GHZ with a 1080ti (at stock clock) and knows of some gaming benchmarks we can run, hit me up and we can compare. I bet performance is pretty close.


I also love how everyone's view of the platform rests on the first reviews during the first week it came out. And everyone keeps slinging those Hardware Unboxed videos around that don't really line up with any other benchmarks that came out around the same time.


----------



## Urtie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> The more I use this platform, the more I get frustrated with the original reviews, both in print and YouTube.
> 
> All of the CPU and Temp issues were caused by these guys never bothering to set a reasonable AVX offset. I mean 4.5GHz+ of AVX on 8+ cores is an insane demand. With the AVX offset to limit these chips to ~4.3GHz durring AVX instructions CPU Temps and VRM temps are no issue. _Only_ allowing these chips to run 4.3GHz of full blown AVX is still faster AVX processing than anything at the market.
> 
> The memory latency with a little teaking, while still not up to 7700k level, can get to around 72ns Memory and 16ns L3...paired super high bandwidth.
> 
> Not to mention that 4.8GHz+ on 8 cores at the kind of IPC this chips have is wickedly fast. Literally like two 7700ks.
> 
> I really really wish I could benchmark my machine the way it is currently setup against a 7700k in gaming. If anyone has a 7700k @ ~4.8GHZ with a 1080ti (at stock clock) and knows of some gaming benchmarks we can run, hit me up and we can compare. I bet performance is pretty close.


I'd like to see that! My 7820X is sitting in the packaging for another few weeks, and it would let me live vicariously through benchmarks to hold me over.


----------



## Pandora's Box




----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> The more I use this platform, the more I get frustrated with the original reviews, both in print and YouTube.
> 
> All of the CPU and Temp issues were caused by these guys never bothering to set a reasonable AVX offset. I mean 4.5GHz+ of AVX on 8+ cores is an insane demand. With the AVX offset to limit these chips to ~4.3GHz durring AVX instructions CPU Temps and VRM temps are no issue. _Only_ allowing these chips to run 4.3GHz of full blown AVX is still faster AVX processing than anything at the market.
> 
> The memory latency with a little teaking, while still not up to 7700k level, can get to around 72ns Memory and 16ns L3...paired super high bandwidth.
> 
> Not to mention that 4.8GHz+ on 8 cores at the kind of IPC this chips have is wickedly fast. Literally like two 7700ks.
> 
> I really really wish I could benchmark my machine the way it is currently setup against a 7700k in gaming. If anyone has a 7700k @ ~4.8GHZ with a 1080ti (at stock clock) and knows of some gaming benchmarks we can run, hit me up and we can compare. I bet performance is pretty close.


Same feeling. Which I've had since day 2 of building the box. Skylake X has a lot of bad press. Some valid, some overblown, some just wrong.

Here's my analysis of all the negatives about Skylake X off the top of my head.

*VRM Disaster:* Somewhat overblown.

This is true only on the motherboards with crappy VRM heatsinks. And also only true if you've delidded and are running a high overclock. Otherwise, you will hit TjMax long before you hit VRM throttling. The Gigabyte Gaming 7 and 9 boards were available since launch and have the best VRM sinks among those available at launch.

*Pigeon Poop:* Definitely true.

Shame on you Intel. I hope AMD eats you alive until you fix this.

*Market segmentation on PCIe lanes:* Definitely true.

Shame on you Intel. I hope AMD eats you alive until you fix this.

*VROC NVMe Key:* Definitely true.

Shame on you Intel. I hope AMD eats you alive until you fix this.

*Skylake X runs really hot:* Depends

This one is complicated. "Skylake X is hot" only makes sense when you have something to compare to.

*Skylake X is hot compared to Ryzen overall.* True. But only because Ryzen won't overclock above 4 GHz. And 4 GHz is not enough to make Ryzen run very hot.
*Skylake X is hot compared to Ryzen at the same frequency.* Stop trying to run AVX and AVX512 at the same frequency as normal code. Ryzen runs AVX at half speed and can't run AVX512 at all so it's not a fair comparison. Unfortunately, mobo manufacturers haven't gotten this message as some (Gigabyte) willingly zero out these offsets.
*Skylake X is hot compared to Kaby Lake.* There's twice as many cores. So twice as much power draw. What do you expect?
*Skylake X overpowers even large AIOs at stock.* Shame on you mobo manufacturers for ignoring the AVX and AVX512 offsets.
*Prime95 stress-test uses AVX512. So if it passes that, it's AVX512-stable:* False

No it does not. The latest version of Prime95 adds AVX512 support, but only for trial factoring - not the FFT stress-tests. The FFT stress-tests are still using AVX. And looking over at Mersenneforum where the author of Prime95 lives, he hasn't made much progress on AVX512 yet.

Therefore, the latest Prime95 running AVX small FFTs does not generate maximum load/heat/power-draw on the processor. You need something that actually does support AVX512.

*Phantom Throttling:* True.

This is something I've spent a lot of time investigating. And it affects some motherboards more than others. (Gigabyte seems to have it the worst according to Silicon Lottery.) If Phantom Throttling is intentional by Intel - shame on them.

*Only the Core i9s have the full AVX512:* False

Every single reviewer so far has said that the 7800X and 7820X have the extra FMA disabled and therefore half the AVX512 throughput. This is not true. And it has been confirmed from multiple sources using benchmarks that all of the desktop Skylake X chips have both FMAs and therefore the full AVX512.

I

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/896020796656803841 about this and they said they got their information directly from Intel. So either Intel lied to us, or there was some miscommunication going on.

*Skylake X is overpriced:* Subjective

Personally, I will say yes.

*Skylake X sucks for gaming:* Depends

Unless you want 2/3-way SLI or Crossfire, you're on the wrong platform.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Praz mentioned this and I noticed it in my own tests.
> 
> Basically there's a minimal voltage that the system will default to. So the setting for "additional turbo mode cpu core voltage" can be left to auto. Start up windows and see what it's at. If you need less voltage then subtract a negative offset. If you need more voltage you can add a positive offset.
> 
> I'm not 100% sure about when you should use additional turbo mode cpu core voltage.


If I don't set additional to something I get higher temps.
Don't worry I thought I was really strange too.

Currently I'm using a offset of -1.110v, for 4.5Ghz/3Ghz mesh, 2 hours Realbench stable.
Stock voltages at those clocks are 1.28v, a little high if I do say so.


----------



## evrae

I upped my 7800x freq to 4.7 Ghz recently and have it running well on 1.25v, but an FPU stress test on AIDA64 will immediately crash the system due to overheating. Can I still call this stable? The normal CPU stress test in AIDA64 is fine and puts me into the low 80s in temperature, which I'm comfortable with even on air.

Have scores of 1528 and 201 in Cinebench R15. Very pleased!


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I also love how everyone's view of the platform rests on the first reviews during the first week it came out. And everyone keeps slinging those Hardware Unboxed videos around that don't really line up with any other benchmarks that came out around the same time.


Samezies. I picked up a 7740 right away and never even paid attention to the reviewers. They said that was the worst one. And funny as of late it's leading most people's charts.


----------



## Pandora's Box

Up and running...


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> Up and running...


Still has that new PC smell, congrats!


----------



## Pandora's Box

Early hours of overclocking. Getting some good results. 4.8GHz across all 8 cores at 1.27volts on average. I say on average because I'm using offset voltages (I like some power savings). Lowest core is 1.266, core 4 likes a little more voltage apparently at 1.285 volts. Have the MESH overclocked to 3.0GHz from 2.4GHz. Hitting 83C max.

It would seem that VRM's overheating on X299 is seriously blown out of proportion. Highest temp I am getting on my motherboard is 76C. Though I do think the Gigabyte Gaming 9 is the best motherboard in terms of VRM heatsinks.

So far I am impressed. Max overclock I could get on my 6700K was 4.6GHz. This thing has double the core count and is achieving a higher overclock. From 3.6GHz base clock to 4.8GHz is impressive imo, a 1.2GHz overclock on a 8 core CPU.

Whats everyone using for stress testing? I'm using Intel Extreme Tuning Utility. Thats always been my go to stress test software.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I'm using realbench.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> Early hours of overclocking. Getting some good results. 4.8GHz across all 8 cores at 1.27volts on average. I say on average because I'm using offset voltages (I like some power savings). Lowest core is 1.266, core 4 likes a little more voltage apparently at 1.285 volts. Have the MESH overclocked to 3.0GHz from 2.4GHz. Hitting 83C max.
> 
> It would seem that VRM's overheating on X299 is seriously blown out of proportion. Highest temp I am getting on my motherboard is 76C. Though I do think the Gigabyte Gaming 9 is the best motherboard in terms of VRM heatsinks.
> 
> So far I am impressed. Max overclock I could get on my 6700K was 4.6GHz. This thing has double the core count and is achieving a higher overclock. From 3.6GHz base clock to 4.8GHz is impressive imo, a 1.2GHz overclock on a 8 core CPU.
> 
> Whats everyone using for stress testing? I'm using Intel Extreme Tuning Utility. Thats always been my go to stress test software.


14nm process greatly improved clocks from skylake to kabylake, which carried improvements to skx and coffee.
Kaby is already a monster overclocking, and its reflected on skx where ofter you hit thermal limits before die limits.

Im still waiting for coffee lake to hit the hammer on either skx or coffee. I mean, i love my 7700K, even just gaming at home, i want more cores.
Following the trend of 7800x, i bet a great portion of 8700K will hit 4.8+ ~ 5.0 easily and it should be possible to delid with current tools.
Reusing z170-270 mobos would be a plus.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I really really wish I could benchmark my machine the way it is currently setup against a 7700k in gaming. If anyone has a 7700k @ ~4.8GHZ with a 1080ti (at stock clock) and knows of some gaming benchmarks we can run, hit me up and we can compare. I bet performance is pretty close.


Send me a priv if you wanna do. I really want to know more data about SKX 7820x to know if i drop my 7700K for this one.
Are you delided?
Im 5.0ghz, but i can downclock, have dual 1080s, but we can sort some low resolution benchmark to check CPU bottlenecks and frametimes.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> On my 7900X for the workloads I was testing, increasing the mesh from 2.4 -> 3.2 without touching voltages led to an increase from 250W -> 300W.. The workload was extremely bottlenecked by the L3 bandwidth. Overclocking the L3 reduced that bottleneck thereby allowing the code to better utilize the core itself - thus a secondary increase in power consumption.


Just a question mystical, what kinds of latency you are getting now on L3?
What Ram speed / latency are you using and what mesh frequency?

As some pointed out, some perf issues seen to be linked to L3 being now inclusive, generating traffic between caches.

Another final question: about DDR4 frequency.
Im in a country (Brazil) where is very hard to get memory past 3400hz. As far as i understand, getting higher frequency will increase bandwidth, which is already high on quad channel, but if you can manage to have RAM working with tigher latencies, even on lower clocks it will bring down latency right?
Upon this, what should be better, 3000-3200 @ 14-15 or 3600-3800 @ 16-17 ? I bet CAS 18 is even worse.

Thanks


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> Just a question mystical, what kinds of latency you are getting now on L3?
> What Ram speed / latency are you using and what mesh frequency?
> 
> As some pointed out, some perf issues seen to be linked to L3 being now inclusive, generating traffic between caches.
> 
> Another final question: about DDR4 frequency.
> Im in a country (Brazil) where is very hard to get memory past 3400hz. As far as i understand, getting higher frequency will increase bandwidth, which is already high on quad channel, but if you can manage to have RAM working with tigher latencies, even on lower clocks it will bring down latency right?
> Upon this, what should be better, 3000-3200 @ 14-15 or 3600-3800 @ 16-17 ? I bet CAS 18 is even worse.
> 
> Thanks


I haven't measured the latencies or bandwidth directly. But when I look at the AIDA64 numbers from other people's Skylake X machines and compare the L3 bandwidth with what my specific workload needs, and it falls way short - whereas Haswell-E/Broadwell-E don't have this problem.

This theoretical shortage of L3 bandwidth prompted me to test the effect of increasing the L3 frequency. And as I had predicted, it had a huge effect. Increasing the cache from 2.4 -> 3.2 led to a 10% improvement in performance and more than 10% increase in power consumption.

Playing with memory bandwidth leads to similar performance increases going from 2133 -> 3200 MHz. The workload is latency insensitive and only cares about bandwidth. So I can't say much about the latencies.


----------



## Hatnim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Looks like original findings concerning Mesh voltage and package temps were not repeatable. After repeated tests I have determined the temp difference in lowering mesh voltage and LLC to be 2c. Not terrible, but not earth shattering.


Actually thanks to your experiment, I found that under-volting Mesh noticeably reduces my 7800x temperature in my first couple of tests.

(Edit) Interestingly, after several tests the temp difference in lowering Mesh voltage doesn't look substantial.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> Just a question mystical, what kinds of latency you are getting now on L3?
> What Ram speed / latency are you using and what mesh frequency?
> 
> As some pointed out, some perf issues seen to be linked to L3 being now inclusive, generating traffic between caches.
> 
> Another final question: about DDR4 frequency.
> Im in a country (Brazil) where is very hard to get memory past 3400hz. As far as i understand, getting higher frequency will increase bandwidth, which is already high on quad channel, but if you can manage to have RAM working with tigher latencies, even on lower clocks it will bring down latency right?
> Upon this, what should be better, 3000-3200 @ 14-15 or 3600-3800 @ 16-17 ? I bet CAS 18 is even worse.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't measured the latencies or bandwidth directly. But when I look at the AIDA64 numbers from other people's Skylake X machines and compare the L3 bandwidth with what my specific workload needs, and it falls way short - whereas Haswell-E/Broadwell-E don't have this problem.
> 
> This theoretical shortage of L3 bandwidth prompted me to test the effect of increasing the L3 frequency. And as I had predicted, it had a huge effect. Increasing the cache from 2.4 -> 3.2 led to a 10% improvement in performance and more than 10% increase in power consumption.
> 
> Playing with memory bandwidth leads to similar performance increases going from 2133 -> 3200 MHz. The workload is latency insensitive and only cares about bandwidth. So I can't say much about the latencies.
Click to expand...

So your saying that Haswell-E/Broadwell-E have a faster L3 Cache than Skylake X?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> Just a question mystical, what kinds of latency you are getting now on L3?
> What Ram speed / latency are you using and what mesh frequency?
> 
> As some pointed out, some perf issues seen to be linked to L3 being now inclusive, generating traffic between caches.
> 
> Another final question: about DDR4 frequency.
> Im in a country (Brazil) where is very hard to get memory past 3400hz. As far as i understand, getting higher frequency will increase bandwidth, which is already high on quad channel, but if you can manage to have RAM working with tigher latencies, even on lower clocks it will bring down latency right?
> Upon this, what should be better, 3000-3200 @ 14-15 or 3600-3800 @ 16-17 ? I bet CAS 18 is even worse.
> 
> Thanks


Does this help?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Guys, what sort of cooling and temp do you get with your X299 rigs?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> So your saying that Haswell-E/Broadwell-E have a faster L3 Cache than Skylake X?


That is correct. Skylake X L3 has just around half the L3 bandwidth of Haswell-E.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Guys, what sort of cooling and temp do you get with your X299 rigs?


This is with power limits cranks all the way...no phantom throttling.

Not delidded:
4.7GHz @ 1.235v and -5 AVX/AVX512 offset cooled with h115i push/pull
2hrs Realbench: 81c
1hr Prime95 w/AVX: 83c

Delidded
4.8Ghz @ 1.285v and -5 AVX/AVX512 offset cooled with h115i push/pull
2hrs Realbench: 78c
2hrs OCCT: 70c
2hrs Prime95 w/AVX: 82c
12hrs Prime95 w/AVX: 82c

4.7GHz @ 1.245v and -5 AVX/AVX512 offset cooled with h115i push/pull
2hrs Realbench: 73c


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> So your saying that Haswell-E/Broadwell-E have a faster L3 Cache than Skylake X?
> 
> 
> 
> That is correct. Skylake X L3 has just around half the L3 bandwidth of Haswell-E.
Click to expand...

Do you think that is caused from switching from Ring bus to Mesh?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Do you think that is caused from switching from Ring bus to Mesh?


Probably. And while I'm not sure how relevant it is compare Skylake X mesh clocks with Haswell/Broadwell uncore clocks, the mesh clock is stock 2.4 GHz while the uncore on the previous gen are all upwards of 3.0 - 3.5.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> This is with power limits cranks all the way...no phantom throttling.
> 
> Not delidded:
> 4.7GHz @ 1.235v and -5 AVX/AVX512 offset cooled with h115i push/pull
> 2hrs Realbench: 81c
> 1hr Prime95 w/AVX: 83c
> 
> 4.7GHz @ 1.245v and -5 AVX/AVX512 offset cooled with h115i push/pull
> 2hrs Realbench: 73c


Man I wish I got temps like that, mine are around 83c at 4.5Ghz AVX offsets of -5 with Realbench 2.44, it doesn't rely heavily on AVX, lower with Realbench 2.54 which does use AVX.
Same push/pull.
Are you running a higher fan curve, mine's on silent.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Man I wish I got temps like that, mine are around 83c at 4.5Ghz AVX offsets of -5 with Realbench.
> Same push/pull.
> Are you running a higher fan curve, mine's on silent.


I'm running custom curve. Hits 100% when the liquid temp hits 36c. I am running Noiseblocker NB-eLoop fans. They are VERY quiet, even at 100%.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I'm running custom curve. Hits 100% when the liquid temp hits 36c. I am running Noiseblocker NB-eLoop fans. They are VERY quiet, even at 100%.


All good now, I went a tinkered with the voltages and noticed AVX was on Auto again (AVX512 was -5).
So with OCCT I got a spike of 83c for a split second but the rest of the test didn't go over 70c.

Realbench 2.44 peaks at 83c then hovers around 78c, 2.54 is lower around 68c.
I like to run both because 2.44 doesn't just use AVX like 2.53, so it loads the cpu to max clocks, but runs AVX at the offset.

Fans at 60%, I'm using those white Corsair Magnetic Levitation fans.


----------



## Pandora's Box

So with the mesh at 3ghz I'm loosing one of my nvme SSD's. I already have the voltage at 1.9, safe to go higher?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> So with the mesh at 3ghz I'm loosing one of my nvme SSD's. I already have the voltage at 1.9, safe to go higher?


What do you mean loosing?
I've got my mesh a 3Ghz and have 2 Nvme drives, no issues here.
My VCCIN is 1.95v though.


----------



## Pandora's Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> What do you mean loosing?
> I've got my mesh a 3Ghz and have 2 Nvme drives, no issues here.
> My VCCIN is 1.95v though.


At 3GHz my third nvme drive disappears from windows, lowering it back to 2.4ghz makes it appear again. I might try 1.95v.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> At 3GHz my third nvme drive disappears from windows, lowering it back to 2.4ghz makes it appear again. I might try 1.95v.


Wait, wait...

There should be a separate voltage for the mesh.


----------



## Pandora's Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Wait, wait...
> 
> There should be a separate voltage for the mesh.


Yeah someone on anandtech forums suggested 1.1 volts for the mesh. That did the trick. 3ghz mesh with all my drives showing up.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> Yeah someone on anandtech forums suggested 1.1 volts for the mesh. That did the trick. 3ghz mesh with all my drives showing up.


Crank it up to 3.2GHz and 1.155v


----------



## Pandora's Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Crank it up to 3.2GHz and 1.55v


Mesh voltage to 1.55? That seems like a large increase.


----------



## Chargeit

Well guys I've had my RMA'ed x850 sitting on my other desk for 2 days now. Still haven't gotten around to reinstalling it.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> Mesh voltage to 1.55? That seems like a large increase.


Sorry...I meant 1.155v. Yikes.


----------



## Pandora's Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Sorry...I meant 1.155v. Yikes.


Lol ok that sounds more reasonable


----------



## cgpyos

guys, what's the difference between using manual voltage and voltage offset? what advantages both methods have? thanks!


----------



## artins90

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cgpyos*
> 
> guys, what's the difference between using manual voltage and voltage offset? what advantages both methods have? thanks!


The offload mode allows the voltage to drop and increase dynamically depending on the CPU load, it can help lowering temps but it can cause instability.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artins90*
> 
> The offload mode allows the voltage to drop and increase dynamically depending on the CPU load, it can help lowering temps but it can cause instability.


Hello

Any instability with offset compared to manual voltage will be the result of user induced tuning errors.


----------



## Scotty99

^

Ive been using offset since sandy, works great and is the proper way to overclock imo.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Probably. And while I'm not sure how relevant it is compare Skylake X mesh clocks with Haswell/Broadwell uncore clocks, the mesh clock is stock 2.4 GHz while the uncore on the previous gen are all upwards of 3.0 - 3.5.


Mistic what you think causes lower performance in loads like games, even nearing same clocks as a 7700K (around 4.6-4.8) ?
Are those loads so sensitive to L3 being changed to non inclusive or the non inclusive policy is saturating the mesh with constant eviction?

Or, these kind of loads does process intercomunication in L3?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> ^
> 
> Ive been using offset since sandy, works great and is the proper way to overclock imo.


You should be using Adaptive mode. Read this from Asus Edgeup:

Offset Mode: In Offset Mode, we can add or subtract voltage from the CPU's default voltage for a given CPU core ratio. The default voltage scales according to the active multiplier ratio. This provides power saving when application loading is light. The side effect to using offset mode is that any offset value we select will be applied to all core ratios. This can result in too much or too little voltage for a given ratio, which leads to instability.

If you wish to use Offset Mode, then bear in mind that the Vcore displayed in the UEFI is simply a snapshot of the offset voltage stack; the firmware interface only places a partial load on the CPU. The full-load voltage in the operating system will be different, so you will need to check the voltage by running a suitable application within the OS. Use Ai Suite to check the full-load voltage. Also, bear in mind that the default voltage receiving the offset changes with the applied CPU ratio.

Adaptive Mode: Adaptive Mode was developed to account for the inadequacies of Offset Mode for overclocking. We use it to specify the voltage used when the CPU is faced with a heavy application load. The voltage we set is the maximum voltage the PCU is allowed to apply, which takes all the load-related guesswork hampering Offset mode out of the equation. The other boon of Adaptive Mode is that it does not alter voltages for non-Turbo CPU ratios, allowing us to enjoy the benefits of power saving without the voltage adjustment range issues presented by the Offset Mode function. We recommend Adaptive Mode for all normal overclocking.

adaptive crop2

To use Adaptive Mode, simply enter the full load voltage you wish to use in the Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage box. So, if you wish to set 1.20V for full load, just type 1.20 into the box. The target full-load voltage is shown in the Total Adaptive Mode CPU Core Voltage area.

Note that the Adaptive voltage target works on the Turbo ratios only. So, if you change the CPU strap and use a non-Turbo CPU ratio, the value in the Adaptive voltage setting box will not be applied. That's why there is the option to apply an offset when in Adaptive mode. The offset value is added or subtracted from the Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage box, and the total is displayed in the Total Adaptive Mode CPU Core Voltage pane. The side effect of applying an offset is that it affects the entire voltage stack - from idle to Turbo ratios, which can limit the usable offset voltage range.


----------



## Scotty99

Well of course if the board has adaptive use it, its just a better version of offset. There is also turbo core voltage which is very useful when overclocking core by core. The larger point i was trying to make is.....dont use fixed anything.


----------



## postem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> This is with power limits cranks all the way...no phantom throttling.
> 
> Not delidded:
> 4.7GHz @ 1.235v and -5 AVX/AVX512 offset cooled with h115i push/pull
> 2hrs Realbench: 81c
> 1hr Prime95 w/AVX: 83c
> 
> Delidded
> 4.8Ghz @ 1.285v and -5 AVX/AVX512 offset cooled with h115i push/pull
> 2hrs Realbench: 78c
> 2hrs OCCT: 70c
> 2hrs Prime95 w/AVX: 82c
> 12hrs Prime95 w/AVX: 82c
> 
> 4.7GHz @ 1.245v and -5 AVX/AVX512 offset cooled with h115i push/pull
> 2hrs Realbench: 73c


So no real difference before and after delid? Did you delid yourself?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well of course if the board has adaptive use it, its just a better version of offset. There is also turbo core voltage which is very useful when overclocking core by core. The larger point i was trying to make is.....dont use fixed anything.


I don't know of any newer boards that don't have Adaptive mode. I agree with the rest of your statement. Don't use fixed anything. If you want your machine to run maxed out for benching just set your Windows power mode to performance.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Over 1600 points in Cinebench R15 on a 7800X,,


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
















Is there any tweaks to increase score? I've just installed the OS.







Any guide on good mem OC? I guess I could improve mine.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cgpyos*
> 
> guys, what's the difference between using manual voltage and voltage offset? what advantages both methods have? thanks!


I find that I can use less core voltage using offset than fixed Vcore for stability.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *postem*
> 
> So no real difference before and after delid? Did you delid yourself?


There is a ~10c difference running the same tests at the same voltage before and after the delidding. I just have not run that any test using the same setting before and after. Instead I just raised my overclock until I hit the same temps as before. SIlicon lottery did it.


----------



## Chargeit

My rma'd psu and braided cables are installed.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Fixed my temp issues. Got rid of the XTX360 and installed MO-RA3. 

Now I only need to delid. 4800 for 24/7 is absolutely perfect! Total silence as well.


----------



## KCDC

The time is coming close, the 7820 is on the way, the plan is to build this next weekend.

no overclocking, but want to make it stable. Thinking I should clamp CPU v to 1.0 adaptive. Yes?

Leaving mesh and cache on auto. Yes, no?

rams 3200. trident z

one 960 evo

two 980ti


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KCDC*
> 
> The time is coming close, the 7820 is on the way, the plan is to build this next weekend.
> 
> no overclocking, but want to make it stable. Thinking I should clamp CPU v to 1.0 adaptive. Yes?
> 
> Leaving mesh and cache on auto. Yes, no?
> 
> rams 3200. trident z
> 
> one 960 evo
> 
> two 980ti


Eh almost da same build as mine..
was tempted to sell n get a 1080ti poseidon but hmm will end up losing da sli look from the terminal block .

Strix x299??
Just waiting for dhl to arrive anytime today for the monoblock.


----------



## KCDC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Eh almost da same build as mine..
> was tempted to sell n get a 1080ti poseidon but hmm will end up losing da sli look from the terminal block .
> 
> Strix x299??
> Just waiting for dhl to arrive anytime today for the monoblock.


Yes strix x299. This build is more for VFX and particle FX work, not gaming. That said, I want to make it a solid render machine on CPU and GPUs that can also game.. Probably a 4k at some point, but again, not the issue as much as render power and a solid workstation (after effects, real flow, maya, c4d, houdini, fumeFX)


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KCDC*
> 
> The time is coming close, the 7820 is on the way, the plan is to build this next weekend.
> 
> no overclocking, but want to make it stable. Thinking I should clamp CPU v to 1.0 adaptive. Yes?
> 
> Leaving mesh and cache on auto. Yes, no?
> 
> rams 3200. trident z
> 
> one 960 evo
> 
> two 980ti


Awe come on man!...you know overclocks can be stable right? Here are 12hr Prime95 runs at 4.8GHz...

Without AVX....


With AVX...


----------



## Chargeit

Took a picture of my mic for a friend but you can see my rig in the background with my rgb ram.


----------



## cstkl1

Yippy. So that puts the vrm out the equation.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Awe come on man!...you know overclocks can be stable right? Here are 12hr Prime95 runs at 4.8GHz...
> 
> Without AVX....
> 
> 
> With AVX...


Is that a delided cpu?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Is that a delided cpu?


Yes. It ran the same temps +/-1c before delidding, but 4.7GHz @ 1.240v.


----------



## KCDC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Awe come on man!...you know overclocks can be stable right? Here are 12hr Prime95 runs at 4.8GHz...
> 
> Without AVX....
> 
> 
> With AVX...


If it was going to be mine, I'd OC of course, but it's a build for a friend and he just wants it solid, doesn't care about OC. I wanna tweak it a little bit.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KCDC*
> 
> If it was going to be mine, I'd OC of course, but it's a build for a friend and he just wants it solid, doesn't care about OC. I wanna tweak it a little bit.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

VRM is not really an issue if you got some airflow..

On my "cheap" X299 Tomhawk, it never exceed 50'C even with realbench at 4800 1.260-1.280V.

I do have a 120 fan on 700-800 rpm blowing directly on it though


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> VRM is not really an issue if you got some airflow..
> 
> On my "cheap" X299 Tomhawk, it never exceed 50'C even with realbench at 4800 1.260-1.280V.
> 
> I do have a 120 fan on 700-800 rpm blowing directly on it though


You know non-users often make up problems on a product, to make themself happy.

Younoobers do it because they're getting more "clicks" like #vrm scandal


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> You know non-users often make up problems on a product, to make themself happy.
> 
> Younoobers do it because they're getting more "clicks" like #vrm scandal


Yeah, you especially notice which users you can take their word on it, and which you can't.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

I noticed that the only software that will read the CPU voltage on the TUF Mark 1 is AIDA64.
HWiNFO64, CPUZ, Core temp won't, they all read 1.000v, AIDA64 reads 1.180v under load, that's the correct set voltage.

Kinda annoying.

Oh CPU SVID is disabled.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I noticed that the only software that will read the CPU voltage on the TUF Mark 1 is AIDA64.
> HWiNFO64, CPUZ, Core temp won't, they all read 1.000v, AIDA64 reads 1.180v under load, that's the correct set voltage.
> 
> Kinda annoying.
> 
> Oh CPU SVID is disabled.


Similar problem. I set 1.200V in bios for 4700mhz. Aida reads 1.216V which seems to be correct.

I am very pleased with the MO-RA3. Though, the core temp difference is annoying.. 8'C between them, and them package is another 8'C higher..

I know having the CPU upto 80'C is not good, but is it okay that the package is..? Currently it is well below.

The "new" G.Skill ram I got seems to be stable at 3800 16-18-18-1T 1.400V.. That has to be alright..? I'm a noob mem OCer.


----------



## cstkl1

My buddy @owikh84
Just informed me the new nvidia drivers 385.28
Sli fix for x299 is in..


----------



## Chargeit

I'm working on getting my cores listed from best to worst. I ran realbench for 30 min and then organized my cores from coolest to hottest. One thing I noticed is intels turbo has core 6 listed as my top core but as far as my test goes core number 6 is my 7th core at 80c. I'm wondering if the reason for it being on of my hotter cores is because it's listed as a favored core and maybe it sees more work. Any thoughts on this?

My best core is my number 2 core at 74c. Intel has it listed as my second best core.

Looking at,

.core...temp
..2.......74c
..0.......76c
..4.......76c
..7.......77c
..5.......79c
..1.......79c
..6.......80c
..3.......82c

Intel does have my worst core correct, core 3 in the last spot.



What I'm wanting to do is set up my oc do 48 dual core loads, 47 quad core, and 45 on 8 core loads.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'm working on getting my cores listed from best to worst. I ran realbench for 30 min and then organized my cores from coolest to hottest. One thing I noticed is intels turbo has core 6 listed as my top core but as far as my test goes core number 6 is my 7th core at 80c. I'm wondering if the reason for it being on of my hotter cores is because it's listed as a favored core and maybe it sees more work. Any thoughts on this?
> 
> My best core is my number 2 core at 74c. Intel has it listed as my second best core.
> 
> Looking at,
> 
> .core...temp
> ..2.......74c
> ..0.......76c
> ..4.......76c
> ..7.......77c
> ..5.......79c
> ..1.......79c
> ..6.......80c
> ..3.......82c
> 
> Intel does have my worst core correct, core 3 in the last spot.
> 
> 
> 
> What I'm wanting to do is set up my oc do 48 dual core loads, 47 quad core, and 45 on 8 core loads.


I doubt temperature is the only factor in deciding the favored cores. I would imagine that stability matters as well and is probably the most important factor.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'm working on getting my cores listed from best to worst. I ran realbench for 30 min and then organized my cores from coolest to hottest. One thing I noticed is intels turbo has core 6 listed as my top core but as far as my test goes core number 6 is my 7th core at 80c. I'm wondering if the reason for it being on of my hotter cores is because it's listed as a favored core and maybe it sees more work. Any thoughts on this?
> 
> My best core is my number 2 core at 74c. Intel has it listed as my second best core.
> 
> Looking at,
> 
> .core...temp
> ..2.......74c
> ..0.......76c
> ..4.......76c
> ..7.......77c
> ..5.......79c
> ..1.......79c
> ..6.......80c
> ..3.......82c
> 
> Intel does have my worst core correct, core 3 in the last spot.
> 
> 
> 
> What I'm wanting to do is set up my oc do 48 dual core loads, 47 quad core, and 45 on 8 core loads.


I know asus bios highlights two cores..


----------



## Chargeit

Ok I'll have to take a look in the bios and see how it lines up.

Seems like this way of oc'ing will be a lot of trouble since you have to set voltages and clocks for each core but I think it should work well when gaming since often you're not using more then 2 - 4 cores so it makes sense to have them run as high as possible without being held back by limits of an all core oc.


----------



## Artah

Anyone else over the skylake-x hype? I know it runs better than ryzen in a few things but the price is just ridiculous. I have a de-lidded 4.9GHz 7900X @1.275v sitting cold in the box and expecting to spend $700 on an Apex. I bought the CPU for $1,050 + $105 tax from amazon, paid $130 with shipping to de-lid and verify frequency/voltage. That's a total of around 2K motherboard/cpu slight upgrade (I know nothing new).

I'm thinking of staying with my X99 and getting another 6950X or going AMD. The 7980XE you say? After seeing those Xeon clocks I'm shying away from it.

I'm just tired of intel screwing me with a carrot stick.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I am loving my 7800X that I got 20% off. I bought the memory second hand (G.Skill 3600 running at 3800 16-18-18-38-1T) and the motherboard was another 6% off. So for me it was definetly worth the jump from Ryzen 1700. 25% higher min and avg. fps in Battlefield 1.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Anyone else over the skylake-x hype? I know it runs better than ryzen in a few things but the price is just ridiculous. I have a de-lidded 4.9GHz 7900X @1.275v sitting cold in the box and expecting to spend $700 on an Apex. I bought the CPU for $1,050 + $105 tax from amazon, paid $130 with shipping to de-lid and verify frequency/voltage. That's a total of around 2K motherboard/cpu slight upgrade (I know nothing new).
> 
> I'm thinking of staying with my X99 and getting another 6950X or going AMD. The 7980XE you say? After seeing those Xeon clocks I'm shying away from it.
> 
> I'm just tired of intel screwing me with a carrot stick.


'

I guess I missed the "skylake-x hype"...all I saw was Skylake-x hate. If I already had x99, I probably would not have moved to x299. That said, I am pretty sure your 4.9GHz 7900x would run better than ryzen at more than a few things.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> '
> 
> I guess I missed the "skylake-x hype"...all I saw was Skylake-x hate. If I already had x99, I probably would not have moved to x299. That said, I am pretty sure your 4.9GHz 7900x would run better than ryzen at more than a few things.


It's just that I'm torn on continuing to supporting the big bully intel. I'm really bummed about their decision to chop down the lanes support even though it doesn't affect me because I usually go for the bigger chips but uncool to people that don't want/need a billion cores and just want to play games with SLI and some M.2.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'm working on getting my cores listed from best to worst. I ran realbench for 30 min and then organized my cores from coolest to hottest. One thing I noticed is intels turbo has core 6 listed as my top core but as far as my test goes core number 6 is my 7th core at 80c. I'm wondering if the reason for it being on of my hotter cores is because it's listed as a favored core and maybe it sees more work. Any thoughts on this?
> 
> My best core is my number 2 core at 74c. Intel has it listed as my second best core.
> 
> Looking at,
> 
> .core...temp
> ..2.......74c
> ..0.......76c
> ..4.......76c
> ..7.......77c
> ..5.......79c
> ..1.......79c
> ..6.......80c
> ..3.......82c
> 
> Intel does have my worst core correct, core 3 in the last spot.
> 
> What I'm wanting to do is set up my oc do 48 dual core loads, 47 quad core, and 45 on 8 core loads.
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt temperature is the only factor in deciding the favored cores. I would imagine that stability matters as well and is probably the most important factor.
Click to expand...

Is everyone's fastest cores in a different arrangement with each processor?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Ok I'll have to take a look in the bios and see how it lines up.
> 
> Seems like this way of oc'ing will be a lot of trouble since you have to set voltages and clocks for each core but I think it should work well when gaming since often you're not using more then 2 - 4 cores so it makes sense to have them run as high as possible without being held back by limits of an all core oc.


How do you only use 4 cores when gaming since windows scheduler will use all threads?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Dude a 7900x at 4.9ghz? That's nutty

I think you should set your morals aside and just enjoy that beast









And yeah the lane support thing and not soldering their HEDT line is kind of BS but unfortunately until AMD can offer Intel's IPC and clock speeds with 8+ cores this is kind of our only option to have the best of both worlds.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> '
> 
> I guess I missed the "skylake-x hype"...all I saw was Skylake-x hate. If I already had x99, I probably would not have moved to x299. That said, I am pretty sure your 4.9GHz 7900x would run better than ryzen at more than a few things.
> 
> 
> 
> It's just that I'm torn on continuing to supporting the big bully intel. I'm really bummed about their decision to chop down the lanes support even though it doesn't affect me because I usually go for the bigger chips but uncool to people that don't want/need a billion cores and just want to play games with SLI and some M.2.
Click to expand...

If all the folks want to do is play games with SLI and M.2, they can save a lot of money and purchase i7 7700k.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> If all the folks want to do is play games with SLI and M.2, they can save a lot of money and purchase i7 7700k.


I mean if you only have 1 m.2 and don't mind running x8/x8


----------



## TahoeDust

Ugh...SLI. Like the Holocaust...NEVER AGAIN.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> If all the folks want to do is play games with SLI and M.2, they can save a lot of money and purchase i7 7700k.
> 
> 
> 
> I mean if you only have 1 m.2 and don't mind running x8/x8
Click to expand...

Yea 8x/8x Vs 16x/16x is only 0-1% improvement.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'm working on getting my cores listed from best to worst. I ran realbench for 30 min and then organized my cores from coolest to hottest. One thing I noticed is intels turbo has core 6 listed as my top core but as far as my test goes core number 6 is my 7th core at 80c. I'm wondering if the reason for it being on of my hotter cores is because it's listed as a favored core and maybe it sees more work. Any thoughts on this?
> 
> My best core is my number 2 core at 74c. Intel has it listed as my second best core.
> 
> Looking at,
> 
> .core...temp
> ..2.......74c
> ..0.......76c
> ..4.......76c
> ..7.......77c
> ..5.......79c
> ..1.......79c
> ..6.......80c
> ..3.......82c
> 
> Intel does have my worst core correct, core 3 in the last spot.
> 
> 
> 
> What I'm wanting to do is set up my oc do 48 dual core loads, 47 quad core, and 45 on 8 core loads.


That's interesting as 3 and 6 are my hottest cores as well. I wonder if it has to do with die placement?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Yea 8x/8x Vs 16x/16x is only 0-1% improvement.


A lot of people in this forum would argue with that but I would agree with you. Although it's not something I really follow as I have no desire to run multiple cards ever again.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> If all the folks want to do is play games with SLI and M.2, they can save a lot of money and purchase i7 7700k.


16 lanes is just not enough unless you're a light gamer.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I mean if you only have 1 m.2 and don't mind running x8/x8


yup and use a gtx 980 video card.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Ugh...SLI. Like the Holocaust...NEVER AGAIN.


I would love to drop this SLI none sense but until a single card can dominate 4k with absolutely everything turned up maxed out some people are stuck with it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Yea 8x/8x Vs 16x/16x is only 0-1% improvement.


it's more than that with SLI pascal IIRC, I saw a test somewhere.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> If all the folks want to do is play games with SLI and M.2, they can save a lot of money and purchase i7 7700k.
> 
> 
> 
> 16 lanes is just not enough unless you're a light gamer.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I mean if you only have 1 m.2 and don't mind running x8/x8
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> yup and use a gtx 980 video card.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Ugh...SLI. Like the Holocaust...NEVER AGAIN.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I would love to drop this SLI none sense but until a single card can dominate 4k with absolutely everything turned up maxed out some people are stuck with it.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Yea 8x/8x Vs 16x/16x is only 0-1% improvement.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> it's more than that with SLI pascal IIRC, I saw a test somewhere.
Click to expand...

Actually your incorrect here are some links.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Those links aren't useful. The first one is a Linus video from 2014.

The second one I'm not sure if you watched it because it's unrelated.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I would love to drop this SLI none sense but until a single card can dominate 4k with absolutely everything turned up maxed out some people are stuck with it.


I get it. I go so sick of the SLI nonsense, I decided I would let the fastest single card dictate my monitor selection instead of letting my monitor selection dictate my GPU needs. 3440x1440 @ 100hz is about all that 1 1080ti can beats out, so that is what I play at.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Those links aren't useful. The first one is a Linus video from 2014.
> 
> The second one I'm not sure if you watched it because it's unrelated.


Well that is because there has been no change in performance it is still 8X/8X VS 16x/16X 0-1% unless proven otherwise.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Actually your incorrect here are some links.


well take a look at a slightly modern one and decide for yourself with Titan X not even Titan X(p) where they show 10-30% difference on some applications, no not the 1080p one, I think heavy gamers would go slightly higher than that and probably run at least 2 M.2 SSDs. https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Titan-X-Performance-PCI-E-3-0-x8-vs-x16-851/

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Those links aren't useful. The first one is a Linus video from 2014.
> 
> The second one I'm not sure if you watched it because it's unrelated.


Yea Linus was either drinking something that expired 3 years ago or he was comparing 980 cards.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I get it. I go so sick of the SLI nonsense, I decided I would let the fastest single card dictate my monitor selection instead of letting my monitor selection dictate my GPU needs. 3440x1440 @ 100hz is about all that 1 1080ti can beats out, so that is what I play at.


That's actually a great Idea, I'll keep that in mind next time.


----------



## Nizzen

X299 SLI fix
385.28 whql
http://www.guru3d.com/files-details/geforce-385-28-whql-driver-download.html


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Actually your incorrect here are some links.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> well take a look at a slightly modern one and decide for yourself with Titan X not even Titan X(p) where they show 10-30% difference on some applications, no not the 1080p one, I think heavy gamers would go slightly higher than that and probably run at least 2 M.2 SSDs. https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Titan-X-Performance-PCI-E-3-0-x8-vs-x16-851/
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Those links aren't useful. The first one is a Linus video from 2014.
> 
> The second one I'm not sure if you watched it because it's unrelated.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yea Linus was either drinking something that expired 3 years ago or he was comparing 980 cards.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I get it. I go so sick of the SLI nonsense, I decided I would let the fastest single card dictate my monitor selection instead of letting my monitor selection dictate my GPU needs. 3440x1440 @ 100hz is about all that 1 1080ti can beats out, so that is what I play at.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's actually a great Idea, I'll keep that in mind next time.
Click to expand...

I was only slightly off 1%.

Unlike the single GPU results, when using two Titan X cards in SLI the results not nearly as consistent. At 1080p, running at x16/x8 was actually the fastest, beating x16/x16 by about 10%. Similarly, x8/x8 was also faster than x16/x16, but only by about 8%

Increasing the resolution to 4K gave us results more in line with what you would expect. At this resolution, x16/x8 was about 2% slower than x16/x16 and x8/x8 was about 8.5% slower. Finally, with 4K surround we saw about a 5% drop in performance with x16/x8 and a 6.5% drop in performance with x8/x8

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Titan-X-Performance-PCI-E-3-0-x8-vs-x16-851/


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I was only slightly off 1%.
> 
> Unlike the single GPU results, when using two Titan X cards in SLI the results not nearly as consistent. At 1080p, running at x16/x8 was actually the fastest, beating x16/x16 by about 10%. Similarly, x8/x8 was also faster than x16/x16, but only by about 8%
> 
> Increasing the resolution to 4K gave us results more in line with what you would expect. At this resolution, x16/x8 was about 2% slower than x16/x16 and x8/x8 was about 8.5% slower. Finally, with 4K surround we saw about a 5% drop in performance with x16/x8 and a 6.5% drop in performance with x8/x8
> 
> https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Titan-X-Performance-PCI-E-3-0-x8-vs-x16-851/


Yeah its the samething as ram speed does help im fps especially the minimum. In the ddr4 platform kaby/sky/ryzen
Its very noticeable.

But if one was to quote linus.. we be livin in da stone age pretty soon. ?


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> X299 SLI fix
> 385.28 whql
> http://www.guru3d.com/files-details/geforce-385-28-whql-driver-download.html


Yeah I've been seeing this issue since *29.6.2017* so it only took around 7 weeks for them to enable support on X299 since launch!







It means nobody even tested SLI when there was a SLI support logo on the board boxes already....


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Yeah I've been seeing this issue since *29.6.2017* so it only took around 7 weeks for them to enable support on X299 since launch!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It means nobody even tested SLI when there was a SLI support logo on the board boxes already....


Sli worked on gta V, crysis 3.. few games
Wildlands etc scaling was bad.

Come on z170 6700k fix took even longer. First two months 4790k was killin it in gaming.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Sli worked on gta V, crysis 3.. few games
> Wildlands etc scaling was bad.
> 
> Come on z170 6700k fix took even longer. First two months 4790k was killin it in gaming.


I think it is reasonable to expect a functionality to work on a new platform at, or at least shortly after launch date if such functionality is advertised and fully supported. And instead of submitting "bug reports" to the GPU/driver vendor.


----------



## Pandora's Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Anyone else over the skylake-x hype? I know it runs better than ryzen in a few things but the price is just ridiculous. I have a de-lidded 4.9GHz 7900X @1.275v sitting cold in the box and expecting to spend $700 on an Apex. I bought the CPU for $1,050 + $105 tax from amazon, paid $130 with shipping to de-lid and verify frequency/voltage. That's a total of around 2K motherboard/cpu slight upgrade (I know nothing new).
> 
> I'm thinking of staying with my X99 and getting another 6950X or going AMD. The 7980XE you say? After seeing those Xeon clocks I'm shying away from it.
> 
> I'm just tired of intel screwing me with a carrot stick.


a 4.9 GHz 7900X - I'd just enjoy it and try to forget about how much the purchase set you back. I think if you bought a 7900X, I'm going to assume that cash flow is not an issue. Do you need more PCI-e lanes than what 7900X offers? Most people don't, especially with multi-gpu being dead at this point.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> I think it is reasonable to expect a functionality to work on a new platform at, or at least shortly after launch date if such functionality is advertised and fully supported. And instead of submitting "bug reports" to the GPU/driver vendor.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> I think it is reasonable to expect a functionality to work on a new platform at, or at least shortly after launch date if such functionality is advertised and fully supported. And instead of submitting "bug reports" to the GPU/driver vendor.


Sli was working. Just that it wasnt in all games.
Amd if you check nvidia geforce forum. They admit the drivers for x299 fix was not ready.

What i need is the samsung fix for the nvme speed


----------



## Pandora's Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Sli was working. Just that it wasnt in all games.
> Amd if you check nvidia geforce forum. They admit the drivers for x299 fix was not ready.
> 
> What i need is the samsung fix for the nvme speed


Whats wrong with nvme speed?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> Whats wrong with nvme speed?


So how to get the rated speed 3k,2.4k??


----------



## Pandora's Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> So how to get the rated speed 3k,2.4k??


check the reviews mate...no one is getting those speeds.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> check the reviews mate...no one is getting those speeds.


Reviews of x299 or the samsung 960 ??
Apex.. has setting in bios to enable VROC . went 3k. Still lower than rated but highest i have seen. Its the dimm m.2


----------



## Pandora's Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Reviews of x299 or the samsung 960 ??
> Apex.. has setting in bios to enable VROC . went 3k. Still lower than rated but highest i have seen. Its the dimm m.2


960 pro, not x299.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I'm working on getting my cores listed from best to worst. I ran realbench for 30 min and then organized my cores from coolest to hottest. One thing I noticed is intels turbo has core 6 listed as my top core but as far as my test goes core number 6 is my 7th core at 80c. I'm wondering if the reason for it being on of my hotter cores is because it's listed as a favored core and maybe it sees more work. Any thoughts on this?
> 
> My best core is my number 2 core at 74c. Intel has it listed as my second best core.
> 
> Looking at,
> 
> .core...temp
> ..2.......74c
> ..0.......76c
> ..4.......76c
> ..7.......77c
> ..5.......79c
> ..1.......79c
> ..6.......80c
> ..3.......82c
> 
> Intel does have my worst core correct, core 3 in the last spot.
> 
> 
> 
> What I'm wanting to do is set up my oc do 48 dual core loads, 47 quad core, and 45 on 8 core loads.


Run the lastest prime, custom 30,000mb, fft min/max 12..
U will see the difference of that two cores. My 6s all hit 89-95c.. but those two.. 79,80c..


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> 960 pro, not x299.


Have seen on benches on z270.


----------



## Nizzen

X299 and sm961 nvme m.2 1TB works great with asrock taichi x299 and msi tomahawk here. Even faster than x99.
"Samsung oem 960pro"
64MB/s 4k rr in CDM









No issues


----------



## Pandora's Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Reviews of x299 or the samsung 960 ??
> Apex.. has setting in bios to enable VROC . went 3k. Still lower than rated but highest i have seen. Its the dimm m.2




Used Samsung Magician to Bench it on X299.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> 
> 
> Used Samsung Magician to Bench it on X299.












lost the silicon lottery i guess













hmmm always wondered how would a 5ghz pure 8 core stack against a 7700k...


----------



## Pandora's Box

Your Cinebench score at 5GHz is lower than mine at 4.7GHz.


----------



## Scotty99

He has hyperthreading disabled.

But if you click his link it shows his CPU is at 4.7ghz, mismatch of screenshots not sure what the dude is saying lol.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> Your Cinebench score at 5GHz is lower than mine at 4.7GHz.


Ht disabled


----------



## Pandora's Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> He has hyperthreading disabled.
> 
> But if you click his link it shows his CPU is at 4.7ghz, mismatch of screenshots not sure what the dude is saying lol.


Why would you disable hyperthreading??


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> He has hyperthreading disabled.
> 
> But if you click his link it shows his CPU is at 4.7ghz, mismatch of screenshots not sure what the dude is saying lol.


Oh was hoping to get a 4.8/4.9ghz @1.2v
The jackpot. Based on the vid there should be


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> Why would you disable hyperthreading??


Some games perform better without.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> Why would you disable hyperthreading??


4.7ghz 96c.

Havent u ever wondered.. how is it with a pure 8 core cpu??


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I got 4600, 4700, 4800 and 4900 results on Cinebench running the same mem and mesh i people are interested

EDIT on a I7 7800X.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Oh was hoping to get a 4.8/4.9ghz @1.2v
> The jackpot. Based on the vid there should be


You have two different screenshots is what im saying, one at 5ghz showing cpu-z benchmarks and your one with prime 95 running at 4.7. Who's 5ghz 7820x is that lol?


----------



## Scotty99

Thats a pretty crazy single core cpu-z score, my 3.9ghz ryzen gets 445.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You have two different screenshots is what im saying, one at 5ghz showing cpu-z benchmarks and your one with prime 95 running at 4.7. Who's 5ghz 7820x is that lol?


Oh 4.7 is the max my cooling/aircond can handle
5ghz was for da lolz.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Anyone else over the skylake-x hype? I know it runs better than ryzen in a few things but the price is just ridiculous. I have a de-lidded 4.9GHz 7900X @1.275v sitting cold in the box and expecting to spend $700 on an Apex. I bought the CPU for $1,050 + $105 tax from amazon, paid $130 with shipping to de-lid and verify frequency/voltage. That's a total of around 2K motherboard/cpu slight upgrade (I know nothing new).
> 
> I'm thinking of staying with my X99 and getting another 6950X or going AMD. The 7980XE you say? After seeing those Xeon clocks I'm shying away from it.
> 
> I'm just tired of intel screwing me with a carrot stick.


Apex will be $450.


----------



## Pandora's Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Thats a pretty crazy single core cpu-z score, my 3.9ghz ryzen gets 445.


546.5 on my 7820X @ 4.7


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Here's my 7800X results at 4600, 4700, 4800 and 4900. All of these are 24/7 settings and can be used to it. Even the 4900 is okey. Package spike up to 80s, but cores are under 80'c. Could probably run 5 ghz if I delid.

I guess temps under the 80-ish and voltage at around 1.310-1.320V under load are fine for 24/7?


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Thats a pretty crazy single core cpu-z score, my 3.9ghz ryzen gets 445.


I get 560 - 7800X @4.9


----------



## aDyerSituation

I sent my cpu back. Waiting on replacement. Can't wait to see how high I can clock it.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> a 4.9 GHz 7900X - I'd just enjoy it and try to forget about how much the purchase set you back. I think if you bought a 7900X, I'm going to assume that cash flow is not an issue. Do you need more PCI-e lanes than what 7900X offers? Most people don't, especially with multi-gpu being dead at this point.


definitely need a lot of lanes I still use two titan x(p) until I can run one efficiently on 4k max settings on anything. I also like to use m.2 SSD, I have some that I will not be able to use on VRoc possibly so it will be a raided storage for games and on primary I'm going to use the fastest bootable combination. It's not really the cost for me but for a few that don't want to spend much it sucks especially people that will defend a lower performing hardware to the bitter end just to justify that what they bought runs as fast or faster like a few of the trollers on the titan x(p) thread talking about their 1080ti.

This is mostly my frustration with intel and how they do things, it's turning into like the blackberry giant that went down crashing and burning after they got way too complacent.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Apex will be $450.


is that usd? that would be nice for everyone if it's less than the prime deluxe. what source did you get this from?


----------



## aDyerSituation

I don't see the Apex being less than $600


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I don't see the Apex being less than $600


it's supposed to have less parts suposedly so it should be $250


----------



## Nizzen

Komplett.no

Apex = 4700 NOK
RVI = 6350 NOK

In Norway ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I don't see the Apex being less than $600


it will be... i hope.


----------



## czin125

http://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4400c19d-16gtzkk
http://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4200c19q2-64gtzkk

64GB 4200 CL19
16GB 4400 CL19 (1.40v)


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> http://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4400c19d-16gtzkk
> http://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-4200c19q2-64gtzkk
> 
> 64GB 4200 CL19
> 16GB 4400 CL19 (1.40v)


finally


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I sent my cpu back. Waiting on replacement. Can't wait to see how high I can clock it.


What was defective with the processor?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What was defective with the processor?


It was getting way too hot, even at stock(and delidded of course)

So I replaced the the cooler and the motherboard, and opened all side panels, same results.


----------



## Pandora's Box

Wait so you returned a delidded CPU?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> Wait so you returned a delidded CPU?


No. It's from Silicon Lottery. I returned it to them lol


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What was defective with the processor?
> 
> 
> 
> It was getting way too hot, even at stock(and delidded of course)
> 
> So I replaced the the cooler and the motherboard, and opened all side panels, same results.
Click to expand...

What temperature were you seeing stock and Who did you send it back to?

Could it have been your cooler that was malfunctioning?


----------



## aDyerSituation

I said I replaced the cooler. And I was using the same cooler in a previous build just fine. I still replaced it anyway but it didn't change anything.

I could climb upwards to the 90's at stock if I let realbench run longer than 15 minutes. So Silicon Lottery agreed they would get me an RMA going.

I didn't buy the chip retail guys lol


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> finally


Those aren't listed if you click on their "product" -> "desktop memory" "scroll down to 4266" though...


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I said I replaced the cooler. And I was using the same cooler in a previous build just fine. I still replaced it anyway but it didn't change anything.
> 
> I could climb upwards to the 90's at stock if I let realbench run longer than 15 minutes. So Silicon Lottery agreed they would get me an RMA going.
> 
> I didn't buy the chip retail guys lol


What was the cpu and silicon lottery bin??

On another note based on so many 7820x here in ocn able to hit 4.8 under 1.3.. seems like their pricing OP.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lost the silicon lottery i guess
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm always wondered how would a 5ghz pure 8 core stack against a 7700k...


Your CPU-Z results intrigued me so I benched my 4.3ghz 6900k and got the following:



My multi thread score is about 1200 points higher while only being 90 points lower on single thread... I know CPU-Z doesn't mean much but that doesn't seem right to me. I guess there really is no point in moving to Skylake-X for me unless I went with the 7900x.


----------



## wingman99

How come folks are not overclocking to 5.0 GHz 24/7 on skylake X? I would think it would not be a problem with 14nm+ process.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Your CPU-Z results intrigued me so I benched my 4.3ghz 6900k and got the following:
> 
> 
> 
> My multi thread score is about 1200 points higher while only being 90 points lower on single thread... I know CPU-Z doesn't mean much but that doesn't seem right to me. I guess there really is no point in moving to Skylake-X for me unless I went with the 7900x.


I think he had hyperthreading turned off.

In case anyone was wondering about 5.1GHz...


----------



## tizziano

Greetings to all, after having everything installed and configured I started to apply OC, I do not want an aggressive profile due to the intensive use of 3d workloads and especially to consumption which shoots up substantially as soon as you pass certain limits with just increase performance.
The case is that the profile xpm of the ram took it without problems and I looked with fixed voltage (manual) the lowest vcore possible. Passing render and several stress tests (realbench, aida, occt, real render in 3ds max) I found that for 4,400 Mhz the minimum stable voltage is 1.09v and for 4,500 Mhz ,1.26.v
With this configuration everything is completely stable, the temperatures very contained, except in stress tests that use massively avx (although without going from 81 degrees the hottest core)
So at this point, to fine tune the equipment what I want is to apply a negative offset to the instructions avx and avx 512, I think it's simple to just put the number that multiplied by the strap will be subtracted from the main core ratio
But it also wants to apply an offset or adaptive to the main voltage so that when it is not under heavy workloads the cpu goes more relaxed in voltage, frequency and consumptions. And here come the problems since to put it in adaptive and adjust the aditional turbo mode cpu core voltage to the stable value that I obtained in manua, and to apply a positive or negative offset of 0.01v, the voltage and the temperatures are triggered as soon as I put any load of work, not avx, it is as if It did not respect the figures adjusted in the bios.
I have also read Raja's tutorial for broadwell-e, but I was able to confuse myself even more. So I come to see if you can lend me a hand and finally leave the medium equipment to work.
PD: In the tutorial of Raja I have seen that it is not compatible, at least in Broadwell-E, to use adaptive and the offset of the avx instructions, this is also so in Skylake-X? I for this reason I have not yet applied it, I have it in the auto.
Thank you and apologize for the long explanation.

My computer:

i7 7820x - Asus Tuf Mark 1 - 32 Gb corsair vengance LPX 3200 CL16 8x4 Gb - Kraken x62 - Gigabyte 1080 G1 - Samsung 850 evo 500 Gb - Toshiba 3T - Corsair Air 540 - Corsair RM850i


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tizziano*
> 
> Greetings to all, after having everything installed and configured I started to apply OC, I do not want an aggressive profile due to the intensive use of 3d workloads and especially to consumption which shoots up substantially as soon as you pass certain limits with just increase performance.
> The case is that the profile xpm of the ram took it without problems and I looked with fixed voltage (manual) the lowest vcore possible. Passing render and several stress tests (realbench, aida, occt, real render in 3ds max) I found that for 4,400 Mhz the minimum stable voltage is 1.09v and for 4,500 Mhz ,1.26.v
> With this configuration everything is completely stable, the temperatures very contained, except in stress tests that use massively avx (although without going from 81 degrees the hottest core)
> So at this point, to fine tune the equipment what I want is to apply a negative offset to the instructions avx and avx 512, I think it's simple to just put the number that multiplied by the strap will be subtracted from the main core ratio
> But it also wants to apply an offset or adaptive to the main voltage so that when it is not under heavy workloads the cpu goes more relaxed in voltage, frequency and consumptions. And here come the problems since to put it in adaptive and adjust the aditional turbo mode cpu core voltage to the stable value that I obtained in manua, and to apply a positive or negative offset of 0.01v, the voltage and the temperatures are triggered as soon as I put any load of work, not avx, it is as if It did not respect the figures adjusted in the bios.
> I have also read Raja's tutorial for broadwell-e, but I was able to confuse myself even more. So I come to see if you can lend me a hand and finally leave the medium equipment to work.
> PD: In the tutorial of Raja I have seen that it is not compatible, at least in Broadwell-E, to use adaptive and the offset of the avx instructions, this is also so in Skylake-X? I for this reason I have not yet applied it, I have it in the auto.
> Thank you and apologize for the long explanation.
> 
> My computer:
> 
> i7 7820x - Asus Tuf Mark 1 - 32 Gb corsair vengance LPX 3200 CL16 8x4 Gb - Kraken x62 - Gigabyte 1080 G1 - Samsung 850 evo 500 Gb - Toshiba 3T - Corsair Air 540 - Corsair RM850i


From default voltage you should try both avx -5. Set manual voltage for your cpu at that default. Try to clock as high as u can with that .. disable any anticlocking stuff like cpu sprrad spectrum etc
Run prime95 27/28.x with avx disable custom blend full mem
See how u fair after any hour

Btw i always create a profile for daily driver

Currently its [email protected] 3200mhz 1.35v, mesh 3000mhz 1v, vccio at 0.95v, vcssa 0.84.. etc basically push the settings at stock. This includes total custom timings for imc etc with all ram trainings turned off . So its a consistent performance and skips certain ram boot sequence.

After you are done with this time to get the proper setting with digivrm.. for a fft12 run..


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I find 4900 to give out alot of more heat, and not the same performance increase as >-- 46 - 47 - 48. I might just stick to 4800 as 24/7 setting. That is plenty power for gaming.

Have anyone overclocked mesh past 3200..? I am running 3200 at 1.148V, but I don't know how strong the cache is on this. I damaged a 5820K by running cache at 45x at 1.25V..


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I find 4900 to give out alot of more heat, and not the same performance increase as >-- 46 - 47 - 48. I might just stick to 4800 as 24/7 setting. That is plenty power for gaming.
> 
> Have anyone overclocked mesh past 3200..? I am running 3200 at 1.148V, but I don't know how strong the cache is on this. I damaged a 5820K by running cache at 45x at 1.25V..


Btw mesh stability. 1344 prime fft avx is the best way to test if. Doesnt matter what cpu speed you are running at.
I keep mine at 3ghz @1v.

Realbench after testing abit is too lenient for this platform.
But if your cpu is more for gaming then i guess its ok,

Be warned realbench doest stress avx.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I run Realbench two hours. If it is stable, I call it a day.

I also fold on the GPU and CPU simultaneously, If this can fold for over 24 hours, it won't ever crash on me. It was like that on my 5820K and 5960X rig at least.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I run Realbench two hours. If it is stable, I call it a day.
> 
> I also fold on the GPU and CPU simultaneously, If this can fold for over 24 hours, it won't ever crash on me. It was like that on my 5820K and 5960X rig at least.


Ok. Good nuff i guess.

I need more avx intensive since its a encoding rig. It will be running 24/7 for few years. It just replaced the little chugger that could.

So found that many stress test was lenient especially on mesh oc.

One of the reasons i advised you to test avx stress test cause saw you posting somewhere your clocks is with zero offset but you were testing your cpu with realbench which doesnt use avx.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Ok. Good nuff i guess.
> 
> I need more avx intensive since its a encoding rig. It will be running 24/7 for few years. It just replaced the little chugger that could.
> 
> So found that many stress test was lenient especially on mesh oc.
> 
> One of the reasons i advised you to test avx stress test cause saw you posting somewhere your clocks is with zero offset but you were testing your cpu with realbench which doesnt use avx.


Realbench does use AVX


----------



## Mysticial

Speaking of which, has anyone here other than myself actually tried stressing the AVX512?
(Note that the latest Prime95 (v29) doesn't support AVX512 for the stress-tests. It supports it for the trial factoring, but not the FFT used in the stress-test.)

The thermals hard cap me to 4.0 GHz on my non-delidded 7900X. And even that 4.0 GHz results in temperature throttling since 3 of the cores go over 95C.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Speaking of which, has anyone here other than myself actually tried stressing the AVX512?
> (Note that the latest Prime95 (v29) doesn't support AVX512 for the stress-tests. It supports it for the trial factoring, but not the FFT used in the stress-test.)
> 
> The thermals hard cap me to 4.0 GHz on my non-delidded 7900X. And even that 4.0 GHz results in temperature throttling since 3 of the cores go over 95C.


How are you testing it?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Realbench does use AVX


Are you sure? Because when I used realbench it didn't use my AVX offset


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> How are you testing it?


y-cruncher


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Are you sure? Because when I used realbench it didn't use my AVX offset


I am pretty certain. It uses Handbrake, which uses AVX. If watch individual core speeds, you should see the AVX offset kicking in.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I am pretty certain. It uses Handbrake, which uses AVX. If watch individual core speeds, you should see the AVX offset kicking in.


gotcha. I'll have to test more when I get my chip


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> How are you testing it?


LinX 0.7.3 supports AVX512 and makes your processor melt at 4.0GHz, if that's what you want to do


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> LinX 0.7.3 supports AVX512 and makes your processor melt at 4.0GHz, if that's what you want to do


Can it run in windows? Do you have a link?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> y-cruncher


Wow...as soon as it hit AVX512 Integer it caused an orderly shutdown...lol. This was at 4.3GHz. I'll play with it some more later.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Wow...as soon as it hit AVX512 Integer it caused an orderly shutdown...lol. This was at 4.3GHz. I'll play with it some more later.


I was about to say that the thread went quiet presumably because someone's house went up in flames.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

As far as I've understood - Realbench uses AVX but does not trigger the AVX function.. Sounds weird, but that is how I've understood it.

Though, as of now.. Pretty happy with 4800 on 1.260-1.265V and not even delided.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> As far as I've understood - Realbench uses AVX but does not trigger the AVX function.. Sounds weird, but that is how I've understood it.
> 
> Though, as of now.. Pretty happy with 4800 on 1.260-1.265V and not even delided.


It definitely triggers AVX offset so I assume that it uses it in some mild manner.


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Wow...as soon as it hit AVX512 Integer it caused an orderly shutdown...lol. This was at 4.3GHz. I'll play with it some more later.


You can't do (much) more than 4.0GHz








4.1 is very likely put you into thermal shutdown.

Here's a link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/i3tgnffx47nekm5/LinX%20v0.7.3.zip?dl=0


----------



## GreedyMuffin

https://rog.asus.com/articles/overclocking/realbench-benchmarking-stress-test-insights/

Yep.. Seems to be using AVX.

Then I am extermely happy with 4800 at 1.260V and temps below 80'C max.

Seems to be at least a halfgood overclocker. :-D


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/articles/overclocking/realbench-benchmarking-stress-test-insights/
> 
> Yep.. Seems to be using AVX.
> 
> Then I am extermely happy with 4800 at 1.260V and temps below 80'C max.
> 
> Seems to be at least a halfgood overclocker. :-D


dont believe everything u google..
u can just do a simple test..

just set any offset on avx in the bios. Runrealbench. Watch CLOCK DOWN in realbench.simple.

Btw if u dont need avx and is totally fine with your setup by all means
I do tons of encodes. That 7820x of mine will be churning everyday for next few years.
So for me avx is important and i always use the latest h264, ffmpeg for my script.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Are you sure? Because when I used realbench it didn't use my AVX offset
> 
> 
> 
> I am pretty certain. It uses Handbrake, which uses AVX. If watch individual core speeds, you should see the AVX offset kicking in.
Click to expand...

RealBench Version 2.43 does not use AVX, the latest vesion does.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I am pretty certain. It uses Handbrake, which uses AVX. If watch individual core speeds, you should see the AVX offset kicking in.


Depends on what version of REalbench you're using.
2.44 Still uses AVX but not 100%, so with a AVX offset you'll still get the full clock speed.
2.54 seems to be only using AVX, which mean your clocks will only hit your AVX offset.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I've been using 2.43 because that's the only version I could ever find. Just assumed it was the latest.


----------



## mouacyk

So this whole AVX offset business... does it down-clock only the core that encounters the AVX instruction or all cores?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I've been using 2.43 because that's the only version I could ever find. Just assumed it was the latest.


2.54 is the latest.

This is what I mean by the older version's AVX usage, it's still using AVX but there's something else pushing the clocks to non AVX speed
2.54 just seems to be using AVX so it's not testing non AVX loads as well:

2.44


2.54


----------



## aDyerSituation

I only was able to find the 2.54 version by going to ASUS site, clicking downloads, and click on the real bench icon.

everywhere else it shows 2.43 as the latest version. Not sure why they have to make it complicated lol


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> I have not bothered testing AVX-512, because no good stress test exists. At stock frequencies, ZIH FIRESTARTER draws more power in AVX2/FMA3 mode than MKL LINPACK AVX-512.


What motherboard do you have? Is the AVX512 causing it to phantom throttle?

On my Gigabyte Aorus 7 at stock frequencies (which is 4.0 GHz with zero AVX/AVX512 offsets), AVX2/FMA3 pulls about 200 - 220W. But AVX512 pulls only 150W because of the phantom throttle. Once I fixed the throttle, the AVX512 pulls 300W+.

Or to put it another way, the Gigabyte boards are *broken at stock settings* because the AVX/AVX512 offsets are zero. I asked them about it and they said it was intentional to keep people from complaining about frequency drops.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Okei.. I checked and I am using 2.54. So the one with AVX.

Good to know, would be a bit sad if I had used the older version.. ?


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> I know what I am doing. ZIH FIRESTARTER AVX2/FMA3 can draw 200 W at stock frequency, which is the same as MKL LINPACK AVX-512 at stock frequency. This is because LINPACK does not utilize all resources on the CPU at work sizes that achieve reasonable efficiency. In particular, cache and memory traffic will be low at large matrix sizes. FIRESTARTER, and to a lesser extent Prime95, maximizes power usage by generating as much L2 traffic as possible without causing a bandwidth deficiency. LINPACK is a less intensive workload than Prime95, which itself is 10-20 W less intensive than FIRESTARTER.
> 
> Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-7900X stock frequencies are:
> 3.3 GHz base
> 3.3 GHz AVX-512
> 3.6 GHz AVX
> 4.0 GHz non-AVX
> 
> Stock frequency also implies PL1 and PL2 power management, but I am assuming those have been disabled.


From what i can tell Silicon lottery offeset -3 avx, -5 512avx is spot on.
7820x is
3.6 512,
3.7 avx
4ghz non

Btw thats the wrong way to run linpack. You need to disable HT.


----------



## district9prawn

Hi all,

How are people per core overclocking? On my MSI board I can only adjust per core ratios but not per core voltages. Only Intel's xtu seems to allow this. The turbo boost 3.0 driver seems to do a good job of prioritizing threads to the favourite cores though.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> How are people per core overclocking? On my MSI board I can only adjust per core ratios but not per core voltages. Only Intel's xtu seems to allow this. The turbo boost 3.0 driver seems to do a good job of prioritizing threads to the favourite cores though.


Asus no issue. Heck you can even set each core one manual, anothet offset and another adaptive,


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Asus no issue. Heck you can even set each core one manual, anothet offset and another adaptive,


Bloody hell that's good. The one time I decide to not buy Asus. I'm going to resort to software overclocking with XTU. x299 is well supported at least.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> Bloody hell that's good. The one time I decide to not buy Asus. I'm going to resort to software overclocking with XTU. x299 is well supported at least.


well the bios is currently a nightmare for anybody wants auto xmp to work for anything above 3000mhz
but no issue for those been clocking since x58, p67,z87.. its eerily similar to haswell.



daily driver almost done.. just testing at stock voltages to see how far everything can go on stock.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

My 3600 XMP worked fine on my Tomhawk.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

I can use Auto XMP with my Corsair Vengeance 3200Mhz 32GB kit fine on the TUF Mark 1.
Other than the secondary timing issue with the 0503 BIOS, I've had no problems.


----------



## TahoeDust

No auto XMP issues here.


----------



## cstkl1

da quest to hit 2000 @ 4.4ghz continues..


----------



## Mysticial

To anyone hoping that the higher core 165W chips are soldered... Doesn't look like it:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I don't want to add any more fuel to the AMD vs. Intel firestorm, but it looks like the 7960X has no holes on the IHS, and therefore probably not soldered:
> 
> http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?p=493559#post493559
> 
> So it's unlikely any of these higher core 165W chips will be soldered.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> I know what I am doing. ZIH FIRESTARTER AVX2/FMA3 can draw 200 W at stock frequency, which is the same as MKL LINPACK AVX-512 at stock frequency. This is because LINPACK does not utilize all resources on the CPU at work sizes that achieve reasonable efficiency. In particular, cache and memory traffic will be low at large matrix sizes. FIRESTARTER, and to a lesser extent Prime95, maximizes power usage by generating as much L2 traffic as possible without causing a bandwidth deficiency. LINPACK is a less intensive workload than Prime95, which itself is 10-20 W less intensive than FIRESTARTER.
> 
> Intel(R) Core(TM) i9-7900X stock frequencies are:
> 3.3 GHz base
> 3.3 GHz AVX-512
> 3.6 GHz AVX
> 4.0 GHz non-AVX
> 
> Stock frequency also implies PL1 and PL2 power management, but I am assuming those have been disabled.


Ok. In that case, I'm not surprised that AVX512 @ 3.3 GHz would pull the same (or slightly less) than AVX @ 3.6 GHz. Since that's what the purpose of the offset is for - to keep the TDP relatively constant for all loads.

In my own testing with loading CPU only/CPU+cache rarely had more than 10% effect on power draw at VCCIN unless the mesh was overclocked. That difference is much less than adjusting the CPU frequency by 200 - 300 MHz when taking into account for the adaptive voltages as well.


----------



## justinjb

Adding myself to the folks who have RAM issues with the latest ASUS 0503 BIOS.

I have the Prime x299-Deluxe with Corsair LPX Vengeance DDR4-3200 (16-18-18-36) and nothing I can set will let me boot other than Auto. This all worked fine with 0402. I too cannot downgrade the BIOS to 0402. See attached screenshot:


I have sent a support ticket to ASUS. I know I am late to the game here...

If anyone knows a workaround, I am all ears!


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *justinjb*
> 
> Adding myself to the folks who have RAM issues with the latest ASUS 0503 BIOS.
> 
> I have the Prime x299-Deluxe with Corsair LPX Vengeance DDR4-3200 (16-18-18-36) and nothing I can set will let me boot other than Auto. This all worked fine with 0402. I too cannot downgrade the BIOS to 0402. See attached screenshot:
> 
> 
> I have sent a support ticket to ASUS. I know I am late to the game here...
> 
> If anyone knows a workaround, I am all ears!


Flash 0031, it fixes this problem.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1635170/asus-x299-motherboard-series-official-support-thread#post_26249446


----------



## justinjb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Flash 0031, it fixes this problem.
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1635170/asus-x299-motherboard-series-official-support-thread#post_26249446


Thanks! I just stumbled across that after my post. Should have done more research first... Thanks!


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## district9prawn

Vice delidded!










Temps at 4.8 are slightly better than temps at 4.7 before delidding. 4.8 was too hot before.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> Vice delidded!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Temps at 4.8 are slightly better than temps at 4.7 before delidding. 4.8 was too hot before.


Another fellow OCAU member.
I thought I had seen the delidding pic before..

I'm so tempted to do mine, I don't think the TIM on my 7820x is the best, seems to be warmer that a lot of the guys over here.


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Another fellow OCAU member.
> I thought I had seen the delidding pic before..
> 
> I'm so tempted to do mine, I don't think the TIM on my 7820x is the best, seems to be warmer that a lot of the guys over here.


I was a bit worried about voiding warranty as I started off with an x299 mobo that immediately fried my cpu. Store replaced both after the board fried their test cpu







.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> Vice delidded!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Temps at 4.8 are slightly better than temps at 4.7 before delidding. 4.8 was too hot before.


Nice! This is my exact same experience with having my 7820x delidded. Got me from 4.7GHz to a slightly comfortable 4.8GHz.


----------



## Pandora's Box

If delidding is only giving 100MHz, I don't think it's worth it imo.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> If delidding is only giving 100MHz, I don't think it's worth it imo.


Than I recommend you don't do it.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> If delidding is only giving 100MHz, I don't think it's worth it imo.


That is the average I have seen here for delidding.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Another fellow OCAU member.
> I thought I had seen the delidding pic before..
> 
> I'm so tempted to do mine, I don't think the TIM on my 7820x is the best, seems to be warmer that a lot of the guys over here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was a bit worried about voiding warranty as I started off with an x299 mobo that immediately fried my cpu. Store replaced both after the board fried their test cpu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
Click to expand...

What motherboard did you have that wiped out the processor?


----------



## district9prawn

MSI carbon


----------



## cstkl1

Overated and seems only asus boards require this with the screwed up bios.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Than I recommend you don't do it.


Btw what cooling you are running and whats your ambient temp.
The voltage you must have used for the 5.1 must be quite abit. I can bench at 5 if i raise asus tjmax from 105 to 120.


----------



## Pandora's Box

Ordered a complete custom watercooling setup from EKWB this morning. Pre-ordered the monoblock for the X299 Gaming 9 board. Can't wait!


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Btw what cooling you are running and whats your ambient temp.
> The voltage you must have used for the 5.1 must be quite abit. I can bench at 5 if i raise asus tjmax from 105 to 120.


Cooling is a h115i using push/pull. Ambient is 21c-22c. 5.1 was at 1.45v. I did not touch tjmax. Unfortunately the only bench it has not been able to complete at 5.1GHz is Cinebench multicore. I have not tried the voltage any higher. I have not tried geekbench at 5.1 yet, I'll give it a shot in a minute and record temps.

Edit: Geekbench crashes during the SQLITE test at 5.1GHz.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Cooling is a h115i using push/pull. Ambient is 21c-22c. 5.1 was at 1.45v. I did not touch tjmax. Unfortunately the only bench it has not been able to complete at 5.1GHz is Cinebench multicore. I have not tried the voltage any higher. I have not tried geekbench at 5.1 yet, I'll give it a shot in a minute and record temps.
> 
> Edit: Geekbench crashes during the SQLITE test at 5.1GHz.


I am guessing because of the delid your temps dont sky rocket,


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> Ordered a complete custom watercooling setup from EKWB this morning. Pre-ordered the monoblock for the X299 Gaming 9 board. Can't wait!


Nice. Da monoblocks are crazy nice.

You might as well buy a m.2 heatsink. I totally forgot to buy one.


----------



## cstkl1

per core voltage set.. so all cores are different voltages...
4.7ghz avx offset -3 512 offset -5


----------



## Badass1982

Hi All,

I'm interested in getting the flagship I9-7980XE when it comes out (although I'm tempted to get a tested de-lidded one from SL if they have them) I just have a question about the OC-ing of them really.

I currently have a 5960X which i run at 4.453Ghz on all cores all the time. I noticed that the 7980XE base core is super low (in comparison) and I'm curious as to whether you guys think it will even be possible to overclock the 7980XE on all 18 cores at the same time.

I don't like to do offset overclock's , I prefer to just go all out on my liquid set up and overclock the total amount of cores. On the 7980XE if I could get anywhere near all cores to 4.2Ghz or so all of the time that would be insane.

Thanks

Martin


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Badass1982*
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> I'm interested in getting the flagship I9-7980XE when it comes out (although I'm tempted to get a tested de-lidded one from SL if they have them) I just have a question about the OC-ing of them really.
> 
> I currently have a 5960X which i run at 4.453Ghz on all cores all the time. I noticed that the 7980XE base core is super low (in comparison) and I'm curious as to whether you guys think it will even be possible to overclock the 7980XE on all 18 cores at the same time.
> 
> I don't like to do offset overclock's , I prefer to just go all out on my liquid set up and overclock the total amount of cores. On the 7980XE if I could get anywhere near all cores to 4.2Ghz or so all of the time that would be insane.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Martin


It depends. If the Skylake-X processors already out are any indication then you will need a serious cooling setup to overclock the higher up Skylake-X chips.

I'd say 4.0ghz is a reasonable expectation. Maybe more if they actually solder them, but I doubt that will happen.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Badass1982*
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> I'm interested in getting the flagship I9-7980XE when it comes out (although I'm tempted to get a tested de-lidded one from SL if they have them) I just have a question about the OC-ing of them really.
> 
> I currently have a 5960X which i run at 4.453Ghz on all cores all the time. I noticed that the 7980XE base core is super low (in comparison) and I'm curious as to whether you guys think it will even be possible to overclock the 7980XE on all 18 cores at the same time.
> 
> I don't like to do offset overclock's , I prefer to just go all out on my liquid set up and overclock the total amount of cores. On the 7980XE if I could get anywhere near all cores to 4.2Ghz or so all of the time that would be insane.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Martin


Extrapolating the #'s for the 7900X, I think 4.0 GHz all-core non-AVX should be doable on the 7980XE if you're able to dissipate 400W. That's well beyond the range of even the 280/360 CLCs/AIOs. But maybe the higher-end custom water setups can do it.

4.2 GHz non-AVX is probably gonna be pushing it though.

4.0 GHz AVX will probably pull around 500 - 600W. I don't know what the limit of custom water is.
4.0 GHz AVX512 will probably pull around 600 - 800W depending on how intensive it is. I'm no extreme overclocker, but that might be into LN2 territory.

Though at some point, either the VRMs or the socket itself will probably give out before then.


----------



## Badass1982

So heres some basic info from my current setup. I have 3 x 540 rads cooling my 2x Titan X (maxwells) and my heavily OCed 5960x in one loop. 28 fans total in my system, yes it sounds like a helicopter. I get idle temps in windows when just chilling browsing the net etc of around low 30's when under load that increases to around 75 ish very rarely will I ever hit 70 (just ran a quick 3d mark timespy run and the highest even one core hit was 63c) even during the longest gaming sessions.

Forgive my ignorance but what is AVX??? I currently run at 1.3v on 5960x and have had no issues with my current setup, yeah atm its all custom water. My next build will probably be built in a desk case, although I'm holding off currently due to being poor as I just bought my first house. Damned necessities getting in the way of my PC builds.


----------



## aDyerSituation

78 is pretty high for 3x 540 rads. Not sure that will be enough

8 vs 18 cores after all.

Also AVX and AVX512 is an instruction set that isn't used in much besides stress tests and a few rendering programs, from my understanding.


----------



## Badass1982

Just edited my initial post as my load temps were way out. Have corrected it now, 63c max (and that was only on 1 core) running Timespy.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Badass1982*
> 
> So heres some basic info from my current setup. I have 3 x 540 rads cooling my 2x Titan X (maxwells) and my heavily OCed 5960x in one loop. 28 fans total in my system, yes it sounds like a helicopter. I get idle temps in windows when just chilling browsing the net etc of around low 30's when under load that increases to around 75 ish very rarely will I ever hit 80 even during the longest gaming sessions.
> 
> Forgive my ignorance but what is AVX??? I currently run at 1.3v on 5960x and have had no issues with my current setup, yeah atm its all custom water. My next build will probably be built in a desk case, although I'm holding off currently due to being poor as I just bought my first house. Damned necessities getting in the way of my PC builds.


AVX (and AVX2 and AVX512) are vector instructions that perform mathematical/logical operations on a multiple fields at the same time. So, instead of A + B, it is doing A[0] + B[0], A[1] + B[1], A[2] + B[2]] and so on and so forth with a single instruction.

As a result you have a LOT of transistors toggling in parallel which means not only power consumption, but concentrated power consumption in one area of the chip and concentrated on a single clock cycle.

So, intel drops the clock rate (power consumption scales up exponentially with frequency all else being equal). However, the throughput on those operations is much higher as in a single or a few clocks you are doing 512/8, 512/16, 512/64, etc... operations (depending on the width of your operands (A and B).

These instructions aren't generally useful for complex instruction flow, but rather large scale data transformation or searching. Compression, transcoding, filtering, etc...


----------



## cekim

BTW - Given my experience with a few overclocked 6700, 5960, 6950, 2696v3 (aka HW, BW, SKL) you won't even come close to using the entire capacity of a single 540 rad (or even a 280), the limiting factor will be the die-to-TIM, TIM to IHS and IHS to cooling head/sink heat transfer. It appears to be even more pronounced with SKLX that dumping the heat to the air just isn't the bottlneck at this point. It's getting the heat off the gates themselves fast enough.

The rest is how slow you can run your fans and still cool it.

TitanXp/1080ti are toasty when OC'd though. I am able to cool 2 1080ti with a single EK 280 (the thick one, I forget the depth right now), but it definitely had to work a LOT harder than the same rad/pump did with 2 1080s. I wouldn't want to go smaller, but that's something like 400-500Ws OC'd and pushed to 100%.

Those 2 (1080ti) are now on a dedicated single 360 and doing fine.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Badass1982*
> 
> So heres some basic info from my current setup. I have 3 x 540 rads cooling my 2x Titan X (maxwells) and my heavily OCed 5960x in one loop. 28 fans total in my system, yes it sounds like a helicopter. I get idle temps in windows when just chilling browsing the net etc of around low 30's when under load that increases to around 75 ish very rarely will I ever hit 80 even during the longest gaming sessions.
> 
> Forgive my ignorance but what is AVX??? I currently run at 1.3v on 5960x and have had no issues with my current setup, yeah atm its all custom water. My next build will probably be built in a desk case, although I'm holding off currently due to being poor as I just bought my first house. Damned necessities getting in the way of my PC builds.
> 
> 
> 
> AVX (and AVX2 and AVX512) are vector instructions that perform mathematical/logical operations on a multiple fields at the same time. So, instead of A + B, it is doing A[0] + B[0], A[1] + B[1], A[2] + B[2]] and so on and so forth with a single instruction.
> 
> As a result you have a LOT of transistors toggling in parallel which means not only power consumption, but concentrated power consumption in one area of the chip and concentrated on a single clock cycle.
> 
> So, intel drops the clock rate (power consumption scales up exponentially with frequency all else being equal). However, the throughput on those operations is much higher as in a single or a few clocks you are doing 512/8, 512/16, 512/64, etc... operations (depending on the width of your operands (A and B).
> 
> These instructions aren't generally useful for complex instruction flow, but rather large scale data transformation or searching. Compression, transcoding, filtering, etc...
Click to expand...

Does AVX extension filter down to to 64-bit integers?


----------



## ssateneth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> 78 is pretty high for 3x 540 rads. Not sure that will be enough
> 
> 8 vs 18 cores after all.
> 
> Also AVX and AVX512 is an instruction set that isn't used in much besides stress tests and a few rendering programs, from my understanding.


Have people actually tested the difference for different amounts/sizes of rads? If your coolant is the same temperature under load between 1 and 3 rads, whats the point? I have a single 560x140x80mm radiator and delta between ambient and idle coolant is in the area of 1-2 degrees, and when I had 2 kepler titans, was able to pull about 1200W at the wall. Delta went up to about 8-10 degrees under the 'worst case' load I could pull.

Really you should not concern yourself with die temperatures when comparing different radiator setups. Instead, compare the coolant temperatures. Die temperatures really only have to do with TIM used, the cold plate (waterblock), and to some degree, coolant flow rate.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Does AVX extension filter down to to 64-bit integers?


Not entirely sure what you are asking?

The result of an AVX instruction is, generally speaking, a matrix operation:
R[N] = A[N] + B[N]

So, the result consumes as much space as either one of the operands (or more with carry/sign extension). So, a an AVX512 instruction that supports 64bit operands would simultaneously take in 8 A's and 8 B's and produce 8 R's.

So, 512bits of A + 512bits of B = 512bits of result (aka: 8 64bit quad words)

A simple example (SIMD operation on 4 words at a time

Code:



Code:


  A[0] = 1 A[1] = 2 A[2] = 3 A[3] = 4
+ B[0] = 1 B[1] = 1 B[2] = 1 B[3] = 1
___________________________
  C[0] = 2 C[1] = 3 C[2] = 4 C[3] = 5


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Does AVX extension filter down to to 64-bit integers?
> 
> 
> 
> Not entirely sure what you are asking?
> 
> The result of an AVX instruction is, generally speaking, a matrix operation:
> R[N] = A[N] + B[N]
> 
> So, the result consumes as much space as either one of the operands (or more with carry/sign extension). So, a an AVX512 instruction that supports 64bit operands would simultaneously take in 8 A's and 8 B's and produce 8 R's.
> 
> So, 512bits of A + 512bits of B = 512bits of result (aka: 8 64bit quad words)
> 
> A simple example (SIMD operation on 4 words at a time
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> A[0] = 1 A[1] = 2 A[2] = 3 A[3] = 4
> + B[0] = 1 B[1] = 1 B[2] = 1 B[3] = 1
> ___________________________
> C[0] = 2 C[1] = 3 C[2] = 4 C[3] = 5
Click to expand...

Thanks for the information. I was wondering how the arithmetic and logic unit can handle 512bits when it is only 64bits. So your saying AVX gathers 512bits then breaks the word into 8 parts for 64bit feed through the arithmetic and logic unit?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Extrapolating the #'s for the 7900X, I think 4.0 GHz all-core non-AVX should be doable on the 7980XE if you're able to dissipate 400W. That's well beyond the range of even the 280/360 CLCs/AIOs. But maybe the higher-end custom water setups can do it.
> 
> 4.2 GHz non-AVX is probably gonna be pushing it though.
> 
> 4.0 GHz AVX will probably pull around 500 - 600W. I don't know what the limit of custom water is.
> 4.0 GHz AVX512 will probably pull around 600 - 800W depending on how intensive it is. I'm no extreme overclocker, but that might be into LN2 territory.
> 
> Though at some point, either the VRMs or the socket itself will probably give out before then.


I am on 7820x with two Titan X maxwell with a 560+280 rad with push config fans with two d5s on a single loop.
On stresstest of the cpu increasing fan speed from my notm run at 800rpm (max is 1400rpm) wont help with cpu cooling as much as me turning up the pumps to max. The later actually helps. My config is pump to cpu to gpu1/2 parrallel.
Ambient temp with ac is arnd 23c. Cpu temps are as posted above.

Based on da spec of 7980xe and 7900x/7820x vid ..4ghz is doable at 1v but 4ghz avx.. hmmm highly unlikely at 1v.


----------



## cstkl1

For per core clocking
Ok tested the best core thing overclock. Generally its not a good idea for stock cpu.

Y because we should overclock the core that has the lowest temp. It may even require more voltage than the best core but it will be way cooler.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> For per core clocking
> Ok tested the best core thing overclock. Generally its not a good idea for stock cpu.
> 
> Y because we should overclock the core that has the lowest temp. It may even require more voltage than the best core but it will be way cooler.


Did you miss Broadwell-E? We have been doing per core overclocking for a while now.


----------



## Pandora's Box

Messing around with fine tuning my overclock today. Trying to bring down the voltage as much as I can. I was at 4.7GHz @ 1.28volts. Now down to 1.25 volts @ 4.7GHz. Intel Extreme Tuning Utility has been running for 2 hours now, max temp is 82C on the CPU, down for 86C









Btw it would definitely seem the whole X299 VRM overheating debacle is blown completely out of proportion. Here is what I get on my Gigabyte X299 Gaming 9 motherboard:

I'm at 73C on my VRM, 63C on the PCH, and motherboard is at 39C with the CPU at 4.7 GHz 1.25 volts and the MESH overclocked to 3GHz @ 1.15 volts with DDR4 3200MHz memory.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pandora's Box*
> 
> Messing around with fine tuning my overclock today. Trying to bring down the voltage as much as I can. I was at 4.7GHz @ 1.28volts. Now down to 1.25 volts @ 4.7GHz. Intel Extreme Tuning Utility has been running for 2 hours now, max temp is 82C on the CPU, down for 86C
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Btw it would definitely seem the whole X299 VRM overheating debacle is blown completely out of proportion. Here is what I get on my Gigabyte X299 Gaming 9 motherboard:
> 
> I'm at 73C on my VRM, 63C on the PCH, and motherboard is at 39C with the CPU at 4.7 GHz 1.25 volts and the MESH overclocked to 3GHz @ 1.15 volts with DDR4 3200MHz memory.


Very nice man! Can you do me a favour..?

I have a problem where Aida64 reports a 15-20mv higher voltage compared to HWInfo, CPU-Z etc. So I guess Aida64 is correct in my case.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Did you miss Broadwell-E? We have been doing per core overclocking for a while now.


Yeah. U mean broadwell-e had .. instead of a single cpu vid.. there was each core with different vid and the best two vid is boosting higher with turbo 3.0 and a bios option on asus to set one core manual voltage, another adaptive, and another offset .. for thr fun of it??

It had all that?? Afaik u could only set diff multis on broadwell-e. Didnt know u can set each voltage for each core with different type control manual/offset/adaptive.. mix & match

But Thats dope if it could..


----------



## Pandora's Box

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Very nice man! Can you do me a favour..?
> 
> I have a problem where Aida64 reports a 15-20mv higher voltage compared to HWInfo, CPU-Z etc. So I guess Aida64 is correct in my case.


Seems to be reporting the same here.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Thanks for the information. I was wondering how the arithmetic and logic unit can handle 512bits when it is only 64bits. So your saying AVX gathers 512bits then breaks the word into 8 parts for 64bit feed through the arithmetic and logic unit?


There are actually multiple ALU's and assorted logic that provide an array of ALUs which can operate at various widths (that sum together to 512bits). It is not multiplexing down to 64, it is performing all of those operations on the same clock cycle (which is why it consumes so much power).

So, if you have 10 cores running AVX512 operations on 64bit operands (for example), you effectively have 80 simultaneous 64bit ALUs performing that operation at the same time.

Again, the actual width of the operation is a variable (8,16,32,64,128,256), but the underlying logic functions against 512bits, so it is divided up into 512/operand_width entries in a matrix/vector operation.

FMA (Fuse-Multiply-Add) opcodes mean its even more as the ALU is performing multiple calculations per instruction - again - hence all the heat.

This is also why the XCC (and EPYC) parts (18-32 cores) are now passing 1TFLOP plus... When you consider the number of ALUs in these chips relative to a GPU, they are now _only_ an order of magnitude apart (10TFLOP for a GPU vs 1TFLOP for a CPU). The same is true of the total number of ALUs in these systems... CPUs are running at higher clocks (~1.5-2.0GHz for GPU and 2.5-3.0GHz for AVX CPU), but Cores X ALUs is now much closer than it has ever been.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> There are actually multiple ALU's and assorted logic that provide an array of ALUs which can operate at various widths (that sum together to 512bits). It is not multiplexing down to 64, it is performing all of those operations on the same clock cycle (which is why it consumes so much power).
> 
> So, if you have 10 cores running AVX512 operations on 64bit operands (for example), you effectively have 80 simultaneous 64bit ALUs performing that operation at the same time.
> 
> Again, the actual width of the operation is a variable (8,16,32,64,128,256), but the underlying logic functions against 512bits, so it is divided up into 512/operand_width entries in a matrix/vector operation.
> 
> FMA (Fuse-Multiply-Add) opcodes mean its even more as the ALU is performing multiple calculations per instruction - again - hence all the heat.
> 
> This is also why the XCC (and EPYC) parts (18-32 cores) are now passing 1TFLOP plus... When you consider the number of ALUs in these chips relative to a GPU, they are now _only_ an order of magnitude apart (10TFLOP for a GPU vs 1TFLOP for a CPU). The same is true of the total number of ALUs in these systems... CPUs are running at higher clocks (~1.5-2.0GHz for GPU and 2.5-3.0GHz for AVX CPU), but Cores X ALUs is now much closer than it has ever been.


So when they say 7820x has one AVX 512 per core instead of two.. my understanding is out of the 16 threads only 8 will be running it??
interest in this is purely for encoding.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> So when they say 7820x has one AVX 512 per core instead of two.. my understanding is out of the 16 threads only 8 will be running it??
> interest in this is purely for encoding.


The prerelease reviews got it wrong. All the Skylake X chips have the full AVX512. I asked Anandtech about this and they said they got that information from an Intel slide. He has since asked Intel about it but Intel hasn't said anything.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Thanks for the information. I was wondering how the arithmetic and logic unit can handle 512bits when it is only 64bits. So your saying AVX gathers 512bits then breaks the word into 8 parts for 64bit feed through the arithmetic and logic unit?
> 
> 
> 
> There are actually multiple ALU's and assorted logic that provide an array of ALUs which can operate at various widths (that sum together to 512bits). It is not multiplexing down to 64, it is performing all of those operations on the same clock cycle (which is why it consumes so much power).
> 
> So, if you have 10 cores running AVX512 operations on 64bit operands (for example), you effectively have 80 simultaneous 64bit ALUs performing that operation at the same time.
> 
> Again, the actual width of the operation is a variable (8,16,32,64,128,256), but the underlying logic functions against 512bits, so it is divided up into 512/operand_width entries in a matrix/vector operation.
> 
> FMA (Fuse-Multiply-Add) opcodes mean its even more as the ALU is performing multiple calculations per instruction - again - hence all the heat.
> 
> This is also why the XCC (and EPYC) parts (18-32 cores) are now passing 1TFLOP plus... When you consider the number of ALUs in these chips relative to a GPU, they are now _only_ an order of magnitude apart (10TFLOP for a GPU vs 1TFLOP for a CPU). The same is true of the total number of ALUs in these systems... CPUs are running at higher clocks (~1.5-2.0GHz for GPU and 2.5-3.0GHz for AVX CPU), but Cores X ALUs is now much closer than it has ever been.
Click to expand...

So X86 64 is 64bit with, then processing AVX 512 bit length is processed in one clock cycle? It looks like you mean length or quantity instead of with?

Advanced Vector Extensions
AVX uses sixteen YMM registers. Each YMM register contains:

eight 32-bit single-precision floating point numbers or
four 64-bit double-precision floating point numbers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Vector_Extensions


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> The prerelease reviews got it wrong. All the Skylake X chips have the full AVX512. I asked Anandtech about this and they said they got that information from an Intel slide. He has since asked Intel about it but Intel hasn't said anything.


Is my assumption valid if its true??

Compiling the latest h264 which supports avx. Will set two diff offsets 4.3 for avx and 4ghz for 512x. Doing it in abit.
If the assumption is true should be seeing half at 4.3 and the other half at 4ghz right??


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Is my assumption valid if its true??
> 
> Compiling the latest h264 which supports avx. Will set two diff offsets 4.3 for avx and 4ghz for 512x. Doing it in abit.
> If the assumption is true should be seeing half at 4.3 and the other half at 4ghz right??


There's no asymmetry like that. On the SKUs with full AVX512, each core has two of them. Otherwise they each only have one. The difference in performance is that the full AVX512 SKUs have higher IPC when running AVX512.


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I have a problem where Aida64 reports a 15-20mv higher voltage compared to HWInfo, CPU-Z etc. So I guess Aida64 is correct in my case.


CPU-Z doesn't report a voltage. It reports the VID. So do the VID readouts in hwinfo.









AIDA may very well report a voltage readout. Additional 15mV is in line with internal LLC of previous (F)IVR chips


----------



## cstkl1

Double post


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> CPU-Z doesn't report a voltage. It reports the VID. So do the VID readouts in hwinfo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AIDA may very well report a voltage readout. Additional 15mV is in line with internal LLC of previous (F)IVR chips


Cpuz reports the highest core vid as does core temp afaik. Cpuz reports i suspect the mesh voltage on strix.

Seeing you here brings back memories .. familar nicks.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> So currently its not confirmed? Pretty big deal for me actually as i am pretty happy on how solid x299 is so its either build a 16 core with tuf 1 or two 7820x tuf 1 rigs standlone rigs for scene release. It was due for an upgrade. The deciding factor is avx 512 performance


It has been confirmed via benchmarks that all the Skylake X SKUs have the full AVX512 despite Intel saying that they don't. It's only the low-end Bronze/Silver/Gold Xeons that don't. So this is a rare case where Intel gimped the server parts instead of the desktop parts.

So no, you do not need to get the 7900X for the full AVX512. A 7800X or 7820X will do.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> It has been confirmed via benchmarks that all the Skylake X SKUs have the full AVX512 despite Intel saying that they don't. It's only the low-end Bronze/Silver/Gold Xeons that don't. So this is a rare case where Intel gimped the server parts instead of the desktop parts.
> 
> So no, you do not need to get the 7900X for the full AVX512. A 7800X or 7820X will do.


My reasoning is better to get two 7820x rigs instead of one 7960x . Divide the job to two cpus/rigs.

Btw do you mind linking me the correct reviews with the benchmarks??


----------



## cstkl1

@Mysticial



running the latest h264 which supports avx512 on 7820x.

for this test
4.4ghz offset -1(4.3) for AVX and offset -4 (4ghz) for 512

seems to be working but its fluctuation between avx offsets.. 6-8 cores most of the time at 4ghz ...

could be because of the beta nature of the h264.


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Cpuz reports the highest core vid as does core temp afaik. Cpuz reports i suspect the mesh voltage on strix.
> 
> Seeing you here brings back memories .. familar nicks.












Actually CPU-Z reports the VID of Core#0. One of my 7820X has a great Core#0 VID, on the other one #0 is the worst by far.








This is on MSI... on Giga I've seen reported load volts of 0.016V at 1.170V VID. On some boards CPU-Z is still screwed up it seems.

You are right about CoreTemp, it does report the highest VID of all cores.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually CPU-Z reports the VID of Core#0. One of my 7820X has a great Core#0 VID, on the other one #0 is the worst by far.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is on MSI... on Giga I've seen reported load volts of 0.016V at 1.170V VID. On some boards CPU-Z is still screwed up it seems.
> 
> You are right about CoreTemp, it does report the highest VID of all cores.


Does your msi able to do each core voltagd adjustment and even give you a choice for each core to choose between manual/adaptive/offset??

Asus i suspect does an avg of all the vids each core running and reports back.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> My reasoning is better to get two 7820x rigs instead of one 7960x . Divide the job to two cpus/rigs.
> 
> Btw do you mind linking me the correct reviews with the benchmarks??


There are few reviews that specifically test the AVX512 because there are very few AVX512 benchmarks that exist yet.

https://proclockers.com/reviews/cpus/intel-core-i7-7820x-cpu-review/page/0/4

Here are the links about the AVX512 throughput on the lower SKUs.

https://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/intel-isa-extensions/topic/737959
http://www.overclock.net/t/1632638/just-a-heads-up-for-anyone-buying-x299-if-you-want-full-avx-capability-you-need-to-buy-the-7900x-and-up#post_26216596

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> @Mysticial
> 
> 
> 
> running the latest h264 which supports avx512 on 7820x.
> 
> for this test
> 4.4ghz offset -1(4.3) for AVX and offset -4 (4ghz) for 512
> 
> seems to be working but its fluctuation between avx offsets.. 6-8 cores most of the time at 4ghz ...
> 
> could be because of the beta nature of the h264.


I don't believe h264 uses AVX512 yet. But I'm not positive about that.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> There are no reviews that specifically test the AVX512 because there are very few AVX512 benchmarks that exist yet.
> 
> Here are the links about the AVX512 throughput on the lower SKUs.
> 
> https://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/intel-isa-extensions/topic/737959
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1632638/just-a-heads-up-for-anyone-buying-x299-if-you-want-full-avx-capability-you-need-to-buy-the-7900x-and-up#post_26216596
> https://proclockers.com/reviews/cpus/intel-core-i7-7820x-cpu-review/page/0/4
> I don't believe h264 uses AVX512 yet. But I'm not positive about that.


Its using it bro. Check their history log.

And you have the proof on the above pic.

I am clocking 4.4ghz with avx offset 1 (4.3ghz) and avx 512 offset 4 (4ghz)

You can see the 4ghz kicking in. Heck the temps itself confirms it. 70c and avg core voltage of 1.08..
before this on older h264 it was churning avx with temps arnd 52c at 4.3ghz ..

Also confirmed a similar size video with similar no of frames.. encoding time dropped. Older h264 was 3hrs plus.. the newer one did it in 2hrs plus.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Its using it bro. Check their history log.
> 
> And you have the proof on the above pic.
> 
> I am clocking 4.4ghz with avx offset 1 (4.3ghz) and avx 512 offset 4 (4ghz)
> 
> You can see the 4ghz kicking in. Heck the temps itself confirms it. 70c and avg core voltage of 1.08..
> before this on older h264 it was churning avx with temps arnd 52c at 4.3ghz ..
> 
> Also confirmed a similar size video with similar no of frames.. encoding time dropped. Older h264 was 3hrs plus.. the newer one did it in 2hrs plus.


Ah, last time I checked their forums they said AVX512 was "months away". That was fast...


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Ah, last time I checked their forums they said AVX512 was "months away". That was fast...


But what i am curious why is the 512 flux with avx..
Based on the core speed.. 5-8 cores running 4ghz with 0-3 running at 4.3.
Again could it be the beta nature of x264.. but could it because of that gimped thing intel said??

To confirm we need a 7900x user.

Y isnt it fixed all 8cores at 4ghz??


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> But what i am curious why is the 512 flux with avx..
> Based on the core speed.. 5-8 cores running 4ghz with 0-3 running at 4.3.
> Again could it be the beta nature of x264.. but could it because of that gimped thing intel said??
> 
> To confirm we need a 7900x user.
> 
> Y isnt it fixed all 8cores at 4ghz??


Have you tried firing up an AVX512 stress test to see how the clocks behave?

I have a 7900X, but I'm OOT for the solar eclipse.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Have you tried firing up an AVX512 stress test to see how the clocks behave?
> 
> I have a 7900X, but I'm OOT for the solar eclipse.


U mean prime95 29.1?? Will test after the encode finishes.

Btw running this actually increased my water loop temps by 6-7c ?... It increased VRMs temps by 15c to all time high of 50c . Running a monoblock btw. Doubt the stock heatsink can handle this.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> U mean prime95 29.1?? Will test after the encode finishes.
> 
> Btw running this actually increased my water loop temps by 6-7c ?... It increased VRMs temps by 15c to all time high of 50c . Running a monoblock btw. Doubt the stock heatsink can handle this.


Prime95 29's AVX512 is not for the FFT stress tests. It's for the trial factoring which is a hidden feature.

So it's only using AVX. And if that's running hotter than x264, then that probably means x264 is not using AVX512 very heavily at all.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Prime95 29's AVX512 is not for the FFT stress tests. It's for the trial factoring which is a hidden feature.
> 
> So it's only using AVX. And if that's running hotter than x264, then that probably means x264 is not using AVX512 very heavily at all.


I meant running the h264. Thats what loading the vrm quite abit..Waiting for the encode to finish. Water temps increased quite abit.

So which avx 512 stress test can i run with??

Btw do you know which bios setting is making hwinfo report cpu package power incorrectly??


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> I meant running the h264. Thats what loading the vrm quite abit..Waiting for the encode to finish. Water temps increased quite abit.
> 
> So which avx 512 stress test can i run with??
> 
> Btw do you know which bios setting is making hwinfo report cpu package power incorrectly??


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> y-cruncher


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Wow...as soon as it hit AVX512 Integer it caused an orderly shutdown...lol. This was at 4.3GHz. I'll play with it some more later.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> So X86 64 is 64bit with, then processing AVX 512 bit length is processed in one clock cycle? It looks like you mean length or quantity instead of with?
> 
> Advanced Vector Extensions
> AVX uses sixteen YMM registers. Each YMM register contains:
> 
> eight 32-bit single-precision floating point numbers or
> four 64-bit double-precision floating point numbers.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Vector_Extensions


XMM/YMM registers are 128 and 256bits respectively, AVX512 can operate on those registers as well as memory operands.

x86_64 is indeed "64bit", but that does not mean all data paths are limited to 64bits. In particular AVXnnn functionality is specifically designed to operate on much larger vectors. That's how its faster (significantly so if your compiler and coder know what they are doing) than just performing 8 64bit operations in the integer or floating point pipe-line.

The execution flow when memory operands are used (vs registers) is (simplified to ignore threading, register rename, branch prediction, etc... ):
1. read 512bits x 2 from memory starting at the provided pointers (or 8 64bit quad-words for each) and place them in the operand registers of the AVX unit
2. AVX unit operates on these in as many or few clock cycles as required by its pipe for a given operation
- BUT NOTE, IT IS NOT PERFORMING 8 64bit OPERATIONS - only that some mathematical functions require more than one cycle. The entire 512bit vector is operated on in parallel.
3. write back the result from the AVX result register to the provided target registers (XMM/YMM or memory - which is 128/256 or 512bits respectively)

So, if a memory is specified as the source and target of the AVX operation, it is burst read - execute - burst write. No serialization into "64bits" occurs at any time inside the processor. The IMC/DDR will of course write out per its configuration (channels, span, etc... ).


----------



## garyd9

I'm considering running out tomorrow (Sunday) to purchase a 7820X, but I'm not sure which motherboard choice would be best considering my budget limitations. I'd normally spend 2 or 3 weeks reading any reviews I could find, studying forums, etc - but I'm kind of on a time crunch, so I'm hoping the folks here can help out...

Everything on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being insignificant to me, 5 being a requirement...) in parens (1)(2), etc.

The motherboard should be priced <=350 USD (5). That puts me in the range of the Asrock X299 Taichi or Asus Strix X299-E. I'm water cooling (custom loop), so lots of PWM fan headers are extremely useful (5). (Does that asus strix x299-E support the fan/sensor extension card? (3) I actually have one on my current board I could re-use.) At the current moment, I am using 1 CPU fan header (pump) and 4 other fan headers (all PWM.) In addition, I'm using 3 temp sensor headers (water temp, radiator incoming air temp, and a sensor shoved under my GPU backplate.)

I NOT doing SLI (and have no intention of doing so.) M.2 is a big deal for me, and any board MUST support m.2 PCIe3x4 (I think they all do.)(5) A second m.2 slot would be nice (2). Intel LAN is a requirement (5) (I only need a single LAN adapter, but a second one is nice (2)- as long as it's Intel and not the so-called "killer" thing.) Wifi onboard would be extremely useful (4), but I could live without it.

Onboard LED headers (asus aura, msi mystic, etc) is nice, but not a requirement. On the other hand, the board is going to be installed in a tempered glass case, so cosmetics do matter some. (3)

I intend to overclock, but not a LOT. For example, I'm perfectly happy with my existing i7-7700k running at 4.6 all cores 24/7. So, minimal overclocking is a big deal (4), but massive overclocking is not important (2.)

I understand that there are many options, and some people have strong opinions for/against certain boards. If you feel a negative is significant, but might bother someone, please PM it to me instead of turning the CPU thread into a motherboard fight...

My current (unresearched) options are the Asrock and Asus boards mentioned above.. (and I don't know if either can handle my fan header requirements.)

Thank you all in advance
Gary


----------



## aerotracks

If anyone over here is familiar with German or fancies choppy Google translate results







- I wrote a small guide on overclocking Skylake-X
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f139/intel-skylake-x-sockel-2066-oc-guide-1172969.html


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> Quite frankly, the existing AVX2 optimizations in x264 are already a joke. After you account for the frequency reduction on any non-client CPU, the AVX2 mode actually runs slower than the previous SSE code. Given the even steeper frequency penalty for using AVX-512, I would not be surprised to see x264 with AVX-512 being as much as 10% slower than the old versions.


My run shows difference in time was around 30minutes faster.
Encode sample was arnd 20gb avc high profile 4.0 with 160k frames.
Latest x264 build 2hours 43minutes. Two years ago x264 build 3hrs 20 minutes i think.
Will check the log later on what was the avg fps.
Temps difference was 64 vs 52 avg.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> If anyone over here is familiar with German or fancies choppy Google translate results
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - I wrote a small guide on overclocking Skylake-X
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f139/intel-skylake-x-sockel-2066-oc-guide-1172969.html


Good job dude.

Stock vid. Asus boards reads out the vid based on 4ghz instead of 3.6.

Afaik its not based on average..

my guess its ( highest core vid+avg of all cores)/2.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *garyd9*
> 
> I'm considering running out tomorrow (Sunday) to purchase a 7820X, but I'm not sure which motherboard choice would be best considering my budget limitations. I'd normally spend 2 or 3 weeks reading any reviews I could find, studying forums, etc - but I'm kind of on a time crunch, so I'm hoping the folks here can help out...
> 
> Everything on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 being insignificant to me, 5 being a requirement...) in parens (1)(2), etc.
> 
> The motherboard should be priced <=350 USD (5). That puts me in the range of the Asrock X299 Taichi or Asus Strix X299-E. I'm water cooling (custom loop), so lots of PWM fan headers are extremely useful (5). (Does that asus strix x299-E support the fan/sensor extension card? (3) I actually have one on my current board I could re-use.) At the current moment, I am using 1 CPU fan header (pump) and 4 other fan headers (all PWM.) In addition, I'm using 3 temp sensor headers (water temp, radiator incoming air temp, and a sensor shoved under my GPU backplate.)
> 
> I NOT doing SLI (and have no intention of doing so.) M.2 is a big deal for me, and any board MUST support m.2 PCIe3x4 (I think they all do.)(5) A second m.2 slot would be nice (2). Intel LAN is a requirement (5) (I only need a single LAN adapter, but a second one is nice (2)- as long as it's Intel and not the so-called "killer" thing.) Wifi onboard would be extremely useful (4), but I could live without it.
> 
> Onboard LED headers (asus aura, msi mystic, etc) is nice, but not a requirement. On the other hand, the board is going to be installed in a tempered glass case, so cosmetics do matter some. (3)
> 
> I intend to overclock, but not a LOT. For example, I'm perfectly happy with my existing i7-7700k running at 4.6 all cores 24/7. So, minimal overclocking is a big deal (4), but massive overclocking is not important (2.)
> 
> I understand that there are many options, and some people have strong opinions for/against certain boards. If you feel a negative is significant, but might bother someone, please PM it to me instead of turning the CPU thread into a motherboard fight...
> 
> My current (unresearched) options are the Asrock and Asus boards mentioned above.. (and I don't know if either can handle my fan header requirements.)
> 
> Thank you all in advance
> Gary


Currently based on the discussion here MSI has the most stable board.
Asus advantage is the per core voltage. The new bios sorted the ram xmp debacle. Biggest grip with them.. look at how the pcie lanes is done. Example strix. If u put two gpus like 1080ti strix.. u cannot use most of the smaller pcie lanes.
Gigabyte atm seems to have more cpu related bugs

Overclocking should be the same for any boards since its fivr.
Monoblocks recommended.


----------



## cstkl1

@aerotracks@Mysticial
y-cruncher

Is the first test i had to bump my vccin to 1.88 atm from 1.8v max loadline.

7820x 4.4ghz avx offset 1 4.3ghz and avx 512 offset 4 [email protected] 1.08v

Really need to know whats the fix to get the cpu package reading in hwinfo working correctly. Enabling svid and powercycling doesnt help.

Temp load however its not the most strenenous for 512.
http://users.skynet.be/fquake/Mandel_AVX512.zip
This one is
Source
https://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/intel-isa-extensions/topic/737959


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Temp load however its not the most strenenous for 512.
> http://users.skynet.be/fquake/Mandel_AVX512.zip


This is a lot of colors









I did run a few loops of LinX with the AVX512 Linpack the other day. Performance didn't seem to be gimped compared to 10 core.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> This is a lot of colors
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did run a few loops of LinX with the AVX512 Linpack the other day. Performance didn't seem to be gimped compared to 10 core.


Holy skippy peanut butter
Those gflop number!!! ?????


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Holy skippy peanut butter
> Those gflop number!!! ?????


While also almost blowing the CPU's lid off
















Coretemp was showing 340W power. At 4GHz.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> While also almost blowing the CPU's lid off
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coretemp was showing 340W power. At 4GHz.


I have no clue how to get cpu package working for asus. Enabled svid does nothing.


----------



## aerotracks

What's that?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> What's that?


The power reporting u getting from the cpu. On asus it shows 1.7watts. No idea how to get it to report correctly


----------



## Nizzen

Trying to tweak my memory on X299 Taichi:



Using 4x G.skill 4266 c19 memory sticks

37. place HOF @ 3dmark physics test








http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13408328


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> The power reporting u getting from the cpu. On asus it shows 1.7watts. No idea how to get it to report correctly


Did you try the new Core Temp 64 1.10.2?

http://www.alcpu.com/CoreTemp/


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Trying to tweak my memory on X299 Taichi:
> 
> 
> 
> Using 4x G.skill 4266 c19 memory sticks


For asus.. to get better ram clocks.. but hmm take note somehow i nearly kil
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> Did you try the new Core Temp 64 1.10.2?
> 
> http://www.alcpu.com/CoreTemp/


fixed it.. wasnt core temp.. it was some stupid way to enable svid in asus mobo.. took some searching but found somebody who did it. replicated.. it worked



avx-512 .. ok now that this works.. gonna see how far i can strech the offsets. at default vid.

200 watts max...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> There are actually multiple ALU's and assorted logic that provide an array of ALUs which can operate at various widths (that sum together to 512bits). It is not multiplexing down to 64, it is performing all of those operations on the same clock cycle (which is why it consumes so much power).
> 
> So, if you have 10 cores running AVX512 operations on 64bit operands (for example), you effectively have 80 simultaneous 64bit ALUs performing that operation at the same time.
> 
> Again, the actual width of the operation is a variable (8,16,32,64,128,256), but the underlying logic functions against 512bits, so it is divided up into 512/operand_width entries in a matrix/vector operation.
> 
> FMA (Fuse-Multiply-Add) opcodes mean its even more as the ALU is performing multiple calculations per instruction - again - hence all the heat.
> 
> This is also why the XCC (and EPYC) parts (18-32 cores) are now passing 1TFLOP plus... When you consider the number of ALUs in these chips relative to a GPU, they are now _only_ an order of magnitude apart (10TFLOP for a GPU vs 1TFLOP for a CPU). The same is true of the total number of ALUs in these systems... CPUs are running at higher clocks (~1.5-2.0GHz for GPU and 2.5-3.0GHz for AVX CPU), but Cores X ALUs is now much closer than it has ever been.










+1
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> There are few reviews that specifically test the AVX512 because there are very few AVX512 benchmarks that exist yet.
> 
> https://proclockers.com/reviews/cpus/intel-core-i7-7820x-cpu-review/page/0/4
> 
> Here are the links about the AVX512 throughput on the lower SKUs.
> 
> https://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/intel-isa-extensions/topic/737959
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1632638/just-a-heads-up-for-anyone-buying-x299-if-you-want-full-avx-capability-you-need-to-buy-the-7900x-and-up#post_26216596
> I don't believe h264 uses AVX512 yet. But I'm not positive about that.


Does x265 use avx512?

____________________________
Baby-X

x299 Apex was very easy to get going on a test bench. 4133 ram preset booted 1st time. 7740X is a snappy 4 core. 5.2GHz @ 1.27V. Hottest core hit 72C during R15.
The board is put together really well, I like how the sata ports are located in a cutout. Elmor has posted a *download* for turboVcore and the firmware for the OC panel if you have one.
AID64, SIV64 etc will report the correct vcore when in adaptive mode with CPUSVID enabled (or auto). Manual override is not reporting vcore correctly? (or is this old news?)
I loaded the OS on 1 960 evo nvme on the dimm.2 card. Worked easily!!




Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ____________________________
> Baby-X
> 
> x299 Apex was very easy to get going on a test bench. 4133 ram preset booted 1st time. 7740X is a snappy 4 core. 5.2GHz @ 1.27V.










Couldn't wait, could you...

44PCIe is an even bigger thorn in my decision making now that I have my hands on an SSD7101, but its not running at full potential yet, so... we'll see... 18core @ 4.0GHz+ or bust.

2x16 GPU
1x16 SSD7101
1x8 10GbE
(1x8 RAID, but can live without if 7101 is working)
56-64 lanes of stuff I need in my machine... but Intel doesn't love us, so we only get 44 lanes... AMD doesn't love us so we only get 16 cores...


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> For asus.. to get better ram clocks.. but hmm take note somehow i nearly kil
> fixed it.. wasnt core temp.. it was some stupid way to enable svid in asus mobo.. took some searching but found somebody who did it. replicated.. it worked
> 
> 
> 
> avx-512 .. ok now that this works.. gonna see how far i can strech the offsets. at default vid.
> 
> 200 watts max...


Those temperatures and power draw are suspiciously low even for the 7820X. You should be pulling at around 250W @ 4.0 GHz with 8 cores. You might want to check for phantom throttling. http://www.overclock.net/t/1634045/skylake-x-phantom-throttling

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +1
> Does x265 use avx512?


I have no idea. I don't use either.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Those temperatures and power draw are suspiciously low even for the 7820X. You should be pulling at around 250W @ 4.0 GHz with 8 cores. You might want to check for phantom throttling. http://www.overclock.net/t/1634045/skylake-x-phantom-throttling
> I have no idea. I don't use either.


I am on a monoblock. No throttling here. There was no flux.
Take note of the voltage i am running. Also i actuallty found out why debauer etc is throttling. Instead of me starting a debate about it and trying proof it.. its just a matter of time somebody realize the flaw. Its right there on your thread.


----------



## ssateneth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> The power reporting u getting from the cpu. On asus it shows 1.7watts. No idea how to get it to report correctly


You need to enable CPU SVID to get it to report correctly. Some people report SVID enabled hampers overclocks, but in my experience it did not (custom liquid loop, below ambient, got the same max clocks with and without SVID)

edit: never mind, you already figured that out.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ssateneth*
> 
> You need to enable CPU SVID to get it to report correctly. *Some people report SVID enabled hampers overclocks*, but in my experience it did not (custom liquid loop, below ambient, got the same max clocks with and without SVID)
> 
> edit: never mind, you already figured that out.


The Asus BIOS recommends it be disabled for overclocking, but yeah, I haven't noticed any hampering.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> I am on a monoblock. No throttling here. There was no flux.
> Take note of the voltage i am running. Also i actuallty found out why debauer etc is throttling. Instead of me starting a debate about it and trying proof it.. its just a matter of time somebody realize the flaw. Its right there on your thread.


What are you power and current limit settings in your bios? You can be running under LN2 and still have the type of throttling he was referring to.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> What are you power and current limit settings in your bios?


All maxed out for cpu .


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> What are you power and current limit settings in your bios? You can be running under LN2 and still have the type of throttling he was referring to.


Btw your issue was very obvious . Btw your cpu voltage is stable.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Btw your issue was very obvious . Btw your cpu voltage is stable.


What issue? What do you mean my CPU voltage is stable?


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> Nope. Generally, *video codecs are hard to vectorize*, so whatever code structure they have in x265 might not work with 512-bit SIMD because their control logic is based on block sizes that fit in 256-bit vectors. MultiCoreWare (x265 authors) have claimed to be working with Intel in AVX-512, but so far that effort has not produced anything.


This. A perennial problem with vectorization is its inability to be programmatically/automatically produced from code written or understood by typical humans.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Couldn't wait, could you...
> 
> 44PCIe is an even bigger thorn in my decision making now that I have my hands on an SSD7101, but its not running at full potential yet, so... we'll see... 18core @ 4.0GHz+ or bust.
> 
> 2x16 GPU
> 1x16 SSD7101
> 1x8 10GbE
> (1x8 RAID, but can live without if 7101 is working)
> 56-64 lanes of stuff I need in my machine... but Intel doesn't love us, so we only get 44 lanes... AMD doesn't love us so we only get 16 cores...


"love the one you're with" (for now anyway) 7740X is just keeping the socket warm 'til' 7980XE







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> The Asus BIOS recommends it be disabled for overclocking, but yeah, I haven't noticed any hampering.


this recommendation assumes manual override vcore (and disable cpu-IVR/FIVR communications). It should be enabled/Auto for adaptive and offset.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> this recommendation assumes manual override vcore (and disable cpu-IVR/FIVR communications). It should be enabled/Auto for adaptive and offset.


Which is all many (most?) of us OC'ers ever use









Definitely misleading


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Which is all many (most?) of us OC'ers ever use
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Definitely misleading


I don't/rarely use manual override and haven;t for many years... well except for some benchmarks. When I need full freq and voltage I just set the power plan to High Perf.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I don't/rarely use manual override and haven;t for many years... well except for some benchmarks. When I need full freq and voltage I just set the power plan to High Perf.


i really dont know how u guys gonna do voltage offset without overvolting the non-avx load

example i tested this

4.4ghz non avx , 4.3ghz avx, 4.0ghz all works beautifully at manual 1.08v

tried offset and its not possible for avx as it was undervolting at all multies below 44. the offset was too huge that resulted not enough voltage for avx/avx512.

bumped up to 4.7ghz.., 4.4ghz avx, 4ghz avx 512.
4.7ghz PERFECT voltages. as asus u can do each core voltage.
4.4ghz AVX ok it was overvolted around 0.010v on some cores. ( tested already 4.4ghz prime 28.2 avx load.. so i know whats the voltages required)

any multiplier for avx is undervolted. 4ghz was doing at 1v.. instant bsod with y-cruncher..

hence y i state if ure gonna do avx 512... use manual voltage on your cores.
if ure only gonna use avx and non avx load.. then offset is viable but at the expense of slight overvolting for avx load. AVX 512 maybe possible if i reduce the multiplier to say 3.6ghz...

why this happens. because the vid scaling is often more than your actual voltage scaling required.
you may almost get it perfect once like the 4.7ghz stated above with avx but ure not going to do it again with avx 512.
from the jump of vid vs actual voltage scaling .
it could be possible at 5ghz offset but its highly likely that one of the avx offset multiplier or 512 offset is going to be overvolted from the perfect voltage u can run it via manual.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## cekim

FWIW, and apologies if someone posted this already, regarding AVX512 support in the 7xxx line, Anandtech had this tidbit which refines some of what has been said here:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Anandtech*
> Nominally the FMAs on ports 0 and 1 are 256-bit, so in order to drive towards the AVX-512-F these two ports are fused together, similar to how AVX-512-F is implemented in Knights Landing. The six-core and eight-core Skylake-X parts support one fused FMA for AVX-512-F, although the 10-core will support dual 512-bit AVX-512-F ports, which seems to be located on port 5. This means that the 10-core i9-7900X can support 64 SP or 32 DP calculations per cycle, whereas the 8-core/6-core parts can support 32 SP or 16 DP per cycle.
> http://www.anandtech.com/show/11550/the-intel-skylakex-review-core-i9-7900x-i7-7820x-and-i7-7800x-tested/3


So, there are some limitations on the 78xx not present on the 79xx WRT AVX512. My commentary in prior posts was assuming the 10core part and reflects what is said above.


----------



## mouacyk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> FWIW, and apologies if someone posted this already, regarding AVX512 support in the 7xxx line, Anandtech had this tidbit which refines some of what has been said here:
> So, there are some limitations on the 78xx not present on the 79xx WRT AVX512. My commentary in prior posts was assuming the 10core part and reflects what is said above.


That may have been in writing from Intel, but @Mystical from here has proven that the 78XX's do support full AVX512.
src: http://www.overclock.net/t/1632638/just-a-heads-up-for-anyone-buying-x299-if-you-want-full-avx-capability-you-need-to-buy-the-7900x-and-up/20#post_26181442

See post #26 on that same thread for confirmation on the 7800X.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mouacyk*
> 
> That may have been in writing from Intel, but @Mystical from here has proven that the 78XX's do support full AVX512.
> src: http://www.overclock.net/t/1632638/just-a-heads-up-for-anyone-buying-x299-if-you-want-full-avx-capability-you-need-to-buy-the-7900x-and-up/20#post_26181442
> 
> See post #26 on that same thread for confirmation on the 7800X.


My reading of Anandtech's description indicates that 78xx "supports" AVX512, but at a reduced throughput owing to fewer scheduler ports available to write operands to the AVX engines.

If their description is accurate, it would suggest that AVX512 would "work", but at a lower per-core throughput (and corresponding power/heat). Has anyone compared a 10core cut down to 4 and a 78xx running at the same speed?

EDIT: I see some comparisons/graphs that indicate up to 256 they are the same (which is expected, given Anandtech's description). The specific limitation is that there are only sufficient scheduler ports to write 512bits each cycle in the 78xx. So, AVX256 would function at full speed. AVX512 would require an extra cycle to pass the second operand.

Did I miss a chart? I don't speak german and the chart there seemed to support my and Anandtech's assertion (up to 256 shows parity, but then 512 is beyond the other chips).

There was an earlier assertion that the 78xx might not have as many AVX units so even at lower width operations it would be slower. That DOES NOT appear to be the case - only that 512 operations require an additional cycle.


----------



## aerotracks

Nah they're fine. Your information is not correct


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> Nah they're fine. Your information is not correct


Not disputing, I haven't been following this until now...

ok, I found the graph I was looking for:


This confirms what you were saying...

Odd - I wonder if what Intel told Anand was true, but that the dual port arrangement is underutilized for other reasons and provides not benefit? That would be pretty fascinating.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> Is there a special way to run y-cruncher for AVX-512 stress testing? I ran the "benchmark pi" in "multi-threaded" mode. It only generates about 185 W at 3.3 GHz, so at this point I would recommend LinX 0.7.2 or Intel MKL for AVX-512 stress testing. Those could go to 230 W on factory turbo frequency.


There is a built in stress-tester, but neither the stress-tester nor the main computations can put maximum stress on the AVX512 since the code isn't synthetic and is memory-bound.

I'm working on an update that will address this, but no ETA in sight yet. It's not an easy thing to code for.

For now, if you run the BBP benchmark to 100 billion, it'll produce higher temperatures but not necessarily higher power since the cache is idle.


----------



## Fediuld

Guys, I am between 7900X and 1920X. Both in UK are within £50 (with sales tax) difference.
Has anyone see any benchmark with 7900X using 4000Mhz+ ram? (i believe can do 4133?)
Asking because the mesh topology makes the SkylakeX sensitive to ram speeds, bit less than the Zen CPUs but still dependent on it. (On Ryzen 2666 to 3466C14 is like 20% more fps).

And is the main reason why Ring CPUs (Skylake, Kabylake, KabylakeX) were the external bus is running at the speed of the CPU show such better performance on gaming. Or Broadwel-E because the ring can be set manually on the bios. (usual speed 3.4Ghz).


----------



## aerotracks

1920X should be a couple hundred cheaper than 7900X


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Trying to tweak my memory on X299 Taichi:
> 
> 
> 
> Using 4x G.skill 4266 c19 memory sticks
> 
> 37. place HOF @ 3dmark physics test
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13408328


best I got with my 2x FTW 3 in SLI and running my 7900x at 5.0 GHz and G.Skill 3200 cl14 oc'd to 3800

Reg
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13341992

extreme
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13341833

ultra
https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13341879


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> best I got with my 2x FTW 3 in SLI and running my 7900x at 5.0 GHz and G.Skill 3200 cl14 oc'd to 3800
> 
> Reg
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13341992
> 
> extreme
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13341833
> 
> ultra
> https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13341879


what voltage are you feeding the CPU for 5.0Ghz?


----------



## Fediuld

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> 1920X should be a couple hundred cheaper than 7900X


Not in UK. 1920X goes for £780 (with 20% sales tax) and 7900X £860 (with 20% sales tax). So £80 difference.
Without sales tax and in USD with today rate is $838 the 1920X and $923 the 7900X.


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> what voltage are you feeding the CPU for 5.0Ghz?


I run it at 1.35 volts for 5GHz. I can run all the graphics benchmarks that I run. All 3rd mark, Heaven, Superposition, CineBench GL.

it will run Cinebench 15, Geekbench 3 and 4, CPUZ bench, and Super PI 32m.

it will not complete a Real Bench run or the bench in Intel XTU.

I can game for hours without any issues.

I do not think that this is a 100% stable Overclock. I am just trying to find the limitations of the chip.

I am currently waiting for it to return from Silicon as a matter of fact.

I will eventually being putting in an Full Custom EK loop once the Rampage comes out and they release their full block for it.

For now my swiftech AIO is proving to be quit the little soldier


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## KCDC

I'll be building friend's 7820 build on a strix x299 tonight after work. Sounds like I should flash the bios before anything.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> I run it at 1.35 volts for 5GHz. I can run all the graphics benchmarks that I run. All 3rd mark, Heaven, Superposition, CineBench GL.
> 
> it will run Cinebench 15, Geekbench 3 and 4, CPUZ bench, and Super PI 32m.
> 
> it will not complete a Real Bench run or the bench in Intel XTU.
> 
> I can game for hours without any issues.
> 
> I do not think that this is a 100% stable Overclock. I am just trying to find the limitations of the chip.
> 
> I am currently waiting for it to return from Silicon as a matter of fact.
> 
> I will eventually being putting in an Full Custom EK loop once the Rampage comes out and they release their full block for it.
> 
> For now my swiftech AIO is proving to be quit the little soldier


Ha I'm in the same boat. I'm waiting for a better board before dismantling my loop to put in my chip. I can pass xtu on 5GHz. I was giving up for a moment there but I hope these boards come out any day now not another disappointment.

edit: corrected iPhone text errors


----------



## aDyerSituation

Alright boys so I got my replacement processor from Silicon Lottery and...I'm still having a bit of trouble with temps. In prime 95 small fft's I get to the mid 90's after a few minutes. In realbench I hover around 80-85. This is at 4.6ghz and 1.2vcore.

I've replaced the cooler and remounted and so on as I mentioned way back in this thread. So I am starting to wonder if my case is actually the problem? Looking to get your guy's opinion.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Alright boys so I got my replacement processor from Silicon Lottery and...I'm still having a bit of trouble with temps. In prime 95 small fft's I get to the mid 90's after a few minutes. In realbench I hover around 80-85. This is at 4.6ghz and 1.2vcore.
> 
> I've replaced the cooler and remounted and so on as I mentioned way back in this thread. So I am starting to wonder if my case is actually the problem? Looking to get your guy's opinion.


do you only get this kind of temp with avx on? have you tried doing like -10 avx and avx-512? what TIM are you using? don't put too much, just a very thin layer, it's only needed for filling in the micro gaps between the IHS and your heatsink. You want metal to metal contact as much as possible. Check to make sure your heatsink does not have any bends on it and make sure you don't over-tighten it, it's a common mistake because it seems to be logical if you tighten it then it should make more contact but actually it's the opposite. If you over-tighten then the heatsink will actually be tilted a bit making a lot less contact with the IHS, you want the spring to press the heatsink down to the IHS.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> do you only get this kind of temp with avx on? have you tried doing like -10 avx and avx-512? what TIM are you using? don't put too much, just a very thin layer, it's only needed for filling in the micro gaps between the IHS and your heatsink. You want metal to metal contact as much as possible. Check to make sure your heatsink does not have any bends on it and make sure you don't over-tighten it, it's a common mistake because it seems to be logical if you tighten it then it should make more contact but actually it's the opposite. If you over-tighten then the heatsink will actually be tilted a bit making a lot less contact with the IHS, you want the spring to press the heatsink down to the IHS.


My offsets are -4 AVX and -6 AVX512. I could try higher.

I am using Gelid Extreme or GC Extreme whatever it is called. I put a little more than a rice size dot since the chip is slightly bigger than others.

As for over tightening the cooler, that is a possibility. I will try to tighten it with just my fingers later.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> My offsets are -4 AVX and -6 AVX512. I could try higher.
> 
> I am using Gelid Extreme or GC Extreme whatever it is called. I put a little more than a rice size dot since the chip is slightly bigger than others.
> 
> As for over tightening the cooler, that is a possibility. I will try to tighten it with just my fingers later.


That's a decent TIM. What cooler are you using? Definitely try to down clock the AVX a bit more just to find out what's causing it, this will tell you if it's the chip, your cooling or voltage settings. What's core voltage, vcsa, vccin, etc? You have LLC set to around 5 or did you go higher? Also when you have it set to default settings after booting what voltage are you getting for core on auto? It may be a combination of things that's working your temps.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Voltage is stuck at a hard 1.2. I haven't messed with LLC because of that.

I'm using an EVGA 280 CLC now, beforehand I was using a Deepcool Captain 240 EX which was having the same or similar problems. VCCIN is at stock which I think is 1.7


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Voltage is stuck at a hard 1.2. I haven't messed with LLC because of that.
> 
> I'm using an EVGA 280 CLC now, beforehand I was using a Deepcool Captain 240 EX which was having the same or similar problems. VCCIN is at stock which I think is 1.7


Before you make changes, go into bios and check what voltage you are getting on vcsa, it's possible that your motherboard is doing it. Did you lock at 1.2v on purpose or you have not had a chance to set it up with something like an adaptive voltage or you have all power saving features turned off?


----------



## aDyerSituation

It's at 1.2 on purpose. Power savings are turned off I believe. I don't mess with offset or adaptive voltage.

I'm not at home so I will have to check what VCSA is at, probably auto. What does this control?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> It's at 1.2 on purpose. Power savings are turned off I believe. I don't mess with offset or adaptive voltage.
> 
> I'm not at home so I will have to check what VCSA is at, probably auto. What does this control?


I was just curious about what voltage your motherboard set it at because normally if you are not overclocking your memory with XMP then that should be around .8 to 1v. I have seen XMP bump up vcsa all the way to 1.30v unnecessarily, if that's out of wack then other voltages maybe also on that bios version. Is it possible for you to PM me your bios settings or post it so others can see and maybe spot the issue? If none of the other things I mentioned helps off course. One thing though if your CPU's default voltage is higher than average then you need to feed it more voltage to overclock it which will make your CPU run hotter. With these chips at 4.6GHz 1.2v core your 140mmx2 cooler is suspect. You may need to try to find your lowest possible vcore voltage for 4.6GHz. I was struggling trying to cool my cpu at 5.0GHz using an external 360mm x2 at 1.291v. My temp wall started at around 4.8/4.9GHz so you are getting close to that neighborhood.

Here is a discussion on system agent voltage.
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?71786-System-Agent-Voltage-too-high/page2

Here is general settings to get ideas from, I know it's older but basic ideas apply on adaptive in case you have not done it before.
https://rog.asus.com/articles/maximus-motherboards/recommended-settings-for-overclocking-maximus-vi-motherboards/


----------



## aDyerSituation

I have my ram set manually as XMP didn't take. There are user's on this forum with similar AIO coolers that are pushing 1.25+- and still have lower temps than me. So I do think there is something else going on. Just not sure if it's settings related or case related.

The chip is delidded by the way.
My cpu's voltage at default is only 1.075.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I have my ram set manually as XMP didn't take. There are user's on this forum with similar AIO coolers that are pushing 1.25+- and still have lower temps than me. So I do think there is something else going on. Just not sure if it's settings related or case related.
> 
> The chip is delidded by the way.
> My cpu's voltage at default is only 1.075.


You have a 7900x? have you tried dropping the voltage on your cpu to around 1.1v or 1.2 is the only voltage you can get stable on? When you start to get closer to minimum voltage you are likely going to need to increase LLC to around 6 to counter vdroop so your cpu don't dip below instability. Also input voltage set to 1.92v for testing. Have you tried dropping XMP and setting voltages/oc manually?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Silicon Lottery 7820x binned at 4.6 @ 1.2v.

Haven't tried to go lower than that. But my point is that my temps are too high at that voltage. So even if I got it stable at say 1.18, it wouldn't really solve my issue.
I also said XMP didn't take so I entered in the timings and voltage myself. Won't raising VCCIN just make temps worse? And I don't want to mess with LLC as my voltage seems to stay where I put it even under load.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Alright boys so I got my replacement processor from Silicon Lottery and...I'm still having a bit of trouble with temps. In prime 95 small fft's I get to the mid 90's after a few minutes. In realbench I hover around 80-85. This is at 4.6ghz and 1.2vcore.


You're getting the same temps I'm getting with a non delidded Silicon lottery 7820x.
With [email protected] (AVX offsets of -6), I'm topping out at 85c in Realbench 2.44.

Though I'm still no sure what package temp reading to go off in HWiNFO64 as one says 81c and the other 85c, both labeled "CPU Package"...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Silicon Lottery 7820x binned at 4.6 @ 1.2v.
> 
> Haven't tried to go lower than that. But my point is that my temps are too high at that voltage. So even if I got it stable at say 1.18, it wouldn't really solve my issue.
> I also said XMP didn't take so I entered in the timings and voltage myself. Won't raising VCCIN just make temps worse? And I don't want to mess with LLC as my voltage seems to stay where I put it even under load.


regarding the temperature... is the chip immediately hitting the high temps? If yes, and assuming other voltage rails are not overvolted and responsible for the hi temps, the cooler is the issue. Is that evga 280 in push-pull and is the air in from outside the case?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Silicon Lottery 7820x binned at 4.6 @ 1.2v.
> 
> Haven't tried to go lower than that. But my point is that my temps are too high at that voltage. So even if I got it stable at say 1.18, it wouldn't really solve my issue.
> I also said XMP didn't take so I entered in the timings and voltage myself. Won't raising VCCIN just make temps worse? And I don't want to mess with LLC as my voltage seems to stay where I put it even under load.


Sorry that's what I get for posting while I'm at work in between working.

VCCIN does not equal vcore and the CPU internal voltage regulator will not allow excess voltage to be supplied to the cores so it will not significantly increase your temp if at all afaik. You're just making sure that the voltage supply to the cpu is sufficient so when you are overclocking memory and such.

LLC is required to make sure core voltage do not drop lower than your stable OC voltage requirement when you put max load on the CPU so when you start trying to use as little voltage as possible then you'll need to counter the voltage drop on higher loads. This will produce extra heat but if you're using lower voltage in the first place then it's better, I wouldn't leave this higher than necessary though.

So you're not using the XMP settings on your memory and you're using the non overclocked speed of 2666 for skyline-x cpus? This matters because if you OC the IMC it will add to the heat.

Try to drop that core voltage, you might be able to run that CPU faster with less heat than what you are getting now. If you get stable at 1.1v it would immediately solve your issue unless you're running AVX at max. AVX is there for people that need it at a cost of a ton of heat. Unless you're going to need to use AVX all the time it's probably ok to dampen it down.

These CPUs seem to need less voltage than the broadwell-e but heat is the wall even at lower voltages. Here is one of my tests on XTU that's not working AVX I'm able to max it out at 5GHz and staying around 72c with only 1291v.


----------



## TahoeDust

Something is deffinitely off @aDyerSituation. My delidded 7820x has better temps running [email protected] and -5 AVX/AVX512 offsets. I can tell you that getting adaptive voltage working correctly helps a good bit. This lets the voltage drop when the clocks drop to run AVX instructions. You can see in this 12hr run of Prime95 the temps maxed to 82c. Although max voltage was set at 1.285v, the average voltage was 1.216v.



Here is Realbench 2hr run for reference also.



I wish I had more knowledge about the Asus bios so I could try to be more of a help. Here are my bios settings if they help...


http://imgur.com/5eyoe


----------



## aDyerSituation

Thank you for the pictures. If i'm reading that correctly, your mesh voltage is .9? Is that the same as cache voltage? I believe mine is at like 1.15 on auto. Is there a software out there to verify that? Because that just might be your idle voltage but I'm not sure.

But even with a non-avx stress test I still peak at around 85c package with most cores between 78-82 after just 15 minutes. I haven't tested much longer than that. This still just seems way too high for only 1.2vcore. I also double checked that the pump on my AIO was going at full speed. I can hear my fans ram up in down if I listen for it.

This has been an expensive and time consuming process of elimination







But I really do appreciate all the input


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Thank you for the pictures. If i'm reading that correctly, your mesh voltage is .9? Is that the same as cache voltage? I believe mine is at like 1.15 on auto. Is there a software out there to verify that? Because that just might be your idle voltage but I'm not sure.
> 
> But even with a non-avx stress test I still peak at around 85c package with most cores between 78-82 after just 15 minutes. I haven't tested much longer than that. This still just seems way too high for only 1.2vcore. I also double checked that the pump on my AIO was going at full speed. I can hear my fans ram up in down if I listen for it.
> 
> This has been an expensive and time consuming process of elimination
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I really do appreciate all the input


I have my mesh (cache) voltage running adaptive. So, yes in that picture it is idling ~.9v, but underload it is running 1.66v.


----------



## Captain4W

Does anyone know if the EKWB Monoblock actually makes a significant difference??? I have a Gigabyte Gaming 9 and I'm almost finished bending the tubing for the custom loop. I just want to know if I should wait yet another 2 weeks to get the monoblock or go with what I have and call it good enough. Aside from the time there is also the extra $150 I have to think about as I already have a Phanteks CPU cooler...
Thoughts?


----------



## cstkl1

@aDyerSituation
What is your room ambient temp?

Vccio default is 1v
Vcssa has no default and its between 0.5-1.1v.. 0.8v is fine
VCCIN depends whether u want to keep within tdp spec 1.8 max LLC is fine

Your stock is 1.075v? . Its actually meaningless. 7820x has different stock voltages for each core.

Asus i am guessing is taking (avg of all cores + the core with max voltage)/2 = voltage reported in bios
Msi according to @aerotracks voltage read in bios is the actually the core with worst vid.
Run coretemp. Coretemp will always report your the core with max vid. Im hwinfo you can see all your vid.

Generally 1.075v vid you should be able to do [email protected] etc but need to check how bad the worst core stock voltage is. Maybe thany why SL binned it at [email protected] . But based on how i think asus bios voltage readout.. it cant be that bad.
either you have few cores that crazy low vid with a few very high vid ( thats the extreme case )

Msi way of bios voltage reading is better but its flawed in respect of asus where you can overclock each core and set each cores voltage.

Read @aerotracks review. Its actually the only decent overclocking guide for skylake-x
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f139/intel-skylake-x-sockel-2066-oc-guide-1172969.html

@TahoeDust
His avx offset setting technically is a good idea if you want to run offset voltage for non avx load. However he took a hit to underclock his avx offset=512 offset. His realbench voltage is actuallt is avx load voltage. His biggest headache is making sure his avx 512v has enough voltage for offset oc.

I tested mesh oc. Be warned it can increase your cpu temps.

Btw since you are not running xmp. You need to test your rams stability and whether asus auto timings in secondary are correct. Test this with stock cpu with hci etc.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Below are some pictures of my BIOS. I do want to point out that I cannot get Realbench 2.54 to even start even at stock settings so not sure what's going on there. Luxmark.exe crashes instantly.
I've been using 2.43 for now, and I know that doesn't test AVX which is fine. I'm going to run it for 30 minutes and report back with my temps. Sorry for poor quality pictures


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!




]





Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Another thing I want to mention is it does not show what my VCCIN or Mesh voltage actually is. Just says "Auto"
Is there any software that can actually read that for me?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Below are some pictures of my BIOS. I do want to point out that I cannot get Realbench 2.54 to even start even at stock settings so not sure what's going on there. Luxmark.exe crashes instantly.
> I've been using 2.43 for now, and I know that doesn't test AVX which is fine. I'm going to run it for 30 minutes and report back with my temps. Sorry for poor quality pictures
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another thing I want to mention is it does not show what my VCCIN or Mesh voltage actually is. Just says "Auto"
> Is there any software that can actually read that for me?


You are failing because of mesh. Run mesh at stock or arnd 27x
Avx is very paticular on mesh stability.
Also suspect your 4000mhz ram settings are unstable.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I'm not failing though. I'm just getting hot.

And not even 8 minutes in realbench and one core hit 91c


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I'm not failing though. I'm just getting hot.
> 
> And not even 8 minutes in realbench and one core hit 91c


then something off dude...
whats your ambient temp
what cooler are you using
what tim are you using
did you check the contact between your cooler and your cpu.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Below are some pictures of my BIOS. I do want to point out that I cannot get Realbench 2.54 to even start even at stock settings so not sure what's going on there. Luxmark.exe crashes instantly.
> I've been using 2.43 for now, and I know that doesn't test AVX which is fine. I'm going to run it for 30 minutes and report back with my temps. Sorry for poor quality pictures
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another thing I want to mention is it does not show what my VCCIN or Mesh voltage actually is. Just says "Auto"
> Is there any software that can actually read that for me?


in your first screen shot, change AI overclock tuner to Manual then set min cache ratio to auto. You ahev several setings mixed up (eg... auto OC and setting a manual override voltage is not correct)
get a usb stick, insert it into any USB port on the MB, enter bios and hit F12 on all relevant bios pages, when done enter windows and select all the pics on the stick, rt-click? send to> compressed zip folder. POst that folder back here using the paperclip tool in the OCN editor.

Again, check that you r cooler is mounted properly and working correctly. do you hear the pump running? is it reporting rpm to a MB fan header?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Again, check that you r cooler is mounted properly and working correctly. do you hear the pump running? is it reporting rpm to a MB fan header?


This is why I pointed out my non delidded 7820x at 4.6Ghz (1.2v) is cooler than @aDyerSituation deliided chip.
Something isn't right.
Running 3Ghz on the Mesh, but a different cooler, still a 280mm AIO (H115i).
Top I saw today was 86c CPU Package, hottest core 78c due to it being 29c inside and I was too cheap to put on the Aircon (summer is coming so plenty of time for that







).


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> in your first screen shot, change AI overclock tuner to Manual then set min cache ratio to auto. You ahev several setings mixed up (eg... auto OC and setting a manual override voltage is not correct)
> get a usb stick, insert it into any USB port on the MB, enter bios and hit F12 on all relevant bios pages, when done enter windows and select all the pics on the stick, rt-click? send to> compressed zip folder. POst that folder back here using the paperclip tool in the OCN editor.
> 
> Again, check that you r cooler is mounted properly and working correctly. do you hear the pump running? is it reporting rpm to a MB fan header?


Bro
Have you found out how to set the rtl/iol manually??


----------



## iamjanco

Just joined the club:



My son needed a new computer so I'm letting him have my SL 4.4GHz Broadwell e 6850K and Asrock x99 Gaming i7 mb, a BeQuiet 900 Dark Base Pro case, and a few other things he'll need to complete his build. It also gave me an excuse to pull the trigger on the SL 7900x.

I'm pumped.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> This is why I pointed out my non delidded 7820x at 4.6Ghz (1.2v) is cooler than @aDyerSituation deliided chip.
> Something isn't right.
> Running 3Ghz on the Mesh, but a different cooler, still a 280mm AIO (H115i).
> Top I saw today was 86c CPU Package, hottest core 78c due to it being 29c inside and I was too cheap to put on the Aircon (summer is coming so plenty of time for that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ).


Asus mobo?? Avx offset???

Eh seriously you need 1.2v @4.6??
Thought all 7820x can do [email protected] with better ones doing [email protected]


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Asus mobo?? Avx offset???
> 
> Eh seriously you need 1.2v @4.6??
> Thought all can do arnd [email protected] with better ones doing [email protected]


AVX offsets both are at -6 so 4Ghz.
Asus TUF Mark 1.

I need 1.183v for 4.5Ghz _-5 avx) stable so it's not the best overclocker, 4.6Ghz needed 1.198v, so close enough to 1.2V...lol..
There's 1c difference between the 4.5Ghz and 4.6Ghz(all core) overclocks, so why not go higher









Realbech passed at a lower voltage, but OCCT failed within the 30 second mark, so I had to bump up the voltages.

What's annoying me is finding a stress test other than Realbench 2.44 that doesn't only use AVX.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> AVX offsets both are at -6 so 4Ghz.
> Asus TUF Mark 1.
> 
> I need 1.183v for 4.5Ghz _-5 avx) stable so it's not the best overclocker, 4.6Ghz needed 1.198v, so close enough to 1.2V...lol..
> There's 1c difference between the 4.5Ghz and 4.6Ghz(all core) overclocks, so why not go higher
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Realbech passed at a lower voltage, but OCCT failed within the 30 second mark, so I had to bump up the voltages.
> 
> What's annoying me is finding a stress test other than Realbench 2.44 that doesn't only use AVX.


This is what i use
Prime95 26.6 (no avx), 27.7 avx, 28.2 avx2 fma, y-cruncher avx 512, hci memtest with the launcher@Praz uploaded,
Certain ffts i need them to pass all in 2hrs, fft 12,128 abd 1344.

Hmm something off if you only need a small bump in voltage for 4.5 to 4.6ghz


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Hmm something off if you only need a small bump in voltage for 4.5 to 4.6ghz


But the AVX clocks stayed the same, maybe there wasn't enough voltage to handle the 4Ghz AVX load of OCCT.
Can only try lowering the voltage back to the 4.5Ghz voltages and see if 4.6Ghz is still stable.


----------



## aDyerSituation

So I remounted the cooler for the 20th time and just hand tightened the scews until I felt the slightest bit of resistance - temps seem the same
I reset everything to stock/default in the bios and ran realbench 2.43 for 15 minutes. Hottest core peaked around 69c while most hovered in the mid 60's.

That just seems way hot to me. The voltage was staying around 1.071-1.073


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> So I remounted the cooler for the 20th time and just hand tightened the scews until I felt the slightest bit of resistance - temps seem the same
> I reset everything to stock/default in the bios and ran realbench 2.43 for 15 minutes. Hottest core peaked around 69c while most hovered in the mid 60's.
> 
> That just seems way hot to me. The voltage was staying around 1.071-1.073


I'll run the same test at stock tomorrow and let you know what the temps are.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I'll run the same test at stock tomorrow and let you know what the temps are.


yeah I'm thinking about switching to the case you have if it comes to it.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> yeah I'm thinking about switching to the case you have if it comes to it.


This is what I'm getting when running Realbench 2.44.
29.8c in the house.


----------



## aDyerSituation

That's lower than mine, and mine is deli dded and my ambient is lower than that.

THIS IS FRUSTRATING


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> So I remounted the cooler for the 20th time and just hand tightened the scews until I felt the slightest bit of resistance - temps seem the same
> I reset everything to stock/default in the bios and ran realbench 2.43 for 15 minutes. Hottest core peaked around 69c while most hovered in the mid 60's.
> 
> That just seems way hot to me. The voltage was staying around 1.071-1.073


So did u check the tim spread on your cooler.

Try doing a thin layer spread on the cpu. Mount your cooler. Tighten etc
Remove cooler check the contact of tim on your cooler.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> So did u check the tim spread on your cooler.
> 
> Try doing a thin layer spread on the cpu. Mount your cooler. Tighten etc
> Remove cooler check the contact of tim on your cooler.


yeah it looked fine.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> yeah it looked fine.


Ok then its SL issue. Btw ambient temp?? Whats the cooler you are using??


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Ok then its SL issue. Btw ambient temp?? Whats the cooler you are using??


Thermostat is reading 24c. I am using an EVGA 280 CLC. I was using a Deepcool Captain EX 240 with same issues.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Thermostat is reading 24c. I am using an EVGA 280 CLC. I was using a Deepcool Captain EX 240 with same issues.


Send it back to sl
I am guessing they put too much whatever they used to reseal the heatsink back.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Send it back to sl
> I am guessing they put too much whatever they used to reseal the heatsink back.


I already have. This is my replacement. He said it read 72c at 1.15vcore for him and that was under prime, not realbench.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I already have. This is my replacement. He said it read 72c at 1.15vcore for him and that was under prime, not realbench.


Did he mention which prime.. should be 26.6..


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I already have. This is my replacement. He said it read 72c at 1.15vcore for him and that was under prime, not realbench.


Something is off. That vccin voltage should show up. Re flash the bios again with the latest then do a cmos clear. When you get back to the bios press F5 then set your vcore voltage to 1.15v and multiplier to 46 then AVX offset to -5 & -7 and save/reboot. When you get into windows test it again.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I already have. This is my replacement. He said it read 72c at 1.15vcore for him and that was under prime, not realbench.


This is mine under Prime95 26.6 (4Ghz on both AVX's)
Lowered the voltages a bit too:


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Bro
> Have you found out how to set the rtl/iol manually??


is this a serious question?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> is this a serious question?


Err yeah. No issue for you??
Norm init rtl with the latency thingy. Then once rtl/iol trained key in. Z87 m6e had to disable swizzling bit 2. From google seems z270 etc doesnt have to..

iol delayed by 1 or 2 just like past with rtl exact value.
Error 49.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Err yeah. No issue for you??
> Norm init rtl with the latency thingy. Then once rtl/iol trained key in. Z87 m6e had to disable swizzling bit 2. From google seems z270 etc doesnt have to..
> 
> iol delayed by 1 or 2 just like past with rtl exact value.
> Error 49.


What he is trying to say is you do not want to manually set your rtl's and io's. You need to increase or decrease you VCCSA, VCCIO and DRAM voltages to get your rlt's and io's to align then they will train properly. Here is a good link and drop down all of the spoilers for the information you seek: http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Err yeah. No issue for you??
> Norm init rtl with the latency thingy. Then once rtl/iol trained key in. Z87 m6e had to disable swizzling bit 2. From google seems z270 etc doesnt have to..
> 
> iol delayed by 1 or 2 just like past with rtl exact value.
> Error 49.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> What he is trying to say is you do not want to manually set your rtl's and io's. You need to increase or decrease you VCCSA, VCCIO and DRAM voltages to get your rlt's and io's to align then they will train properly. Here is a good link and drop down all of the spoilers for the information you seek: http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread


Looks like its back to 4 years ago again. Ppl then said the same-thing and then the option was given thanks to few individuals. Those ppl are forgotten and now there are ppl trying to educate them how to use rtl iols is really a joke.

Ok so i guess the answer is you dont know. Just go with that.

Then i just got to figure out how to disable sensing myself or pester @coolice via da phone, whatsapp & facebook. @Shamino you are sorely missed.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> So I remounted the cooler for the 20th time and just hand tightened the scews until I felt the slightest bit of resistance - temps seem the same
> I reset everything to stock/default in the bios and ran realbench 2.43 for 15 minutes. Hottest core peaked around 69c while most hovered in the mid 60's.
> 
> That just seems way hot to me. The voltage was staying around 1.071-1.073


Here you go man. This was using the bios defaults, Realbench 2.43, 30 minute test.

You can see average clocks were 4GHz on all cores, average voltage was 1.108v, *max temp was 49c*...hottest core averaged 45c.



Something is definitely wrong in your setup somewhere. I wish I could give you some advice on what it is. Try resisting the cmos? If you are going to change cases look at the Fractal Meshify C. If it was out when I bought mine, it would have gotten a long look. It should be better than my case for cooling.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Looks like its back to 4 years ago again. Ppl then said the same-thing and then the option was given thanks to few individuals. Those ppl are forgotten and now there are ppl trying to educate them how to use rtl iols is really a joke.
> 
> Ok so i guess the answer is you dont know. Just go with that.
> 
> Then i just got to figure out how to disable sensing myself or pester @coolice via da phone, whatsapp & facebook. @Shamino you are sorely missed.


I gave you the information on how to train your rlt's and io's? I guess you want a short cut or a simple fix doing it right is not easy.....try increasing or decreasing your voltages 10 mv at a time and see results in UEFI. if the io's come closer to aligning than keep going until you have success. Same with rlt's.







Note: bashing people who are trying to help is not cool.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Did he mention which prime.. should be 26.6..


Yes it is 26.6. I ran blend overnight to make sure my ram was stable at 4000mhz and my max temp on cpu hit 70.

So 20c higher than @TahoeDust.


----------



## Scotty99

Dyer have you tried putting the AIO in the front of the H440? The top would be just blowing against the roof, this case is made for air coolers anyways.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Looks like its back to 4 years ago again. Ppl then said the same-thing and then the option was given thanks to few individuals. Those ppl are forgotten and now there are ppl trying to educate them how to use rtl iols is really a joke.
> 
> Ok so i guess the answer is you dont know. Just go with that.
> 
> Then i just got to figure out how to disable sensing myself or pester @coolice via da phone, whatsapp & facebook. @Shamino you are sorely missed.


sure you can manually set rtls/iols... do it routinely for benchmarking... and outside of squeezing a few point here or there, it's best to leave these on Auto and let them train properly during post. If you are seeing very dissimilar D0 values.. then the ram is not trained properly and you need to tune voltages and/or other parameters like DSQs. (assuming the sticks are the same)

Putzing with these settings for 24/7 use is just running down the rabbit hole.









24/7:

not 24/7:


and if you know what you say you do... 4000c12 49/50 is not "routine".


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Dyer have you tried putting the AIO in the front of the H440? The top would be just blowing against the roof, this case is made for air coolers anyways.


I haven't tried it with this cooler because it is a pain to mount in the front because I cant hold the rad against the fans to screw it in on the front because the hard drive cage thing


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I haven't tried it with this cooler because it is a pain to mount in the front because I cant hold the rad against the fans to screw it in on the front because the hard drive cage thing


Well if you get someone to hold it, i guarantee a 5-10c drop just by putting it in the front. Ideally tho you would ditch AIO for a dual tower cooler like i have, your temp issues will disappear. I get lower temps than almost everyone ive seen with 240 or 280 AIO's on my ryzen chip.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I gave you the information on how to train your rlt's and io's? I guess you want a short cut or a simple fix doing it right is not easy.....try increasing or decreasing your voltages 10 mv at a time and see results in UEFI. if the io's come closer to aligning than keep going until you have success. Same with rlt's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Note: bashing people who are trying to help is not cool.


I am still wondering at what point you are gonna realize you really dont know what you are talking about and have made a lot of assumptions since joining within 10months.
When you dont know. Just say dont know. Or state in my opinion context.
I am ex ocd ram addict and a stability nut.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I haven't tried it with this cooler because it is a pain to mount in the front because I cant hold the rad against the fans to screw it in on the front because the hard drive cage thing


This sounds so obvious that I might've missed it earlier in the conversation, but have you tried testing it open-air with a fan blowing into the case? At the very least, that should separate out an issue with the CPU from any case/airflow problems.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> sure you can manually set rtls/iols... do it routinely for benchmarking... and outside of squeezing a few point here or there, it's best to leave these on Auto and let them train properly during post. If you are seeing very dissimilar D0 values.. then the ram is not trained properly and you need to tune voltages and/or other parameters like DSQs. (assuming the sticks are the same)
> 
> Putzing with these settings for 24/7 use is just running down the rabbit hole.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 24/7:
> 
> not 24/7:


The Rabbit hole....I think he is heading there quickly!


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> I am still wondering at what point you are gonna realize you really dont know what you are talking about and have made a lot of assumptions since joining within 10months.
> When you dont know. Just say dont know. Or state in my opinion context.
> I am ex ocd ram addict and a stability nut.


I don't know what I am talking about? I think jpm just gave you the same information? Oh the I got more posts than you there for I know more than you do....Good luck with that....you know there are other forums beside this one? Attatude you gotta love it


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> This sounds so obvious that I might've missed it earlier in the conversation, but have you tried testing it open-air with a fan blowing into the case? At the very least, that should separate out an issue with the CPU from any case/airflow problems.


I've taken parts of the case off but never everything. Taking the top off I drop about 3 degrees. I will take every panel off later. Unfortunately I work weird hours so i'm not near my computer if I am on this forum, usually.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> This sounds so obvious that I might've missed it earlier in the conversation, but have you tried testing it open-air with a fan blowing into the case? At the very least, that should separate out an issue with the CPU from any case/airflow problems.


All he really needs to do to test is remove top panel, that is the design "flaw" with H400 (flaw in quotes because it is a silence optimized case first and foremost). The front really isnt all that restrictive, has plenty of openings for air to get pulled through.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I haven't tried it with this cooler because it is a pain to mount in the front because I cant hold the rad against the fans to screw it in on the front because the hard drive cage thing


i see you struggling with this still... basically if the hi temps are hit instantlly - delid or try a different cooler. if the hi temps build over time... the AIO can;t shed the heat as fast as it is being generated (and transfered). The later is shown by steady-state coolant temperature, the former by very hi temps, very quickly. You'll better understand the root cause of the problem if you examine the heating rate (flux value).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> The Rabbit hole....I think he is heading there quickly!


oops, derped.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I've taken parts of the case off but never everything. Taking the top off I drop about 3 degrees. I will take every panel off later. Unfortunately I work weird hours so i'm not near my computer if I am on this forum, usually.


Surprising, i would have expected a larger drop than that.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> i see you struggling with this still... basically if the hi temps are hit instantlly - delid or try a different cooler. if the hi temps build over time... the AIO can;t shed the heat as fast as it is being generated (and transfered). The later is shown by steady-state coolant temperature, the former by very hi temps, very quickly. You'll better understand the root cause of the problem if you examine the heating rate (flux value).


The chip is deli-dded and I have tried a different cooler and even replaced the CPU. The temps rise slowly, they don't jump straight to the max temp or anything.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> sure you can manually set rtls/iols... do it routinely for benchmarking... and outside of squeezing a few point here or there, it's best to leave these on Auto and let them train properly during post. If you are seeing very dissimilar D0 values.. then the ram is not trained properly and you need to tune voltages and/or other parameters like DSQs. (assuming the sticks are the same)
> 
> Putzing with these settings for 24/7 use is just running down the rabbit hole.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 24/7:
> 
> not 24/7:


Yeah dude . The reason for manually inserting rtl/iols is to maintain the same latency when you clock your cpu/mesh so it wouldnt tax the imc voltages/third timings.

The reason y i prefer manual .. is for the sensing to be consistent day in day out.

Also skews .. will doing that after i decide what ram speeds and either 64gb or 128gb kit. Skews are better manually set from my experience once you go full dimm population.

from what i have seen in the bios its either
1. Theres a multi combi difference in the values we set and values shown

2. the most likely theres an option we need to disable some sensing thing equivalent to swizzling bit 2 back in the day to insert it.

I am hoping for no 2. I was hoping some of these testers had the information unless asus changed their way for passing merch to them. Last time they will pass a cheat sheet.


----------



## cstkl1

So hmm everybody thinks @aDyerSituation
Temps is because the vrm heat is affecting his rad??


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> So hmm everybody thinks @aDyerSituation
> Temps is because the vrm heat is affecting his rad??


No. Definitely not. He should not have any VRM temp issues at stock.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> No. Definitely not. He should not have any VRM temp issues at stock.


yeah I've also moved my rear fan as an intake to test, didn't make much of a difference.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you speak in the third person regularly?


Yes, been there done that (is Windows Corrupt again?







) but I know who to listen to for the right information.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> yeah I've also moved my rear fan as an intake to test, didn't make much of a difference.


What are your VRM temps? You can see mine maxed at 51c. I would expect yours to be relatively close to that.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> The chip is deli-dded and I have tried a different cooler and even replaced the CPU. The temps rise slowly, they don't jump straight to the max temp or anything.


okay, so then is is the air flow through the AIO rad (insufficient hear shedding). post a picture, lets see the setup. and if you can sketch out how you believe the fans are forcing air in and thru the case and rad.


----------



## Scotty99

Im telling you tho, an air cooler will fix all of your issues. This case is setup to work best with a big tower cooler, lower VRM temps as well.






Even a lowly 212 evo beats an AIO in this case.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Im telling you tho, an air cooler will fix all of your issues. This case is setup to work best with a big tower cooler, lower VRM temps as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even a lowly 212 evo beats an AIO in this case.


I would change cases before I went to an air cooler. The cooling demands of this platform are not even in the same world as your experience with Ryzen.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I would change cases before I went to an air cooler. The cooling demands of this platform are not even in the same world as your experience with Ryzen.


^^ This


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I would change cases before I went to an air cooler. The cooling demands of this platform are not even in the same world as your experience with Ryzen.


Eh, you do realize dual tower coolers like NH-D15 cool better than most AIO's on the market.....right?

Thats before even taking into account VRM temps.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> No. Definitely not. He should not have any VRM temp issues at stock.
> 
> 
> 
> yeah I've also moved my rear fan as an intake to test, didn't make much of a difference.
Click to expand...

Did you try running with the case cover off?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Did you try running with the case cover off?


That's on my to do list when I get to my computer later.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Eh, you do realize dual tower coolers like NH-D15 cool better than most AIO's on the market.....right?
> 
> Thats before even taking into account VRM temps.


the NH-D14 or 15 are way better than most AIOs under 240 mm


----------



## CptSpig

Mistake


----------



## aDyerSituation

Here is how my airflow was originally before I started moving fans around and such.


----------



## senzi123

Hi, I have a dilemma. Im more focused on games but in budget as well. I want to upgrade my rig from 2500k oc 4.5 to I7 6700k oc .
I need a z270 that can allow to oc 6700k as much as I can with an evo 212(air cooling from 2500k)
Second thought, ddr4 . I want to oc to max permit from motherbord (3866mhz-4000). Higher better for games.

The budget for this is not much 90-130£ for z270 ; 130£ for ram. I will try to buy from ebay for better price, so can be +20£ to each .

Any suggestions? Thx.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Eh, you do realize dual tower coolers like NH-D15 cool better than most AIO's on the market.....right?
> 
> Thats before even taking into account VRM temps.


I know the cooler well. I have owned one. It would not be my choice for cooling a delidded and overclocked 7820x. Really a 280mm AIO, preferably running push/pull, would be the minimum I would want.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> 
> 
> Here is how my airflow was originally before I started moving fans around and such.


and out the top side of the rad too - right? it's likely the inside case temperature (air into the rad) that is causing this. and really.. trying to cool an 8-core processor with that is folly IMO.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I know the cooler well. I have owned one. It would not be my choice for cooling a delidded and overclocked 7820x. Really a 280mm AIO, preferably running push/pull, would be the minimum I would want.


In his case, a NH-D15 will hands down beat a 280mm AIO. People underestimate how good dual tower coolers are, my guess is you may have used a case not optimal for air cooling, the H440 has the perfect in the front out the back configuration for an air cooled setup. He should either get an air cooler, or keep his EVGA 280 and get a case like corsair 400c/460x and put the rad in the front.


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Really a 280mm AIO, preferably running push/pull, would be the minimum I would want.


At the beginning of testing that 7820X I had hot air coming out of the radiator with just two 1500rpm Noctuas on my H110i GT








Push Pull with fans at 2000rpm took care of that problem^


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> In his case, a NH-D15 will hands down beat a 280mm AIO. People underestimate how good dual tower coolers are, my guess is you may have used a case not optimal for air cooling, the H440 has the perfect in the front out the back configuration for an air cooled setup. He should either get an air cooler, or keep his EVGA 280 and get a case like corsair 400c/460x and put the rad in the front.


I know the H440 well also. I have one. That is what the 2700k build is in. I agree, the NH-D15 would be better in his case, but I feel like he would get better performance out of his EVGA 280 in a proper case, than with e NH-D15 in his H440. That is why I said I would buy a different case, before I bought a NH-D15 to use in his.

I am still not convinced the issue is a case/airflow one. 20c difference between my setup and his is A LOT...


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> At the beginning of testing that 7820X I had hot air coming out of the radiator with just two 1500rpm Noctuas on my H110i GT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Push Pull with fans at 2000rpm took care of that problem^


----------



## Scotty99

This guys review from this very forum has NH-D15 ahead of a H110:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1519715/mini-review-noctua-nh-d15-vs-corsair-h110

Quieter, more reliable, and better performance?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I know the H440 well also. I have one. That is what the 2700k build is in. I agree, the NH-D15 would be better in his case, but I feel like he would get better performance out of his EVGA 280 in a proper case, than with e NH-D15 in his H440. That is why I said I would buy a different case, before I bought a NH-D15 to use in his.
> 
> *I am still not convinced the issue is a case/airflow one. 20c difference between my setup and his is A LOT...*


This is what is making this so frustrating. I know my airflow setup isn't ideal but I've never had airflow cause this much of a difference.

But I have the issue with both my Deepcool Captain 240 EX and my new EVGA 280 cooler, so it's like what else can it be? 2 bad coolers?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> This guys review from this very forum has NH-D15 ahead of a H110:
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1519715/mini-review-noctua-nh-d15-vs-corsair-h110
> 
> Quieter, more reliable, and better performance?


Ok man. Buy a 7820x, have it delidded, then cool it with a NH-D15. We can compare results.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> At the beginning of testing that 7820X I had hot air coming out of the radiator with just two 1500rpm Noctuas on my H110i GT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Push Pull with fans at 2000rpm took care of that problem^


Lol. Memories of da past where delta fans took care of everything + table fan blowing into the case

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> This guys review from this very forum has NH-D15 ahead of a H110:
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1519715/mini-review-noctua-nh-d15-vs-corsair-h110
> 
> Quieter, more reliable, and better performance?


Aircoolers has zero improvement past few years. Same cannot be said with aio. So cannot quote a 3 year old post dude. Theres better pumps with little heatdump, better dualpass rads etc..


----------



## Scotty99

You guys are pretty defensive over this, i am only offering a suggestion. Putting a different cooler in and testing is a lot less work (and less money) than getting a new case.

My goodness.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> You guys are pretty defensive over this, i am only offering a suggestion. Putting a different cooler in and testing is a lot less work (and less money) than getting a new case.
> 
> My goodness.


I'm not defensive. I just don't agree that it will solve the issue. Do you think it will really run 20c cooler?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I'm not defensive. I just don't agree that it will solve the issue. Do you think it will really run 20c cooler?


Yes it could happen. H440 is a TERRIBLE case for AIO's, did you not click the link i provided earlier? A 30 dollar air cooler is besting a 240mm radiatior in this case.


----------



## Scotty99

Time stamped for you.

H440 hates AIO's.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> This is what is making this so frustrating. I know my airflow setup isn't ideal but I've never had airflow cause this much of a difference.
> 
> But I have the issue with both my Deepcool Captain 240 EX and my new EVGA 280 cooler, so it's like what else can it be? 2 bad coolers?


I'm gonna suggest another possibility. Perhaps the hardware monitoring is wrong.

What programs are you using to monitor the temperatures? And what is Tj.Max set to? Some programs don't show the correct temperature when Tj.Max is set to something other than the default (95C) for Skylake X. CoreTemp is the only program I use that does it right. I've noticed that some motherboards/BIOS have Tj.Max set to 105C. But the default is 95C. And if the temperature monitoring program uses the wrong Tj.Max it won't compute the temperature correctly.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Yes it could happen. H440 is a TERRIBLE case for AIO's, did you not click the link i provided earlier? A 30 dollar air cooler is besting a 240mm radiatior in this case.


I own a H440 with a 240mm AIO cooling a 2700k running 4.8GHz. The cooling is not THAT bad. I do have it running push/pull intake from the top. I like positive case pressure.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I'm gonna suggest another possibility. Perhaps the hardware monitoring is wrong.
> 
> What programs are you using to monitor the temperatures? And what is Tj.Max set to? Some programs don't show the correct temperature when Tj.Max is set to something other than the default (95C) for Skylake X. CoreTemp is the only program I use that does it right. I've noticed that some motherboards/BIOS have Tj.Max set to 105C. But the default is 95C. And if the temperature monitoring program uses the wrong Tj.Max it won't compute the temperature correctly.


Right now everything is set to default except my ram speed/voltage and timings. But I will check that out later as well.

The program I have been using is HWMonitor. But this EVGA flow control software is reporting the same temp

I need to make a list of things to try when I get home lol


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I own a H440 with a 240mm AIO cooling a 2700k running 4.8GHz. The cooling is not THAT bad. I do have it running push/pull intake from the top. I like positive case pressure.


Think @der8auer 7900x 5ghz 1.32v cooled by a aio on a test bench youtube should be nuff said bro..


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I own a H440 with a 240mm AIO cooling a 2700k running 4.8GHz. The cooling is not THAT bad.


Are you dense? Have you tested it against an air cooler like the guy did with the video i linked?

I just linked you a video showing a THIRTY DOLLAR ENTRY LEVEL air cooling besting a corsair H105 in this case, and you still refuse to accept the problem is the AIO in combination with his case.

Why do i even bother trying to help people, sigh.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Are you dense? Have you tested it against an air cooler like the guy did with the video i linked?
> 
> I just linked you a video showing a THIRTY DOLLAR ENTRY LEVEL air cooling besting a corsair H105 in this case, and you still refuse to accept the problem is the AIO in combination with his case.
> 
> Why do i even bother trying to help people, sigh.


If he is getting those temps with the side panel and top panel off his case, and he is getting temp 20c higher than me, the issue is not the "AIO in combination with his case".


----------



## aDyerSituation

- Try taking all panels and covers off the case
- Check TJMax is Bios
- Struggle to Mount the Rad in the Front if taking all panels off makes a difference

Anything else to try?


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> If he is getting those temps with the side panel and top panel off his case, the issue is not the "AIO in combination with his case".


Two things:

1. H440 IS that bad in regards to temps with an AIO. An air cooler will 100% unequivocally lower his temps, my guess is 10c minimum.
2. The only thing that he possibly has wrong is he plugged the AIO pump header into the PWM fan hub instead of giving it 12v from the board. I dont see this causing his problem tho.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> 
> 
> Here is how my airflow was originally before I started moving fans around and such.


Yipes, why do you have the intake into the rad coming from the inside of the case? I may be missing information here forgive me if I do but have you tried to turn that around? Basically reverse all fans including the front ones? It's always a good idea to have fresh air coming into your radiators, since you don't have rads in front then might as well have it help pull air in through the rad. You will probably collect more dust inside though since you totally lose the positive pressure inside your case and hope you have good filters on top.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Two things:
> 
> 1. H440 IS that bad in regards to temps with an AIO. An air cooler will 100% unequivocally lower his temps, my guess is 10c minimum.
> 2. The only thing that he possibly has wrong is he plugged the AIO pump header into the PWM fan hub instead of giving it 12v from the board. I dont see this causing his problem tho.


Would running it with all panels off the case alleviate and issues the H440's poor AIO configuration causes? Would this be a good way to test and see if the H440's layout is the issue?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> - Try taking all panels and covers off the case
> - Check TJMax is Bios
> - Struggle to Mount the Rad in the Front if taking all panels off makes a difference
> 
> Anything else to try?


Use the latest Coretemp and compare the temps it gives you with the rest of your hardware monitors. It'll also tell you the Tj.Max.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Would running it with all panels off the case alleviate and issues the H440's poor AIO configuration causes? Would this be a good way to test and see if the H440's layout is the issue?


Ya that would simulate what he would get from a cosair 460x, which is a very good case for cooling. If he takes top and front panel off and does not see a large drop, that would indicate a problem elsewhere. If he hasnt i would bypass the PWM hub entirely for this testing, make sure pump header is giving 12v as well in the bios. (most do this by default)


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ya that would simulate what he would get from a cosair 460x, which is a very good case for cooling. If he takes top and front panel off and does not see a large drop, that would indicate a problem elsewhere. If he hasnt i would bypass the PWM hub entirely for this testing, make sure pump header is giving 12v as well in the bios. (most do this by default)


Welp, it sounds like that is what he is going to do, so we should have our answer soon enough.

...and no. I am not dense.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Welp, it sounds like that is what he is going to do, so we should have our answer soon enough.
> 
> ...and no. I am not dense.


My bad i went a little ham there. I had this same conversation with someone about the H440 on another thread.

Id just like to add that people should always be mounting an AIO in the front when its an option. Heat from GPU WILL raise temps by not so small margins on your CPU, the opposite of this does not happen (maybe 1c higher GPU temps, compared to upwards of 10c for a top mounted rad).


----------



## aDyerSituation

Is there an easier way to front mount radiators? It's so awkward and annoying trying to get the fan to line up with the case hole and getting the rad to line up with the fan.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Is there an easier way to front mount radiators? It's so awkward and annoying trying to get the fan to line up with the case hole and getting the rad to line up with the fan.


Sitting the case on it's back with the front facing up makes it a little easier. It is awkward.


----------



## Scotty99

Id just like to put this, part of my frustration in this thread was how easily people are dismissing dual tower heatsinks. I cannot find a direct evga 280 vs NH-D15 result but we can extrapolate from these two:






Hardware canucks has the evga 280 6c behind nzxt's x62.

Tom at OC3D has x62 4c ahead of NH-D15:





That would put the NH-D15 actually *ahead* of the EVGA 280 by 2c. The point was more to show here how close air coolers are to 280's when fans are running at similar RPM's. And in this particular scenario, an air cooler would be even more superior given the case in question.

@adyersituation lay case on its backside (rear io) and hold the radiator from the rear side so you dont have to mess with the hdd tray from the front, should be similar to top mounting.


----------



## aDyerSituation

http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/2788-evga-clc-280-review-vs-nzxt-x62-corsair-h115i/page-3

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cooling/105637-evga-clc-280/?page=2

It would be easier to set it up as pull instead of push. Then I could premount the fans to the radiator. That shouldn't make a difference should it?


----------



## pantsaregood

Has anyone attempted per-core overclocking? Planning on buying an i7-7820X binned for 4.9 GHz and working from there. Getting eight cores up to or above 5.0 GHz seems like it may be difficult, but what are the odds of making six cores turbo to 5.0 GHz, four cores turbo to 5.1 GHz, or even two cores turbo to 5.2 GHz?

From the looks of it, these CPUs are hitting thermal limits long before they're out of overclocking headroom, so I'm curious to see if anyone has played around with getting around the thermal limit by turboing fewer cores.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/2788-evga-clc-280-review-vs-nzxt-x62-corsair-h115i/page-3
> 
> http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cooling/105637-evga-clc-280/?page=2
> 
> It would be easier to set it up as pull instead of push. Then I could premount the fans to the radiator. That shouldn't make a difference should it?


From what I've read online, mounting as pull will increase temps a bit (like 1-2C). And it will probably matter whether the fans are airflow vs. static-pressure.
I have a slight preference for pull over push since you don't need grills if they are otherwise exposed and they're easier to dust out.

Another option to mount as push is to mount the fans first using short screws. Then use normal fan screws to screw the fans to the case (the ones that cut threads into the fan holes). IOW, don't use the long screws at all.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Yes, been there done that (is Windows Corrupt again?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) but I know who to listen to for the right information.


lol- sorry bro - I responded to your post ... was the wrong one.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Think @der8auer 7900x 5ghz 1.32v cooled by a aio on a test bench youtube should be nuff said bro..


if that's the video where vrms were frying... not a good day for Roman.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> From what I've read online, mounting as pull will increase temps a bit (like 1-2C). And it will probably matter whether the fans are airflow vs. static-pressure.
> I have a slight preference for pull over push since you don't need grills if they are otherwise exposed and they're easier to dust out.
> 
> Another option to mount as push is to mount the fans first using short screws. Then use normal fan screws to screw the fans to the case (the ones that cut threads into the fan holes). IOW, don't use the long screws at all.


How do you mount the fan to the rad using short screws?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol- sorry bro - I responded to your post ... was the wrong one.


No worries! Still funny..


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> How do you mount the fan to the rad using short screws?


If you're asking that, then it might be impossible for your fans.

You need fans that don't have "tubes" connecting the holes on both sides. A fan like this can be mounted with short screws:


But you can't use short screws for fans like this:


----------



## schoolofmonkey

I call B.S on this AIO thing.
I've posted my temps using a H115i, temps are lower than aDyerSituation's on my non delidded 7820x using the same voltages.

Yes I have 1500rpm Noctua's in Push/Pull and have a Enthoo Primo case, but I find even with that I have to remove the side panel to get 4 - 5c lower temperatures in Realbench thanks it it heating up the GPU too









If aDyerSituation has taken the top, front and side panels off the H440 with barely any change to temps, a air cooler is not going to help, the H440 is still going to restrict cool airflow.

I have a H440 for my media PC, I'm using a H110 on a 4790k in that and temps are no different to the Air 540 it was originally in,


----------



## Scotty99

Calling BS on what? He will get lower temps with a NH-D15 in a H440 case, ill put any amount of money people want to bet me on that. The question here is whether there is something wrong with his current setup either poorly delidded chip, improper block mount, pump not spinning fast enough etc etc.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> If you're asking that, then it might be impossible for your fans.
> 
> You need fans that don't have "tubes" connecting the holes on both sides. A fan like this can be mounted with short screws:
> 
> 
> But you can't use short screws for fans like this:


Ah that's what I thought you were getting at. I don't think my fans have that option because the tube as you call it

but hypothetically speaking how would you get a screwdriver in there to screw it down? lol

and my pump RPM is reporting at 2500


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Calling BS on what? He will get lower temps with a NH-D15 in a H440 case, ill put any amount of money people want to bet me on that. The question here is whether there is something wrong with his current setup either poorly delidded chip, improper block mount, pump not spinning fast enough etc etc.


Ok based on your Ryzen chip getting better temps.
Here I am talking from experience with the H440 case I bought from launch, it's a horrible case for airflow no matter what you use.
Removing all the panels get's you good airflow, so the current AIO should be producing lower temps than mine.
I even had a E-ATX motherboard in mine once just to prove they fit









There's more to it than swapping to a NH-D15 seeing even Silicon Lottery are testing with AIO's.


----------



## Scotty99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Ok based on your Ryzen chip getting better temps.
> Here I am talking from experience with the H440 case I bought from launch, it's a horrible case for airflow no matter what you use.
> Removing all the panels get's you good airflow, so the current AIO should be producing lower temps than mine.
> I even had a E-ATX motherboard in mine once just to prove they fit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's more to it than swapping to a NH-D15 seeing even Silicon Lottery are testing with AIO's.


You are confused on what is being discussed. Its very possible he has something wrong with his current setup, but even if everything was running as it should a NH-D15 in his H440 will get lower temps than an EVGA 280 CLC. This has nothing to do with my PC or what CPU i have, simple common sense when looking at the case and knowing what would work best in it. Putting a rad in the front of the H440 will help as its intaking cold air and not exhausting against a solid roof (as well as intaking hot GPU air), but the optimal configuration is with an air cooler exhausting out the back, i have even linked videos showing this.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Ah that's what I thought you were getting at. I don't think my fans have that option because the tube as you call it
> 
> but hypothetically speaking how would you get a screwdriver in there to screw it down? lol
> 
> and my pump RPM is reporting at 2500


There are screwdrivers that are thin enough to fit through the holes. I'm not sure where to buy them, but I have one that came with an HD enclosure that I bought years ago. Its usefulness has outlived that of the HD enclosure itself. lol

Two of my builds have short-screw mounting with rads. One is a 30 x 120mm fan between case and rad in pull config. Couldn't use long screws for that since they weren't long enough for 30mm thick fans. The other is 2 x 140mm also with fans between case and rad in pull config. I couldn't use long screws for those because the case was weird so the long screws also weren't long enough.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I call B.S on this AIO thing.
> I've posted my temps using a H115i, temps are lower than aDyerSituation's on my non delidded 7820x using the same voltages.
> 
> Y*es I have 1500rpm Noctua's in Push/Pull* and have a Enthoo Primo case, but I find even with that I have to remove the side panel to get 4 - 5c lower temperatures in Realbench thanks it it heating up the GPU too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If aDyerSituation has taken the top, front and side panels off the H440 with barely any change to temps, a air cooler is not going to help, the H440 is still going to restrict cool airflow.
> 
> I have a H440 for my media PC, I'm using a H110 on a 4790k in that and temps are no different to the Air 540 it was originally in,


this is what he needs to try.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> this is what he needs to try.


I have no problem buying more fans but I have to test if that is actually the issue or not

and it won't be any poopy brown fans that's for sure(no offense)


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I have no problem buying more fans but I have to test if that is actually the issue or not
> 
> and it won't be any poopy brown fans that's for sure(no offense)


4 Noiseblocker eLoop B14-PS fans would do nicely. Ask me how I know.









...but I don't think that is the issue.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I have no problem buying more fans but I have to test if that is actually the issue or not
> 
> and it won't be any poopy brown fans that's for sure(no offense)


I'd be using my Corsair White Mag lev fans if I had 4, but I only have 3 at the moment, will buy 2 more one day...









Can't see the Noctua's anyway due to them being hidden at the top, the Enthoo Primo is a rather large case.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 4 Noiseblocker eLoop B14-PS fans would do nicely. Ask me how I know.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...but I don't think that is the issue.


Another hour or two and I will be home to take all the panels off and test temps.

I'm really hoping that's the issue because that can be rectified easily but like you said. 20c is quite a discrepancy


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 4 Noiseblocker eLoop B14-PS fans would do nicely. Ask me how I know.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...but I don't think that is the issue.


I'm still waiting for Delta fans with RGB. 6 of them on a 360 in push-pull should be enough to keep my box cool and make sure that everyone within a 1 mile radius will be aware of it.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I'm still waiting for Delta fans with RGB. 6 of them on a 360 in push-pull should be enough to keep my box cool and make sure that everyone within a 1 mile radius will be aware of it.


Haha...those thing are monsters!...and the roar like one. I was really determined to find a quiet fans that performed what the way I needed. I went through 5 different sets before landing on these. They are 29mm thick, so if anyone is considering them, keep that in mind. You will need longer screws and take into account the extra thickness. Plus, I think they look soooo sick...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I have no problem buying more fans but I have to test if that is actually the issue or not
> 
> and it won't be any poopy brown fans that's for sure(no offense)


lol - the noctura fans are the ugliest... by far.









i really like the new corsair 120s:


----------



## aDyerSituation

So I tested realbench 2.43 for 15 minutes with all the side panels and covers off. Here are peak temps.

Stock settings(1.07vcore):
Panels On: 69c Panels Off: 63c

Overclocked (1.20vcore 4.6ghz, 3ghz mesh)
Panels On: 86c Panels Off: 82c

So yeah. Airflow is a problem in my case but it is still getting hotter than it should be.


----------



## Scotty99

To sum it up this is your 2nd chip from SL and your 2nd AIO right?

Not trying to be a dick here, but im going to go with user error just from the data we have to work with. Go out tomorrow and buy the biggest air cooler you can find and slap it on. If a gigantic piece of metal does not lower your temps then you know for sure that you got two bad chips in a row from SL.

With all those panels off that would mimic the best cooling case on the market, so ya something definitely off if you are still ~14c above the other guys stock realbench results. Too many variables with AIO, even if its just a buy+return situation i honestly would try the air cooler.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> So I tested realbench 2.43 for 15 minutes with all the side panels and covers off. Here are peak temps.
> 
> Stock settings(1.07vcore):
> Panels On: 69c Panels Off: 63c
> 
> Overclocked (1.20vcore 4.6ghz, 3ghz mesh)
> Panels On: 86c Panels Off: 82c
> 
> So yeah. Airflow is a problem in my case but it is still getting hotter than it should be.


Do you have your fans on high? How high is your fluid temp getting?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Do you have your fans on high? How high is your fluid temp getting?


Fans max out at 1500 rpm for some reason. I can set them in flow control to go higher but the noise is ridiculous after 1500rpm.
Fluid temp is around 38c under load

And Scotty yeah this is the 2nd cooler and 2nd cpu. Unfortunately there are no stores that sell even a stock heatsink around here.
And I really hate big air coolers. I like seeing my motherboard


----------



## Scotty99

Well 1500 is more than i find audibly comfortable as well, so that really isnt a problem. Unless the guy you are comparing temnps against was for some reason using max fan speed to test a stock real bench test?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Well 1500 is more than i find audibly comfortable as well, so that really isnt a problem. Unless the guy you are comparing temnps against was for some reason using max fan speed to test a stock real bench test?


I am running a custom curve. My fans max speed are 1200rpm. They were not maxed out.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I am running a custom curve. My fans max speed are 1200rpm. They were not maxed out.


I have mine running at 1200rpm during benchmarks (fans are rated for 1500rpm).

Everyday use they are around 1000rpm max.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Fans max out at 1500 rpm for some reason. I can set them in flow control to go higher but the noise is ridiculous after 1500rpm.
> Fluid temp is around 38c under load


And I think you said the pump is running at full speed?
I do with the H115i, which is 1400rpm.


----------



## Scotty99

Ok so with that detail out of the way, something is definitely goofy with his setup. His case with all the panels off should be cooler than yours in realbench, not 14c hotter.

Id say its unlikely that SL sent you two defective delids, my honest advice is to try the air cooler idea, this would rule out any user error or malfunctions with an AIO.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Ok so with that detail out of the way, something is definitely goofy with his setup. His case with all the panels off should be cooler than yours in realbench, not 14c hotter.
> 
> Id say its unlikely that SL sent you two defective delids, my honest advice is to try the air cooler idea, this would rule out any user error or malfunctions with an AIO.


Silicon lottery also said that they tested my previous processor when I returned it and their temps were also way lower than mine(aka same as when they originally binned it).
So I really don't think it's the processor itself.

I will try the air cooler method if it really comes to it. But that's ~$80 on top of the ~$140 for this cooler so this is getting quite expensive.


----------



## Scotty99

I just think it would be something useful for testing purposes, you can return if it does nothing of course (newegg is 30 days i believe).

If anyone else has a better suggestion feel free, but he said his pump is running at 2500 RPM (max is 3000 on that model i believe) and 1500 rpm fans is more than fine.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

[/quote]
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Silicon lottery also said that they tested my previous processor when I returned it and their temps were also way lower than mine(aka same as when they originally binned it).
> So I really don't think it's the processor itself.
> 
> I will try the air cooler method if it really comes to it. But that's ~$80 on top of the ~$140 for this cooler so this is getting quite expensive.


Sad thing is they would of tested it with a AIO as well.

This air cooler thing I find amusing, the case is already starved of air, so how is a air cooler going to get any more cooler air.

The fans on those eVGA CLC's aren't the best either.


----------



## Scotty99

Because its a giant hunk of metal, aside from crossthreading screws you cant mess it up. With AIO's you can have a plethora of problems, its merely ruling things out one by one.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> Because its a giant hunk of metal, aside from crossthreading screws you cant mess it up. With AIO's you can have a plethora of problems, its merely ruling things out one by one.


----------



## fireedo

doesnt have any intention for trolling, but what do you guys here suggest for me between AMD 1800x vs Intel i9 7900x if I live in the tropical country, I mean temperature average here around 27-32 Celcius and I just have an AIO cooler.
What if I want to overclock say maybe on AMD I go 4 Ghz and Intel lets say 4.5 Ghz, will I get trouble about thermal throtling? which one will give me best?
Just dont give me about price vs performance

since a lot of review about x299 based system lived in the cold country and I read a lot that they got fast reach 90 degree celcius

thx


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fireedo*
> 
> doesnt have any intention for trolling, but what do you guys here suggest for me between AMD 1800x vs Intel i9 7900x if I live in the tropical country, I mean temperature average here around 27-32 Celcius and I just have an AIO cooler.
> What if I want to overclock say maybe on AMD I go 4 Ghz and Intel lets say 4.5 Ghz, will I get trouble about thermal throtling? which one will give me best?
> Just dont give me about price vs performance
> 
> since a lot of review about x299 based system lived in the cold country and I read a lot that they got fast reach 90 degree celcius
> 
> thx


err no prob dude stock voltage for all this cpus are all under 1.1v afaik. and their base clock is the avx 512 and will throttle to that voltage with avx speed + 2 multiplier on the base and non avx is +4 on the base... hence 3.7ghz for 7900x. there will be two cores boosting to 4.5ghz. Generally most skylake-X has non avx boost +8/+9 multiplier boost from base speed easily from this vid.

also weird comparison with a USD 999 cpu and USD400 cpu.


----------



## aDyerSituation

So I uninstalled this evga cooler and put the deepcool captain back on and temps aren't much different. Mid 80's during real bench.

but coretemp is reading about 10c lower than hwmonitor so not sure which to go with. I'm probably going to return this evga cooler though and buy 4 new fans and set up push pull .I front mounted the radiator this time..


----------



## fireedo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> err no prob dude stock voltage for all this cpus are all under 1.1v afaik. and their base clock is the avx 512 and will throttle to that voltage with avx speed + 2 multiplier on the base and non avx is +4 on the base... hence 3.7ghz for 7900x. there will be two cores boosting to 4.5ghz. Generally most skylake-X has non avx boost +8/+9 multiplier boost from base speed easily from this vid.
> 
> also weird comparison with a USD 999 cpu and USD400 cpu.


sorry about that weird comparison since threadripper cpus are very rare here, if I got lucky got the cpu then there are no x399 motherboards available here
and thankyou for your response


----------



## czin125

http://ikki210jp.blog.fc2.com/img/20170715060329252.jpg/
http://ikki210jp.blog.fc2.com/img/201707150603275f6.jpg/
Is anyone going to put a waterblock on the back of the motherboard socket like this? It looks like he has one for the cpu and the back.

Corsair has a 16GB kit 4400 19-19-19-39 for 478 USD after conversion from scan.co.uk
Gskill 16GB kit 4400 19-19-19-39 is available for 361 USD after conversion ( 39500 JPY )
Gskill 8x8GB 4200 19-19-19-39 is 159400 JPY (1458 USD)


----------



## Rex65

Hi,
Just thought I'd post my temps with the 7820x at 4.6GHz, 3.0GHz cache.... New to this stuff but an extra data point for aDyerSituation.
Standard chip. Cinebench a few times gets to 83°C for pack, 86°C for one core, realbench around 79°C for package. This is with Kraken x62 with custom profile, needed to increase pump rate more than performance profile when overclocking for my setup.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> So I uninstalled this evga cooler and put the deepcool captain back on and temps aren't much different. Mid 80's during real bench.
> 
> but coretemp is reading about 10c lower than hwmonitor so not sure which to go with. I'm probably going to return this evga cooler though and buy 4 new fans and set up push pull .I front mounted the radiator this time..


Ray's SIV would be the one to base core, package and VRM temps on. The new beta version...

http://rh-software.com/


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> but coretemp is reading about 10c lower than hwmonitor so not sure which to go with. I'm probably going to return this evga cooler though and buy 4 new fans and set up push pull .I front mounted the radiator this time..


That could explain part of it since I typically go by Coretemp's numbers. What is it reading the Tj.Max as? 85C? 95C? 105C?

An experiment you might want to try is to change the Tj.Max in the BIOS. Then observe how each of the hardware monitors respond under the same load.

In my case, HWMonitor, CoreTemp, and Gigabyte's monitor only gave the same numbers when the Tj.Max was 95C. When I decrease Tj.Max to 85C, CoreTemp stays consistent with the same temperatures for the same load with different Tj.Max's. But everything else started displaying temps that were 10C higher than before. This is presumably because those other monitors assume the Tj.Max to be 95C. But since it is actually 85C, they read a smaller "distance to Tj.Max" so they subtract a smaller number from 95C thereby reading out a temperature that is 10C higher than what it should be.

In any case, from the various screenshots I've seen, it seems that mobos are usually picking 105C as the Tj.Max. That would actually cause hardware monitors to report temps that were 10C _lower_ than CoreTemp. (so it's in the wrong direction) But either way it does imply that at least some of the hardware monitors that you're using aren't applying the right temperature offsets.

The fact that CoreTemp is able to read Tj.Max and adjust for it correctly is what led me to trust CoreTemp over other monitors. Idle temperatures shown by CoreTemp were also reasonably consistent with those read from the BIOS.


----------



## Artah

Anyone have the latest info on actual availability for the next batch of processors with 12+ cores?


----------



## cstkl1

eh first game i see for a brief moment went 16 threads 100%

agent of mayhem


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> So I uninstalled this evga cooler and put the deepcool captain back on and temps aren't much different. Mid 80's during real bench.
> 
> but coretemp is reading about 10c lower than hwmonitor so not sure which to go with. I'm probably going to return this evga cooler though and buy 4 new fans and set up push pull .I front mounted the radiator this time..


I'm pretty sure this is your problem right here. Stick with Core Temp, Hwmonitor isn't reporting the correct temperatures for me either on an X299A.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Anyone have the latest info on actual availability for the next batch of processors with 12+ cores?


This doesn't quite match up with the 9/25 (not 8/28) date we'd seen previously for the 14,16,18 core variants. The last date I saw prior to WCCF's latest was 8/25 for 12, 9/25 for 14,16,18 (shocking that WCCF's info might not be 100% right? ;-) )

http://wccftech.com/intel-core-x-core-i9-7980xe-7960x-7940x-7920x-pre-order-available/
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wccf*
> Intel had already previously announced the full specifications and launch dates for their Core X family. According to the details, the 12 core, Core i9-7920X will be available on 25th August while the 14, 16 and 18 core variants will be available on 28th August.


9/25 date:
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/08/intel-i9-7980xe-launch-date-price/
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ArsTechnica*
> Intel's monstrous 18-core, 36-thread Core i9-7980XE CPU launches September 25 for a whopping $2,000, Intel announced today. It will be joined by the $1,700 16C/32T i9-7960X and the $1,400 14C/28T i9-7940X, while the 12C/12T i9-7920X launches a month earlier on August 28 for $1,200. UK prices are TBC, but the top-end chip will likely start at around £1,900 and then work its way down from there.


Grains of salt everywhere...


----------



## ManyThreads

Looks like ASUS has a new BIOS out, 0702. Anyone having problems with that one? 0503 bricked my machine unless I ran the RAM at base frequency, and I have been using I think 0302, which is a beta BIOS Rishi posted in a thread somewhere. Any advantage to moving to 0702? Have the fixed the M2 SSD speed issues perhaps? (currently it cannot even come close to maxing out a 960 pro during benchmarks).


----------



## aDyerSituation

Would these be some good fans to toss on this deepcool captain for now?

https://www.amazon.com/EK-Vardar-F3-120-1850rpm-Performance-Cooling/dp/B072FH44BV/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1503619922&sr=1-1&keywords=ek+vardar


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Would these be some good fans to toss on this deepcool captain for now?
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/EK-Vardar-F3-120-1850rpm-Performance-Cooling/dp/B072FH44BV/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1503619922&sr=1-1&keywords=ek+vardar


Verdars are great fan. The only ones I have owned that I liked better are Gentle Typhoons.


----------



## hrmgamer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Would these be some good fans to toss on this deepcool captain for now?
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/EK-Vardar-F3-120-1850rpm-Performance-Cooling/dp/B072FH44BV/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1503619922&sr=1-1&keywords=ek+vardar


The EK Vardar fans have a great reputation, but I'm confused as to why they are so expensive, they're much cheaper on the EK website and at the few places that stock them in Australia. That said I'd probably look at the F4s and just run them a bit slower. They've also just brought out some new fans that stop completely when your temperatures get low enough (fan curve controlled) that might interest you.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hrmgamer*
> 
> The EK Vardar fans have a great reputation, but I'm confused as to why they are so expensive, they're much cheaper on the EK website and at the few places that stock them in Australia. That said I'd probably look at the F4s and just run them a bit slower. They've also just brought out some new fans that stop completely when your temperatures get low enough (fan curve controlled) that might interest you.


That is the price for two. It is about right.


----------



## hrmgamer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> That is the price for two. It is about right.


Depending on the fan model they're showing as 11-18AUD each (so about 9-14USD) on EK's site for me, and the places in AU that carry them are the same.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hrmgamer*
> 
> Depending on the fan model they're showing as 11-18AUD each (so about 9-14USD) on EK's site for me, and the places in AU that carry them are the same.


The same fan is $17.99 each on EK's US site.


----------



## hrmgamer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> The same fan is $17.99 each on EK's US site.


That's odd, I wonder why the fans are showing up so much cheaper on the AU EK page (won't let me change region) when the other parts seem to be adjusting for the exchange rate correctly. That said I just checked the AU 3rd party stores again and while they are about the same as the AU EK store, they're showing as clearance prices which I hadn't realised.

Edit: edited for clarity, added '3rd party'.


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Would these be some good fans to toss on this deepcool captain for now?
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/EK-Vardar-F3-120-1850rpm-Performance-Cooling/dp/B072FH44BV/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1503619922&sr=1-1&keywords=ek+vardar


I have some varders, the 120ER ones. They're ok, but I got some corsair magnetic levitation ones lately and they're way better. The varders are high speed, louder and pump more air, the corsairs are very quiet. SO if your rad space is small, the vardars will make your rig cooler. If your rad space is ok, the corsairs will make it silent.

I also have some Phanteks 140mm and they're about the best, but the 120mm ones are rubbish.

Hope this helps


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> I run it at 1.35 volts for 5GHz. I can run all the graphics benchmarks that I run. All 3rd mark, Heaven, Superposition, CineBench GL.
> 
> it will run Cinebench 15, Geekbench 3 and 4, CPUZ bench, and Super PI 32m.
> 
> it will not complete a Real Bench run or the bench in Intel XTU.
> 
> I can game for hours without any issues.
> 
> I do not think that this is a 100% stable Overclock. I am just trying to find the limitations of the chip.
> 
> I am currently waiting for it to return from Silicon as a matter of fact.
> 
> I will eventually being putting in an Full Custom EK loop once the Rampage comes out and they release their full block for it.
> 
> For now my swiftech AIO is proving to be quit the little soldier


Got My CPU back from Silicon Lottery Today!!!!!!

has dramatically lowered my temps..

AIDA64 stress test at 4.9GHz would instantly thermal throttle but now it hits a high of 83c after 1 hour.

CPU-Z bench would hit 105c now hits 81c

easly completes the XTU bench mark hitting a package temp of 78c

completes Real Bench 2.54 with the 3 and 5 AVX off set with a high of 81c

this while running 4.9Ghz at 1.32 volts

now going back in for the 5GHz!!

then I will be just waiting for the Rampage Extreme....then the full loop from EK


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> Got My CPU back from Silicon Lottery Today!!!!!!
> 
> has dramatically lowered my temps..
> 
> AIDA64 stress test at 4.9GHz would instantly thermal throttle but now it hits a high of 83c after 1 hour.
> 
> CPU-Z bench would hit 105c now hits 81c
> 
> easly completes the XTU bench mark hitting a package temp of 78c
> 
> completes Real Bench 2.54 with the 3 and 5 AVX off set with a high of 81c
> 
> this while running 4.9Ghz at 1.32 volts
> 
> now going back in for the 5GHz!!
> 
> then I will be just waiting for the Rampage Extreme....then the full loop from EK


What LLC level are you using? I can pass Realbench and XTU no problem at 5GHz but it dies with Cinebench. I have to find out why when I get more time.


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> What LLC level are you using? I can pass Realbench and XTU no problem at 5GHz but it dies with Cinebench. I have to find out why when I get more time.


I'd guess either you're using AVX offsets (Realbench and XTU use AVX, so you're running those at lower frequencies than cinebench) or you have some phantom/current throttling going on reducing the frequency of realbench and XTU (high power usage) but not Cinebench (Not so much power usage.)


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> What LLC level are you using? I can pass Realbench and XTU no problem at 5GHz but it dies with Cinebench. I have to find out why when I get more time.


When you say you pass RealBench, are you talking about the stress test or the benchmark?


----------



## tistou77

Hello

Not had time to read all the last page
There are tests of 7920X and 7940X ?

Thanks


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> I'd guess either you're using AVX offsets (Realbench and XTU use AVX, so you're running those at lower frequencies than cinebench) or you have some phantom/current throttling going on reducing the frequency of realbench and XTU (high power usage) but not Cinebench (Not so much power usage.)


I'm heavily down clocking AVX to -12 and -15, I don't really care about AVX, if I had to do a lot of video converting and using encryption I would lower down the OC to a very moderate level for the whole chip.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> When you say you pass RealBench, are you talking about the stress test or the benchmark?


Either one of the tests it works fine, I should have been more specific. Cinebench does not cause a complete system crash it's just Cinebench.



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Not had time to read all the last page
> There are tests of 7920X and 7940X ?
> 
> Thanks


I have not seen any around but I have not looked for them that hard either, I'm also interested in seeing some good tests. I want to see if the clocks sucks on these chips compared to the 7900X. I don't remember seeing anyone with it in this thread.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Not had time to read all the last page
> There are tests of 7920X and 7940X ?
> 
> Thanks


7920x will be out for consumers on 28th, 7940x and top of line (xeons) on september the 25th.


----------



## tistou77

Ok thanks


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I'm heavily down clocking AVX to -12 and -15, I don't really care about AVX, if I had to do a lot of video converting and using encryption I would lower down the OC to a very moderate level for the whole chip.
> Either one of the tests it works fine, I should have been more specific. Cinebench does not cause a complete system crash it's just Cinebench.
> 
> 
> I have not seen any around but I have not looked for them that hard either, I'm also interested in seeing some good tests. I want to see if the clocks sucks on these chips compared to the 7900X. I don't remember seeing anyone with it in this thread.


Nice stresstest on 3.8ghz if ure using that offset for avx with realbench 2.54


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I'm heavily down clocking AVX to -12 and -15, I don't really care about AVX, if I had to do a lot of video converting and using encryption I would lower down the OC to a very moderate level for the whole chip.
> Either one of the tests it works fine, I should have been more specific. Cinebench does not cause a complete system crash it's just Cinebench.
> 
> 
> I have not seen any around but I have not looked for them that hard either, I'm also interested in seeing some good tests. I want to see if the clocks sucks on these chips compared to the 7900X. I don't remember seeing anyone with it in this thread.


Five minutes of RealBench stress is not telling much - try at the very least one hour, preferably two.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I'm heavily down clocking AVX to -12 and -15, I don't really care about AVX, if I had to do a lot of video converting and using encryption I would lower down the OC to a very moderate level for the whole chip.
> Either one of the tests it works fine, I should have been more specific. Cinebench does not cause a complete system crash it's just Cinebench.
> 
> 
> I have not seen any around but I have not looked for them that hard either, I'm also interested in seeing some good tests. I want to see if the clocks sucks on these chips compared to the 7900X. I don't remember seeing anyone with it in this thread.


Jesus, with that big of an offset, I would certainly hope it is staying cool...lol.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Jesus, with that big of an offset, I would certainly hope it is staying cool...lol.


Back in the days where there were no offsets, some people were disabling AVX completely via bcdedit so that they could get higher overclocks. But that led to some programs crashing because of a very common programming error where you check that the _hardware_ supports AVX, but not the _OS_. So all these programs see a Sandy Bridge or Haswell chip and try to run AVX, only to crash because the OS hasn't enabled it.

It was almost hilarious to read about it.


----------



## denjin

Hello.







Long time reader, first time poster!

I am running an ancient Asus P6X58D-E x5650 at 4GHz build and I think it is finally time to upgrade. I've decided on this platform as I could use the extra cores and PCIe lanes.

These are my parts so far:

*Current Parts*

Fractal Design Define C (2 x 140mm at front and 1 x 120mm at back, although I can move the 140s around)
be quiet! Dark Power Pro 11 850W
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition
960 EVO m.2 1TB
LG 34UC88 Monitor
Technically I have a Silverstone Fortress FT05 from my x5650 build I could use instead of the C but it has an odd interior arrangement.

Anyway, just a few questions as I put together the rest of my build -

*Questions:*

Is my Noctua D15 going to be sufficient? Or should I look at getting a Corsair 110 or 115 instead? If I need to go the 110 or 115 route, is it better for them to intake from the front or exhaust at the top?
Perhaps related to the above, which is going to be harder to cool - 7800x or 7820x? I'm open to either, really, although personally I can get by with 6 cores I guess.
I am leaning towards the Asus x299 TUF Mark 1, but does the Deluxe have better VRM temps? I prefer the look of the TUF but since I am using the ThunderboltEX 3 board the Deluxe isn't really going to be much more £ in the end.
Thanks and nice to meet you all, virtually. I promise to post updates after I start assembling the rest of the parts and won't disappear.


----------



## aDyerSituation

If I bought one of these kits
https://www.ekwb.com/shop/ek-kit-s360

there wouldn't be anything stopping me from putting dye in it would there?


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> 7920x will be out for consumers on 28th, 7940x and top of line (xeons) on september the 25th.


i did see a screenshot of a 7920 @ 4.5 scoring 3000 on cinebench. i should have saved it not sure if any truth but it looked fine to me. i was waiting for the 7920 but instead my eye is on the 7940.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> i did see a screenshot of a 7920 @ 4.5 scoring 3000 on cinebench. i should have saved it not sure if any truth but it looked fine to me. i was waiting for the 7920 but instead my eye is on the 7940.


I guess the sweet spot will be that 7940x... Will it come soldered???


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> If I bought one of these kits
> https://www.ekwb.com/shop/ek-kit-s360
> 
> there wouldn't be anything stopping me from putting dye in it would there?


Only dye itself should stop you from putting dye in there...









After the tear-down I needed and staining incurred on nickle under plexy (staining on the metal), I'm firmly in the "never again" camp on dyes...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *denjin*
> 
> Hello.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Long time reader, first time poster!
> 
> I am running an ancient Asus P6X58D-E x5650 at 4GHz build and I think it is finally time to upgrade. I've decided on this platform as I could use the extra cores and PCIe lanes.
> 
> These are my parts so far:
> 
> *Current Parts*
> 
> Fractal Design Define C (2 x 140mm at front and 1 x 120mm at back, although I can move the 140s around)
> NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition
> 960 EVO m.2 1TB
> LG 34UC88 Monitor
> Technically I have a Silverstone Fortress FT05 from my x5650 build I could use instead of the C but it has an odd interior arrangement.
> 
> Anyway, just a few questions as I put together the rest of my build -
> 
> *Questions:*
> 
> Is my Noctua D15 going to be sufficient? Or should I look at getting a Corsair 110 or 115 instead? If I need to go the 110 or 115 route, is it better for them to intake from the front or exhaust at the top?
> Perhaps related to the above, which is going to be harder to cool - 7800x or 7820x? I'm open to either, really, although personally I can get by with 6 cores I guess.
> I am leaning towards the Asus x299 TUF Mark 1, but does the Deluxe have better VRM temps? I prefer the look of the TUF but since I am using the ThunderboltEX 3 board the Deluxe isn't really going to be much more £ in the end.
> Thanks and nice to meet you all, virtually. I promise to post updates after I start assembling the rest of the parts and won't disappear.


the Nh d15 is the best air cooler, depending on your overclocking intentions, Air cooling will limit things.
the 7820X will generate more heat. Delidding either will help greatly
VRM temps are only a concern if you are pushing the overclock.. and with an aircooled cpu, don;t worry about vrm temperatures. That said, either will do fine for a 6 or 8 core cpu.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Only dye itself should stop you from putting dye in there...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After the tear-down I needed and staining incurred on nickle under plexy (staining on the metal), I'm firmly in the "never again" camp on dyes...


^^ This.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Five minutes of RealBench stress is not telling much - try at the very least one hour, preferably two.


You nailed it, but it was actually 15 minutes. I tried 1 hour and got instability, it's close though. Probably what's causing Cinebench to crash. The good news is at 4.9GHz it passes backwards and forward. Can't spend too much time on it right now but I'll report back later.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> You nailed it, but it was actually 15 minutes. I tried 1 hour and got instability, it's close though. Probably what's causing Cinebench to crash. The good news is at 4.9GHz it passes backwards and forward. Can't spend too much time on it right now but I'll report back later.


Getting close!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

For me it has to get two hours stable at least.

No point in bragging when the chip is not even stable.  ^^


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *curseddiamond*
> 
> Got My CPU back from Silicon Lottery Today!!!!!!
> 
> has dramatically lowered my temps..
> 
> AIDA64 stress test at 4.9GHz would instantly thermal throttle but now it hits a high of 83c after 1 hour.
> 
> CPU-Z bench would hit 105c now hits 81c
> 
> easly completes the XTU bench mark hitting a package temp of 78c
> 
> completes Real Bench 2.54 with the 3 and 5 AVX off set with a high of 81c
> 
> this while running 4.9Ghz at 1.32 volts
> 
> now going back in for the 5GHz!!
> 
> then I will be just waiting for the Rampage Extreme....then the full loop from EK


good luck on stabilizing at 5GHz







I have not gone past 1.299v core to test it out but I have gone LLC8 and 2.1v VCCIN. I can taste that 5GHz victory, it is so close. I wonder if we have batch numbers close to each other, what's yours?

I may have found a bug on the R6A motherboard/BIOS, I'm using the latest BIOS 0702 and I'm not able to lock the VCCIN. I can set it in the BIOS and it sticks but VCCIN voltage goes way past it still. Anyone else see this on Asus motherboards?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> good luck on stabilizing at 5GHz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have not gone past 1.299v core to test it out but I have gone LLC8 and 2.1v VCCIN. I can taste that 5GHz victory, it is so close. I wonder if we have batch numbers close to each other, what's yours?
> 
> I may have found a bug on the R6A motherboard/BIOS, I'm using the latest BIOS 0702 and I'm not able to lock the VCCIN. I can set it in the BIOS and it sticks but VCCIN voltage goes way past it still. Anyone else see this on Asus motherboards?


Loadline 8 dude. Try to stay below 2.15v on load. But since you are heading quite close to the max spec.. advice to check it with Multimeter.


----------



## hrmgamer

We may have just gotten the approximate release date of the Rampage VI Extreme, just one and a half weeks to go! What I don't know is whether the price is inflated because of the Australia Tax (not a literal tax, just the inflated prices we usually pay), or whether the board is more expensive than predicted. But the 1049 AUD, inc. GST would put it around 750 USD ex. tax.

Part of me is wondering if I should switch out my planned purchase of a 7900 for a 7940 :S

Edit: added conversion to USD.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Loadline 8 dude. Try to stay below 2.15v on load. But since you are heading quite close to the max spec.. advice to check it with Multimeter.


I already dropped LLC way down and it's still going way above my locked voltage. The max is supposed to be 2.7v before it melts but I still don't want to get that close.


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> I guess the sweet spot will be that 7940x... Will it come soldered???


so far i havent read anything that says otherwise, but i dont mind id like to send to SL anyway.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I already dropped LLC way down and it's still going way above my locked voltage. The max is supposed to be 2.7v before it melts but I still don't want to get that close.


Where did u read that.. max is 2.15v intel spec sheet.


----------



## denjin

So if I do go and try my Noctua D15 in the TUF Mark 1, am I stuck with buying some Corsair LPX? Or can I get by with something like this G.Skill? https://www.amazon.co.uk/G-SKILL-F4-3600C17D-32GTZKW-Trident-PC4-28800-Channel/dp/B01N9TBIMB/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1503770870 At least I think that will work as I can't even find that part on the G.Skill site.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Where did u read that.. max is 2.15v intel spec sheet.


On the Apex bios. I have not read the 7800X specs thoroughly.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I already dropped LLC way down and it's still going way above my locked voltage. The max is supposed to be 2.7v before it melts but I still don't want to get that close.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> On the Apex bios. I have not read the 7800X specs thoroughly.


Hello

In the APEX BIOS the upper limit of 2.70V with LN2 disabled for VCCIN does not imply any type of safe limit. Such assumptions on your part may prove catastrophic at some point.


----------



## hrmgamer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *denjin*
> 
> So if I do go and try my Noctua D15 in the TUF Mark 1, am I stuck with buying some Corsair LPX? Or can I get by with something like this G.Skill? https://www.amazon.co.uk/G-SKILL-F4-3600C17D-32GTZKW-Trident-PC4-28800-Channel/dp/B01N9TBIMB/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1503770870 At least I think that will work as I can't even find that part on the G.Skill site.


Hi sorry I meant to reply yesterday. We're actually in very similar positions.

Ok, you probably just saw the HSF v. AIO argument in this thread, but from what I've seen the good AIO models v. the D15 tends to come out as a wash in cooling if the case has good airflow. The 90 degree turn the air needs to make getting sucked into the front of your case will slow your intake a bit, but other than that you should have good flow. So I'd suggest starting with the D15 and if it isn't enough then look at other options. If you do get an AIO start by in-taking at the front and keep an eye on what it does to your 1080 founders temps.

As for RAM the height of those Tridents is listed at 44mm. The D15 in dual fan configuration supports up to 32mm without any rearranging. I seen some threads state that 32mm doesn't take into account the CPU mounting bracket so you actually end up with a bit more? If you've already got it mounted I'd suggest powering down the box and just measuring to see what sort of clearance you really get. One interesting thing the Noctua site mentions is that if you want dual fans but have tall RAM you can offset the position of the front fan provided you have enough depth in the case (so the fan doesn't hit your case's side panel).

The other thing that is worth doing is checking that whatever you buy is on the motherboard's RAM QVL. As time goes on and we get more information about what the boards like that's not on the QVL you can venture out. But since this is a new platform I'd stick with what has supposedly been tested against it.

The 7820 will be harder to cool, but if you have the budget I'd go the 7820 and upgrade the cooling if required. Since like me you hang onto builds forever those two extra cores will make a big difference in the long run.

I also want to use the Thunderbolt add-in card, but the user reviews I'm seeing aren't filling me with all that much hope that it will work as advertised on the Asus X299 boards.

As for which board you're best of going with I'll defer to those who are actually playing with them, I'm waiting for the Rampage VI Extreme (the built in 10GbE will be a big help for me).

Cheers
HRMGamer

Edit: Added note about QVL. I do tend to edit my posts a lot, don't I? Sigh.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Where did u read that.. max is 2.15v intel spec sheet.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> In the APEX BIOS the upper limit of 2.70V with LN2 disabled for VCCIN does not imply any type of safe limit. Such assumptions on your part may prove catastrophic at some point.


Agreed, that's why when I measured it with the DMM I turned blue. Not arguing with you guys at all, absolute maximum VCCIN for 7900X is 2.15v according to the intel data sheet, I don't really want to run it that high constantly but for 5GHz it is mostly likely required to be close.


----------



## hrmgamer

This is a rewritten post, I replied earlier today but I'm not sure what happened to it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *denjin*
> 
> *Questions:*
> 
> Is my Noctua D15 going to be sufficient? Or should I look at getting a Corsair 110 or 115 instead? If I need to go the 110 or 115 route, is it better for them to intake from the front or exhaust at the top?
> Perhaps related to the above, which is going to be harder to cool - 7800x or 7820x? I'm open to either, really, although personally I can get by with 6 cores I guess.
> I am leaning towards the Asus x299 TUF Mark 1, but does the Deluxe have better VRM temps? I prefer the look of the TUF but since I am using the ThunderboltEX 3 board the Deluxe isn't really going to be much more £ in the end.


1. You may have seen the AIO v. HSF discussion a few pages back in this thread, if not it's worth a read. IMO a D15 and a good AIO are a wash in a well ventilated case. So given that your case has fairly good airflow I'd suggest you start with your D15 and only look at an AIO if the D15 can't keep up. If you go a the AIO route mount it at the front.

2. 7820 is harder to cool, but since like me you hang onto systems forever (I'm just about to move off X58 too) I'd go the 7820 because in the long run those two extra cores will make a huge difference. Again, if you find the D15 isn't enough then look at alternate cooling arrangements.

3. I can't comment on the VRM temps, I don't have either board. That said I'm also after Thunderbolt and from the user reviews I've seen apparently that add-on card has some fairly noticeable driver and stability issues.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *denjin*
> 
> So if I do go and try my Noctua D15 in the TUF Mark 1, am I stuck with buying some Corsair LPX? Or can I get by with something like this G.Skill? https://www.amazon.co.uk/G-SKILL-F4-3600C17D-32GTZKW-Trident-PC4-28800-Channel/dp/B01N9TBIMB/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1503770870 At least I think that will work as I can't even find that part on the G.Skill site.


On the spec sheet the D15 in the default dual fan configuration has a clearance of 32mm. That Trident kit is 44mm. According to a few threads I found apparently the D15 has a little more clearance than the spec sheet suggests as it doesn't take into account the CPU mounting block? If you currently have the D15 mounted I'd suggest powering off your rig and measuring for yourself just how much clearance you actually have. If you don't have enough clearance the Noctua site suggests mounting the front fan slightly offset, provided you have enough depth in your case (so that the adjusted fan doesn't hit your side panel/cover). The amount you need to adjust the fan won't have any real detrimental cooling effect, it just won't look as nice.

While we are on the topic of RAM I'd make sure that whatever you buy is on your motherboard's QVL. Once x299 has been around for a while and the community gets a handle on what does and does not play nicely with it you can afford to venture out. But right now I'd stick with the stuff that has ostensibly been tested with the board.

I'm pretty sure I'm forgetting something I included in my earlier version of this post...oh well.

I hope this helps
HRMGamer.


----------



## ravenrocha

Just to post here my first results for overclocking 7900X on a ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe

7900X @ 4,5 Ghz with offest -2 avx and -4 avx 512

See my screeshots. They speak for them self









After 1 hour of prime95 26.6 (non avx)





after 1 hour of Realbench 2,4 (non avx)





Core1 1,103v
Core2 1,107v
Core3 1,117v
Core4 1,111v
Core5 1,132v
Core6 1,13v
Core7 1,112v
Core8 1,116v
Core9 1,112v
Core10 1,131v

I've done so far:

Prime95 26.6 (non avx) - 1 hour - max vcore temp 83º max VRM 73ºc (custom: 12k small ffts)
Realbench 2.4 (non avx) - 2 hours - max vcore temp 80º max VRM 75º C

Will continue with:

OCCT 4.5 (normal avx) - 2 hours
Realbench 2.5 (avx) - 2 hours
y-crunch (avx 512) 1 hour

and post more results

So far, my average VID is 1.125v for stable 4.5ghz and avx -2 and avx 512 offset smile.gif

Btw I'm using a normal AIO X62 Kraken Water cooling. Whish I had a custom loop to go to 4.9 Ghz smile.gif


----------



## sblantipodi

it seems that intel is pushing six coffe lake cores in a 65W CPU with more than 4GHz per core.
I think that heavy threaded processors will have some great improvements in the near future.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> it seems that intel is pushing six coffe lake cores in a 65W CPU with more than 4GHz per core.
> I think that heavy threaded processors will have some great improvements in the near future.


Let's hope we won't have to swap our X299 motherboards as well in order to upgrade to the 89xx cpu's


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Let's hope we won't have to swap our X299 motherboards as well in order to upgrade to the 89xx cpu's


Agreed


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ravenrocha*
> 
> Just to post here my first results for overclocking 7900X on a ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe
> 
> 7900X @ 4,5 Ghz with offest -2 avx and -4 avx 512
> 
> See my screeshots. They speak for them self
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After 1 hour of prime95 26.6 (non avx)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> after 1 hour of Realbench 2,4 (non avx)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Core1 1,103v
> Core2 1,107v
> Core3 1,117v
> Core4 1,111v
> Core5 1,132v
> Core6 1,13v
> Core7 1,112v
> Core8 1,116v
> Core9 1,112v
> Core10 1,131v
> 
> I've done so far:
> 
> Prime95 26.6 (non avx) - 1 hour - max vcore temp 83º max VRM 73ºc (custom: 12k small ffts)
> Realbench 2.4 (non avx) - 2 hours - max vcore temp 80º max VRM 75º C
> 
> Will continue with:
> 
> OCCT 4.5 (normal avx) - 2 hours
> Realbench 2.5 (avx) - 2 hours
> y-crunch (avx 512) 1 hour
> 
> and post more results
> 
> So far, my average VID is 1.125v for stable 4.5ghz and avx -2 and avx 512 offset smile.gif
> 
> Btw I'm using a normal AIO X62 Kraken Water cooling. Whish I had a custom loop to go to 4.9 Ghz smile.gif


thats definately a gem of a cpu

Beauty of asus per core voltage overclocking
X299 done right.


----------



## ravenrocha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> thats definately a gem of a cpu
> 
> Beauty of asus per core voltage overclocking
> X299 done right.


Thanks dude!! I also had a precious help from some one here on the forum!


----------



## Artah

Here's an update, I think I'm throwing in the towel and move on to waiting for the 7980xe to decide if I wanted to buy one of those frankenchips. I was able to run Cinebech @5GHz CPU but I had to throw the kitchen sink at it, I'm running 0702 08/08/2017 BIOS maybe more fixes for stabilization will help later on. It's just not worth it and probably going to be running this CPU 4.9GHz 24/7, wonder what it can do on the Extreme board when it comes out. Here is what I had to do.

Offset .001v
Core 1.31v
VCCIN at 1.92v but it shoots up to 1.968v during high loads with my DMM.
VRM Temp on the heatsink measured with an IR temperature gun staying at around 36c (120mm fan pointed right at it)
LLC 4 (higher was actually worse and causes the crash instantly)
CPU Current 140%
AVX offset 31
AVX -512 offset 31
DRAM Current Capability 140%
DRAM Power Phase Control Optimized
VRM Spread Spectrum disabled but I did see interference on my other monitor input, not 100% sure it's related but I have a 43" 4K monitor and I cut it up into 4 4X quadrants.

I also changed memory to 3200MHz C15 corsair dominator platinum, not sure if that helped any, the 3000C15 didn't even boot with XMP with everything else at default so for the 3000C15 tests I had to do it manually.

Temperature still sucks, it stays around mid 80s, don't know why realbench records it a lot higher, I was watching it with the OC panel 1 and the onboard temperature display the whole time.

The good news is I can OC this chip at 4.9GHz blind folded and game with it just fine at 5GHz if I wanted to with good temps. Maybe I'll test it later on with "bad cores" disabled and without HT.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Here's an update, I think I'm throwing in the towel and move on to waiting for the 7980xe to decide if I wanted to buy one of those frankenchips. I was able to run Cinebech @5GHz CPU but I had to throw the kitchen sink at it, I'm running 0702 08/08/2017 BIOS maybe more fixes for stabilization will help later on. It's just not worth it and probably going to be running this CPU 4.9GHz 24/7, wonder what it can do on the Extreme board when it comes out. Here is what I had to do.
> 
> Offset .001v
> Core 1.31v
> VCCIN at 1.92v but it shoots up to 1.968v during high loads with my DMM.
> VRM Temp on the heatsink measured with an IR temperature gun staying at around 36c (120mm fan pointed right at it)
> LLC 4 (higher was actually worse and causes the crash instantly)
> CPU Current 140%
> AVX offset 31
> AVX -512 offset 31
> DRAM Current Capability 140%
> DRAM Power Phase Control Optimized
> VRM Spread Spectrum disabled but I did see interference on my other monitor input, not 100% sure it's related but I have a 43" 4K monitor and I cut it up into 4 4X quadrants.
> 
> I also changed memory to 3200MHz C15 corsair dominator platinum, not sure if that helped any, the 3000C15 didn't even boot with XMP with everything else at default so for the 3000C15 tests I had to do it manually.
> 
> Temperature still sucks, it stays around mid 80s, don't know why realbench records it a lot higher, I was watching it with the OC panel 1 and the onboard temperature display the whole time.
> 
> The good news is I can OC this chip at 4.9GHz blind folded and game with it just fine at 5GHz if I wanted to with good temps. Maybe I'll test it later on with "bad cores" disabled and without HT.


lol - are you actually _complaining_ about that CPu sample???


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I already dropped LLC way down and it's still going way above my locked voltage. The max is supposed to be 2.7v before it melts but I still don't want to get that close.


Just curious, have you approached ASUS yet about exceeding your spec'd locked voltage?

@[email protected]


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - are you actually _complaining_ about that CPu sample???


what do you mean by avx offset = 31? Also, you may want to try setting an Ac and DC load line value. Try 0.01 for both.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - are you actually _complaining_ about that CPu sample???


Not complaining at all, just bummed that I can't hit that 5.0 without going up higher on voltage.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Just curious, have you approached ASUS yet about exceeding your spec'd locked voltage?
> 
> @[email protected]


No I have not but either way this CPU requires it because it's not stable at LLC 1.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> what do you mean by avx offset = 31? Also, you may want to try setting an Ac and DC load line value. Try 0.01 for both.


AVX set to negative offset 31 is the lowest to drown it to 1800MHz. I don't know where the Ac and DC load lines are, is it somewhere in the digi+ setting?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Not complaining at all, just bummed that I can't hit that 5.0 without going up higher on voltage.
> No I have not but either way this CPU requires it because it's not stable at LLC 1.
> AVX set to negative offset 31 is the lowest to drown it to 1800MHz. I don't know where the Ac and DC load lines are, is it somewhere in the digi+ setting?


Hmm first dude
Realbench 2.54 stresses avx
So showing that screen shot shows 2.9ghz avx stable. Says nothing about the 5ghz

Hmm you want help?? ?????. Pm me will get u that 5ghz.

Btw LLC1 with svid enabled is intek default vccin.
Weird the vrm spectrum is affecting your gpu. Afaik cpu spectrum olden days used to affect i/o ports for inbuilt audio Or olden days open unshielded soundcards..


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Not complaining at all, just bummed that I can't hit that 5.0 without going up higher on voltage.
> No I have not but either way this CPU requires it because it's not stable at LLC 1.
> AVX set to negative offset 31 is the lowest to drown it to 1800MHz. I don't know where the Ac and DC load lines are, is it somewhere in the digi+ setting?


yeah - the digi+ page... should be under the VRM control section. Anyway - just to be sure I understand, with an LLC setting of 1-4 on the APEX, you are seeing VCCIN jack up when under load?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Hmm first dude
> Realbench 2.54 stresses avx
> So showing that screen shot shows 2.9ghz avx stable. Says nothing about the 5ghz
> 
> Hmm you want help?? ?????. Pm me will get u that 5ghz.
> 
> Btw LLC1 with svid enabled is intek default vccin.
> Weird the vrm spectrum is affecting your gpu. Afaik cpu spectrum olden days used to affect i/o ports for inbuilt audio Or olden days open unshielded soundcards..


That's why I threw in the towel lol. SVID is disabled.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - the digi+ page... should be under the VRM control section. Anyway - just to be sure I understand, with an LLC setting of 1-4 on the APEX, you are seeing VCCIN jack up when under load?


Roger that, I set it to 1.920v and on load my DMM tells me it's 1.988v on LLC4 at the moment.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> That's why I threw in the towel lol. SVID is disabled.
> Roger that, I set it to 1.920v and on load my DMM tells me it's 1.988v on LLC4 at the moment.


well if u really want to persue that 5ghz.. PM me. Theres a method of overclocking old school that seems to be lost in the forum nowadays

btw u should set all your phases to extreme.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> well if u really want to persue that 5ghz.. PM me. Theres a method of overclocking old school that seems to be lost in the forum nowadays
> 
> btw u should set all your phases to extreme.


Not gonna lie, not sure what artah is gonna do but I'm taking you up on learning this old school offer. PM in bound.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Not gonna lie, not sure what artah is gonna do but I'm taking you up on learning this old school offer. PM in bound.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> well if u really want to persue that 5ghz.. PM me. Theres a method of overclocking old school that seems to be lost in the forum nowadays
> 
> btw u should set all your phases to extreme.


I don't feel like overclocking the bclk at all and get into more headache territory. 4.9GHz is plenty fast already.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I don't feel like overclocking the bclk at all and get into more headache territory. 4.9GHz is plenty fast already.


again.. not bclk.

nvrmind dude. this is the problem with all so call elite purchasers in flooding the forums with highend hardware.
they dictate what they think is correct and influence the masses...

those who want to learn will always have a thirst to learn.

time for GOT.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I'd love to learn how to OC SK-X. I got my 7800X running at a dirty 4800 OV without any tweaks.

Honestly, I could do 2 hours Realbench AVX at 4800 1.250V. Should I decrease 512 and normal AVX offset and push for closer to 4900 at the same
voltage..?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I'd love to learn how to OC SK-X. I got my 7800X running at a dirty 4800 OV without any tweaks.
> 
> Honestly, I could do 2 hours Realbench AVX at 4800 1.250V. Should I decrease 512 and normal AVX offset and push for closer to 4900 at the same
> voltage..?


That's dependent on what you plan to do with it. If you're going to encode a ton then higher AVX is better as you already know and if you're mostly going to game with it then the higher clocks would be best.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Folding, and playing games once i a while.

That is it.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Folding, and playing games once i a while.
> 
> That is it.


Folding with a good GPU is much more effective. I'd leave the CPU out of it completely if possible.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I know, but I do it for total WU's. Not for normal folding though, but it happens. The 1080Ti deliver 1.1-1.45 mill PPD, so alot better than 30K for less power than the CPU uses.









Never goes above 200 watts, even under gaming. Undervolting FTW!


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I'd love to learn how to OC SK-X. I got my 7800X running at a dirty 4800 OV without any tweaks.
> 
> Honestly, I could do 2 hours Realbench AVX at 4800 1.250V. Should I decrease 512 and normal AVX offset and push for closer to 4900 at the same
> voltage..?


Really curious about 7800x. You are on msi/giga right. If its asus pm me.. Worth your while .. just indulge me.

From what i see -2/-4 is the best. But curious whats the default offset by intel for your 7800x to maintain tdp.


----------



## denjin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hrmgamer*
> 
> This is a rewritten post, I replied earlier today but I'm not sure what happened to it.
> 1. You may have seen the AIO v. HSF discussion a few pages back in this thread, if not it's worth a read. IMO a D15 and a good AIO are a wash in a well ventilated case. So given that your case has fairly good airflow I'd suggest you start with your D15 and only look at an AIO if the D15 can't keep up. If you go a the AIO route mount it at the front.
> 
> 2. 7820 is harder to cool, but since like me you hang onto systems forever (I'm just about to move off X58 too) I'd go the 7820 because in the long run those two extra cores will make a huge difference. Again, if you find the D15 isn't enough then look at alternate cooling arrangements.
> 
> 3. I can't comment on the VRM temps, I don't have either board. That said I'm also after Thunderbolt and from the user reviews I've seen apparently that add-on card has some fairly noticeable driver and stability issues.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the spec sheet the D15 in the default dual fan configuration has a clearance of 32mm. That Trident kit is 44mm. According to a few threads I found apparently the D15 has a little more clearance than the spec sheet suggests as it doesn't take into account the CPU mounting block? If you currently have the D15 mounted I'd suggest powering off your rig and measuring for yourself just how much clearance you actually have. If you don't have enough clearance the Noctua site suggests mounting the front fan slightly offset, provided you have enough depth in your case (so that the adjusted fan doesn't hit your side panel/cover). The amount you need to adjust the fan won't have any real detrimental cooling effect, it just won't look as nice.
> 
> While we are on the topic of RAM I'd make sure that whatever you buy is on your motherboard's QVL. Once x299 has been around for a while and the community gets a handle on what does and does not play nicely with it you can afford to venture out. But right now I'd stick with the stuff that has ostensibly been tested with the board.
> 
> I'm pretty sure I'm forgetting something I included in my earlier version of this post...oh well.
> 
> I hope this helps
> HRMGamer.


Thanks for the reply. I did see it show up and disappear - very odd!









I noticed I didn't keep the box the D15 came in so think I need to buy a new mounting kit for this setup I think. I'm leaning towards trying something like a Celsius S36 (since it will fit perfectly in the front of the Define C case)...I just find the RAM limitations annoying. In my current FT05 case setup the 1080 hits 83C all the time but perhaps it has worse airflow in general.

Pretty sure I'll just get the 7820x since, as you said, I'll hang on to this system for a very long time.

Hope TB3 isn't super buggy. I wonder if the Deluxe is a better buy if you want TB3 since the Deluxe comes with the card, but I doubt it matters too much? Generally prefer the TUF I think.

Agree about the QVL but a lot of the ones on the list I can't find in the UK. The part numbers are slightly different. Need to find a decent 3200 (or better) 32G kit and it also depends if I end up needing the low profile or not.


----------



## Pandora's Box

Overclocked my ram tonight. from DDR4-3200 @ 14-14-14-34 1.35V to DDR4-3800 @ 16-16-16-34 1T 1.40V


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Really curious about 7800x. You are on msi/giga right. If its asus pm me.. Worth your while .. just indulge me.
> 
> From what i see -2/-4 is the best. But curious whats the default offset by intel for your 7800x to maintain tdp.


Yeah.. I am on MSI this time. Got really tired after being on ASUS on my latest boards. (Z87/X-99S/X99-E WS/Z97/Z170/X370 CH6). All All non-specified is ASUS ROG boards.

This cheapo Tomhawk is really doing good for the price. 4800 full AVX stability is no issues.

Will do -2/-4 and them perhaps push for 5 ghz since I am gaming. I will delid this if I get to borrow a delid mate X from some guys at my local forum. Time will tell.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Yeah.. I am on MSI this time. Got really tired after being on ASUS on my latest boards. (Z87/X-99S/X99-E WS/Z97/Z170/X370 CH6). All All non-specified is ASUS ROG boards.
> 
> This cheapo Tomhawk is really doing good for the price. 4800 full AVX stability is no issues.
> 
> Will do -2/-4 and them perhaps push for 5 ghz since I am gaming. I will delid this if I get to borrow a delid mate X from some guys at my local forum. Time will tell.


Msi bios seems to be the most stable x299 overall. If only it has the per core voltage adjustment.


----------



## hrmgamer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *denjin*
> 
> Hope TB3 isn't super buggy. I wonder if the Deluxe is a better buy if you want TB3 since the Deluxe comes with the card, but I doubt it matters too much? Generally prefer the TUF I think.


If you prefer the TUF get it and buy a Thunderbolt expansion card once they sort the issues it has. That said you're right about there not being much of a price difference (the Deluxe is 50GBP off on Amazon atm). May I ask why you prefer the TUF Mk1? Honestly I'd get the Deluxe over the TUF in a heart beat. For me probably the biggest reason I ignored the TUF Mk1 is that it has active cooling which will probably need replacing in a few years, which in turn doesn't lend itself well to a long term build. Added to that the Deluxe has far more and varied connection options and the OLED diagnostic display.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *denjin*
> 
> Agree about the QVL but a lot of the ones on the list I can't find in the UK. The part numbers are slightly different. Need to find a decent 3200 (or better) 32G kit and it also depends if I end up needing the low profile or not.


There are a few options, e.g. CMR32GX4M4C3600C18, F4-3466C16Q-32GTZR,. What are you after long term? Is what you put in now the be all and end all? I ended up buying all 128GB (2x4x16GB) now because apparently mixing batches later isn't great for stability (particularly when overclocking). If you're not planning on putting more than 64GB in I'd go either 4x8GB (quad channel right away) or 8x8GB (cheaper than 4x16GB).

Cheers
HRMGamer


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> That's why I threw in the towel lol. SVID is disabled.
> Roger that, I set it to 1.920v and on load my DMM tells me it's 1.988v on LLC4 at the moment.


.. and it is reading 1.92-ish at Idle? AC/DC load line should be under the Internal Power submenu.

Anyway - I can see one issue that might be causing problems... by disabling cpusvid AND leaving cache or core voltage on Auto, you are asking the VR system to adjust voltage based on commands from the PCU that are now disabled. Leave it on Auto and the auto rules handle a mixed voltage control setting... for the most part. You only need or should disable CPUSVID when you go Full manual override mode, or use a high BCLK (or strap). The PEG/DMI is uncoupled from baseclock, so a bclk like 166 and higher does not bork the PCIE clock (cards and disks).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> well if u really want to persue that 5ghz.. PM me. Theres a method of overclocking old school that seems to be lost in the forum nowadays
> btw u should set all your phases to extreme.


there been a few more controls since old-school base clock days.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> .. and it is reading 1.92-ish at Idle? AC/DC load line should be under the Internal Power submenu.
> 
> Anyway - I can see one issue that might be causing problems... by disabling cpusvid AND leaving cache or core voltage on Auto, you are asking the VR system to adjust voltage based on commands from the PCU that are now disabled. Leave it on Auto and the auto rules handle a mixed voltage control setting... for the most part. You only need or should disable CPUSVID when you go Full manual override mode, or use a high BCLK (or strap). The PEG/DMI is uncoupled from baseclock, so a bclk like 166 and higher does not bork the PCIE clock (cards and disks).
> there been a few more controls since old-school base clock days.


I'll have to reverify but I think it did exactly the same thing on full manual. I'll check when I get home from work.


----------



## tistou77

Like the X99, there has to be a vdrop to the Input Voltage in load (by the LLC) or not ?

Thanks


----------



## GreedyMuffin

5000mhz is not possible. 4900 is, but instead of running 4800 full AVX at 1.260V. I am testing -1 AVX offset and 4800 at 1.240V. So lowering the voltage instead. 4800 is plenty fast enough. And If I could lower the power draw, why not. ^^ I know that 4700 AVX is stable at 1.215V.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Like the X99, there has to be a vdrop to the Input Voltage in load (by the LLC) or not ?
> 
> Thanks


There is definitely vdroop in the higher clocks near the upper wall but with this chip either it's doing a lousy job with the IVR or the boards's overzealous to feed it voltage is a little bit much. There is much more testing that needs to be done, I didn't have a whole lot of time this weekend since I was overloaded with other things going on but I hope I get more time soon or someone else can experiment near the higher end of overclocking this chip.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Like the X99, there has to be a vdrop to the Input Voltage in load (by the LLC) or not ?
> 
> Thanks


yes to your question for vdroop in vccin. vdrop is voltage loss due to trace path, vdroop is voltage lowering under load which can be mitigated via LLC.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> There is definitely vdroop in the higher clocks near the upper wall but with this chip either it's doing a lousy job with the IVR or the boards's overzealous to feed it voltage is a little bit much. There is much more testing that needs to be done, I didn't have a whole lot of time this weekend since I was overloaded with other things going on but I hope I get more time soon or someone else can experiment near the higher end of overclocking this chip.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes to your question for vdroop in vccin. vdrop is voltage loss due to trace path, vdroop is voltage lowering under load which can be mitigated via LLC.


Ok thanks









The vdroop is always the same as on X99 (~5, 6mV) ?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Ok thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The vdroop is always the same as on X99 (~5, 6mV) ?


I'll have to do more testing to get a more accurate information but I do know that LLC4 gives me about 1.962 VCCIN and LLC5 shoots up to about 2v on an Apex motherboard using a 7900X. Not sure if that's the new normal but not likely since it's getting close to the VCCIN data spec limits. I'll check how much voltage I lose on core depending on what frequency later on when I get home. Unless someone else have another method it's tough to measure this because you'd have to count on the OS not crashing right away before I can get a voltage droop reading. I usually just increase LLC until it no longer crashes and never paid attention to the actual voltage droop value.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I'll have to do more testing to get a more accurate information but I do know that LLC4 gives me about 1.962 VCCIN and LLC5 shoots up to about 2v on an Apex motherboard using a 7900X. Not sure if that's the new normal but not likely since it's getting close to the VCCIN data spec limits. I'll check how much voltage I lose on core depending on what frequency later on when I get home. Unless someone else have another method it's tough to measure this because you'd have to count on the OS not crashing right away before I can get a voltage droop reading. I usually just increase LLC until it no longer crashes and never paid attention to the actual voltage droop value.


And you have what difference voltage between idle and load ?


----------



## denjin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hrmgamer*
> 
> If you prefer the TUF get it and buy a Thunderbolt expansion card once they sort the issues it has. That said you're right about there not being much of a price difference (the Deluxe is 50GBP off on Amazon atm). May I ask why you prefer the TUF Mk1? Honestly I'd get the Deluxe over the TUF in a heart beat. For me probably the biggest reason I ignored the TUF Mk1 is that it has active cooling which will probably need replacing in a few years, which in turn doesn't lend itself well to a long term build. Added to that the Deluxe has far more and varied connection options and the OLED diagnostic display.
> There are a few options, e.g. CMR32GX4M4C3600C18, F4-3466C16Q-32GTZR,. What are you after long term? Is what you put in now the be all and end all? I ended up buying all 128GB (2x4x16GB) now because apparently mixing batches later isn't great for stability (particularly when overclocking). If you're not planning on putting more than 64GB in I'd go either 4x8GB (quad channel right away) or 8x8GB (cheaper than 4x16GB).
> 
> Cheers
> HRMGamer


I guess I just prefer the look of the TUF (and covers on un-used PCIe slots). However, current price on Deluxe has me pondering it, since when you add price of separate TB3 card it's really only like £25 more and has a lot more 'stuff' on it. Good point about longevity, too!

Thanks for the RAM links - just need to decide 100% on my cooling solution. I think I'll be buying a new cooler and giving father-in-law the old x5650 system, so maybe some AIO makes sense for new build. As for what I'm looking for in RAM, I doubt I'll ever need more than 32GB myself and don't plan on too insane of an overclock - so 4x8GB.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> And you have what difference voltage between idle and load ?


ok the last test I did I had set a 1.920v as the VCCIN and idle I think it was around 1.94v and when I loaded it with LLC 5 it went to around 2v with realbench v2.54 running a stress test with the CPU set to 5GHz. Not sure if that's what you are looking for as an example. I wish I was home dang, would love to be checking these live at the moment


----------



## tistou77

Ok thanks


----------



## ELIAS-EH

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-coffee-lake-cpu-motherboard-asrock,35147.html


----------



## surfinchina

Hi, I'm after a bit of advice.
I'm running at 4.7, auto volts, avx offset 4 and 5, on my 7900x with GA aorus 9, with brand new monoblock







(check out the VRM temps!)
I'm wondering if the figures below look ok and what I can do to make minor improvements.
I ran Prime blend and stopped it after 20min on account of temps continuing to climb.
I have an EK PE420 and PE 360 rad. Vega FE is under water in the same loop.
Thanks!


----------



## sblantipodi

just an ignorant question but how you overclock so many cores?
suppose even the 18 cores processors. how do you oc a cpu like that?

I think that all cores overclock is no more feasible neither good for performance reason.
so what is the right way to overclock those monsters?


----------



## hrmgamer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *denjin*
> 
> As for what I'm looking for in RAM, I doubt I'll ever need more than 32GB myself and don't plan on too insane of an overclock - so 4x8GB.


I missed the F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR before. This gives you 32GB quad channel at 3600MHz with a reasonable latency of 16-16-16-36.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hrmgamer*
> 
> I missed the F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR before. This gives you 32GB quad channel at 3600MHz with a reasonable latency of 16-16-16-36.


This is the kit I own. Good stuff.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> This is the kit I own. Good stuff.


Any good overclock results with that kit? Thinking about getting one of those kits down the road


----------



## denjin

Holy crap memory is so expensive now. This build is going to cost a fortune but should last me a very long time I guess! Just deciding on the AIO cooler to use now since I'll be handing down my x5650 setup to my father-in-law and it has the D15.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Yeah. Memory prices are insane. Glad I bought this kit second-hand.

This whole upgrade from Ryzen was cheap. 20% off CPU, 6% off mobo and around 40% off mem as that was second hand. :-D


----------



## ELIAS-EH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> just an ignorant question but how you overclock so many cores?
> suppose even the 18 cores processors. how do you oc a cpu like that?
> 
> I think that all cores overclock is no more feasible neither good for performance reason.
> so what is the right way to overclock those monsters?


LN2 only


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> LN2 only


leave alone the way you cool down your CPU, I mean, how can I tell the CPU to boost at 4.5GHz when using 6 cores, to 4GHz when using 8 cores, to 3.7GHz when using 10 cores and to stay at 3.5GHz when using all cores?

Is this something possible? Is this the right way to overclock those CPUs?


----------



## czin125

https://www.mindfactory.de/product_info.php/16GB-G-Skill-PC-4400-CL19-KIT--2x8GB--16GTZKK_1189341.html
274 euros now or 328 USD


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> This is the kit I own. Good stuff.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Yeah. Memory prices are insane. Glad I bought this kit second-hand.
> 
> This whole upgrade from Ryzen was cheap. 20% off CPU, 6% off mobo and around 40% off mem as that was second hand. :-D


What kind of OC are you guys able to get with this? At least 3800?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I got the Ripjaws V 3600. Running at 3800 16-18-18-38-1T.


----------



## curseddiamond

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> What kind of OC are you guys able to get with this? At least 3800?


I run 4.9 everyday OC on a dillided 7900x 3800 16-16-16-31 1T on my memory. Gskill 3200 14


----------



## denjin

3rd of September for stock on 7820x.







Would you buy a Celsius S36 or a Corsair 115i + additional 120mm in front of case? Last piece of the puzzle...


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> What kind of OC are you guys able to get with this? At least 3800?


I have not overclocked the memory speed, just timings - primary and secondary. I am getting good results...


----------



## aDyerSituation

So is there any software that will read mesh and input voltage? bios doesn't tell me it


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> So is there any software that will read mesh and input voltage? bios doesn't tell me it


https://www.aida64.com/downloads/NTAxZDdhMGY=


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> https://www.aida64.com/downloads/NTAxZDdhMGY=


really? I have that installed but never thought to look lol


----------



## Jpmboy

This is ridiculous... check out the tim application on my 7740X. Are they kidding???



anyhoo... delided (hammer and vise) and relid with CLU - temps dropped 15-20C depending on the specific core.

edit - @Silicon Lottery is this what you are seeing?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> This is ridiculous... check out the tim application on my 7740X. Are they kidding???
> 
> 
> 
> anyhoo... delided (hammer and vise) and relid with CLU - temps dropped 15-20C depending on the specific core.





LOL


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> This is ridiculous... check out the tim application on my 7740X. Are they kidding???
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> anyhoo... delided (hammer and vise) and relid with CLU - temps dropped 15-20C depending on the specific core.


Dude, what do you mean???? Intel was nice enough to give you enough spare TIM on there just for good measures...









What did you glue it back together with?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Dude, what do you mean???? Intel was nice enough to give you enough spare TIM on there just for good measures...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What did you glue it back together with?


just tacked down the 4 corners with some rtv silicon. avx load temp at 5.2 dropped from low 80s to low 60s.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> just tacked down the 4 corners with some rtv silicon. avx load temp at 5.2 dropped from low 80s to low 60s.


Nice, trying for 5.7GHz this time?







I think I read that you got that chip to 5.5GHz afaik.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Nice, trying for 5.7GHz this time?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think I read that you got that chip to 5.5GHz afaik.


yeah - we'll see how far it can go....


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> This is ridiculous... check out the tim application on my 7740X. Are they kidding???
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> anyhoo... delided (hammer and vise) and relid with CLU - temps dropped 15-20C depending on the specific core.
> 
> edit - @Silicon Lottery is this what you are seeing?


It's the dog poop effect, what the bottom of a sneaker looks like after treading in it.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> It's the dog poop effect, what the bottom of a sneaker looks like after treading in it.


looks like it was applied with an iceing bag.. or cement bag . ther was so much it was oozing out the vent port in the bondline sealant.

they hired this guy and put him in charge to the thermal interface,


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> looks like it was applied with an iceing bag.. or cement bag . ther was so much it was oozing out the vent port in the bondline sealant.
> 
> they hired this guy and put him in charge to the thermal interface,


Personally I think he would of done a better job


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Personally I think he would of done a better job


you are probably right. can't imagine someone taking a TIM dump on a $2000 18-core processor.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you are probably right. can't imagine someone taking a TIM dump on a $2000 18-core processor.


Well someone did on your 7740x by the looks of it.









I feel for Silicon Lottery now having to clean up that mess multiple times..


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah, let's hope the SL gys are in good shape- i think they are in Houston, TX?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah, let's hope the SL gys are in good shape- i think they are in Houston, TX?


From what I understand they are.
Looks bad over there from what I've seen.


----------



## czin125

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11775/intel-launches-xeon-w-cpus-for-workstations?
The xeon version of the 7900X has 4.5ghz TBM 2.0 while the 7900X's TBM 3.0 is 4.5ghz.


----------



## KCDC

Wish there were industrial vids of the CPU production line, I wanna see the goop application robot..


----------



## Kana Chan

http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/27/1605931
7960X delidded pictures


----------



## iamjanco

^ So the HCC cores aren't soldered?


----------



## MJB13SRT8

first that pic shows a 7920x not a 7960x and that is a 140 watt tdp part we still haven't seen any 165 watt tdp parts delided yet.

Montrose


----------



## iamjanco

The 7920x I saw. I asked because the comments included a statement about the 7980x as well.

Hard to tell for sure though with the imperfect translation done by Google translate.


----------



## Jbravo33

7920 finally listed on amazon just not in stock


----------



## MJB13SRT8

I went by the IHS in the picture.

Montrose


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> good luck on stabilizing at 5GHz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have not gone past 1.299v core to test it out but I have gone LLC8 and 2.1v VCCIN. I can taste that 5GHz victory, it is so close. I wonder if we have batch numbers close to each other, what's yours?
> 
> I may have found a bug on the R6A motherboard/BIOS, I'm using the latest BIOS 0702 and I'm not able to lock the VCCIN. I can set it in the BIOS and it sticks but VCCIN voltage goes way past it still. Anyone else see this on Asus motherboards?


LLC rules were revised for this gen to avoid CPU throttling. Divider on VCCIN monitors sag on the line, and if it breaches past a given value, the CPU will throttle. The throttling is an Intel feature that's designed to keep current within spec. Rules probably aren't perfect, but were likely put in place to prevent weird performance anomalies from throwing review scores out of whack and confusing people. You know how things are in this industry. Anything past plugging in a power cable is too much like hard work.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> LLC rules were revised for this gen to avoid CPU throttling. Divider on VCCIN monitors sag on the line, and if it breaches past a given value, the CPU will throttle.


I presume this is precisely the thing that causes Phantom Throttling? Has Intel said anything about the inner workings of the throttle? Since it clearly nerfs IPC without affecting clock speed.

On my Gigabyte board, I notice it when VCCIN drops below something like 1.68 or so.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> LLC rules were revised for this gen to avoid CPU throttling. Divider on VCCIN monitors sag on the line, and if it breaches past a given value, the CPU will throttle. The throttling is an Intel feature that's designed to keep current within spec. Rules probably aren't perfect, but were likely put in place to prevent weird performance anomalies from throwing review scores out of whack and confusing people. You know how things are in this industry. Anything past plugging in a power cable is too much like hard work.


it all makes sense now, thanks for clarifying. I thought I was lacking too much sleep lol. Either way Apex is a win, it was nicely done imho. I don't know if it was the same way on other Apex boards but I love the way I can monitor the CPU temperature without having to rely on software in windows. Can't wait to meet the Extreme in person.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I presume this is precisely the thing that causes Phantom Throttling? Has Intel said anything about the inner workings of the throttle? Since it clearly nerfs IPC without affecting clock speed.
> 
> On my Gigabyte board, I notice it when VCCIN drops below something like 1.68 or so.


There's nothing special about the inner workings. It's just a divider network, with a tripping point prolly tied to something like prochot. Drops frequency and vcore to reduce current. And yes, this is the phantom throttling menace.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> it all makes sense now, thanks for clarifying. I thought I was lacking too much sleep lol. Either way Apex is a win, it was nicely done imho. I don't know if it was the same way on other Apex boards but I love the way I can monitor the CPU temperature without having to rely on software in windows. Can't wait to meet the Extreme in person.


For some reason I keep imagining you greeting it.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> There's nothing special about the inner workings. It's just a divider network, with a tripping point prolly tied to something like prochot. Drops frequency and vcore to reduce current. And yes, this is the phantom throttling menace.


If it drops the frequency, then why does CPUz and all other hardware monitors show the original clock speed instead of the throttled one? Otherwise it wouldn't be called, "phantom".

Or perhaps there's a separate "internal" clock that's independent of the visible one?


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> If it drops the frequency, then why does CPUz and all other hardware monitors show the original clock speed instead of the throttled one? Otherwise it wouldn't be called, "phantom".
> 
> Or perhaps there's a separate "internal" clock that's independent of the visible one.


Polling rate probably not fast enough. You need the right tool. Just for clarification, any reduction in voltage has to be accompanied by a drop in frequency, otherwise, the system would crash.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Polling rate probably not fast enough. You need the right tool.


I find that somewhat hard to believe. Because even when I'm phantom throttled for several minutes straight (with ~1/3 of the non-throttled performance), all the CPU frequency monitors still show the full speed the entire time. The polling rate for these apps are on the order of seconds, not minutes.

Or perhaps CPUz and all the other monitors just aren't reading it right?


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I find that somewhat hard to believe. Because even when I'm phantom throttled for several minutes straight (with ~1/3 of the non-throttled performance), all the CPU frequency monitors still show the full speed the entire time. The polling rate for these apps are on the order of seconds, not minutes.
> 
> Or perhaps CPUz and all the other monitors just aren't reading it right?


Usually, to catch this type of stuff, you need the right monitoring tool. Intel has a few of their own, but those aren't public.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Usually, to catch this type of stuff, you need the right monitoring tool. Intel has a few of their own, but those aren't public.


Can you recommend a "right monitoring tool"?

Here's the monitors that I've tried, and all of them show the full CPU frequency during phantom throttling:

CPUz
HWMonitor
CoreTemp
Windows Task Manager
EDIT:

Once I get my hands on the latest VTune Amplifier, I should be able to (indirectly) sample turbo ratios at microsecond granularity. So if the phantom throttling really isn't phantom at all, then it should show up as extremely low turbo ratios. If the phantom throttle really is phantom, then the turbo ratios should stay high and the reported IPC will be the one that drops drastically.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Can you recommend a "right monitoring tool"?
> 
> Here's the monitors that I've tried, and all of them show the full CPU frequency during phantom throttling:
> 
> CPUz
> HWMonitor
> CoreTemp
> Windows Task Manager
> EDIT:
> 
> Once I get my hands on the latest VTune Amplifier, I should be able to (indirectly) sample turbo ratios at microsecond granularity. So if the phantom throttling really isn't phantom at all, then it should show up as extremely low turbo ratios. If the phantom throttle really is phantom, then the turbo ratios should stay high and the reported IPC will be the one that drops drastically.


The tool needs to be configured to read the frequency correctly. Not sure any of these tools do. They avoid polling that way to reduce system overhead. However, some of these guys should know how to configure their software to read the frequency correctly. You may want to contact Frank from CPU-Z. It's not something new and he should know about it.

BTW, this isn't IPC throttling. It is definitely the core frequency.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana Chan*
> 
> http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/27/1605931
> 7960X delidded pictures


lol - nice pictures,. but the poster used waaay too much LM. Just paint the underside of the IHS and the die - paint. NO blobs.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - nice pictures,. but the poster used waaay too much LM. Just paint the underside of the INS and the die - paint. NO blobs.


Mr Blobby over here, eh


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Mr Blobby over here, eh


ever seen anything like that 7740X TIM job? I mean even the dozen or so GPUs I've done aren't in that league.. and EVGA has some prime blobbers.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ever seen anything like that 7740X TIM job? I mean even the dozen or so GPUs I've done aren't in that league.. and EVGA has some prime blobbers.


lol, I was saying to someone else - looks like a dinner lady has just turned over her ladle onto it.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> lol, I was saying to someone else - looks like a dinner lady has just turned over her ladle onto it.


process engineering at it's finest. (or a very clever explanation in the waiting)


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> process engineering at it's finest. (or a very clever explanation in the waiting)


Skylake and Kaby are awesome, let's not get things twisted, and don't really want to be crapping on the hand that is feeding you - but when they're crapping on their own CPU I think it's warranted


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> anyhoo... delided (hammer and vise) and relid with CLU - temps dropped 15-20C depending on the specific core.


You prefer CLU to the Grizzly ? Or is it the same?

For those who delided, you use what as silicone and applied how ?
If you have a good video for Skylake-X


----------



## MunneY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> This is ridiculous... check out the tim application on my 7740X. Are they kidding???
> 
> 
> 
> anyhoo... delided (hammer and vise) and relid with CLU - temps dropped 15-20C depending on the specific core.
> 
> edit - @Silicon Lottery is this what you are seeing?


Man I put TG Kryo on mine and can only get it down less than 10c. Mine will do 4.7 @ 1.22v but I cant keep it there because of temps

EDIT: mines a 7900x


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> The tool needs to be configured to read the frequency correctly. Not sure any of these tools do. They avoid polling that way to reduce system overhead. However, some of these guys should know how to configure their software to read the frequency correctly. You may want to contact Frank from CPU-Z. It's not something new and he should know about it.
> 
> BTW, this isn't IPC throttling. It is definitely the core frequency.


So you're saying that there are no publicly available tools that can read the frequency correctly?

I'm not trying to question your authority here, but the reason why I remain so skeptical about the reason being solely the polling frequency is because if it was polling you should still see the current apps "occasionally" show the lower frequency. So if the throttling is jumping back and forth between low and high frequencies, when you're running phantom throttled at 1/3 the performance, the actual frequency should be less than full speed at least 2/3 of the time. So the probability that the apps will poll the frequency while it is low at least once over several minutes should be almost 100%.

Yet, I do not observe this behavior. Everything consistently reads full speed regardless of how long I keep them running and regardless of how many times they update during phantom throttling.

Furthermore, temperature and VRM throttling are both clearly observable in CPUz and others. When those kick in they jump between low and high frequencies at high speed and can be observed as the various apps sample it at both the high and low frequencies. Why would throttling from VCCIN be any different?

In other words, something does not add up.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> So you're saying that there are no publicly available tools that can read the frequency correctly?
> 
> I'm not trying to question your authority here, but the reason why I remain so skeptical about the reason being solely the polling frequency is because if it was polling you should still see the current apps "occasionally" show the lower frequency. So if the throttling is jumping back and forth between low and high frequencies, when you're running phantom throttled at 1/3 the performance, the actual frequency should be less than full speed at least 2/3 of the time. So the probability that the apps will poll the frequency while it is low at least once over several minutes should be almost 100%.
> 
> Yet, I do not observe this behavior. Everything consistently reads full speed regardless of how long I keep them running and regardless of how many times they update during phantom throttling.
> 
> Furthermore, temperature and VRM throttling are both clearly observable in CPUz and others. When those kick in they jump between low and high frequencies at high speed and can be observed as the various apps sample it at both the high and low frequencies. Why would throttling from VCCIN be any different?
> 
> In other words, something does not add up.


In that case, what is it you think is happening here?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> In that case, what is it you think is happening here?


I honestly have no idea. Otherwrise I wouldn't be asking. Both explanations have strong counter-evidence against them:

*Phantom Throttling is not really phantom. There is a core frequency drop that isn't picked up the monitor programs because they aren't polling fast enough.*

Counter Evidence:

Regardless of what your polling rate is, you should still capture the lower frequency every once in a while. (or most of the time, if you're throttled hard)
If the core frequency is dropping, then the voltage should drop as well. But the voltage stays high and consistent during phantom throttling.
*Phantom Throttling is an IPC Throttle:*

Counter Evidence:

IPC throttling would mean slowing down or disabling parts of the core. Why would you do that when it's so much simpler to just drop the core frequency.
Dropping the core frequency lets you drop the voltage to further lower the power-draw. Why wouldn't you do that instead?
In reality, these are the only two possible explanations. The frequency is either dropping or it's not. (there may be more frequencies involved than just the core)
IPC is merely defined as the # of instructions/cycle - which is tied to the core frequency.

Some other possible explanations:

There are multiple clock speeds involved. CPUz and others aren't reading the right ones. (or aren't reading the ones that matter)
Conspiracy: Phantom throttling is meant to trick the overclocker in to "thinking" they're at XX GHz when they really aren't to protect the processor and keep them happy at the same time.
EDIT:

Reading more closely at what Raja said, there is a frequency divider that kicks in when the throttling does.

This leads to this hypothesis:

CPUz and other programs are reading the input frequency (before the divider). IOW, the input frequency is separate from the "real" frequency and would easily explain Phantom Throttling as is observed right now. And you need "special tools" to be able to read the post-divider frequency - which is the one that actually matters.

But if this were the case, it also invalidates all his statements about polling frequency.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Wouldn't you know if you were phantom throttling based off benchmark scores?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Wouldn't you know if you were phantom throttling based off benchmark scores?


Yes and no. Hypothetically, you could bench Cinebench with a good score and "be happy". Then you stress-test with Prime95 AVX which phantom throttles. Now you have the illusion that you're fully stable* at your frequency for all workloads.

*Technically, you are actually "stable" since you won't crash or overheat regardless of the load. But that's only because phantom throttling is protecting you on the heavier loads. And you won't know your heavier workloads are getting throttled until you run a benchmark that is that heavier workload.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> For some reason I keep imagining you greeting it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


seriously intel needs to hire this guy to do a commercial on the latest processors









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I find that somewhat hard to believe. Because even when I'm phantom throttled for several minutes straight (with ~1/3 of the non-throttled performance), all the CPU frequency monitors still show the full speed the entire time. The polling rate for these apps are on the order of seconds, not minutes.
> 
> Or perhaps CPUz and all the other monitors just aren't reading it right?


I really doubt software monitors will be able to read this anytime soon or at all if I understand this correctly because I'm suspecting that what we are experiencing is intel's new speed shift technology that they worked with Microsoft on Windows 10 where the OS hands over control of the P-States to the processor where it takes 1ms (20-30ms if it's on the OS) to switch between max frequency and throttled frequency and any software monitor will not be able to detect the frequency fluctuations. So @[email protected] is most likely accurate (as usual...) that it's the external frequency, something after the base clock is multiplied type throttling most likely because a separate internal clock would be extremely unlikely. Just imagine all the code that needs to be changed to accommodate the constantly simultaneous changing internal/external frequencies at different rates if that's even possible. I'm going to find out how to disable this technology or maybe try out this theory on a windows 7 computer if I can get it to work. Possible related info. http://www.anandtech.com/show/9751/examining-intel-skylake-speed-shift-more-responsive-processors
https://www.windowscentral.com/intel-speed-shift-windows-10

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Usually, to catch this type of stuff, you need the right monitoring tool. Intel has a few of their own, but those aren't public.


So how are you guys planning to catch this with the new version of the OC Panel hardware that you're working on?









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> process engineering at it's finest. (or a very clever explanation in the waiting)


They most likely did that so that they can prep the cpu to keep the CLU from leaking to the sides when you place it on top of the chip! I've never de-lidded a CPU before, how do you keep the CLU in place? Before you close up your CPU pls take pictures and share.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Yes and no. Hypothetically, you could bench Cinebench with a good score and "be happy". Then you stress-test with Prime95 AVX which phantom throttles. Now you have the illusion that you're fully stable* at your frequency for all workloads.
> 
> *Technically, you are actually "stable" since you won't crash or overheat regardless of the load. But that's only because phantom throttling is protecting you on the heavier loads. And you won't know your heavier workloads are getting throttled until you run a benchmark that is that heavier workload.


Actually I seen Cinebench phantom throttle with AVX and AVX 512 set to negative offset of 31 when I compared 4.9GHz and 5.0GHz recently, the score was almost identical.


----------



## opt33

laptops have used multiple mechanisms of throttling, ie clock modulation/forced idling of cores, to keep current/temps in limit, and not exceed ratings for power adaptors, etc. clock modulation wont decrease frequency or voltage, but since say only working at 75% time would cause it to go slow. Kevin (author of realtemp) wrote throttlestop for monitoring/alleviating the throttling including odcm. might be worthwhile downloading and running it for monitoring, to see how it is throttling.

https://www.techpowerup.com/download/techpowerup-throttlestop/


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Yes and no. Hypothetically, you could bench Cinebench with a good score and "be happy". Then you stress-test with Prime95 AVX which phantom throttles. Now you have the illusion that you're fully stable* at your frequency for all workloads.
> 
> *Technically, you are actually "stable" since you won't crash or overheat regardless of the load. But that's only because phantom throttling is protecting you on the heavier loads. And you won't know your heavier workloads are getting throttled until you run a benchmark that is that heavier workload.


Cinebench is more demanding than anything I could do on my computer lol


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> This is ridiculous... check out the tim application on my 7740X. Are they kidding???


What did the dog say after eating a length of rope?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I really doubt software monitors will be able to read this anytime soon or at all if I understand this correctly because I'm suspecting that what we are experiencing is intel's new speed shift technology that they worked with Microsoft on Windows 10 where the OS hands over control of the P-States to the processor where it takes 1ms (20-30ms if it's on the OS) to switch between max frequency and throttled frequency and any software monitor will not be able to detect the frequency fluctuations. So @[email protected] is most likely accurate (as usual...) that it's the external frequency, something after the base clock is multiplied type throttling most likely because a separate internal clock would be extremely unlikely. Just imagine all the code that needs to be changed to accommodate the constantly simultaneous changing internal/external frequencies at different rates if that's even possible. I'm going to find out how to disable this technology or maybe try out this theory on a windows 7 computer if I can get it to work. Possible related info. http://www.anandtech.com/show/9751/examining-intel-skylake-speed-shift-more-responsive-processors
> https://www.windowscentral.com/intel-speed-shift-windows-10


If you're referring to the frequency divider or modulation, then yes, I can imagine that it would be difficult for software to detect. Though a frequency divider does imply two separate frequencies internally. One before the modulation, and one after - both being derived from the same source clock. So I can't imagine it adding too much additional complexity to the processor itself.

The pstate stuff is a mess on Linux. Based on my test, Ubuntu 17.04 doesn't handle the pstates well even with Intel's drivers. And the CPU frequency stays pinned at 0.7 - 1.2 GHz under all but the most specific workloads. (CPU frequency being read by "lscpu") Likewise, the performance was as expected for that frequency: 3 - 4x slower.

I had to insert something into grub to disable the pstates. Only then did the frequencies go up to what I expected them to be. But in this case, it wasn't a phantom throttle. I was easily able to detect the 0.7 - 1.2 GHz speeds simply by refreshing lscpu.

I have yet to test to see what Linux does when I give it the same BIOS settings that result in phantom throttling under Windows.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> You prefer CLU to the Grizzly ? Or is it the same?
> 
> For those who delided, you use what as silicone and applied how ?
> If you have a good video for Skylake-X


any of the liquid metals wil do fine. CLU, CLP or conductonaut.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> What did the dog say after eating a length of rope?


cue Jeopardy music....








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Skylake and Kaby are awesome, let's not get things twisted, and don't really want to be crapping on the hand that is feeding you - but when they're crapping on their own CPU I think it's warranted


lol - surprising tolerance for a Brit.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> any of the liquid metals wil do fine. CLU, CLP or conductonaut.


Ok thanks


----------



## aDyerSituation

Anyone with an ASUS board try the 0702 BIOS? Any noticeable differences?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Anyone with an ASUS board try the 0702 BIOS? Any noticeable differences?


I'm still on 503. My ram kit worked fine with the less forgiving timings which makes me worry about having reduced ram performance moving to 702. Planning on writing down sub-timings before making the move to 702 but I just haven't gotten around to it.

Not sure if you've found this thread that's dedicated to Asus x299 boards,

http://www.overclock.net/t/1635170/asus-x299-motherboard-series-official-support-thread/630#post_26313472

I find #4 interesting. What's that all about?
Quote:


> TUF X299 MARK 1 BIOS 0702
> 1.Upgrade M.2 compatibility
> 2.Updated EC firmware
> 3.Upgrade DRAM compatibility and performance.
> 4.Update SKL-X CPU MicroCode


Been pretty preoccupied lately. 2 weeks ago my dog injured her back jumping onto the bed and is now paralyzed. Haven't kept up with things like I otherwise would.


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana Chan*
> 
> http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/27/1605931
> 7960X delidded pictures


Those delidding tools are beautiful . . . anyone know where to get them? (I'd love to delid some of my older CPUs)


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Can't wait to meet the Extreme in person.


This x1000. Besides this, I am waiting on the "right" RAM. The one listed so far at 4133MHz is VERY expensive. My last build I bought my 16GB of RAM for under $75 . . .


----------



## meshal300

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jobotoo*
> 
> Those delidding tools are beautiful . . . anyone know where to get them? (I'd love to delid some of my older CPUs)


this is the one who sale them..
http://www.shop-siomi.com/shopdetail/000000000055/ct10/page1/order/

but seems out of stock


----------



## czin125

That one may be able to delid a TR chip and use a blow dryer or heat gun over it while pushing the ihs off.


----------



## Piospi

I'm waiting for https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-delid-die-mate-x-fsd8-020.html


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *meshal300*
> 
> this is the one who sale them..
> http://www.shop-siomi.com/shopdetail/000000000055/ct10/page1/order/
> 
> but seems out of stock


Looks like there won't be any more in production until 2018 . . . Thanks for the info and link! I'll keep an eye out for it.


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Piospi*
> 
> I'm waiting for https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-delid-die-mate-x-fsd8-020.html


Do they ship to the U.S.?


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jobotoo*
> 
> Do they ship to the U.S.?


*Doesn't look like it*, but you could always touch base with them to firm that up. Didn't see anything other than Europe in their other relevant pages.

Edited: I've bought items from *this shop* before which were shipped relatively fast to the US. Shipping was fairly expensive though.


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> *Doesn't look like it*, but you could always touch base with them to firm that up. Didn't see anything other than Europe in their other relevant pages.


Thanks for confirming, as that is what I thought but wasn't totally sure with using Google translate. I think I'll wait a while and see what and when we get some of these newer tools for delidding. I am really liking the look of the Japanese Delid Master:


----------



## Ostrava

Hey everyone,

I've got an i9-7900x I purchased from Silicon Lottery (with their delidding service and binned for 4.7GHz), and I'm using the settings they recommend in the BIOS on an ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe. Running OCCT 4.5 on all 10 cores causes the CPU to hit OCCT's software limit of 90C after about 40 seconds. I'm aware that the i9 7900x is a hot running chip, but I wasn't aware it was going to be this hard to cool. I'm using an EK Supremacy EVO block on the CPU, and my waterloop is cooled by 2 560mmx140mm radiators (typical water temperature under stress is between 28-29C). My loop also cools 2x Nvidia Tixan X (Pascal)s, but they are idling during the tests I've run on the CPU.

For anyone with a similar setup, are these results consistent with what you've seen?
Is it possible to delid the chip again after a liquid metal TIM has been placed between the die and the IHS (Silicon Lottery's delidding service does this), and can I get Silicon Lottery to delid the chip and leave off the IHS?
Would completely delidding the processor even provide a reasonable drop in temperature to run at 4.7GHz?
Hope y'all can help me with this, I wasn't expecting my loop to have trouble cooling the 7900x.


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> Hey everyone,
> 
> I've got an i9-7900x I purchased from Silicon Lottery (with their delidding service and binned for 4.7GHz), and I'm using the settings they recommend in the BIOS on an ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe. Running OCCT 4.5 on all 10 cores causes the CPU to hit OCCT's software limit of 90C after about 40 seconds. I'm aware that the i9 7900x is a hot running chip, but I wasn't aware it was going to be this hard to cool. I'm using an EK Supremacy EVO block on the CPU, and my waterloop is cooled by 2 560mmx140mm radiators (typical water temperature under stress is between 28-29C). My loop also cools 2x Nvidia Tixan X (Pascal)s, but they are idling during the tests I've run on the CPU.
> 
> For anyone with a similar setup, are these results consistent with what you've seen?
> Is it possible to delid the chip again after a liquid metal TIM has been placed between the die and the IHS (Silicon Lottery's delidding service does this), and can I get Silicon Lottery to delid the chip and leave off the IHS?
> Would completely delidding the processor even provide a reasonable drop in temperature to run at 4.7GHz?
> Hope y'all can help me with this, I wasn't expecting my loop to have trouble cooling the 7900x.


Now you have me worried with that much rad . . .

Ask Silicon Lottery for the best answer, but I am quite sure you CAN delid it again. And you can always ask them NOT to "close" the IHS (aka, leave it loose).


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> Hey everyone,
> 
> I've got an i9-7900x I purchased from Silicon Lottery (with their delidding service and binned for 4.7GHz), and I'm using the settings they recommend in the BIOS on an ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe. Running OCCT 4.5 on all 10 cores causes the CPU to hit OCCT's software limit of 90C after about 40 seconds. I'm aware that the i9 7900x is a hot running chip, but I wasn't aware it was going to be this hard to cool. I'm using an EK Supremacy EVO block on the CPU, and my waterloop is cooled by 2 560mmx140mm radiators (typical water temperature under stress is between 28-29C). My loop also cools 2x Nvidia Tixan X (Pascal)s, but they are idling during the tests I've run on the CPU.
> 
> For anyone with a similar setup, are these results consistent with what you've seen?
> Is it possible to delid the chip again after a liquid metal TIM has been placed between the die and the IHS (Silicon Lottery's delidding service does this), and can I get Silicon Lottery to delid the chip and leave off the IHS?
> Would completely delidding the processor even provide a reasonable drop in temperature to run at 4.7GHz?
> Hope y'all can help me with this, I wasn't expecting my loop to have trouble cooling the 7900x.


the delid can be redone, but that's not the issue. Why are you attempting to run OCCT on that CPU? Looking to kill it?
OCCT is basically considered a power virus by Intel (see the product spec sheet for the stock "Virus Mode TDP"). You chip certainly was throttling before hitting the prochot signal. forget OCCT and p95 with AVX and something like y-prime with AVX512 until you adjust the appropriate offsets. SI tests using realbench. If you must use OCCTG or p95 lower your OC by 200 to 500MHz.

Lol - first see if the chip can run OCCT at full stock settings.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jobotoo*
> 
> Now you have me worried with that much rad . . .
> 
> Ask Silicon Lottery for the best answer, but I am quite sure you CAN delid it again. And you can always ask them NOT to "close" the IHS (aka, leave it loose).


Given the water temps, its clear the rad isn't the limit. The heat isn't making it to the water....

I don't have a 79xx yet, so I can only speculate generally from following this thread. Whether or not its typical for 4.7, its too hot. What are your voltages being reported during the test?

and what JPM said - if you don't have offsets for AVX - it's gonna cook the chip.


----------



## Ostrava

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the delid can be redone, but that's not the issue. Why are you attempting to run OCCT on that CPU? Looking to kill it?
> OCCT is basically considered a power virus by Intel (see the product spec sheet for the stock "Virus Mode TDP"). You chip certainly was throttling before hitting the prochot signal. forget OCCT and p95 with AVX and something like y-prime with AVX512 until you adjust the appropriate offsets. SI tests using realbench. If you must use OCCTG or p95 lower your OC by 200 to 500MHz.
> 
> Lol - first see if the chip can run OCCT at full stock settings.


I've run it at stock settings and the temps are well within reason, staying around 55-60C on all cores for the full duration of the test. I also -3 on the AVX offset and -5 on the AVX512 offset like Silicon Lottery recommends. I'll try realbench and see what happens, I had heard prime95 was bad for chips but didn't realize occt wasn't recommended either.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Given the water temps, its clear the rad isn't the limit. The heat isn't making it to the water....
> 
> I don't have a 79xx yet, so I can only speculate generally from following this thread. Whether or not its typical for 4.7, its too hot. What are your voltages being reported during the test?
> 
> and what JPM said - if you don't have offsets for AVX - it's gonna cook the chip.


I didn't really look at the voltages that occt reported when I ran it a couple days ago and I'm kind of afraid to run OCCT overclocked again lol.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> I've run it at stock settings and the temps are well within reason, staying around 55-60C on all cores for the full duration of the test. I also -3 on the AVX offset and -5 on the AVX512 offset like Silicon Lottery recommends. I'll try realbench and see what happens, I had heard prime95 was bad for chips but didn't realize occt wasn't recommended either.
> I didn't really look at the voltages that occt reported when I ran it a couple days ago and I'm kind of afraid to run OCCT overclocked again lol.


OCCT and prime95 are "bad" because they use AVX. In the past, all code ran at the same frequency, so a maximum overclock for normal code would be dangerous for AVX.

Now with Skylake X, you're supposed to set offsets that make run AVX (and AVX512) at lower frequencies.

So rather than thinking of AVX applications as "bad", think of overclocking Skylake X as doing 3 overclocks at once. Normal code, AVX, and AVX512. All of these have different power draws and will need to run at different frequencies. Likewise, you will need different stress-tests for each.

If you don't care about AVX and AVX512, then you can do what @Artah is doing which is to max out their offsets and have them run at a crawl. Though IMO, that's overkill. Offsets of AVX = -5, and AVX512 = -10 will be more than enough. Stock offsets vary by processor. For the 7900X, there are conflicting numbers, but the ones I've been hearing the most are AVX = -4, and AVX512 = -7.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> I didn't really look at the voltages that occt reported when I ran it a couple days ago and I'm kind of afraid to run OCCT overclocked again lol.


What did you set the voltage at in the bios?


----------



## Ostrava

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> What did you set the voltage at in the bios?


1.225 on the Vcore


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> 1.225 on the Vcore


That seems really hot for that voltage. With your AVX offset the clocks should have shown 4.4GHz while running OCCT. I that what you saw during the test?


----------



## Ostrava

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> That seems really hot for that voltage. With your AVX offset the clocks should have shown 4.4GHz while running OCCT. I that what you saw during the test?


Nope the clock read 4.7, although it was hardly constant, dropping to 3.9 periodically but generally staying near 4.7.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> Nope the clock read 4.7, although it was hardly constant, dropping to 3.9 periodically but generally staying near 4.7.


I am pretty sure OCCT should trigger your AVX offset and drop your clock to keep the temps in check. I'll check real quick.


----------



## Ostrava

I just ran the realbench stress test for a minute and the temps were running well into the 90s on all cores. I even turned down the oc to 4.6 but still at the same vcore.


----------



## TahoeDust

I just ran OCCT on my 7820x and it sounds like your AVX offset is not kicking in. I run at 4.8GHz with -5 AVX offset and as you can see my clocks in OCCT are 4.3GHz most of the time.


----------



## Ostrava

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I just ran OCCT on my 7820x and it sounds like your AVX offset is not kicking in. I run at 4.8GHz with -5 AVX offset and as you can see my clocks in OCCT are 4.3GHz most of the time.


I just downloaded that HWInfo you're using so let me see if it shows the avx offset being applied


----------



## Mysticial

I don't think this is relevant here, but there's one thing that I've noticed with the AVX/AVX512 offsets. Not all AVX instructions trigger the AVX offset and not all AVX512 instructions trigger the AVX512 offset.

128-bit AVX and "simple" 256-bit AVX will run at the full speed without an AVX offset.
256-bit AVX instructions that use the FMAC will trigger the AVX offset. This includes all floating-point instructions as well as AVX2 integer multiplication.
All 512-bit AVX512 instructions will trigger at least the AVX offset.
Only 512-bit AVX512 instructions that use the FMAC will trigger the AVX512 offset. This includes all floating-point instructions as well as AVX512 integer multiplication.
Or to summarize:

Normal code and non-FMA AVX will run at the same speed. (the full speed)
Heavy AVX and non-FMA AVX512 will run at the same speed. (full speed - AVX offset)
Heavy AVX512 will run at the lowest speed. (full speed - AVX512 offset)
The reason here is that it's really the FMA units that consume all that power. Simple operations like boolean logic and addition are cheap and don't need the FMA. So Intel opted not to throttle those.

So when people say, XX application uses AVX or AVX512 and it doesn't cause the offset, it may be because the application doesn't actually use the FMA units.

Prime95 is floating-point and therefore uses the FMAs. So Prime95 AVX will run with the AVX offset. Likewise, y-cruncher always uses the FMAs. So the AVX and AVX512 binaries will run at the AVX and AVX512 offsets respectively. But I'm unsure of the situation with OCCT.

Here's one thing: I have not tried to measure the power consumption and stability of non-FMA AVX relative to normal code and non-FMA AVX512 code relative to AVX. That's an experiment worth doing. Since it seems possible for an overclock to be stable for normal code, but unstable when running non-FMA AVX. Likewise, an overclock can be stable running heavy AVX, but unstable when running non-FMA AVX512.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> I just downloaded that HWInfo you're using so let me see if it shows the avx offset being applied


Run it for a bit and shoot a screenshot if you can showing core voltage, Package Power, Core speed, etc. The more data the better.


----------



## Ostrava

Well I just ran occt for half a minute just to see what hwinfo reports and it does look like the cores are running at 4.3 most of the time with occasional hops to 4.6. Even so, the temperatures on all cores get into the high 70s in a hurry with a few in the low 80s. I've run it for longer before at 4.6 with avx -3 and it was pushing into the 90s on some cores.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MunneY*
> 
> Man I put TG Kryo on mine and can only get it down less than 10c. Mine will do 4.7 @ 1.22v but I cant keep it there because of temps
> 
> EDIT: mines a 7900x


hey bud.. gotta use a LM on the die-IHS interface, otherwise only a nominal gain as you observed. Folks tend to think of LM like a regular tim... it's not. Really.. only paint on a thin paint-like layer on both parts.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> I've run it at stock settings and the temps are well within reason, staying around 55-60C on all cores for the full duration of the test. I also -3 on the AVX offset and -5 on the AVX512 offset like Silicon Lottery recommends. I'll try realbench and see what happens, I had heard prime95 was bad for chips but didn't realize occt wasn't recommended either.
> I didn't really look at the voltages that occt reported when I ran it a couple days ago and I'm kind of afraid to run OCCT overclocked again lol.


realbench uses AVX, just not in kill mode like LinPac or prime calcs.
this x264 stability test is very good for high core counts (AVX, AVX2, not avx512) and loads the cpu a bit more than the encoder in realbench. If you set threads to be 1.5x actual, it works as one component of a stability regime with 10 cores and higher.
add to this, HCI memtest, and maybe a few loops of IBT if you must have a high current test. (then again, HWBOT x265 does very well for that).
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7gpMyj43ZFjSzJ4Nm0xT3pobjA








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> Nope the clock read 4.7, although it was hardly constant, *dropping to 3.9 periodically* but generally staying near 4.7.


yep - throttling. Be careful, you have a 4.7 binned sample, try not to cook it with a synthetic test.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> I just ran the realbench stress test for a minute and the temps were running well into the 90s on all cores. I even turned down the oc to 4.6 but still at the same vcore.


erm...If that RB run was using the SL conditions, you should check the block mount before going much further


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> Well I just ran occt for half a minute just to see what hwinfo reports and it does look like the cores are running at 4.3 most of the time with occasional hops to 4.6. Even so, the temperatures on all cores get into the high 70s in a hurry with a few in the low 80s. I've run it for longer before at 4.6 with avx -3 and it was pushing into the 90s on some cores.


That is odd to me. I know you have two more cores, but my delidded 7820x running the same speed stays MUCH cooler. What is your CPU package power like while running OCCT?


----------



## Ostrava

Just ran again for 49s and this is what it looks like in hwinfo


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> 
> 
> Just ran again for 49s and this is what it looks like in hwinfo


From the looks of that, I would say something is wrong with your cooling or delidding. CPU package power is _only_ pushing 197w in that screenshot and things are already heating up. In my screenshot you can see I am averaging ~206w and my hottest core barely is out of the 60s. Also, the delta between your hottest and coolest core is crazy....24c.

Reset HWInfo and OCCT. Let it run until it starts to throttle then take another screenshot.

I am not an expert, other's who have a different opinion/theory please chime in.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> https://www.windowscentral.com/intel-speed-shift-windows-10
> So how are you guys planning to catch this with the new version of the OC Panel hardware that you're working on?


That isn't the role of the OC Panel.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Skylake and Kaby are awesome, let's not get things twisted, and don't really want to be crapping on the hand that is feeding you - but when they're crapping on their own CPU I think it's warranted


Don't think that's an Intel paste job. That CPU was delidded and pasted for Ln2 use, where things are liberal as the paste can crack.


----------



## Ostrava

I think I'm gonna check the thermal mating between the CPU and waterblock, I have to modify my loop to switch out a gpu waterblock connector for a larger one anyways. I'll be back with results or lack thereof in a couple days.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> So you're saying that there are no publicly available tools that can read the frequency correctly?
> 
> I'm not trying to question your authority here, but the reason why I remain so skeptical about the reason being solely the polling frequency is because if it was polling you should still see the current apps "occasionally" show the lower frequency. So if the throttling is jumping back and forth between low and high frequencies, when you're running phantom throttled at 1/3 the performance, the actual frequency should be less than full speed at least 2/3 of the time. So the probability that the apps will poll the frequency while it is low at least once over several minutes should be almost 100%.
> 
> Yet, I do not observe this behavior. Everything consistently reads full speed regardless of how long I keep them running and regardless of how many times they update during phantom throttling.
> 
> Furthermore, temperature and VRM throttling are both clearly observable in CPUz and others. When those kick in they jump between low and high frequencies at high speed and can be observed as the various apps sample it at both the high and low frequencies. Why would throttling from VCCIN be any different?
> 
> In other words, something does not add up.


As far as I am aware:

1) Most of the tools out there will read the ratio and BCLK, which is the low-overhead (with low-impact polling) way of deriving the freq. Those values don't get updated for this type of throttling.

2) To derive the freq correctly the frequency needs to be read another way, which has more impact on the system. Not sure if any of the public tools are setup to read this way, but some of the guys that code the tools ( such as Frank from CPU-Z) are aware of the methods and could do it if asked.

And once again, no matter how much you want to speculate there is some kind of IPC throttling, there simply isn't.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> That isn't the role of the OC Panel.


New feature request...


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> As far as I am aware:
> 
> 1) Most of the tools out there will read the ratio and BCLK, which is the low-overhead (with low-impact polling) way of deriving the freq. Those values don't get updated for this type of throttling.
> 
> 2) To derive the freq correctly the frequency needs to be read another way, which has more impact on the system. Not sure if any of the public tools are setup to read this way, but some of the guys that code the tools ( such as Frank from CPU-Z) are aware of the methods and could do it if asked.
> 
> And once again, no matter how much you want to speculate there is some kind of IPC throttling, there simply isn't.


Thanks, that does make sense.

And it does seem to at least partly agree with my hypothesis here:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Reading more closely at what Raja said, there is a frequency divider that kicks in when the throttling does.
> 
> This leads to this hypothesis:
> 
> CPUz and other programs are reading the input frequency (before the divider). IOW, the input frequency is separate from the "real" frequency and would easily explain Phantom Throttling as is observed right now. And you need "special tools" to be able to read the post-divider frequency - which is the one that actually matters.
> 
> But if this were the case, it also invalidates all his statements about polling frequency.


Though I'll revise that in that the full frequency might not be generated at all depending on where the clock modulation is done. But at least the adaptive vcore remains as if the frequency was not throttled. (as far as I can tell)

So here's a summary of my understanding as of right now:

The actual frequency in the system is: (base clock) * (multiplier) / (frequency divider)
(It may not be exactly that, nor are they generated in that order, but at least it contains those 3 inputs.)

CPUz and most other programs measure frequency by reading the base clock and multiplier: frequency = (base clock) * (multiplier)
The frequency divider is normally disabled (1.0). But during phantom throttling, it kicks in. (> 1.0)

Temperature and VRM throttling merely drops the multiplier. This is visible in CPUz. And it allows vcore to be dropped.
Phantom throttling is when the frequency divider kicks in. This drops the true frequency that the core is running at. But is invisible to all monitoring programs that only read base clock and multiplier.
Adaptive vcore is oblivious to the phantom throttle frequency divider.
I guess the only question now is why would Intel go for a frequency divider instead of dropping the multiplier like for temperature and VRM throttling. Temperature and VRM throttling (by means of dropping the multiplier) is gradual in performance, power, etc... But phantom throttling is a sudden "cliff" that drops performance by large amounts (up to 3x from my observations).

Assuming I'm not completely off at this point, it almost seems as if the frequency divider is a complete hack. Like a band-aid fix to some critical bug that needed to be fixed asap.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Thanks, that does make sense.
> 
> And it does seem to at least partly agree with my hypothesis here:
> Though I'll revise that in that the full frequency might not be generated at all depending on where the clock modulation is done. But at least the adaptive vcore remains as if the frequency was not throttled. (as far as I can tell)
> 
> So here's a summary of my understanding as of right now:
> 
> The actual frequency in the system is: (base clock) * (multiplier) / (frequency divider)
> (It may not be exactly that, nor are they generated in that order, but at least it contains those 3 inputs.)
> 
> CPUz and most other programs measure frequency by reading the base clock and multiplier: frequency = (base clock) * (multiplier)
> The frequency divider is normally disabled (1.0). But during phantom throttling, it kicks in. (> 1.0)
> 
> Temperature and VRM throttling merely drops the multiplier. This is visible in CPUz. And it allows vcore to be dropped.
> Phantom throttling is when the frequency divider kicks in. This drops the true frequency that the core is running at. But is invisible to all monitoring programs that only read base clock and multiplier.
> Adaptive vcore is oblivious to the phantom throttle frequency divider.
> I guess the only question now is why would Intel go for a frequency divider instead of dropping the multiplier like for temperature and VRM throttling. Temperature and VRM throttling (by means of dropping the multiplier) is gradual in performance, power, etc... But phantom throttling is a sudden "cliff" that drops performance by large amounts (up to 3x from my observations).
> 
> Assuming I'm not completely off at this point, it almost seems as if the frequency divider is a complete hack. Like a band-aid fix to some critical bug that needed to be fixed asap.


I'd save yourself the strange hypothesizing and just ask one of the guys to make a tool that you can read the freq with.


----------



## Ostrava

Just took off the waterblock and this is what the TIM looks like. Did I use to much and is the slightly faded part in the middle indicative of anything?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> Hey everyone,
> 
> I've got an i9-7900x I purchased from Silicon Lottery (with their delidding service and binned for 4.7GHz), and I'm using the settings they recommend in the BIOS on an ASUS Prime X299 Deluxe. Running OCCT 4.5 on all 10 cores causes the CPU to hit OCCT's software limit of 90C after about 40 seconds. I'm aware that the i9 7900x is a hot running chip, but I wasn't aware it was going to be this hard to cool. I'm using an EK Supremacy EVO block on the CPU, and my waterloop is cooled by 2 560mmx140mm radiators (typical water temperature under stress is between 28-29C). My loop also cools 2x Nvidia Tixan X (Pascal)s, but they are idling during the tests I've run on the CPU.
> 
> For anyone with a similar setup, are these results consistent with what you've seen?
> Is it possible to delid the chip again after a liquid metal TIM has been placed between the die and the IHS (Silicon Lottery's delidding service does this), and can I get Silicon Lottery to delid the chip and leave off the IHS?
> Would completely delidding the processor even provide a reasonable drop in temperature to run at 4.7GHz?
> Hope y'all can help me with this, I wasn't expecting my loop to have trouble cooling the 7900x.
> 
> 
> 
> the delid can be redone, but that's not the issue. Why are you attempting to run OCCT on that CPU? Looking to kill it?
> OCCT is basically considered a power virus by Intel (see the product spec sheet for the stock "Virus Mode TDP"). You chip certainly was throttling before hitting the prochot signal. forget OCCT and p95 with AVX and something like y-prime with AVX512 until you adjust the appropriate offsets. SI tests using realbench. If you must use OCCTG or p95 lower your OC by 200 to 500MHz.
> 
> Lol - first see if the chip can run OCCT at full stock settings.
Click to expand...

Quote:


> OCCT is basically considered a power virus by Intel


Do you have a link for that information?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> I'd save yourself the strange hypothesizing and just ask one of the guys to make a tool that you can read the freq with.


Sorry, if I came out annoying. I'm just genuinely trying to understand the nature of the throttling and how it works internally.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Sorry, if I came out annoying. I'm just genuinely trying to understand the nature of the throttling and how it works internally.


You're overthinking it.


----------



## TahoeDust

7980xe @ 4.5GHz
Cinebench R15 Score: 4447cb

http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/27/1608222


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 7980xe @ 4.5GHz
> Cinebench R15 Score: 4447cb
> 
> http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/27/1608222


----------



## Feklar

Does that screenie say 4.5Ghz at 1.10V?


----------



## xarot

7980XE can't wait.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ra[email protected]*
> 
> Don't think that's an Intel paste job. That CPU was delidded and pasted for Ln2 use, where things are liberal as the paste can crack.


thank you - helping to restore faith in Intel.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Don't think that's an Intel paste job. That CPU was delidded and pasted for Ln2 use, where things are liberal as the paste can crack.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> thank you - helping to restore faith in Intel.


Yeah, makes sense. If anything from Intel's perspective that would be massively wasteful, too lol


----------



## czin125

https://www.pcmrace.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/ASRock_X299_OC_Formula_2.jpg
Looks like the heatsink is a lot larger than the one from May 30, 2017.


----------



## Silicon Lottery

Talks with temperature here, you guys need to keep in mind peak core temperatures on these Sky-X chips (especially the 8 core and beyond) vary across each sample even up to *30C* (although the majority are typically within 15C or so of eachother). Delta between cores can also be up to 30C! Before and after delidding, some just have an incredible leakage. A consequence is a lot of these chips with warmer temperatures are also the best clockers. But directly comparing one Sky-X chip to another in regards to temperature isn't the best way to go.

Our Asus boards default with a 105C TJmax. We make sure the most stressful non-AVX loads here stay under 100C peak core temperatures (most peak temperatures land somewhere in the 80-90C area). If you want to run heavy AVX/AVX512 loads like OCCT, P95, and linpack without thermal throttling, you're probably going to need to run a lower voltage than what we test with.

Typical encoding like X264 X265 and realbench should not thermal throttle with our settings (again, staying under 100C peaks.)


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silicon Lottery*
> 
> Talks with temperature here, you guys need to keep in mind peak core temperatures on these Sky-X chips (especially the 8 core and beyond) vary across each sample even up to *30C* (although the majority are typically within 15C or so of eachother). Delta between cores can also be up to 30C! Before and after delidding, some just have an incredible leakage. A consequence is a lot of these chips with warmer temperatures are also the best clockers. But directly comparing one Sky-X chip to another in regards to temperature isn't the best way to go.
> 
> Our Asus boards default with a 105C TJmax. We make sure the most stressful non-AVX loads here stay under 100C peak core temperatures (most peak temperatures land somewhere in the 80-90C area). If you want to run heavy AVX/AVX512 loads like OCCT, P95, and linpack without thermal throttling, you're probably going to need to run a lower voltage than what we test with.
> 
> Typical encoding like X264 X265 and realbench should not thermal throttle with our settings (again, staying under 100C peaks.)


I did some tests last nigh with a little bit of time I had. I ran everything default/auto and I noticed a 100mv drop in VCCIN in full load AVX/AVX-512 at 4500MHz with a constant VCCIN at 1.8v and VCore was around 1.1v. The temps the entire time stayed in the low 50s and spiked to 70 once in a great while according to realbench stress test with everything is turned on. With 4.9/5GHz at 1.275-1.31v AVX/AVX-512 running at 1800MHz I was hitting temp limits at times but stayed mostly around 90c. Overclocking these things is more of a challenge, I like it. I do need to get the to the root cause of the temperature rise though. I have not had time to try down clocking the mesh though, the temp monsters may be lurking under those waters but I'm not seeing AVX alone harboring all of them. I'm wondering if the frequency throttling mechanics itself is causing extra heat when it down clocks the core and spikes it back up so fast. Finally going to get some time this weekend to do more research.

By the way are you guys planning to sell 7980xe de-lidded/binned chips?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I did some tests last nigh with a little bit of time I had. I ran everything default/auto and I noticed a 100mv drop in VCCIN in full load AVX/AVX-512 at 4500MHz with a constant VCCIN at 1.8v and VCore was around 1.1v. The temps the entire time stayed in the low 50s and spiked to 70 once in a great while according to realbench stress test with everything is turned on. With 4.9/5GHz at 1.275-1.31v AVX/AVX-512 running at 1800MHz I was hitting temp limits at times but stayed mostly around 90c. Overclocking these things is more of a challenge, I like it. I do need to get the to the root cause of the temperature rise though. I have not had time to try down clocking the mesh though, the temp monsters may be lurking under those waters but I'm not seeing AVX alone harboring all of them. I'm wondering if the frequency throttling mechanics itself is causing extra heat when it down clocks the core and spikes it back up so fast. Finally going to get some time this weekend to do more research.
> 
> By the way are you guys planning to sell 7980xe de-lidded/binned chips?


What VCCIN are you using for 4.9GHZ?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> What VCCIN are you using for 4.9GHZ?


I only need 1.275v for it luckily. Ok corrections lol I read vcore somehow on my quick glance. I set it to 1.92v and it shoots up to around 1.96ishv with LLC4/5.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I only need 1.275v for it luckily. Ok corrections lol I read vcore somehow on my quick glance. I set it to 1.92v and it shoots up to around 1.96ishv with LLC4/5.


Thanks. For my benefit really as just gauging what other samples are needing for those speeds


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Thanks. For my benefit really as just gauging what other samples are needing for those speeds


I hope you get a good sample, want to see good clocks for these chips. I hope the 7980xe does not run like a dog as @Jpmboy describes things sometimes, I'll have to take that dog for a walk to the post office otherwise unless it's been de-lidded.

One thing to note, at 5GHz the VCCIN shoots up to a whopping 2v with the exact same settings including LLC/Offsets/ETC. I'll get more testing time this weekend, hopefully I can tame down the temp with higher AVX and no phantom throttling. Wish I had faster memory but I am torn on what to get but definitely binned for quad.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I hope you get a good sample, want to see good clocks for these chips. I hope the 7980xe does not run like a dog as @Jpmboy describes things sometimes, I'll have to take that dog for a walk to the post office otherwise unless it's been de-lidded.
> 
> One thing to note, at 5GHz the VCCIN shoots up to a whopping 2v with the exact same settings including LLC/Offsets/ETC. I'll get more testing time this weekend, hopefully I can tame down the temp with higher AVX and no phantom throttling. Wish I had faster memory but I am torn on what to get but definitely binned for quad.


I already have mine. Have been using very similar settings.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I hope you get a good sample, want to see good clocks for these chips. I hope the 7980xe does not run like a dog as @Jpmboy describes things sometimes, I'll have to take that dog for a walk to the post office otherwise unless it's been de-lidded.
> 
> One thing to note, at 5GHz the VCCIN shoots up to a whopping 2v with the exact same settings including LLC/Offsets/ETC. I'll get more testing time this weekend, hopefully I can tame down the temp with higher AVX and no phantom throttling. Wish I had faster memory but I am torn on what to get but definitely binned for quad.


At least in my X99 Strix, VCCIN will change based on load depending on the LLC setting. A high LLC setting will increase the VCCIN that was set in the BIOS, the higher the LLC the higher the increment.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> At least in my X99 Strix, VCCIN will change based on load depending on the LLC setting. A high LLC setting will increase the VCCIN that was set in the BIOS, the higher the LLC the higher the increment.


I'm seeing the exact same thing.


----------



## djgar

I use it as a way to regulate how my VCCIN behaves. Currently using LLC-7 which takes my 1.95 set VCCIN to 1.97-1.98 under full load.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> 7980XE can't wait.


but please let me understand, is it possible to overclock those CPUs by steps?
for example, 4.5GHz up to 4 cores, 4.3GHz up to 8 cores, 4 GHz up to 10 cores, 3.8GHz up to 16 cores and so on?

is it possible to do an overclock like this with X299?
if not how can you overclock a 18 cores CPU? no way that you can have 18 cores at 4GHz...
so a fixed overclock could be even counterproductive when the load is under 6 cores for example.


----------



## superV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 7980xe @ 4.5GHz
> Cinebench R15 Score: 4447cb
> 
> http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/27/1608222


damm, skipping the threadripper,very low performance on x264 due to the latency.
do want for obs for very low presets.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> but please let me understand, is it possible to overclock those CPUs by steps?
> for example, 4.5GHz up to 4 cores, 4.3GHz up to 8 cores, 4 GHz up to 10 cores, 3.8GHz up to 16 cores and so on?
> 
> is it possible to do an overclock like this with X299?
> if not how can you overclock a 18 cores CPU? no way that you can have 18 cores at 4GHz...
> so a fixed overclock could be even counterproductive when the load is under 6 cores for example.


Yes. At least in the Gigabyte BIOS, you can select a different maximum turbo for different # of active/idle cores. So it's possible to achieve exactly what you want.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> I use it as a way to regulate how my VCCIN behaves. Currently using LLC-7 which takes my 1.95 set VCCIN to 1.97-1.98 under full load.


what temps are you getting at LLC7 and 1.98v VCCIN?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> but please let me understand, is it possible to overclock those CPUs by steps?
> for example, 4.5GHz up to 4 cores, 4.3GHz up to 8 cores, 4 GHz up to 10 cores, 3.8GHz up to 16 cores and so on?
> 
> is it possible to do an overclock like this with X299?
> if not how can you overclock a 18 cores CPU? no way that you can have 18 cores at 4GHz...
> so a fixed overclock could be even counterproductive when the load is under 6 cores for example.


You can overclock only certain cores with different speeds but you would have to tie your application the used for example 6 cores if you want to map it to the overclocked ones.

@schoolofmonkey. Is it possible to put up a spreadsheet that we can register our overclocks/settings with so we can all compare on what everyone is doing easily? An editable one would be helpful because we're all trying out different settings so we don't have like 10 entries per person


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> what temps are you getting at LLC7 and 1.98v VCCIN?
> You can overclock only certain cores with different speeds but you would have to tie your application the used for example 6 cores if you want to map it to the overclocked ones.


Your BIOS doesn't have the option to set a different turbo for different # of active cores?

The Gigabyte BIOS lets you do both that in addition to a per-core turbo limit that you're describing. As far as I can tell, that's how it implements the Turbo 3.0. At stock, it sets the 2-core turbo to 4.5 GHz, but it caps all the non-preferred cores to 4.3 GHz and the preferred cores to 4.5 GHz. So you only get the 4.5 GHz when at most two cores are active and only on the two preferred cores.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> what temps are you getting at LLC7 and 1.98v VCCIN?


I got 53-69 max core temps after 2 hrs RealBench.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> I use it as a way to regulate how my VCCIN behaves. Currently using LLC-7 which takes my 1.95 set VCCIN to 1.97-1.98 under full load.


I need to correct that - I get 1.96-1.97 with LLC-7 @ 4500GHz - was thinking of my 4550 days


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Your BIOS doesn't have the option to set a different turbo for different # of active cores?
> 
> The Gigabyte BIOS lets you do both that in addition to a per-core turbo limit that you're describing. As far as I can tell, that's how it implements the Turbo 3.0. At stock, it sets the 2-core turbo to 4.5 GHz, but it caps all the non-preferred cores to 4.3 GHz and the preferred cores to 4.5 GHz. So you only get the 4.5 GHz when at most two cores are active and only on the two preferred cores.


this surely creates a big complication in the overclock process.
it seems very difficult to overclock those CPUs.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Your BIOS doesn't have the option to set a different turbo for different # of active cores?
> 
> The Gigabyte BIOS lets you do both that in addition to a per-core turbo limit that you're describing. As far as I can tell, that's how it implements the Turbo 3.0. At stock, it sets the 2-core turbo to 4.5 GHz, but it caps all the non-preferred cores to 4.3 GHz and the preferred cores to 4.5 GHz. So you only get the 4.5 GHz when at most two cores are active and only on the two preferred cores.


I have not tried to do a turbo per core but the setting is not at the same place as the multiplier settings on Asus if it even exists that I paid attention to.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> this surely creates a big complication in the overclock process.
> it seems very difficult to overclock those CPUs.


Yep. Even with just 10 cores, that BIOS tab is really long since each of those options ("active-core turbo limit" + "per-core turbo limit") each have 10 options under them for 1 - 10 active cores and core #'s 0 - 9. So there's a lot of scrolling if you enable both. The 7980XE will be hilarious.

And then there's the AVX and AVX512 offsets. I heard from someone that Intel allows completely separate profiles for these as well. So that would be 3 x (10 + 10) = 60 multiplier settings for the 10 core. But all the Skylake X BIOS's I've seen so far only offer an offset as opposed to full control. Supposedly some of the server chips will have fully-custom factory set profiles for everything. So on the 28-core, that would be 3 x (28 + 28) = 168 multiplier settings. But you won't be able to change them since they're locked down.

For the purpose of overclocking, you won't need to use the per-core turbo limits unless you're trying to suppress a weak core or you're trying to push a few good ones higher than everything else.

Personally, I started off using a 2-core/4.5 GHz, 4-core/4.3 GHz, 10-core/4.2 GHz profile. But I found that I had the cooling to do 10-core/4.5 GHz. I didn't try pushing above 4.5 GHz since I wasn't liking the voltages that the adaptive vcore was using.


----------



## Iceman2733

Is everyone just using manual volts for the Core Volt? For the life I still can't even with a - offset get the adaptive to work correctly. From you guys are saying it is working correctly but I am not sure what the issue is.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Yep. Even with just 10 cores, that BIOS tab is really long since each of those options ("active-core turbo limit" + "per-core turbo limit") each have 10 options under them for 1 - 10 active cores and core #'s 0 - 9. So there's a lot of scrolling if you enable both. The 7980XE will be hilarious.
> 
> And then there's the AVX and AVX512 offsets. I heard from someone that Intel allows completely separate profiles for these as well. So that would be 3 x (10 + 10) = 60 multiplier settings for the 10 core. But all the Skylake X BIOS's I've seen so far only offer an offset as opposed to full control. Supposedly some of the server chips will have fully-custom factory set profiles for everything. So on the 28-core, that would be 3 x (28 + 28) = 168 multiplier settings. But you won't be able to change them since they're locked down.
> 
> For the purpose of overclocking, you won't need to use the per-core turbo limits unless you're trying to suppress a weak core or you're trying to push a few good ones higher than everything else.
> 
> Personally, I started off using a 2-core/4.5 GHz, 4-core/4.3 GHz, 10-core/4.2 GHz profile. But I found that I had the cooling to do 10-core/4.5 GHz. I didn't try pushing above 4.5 GHz since I wasn't liking the voltages that the adaptive vcore was using.


what you use to cool that monster?
are you saying that now there is a frequency setting for AVX and for AVX2? never seen it on my X99, I am just tired to think on how to overclock this CPUs before buying one of them









PS: I'm just curious to know what is the use of 128GB of ram on a workstation. Is it something useful or you just like it


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> what you use to cool that monster?
> are you saying that now there is a frequency setting for AVX and for AVX2? never seen it on my X99, I am just tired to think on how to overclock this CPUs before buying one of them


Just a 360 AIO. And the chip isn't delidded. So there's no way I'm gonna be able to hit the 4.7+ speeds (all cores) that everyone else is reaching here.

I'm also running with offsets of AVX = -5 and AVX512 = -7. So I'm not running AVX512 above 3.8 GHz. AVX512 @ 4.0 GHz requires me to increase the global vcore offset - not something I want to do since 4.5 GHz (non-AVX) is already pushing the cooling limits of my setup.

The AVX offsets don't exist in Haswell and Haswell-E. That's partly why AVX stress-testing was so problematic on those chips. The AVX offsets started showing up in Haswell-EP for servers and in Kaby Lake.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Iceman2733*
> 
> Is everyone just using manual volts for the Core Volt? For the life I still can't even with a - offset get the adaptive to work correctly. From you guys are saying it is working correctly but I am not sure what the issue is.


I'm running a negative offset on my adaptive vcore. Stock vcore was putting in 1.28v @ 4.5 GHz. I'd like to drop the vcore even further, but I'm limited by the AVX512. While 4.5 GHz runs fine below 1.2v, the AVX512 starts choking at 4.0 GHz with 1.0v (which is what the adaptive picks).


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Just a 360 AIO. And the chip isn't delidded. So there's no way I'm gonna be able to hit the 4.7+ speeds (all cores) that everyone else is reaching here.
> 
> I'm also running with offsets of AVX = -5 and AVX512 = -7. So I'm not running AVX512 above 3.8 GHz. AVX512 @ 4.0 GHz requires me to increase the global vcore offset - not something I want to do since 4.5 GHz (non-AVX) is already pushing the cooling limits of my setup.
> 
> The AVX offsets don't exist in Haswell and Haswell-E. That's partly why AVX stress-testing was so problematic on those chips. The AVX offsets started showing up in Haswell-EP for servers and in Kaby Lake.
> I'm running a negative offset on my adaptive vcore. Stock vcore was putting in 1.28v @ 4.5 GHz. I'd like to drop the vcore even further, but I'm limited by the AVX512. While 4.5 GHz runs fine below 1.2v, the AVX512 starts choking at 4.0 GHz with 1.0v (which is what the adaptive picks).


thanks for the answer, I edited my post adding a question...
I'm just curious to know what is the use of 128GB of ram on a workstation. Is it something useful or you just like it?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> thanks for the answer, I edited my post adding a question...
> I'm just curious to know what is the use of 128GB of ram on a workstation. Is it something useful or you just like it?


It was less of a dire need and more of an opportunity I jumped on.

One thing I like to do is to compile all my C++ projects at once, leave the computer and come back an hour later when they're all done. That easily peaks at 70 - 80GB depending on how much other junk I have open. Sometimes, I do it on a ram drive which then puts it up to 120GB. But this usage scenario is somewhat unrealistic since it's easily worked around by doing half of them first, then the other half - then it stays under 64GB. I could probably script it to make it automatic if I cared enough.

The "real" reason I have that 8 x 16GB kit is because it was on sale for $800 back in March. I was having memory troubles with my Ryzen build and I needed a different set of memory to test with. So I couldn't resist the deal.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Iceman2733*
> 
> Is everyone just using manual volts for the Core Volt? For the life I still can't even with a - offset get the adaptive to work correctly. From you guys are saying it is working correctly but I am not sure what the issue is.


I'm using adaptive. No need to set a negative offset in order to use this function, only entering the desired voltage into the additional voltage box. However, as has already been pointed out, the voltage cannot be set lower than the default VID.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> It was less of a dire need and more of an opportunity I jumped on.
> 
> One thing I like to do is to compile all my C++ projects at once, leave the computer and come back an hour later when they're all done. That easily peaks at 70 - 80GB depending on how much other junk I have open. Sometimes, I do it on a ram drive which then puts it up to 120GB. But this usage scenario is somewhat unrealistic since it's easily worked around by doing half of them first, then the other half - then it stays under 64GB. I could probably script it to make it automatic if I cared enough.
> 
> The "real" reason I have that 8 x 16GB kit is because it was on sale for $800 back in March. I was having memory troubles with my Ryzen build and I needed a different set of memory to test with. So I couldn't resist the deal.


thanks for the answer


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> It was less of a dire need and more of an opportunity I jumped on.
> 
> One thing I like to do is to compile all my C++ projects at once, leave the computer and come back an hour later when they're all done. That easily peaks at 70 - 80GB depending on how much other junk I have open. Sometimes, I do it on a ram drive which then puts it up to 120GB. But this usage scenario is somewhat unrealistic since it's easily worked around by doing half of them first, then the other half - then it stays under 64GB. I could probably script it to make it automatic if I cared enough.
> 
> The "real" reason I have that 8 x 16GB kit is because it was on sale for $800 back in March. I was having memory troubles with my Ryzen build and I needed a different set of memory to test with. So I couldn't resist the deal.


Yeah, those ram prices lately... ooooouch... I picked up 2 128G kits (1 ECC, 1 non) at the 799 mark, then needed 2 more and they were 1100, now I think its even worse... particularly for high-speed.

Various scenarios I run into, some more "optional" than others
- big SQL DBs
- big verilog simulations
- debugging memory leaks or functional failures that take a long time to show in either of the above
- running multiple multi-day versions of the above at a time adds up
- multiple VMs with 8-16G for testing
- Firefox with 20 tabs in two windows (lol - funnier if not so true... leaks like a sieve... )
- folding/compute-a-thon fun (that's the optional part) 2G per instance with virtual box apps happens... now multiply by 36-72 threads

With consumers now getting 16-18 cores and dual socket workstations 32-36 that memory is going to get chewed up fast if you use all those cores.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Yeah, those ram prices lately... ooooouch... I picked up 2 128G kits (1 ECC, 1 non) at the 799 mark, then needed 2 more and they were 1100, now I think its even worse... particularly for high-speed.
> 
> Various scenarios I run into, some more "optional" than others
> - big SQL DBs
> - big verilog simulations
> - debugging memory leaks or functional failures that take a long time to show in either of the above
> - running multiple multi-day versions of the above at a time adds up
> - multiple VMs with 8-16G for testing
> - Firefox with 20 tabs in two windows (lol - funnier if not so true... leaks like a sieve... )
> - folding/compute-a-thon fun (that's the optional part) 2G per instance with virtual box apps happens... now multiply by 36-72 threads
> 
> With consumers now getting 16-18 cores and dual socket workstations 32-36 that memory is going to get chewed up fast if you use all those cores.


those are a server necessity, not a PC/workstation one.
I'm a web developer for big Telco company and I develop using a laptop, than I put my software on a server.
What's the point to have the DB on a Workstation? X299 is a Workstation platform, not a server one.


----------



## tistou77

If I read correctly last posts, the VCCIN increases in load (compared to the idle)
The inverse of the X99, just for curiosity

And about the phantom throttle (not had the courage to read all the last pages







), with the Asus card, just need to disable the SVID and the current capacity at 140 and what's good ?
When testing stability, how do you make sure that there is no phantom throttle ?

Thanks


----------



## czin125

https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u6914/image_id_1893483.png
7960X getting 5149 in CB15


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u6914/image_id_1893483.png
> 7960X getting 5149 in CB15


I will never understand the reason of using liquid nitrogen.


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> I will never understand the reason of using liquid nitrogen.


Works great in tires in its (inert) gaseous state.


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Works great in tires in its (inert) gaseous state.


lol


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> I will never understand the reason of using liquid nitrogen.


You do surprise me.


----------



## TahoeDust

@Mystical Did you ever figure out if the 7800x and 7820x have full AVX512 throughput the same as the 7900x?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> @Mystical Did you ever figure out if the 7800x and 7820x have full AVX512 throughput the same as the 7900x?


Yes, and both of them do. Here are my sources:

7800X:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Skylake-X-Codename-266252/News/Core-i7-7800X-AVX512-Durchsatz-1232713/
https://github.com/InstLatx64/InstLatx64/blob/master/GenuineIntel0050654_SkylakeX2_InstLatX64.txt
http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?p=490227#post490227 (ES - not reliable)
7820X:

https://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/intel-isa-extensions/topic/737959 (potentially unreliable source)
I've seen one other forum post from a low-level programmer saying that he personally tested the 7820X and found that it has both FMAs. But I can't find it.

In any case, both sources for 7820X are flaky since they're just forum posts. But the first 2 sources for the 7800X are about as strong as it gets. (That second one is the strongest source, but you need to know specifically which numbers to look for.)

Given that the 7820X is higher than 7800X, I see it very unlikely that the 7800X would have the full AVX, and that the 7820X doesn't with both sources being wrong.

I have yet to see any _benchmarks_ that conflict with the stance that both the 7800X and 7820X have only one FMA. And I consider benchmarks to be stronger than Intel's word.

The fact that your overclock blew up when you ran y-cruncher AVX512 also (lightly) supports this. Because if it only had half-throughput AVX512, it wouldn't be much more stressful than AVX.


----------



## Ostrava

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> I think I'm gonna check the thermal mating between the CPU and waterblock, I have to modify my loop to switch out a gpu waterblock connector for a larger one anyways. I'll be back with results or lack thereof in a couple days.


Ok well I took apart my loop and put it back together, and I realized that when I first installed the 7900x I had installed the EK Evo Supremacy block wrong (I didn't screw down the thumb nuts to the end of the thread like it says in the manual, I only tightened them halfway down the thread cause I was going off an incorrect memory of how I did it on my previous CPU).

After reinstalling the waterblock OCCT is now running around 60-70C average on all cores with peaks in the low 80s and a package temp around 72 average with an 89C peak at 4.6GHz. Also the package power is running around 160W average now. Gonna clock back up to 4.7 later today and see how that goes. Thanks for your help @TahoeDust suggesting my cooling was messed up cause that was the problem.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ostrava*
> 
> Ok well I took apart my loop and put it back together, and I realized that when I first installed the 7900x I had installed the EK Evo Supremacy block wrong (I didn't screw down the thumb nuts to the end of the thread like it says in the manual, I only tightened them halfway down the thread cause I was going off an incorrect memory of how I did it on my previous CPU).
> 
> After reinstalling the waterblock OCCT is now running around 60-70C average on all cores with peaks in the low 80s and a package temp around 72 average with an 89C peak at 4.6GHz. Also the package power is running around 160W average now. Gonna clock back up to 4.7 later today and see how that goes. Thanks for your help @TahoeDust suggesting my cooling was messed up cause that was the problem.


Good job man! I'm glad I could help.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Those temps are still high. My max core at 4.6 1.2vcore is like 88c on this mediocre deepcool captain, and I still don't think that's right.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> *If I read correctly last posts, the VCCIN increases in load (compared to the idle)
> The inverse of the X99, just for curiosity*
> ...
> Thanks


No, in X99 VCCIN will tend to increase with load, at least using adaptive and a high enough LLC.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> No, in X99 VCCIN will tend to increase with load, at least using adaptive and a high enough LLC.


With my R5E and R5E10, LLC to 6, VCCIN in

Load : 1.80v
Idle : 1.857v

I've always seen this behavior on topics X99


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> those are a server necessity, not a PC/workstation one.
> I'm a web developer for big Telco company and I develop using a laptop, than I put my software on a server.
> What's the point to have the DB on a Workstation? X299 is a Workstation platform, not a server one.


You have to get outside your own box (metaphorical). Not everyone works on the same sort of problems you do in the same way with the same tools and within a wide range, none of them are "wrong".

So, um, ah, yeah, I do this on a "workstation"







I do this because I can do it faster, I can experiment, I can debug, I can change out hardware, I can add disk space or use technologies that are not presently deployable (either at my company or anywhere yet).

I put even bigger stuff (like regressions of all that nastiness) on to a compute grid as needed, but that sort of stuff is my "day to day" interactive design/test/debug sort of work.

Why would I need a big giant DB on a "workstation"? Because its not a big giant DB that serves 10's of thousands of people. It's a big giant DB that serves little old me (and maybe a few other people, but not even at the same time).

I have, frequently, purchased used "big iron" hardware to experiment locally. A computer is a computer, the only magic is the price (and proprietary connectors/drivers)... I have old Sun, Alpha, HPux, IBM, etc... stuff (or had and long since tossed in some cases). Often not the sort of things you play BF1 on, but still just computers.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I have yet to see any _benchmarks_ that conflict with the stance that both the 7800X and 7820X have only one FMA. And I consider benchmarks to be stronger than Intel's word.


Yeah, either Intel rushed/goofed the "intel" or the benefit of the dual FMA is non-existent, but bottom line, you don't seem to lose anything with the lower SKUs empirically.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> The fact that your overclock blew up when you ran y-cruncher AVX512 also (lightly) supports this. Because if it only had half-throughput AVX512, it wouldn't be much more stressful than AVX.


Ditto on the 29C water temps...

Glad he found it.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> With my R5E and R5E10, LLC to 6, VCCIN in
> 
> Load : 1.80v
> Idle : 1.857v
> 
> I've always seen this behavior on topics X99


You're supposed to lose voltage on VCCIN if the LLC doesn't counter vdroop enough. that looks about right.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> With my R5E and R5E10, LLC to 6, VCCIN in
> 
> Load : 1.80v
> Idle : 1.857v
> 
> I've always seen this behavior on topics X99


Hence the "high enough LLC" - try LLC-8 and see if it still behaves that way.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Yeah, either Intel rushed/goofed the "intel" or the benefit of the dual FMA is non-existent, but bottom line, you don't seem to lose anything with the lower SKUs empirically.


Benefit of dual FMA is clear when you compare AVX512 with AVX2. Single-FMA SKUs have the same FP compute throughput as AVX2. Dual-FMA SKUs have double.

The AVX512 numbers were exactly double that of AVX2 on both the 7800X and 7900X at the same clock frequency. I haven't seen the benchmark run on the 7820X yet, but I don't expect it to be different.

Also, if you take a look at the table (from my second source): https://github.com/InstLatx64/InstLatx64/blob/master/GenuineIntel0050654_SkylakeX2_InstLatX64.txt#L2428

Code:



Code:


2430 AVX512F         :{EVEX} VFMADD132SS xmm, xmm, xmm      L:   1.14ns=  4.0c  T:   0.14ns=  0.50c
2431 AVX512VL        :{EVEX} VFMADD132PS xmm, xmm, xmm      L:   1.14ns=  4.0c  T:   0.14ns=  0.50c
2432 AVX512VL        :{EVEX} VFMADD132PS ymm, ymm, ymm      L:   1.14ns=  4.0c  T:   0.14ns=  0.50c
2433 AVX512F         :VFMADD132PS zmm, zmm, zmm             L:   1.14ns=  4.0c  T:   0.14ns=  0.50c

What it means is that it takes 0.5 cycles per FMA regardless of vector size. That's 2/cycle - or both 512-bit FMAs enabled.

On a single-FMA SKU, it should look like this instead:

Code:



Code:


2430 AVX512F         :{EVEX} VFMADD132SS xmm, xmm, xmm      L:   1.14ns=  4.0c  T:   0.14ns=  0.50c
2431 AVX512VL        :{EVEX} VFMADD132PS xmm, xmm, xmm      L:   1.14ns=  4.0c  T:   0.14ns=  0.50c
2432 AVX512VL        :{EVEX} VFMADD132PS ymm, ymm, ymm      L:   1.14ns=  4.0c  T:   0.14ns=  0.50c
2433 AVX512F         :VFMADD132PS zmm, zmm, zmm             L:   1.14ns=  4.0c  T:   0.14ns=  1.0c

The 512-bit (zmm) FMA now only runs 1/cycle. Whereas the rest of them (xmm = 128-bit, ymm = 256-bit) still run at 2/cycle since all Skylake SKUs have a pair of 256-bit FMAs.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> No, in X99 VCCIN will tend to increase with load, at least using adaptive and a high enough LLC.


not sure why one would use LLC to add voltage under load above the bios setting. Kinda bassackwards.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not sure why one would use LLC to add voltage under load above the bios setting. Kinda bassackwards.


I figure out how much VCCIN I need for my stable full-load OC and using a higher LLC lets me set a lower normal VCCIN in the BIOS, so I save some power at low loads. Just my perhaps not so clever take


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> I figure out how much VCCIN I need for my stable full-load OC and using a higher LLC lets me set a lower normal VCCIN in the BIOS, so I save some power at low loads. Just my perhaps not so clever take


if it works... let it ride!


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Your BIOS doesn't have the option to set a different turbo for different # of active cores?
> 
> The Gigabyte BIOS lets you do both that in addition to a per-core turbo limit that you're describing. As far as I can tell, that's how it implements the Turbo 3.0. At stock, it sets the 2-core turbo to 4.5 GHz, but it caps all the non-preferred cores to 4.3 GHz and the preferred cores to 4.5 GHz. So you only get the 4.5 GHz when at most two cores are active and only on the two preferred cores.


Turbo 3.0 2 core boost is based on the two lowest vid binning of your cores. The vid table boost at 4.5ghz for those two cores can be anywhere betwen 1.2v-1.3v

Its not really the best cores in terms of temps. Example i have two other cores than run 10c-15c cooler than the rest.

Asus afaik has one serious advantage. You can set different voltages to all cores with multiplier while having a choice of manual/offset/adaptive for every core.

Vccin i set mine with svid enabled with llc 6. It doesnt move from 2.0v.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> You have to get outside your own box (metaphorical). Not everyone works on the same sort of problems you do in the same way with the same tools and within a wide range, none of them are "wrong".
> 
> So, um, ah, yeah, I do this on a "workstation"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do this because I can do it faster, I can experiment, I can debug, I can change out hardware, I can add disk space or use technologies that are not presently deployable (either at my company or anywhere yet).
> 
> I put even bigger stuff (like regressions of all that nastiness) on to a compute grid as needed, but that sort of stuff is my "day to day" interactive design/test/debug sort of work.
> 
> Why would I need a big giant DB on a "workstation"? Because its not a big giant DB that serves 10's of thousands of people. It's a big giant DB that serves little old me (and maybe a few other people, but not even at the same time).
> 
> I have, frequently, purchased used "big iron" hardware to experiment locally. A computer is a computer, the only magic is the price (and proprietary connectors/drivers)... I have old Sun, Alpha, HPux, IBM, etc... stuff (or had and long since tossed in some cases). Often not the sort of things you play BF1 on, but still just computers.


No silicon graphics workstations?


----------



## NYU87

Proud owner of a 7820x, X299 Strix, and 32GB Trident Z 3600MHz CL16!

I can put my 4930K to rest now.


----------



## DeathAngel74

Hello all!
I'll be joining tomorrow or Saturday.... New rig is in my sig.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> I figure out how much VCCIN I need for my stable full-load OC and using a higher LLC lets me set a lower normal VCCIN in the BIOS, so I save some power at low loads. Just my perhaps not so clever take


It's not so clever if wanting the CPU to last, no


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Hence the "high enough LLC" - try LLC-8 and see if it still behaves that way.


Same thing


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> I figure out how much VCCIN I need for my stable full-load OC and using a higher LLC lets me set a lower normal VCCIN in the BIOS, so I save some power at low loads. Just my perhaps not so clever take


Y-cruncher. Nough said

I test all my multiplier offsets.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NYU87*
> 
> Proud owner of a 7820x, X299 Strix, and 32GB Trident Z 3600MHz CL16!
> 
> I can put my 4930K to rest now.


Wish you luck on Silicon lottery. Still havent see the good bin [email protected] and golden bin [email protected]

I lucked out average [email protected]


----------



## magnusavr

Quake champions triggers the avx offset on my Msi tomahawk arctic (according to hwinfo). Is it normal for new games to use avx?


----------



## hrmgamer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> PS: I'm just curious to know what is the use of 128GB of ram on a workstation. Is it something useful or you just like it


1. VMs
2. RAM Disk


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hrmgamer*
> 
> 1. VMs
> 2. RAM Disk


Nosql zfs cache.


----------



## hrmgamer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Nosql zfs cache.


I was actually going to add more items and details to my list but I was lazy








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> those are a server necessity, not a PC/workstation one.
> I'm a web developer for big Telco company and I develop using a laptop, than I put my software on a server.
> What's the point to have the DB on a Workstation? X299 is a Workstation platform, not a server one.


Yes most of the time you don't need heaps of RAM on your workstation(s) but you do want it on your server(s)...for me what it comes down to is that it's cheaper for me to run a stupid spec workstation than a moderate spec workstation and yet another server. Having said that looking at cekim's post, most of his uses you wouldn't necessarily want those on a server anyway.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Various scenarios I run into, some more "optional" than others
> - big SQL DBs
> - big verilog simulations
> - debugging memory leaks or functional failures that take a long time to show in either of the above
> - running multiple multi-day versions of the above at a time adds up
> - multiple VMs with 8-16G for testing
> - Firefox with 20 tabs in two windows (lol - funnier if not so true... leaks like a sieve... )
> - folding/compute-a-thon fun (that's the optional part) 2G per instance with virtual box apps happens... now multiply by 36-72 threads


1. SQL DBs, yes typically server and I can't think of an advantage off hand for sticking them on a workstation, but that doesn't mean there isn't one








2. simulations are sometimes more (cost) suited to high-end workstations than mid-end servers at the same price tier, especially when the engine you're using supports some form of GPGPU
3. In an ideal world debugging should be done on the same platform as the one throwing errors. Failing that a platform as close to the target platform is best as the inherent differences in the server/client architecture do screw with debugging
4. I'm sticking VMs on my workstation because I want a few VMs that have high thread performance, I won't get that on a Xeon.
etc.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnusavr*
> 
> Quake champions triggers the avx offset on my Msi tomahawk arctic (according to hwinfo). Is it normal for new games to use avx?


Seriously.. gonna go download it now. U did a hwinfo osd?


----------



## magnusavr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Seriously.. gonna go download it now. U did a hwinfo osd?


Everytime I ran quake champions I could see the lowest clock had been the same as my avx offset in hwinfo. Running 4.6Ghz with avx offset - 3.so something in quake triggers it. But if it's just for a second or how long it is I don't know. But it's not for most of the time or else my average speed would be affected.

Don't have a picture. On vacation atm.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> No silicon graphics workstations?


Never had need of an SGI.

Regarding VMs on xeons, with the ucode exploit I can run 20 cores at 3.8ghz on my current system and the latest xeons will have skus that could do 3.7 on 36cores.

But yeah this is one of many reasons I'm excited to see things like 7980ex coming out. I like to be able to "do it all" on Fewer machines or even one (or a couple of the same).

As far as debugging on the exact system that's almost always a performance tuning exercise not a debug for me - we do that too... If the specific architecture exposes a bug, then your testing was not good enough. At this point x86 is x86. The days of dealing with thread quirks and odd ball posix non-compliance are thankfully a thing of the past for the most part. Distro specific features are a different issue - hence lots of VMs with 16G+ to run tests.

I do some CAD/CAM as well, but even my "big models" aren't approaching the entire car, so for me that's not an issue, for some it is.

No one size fits all but the more cores and memory I have locally the more I can do in one place and faster.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hrmgamer*
> 
> 1. SQL DBs, yes typically server and I can't think of an advantage off hand for sticking them on a workstation, but that doesn't mean there isn't one ;


select * from possibilities where dream > big;


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> It's not so clever if wanting the CPU to last, no


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Y-cruncher. Nough said


Can you guys elaborate on where I'm going wrong here? By setting VCCIN to 1.95 / LLC-7 I'm getting the same max VCCCIN at full load (say 1.97) but lower low load VCCIN than if I plain set the VCCIN to 1.97 / LLC-6. Are there other side effects I need to be aware of? TIA


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Can you guys elaborate on where I'm going wrong here? By setting VCCIN to 1.95 / LLC-7 I'm getting the same max VCCCIN at full load (say 1.97) but lower low load VCCIN than if I plain set the VCCIN to 1.97 / LLC-6. Are there other side effects I need to be aware of? TIA


Higher LLC will drive more overshoot and current into the device to maintain voltage... So, the higher you set LLC, the higher the max voltage seen by the device.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Higher LLC will drive more overshoot and current into the device to maintain voltage... So, the higher you set LLC, the higher the max voltage seen by the device.


Even if you lower the VCCIN in the BIOS? Is AIDA then not showing the real VCCIN? It's how I monitor my state.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Even if you lower the VCCIN in the BIOS? Is AIDA then not showing the real VCCIN? It's how I monitor my state.


LLC's effect is not static.

To see its actual effect, you'd need an oscilloscope.

AIDA is showing you a sample of a continuous voltage (like opening and shutting your eyes quickly and recalling what you saw).

The "average" increase you see in AIDA is just that - an averaging of what the regulator is actually doing that results from sampling that AIDA does.

Take a peek here if you haven't already:
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?59651-R5E-VCCIN-LLC-7-amp-8-quot-measured-quot


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> LLC's effect is not static.
> 
> To see its actual effect, you'd need an oscilloscope.
> 
> AIDA is showing you a sample of a continuous voltage (like opening and shutting your eyes quickly and recalling what you saw).
> 
> The "average" increase you see in AIDA is just that - an averaging of what the regulator is actually doing that results from sampling that AIDA does.
> 
> Take a peek here if you haven't already:
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?59651-R5E-VCCIN-LLC-7-amp-8-quot-measured-quot


Thanks for the link! I'm familiar with oscilloscopes - used to own a Philips dual-trace (the pots felt like they were loaded with snot







). But that was many moons ago in my late / post college days. I get the overshoot scenario. My big disconnect is I've been using SVID disabled as per recommendation in the BIOS for OC, but now I get that's only for manual vcore - for adaptive, enabled is better. And if set to auto voltage that's why @tistou77 gets the same VCCIN with LLC-6 and LLC-8.

So, I have some rethinking to do in my OC


----------



## tistou77

It's not same voltage in load with LLC-6 and LLC-8
I said it was the same thing, that in load the voltage drop compared to the idle
Sorry if I was not clear

But the gap is much less with LLC-8
I leave in LLC-6, because on X99, it is advisable to have a vdrop of about 5, 6mV

I do not know what is advised for the X299, I asked but no one should know


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> It's not same voltage in load with LLC-6 and LLC-8
> I said it was the same thing, that in load the voltage drop compared to the idle
> Sorry if I was not clear
> 
> But the gap is much less with LLC-8
> I leave in LLC-6, because on X99, it is advisable to have a vdrop of about 5, 6mV
> 
> I do not know what is advised for the X299, I asked but no one should know


Thanks for the update - it will save me some time in my OC re-think


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> It's not same voltage in load with LLC-6 and LLC-8
> I said it was the same thing, that in load the voltage drop compared to the idle
> Sorry if I was not clear
> 
> But the gap is much less with LLC-8
> I leave in LLC-6, because on X99, it is advisable to have a vdrop of about 5, 6mV
> 
> I do not know what is advised for the X299, I asked but no one should know


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Thanks for the update - it will save me some time in my OC re-think


Normally you would only use LLC to stay above crashing voltages on load but on skyline-x and Asus motherboard I'll need to look a little bit closer. I'll have some time this weekend for more tests finally.

One thing to keep in mind is that just because your VCCIN dipped on load does not mean you're not supplying enough voltages to your cores. There is a voltage regulator inside the CPU a.k.a. IVR. Normally core voltages for your CPU is around 1.0-1.3v right? Well VCCIN is at 1.8-2.0v so there is enough room for the internal voltage regulator to be able to step down supply 1.2-1.3v with 1.8v. A voltage drop in VCCIN does not necessarily mean a crash is imminent, it's actually better if you don't feed it anymore voltage if it does not need it. What you are doing by increasing VCCIN instead of core is giving your CPU internal voltage regulator a workout for nothing and wearing it down sooner in the process. Try to aim for around 1.9v VCCIN and less than 1.3V core if you want a longer lasting CPU.

With all that said, rules at the upper end of the frequency limits of these CPUs seem to change dramatically, at least I think it does to keep it stable.

Believe it when @Silent Scone says you're cpu is not going to last long if you continue to use LLC to control your core voltage.


----------



## Fediuld

Idk is posted before but this is interesting.

Has exactly the same behaviour with Ryzen when comes higher speed ram.


http://imgur.com/XU6na


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> No silicon graphics workstations?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never had need of an SGI.
> 
> Regarding VMs on xeons, with the ucode exploit I can run 20 cores at 3.8ghz on my current system and the latest xeons will have skus that could do 3.7 on 36cores.
> 
> But yeah this is one of many reasons I'm excited to see things like 7980ex coming out. I like to be able to "do it all" on Fewer machines or even one (or a couple of the same).
> 
> As far as debugging on the exact system that's almost always a performance tuning exercise not a debug for me - we do that too... If the specific architecture exposes a bug, then your testing was not good enough. At this point x86 is x86. The days of dealing with thread quirks and odd ball posix non-compliance are thankfully a thing of the past for the most part. Distro specific features are a different issue - hence lots of VMs with 16G+ to run tests.
> 
> I do some CAD/CAM as well, but even my "big models" aren't approaching the entire car, so for me that's not an issue, for some it is.
> 
> No one size fits all but the more cores and memory I have locally the more I can do in one place and faster.
Click to expand...

What is the CPU temperature running CAD/CAM? Can you do CAD/CAM in the cloud?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is the CPU temperature running CAD/CAM? Can you do CAD/CAM in the cloud?


I don't do anything I don't have to in "the cloud".

The only thing more voluminous the promises of security are the compromises of that security. So... maybe some day, but today is not that day.

Frankly, my CAD/CAM needs are trivial, particularly compared to my general data crunching. CAD/CAM is very much side-work.

So, it will engage a few cores and have them in the 40-50C range under water. (dual EVO blocks on a pair of 2696v3). Same basic result with an H80 on a single core system - same CPU, same uCode exploit.

Data crunching work varies according to the work... This is what one socket (18 cores) looks like on day 3 of 5 on 18 cores:


Full disclosure - the first is a single 18core system, so all-core, even exploit is 3.4GHz. The second - a dual 18core system runs at 3.8GHz with the same 18 core job (9+9 split over 2 sockets) and hovers around 55-60C max 63 running the same multi-day job.

It's only showing 14x2 cores because I previously had 2x2690v4's in that system and never re-configured the temp app to get all 18 cores...


----------



## aDyerSituation

My chip is binned at 4.6 1.2v and I tried to get it to 4.7 and even at 1.24v I crashed pretty quickly in realbench.

I didn't adjust anything else and my temps were mid 90's so not sure what effect that would have but seems like my chip won't be able to hit 4.8









I was considering getting a real loop but won't be worth it


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Normally you would only use LLC to stay above crashing voltages on load but on skyline-x and Asus motherboard I'll need to look a little bit closer. I'll have some time this weekend for more tests finally.
> 
> One thing to keep in mind is that just because your VCCIN dipped on load does not mean you're not supplying enough voltages to your cores. There is a voltage regulator inside the CPU a.k.a. IVR. Normally core voltages for your CPU is around 1.0-1.3v right? Well VCCIN is at 1.8-2.0v so there is enough room for the internal voltage regulator to be able to step down supply 1.2-1.3v with 1.8v. A voltage drop in VCCIN does not necessarily mean a crash is imminent, it's actually better if you don't feed it anymore voltage if it does not need it. What you are doing by increasing VCCIN instead of core is giving your CPU internal voltage regulator a workout for nothing and wearing it down sooner in the process. Try to aim for around 1.9v VCCIN and less than 1.3V core if you want a longer lasting CPU.
> 
> With all that said, rules at the upper end of the frequency limits of these CPUs seem to change dramatically, at least I think it does to keep it stable.
> 
> Believe it when @Silent Scone says you're cpu is not going to last long if you continue to use LLC to control your core voltage.


I've been tweaking LLC mainly to get stability under stress testing. However, I've been using LLC-7 and even LLC-9 (for a short while) over a year on my 6900K. I do love this CPU - it's been quite forgiving


----------



## Silent Scone

Honestly, it'll still likely outlive you, but the fact remains.

The only time any significant degradation has been seen on BWE afaik is either on LN2 or through abuse of Prime AVX


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is the CPU temperature running CAD/CAM? Can you do CAD/CAM in the cloud?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't do anything I don't have to in "the cloud".
> 
> The only thing more voluminous the promises of security are the compromises of that security. So... maybe some day, but today is not that day.
> 
> Frankly, my CAD/CAM needs are trivial, particularly compared to my general data crunching. CAD/CAM is very much side-work.
> 
> So, it will engage a few cores and have them in the 40-50C range under water. (dual EVO blocks on a pair of 2696v3). Same basic result with an H80 on a single core system - same CPU, same uCode exploit.
> 
> Data crunching work varies according to the work... This is what one socket (18 cores) looks like on day 3 of 5 on 18 cores:
> 
> 
> Full disclosure - the first is a single 18core system, so all-core, even exploit is 3.4GHz. The second - a dual 18core system runs at 3.8GHz with the same 18 core job (9+9 split over 2 sockets) and hovers around 55-60C max 63 running the same multi-day job.
> 
> It's only showing 14x2 cores because I previously had 2x2690v4's in that system and never re-configured the temp app to get all 18 cores...
Click to expand...

Looks like you will have the temperature room to be able to do a lot of overclocking with i9 7980XE.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Honestly, it'll still likely outlive you, but the fact remains.
> 
> The only time any significant degradation has been seen on BWE afaik is either on LN2 or through abuse of Prime AVX


I've been running Prime 95 for five years without a problem.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I've been running Prime 95 for five years without a problem.


That does not proof a thing....

/internet spam


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I've been running Prime 95 for five years without a problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That does not proof a thing....
> 
> /internet spam
Click to expand...

I belong to mersenneforum.org and have not heard of any problems with CPUs running prime95. LINK: http://www.mersenneforum.org/index.php


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Higher LLC will drive more overshoot and current into the device to maintain voltage... So, the higher you set LLC, the higher the max voltage seen by the device.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Normally you would only use LLC to stay above crashing voltages on load but on skyline-x and Asus motherboard I'll need to look a little bit closer. I'll have some time this weekend for more tests finally.
> 
> One thing to keep in mind is that just because your VCCIN dipped on load does not mean you're not supplying enough voltages to your cores. There is a voltage regulator inside the CPU a.k.a. IVR. Normally core voltages for your CPU is around 1.0-1.3v right? Well VCCIN is at 1.8-2.0v so there is enough room for the internal voltage regulator to be able to step down supply 1.2-1.3v with 1.8v. A voltage drop in VCCIN does not necessarily mean a crash is imminent, it's actually better if you don't feed it anymore voltage if it does not need it. What you are doing by increasing VCCIN instead of core is giving your CPU internal voltage regulator a workout for nothing and wearing it down sooner in the process. Try to aim for around 1.9v VCCIN and less than 1.3V core if you want a longer lasting CPU.
> 
> With all that said, rules at the upper end of the frequency limits of these CPUs seem to change dramatically, at least I think it does to keep it stable.
> 
> Believe it when @Silent Scone says you're cpu is not going to last long if you continue to use LLC to control your core voltage.


LLC is usually on a voltage rail that is subject to current-changed induced voltage swing (when the voltage is "clamped"), that can be modulated at the MB level. On x299 (like x99) LLC acts on VCCIN. There is over and under shoot. Too much undershoot and the system fails when a high current load abruptly ends.. this is easy to identify







.
Overshoot is a different beast and the transient voltage spike can lead to performance loss/degradation (eg, a drop in the Hz per mV response) over time. LLC simply adds voltage to the bios setting to overcome vdroop... historically to deal with vdroop and undershoot. It really does nothing to dampen the swing in either direction.
Frankly, I've never come across a situation where the only way to hold the needed voltage under load was thru LLC. Just raise the idle voltage and let it droop to what's needed under load. Idle voltage is basically harmless (within reason)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> That does not proof a thing....
> 
> /internet spam


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Looks like you will have the temperature room to be able to do a lot of overclocking with i9 7980XE.


All that is with fans at "on the floor next to me" levels as well. This is why I've been saying that even an 18 core part if binned like prior generations should have no trouble with all-core 4.0GHz non-AVX loads and possibly even higher under custom water. It's just not a big stretch from what I have working now.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I've been running Prime 95 for five years without a problem.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kana Chan*
> 
> http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/27/1605931
> 7960X delidded pictures


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> My chip is binned at 4.6 1.2v and I tried to get it to 4.7 and even at 1.24v I crashed pretty quickly in realbench.
> 
> I didn't adjust anything else and my temps were mid 90's so not sure what effect that would have but seems like my chip won't be able to hit 4.8
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was considering getting a real loop but won't be worth it


Sounds like my 7820x as well, [email protected] (AVX 4Ghz) is the sweet spot, going higher leads to needing more voltage (over 1.2v).
Happy with what I've got now.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Yeah what I got now is plenty fast but little disappointed in having a voltage bump like that to get 4.7

Speaking of which do temps effect stability on these processors? Like under TJMax but hot.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I belong to mersenneforum.org and have not heard of any problems with CPUs running prime95. LINK: http://www.mersenneforum.org/index.php


Five years on Broadwell-E? That's some feat, given the CPUs were released in 2016.









Anyway, exposing a CPU to 3-4X more current than it's rated for can lead to degradation. Generally, on any platform, if we don't stray too far above 2X the stock TDP, things tend to have lower failure/degradation rates. Above that, you start to see more progressive degradation when you run aging tests.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Yeah what I got now is plenty fast but little disappointed in having a voltage bump like that to get 4.7
> 
> Speaking of which do temps effect stability on these processors? Like under TJMax but hot.


Hmmm what mobo ure running?? Whats the full setup?? No of gpu and nvme??

Bro ure 4.7ghz crash is the same y that dude cannot do 5ghz and its the might be the same answer mystical been looking for the phantom throttling.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I'm not sure what you mean


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*







I've had this CPU for five years. It's had five new IHSes and five new PCBs.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Five years on Broadwell-E? That's some feat, given the CPUs were released in 2016.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, exposing a CPU to 3-4X more current than it's rated for can lead to degradation. Generally, on any platform, if we don't stray too far above 2X the stock TDP, things tend to have lower failure/degradation rates. Above that, you start to see more progressive degradation when you run aging tests.


Assuming temperatures weren't an issue, what is the max vcore you would recommend?


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Assuming temperatures weren't an issue, what is the max vcore you would recommend?


I usually go by power and what kind of loads you run on the system. I generally don't stray above 2X the stock TDP for systems that see 100% loads for extended periods (if I'm aiming for a few years of trouble-free use at the target OC freqeuncy). If you're only gaming and running the occasional encode, then you can de-rate somewhat.


----------



## sblantipodi

Is there someone with a 7900X and a Corsair H100i GT?
what is the temperature with that AIO? Is it possible to overclock with a small AIO like that?
If yes? What are the OC that can be achieved with an AIO like that?


----------



## fireedo

well finally I have made my decision, purchased just now an i7 7820x and Asus x299 Strix-e gaming
dunno if I made a silly choice since this time are Ryzens time


----------



## NYU87

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fireedo*
> 
> well finally I have made my decision, purchased just now an i7 7820x and Asus x299 Strix-e gaming
> dunno if I made a silly choice since this time are Ryzens time


Ryzens can only overclock to 3.9GHz on average compared to 4.5+ for Skylake X, also higher IPC. After a delid you can probably go higher. If you have the money, you made the right choice.


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fireedo*
> 
> well finally I have made my decision, purchased just now an i7 7820x and Asus x299 Strix-e gaming
> dunno if I made a silly choice since this time are Ryzens time


Depends what you want it for really. I run hackintosh and intel are a LOT better. If you need lots of fast cores in windows then maybe the ryzen was better. Don't know don't care about gaming.


----------



## DeathAngel74

@fireedo


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!






i7 7820X and ASUS X299 STRIX-E GAMING also...


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> @fireedo
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i7 7820X and ASUS X299 STRIX-E GAMING also...


RGB galore


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> RGB galore


----------



## fireedo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> @fireedo
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i7 7820X and ASUS X299 STRIX-E GAMING also...


Wow a lot of great stuff there








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NYU87*
> 
> Ryzens can only overclock to 3.9GHz on average compared to 4.5+ for Skylake X, also higher IPC. After a delid you can probably go higher. If you have the money, you made the right choice.


Yep, already purchased








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *surfinchina*
> 
> Depends what you want it for really. I run hackintosh and intel are a LOT better. If you need lots of fast cores in windows then maybe the ryzen was better. Don't know don't care about gaming.


I want to do everything but not hackintosh or maybe I will try later


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Never had need of an SGI.
> 
> Regarding VMs on xeons, with the ucode exploit I can run 20 cores at 3.8ghz on my current system and the latest xeons will have skus that could do 3.7 on 36cores.
> 
> But yeah this is one of many reasons I'm excited to see things like 7980ex coming out. I like to be able to "do it all" on Fewer machines or even one (or a couple of the same).
> 
> As far as debugging on the exact system that's almost always a performance tuning exercise not a debug for me - we do that too... If the specific architecture exposes a bug, then your testing was not good enough. At this point x86 is x86. The days of dealing with thread quirks and odd ball posix non-compliance are thankfully a thing of the past for the most part. Distro specific features are a different issue - hence lots of VMs with 16G+ to run tests.
> 
> I do some CAD/CAM as well, but even my "big models" aren't approaching the entire car, so for me that's not an issue, for some it is.
> 
> No one size fits all but the more cores and memory I have locally the more I can do in one place and faster.


The new frankenchips coming out looks to be the exact same die as Xeons according to that delid picture of the 7920X. This means it would be great for what you are doing. Intel would probably split the cores and run two busses which will have inherent latency issues. I'm curious to see how this affects overclockability.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11464/intel-announces-skylakex-bringing-18core-hcc-silicon-to-consumers-for-1999/2


----------



## fireedo

Been testing this new toy

well this 7820x while on OC it can be transformed to be a room heater
















at least this cpu can be overclock very easy
this is my first attempt
all core @ 45 multiplier
with 1.200v vcore

and of course XMP mode running @ 3200 Mhz but only dual channel (didnt have enough money to get quad channel)

cooled by corsair H115i

and seems like a little scary

















Spoiler: image


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fireedo*
> 
> Been testing this new toy
> 
> well this 7820x while on OC it can be transformed to be a room heater
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> at least this cpu can be overclock very easy
> this is my first attempt
> all core @ 45 multiplier
> with 1.200v vcore
> 
> and of course XMP mode running @ 3200 Mhz but only dual channel (didnt have enough money to get quad channel)
> 
> cooled by corsair H115i
> 
> and seems like a little scary
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: image


Thats a decent cpu. U should be able to do 4.7ghz non avx easy.


----------



## Nikos4Life

Hi guys!

First time around this thread so I hope everyone's enjoying their new socket and big CPUs









I am just come by to ask about this matter that is bugging me for a couple of weeks which is the following:

I do have the chance to sell or change my current CPU/MB (Asus REV10 + 6900K) so with that and paying the difference the option I was thinking about was to upgrade to the 7980XE + Asus Rampage VI Extreme when it comes out (maybe later this month).
I would like your opinion about this change and what would you do if you were me.

Regards,
Nikos


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nikos4Life*
> 
> Hi guys!
> 
> First time around this thread so I hope everyone's enjoying their new socket and big CPUs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am just come by to ask about this matter that is bugging me for a couple of weeks which is the following:
> 
> I do have the chance to sell or change my current CPU/MB (Asus REV10 + 6900K) so with that and paying the difference the option I was thinking about was to upgrade to the 7980XE + Asus Rampage VI Extreme when it comes out (maybe later this month).
> I would like your opinion about this change and what would you do if you were me.
> 
> Regards,
> Nikos


Do it, then go to to the local bar and get some tapas.


----------



## fireedo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Thats a decent cpu. U should be able to do 4.7ghz non avx easy.


Well thankyou, glad to hear that

Maybe I should consider to get monoblock for this, maybe suggestion to get properly "safe" temp ( safe temp here is around 60-70 maybe) I dont really know about this ?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> The new frankenchips coming out looks to be the exact same die as Xeons according to that delid picture of the 7920X. This means it would be great for what you are doing. Intel would probably split the cores and run two busses which will have inherent latency issues. I'm curious to see how this affects overclockability.
> 
> http://www.anandtech.com/show/11464/intel-announces-skylakex-bringing-18core-hcc-silicon-to-consumers-for-1999/2


http://wccftech.com/intels-core-i9-7980xe-flagship-18-core-cpu-gets-first-benchmarks/

Evidently not - but it is WCCF, soooo another month before we know... Looking promising and in line with my fat-thumb estimates of what should be possible given HW->SKL experiences... (which is much more interesting than marked base clocks and turbo limits).

BTW, why makes you call them "frankenchips?" or multi-die/bus? They are neither. They are xeon dies put on a 2066 interposer, but the W-series xeons are too... They may or may not have been planned prior to TR, but there is no "stitcihing' on these dies. It is a mesh with 12-28 cores depending on the SKU and dark cores everywhere in-between...

Shouldn't be anything but improvement in consistency over the dual ring architecture of HW/BW. The only risk is that the cache shift from shared to local impacts certain applications negatively (heavily threaded, IPC laden apps that rely on the shared cache more than the local). Even that, so far, seems to be minimal given other improvements.

P.S. not that there is anything inherently bad with AMD's approach - but it does create latency behavior similar to multi-socket designs. It's a trade-off that has minimal impact in most high-core-count cases.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fireedo*
> 
> Well thankyou, glad to hear that
> 
> Maybe I should consider to get monoblock for this, maybe suggestion to get properly "safe" temp ( safe temp here is around 60-70 maybe) I dont really know about this ?


You need to set your AVX offsets.

I'm running [email protected] with a AVX offset of -6 (4Ghz), top temp I'm seeing is 68c during Realbench 2.54, 80c Realbench 2.44 and 79c Prime95 26.6 (no avx), these are Package temps, hottest core temp is lower.
This is under a H115i with Push/Pull Noctua fans.

Like a lot of the guys here are saying you won't notice a lower AVX offset anyway, plus if your gaming your wanting a higher core clock anyway.


----------



## sethk

Hello all - I'm on the lookout for a good article / review / video or thread/advice that has details on the effects of overclocked DDR4 timing and bandwidth on games and synthetics (quad channel, in particular 7820x although 7800x or 7900x would be fine). I'm looking at 4 x 8GB kits - I do like the look of the Trident Z RGB kits, although a non LED kit would be probably be OK too.

I see a few semi-reasonable kits that can do 3200 CL16 @ 1.35, anything much better than that seems to quickly go from ~$320 to $400+, which I'm not sure is worth it. On the other hand DDR4 prices look to be set to keep rising for the rest of the year, so I may as well buy the RAM first as I put together the rest of the rig. Suggestions?


----------



## glnn_23

Having a bit of fun with a 7800x at the moment. Temps on the 6 core seem ok.
P95 26.6 1hr.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> Having a bit of fun with a 7800x at the moment. Temps on the 6 core seem ok.
> P95 26.6 1hr.


Prime..









Seems like a good chip tho!


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> Having a bit of fun with a 7800x at the moment. Temps on the 6 core seem ok.
> P95 26.6 1hr.


Thats a good cpu as well.


----------



## fireedo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> You need to set your AVX offsets.
> 
> I'm running [email protected] with a AVX offset of -6 (4Ghz), top temp I'm seeing is 68c during Realbench 2.54, 80c Realbench 2.44 and 79c Prime95 26.6 (no avx), these are Package temps, hottest core temp is lower.
> This is under a H115i with Push/Pull Noctua fans.
> 
> Like a lot of the guys here are saying you won't notice a lower AVX offset anyway, plus if your gaming your wanting a higher core clock anyway.


I dont know if I doin this right, I have try lower AVX offset option in BIOS both AVX and AVX512 to 6 (negative)

I raise my multiplier to 46 and lower the vcore to 1.180v

Realbench 2.54 still eat me


----------



## glnn_23

Here's my 7800x RB 2.54 run at 4.8Ghz with 0 offset AVX. Temps still fine.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> Here's my 7800x RB 2.54 run at 4.8Ghz with 0 offset AVX. Temps still fine.


Excellent cpu and awesome ram 4k [email protected]
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fireedo*
> 
> I dont know if I doin this right, I have try lower AVX offset option in BIOS both AVX and AVX512 to 6 (negative)
> 
> I raise my multiplier to 46 and lower the vcore to 1.180v
> 
> Realbench 2.54 still eat me


Rb 2.54 is running avx so you are technically stressing 4ghz with that offset.


----------



## fireedo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> Here's my 7800x RB 2.54 run at 4.8Ghz with 0 offset AVX. Temps still fine.


what do you mean with 0 offset AVX? did you disable the AVX offset completely? if so how to do that? I'm on asus x299 strix
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Rb 2.54 is running avx so you are technically stressing 4ghz with that offset.


so do i need to lower AVX or disable it? if so how to disable AVX offset?

found it how to do it









***
Updated

I lower the AVX and AVX-512 offset to 8 (negative)

and lower vcore to 1.170v @ 46 Multiplier

setting my H115i pump to performance

using Realbench 2.54 stress test just 15 minutes

showing a better result


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fireedo*
> 
> what do you mean with 0 offset AVX? did you disable the AVX offset completely? if so how to do that? I'm on asus x299 strix
> so do i need to lower AVX or disable it? if so how to disable AVX offset?
> 
> found it how to do it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ***
> Updated
> 
> I lower the AVX and AVX-512 offset to 8 (negative)
> 
> and lower vcore to 1.170v @ 46 Multiplier
> 
> setting my H115i pump to performance
> 
> using Realbench 2.54 stress test just 15 minutes
> 
> showing a better result


Again RB 2.54 uses avx. All you are doing is testing now at [email protected]

Use realbench 2.43 for non avx load for your 4.6. Or prime95 26.6. ( its good only for cpu voltage but not for mesh/ram etc)


----------



## Artah

I wish I could tell you that I'm doing the 5.0GHz victory dance, I got very close but no cigar, RB 2.54 still BSOD after a few minutes on 5.0GHz but on 4.9 it's solid. Cinebench R15 it passes. Here is my settings, let me know if you spot anything I should try but I inched into these settings very slowly. I might be missing something that could stabilize it even better but it is possible that it's the heat that's causing the crashes since it's not an instant crash at all and it's not the switch from AVX to non AVX phases of RB. Also I read that Pascal has some issues with RB but Chino is not having these issues apparently. I switched out a Zotac 1080 FE for an EVGA 980 FE and some error I was getting about luxmark went away. https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?90699-Realbench-LuxMark-x64-exe-stopped-working

Here is my settings, complete details on the screenshots.

VCCIN 1.94v Yes the Apex motherboard loves to shoot it up to 2.0v at 5GHz. I was able to tame it by turning off XMP and keeping everything manual. At 4.6-4.8ish I was able to stay close to 1.90v.
VCORE 1.311v + .001v Adaptive
LLC5
AVX/AVX-512 31
VCCIO 1.015v and VCSA .775v I added .0050v to the auto settings (this helped stabilize it but not enough)
VRM SS disabled
CPU current 140%
CPU power duty - Extreme
CPU power phase - Extreme

One thing I have not done is Bench this on a new clean install of windows 10.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I wish I could tell you that I'm doing the 5.0GHz victory dance, I got very close but no cigar, RB 2.54 still BSOD after a few minutes on 5.0GHz but on 4.9 it's solid. Cinebench R15 it passes. Here is my settings, let me know if you spot anything I should try but I inched into these settings very slowly. I might be missing something that could stabilize it even better but it is possible that it's the heat that's causing the crashes since it's not an instant crash at all and it's not the switch from AVX to non AVX phases of RB. Also I read that Pascal has some issues with RB but Chino is not having these issues apparently. I switched out a Zotac 1080 FE for an EVGA 980 FE and some error I was getting about luxmark went away. https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?90699-Realbench-LuxMark-x64-exe-stopped-working
> 
> Here is my settings, complete details on the screenshots.
> 
> VCCIN 1.94v Yes the Apex motherboard loves to shoot it up to 2.0v at 5GHz. I was able to tame it by turning off XMP and keeping everything manual. At 4.6-4.8ish I was able to stay close to 1.90v.
> VCORE 1.311v + .001v Adaptive
> LLC5
> AVX/AVX-512 31
> VCCIO 1.015v and VCSA .775v I added .0050v to the auto settings (this helped stabilize it but not enough)
> VRM SS disabled
> CPU current 140%
> CPU power duty - Extreme
> CPU power phase - Extreme
> 
> One thing I have not done is Bench this on a new clean install of windows 10.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


OCUK binning have come forward to say that less than 10% can do 5Ghz after delid, so this is hardly surprising.


----------



## aDyerSituation

is "Cpu core" in Aida64 actually VCCIN voltage?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> is "Cpu core" in Aida64 actually VCCIN voltage?


On the Apex, this displays Vcore.


----------



## magnusavr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Seriously.. gonna go download it now. U did a hwinfo osd?


What did you find out?


----------



## fireedo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Again RB 2.54 uses avx. All you are doing is testing now at [email protected]
> 
> Use realbench 2.43 for non avx load for your 4.6. Or prime95 26.6. ( its good only for cpu voltage but not for mesh/ram etc)


finally survived realbench 2.43








46 multiplier realbench 2.43 need bigger core voltage around 1.195 v got stable at least for 15 minutes (I think it should be enough)

temp still scary though, but I got all the performance for my applications and gamings, still it really worth it

well I think I need custom water cooling,


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I wish I could tell you that I'm doing the 5.0GHz victory dance, I got very close but no cigar, RB 2.54 still BSOD after a few minutes on 5.0GHz but on 4.9 it's solid. Cinebench R15 it passes. Here is my settings, let me know if you spot anything I should try but I inched into these settings very slowly. I might be missing something that could stabilize it even better but it is possible that it's the heat that's causing the crashes since it's not an instant crash at all and it's not the switch from AVX to non AVX phases of RB. Also I read that Pascal has some issues with RB but Chino is not having these issues apparently. I switched out a Zotac 1080 FE for an EVGA 980 FE and some error I was getting about luxmark went away. https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?90699-Realbench-LuxMark-x64-exe-stopped-working
> 
> Here is my settings, complete details on the screenshots.
> 
> VCCIN 1.94v Yes the Apex motherboard loves to shoot it up to 2.0v at 5GHz. I was able to tame it by turning off XMP and keeping everything manual. At 4.6-4.8ish I was able to stay close to 1.90v.
> VCORE 1.311v + .001v Adaptive
> LLC5
> AVX/AVX-512 31
> VCCIO 1.015v and VCSA .775v I added .0050v to the auto settings (this helped stabilize it but not enough)
> VRM SS disabled
> CPU current 140%
> CPU power duty - Extreme
> CPU power phase - Extreme
> 
> One thing I have not done is Bench this on a new clean install of windows 10.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


?????. A sane person test on manual voltages first.
y 1.312??
So many thing running on auto. RB2.54 you are stressing multiplier 29 with cpu vid pairing way below spec termination voltage. No wonder it aint wotking..

Test with rb 2.43 or prime 26.6 fft 12. Post any 30 minutes running screenshot of your "4.9ghz solid"
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnusavr*
> 
> What did you find out?


Havent had chance yet to test it. Public holiday weekend atm. Taking out all da kids/nephew nieces shopping/swim pool/vaca in outstation resort . theres goes one 7980xe on a weekend excursion. Worth it.


----------



## magnusavr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> ?????. A sane person test on manual voltages first.
> y 1.312??
> So many thing running on auto. RB2.54 you are stressing multiplier 29 with cpu vid pairing way below spec termination voltage. No wonder it aint wotking..
> 
> Test with rb 2.43 or prime 26.6 fft 12. Post any 30 minutes running screenshot of your "4.9ghz solid"
> Havent had chance yet to test it. Public holiday weekend atm. Taking out all da kids/nephew nieces shopping/swim pool/vaca in outstation resort . theres goes one 7980xe on a weekend excursion. Worth it.


Can't compare family and hardware. Family is worth it. Spending 3-4 of those 7980 cpu a on our vacation in the Seychelles at the moment myself


----------



## Nikos4Life

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jobotoo*
> 
> Do it, then go to to the local bar and get some tapas.


I was seriously asking about it. I would like to know the trade off changing to X299's platform.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> is "Cpu core" in Aida64 actually VCCIN voltage?


I get CPU Core for VCORE, CPU VRM for VCCIN.


----------



## DeathAngel74

I'm new here...Is 4.5GHz @ 1.1v/81C max core temp decent for the 7820x? Most of the time temps were between 70-77C, sometimes peaking at 80-81C.


----------



## cstkl1

Bought some samsung b-dies to check the F-up asus bios 0702 vs 0503. Zero gain on the former except tons of issues.

Replicated da issue so many times n saw the dcp issue with pll. Afaik big diff between the bios is some dram "improvement". Already saw alot of bad auto timings n the third n skews side about the same for 3200c16 hynix. Manual fix didnt take.
Also oddly that gskill 32gb ram no more on their qvl. Could have sworn it was on it before.

Seriously didnt want to blow money on rams for all things especially samsung variant which sooner of later will be hard to find down the line.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> ?????. A sane person test on manual voltages first.
> y 1.312??
> So many thing running on auto. RB2.54 you are stressing multiplier 29 with cpu vid pairing way below spec termination voltage. No wonder it aint wotking..
> 
> Test with rb 2.43 or prime 26.6 fft 12. Post any 30 minutes running screenshot of your "4.9ghz solid"
> Havent had chance yet to test it. Public holiday weekend atm. Taking out all da kids/nephew nieces shopping/swim pool/vaca in outstation resort . theres goes one 7980xe on a weekend excursion. Worth it.


No clue what you are talking about. I was trying not to tame temps. Can you post your 5.0GHz on a 7900X OC using Apex so we can all learn from you?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> No clue what you are talking about. I was trying not to tame temps. Can you post your 5.0GHz on a 7900X OC using Apex so we can all learn from you?


Sure. Of course you dont. I got a 4.9ghz stable realbench 2.43/prime 26.6 stable like yourself stable. Lets compare screenshots.

Do the honors dude.

Btw u might want to try older bios. Seriously see alot of issues with 0702. Gonna confirm this with another ram chipset.
No idea y u having such a hard time getting 2.9ghz avx stable with rb 2.54.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> No clue what you are talking about. I was trying not to tame temps. Can you post your 5.0GHz on a 7900X OC using Apex so we can all learn from you?


I don't even think he has a 7900X.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Sure. Of course you dont. I got a 4.9ghz stable realbench 2.43/prime 26.6 stable like yourself stable. Lets compare screenshots.
> 
> Do the honors dude.


I only tested it with 2.54 I have an hour screenshot somewhere I took last night. Like I said in a few posts, I can do 4.9 blind folded but have many issues with 5.0GHz. Can you get your chip to 5GHz so I can maybe find out what I'm doing wrong? You're using a 7900X and Apex right?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I only tested it with 2.54 I have an hour screenshot somewhere I took last night. Like I said in a few posts, I can do 4.9 blind folded but have many issues with 5.0GHz. Can you get your chip to 5GHz so I can maybe find out what I'm doing wrong? You're using a 7900X and Apex right?


The 7900x ES and apex was a loaner unit from asus. Returned already. Again can be confirmed with any asus fae.
Dude rb 2.54 is avx intensive. You are testing your avx clocks. Hence if its 31 offset 49 .. 2.8ghz.
If you want to test 4.9ghz run rb 2.43.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I don't even think he has a 7900X.


Doh I meant to type I was trying to tame temps with lower voltages. I have not tried disabling some of the cores because if I wanted less cores I would have gotten a chip with less. The ones with less cores would have less transistors to feed especially because it has less lanes. You spot anything on there on my settings that I could try to make it more stable?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> The 7900x ES and apex was a loaner unit from asus. Returned already. Again can be confirmed with any asus fae.
> Dude rb 2.54 is avx intensive. You are testing your avx clocks. Hence if its 31 offset 49 .. 2.8ghz.
> If you want to test 4.9ghz run rb 2.43.


negative 31 offset gives you 1900MHz on a 5.0GHz OC btw. Yes I'm aware that I'm testing AVX and I want to test with AVX that's why I'm using 2.54 specifically.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> negative 31 offset gives you 1900MHz on a 5.0GHz OC btw. Yes I'm aware that I'm testing AVX and I want to test with AVX that's why I'm using 2.54 specifically.


My bad .. maths fail for myself. Looking for da nearby wall.
Since you know that..
So you want to know how to get 1.9ghz avx stable with 1.312v adaptive?? While saying you have 1.8ghz stable screenshot??
?????


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> My bad .. maths fail for myself. Looking for da nearby wall.
> Since you know that..
> So you want to know how to get 1900ghz avx stable with 1.312v adaptive?? While saying you have 1.8ghz stable screenshot??
> ?????


here is the 60 minute RB 2.54 I found it. So what do you suggest I should change to stabilize it? I posted this because I needed a little help obviously not to piss anyone off or challenge anyone on anything, I'm a technie not politician. I think @Silent Scone is using a 7900X I wanted to get an apple vs apple-ish comparison and he's a seasoned overclocking. Maybe @Jpmboy take a peek? I know you don't have a 7900X but maybe something that would help.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> here is the 60 minute RB 2.54 I found it. So what do you suggest I should change to stabilize it? I posted this because I needed a little help obviously not to piss anyone off or challenge anyone on anything, I'm a technie not politician. I think @Silent Scone is using a 7900X I wanted to get an apple vs apple-ish comparison and he's a seasoned overclocking. Maybe @Jpmboy take a peek? I know you don't have a 7900X but maybe something that would help.


if u want i will teach ya if you have time and patience infront of the computer.

PM me.

btw you can judge others later after few hours how " seasoned" they are.


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> if u want i will teach ya if you have time and patience infront of the computer.
> 
> PM me.
> 
> btw you can judge others later after few hours how " seasoned" they are.


Just out of curiosity, why don't you post the information here so we can all learn. I'd be very interested and you've posted about it many times. If you have something to share, please share.


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> if u want i will teach ya if you have time and patience infront of the computer.
> 
> PM me.


Maybe it's because I'm old-schooled and an old fart, but I don't get it. Why the need for PMs, why so secretive?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jobotoo*
> 
> Just out of curiosity, why don't you post the information here so we can all learn. I'd be very interested and you've posted about it many times. If you have something to share, please share.


Its long. I need to actually write a guide. It works on 7820x and 7900x. Not sure on 7800x. Will confirm when 7960x arrives as thats the cpu i am aiming for.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Maybe it's because I'm old-schooled and an old fart, but I don't get it. Why the need for PMs, why so secretive?


Already taught 4 ppl so y they are not posting it??
Because you need time to write it all down properly. Only works on asus afaik.
If you want pm me. We will be talking via whatsapp/telegram.
Old school better.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

The weird thing is that I can't seem to lower my voltage for 4800. Like I need 1.255-1.260V for 4800 AVX 2 hours RB, but non AVX still needs 1.240V or so..

Maybe I am doing something wrong..?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jobotoo*
> 
> Just out of curiosity, why don't you post the information here so we can all learn. I'd be very interested and you've posted about it many times. If you have something to share, please share.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Maybe it's because I'm old-schooled and an old fart, but I don't get it. Why the need for PMs, why so secretive?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Its long. I need to actually write a guide. It works on 7820x and 7900x. Not sure on 7800x. Will confirm when 7960x arrives as thats the cpu i am aiming for.


I agree let's make this all public. By the way my OC is extremely stable with HT disabled and without Intel Speedshift technology. That's the reason why I'm thinking it's the heat that's doing me in but I don't want to install this on my main rig until I get to test out the R6E because I might go with that board for my daily computer instead and Apex for testing only..

edit: adding in the screenshot of 5GHz passing 15 minutes (don't feel the need to run it hour+) of RB 2.54 without HT/Speedshift tech. Notice the big hit on Cinebench though!


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Its long. I need to actually write a guide. It works on 7820x and 7900x. Not sure on 7800x. Will confirm when 7960x arrives as thats the cpu i am aiming for.


Awesome, I can't wait to see the guide!


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I agree let's make this all public. By the way my OC is extremely stable with HT disabled and without Intel Speedshift technology. That's the reason why I'm thinking it's the heat that's doing me in but I don't want to install this on my main rig until I get to test out the R6E because I might go with that board for my daily computer instead and Apex for testing only..


Waiting for the Extreme also. I purchased some 4133 RAM (I actually think you linked it). But I have a question regarding faster RAM and temps. It never occurred to me, but in a different thread, someone was stating that using faster RAM significantly raises temps . . . Is this true? I could maybe see a little, but "significantly", really?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Its long. I need to actually write a guide. It works on 7820x and 7900x. Not sure on 7800x. Will confirm when 7960x arrives as thats the cpu i am aiming for.


Nonsense. If you'd already written it out once, it's not difficult to post publically. Sounds like it's probably pseudoscience.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I agree let's make this all public. By the way my OC is extremely stable with HT disabled and without Intel Speedshift technology. That's the reason why I'm thinking it's the heat that's doing me in but I don't want to install this on my main rig until I get to test out the R6E because I might go with that board for my daily computer instead and Apex for testing only..


Then theres nothing to talk about.

Anyway my issues with the asus x299 platform now atm is bios 0702 dpc issue.
Also solved the cpu power package reading issue fix for asus x299.
Solved the fast boot up but works only on 0702 but its having issue with dpc. Already narrowed down to what seems like ram related. Manual settings that work on 0503 not working on 0702. Retested all ram skews and was the same.
Bought samsung b-dies due to my ocd to confirm things.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> The weird thing is that I can't seem to lower my voltage for 4800. Like I need 1.255-1.260V for 4800 AVX 2 hours RB, but non AVX still needs 1.240V or so..
> 
> Maybe I am doing something wrong..?


Whats the offset scaling like with 7800x..
7820/7900x is -2/-4 confirm right up to 4.7/4.6ghz. The non avx voltage scales pretty good. Avx 512 currently only test available i think its only y-cruncher. Its not strenous enough. Prime 28.5 avx2 loads much higher.
Test was based on few samples of cpus and one es 7900x on all asus boards expect for prime-a/tuf mark 2 by myself/few ppl. Rams were all 3200 and below.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> Here's my 7800x RB 2.54 run at 4.8Ghz with 0 offset AVX. Temps still fine.


that screen shot is not showing any voltages...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> here is the 60 minute RB 2.54 I found it. So what do you suggest I should change to stabilize it? I posted this because I needed a little help obviously not to piss anyone off or challenge anyone on anything, I'm a technie not politician. I think @Silent Scone is using a 7900X I wanted to get an apple vs apple-ish comparison and he's a seasoned overclocking. Maybe @Jpmboy take a peek? I know you don't have a 7900X but maybe something that would help.


eyah, it's hard to see what's needed (if anything) from that screenshot. Best to post bios screenshots as a zip file. When pushing that high, things like DMI, PLL etc play into aligning various domains.
What's your goal? A bench stable 5.0 or (something silly like) p95/RB/OCCT stable 5.0?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Its long. I need to actually write a guide. It works on 7820x and 7900x. Not sure on 7800x. Will confirm when 7960x arrives as thats the cpu i am aiming for.


write the guide already... do it once, rather than 20 times with members by PM.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jobotoo*
> 
> Waiting for the Extreme also. I purchased some 4133 RAM (I actually think you linked it). But I have a question regarding faster RAM and temps. It never occurred to me, but in a different thread, someone was stating that using faster RAM significantly raises temps . . . Is this true? I could maybe see a little, but "significantly", really?


that depends on whether the higher frequency requires you to jack up VSA, VCCIO.. etc.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I agree let's make this all public. By the way my OC is extremely stable with HT disabled and without Intel Speedshift technology. That's the reason why I'm thinking it's the heat that's doing me in but I don't want to install this on my main rig until I get to test out the R6E because I might go with that board for my daily computer instead and Apex for testing only..
> 
> edit: adding in the screenshot of 5GHz passing 15 minutes (don't feel the need to run it hour+) of RB 2.54 without HT/Speedshift tech. Notice the big hit on Cinebench though!


10 core w/ HT off? shoulda got a 5.4GHz 7700K.


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Already taught 4 ppl so y they are not posting it??


First, good question. Is there anyone here who's gotten help from cstkl1 by way of PMs and messaging apps that can confirm his approach works? If so, please let us know.
Quote:


> Because you need time to write it all down properly. Only works on asus afaik.
> If you want pm me. We will be talking via whatsapp/telegram.
> Old school better.


I've got an x299 Apex and an SL 7900X, but unfortunately I've been busy with other tasks which haven't allowed me to bench either yet. Still, I'd be very interested in reading what you've got. But like I said, I'm old school and don't do apps, social media, texting, etc., so unless I can read it, I'm afraid I won't be able to gauge whether your approach would work for me or not. There are plenty of other helpful people here who I might eventually turn to for such assistance. Thanks for the offer though.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jobotoo*
> 
> Waiting for the Extreme also. I purchased some 4133 RAM (I actually think you linked it). But I have a question regarding faster RAM and temps. It never occurred to me, but in a different thread, someone was stating that using faster RAM significantly raises temps . . . Is this true? I could maybe see a little, but "significantly", really?


It would add to the temp because demand is feeding more voltage to the memory controller but a significant increase that they have seem is probably the use of the all encompassing XMP profile which is fine for running stock clocks but when you start overclocking the CPU all the heat is compounded and gets worse by injecting more voltage in.

tldr; faster ram would produce more heat but I don't know about significant, I'll have to test it out myself without using the XMP profiles.

By the way to show how bad XMP profiles could be sometimes, when I started overclocking my 7900X I used XMP profile to get the feel for the CPU and I couldn't figure out why the VCCIN would shoot up to 2v with clocks at around 4.7GHz until I turned it off. Another XMP profile I ran into had the voltage for VCSA at 1.3v+ on an R5E10 board and 6950x.

If you're going to overclock a lot expect to run your ram slower but for moderate overclocks running at the ram's posted speed is good. The reason why I'm going 4133 is because I don't run my daily computer at max OC, I always have it toned down.

More experienced people may have more accurate take/corrections on this but this is AFAIK.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> it's hard to see what's needed (if anything) from that screenshot. Best to post bios screenshots as a zip file. When pushing that high, things like DMI, PLL etc play into aligning various domains.
> What's your goal? A bench stable 5.0 or (something silly like) p95/RB/OCCT stable 5.0?


Just looking for a bench stable 5.0 without turning features off and call it a day. I guess I have hit that goal doh!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> .
> Just looking for a bench stable 5.0 without turning features off and call it a day. I guess I have hit that goal doh!


"QED""


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Testing 4600 at 1.148V.. Can't get it lower as that is stock voltage. Temps are high 50s, low 60s under Realbench.

When I get new HW I always go for max OC the first month(s) and then for a "cold" OC so the temp barley exceed 60'C. The 5820K was 4800, then 4600, 5960X was 4700, then 4500, 7700K was 5 ghz, then 4800, R7 1700 was 3900, then 3700 and now this 7800X. I can get 4900, settled on a 4800 and going down to a 4600.


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> It would add to the temp because demand is feeding more voltage to the memory controller but a significant increase that they have seem is probably the use of the all encompassing XMP profile which is fine for running stock clocks but when you start overclocking the CPU all the heat is compounded and gets worse by injecting more voltage in.
> 
> tldr; faster ram would produce more heat but I don't know about significant, I'll have to test it out myself without using the XMP profiles.
> 
> By the way to show how bad XMP profiles could be sometimes, when I started overclocking my 7900X I used XMP profile to get the feel for the CPU and I couldn't figure out why the VCCIN would shoot up to 2v with clocks at around 4.7GHz until I turned it off. Another XMP profile I ran into had the voltage for VCSA at 1.3v+ on an R5E10 board and 6950x.
> 
> If you're going to overclock a lot expect to run your ram slower but for moderate overclocks running at the ram's posted speed is good. The reason why I'm going 4133 is because I don't run my daily computer at max OC, I always have it toned down.
> 
> More experienced people may have more accurate take/corrections on this but this is AFAIK.


Ok, makes sense, thanks for the info. I may see how far I can get stable, but for everyday use I don't see myself pushing the OC too hard.


----------



## cstkl1

Fast boot finally working on x299 bios 0702


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Whats the offset scaling like with 7800x..
> 7820/7900x is -2/-4 confirm right up to 4.7/4.6ghz. The non avx voltage scales pretty good. Avx 512 currently only test available i think its only y-cruncher. Its not strenous enough. Prime 28.5 avx2 loads much higher.
> Test was based on few samples of cpus and one es 7900x on all asus boards expect for prime-a/tuf mark 2 by myself/few ppl. Rams were all 3200 and below.


If you run y-cruncher's BBP benchmark at offset 100 billion+, you'll get a higher load: 4 -> 2 -> 100b -> 0

The reason why y-cruncher's stress tester can't put a very high load on the AVX512 is because it's bottlenecked by memory and cache bandwidth. AVX512 makes the computation go so fast that the memory subsystem can't keep up.

So you'll get a disproportionately large increase in temps and power consumption if you overclock the cache and memory since it helps lift that bottleneck.

But I don't see that bottleneck going away unless the cache is running at 6+ GHz and the memory at 6000+ MHz. (IOW, not possible with this platform unless you underclock the CPU.) So there's a reason why these chips have 6 channels of memory on the server line.

That BBP test is unaffected since it doesn't use memory. But that also works against it (to a lesser extent) since it doesn't stress the memory subsystem.

Version 0.7.4 will move the that BBP tester into the formal stress tests.

If you find that y-cruncher AVX512 is less intensive than Prime95 AVX2, that could be for several reasons:

Your AVX512 offset is greater than your AVX2 offset. So y-cruncher AVX512 is running at a lower frequency than Prime95 AVX2.
You're running the BKT or FFT tests. Neither of those tests are intensive. I will be disabling the FFT test by default in the next version. But I'll keep the BKT test since it's a good "warm-up" test that doesn't use AVX512.
You're throttling with AVX512, but not AVX(2).
At the same frequency, y-cruncher's (not super-intensive AVX512) will still run hotter and draw more power than Prime95 AVX2.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Fast boot finally working on x299 bios 0702
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


So many bugs, where to begin.... The most annoying one is when you shutdown the PC and it shuts down properly and then a few seconds later it wakes up magically by itself and boots into the OS, walking dead effect??? How about after a crash BSOD and it reboots and shows zero video then all of a sudden you're back into a loaded windows? How about the VCCIN voltage flooding? I appreciate them releasing this board even with some bugs because the suspense was killing me like the same feeling about the R6E ATM, at least they did it not like EVGA where there is zero hint on when the EVGA Dark is going to be around except rumors that seem to indicate possibly end of September or was that October? I lost track...


----------



## aDyerSituation

Random bug I noticed on my Strix is when I run Windows Memory Diagnostic it boots into bios first then you have to save and exit to get to the test screen.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Random bug I noticed on my Strix is when I run Windows Memory Diagnostic it boots into bios first then you have to save and exit to get to the test screen.


lol that's a good one, wonder if there is a reason for it if it's not a "bug", I can't possible visual the need to save your bios settings right before you run windows mem diag. I mean if you ran diag from windows you want to know what's happening with the exact bios settings you booted with right? Only reason you want a reboot before doing the actual test afaik is to eliminate any possible memory leaking if any that happened while you had the OS up and running on your previous boot.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> So many bugs, where to begin.... The most annoying one is when you shutdown the PC and it shuts down properly and then a few seconds later it wakes up magically by itself and boots into the OS, walking dead effect??? How about after a crash BSOD and it reboots and shows zero video then all of a sudden you're back into a loaded windows? How about the VCCIN voltage flooding? I appreciate them releasing this board even with some bugs because the suspense was killing me like the same feeling about the R6E ATM, at least they did it not like EVGA where there is zero hint on when the EVGA Dark is going to be around except rumors that seem to indicate possibly end of September or was that October? I lost track...


go into the control panel USB and set all the hubs to power off attached devices and disable any instance of "allow this device to wake the computer" do the same for the network settings. The rig seems to be waking due to one of these settings. the blank screen after a crash is not uncommon, you can try setting any available PCIE amplitude settings to "High"... this is mostly a GPU and driver issue. The more you bench, the more you will see this, and it will require you to interrupt the post with the retrry button.
the VCCIN voltage thing I can't understand.. and am not able to replicate at the moment... waiting on the 18 core.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> go into the control panel USB and set all the hubs to power off attached devices and disable any instance of "allow this device to wake the computer" do the same for the network settings. The rig seems to be waking due to one of these settings. the blank screen after a crash is not uncommon, you can try setting any available PCIE amplitude settings to "High"... this is mostly a GPU and driver issue. The more you bench, the more you will see this, and it will require you to interrupt the post with the retrry button.
> the VCCIN voltage thing I can't understand.. and am not able to replicate at the moment... waiting on the 18 core.


We shouldn't have to disable stuff though, all I'm doing is powering the thing off







come on! Maybe put some delay on when these devices are allowed to power on the whole system after a shutdown. This is the first time I have seen video behave this way, didn't know it was common. I'm going to wait for your assessment/review of the 18 core before I buy one!


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> go into the control panel USB and set all the hubs to power off attached devices and disable any instance of "allow this device to wake the computer" do the same for the network settings. The rig seems to be waking due to one of these settings. the blank screen after a crash is not uncommon, you can try setting any available PCIE amplitude settings to "High"... this is mostly a GPU and driver issue. The more you bench, the more you will see this, and it will require you to interrupt the post with the retrry button.
> the VCCIN voltage thing I can't understand.. and am not able to replicate at the moment... waiting on the 18 core.


Hello

The Windows media settings can also cause the wake up issue. I am unable to replicate the VCCIN problem as well. At least to the extent the complaining is about. I am able to force a voltage increase if lowering VCCIN below the threshold of throttling. VCCIN will then be increased according to the auto rules to negate throttling but not to the extent being stated.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> The Windows media settings can also cause the wake up issue. I am unable to replicate the VCCIN problem as well. At least to the extent the complaining is about. I am able to force a voltage increase if lowering VCCIN below the threshold of throttling. VCCIN will then be increased according to the auto rules to negate throttling but not to the extent being stated.


It only happens on XMP, manual is working just fine. I have not began to attempt to identify the issue if it is the in the first place if we are to accept voltages of 2.0+ while using XMP and overclocks of 5GHz and LLC of around 4, more testing need to find out exactly what settings produce 2+ volts. Do you know what could possibly cause it by turning on XMP. Are you by chance using a 44 lane CPU?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> *It only happens on XMP,* manual is working just fine. I have not began to attempt to identify the issue if it is the in the first place if we are to accept voltages of 2.0+ while using XMP and overclocks of 5GHz and LLC of around 4, more testing need to find out exactly what settings produce 2+ volts. Do you know what could possibly cause it by turning on XMP. Are you by chance using a 44 lane CPU?


gotta remind us about that.. XMP is a definite no-no if serious about overclocking.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Then theres nothing to talk about.
> 
> Anyway my issues with the asus x299 platform now atm is bios 0702 dpc issue.
> Also solved the cpu power package reading issue fix for asus x299.
> Solved the fast boot up but works only on 0702 but its having issue with dpc. Already narrowed down to what seems like ram related. Manual settings that work on 0503 not working on 0702. Retested all ram skews and was the same.
> Bought samsung b-dies due to my ocd to confirm things.


what level of DPCs are you seeing?
1h 20min recording, and I can;t see anything.(7740X tho).


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> The Windows media settings can also cause the wake up issue. I am unable to replicate the VCCIN problem as well. At least to the extent the complaining is about. I am able to force a voltage increase if lowering VCCIN below the threshold of throttling. VCCIN will then be increased according to the auto rules to negate throttling but not to the extent being stated.


yeah - windows media is borst IMO.
INteresting... on Winver 1607 I was seeing very high RB image edit scores.. winVer1703 and they dropped more than 60%?

1607:

1073:


ignore the 5.3 vs 5.0 clocks... both are 5.3 AVX-3 And 5.3 vs 5.0 couldn;t account for that difference anyway


----------



## Iceman2733

For the 7900x where is a good spot for memory speed? Shooting for a 4.6oc going to buy me some new memory didn't know if I should stick with 3200 or go up to 3400 or 3600memory didn't know how far we can go without much resistance from the pc lol


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Iceman2733*
> 
> For the 7900x where is a good spot for memory speed? Shooting for a 4.6oc going to buy me some new memory didn't know if I should stick with 3200 or go up to 3400 or 3600memory didn't know how far we can go without much resistance from the pc lol


3866 or 4000 - doable on 3200c14 and similar bin samsung b-die kits.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> If you run y-cruncher's BBP benchmark at offset 100 billion+, you'll get a higher load: 4 -> 2 -> 100b -> 0
> 
> The reason why y-cruncher's stress tester can't put a very high load on the AVX512 is because it's bottlenecked by memory and cache bandwidth. AVX512 makes the computation go so fast that the memory subsystem can't keep up.
> 
> So you'll get a disproportionately large increase in temps and power consumption if you overclock the cache and memory since it helps lift that bottleneck.
> 
> But I don't see that bottleneck going away unless the cache is running at 6+ GHz and the memory at 6000+ MHz. (IOW, not possible with this platform unless you underclock the CPU.) So there's a reason why these chips have 6 channels of memory on the server line.
> 
> That BBP test is unaffected since it doesn't use memory. But that also works against it (to a lesser extent) since it doesn't stress the memory subsystem.
> 
> Version 0.7.4 will move the that BBP tester into the formal stress tests.
> 
> If you find that y-cruncher AVX512 is less intensive than Prime95 AVX2, that could be for several reasons:
> 
> Your AVX512 offset is greater than your AVX2 offset. So y-cruncher AVX512 is running at a lower frequency than Prime95 AVX2.
> You're running the BKT or FFT tests. Neither of those tests are intensive. I will be disabling the FFT test by default in the next version. But I'll keep the BKT test since it's a good "warm-up" test that doesn't use AVX512.
> You're throttling with AVX512, but not AVX(2).
> At the same frequency, y-cruncher's (not super-intensive AVX512) will still run hotter and draw more power than Prime95 AVX2.


Ok. I just need better confirmation on the avx 512 offset stability. 7900x default is -6 but y-cruncher seems fine with -4. 7820x default is -4 and it runs at -4 perfectly. Y the diff between default and testing for 7900x. Thats y i asked.

Another note is mesh clock testing. Havent found a single test thats just does it. Older cpus use to run linpack but Linpack is way too strong for my cooler.
running now 2.8ghz at default mesh voltage. Stable so far with current test available but i wouldnt bank on it.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Random bug I noticed on my Strix is when I run Windows Memory Diagnostic it boots into bios first then you have to save and exit to get to the test screen.


Is secureboot set to windows. I get the samething with my laptop.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> what level of DPCs are you seeing?
> 1h 20min recording, and I can;t see anything.(7740X tho).
> 
> 
> yeah - windows media is borst IMO.
> INteresting... on Winver 1607 I was seeing very high RB imafeedit scores.. 1703 and thay are dropped more than 60%?
> 
> 1607:
> 
> 1073:
> 
> 
> ignore the 5.3 vs 5.0 clocks... both are 5.3 AVX-3 And 5.3 vs 5.0 couldn;t account for that difference anyway


And certain stresstest the windows time runs off syncing over the internet frequently. Seriously no clue why its happening on 0703.

Exact same setting on 0503 except third timings were diff between them for same dram clk pairing with 3200c16. 0703 keeps changing tccd_L and tccdWR_L pairing on auto dram clk on different boots I normally leave it on auto.
So thats the only diff i found between the bios.


----------



## ESRCJ

Any word on if the rest of the i9 series (12 core and up) will be soldered?


----------



## trippinonprozac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 3866 or 4000 - doable on 3200c14 and similar bin samsung b-die kits.


What voltage and timings?

I have B-Die 3200 14-14-14.

I have been running at 3400 14 14 14 on my 7900x.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Any word on if the rest of the i9 series (12 core and up) will be soldered?


No solder. Are still going to buy Intel?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> The Windows media settings can also cause the wake up issue. I am unable to replicate the VCCIN problem as well. At least to the extent the complaining is about. I am able to force a voltage increase if lowering VCCIN below the threshold of throttling. VCCIN will then be increased according to the auto rules to negate throttling but not to the extent being stated.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> go into the control panel USB and set all the hubs to power off attached devices and disable any instance of "allow this device to wake the computer" do the same for the network settings. The rig seems to be waking due to one of these settings. the blank screen after a crash is not uncommon, you can try setting any available PCIE amplitude settings to "High"... this is mostly a GPU and driver issue. The more you bench, the more you will see this, and it will require you to interrupt the post with the retrry button.
> the VCCIN voltage thing I can't understand.. and am not able to replicate at the moment... waiting on the 18 core.


As much help as the Works on My Machine Award is, I've no wake issues here once the OS is configured. Nor am I able to replicate the VCCIN issue to any appreciable agree unless setting too low a value. If people aren't happy with how the rules work now, I'm sure they'll be equally as unhappy if they were scaled back given Intel's throttling would likely take precedence lol


----------



## CaptnNemo

Hello to all of you experts









I have also purchased the Asus X299 E-Gaming board with the 7820x. I currently have 32 (8x4g) gigs of Corsair Vengeance 2800mhz. I am waiting for my 4x8g kit at 3466mhz.

Now, I also have the Kraken x62.

What would be the easiest simple stable oc I can get without fiddling too much with all the options, avx and whatnot. I have no clue what those do.

Also will it be possible to oc the mem kit to 3600mhz or whatever it can take ?

I'm not looking to break any records or anything. I would just like a decent oc...maybe in the ranges of 4.6 or so on all cores if doable.

Thank you

P.s Any of you have a 960 Pro m2 ? or the likes. For some reason I can't get it to run higher then 2800mb/s. Don't they advertise 3500 read speeds ?

Tried both m2 slots set at Pcie Gen 3x4 and also tried on a adapter pcie4x slot. Still the same.

I'ver read that this is a known issue and should be resolved in future bios/chipset updates...hopefully.

What is your experience take on this issue ?

Thanks again!!


----------



## MsNikita

Hey guys.. Long time no see!









I'm in the market for a new build, thinking about the Core i9-7980ex when it eventually appears. Not really concerned about out of box temps, it's gonna be water-cooled. My 2011 Sandy Bridge-E is getting long in the tooth though still a great workhorse, I like more grunt.

Unfortunately there's not that many boards with water-block support.


----------



## CaptnNemo

Hi to all of you experts and the likes.

Just got myself the 7820x and x299 egaming from Asus.

How can I oc this in a simple way without fiddling too much with the options as I am not very familiar...yet..avx and whatnot.

I'm not looking to break records or anything. I just want a decent stable oc..maybe in the 4.6 area or the likes.

You can see my specs if it helps out in my sig.

Please note that I will be changing RAM next week and be getting 4x8gigs kit at 3466mhz instead of 8x4gigs.

Might want to oc this too if possible.

Lastly, maybe not the right thread but I have a speed read problem with my M2. It is advertised at 3500 or so. I only get 2800 or so read speeds.

I have tried both m2 slots and via pcie4x adapter. Same results. Apparently it is a known issue right now on these boards and hopefully a fix will come up sooner then later.

In the meantime, what is your experienced take on this particular issue ? Everything is / was setup to PciE Gen 3 x4

Thank you, I really appreciate it.









Cheers!


----------



## WeirdBob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CaptnNemo*
> 
> Hi to all of you experts and the likes.
> 
> Just got myself the 7820x and x299 egaming from Asus.
> 
> How can I oc this in a simple way without fiddling too much with the options as I am not very familiar...yet..avx and whatnot.
> 
> I'm not looking to break records or anything. I just want a decent stable oc..maybe in the 4.6 area or the likes.


Hi man,
I'm no expert but I oced my 7820x this week end. I mainly followed this guide: http://edgeup.asus.com/2016/06/17/broadwell-e-overclocking-guide/
I'm not in front of my bios but from memory what I have changed is roughly:

- Ai overclock tuner: XMP
- cpu core ratio: sync all cores, 48
- AVX ratio negative offset: -2
- AVX512 ratio negative offset: -5
- Max CPU cache ratio: 30
- CPU core voltage: adaptive
- offset mode sign: -
- CPU core voltage offset: 0.001
- Additional turbo mode cpu core voltage: 1.240

I used XTU to test some multipliers/voltages before setting them in bios.

I'm stable at these settings at 48x, max temp is 81°C under xtu and cinebench (delided & custom loop), RAM is gskill 3600C16

I may try to lower my voltage some more.
I couldn't get it stable at 49x at 1.3v (instant reboot when starting CB benchmark) but I didn't fiddle with the other voltages & pll.

Next step is RAM optimization.

Again, I'm no expert but I hope it can help you starting









Now Intel turbo boost 3 doesn't seem to work. I tried a "per core usage" 2 cores OC but the frequencies don't change and in XTU the turbo boost line is grayed out. I don't now how to make it work, I have iTB3 installed, tried to add cinebench in the supported apps, no change.


----------



## CaptnNemo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WeirdBob*
> 
> Hi man,
> I'm no expert but I oced my 7820x this week end. I mainly followed this guide: http://edgeup.asus.com/2016/06/17/broadwell-e-overclocking-guide/
> I'm not in front of my bios but from memory what I have changed is roughly:
> 
> - Ai overclock tuner: XMP
> - cpu core ratio: sync all cores, 48
> - AVX ratio negative offset: -2
> - AVX512 ratio negative offset: -5
> - Max CPU cache ratio: 30
> - CPU core voltage: adaptive
> - offset mode sign: -
> - CPU core voltage offset: 0.001
> - Additional turbo mode cpu core voltage: 1.240
> 
> I used XTU to test some multipliers/voltages before setting them in bios.
> 
> I'm stable at these settings at 48x, max temp is 81°C under xtu and cinebench (delided & custom loop), RAM is gskill 3600C16
> 
> I may try to lower my voltage some more.
> I couldn't get it stable at 49x at 1.3v (instant reboot when starting CB benchmark) but I didn't fiddle with the other voltages & pll.
> 
> Next step is RAM optimization.
> 
> Again, I'm no expert but I hope it can help you starting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now Intel turbo boost 3 doesn't seem to work. I tried a "per core usage" 2 cores OC but the frequencies don't change and in XTU the turbo boost line is grayed out. I don't now how to make it work, I have iTB3 installed, tried to add cinebench in the supported apps, no change.


Alright!!

I will look at the guide and follow your options I guess. I didn't understand half of the terms you used as for specifications but that's just because I never went that deep into the subject and not because I'm stupid hahaha!!!









In any case 81 degrees is not to high ? I don't think any games even come close to stress the cpu like a benchmark does.

Anyhow, currently my temps with the base boost clock and whatever else options enables this is set at 4000 and varies depending on workload are around 21 degrees in average for each core. When I game and a heavy game that is, I went up maxed 60 degrees.

What can I expect on idle and gaming with let's say 4.6 ? And is it also much more hungry on electricity consumption or it's not that bad ?

Thanks again, meanwhile i'll take a glance at the guide and your settings.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trippinonprozac*
> 
> What voltage and timings?
> 
> I have B-Die 3200 14-14-14.
> 
> I have been running at 3400 14 14 14 on my 7900x.


4000 16-17-17-40-1t (or 2T). 1,4V vdimm, just set VSA to like 1.000V (or lower) and VCCIO about the same (these you have to adjust per cpu sample). Check scone's posts, he has this running on his 7900X as do a few others - may be the sweetspot for this gen.


----------



## CaptnNemo

Alright!!

First overclock trials. I managed to run aida64 cpu test at 4.4 / 4.6 / 4.7 for around 15 minutes each. Did a Cinebench run on 3 oc's.

Last score was 2022 at 4.7ghz

Left the avx settings at auto for now.

All this at 1.200v

Going for the 4.8 mark see what gives!!









Is that a good oc ?

How long should I run aida to really see if it is stable ? Is 15-20 minutes good enough ? I mean, if that goes well, there is no games as an example that will stress my cpu like aida did right ?

I need more enlightenment on this and also the FPU test on aida, what does that do exactly ?

I tried and the temps sky rocket to a 100 degrees. Stopped it obviously.

Is that an indication of instability or would I be fine with a day to day use ?

Thanks


----------



## GreedyMuffin

At least one hour Realbench IMHO. I always go for two hours.

Aida is a piece of cake compared, and so is CB.


----------



## WeirdBob

AIDA64 FPU uses AVX, so does Realbench in its latest versions.

I don't know how much negative offset is applied on "Auto", but if it makes your cpu go to 100° then maybe the offset is not enough.

My understanding is that if you have 48x multiplier and -5 avx offset, aida fpu & rb will test avx at 43, you won't test your cpu at 48. I think the best is to mix and match stress tests to cover all the workloads (vanilla, avx and avx512)


----------



## CaptnNemo

Ok,

So now got to 4.8 with 1.225v

Did 30 minutes Aida (before I just saw the few last posts)

Here's a few images





So what you'r saying is I should put an offset of lets say 2 on both settings ? and leave this at 48 multiplier ?

And test for how long and with what exactly that's not going to blow my pc up ?









Again, I mostly game on my rig and browse the net. No intense photoshoping nor encoding movies and such.

What would be the equivalent benchmark reflecting my daily uses ?

Thanks again guys!! I'm off to bed. I'll be back in a few hours










Cheers!!


----------



## Iceman2733

Anyone else notice that High Performance in windows 10 is not keeping the clocks up? Mine will still idle down to 945mhz


----------



## Silicon Lottery

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> This is ridiculous... check out the tim application on my 7740X. Are they kidding???
> 
> 
> 
> anyhoo... delided (hammer and vise) and relid with CLU - temps dropped 15-20C depending on the specific core.
> 
> 
> edit - @Silicon Lottery is this what you are seeing?


That is definitely not what I've been seeing! Looks to me like a paste job for sub-zero usage.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

Aida64 is the most useless stress test, CPU that doesn't pass OCCT large data set (4.5.1 for skylake-x) for 3 hours is not stable.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> Aida64 is the most useless stress test, CPU that doesn't pass OCCT large data set (4.5.1 for skylake-x) for 3 hours is not stable.


If my cpu is stable for 4h playing Battlefield 1 multiplayer, my cpu is stable enough









I don't play linX, Prime 95, and other usless games


----------



## ELIAS-EH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> If my cpu is stable for 4h playing Battlefield 1 multiplayer, my cpu is stable enough
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't play linX, Prime 95, and other usless games


BF1 is so much better than aida64 and good sign for stability for many hours. But for absolute stability, occt is the right one


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CaptnNemo*
> 
> Ok,
> 
> So now got to 4.8 with 1.225v
> 
> Did 30 minutes Aida (before I just saw the few last posts)
> 
> Here's a few images
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what you'r saying is I should put an offset of lets say 2 on both settings ? and leave this at 48 multiplier ?
> 
> And test for how long and with what exactly that's not going to blow my pc up ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, I mostly game on my rig and browse the net. No intense photoshoping nor encoding movies and such.
> 
> What would be the equivalent benchmark reflecting my daily uses ?
> 
> Thanks again guys!! I'm off to bed. I'll be back in a few hours
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers!!


Set your AVX offsets to -5 and run Realbench for 2 hours.


----------



## cstkl1

Fixed bios 0702 issue for the out of sync time. It was due to some signal loss between two voltages on auto. So guessing on 0503 the auto voltage diff was larger.

Finally get to test 0702 fully. Hmm now kindda regretted for paying da rams already to gskill taiwan.. its being qued for production. Seems like gskill so busy nowadays that their production cannot keep up with demand .


----------



## Artah

Anyone else testing with realbench 2.54 wanted to see how mine compares, my highest so far is 273 system score. I can't upload it though because uploads don't work & I don't have the save an offline option it's greyed out and couldn't find a new leader board for x299 website. It's like realbench is not recognizing that my motherboard is ROG.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> At least one hour Realbench IMHO. I always go for two hours.
> 
> Aida is a piece of cake compared, and so is CB.


some of the fpu, mandel and vp8 modules in AID64 are not really a piece of cake. run a full system report and see.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Iceman2733*
> 
> Anyone else notice that High Performance in windows 10 is not keeping the clocks up? Mine will still idle down to 945mhz


disable INtel Speed Shift. (you can keep speed step enabled)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silicon Lottery*
> 
> That is definitely not what I've been seeing! Looks to me like a paste job for sub-zero usage.


yeah - mia cuilpa. That's exactly what it was for this ES sample.









And HEY - Good to know you got thru the flood and are back!


----------



## Silicon Lottery

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - mia cuilpa. That's exactly what it was for this ES sample.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And HEY - Good to know you got thru the flood and are back!


Good to be back! Things are finally starting to get normal around here again. Fortunately we took minimal damage where we are locally, parts of inner Houston are still a mess.


----------



## REAN1MAT0R

HI guys
not far ago there are some dual ranked memory per 16gb samsung b-die appears
does anyone tryed some dual rank samsung b-die memory? how far does it goes with skylake-x ?
actually here is a list of 16gb samsung b-die tridentZ RGB modules

F4-3000C14D-32GTZR 2x16GB DDR4-3000 14-14-14-34 1.35V
F4-3000C14Q-64GTZR 4x16GB DDR4-3000 14-14-14-34 1.35V
F4-3000C14Q2-128GTZR 8x16GB DDR4-3000 14-14-14-34 1.35V
F4-3200C14D-32GTZR 2x16GB DDR4-3200 14-14-14-34 1.35V
F4-3200C14Q-64GTZR 4x16GB DDR4-3200 14-14-14-34 1.35V
F4-3200C14Q2-128GTZR 8x16GB DDR4-3200 14-14-14-34 1.35V
F4-3600C17D-32GTZR 2x16GB DDR4-3600 17-19-19-39 1.35V
F4-3600C17Q-64GTZR 4x16GB DDR4-3600 17-19-19-39 1.35V
F4-3600C17Q2-128GTZR 8x16GB DDR4-3600 17-19-19-39 1.35V
F4-3866C18D-32GTZR 2x16GB DDR4-3866 18-19-19-39 1.35V
F4-3866C18Q-64GTZR 4x16GB DDR4-3866 18-19-19-39 1.35V

im trying to figure out which would be better
Rampage + 8x8gb b-die or
Apex + 4x16gb b-die
in terms of 24/7 perfomance with watercooled 7900x (49 radiator sections on the balcony)
but need some overclocking results for dual rank b-die, cant find anythink about this


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silicon Lottery*
> 
> Good to be back! Things are finally starting to get normal around here again. Fortunately we took minimal damage where we are locally, parts of inner Houston are still a mess.


An amazing bunch of folks in Texas,









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *REAN1MAT0R*
> 
> HI guys
> not far ago there are some dual ranked memory per 16gb samsung b-die appears
> does anyone tryed some dual rank samsung b-die memory? how far does it goes with skylake-x ?
> actually here is a list of 16gb samsung b-die tridentZ RGB modules
> 
> F4-3000C14D-32GTZR 2x16GB DDR4-3000 14-14-14-34 1.35V
> F4-3000C14Q-64GTZR 4x16GB DDR4-3000 14-14-14-34 1.35V
> F4-3000C14Q2-128GTZR 8x16GB DDR4-3000 14-14-14-34 1.35V
> F4-3200C14D-32GTZR 2x16GB DDR4-3200 14-14-14-34 1.35V
> F4-3200C14Q-64GTZR 4x16GB DDR4-3200 14-14-14-34 1.35V
> F4-3200C14Q2-128GTZR 8x16GB DDR4-3200 14-14-14-34 1.35V
> F4-3600C17D-32GTZR 2x16GB DDR4-3600 17-19-19-39 1.35V
> F4-3600C17Q-64GTZR 4x16GB DDR4-3600 17-19-19-39 1.35V
> F4-3600C17Q2-128GTZR 8x16GB DDR4-3600 17-19-19-39 1.35V
> F4-3866C18D-32GTZR 2x16GB DDR4-3866 18-19-19-39 1.35V
> F4-3866C18Q-64GTZR 4x16GB DDR4-3866 18-19-19-39 1.35V
> 
> im trying to figure out which would be better
> Rampage + 8x8gb b-die or
> Apex + 4x16gb b-die
> in terms of 24/7 perfomance with watercooled 7900x (49 radiator sections on the balcony)
> but need some overclocking results for dual rank b-die, cant find anythink about this


I'm running these at 4000MHz I don't know if it's b-die (CMD16GX4M4B3200C15) corsair dominator platinum 4x4gb.


----------



## REAN1MAT0R

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I'm running these at 4000MHz I don't know if it's b-die (CMD16GX4M4B3200C15) corsair dominator platinum 4x4gb.


they are not b-die

anyway the question is about 16gb dimms b-die that are dual ranked
can they achieve at least 4000 rock stable or not
mb someone maked test of dual ranked b-die memory?


----------



## TahoeDust

Check this out. Delidded 7980xe is going 5.0GHz on all 18-cores with just 1.122v under water...

http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/27/1613194

Setting a new Firestrike Physics record without even needing LN2.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Check this out. Delidded 7980xe is going 5.0GHz on all 18-cores with just 1.122v under water...
> 
> http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/27/1613194
> 
> Setting a new Firestrike Physics record without even needing LN2.


gonna need a moment....


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Check this out. Delidded 7980xe is going 5.0GHz on all 18-cores with just 1.122v under water...
> 
> http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/27/1613194
> 
> Setting a new Firestrike Physics record without even needing LN2.


Its not 1.12v. Asus mobo doesnt report the vids of any of the cores.

Theres two voltages on the mobo no idea what it is when read in hwinfo, siv
Cpu vcore and vin 9 voltage.

Changing in bios every imaginable voltage so far doesnt read the same .

Crazy 7980xe 5ghz. The same dude who also has a 5ghz 7900x, 7920x 4.8ghz, 7960x ( i know he has one) and now 7980xe .

The vid is pretty interesting. Stock cpu vid below 1v


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Check this out. Delidded 7980xe is going 5.0GHz on all 18-cores with just 1.122v under water...
> 
> http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/27/1613194
> 
> Setting a new Firestrike Physics record without even needing LN2.


Whoa! is he a reliable source? I'm selling my 5GHz 7900x chip!


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Whoa! is he a reliable source? I'm selling my 5GHz 7900x chip!


Well, at least we all know you're an easy sell


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Well, at least we all know you're an easy sell


Seriously though if a few of you guys can get it up that high with low voltages and don't need LN2 to do it then I'm definitely sold on that frankenchip. I was thinking average OC is aroumd 4GHz looks like I'm way off which is good news.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Seriously though if a few of you guys can get it up that high with low voltages and don't need LN2 to do it then I'm definitely sold on that frankenchip. I was thinking average OC is aroumd 4GHz looks like I'm way off which is good news.


Word is they OC well (OCUK binning), but 5Ghz is still going to be optimistic.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *REAN1MAT0R*
> 
> HI guys
> not far ago there are some dual ranked memory per 16gb samsung b-die appears
> does anyone tryed some dual rank samsung b-die memory? how far does it goes with skylake-x ?
> actually here is a list of 16gb samsung b-die tridentZ RGB modules
> 
> F4-3000C14D-32GTZR 2x16GB DDR4-3000 14-14-14-34 1.35V
> F4-3000C14Q-64GTZR 4x16GB DDR4-3000 14-14-14-34 1.35V
> F4-3000C14Q2-128GTZR 8x16GB DDR4-3000 14-14-14-34 1.35V
> F4-3200C14D-32GTZR 2x16GB DDR4-3200 14-14-14-34 1.35V
> F4-3200C14Q-64GTZR 4x16GB DDR4-3200 14-14-14-34 1.35V
> F4-3200C14Q2-128GTZR 8x16GB DDR4-3200 14-14-14-34 1.35V
> F4-3600C17D-32GTZR 2x16GB DDR4-3600 17-19-19-39 1.35V
> F4-3600C17Q-64GTZR 4x16GB DDR4-3600 17-19-19-39 1.35V
> F4-3600C17Q2-128GTZR 8x16GB DDR4-3600 17-19-19-39 1.35V
> F4-3866C18D-32GTZR 2x16GB DDR4-3866 18-19-19-39 1.35V
> F4-3866C18Q-64GTZR 4x16GB DDR4-3866 18-19-19-39 1.35V
> 
> im trying to figure out which would be better
> Rampage + 8x8gb b-die or
> Apex + 4x16gb b-die
> in terms of 24/7 perfomance with watercooled 7900x (49 radiator sections on the balcony)
> but need some overclocking results for dual rank b-die, cant find anythink about this


Just curious. How do you know these SKUs are all Samsung B die? G. Skill does not publish that information (AFAIK). I thought the only way to find out is by getting an SPD dump using Thaiphoon Burner or similar, or from someone who purchased and did same. If there is a data base or list of G. Skill SKUs and what manufacturer and die they are, I sure would like to have it. Same for Corsair. I have always used G. Skill but after the way they have handled (or ignored) the Trident-Z RBG LED fiasco, I am hesitant to buy their products. They offer some of the best DDR4 on the market and it's all great, until there is a problem.

But I digress. Is there a master list or way I can know which kits are Samsung B die (or Hynix etc) before purchasing?

Thx!!


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Anyone else testing with realbench 2.54 wanted to see how mine compares, my highest so far is 273 system score. I can't upload it though because uploads don't work & I don't have the save an offline option it's greyed out and couldn't find a new leader board for x299 website. It's like realbench is not recognizing that my motherboard is ROG.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I believe RealBench has not been updated for the new platforms yet, may as well wait for Coffee Lake and update for all the new platforms at one time


----------



## REAN1MAT0R

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Just curious. How do you know these SKUs are all Samsung B die? G. Skill does not publish that information (AFAIK). I thought the only way to find out is by getting an SPD dump using Thaiphoon Burner or similar, or from someone who purchased and did same. If there is a data base or list of G. Skill SKUs and what manufacturer and die they are, I sure would like to have it. Same for Corsair. I have always used G. Skill but after the way they have handled (or ignored) the Trident-Z RBG LED fiasco, I am hesitant to buy their products. They offer some of the best DDR4 on the market and it's all great, until there is a problem.
> 
> But I digress. Is there a master list or way I can know which kits are Samsung B die (or Hynix etc) before purchasing?
> 
> Thx!!


of course you can
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f13/die-ultimate-hardwareluxx-samsung-8gb-b-die-liste-alle-hersteller-01-09-17-a-1161530.html

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/62vp2g/clearing_up_any_samsung_bdie_confusion_eg_on/

but anyway you must know about pushing potential on skylake-x, do you know some tests for dual ranked b-die mem?

what Trident-Z RBG LED fiasco are you speaking about?


----------



## czin125

So it looks like Skylake-X architecture maxes out at ~5000mhz. It seems like a delidded 7980XE can achieve 5000mhz on water if silicon quality, temperature, motherboard design, and vrm is not holding it back.

Skylake-S ~5000mhz
Kabylake-S ~5400mhz ( +12% ULV ( their statements/from the graphs ) and +8% max OC ( 54/50 = 1.08x )
Coffeelake-S ~5x00mhz ( +23-24% ULV ( their statements/from the graphs ) and +16% max OC (somewhat close to this?)
Cannonlake ( +18% ULV and +12% max OC ? )
Icelake-S ( +21-22% ULV and +14% max OC ? )


----------



## Kimir

Higher frequency is not always better, more overclock-ability is always welcome for us, customers.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Word is they OC well (OCUK binning), but 5Ghz is still going to be optimistic.


Is there some consensus on around what's average on the site?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I believe RealBench has not been updated for the new platforms yet, may as well wait for Coffee Lake and update for all the new platforms at one time


ahh thanks for the info, this is the first gen that I'm using RB on. The uploading and leaderboard is for Asus motherboards only right?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> So it looks like Skylake-X architecture maxes out at ~5000mhz. It seems like a delidded 7980XE can achieve 5000mhz on water if silicon quality, temperature, motherboard design, and vrm is not holding it back.
> 
> Skylake-S ~5000mhz
> Kabylake-S ~5400mhz ( +12% ULV ( their statements/from the graphs ) and +8% max OC ( 54/50 = 1.08x )
> Coffeelake-S ~5x00mhz ( +23-24% ULV ( their statements/from the graphs ) and +16% max OC (somewhat close to this?)
> Cannonlake ( +18% ULV and +12% max OC ? )
> Icelake-S ( +21-22% ULV and +14% max OC ? )


it's hard for me to comprehend how an 18 core run lower voltages and temps with a lot more transistors and using the same 14nm, I hope this is the case though.

@Jpmboy Do you have your memory OCed and everything enabled on your 5.5GHz 7740x? I'm thinking of getting it to replace my dedicated home work computer hardware. I was going to wait for coffee lake but I was inspired by your results. It's seems to fit just right, don't need that many pcie lanes and fast clocks. You run the video card at x8 and give the rest to CPU m.2 or is there lanes spared for that not including on the 16 lane spec and can run the video card at x16?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Check this out. Delidded 7980xe is going 5.0GHz on all 18-cores with just 1.122v under water...
> 
> http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/27/1613194
> 
> Setting a new Firestrike Physics record without even needing LN2.


ignore the "vcore" in cpuz.. it's wrong. Tho "July 1" usually is a tough one to beat in the HOF.








IMO, firestrike is getting a bit long in the tooth. His 7980xe ES sample scored well in time spy too.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Is there some consensus on around what's average on the site?
> ahh thanks for the info, this is the first gen that I'm using RB on. The uploading and leaderboard is for Asus motherboards only right?
> it's hard for me to comprehend how an 18 core run lower voltages and temps with a lot more transistors and using the same 14nm, I hope this is the case though.
> 
> @Jpmboy Do you have your memory OCed and everything enabled on your 5.5GHz 7740x? I'm thinking of getting it to replace my dedicated home work computer hardware. I was going to wait for coffee lake but I was inspired by your results. It's seems to fit just right, don't need that many pcie lanes and fast clocks. You run the video card at x8 and give the rest to CPU m.2 or is there lanes spared for that not including on the 16 lane spec and can run the video card at x16?


yep - settled in at 5.4/0/4.8 core/avx offset/cache with 1.355V, ram is at 3866 or 4000 c16. I like 3866c16 a bit more; lower vsa and always trains to the same RTLs. 4000 is GSAT and HCI stable, but not worth the extra VSA and VCCIO. I have a 960 on the dimm2 card (PCH linked - the one closest to the ATX connector). GPU runs at x16. Can use only 2 ram slots, the back slots are disabled with the 7740X. Basically it is a faster 7700K.









I too keep saying I'm gonna replace my home office PC with one of these... but my trusty [email protected] is still _very_ quick for that use (sometimes "snappier" than anything else I'm using)









this 7700K/1080 is the most likely candidate. NVMe raid 0, 2GB data drive, 3866c16. 1 360 rad, and that corsair glass case.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Is there some consensus on around what's average on the site?


No, possibly on the forum but not that I've read. Just don't expect 5GHz.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ignore the "vcore" in cpuz.. it's wrong. Tho "July 1" usually is a tough one to beat in the HOF.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMO, firestrike is getting a bit long in the tooth. His 7980xe ES sample scored well in time spy too.
> yep - settled in at 5.4/0/4.8 core/avx offset/cache with 1.355V, ram is at 3866 or 4000 c16. I like 3866c16 a bit more; lower vsa and always trains to the same RTLs. 4000 is GSAT and HCI stable, but not worth the extra VSA and VCCIO. I have a 960 on the dimm2 card (PCH linked - the one closest to the ATX connector). GPU runs at x16. Can use only 2 ram slots, the back slots are disabled with the 7740X. Basically it is a faster 7700K.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I too keep saying I'm gonna replace my home office PC with one of these... but my trusty [email protected] is still _very_ quick for that use (sometimes "snappier" than anything else I'm using)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this 7700K/1080 is the most likely candidate. NVMe raid 0, 2GB data drive, 3866c16. 1 360 rad, and that corsair glass case.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


That's some good news, I thought I would have to give up x16 on the 1080 that I'm going to use for it. So the PCH lanes don't count against the CPU lanes posted that's cool. My home office work computer could really use some help







it's a 2500 CPU non K using DDR3 SATA. It at least has SSD and a 1050ti. I was thinking of getting 4400 tridentz 2x8gb ram for it, maybe I'll go lower and overclock them.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> No, possibly on the forum but not that I've read. Just don't expect 5GHz.


I'd be cool with a 4.5GHz stable on everything OC on an 7980xe, I hope that's at least on the table.


----------



## DStealth

Can you gents just post Aida64 Memory benchmark scores with memory 3400-3600+ tightened timings...
My jaw just dropped when saw this scores from 6c CPU and 3ghz cl16-18-...bad RAM close to 90gb/s copy...Asrock released а bandwidth performance optimized BIOS but it exceeded my expectations in terms of performance


----------



## cstkl1

Msi users can u enter rtl values??

Asus so far only iol. Rtl no clue atm how to key in.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Can you gents just post Aida64 Memory benchmark scores with memory 3400-3600+ tightened timings...
> My jaw just dropped when saw this scores from 6c CPU and 3ghz cl16-18-...bad RAM close to 90gb/s copy...Asrock released а bandwidth performance optimized BIOS but it exceeded my expectations in terms of performance


Tref.. 3200c16 is already 92/90/80k


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I believe RealBench has not been updated for the new platforms yet, may as well wait for Coffee Lake and update for all the new platforms at one time


Not really. Most ppl here wont run rb2.43 because its actually harder to pass the non avx clocks for skylake-x.
Atm for true stability for 7900x only few ppl posted prims 26.6 and rb2.43.

If they update it to the latest x264.. we are gonna see avx 512/avx stresstesting.

Rest you can just just grab a popcorn. Rb2.54 only good for avx offset 0 . The switch to non avx clocks only happens during end of cpu stress cycle. Theres no stress on the non avx clocks.

Currently cannot find a good test for mesh. Long game sessions many atimes showed all the current test not stressful enough.

Btw again msi and asrock users. Can you adjust your rtl.
Asus atm only iol.


----------



## czin125

You can go as low as 49ns with the right memory and NB clock.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Can you gents just post Aida64 Memory benchmark scores with memory 3400-3600+ tightened timings...
> My jaw just dropped when saw this scores from 6c CPU and 3ghz cl16-18-...bad RAM close to 90gb/s copy...Asrock released а bandwidth performance optimized BIOS but it exceeded my expectations in terms of performance


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Not really. Most ppl here wont run rb2.43 because its actually harder to pass the non avx clocks for skylake-x.
> Atm for true stability for 7900x only few ppl posted prims 26.6 and rb2.43.
> 
> If they update it to the latest x264.. we are gonna see avx 512/avx stresstesting.
> 
> Rest you can just just grab a popcorn. Rb2.54 only good for avx offset 0 . The switch to non avx clocks only happens during end of cpu stress cycle. Theres no stress on the non avx clocks.
> 
> Currently cannot find a good test for mesh. Long game sessions many atimes showed all the current test not stressful enough.
> 
> Btw again msi and asrock users. Can you adjust your rtl.
> Asus atm only iol.


is it better to use RB 2.43 instead of RB 2.54 with Skylale-X ? And
2.43 for no AVX core ?
2.54 for AVX core ?

Sorry if I did not quite understand your message (my English is bad enough







)

Thanks


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *REAN1MAT0R*
> 
> of course you can
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f13/die-ultimate-hardwareluxx-samsung-8gb-b-die-liste-alle-hersteller-01-09-17-a-1161530.html
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/62vp2g/clearing_up_any_samsung_bdie_confusion_eg_on/%5B/URL


----------



## pphx459

I've heard abou that beta software, but is it safe to use Aura?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Msi users can u enter rtl values??
> 
> Asus so far only iol. Rtl no clue atm how to key in.
> Tref.. 3200c16 is already 92/90/80k


on rog boards, RTLs can be manually entered in the RTL submenu under the dram timing menu.


----------



## D4NI3L3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Fast boot finally working on x299 bios 0702
> ...cut...


How did you do that?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D4NI3L3*
> 
> How did you do that?


Fast Boot is enabled by default. MRC Fast path is not... I think that is what he is referring to?


----------



## D4NI3L3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Fast Boot is enabled by default. MRC Fast path is not... I think that is what he is referring to?


Yes I know, I have it enabled but my boot is not fast at all.

What do you mean with MRC? Sorry for this dumb question.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*


Love the landscape! That brownish section under "Start Benchmark" looks like a keyboard


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Love the landscape! That brownish section under "Start Benchmark" looks like a keyboard


Haha,...yeah it does. I never noticed that. Here is the full thing...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D4NI3L3*
> 
> Yes I know, I have it enabled but my boot is not fast at all.
> 
> What do you mean with MRC? Sorry for this dumb question.


that's the memory training system. If you have a rog board it it near the end of the dram timing bios page.


----------



## ravenrocha

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D4NI3L3*
> 
> Yes I know, I have it enabled but my boot is not fast at all.
> 
> What do you mean with MRC? Sorry for this dumb question.


Hi D4NI3L3,

btw, did u solve ur slow shutdown issue on x299 platform? For me, since I got back to IRST 14.8 drivers, every shutdown is instantanely


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> on rog boards, RTLs can be manually entered in the RTL submenu under the dram timing menu.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that's the memory training system. If you have a rog board it it near the end of the dram timing bios page.


Didnt see that with the loaner apex and 7900x es
The ram bios settings and the inability to enter rtl values exist on apex as well. could only do iol.
Ram timings option on apex for sky-x other than presets id the same as strix, deluxe, tuf 1 btw.
Guess something diff with kaby-x


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Fast Boot is enabled by default. MRC Fast path is not... I think that is what he is referring to?


Little off topic. Gonna make a move on a 720xt I couldn't find but I thought u had mentioned something about replacing the stock pump? Decided to go external for this upcoming sky x build.


----------



## aDyerSituation

What is everyone's stock mesh voltage? I'm at AUTO right now at 3.0ghz. Want to try to get at least 3.2 but I don't know what to use as a baseline, bios doesn't tell me.

Sorry keep bringing this up but can't get an answer


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> What is everyone's stock mesh voltage? I'm at AUTO right now at 3.0ghz. Want to try to get at least 3.2 but I don't know what to use as a baseline, bios doesn't tell me.
> 
> Sorry keep bringing this up but can't get an answer


I don't remember what the stock voltage was. I can tell you I run my Mesh at 3.2GHz @ 1.155v


----------



## Mumriken

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> What is everyone's stock mesh voltage? I'm at AUTO right now at 3.0ghz. Want to try to get at least 3.2 but I don't know what to use as a baseline, bios doesn't tell me.
> 
> Sorry keep bringing this up but can't get an answer


[email protected] but I have no idea if that is high or not


----------



## TahoeDust

Holy bejeezus. Must have 7980xe...

Translated from Korean...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> Cinebench r15
> 4.8G
> Score 4748
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Below is the 7980XE Real Bench temperature test before and after tortoise (Delid).
> 
> I set up the bios I set up before the water temperature I tried to make all other environments the same as possible.
> 
> At full load, all of the 18 cores dropped by about 15 degrees, and the deviation per core was not as large as 10 degrees, and it was satisfactory.
> 
> SIV64 1.18v Same as Bias applied voltage
> 
> Water temperature 20 degrees +
> 
> Touta I
> 22 to 76 degrees
> 
> Touta
> 19 to 60 degrees
> 
> Before Delid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> on rog boards, RTLs can be manually entered in the RTL submenu under the dram timing menu.


Finally got my board and CPU, I had SL bin it for me just to compare with my results, and they seem to be spot on, 5.3 @ 1.45v, I ran XTU at 5.5 @1.5v (chilled water) without issue so I guess it's an OK chip but nothing special, at least I can play while waiting for the big chips
I see AIDA64 doesn't report much in the way of voltages, fans, etc. so I sent a report to them, everyone should send them a report so they can get all the sensors, etc. working

With a 18 core chip you'll need to turn one monitor vertical to show all the info AIDA64 usually reads


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> What is everyone's stock mesh voltage? I'm at AUTO right now at 3.0ghz. Want to try to get at least 3.2 but I don't know what to use as a baseline, bios doesn't tell me.
> 
> Sorry keep bringing this up but can't get an answer


Stock is either two voltages
Older cpu its always near or slightly higher than stock vid..

So arnd 1.04-1.15
Giga board indicates 0.9v

Since its a multiplier it should have its own vid table. So i leaning to it being arnd same or more than your stock cpu core vid...


----------



## aDyerSituation

I'm trying to find a solid baseline but if worse comes to worse I will just play around with it. My stock voltage is 1.075ish


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Little off topic. Gonna make a move on a 720xt I couldn't find but I thought u had mentioned something about replacing the stock pump? Decided to go external for this upcoming sky x build.


That's what I'm using for testing the 7900X and the issue is that the pump is a little bit slow, you can add a booster pump to it to put it in series. The unit is epic, best first external investment I had ever made.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Finally got my board and CPU, I had SL bin it for me just to compare with my results, and they seem to be spot on, 5.3 @ 1.45v, I ran XTU at 5.5 @1.5v (chilled water) without issue so I guess it's an OK chip but nothing special, at least I can play while waiting for the big chips
> I see AIDA64 doesn't report much in the way of voltages, fans, etc. so I sent a report to them, everyone should send them a report so they can get all the sensors, etc. working
> 
> With a 18 core chip you'll need to turn one monitor vertical to show all the info AIDA64 usually reads


Fiery at Aida64 is very dedicated in keeping it updated, no mean task. The guy is a standout crusader.


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Fiery at Aida64 is very dedicated in keeping it updated, no mean task. The guy is a standout crusader.


Give SIV a try. It reports more system data than any other utility I am aware of. The author has added X299 support and is adding more specific motherboards as he encounters them. If you have a board that is not currently supported, he will add it and release a beta update - usually within a day. I am seeing SIV panels in more screen shots on this forum so I think more people are discovering how powerful it is. The author is buds with the authors of AIDA64, CPUz, Core Temp, and others and has been helping them to add support for X299 and X399.

SIV can be a bit overwhelming when you first look at it but once you learn your way around the menus, you will find that it can provide a huge wealth of information. You can check it out here.

http://rh-software.com


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Finally got my board and CPU, I had SL bin it for me just to compare with my results, and they seem to be spot on, 5.3 @ 1.45v, I ran XTU at 5.5 @1.5v (chilled water) without issue so I guess it's an OK chip but nothing special, at least I can play while waiting for the big chips
> I see AIDA64 doesn't report much in the way of voltages, fans, etc. so I sent a report to them, everyone should send them a report so they can get all the sensors, etc. working
> 
> With a 18 core chip you'll need to turn one monitor vertical to show all the info AIDA64 usually reads


Already done


----------



## Nikos4Life

Does anyone know the expected release date for 7980XE?

Regards


----------



## DeadSec

@aDyerSituation
I bumped the Mesh stable up to 3200 MHz by using 1.070 V. Default seams to be at 0.925 V.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nikos4Life*
> 
> Does anyone know the expected release date for 7980XE?
> 
> Regards


September 25th from around the webs.


----------



## Nikos4Life

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> September 25th from around the webs.


Thank you


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Didnt see that with the loaner apex and 7900x es
> The ram bios settings and the inability to enter rtl values exist on apex as well. could only do iol.
> Ram timings option on apex for sky-x other than presets id the same as strix, deluxe, tuf 1 btw.
> *Guess something diff with kaby-x*


could be.... but that would be a break from the norm for ROG boards. Rtls are available for "tuning" with the 7740X on the APEX, may be the higher core count SKL-X are treated differently?









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Little off topic. Gonna make a move on a 720xt I couldn't find but I thought u had mentioned something about replacing the stock pump? Decided to go external for this upcoming sky x build.


no need to replace the stock pump, I added a second pump to boost flow... in my installation the first block is 1 meter above the 720XT base so the lift was an issue (not a problem - flow was still fine). the builtn pump is a champ and has been running for 5 years now... nearly non-stop.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Finally got my board and CPU, I had SL bin it for me just to compare with my results, and they seem to be spot on, 5.3 @ 1.45v, I ran XTU at 5.5 @1.5v (chilled water) without issue so I guess it's an OK chip but nothing special, at least I can play while waiting for the big chips
> I see AIDA64 doesn't report much in the way of voltages, fans, etc. so I sent a report to them, everyone should send them a report so they can get all the sensors, etc. working
> 
> *With a 18 core chip you'll need to turn one monitor vertical to show all the info AIDA64 usually reads*


yeah - sent in a report and have been using SIV64 meanwhile.
Thats's so true! the OSD will be 3 feet long!

edit - I gotta admit tho, with this 7740X running at 5.4/5.0/3866 with a 144Hz monitor, things happen like... instantly.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Fiery at Aida64 is very dedicated in keeping it updated, no mean task. The guy is a standout crusader.


^^ This!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> September 25th from around the webs.


tic-toc, tic-toc


----------



## Asmola

*Could some one make some memory scaling testings on Skylake-X platform? Im curious to know how much fast/tight memory + fast mesh affect to gaming performance. Thank you!







*


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeadSec*
> 
> @aDyerSituation
> I bumped the Mesh stable up to 3200 MHz by using 1.070 V. Default seams to be at 0.925 V.


I found that mesh stuff a real pain in the ass.








I was going for 3400 and all was fine.. but saw some random issues... then i dropped it to 3200. That also seemed great. But still some odd crashes (yes, after hours of gaming or stress testing.)
I finally dropped it down to 3000 and zero issues.
It sucks when issues hide out and need hours to spot.
I need my system to be stable even after hours of prime95







that said, even not very stressful stuff like Intel Extreme Tuning Util will catch the Mesh issues. I'd suggest running the Stress Test for a few hours (2-3 should catch the issue).



Hopefully you are 100% and 3200 works for you. I thought i was too.. but.. wasn't. Luckily that mem test would catch it.
Of course faster Mesh doesn't seem to do jack







haha


----------



## czin125

http://imgur.com/XU6na


This one is missing another column I think.

It only has the following:
4000 17-19-19-36 1T tRFC 631 Mesh 2400
4000 17-19-19-36 1T tRFC 631 Mesh 3200
4000 17-19-19-36 1T tRFC 300 Mesh 3200 ( 49.8ns latency in aida64 )
but it doesn't have
4000 17-19-19-36 1T tRFC 300 Mesh 2400


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmola*
> 
> *Could some one make some memory scaling testings on Skylake-X platform? Im curious to know how much fast/tight memory + fast mesh affect to gaming performance. Thank you!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Being that big changes to mem speed in gaming is pretty minor. The even more minor changes in Mesh speed most likely have zero impact.
Mem will impact some benchmarks like 3dmark (like quad channel or higher speeds), but I didn't see any real changes in those test when screwing around with Mesh (24000, 3000, or 3600.)


----------



## Asmola

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> Being that big changes to mem speed in gaming is pretty minor. The even more minor changes in Mesh speed most likely have zero impact.
> Mem will impact some benchmarks like 3dmark (like quad channel or higher speeds), but i so no change in those test when Mesh was at 24000, 3000, or 3600.


This post rouse my interest about Skylake-X, but not sure are those valid results.


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/6v9v0n/to_test_just_how_much_memory_latency_affects/


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> I found that mesh stuff a real pain in the ass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was going for 3400 and all was fine.. but saw some random issues... then i dropped it to 3200. That also seemed great. But still some odd crashes (yes, after hours of gaming or stress testing.)
> I finally dropped it down to 3000 and zero issues.
> It sucks when issues hide out and need hours to spot.
> I need my system to be stable even after hours of prime95
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that said, even not very stressful stuff like Intel Extreme Tuning Util will catch the Mesh issues. I'd suggest running the Stress Test for a few hours (2-3 should catch the issue).
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully you are 100% and 3200 works for you. I thought i was too.. but.. wasn't. Luckily that mem test would catch it.
> Of course faster Mesh doesn't seem to do jack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> haha


that's a damn good OC buddy!
Considering you're building gaming rigs - do you find that you need that many cores?


----------



## DeadSec

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmola*
> 
> *Could some one make some memory scaling testings on Skylake-X platform? Im curious to know how much fast/tight memory + fast mesh affect to gaming performance. Thank you!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


How do ya like this?

http://abload.de/image.php?img=c5ghz_4000ram_16-16-1q0szd.png

tightening down the tRFC to 300 had an impressive impact.


----------



## czin125

You're getting 52.5ns with 4000 16-16-16-30 1T with 3200 NB vs 49.8ns 4000 17-19-19-36 1T 300 with 3200 NB?



http://imgur.com/XU6na


Can your 7740X run 5.5ghz without chilled water with a larger cooling setup?

Tigerlake-S might be the first 6ghz cpu on water. Should clock higher with a standard design vs the server based variant. 7800X is only 6C and maxes out at 5ghz as does all Skylake-X ( clocks like Skylake-S across the board from high to lower core counts ) chips including the 7980XE.

7740X at max ~ 5.5ghz on water ( +10% max OC vs Skylake-S )
Cannonlake has a higher clocking process node than Kabylake-S/X. ( 10nm++ > 14nm++ > 10nm+ > 10nm > 14nm+ )
10nm++ is +15% ULV vs 10nm ( 1.00v vs 1.00v from their graph ), so max OC should be around +10% over 10nm ( water ).

2/3 % ULV ~ max % OC for Skylake-S -> Kabylake-S
http://fpga.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/10nm-Perf-Power-Enhancements.png


----------



## D4NI3L3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that's the memory training system. If you have a rog board it it near the end of the dram timing bios page.


Ah ok, I disabled it already. No changes in boot time.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ravenrocha*
> 
> Hi D4NI3L3,
> 
> btw, did u solve ur slow shutdown issue on x299 platform? For me, since I got back to IRST 14.8 drivers, every shutdown is instantanely


I've still not uninstalled the drivers (I have been very busy) but my shutdown is regular for now. The boot time is still the problem (well not a real problem, a bit of annoyance really).


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D4NI3L3*
> 
> Ah ok, I disabled it already. No changes in boot time.
> I've still not uninstalled the drivers (I have been very busy) but my shutdown is regular for now. The boot time is still the problem (well not a real problem, a bit of annoyance really).


disabling dram training really requires that you have the ram set up such that drift is nominal and timings are very solid. If it did not benefit the boot time, leave it on auto.

Now.. are you refering to boot or post time? look in event viewer for boot performance and set up a log. And in task manager>startup you can see an estimate of bios time in the upper right corner. POst time (start to OS handoff) and Boot time (hand off to desktop) are very different issues.


----------



## magnusavr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> I found that mesh stuff a real pain in the ass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was going for 3400 and all was fine.. but saw some random issues... then i dropped it to 3200. That also seemed great. But still some odd crashes (yes, after hours of gaming or stress testing.)
> I finally dropped it down to 3000 and zero issues.
> It sucks when issues hide out and need hours to spot.
> I need my system to be stable even after hours of prime95
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that said, even not very stressful stuff like Intel Extreme Tuning Util will catch the Mesh issues. I'd suggest running the Stress Test for a few hours (2-3 should catch the issue).
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully you are 100% and 3200 works for you. I thought i was too.. but.. wasn't. Luckily that mem test would catch it.
> Of course faster Mesh doesn't seem to do jack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> haha


aida64 fpu test maybe


----------



## D4NI3L3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> disabling dram training really requires that you have the ram set up such that drift is nominal and timings are very solid. If it did not benefit the boot time, leave it on auto.
> 
> Now.. are you refering to boot or post time? look in event viewer for boot performance and set up a log. And in task manager>startup you can see an estimate of bios time in the upper right corner. POst time (start to OS handoff) and Boot time (hand off to desktop) are very different issues.


Sorry I mean POST time, boot time it's not a problem, it takes some time but I have many things that start at startup. POST time is a pain instead.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D4NI3L3*
> 
> Sorry I mean POST time, boot time it's not a problem, it takes some time but I have many things that start at startup. POST time is a pain instead.


yeah - if you have a lot of connected devices it can take long to initialize everything... especially on high end boards. try removing everything except keyboard and mouse, check post time, if it is better, add things back one at a time - maybe you can Id the "offending" device.


----------



## D4NI3L3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - if you have a lot of connected devices it can take long to initialize everything... especially on high end boards. try removing everything except keyboard and mouse, check post time, if it is better, add things back one at a time - maybe you can Id the "offending" device.


Well maybe you are right, I have to try it. I'll try as soon as I have time.

As I said in another thread I have:

3 Mice
2 Keyboards
2 Keypads
2 USB 3.0 hubs
1 hdd external box (2 HDDs)
3D Vision transmitter
4 Midi Controllers
1 External Audio Sound Card
1 HDD docking station
1 WebCam (turned off)
1 usb headset

Maybe it's only one or two of this.


----------



## aerotracks

Some legacy IC testing - first gen Hynix MFR running 3200C14 1.36V. All sticks still alive and kicking









http://abload.de/image.php?img=20170906-223913i2six.png

3200 11-13-15-14 1.9V is what I originally binned for, they still match it on the Skylake-X platform


----------



## aDyerSituation

Do you all think a 360 EK XE Rad, a D5 Pump and a Strix Monoblock would be enough to reach 1.3vcore?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Do you all think a 360 EK XE Rad, a D5 Pump and a Strix Monoblock would be enough to reach 1.3vcore?


that depends on how much overclocking you're doing, if you're looking at below 4.8 then you're probably ok but if you do 4.8/5.0 you may struggle to keep it cool enough. Voltage is not going to determine the heat alone it's voltage and how much current you're going to draw and the higher the overclock the higher current which equates to temps. Actually I was assuming you're using a 7900X I can't attest to temps on lower core CPUs with less lanes.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D4NI3L3*
> 
> Well maybe you are right, I have to try it. I'll try as soon as I have time.
> 
> As I said in another thread I have:
> 
> 3 Mice
> 2 Keyboards
> 2 Keypads
> 2 USB 3.0 hubs
> 1 hdd external box (2 HDDs)
> 3D Vision transmitter
> 4 Midi Controllers
> 1 External Audio Sound Card
> 1 HDD docking station
> 1 WebCam (turned off)
> 1 usb headset
> 
> Maybe it's only one or two of this.


yep... just a few connected devices.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Do you all think a 360 EK XE Rad, a D5 Pump and a Strix Monoblock would be enough to reach 1.3vcore?


On what CPU???
If you have good fans and run push pull or 3 HQ, high static pressure fans a 360 XE is basically enough for any cpu if it is the only thing in the loop. A single (good) 360 is capable of shedding >500 watts with proper air flow., a good block mount and reasonable ambient temps at steady state. Add a GPU and a single 360 is not enough with high core count CPUs. (1 360 works fine with a 4C/8T processor and a pascal card)


----------



## aDyerSituation

Sorry I forgot to put CPU Only.

So EK XE 360 with probably 3 vardars isn't enough to reach 1.3vcore?(I'm guessing that's what it will take my chip to reach 4.8)


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Sorry I forgot to put CPU Only.
> 
> So EK XE 360 with probably 3 vardars isn't enough to reach 1.3vcore?(I'm guessing that's what it will take my chip to reach 4.8)


I have a PE420 plus a PE360 and that'll take me to 4.7.
I'm not sure about the 1.3volt thing.
I'll expand on that if it's ok.
On my old X99, it was totally uncool to leave volts on auto because it used to overvolt something terrible.
On the X299 the general consensus is to leave volts on auto. It's way more sophisticated than it's predecessor. So I've left volts on auto.
On 4.7Ghz overclock my volts have only ever got to 1.22. In fact if I set volts to 2.5 it goes unstable on me.
All things being equal, I'm not sure 1.3v would be necessary for anything under 5Ghz.
Adding to that statement:
I've noticed that the sweet spot for my CPU is 4.7 at 1.2 volts and my cooling is good for that.
If I go to 4.8 I need way more volts and the benchmarks are basically the same - the o/c is way less efficient and the whatever law it is of more effort for less reward comes into play.
To sum all that up, these CPUs seem to require a LOT less volts to oc and I think 1.3v isn't necessary unless you want to do a quick bench then go back to a reasonable oc.
So, 1 XE 360 might do it for 4.7 or 4.8 depending on the CPU.
To get enough air through that baby you'd need push pull though = 6 fans. In my experience EK Vardars are great for airflow, but not so great with a lot of resistance (read fat radiators). Noctua Industrial might do it but they're loud.
Hope this helps


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Sorry I forgot to put CPU Only.
> 
> So EK XE 360 with probably 3 vardars isn't enough to reach 1.3vcore?(I'm guessing that's what it will take my chip to reach 4.8)


it's less a matter of "volts" tha a matter of Watts. Depending on your load-usage scenario, a 360 shold be fine - try it and see. Add more fans if necessary.


----------



## aDyerSituation

My 240 AIO is barely cutting it for 4.6 1.2vcore.

I say 1.3vcore because my chip wasn't even stable at 1.24 at 4.7(although temps were super high, so not sure if accurate)

Should I get a slimmer rad then? Maybe a PE instead of XE? Don't really want to run push pull

chip is delidded btw..

also I'm not opposed to buying more rads. Just not sure if it would be necessary since it's just a cpu+vrm


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> My 240 AIO is barely cutting it for 4.6 1.2vcore.
> 
> I say 1.3vcore because my chip wasn't even stable at 1.24 at 4.7(although temps were super high, so not sure if accurate)
> 
> Should I get a slimmer rad then? Maybe a PE instead of XE? Don't really want to run push pull
> 
> chip is delidded btw..
> 
> also I'm not opposed to buying more rads. Just not sure if it would be necessary since it's just a cpu+vrm


My 280mm AIO running push//pull is keeping my 7820x nice and cool...well comfortably cool at 4.8GHz @ 1.285v.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> My 280mm AIO is keeping my 7820x nice and cool...well comfortably cool at 4.8GHz @ 1.285v.


I'm beginning to think you are an exception. Because everyone else I have talked to is getting super high temps with AIO's

Golden chip maybe? and what were your temps again?

I ran prime blend over night and 1 core hit 100c most hovering around 85-95c


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I'm beginning to think you are an exception. Because everyone else I have talked to is getting super high temps with AIO's
> 
> Golden chip maybe? and what were your temps again?
> 
> I ran prime blend over night and 1 core hit 100c most hovering around 85-95c


What AVX offset are you running?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I'm beginning to think you are an exception. Because everyone else I have talked to is getting super high temps with AIO's
> 
> Golden chip maybe? and what were your temps again?
> 
> I ran prime blend over night and 1 core hit 100c most hovering around 85-95c


Another data point here:

7900X - not delided
360 AIO
Normal/AVX/AVX512 - 4.5/4.0/3.8 (1.24v @ 4.5 GHz) - all cores
Cache @ 3.0 GHz
Temps usually around 85C, but will occasionally peak to 95C. All the different loads (normal, AVX, AVX512) reach the same temperatures under the most intensive loads for its type.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I am running -4 AVX and -6 AVX512

@Mystical that's a lot of vcore for 4.5. But that's about my temps right now with a 240 and a delidded 7820x at 1.2


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> I found that mesh stuff a real pain in the ass.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was going for 3400 and all was fine.. but saw some random issues... then i dropped it to 3200. That also seemed great. But still some odd crashes (yes, after hours of gaming or stress testing.)
> I finally dropped it down to 3000 and zero issues.
> It sucks when issues hide out and need hours to spot.
> I need my system to be stable even after hours of prime95
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that said, even not very stressful stuff like Intel Extreme Tuning Util will catch the Mesh issues. I'd suggest running the Stress Test for a few hours (2-3 should catch the issue).
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully you are 100% and 3200 works for you. I thought i was too.. but.. wasn't. Luckily that mem test would catch it.
> Of course faster Mesh doesn't seem to do jack
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> haha


Thats what i have been preaching. Theres currently no quick way to test mesh overclock stability.

In da past for ringbus was linx with avx. Hmm but running linpack with avx 512.. temps are in da crazy zone just at 1.05v 4ghz
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I'm beginning to think you are an exception. Because everyone else I have talked to is getting super high temps with AIO's
> 
> Golden chip maybe? and what were your temps again?
> 
> I ran prime blend over night and 1 core hit 100c most hovering around 85-95c


His is delided from SL afaik


----------



## aDyerSituation

so is mine


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I am running -4 AVX and -6 AVX512


That should definitely be enough of an offset for 4.7GHz. You may need to bump it up if you go higher. I use a -5 AVX and -7 AVX512 offset resulting in a 4.3GHz AVX speed...this is about as high as I want to go.

I don't think I have a golden chip...it takes a reasonable amount of voltage. What is your CPU Package Power (wattage) like when you are running Prime?

Here is 12hrs blend with AVX...Max temp 82c



Here is 12hrs blend without AVX...Max temp 85c


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> My 240 AIO is barely cutting it for 4.6 1.2vcore.
> 
> I say 1.3vcore because my chip wasn't even stable at 1.24 at 4.7(although temps were super high, so not sure if accurate)
> 
> Should I get a slimmer rad then? Maybe a PE instead of XE? Don't really want to run push pull
> 
> chip is delidded btw..
> 
> also I'm not opposed to buying more rads. Just not sure if it would be necessary since it's just a cpu+vrm


You could try auto volts to see what it settles at for the given o/c. These CPUs seem to get unstable at too high volts as well as too low.
Re the rad,
read some reviews! For example, the EK PE420 is excellent whereas the EK 360 is not. If you can fit a 420 with say phanteks 140s it's a great combo.
The Phanteks 12" fans however are not good. The new Corsair maglevs are good in 12" and the vardars are ok.
If you want 360 I would look at the HWLabs crossflow if your loop can support the crossflow, it's a brilliant rad also.
I say all this because I think only the best of the 360 rads is good enough for these CPUs.


----------



## aDyerSituation

EK XE 360 is one of the best rads though? According to reviews.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> EK XE 360 is one of the best rads though? According to reviews.


All rads from all pc coolings etc are from oem from china except for
Hwlabs and aquatuning which does pc specific rads. Nemesis Gtx are awesome.
Time to update to the new GTR


----------



## TahoeDust

@aDyerSituation what is HWinfo reporting as your CPU Package Power while running Prime?


----------



## GXTCHA

Can anyone enlighten me as to why i would be getting screen flicker at post and during the hand off to boot?

This is something I've never encountered across 1150, 1151 or x99. I've used the same RAM kit on 1151, x99 and now x299 however, just prior to post and boot the screen flickers.

I don't really know why or how rtl or iol's would impact post/boot or what it is about the RAM that would cause this on x299 but not on any other platform. I've never changed them and wouldnt even know what values to enter if I did need to change them.

I've reflashed bios, clmos, load defaults and am currently reinstalling windows but don't think the latter will have any impact. I'm using the following g.skill kit (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR). I've never installed the gksill software but have used AURA. I checked the SPD info in CPUZ and it looked correct so I dont think I've corrupted anything but is there any other way to tell? Would changing the dimms around make any difference?

Is anyone else seeing issues with post/boot screen flashing?

Thanks in advance...


----------



## Asmodian

So, I have been overclocking my 7900X but am curious if anyone knows anything about uncore voltage offsets. Any suggestions?

I seem to be nice and stable at:

4.7 GHz on all cores, 1.225 V
3.2 GHz cache, 1.075 V (not too aggressive yet)
System Agent at 0.9 V (DDR4 4000 18-19-19-39-1T), it doesn't seem to like 1T with the default 0.8 V.

I was hoping to go a bit lower in Vcore but much lower has been unstable. How about the cache? Is this voltage higher than expected for 3.2 GHz? 3.3 GHz is unstable even at 1.2 V and I want to stay below the point where voltage needs to go up a lot for any increase.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> @aDyerSituation what is HWinfo reporting as your CPU Package Power while running Prime?


Not sure. I don't use HWInfo. HWmonitor and Coretemp show 1.2watts static ever since I upgraded the BIOS to 0702. Obviously that isn't correct. I can download HWInfo but I thought that was the same as HWmonitor

but what do I know anymore


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Not sure. I don't use HWInfo. HWmonitor and Coretemp show 1.2watts static ever since I upgraded the BIOS to 0702. Obviously that isn't correct. I can download HWInfo but I thought that was the same as HWmonitor
> 
> but what do I know anymore


Guessing you have no interest on how to get svid and cpu power package being reported properly on asus.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Guessing you have no interest on how to get svid and cpu power package being reported properly on asus.


I'm not sure if you are being smart or? Of course I would like my readouts to be correct lol


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Can anyone enlighten me as to why i would be getting screen flicker at post and during the hand off to boot?
> 
> This is something I've never encountered across 1150, 1151 or x99. I've used the same RAM kit on 1151, x99 and now x299 however, just prior to post and boot the screen flickers.
> 
> I don't really know why or how rtl or iol's would impact post/boot or what it is about the RAM that would cause this on x299 but not on any other platform. I've never changed them and wouldnt even know what values to enter if I did need to change them.
> 
> I've reflashed bios, clmos, load defaults and am currently reinstalling windows but don't think the latter will have any impact. I'm using the following g.skill kit (F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR). I've never installed the gksill software but have used AURA. I checked the SPD info in CPUZ and it looked correct so I dont think I've corrupted anything but is there any other way to tell? Would changing the dimms around make any difference?
> 
> Is anyone else seeing issues with post/boot screen flashing?
> 
> Thanks in advance...


Load msconfig. Hide all ms services. Load diagnistic mode.

Reboot. ( if you dont do step two and its disabled.. gonna get a hardtime entering windows if you are using password with ms account).

Are you still getting it??


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> EK XE 360 is one of the best rads though? According to reviews.


Yes absolutely. Even just in push it does well.
This is my go to review for all rads http://www.xtremerigs.net/2015/02/11/radiator-round-2015/


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I'm not sure if you are being smart or? Of course I would like my readouts to be correct lol


Run auto ( not xmp/manual) xmp works for bios 0702
Enable svid
Save
Enter back bios
Shutdown your pc while in bios (casing/mobo switch)
On back.

If you ran manual. Before switching svid enable, set vccin to auto first.

Works on asus strix, apex. Works on every other asus board since z87.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Run auto ( not xmp/manual)
> Enable svid
> Save
> Enter back bios
> Shutdown your pc while in bios (casing/mobo switch)
> On back.


Ok I will try that







thanks


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Ok I will try that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanks


Added few other condition on da above post.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Not sure. I don't use HWInfo. HWmonitor and Coretemp show 1.2watts static ever since I upgraded the BIOS to 0702. Obviously that isn't correct. I can download HWInfo but I thought that was the same as HWmonitor
> 
> but what do I know anymore


When/if you get a good CPU Power Package reading post it up. If it is roughly the same as mine, it points to your problem being your delid job or cooling solution not the quality of the silicon.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Load msconfig. Hide all ms services. Load diagnistic mode.
> 
> Reboot. ( if you dont do step two and its disabled.. gonna get a hardtime entering windows if you are using password with ms account).
> 
> Are you still getting it??


Still getting it and wont boot past the "loading" screen. Looks like im reinstall windows again.

It doesnt seem like a OS issue though. video card maybe?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Still getting it and wont boot past the "loading" screen. Looks like im reinstall windows again.
> 
> It doesnt seem like a OS issue though. video card maybe?


But you tried two gpus.
I am thinking board or ram . Ram cause its from gskill. If it was from corsair.. they have better qc control.


----------



## aDyerSituation

So that trick work. Screenshot below.



this is while running small ffts 26.6. Vcore reading 1.2002


----------



## GXTCHA

I havent tried a second gpu which is my next step...

if that doesnt change anything then yeah, i guess its the MB or RAM. I feel like the RAM is good though as I've used it without issue in two other setups but who knows with these latest kits...


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> So that trick work. Screenshot below.
> 
> 
> 
> this is while running small ffts 26.6. Vcore reading 1.2002


Of course it did. Its been asus issue since svid was introduced in z87.

@Jpmboy
Got rtl working manually. What a screwed up way to do it.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> So that trick work. Screenshot below.
> 
> 
> 
> this is while running small ffts 26.6. Vcore reading 1.2002


Hmmm...I am only drawing ~240w-245w running small ffts 26.6 with Vcore reading 1.285v


----------



## Asmodian

Don't you want to avoid enabling the SVID when overclocking? I remember always keeping that disabled for X99, doesn't it add another point of failure/stress?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> That should definitely be enough of an offset for 4.7GHz. You may need to bump it up if you go higher. I use a -5 AVX and -7 AVX512 offset resulting in a 4.3GHz AVX speed...this is about as high as I want to go.
> 
> I don't think I have a golden chip...it takes a reasonable amount of voltage. What is your CPU Package Power (wattage) like when you are running Prime?
> 
> Here is 12hrs blend with AVX...Max temp 82c
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is 12hrs blend without AVX...Max temp 85c
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


there are actually more differences between those two versions of p95 than just AVX. If you want to use the recent version (and its bug fixes) you can add the following toggles to the local.txt file in the p95 folder:
CpuSupportsAVX=0 or 1
CpuSupportsFMA3=0 or 1
it's all explained in the undoc.txt file.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> EK XE 360 is one of the best rads though? According to reviews.


yeah - it's a fine rad. If you are running a full cover mono block, proper mounting can be a real issue. I'd check the mount quality by examiing the TIM spread on the CPU and be sure it's good. what TIM _did_ you use?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> *Load msconfig. Hide all ms services. Load diagnistic mode.*
> 
> Reboot. ( if you dont do step two and its disabled.. gonna get a hardtime entering windows if you are using password with ms account).
> 
> Are you still getting it??


Be real careful doing this with an OS loaded on the DIMM2 card.. especially if running an NVMe Raid 0. can be a real pia to get this back to normal.
you may want to issue this command in an admin cmnd prompt just in case:
_bcdedit /set {bootmgr} displaybootmenu yes_
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Of course it did. Its been asus issue since svid was introduced in z87.
> @Jpmboy
> Got rtl working manually. What a screwed up way to do it.


what? the RTL menu has been in the same place on ROG boards for quite some time.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> I havent tried a second gpu which is my next step...
> 
> if that doesnt change anything then yeah, i guess its the MB or RAM. I feel like the RAM is good though as I've used it without issue in two other setups but who knows with these latest kits...


Thats y wish corsair redo their plats lineup. In da past they always bin their rams below voltage spec so it works on any boards. Gskill goes to the point exact voltage and need specific board.

Btw your bios update to 0702.
Did it reboot twice? Did you do it via usb flashback?
Windows install
Uefi usb or legacy install? Did you try with csm disable secure boot "other os".
Nvme ahci? All firmware on nvme drive updated?
Have you tried install on your ssd first??


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Hmmm...I am only drawing ~240w-245w running small ffts 26.6 with Vcore reading 1.285v


***???

why is mine so high lol


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> ***???


No idea.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> there are actually more differences between those two versions of p95 than just AVX. If you want to use the recent version (and its bug fixes) you can add the following toggles to the local.txt file in the p95 folder:
> CpuSupportsAVX=0 or 1
> CpuSupportsFMA3=0 or 1
> it's all explained in the undoc.txt file.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah - it's a fine rad. If you are running a full cover mono block, proper mounting can be a real issue. I'd check the mount quality by examiing the TIM spread on the CPU and be sure it's good. what TIM _did_ you use?
> Be real careful doing this with an OS loaded on the DIMM2 card.. especially if running an NVMe Raid 0. can be a real pia to get this back to normal.
> you may want to issue this command in an admin cmnd prompt just in case:
> _bcdedit /set {bootmgr} displaybootmenu yes_
> what? the RTL menu has been in the same place on ROG boards for quite some time.


Asus implemention to enter rtl for x299 is diff. You cannot just enter the values you get on training. I somehow got it all done now with third timings intact on training. Gonna seriously start back scratch and will post here.

Rtl/iol on x299 seriously weird. The range for correct training only differs min/max -1/-2 to +1/+2 from asus auto. iol i nvr seen a bigg diff between running 0/1/0/1 and 6/8/6/8 . Also it seems dependednt on third timings and is linked to dram clk.
Z87 u can disable this link with swizzling bit 2. Was hoping for an option like that but looks like none.

It started with elpida hypers 2kc6 sticks. At that time x58 only dfi had a proper implementation. Asus r2e was screwed up. Later evga x58 classified thanks to the faes got it working.
Rtl/iol has been there since r3e. P67 onwards you can enter it manually. Asus introduced init rtl on z87. Only the extreme version has swizzling bit. So yeah i know how long rtl iol has been in asus. Maybe this is my first foray into quad rams. Its just weird the things you need to do to get it to work on x299 asus. Took 3 days .. after 30 odd cmos resets. Got it to work.

From my check on x99.. most ppl are adjusting iols only. Dont see anybody doing manual rtl.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> ***???
> 
> why is mine so high lol


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> No idea.


its based off cpu power package temps /core voltage/frequency afaik.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> its based off cpu power package temps /core voltage/frequency afaik.


My core voltage and frequency are higher, but my CPU Package Power wattage and temp are lower. How does this happen?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> My core voltage and frequency are higher, but my CPU Package Power wattage and temp are lower. How does this happen?


Yeah the calculation of tdp has cpu package temps in it afaik.
Its the samething why my y-cruncher 4ghz avx 512 at 1.06v is way lower than mystical post on 8 core 16thread 240 watts 4ghz @ higher voltage


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Yeah the calculation of tdp has cpu package temps in it afaik.
> Its the samething why my y-cruncher 4ghz avx 512 at 1.06v is way lower than mystical post on 8 core 16thread 240 watts 4ghz @ higher voltage


Interesting. So the better your cooling and lower your temps, the lower your CPU Package Power will be even if your core voltage and frequency is higher? Or is this more about silicon lottery and power leakage?


----------



## ESRCJ

I'm thinking about getting a 7920X, but one that isn't delidded. Based on what you've all experienced with the 7900X, would an EK Predator 360 AIO (dedicated to the CPU) be enough to cool the CPU and get 4.6-4.7GHz, assuming it clocks similarly to the 7900X and thermals are more or less the same?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Interesting. So the better your cooling and lower your temps, the lower your CPU Package Power will be even if your core voltage and frequency is higher? Or is this more about silicon lottery and power leakage?


I am not so sure. Just basing from what i have seen.


----------



## aDyerSituation

so you are saying that my power draw is higher because my cooling is worse?

that doesn't make much sense to me


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> so you are saying that my power draw is higher because my cooling is worse?
> 
> that doesn't make much sense to me


There is *some* amount of truth to it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_coefficient

For non-semiconductors, resistance increases when the temperature goes up. This is probably why sub-zero temperatures let you hit higher clocks as the material approaches superconductivity. Admittedly, I'm not an expert in this area. Silicon is semiconductor and has a negative coefficient.

Either way I don't think it's the primary factor. You need large temperature fluctuations for it to matter and temperature is measured relative to absolute zero. So when you're talking about something on the order of 350 Kelvin, a difference of 10C is almost negligible.

(p.s. All the EE classes I took in college are long gone from my head.)


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> so you are saying that my power draw is higher because my cooling is worse?
> 
> that doesn't make much sense to me


Well i know nvidia gpu tdp mentioned has temps factored into it. Hence y moving to watercooling you see the power draw percentage drops and you dont get throttled. Example 1080 fe stock max air 72c ..power draw in witcher 3 certain scenes hit the 100% mark which causes throttling..
On water it doesnt hit than 100% . Zero throttle. Temps 40c.
All on stock


----------



## aDyerSituation

yeah but he is .085 vcore higher than me and I am still pulling 50 watts more


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> yeah but he is .085 vcore higher than me and I am still pulling 50 watts more


I'd like to see more info if you can. Download hwinfo64, open it with enough columns to show all the CPU/Mobo reading, and run P95 no AVX for 10 minutes. This will show us min/max/avg of all the readings. I'll do the same.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I'd like to see more info if you can. Download hwinfo64, open it with enough columns to show all the CPU/Mobo reading, and run P95 no AVX for 10 minutes. This will show us min/max/avg of all the readings. I'll do the same.


I'm not sure I could do FFTs for 10 minutes. My temps get out of control on that. and how could I run without avx?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I'd like to see more info if you can. Download hwinfo64, open it with enough columns to show all the CPU/Mobo reading, and run P95 no AVX for 10 minutes. This will show us min/max/avg of all the readings. I'll do the same.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure I could do FFTs for 10 minutes. My temps get out of control on that. and how could I run without avx?
Click to expand...

In the prime95 local.txt add this command CpuSupportsAVX=0 and that will disable AVX.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I'm not sure I could do FFTs for 10 minutes. My temps get out of control on that. and how could I run without avx?


Are you using SIV64 5.23 beta to read temps? That's the one that actually works, RB I know is way off.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I'm not sure I could do FFTs for 10 minutes. My temps get out of control on that. and how could I run without avx?


Just use the regular blend this time. Run v26.6 like you did before. It does not use AVX.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Just run 26.6 like you did before. It does not use AVX.


will realbench 2.43(non avx) work instead? I can't handle prime ffts for 5 minutes without hitting 100c.

@Arthah never heard of that. Is there a link? Their site is hard to navigate. I only see ver 5.22


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> will realbench 2.43(non avx) work instead? I can't handle prime ffts for 5 minutes without hitting 100c.


Does it overheat running "Blend" in Prime v26.6? If not, do that for 10-15 minutes. If it can't do that, we could use Realbench.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Does it overheat running "Blend" in Prime v26.6? If not, do that for 10-15 minutes. If it can't do that, we could use Realbench.


nah I ran blend overnight and 1 core hit 100c but rest stayed around 85-95. I'll do blend and post back

EDIT: are you sure blend doesn't use AVX? Because I am sitting at 4.2ghz


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> will realbench 2.43(non avx) work instead? I can't handle prime ffts for 5 minutes without hitting 100c.
> 
> @Arthah never heard of that. Is there a link? Their site is hard to navigate. I only see ver 5.22


use 5.22 and when you have it opened click on the little wizard on the top left to get the menu then navigate to file-->download-->SIV Beta that's for apex boards and possibly other x299 boards


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> nah I ran blend overnight and 1 core hit 100c but rest stayed around 85-95. I'll do blend and post back
> 
> EDIT: are you sure blend doesn't use AVX? Because I am sitting at 4.2ghz


v26.6 should not use AVX.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Temps the same on SIV, Coretemp and HWInfo for me

well it's downclocking me to 4.2 for some reason


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Temps the same on SIV, Coretemp and HWInfo for me


Let's see all the data. Maybe we can figure out the difference.



This is 15 minutes of Prime95 v26.6 "Blend"


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> nah I ran blend overnight and 1 core hit 100c but rest stayed around 85-95. I'll do blend and post back
> 
> EDIT: are you sure blend doesn't use AVX? Because I am sitting at 4.2ghz
> 
> 
> 
> v26.6 should not use AVX.
Click to expand...

So there is a chance it could use AVX?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> So there is a chance it could use AVX?


From what I have experienced and read, v26.6 is the last version to not support AVX instructions.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> From what I have experienced and read, v26.6 is the last version to not support AVX instructions.


Hmm wonder what is causing me to throttle then. I haven't hit TJMax


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Hmm wonder what is causing me to throttle then. I haven't hit TJMax


IDK. We can do Realbench 2.43 instead if you want. 15 Minute stress test.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> IDK. We can do Realbench 2.43 instead if you want. 15 Minute stress test.


alrighty


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Hmm wonder what is causing me to throttle then. I haven't hit TJMax


you can find out quickly if it's AVX downclocking, set the AVX offset to 31 on both and see if you get downclocked to 1800MHz.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> you can find out quickly if it's AVX downclocking, set the AVX offset to 31 on both and see if you get downclocked to 1800MHz.


Have you run Prime95 v26.6? If so, does it trigger your AVX offset. It does not for me, but any newer version does.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> alrighty


Reset the values in HWinfo right after you start the test and take your screenshot before the test stops. This way the idle values will not skew the min and avg readings.


----------



## TahoeDust

Here is what I got...


----------



## aDyerSituation

I keep getting "instability detected" so I will have to play around with it more before I can post back.

but I will say my power was only 220ish while running realbench

it's probably my ram as that's the only thing I've changed in a couple of days besides enable SVID to get power to read out properly

EDIT: So I am crashing faster in faster in realbench even if I use my old ram timings and set mesh back to default.

Going to run memtest and see if there's something wrong with my memory

Man this build has been a pain in the butt


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I keep getting "instability detected" so I will have to play around with it more before I can post back.
> 
> but I will say my power was only 220ish while running realbench
> 
> it's probably my ram as that's the only thing I've changed in a couple of days besides enable SVID to get power to read out properly
> 
> EDIT: So I am crashing faster in faster in realbench even if I use my old ram timings and set mesh back to default.
> 
> Going to run memtest and see if there's something wrong with my memory
> 
> Man this build has been a pain in the butt


Realbench 2.43?
What mem you are running?
What gpu are you using.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Have you run Prime95 v26.6? If so, does it trigger your AVX offset. It does not for me, but any newer version does.


It shouldn't but he might have something else triggering it. That's why if he changes the offset it will be clearly visible for troubleshooting.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Thats y wish corsair redo their plats lineup. In da past they always bin their rams below voltage spec so it works on any boards. Gskill goes to the point exact voltage and need specific board.
> 
> Btw your bios update to 0702.
> Did it reboot twice? Did you do it via usb flashback?
> Windows install
> Uefi usb or legacy install? Did you try with csm disable secure boot "other os".
> Nvme ahci? All firmware on nvme drive updated?
> Have you tried install on your ssd first??


Alrighty so I think I've gotten everything squared away. reflashed bios to 0702, clrmos, reboot twice, load defaults, reboot, reformatted 960 evo and did a clean install of win10 pro. This seems to have cleared up the issues with post/boot screen flicker/hand off. I've also now got the ROG splash instead of the windows splash.

I think it my ISO was corrupt or not jiving with the new hardware. I also updated the Samsung firmware to latest and so far so good. Will see how it goes tonight as I had to put the project to bed and hit the rack. Are people installing the chipset and IME drivers from ASUS's website?

Will run memtest to check the memory but so far so good. I'm hesitant to load AURA at this point though.

Thanks for the help and suggestions.


----------



## DeathAngel74

ASUS didn't have the drivers for IMEI(Simple PCIE Communications Device). I had to get those from station-drivers.com. Search for your mobo and all recent drivers will be on one page. Intel IMEI should be first or second from the top.


----------



## The_Rocker

Im just about to build my new system with an i9 7900X and MSI X299 PRO CARBON. I am waiting for my WC loop parts to arrive, but I wondered if someone could give me a heads up on what settings I should be changing to achieve 4.2Ghz across all cores?

I am not new to overclocking, but my last clocking experience was first generation i7 so a lot has changed.

Mainly I need to understand what to set the turbo modes to? I don't want individual core boosts or anything. I just want all cores at 4.2Ghz when under load. Also, I assume the AVX offset is a lower multiplier for AVX workloads?

Can someone give me some pointers?


----------



## fireedo

well this is not a world record or an amazing result but for me 8c/16 @ 4.5 Ghz really great









on short test time everything went smooth, temp is skyrocketing but for daily use I think it never reach that temp, here some of my stress test results :





updated :

using 2 fans Noctua NF-A14 PWM 3000 on the H115i radiator, better temp but very loud


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Rocker*
> 
> Im just about to build my new system with an i9 7900X and MSI X299 PRO CARBON. I am waiting for my WC loop parts to arrive, but I wondered if someone could give me a heads up on what settings I should be changing to achieve 4.2Ghz across all cores?
> 
> I am not new to overclocking, but my last clocking experience was first generation i7 so a lot has changed.
> 
> Mainly I need to understand what to set the turbo modes to? I don't want individual core boosts or anything. I just want all cores at 4.2Ghz when under load. Also, I assume the AVX offset is a lower multiplier for AVX workloads?
> 
> Can someone give me some pointers?


Default stock voltage under 1.1v no problem 4.3ghz
With avx offset -2 and -4 avx 512.
?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fireedo*
> 
> well this is not a world record or an amazing result but for me 8c/16 @ 4.5 Ghz really great
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> on short test time everything went smooth, temp is skyrocketing but for daily use I think it never reach that temp, here some of my stress test results :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> updated :
> 
> using 2 fans Noctua NF-A14 PWM 3000 on the H115i radiator, better temp but very loud


Nice.
Side note
Just bought and installed a ek a240g for friends 4790k and gtx1080. Was suprised at the results. Seriously recommended over aio. However had a few qualms on them cheapening stuff.

I am always amazed at ppl running aio stress testing hightemps.


----------



## czin125

https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/support/X299-XPOWER-GAMING-AC#support-mem-1 / 4 core column
voltages listed on msi's page

Corsair CMK16GX4M2F4500C19 DDR4 4500 Samsung 1.45v SS 8GB
ADATA AX4U450038G19-DRZ　　DDR4 4500 Samsung 1.45v SS 8GB
G.Skill F4-4500C19D-16GTZ　　　DDR4 4500 Samsung 1.45v SS 8GB ( CL18/17 with just a tad more voltage and still under 1.50v ? )

4500 16-16-16-36 2T 535 tRFC at 1.50v from 2016

F4-4600CL19D-16GTZKKC ( not on gskill's site http://www.asrock.com.tw/mb/Intel/X299%20OC%20Formula/index.asp#MemoryKBL )


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fireedo*
> 
> well this is not a world record or an amazing result but for me 8c/16 @ 4.5 Ghz really great
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> on short test time everything went smooth, temp is skyrocketing but for daily use I think it never reach that temp, here some of my stress test results :
> 
> updated :
> 
> using 2 fans Noctua NF-A14 PWM 3000 on the H115i radiator, better temp but very loud


real nice sir








Are you screwing around with Mesh? (i don't really think it is needed other than for epeen), but if you are try hitting it with the mem test in the intel tuning for a few hours.


----------



## DeathAngel74

My 7820x can hit 4.5 GHz @ 70-72C, 1.1V. Those temps are kinda high, just sayin. Nice job though. I'm done stress testing, time to actually play some games and enjoy the new build as it was intended.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I keep getting "instability detected" so I will have to play around with it more before I can post back.
> 
> but I will say my power was only 220ish while running realbench
> 
> it's probably my ram as that's the only thing I've changed in a couple of days besides enable SVID to get power to read out properly
> 
> EDIT: So I am crashing faster in faster in realbench even if I use my old ram timings and set mesh back to default.
> 
> Going to run memtest and see if there's something wrong with my memory
> 
> Man this build has been a pain in the butt


So just an update I ran memtest at 4000 19-19-19-39-1t on my ram and got a TON of errors I wasn't getting before.

I reset ram and everything to default and ran memtest again overnight, no errors. So now I have a new problem and I'm guessing it is the subtimings on my ram.
I have left them at auto but I guess when I reboot they change. Is there a way to get my subtimings for my ram? I don't think I can even boot into windows using XMP.

My kit is F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW rest of parts in sig by the way

I do want to point out I ran Prime Blend 26.6 over night and got 0 errors. But realbench and memtest picked it up within minutes.
I won't be using prime blend anymore


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> So just an update I ran memtest at 4000 19-19-19-39-1t on my ram and got a TON of errors I wasn't getting before.
> 
> I reset ram and everything to default and ran memtest again overnight, no errors. So now I have a new problem and I'm guessing it is the subtimings on my ram.
> I have left them at auto but I guess when I reboot they change. Is there a way to get my subtimings for my ram? I don't think I can even boot into windows using XMP.
> 
> My kit is F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW rest of parts in sig by the way
> 
> I do want to point out I ran Prime Blend 26.6 over night and got 0 errors. But realbench and memtest picked it up within minutes.
> I won't be using prime blend anymore


I have the same ram but yelled at it and walked away when it (the ram/mobo/cpu) couldn't do 4200. The sparkly 3200 ram i'm running @ 3600 won the day. SPARKLE!

I couldn't even get the thing to boot in 4200. (oh... sexy pointless changing RGB ram you woo me)
I think my system also really didn't like the 1.40v for dram either.

Please keep us updated on your ram progress! What Mesh are you running at?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I keep getting "instability detected" so I will have to play around with it more before I can post back.
> 
> but I will say my power was only 220ish while running realbench
> 
> it's probably my ram as that's the only thing I've changed in a couple of days besides enable SVID to get power to read out properly
> 
> EDIT: So I am crashing faster in faster in realbench even if I use my old ram timings and set mesh back to default.
> 
> Going to run memtest and see if there's something wrong with my memory
> 
> Man this build has been a pain in the butt
> 
> 
> 
> So just an update I ran memtest at 4000 19-19-19-39-1t on my ram and got a TON of errors I wasn't getting before.
> 
> I reset ram and everything to default and ran memtest again overnight, no errors. So now I have a new problem and I'm guessing it is the subtimings on my ram.
> I have left them at auto but I guess when I reboot they change. Is there a way to get my subtimings for my ram? I don't think I can even boot into windows using XMP.
> 
> My kit is F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW rest of parts in sig by the way
> 
> I do want to point out I ran Prime Blend 26.6 over night and got 0 errors. But realbench and memtest picked it up within minutes.
> I won't be using prime blend anymore
Click to expand...

For stability test it is best to use more than one test. I have had prime95 fail then RealBench pass.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Prime is way overkill for what I do anyway. And everything else is at stock, including mesh.

If anyone has any idea on how to get the XMP sub timings for my ram let me know


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> So, I have been overclocking my 7900X but am curious if anyone knows anything about uncore voltage offsets. Any suggestions?
> 
> I seem to be nice and stable at:
> 
> 4.7 GHz on all cores, 1.225 V
> 3.2 GHz cache, 1.075 V (not too aggressive yet)
> System Agent at 0.9 V (DDR4 4000 18-19-19-39-1T), it doesn't seem to like 1T with the default 0.8 V.
> 
> I was hoping to go a bit lower in Vcore but much lower has been unstable. How about the cache? Is this voltage higher than expected for 3.2 GHz? 3.3 GHz is unstable even at 1.2 V and I want to stay below the point where voltage needs to go up a lot for any increase.


Uncore voltage offset. I suspect its vcc pll.
I wish asus uses intel spec sheet naming.

Btw excellent cpu


----------



## aDyerSituation

@TahoeDust I found out my memory was causing the crash so I reset that to stock voltage. I also reset mesh to auto. All I have is vcore set to 1.2 and core ratio to 46
I lost about 30 watts after going back to stock ram and mesh and just keeping the cpu overclock. Temps were ~5c cooler at most though. Let me know if you notice any other anomalies.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> @TahoeDust I found out my memory was causing the crash so I reset that to stock voltage. I also reset mesh to auto. All I have is vcore set to 1.2 and core ratio to 46
> I lost about 30 watts after going back to stock ram and mesh and just keeping the cpu overclock. Temps were ~5c cooler at most though. Let me know if you notice any other anomalies.


I think it must be your cooling, not the chip. I averaged 7* cooler while also averaging 41w higher. I'm really surprised that my cooling setup would perform that much better. Adjusting your memory voltage changed your CPU Package Power?...I did not know they affected each other.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I think it must be your cooling, not the chip. I averaged 7* cooler while also averaging 41w higher. I'm really surprised that my cooling setup would perform that much better. Adjusting your memory voltage changed your CPU Package Power?...I did not know they affected each other.


I don't know if it does, but if not it was the mesh voltage. I left it at auto voltage* and 3.0 originally and now it's auto vcore and 2.4


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> real nice sir
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you screwing around with Mesh? (i don't really think it is needed other than for epeen), but if you are try hitting it with the mem test in the intel tuning for a few hours.


There are some tangible gains to be had there due to changes on previous gen.


----------



## czin125

http://www.gskill.com/en/press/view/g-skill-announces-new-ddr4-4600mhz-extreme-performance-trident-z-memory-kit
http://cdn.overclock.net/1/19/19a8245c_AXfdaL1.png A user's 5.3/4.96 + 4510 18-19-19-32 2T 790 ( unknown volts )

http://cdn.overclock.net/2/27/278e1d6e_IMG0050985_1.jpeg pic from 2016 4500 16-16-16-36 2T 535 1.50v ( This one looks better given the voltage )

http://gskill.com/img/pr/2017.09.08_4600mhz/03.ddr4.4600mhz.png 2017 4600 19-23-23-43 2T 807 1.50v

"
Trident Z Series DDR4-4600MHz CL19-23-23-43 16GB (8GBx2)

Previously, the speed of DDR4-4600MHz was only achievable under extreme overclocking with liquid nitrogen cooling. Now, designed for extreme speed dual-channel memory operation on the latest Intel® X299 high-end desktop platform, G.SKILL is once again raising the limits on DDR4 memory speed to DDR4-4600MHz CL19-23-23-43 at 1.5V, with a total capacity of 16GB (8GBx2). The following stress test screenshot shows the new memory kit in action, validated with an Intel® Kaby Lake-X Core™ i7-7740X processor on the new ASRock X299 OC Formula motherboard:

Intel XMP 2.0 Support & Availability

This new high performance Trident Z kit is designed with Intel XMP 2.0 support, and the two variations of Trident Z DDR4-4600MHz memory kit are scheduled for release via G.SKILL authorized distribution partners at the end of September 2017.
"
New samsung modules? This looks like the limit for ~20nm DDR4 but there's 10nm LPDDR4X that clocks 4266mhz 0.60v ( for cellphones )


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Prime is way overkill for what I do anyway. And everything else is at stock, including mesh.
> 
> If anyone has any idea on how to get the XMP sub timings for my ram let me know


aid64 and SIV64 will list tthem. Thiaphoon will list and let you reprogram the timings.


you want to enter the subtimings manually? You'd do better to load a preset and then adjust the primary timings. Try one of the "sane" presets just for the 2nd and 3rd timings, adjust the primaries manually.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> aid64 and SIV64 will list tthem. Thiaphoon will list and let you reprogram the timings.
> 
> 
> you want to enter the subtimings manually? You'd do better to load a preset and then adjust the primary timings. Try one of the "sane" presets just for the 2nd and 3rd timings, adjust the primaries manually.


I loaded the XMP 4273 and lowered it all the way down to 3800 with the same timings and I still crash

It's at 3600 right now untested. Will have to test when I get home but I have a feeling I should have bought a qvl quad channel kit from the start


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I loaded the XMP 4273 and lowered it all the way down to 3800 with the same timings and I still crash
> 
> It's at 3600 right now untested. Will have to test when I get home but I have a feeling I should have bought a qvl quad channel kit from the start


What kit(s) did you buy?
yeah - very doubtful XMP for 4266 or higher will work. just leave all but the primary timings on Auto, enter them manually. Use 2T (CR=2) at first and adjust VSA "appropriately.
Better yet, just tryt 4000 16-17-17-44-1T with 1.4 to 1.45V.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> What kit(s) did you buy?
> yeah - very doubtful XMP for 4266 or higher will work. just leave all but the primary timings on Auto, enter them manually. Use 2T (CR=2) at first and adjust VSA "appropriately.
> Better yet, just tryt 4000 16-17-17-44-1T with 1.4 to 1.45V.


here is my kit

Model F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232472

also not sure what VSA is


----------



## Silent Scone

AIDA has just been updated to read some of the voltage rails and VRM/PCH temperature (ROG Apex)


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> here is my kit
> 
> Model F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232472
> 
> also not sure what VSA is


VCCSA or System Agent Voltage.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> here is my kit
> 
> Model F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232472
> 
> also not sure what VSA is


I'd avoid using XMP. Just enter the timings manully. Get a solid 4000 c16 or 17, then 41323... 4200 is more likely than 4266.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> AIDA has just been updated to read some of the voltage rails and VRM/PCH temperature (ROG Apex)


got an email from Tamas... is it reading vcore on your 7900X?


----------



## aDyerSituation

I was entering timings manually. But then all of a sudden it was unstable so I reset it to stock


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I'd avoid using XMP. Just enter the timings manully. Get a solid 4000 c16 or 17, then 41323... 4200 is more likely than 4266.
> got an email from Tamas... is it reading vcore on your 7900X?


Tamas is the man, Vcore voltage reading seems stuck now, will try uninstalling and installing again. Most all voltages are read for KBL now
I can run my 4226 kt at 4400 C19 without much issue, tried 4600 for the hell of it but could not get it to boot at that speed, 4133 c16 was easy enough also


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> tried 4600 for the hell of it but could not get it to boot at that speed,


Hello

Approaching that kind of speed will most likely require adjustment of the some of the skew and IO settings for most CPUs that are capable of that high of MHz.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Tamas is the man, Vcore voltage reading seems stuck now, will try uninstalling and installing again. Most all voltages are read for KBL now
> I can run my *4226 kt at 4400 C19* without much issue, tried 4600 for the hell of it but could not get it to boot at that speed, 4133 c16 was easy enough also


that's crazy! eh - I gave my 4266c19 kit to my nephew in the gaming rig he "inherited". Looking at the new GSkill kits... end of sept I believe.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Approaching that kind of speed will most likely require adjustment of the some of the skew and IO settings for most CPUs that are capable of that high of MHz.


if only I knew how to tune skews better... it's very Edisonian for me.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that's crazy! eh - I gave my 4266c19 kit to my nephew in the gaming rig he "inherited". Looking at the new GSkill kits... end of sept I believe.
> if only I knew how to tune skews better... it's very Edisonian for me.


tuning skewers, first meat, vegetable, meat, grill


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> tuning skewers, first meat, vegetable, meat, grill


now that looks good! add a few shrimp.









eh - if i add a 2x correction to the vcore in aid64 it is reading (and drooping) correctly


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that's crazy! eh - I gave my 4266c19 kit to my nephew in the gaming rig he "inherited". Looking at the new GSkill kits... end of sept I believe.


A lot of G.skill kits seem to just be vaporware. I've seen them announce many kits that never see the light of day!


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that's crazy! eh - I gave my 4266c19 kit to my nephew in the gaming rig he "inherited". Looking at the new GSkill kits... end of sept I believe.
> if only I knew how to tune skews better... it's very Edisonian for me.


Its not that difficult. For starters google shamino guide in kingpin forum for M6e as starter point , it was when skews option was given first time in asus.
And then raja guide on m7 boards as secondary reference.
It will give you the general idea.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> A lot of G.skill kits seem to just be vaporware. I've seen them announce many kits that never see the light of day!


damn - I hope you are wrong.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Its not that difficult. For starters google shamino guide in kingpin forum for M6e as starter point , it was when skews option was given first time in asus.
> And then raja guide on m7 boards as secondary reference.
> It will give you the general idea.


Thanks
yeah - I have that link, and Raja's guide and *Alex's* (i had an m6e), and *XA's guide* from last year too... time, gotta have time for a deep dive.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> A lot of G.skill kits seem to just be vaporware. I've seen them announce many kits that never see the light of day!


You need to order them directly. From taiwan. Their production que is now getting longer and longer. One malaysia nut i know ordered the 128gb 3866 kit. The highest binned 128gb production kit and eta is 3weeks.
Most lower samsung b die are 2weeks.. for 32gb 3200-4k.

My 32gb 3600 was 2 weeks and suppose to be here next week.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Seijitsu*
> 
> A lot of G.skill kits seem to just be vaporware. I've seen them announce many kits that never see the light of day!


Halo kits that are produced in small quantity. As above you need to order them directly, hardly any etailer will be willing to stock them.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I'd avoid using XMP. Just enter the timings manully. Get a solid 4000 c16 or 17, then 41323... 4200 is more likely than 4266.
> got an email from Tamas... is it reading vcore on your 7900X?


The previous build was reading vcore. I've now got DRAM, IO, SA and PCH rails


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Halo kits that are produced in small quantity. As above you need to order them directly, hardly any etailer will be willing to stock them.
> The previous build was reading vcore. I've now got DRAM, IO, SA and PCH rails


yah- on the 7740X it was reading 1/2.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yah- on the 7740X it was reading 1/2.


Weird, was reading fine on the 7900X


----------



## aDyerSituation

So I have my ram Model F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW @ 3600 16-17-17-38-1T right now with auto subtimings and it seems stable

Passed a bit of realbench and a pass of memtest86. All I did was increase System Agent Voltage from .9 to .95.
This is the only settings I have been able to find, besides stock that are stable.

Does system agent voltage really make that much of a difference? I would like to get the memory to ~4000mhz
so if anyone has any settings I should try let me know!


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Tamas is the man, Vcore voltage reading seems stuck now, will try uninstalling and installing again. Most all voltages are read for KBL now
> I can run my 4226 kt at 4400 C19 without much issue, tried 4600 for the hell of it but could not get it to boot at that speed, 4133 c16 was easy enough also


were you able to do it with* a bclk at 100? Which kit do you have exactly? I tried the tridentz 4400 and it would not run at 4400 without running a 106+ bclk. I had to go back to using a 3200 kit running it at 4000.


----------



## czin125

http://images.anandtech.com/doci/9483/1-page-010_575px.jpg
https://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/content/7/4/7481_02_tweaktowns-ultimate-intel-skylake-overclocking-guide_full.png
This might be the maximum for all their cpus from Skylake to Skylake-X/Coffeelake ( 4133 @ 100.00 ? )


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> were you able to do it with* a bclk at 100? Which kit do you have exactly? I tried the tridentz 4400 and it would not run at 4400 without running a 106+ bclk. I had to go back to using a 3200 kit running it at 4000.


Need to use blk to run memory at those speeds, at least at this time with KBLX, memory at these speeds are really only for benching, or just to see what you can do with your hardware short term, I wouldn't run at those speeds for any daily use, it's takes to much voltage and tweaking, it's difficult to get and keep stable, and you can corrupt your OS in a blink of an eye


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> So I have my ram Model F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW @ 3600 16-17-17-38-1T right now with auto subtimings and it seems stable
> 
> Passed a bit of realbench and a pass of memtest86. All I did was increase System Agent Voltage from .9 to .95.
> This is the only settings I have been able to find, besides stock that are stable.
> 
> Does system agent voltage really make that much of a difference? I would like to get the memory to ~4000mhz
> so if anyone has any settings I should try let me know!


System agent voltage supplies (along with VCCIO and a few others) the power to the IMC. So, yes, VCCSA (or SAV) is important when overclocking ram.

______________________________

hey guys - the asrock timing configurator v4.0.3 works on the R6A (with a 7740X/KBL-X at least). Someone plz try with a SLK-X

TimingConfiguratorv4.0.3.zip 2879k .zip file


----------



## djgar

NM - wrong thread


----------



## coolbho3k

Is double-sided RAM trash on Skylake-X? I think I have a G.Skill kit 3400 MHz, it's Samsung D-die. It runs at 3400 MHz, haven't tried OCing yet, getting the 7900X back from Silicon Lottery soon.


----------



## OZrevhead

Any of you guys stepping up to 7920x or higher? Or leave them to the benchmarkers?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OZrevhead*
> 
> Any of you guys stepping up to 7920x or higher? Or leave them to the benchmarkers?


I might upgrade to the 7980xe if the temps and voltages are good for 4.5-5.0GHz otherwise my 7900x is good enough for me.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I might upgrade to the 7980xe if the temps and voltages are good for 4.5-5.0GHz otherwise my 7900x is good enough for me.


I've been needing a second box with AVX512 since about day 10 of my 7900X. And I was seriously considering the 7980XE until it became clear that they wouldn't be soldiered. So that's probably not gonna happen any time soon.

OTOH, at work, we have some ES 12 - 18 core chips coming our way pending availability from Intel to experiment with. And since I'm the one with the most overclocking experience among my colleagues, it looks like I'll be the lucky one who gets to do it. Intel has this 197 page overclocking guide for Skylake X that's under NDA (with no expiration date) - and it's a definitely a bit more detailed than it needs to be for most people. lol


----------



## Jobotoo

Personally I'd rather they not be soldered as I'd prefer to delid and put LM.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I've been needing a second box with AVX512 since about day 10 of my 7900X. And I was seriously considering the 7980XE until it became clear that they wouldn't be soldiered. So that's probably not gonna happen any time soon.
> 
> OTOH, at work, we have some ES 12 - 18 core chips coming our way pending availability from Intel to experiment with. And since I'm the one with the most overclocking experience among my colleagues, it looks like I'll be the lucky one who gets to do it. Intel has this 197 page overclocking guide for Skylake X that's under NDA (with no expiration date) - and it's a definitely a bit more detailed than it needs to be for most people. lol


Oh no! You just disclosed that it's 197 pages


----------



## DeathAngel74

I almost killed my 7820x by setting adaptive voltage incorrectly.....(dumba**). I loaded Windows and Core Temp said I was using 1.7 volts and one core hit 105c instantly, just loading Windows... Needless to say, I rebooted and set it to 1.125 volts manually. Dang I feel stupid.

*EDIT:* Everything is fine










Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!








https://valid.x86.fr/vngwdz


----------



## SpeedyIV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Intel has this 197 page overclocking guide for Skylake X that's under NDA (with no expiration date) - and it's a definitely a bit more detailed than it needs to be for most people. lol


Boy I would like to see that guide. Why is it protected under an NDA? I am guessing if they published it for general consumption they would be officially endorsing over clocked modes of operation which would imply warranty coverage? Just curious.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> So I have my ram Model F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW @ 3600 16-17-17-38-1T right now with auto subtimings and it seems stable
> 
> Passed a bit of realbench and a pass of memtest86. All I did was increase System Agent Voltage from .9 to .95.
> This is the only settings I have been able to find, besides stock that are stable.
> 
> Does system agent voltage really make that much of a difference? I would like to get the memory to ~4000mhz
> so if anyone has any settings I should try let me know!


To follow up 3600 is still unstable according to realbench 2.43. So far I have it at 3000 with the same timings and that is able to pass realbench and memtest86.

I don't know if it's this BIOS (0702) or what but my ram wasn't unstable on the previous BIOS. Might switch back and test.


----------



## tistou77

The R6E has poor memory performance


----------



## Kimir

Nothing a bios update can't fix lol


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> The R6E has poor memory performance


Noobs allways have probems









Apex 4200mhz memory done right;

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=132407&d=1503073527


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Noobs allways have probems


I prefer and I hope this is it







because the difference is enormous anyway between Extreme and Apex


----------



## The_Rocker

My new i9 7900X is a beast. Currently at 4.5Ghz on all cores with 1.15v.

Non AVX Prime95:



I have an AVX offset of -5 at the moment to keep temps down when running AVX Prime95. They hit high 70's/low 80's @ 4Ghz.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Noobs allways have probems
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apex 4200mhz memory done right;
> 
> http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=132407&d=1503073527


5000mhz Core + 3403 NB Clock + Quad channel 4200C16 1T and gets 46.4ns on Skylake-X. Only 10ns higher than normal Skylake design.

If Cascadelake can bring the NB Clock to 3800-4000, 42s to 40ns might be possible.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jobotoo*
> 
> Personally I'd rather they not be soldered as I'd prefer to delid and put LM.


wut?
if it was soldered, it would have "solid" metal, not liquid metal.


----------



## superV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> wut?
> if it was soldered, it would have "solid" metal, not liquid metal.


naked mounting beats them all


----------



## czin125

You can buy 100 pieces of nanofoil solder ( 250 USD per pack ). No one's ever did a video with an actual cpu though.


----------



## Sobo

Could someone please advise me about memory overclocking? I'm running a 7820X (4500 core, 3000 mesh) with 4x8GB Corsair LPX 3200Mhz CL16 (16-18-18-36), part number CMK16GX4M2B3200C16 (Hynix modules from what I've heard) on ASUS TUF Mark I.

I am not sure if I should:

A) Push for maximum frequency even with worse timings
B) Push for maximum frequency while keeping default timings
C) Go for fastest timings while staying on 3200Mhz

Or is there no definitive answer and I would need to test all options?

- If I want best gaming performance -> that should be represented by lowest measured latency, correct? With stock XMP profile (i.e. 3200 CL16) I am getting 69ns mem latency, which looks pretty terrible to me.

From what I know the new cache structre of SKX is pretty horrible for gaming, because older Intel CPUs had a large inclusive L3 cache, so when a certain core needed data which were present in another core's L2 for example, it could easily find it in the L3, since all L1+L2 data were copied in the L3. SKX cannot do that (L3 is non-inclusive and super slow on top of that), so it has to go all the way back to the RAM to get the data -> RAM speed (meaning latency, bandwith is completely worthless) is crucial for those CPUs.

- Default XMP voltage is 1.35V -> is it safe to run 1.4V as 24/7 setup? I'm thinking it is, but it's always better to ask.

- How about TRFC timing? Currently my kit is sitting at 561 clocks, which again is kinda crap? I saw some benchmarks a few pages back with like 300 TRFC getting a nice perf boost (though I somehow doubt my kit could go that low). What should be the lowest reasonable value I should try for stability testing?

Sorry for possibly noobish questions, but none of the stuff I googled gave me solid answers since so much stuff is related to specific hardware and there's almost nothing for Skylake-X in particular.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> You can buy 100 pieces of nanofoil solder ( 250 USD per pack ). No one's ever did a video with an actual cpu though.


Surface prep on both sides would be an issue along with how to apply voltage to the foil (both mechanically reaching it and how not to fry the CPU). I'd assume you'd want to use a heat process, not plating...

Not sure what the Si surface would require to make a good bond?


----------



## Pume91

Seems like 7820x really likes fast memory, very happy with the latency i am getting right now.


----------



## Pume91

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sobo*
> 
> Could someone please advise me about memory overclocking? I'm running a 7820X (4500 core, 3000 mesh) with 4x8GB Corsair LPX 3200Mhz CL16 (16-18-18-36), part number CMK16GX4M2B3200C16 (Hynix modules from what I've heard) on ASUS TUF Mark I.
> 
> I am not sure if I should:
> 
> A) Push for maximum frequency even with worse timings
> B) Push for maximum frequency while keeping default timings
> C) Go for fastest timings while staying on 3200Mhz
> 
> Or is there no definitive answer and I would need to test all options?
> 
> - If I want best gaming performance -> that should be represented by lowest measured latency, correct? With stock XMP profile (i.e. 3200 CL16) I am getting 69ns mem latency, which looks pretty terrible to me.
> 
> From what I know the new cache structre of SKX is pretty horrible for gaming, because older Intel CPUs had a large inclusive L3 cache, so when a certain core needed data which were present in another core's L2 for example, it could easily find it in the L3, since all L1+L2 data were copied in the L3. SKX cannot do that (L3 is non-inclusive and super slow on top of that), so it has to go all the way back to the RAM to get the data -> RAM speed (meaning latency, bandwith is completely worthless) is crucial for those CPUs.
> 
> - Default XMP voltage is 1.35V -> is it safe to run 1.4V as 24/7 setup? I'm thinking it is, but it's always better to ask.
> 
> - How about TRFC timing? Currently my kit is sitting at 561 clocks, which again is kinda crap? I saw some benchmarks a few pages back with like 300 TRFC getting a nice perf boost (though I somehow doubt my kit could go that low). What should be the lowest reasonable value I should try for stability testing?
> 
> Sorry for possibly noobish questions, but none of the stuff I googled gave me solid answers since so much stuff is related to specific hardware and there's almost nothing for Skylake-X in particular.


Hynix doesnt overclock well, but what i have noticed is that tighter timings give better performance boost than higher frequency. And yeah setting tRFC 300 helps alot in latency, so does setting tREFI to max value.


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pume91*
> 
> Seems like 7820x really likes fast memory, very happy with the latency i am getting right now.


Love the timings on that!

Higher Freq and tighter timings are even better.


----------



## czin125

http://cdn.overclock.net/5/59/59a94554_fallout420cpu20vs20ram.png
http://cdn.overclock.net/2/29/290a5b22_6700k204.7204000c17.jpeg 37.3ns and higher score
http://cdn.overclock.net/d/dd/dd4a6065_6700k204.7203000c12.jpeg 37.3ns
4000C17 2T ( 235 perf index ) is still managed to beat 3000C12 1T ( 250 perf index ). Probably best to test to find out.


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pume91*
> 
> Seems like 7820x really likes fast memory, very happy with the latency i am getting right now.


Very impressive! Your timings gave me an idea and I was able to match your scores using similar timings on a 7900X.










Edit: Oddly I cannot match your scores at 3000 MHz cache, I wonder if the 7820X is slightly faster or if this is simply due to small differences in timings system to system.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyIV*
> 
> Boy I would like to see that guide. Why is it protected under an NDA? I am guessing if they published it for general consumption they would be officially endorsing over clocked modes of operation which would imply warranty coverage? Just curious.


I have no idea, so your guess is as good as mine. It got forwarded to me from a colleague and it's got "Intel Confidential" in bright red on every single page. So I'm not messing with it.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> Very impressive! Your timings gave me an idea and I was able to match your scores using similar timings on a 7900X.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Oddly I cannot match your scores at 3000 MHz cache, I wonder if the 7820X is slightly faster or if this is simply due to small differences in timings system to system.


Very nice results. What kind of voltage are you guys running on dram?


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Very nice results. What kind of voltage are you guys running on dram?


1.4V right now, I haven't tested trying to go lower yet.

I seem to get a bit better latency relaxing tRAS to 40?


----------



## Artah

X299 EVGA Micro is in stock for those of you wanting to miniaturize your build. https://www.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=131-SX-E295-KR


----------



## DVLux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> X299 EVGA Micro is in stock for those of you wanting to miniaturize your build. https://www.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=131-SX-E295-KR


Mmm,.. Not much different than the MSI Micro. Looks like the only difference is sacrificing a secondary NIC, and two SATA, for a U.2 port.

The 8-pin _seems_ to be in a better location on the EVGA.


----------



## The_Rocker

Hi guys, I have just finished testing of my 7900X at 4.5Ghz. AVX2 offset -3 and AVX512 -4.

Temps with NON AVX Prime95 sit at around 75-80c.

Now i have upped the voltage to 1.2v and clock to 4.7Ghz am running Prime95 NON AVX, temps are hitting 84-86c at the highest.

Obviously when I run an AVX load I am probably going to exceed the TJmax if I leave my offsets like they were for 4.5. I am just wondering what sort of offsets other 7900X owners were running when up at 4.7Ghz? I think I might have to go for -5 and -6, is this normal?

I am about to install some pull fans on my radiator to complete my push pull set up.

Thanks


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Rocker*
> 
> Hi guys, I have just finished testing of my 7900X at 4.5Ghz. AVX2 offset -3 and AVX512 -4.
> 
> Temps with NON AVX Prime95 sit at around 75-80c.
> 
> Now i have upped the voltage to 1.2v and clock to 4.7Ghz am running Prime95 NON AVX, temps are hitting 84-86c at the highest.
> 
> Obviously when I run an AVX load I am probably going to exceed the TJmax if I leave my offsets like they were for 4.5. I am just wondering what sort of offsets other 7900X owners were running when up at 4.7Ghz? I think I might have to go for -5 and -6, is this normal?
> 
> I am about to install some pull fans on my radiator to complete my push pull set up.
> 
> Thanks


The stock AVX and AVX512 offsets for the 7900X are 4 and 7. (4.0 GHz non-AVX, 3.6 AVX, 3.3 AVX512)

Those offsets seem to be about right even with the non-AVX speed is overclocked as much as possible. As in: -4 AVX and -7 AVX512 lead to about the same thermals as non-AVX.

I currently run 4.5/4.0/3.8 for (non-AVX/AVX/AVX512). So offsets -5 and -7. Though I can probably bump the AVX up to 4.1 since at 4.0 GHz, it runs noticeably cooler than non-AVX @ 4.5 and AVX512 @ 3.8.

The catch is that there are very few AVX512 stress-tests right now. So if you're finding that your "optimal" AVX512 offset is about the same as AVX, then you're not really stressing the AVX512 at all. Contrary to popular belief, Prime95 29 does not use AVX512 for its stress-tests. So if that's what you're using to test AVX512, you haven't tested AVX512 at all.


----------



## czin125

https://abload.de/img/aida64_3.5ghzjoz5x.jpg

7820X
X299 Taichi
Core Clock 5000mhz @ 1.329v
NB Clock 3500mhz
64GB 3800mhz 15-14-14-28 1T 400
47.4ns

http://abload.de/img/cb152205y4u5o.png
Something about 70C or so
7820X
X299 Apex
Core Clock 5000mhz @ 1.28v
NB Clock 3300mhz
32GB 3200mhz 11-11-11-28 1T 280
CB 2205


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> The stock AVX and AVX512 offsets for the 7900X are 4 and 7. (4.0 GHz non-AVX, 3.6 AVX, 3.3 AVX512)
> 
> Those offsets seem to be about right even with the non-AVX speed is overclocked as much as possible. As in: -4 AVX and -7 AVX512 lead to about the same thermals as non-AVX.
> 
> I currently run 4.5/4.0/3.8 for (non-AVX/AVX/AVX512). So offsets -5 and -7. Though I can probably bump the AVX up to 4.1 since at 4.0 GHz, it runs noticeably cooler than non-AVX @ 4.5 and AVX512 @ 3.8.
> 
> The catch is that there are very few AVX512 stress-tests right now. So if you're finding that your "optimal" AVX512 offset is about the same as AVX, then you're not really stressing the AVX512 at all. Contrary to popular belief, Prime95 29 does not use AVX512 for its stress-tests. So if that's what you're using to test AVX512, you haven't tested AVX512 at all.


Eh stock 7900x
Afaik its 3.9ghz all core, 3.5ghz avx, 3.3ghz avx 512, -4/-6.

Avx 512 always at base clock.

7820x is 4ghz all core avx 3.8ghz avx 512 3.6ghz


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> https://abload.de/img/aida64_3.5ghzjoz5x.jpg
> 
> 7820X
> X299 Taichi
> Core Clock 5000mhz @ 1.329v
> NB Clock 3500mhz
> 64GB 3800mhz 15-14-14-28 1T 400
> 47.4ns
> 
> http://abload.de/img/cb152205y4u5o.png
> Something about 70C or so
> 7820X
> X299 Apex
> Core Clock 5000mhz @ 1.28v
> NB Clock 3300mhz
> 32GB 3200mhz 11-11-11-28 1T 280
> CB 2205


So what are you trying to show?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Eh stock 7900x
> Afaik its 3.9ghz all core, 3.5ghz avx, 3.3ghz avx 512, -4/-6.
> 
> Avx 512 always at base clock.
> 
> 7820x is 4ghz all core avx 3.8ghz avx 512 3.6ghz


Stock all-core turbo for non-AVX is 4.0 on the 7900X.



I've been seeing multiple different stock offsets from different sources. But that's probably because the offsets differ by model and the sources don't specify for which model. The ones I'm seeing the most for the 7900X are -4 and -7. And based on the thermals, I believe those are the correct ones.


----------



## Sobo

Played around with RAM a bit. Let me tell you, the Corsair LPX RAM is beyond garbage in terms of OC potential. I increased voltage from 1.35 to 1.4V and frequency from 3200 to 3400 (lowest increment of my mobo) -> instant black screen, wouldn't even post. I will have to remind myself to never buy anything from Hynix again, but I guess I can't expect too much since the kit was pretty decent value.

Still, for another run I kept it at 3200 and decreased timings from 16-18-18-36 (561 TRFC) to 15-17-17-33 (480 TRFC). To my suprise this had a noticable impact on performance in cache / mem intensive benchmarks.

As a CPU gaming test I like to run the good old Final Fantasy Heavensward benchmark at max. settings, but in 720p mode. Just from that little timings upgrade I gained nearly a thousand points, which translates into almost 4% performance improvement. That's pretty insane for such a tiny change, and it also means that the new SKX cache structure is beyond useless for gaming, because the amount of trips all they way to the RAM instead of just to one of the CPU caches must be ludicrously high for it to have such a massive perf. impact.

Anyway, are there any hints as to how set the fastest TRFC? Lowering mine from 560 to 480 seems to be fine, what kind of headroom should I expect?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Stock all-core turbo for non-AVX is 4.0 on the 7900X.
> 
> 
> 
> I've been seeing multiple different stock offsets from different sources. But that's probably because the offsets differ by model and the sources don't specify for which model. The ones I'm seeing the most for the 7900X are -4 and -7. And based on the thermals, I believe those are the correct ones.


Asus confirm its 3.9ghz even the vid confirms it
Disable asus multicore
Set svid enable
Set cpu core ratio to auto
Enable cstates ( this part really not sure correct)

Sample size one es, two other 7900x users. 3 diff asus mobo
If left asus default.. it will be 4ghz

if default it says some whacked up values on the avx in bios
but when loading fft 12 prime 26.6 confirms its 3.9ghz. prime 28.2 avx was 3.5ghz and y-cruncher 3.3ghz.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Asus confirm its 3.9ghz even the vid confirms it
> Disable asus multicore
> Set svid enable
> Set cpu core ratio to auto
> Enable cstates ( this part really not sure correct)
> 
> Sample size one es, two other 7900x users. 3 diff asus mobo
> If left asus default.. it will be 4ghz


Ugh... so much conflicting information. On Gigabyte's side, they use the 4.0 GHz all-core turbo. But they default both offsets to zero. So it tries to run AVX512 at 4.0 GHz. If it weren't for the phantom throttling, it would destroy anything that isn't at least custom water.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Ugh... so much conflicting information. On Gigabyte's side, they use the 4.0 GHz all-core turbo. But they default both offsets to zero. So it tries to run AVX512 at 4.0 GHz. If it weren't for the phantom throttling, it would destroy anything that isn't at least custom water.


Asus bios only 7820x reports the default offset correctlly
Speedstep disable. Bios boot set to performance

7820x
Ai tweaker will show
Turbo 4.5ghz
Avx 3.8ghz
Avx 512 3.6ghz
On the side hardware monitor 4ghz

For 7900x it stupidly shows all 4.5ghz
Hw monotor side 3.9ghz
Vid actually drops to that off 3.9ghz once asus enchancements are disabled

Stress in windows n it results 3.9/3.5/3.3.


----------



## Jpmboy

7920X in stock at newegg...


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> I uploaded a new AVX-512 stress test a few pages ago. The program is a patched version of FIRESTARTER. FIRESTARTER is used to size heatsinks for HPC supercomputers. I uploaded a patched version, because the official Windows build is broken. The changes can be confirmed in a hex editor.
> 
> Link: https://www.sendspace.com/file/648lp0


Pretty easy way to settle this
Indulge me if u may

Tools needed
1. hwinfo
2. prime95 26.6
3. intel turbo boost 3.0
4. asus mobo preferabaly. If other mobo set vccin to 2.0v and corresponding loadline to make sure that voltage sticks on load.

1st Screenshot
Post a screenshot of your intel turbo 3.0. Want to see the prefered core list. Set it to disabled btw for the later part.

2nd Screenshot
Post me a screenshot of hwinfo core vid/cpu speed of your 4.5ghz stable with p95 26.6 fft 12 on load

Svid enable , loadline 6.

3rd Screenshot
set cpu ratio sync all cores 39, cpu voltage auto
Post a screenshot hwinfo all the core vid/cpu speed of p95 26.6 fft 12 run on load

4th Screenshot
set cpu ratio aync all cores 40, cpu voltage auto
Post a screenshot hwinfo all the core vid/cpu speed of p95 26.6fft 12fft run on load
You can take the screenshot after 2-3 minutes during load.

Anybody else want to join in please do.
Just indulge me if you may.


----------



## pantsaregood

Has anyone used a 7820X in conjunction with an NH-D15 or NH-D15S?

I'm going to be air cooling a 7820X (binned at 1.25V/4.8 GHz) with an NH-D15S. I have two NF-A14 iPPC 3000 fans attached to it, so there's a lot of air moving over it. It has also been delidded.

Curious to see if anyone has attempted something like this - I want to know if I'm going to have issues with cooling.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> Has anyone used a 7820X in conjunction with an NH-D15 or NH-D15S?
> 
> I'm going to be air cooling a 7820X (binned at 1.25V/4.8 GHz) with an NH-D15S. I have two NF-A14 iPPC 3000 fans attached to it, so there's a lot of air moving over it. It has also been delidded.
> 
> Curious to see if anyone has attempted something like this - I want to know if I'm going to have issues with cooling.


I'm hitting 90ish on my hottest cores with a 240 aio and only at 1.2vcore
so yeah you might not be able to reach 1.25vcore


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I'm hitting 90ish on my hottest cores with a 240 aio and only at 1.2vcore
> so yeah you might not be able to reach 1.25vcore


Delidded?

NH-D15 outperforms most 240mm AIOs, too.


----------



## Mastertwiz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Instead of chatting in other threads like Broadwell-E, I thought I'd start a thread where everything can be put.


This is a review of a binned and delidded 7900X (4.8 @ 1.225 V) purchased from Silicon Lottery. My 7900X is paired with the MSI X299 XPOWER GAMING.








Blazing single core performance (Cinebench 226) balanced w/ great multithread scores (Cinebench 2707)

I was able to maintain a stable 4.9 overclock on all cores, but eventually ended up with a turbo overclock (per core) @ 5.1 GHz on 4 cores and 4.7 GHZ on the 6 remaining cores. My cinebench multi-threaded scores come in at 2640 - 2706 with single core scores between 220-226. I couldn't be more thrilled.

Aidia 64 stability test for 30 minutes (CPU temperatures between 82 - 8 7 degrees, VRM temperatures peaked at 72). I'm running a single custom loop that cools both the CPU and 2 x GTX 1080 Tis. The custom loop consists of 2 x 420 mm radiators with 6 fans on each in push/pull configuration, and 2 additional intake fans (14 fans in total) housed in the EVGA DG-87.

My best 3D Mark TimeSpy score came in at 19306. No need for threadripper here. I'm very glad I went with silicon lottery for the binned and delidded 7900X. Well worth the price. I'm thinking about doing my first youtube review with graphs, screenshots, and benchmarks if I can find the time.

Cinebench


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







UEFI/BIOS Settings


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Picture of set-up


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> Delidded?
> 
> NH-D15 outperforms most 240mm AIOs, too.


yes. And no it doesn't


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> Delidded?
> 
> NH-D15 outperforms most 240mm AIOs, too.


The D15 might match 240mm AIOs on the mainstream chips (150 watts or so overclocked), but in my experience it's a night an day difference once you start pushing 250W+. The D15 simply can't cope.


----------



## pantsaregood

Are benchmarks showing the NH-D15 landing between 280mm and 240mm radiators faulty? I never saw anything clearly wrong with their methodology, but it is possible.

Also, I've had no issues cooling a 6800K pulling 180W before. That wasn't an issue at all. There was still thermal headroom, but throwing voltage at it wasn't really doing anything at that point. It's rated for 220W TDP max, since that's the highest any recent consumer chip (FX 9590) has pushed.


----------



## aDyerSituation

If you already have it I don't see what trying it will hurt.


----------



## pantsaregood

Looking for a contingency plan more than anything. If it isn't sufficient, I'm looking for a 360mm AIO to replace it.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mastertwiz*
> 
> This is a review of a binned and delidded 7900X (4.8 @ 1.225 V) purchased from Silicon Lottery. My 7900X is paired with the MSI X299 XPOWER GAMING.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blazing single core performance (Cinebench 226) balanced w/ great multithread scores (Cinebench 2707)
> 
> I was able to maintain a stable 4.9 overclock on all cores, but eventually ended up with a turbo overclock (per core) @ 5.1 GHz on 4 cores and 4.7 GHZ on the 6 remaining cores. My cinebench multi-threaded scores come in at 2640 - 2706 with single core scores between 220-226. I couldn't be more thrilled.
> 
> Aidia 64 stability test for 30 minutes (CPU temperatures between 82 - 8 7 degrees, VRM temperatures peaked at 72). I'm running a single custom loop that cools both the CPU and 2 x GTX 1080 Tis. The custom loop consists of 2 x 420 mm radiators with 6 fans on each in push/pull configuration, and 2 additional intake fans (14 fans in total) housed in the EVGA DG-87.
> 
> My best 3D Mark TimeSpy score came in at 19306. No need for threadripper here. I'm very glad I went with silicon lottery for the binned and delidded 7900X. Well worth the price. I'm thinking about doing my first youtube review with graphs, screenshots, and benchmarks if I can find the time.
> 
> Cinebench
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UEFI/BIOS Settings
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picture of set-up
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Nice...


----------



## GreedyMuffin

How many have a 7800X?

Currently running mine at 4600/3200 at 1.146/1.150V on core/cache and the temps are around the mid/high 50s after folding for a few hours last I checked.

I can also do 4800 1.260V that is as stable (2 hours Realbench AVX 2.54V)


----------



## DeathAngel74

boo..sad panda face...


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## kotal7

Its ok. My 7800X 4.6/3.2 1.16V, 4.8/3.2 1.248V. CPU is without delid, max temps on core 87C in stress test.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> How many have a 7800X?
> 
> Currently running mine at 4600/3200 at 1.146/1.150V on core/cache and the temps are around the mid/high 50s after folding for a few hours last I checked.
> 
> I can also do 4800 1.260V that is as stable (2 hours Realbench AVX 2.54V)


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Funny how I need less voltage for 4600, but more for 4800.









What are you stresstesting with? Thanks!


----------



## kotal7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Funny how I need less voltage for 4600, but more for 4800.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are you stresstesting with? Thanks!


OCCT, realbench and prime 95. Run on AVX 4.3GHz.


----------



## Sgang

hi guys,
what do you think of the 7740x? is worth a try ? (the price is 300$)
I've received a X299 Motherboard as gift and would like to use it as my second PC (my first one is an AMD rig ryzen 1800x B350)


----------



## The_Rocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgang*
> 
> hi guys,
> what do you think of the 7740x? is worth a try ? (the price is 300$)
> I've received a X299 Motherboard as gift and would like to use it as my second PC (my first one is an AMD rig ryzen 1800x B350)


I'd say no. Firstly because I wonder what the point of only using a quad on the X299 platform is, and secondly because you'll only have 16 total PCI-E lanes.

Sell the board and buy something extra for your Ryzen build.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgang*
> 
> hi guys,
> what do you think of the 7740x? is worth a try ? (the price is 300$)
> I've received a X299 Motherboard as gift and would like to use it as my second PC (my first one is an AMD rig ryzen 1800x B350)


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Rocker*
> 
> I'd say no. Firstly because I wonder what the point of only using a quad on the X299 platform is, and secondly because you'll only have 16 total PCI-E lanes.
> 
> Sell the board and buy something extra for your Ryzen build.


It depends. Theres one oblivious truth all da reviewers are pretty silly not to realize or mention.
High end z270 pretty much dead in da water atm.
M9e, giga soc z270 etc.

So if you have a x299.. go for it. 7740x etc


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Funny how I need less voltage for 4600, but more for 4800.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are you stresstesting with? Thanks!


I have 7800x also...never tested with such tools, but playing games 2 weeks in a row with these settings
5050 1.31v and 3200 mesh 1.15v


Edit: Before jumping on me to clarify my currant case is not fitting 3*120 radiator well and just 2 fans are breathing...in some weeks when migrate the PC in proper case will test it deeply.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Funny how I need less voltage for 4600, but more for 4800.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are you stresstesting with? Thanks!


Err
Isnt it because you are running zero offset for avx/512.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgang*
> 
> hi guys,
> what do you think of the 7740x? is worth a try ? (the price is 300$)
> I've received a X299 Motherboard as gift and would like to use it as my second PC (my first one is an AMD rig ryzen 1800x B350)


yes, it's worth a spin. Mine is running at 5.3/5.3/4.8 with 1.36V (droop to 1.328V under Y-crunch) with ram at 4000. 5.4/5.4/5.0 @ 1.4V. Highest core temp is low 60s It's a very fast 4 core... fastest single and dual core performance available today.
Delid and let 'er rip!


----------



## Sgang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> It depends. Theres one oblivious truth all da reviewers are pretty silly not to realize or mention.
> High end z270 pretty much dead in da water atm.
> M9e, giga soc z270 etc.
> 
> So if you have a x299.. go for it. 7740x etc


thank you all for the suggestions, my main use will be gaming and (maybe) i would like also to try an hackintosh setup ...


----------



## Sgang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes, it's worth a spin. Mine is running at 5.3/5.3/4.8 with 1.36V (droop to 1.328V under Y-crunch) with ram at 4000. 5.4/5.4/5.0 @ 1.4V. Highest core temp is low 60s It's a very fast 4 core... fastest single and dual core performance available today.
> Delid and let 'er rip!


Wow, how do you cool the cpu at those speed?


----------



## DeathAngel74

Lowered VCORE to 1.140V, same results...less heat. YAY!


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!






4.5/4.2/4.0GHz, Mesh-3.2GHz, DDR4-3.2GHz @1.35V
https://valid.x86.fr/iicpb5
Ok, I'm done for now! Waiting for payday to buy Intel overclocking insurance ($69 USD), then delid!


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> Lowered VCORE to 1.140V, same results...less heat. YAY!
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.5/4.2/4.0GHz, Mesh-3.2GHz, DDR4-3.2GHz @1.35V
> https://valid.x86.fr/4z3qe1
> Ok, I'm done for now! Waiting for payday to buy Intel overclocking insurance ($69 USD), then delid!


Have you looked into that? Unless something has changed recently, Intel's tuning plan does not cover any physical modification of the CPU.


----------



## DeathAngel74

I may have to reconsider then, lol. $600 CPU...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgang*
> 
> Wow, how do you cool the cpu at those speed?


after delid, jst about any cooler would be enough. I have a simple 360 custom loop and EK block. (loop probably cost as much as a 360 AIO).
delid and used CLP
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> I may have to reconsider then, lol. $600 CPU...


If you want a "warranted" delideded cpu, should buy it from Silicon Lottery.


----------



## DeathAngel74

I know, I know...Lack of sleep is clouding my judgement, lol.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> I uploaded a new AVX-512 stress test a few pages ago. The program is a patched version of FIRESTARTER. FIRESTARTER is used to size heatsinks for HPC supercomputers. I uploaded a patched version, because the official Windows build is broken. The changes can be confirmed in a hex editor.
> 
> Link: https://www.sendspace.com/file/648lp0


I may try it later if and when I get the time.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes, it's worth a spin. Mine is running at 5.3/5.3/4.8 with 1.36V (droop to 1.328V under Y-crunch) with ram at 4000. 5.4/5.4/5.0 @ 1.4V. Highest core temp is low 60s It's a very fast 4 core... fastest single and dual core performance available today.
> Delid and let 'er rip!


How does it have 3 frequencies? Kaby Lake X doesn't have AVX512.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I may try it later if and when I get the time.
> How does it have 3 frequencies? Kaby Lake X doesn't have AVX512.


Last one is ringbus speed


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I may try it later if and when I get the time.
> How does it have 3 frequencies? Kaby Lake X doesn't have AVX512.


core/avx/cache.


----------



## Sgang

How silicon lottery works ? i can buy the cpu from the site? They Ship to Europe?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgang*
> 
> How silicon lottery works ? i can buy the cpu from the site? They Ship to Europe?


ask him directly.. He's an OCN member

@silicon lottery


----------



## iamjanco

oops... wrong thread.


----------



## CuewarsTaner

I am currently running my delidded EK Monoblock cooled 7900X @4.8GHz with 1.255V.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CuewarsTaner*
> 
> I am currently running my delidded EK Monoblock cooled 7900X @4.8GHz with 1.255V.


what are your temps?


----------



## fireedo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CuewarsTaner*
> 
> I am currently running my delidded EK Monoblock cooled 7900X @4.8GHz with 1.255V.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> what are your temps?


yeah really want to know what your load temp while in the stressing test


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CuewarsTaner*
> 
> I am currently running my delidded EK Monoblock cooled 7900X @4.8GHz with 1.255V.


Me three. Post a one hr realbench 2.43 with siv open.


----------



## The_Rocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Me three. Post a one hr realbench 2.43 with siv open.


Im running my 7900X @ 4.7Ghz with 1.2v and it is NOT de-lidded.

Tested with the following:

Intel Burn Test 10 passes HIGH
Intel Burn Test 10 passes VHIGH
NonAVX Prime95 SmallFFT - 2hrs 30mins
NonAVXPrime95 LargeFFT - 2hrs 30mins
AVX Prime95 SmallFFT - 2hrs 30mins
AVX Prime95 LargeFFT - 2hrs 30mins
Cinebench CPU Benchmark
NonAVX Prime95 Blend - 12hrs

Max temp during smallFFT AVX P95 was 91c. Max temp during smallFFT nonAVX P95 is 82c.

This is 10 mins into a smallFFT:


And heres 10 hours into a blend:


----------



## Artah

I'm able to run my 7900X chip at 5.1GHz and pass XTU Bench but the problem I'm having is temp control and it's a delided chip. Anyone have any suggestions on where I can trim to lower temps even more? I have to run LLC6 and I know I can most likely lower the core voltage a bit more, I have it at 1.35v for 5.1 but I only need 1.312v for 5GHz. Just need some ideas of where I can trim down to lower temps on load.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I'm able to run my 7900X chip at 5.1GHz and pass XTU Bench but the problem I'm having is temp control and it's a delided chip. Anyone have any suggestions on where I can trim to lower temps even more? I have to run LLC6 and I know I can most likely lower the core voltage a bit more, I have it at 1.35v for 5.1 but I only need 1.312v for 5GHz. Just need some ideas of where I can trim down to lower temps on load.


You're at a wall with that voltage, really. You can lower the uncore and keep voltage to around 1v, this may help.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Rocker*
> 
> Im running my 7900X @ 4.7Ghz with 1.2v and it is NOT de-lidded.
> 
> Tested with the following:
> 
> Intel Burn Test 10 passes HIGH
> Intel Burn Test 10 passes VHIGH
> NonAVX Prime95 SmallFFT - 2hrs 30mins
> NonAVXPrime95 LargeFFT - 2hrs 30mins
> AVX Prime95 SmallFFT - 2hrs 30mins
> AVX Prime95 LargeFFT - 2hrs 30mins
> Cinebench CPU Benchmark
> NonAVX Prime95 Blend - 12hrs
> 
> Max temp during smallFFT AVX P95 was 91c. Max temp during smallFFT nonAVX P95 is 82c.
> 
> This is 10 mins into a smallFFT:
> 
> 
> And heres 10 hours into a blend:


Thats stable vcore alright.
Da interesting part will be realbench 2.43 , 2hrs recommended.. prefered 4hrs. Its gonna point out something nobody here seem to state. You can pause the gpu testing btw..

Would you mind doing it??
Curious about msi atm.


----------



## The_Rocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I'm able to run my 7900X chip at 5.1GHz and pass XTU Bench but the problem I'm having is temp control and it's a delided chip. Anyone have any suggestions on where I can trim to lower temps even more? I have to run LLC6 and I know I can most likely lower the core voltage a bit more, I have it at 1.35v for 5.1 but I only need 1.312v for 5GHz. Just need some ideas of where I can trim down to lower temps on load.


If its Delidded, you have good watercooling AND you can't lower the volts.... Then there is nothing you can do buddy. You are at the limits of the chip. And to be honest I think you need to take a step back and just think about what you have achieved already! You have a 10core intel chip running at 5Ghz! What a BEAST!

However... Like you have noticed.... There is no way you are controlling those temps at over 1.3v unless you use sub ambient cooling. At those speeds & voltages, the CPU will be pulling over 300w.

What are your current temperatures under Prime95 smallFFT v26.6 (nonAVX) and then Prime95 smallFFT v28.10 (AVX)?

Also what is your AVX offset?


----------



## The_Rocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Thats stable vcore alright.
> Da interesting part will be realbench 2hrs prefered 4hrs. Its gonna point out something nobody here seem to state.


What will realbench point out?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Rocker*
> 
> What will realbench point out?


Mesh. Afaik only can narrow it down to asus.
Msi???? Hence my request.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> You're at a wall with that voltage, really. You can lower the uncore and keep voltage to around 1v, this may help.


I'll try that tomorrow thanks.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Rocker*
> 
> If its Delidded, you have good watercooling AND you can't lower the volts.... Then there is nothing you can do buddy. You are at the limits of the chip. And to be honest I think you need to take a step back and just think about what you have achieved already! You have a 10core intel chip running at 5Ghz! What a BEAST!
> 
> However... Like you have noticed.... There is no way you are controlling those temps at over 1.3v unless you use sub ambient cooling. At those speeds & voltages, the CPU will be pulling over 300w.
> 
> What are your current temperatures under Prime95 smallFFT v26.6 (nonAVX) and then Prime95 smallFFT v28.10 (AVX)?
> 
> Also what is your AVX offset?


I have not tried those, just XTU at 5.1GHz. I have AVX set to -3 -5 atm. I'm just trying to bench as high as I can for now to record on hwbot. I don't want to put this thing in my rig with the massive custom loop. Only using a 720XT Mark V atm. I was hoping to throw in the R6E in the rig if it acts similar to the Apex but can't buy it atm









Temps def hitting ceiling at 104c btw.


----------



## The_Rocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Mesh. Afaik only can narrow it down to asus.
> Msi???? Hence my request.


What about it? I will run realbench for you, just using my machine at the moment but will run it in a couple of hours.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Rocker*
> 
> If its Delidded, you have good watercooling AND you can't lower the volts.... Then there is nothing you can do buddy. You are at the limits of the chip. And to be honest I think you need to take a step back and just think about what you have achieved already! You have a 10core intel chip running at 5Ghz! What a BEAST!
> 
> However... Like you have noticed.... There is no way you are controlling those temps at over 1.3v unless you use sub ambient cooling. At those speeds & voltages, the CPU will be pulling over 300w.
> 
> What are your current temperatures under Prime95 smallFFT v26.6 (nonAVX) and then Prime95 smallFFT v28.10 (AVX)?
> 
> Also what is your AVX offset?


If its like anything before He is running offset 31 ?????


----------



## The_Rocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> If its like anything before He is running offset 31 ?????


Personally, I can't see this system passing any real stress test like P95 with those voltages and clocks... Without sub ambient cooling anyway.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Rocker*
> 
> What about it? I will run realbench for you, just using my machine at the moment but will run it in a couple of hours.


Seriously i havent spoken about this since i only see it on asus.
Hence why i am requesting. Msi seems like a way easier board atm.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> If its like anything before He is running offset 31 ?????


nope, like I said above offset -3 -5 it will die on RB 2.54. I'm only after XTU atm.


----------



## The_Rocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I'll try that tomorrow thanks.
> I have not tried those, just XTU at 5.1GHz. I have AVX set to -3 -5 atm. I'm just trying to bench as high as I can for now to record on hwbot. I don't want to put this thing in my rig with the massive custom loop. Only using a 720XT Mark V atm. I was hoping to throw in the R6E in the rig if it acts similar to the Apex but can't buy it atm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Temps def hitting ceiling at 104c btw.


Ohhhh you're benching and shooting for high numbers. That explains your extreme settings then


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The_Rocker*
> 
> Personally, I can't see this system passing any real stress test like P95 with those voltages and clocks... Without sub ambient cooling anyway.


We all know that. He ran 5ghz offset 31 avx/512 for with rb 2.53.. ( which stresses avx) and chopped sign 5ghz stable.
Afaik his is a 4.9ghz binned cpu from silicon lottery.

So his 5ghz shouldnt be that far off


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> nope, like I said above offset -3 -5 it will die on RB 2.54. I'm only after XTU atm.


I seriously wished you actually start clocking from a baseline prespective
But i do understand your point is from SL binned prespective.
Can you pass rb2.43 and rb2.54 with SL binned at 4.9ghz -3/-5??


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> I seriously wished you actually start clocking from a baseline prespective
> But i do understand your point is from SL binned prespective.
> Can you pass rb2.43 and rb2.54 with SL binned at 4.9ghz -3/-5??


Only while blind folded or under the influence of alcohol.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Only while blind folded or under the influence of alcohol.


You actually made me choke on beer just now ...was LOL on da reply. Freaking warm day today.


----------



## The_Rocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> You actually made me choke on beer just now ...was LOL on da reply. Freaking warm day today.


Was just wondering if your running a 7900X or other Skylake X chip as well and what your clocks are?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> You actually made me choke on beer just now ...was LOL on da reply. Freaking warm day today.










Don't waste beer! Well I'm sure I can pass most tests with avx cranked up but I would have to give it more juice. when I get more play time I'll try it out. I had it at 5GHz before I sent it to SL so they can delid it and had them bench it on their own way with the hardware they have and that's when they came up with 4.9 @ 1.275 but I did start from 4.5GHz and worked my way up when I first got it. For now I need to overclock my pillow, peace out


----------



## Martin778

Are there already any OC guides for the big SKL-X? I have a 7920X and want to try it out.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Are there already any OC guides for the big SKL-X? I have a 7920X and want to try it out.


Not any good ones yet, no.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Are there already any OC guides for the big SKL-X? I have a 7920X and want to try it out.


None. But msi mobo seems to be pretty straight forward. Most of the high clocks cpu paired with high ram clocks with norm cooling s-x cpu seems to be on it.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Are there any real Skylake-X overclocking guides in general? Only ones I have seen: "up vcore up clockspeed. and oh btw mesh overclocking is important! Look it up in other guides"


----------



## The_Rocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Are there already any OC guides for the big SKL-X? I have a 7920X and want to try it out.


https://hwbot.org/newsflash/4701_gigabyte_x299_skylake_x_overclocking_guide











And of course there is this thread.

To get you started. Essentially you set your multiplier/ratio to static and set it to a number which multiplied by 100x gives your clock. So a multi of 40 x 100 = 4000Mhz or 4Ghz. The next most important setting is core voltage or VCORE. As you raise your clock speed, you must usually raise v core as well, but only gradually. Find some examples of what vcore others with the same cpu are using, or the stock vcore and set it manually. Then start bumping your multiplier up. Get into Windows, do some quick stress testing, if it passes, up the multi again, then test again. Keep on going until you crash during a test.

When you fail a test, increase the voltage by a little and try again... rinse and repeat.

Once you are at your target clock speed, its time to do more in depth stability testing over multiple hours with multiple tests. Also don't forgot to use the machine for whatever you are using it for, like gaming etc... as this is also a test.

That should start you off!

EDIT: I see you edited your post looking for something more in depth!









Will say... Overclocking the mesh doesn't seem to really do a lot.


----------



## Martin778

Oh and by the way, the 7920X is indeed an oddball. It's a rebranded, unlocked Xeon, even HWInfo64 says it's a 2900 series Xeon








I bought it over the 7900X because it has the bigger HCC die (2 more cores but a way bigger heat dissipation area) and I expect Xeon core to be a bit more durable.

Funny how there are still NONE of 7920X reviews and I have one in my PC already since yesterday. 2545 points in Cine R15 just with loaded 3200C14 XMP and after a fresh Win 10 Pro x64 install.

My stock temps on a Kraken X62 don't go above 50*C under full load in Aida64.


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Are there any real Skylake-X overclocking guides in general? Only ones I have seen: "up vcore up clockspeed. and oh btw mesh overclocking is important! Look it up in other guides"


Lol true, maybe Intel should leak the 197 page overclocking guide for Skylake-X. Why would you keep something like that confidential?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh and by the way, the 7920X is indeed an oddball. It's a rebranded, unlocked Xeon, even HWInfo64 says it's a 2900 series Xeon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I bought it over the 7900X because it has the bigger HCC die (2 more cores but a way bigger heat dissipation area) and I expect Xeon core to be a bit more durable.
> 
> Funny how there are still NONE of 7920X reviews and I have one in my PC already since yesterday. 2545 points in Cine R15 just with loaded 3200C14 XMP and after a fresh Win 10 Pro x64 install.
> 
> My stock temps on a Kraken X62 don't go above 50*C under full load in Aida64.


Whats the default core speed. I am dwindling between the 12/16 cores atm.
Preferabably 4.4ghz min oc under 1.15v


----------



## Martin778

Varies, really.

It says it's base clock is 2.9GHz but I've never seen it do 2.9GHz, it rather idles at 1.0-1.2GHz or hovers around 3400-4300MHz.
Fully loaded in Aida64 stress test it's mostly at 3400-3700MHz across all cores. Not sure how HWInfo64 is about CPU power but it peaked at 156W.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Varies, really.
> 
> It says it's base clock is 2.9GHz but I've never seen it do 2.9GHz, it rather idles at 1.0-1.2GHz or hovers around 3400-4300MHz.
> Fully loaded in Aida64 stress test it's mostly at 3400-3700MHz across all cores. Not sure how HWInfo64 is about CPU power but it peaked at 156W.


Can you try prime 26.6 just run fft 1344 for now. Whats the all core speed??


----------



## Martin778

Will do that when I'm home (over 6 hours). I think it's 3400MHz for all cores.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Thats stable vcore alright.
> Da interesting part will be realbench 2.43 , 2hrs recommended.. prefered 4hrs. *Its gonna point out something nobody here seem to state. You can pause the gpu testing btw*..
> 
> Would you mind doing it??
> Curious about msi atm.


halting the GPU load in realbench... you are better off using this x264 stability test: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7gpMyj43ZFjSzJ4Nm0xT3pobjA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Are there already any OC guides for the big SKL-X? I have a 7920X and want to try it out.


post back with how you do with the 7920X... they just became available retail here too.


----------



## CuewarsTaner

Here is my system with all current settings working good.





Tested with Prime95 v26.6 Non-AVX, Cinebench R15 and CPU-Z Benchmark.

If I get a chance to switch to new bigger case and triple radiator, I believe I will be able to push the limit to 5.0GHz. But, So far so good!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

7800X at 4900 full AVX om Realbench 2.54V isen't bad? Voltage is 1.310-1.320V..








If it is stable that is.

I find my temps "low", but the power draw is spot on. 420 watts with GPU om fixed idle. Ambient is low, probably 17'C Max.

Temp was mostly around 70-ish with some higher spikes up to 78-79'C. Ran it for a 50 minutes before I stopped since i had to go to bed.








Max temp according to Realbench was 85'C.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> You're at a wall with that voltage, really. You can lower the uncore and keep voltage to around 1v, this may help.


Messing with the uncore greatly improved my XTU score, thanks!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

How can I tell if my CPU phantom throttles..?

I get an increase on Cinebench. Scoring 1623/217P at 4900, but the increase from 4700 to 4800 is like 1583/210 to 1610/215.

Less than one percent improvement for another 100mhz.

The temps in Cinebench was also a good amount higher compared to RB 2.54 AVX, but power draw seems to be correct. WIll investigate more later today if I get the time.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> How can I tell if my CPU phantom throttles..?
> 
> I get an increase on Cinebench. Scoring 1623/217P at 4900, but the increase from 4700 to 4800 is like 1583/210 to 1610/215.
> 
> Less than one percent improvement for another 100mhz.
> 
> The temps in Cinebench was also a good amount higher compared to RB 2.54 AVX, but power draw seems to be correct. WIll investigate more later today if I get the time.


Normal. You need to overclock you ram, mesh clocks and possibly even dmi to keep getting good increamental scaling for cpu multipliers.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Normal. You need to overclock you ram, mesh clocks and possibly even dmi to keep getting good increamental scaling for cpu multipliers.


Ram is 4x4GB at 3800 CL16-18-18-38-1T and mesh is at 3200.

Is it worth to increase the mesh clock any further?

Sorry for asking, but what is DMI?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Ram is 4x4GB at 3800 CL16-18-18-38-1T and mesh is at 3200.
> 
> Is it worth to increase the mesh clock any further?
> 
> Sorry for asking, but what is DMI?


Just theories btw.
Dmi is the uplink between your cpu and pch at runs at 100 bclk.
Have you tried upping it ( dont use straps) and try a diff angle at the 4.9ghz??


----------



## GreedyMuffin

So bascially I need to increase my BCLK?

I'll try that!

I am only testing 102.15 BCLK. That might be so low that it wont make a difference.


----------



## Martin778

What are safe voltages for SKL-X for VCCIO, VCCSA, VCCIN etc.?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> What are safe voltages for SKL-X for VCCIO, VCCSA, VCCIN etc.?


1.35,1.35,2.15


----------



## st3roids1

Hi quick question because thread is kinda big , does 7800x worth it if i found it in good price?

I had a bad experience with ryzen which i now sold and im trying to build a new pc. I would love to get the 7820 but its ridiculous expensive where i live still


----------



## The_Rocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st3roids1*
> 
> Hi quick question because thread is kinda big , does 7800x worth it if i found it in good price?
> 
> I had a bad experience with ryzen which i now sold and im trying to build a new pc. I would love to get the 7820 but its ridiculous expensive where i live still


Where do you live? I have a new 7820X for sale in the UK.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st3roids1*
> 
> Hi quick question because thread is kinda big , does 7800x worth it if i found it in good price?
> 
> I had a bad experience with ryzen which i now sold and im trying to build a new pc. I would love to get the 7820 but its ridiculous expensive where i live still


it is better priced than 7700k. Just the question of x299 motherboard price.
Another soon to be topic is 8700k better since mid end z370 will be half the price of any decent x299.
So tha biggest question is do you need it right now. If yes go ahead. If no then wait.


----------



## czin125

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team-group-xtreem-8pack-edition-16gb-2x8gb-ddr4-pc4-36000c18-4500mhz-dual-channel-kit-black-my-09a-tg.html

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/team-xtreem-8pack-edition-now-in-stock-4133mhz-kit-oc-results-within.18789436/
He says they can run 4550-4575 with 18-18-18 and 18-19-19 fine


----------



## DeadSec

How do you like this:


----------



## st3roids1

yea screw that i was about to order a 7820 too. But lame youtube reviewers like hardware unbox pulling fake numbers and spread miss information along with a fested (from amd fanboys) reddit amd and intel forums made me think , eh they probably not as bad as some saying.

Well they are. Maybe ill wait couple of months and get me a 7820x my self as well. I still have my evga gtx1080ti and my phanteks case along with ssd and psu , so i might wait a bit for prices to drop


----------



## czin125

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/59128/corsair-reveals-16gb-ddr4-4600mhz-kits/index.html
The modules feature full support for Intel's XMP 2.0 platform and its high-end Core X-Series processors. These high-performance RAM kits feature CL19-26-26-46 timings at 1.5V and are optimized for enthusiasts and overclockers alike. The kits will be quite pricey: MSRP for the 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4-4600 kits sits at a hefty $549 and will be available on September 21, whereas the 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4-4500 kits sit at $479 and are available now. Corsair's Vengeance LPX RAM also features a lifetime limited warranty.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> https://www.tweaktown.com/news/59128/corsair-reveals-16gb-ddr4-4600mhz-kits/index.html
> The modules feature full support for Intel's XMP 2.0 platform and its high-end Core X-Series processors. These high-performance RAM kits feature CL19-26-26-46 timings at 1.5V and are optimized for enthusiasts and overclockers alike. The kits will be quite pricey: MSRP for the 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4-4600 kits sits at a hefty $549 and will be available on September 21, whereas the 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4-4500 kits sit at $479 and are available now. Corsair's Vengeance LPX RAM also features a lifetime limited warranty.


Nice timings lmao

I have 4266 19-19-19-39-1t ram at 1.4v
Too bad I can't get it to run at those speeds


----------



## Martin778

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> 1.35,1.35,2.15


Strange, then Asrock BIOS must be bugged, it shows 1.8VCCIN in deep red colour, it actually turns red from like 1.3 or 1.4V. Maybe they have mistaken it for Vcore as HWInfo64 also reports this wrong.


----------



## GXTCHA

Alright folks, I might need some help here...

Just finished tweaking my setup, passed RB 2.54 with the following settings:

CPU: 7900x, 4.8 @ 1.225v adaptive
BIOS: 0702
MB: R6 Apex
RAM: 32GB g.skill 3600 @ stock settings, no XMP (yet)
vccin: 1.8v
avx/512: -3/-5
LLC: 4
Current: 140%
SVID: Disabled



I'm just worried that I'm phantom throttling but I cant tell...

I've tried testing it with XTU and I get the following results:

1. If I set Win10 power to "balanced", XTU reports max frequency as 4.6
2. If I set Win10 power to "performance", XTU repots max frequency as 4.79 (basically 4.8)

My question is at this point, how do I know if I'm throttling and how can I stop it from happening? It doesn't appear that I'm at the thermal limit, VRM limit or any other limit. Does having Turbo Boost 3.0 installed/enabled cause any issues?

Thanks in advance for any help.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Alright folks, I might need some help here...
> 
> Just finished tweaking my setup, passed RB 2.54 with the following settings:
> 
> CPU: 7900x, 4.8 @ 1.225v adaptive
> BIOS: 0702
> MB: R6 Apex
> RAM: 32GB g.skill 3600 @ stock settings, no XMP (yet)
> vccin: 1.8v
> avx/512: -3/-5
> LLC: 4
> Current: 140%
> SVID: Disabled
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just worried that I'm phantom throttling but I cant tell...
> 
> I've tried testing it with XTU and I get the following results:
> 
> 1. If I set Win10 power to "balanced", XTU reports max frequency as 4.6
> 2. If I set Win10 power to "performance", XTU repots max frequency as 4.79 (basically 4.8)
> 
> My question is at this point, how do I know if I'm throttling and how can I stop it from happening? It doesn't appear that I'm at the thermal limit, VRM limit or any other limit. Does having Turbo Boost 3.0 installed/enabled cause any issues?
> 
> Thanks in advance for any help.


The only way to know for sure that you're not phantom throttling is to run a benchmark or measure your power consumption to see if they're in line with everyone else. But be aware that the phantom throttling is load-dependent. So you may throttle on a heavier work-load without throttling on a lighter workload.

But the phantom throttling is known to be caused by (or strongly correlated with) a VCCIN vdroop below 1.68-ish. So if your monitors are showing 1.75+ consistently, you should be safe. According to Raja, Asus has revised the voltage plans/curves on the Apex to avoid this vdroop so you shouldn't be hitting it at all on that motherboard. (unless you intentionally undervolt VCCIN)


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> The only way to know for sure that you're not phantom throttling is to run a benchmark or measure your power consumption to see if they're in line with everyone else. But be aware that the phantom throttling is load-dependent. So you may throttle on a heavier work-load without throttling on a lighter workload.
> 
> But the phantom throttling is known to be caused by (or strongly correlated with) a VCCIN vdroop below 1.68-ish. So if your monitors are showing 1.75+ consistently, you should be safe. According to Raja, Asus has revised the voltage plans/curves on the Apex to avoid this vdroop so you shouldn't be hitting it at all on that motherboard. (unless you intentionally undervolt VCCIN)


Thank you very much for the response!

I don't see vccin reported in HWinfo directly (unless its named something else)... Is there an alternative you recommend to measure vccin? Or maybe I missed a setting...

Thanks


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Thank you very much for the response!
> 
> I don't see vccin reported in HWinfo directly (unless its named something else)... Is there an alternative you recommend to measure vccin? Or maybe I missed a setting...
> 
> Thanks


I'm pretty sure Asus' own monitoring tools should have it. Otherwise I use HWMonitor. VCCIN may also be called VRIN (not to be confused with VIN). So VCCIN and VRIN are two different names for the same thing.


----------



## Martin778

What should i increase/lower for stable 4.6GHz?
(1st "vcore" reading is actually VCCIN").
I'm trying with manual 1.24Vcore, LLC2



I get a black screen after a few minutes of RealBench.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Thank you very much for the response!
> 
> I don't see vccin reported in HWinfo directly (unless its named something else)... Is there an alternative you recommend to measure vccin? Or maybe I missed a setting...
> 
> Thanks


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I'm pretty sure Asus' own monitoring tools should have it. Otherwise I use HWMonitor. VCCIN may also be called VRIN (not to be confused with VIN). So VCCIN and VRIN are two different names for the same thing.


SIV64 can read Vccin, have to download beta 5.23 within the v5.22 by going through the menu and download the file from there, let me know if you need exact path. VCCIN is going to be labeled CPU core IIRC


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> SIV64 can read Vccin, have to download beta 5.23 within the v5.22 by going through the menu and download the file from there, let me know if you need exact path. VCCIN is going to be labeled CPU core IIRC


Ran RB 2.54 and monitored with SIV64X 5.23 and the "Core" which is vccin from what I can gather, was as follows:

During the stress test: 1.76v
Min: 1.744v
Avg: 1.784v
Max: 1.808v

At system idle, it's reading at 1.81v

I guess at this point I can assume I am not phantom throttling @artah & @mystical? I can bump LLC up from 4 to 5 and see if that changes the minimum however, I dont ever remember seeing the minimum come up as a "current" value. Maybe it was so quick I missed it.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Ran RB 2.54 and monitored with SIV64X 5.23 and the "Core" which is vccin from what I can gather, was as follows:
> 
> During the stress test: 1.76v
> Min: 1.744v
> Avg: 1.784v
> Max: 1.808v
> 
> At system idle, it's reading at 1.81v
> 
> I guess at this point I can assume I am not phantom throttling @artah & @mystical? I can bump LLC up from 4 to 5 and see if that changes the minimum however, I dont ever remember seeing the minimum come up as a "current" value. Maybe it was so quick I missed it.


Watch your cpu core voltage on load (not vccin) and see if the voltage dips down if it doesn't then you shouldn't increase LLC and maybe can get away with lowering it.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Watch your cpu core voltage on load (not vccin) and see if the voltage dips down if it doesn't then you shouldn't increase LLC and maybe can get away with lowering it.


Hmm, I'm pretty sure one of the cores dropped voltage... I'll have to bench again and keep an eye on it.


----------



## NYU87

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *st3roids1*
> 
> yea screw that i was about to order a 7820 too. But lame youtube reviewers like hardware unbox pulling fake numbers and spread miss information along with a fested (from amd fanboys) reddit amd and intel forums made me think , eh they probably not as bad as some saying.
> 
> Well they are. Maybe ill wait couple of months and get me a 7820x my self as well. I still have my evga gtx1080ti and my phanteks case along with ssd and psu , so i might wait a bit for prices to drop


Lol my post got deleted, I guess some AMD fanboy couldn't take the truth about Ryzens only clocking 3.8GHz.

Good choice, 7820x while more expensive is far superior compared to the 1800x.


----------



## Martin778

3.8 is kinda low, I think 3.9 is the average for 24/7 stable units and a very small amount can do 4.0-4.1.

I got rid of my 1800X/C6H for the 7920X.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Yeah me too. I switched from CH6/1700 to 7800X on a Tomhawk. Got 22/25% better min/avg fps in Battlefield 1. So it was well worth it. I also bought the ram used (4x4GB Ripjaws V 3600) and CPU i got 20% off. So there was not alot of money inbetween. Sold it for a nice price to a fellow folder! He was happy, and so was I.

I am currently testing -2/-4 AVX with lower voltage for non AVX workloads as I never use AVX. So no need to have additional voltage for in case I'd use a program that uses AVX. Rather have the CPU downclock to a couple of hundred mhz.

4900 is very hot compared to 4800, like 6-8'C difference for such as small increase in performance compared to 4.6 to 4.7, or 4.7 to 4.8. (4.8 to 4.9 is 0.8% increase in Cinebench. Not worth it..







)

I'd say that I'm happy about 4800 at 1.240V if it is stable. (1.220V in BIOS, according to Aida64 it is 1.240V.....)


----------



## Martin778

*I want to give some advice what NOT to do on SKL-X = use the XMP profile on your G.Skills....it sets VCCSA to almost 1.4V















Or you can load the profile and override the VCCSA, that is.*

I also suspect the adaptive Vcore not working properly, setting it to 1.225V adaptive results in vcore varying from 1.21 to 1.28 between cores.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> *I want to give some advice what NOT to do on SKL-X = use the XMP profile on your G.Skills....it sets VCCSA to almost 1.4V
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or you can load the profile and override the VCCSA, that is.*
> 
> I also suspect the adaptive Vcore not working properly, setting it to 1.225V adaptive results in vcore varying from 1.21 to 1.28 between cores.


What the ram you used?


----------



## Martin778

2x8 G.Skill TZ RGB 3200 CL14 and 2x8 G.Skill FlareX 3200CL14 (leftovers from my Ryzen).

They both seem to have the same XMP.
UNLESS, the FlareX has something funny programmed in it....


----------



## T800

Which jet plate works best for an LGA 2066 CPU ? (EK Supremacy EVO)

I will go with the LGA 2011v3 one which is the thinnest.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> *
> 
> I also suspect the adaptive Vcore not working properly, setting it to 1.225V adaptive results in vcore varying from 1.21 to 1.28 between cores.*


Hello

At least with ASUS boards the adaptive voltage mode functions correctly. Because of Intel's CPU programming the voltage range you state is not unexpected.


----------



## Martin778

I'm using fixed voltage now, seems to work much better and is perfectly on point to what I set it to in BIOS.

My 7920X is stable at *4.6GHz @ 1.2V. Passed 1.5h P95 26.6* and that's all she wrote. FAR from bad considering we are talking about *12 cores*.
I won't be running 8-12H torture runs on Intel CPU's anymore, too much wasted electricity and heat. With 24 threads I will see much faster whether it's stable or not if it crashes 1-2 threads.

4.7Ghz 1.225V crashes after about 5 minutes, I don't want to go above 1.2V anyway as the Kraken X62 is already cooking from 300-320W CPU load and my CPU package tops out at around 99*C and 92*C on the cores after everything warms up.
Again, I don't think it's a TIM issue looking at the radiator and coolant temps (50.7*C, 20*C diff over idle).

I will now focus on MESH OC, trying 3GHz w. +0.1V offset and do some memory tweaking.
However, I doubt if there is much to be gained from 3200MHz CL14 and above.

I seriously don't luck with any ASUS products after LGA775 which were godly (REX anyone?).
Even the #@%@# RealBench 2.54 makes my OS crash, now with code 116 which would point out to something with the graphics card (1080ti, running perfectly on stock settings). last year it was crashing the Nvidia driver when I had 980Ti SLI....


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> 4.7Ghz 1.225V crashes after about 5 minutes, I don't want to go above 1.2V anyway as the Kraken X62 is already cooking from 300-320W CPU load and my CPU package tops out at around 99*C and 92*C on the cores after everything warms up.


Dat heat..! Why not try lower clocks for 24/7 use, like 4.4 Ghz and 1.15v or something.


----------



## Martin778

Because it won't go above 70 when in normal use. These are absolute peak temps after P95 starts the smallFFT part of it's blend test and after the coolant is already preheated to almost 50*C...
It doesn't not throttle or hit it's Tjmax of 105*C so it's all right-y but far from optimal, of course.


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Because it won't go above 70 when in normal use. These are absolute peak temps after P95 starts the smallFFT part of it's blend test and after the coolant is already preheated to almost 50*C...
> It doesn't not throttle or hit it's Tjmax of 105*C so it's all right-y but far from optimal, of course.


Okay. Have you mounted the Kraken X62 as intake in the front or exhaust in the top of your case?


----------



## Martin778

It can only be mounted 1 way - as front intake. That's why I don't even close the side panel, enough inferno already








Can't blame the kraken though, 310W of CPU package power does it's thing...the liquid and the rad both get very hot.


----------



## Skybluedk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Because it won't go above 70 when in normal use. These are absolute peak temps after P95 starts the smallFFT part of it's blend test and after the coolant is already preheated to almost 50*C...
> It doesn't not throttle or hit it's Tjmax of 105*C so it's all right-y but far from optimal, of course.


P95 is just a torture test. It doesn't resemble any real life usage.

One question? Is your cpu delidded?


----------



## Martin778

No, it's not delidded. haven't seen any tools for it released yet. It must happen 100% perfectly with glueing the lid back on, in case of RMA.
Der8auer tool will be released on 10th of October but I'm not going to pay 90 euros for a single-use gimmick, unless I can find more people around me so we can split the costs.

I don't see a point in delidding at this moment, when I start P95 it takes only 2-3 seconds to feel the radiator warming up so so far the thermal transfer is perfect but the AIO cooler itself throws in the towel.
I've been playing GTA V etc. with V-Sync off and my highest temp was 60*C so those mid 90's are purely from the lack of cooling capacity.


----------



## Silent Scone

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/der8auer-delid-die-mate-x-hs-004-dr.html

Stock seems to be very limited. Sign up to be notified


----------



## Martin778

That's exactly the tool I mentioned in my previous post







It will be released on 10th of October.
If it wasn't for those pesky little caps around the die I would've done it myself with a razor blade, just as I did with a 3770K 5 years ago.

I really wish I could set fixed voltage to my 7920X that would drop to like 0.9-1.0V when the CPU is idle (1200MHz)
Adaptive doesn't work as it should. If I set it to 1.15 and -0.0.15V I get 1.18V-1.234V between the cores.
All I want is the same voltage across every core


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> That's exactly the tool I mentioned in my previous post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It will be released on 10th of October.
> If it wasn't for those pesky little caps around the die I would've done it myself with a razor blade, just as I did with a 3770K 5 years ago.
> 
> I really wish I could set fixed voltage to my 7920X that would drop to like 0.9-1.0V when the CPU is idle (1200MHz)
> Adaptive doesn't work as it should. If I set it to 1.15 and -0.0.15V I get 1.18V-1.234V between the cores.
> All I want is the same voltage across every core


Hello

Again, adaptive voltage seems to be working as designed per the info you have provided. Future posts will be more accurate if you state "Adaptive doesn't work as _*I think*_ it should.


----------



## Martin778

But where does that 1.23V come from when I set it to 1.15 and even add a negative offset?

Isn't there any voltage option that would let me sync all voltages but still reduce it when idle?


----------



## Artah

Guys help us out in folding to cure diseases this Monday info here. http://www.overclock.net/t/1637951/september-2017-foldathon-monday-18th-wednesday-20th-1200-et-1600-utc/0_100#post_26344781


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skybluedk*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Because it won't go above 70 when in normal use. These are absolute peak temps after P95 starts the smallFFT part of it's blend test and after the coolant is already preheated to almost 50*C...
> It doesn't not throttle or hit it's Tjmax of 105*C so it's all right-y but far from optimal, of course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> P95 is just a torture test. It doesn't resemble any real life usage.
> 
> One question? Is your cpu delidded?
Click to expand...

Prime95 is good for People finding prime numbers also physics calculations and math calculations.


----------



## aerotracks

Your CPU cores won't drop
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> But where does that 1.23V come from when I set it to 1.15 and even add a negative offset?
> 
> Isn't there any voltage option that would let me sync all voltages but still reduce it when idle?


Your voltage mode (Adaptive/Override) has nothing to do with reducing them to almost zero on idle. They both do, since this is the job C-States get done.


----------



## Skybluedk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Prime95 is good for People finding prime numbers also physics calculations and math calculations.


True, but it was my impression that those people didn't buy these kind of processors, let alone bothered to overclock them.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skybluedk*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Prime95 is good for People finding prime numbers also physics calculations and math calculations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True, but it was my impression that those people didn't buy these kind of processors, let alone bothered to overclock them.
Click to expand...

Some folks work on distributing computing projects also mathematical computations using PCs


----------



## Martin778

The thing is - when I use override the voltage is always, say, 1.20V.
The clock drops but the Vcore doesn't. Or am I doing something wrong again?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Hey is it normal to need a little more voltage the longer you had your CPU.

I updated to the new 0802 BIOS and found my [email protected]/3Ghz Mesh wasn't stable, at first I thought it was the BIOS, but it kept doing it under the older BIOS too.
Dropping the mesh back to default gave me stability in Realbench and Prime95, but if I increase it again without adding extra voltage it's not.

Didn't have that back in August when I first set and tested the overclocked.

Currently it's [email protected]/Mesh Auto, can pass 2 hours of Realbench and 1 hour of Prime95 26.6, any higher voltage and it gets too hot. (91c Package)


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> The thing is - when I use override the voltage is always, say, 1.20V.
> The clock drops but the Vcore doesn't. Or am I doing something wrong again?


1. Loading a core and idling a core example 1.2ghz at 1.2v vs 1.2ghx at 0.9 v with cstate you will end up the same temps.
2. Adaptive voltage. You need to check your multiplier voltage first. If you are going negative offset against if or running it on auto... you cannot set the additional voltage lower than it. This aint a x299 thing but its how adaptive voltages work since day one. Just a cautioned in using lower voltages than your multiplier vid, you might have to lower your avx/avx 512 multipliers to stock.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Hey is it normal to need a little more voltage the longer you had your CPU.
> 
> I updated to the new 0802 BIOS and found my [email protected]/3Ghz Mesh wasn't stable, at first I thought it was the BIOS, but it kept doing it under the older BIOS too.
> Dropping the mesh back to default gave me stability in Realbench and Prime95, but if I increase it again without adding extra voltage it's not.
> 
> Didn't have that back in August when I first set and tested the overclocked.
> 
> Currently it's [email protected]/Mesh Auto, can pass 2 hours of Realbench and 1 hour of Prime95 26.6, any higher voltage and it gets too hot. (91c Package)


Did you set your skews?
Is your rtl/iol fixed
How many settings are you running on auto.

This is the reason. Overvolting cpu can mask instabilities in other areas. also new bioses has enchanced dram etc performance which can also show your so called stable clocks on other bios are unstable due to overvolting etc.

ROG STRIX X299-E GAMING BIOS 0802
1.Fixed SanDisk M.2 device issue.
2.Fixed PLEXTOR device issue.
3.Update Intel X-series CPU (6-core and above) microcode.
4.Improved DRAM / system compatibility.
5.Improved secure erase function.
6.Improved Q-Fan function.
7.Improved system performance.
8.Improve PCH PCIe SSD Performance.

Actual 0802 fixes. No idea why he stated "avx offset fix".


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Did you set your skews?
> Is your rtl/iol fixed
> How many settings are you running on auto.
> 
> This is the reason. Overvolting cpu can mask instabilities in other areas. also new bioses has enchanced dram etc performance which can also show your so called stable clocks on other bios are unstable due to overvolting etc.


No I didn't set the skews or touch the rtl/iol.
There's a few settings on Auto, I did increase the power target to 140% and am using a LLC of 4.

I did do a BIOS flashback to a older BIOS so it cleared everything, but it was unstable there.
Funnily enough Prime95 26.6 was stable but Realbench 2.44 wasn't until I lowered the mesh to 2.7Ghz, I don't use the newer versions due to have a AVX/AVX512 offset of 4Ghz.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> No I didn't set the skews or touch the rtl/iol.
> There's a few settings on Auto, I did increase the power target to 140% and am using a LLC of 4.
> 
> I did do a BIOS flashback to a older BIOS so it cleared everything, but it was unstable there.
> Funnily enough Prime95 26.6 was stable but Realbench 2.44 wasn't until I lowered the mesh to 2.7Ghz, I don't use the newer versions due to have a AVX/AVX512 offset of 4Ghz.


Sounds like you need to rework a baseline. Its very apparent you jumped to a higher voltage and multiplier.
Whats your 4.4,4.5 voltages etc.
do they have similar issue

I always test my baseline voltages for a insane level aka more than 8 hrs with every test available except linpack.

Prime95 26.6 doesnt stress other things in your overclocking
Realbench does.
Again you have too many things on auto.
Btw
I run up to 4.7 during stress test with svid enabled loadline 6. Which keeps vccin fixed at 2.0. Only after everything passes to the standards i want.. i will rerun at loadline 1.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Sounds like you need to rework a baseline. Its very apparent you jumped to a higher voltage and multiplier.
> Whats your 4.4,4.5 voltages etc.
> do they have similar issue
> 
> I always test my baseline voltages for a insane level aka more than 8 hrs with every test available except linpack.
> 
> Prime95 26.6 doesnt stress other things in your overclocking
> Realbench does.
> Again you have too many things on auto.
> Btw
> I run up to 4.7 during stress test with svid enabled loadline 6. Which keeps vccin fixed at 2.0. Only after everything passes to the standards i want.. i will rerun at loadline 1.


Sounds like a plan of action.
I'm not using custom water...yet, just using a H115i so going over 1.2v is a no go temp hit 90c - 100c very quickly.

I did a 2 hour Realbench lastnight which it passed, prior to tweaking it was just have random screen freezes(mouse stops moving) then a blue screen, doesn't do it now.

These are my BIOS settings, stuck them in a rar instead a heap of files:
http://www.filedropper.com/biossettings

Any pointers would be greatly appreciated.
Honestly while working in IT for 20+ years my overclocking venture really only started with my 4790k and 5820k, learnt what I know from the guys here.


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> The thing is - when I use override the voltage is always, say, 1.20V.
> The clock drops but the Vcore doesn't. Or am I doing something wrong again?


This is how override voltage works. I was unable to get stable using Adaptive or Offset on my 7900X and on previous generations it was common to need a higher max turbo voltage to get the entire range stable. It would be nice to be able to edit the adaptive voltage table directly, or simply extend it, so clocks under max turbo used their stock voltages but sadly it doesn't seem to work that way.









I recommend staying with a constant manual voltage, at least I have had a lot more success with it.

I also would recommend to stay well below dangerous voltages since it will be running at that voltage all the time (not that dangerous voltages are ever a good idea).


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Sounds like a plan of action.
> I'm not using custom water...yet, just using a H115i so going over 1.2v is a no go temp hit 90c - 100c very quickly.
> 
> I did a 2 hour Realbench lastnight which it passed, prior to tweaking it was just have random screen freezes(mouse stops moving) then a blue screen, doesn't do it now.
> 
> These are my BIOS settings, stuck them in a rar instead a heap of files:
> http://www.filedropper.com/biossettings
> 
> Any pointers would be greatly appreciated.
> Honestly while working in IT for 20+ years my overclocking venture really only started with my 4790k and 5820k, learnt what I know from the guys here.


Whats your cpu. Pm me. Will give you some baselines.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Whats your cpu. Pm me. Will give you some baselines.


7820x, PM Sent


----------



## trippinonprozac

I just pulled the trigger on Rampage VI Extreme and 7920x ... Cant wait for the end of the week!


----------



## DeathAngel74

I have a weird question. Anyone with a 7820x have Star Wars Battlefront 2015? I'm getting temps between 60-83C depending on the load at the time(95-99%). Just wondering if these temps are normal for CPU intensive games. 4.5GHz @1.14v, AVX -3, AVX512 -5, Mesh 3.2GHz. TIA

*Solved!*
Thanks @Artah


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> I have a weird question. Anyone with a 7820x have Star Wars Battlefront 2015? I'm getting temps between 60-73C depending on the load at the time(95-99%). Just wondering if these temps are normal for CPU intensive games. 4.5GHz @1.14v, AVX -3, AVX512 -5, Mesh 3.2GHz. TIA


What is your cooling looking like and voltage for the mesh, are you locking down VCCIN and what LLC? I'm seeing LLC7 on auto on a 7820x I'm testing, I know it's too high so auto is not a good thing.


----------



## DeathAngel74

Thermaltake Water 3.0 360mm push/pull all 6 fans @1500rpm. LLC4, Auto voltage for cache/mesh. Idle temps are 27-34C depending on ambient temps.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> Thermaltake Water 3.0 360mm push/pull all 6 fans @1500rpm. LLC4, Auto voltage for cache/mesh. Idle temps are 27-34C depending on ambient temps.


Impressed with that cooler even if I don't like what TT did to CL, I'm testing one now for my home work computer. Those all look good as long as the mesh voltage don't go nuts on you, I would check that on probe it if you can while running that game at 3.2GHz mesh. I'm getting about up to 85c folding with the CPU.


----------



## DeathAngel74

I was chalking it up to Monterey being warm due to Indian Summer, lol.
I did some Googling..pretty average from what I can see. I suppose I can stop worrying now and actually enjoy the newly built PC.










Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







4.5GHz @ 1.1v
100MHz BCLK
Mesh 3200MHz @ 1.1v
X299SE BIOS 0802

https://valid.x86.fr/e28es4

*Edit:*
Gaming temps are down to 64C. They were hitting 77-83C before I lowered mesh/cache voltage to 1.1v.....
Thank you @Artah for mentioning cache/mesh advice.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Testing now with offset. The thing that buggers me is that the V-core varies alot from what I set in the BIOS.

I set 4600 with 1.115V in BIOS. It adds up to 1.135 to 1.140V.

Anybody know what the stock voltage for the 7800X?


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Testing now with offset. The thing that buggers me is that the V-core varies alot from what I set in the BIOS.
> 
> I set 4600 with 1.115V in BIOS. It adds up to 1.135 to 1.140V.


Too high LLC maybe? Do you have it on auto?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> Too high LLC maybe? Do you have it on auto?


Nope. Tried LLC8, LLC4 and Auto. Same result on Vcore, only the VCCIN differ.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Actual 0802 fixes. No idea why he stated "avx offset fix".


Pretty straightforward, really. Because that's the notable fix in microcode and not board specific.


----------



## Martin778

FYI - LLC works on VCCIN and not VCORE.
GreedyMuffin is reporting the same vcore discrepancy as I did.

By the way, has anyone found out already how to read out the mesh voltage on the Taichi?? What's the normal mesh V for 2.8-3.0GHz?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Hey I'm curious.
Is it ok to run a manual voltage 24/7, I was just dialing in my overclock and have found I get a lower voltage from using manual that Adaptive + Offset.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> The thing is - when I use override the voltage is always, say, 1.20V.
> The clock drops but the Vcore doesn't. Or am I doing something wrong again?


no, you are not doing anything wrong. If you use deep c-states, individual cores will be near zero volts, wake cores will still receive the _manual_ _override_ voltage you specify in bios (this is why it is called manual override)... want zero Volts with manual voltage? Sleep the rig (suspend to ram)








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> *Hey is it normal to need a little more voltage the longer you had your CPU.*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> I updated to the new 0802 BIOS and found my [email protected]/3Ghz Mesh wasn't stable, at first I thought it was the BIOS, but it kept doing it under the older BIOS too.
> Dropping the mesh back to default gave me stability in Realbench and Prime95, but if I increase it again without adding extra voltage it's not.
> 
> Didn't have that back in August when I first set and tested the overclocked.
> 
> Currently it's [email protected]/Mesh Auto, can pass 2 hours of Realbench and 1 hour of Prime95 26.6, any higher voltage and it gets too hot. (91c Package)


very common occurance. burn-in.. "rounding".

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Hey I'm curious.
> *Is it ok to run a manual voltage 24/7,* I was just dialing in my overclock and have found I get a lower voltage from using manual that Adaptive + Offset.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Yes it's perfectly fine to run manual vcore 24/7. Yeah, I know adaptive is empirically more pleasing (seeing the cpu vcore drop to ~0.7V), but sometimes Manual is the way to go... especially when the VID stack is programmed high, like SLK-X and (at least my KBL-X) seem to be.


----------



## Martin778

I was referring to the phenomenon of setting 1.15V adaptive in BIOS and getting 1.22-1.25V reading in HWInfo. What I want to achieve is 1.2V under load, not 1.18-1.23 around cores.

This is 1.15V adaptive:


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I was referring to the phenomenon of setting 1.15V adaptive in BIOS and getting 1.22-1.25V reading in HWInfo. What I want to achieve is 1.2V under load, not 1.18-1.23 around cores.
> 
> This is 1.15V adaptive:


You're trying to use a voltage lower than the stock VID of the cores, you can't accomplish that with adaptive unfortunately. Hopefully sometime we will get AVX/AVX512 voltage offsets along with the frequency offsets we already have. Without voltage offsets, it's a bit of a pain.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> very common occurance. burn-in.. "rounding".
> Yes it's perfectly fine to run manual vcore 24/7. Yeah, I know adaptive is empirically more pleasing (seeing the cpu vcore drop to ~0.7V), but sometimes Manual is the way to go... especially when the VID stack is programmed high, like SLK-X and (at least my KBL-X) seem to be.


Didn't happen this quickly with the 6900k, but I thought I'd read something here of it happening, was just double checking.

I did switch to offset's, a little higher but not by much, I'm still trying to figure out the Mesh offset though, the TUF can't monitor the voltage at all.
Tried a offset of +0.010, +0.020 both failed, tired +0.100 which was fine so I'll try going backwards instead


----------



## Martin778

I'm with the same issue - no MESH voltage readings yet...I've set mine up to 3GHz/1.25V. 3.1GHz crashed pretty quickly under P95 26.6 with a 0x124 code.
124 mostly means RAM but in this case it's running stock/XMP so it must've been the uncore that crashed.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

I just did a quick 15 minute Realbench run at +0.030v offset on the mesh which passed.
+0.020 crashes within the first 2 minutes.

@Jpmboy
These are my offset voltages now, not much difference from manual.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I was referring to the phenomenon of setting 1.15V adaptive in BIOS and getting 1.22-1.25V reading in HWInfo. What I want to achieve is 1.2V under load, not 1.18-1.23 around cores.
> 
> This is 1.15V adaptive:


as you can see each core has a slightly different VID, so Adaptive will adjust the load voltage based on each core's VID for the frequency it is operating at. - you are looking at VID in that snip, not vcore?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I'm with the same issue - no MESH voltage readings yet...I've set mine up to 3GHz/1.25V. 3.1GHz crashed pretty quickly under P95 26.6 with a 0x124 code.
> 124 mostly means RAM but in this case it's running stock/XMP so it must've been the uncore that crashed.


well... 124 can mean a number of things, ram, IO, cache, and now I suspect mesh?... but also core if the error became an un-correctable MCE (machine check error). It's a pretty non-specific bugcheck, unlike a 101.


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> I have a weird question. Anyone with a 7820x have Star Wars Battlefront 2015? I'm getting temps between 60-83C depending on the load at the time(95-99%). Just wondering if these temps are normal for CPU intensive games. 4.5GHz @1.14v, AVX -3, AVX512 -5, Mesh 3.2GHz. TIA
> 
> *Solved!*
> Thanks @Artah


What was the issue/solution?

EDIT: I read a few posts later, you lowered the mesh.


----------



## DeathAngel74

Yeah, the mesh voltage was set to Auto.


----------



## trippinonprozac

Has anyone received their 7920x yet?

How are they looking for heat/overclocking headroom?


----------



## DarkIdeals

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trippinonprozac*
> 
> Has anyone received their 7920x yet?
> 
> How are they looking for heat/overclocking headroom?


I'm curious about 7920X owners myself as well. The 7920X has been available for purchase for over a week now but there still aren't any reviews anywhere from what I've seen.

I'm mostly interested in the larger die size the 12-18 core chips are using. After seeing photos of a de-lidded 12 core+ model chip which show a significantly larger die-size vs the 7900X die, I'm real curious of the thermal performance and OC headroom of these high-core-count models. Theoretically a larger die size would drastically improve the main problem of the 7900X (a ton of transistors + cores on cramped 14nm lithogrophy and small die size, meaning a lot of heat spread over a small area) and thus give better temps which in turn should give better overclocking.

And since there's already benchmark results showing an i9 7980XE hitting 4.8ghz+ on all 18 cores and passing Cinebench, Realbench etc... (and getting ~4,700 points in Cinebench no less! insane.) with no mention of it being de-lidded, it might be true. I'm curious of how well a 7960X or 7980XE would do with a larger die and de-lid + conductonaut/CL Ultra.


----------



## HeyThereGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarkIdeals*
> 
> I'm curious about 7920X owners myself as well. The 7920X has been available for purchase for over a week now but there still aren't any reviews anywhere from what I've seen.
> 
> I'm mostly interested in the larger die size the 12-18 core chips are using. After seeing photos of a de-lidded 12 core+ model chip which show a significantly larger die-size vs the 7900X die, I'm real curious of the thermal performance and OC headroom of these high-core-count models. Theoretically a larger die size would drastically improve the main problem of the 7900X (a ton of transistors + cores on cramped 14nm lithogrophy and small die size, meaning a lot of heat spread over a small area) and thus give better temps which in turn should give better overclocking.
> 
> And since there's already benchmark results showing an i9 7980XE hitting 4.8ghz+ on all 18 cores and passing Cinebench, Realbench etc... (and getting ~4,700 points in Cinebench no less! insane.) with no mention of it being de-lidded, it might be true. I'm curious of how well a 7960X or 7980XE would do with a larger die and de-lid + conductonaut/CL Ultra.


I am curious about the 7940X with the higher TDP.


----------



## Martin778

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *trippinonprozac*
> 
> Has anyone received their 7920x yet?
> 
> How are they looking for heat/overclocking headroom?


Look up a few of my previous posts.








4.5-4.6GHz is borderline for even the best AIO, it will not throttle but hit around 95*C under full load with maxed out fans. They do put out a TON of heat with 300-325 power draw.
When gaming I haven't seen it go past 60-65*C.

I wouldn't bother with anything bigger if you intend to OC. 7920's stock package power is around 195W full load.
The 7920 also doesn't seem to suffer from bad TIM as the die is much bigger than 7900X's.

In the end, it's a Skylake. Give it enough volts and it will do 4.8-5.0 but power draw and heat output will be immense.


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Look up a few of my previous posts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.5-4.6GHz is borderline for even the best AIO, it will not throttle but hit around 95*C under full load with maxed out fans. They do put out a TON of heat with 300-325 power draw.
> When gaming I haven't seen it go past 60-65*C.
> 
> I wouldn't bother with anything bigger if you intend to OC. 7920's stock package power is around 195W full load.
> The 7920 also doesn't seem to suffer from bad TIM as the die is much bigger than 7900X's.
> 
> In the end, it's a Skylake. Give it enough volts and it will do 4.8-5.0 but power draw and heat output will be immense.


So the upcoming 7940X with an even bigger die, will OC about the same as the 7920X, but with even higher power draw?
I'm considering buying one of those, and 4.2-4.4 Ghz on all cores is enough for me - cooled by a Kraken X62. But if I need to run the Kraken's fans at 100%, then the noise output is not worth it for me. Maybe stock speed is better then


----------



## Martin778

Not exactly - 7900X and lower all use the small die. 7920X and up are rebranded, unlocked Xeons with the big HCC die.

I only have to set the fans to 100% when i do torture testing like P95. For normal use like gaming I just set the fans in X62 to "performance mode" and it's all good.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Ok so after tinkering all day, running Realbench for 2 hours thinking my OC was fine 1 run of Divinity Original Sin 2 and it crashed after 3 minutes.
Turns out my CPU voltage wasn't higher enough.

So I can pass Prime95 26.6 and Realbench 2.44 but not a game, doesn't leave me much to stress a non-AVX load then


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Not exactly - 7900X and lower all use the small die. 7920X and up are rebranded, unlocked Xeons with the big HCC die.


Yes, and the *7940X* is a 14-core HCC die. Even bigger than your 7920X. 12 cores is plenty for me, so the only reason for me to consider the 7940X is if the thermal performance is a bit better because of the bigger die, but then again it has 2 more cores that pumps out more heat.


----------



## DarkIdeals

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Look up a few of my previous posts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.5-4.6GHz is borderline for even the best AIO, it will not throttle but hit around 95*C under full load with maxed out fans. They do put out a TON of heat with 300-325 power draw.
> When gaming I haven't seen it go past 60-65*C.
> 
> I wouldn't bother with anything bigger if you intend to OC. 7920's stock package power is around 195W full load.
> The 7920 also doesn't seem to suffer from bad TIM as the die is much bigger than 7900X's.
> 
> In the end, it's a Skylake. Give it enough volts and it will do 4.8-5.0 but power draw and heat output will be immense.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Look up a few of my previous posts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.5-4.6GHz is borderline for even the best AIO, it will not throttle but hit around 95*C under full load with maxed out fans. They do put out a TON of heat with 300-325 power draw.
> When gaming I haven't seen it go past 60-65*C.
> 
> I wouldn't bother with anything bigger if you intend to OC. 7920's stock package power is around 195W full load.
> The 7920 also doesn't seem to suffer from bad TIM as the die is much bigger than 7900X's.
> 
> In the end, it's a Skylake. Give it enough volts and it will do 4.8-5.0 but power draw and heat output will be immense.


I'm considering getting either a 7960X or 7980XE potentially, and as long as it can hit ~4.6-4.7ghz or so at feasible voltage/temps with my 480mm + 420mm + 360mm rad setup I see no issue frankly. Especially if i delid it eventually. I've got two 1K-watt 80+ Gold EVGA PSU's (Supernova G2 1000w and Supernova GS 1050w) So power draw is no issue even with SLI TITAN XP, so temps and voltage are my only real concern. Seems weird that rumors for the 7960X and 7980XE are showing higher clock speeds than many 7920X owners are reporting on near identical cooling. I'm beginning to wonder if there's a 3rd tier of die size or if they decided late in the game to solder the 16/18 core chips or something.


----------



## Martin778

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> Yes, and the *7940X* is a 14-core HCC die. Even bigger than your 7920X. 12 cores is plenty for me, so the only reason for me to consider the 7940X is if the thermal performance is a bit better because of the bigger die, but then again it has 2 more cores that pumps out more heat.


As I said, 79*2*0X and up are ALL big HCC die. Same size, different core count.

7920x HCC:


7900x, smaller die:


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> Your voltage mode (Adaptive/Override) has nothing to do with reducing them to almost zero on idle. They both do, since this is the job C-States get done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is - when I use override the voltage is always, say, 1.20V.
> The clock drops but the Vcore doesn't. Or am I doing something wrong again?
Click to expand...

Feels like I've already answered your question, but I'll try again







- Your voltage mode has nothing to do with reduced idle voltage. This is because the C-States are responsible for dropping VCore in idle.

As long as C-States are active, Idle voltage in Override is almost zero just as much as Adaptive voltage is almost zero.

It's been this way since the very first gen of (F)IVR chips in 2013.


----------



## Martin778

Why doesn't it change then? The clocks drop but voltage stays fixed.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Why doesn't it change then? The clocks drop but voltage stays fixed.


Hi Martin. Thanks for sharing your experiences.

Could you please post a cinebench r15 at max overclock???


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> Feels like I've already answered your question, but I'll try again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - Your voltage mode has nothing to do with reduced idle voltage. This is because the C-States are responsible for dropping VCore in idle.
> 
> As long as C-States are active, Idle voltage in Override is almost zero just as much as Adaptive voltage is almost zero.
> 
> It's been this way since the very first gen of (F)IVR chips in 2013.


This interests me as well. So you are saying, if i keep the C-states on, and set the vcore to fixed, the voltage will drop alongside clock speed, when core is idle? What the fixed means then? Its like fixed only under load or something? If already fixed "adapts" to load, what is the point of adaptive?

EDIT: Why does the CPU-Z report fixed vcore value, even at idle, if as you say, that value drops due to C-states?


----------



## ELIAS-EH

C-State only drop CPU frequency on idle, and not the core voltage.
CPU core voltage will drop on idle only when adaptive voltage was chosen in the BIOS


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> As I said, 79*2*0X and up are ALL big HCC die. Same size, different core count.


So the 7920X is basically a 7980XE with 6 cores + cache disabled?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> This interests me as well. So you are saying, if i keep the C-states on, and set the vcore to fixed, the voltage will drop alongside clock speed, when core is idle? What the fixed means then? Its like fixed only under load or something? If already fixed "adapts" to load, what is the point of adaptive?
> 
> EDIT: Why does the CPU-Z report fixed vcore value, even at idle, if as you say, that value drops due to C-states?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> C-State only drop CPU frequency on idle, and not the core voltage.
> CPU core voltage will drop on idle only when adaptive voltage was chosen in the BIOS


guys - c-states operate on individual cores, cpuZ reports the manual override vcore to any core.. and unless you do a complete suspend to ram (s-state) you have wake cores. those cores that are parked or in low power state receive near zero volts.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> So the 7920X is basically a 7980XE with 6 cores + cache disabled?


Yes.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> guys - c-states operate on individual cores, cpuZ reports the manual override vcore to any core.. and unless you do a complete suspend to ram (s-state) you have wake cores. those cores that are parked or in low power state receive near zero volts.


Thanks!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Passed one hour at 4800 1.230V Realbench 2.4x.

Testing 4700 at 1.180-1.184V now. (1.160V in bios).

This is with lowered cache which seems to help alot, maybe my chip is finally "broken" in. Manual voltage and -2/-4 AVX offset.

Seems like a decent 7800X.


----------



## Martin778

I am stable at round 4600 @ 1.21V but it's hard to call it stable as the temps are very high.

What cache voltage/frequency do you use?

My best Cinebench R15 run so far is 3114:
https://i.imgur.com/9wAbnGJ.png


----------



## ELIAS-EH

Any info if the toothpaste quality on the 7920x and above is better or same as the one used on 7900x and lower? ?
Thanks


----------



## Martin778

It's the die surface that does it's job. I can't complain about TIM quality so far.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> My best Cinebench R15 run so far is 3114:
> https://i.imgur.com/9wAbnGJ.png


1.28v for 4700 ?


----------



## Martin778

It was set to 1.2 adaptive...
After that I stopped using offset/adaptive and now run fixed voltage.


----------



## tistou77

ok and @4.7 you need how much vcore to be stable?


----------



## Martin778

Didn't even bother, not enough cooling capacity for torture testing








Selling my Kraken now and going custom...


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Why doesn't it change then? The clocks drop but voltage stays fixed.


If your voltage doesn't drop down your C-States are not working.

Throttle Stop shows what C-State your CPU is in. If it shows C6 everything is good and your idle VCore is close to zero.

https://www.techpowerup.com/download/techpowerup-throttlestop/


----------



## Jobotoo

Is there a way to go back to the previous settings you had in the BIOS? I'm overclocking and when it locks out, I'm hitting the BIOS refresh (as its the only way I've been able to get back into BIOS so far) but it resets everything and I have to start from scratch. Am I doing it right?

Signature is the rig I'm OCing.


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Didn't even bother, not enough cooling capacity for torture testing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Selling my Kraken now and going custom...


Before you swap out the Kraken, could you run Realbench stresstest for ~2 hours at say, 4.4 Ghz, and report back here the CPU temps with the Kraken at just "Performance Mode"? That would be a great help


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I am stable at round 4600 @ 1.21V but it's hard to call it stable as the temps are very high.
> 
> What cache voltage/frequency do you use?
> 
> My best Cinebench R15 run so far is 3114:
> https://i.imgur.com/9wAbnGJ.png


Thanks, nice result. The Intel 12 cores is not far away from AMD 1950x.


----------



## Martin778

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> Before you swap out the Kraken, could you run Realbench stresstest for ~2 hours at say, 4.4 Ghz, and report back here the CPU temps with the Kraken at just "Performance Mode"? That would be a great help


The conclusion will be - cooking. I have to run the pomp and fans at 100% all the time for stress testing.
Stock it doesn't even hit 60*s.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Passed one hour at 4800 1.230V Realbench 2.4x.
> 
> Testing 4700 at 1.180-1.184V now. (1.160V in bios).
> 
> This is with lowered cache which seems to help alot, maybe my chip is finally "broken" in. Manual voltage and -2/-4 AVX offset.
> 
> Seems like a decent 7800X.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I am stable at round 4600 @ 1.21V but it's hard to call it stable as the temps are very high.
> 
> What cache voltage/frequency do you use?
> 
> My best Cinebench R15 run so far is 3114:
> https://i.imgur.com/9wAbnGJ.png


Those numbers are looking good, what cooling are you guys using?


----------



## Martin778

Kraken X62


----------



## DeadSec

Yo guys,
what is the safe Vring limit?


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> The conclusion will be - cooking. I have to run the pomp and fans at 100% all the time for stress testing.
> Stock it doesn't even hit 60*s.


Hmm maybe 4.2 Ghz and 1.12 - 1.15v could be possible.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> The conclusion will be - cooking. I have to run the pomp and fans at 100% all the time for stress testing.
> Stock it doesn't even hit 60*s.


Try with lower voltage, 1,15V max for 4,4 Maybe that will work and without cooking


----------



## DeathAngel74

Anything past 4.5GHz/1.1v (64C max) results in crazy high temps. Then exponentially higher as you raise the multi+voltage. I'm considering selling off this Thermaltake AIO and ordering a full EK loop for the CPU and GPU ($850).


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Those numbers are looking good, what cooling are you guys using?


Custom loop. D5, Supremacy Evo, EK TXP, XT240 + MO-RA3 rad. Fans running at 500-600 RPM.


----------



## DeathAngel74

My fans run @ 1500 RPM with 6 of them on that 360mm rad, still too hot...


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeadSec*
> 
> Yo guys,
> what is the safe Vring limit?


To help keep temps down if nothing else I'd recommend no more than 1.15v


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> It was set to 1.2 adaptive...
> After that I stopped using offset/adaptive and now run fixed voltage.


What motherboard are you using? On Gigabyte you you have to type Normal in the voltage field and then set the offset. Adaptive and offset are not made to be used together. I had some issues in the beginning figuring this out.


----------



## Martin778

X299 Taichi


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> X299 Taichi


Yeah...sorry, can't help. Good luck with the voltage deal. Looks like your chips is running nicely. Have you thought about having Silicon Lottery Delid?


----------



## Artah

Coffee Lake. For those looking at the next generation https://www.primeabgb.com/?s=coffee+lake&post_type=product wow so soon or fake news?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I am stable at round 4600 @ 1.21V but it's hard to call it stable as the temps are very high.
> 
> What cache voltage/frequency do you use?
> 
> My best Cinebench R15 run so far is 3114:
> https://i.imgur.com/9wAbnGJ.png


nice.. what were the peak core temperatures during that run?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Didn't even bother, not enough cooling capacity for torture testing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Selling my Kraken now *and going custom.*..












Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> If your voltage doesn't drop down your C-States are not working.
> 
> Throttle Stop shows what C-State your CPU is in. If it shows C6 everything is good and your idle VCore is close to zero.
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/download/techpowerup-throttlestop/


The recent HWinfo will also display c0 and c6 state residency on a per core basis.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jobotoo*
> 
> Is there a way to go back to the previous settings you had in the BIOS? I'm overclocking and when it locks out, I'm hitting the BIOS refresh (as its the only way I've been able to get back into BIOS so far) but it resets everything and I have to start from scratch. Am I doing it right?
> 
> Signature is the rig I'm OCing.


just hit the red button on the MB or hold down the start button on your case for a few seconds until the system restarts - safe mode - all previous settings are not changed in bios, but it posts with optimized defaults (retains drive config and raid settings).


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I am stable at round 4600 @ 1.21V but it's hard to call it stable as the temps are very high.
> 
> What cache voltage/frequency do you use?
> 
> My best Cinebench R15 run so far is 3114:
> https://i.imgur.com/9wAbnGJ.png


Couldn't your Taichi run 1T with 3200 ? Also lowering tRFC to 300 or sub will give you a nice boost in terms of latency and performance ...What is your MESH speed also ?
Edit: Also try this beta BOIS running it since some time [Beta] 1.60A Improve memory bandwidth ...greatly improved my Aida64 memory scores
Anyway nice results for start


----------



## Jpmboy

lol... I'll tell ya I really want (and likely will get) an 18 core but the speed of this 7740X in every-day use running at 5.4/5.3/4.8 and 3866c16 ram is really spoiling me. It's just so damn fast!


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol... I'll tell ya I really want (and likely will get an 18 core) but the speed of this 7740X in every-day use running at 5.4/5.3/4.0 and 3866c16 ram is really spoiling me. It's just so damn fast!


Yeah raw singel thread performance vs raw multi thread performance. I'm considering 8700K vs 7920X/7940X myself.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol... I'll tell ya I really want (and likely will get) an 18 core but the speed of this 7740X in every-day use running at 5.4/5.3/4.8 and 3866c16 ram is really spoiling me. It's just so damn fast!


I switched to 7820x for my work so I can use CPU nvme and use all 4 slots of ram but started to regret that decision since I can't use the nvme slot for Optane. I may put the 7740x back, that 5GHz was nice with low voltages and fast. Also ran into an issue with optane where keyboard is lost after a crash because I was trying out 4200MHz memory. It boots up but no keyboard, the mouse is working. Already tried a bunch of stuff including power it down completely for a few. Only thing I have not done is clear cmos. I already tried the other BIOS and still the same symptom. This happened before and the cure was remove the Optane memory and add it back in. Not liking optane at the moment but it could be an Apex motherboard issue.

Anyone else trying out Optane?

Edit: I think I found a post that is similar to what I'm experiencing with Optane and they talked about it, intel replicated the issue and closed the thread lol.

https://communities.intel.com/thread/48101


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgang*
> 
> hi guys,
> what do you think of the 7740x? is worth a try ? (the price is 300$)
> I've received a X299 Motherboard as gift and would like to use it as my second PC (my first one is an AMD rig ryzen 1800x B350)


7740X performs really well, not all X299 boards support the 4 core CPU's so make sure before you purchase
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol... I'll tell ya I really want (and likely will get) an 18 core but the speed of this 7740X in every-day use running at 5.4/5.3/4.8 and 3866c16 ram is really spoiling me. It's just so damn fast!


7740X is pretty sweet, since they released KBLX they should also release CFLX


----------



## kappi1997

Does anyone else maybe experience the same OC problem with skylake x as i do? If i overclock my CPU over 4.5GHZ it instantly crashes when running Prime 95 even though i made a -5 AVX Offset. Other benchmarks will let me go until 5GHZ at 1.27V.
System: 7820x Gigabyte x299 aorus gaming 7


----------



## DStealth

Temperatures, cooling ?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kappi1997*
> 
> Does anyone else maybe experience the same OC problem with skylake x as i do? If i overclock my CPU over 4.5GHZ it instantly crashes when running Prime 95 even though i made a -5 AVX Offset. Other benchmarks will let me go until 5GHZ at 1.27V.
> System: 7820x Gigabyte x299 aorus gaming 7


Add more Vcore when running prime95.


----------



## DeadSec

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kappi1997*
> 
> Does anyone else maybe experience the same OC problem with skylake x as i do? If i overclock my CPU over 4.5GHZ it instantly crashes when running Prime 95 even though i made a -5 AVX Offset. Other benchmarks will let me go until 5GHZ at 1.27V.
> System: 7820x Gigabyte x299 aorus gaming 7


Well, it depends on all your other settings. If your mesh freq. is to high related to the Vring prime95 will cut down your oc adventure immediately.
There is no point in raising the Vcore if your mesh freq. for example is unstable.


----------



## czin125

https://videocardz.com/72775/intel-preps-dual-core-i3-7360x-for-x299-but-why

A new cpu is out for X299. ( 7350K on the X299 platform ) but will the 8700K on X299 come soon?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> https://videocardz.com/72775/intel-preps-dual-core-i3-7360x-for-x299-but-why
> 
> A new cpu is out for X299. ( 7350K on the X299 platform ) but will the 8700K on X299 come soon?


Why? indeed lol...

I am starting to wonder if by the time the 25th rolls around for the 18 core, we'll have an announcement for a 32core TR and then a 32core 8XXXxe chip a week later? lol (again)

Then again, I'm also on the fence on a 2x6154 system vs a single 7980xe.... Totally different "value propositions" and price points, but I can survive either choice with other computes I have - frankly, I can make either worth-while or I can survive without either right now, but .... fun....







Thinking the dual system should wait for OEM chips with higher TDPs/clocks and lower prices on ebay. I'm not too proud to buy used server iron if its legit and priced right...

I really, really like having a ludicrous number of cores on my desktop. I no longer have to suspend VMs when running compute intensive/massively parallel apps.

I queue up most of my longer stuff to other nodes on my network, but when you need them all, I can keep doing interactive work even while processing an 18 core simulation that takes a week in the background, running a windows VM because windows (connectivity/office nonsense), other linux VMs for testing and connectivity.

Bring the core-wars.... life is good!









p.s. and now I can let firefox/chrome run away for weeks at a time reaching 10G resident memory size before I re-start them (ask me how I know..... ugh... leakware...)


----------



## djgar

I have to say I'm really enjoying my switch from Firefox to Opera (a couple of weeks so far) ...


----------



## Martin778

The HEDT i3 is just laughable, really no point at all in releasing it. The KL-X are already cripples with missing PCI-E lanes and DIMM controller(s).

BTW, does anyone have full XMP spec of G.Skill TridentZ 4266 CL19? I wonder if it would work with 4 sticks.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> The HEDT i3 is just laughable, really no point at all in releasing it. The KL-X are already cripples with missing PCI-E lanes and DIMM controller(s).
> 
> BTW, does anyone have full XMP spec of G.Skill TridentZ 4266 CL19? I wonder if it would work with 4 sticks.


I'm talking to gskill support now about 4200 that I just bough. Basically he tells me that overclock on the CPU is required for the memory to work properly. I agree it needs to be matched up but for me to even get the 4200 to boot I need an overclock of 5GHz, it does not work on 4.9 or lower. If you are planning to use a 7740x then I would imagine you would be fine since those go way up there.

I strongly discourage anyone buying memory higher than 4000MHz from GSKill unless it's the 4133 that you plan to run at 4000 C17. If you find that I don't know what I'm talking about please slap me around a few times and knock some sense into me so I can get this memory to work with your help







. I won't take offense at all what so ever.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I have to RMA my ram kit in my rig

Bought the X299 labeled 4x8 3600 kit instead and going to get a refund on the old kit. hopefully this one works...build has been a mess


----------



## pphx459

@Artah I'm guessing you are able to do 4000 with that kit, what's your SA and VCCIO?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pphx459*
> 
> @Artah I'm guessing you are able to do 4000 with that kit, what's your SA and VCCIO?


I can do 4k on the 4200 blind folded but have not tried C17 on it, I run the 4133 at C17 just fine with 4k. VCCIO/VCSA I have gone way up 1.3v just to test, that's not the issue though I think it's timing but after dishing out $1,200 for memory I don't feel like helping gskill fix their issue, I'm sure it can be fixed with some deep timing adjustments.


----------



## pphx459

Yea.. I can do 4000 cl17 with the 3866's , and it doesn't seem like SA matters too much when messing with the primary timings, just IO. I need at least 1.1 so was wondering what everyone's results were.


----------



## Martin778

Do you change any secondary timings or just do like 19-19-19-38 and leave the others on auto?


----------



## pphx459

I've only done exactly as you said so far.. Will find time later to start tinkering the other stuff


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Do you change any secondary timings or just do like 19-19-19-38 and leave the others on auto?


There is a memory preset that seems to work very well that does include 2nd and I believe 3rd timing adjustments on Asus Rampage VI Apex and Extreme when you go into the memory timing section for 1.4v.


----------



## pphx459

I've used those on the previous extreme boards, wish I had that on the deluxe..


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> The HEDT i3 is just laughable, really no point at all in releasing it. The KL-X are already cripples with missing PCI-E lanes and DIMM controller(s).
> 
> *BTW, does anyone have full XMP spec of G.Skill TridentZ 4266 CL19*? I wonder if it would work with 4 sticks.


7740X ain't crippled. 5.4 as a 24/7. lol

and you cannot put all the parameters of XMP into effect manually. And sorry, I gave my 4266c19 kit to my nephew - there are better kits.


----------



## Martin778

It is crippled as in the meaning of because it's missing the key features of an HEDT platform like extra PCI-E lanes and quad channel memory controller and therefore you end up with a high-end motherboard with non functional slots/ports









Kinda like a Ferrari with no leather seats and a 4-cillinder engine


----------



## DarkIdeals

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> It is crippled as in the meaning of because it's missing the key features of an HEDT platform like extra PCI-E lanes and quad channel memory controller and therefore you end up with a high-end motherboard with non functional slots/ports
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Kinda like a Ferrari with no leather seats and a 4-cillinder engine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Reminds me of a story I read about a guy who wanted a Lamborghini Countash but couldn't afford the $300K price tag (obviously), so he literally spent FIFTEEN YEARS of his life BUILDING IT FROM SCRATCH in his basement. He even built the frame from scratch with melted down scrap aluminum etc.. and then just stuck the V8 and crap from his pickup into it lol. The hilarious part was, when he finally finished it he was like "oh ****, how am I gonna get this thing out of here!" He ended up having to hire a contractor to come tear down his basement wall so he could haul the car out of the house haha. All in all he supposedly spent close to a cool mil on the project iirc.


----------



## Martin778

I know that story!, the engine however was brand new and/or it was pretty worked - 514hp.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I know that story!, the engine however was brand new and/or it was pretty worked - 514hp.


351 Cleveland....should have been an LSx.


----------



## DarkIdeals

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I know that story!, the engine however was brand new and/or it was pretty worked - 514hp.


Oh i know it was quite the workhorse of an engine (didn't know it was new though. could've swore the guy pulled it from one of his other vehicles). The point was that compared to the V12 shenanigans you see in most of these types of cars it was relatively similar to the comparison you were making. I guess the fact that it was a "franken-car" made me think of the two similarly.


----------



## DarkIdeals

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> 351 Cleveland....should have been an LSx.


I'm a sucker for natural aspirated personally. I love the sound of like a Lexus LFA or a V-10 458.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarkIdeals*
> 
> I'm a sucker for natural aspirated personally. I love the sound of like a Lexus LFA or a V-10 458.


LSx is traditionally NA. LS1, LS2, LS3, LS6, LS7, etc...


----------



## Martin778

*Cries in N/A Brera 2.2JTS*
Nope, we can't have any of those nice big V8's here because of our outrageous gas prices and taxes









I've noticed a strange phenomenon on my Taichi, if I set my RAM to anything higher than it's XMP rating, let's say 3466 15-15-15-35 it will hang on POST and after the first re-try it will fall back to failsafe defaults.
Also, if HWInfo64 is even partially right about CPU package power, then 1.22 or 1.25V doesn't seem to make a difference? I now have a big custom loop with a HW Labs GTS 420 rad, D5 on full kick, EK Evo block and the thickest hoses I could find and there isn't much difference in temps to be honest, I think it might be hitting it's physical thermal transfer limitations or just screaming for a delid


----------



## DeathAngel74

Give me a Turbo 2JZ/2JZ-GE/2JZ-GTE and I'm a happy camper...


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> It is crippled as in the meaning of because it's missing the key features of an HEDT platform like extra PCI-E lanes and quad channel memory controller and therefore you end up with a high-end motherboard with non functional slots/ports
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kinda like a Ferrari with no leather seats and a 4-cillinder engine


It could be a good thing, if we can buy one board and run both HEDT and mid range CPU's could be better than a separate board for each, you know the 6 core CFL will probably clock higher than SKLX 6 core, I say bring it
We all whine about a new board every gen.


----------



## Martin778

Of course but you can get Z270 (hell, even a Z170 would work!) for a 7700K for like 1/2 or 1/3rd the price of a basic X299 board.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> Give me a Turbo 2JZ/2JZ-GE/2JZ-GTE and I'm a happy camper...
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ]


Haha...one of my best friends has a Royal Sapphire Pearl big single MKIV that has been sitting in his garage at different stages build for the better part of 10 years. I've leaned on that car more than he has driven it.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> It is crippled as in the meaning of because it's missing the key features of an HEDT platform like extra PCI-E lanes and quad channel memory controller and therefore you end up with a high-end motherboard with non functional slots/ports
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kinda like a Ferrari with no leather seats and a 4-cillinder engine


it's not targeted to the high end MBs. But is to the fastest 1-4 core performance needs. Wouldn't dis it tho... or I'll have to dis all but 18 cores soon as being crippled.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Of course but you can get Z270 (hell, even a Z170 would work!) for a 7700K for like 1/2 or 1/3rd the price of a basic X299 board.


can't run i9s on a 270. But for that matter, got both of those running here too.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Of course but you can get Z270 (hell, even a Z170 would work!) for a 7700K for like 1/2 or 1/3rd the price of a basic X299 board.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> Give me a Turbo 2JZ/2JZ-GE/2JZ-GTE and I'm a happy camper...


Just added a 2017 911c4s and sold the C6 convertible.


----------



## djgar

AAH! Gorgeous German engineering - no need to overclock


----------



## DStealth

Overclock on German cars is a must some months ago pushed my wife's CLA45 "4C/4T" with new "Pump" from 381 to 656hp


----------



## pantsaregood

Anyone know what kind of mesh voltage is "safe?"

My 7820X pulls off 4.8 GHz on an NH-D15 at about 93°C on the hottest core. The cooler cores are only running around 82°C.. I should be able to drop temperatures a few degrees with a competent thermal paste job, since I pulled the heatsink off of the CPU and reapplied it without repasting several times.

I'm looking to get the last bit of performance out of it by bumping the mesh to 3.2 GHz. Any idea on what kind of offset is necessary?


----------



## DeathAngel74

I'm running at 4.5GHz and 3.2GHz mesh. Both at 1.1v, idle temps are 29-33c. gaming and prime95/cinebench temps are 64c.


----------



## fireedo

my i7 7820x @ 4.6Ghz with 1.185v adaptive (-) 0.035v get the hottest core when stressed about 91-93 c but I saw "a cpu package" temp is at 96-98 c
should I care about that? and what is a cpu package temperature? using corsair H115i AIO cooler

I have consider to delid my cpu, but what exactly temperature difference will I get? is it true I will get 15-20 c lower temp? if thats true then with my current OC I will have my hottest core at around 70-75 c and "cpu package" will be at 76-80 c

well if thats true it is really worth it

since using custom watercooling has the same price with an i7 7820x, so right now for me this custom watercooling is not an option


----------



## DeathAngel74

Package temp=IHS temp I believe


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fireedo*
> 
> my i7 7820x @ 4.6Ghz with 1.185v adaptive (-) 0.035v get the hottest core when stressed about 91-93 c but I saw "a cpu package" temp is at 96-98 c
> should I care about that? and what is a cpu package temperature? using corsair H115i AIO cooler
> 
> I have consider to delid my cpu, but what exactly temperature difference will I get? is it true I will get 15-20 c lower temp? if thats true then with my current OC I will have my hottest core at around 70-75 c and "cpu package" will be at 76-80 c
> 
> well if thats true it is really worth it
> 
> since using custom watercooling has the same price with an i7 7820x, so right now for me this custom watercooling is not an option


Those are about my temps for 4.6 at 1.2 with a deepcool captain. My chip is delidded and my cooler is worse so maybe 10c difference


----------



## fireedo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> Package temp=IHS temp I believe


so cpu temp is core temp and cpu package is IHS temp...ok noted
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Those are about my temps for 4.6 at 1.2 with a deepcool captain. My chip is delidded and my cooler is worse so maybe 10c difference


well 10 c is good enough


----------



## pantsaregood

Any recommendations on stress testing per-core overclocking? Prime95 just kind of jumps around between cores, so it doesn't really work.


----------



## DStealth

Go in task manager details and set affinity for the process/program you prefer









Edit: Just re-benched CB15 with my gaming settings ....for such slow memory and 1.31v this 6 core CPU is acting really well ...so close to 1700 score










[email protected] x32 multi


----------



## Martin778

Hmm, you could say Cinebench has almost 100% per core scaling then. I get around 3100 with 12 cores and quite a bit lower clock.
I wonder if bigger die's need more mesh voltage as they have more cores and thus more mesh connections.


----------



## DStealth

Not exactly 100% @5g my score is ~1650 this makes *2 cores in 3300 region, considering you have much better memory the scaling is in 90% region...
What are your Mesh voltages and frequencies ?


----------



## Martin778




----------



## Martin778

Mesh doesn't seem to do that much in Cine:


----------



## DStealth

A, you're running 4.7...then yes in this particular benchmark the scaling is close to 100% from 6 to 12 cores...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> Package temp=IHS temp I believe


package temp is the temperature of the hottest DTS in the entire.. package. It's not the IHS temperature - there is no DTS in the IHS.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> AAH! Gorgeous German engineering - no need to overclock


True. makes for a decent daily driver.







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Overclock on German cars is a must some months ago pushed my wife's CLA45 "4C/4T" with new "Pump" from 381 to 656hp


no mods on the ZR-1, 650HP out of the box. 700+ is a simple ECM swap away for track days.


----------



## DStealth

ZR1 is a great car non or less. But in OCing joking I mean German car are more advanced and having headroom in this terms...you should know this buying 3t(2981 cm3) engine instead of 6.2..of course . There are many examples for just simple ECU remapping sub 4 liter engines doing 700++ HPs...My 4tfsi all day driver is 800+ with just hybrid turbos








Anyway very good choice mate








Enjoy the engineering


----------



## pantsaregood

Well, that was unexpected.

At 1.25V/4.8 GHz, my i7-7820X pushes about 250W. It runs loaded at about 96°C on my NH-D15 on the hottest core with a poor (reused) thermal paste job. I could likely shave a few degrees off.

HOWEVER - at 1.13V, I can run stable at 4.6 GHz and cut power consumption to 190W. Temperatures aren't breaking 80°C with this OC.

Haven't played around with 4.7 GHz yet.


----------



## Martin778

Yep, that 250W should be about right. My 12-core 7920X pulls 350W peak @ smallFFT at the same voltage.

I hit 96*C peak on a single core and 99*C peak package temp. That is after 1.5h of Prime95 hammering.


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Yep, that 250W should be about right. My 12-core 7920X pulls 350W peak @ smallFFT at the same voltage.
> 
> I hit 96*C peak on a single core and 99*C peak package temp. That is after 1.5h of Prime95 hammering.


What is your power draw and temps at say, 4.0 GHz?


----------



## Martin778

Stock I think it barely touched 60*C on the Kraken X62. Haven't tried it stock on custom LC yet.
HWInfo was showing 195W max CPU package power.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> ZR1 is a great car non or less. But in OCing joking I mean German car are more advanced and having headroom in this terms...you should know this buying 3t(2981 cm3) engine instead of 6.2..of course . There are many examples for just simple ECU remapping sub 4 liter engines doing 700++ HPs...My 4tfsi all day driver is 800+ with just hybrid turbos
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway very good choice mate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Enjoy the engineering


true.. the twin turbo in the new 911 is decent once spun up, but I have to say, the SC'd engine in the ZR-1 is simply stupid on any street or highway. Feels as quick as my YZFR1. But, you know the secret here, right... it's not how fast to 130mph that matters, it's how quick the car is from 130 down to the speed limit.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> true.. the twin turbo in the new 911 is decent once spun up, but I have to say, the SC'd engine in the ZR-1 is *simply stupid on any street or highway.* Feels as quick as my YZFR1. But, you know the secret here, right... it's not how fast to 130mph that matters, it's how quick the car is from 130 down to the speed limit.


False...









Breaking [braking for those not on an phone that knows better than I do what I meant] is for losers... people get out of the way for winners.









Seriously though, forced induction is fine provided there's enough displacement to not require rolling starts... A car should pin you as soon as you mash the gas and without bouncing off the rev-limiter, that's what makes a high-hp DD fun.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> False...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Breaking is for losers... people get out of the way for winners.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously though, forced induction is fine provided there's enough displacement to not require rolling starts... A car should pin you as soon as you mash the gas and without bouncing off the rev-limiter, that's what makes a high-hp DD fun.


Actually, awesome BRAKING is the secret for speeding around corners









But I'm with you, BREAKING is for losers


----------



## Sobo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> Well, that was unexpected.
> 
> At 1.25V/4.8 GHz, my i7-7820X pushes about 250W. It runs loaded at about 96°C on my NH-D15 on the hottest core with a poor (reused) thermal paste job. I could likely shave a few degrees off.
> 
> HOWEVER - at 1.13V, I can run stable at 4.6 GHz and cut power consumption to 190W. Temperatures aren't breaking 80°C with this OC.
> 
> Haven't played around with 4.7 GHz yet.


Just 1.13V for 4.6Ghz is super good I would say, probably qualifies as a golden sample. My 7820X needs 1.14V for 4.5Ghz and 1.19 for 4.6Ghz.

Another thing I discovered: I ran my Noctua NH-D15S in single fan config, because all of the reviews showed there was like 1°C difference between the D15 (dual fan) and D15S (single fan). Until I noticed that just about everyone and their mother is using little midget CPUs like 4770K or 6700K even for high-end cooler testing including AIOs. I mean what the hell? Why would you test highend coolers on a CPU that barely draws over 100W even when overclocked and on top of that those small quadcores have very little surface area + toothpaste, so they are not able to transfer all of the heat into the cooler properly.

So, what happened when I added a second fan to my D15S? A freaking 10°C temp drop in combination with 7820X @ 4500 at 1.14V! Not only does the overclocked SKX draw about double the power of the mainstream platform, but it also has much larger die area with larger IHS, so it is able to tranfer more heat into the cooler, therefore improving the cooling capcity has a direct impact on the temperatures, which really does not happen on the mainstream platform. This is why you shouldn't test highend coolers in mainstream platform, but I guess about 95% of reviewers didn't get it?

EDIT: the temperatures of your 7820X - are they measured in Prime95 small FFTs? Without AVX, I pressume?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Actually, awesome BRAKING is the secret for speeding around corners
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I'm with you, BREAKING is for losers


AC - dammed (damned) if you do dram'ed if you don't... My phone doesn't seem to like "braking" either...


----------



## TahoeDust

@pantsaregood @Sobo

Have either of you thought about delliding? I just ran P95 Small FFTs w/o AVX for 15 minutes. Hottest core hit 85c - 4.8GHz 1.285v averaged 245 watts.


----------



## Sobo

Nah, to me it's not worth it for another 100-200Mhz. Plus you lose the warranty, which is a bummer on a $600 CPU. Today's systems are not as solid as in the old days - for instance a RAM module may die and take the IMC with it rendering the whole CPU useless.

Still, since adding the second cooler fan dropped 10c off in Prime, I don't think the heat transfer is the issue, but rather the cooling capacity. If toothpaste was the culprit, second fan would have made little to no difference.


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> @pantsaregood @Sobo
> 
> Have either of you thought about delliding? I just ran P95 Small FFTs w/o AVX for 15 minutes. Hottest core hit 85c - 4.8GHz 1.285v averaged 245 watts.


I am delidded. My temperatures are peaking out where they're at because I'm running an air cooler with poorly applied thermal paste.

The biggest disadvantage the NH-D15 has given me is that I have to remove the heatsink to access RAM. I had issues with a single stick of RAM while building (turns out it's DOA) and I kept removing the heatsink without repasting.

At 1.25V/4.8 GHz, my coolest cores are a full 15-20 degrees C cooler than the hottest cores at 96C.

What kind of temperature deltas does everyone see between cores?

Also, yes. I air cooled Skylake-X.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> False...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Breaking [braking for those not on an phone that knows better than I do what I meant] is for losers... people get out of the way for winners.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously though, forced induction is fine provided there's enough displacement to not require rolling starts... A car should pin you as soon as you mash the gas and without bouncing off the rev-limiter, that's what makes a high-hp DD fun.


lol - silly me for thinking traction control on the was for snow/ice. Can't go anywhere near the floor with the pedal in the first 2 gears.. and 3rd is tricky since it's already near triples. ("launch control" is for wussies )

Anyway. hoping to see the 7980XE soon. Hopefully Intel does better at launch.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - silly me for thinking traction control on the was for snow/ice. Can't go anywhere near the floor with the pedal in the first 2 gears.. and 3rd is tricky since it's already near triples. ("launch control" is for wussies )
> 
> Anyway. hoping to see the 7980XE soon. Hopefully Intel does better at launch.


The traction control on my SC'd car leans out the fuel - so it stays off lest even 93 knocks... Tactical nope...

but yeah, it requires your attention - which is what makes it fun.

Ditto on the 7980xe... To be honest, the angel on my shoulder is saying, "don't do it, you know in 6-9 months they'll be forced by AMD to come out with something either much better or much cheaper..." The devil is saying, "go on [expletive omitted] it!"


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sobo*
> 
> Just 1.13V for 4.6Ghz is super good I would say, probably qualifies as a golden sample. My 7820X needs 1.14V for 4.5Ghz and 1.19 for 4.6Ghz.


Sounds like my 7820x, I've tried going lower on my 4.6Ghz overclock like some of the other guys and it's a no go, 1.96v is the lowest.
I get about 90c on the Package temp, hottest core is 84c, but I'm using a H115i in Push/Pull.

I was getting this WHEA bluescreen 2 days ago, got that sorted so now I just get the normal unstable overclock bluescreen


----------



## Martin778

Ok, so it turns out that stock 7920X is pulling just shy of 220W when SmallFFT (non AVX) hits. Before SmallFFT it's around 190-200W.
4.5GHz @ 1.15V raises the bar to 297W (peak core temp 80*C / package 85*C).


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Sounds like my 7820x, I've tried going lower on my 4.6Ghz overclock like some of the other guys and it's a no go, 1.96v is the lowest.
> I get about 90c on the Package temp, hottest core is 84c, but I'm using a H115i in Push/Pull.
> 
> I was getting this WHEA bluescreen 2 days ago, got that sorted so now I just get the normal unstable overclock bluescreen


same situation here as far as my vcore goes

Anything under 1.19 is near instant crash at 4.6. Yet 1.2 is perfectly stable


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Ok, so it turns out that stock 7920X is pulling just shy of 220W when SmallFFT (non AVX) hits. Before SmallFFT it's around 190-200W.
> 4.5GHz @ 1.15V raises the bar to 297W (peak core temp 80*C / package 85*C).


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Ok this is a complete noob question but I've never done per core overclocking before.

I've set the core voltages manually (can't use adaptive voltages are higher than I set), but what do you need to set the main cpu voltage to, do I set adaptive Auto, or do I need to set a adaptive additional Turbo mode voltage?


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Ok this is a complete noob question but I've never done per core overclocking before.
> 
> I've set the core voltages manually (can't use adaptive voltages are higher than I set), but what do you need to set the main cpu voltage to, do I set adaptive Auto, or do I need to set a adaptive additional Turbo mode voltage?


Hello

If using the manual voltage mode any settings in the adaptive section are irrelevant as that is not the mode being used.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> If using the manual voltage mode any settings in the adaptive section are irrelevant as that is not the mode being used.


I was thinking of switch to Adaptive offset per core and dialing it in that way after finding the stable manual voltages.
So what you're saying is anything other than manual outside the per core setting is ignored.

I'm trying all core because I think I worked out why my overclocks aren't completely stable, I've been using adaptive offset with a negative offset to keep the core voltages lower than the Intel set 1.25v for 4.6Ghz, so it's lowering all the voltages.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> same situation here as far as my vcore goes
> 
> Anything under 1.19 is near instant crash at 4.6. Yet 1.2 is perfectly stable


And hot.

Been trying lower using manual voltages, per core voltages and there's no way I'm getting under 1.19v, 1.196v is barely stable (few mouse hangs in Realbench 2.44, no actual crashes), but 1.199v is fine for 15 minutes, but package temps hit 90c.

I'm only aiming for 4.6Ghz because of gaming, it never goes over 74c then.


----------



## Chargeit

4.6 @ 1.2v seems to be the magic number for these 7820x. It's what I'm running too. Was using adaptive for awhile but had some stability issues and have been using manual @ 1.2v for a few weeks with zero issues. I'm still on bios 702 though plan on making the move to 802 sooner or later.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> 4.6 @ 1.2v seems to be the magic number for these 7820x. It's what I'm running too. Was using adaptive for awhile but had some stability issues and have been using manual @ 1.2v for a few weeks with zero issues. I'm still on bios 702 though plan on making the move to 802 sooner or later.


Well this is the best I can do for 4.5Ghz (Per core overclock), anything lower results in handbrakcli.exe crashes.



What I'm doing is setting the core clock, booting to get the set intel vid, then setting a -0.100v which seems to be getting me my stable overclocks.
When I try to go lower it's a no go.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I am stable at 4.5 at 1.15 but takes 1.20 for 4.6.

Really wishing I bought a better binned chip. I might just switch to coffee lake if they clock like 7700k


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I am stable at 4.5 at 1.15 but takes 1.20 for 4.6.
> 
> Really wishing I bought a better binned chip. I might just switch to coffee lake if they clock like 7700k


Yeah 1.15v gets me 45. 1.20v 46 and anything over that runs too high temps for me. My chip was not binned or delided.

Does the clock even make a difference with x299 past a point? Far Cry Primal for instance only gained fps when I oc'ed the mesh. Went from 90 fps avg to 111 (105 - 111 avg depending on run). Seems like what holds back x299 in gaming is the mesh.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Was that at 4.5Ghz or 4.6Ghz
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah 1.15v gets me 45. 1.20v 46 and anything over that runs too high temps for me. My chip was not binned or delided.
> 
> Does the clock even make a difference with x299 past a point? Far Cry Primal for instance only gained fps when I oc'ed the mesh. Went from 90 fps avg to 111 (105 - 111 avg depending on run). Seems like what holds back x299 in gaming is the mesh.


Was that at 4.5Ghz or 4.6Ghz when you had the Far Cry FPS increase?

What mesh settings are you using?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Was that at 4.5Ghz or 4.6Ghz
> Was that at 4.5Ghz or 4.6Ghz when you had the Far Cry FPS increase?
> 
> What mesh settings are you using?


Oc'ing the mesh to 3.0 saw the gains in Far Cry at 1080p ultra.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Oc'ing the mesh to 3.0 saw the gains in Far Cry at 1080p ultra.


What core clock were you using 4.5 or 4.6 lol.

Temp between 4.5 and 4.6Ghz are much different for me. Anything over it's too high.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> What core clock were you using 4.5 or 4.6 lol.
> 
> Temp between 4.5 and 4.6Ghz are much different for me. Anything over it's too high.


Last time I ran the Far Cry benchmark I think I was at 45 on all cores.

Yeah 46 is a little hotter then 45 but not enough to make a difference in my usage. Anything over and I can't keep the temps under control at the voltage I need.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Last time I ran the Far Cry benchmark I think I was at 45 on all cores.
> 
> Yeah 46 is a little hotter then 45 but not enough to make a difference in my usage. Anything over and I can't keep the temps under control at the voltage I need.


Cool, I'm just working on my 4.5Ghz voltages now, got it a little lower than before 1.171v worst core. (15 Minute Realbench runs), when I find the lowest unstable I'll start working my way up with longer runs.

Are you just using Auto voltages on the 3Ghz mesh?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Cool, I'm just working on my 4.5Ghz voltages now, got it a little lower than before 1.171v worst core. (15 Minute Realbench runs), when I find the lowest unstable I'll start working my way up with longer runs.
> 
> Are you just using Auto voltages on the 3Ghz mesh?


Yeah I'm using auto voltage for the mesh.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Cool, I'm just working on my 4.5Ghz voltages now, got it a little lower than before 1.171v worst core. (15 Minute Realbench runs), when I find the lowest unstable I'll start working my way up with longer runs.
> 
> Are you just using Auto voltages on the 3Ghz mesh?
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I'm using auto voltage for the mesh.
Click to expand...

What is the voltage on Auto?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Yeah I'm using auto voltage for the mesh.


Dialed in my 4.5Ghz, set 3Ghz on the mesh, temps were a little higher with the mesh overclock, 86c to 89c with the mesh.
It's 31c here today, room temp is about 25c with the air con on so it makes sense.

I get the same temps with 4.6Ghz no mesh overclock, but voltages are 1.199v for 4.6Ghz, so I'm tossing up whether to keep 4.5Ghz/3Ghz mesh or 4.6Ghz/no mesh at the moment.

Currently I'm playing Divinity Original Sin 2 at 1440p with a GTX1080ti, so I don't think it'll make much of a difference.

I may end up going Coffeelake when it drops too, decision decisions


----------



## BroPhilip

On my 7820x I'm running solid at 4.7 all core at 1.18v running real bench my max temp is around 80c. If i move to 30x on mesh it bumps my temps up to 90c on package running realbench but still stable.... I can run cinebench at 4.9 with 1.25 with insane temps...hate to blow up my chip find the voltage to make it real bench stable... might have to consider deliding to find its ceiling.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> 4.6 @ 1.2v seems to be the magic number for these 7820x. It's what I'm running too. Was using adaptive for awhile but had some stability issues and have been using manual @ 1.2v for a few weeks with zero issues. I'm still on bios 702 though plan on making the move to 802 sooner or later.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Cool, I'm just working on my 4.5Ghz voltages now, got it a little lower than before 1.171v worst core. (15 Minute Realbench runs), when I find the lowest unstable I'll start working my way up with longer runs.
> 
> Are you just using Auto voltages on the 3Ghz mesh?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> On my 7820x I'm running solid at 4.7 all core at 1.18v running real bench my max temp is around 80c. If i move to 30x on mesh it bumps my temps up to 90c on package running realbench but still stable.... I can run cinebench at 4.9 with 1.25 with insane temps...hate to blow up my chip find the voltage to make it real bench stable... might have to consider deliding to find its ceiling.


Shutup









There's 3 of us having around the same voltages for the same overclock.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Shutup
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's 3 of us having around the same voltages for the same overclock.


At least we are consistent!









My oc was about the same between my gigabyte MB and the R6E. It's my core 4 and 7 that are spiking my temps. I'm going to try and undervolt them with lower clocks and see if I can push the rest any more since Asus bios will allow for individual core voltage control.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> At least we are consistent!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My oc was about the same between my gigabyte MB and the R6E. It's my core 4 and 7 that are spiking my temps. I'm going to try and undervolt them with lower clocks and see if I can push the rest any more since Asus bios will allow for individual core voltage control.


Been fiddling with per core overclocking as well, was able to lower core 1 a little more as it's the core that required more voltage.

I'm still not sure if mesh overclocking for 1440p is worth it at this stage.


----------



## pantsaregood

Considered attempting per-core overclocking, but I'm having a hard time getting anything useful out of it.

At stock VID, testing cores individually gives me 4.8 GHz stable. Attempting to run them all at the same time, however, results in crashes.

Controlling voltage per-core seems incredibly useful, but figuring out how to properly test it is difficult.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What is the voltage on Auto?


Not sure. Which reading is it for the mesh voltage?


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> Considered attempting per-core overclocking, but I'm having a hard time getting anything useful out of it.
> 
> At stock VID, testing cores individually gives me 4.8 GHz stable. Attempting to run them all at the same time, however, results in crashes.
> 
> Controlling voltage per-core seems incredibly useful, but figuring out how to properly test it is difficult.


What is your package voltage? What kind of crash bosd or overcurent protection?


----------



## fireedo

Right now with 4.6 Ghz @ 1.185v (adaptive (-) 0.035v) my 7820x running very stable on stress test for 2 hours, using 3.2 Ghz mesh with auto

but I dont see any diff between default clock mesh vs 3.0 Ghz vs 3.2 Ghz in Cinebench or gaming, so what mesh clock for?

and I have try to go to 4.7 Ghz with 1.2v and the Temps are scary, maybe 4.6 Ghz is my AIO limit, dunno if I delid this chip


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Not sure. Which reading is it for the mesh voltage?


I can't read the Mesh voltage at all on my TUF Mark 1 so I don't know either.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I can't read the Mesh voltage at all on my TUF Mark 1 so I don't know either.


Well it ain't caught fire yet so can't be that bad.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fireedo*
> 
> Right now with 4.6 Ghz @ 1.185v (adaptive (-) 0.035v) my 7820x running very stable on stress test for 2 hours, using 3.2 Ghz mesh with auto
> 
> but I dont see any diff between default clock mesh vs 3.0 Ghz vs 3.2 Ghz in Cinebench or gaming, so what mesh clock for?
> 
> and I have try to go to 4.7 Ghz with 1.2v and the Temps are scary, maybe 4.6 Ghz is my AIO limit, dunno if I delid this chip


Main game I tested the mesh oc for was Far Cry Primal which had gains of 15 - 21 fps with a mesh oc of 3.0. Currently have max set to 3.0 and min set to even auto or 2.0. Can't remember which.


----------



## DeathAngel74

I didn't pay for a binned or delidded 7820x either. I think I got lucky though. 4.5/3.2ghz at 1.1v for vcore and mesh. Highest core runs 64c.


----------



## DStealth

Mesh @auto goes sky high voltages.
To reduce temps set manually 1.1 to 1.15 and find your max OC. I'm lucky one using [email protected](101x32)


----------



## DeathAngel74

Yep I was pushing 83c before manually setting the mesh voltage.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> Yep I was pushing 83c before manually setting the mesh voltage.


This is going sound like a complete noob question but you set the Mesh voltage in the CPU Cache Voltage or Uncore Voltage Offset, I'm guess Cache like with x99...









And are you guys using offset or manual Mesh voltages?


----------



## DeathAngel74

Cache voltage, manual. Offset was causing instability.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> Cache voltage, manual. Offset was causing instability.


I'm getting about 90c with a [email protected] overclock and no mesh overclock.


----------



## TahoeDust

Looks like we have quite a few 7820x owners now.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Looks like we have quite a few 7820x owners now.


Good 8 core chip









Well I was surprised I knocked 5c off my temps just for setting a 1.000v on the default mesh clocks (2.7Ghz) instead of Auto.

I was seeing a 92c Cpu package temps at 4.6Ghz no mesh overclock now it's 87c max.


----------



## Chargeit

Yeah the 7820x is in a nice price bracket for people who want an hedt but don't need the extra cores and pcie lanes the 7900x offers. Just makes a lot of sense in a single gpu system.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Good 8 core chip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well I was surprised I knocked 5c off my temps just for setting a 1.000v on the default mesh clocks (2.7Ghz) instead of Auto.
> 
> I was seeing a 92c Cpu package temps at 4.6Ghz no mesh overclock now it's 87c max.


I tested manually setting my cache voltage to 1.15v and didn't notice a difference. Guess that's still high enough to generate a lot of heat. Not in the mood for dealing with instabilities so think I'm going to keep my settings as is for now. Have been up and running without issues for weeks now and kind of want to keep it like that. Might test it out later when I'm more willing to deal with instabilities.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> I tested manually setting my cache voltage to 1.15v and didn't notice a difference. Guess that's still high enough to generate a lot of heat. Not in the mood for dealing with instabilities so think I'm going to keep my settings as is for now. Have been up and running without issues for weeks now and kind of want to keep it like that. Might test it out later when I'm more willing to deal with instabilities.


I'm in the same boat now, I think I might stick to the known stable 4.5Ghz/3Ghz Mesh overclock.
4.6Ghz I'm having a little trouble dialing in the 3Ghz Mesh, even at [email protected] it's unstable.
Stock on Auto is fine.

What are you sticking with?


----------



## DStealth

Very strange you cannot run 3 GHz Mesh from 2.7 default as the default is with 900mv or at least mine on 7800x is ...mine is 2.4 GHz default and run @1.1 x32 multi w/o issues ~35% OC


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Very strange you cannot run 3 GHz Mesh from 2.7 default as the default is with 900mv or at least mine on 7800x is ...mine is 2.4 GHz default and run @1.1 x32 multi w/o issues ~35% OC


Not at 4.6Ghz, at 4.5Ghz it's fine.
I suspect I need a little more than 1.199v for 4.6Ghz like the other guys.

Probably should of asked, what are you guy's VCCIN?


----------



## Betroz

From you guys OC results of the 7820X, I have to ask if the 4.5/4.6 Ghz all-core OC is worth it when the temps are so high? And no one is even talking about the noise level of the AIO cooler at that speed








It seams to me that 4.5+ Ghz OC on these SLX chips are mostly for the people who have high-end custom EK water loops - like Nizzen has. Maybe overclocking the Mesh to 3.0-3.2 Ghz, and having fast RAM (DDR4 4000+ Mhz) is more important for performance, and keeping the CPU cores at either stock or a mild OC of 4.0-4.2 Ghz. Just my two cents


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> From you guys OC results of the 7820X, I have to ask if the 4.5/4.6 Ghz all-core OC is worth it when the temps are so high? And no one is even talking about the noise level of the AIO cooler at that speed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It seams to me that 4.5+ Ghz OC on these SLX chips are mostly for the people who have high-end custom EK water loops - like Nizzen has. Maybe overclocking the Mesh to 3.0-3.2 Ghz, and having fast RAM (DDR4 4000+ Mhz) is more important for performance, and keeping the CPU cores at either stock or a mild OC of 4.0-4.2 Ghz. Just my two cents


For me with a average 7820x I find a 4.5Ghz all core overclock fine temps and noise wise (84c on the CPU Package), it was 90c - 91c with 4.6Ghz but I had to use around 1.2v.
This is with a H115i.

After fiddling all day I've settled on 4.5Ghz/3Ghz Mesh, temps are good at 84c Cpu Package running Realbench 2.44.
I do have a -5 AVX and -6AVX512 offset too.

There's some guys able to use a lower voltage getting lower temps, if you're wanting to guarantee something like that buy from Silicon Lottery.


----------



## pantsaregood

As a follow up, dialed in the 4.8 GHz overclock on my 7820X. Ambient temperature is down to 20°C since I pulled my case out of my desk. 1.25V at 4.8 GHz with an NH-D15 maxing out at about 91°C - going from 4.6 GHz to 4.8 GHz increases power consumption to 260W, which is 80W more than 4.6 GHz.

Manually tuning turbo ratios may be worthwhile if you have time. It appears that my CPU will handle 5.0 GHz for two cores and 4.9 GHz for four cores without obvious issues. Stability testing individual turbo ratios seems a bit odd, though.

The 4.8 GHz overclock looks very nice because it's a 1/3 increase from stock frequency, but there's a minor issue I'm not sure how I'd like to address.

With open airflow and ambient at ~20°C, the CPU will not exceed 92°C even when under heavy load. It appears nothing I can throw at the CPU can cause instability in this case.

However, when the case is sitting in its usual spot in my desk, temperatures climb slightly to around 97°C. Intel's specifications state that this is below the Tj Max of 100°C (or 105°C, according to my motherboard) - the issue is that even though it's technically under the thermal junction, I still get instability. I just got a WHEA error from stopping Prime95 workers.

Can anyone think of a use case that's going to create as much heat as Prime95 small FFTs? Running blend, large FFTs, or Realbench fail to push the CPU above 80°C. AVX/AVX2/AVX512 are a nonissue because they're running at 4/8 offsets, so they actually pull considerably less power.


----------



## To4d

My 7820X runs 4.8 with 3.2 (1.075v) on the Mesh. Mesh was 1.120 all the time since i got the CPU, cant go lower a long time because it causes instability. Guess Bios/Microcode updates solved some issues, maybe it was because of the summer, idk. But its running fine with 1.075 for me now. The good thing is, thanks to the reduction in the mesh voltage i got enough thermal headroom to bump my Cpu to 4.8. Before that i was stuck on 4.7.

And the summer is finnaly gone so the room temperatures are way better







But take it with a grain of salt, currently only prime95 and occt (non-avx) is stable (2hrs), realbench 2.43 crashes me after ~5-10min (vcore, 100%). But some finetuning here and there and it should be good.

My AIO is depending on workload a Jet (Stresstesting, 100% fan.. cant change the curve on the cam software above 80c or so... automaticly goes maxspeed. Well it doesnt matter, i could use the water temp for fan management but on my board its the same thing, fans go crazy after i hit the 80c mark so..) or nearly silent (gaming, 50-60~c). If you push your cpu with heavy workload i guess it can be pretty loud. Im more into gaming so its ok









4.7 with mesh voltage 1.120 https://abload.de/img/prime9545mincjk2r.png (summertime, very warm room)
4.8 with mesh voltage 1.075 https://abload.de/img/4.8-3jnb2j.png (1hr ago, maybe 20c room temp)


----------



## GreedyMuffin

If it crashes after 5-10 min it is really unstable..


----------



## DStealth

Very good result with such entry level Water [email protected] with 3200 mesh for 12 hours Prime on 8/16 CPU is very nice


----------



## To4d

Only Realbench, but i agree. Just testing right now, need some finetuning for Rb, goal is 2h stable. Maybe i cant get 4.8 stable for Realbench. Prime95 29.3 with avx disable runs absolutly fine, 4h run passed, occt runs fine, 2h run passed. But Rb is a pain, was with my 4.7 setting aswell (but i got it stable with the settings postet for 4.7ghz 2h run) never crashed in my usecases. Even if i dont get 4.8 Realbench stable it might be good for me, i mean its mostly gaming. we will see







But reducing the mesh voltage helps my coretemps alot! Thats what im trying to say









@DStealth Its not IRL 12hrs, its ~45mins. But runs fine 4hrs IRL earlier.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I get 2 hours AVX stable (RB ver.2.54) at 4800/3200 at 1.260/1.150V. VCCIN is 1.900V.

EDIT: What is considered to be safe VCCIN voltages..?

This is on a little 7800X.


----------



## milikitungi

Wow. Setting the mesh core/voltage properly really makes a difference in temps







My temps dropped 10ºC more or less. And what did I lose, 20 points in Cinebench? For a 10ºC decrease it's priceless.

So currently these are my settings:

i7 7800x 4.7Ghz 1.205v
Mesh 2.4Ghz 0.7250v


----------



## schoolofmonkey

What VCCIN are you guys using for 4.5Ghz+?


----------



## To4d

1.880 & LLC5


----------



## fireedo

well my chip surprised me, after reading this thread for awhile finally I try to use manual voltage using 1.155v @ 4.6Ghz, Mesh 3.2Ghz/1.070v, AVX/AVX512 -3/-5 and passed stress tes using Realbench 24.3 and Prime95 26.6 each for 30 minutes
Cinebench passed smoothly

dunno for gaming, I hope will be fine too

this makes me eager to try lowering vcore maybe around 1.140 or 1.145v








and try mesh voltage around 1.030-1.050v

or keep the voltages but up the multiplier, will try 47 multi


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fireedo*
> 
> well my chip surprised me, after reading this thread for awhile finally I try to use manual voltage using 1.155v @ 4.6Ghz, Mesh 3.2Ghz/1.070v, AVX/AVX512 -3/-5 and passed stress tes using Realbench 24.3 and Prime95 26.6 each for 30 minutes
> Cinebench passed smoothly
> 
> dunno for gaming, I hope will be fine too
> 
> this makes me eager to try lowering vcore maybe around 1.140 or 1.145v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and try mesh voltage around 1.030-1.050v


You know mine did the exact same with Cinebench with the exact same settings as you.
[email protected], Mesh [email protected], VCCIN 1.910v LLC 5.

I haven't ran Realbench yet, but I find it really odd with all the problems I've had trying to run at 4.6Ghz under 1.199v that the machine, 1 Actually boots and 2 Can run Cinebench getting a score of 2006.

What NVIDIA driver version are you using?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> The traction control on my SC'd car leans out the fuel - so it stays off lest even 93 knocks... Tactical nope...
> but yeah, it requires your attention - which is what makes it fun.
> Ditto on the 7980xe... To be honest, the angel on my shoulder is saying, "don't do it, you know in 6-9 months they'll be forced by AMD to come out with something either much better or much cheaper..." The devil is saying, "go on [expletive omitted] it!"


those two little fkrs are always in my ear.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> From you guys OC results of the 7820X, I have to ask if the 4.5/4.6 Ghz all-core OC is worth it when the temps are so high? And no one is even talking about the noise level of the AIO cooler at that speed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It seams to me that 4.5+ Ghz OC on these SLX chips are mostly for the people who have high-end custom EK water loops - like Nizzen has. Maybe overclocking the Mesh to 3.0-3.2 Ghz, and having fast RAM (DDR4 4000+ Mhz) is more important for performance, and keeping the CPU cores at either stock or a mild OC of 4.0-4.2 Ghz. Just my two cents


Depends on what you use your computer for I guess. For me my peak temps are only hit when stress testing. For my use, Gaming/streaming/general I usually peak in the 60's but run lower then that.


----------



## fireedo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> You know mine did the exact same with Cinebench with the exact same settings as you.
> [email protected], Mesh [email protected], VCCIN 1.910v LLC 5.
> 
> I haven't ran Realbench yet, but I find it really odd with all the problems I've had trying to run at 4.6Ghz under 1.199v that the machine, 1 Actually boots and 2 Can run Cinebench getting a score of 2006.
> 
> What NVIDIA driver version are you using?


Nice









btw for my VCCIN I use 1.850v

well just now a 4.7 Ghz @ 1.155v at least with cinebench tes all passed











and FAILED














, just after 2 minute running Realbench 24.3 , trying add more voltage and got more 30 mV to get Realbench stable, but I think is not worth for just 100 Mhz I have to add more 30 mV which result on some more heat and more power needed

Right now I'm still on the 385.41 driver version


----------



## Martin778

There are some issues with RealBench and Nvidia, I was getting black screen lockups all the time using it.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> There are some issues with RealBench and Nvidia, I was getting black screen lockups all the time using it.


Shouldn't. Don't run MSI afterburner while running Realbench.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you two little fkrs are always in my ear.


My two are still battling it out but the angel is currently winning. The devil however will probably jam a fork on my back when I can put the thing in my shopping cart and press checkout. @cekim


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> My two are still battling it out but the angel is currently winning. The devil however will probably jam a fork on my back when I can put the thing in my shopping cart and press checkout. @cekim


lol - don't get forked.


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> If it crashes after 5-10 min it is really unstable..


I can variably make it never crash or make it crash after five minutes. Above 95°C or so, it doesn't throttle and appears to become wildly unstable. If I remain below that temperature, everything is fine.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> If it crashes after 5-10 min it is really unstable..
> 
> 
> 
> I can variably make it never crash or make it crash after five minutes. Above 95°C or so, it doesn't throttle and appears to become wildly unstable. If I remain below that temperature, everything is fine.
Click to expand...

I would just stay below 95c, that is what I do.


----------



## BroPhilip

What voltage are you guys running the mesh at.... I currently have 30x at 1.00v


----------



## TahoeDust

Mesh is at 3200MHz 1.177v


----------



## T800

I completed the setup today. i9 7900X-Rampage VI Apex.

I could not play with the PC much but with 1.125V manual voltage, LLC2, at 4600MHz I completed several runs of 3DMark Time Spy and Cinebench 15.

No mesh overclock.
Cinebench 15 score is 2554.

AVX offset is set to 1 and AVX 512 offset is set to 2.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fireedo*
> 
> Nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> btw for my VCCIN I use 1.850v
> 
> well just now a 4.7 Ghz @ 1.155v at least with cinebench tes all passed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and FAILED
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , just after 2 minute running Realbench 24.3 , trying add more voltage and got more 30 mV to get Realbench stable, but I think is not worth for just 100 Mhz I have to add more 30 mV which result on some more heat and more power needed
> 
> Right now I'm still on the 385.41 driver version


I dropped my VCCIN to 1.910v LLC 5, I still couldn't pass Realbench at 1.161v, 1.2v is still the lowest, passed 8 hours of Realbench 2.44, CPU Package temp maxed out at 90c.
No Mesh overclock, not worth the extra heat.

I think I've just got a below average 7820x, for 4.5Ghz I still need 1.179v









At the moment I've got a bug where my cache isn't downclocking on idle with the cpu cores when set to Auto, manually enter the default 2.7Ghz and it will.


----------



## xarot

I sent my poor 7900X for Intel RMA (using the tuning plan) and will get a new one tomorrow. The old one needed 1.24 V for 4.5 GHz on all cores and 1.28 for 4.6 all cores. 4.7...around 1.32 to run Cinebench.









However, 7980XE launches tomorrow, what to do. Haven't got my R6E yet either.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> I sent my poor 7900X for Intel RMA (using the tuning plan) and will get a new one tomorrow. The old one needed 1.24 V for 4.5 GHz on all cores and 1.28 for 4.6 all cores. 4.7...around 1.32 to run Cinebench.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, 7980XE launches tomorrow, what to do. Haven't got my R6E yet either.


Yes but who's going to have stock is the question if it actually does become available.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Yes but who's going to have stock is the question if it actually does become available.


Yeah, we will see. Sometimes strange things happen...last time I got my 7900X shipping confirmation before the actual launch date.







And since it for sure costs over 2000 euros (I am suspecting 2200 - 2500 €) over here, I hope I won't get a poor chip again. The 6950X will go into my HTPC because over here nobody will buy high end parts second hand unless I am willing to part them for a ridiculous fraction of the original price. So I bought a mATX mobo for it too.

Sometimes, things pop up here in cold Finland quite fast and sometimes we will have to wait for weeks...


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Yeah, we will see. Sometimes strange things happen...last time I got my 7900X shipping confirmation before the actual launch date.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And since it for sure costs over 2000 euros (I am suspecting 2200 - 2500 €) over here, I hope I won't get a poor chip again. The 6950X will go into my HTPC because over here nobody will buy high end parts second hand unless I am willing to part them for a ridiculous fraction of the original price. So I bought a mATX mobo for it too.
> 
> Sometimes, things pop up here in cold Finland quite fast and sometimes we will have to wait for weeks...


Are you absolutely sure that 6950X is enough to drive your HTPC?


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Are you absolutely sure that 6950X is enough to drive your HTPC?


My kid will be happy to see YouTube videos are running smoothly.


----------



## T800

My 7900X passed 15 minutes of Realbench 2.54 stress test at 4600MHz with using all of the 32GB system memory at 3200MHz. Core voltage set to manual, 1.150V. Load Line Calibration Level 2. AVX offset set to 1, AVX 512 offset set to 2. Mainboard is Rampage VI Apex.

The chip is good I think. By the way I can not set adaptive voltage properly, it acts like I only set offset voltage and the board supply different level of voltages to two or three of the cores other than my setting which is lower.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T800*
> 
> My 7900X passed 15 minutes of Realbench 2.54 stress test at 4600MHz with using all of the 32GB system memory at 3200MHz. Core voltage set to manual, 1.150V. Load Line Calibration Level 2. AVX offset -1, AVX 512 offset -2. Mainboard is Rampage VI Apex.
> 
> The chip is good I think. By the way I can not set adaptive voltage properly, it acts like I only set offset voltage and the board supply different level of voltages to two or three of the cores other than my setting which is lower.


Realbench 2.43.. ?????


----------



## T800

I tried Realbench 2.43 with my Ryzen 7 1800X and it needed less voltage than 2.54 version to pass 15 minutes stress test.

Why did you suggest 2.43 ? Enlight me please.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T800*
> 
> I tried Realbench 2.43 with my Ryzen 7 1800X and it needed less voltage than 2.54 version to pass 15 minutes stress test.
> 
> Why did you suggest 2.43 ? Enlight me please.


Because 2.43 doesn't only use AVX like 2.54.


----------



## T800

OK, I’ll give it a try to 2.43 too, thank you.


----------



## tistou77

And Realbench 2.44 use AVX or not ?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> And Realbench 2.44 use AVX or not ?


No. Only 2.54.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

People honestly don't think that CB R15 is a good stabilty tester..?

I can pass CB R15 at a far, far lower voltage compared to even non-avx RB 2.43.


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> People honestly don't think that CB R15 is a good stabilty tester..?
> 
> I can pass CB R15 at a far, far lower voltage compared to even non-avx RB 2.43.


The CB15 test is too short of time to test for long-term stability. Realbench at 2 hours ++ is better, as you know


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> No. Only 2.54.


Ok, 2.43 and 2.44 are the "same" for stress test, then


----------



## T800

Realbench 15 minutes is just good enough for gaming, I did not see a game freezing after settings passed this 15 minutes test.

Battlefield 1 is a harsh game for stability too.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T800*
> 
> Realbench 15 minutes is just good enough for gaming, I did not see a game freezing after settings passed this 15 minutes test.
> 
> Battlefield 1 is a harsh game for stability too.


Yes! Bf1 multiplayer is harder for the whole system than CB 15, it's fun too


----------



## SsXxX

hello,

where is the Asus Rampage VI Extreme? why is it not released yet?

searched google news and every techsite i know and nothing as if it is not there!

anybody know anything about it or when it is expected to release?


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Yeah, we will see. Sometimes strange things happen...last time I got my 7900X shipping confirmation before the actual launch date.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And since it for sure costs over 2000 euros (I am suspecting 2200 - 2500 €) over here, I hope I won't get a poor chip again. *The 6950X will go into my HTPC because over here nobody will buy high end parts second hand unless I am willing to part them for a ridiculous fraction of the original price*. So I bought a mATX mobo for it too.
> 
> Sometimes, things pop up here in cold Finland quite fast and sometimes we will have to wait for weeks...


So much true. I always laugh when reading how i could sell my hardware certain amout of time before the launch of the next gen, so i can stay on top for a minimal cost - i mean like selling 1080 few days/weeks before 1080Ti and then use the money to buy 1080Ti.... because i guess in US its easy to find someone who would take it at that point of time for say 3/4 of its original price i paid....but that is not possible here (Europe). People wont buy used stuff, if you wont sell at least for half the price.

On other hand, you, as an owner of 6950x and soon to be of HCC i9, cant really complain At least you can afford it in the first place.


----------



## Martin778

I found out that unstable mesh will also throw WHEA BSOD's...and that 3200MHz mesh <1.20V is undoable.


----------



## DStealth

Got new memories...these B-dies are very good ....w/o any optimizations 3800 16-16-16-30-280 1T @1.4V wow


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I found out that unstable mesh will also throw WHEA BSOD's...and that 3200MHz mesh <1.20V is undoable.


Can you get 3000 mesh stable, and at what volt?


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> People honestly don't think that CB R15 is a good stabilty tester..?
> 
> I can pass CB R15 at a far, far lower voltage compared to even non-avx RB 2.43.


Cinebench is strictly a benchmark, not a stress test. RealBench is both a benchmark and stress test, two different modes configured separately. Obviously if you don't pass a benchmark you're definitely not stable, but passing it does not imply you are. But then different folks may have different definitions of stable, and I don't mean about horses (OK, horsepower might be dragged into the conversation)


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Cinebench is strictly a benchmark, not a stress test. RealBench is both a benchmark and stress test, two different modes configured separately. Obviously if you don't pass a benchmark you're definitely not stable, but passing it does not imply you are. But then different folks may have different definitions of stable, and I don't mean about horses (OK, horsepower might be dragged into the conversation)


+1
Somebody playing Microsoft Solitaire all day might find Cinebench way too stressful


----------



## Chargeit

If you're crashing in Cinebench then you're lucky the computer booted. I've gotten away with benchmarking 48 on my current cpu in Cinebench R15 using settings that had no hope of passing a stress test.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> Can you get 3000 mesh stable, and at what volt?


Mine is on 1.050V or so.. Dunno about stabilty, haven't crashed on me so far. Testet only half an hour Aida64 cache only.


----------



## DStealth

Closer to 50ns latency...these memories are rocking only 1.4v


----------



## RMBR

Hello!
I bought an Apex with 7900x and I am waiting to arrive at my house.
I have two 1080ti strix OC in sli.
A friend has told me that X299 is horrible for sli.
It is true?
Anyone here have and can you tell me how it's working in games?
Thank you very much.


----------



## StreekG

Why is there such a lack of news/reviews on the 7920X??

We are now receiving them in stock in Australia and yet there is not a shred of news on them.


----------



## DVLux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *StreekG*
> 
> Why is there such a lack of news/reviews on the 7920X??
> 
> We are now receiving them in stock in Australia and yet there is not a shred of news on them.


Nobody got review samples. Thus, no reviews.

Same with the 1900X.

Or, perhaps, it just wasn't a hotly anticipated halo product like the 7980XE.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *StreekG*
> 
> Why is there such a lack of news/reviews on the 7920X??
> 
> We are now receiving them in stock in Australia and yet there is not a shred of news on them.


I don't want to be the guy with the Tin foil hat here, but when AMD were throwing CPU's at reviewers not long ago I'm sure they don't want to tick AMD of by showing what a joke Threadripper really is when it comes to the HEDT lineup.
We saw that with the current lineup, none of the 8 core Ryzen CPU's can keep up with the 8 core Intel equivalent.

Don't get me wrong I applaud AMD for coming back in a big way with their new tech, but it's still behind Intel due to them having a bigger research budget and sitting on newer tech


----------



## DStealth

Finally managed to get sub 50ns latency playing with subtimings. For this frequency cl14 requires much more voltage so enjoying 1.4v CL15 speeds


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Finally managed to get sub 50ns latency playing with subtimings. For this frequency cl14 requires much more voltage so enjoying 1.4v CL15 speeds


Nice! I have not gotten there yet. 52.1ns is as low as I have gone. Maybe I will really buckle down and see if my kit can do it.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RMBR*
> 
> Hello!
> I bought an Apex with 7900x and I am waiting to arrive at my house.
> I have two 1080ti strix OC in sli.
> A friend has told me that X299 is horrible for sli.
> It is true?
> Anyone here have and can you tell me how it's working in games?
> Thank you very much.


SLI didn't work on X299 at launch. It was fixed only like a month ago in drivers, so it might be related to that. My X299 build was put to ice before NVIDIA fixed the issues so I haven't tested it now and I am waiting for the Rampage VI Extreme to start replacing parts in my main rig.


----------



## Scotty99

Anyone in here buy their CPU's/boards from microcenter? I am curious if you recall if they offered discounts or board combos at launch. Ryzen took like a month for discounts to show up but i believe thats because of the motherboard shortage. Speculating for coffee lake


----------



## schoolofmonkey




----------



## TahoeDust

Linus' videos have gotten so lame. No overclocking...
There will be much better stuff coming out today.


----------



## Nikos4Life

Insane :O


----------



## fireedo

for a 18 core cpu running @ 4.5 Ghz is amazing, every review successfully OCéd this 18 cores easily
Intel did well afterall









for that $2000 price well this is an exotic sport car class cpu, cant say anything bad about this one


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Nice! I have not gotten there yet. 52.1ns is as low as I have gone. Maybe I will really buckle down and see if my kit can do it.


Tref dude. The latency is pure tref.
X299 seems to love b-dies
I am running mine at 3600 15-15-15-35 1T 54/56/54/56 @1.35.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Finally managed to get sub 50ns latency playing with subtimings. For this frequency cl14 requires much more voltage so enjoying 1.4v CL15 speeds


Guessing thats a B-Die.


----------



## T800

Not only for X299, B-die is superior now. X370 is almost required B-die for proper 3200MHz operation.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Tref dude. The latency is pure tref.
> X299 seems to love b-dies
> I am running mine at 3600 15-15-15-35 1T 54/56/54/56 @1.35.
> Guessing thats a B-Die.


Wonder if I should try similar timings


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Wonder if I should try similar timings


Its actually pretty easy. Its time i go back to ram addict club.


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RMBR*
> 
> Hello!
> I bought an Apex with 7900x and I am waiting to arrive at my house.
> I have two 1080ti strix OC in sli.
> A friend has told me that X299 is horrible for sli.
> It is true?
> Anyone here have and can you tell me how it's working in games?
> Thank you very much.


After Nvidia put our drivers to support SLI on x299 everything is working as one would expect. So don't worry about









Everyone,

We do we expect the 7980 to be on amazon or newegg? today? (i was hope'n it would have been up already)


----------



## Sobo

Anyone tried the newest 0802 bios from ASUS? It says something about some CPU microcode update and performance improvements - I guess it's mostly some hoax which they say all the time.

Still, if I wanted to update from the base 0402 which I still use on my X299 TUF Mark 1, can I do the following? Save all settings in a profile -> flash new bios -> load optimized defaults -> load the privously saved profile back (I wonder if you can load profile saved on bios A into bios B....

I also have a question regarding X299 vs NVME: I read that X299 has some silly chipset limitation which does not allow it to fully saturate high speed NVME SSD drives, source: https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/x299-a-nvme-ssd-read-speeds.18786132/

Using NVME -> PCIE adapter and lanes directly from the CPU can be useful as a workaround. The thing is, you need a special set of drivers for the adapter (or its controller), right? So, before I could install the OS on such a configuration, I would need to download Win10 drivers from the manufacturers website and integrate them into the standard Windows 10 installation?


----------



## cekim

9/25 and no Rampage or 7980xe.... It's like they don't want my money?


----------



## pantsaregood

What kind of VCCSA is everyone running on Skylake-X? Want to push my RAM, but I'm not sure how far I can safely push the IMC's voltage.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sobo*
> 
> Anyone tried the newest 0802 bios from ASUS? It says something about some CPU microcode update and performance improvements - I guess it's mostly some hoax which they say all the time.
> 
> Still, if I wanted to update from the base 0402 which I still use on my X299 TUF Mark 1, can I do the following? Save all settings in a profile -> flash new bios -> load optimized defaults -> load the privously saved profile back (I wonder if you can load profile saved on bios A into bios B....
> 
> I also have a question regarding X299 vs NVME: I read that X299 has some silly chipset limitation which does not allow it to fully saturate high speed NVME SSD drives, source: https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/x299-a-nvme-ssd-read-speeds.18786132/
> 
> Using NVME -> PCIE adapter and lanes directly from the CPU can be useful as a workaround. The thing is, you need a special set of drivers for the adapter (or its controller), right? So, before I could install the OS on such a configuration, I would need to download Win10 drivers from the manufacturers website and integrate them into the standard Windows 10 installation?


0802 has performance improvements for NVME drives, although I've not made a comparison as of yet


----------



## cstkl1

Testing bios 0802


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sobo*
> 
> Anyone tried the newest 0802 bios from ASUS? It says something about some CPU microcode update and performance improvements - I guess it's mostly some hoax which they say all the time.
> 
> Still, if I wanted to update from the base 0402 which I still use on my X299 TUF Mark 1, can I do the following? Save all settings in a profile -> flash new bios -> load optimized defaults -> load the privously saved profile back (I wonder if you can load profile saved on bios A into bios B....
> 
> I also have a question regarding X299 vs NVME: I read that X299 has some silly chipset limitation which does not allow it to fully saturate high speed NVME SSD drives, source: https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/x299-a-nvme-ssd-read-speeds.18786132/
> 
> Using NVME -> PCIE adapter and lanes directly from the CPU can be useful as a workaround. The thing is, you need a special set of drivers for the adapter (or its controller), right? So, before I could install the OS on such a configuration, I would need to download Win10 drivers from the manufacturers website and integrate them into the standard Windows 10 installation?


The latest bios threres a boost about 100MB/s on read/write. Thats about it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> What kind of VCCSA is everyone running on Skylake-X? Want to push my RAM, but I'm not sure how far I can safely push the IMC's voltage.


vcssa/vccio u can leave it at default.
From my very very brief testing it doesnt play much of a role.


----------



## Chargeit

Am I the only one who thinks x299 should of been called FX299? Seems like something is always underperforming.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Am I the only one who thinks x299 should of been called FX299? Seems like something is always underperforming.


Like what?? Only the nvme atm on synthetics.
No diff than any other intel chipset that took months of work.


----------



## fireedo

damn, this deliding thing is really amazing, just now I have delided my 7820x (and this is my first ever deliding)

the temperature gain maybe not what I dream about (around 20-25 c diff) but, with my new OC 4.7 Ghz @ 1.186v, Mesh clock 3.2 Ghz/1.060v, VCCIN 1.880v, now it just sit steady @ 80 c maksimum temp with Prime95 26.6 and @ 86 c with RealBench 24.3 each for 30 minutes

so maybe I got 12-16 c temperature different vs not delid, well it is worth it, it is just a $40 tool and I live in a warm country like everyday my ambient room temperature around 29-32 c ( maybe its not just warm but hot ) without Air Conditioner

maybe if I put custom watercooling I got more headroom for OC









well, Go Delid









lol


----------



## Martin778

So, the 7960 and 7980 are out and it's exactly as I said they would be, especially the 7980, 50% more cores over the 7920 and severely crippled OC due to thermals and absolutely outrageous power draw.
I've read two reviews so far and not any of them showed the temperatures, be it before and after overclocking. Wonder why?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Like what?? Only the nvme atm on synthetics.
> No diff than any other intel chipset that took months of work.


I'll add two more:

L3 cache bandwidth
Memory bandwidth
These two in particular are holding back a lot of the AVX512 workloads that I deal with. There simply isn't enough bandwidth to feed the AVX512 on these chips. (Of course few people here have noticed since the people on this forum are more likely to be gamers which need neither bandwidth nor cores...)

These were meant to be 6-channel processors. Gimping them to 4 really doesn't help - even if you can offset some of it with large memory overclocks. But that's more of an issue with the design of the platform itself rather than a bug.

But this is the first generation of AVX512 chips. And nobody will use it for a few more years. But at some point, we better see either DDR5 or 8-channel HEDT. Otherwise, the gazzilion cores on them are more for show than function. (This is probably also why Threadripper only has 2 active dies. There's no point in having 32 cores if you only have 4 channels of memory to feed them.)


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I'll add two more:
> 
> L3 cache bandwidth
> Memory bandwidth
> These two in particular are holding back a lot of the AVX512 workloads that I deal with. There simply isn't enough bandwidth to feed the AVX512 on these chips. (Of course few people here have noticed since the people on this forum are more likely to be gamers which need neither bandwidth nor cores...)
> 
> These were meant to be 6-channel processors. Gimping them to 4 really doesn't help - even if you can offset some of it with large memory overclocks. But that's more of an issue with the design of the platform itself rather than a bug.
> 
> But this is the first generation of AVX512 chips. And nobody will use it for a few more years. But at some point, we better see either DDR5 or 8-channel HEDT. Otherwise, the gazzilion cores on them are more for show than function. (This is probably also why Threadripper only has 2 active dies. There's no point in having 32 cores if you only have 4 channels of memory to feed them.)


No.2 isnt the current bandwidth on x299 higher than x99??


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> No.2 isnt the current bandwidth on x299 higher than x99??


It is, but you also have 2 - 4x the compute power. (10 -> 18 cores, AVX2 -> AVX512)

Same amount of bandwidth, 2 - 4x the compute. X99 had "just enough" bandwidth to feed the cores. Not so on X299.


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> So, the 7960 and 7980 are out and it's exactly as I said they would be, especially the 7980, 50% more cores over the 7920 and severely crippled OC due to thermals and absolutely outrageous power draw.
> I've read two reviews so far and not any of them showed the temperatures, be it before and after overclocking. Wonder why?


OC3D TV has those numbers for you in Toms' review here :


----------



## T800

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sobo*
> 
> Anyone tried the newest 0802 bios from ASUS? It says something about some CPU microcode update and performance improvements - I guess it's mostly some hoax which they say all the time.
> 
> Still, if I wanted to update from the base 0402 which I still use on my X299 TUF Mark 1, can I do the following? Save all settings in a profile -> flash new bios -> load optimized defaults -> load the privously saved profile back (I wonder if you can load profile saved on bios A into bios B....
> 
> I also have a question regarding X299 vs NVME: I read that X299 has some silly chipset limitation which does not allow it to fully saturate high speed NVME SSD drives, source: https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/x299-a-nvme-ssd-read-speeds.18786132/
> 
> Using NVME -> PCIE adapter and lanes directly from the CPU can be useful as a workaround. The thing is, you need a special set of drivers for the adapter (or its controller), right? So, before I could install the OS on such a configuration, I would need to download Win10 drivers from the manufacturers website and integrate them into the standard Windows 10 installation?


Settings are not interchangeable, I gave it a try with Crosshair VI Hero and settings for the previous version not loadable to new one.

For BIOS upgrade I always Clear CMOS, after that I upgrade BIOS through EZ Flash. This was suggested by @elmor at Crosshair VI Hero overclocking thread and I use this method for all my ASUS boards.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I'll add two more:
> 
> L3 cache bandwidth
> Memory bandwidth
> These two in particular are holding back a lot of the AVX512 workloads that I deal with. There simply isn't enough bandwidth to feed the AVX512 on these chips. (Of course few people here have noticed since the people on this forum are more likely to be gamers which need neither bandwidth nor cores...)
> 
> These were meant to be 6-channel processors. Gimping them to 4 really doesn't help - even if you can offset some of it with large memory overclocks. But that's more of an issue with the design of the platform itself rather than a bug.
> 
> But this is the first generation of AVX512 chips. And nobody will use it for a few more years. But at some point, we better see either DDR5 or 8-channel HEDT. Otherwise, the gazzilion cores on them are more for show than function. (This is probably also why Threadripper only has 2 active dies. There's no point in having 32 cores if you only have 4 channels of memory to feed them.)


110-120GB/s memory read is not good enough memory bandwidth?










Sm961nvme m.2 1TB @ stock cpu and windows nvme driver:

nothing wrong with performance on nvme m.2 ssd on x299 here











Noobs allways have problems


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> 110-120GB/s memory read is not good enough memory bandwidth?


The only way I can explain it with numbers. I'll use the numbers from my own system:

Total Bandwidth = *80 GB/s*
# of Cores = *10*
Bandwidth / Core = *8 GB/s*
Bytes/Cycle per core @ 4 GHz = *2 bytes / cycle*

AVX512 computation throughput: 2 x 512-bit FMA = 2 x 64-bytes/cycle = *128 bytes / cycle* of output data

So you start off with around a 64x gap between memory performance and raw execution throughput. In order to avoid becoming memory-bound, the application needs to do around 64 AVX512 instructions for each vector loaded from or written to memory. In the case of streaming, you need both since you need to read from memory, then write it back. So the 64 becomes 128x.

Most applications (that don't fit entirely in cache) only have a compute density of 1 - 10 execution / memory access. Even the most heavily optimized applications have a hard time achieving compute densities above 50. And most of those rely heavily on using the caches (and the L3 on Skylake X sucks).

How this translates into real-world performance will depend heavily on the application. The reason why most applications manage to scale right now is because they either fit entirely in cache, or they aren't using AVX/AVX512 which is where this bandwidth/compute gap is most pronounced.

If we look to the server variants:

6 channels of memory
Have very low clock speeds
Not overclockable
So in essence, they are better balanced in terms of bandwidth/compute.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

What is the stock core voltage on your CPUs?

Currently running 4400/3000 on completely stock voltages.. CPU-Z says 1.045V, and Aida64 says 1075-1.082V..

I wonder if the difference between my 4800/3200 will be big in gaming. Beside benchmarks I notice nothing. Under folidng it is around 47-52'C.. The package is a whopping 57'C though. If I turn it to completely stock (same voltage, but stock clockspeed) it is 5-6'C cooler.. Is that normal? I mean, does changing the frequency really increase the temps so much?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> What is the stock core voltage on your CPUs?
> 
> Currently running 4400/3000 on completely stock voltages.. CPU-Z says 1.045V, and Aida64 says 1075-1.082V..
> 
> I wonder if the difference between my 4800/3200 will be big in gaming. Beside benchmarks I notice nothing. Under folidng it is around 47-52'C.. The package is a whopping 57'C though. If I turn it to completely stock (same voltage, but stock clockspeed) it is 5-6'C cooler.. Is that normal? I mean, does changing the frequency really increase the temps so much?


Ignore aida. Wait a minute. That cache 3000 cant be at 0.9

But yeah generally if your comp at 4.4 is optimized well especially with high dram etc.. going up to 4.8 aint gonna make a difference.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I am running 3800 at 16-18-18-1T, so ram is decent.

Is Aida wrong? Aida says 1.260V, CPU-Z says 1.224V for 4800 mhz. :O

What is the best stresstest to stress cache?


----------



## Martin778

Prime or Realbench will smash cache pretty good.


----------



## DeathAngel74

I think my stock voltage was 1.040 or 1.050. Getting old(forgot), lol.


----------



## cstkl1

4200 is 50:50 booting into windows with this board. put everything i know on ram timings and it doesnt help.

was curious so testing 4.4/3.2 vs 5/3.4 at [email protected] (set) auto third timings. just left the 3600c15 and changed vdimm and ram speed


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> I think my stock voltage was 1.040 or 1.050. Getting old(forgot), lol.


eh mesh stock first time seeing so high. normally its 0.9v
I need 0.96v for 3ghz mesh.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> 4200 is 50:50 booting into windows with this board. put everything i know on ram timings and it doesnt help.
> 
> was curious so testing 4.4/3.2 vs 5/3.4 at [email protected] (set) auto third timings. just left the 3600c15 and changed vdimm and ram speed
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


4200 ram was tough even with gskill's 8x8 modules rated at 4200 on a 7900x.


----------



## aerotracks

@cstkl1: Your AIDA bandwith looks better than what I can squeeze out of it on MSI









Some AVX 512 numbers at 3800MHz 0.98V, LinX 0.7.3 three runs with 8GB memory

http://abload.de/image.php?img=20170925-2316412sjqc.png


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> 4200 ram was tough even with gskill's 8x8 modules rated at 4200 on a 7900x.


Do you mind posting the txt setting of asus profile for 4kc17.
Ty.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Prime or Realbench will smash cache pretty good.


IMHO AIDA cache stress is best ...


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> @cstkl1: Your AIDA bandwith looks better than what I can squeeze out of it on MSI
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some AVX 512 numbers at 3800MHz 0.98V, LinX 0.7.3 three runs with 8GB memory
> 
> http://abload.de/image.php?img=20170925-2316412sjqc.png


Asus been gracious enough to allow all x299 equal on ram options atm.

Anyway those numbers are not even realistic for 24/7 and its totally boosted from max tref and mesh.
Could go higher if dialed down the third timings its all on crazy numbers.

What i am curious whats happening to 3800 [email protected] .. hci always comes up with 1error for every 100% run. It happens at 105-109% intervals etc 205-209% etc etc.


----------



## TahoeDust

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1361952-REG/intel_bx80673i97980x_core_i9_7980xe_x_series_2_6.html

Ready for order. This is where I bought my 7820x. Pre-ordered and it shipped on launch day. Good company.


----------



## DeathAngel74

Holy C**p!!! That's my house payment and all the rest of the bills for the month, lol!


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Do you mind posting the txt setting of asus profile for 4kc17.
> Ty.


I use the memory preset in the memory timing section on Asus R6E and R6A they both worked for me on any ram I have tried.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1361952-REG/intel_bx80673i97980x_core_i9_7980xe_x_series_2_6.html
> 
> Ready for order. This is where I bought my 7820x. Pre-ordered and it shipped on launch day. Good company.


so tempting, no tax in CA!


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> so tempting, no tax in CA!


I'm just the opposite, living in NY.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> so tempting, no tax in CA!


That is why I ordered from them instead of NewEgg when x299 Launched. I got it Wednesday after it Launched Monday. It was a good choice.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> so tempting, no tax in CA!


^^^^^


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> I'm just the opposite, living in NY.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> That is why I ordered from them instead of NewEgg when x299 Launched. I got it Wednesday after it Launched Monday. It was a good choice.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> ^^^^^


Do you guys know if they have a lame return policy like Newegg? I have never ordered from B&H always talks about them.


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Do you guys know if they have a lame return policy like Newegg? I have never ordered from B&H always talks about them.


I've nevered ordered computer parts from them, but have used them quite a bit over the years for camera gear. They've always provided great service to me, and the others I know in camera forums like Fred Miranda.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Do you guys know if they have a lame return policy like Newegg? I have never ordered from B&H always talks about them.


They have been excellent to me in the return department. I have returned a motherboard and 1080 ti in the last 5 months. They gave me zero issues, paid return shipping, and refunded promptly. Dare I say...Amazon-like.


----------



## iamjanco

Please note that they do close on Saturdays and Jewish holidays.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Please note that they do close on Saturdays and Jewish holidays.


Correct. They are also closing this Thurs-Sat for Yom Kippur.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Please note that they do close on Saturdays and Jewish holidays.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Correct. They are also closing this Thurs-Sat for Yom Kippur.


Thanks guys, I'm going to pre-order but may not use the CPU if the Silicon Lottery comes out around the same time with reasonable prices.







. I want to have a CPU in hand though! So fed up with Newegg and their BS and Amazon never has stock early enough.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Do you guys know if they have a lame return policy like Newegg? I have never ordered from B&H always talks about them.


https://www.bhphotovideo.com/find/HelpCenter/ReturnExchange.jsp

I do not plan to return this CPU unless it's DOA. I will buy a Intel tuning plan and keep until next gen.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> https://www.bhphotovideo.com/find/HelpCenter/ReturnExchange.jsp
> 
> I do not plan to return this CPU unless it's DOA. I will buy a Intel tuning plan and keep until next gen.


I'm starting too think the same thing and not delid it. Ripping out the CPU with a mono block from EK is going to suck so if I install it then it's going to stay there for a while I think. If I get one from SL then at least there is a warranty for a year so I can abuse it a bit, I always give my chips the TLC and not trying out stupid high voltages just for kicks and grins. If I use the B&H one and send it in for delid and it dies then I'm screwed so no delid if I end up using the B&H chip.


----------



## Jbravo33

I preordered the zenith extreme from BHP the second it went live got an email 3 weeks later saying it was in stock and ready to ship. I preordered my 80xefrom Newegg this time around. Not taking any chances even tho I'm not even sure if monoblock has shipped yet. I need it NOAAWW, but why.........


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> I preordered the zenith extreme from BHP the second it went live got an email 3 weeks later saying it was in stock and ready to ship. I preordered my 80xefrom Newegg this time around. Not taking any chances even tho I'm not even sure if monoblock has shipped yet. I need it NOAAWW, but why.........


Monoblock OCT 2nd or 3rd they changed dates or maybe that's only for people that ordered later


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> After Nvidia put our drivers to support SLI on x299 everything is working as one would expect. So don't worry about
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone,
> 
> We do we expect the 7980 to be on amazon or newegg? today? (i was hope'n it would have been up already)


nope - they did not ship product in advance of launch day...

BTW guys - B&H Photo has been around for decades. Save place to buy IMO.

and Rockit has a 2066 delid tool available - $40.


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> BTW guys - B&H Photo has been around for decades. Save place to buy IMO.


Yup, lol, used to see their adverts in the back of all the photography magazines long before some here were but a drop in the eyes of their parents. Used to browse those ads for darkroom equipment.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nope - they did not ship product in advance of launch day...
> 
> BTW guys - B&H Photo has been around for decades. Save place to buy IMO.
> 
> and Rokit has a 2066 delid tool available - $40.


it's official, the devil again stabbed me with a fork on my back, I was hoping for an SL chip though. I hope this thing processes videos like there is no tomorrow!


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> it's official, the devil again stabbed me with a fork on my back, I was hoping for an SL chip though. I hope this thing processes videos like there is no tomorrow!


Good luck, hope it ships soon.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nope - they did not ship product in advance of launch day...
> 
> BTW guys - B&H Photo has been around for decades. Save place to buy IMO.
> 
> and Rokit has a 2066 delid tool available - $40.


I'm into photography and I used to go to their Manhattan store fairly often - to buy the occasional lens and ... film









They're an excellent store / site.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Yup, lol, used to see their adverts in the back of all the photography magazines long before some here were but a drop in the eyes of their parents. Used to browse those ads for darkroom equipment.


a tear of happiness.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> it's official, the devil again stabbed me with a fork on my back, I was hoping for an SL chip though. I hope this thing processes videos like there is no tomorrow!


i ordered one also... but if SL has them up before it ships I'll go with SL.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> I'm into photography and I used to go to their Manhattan store fairly often - to buy the occasional lens and ... film
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They're an excellent store / site.


Same here bud. Been to the old store many times. Yes, even for 35mm film (I still have those cameras!)


----------



## TahoeDust

Damn I am jealous. I just can not bring myself to make that leap.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Damn I am jealous. I just can not bring myself to make that leap.


i expect these things won't be shipping for 1-2 weeks. Good thing, I'm heading north in 2 days for Salmon "on the fly".


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> i expect these things won't be shipping for 1-2 weeks. Good thing, I'm heading north in 2 days for Salmon "on the fly".


Yea same here, I'll be in OKC for a whole week but I have access to civilization where catching tuna involves a credit card and a menu









You ever gone deep sea? Best thing I have caught is 35+ lbs albacore, tough fight but not as hard vs a blue fin.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Yea same here, I'll be in OKC for a whole week but I have access to civilization where catching tuna involves a credit card and a menu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *You ever gone deep sea*? Best thing I have caught is 35+ lbs albacore, tough fight but not as hard vs a blue fin.


absolutely. everything from fluke to marlin. (best is spinner sharks on a 12wt fly rod, 300 yards off shore from Miami to Jupiter - then watching the swimmers when these migrating spinners -
cause they jump/fly and spin - freakout. Big and scary, but not harmful fish.

back OT... may need anothre x299 board for this 7740X

straight water cooling, temps below 70C during the pretty tough benchmark.


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Monoblock OCT 2nd or 3rd they changed dates or maybe that's only for people that ordered later


maaan! i did grab a dark rock 3 190w just in case.








also just received email from newegg that i have been charged. not sure if that 100% means they are shipping asap, but i hope so. first email stated they wouldnt charge till order was fulfilled.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> maaan! i did grab a dark rock 3 190w just in case.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also just received email from newegg that i have been charged. not sure if that 100% means they are shipping asap, but i hope so. first email stated they wouldnt charge till order was fulfilled.


I don;t even see them listed at the egg.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I don;t even see them listed at the egg.


https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=7980XE&N=-1&isNodeId=1

Kinda waiting for MC...


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=7980XE&N=-1&isNodeId=1
> 
> Kinda waiting for MC...


@JpmBoy
Bro you are lacking in newegg stalking skillz..
lol.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> @Jpmboy
> Bro you are lacking in newegg stalking skillz..
> lol.


I was being polite.









So, watching the reviews, Intel took me at my word... They cranked out a 500W, 18c @ 4.5GHz CPU.... They even seem to have exceeded my demands and did that @ 4.4-4.5GHz all-core with avian-fecal TIM... (I expected 4.0-4.2 to be honest)

There is no doubt TR is a better buy, more "efficient", "good enough", etc... but I can't even be mad...

About the only thing that makes me flinch for a second (other than the price tag) is what happens in 6-9 months, but that's future guy's problem right?









They could be like Nvidia and come out with a XEp in a month for the same price that's got 32 cores lol...


----------



## robtorbay

Who else is disappointed with the the performance per the released benchmarks in the new i9 chips?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> @JpmBoy
> Bro you are lacking in newegg stalking skillz..
> lol.


no 7980xe in that link... you click it or just winging it - what? Fake News?








No matter, B&H order is in, SL is next choice. I never have good silicon lottery luck with the egg.



this is all I find . not all eggs are hatched equal it seems


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> no 7980xe in that link... you click it or just winging it - what? Fake News?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No matter, B&H order is in, SL is next choice. I never have good silicon lottery luck with the egg.
> 
> 
> 
> this is all I find . not all eggs are hatched equal it seems


Maybe you aren't worthy?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Maybe you aren't worthy?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


lol - not in the egg I can link to.

(the egg is not worthy







)


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - not in the egg I can link to.
> 
> (the egg is not worthy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Have you tried rebooting?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Have you tried rebooting?


lol - a help desk recording?

Edit: yeah, I can find it with search, along with discontinued and "OOS" products - that's why I don;t use eggsearch. Earlier today they had it listed as 'PreOrder". Must have sold out their first shipment. Will be interesting to see SL's binning on these.


----------



## cstkl1

This is next level defence of stalking skillz.
?????


----------



## Jpmboy




----------



## cstkl1




----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> .
> 
> and Rockit has a 2066 delid tool available - $40.


I wouldn't use that tool for CPUs above the 10 core or use it a lot of time even for chips 10 cores & below. Just my


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## xarot

Hmm it seems the 7980X is not that badly priced in EU as I had feared. I ordered mine for 1999,90 € from Proshop who ship from Denmark. But it seems in Germany, it costs 1889,90 €, so it is "only" around 170-200 € more expensive than the i7-6950X when it launched. I was fearing it to cost around 2400 - 2500 € around here.









BTW anyone thought since all these new processors were urgently released and the number of cores skyrocketed, what will be getting next round and at what price?


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> While what you say is true, it really is not that dire, at least not on the 10-core SKU. Very few kernels will be able to achieve 128 bytes/cycle of computation on Skylake-X, given that it would require an instruction stream containing nothing but FMAs, with at least 12 accumulators (6-cycle latency). Using VTune performance counters, I found that my code was only at 10-20% FPU efficiency, something that is likely to be true for many real-world programs. Getting to 50% or greater FPU efficiency is *hard*, and it usually involves multiple levels of cache-oriented optimization, even with compute-friendly kernels like GEMM. The second FMA unit also conflicts with shuffles, further reducing IPC in real workloads.
> 
> In fact, there is also a category of code that is latency-bound (e.g. recursive filters), where there is basically no memory pressure. One such example is the Mandelbrot kernel in SISOFT. It shows completely linear gains going from AVX2 (Xeon E5v4) to AVX-512 (Xeon-SP).
> 
> * The 18-core SKU will definitely be bandwidth-starved though.


I'm referring mainly to the applications with linear and quasi-linear complexity with linear memory. So specifically the ones with O(1) to O(log(N)) compute density. Obviously level 2 and 3 dense linear algebra applications won't be memory bound if implemented correctly since they have O(N) and O(N^2) compute densities. I'd actually argue that applications with such high compute/memory densities are worth migrating to the GPU.

Take a typical quasi-linear application like an FFT. They have O(log(N)) compute density. A complex radix 4 butterfly can be done 24 FMAs. But it touches 8 - 15 SIMD words depending on whether the twiddle factors are cached or not. If you assume the best case, that's 8 SIMD x 64 bytes = 512 bytes of memory for 24 uops on the two FMAs. Even if the execution kernel can only sustain 50% utilization*, you're at 512 bytes per 24 cycles - 21.3 bytes / cycle. That's already 10x slower than the bandwidth on the 10-core.

Now, smarter implementations will go to higher radices. So something more optimized like Prime95 will be able to do radix 1024 or something. That ups the density to ~4 bytes/cycle. Now we're within a factor of 2 of being on par with memory bandwidth. But Prime95 was written by George Woltman who is arguably the best FFT implementer in the world. Not everybody will be as skilled as he is.

Prime95 has been almost completely memory-bound since Sandy Bridge. And while Prime95 itself isn't useful for anything other than stress-testing or testing prime numbers, the underlying FFT math and software development difficulties are common everywhere - including the stuff that I work on.

*50% utilization is already being generous. Much of the SIMD FP code that I write gets upwards of 80% utilization without much effort using SIMD intrinsics in C/C++. George Woltman reports being able to get near 100% on Haswell with hand-written assembly - limited by 4 instruction/cycle retirement. (which was partially caused by no-op reg-reg moves for non-destructive FMAs)


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I was being polite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, watching the reviews, Intel took me at my word... They cranked out a 500W, 18c @ 4.5GHz CPU.... They even seem to have exceeded my demands and did that @ 4.4-4.5GHz all-core with avian-fecal TIM... (I expected 4.0-4.2 to be honest)
> 
> There is no doubt TR is a better buy, more "efficient", "good enough", etc... but I can't even be mad...
> 
> About the only thing that makes me flinch for a second (other than the price tag) is what happens in 6-9 months, but that's future guy's problem right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *They could be like Nvidia and come out with a XEp in a month for the same price that's got 32 cores lol*...


It would have to be the 32 core 7980XEo-N


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> I can see where you are coming from with the FFT (ycruncher?), as those are cache unfriendly, since the "butterfly" operation has poor locality.


I don't use the normal FFTs for that very reason. I use the finite-field versions which use a lot less memory at the cost of needing a lot more computation. (IOW, much higher compute density.) So while Prime95 became memory-bound with Sandy Bridge, I've managed to get y-cruncher to hold out until now (Skylake X). Unfortunately, Prime95/GIMPS can't use these finite field methods since they don't work for the irrational base FFTs that they need. So they've been hosed for a while - so much so that I don't think George is in any hurry to add AVX512 support since there's nothing to gain with the bandwidth bottleneck.
Quote:


> However, one does not need the n^3 compute to n^2 memory "boon" of GEMM to achieve good speedups from AVX-512. In my case, I mainly work with image processing software. The most common kernel, the convolution, has a very much linear compute complexity. The trick to converting memory-bound code to compute-bound code in this case is stacking operations on top of each other, so that two memory-bound operations become one compute-bound operation.
> 
> There are other reasons why memory bandwidth is not necessarily the limiting factor:
> 
> The code is extremely low-IPC because of data dependencies.
> Forward/backward substitution of LU solver.
> Error diffusion dithering.
> 
> The code has unbalanced instruction mix.
> Filter-bank resampler in 1D. Requires 1 shuffle per 1 FMA.
> Manipulation of AoS data (e.g. RGB pixels). Requires 1 shuffle per 1 load.
> Data is compressed (e.g. 8-bit or 16-bit). Requires 1 shuffle per 1 load.


Is there a limit to how much can be "stacked"? And once you reach that limit, what's the theoretical compute density?

"Stacking" is essentially what high-radix FFTs do - combine as many levels as possible within a single pass. The problem is that the working size grows exponentially to the # of levels you merge.
Quote:


> *EDIT*: I somehow doubt you regularly achieve 80% utilization of FPU if you are complaining about memory bandwidth. MKL LINPACK only gets to the mid-70% range with a favorable kernel.


If you get rid of (design away) all the shuffles so that every single instruction is either an FPU instruction or a load/store, then it's very easy to saturate the FMAs with enough unrolling (especially with 32 AVX512 registers). This is assuming no cache misses or extremely long dependency chains. Cache misses due to random access can be prefetched away or hidden with HT. Cache misses due to bandwidth starvation don't count since that's precisely what we're talking about here. (If you include cache misses due to bandwidth starvation, then yes, a lot of my code falls well below 80% utilization.)

For integer SIMD code, it's even easier since the latencies are much shorter.

This is assuming the computation is relatively straight-line without any sort of pointer-chasing or sparse computation.


----------



## pantsaregood

Getting some peculiar memory issues. Have some B-die binned for DDR4-3600 16-16-16-36, but Memtest86 7.4 just crashes when running the XMP profile. No errors get displayed, just hard crashes.

Dropping to DDR4-3200 does the same. Memtest86 appears to continue crashing until reaching DDR4-2133.

The XMP profile was in use while ran Prime95 Blend for 4 hours and RealBench 2.44 for 4 hours. Is Memtest86 buggy or something else?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> Getting some peculiar memory issues. Have some B-die binned for DDR4-3600 16-16-16-36, but Memtest86 7.4 just crashes when running the XMP profile. No errors get displayed, just hard crashes.
> 
> Dropping to DDR4-3200 does the same. Memtest86 appears to continue crashing until reaching DDR4-2133.
> 
> The XMP profile was in use while ran Prime95 Blend for 4 hours and RealBench 2.44 for 4 hours. Is Memtest86 buggy or something else?


Stop using Memtest86, it's irrelevant. Use HCI Memtest Pro or Google Stress app test


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> Getting some peculiar memory issues. Have some B-die binned for DDR4-3600 16-16-16-36, but Memtest86 7.4 just crashes when running the XMP profile. No errors get displayed, just hard crashes.
> 
> Dropping to DDR4-3200 does the same. Memtest86 appears to continue crashing until reaching DDR4-2133.
> 
> The XMP profile was in use while ran Prime95 Blend for 4 hours and RealBench 2.44 for 4 hours. Is Memtest86 buggy or something else?


It should pass. No issues here on my end. What board are you using.
Stable system will pass anything. Btw realbench doesnt stress ram etc. its normally testing imc/mesh.

Tested memtest86 early on no problem but its too slow in finding issues.

Hci loads my ram from 30c idle to load 40c
Realbench 2.43 30 to 33/34c.

Gsat still a joke on what it stresses on x299.

X299 alot of things are interlinked.

Btw which 3600c16 sticks are these.
I am at currently 90% understand how b-dies are on asus x299.
Currently my daily driver testing at 4k 18-18-18-38 @1.3v
Y the low voltage cause i prefer my tref at 15.6ns.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> It should pass. No issues here on my end. What board are you using.
> Stable system will pass anything. Btw realbench doesnt stress ram etc. its normally testing imc/mesh.
> 
> Tested memtest86 early on no problem but its too slow in finding issues.
> 
> Hci loads my ram from 30c idle to load 40c
> Realbench 2.43 30 to 33/34c.
> 
> Gsat still a joke on what it stresses on x299.
> 
> X299 alot of things are interlinked.
> 
> Btw which 3600c16 sticks are these.
> I am at currently 90% understand how b-dies are on asus x299.
> Currently my daily driver testing at 4k 18-18-18-38 @1.3v
> Y the low voltage cause i prefer my tref at 15.6ns.


Can you present some facts as to why GSAT is a 'joke' on this platform? Or is this just (more) posturing nonsense from your end?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*




Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> *I wouldn't use that tool for CPUs above the 10 core* or use it a lot of time even for chips 10 cores & below. Just my


Why is that?
and regarding multiple uses, well, at least the 1151 tool has worked on 4 cpus here.


----------



## T800

By the way some said 400+ Watts can be so high for a CPU socket to handle ?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> It would have to be the 32 core 7980XEo-N


yep... I've seen more than a couple of people make that connection - though the 12,14,16 cores are also HCC dies just with gimped cores...


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## cekim

Wow, I guess the egg is getting one R6E at a time?

notifty - order - confirm - now showing OOS...

Oh well, mine's on its way, I guess I'm doing this...

C'mon microcenter....


----------



## iamjanco

For those interested:

Puget Systems: *Premiere Pro CC 2017.1.2 CPU Performance: Core i9 7940X, 7960X, 7980XE*

From the article's conclusions, excerpted:
Quote:


> What it comes down to is that at the very top end, the Core i9 7980XE 18 core simply isn't a great choice for Premiere Pro. In a vacuum, the performance is great, but it is slightly out-performed by both the 14 and 16 core models which means there is little reason to pay the extra money for it. Even the Core i9 7960X 16 core you would have a tough time arguing for as it was at most 1% faster than the Core i9 7940X 14 core, but much worse at live playback. There are certainly some use-cases where these CPUs would make sense - such as if you also do a lot of 3D rendering - but Premiere Pro simply can't take advantage of the extra CPU cores.
> 
> Overall, we would say that the Core i9 7940X 14 core is the only new CPU that might actually have a place in a typical Premiere Pro workstation. It isn't significantly faster for exporting and rendering previews than the Core i9 7900X or Core i9 7920X, but the improved live playback performance alone will make it a great choice for some users.


Also of interest, by the same source:

*After Effects CC 2017.2 CPU Performance: Core i9 7940X, 7960X, 7980XE*

Again, from the article's conclusions, excerpted:
Quote:


> There is no reason to try to sugar coat things here, for normal After Effects projects these new CPUs from Intel are not very good. To be fair, After Effects is about the worst case scenario for these CPUs as the software is very poor at utilizing high core counts, but it is interesting to see just how much slower these expensive CPUs actually are:


For additional articles about similar comparisons using different applications, see Puget Systems *PC Hardware Articles*.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> For those interested:
> 
> Puget Systems: *Premiere Pro CC 2017.1.2 CPU Performance: Core i9 7940X, 7960X, 7980XE*
> 
> From the article's conclusions, excerpted:


That article appears to be targeting entirely stock clock settings. An entirely reasonable thing to do in a production environment, but not an entirely valid assessment in the target market of the 79xxx series chips...

The target market of these chips is the market that compares what a typical/stable OC of the chips in question will be. The lower stock clock bins of the 16 and 18 core SKUs will make the 14 core more attractive for software that fails to make use of all the cores effectively.

It appears from all the data we have that the stock bins are wildly conservative IF (and only IF) you can both provide and dissipate much greater than TDP amounts of heat. Even without going to 500W+ a 4.0-4.2 GHz all-core OC will provide a different answer than Puget's and TR won't do all-core > 4.0GHz if it will do 4.0 at all (some will some won't).

So, again, an entirely reasonable assessment from Puget - I'm not faulting their conclusion for a production environment that you'd generally not expect to tolerate these high TDPs and the potential for instability (along with the time required for tuning), but... It doesn't completely capture the reality of the market as we find it, nor all use cases.


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> That article appears to be targeting entirely stock clock settings. An entirely reasonable thing to do in a production environment, but not an entirely valid assessment in the target market of the 79xxx series chips...
> 
> The target market of these chips is the market that compares what a typical/stable OC of the chips in question will be. The lower stock clock bins of the 16 and 18 core SKUs will make the 14 core more attractive for software that fails to make use of all the cores effectively.
> 
> It appears from all the data we have that the stock bins are wildly conservative IF (and only IF) you can both provide and dissipate much greater than TDP amounts of heat. Even without going to 500W+ a 4.0-4.2 GHz all-core OC will provide a different answer than Puget's and TR won't do all-core > 4.0GHz if it will do 4.0 at all (some will some won't).
> 
> So, again, an entirely reasonable assessment from Puget - I'm not faulting their conclusion for a production environment that you'd generally not expect to tolerate these high TDPs and the potential for instability (along with the time required for tuning), but... It doesn't completely capture the reality of the market as we find it, nor all use cases.


Agreed, and I suspect Puget's target market are mostly professionals/enterprises who don't build their own computers. One thing I did note in another of their articles, is how well the 7980XE did in *Arnold for Maya*. That said, that article also makes an argument for the 1950X in instances where questions of cost vs performance come up.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> There are a few limits to how deeply the code can be pipelined.
> 
> There are no more operations left to stack.
> The working set grows with each pipeline step due to filter overlap.
> Eventually the instruction cache becomes the limit
> The first case is not really an "issue," since it means the work itself was trivial. Skylake-X now has a 1 MB L2 cache, which makes the working set much more manageable. I have not yet managed to run out of icache.
> Maybe for specialized code it is possible to design the data structures in such a way that no shuffling is ever needed, although I remain doubtful.


If you're bound by an API, then it'll be impossible to get rid of all the shuffles completely. Depending on how much work you "own", you can do the data-shuffling once at input and once at output. IOW, convert the SIMD-unfriendly data-access into a local one that is friendly. Then crunch at full speed and convert back at the end.
Quote:


> In my case, as a library with a plug-in API, I have to work with standard data formats. I am not convinced that image processing can be done without shuffling, as the operations are 2-D. As an example, the 2-D image resampler looks like this.
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> Vertical data access pattern for three iterations (* = pixel, "([{" = load pattern).
> (* [* {*  *) *] *}
> (* [* {*  *) *] *}
> (* [* {*  *) *] *}
> (* [* {*  *) *] *}
> 
> Horizontal data access pattern (* = pixel, "/-\" = load pattern).
> /  /  /  /
> *  *  *  *
> 
> -  -  -  -
> *  *  *  *
> 
> \  \  \  \
> *  *  *  *
> 
> *  *  *  *
> /  /  /  /
> 
> *  *  *  *
> -  -  -  -
> 
> *  *  *  *
> \  \  \  \
> 
> So you can see that if the image is stored in row-major format, then it will be friendly to one pass, but unfriendly to the other. The same is true for column-major format. The underlying operation is a band-sparse matrix-vector product, but the 2-D nature of the data leads to the need for shuffling.


Sounds like you're bound by the array-of-structs problem. I assume you can't switch to struct-of-arrays because that would break the API?
Quote:


> PMADDWD and PMADDUBSW have the same latency as FMA. In addition, since they widen the accumulator, a shuffle is eventually needed to restore the original type.


True. But that only applies to the multiplies. Everything else is single-cycle. So unless you have a very high ratio of multiplies to add/logic, latency is less likely to be a problem (at least when compared to FP code).


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Agreed, and I suspect Puget's target market are mostly professionals/enterprises who don't build their own computers. One thing I did note in another of their articles, is how well the 7980XE did in *Arnold for Maya*. That said, the article also makes an argument for the 1950X in instances where questions of cost vs performance come up.


The 7960/80 present a pretty wild gap between stock and even a mild OC. A consequence of the core-count... Those extra cycles*cores add up QUICKLY.

You still need to be able to use them which either requires:
1. completely dissociated tasks running in parallel
OR
2. an application scaled and scaleable to that number of nodes (which isn't easy).


----------



## cstkl1

@aerotracks
Is there some new samsung chips?? Thats like bdie but lower voltages.. ??

That 4k c18 made me redo my skews n now i am good at 3600c16 stock timings @1.25v. Doing longer memtest runs.
Gsat is just too easy on x299.

Going to whip out my dmm as well. Concern now is my board overvolting.
Other than aida.. what else to confirm ram bandwidth??


----------



## DStealth

Still testing my new b-dies...
4044 15-16-15-28-280 1T @ 1.45v stable

But let them run peaceful 4044 16-16-16-30-300 [email protected]


These chips are amazing...coming from Hynix and Micron ones...they're a whole new universe...
Although the board requires lots of SA offset running over 4200 mem 1T for the cheapest Asrock and probably board on the market respectable result....









Edit: Win10...many processes behind and no optimizations, if Spi32m results are not on par


----------



## Zurv

Question, am i being a crazy person for wanting an OC that i don't have to use any AVX offsets?







(of course, just asking the question if something a crazy person would ask)









yes, for video 4k video encoding i do (for the youtube page no one looks at... at the sexy quality is crushed by TY) does use AVX. So other than for e-peen, that is the only reason i'd never need a 10 core (or the 18 core comes soon







)

it feels like cheating to use the offsets









that said, note to anyone doing this. holy cow does a full ramped out avx (like prime95 testing) get HOT! My CPU is delid, LM, HUGE rad with 9 120mm fans. I'm using a monoblock on the VRM is over 90!.
(that said, i'm starting high with 1.25 vcore and 4.6ghz AVX offset of 0.)

i bet i'm sucking a ton of power from the wall too







I'm going to step down to see it is stable at lower vcore. (1.185 was to low)


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I only add -4 to 512 AVX offset. No other offset for my 4800 mhz OC.


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I only add -4 to 512 AVX offset. No other offset for my 4800 mhz OC.


Hmm the 7800X only support AVX I believe and not AVX512.


----------



## Zurv

it supports both.

-4 is cheating!









(that said, i think 4.3-4.4ghz is a good place for avx)


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> it supports both.
> 
> -4 is cheating!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (that said, i think 4.3-4.4ghz is a good place for avx)


Have you tried AVX512 @ 4.3 - 4.4 GHz?


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Have you tried AVX512 @ 4.3 - 4.4 GHz?


i was running it at 4.6... and stuff was getting pretty hot. the CPU package was getting to 100c!
4.6 is to0 much for avx512. my guess is massive amount of wattage is being used. (CPU was over 90 too!)


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> Question, am i being a crazy person for wanting an OC that i don't have to use any AVX offsets?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (of course, just asking the question if something a crazy person would ask)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yes, for video 4k video encoding i do (for the youtube page no one looks at... at the sexy quality is crushed by TY) does use AVX. So other than for e-peen, that is the only reason i'd never need a 10 core (or the 18 core comes soon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> it feels like cheating to use the offsets
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that said, note to anyone doing this. holy cow does a full ramped out avx (like prime95 testing) get HOT! My CPU is delid, LM, HUGE rad with 9 120mm fans. I'm using a monoblock on the VRM is over 90!.
> (that said, i'm starting high with 1.25 vcore and 4.6ghz AVX offset of 0.)
> 
> i bet i'm sucking a ton of power from the wall too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm going to step down to see it is stable at lower vcore. (1.185 was to low)


It's not cheating - just physics... AVX512 turns the chip into a rather different beast in terms of which gates are being used (and just how many of them are being used (toggling) all at once.

The problem with NOT setting an avx offset for daily driving in particular is you won't always know when its going to hit you and how much. So, you could be crusing along with seemingly perfectly adequate clocks, temps, cooling, voltage, etc... and then you start a new application and find out its been tuned to use AV512 and suddenly your fans scream and your machine shuts down (hopefully before you cook it).

The problem with NOT setting an avx offset in benchmarks is you will be chasing a corner case trying to make it stabling and paying a HUGE price in the form of lower overall clocks, higher voltages and corresponding heat.

Use the force, Luke... USE IT!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Have you tried AVX512 @ 4.3 - 4.4 GHz?


God no! :O

About Aida64 voltage vs. CPU-Z.. Who is to be believed? Aida is reporting 15-35mv higher, depending on the voltage.

Aida claims 1.260V, CPU-Z claims 1.1224V, and if that is the case, 1.224V is pretty good for 4800 ghz 2 hours Realbench 2.54V. Then I will delid and push for 5 ghz at 1.350V or so.

New BIOS for my Tomhawk, will update.


----------



## SsXxX

hello,

Asus Rampage VI Extreme vs. Gigabye Aorus Gaming 9?

price no object, only care about the better overclocker and quality


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SsXxX*
> 
> hello,
> 
> Asus Rampage VI Extreme vs. Gigabye Aorus Gaming 9?
> 
> price no object, only care about the better overclocker and quality


Asus. The gigabyte has nice hardware, but asus really puts the love in the bios.


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SsXxX*
> 
> hello,
> 
> Asus Rampage VI Extreme vs. Gigabye Aorus Gaming 9?
> 
> price no object, only care about the better overclocker and quality


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SsXxX*
> 
> 
> 
> hello,
> 
> where is the Asus Rampage VI Extreme? why is it not released yet?
> 
> searched google news and every techsite i know and nothing as if it is not there!
> 
> anybody know anything about it or when it is expected to release?


Ok... So from someone that has had both I will try to answer as best as possible. The gaming 9 is a great board with even better audio and a decent vrm setup with ok vrm cooling. It was a breeze to overclock.
Now for the issues that turned me off to it is as follows...,.

1. Poor pcie switching setup designed to accommodate for the 16-Pcie lane skus. but is not an issue on the gaming 7 but you lose the audio..... The rampage dealt with this by offering no support for the 16 lane cpus....

2. The Gigabyte boards went with 50a vrms vs the 60a found on almost everything else.

3. The R6E has sufficient heat sinks for up to 400w pulled through the vrm with no active cooling. The Gigabyte boards will only do in the around 300w if I remember correctly...

4. The R6E has better power delievery with less vdroop but this may have been fixed via bios updates from what i have heard

5. The Asus Bios is the biggest reason.... It has more fine control such as per core voltage control. The Gigabyte bios is to simplified

I must admit I miss the audio quality of the Gaming 9 though

If you can wait it out go with R6E


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> Question, *am i being a crazy person for wanting an OC that i don't have to use any AVX offsets?*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (of course, just asking the question if something a crazy person would ask)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yes, for video 4k video encoding i do (for the youtube page no one looks at... at the sexy quality is crushed by TY) does use AVX. So other than for e-peen, that is the only reason i'd never need a 10 core (or the 18 core comes soon
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> it feels like cheating to use the offsets
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> that said, note to anyone doing this. holy cow does a full ramped out avx (like prime95 testing) get HOT! My CPU is delid, LM, HUGE rad with 9 120mm fans. I'm using a monoblock on the VRM is over 90!.
> (that said, i'm starting high with 1.25 vcore and 4.6ghz AVX offset of 0.)
> 
> i bet i'm sucking a ton of power from the wall too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm going to step down to see it is stable at lower vcore. (1.185 was to low)


no, not at all, you just need to recognize that doing so will force the non-AVX loads to run at AVX clocks. It is unreasonable to expect that the chip run AVX (esp AVX512) at the same OC frequency that non-avx loads can handle (this is mainly a thermal and power limit issue from a practical POV). No size or number of rads address the thermal transfer limit.


----------



## Martin778

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> Asus. The gigabyte has nice hardware, but asus really puts the love in the bios.


And I say Asrock!






















https://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/X299%20OC%20Formula/index.asp

+
I know I will sound like I'm bashing ASUS but I don't get them, they have a massive community but it takes them countless beta BIOS'es to get something right and with the Crosshair Hero I had a feeling of being a beta tester all the time.
I've bought a cheap X299 Taichi and can beat my 7920X to no end on it in terms of OC with a single 8 pin EPS connector and VRM's that don't burn through the PCB. Everything just works out of the box.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> And I say Asrock!


Allways 2-3 weeks behind Asus









I have Asrock x299 Taichi and Asus x299 Apex


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> I can not see any way to arrange a 2-D array such that it can simultaneously be accessed row-wise and column-wise efficiently.


Based on the description of your problem that I have so far, I doubt this approach actually works for your particular scenario since there might not be enough work and/or top-level parallelism between API layers. But I'll explain it anyway just to show how it works for most of the things I've worked on.

The standard to AOS -> SOA transformation is to vectorize at a much higher level. Instead of trying to make a single operation 8x faster with SIMD, you do 8 of them at a time - each one in a different SIMD lane. Then the only shuffling you need is at the very beginning and the end to transpose and un-transpose the data.

So rather than trying to put 8 elements in the same matrix row into one SIMD vector, you do 8 matrices at once - each in a different SIMD lane. This breaks all cross-lane dependencies and eliminates all shuffling. Furthermore, the structure of the code is now identical to the scalar version - but with each operation doing 8 operations at once from 8 different matrices.

This actually lets you substitute in any vector size you want which lets you target all SIMD architectures from scalar to SSE to AVX512 and beyond with the only extra work being changing a few typedefs and implementing the input/output transposes.
Quote:


> The most common operation distribution is 1 multiply to 1 add. Where VFMADD231PS/PD would be used, the corresponding integer operation is one VPMADDWD and one VPADDD. Either way, there needs to be 12 accumulators to fully utilize the ALU. The integer code path has a latency advantage for the final summation of the accumulators, since VPADD is fast, but the multiply-accumulate phase is the same.


Fair. Your integer work-loads are lot more multiply-heavy than the ones I'm used to seeing. Especially in the crypto where there's almost no multiplication at all.
Quote:


> What I am getting at are not the details of my specific code, but that most real-world vector kernels can not be reduced to a FMA chain. Otherwise, there would have been no demand for exotic AVX-512 instructions like conflict-detect, gather-scatter, 64-way permute, etc. For my code, managing the port 5 bottleneck is a much more important issue than memory bandwidth. This is an area that has suffered continue neglect from Intel, starting with Haswell, where the shuffle throughput was cut from 2/cycle to 1.


Agreed, we're getting off topic here. We got here in the first place since you were questioning how it's possible to get 80% utilization in real-life code. And I've demonstrated how to do that for a subset of workloads. They just aren't applicable to your use cases.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Anyone have experience with Silicon Lottery delid/relid services?

I am wondering if I should ship this CPU to him and get it delidded since it is overclocking so good. 1.310-1.330V for 5000 is not bad..)

But I need to ship it from Norway, and the price it ends up with being is 1/3 of what I paid for the CPU alone.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Still testing my new b-dies...
> 4044 15-16-15-28-280 1T @ 1.45v stable
> 
> But let them run peaceful 4044 16-16-16-30-300 [email protected]
> 
> 
> These chips are amazing...coming from Hynix and Micron ones...they're a whole new universe...
> Although the board requires lots of SA offset running over 4200 mem 1T for the cheapest Asrock and probably board on the market respectable result....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Win10...many processes behind and no optimizations, if Spi32m results are not on par


nice. seems like u also have some crazy ram.



i am reworking all the vdimms. from stock..
seems like mine does 3600c16 stock at 1.25v.


----------



## pantsaregood

RAM issue was resolved. The L3 cache/mesh was slightly unstable - it was passing Prime95, but it was crashing while testing RAM.

Mesh is clocked at 3.2 GHz, but I can get it to boot at 3.6 GHz. What kind of voltage is safe to push through the mesh?

Also, does anyone else have anything odd going on with reported RAM? I've got 16 GB of RAM installed, but it shows "15.7 GB useable" - specifically, 16101 MB.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Ahh this damn mesh.
Seems I need more than 1.070v for 3Ghz, I stopped there as I'm not sure what the max voltages is.
WHEA blue screens, if I use Auto it's ok but that's adding nearly 10c more to the temps and as I can't read the mesh voltage with anything I don't know what Auto is using.

2.7Ghz is stable at 1.050v.

@pantsaregood JINX


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Ahh this damn mesh.
> Seems I need more than 1.070v for 3Ghz, I stopped there as I'm not sure what the max voltages is.
> WHEA blue screens, if I use Auto it's ok but that's adding nearly 10c more to the temps and as I can't read the mesh voltage with anything I don't know what Auto is using.
> 
> 2.7Ghz is stable at 1.050v.


I thought everyone was hitting 3.0 at 1v or less.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> I thought everyone was hitting 3.0 at 1v or less.


Not I..
Unless I'm doing something wrong


----------



## pantsaregood

I don't actually don't know how much voltage my mesh is using. I have an offset of 0.150V, but I don't know where that puts it. It's less than 1.2V because 3.6 GHz mesh boots with 1.2V override but not with the 0.150 offset.


----------



## rt123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Why is that?
> and regarding multiple uses, well, at least the 1151 tool has worked on 4 cpus here.


Wouldn't use it on 10core+ chip because if it fails, that'd be an expensive blunder.

As for repeated use, I delidded my 8core with a vice, it take a LOT of force to delid these things, I'm not sure the threads on the acetal assembly will hold for a lot of uses on Skl-x chips. Roman had a similar problem with DDM-X where his prototype tools 'broke" because the threads got destroyed after 5-6 delids. Apparently he had to make some design changes after that.

1151 tools are fine since a lot of force is not needed. Mine has delidded 28 ish CPUs & its only gonna continue to do more work with Coffelake.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> I don't actually don't know how much voltage my mesh is using. I have an offset of 0.150V, but I don't know where that puts it. It's less than 1.2V because 3.6 GHz mesh boots with 1.2V override but not with the 0.150 offset.


I think the stock is 0.900v, so a 0.150v offset would make it 1.050v...

Edit:
Nevermind I'm a knucklehead, I had adaptive set, changed it to offset +0.150v and now 3Ghz doesn't bluescreen in Cinebench/Realbench









A little oversight on my side.


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I think the stock is 0.900v, so a 0.150v offset would make it 1.050v...
> 
> Edit:
> Nevermind I'm a knucklehead, I had adaptive set, changed it to offset +0.150v and now 3Ghz doesn't bluescreen in Cinebench/Realbench
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A little oversight on my side.


Try running Memtest86 with it and see if it freezes. It's peculiar, but regular stress testing works fine at 0.85V offset for me, but Memtest86 just hard locks within five minutes at that voltage.


----------



## T800

I tried my i9 7900X with auto LLC setting and the chip can complete 15 minutes stress run of Realbench 2.43 at 4400MHz with 1.07V and 4500MHz with 1.11V.

But this adaptive voltage setting is killing me, it is not working as written in the BIOS settings descriptions, mainboard is Rampage VI Apex.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> Try running Memtest86 with it and see if it freezes. It's peculiar, but regular stress testing works fine at 0.85V offset for me, but Memtest86 just hard locks within five minutes at that voltage.


Been running HCI memtest for 2 hours so far, seems fine so far.
I couldn't even run Cinebench, but I realized I had it set to adaptive, previously adaptive cache didn't work properly.


----------



## cekim

Bummer - B&H website says end of October for 7980...


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Bummer - B&H website says end of October for 7980...


Damn. These may be tough to get your hands on. B&H had the rest of the Sky-X lineup shipping on launch day.


----------



## PlinytheWelder

Me too ...


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Anyone have experience with Silicon Lottery delid/relid services?
> 
> I am wondering if I should ship this CPU to him and get it delidded since it is overclocking so good. 1.310-1.330V for 5000 is not bad..)
> 
> But I need to ship it from Norway, and the price it ends up with being is 1/3 of what I paid for the CPU alone.


Why dont just ask caseking. ???
You are on the same continent. ?????


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Still testing my new b-dies...
> 4044 15-16-15-28-280 1T @ 1.45v stable
> 
> But let them run peaceful 4044 16-16-16-30-300 [email protected]
> 
> 
> These chips are amazing...coming from Hynix and Micron ones...they're a whole new universe...
> Although the board requires lots of SA offset running over 4200 mem 1T for the cheapest Asrock and probably board on the market respectable result....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Win10...many processes behind and no optimizations, if Spi32m results are not on par


Thats pretty high vcssa/vccio even for 4k.
Also noticed you are running dram vtt quite high as well.
Err dont see how this can be stable bro.

My question on bdies since theres so few proper ocers benching rams on x299.
Is there new bdies or x299 generally require lesser voltage.
I can now run 4k [email protected]
Also noticed after 3800 to 4k and assuming its the same after this.. certain things dont change which is y 4200 low cas is difficult. ?????


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Thats pretty high vcssa/vccio even for 4k.


These are let to auto and it's board decision. Still testing this kit. Will reduce them as low as possible soon as finding the optiomal freq/timing/voltage combination for them....
Strange is the step from 3800 to 4000 multi for the mem requires not less than +.2 to SA not boot 1T .

Also very strange observation... there are zero benefits from from going 3840 15-15-15-28-280 to 4040 15-15-15-28-280 all sub-timings and all the same. Tested Aida64 bech, winrar , 7zip and 32m superPI all very memory dependent apps...Just the voltages for the board goes higher...no real gains....thinking my 7800x is limited in some ways to utilize the extra bandwidth or heat problems...dunno


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> These are let to auto and it's board decision. Still testing this kit. Will reduce them as low as possible soon as finding the optiomal freq/timing/voltage combination for them....
> Strange is the step from 3800 to 4000 multi for the mem requires not less than +.2 to SA not boot 1T .
> 
> Also very strange observation... there are zero benefits from from going 3840 15-15-15-28-280 to 4040 15-15-15-28-280 all sub-timings and all the same. Tested Aida64 bech, winrar , 7zip and 32m superPI all very memory dependent apps...Just the voltages for the board goes higher...no real gains....thinking my 7800x is limited in some ways to utilize the extra bandwidth or heat problems...dunno


Think u havent noticed. Rtl from 3800 to 4000 is the same. The is a gain from 4k is on read compared to 3800.
Your results is masked with that out of spec tref. Thats why you dont see ram diff.


----------



## DStealth

Will check TRL when i get home. What you mean with out of spec tref ?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Will check TRL when i get home. What you mean with out of spec tref ?


Eh.... you are just maxing out your tref right to 32767 etc.
Thats out of clock cycle and so is your trfc based on your tfaw if i remember correctly was 20 with tref 280 right for 3800 and 4000


----------



## DStealth

Yes but how maxed out will become out of specs ?
Tomorrow will make TweakIT screenshots for both situations as many from these sub-timings are set to auto in BIOS and probably affected from higher frequency.
Tfaw was 40 and manually reduced to 20 remembered for both 38 and 40 multi.
But then again as most primary timings are manually set with the same value +200mhz are not affecting results at all...strange to me.


----------



## cstkl1

3800mhz [email protected] 1.3v tREF 15.6uS


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Been running HCI memtest for 2 hours so far, seems fine so far.
> I couldn't even run Cinebench, but I realized I had it set to adaptive, previously adaptive cache didn't work properly.


HCI Memtest wouldn't crash. It is specifically Memtest86 that exposed the instability.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> *Wouldn't use it on 10core+ chip because if it fails, that'd be an expensive blunder*.
> 
> As for repeated use, I delidded my 8core with a vice, it take a LOT of force to delid these things, I'm not sure the threads on the acetal assembly will hold for a lot of uses on Skl-x chips. Roman had a similar problem with DDM-X where his prototype tools 'broke" because the threads got destroyed after 5-6 delids. Apparently he had to make some design changes after that.
> 
> 1151 tools are fine since a lot of force is not needed. Mine has delidded 28 ish CPUs & its only gonna continue to do more work with Coffelake.


lol - any delid fail on a 10+ core is an expensive blunder.








edit: and WTH did you do with 20 1151 cpus? where's all the boints?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Bummer - B&H website says end of October for 7980...


yeah - I emailed them yesterday to see if that is because their first shipment is pre-ordered out, or if their 1st shipment is not until Oct 23rd.

edit: just heard back.. and the end of October is their first shipment. Bummed.... the search continues.








Microcenter would be nice.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> HCI Memtest wouldn't crash. It is specifically Memtest86 that exposed the instability.


something is not right - can you post a pic of HCI passing but memtest86+ failing with the same configuration? MT86+ really only tests for bad sticks (like physical damage).. it's pretty much from the Jurassic period of Ram.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> something is not right - can you post a pic of HCI passing but memtest86+ failing with the same configuration? MT86+ really only tests for bad sticks (like physical damage).. it's pretty much from the Jurassic period of Ram.


I've also run stressapptest with Windows 10 Bash, I don't know if it's as good as running it natively in Linux, but it passed that too


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I've also run stressapptest with Windows 10 Bash, I don't know if it's as good as running it natively in Linux, but it passed that too


Hello

At least under Linux if GSAT passes but another test fails the issue is not memory specific instability. Regardless what some may state there is no other test better at isolating memory instability than GSAT.


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> something is not right - can you post a pic of HCI passing but memtest86+ failing with the same configuration? MT86+ really only tests for bad sticks (like physical damage).. it's pretty much from the Jurassic period of Ram.


I can't post a picture of Memtest86 failing because it hard locks. No memory errors show up, just a hard lock. HCI Memtest images would be equally useless because it proceeds without issue.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> Mesh is clocked at 3.2 GHz, but I can get it to boot at 3.6 GHz..


What latency do you get in aida64 with 3600 mesh / 4000C17?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> At least under Linux if GSAT passes but another test fails the issue is not memory specific instability. Regardless what some may state there is *no other test better at isolating memory instability than GSAT.*


true dat.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> I can't post a picture of Memtest86 failing because it hard locks. No memory errors show up, just a hard lock. HCI Memtest images would be equally useless because it proceeds without issue.


yeah, so memtest 86 is failing probably because the program failed, not the ram. (platform may not be compatible)
if the system passes 500% or more HCi memtest, just ignore MT86+


----------



## Timmaigh!

Anyone in the possesion of the 7980xe, 7960x or 7940x yet?

I was looking to get 7940x this Friday, as it was supposed to be stock over here today, but now i checked the e-shop i was going to buy from and the availability changed to 11 October.....aaaaaargh


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> 3800mhz [email protected] 1.3v tREF 15.6uS
> 
> ...[/IMG


Can you open memtweakit tool to see sub-timings details.
You result seem normal to me 52+ns with 3800 c16-16-16-36-374 1T your transfer if better because you are addressing memory modules from 8 cores instead of my 6.
Want to understand what is limiting me to obtain better results with 4G+ same timings than 3.8G+


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah, so memtest 86 is failing probably because the program failed, not the ram. (platform may not be compatible)
> if the system passes 500% or more HCi memtest, just ignore MT86+


The concern is that Memtest86 only fails when cache is overclocked. I don't understand how that could be a platform issue unless there was some kind of instability in the cache. After raising the cache voltage, the instability is gone.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> The concern i*s that Memtest86 only fails when cache is overclocked*. I don't understand how that could be a platform issue unless there was some kind of instability in the cache. After raising the cache voltage, the instability is gone.


ah - okay. sounds like you know what to do. Remember, an OC on the ram is an OC on the CPU also, so adjustment of voltages is expected.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Remember, an OC on the ram is an OC on the CPU also, so adjustment of voltages is expected.


Some people don't know this, good advice!


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ah - okay. sounds like you know what to do. Remember, an OC on the ram is an OC on the CPU also, so adjustment of voltages is expected.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Some people don't know this, good advice!


Faster memory speed = data moving faster to the CPU = CPU needs to process faster


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ah - okay. sounds like you know what to do. Remember, an OC on the ram is an OC on the CPU also, so adjustment of voltages is expected.


Yeah, I understand that I'm overclocking the IMC. The reason I was pointing this out is that Memtest86 (despite my IMC/RAM being stable) was the only thing that revealed the instability in my cache.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Some people don't know this, good advice!


Mr.T - how you been bud?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> Yeah, I understand that I'm overclocking the IMC. The reason I was pointing this out is that Memtest86 (despite my IMC/RAM being stable) was the only thing that revealed the instability in my cache.


Surprising. HCi works cache pretty hard. IMO, the best (only?) cache test is in AID64.


----------



## Betroz

Is there any real world benefit of having faster memory than DDR4 3200 CL14 for the Core X CPU's for gaming? I know G.Skill has some good memory rated for 3200 CL14, 3600 CL15 and 4000 CL18 (and others). I don't plan on setting memory benchmark records in AIDA64, but would like to avoid a memory bottlenech of course.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> Is there any real world benefit of having faster memory than DDR4 3200 CL14 for the Core X CPU's for gaming? I know G.Skill has some good memory rated for 3200 CL14, 3600 CL15 and 4000 CL18 (and others). I don't plan on setting memory benchmark records in AIDA64, but would like to avoid a memory bottlenech of course.


not really... about the same as a 4.4 vs 4.3 OC from an FPS perspective. Depends on the game I guess. Latency vs frequency


----------



## Betroz

Yeah, but if 4000+ memory stresses the IMC alot more than 3200/3600 memory, then maybe it is not worth it if one is to consider long-term stability. I have killed TWO 5960X CPU's, and I think it was the IMC that died on both of them 







That was with only 4000 cache/uncore at 1.20v and 3200 CL15 memory too...


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Surprising. HCi works cache pretty hard. *IMO, the best (only?) cache test is in AID64.*


+1


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> Yeah, but if 4000+ memory stresses the IMC alot more than 3200/3600 memory, then maybe it is not worth it if one is to consider long-term stability. I have killed TWO 5960X CPU's, and I think it was the IMC that died on both of them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was with only 4000 cache/uncore at 1.20v and 3200 CL15 memory too...


4000 is not the issue, it is the voltages needed to hold stability. the 5960X running here is at 4.7core, 4000cache, 3200c14 (1.328V, 1.18V, 1.45V resp). no problems so far.


----------



## DStealth

Ok, just get home and staring Memtweakit the answer is clear for the similar performance between 3840 and 4040 same timings while first uses 100 mode with 38 ratio the second uses 133 mode...


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 4000 is not the issue, it is the voltages needed to hold stability. the 5960X running here is at 4.7core, 4000cache, 3200c14 (1.328V, 1.18V, 1.45V resp). no problems so far.


My second 5960X worked fine overclocked for about 2 years using the settings I wrote about, but some days ago it would not boot anymore, so I sent it back for RMA.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> Yeah, but if 4000+ memory stresses the IMC alot more than 3200/3600 memory, then maybe it is not worth it if one is to consider long-term stability. I have killed TWO 5960X CPU's, and I think it was the IMC that died on both of them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was with only 4000 cache/uncore at 1.20v and 3200 CL15 memory too...


no it doesnt.. it however stresses something else.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Can you open memtweakit tool to see sub-timings details.
> You result seem normal to me 52+ns with 3800 c16-16-16-36-374 1T your transfer if better because you are addressing memory modules from 8 cores instead of my 6.
> Want to understand what is limiting me to obtain better results with 4G+ same timings than 3.8G+


ok thats an easy answer.. cause you are running tref 32767. You already seen my 4kc15 with tref 32747....

btw you are not seriously thinking your rams are anywhere close to stable with sp32m. Try some hci after aida benchmark.
I only stopped at 600 cause has to use the comp.

To say my [email protected] is ordinary. ?????
Man tough crowd.

and the answer to the second not too sure. But i dont really think thats the case as i am just slight less than a 7900x on aida.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Ok, just get home and staring Memtweakit the answer is clear for the similar performance between 3840 and 4040 same timings while first uses 100 mode with 38 ratio the second uses 133 mode...


No diff between 133 & 100. Unless your board is autoing something. Rtls are the same. Afaik on asus only "hole" is the 3200 at 100:100.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Lol

Seems like my 7800X has degraded. Won't do CB R15 anymore..

EDIT: At 5000mhz


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - I emailed them yesterday to see if that is because their first shipment is pre-ordered out, or if their 1st shipment is not until Oct 23rd.
> 
> edit: just heard back.. and the end of October is their first shipment. Bummed.... the search continues.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Microcenter would be nice.


Boo... hiss....

Might finally be time for me to do a hard-line build?









I'll have a MB and water block next week some time and then it appears it will collect dust handsomely for another month...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> My second 5960X worked fine overclocked for about 2 years using the settings I wrote about, but some days ago it would not boot anymore, so I sent it back for RMA.


\

IMO, the IMC is the weak link in the 5960X chain. I had a 5960x die.. but I'll blame a non-elastic collision involving a tennis ball and a Corgi.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> \
> 
> IMO, the IMC is the weak link in the 5960X chain. I had a 5960x die.. but I'll blame a non-elastic collision involving a tennis ball and a Corgi.


I nearly lost a R5E to canine related collision (bent LGA pins) - fortunately, I'm handy with tweezers and magnifying glasses and completely impervious to the ridicule such an assertion could bring...


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Lol
> 
> Seems like my 7800X has degraded. Won't do CB R15 anymore..
> 
> EDIT: At 5000mhz


Just worked in to its final oc capabilities. Sure it's still good.

Hey Jpmboy. Been good. Setting up for x299. Got the apex and some b die ready. Just need a CPU.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Just worked in to its final oc capabilities. Sure it's still good.
> 
> Hey Jpmboy. Been good. Setting up for x299. Got the apex and some b die ready. Just need a CPU.


cool! 2/3 of the way to another screaming rig. which cpu are you looking at?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Looking at the top dog!









Thinking mid November, should be stock around by then.


----------



## BroPhilip

PER-CORE ADAPTIVE VOLTAGE IS THE BEST THING EVER.... (I also posted this in the Asus Bios forum)

This has to be one of the greatest Intel settings that Asus has added into their bios and is one of the reasons I wanted an Asus R6E. These level of fine tuning has a great effect on core temperature control... I believe this is going to be vital as the core counts increase. As we all know all-core settings are limited by the weakest core. The odds of a weaker core go up as more cores are added. This allows you to isolate those cores. I don't understand why more people are not talking about this feature. Also a huge







to your team at Asus @[email protected] .

This is my voltages at the lowest negative adaptive offset that was realbench 2.43 stable at 4.7ghz. Where I had thermal throttling at on two cores, the mesh, and package.



This next picture is setting an individual adaptive offset for each core and only about two hours of tweaking.... This is realbench 2.43 stable WITH NO THERMAL THROTTLING and I am still working on lowering the voltages more.





Bellow is my methodology. There are a lot of people on here that are much more knowledgeable and can add to this and point out things that I might have missed.

1. I looked for my best stable manual all core voltage which for my 7820x was between 1.17 - 1.18 This told me the minimum of my weakest core. (I already know this from my gigabyte board and just confirmed it on my R6E, I didn't want to leave it on manual as it doesn't allow the voltage to drop in low usage and will continually feed that voltage in the processor)

2. I looked for the best all core adaptive negative offset that was real bench stable around -0.020 and found it was between -0.010 and -0.005. I took a screen shot of the voltages that this offset used.

3. Adjusted the offset of each individual core to balance them out closer to the 1.18 point. This ranged from and offset of .025 to .005

I am still working on adjust it and will post more as I dial it in...


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Just worked in to its final oc capabilities. Sure it's still good.
> 
> Hey Jpmboy. Been good. Setting up for x299. Got the apex and some b die ready. Just need a CPU.


Nah... I could bench it the day before no problems.. I've had this Chip since August or so.

Well well.. i guess 1.3V+ and 80'C+ was the cause.


----------



## cstkl1

Ok taking a short break from stress testing rams. Too many new games are out/incoming.

Ruiner looks awesome
Divinity 2 seems like ballin
Shadow of war seems nice
Still havent played project cars 2 with vive/oculus thats just collecting dust
Call of duty beta test this weekend
?????


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> IMO, the IMC is the weak link in the 5960X chain. I had a 5960x die..


Is the IMC on Skylake X as weak as on Haswell-E, or is higher RAM speeds safe? Maybe not enough data yet on the Skylake X CPU's to say for sure?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> Is the IMC on Skylake X as weak as on Haswell-E, or is higher RAM speeds safe? Maybe not enough data yet on the Skylake X CPU's to say for sure?


The IMC on SKL-X is considerably better than Haswell-E. In actual fact, BWE IMC was consistently better between samples than Haswell-E

Edit, when you say weak, you mean in terms of degradation? Considering most will do 4000 with less than 1v VCCSA, I'd say that also constitutes as not weak. Any long-term effects obviously withstanding


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Just worked in to its final oc capabilities. Sure it's still good.
> 
> Hey Jpmboy. Been good. Setting up for x299. Got the apex and some b die ready. Just need a CPU.


How could you steer away from the Extreme board? It is gorgeous.


----------



## district9prawn

I've been having memory problems with my 7920X. I can't seem to run the ram any faster than 3200 CL14 without losing one or more channels. Increases to SA and IO up to 1.35 don't help. The same board will do 4000 CL16 on a 7820x. I'm using two dual channel kits and every now and then the same problem will happen with the 7820x but a reboot is usually all that is required to fix.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> I've been having memory problems with my 7920X. I can't seem to run the ram any faster than 3200 CL14 without losing one or more channels. Increases to SA and IO up to 1.35 don't help. The same board will do 4000 CL16 on a 7820x. I'm using two dual channel kits and every now and then the same problem will happen with the 7820x but a reboot is usually all that is required to fix.


What board?? Also seems like a ram training issue.
Why are you increasing vccio/vcssa so high??

Gonna be really interesting to get to test that 7980xe, with 128gb kit and r6e.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> I've been having memory problems with my 7920X. I can't seem to run the ram any faster than 3200 CL14 without losing one or more channels. Increases to SA and IO up to 1.35 don't help. The same board will do 4000 CL16 on a 7820x. I'm using two dual channel kits and every now and then the same problem will happen with the 7820x but a reboot is usually all that is required to fix.


Have you set voltages on both AB and CD channels ?


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Edit, when you say weak, you mean in terms of degradation? Considering most will do 4000 with less than 1v VCCSA, I'd say that also constitutes as not weak. Any long-term effects obviously withstanding


Yes, in terms of degradation and long-term stability. I'm asking because I have two dead 5960X CPUs, and don't want to kill a Skylake X....








It's okay to play with high settings for benchmarks, but I am more into long-term stability now because of my experiences.


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> What board?? Also seems like a ram training issue.
> Why are you increasing vccio/vcssa so high??


MSI gaming pro carbon. In my sig. I increased Vccio and Vccsa to see if it it would make any difference. No improvement, which isn't surprising considering 4000mhz is usually possible at stock volts.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Have you set voltages on both AB and CD channels ?


Vdimm at 1.4v. No difference with it set higher.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> Vdimm at 1.4v. No difference with it set higher.


Yes but on some boards in BIOS you can set separately each channel voltage. It happens to me in time to set the AB as is upper in the BIOS and forget the CD voltages at lower settings the symptoms are exactly what you describe loosing memories working in dual channel instead of quad etc...after reboot working for short period or so.


----------



## district9prawn

I just checked and all channels are set the same. 4000mhz quad channel on my 7820x is fine.

Interestingly, the board will not post at stock with a single dimm in either a2,b2,c2 or d2. While this is contrary to what the manual recommends, any configuration should work at stock speeds, right? a1,b1,c1 and d1 are the recommended slots to populate for quad channel and four dimms.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> MSI gaming pro carbon. In my sig. I increased Vccio and Vccsa to see if it it would make any difference. No improvement, which isn't surprising considering 4000mhz is usually possible at stock volts.
> Vdimm at 1.4v. No difference with it set higher.


Suspect bios update needed. Yeah msi especially is easy on ram oc. Most probably some multiplier optimization needed.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Thats pretty high vcssa/vccio even for 4k.
> Also noticed you are running dram vtt quite high as well.


Optimized VCSSA to 1.1v and VCCIO to 1v ...much lower than the AUTO 1.3 settings.
What you mean with VTT quite high running .7v now, what are considered normal/low voltages ?


----------



## GXTCHA

Im currently using a 7900x and an ASUS R6 Apex and noticed that while My OC is stable with the below settings, I'm having trouble confirming if I am phantom throttling or not. I don't believe I am and maybe im just chasing a ghost here&#8230;

Settings are the following an pass RB 2.54 for 1 hour:

vcore: adaptive offset = 1.225
multi: 48
avx/512: -3/-5
input voltage 1.80
LLC: 4
power: 140%
SVID: disabled
RAM: 32gb @ 3600 CL16 manual timings, no xmp
DRAM: 1.35v

I noticed that while my vccin hovered around 1.75 or above that my vcore was dropping below 1.225v on at least one of my cores so I am going to start testing vccin at 1.81+ to see if I can stabilize it above the threshold of 1.75. I'm measuring vccin by using SV64X.

I may also bump LLC up to 5 or 6 (i used 6 on BDW-E with great success) and maybe SKY-X is similar.

Has anyone seen any issues with adaptive offset on the Apex or Extreme? it seems some users are having issues with "throttling" and adaptive or not getting consistent voltage i may switch to a fixed voltage for stability testing as well as to see if testing a high vcore (higher than 1.225v) offers more stability. When I briefly test with manual 1.225v, there is no vdroop on vcore.

Even though I pass RB 2.54, when I test the "bench" mode in XTU, my max frequency does not reach 4.8 unless I change the Win10 power settings from "Balanced" to "Performance". I've also disabled TB 3.0 within windows at this point to rule out any interference.

I'm definitely not hitting Tj.Max unless HWinfo and SV64X are both wrong. I dont believe I'm hitting the VRM max temp either as the VRM temps arent reflecting it (even though the Apex doesnt have a dedicated VRM sensor) HWinfo and SIV64 show temps in the 50 to 60 range. I've also got great airflow through my case.

The only other thing I guess it could be is current and perhaps lifting the power percentage from 140 to 200% might alleviate the pain. During stress testing I never see the clocks drop to 1.2ghz, they only drop to the AVX offset of -3 (4.8 - 3 = 4.5 or slightly under that, 4.45). With adaptive, will the vcore drop to below the max offset if the core doesn't need as much voltage or am I witnessing vdroop?


----------



## MJB13SRT8

GXTCHA

try adjusting your LLC to 5 or 6 it should keep your VCCIN closer to 1.8 and help with your vcore from droping as much.

Montrose


----------



## cekim

This door stop newegg sent me is terrible.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> This door stop newegg sent me is terrible.


LOL

on a side note my ram is rated at 1.35v but I can't even post at 1.4v for some reason.
Trying to reach 4000mhz on this kit


----------



## ELIAS-EH

R
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fireedo*
> 
> damn, this deliding thing is really amazing, just now I have delided my 7820x (and this is my first ever deliding)
> 
> the temperature gain maybe not what I dream about (around 20-25 c diff) but, with my new OC 4.7 Ghz @ 1.186v, Mesh clock 3.2 Ghz/1.060v, VCCIN 1.880v, now it just sit steady @ 80 c maksimum temp with Prime95 26.6 and @ 86 c with RealBench 24.3 each for 30 minutes
> 
> so maybe I got 12-16 c temperature different vs not delid, well it is worth it, it is just a $40 tool and I live in a warm country like everyday my ambient room temperature around 29-32 c ( maybe its not just warm but hot ) without Air Conditioner
> 
> maybe if I put custom watercooling I got more headroom for OC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> well, Go Delid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol


replacing colgate with liquid metal is for sure worth it.


----------



## cheddle

MEGAQWOTE
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Ahh this damn mesh.
> Seems I need more than 1.070v for 3Ghz, I stopped there as I'm not sure what the max voltages is.
> WHEA blue screens, if I use Auto it's ok but that's adding nearly 10c more to the temps and as I can't read the mesh voltage with anything I don't know what Auto is using.
> 
> 2.7Ghz is stable at 1.050v.
> 
> @pantsaregood JINX


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> I don't actually don't know how much voltage my mesh is using. I have an offset of 0.150V, but I don't know where that puts it. It's less than 1.2V because 3.6 GHz mesh boots with 1.2V override but not with the 0.150 offset.


I too really want to know what is 'safe' for cache. It seems like 3.1-3.2ghz is fine on stock voltage with a steep wall of voltage required past that

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> These are let to auto and it's board decision. Still testing this kit. Will reduce them as low as possible soon as finding the optiomal freq/timing/voltage combination for them....
> Strange is the step from 3800 to 4000 multi for the mem requires not less than +.2 to SA not boot 1T .
> 
> Also very strange observation... there are zero benefits from from going 3840 15-15-15-28-280 to 4040 15-15-15-28-280 all sub-timings and all the same. Tested Aida64 bech, winrar , 7zip and 32m superPI all very memory dependent apps...Just the voltages for the board goes higher...no real gains....thinking my 7800x is limited in some ways to utilize the extra bandwidth or heat problems...dunno


My 7800x and my 7900x both run 4000 17-18-18-40-350 T1 with VCCIO 1.013v and VCCSA 0.928v (locked at non-XMP stocks) dram 1.384v and vtt 1.320v (670mv in BIOS)

I dont think VCCSA/VCCIO need much at all - I cant post 4200c17 but I can post 4000c16 but I hardlock in windows. im going to try 1.42-1.45v dram to se if I can get it stable. im working for 24/7 clocks here and ive already had one 7900x die - scared as **** to push this one at all lol...

using the above memory clocks my 7900x has about 15% more memory bandwitdh than my 7800x did - im guessing the 7800x has a bottleneck before the ram? if you are interested in the exact AIDA64 screen grabs let me know.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> Yes, in terms of degradation and long-term stability. I'm asking because I have two dead 5960X CPUs, and don't want to kill a Skylake X....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's okay to play with high settings for benchmarks, but I am more into long-term stability now because of my experiences.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Lol
> 
> Seems like my 7800X has degraded. Won't do CB R15 anymore..
> 
> EDIT: At 5000mhz


Im interested to know how you go with this... my first 7900x was stable at 4.8ghz @ 1.3v for the first dew days, then it started BSOD'ing while gaming, then at desktop, then it coudlnt do 4.5ghz @ 1.3v stable, then another day later it couldnt do 4.2ghz @ 1.3v - then another day later it wouldnt post...

My 5820k ran some fairly agressive voltages for a few years. I tossed a second-hand 5930k in there on the same voltages and it died within a few days... put my 5820k back in on the same voltages and it just kepty plodding along for months.

silicon aint silicon - intrerestingly the 5930k ran much colder but slightly more core voltage than my 5820k


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MJB13SRT8*
> 
> GXTCHA
> 
> try adjusting your LLC to 5 or 6 it should keep your VCCIN closer to 1.8 and help with your vcore from droping as much.
> 
> Montrose


I'll give it a whirl. Thanks!


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> I'll give it a whirl. Thanks!


I would ignore that. ?????

Vccin on 7820x confirmed has to be 0.6v above your vcore. Tested it on linpack, y cruncher, prime95 26.6, 27.9, 28.2, 29.3, realbench 2.43/2.54.
Its the first thing we test since fivr was introduced back in the day.

What happens when vccin not enough
Depending on the severity..

1. Some Cores wont hit 100% in avx2/fma/avx512 & linpack
2. Cpu will throttle example 4.4 to 4.35 in avx2/fma3 & linpack

Yeah its odd. It wont bsod. Lol. X299 i went all the way down to 0.3v diff. No bsod. No hardlock hang. Just what i said above will happen.

Since vccin doesnt affect cpu temps .. i would keep it arnd 0.7-0.8v diff with vcore. So your cpus are fed properly. ?????.

Theres no vcore drooping on x299 due to vccin.
On offset/auto it drops to a lower multiplier vid pairing.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Vccin on 7820x confirmed has to be 0.6v above your vcore.


Interesting... Is that only for the 7820X? I've observed no throttling on my 7900X with VCCIN 1.80 and an adaptive vcore of 1.28.

Or is there some other factor involved?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Interesting... Is that only for the 7820X? I've observed no throttling on my 7900X with VCCIN 1.80 and an adaptive vcore of 1.28.
> 
> Or is there some other factor involved?


You see it on prime 28.x with fft 12. Did manual for cpu voltage, llc 6 ( vccin doesnt flux much)

But what i was really suprised was the no hang thing. Its like intel took account of idiots like me who will go all the way down to 0.3v diff lol. When its very close you will see certain cores not loading scenario.

Btw bro think alot of ppl havent noticed something but your case forgiven since its not a asus mobo.

Theres this ONE CORE that rules them all. That one core is what causes bsod. The others if less you will just get instability or worker stop thread.

Vccin difference is between that core btw.
Gonna see next week hopefully if this is the case with 7980xe. That "control core".
Confirmed its true for 7900x .

Currently i testing mesh scaling with ram. This platform is seriously harsh. You need fantastic rams to test everything out. Found and even fixed a few issues on asus.

Got my nvme drives now even higher at 3165mb/s on bios 0802.
0702 it was 2933
0802 default was 3060
No improvement on write all around 1700-1750.


----------



## cheddle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> You see it on prime 28.x with fft 12. Did manual for cpu voltage, llc 6 ( vccin doesnt flux much)
> 
> But what i was really suprised was the no hang thing. Its like intel took account of idiots like me who will go all the way down to 0.3v diff lol. When its very close you will see certain cores not loading scenario.
> 
> Btw bro think alot of ppl havent noticed something but your case forgiven since its not a asus mobo.
> 
> Theres this ONE CORE that rules them all. That one core is what causes bsod. The others if less you will just get instability or worker stop thread.
> 
> Vccin difference is between that core btw.


yeah 600mv gap is what was reccomended on X99 - did you graph power consumption and thermals across a range of Vrin's while keeping vcore/clock locked?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> You see it on prime 28.x with fft 12. Did manual for cpu voltage, llc 6 ( vccin doesnt flux much)
> 
> But what i was really suprised was the no hang thing. Its like intel took account of idiots like me who will go all the way down to 0.3v diff lol. When its very close you will see certain cores not loading scenario.
> 
> Btw bro think alot of ppl havent noticed something but your case forgiven since its not a asus mobo.
> 
> Theres this ONE CORE that rules them all. That one core is what causes bsod. The others if less you will just get instability or worker stop thread.
> 
> Vccin difference is between that core btw.


That was with all stock voltages. It would reach 1.28v when it turboed up to 4.5 GHz. (both single-core and all cores) And I never saw any throttling unless the VCCIN drooped down to < 1.68 (which would trigger the phantom throttle). Or if the temps hit Tj.Max.

The only voltage-related change I made was to enable LLC to prevent the VCCIN from drooping.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cheddle*
> 
> yeah 600mv gap is what was reccomended on X99 - did you graph power consumption and thermals across a range of Vrin's while keeping vcore/clock locked?


Nope to the graph. Was just looking at siv/hwinfo/cpu task manager.
Oh yeah siv flawed. It cannot spot that 4.35mhz thing. Only hwinfo did.

Was actually testing something else and was trying to put cpu in starve state. I kept thinking when this is gonna hang.. it didnt. Lower than 0.3v diff my "package" aint big enough to go further.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> That was with all stock voltages. It would reach 1.28v when it turboed up to 4.5 GHz. (both single-core and all cores) And I never saw any throttling unless the VCCIN drooped down to < 1.68 (which would trigger the phantom throttle). Or if the temps hit Tj.Max.
> 
> The only voltage-related change I made was to enable LLC to prevent the VCCIN from drooping.


This was at 4.4ghz -4.7 ghz from 1.08 to 1.2v
For avx2/fma3 i could only test on 4.4 and 4.5 offset 2
For linpack 512 was on 4.4 offset 4.
4.6-4.7 tested up to 0.5v with rb2.54/2.43 didnt have any throttling etc.
was doing more on 4.4 and 4.5.
Vccin range went to 2v. That part i wanted to find impact on cpu temps.


----------



## cstkl1

@Mystical

Actually dude i implore to go and get any asus board. It has more options to test.

Theres a lot of thing ppl dont realize in this forum or fail to see.

The relationship between mesh and ram clocks
The relationship between mesh and cpu multiplier.

Theres a lot more to cpu. Currently its mesh is what i am after atm. its the final puzzle.


----------



## cstkl1

found the voltage that will increase performance for my nvme for this nvme in asus.

0702 default 29xx,
0802 default 30xx


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> @Mystical
> 
> Actually dude i implore to go and get any asus board. It has more options to test.
> 
> Theres a lot of thing ppl dont realize in this forum or fail to see.
> 
> The relationship between mesh and ram clocks
> The relationship between mesh and cpu multiplier.
> 
> Theres a lot more to cpu. Currently its mesh is what i am after atm. its the final puzzle.


No. I'm not spending any more money for a while.

I picked the Gigabyte 7 because I liked its aesthetics and (at the time) it had the best thermals (dual 8-pin + VRM heatpipe).


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> No. I'm not spending any more money for a while.
> 
> I picked the Gigabyte 7 because I liked its aesthetics and (at the time) it had the best thermals (dual 8-pin + VRM heatpipe).


I understand. But due to your methodical nature.. you need a board with more open options.
Its actually a "loss" because theres only very few ppl are testing x299 throughly and you bro have the capability and patience.
Now with z370 etc coming in.. x299 testing is gonna be even fewer.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> I understand. But due to your methodical nature.. you need a board with more open options.
> Its actually a "loss" because theres only very few ppl are testing x299 throughly and you bro have the capability and patience.
> Now with z370 etc coming in.. x299 testing is gonna be even fewer.


I actually don't have as much time and patience as you think I do.









I only went deep into the phantom throttling thing because it was actively preventing me from doing the AVX512 development work that I built the machine for. So until it was solved, I had a really expensive lemon on desk with flashy lights.

While I technically could've waited for someone else to solve it, that wait could've been indefinite since I initially thought it was AVX512-only. And I was probably the only hobbyist overclocker in the world who was doing AVX512 so early.


----------



## Mysticial

The 7980XE has been confirmed to have the full AVX512 (both FMAs enabled). Not that anybody was expecting less.

http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?p=496449#post496449



(2 x FMA) * (18 cores) * (8 DP / AVX512 instruction) * (2 FLOPs / FMA) * (4.5 GHz) = *2,592 GFLOPs* (double precision)

Now... That's *18 cores of AVX512 @ 4.5 GHz*. Please tell me this was under LN2... And I hope he can tell me how many watts it pulled.


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Now... That's *18 cores of AVX512 @ 4.5 GHz*. Please tell me this was under LN2... And I hope he can tell me how many watts it pulled.


1000W?


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> 
> 
> found the voltage that will increase performance for my nvme for this nvme in asus.
> 
> 0702 default 29xx,
> 0802 default 30xx


And what voltage ?


----------



## Nizzen

My retail 7980xe arrived today


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Suspect bios update needed. Yeah msi especially is easy on ram oc. Most probably some multiplier optimization needed.


I reckon I've solved my memory overclocking problems.

I was swapping cpus and noticed I didn't do a very good job of cleaning the remaining adhesive off the IHS on my 7820x. I scraped off and noticed channels started to go missing more frequently at high speeds. Shimmed the IHS off the pcb with one layer of masking tape. No difference. With three layers of tape, memory overclocking is much better. I can reliably train 4000mhz cl16. Can post at 4200 but bsod immediately. Previously I never even encountered memory instability as I would just lose channels or fail to post.

The fix is showing some improvement on my 7920x. Though I've only tried 1 layer of tape so far. I'm exhausted.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> I would ignore that. ?????
> 
> Vccin on 7820x confirmed has to be 0.6v above your vcore. Tested it on linpack, y cruncher, prime95 26.6, 27.9, 28.2, 29.3, realbench 2.43/2.54.
> Its the first thing we test since fivr was introduced back in the day.
> 
> What happens when vccin not enough
> Depending on the severity..
> 
> 1. Some Cores wont hit 100% in avx2/fma/avx512 & linpack
> 2. Cpu will throttle example 4.4 to 4.35 in avx2/fma3 & linpack
> 
> Yeah its odd. It wont bsod. Lol. X299 i went all the way down to 0.3v diff. No bsod. No hardlock hang. Just what i said above will happen.
> 
> Since vccin doesnt affect cpu temps .. i would keep it arnd 0.7-0.8v diff with vcore. So your cpus are fed properly. ?????.
> 
> Theres no vcore drooping on x299 due to vccin.
> On offset/auto it drops to a lower multiplier vid pairing.


Ok...

So with 1.225 vcore id be looking at ~1.925 to 2.025 for vccin with your +.7 to .80 over vcore... seems a bit high but will give it a shot.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Ok...
> 
> So with 1.225 vcore id be looking at ~1.925 to 2.025 for vccin with your +.7 to .80 over vcore... seems a bit high but will give it a shot.


thats asus svid default bro.
It has almost no impact on temps.
As i mentioned before vid stops at 45. At multiplier 45 voltage for every cpu i have seen is 1.2xx on auto.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> I reckon I've solved my memory overclocking problems.
> 
> I was swapping cpus and noticed I didn't do a very good job of cleaning the remaining adhesive off the IHS on my 7820x. I scraped off and noticed channels started to go missing more frequently at high speeds. Shimmed the IHS off the pcb with one layer of masking tape. No difference. With three layers of tape, memory overclocking is much better. I can reliably train 4000mhz cl16. Can post at 4200 but bsod immediately. Previously I never even encountered memory instability as I would just lose channels or fail to post.
> 
> The fix is showing some improvement on my 7920x. Though I've only tried 1 layer of tape so far. I'm exhausted.


I seriously have no clue what you are talking about.
But it sound to be like you are talking about baredie since you are talking about pcb
1. Is your cpu delided?
2. Did you perma mount back the ihs or just placed it?

Masking tape effect on ihs??


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> I seriously have no clue what you are talking about.
> But it sound to be like you are talking about baredie since you are talking about pcb
> 1. Is your cpu delided?
> 2. Did you perma mount back the ihs or just placed it?
> 
> Masking tape effect on ihs??


My cpu is delidded. The problem was the ihs placing too much pressure on the die and not enough pressure on the edge of the pcb leading to poor contact. I just used tape to test as it is removable.


----------



## Menthol

PC Connection has a few 7940 - 7960 - available, no 7980xe at this time


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Mentioned that I thought my CPU got degraded - well it didn't. Passed Cinebench at the same voltage today. My bad

The package peaked 90'C though. Getting toasty..

And I don't know if I should believe Aida64 or CPU-Z, HWInfo, HWmonitor etc. They say 1.325V as I wrote in the BIOS, but Aida reports a whopping 1.364V..


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Mentioned that I thought my CPU got degraded - well it didn't. Passed Cinebench at the same voltage today. My bad
> 
> The package peaked 90'C though. Getting toasty..
> 
> And I don't know if I should believe Aida64 or CPU-Z, HWInfo, HWmonitor etc. They say 1.325V as I wrote in the BIOS, but Aida reports a whopping 1.364V..


Thanks for the update, I'm sure it scared some ppl that these cpus degrade quickly.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Yeah. Must have messed with the wrong settings.. Just wanted to let you guys know.

It is under 80'C during folding, So I guess I'll play with this for a while. These chips are fine up to 1.4V if I remeber my old Skylake/Kaby 6700K and 7700K?

I am just worried it might degrade at sub 80'C for a few months playing games and folidng. I guess time will see.

I'm hoping for at least a 20'C improvement.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Sometimes you just have to shut down the pc, turn off the psu or unplug it, then push the start button a couple times drain the power from the mobo caps to get a full reset. Then all of a sudden, you're good as new to bench at the same clocks and voltage as before.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Yeah. Must have messed with the wrong settings.. Just wanted to let you guys know.
> 
> It is under 80'C during folding, So I guess I'll play with this for a while. These chips are fine up to 1.4V if I remeber my old Skylake/Kaby 6700K and 7700K?
> 
> I am just worried it might degrade at sub 80'C for a few months playing games and folidng. I guess time will see.
> 
> I'm hoping for at least a 20'C improvement.


Degrading at sub-80 at 1.3v would've definitely set off alarms. Most of these chips reach 1.28v - 1.29v at *stock* vcore when turboing up to the *stock* 4.5 GHz via Turbo 3.0. It would be hard to imagine Intel designing these chips with so little headroom.

Personally, I've only ever had 2 instances of noticeable degradation:

Sandy Bridge 2600K: Running 1.38v vcore for 6 months with 75C sustained. Stock vcore was around 1.150v IIRC.
Haswell 5960X: Running +0.150v offset on uncore voltage for 3 years (with mostly idle usage) led to a loss of about 200 MHz of uncore overclockability.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Yeah. I'll keep this in mind. Reset everything and test again.

The thing is that 4900 is about 10'C cooler. Around the high 60s and low 70s.

I'll settle on 4900 I believe. I don't need to delid either. But man, the 5 ghz barrier.. ^^

The CPU block is cold, the tubes are cold.. I wish these were soldered..

The sad thing is that the 8700K seems like a bargain for what it is. Luckily I got 25% off the CPU and 6% of the motherboard (X299 Tomhawk) which is doing an awesome job for it's price. So I can at least use the as comforting.


----------



## 7820x

Yeah and then there was that other guy that said he killed 2 7900x chips already by running it at 1.3V. 1.4V seemed to be the accepted max for 24/7 overclock on Kaby Lake, but then again the stock voltages for those chips were higher than 1.0V. JayzTwoCents degraded his 7980xe by going for 5ghz @ over 1.3V too.

Kinda scary to think you could fry/degrade your new enthusiast grade crazy expensive CPU by running it at 1.3V to hit that mythical 5gz 24/7 all core overclock lol. I'm at [email protected] no AVX offset (Delidded, full custom EK loop with Monoblock, 480mm quad XE radiator on an MSI Gaming M7 ACK) and am pretty happy with it. Max temps in the low 90s/high 80s when running Realbench and Prime95 26.6. Benched [email protected] but temps got out of hand real fast. Seems like 4.9 and beyond you're going to require some insane voltage to keep stable and even a crazy custom loop can't dissipate the heat fast enough.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Yeah. I'll keep this in mind. Reset everything and test again.
> 
> The thing is that 4900 is about 10'C cooler. Around the high 60s and low 70s.
> 
> I'll settle on 4900 I believe. I don't need to delid either. But man, the 5 ghz barrier.. ^^
> 
> The CPU block is cold, the tubes are cold.. I wish these were soldered..
> 
> The sad thing is that the 8700K seems like a bargain for what it is. Luckily I got 25% off the CPU and 6% of the motherboard (X299 Tomhawk) which is doing an awesome job for it's price. So I can at least use the as comforting.


You have a nice upgrade path all the way to 18cores with x299 though.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Yeah and then there was that other guy that said he killed 2 7900x chips already by running it at 1.3V. 1.4V seemed to be the accepted max for 24/7 overclock on Kaby Lake, but then again the stock voltages for those chips were higher than 1.0V. JayzTwoCents degraded his 7980xe by going for 5ghz @ over 1.3V too.
> 
> Kinda scary to think you could fry/degrade your new enthusiast grade crazy expensive CPU by running it at 1.3V to hit that mythical 5gz 24/7 all core overclock lol. I'm at [email protected] no AVX offset (Delidded, full custom EK loop with Monoblock, 480mm quad XE radiator on an MSI Gaming M7 ACK) and am pretty happy with it. Max temps in the low 90s/high 80s when running Realbench and Prime95 26.6. Benched [email protected] but temps got out of hand real fast. Seems like 4.9 and beyond you're going to require some insane voltage to keep stable and even a crazy custom loop can't dissipate the heat fast enough.


Your chips is even better than mine, not that mine is a golden one, but still. I need 1.240V (In bios) to pass 2 hours Realbench 2.54V.

I am doing 4900 at 1.270V (Bios) though.


----------



## 7820x

They're pretty close. I remember needing 1.27v for 4900 to pass realbench. What mesh are you running? I'm at [email protected]

Just saw you're not even delidded. I'd say yours is better lol


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I am currently at 3000 at 0.975V (0.990V) according to Aida. I can run 3200 at 1.100V.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Yeah and then there was that other guy that said he killed 2 7900x chips already by running it at 1.3V. 1.4V seemed to be the accepted max for 24/7 overclock on Kaby Lake, but then again the stock voltages for those chips were higher than 1.0V. JayzTwoCents degraded his 7980xe by going for 5ghz @ over 1.3V too.
> 
> Kinda scary to think you could fry/degrade your new enthusiast grade crazy expensive CPU by running it at 1.3V to hit that mythical 5gz 24/7 all core overclock lol. I'm at [email protected] no AVX offset (Delidded, full custom EK loop with Monoblock, 480mm quad XE radiator on an MSI Gaming M7 ACK) and am pretty happy with it. Max temps in the low 90s/high 80s when running Realbench and Prime95 26.6. Benched [email protected] but temps got out of hand real fast. Seems like 4.9 and beyond you're going to require some insane voltage to keep stable and even a crazy custom loop can't dissipate the heat fast enough.


If people are really degrading these chips at 1.30v vcore, then it can't be just the vcore (if at all).

Perhaps it's the power delivery? I can't imagine pulling 500 - 1000W though a bunch of skinny pins being a good thing. That's 3 - 6x the design limit. And these power delivery pins get much narrower once they enter the chip and land on the PCB and such.

By comparison, a 1000W space heater has a pretty impressive power cable...

EDIT:

And there's another factor that seems to work against the socket: voltage

Power lines use high voltage + low current because it reduces the energy lost to resistance. A 1000W space heater runs on either 120V or 240V has a really fat cable. And even then, it often feels pretty warm to touch after running over night. This is about 5 - 10A.

On the X299 socket, the voltage is only around 1.8v. So the current is much higher (~500A) which is delivered over an unknown number of tiny pins with much less cross-sectional area as a fat space heater power cable.

Sure the socket uses better materials (I believe gold on the chip/PCB side). But still...


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Perhaps it's the power delivery? I can't imagine pulling 500 - 1000W though a bunch of skinny pins being a good thing. That's 3 - 6x the design limit. And these power delivery pins get much narrower once they enter the chip and land on the PCB and such.


[email protected] said something like he does'nt go over 2X the TDP of the CPU. So about 300W max for the 7900X and models under then, and about 340ish watt for the top end models. 400+ watt is just insane for 24/7 use!


----------



## Silent Scone

All depends on what you're using the machine for. If the current demands are low, then you're likely fine.


----------



## cekim

1000W CPUs - yee haw!

Real power delivery involves giant bundles single-digit gauge copper strands, threaded posts, nuts...

C'mon Intel you know what to do next... You have that 100G network port on one side, the other side should be two terminals for power, excuse me.. "powah!"

In all seriousness, that we are performing as we are now means we are close to some pretty amazing things being not only possible, but practical. I am genuinely surprised to see all-core turbos as high as they are even under 300W.

Now, if, cough, the software guys could up their game a bit (myself included)?

Of course, there's more to do on IPC (Inter Process Communication). Intel and frankly even more so for AMD, can both improve thread communication overhead. 4GHz memory off chip means that some changes to memory tech could potentially change that game too...

Exciting times for a compute geek after a longs spell of blaaaaaaaah.


----------



## cekim

My excitement is tempered by my failure to factor in the crazyness of the Si market right now that a "retail launch" isn't a launch, its a head-fake owing to strangled pipelines and shortages in strange places, so I'll maybe get a chip before the next HEDT "launch".

Rookie mistake on my part to think something was going to happen anywhere near the 25th....

It should be a gut check to someone to see MSI and Gigabyte pulling out of AIB Vega... Not enough refined sand on the planet these days apparently.


----------



## Nizzen

2x780ti classified @ 1550mhz + 3930k 6core @ 5,2ghz draw 1700w from the wall....

PS: got my 7980xe today... Some days before others


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> 2x780ti classified @ 1550mhz + 3930k 6core @ 5,2ghz draw 1700w from the wall....


Your 15A circuit called and said "uncle"... Whatever you do - don't point a thermal camera at the wall....









Better yet, do and then put in a 20A circuit for that monster....


----------



## 7820x

Well according to XTU, There's a 1000A limit on the CPU lol


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Well according to XTU, There's a 1000A limit on the CPU lol


"Great! It worked! Now if we could just keep it from exploding..."

and... "you say limit... I say GOAL..."


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> 2x780ti classified @ 1550mhz + 3930k 6core @ 5,2ghz draw 1700w from the wall....
> 
> PS: got my 7980xe today... Some days before others


You misspelled "neener"


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> My retail 7980xe arrived today


Nice! Hope you get the same Norway binning luck you've had in the past


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I am currently at 3000 at 0.975V (0.990V) according to Aida. I can run 3200 at 1.100V.


Man that's a great chip if not golden. I couldn't get 3200 benchmark stable @ 1.1


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> "Great! It worked! Now if we could just keep it from exploding..."
> 
> and... "you say limit... I say GOAL..."


Lol. Let us know if you hit that GOAL on your new 6E


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Lol. Let us know if you hit that GOAL on your new 6E


Nope... only 8x4 power and frankly I'm going to be running 128G of ram... So, while I'll definitely keep it warm, but...


----------



## pantsaregood

So, has anyone figured out per-core voltage control? Specifically stability testing. All of my cores are currently running at 1.258V, but I'm hoping to lower some of them.

I'm thinking I'll open eight instances of Prime95 26.6 and set the affinity to the two threads on each core and then lower voltages until cores start failing. Anyone know of a faster way to go about this?


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> So, has anyone figured out per-core voltage control? Specifically stability testing. All of my cores are currently running at 1.258V, but I'm hoping to lower some of them.
> 
> I'm thinking I'll open eight instances of Prime95 26.6 and set the affinity to the two threads on each core and then lower voltages until cores start failing. Anyone know of a faster way to go about this?


I posted my results in this thread and the Asus bios thread.... drop my temps significantly.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

What would the stock voltage on a 7800X be...? Anyone got a 7800X and care to test? Pref. In aida64 AND CPU-Z. Thanks.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Man that's a great chip if not golden. I couldn't get 3200 benchmark stable @ 1.1


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Lol. Let us know if you hit that GOAL on your new 6E


Eh.. i run 3200 @1.06v lol.


----------



## cstkl1

M
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> What would the stock voltage on a 7800X be...? Anyone got a 7800X and care to test? Pref. In aida64 AND CPU-Z. Thanks.


Stock is at your all core load..


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> So, has anyone figured out per-core voltage control? Specifically stability testing. All of my cores are currently running at 1.258V, but I'm hoping to lower some of them.
> 
> I'm thinking I'll open eight instances of Prime95 26.6 and set the affinity to the two threads on each core and then lower voltages until cores start failing. Anyone know of a faster way to go about this?


Been doing it from day one.


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Been doing it from day one.


Care to explain how you have effectively stress tested this setup?


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Eh.. i run 3200 @1.06v lol.


Hah nice...what's your CPU clock at and what voltage?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Eh.. i run 3200 @1.06v lol.


Thanks man. You inspired me to try a lilttle harder. Isn't it great not seeing any red letters in HWINFO during stress testing?


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Hah nice...what's your CPU clock at and what voltage?
> Thanks man. You inspired me to try a lilttle harder. Isn't it great not seeing any red letters in HWINFO during stress testing?


Daily driver is 4.6ghz avg core voltage 1.147v. Rb 2.43 4+ hrs

Your rams timings looks flawed btw

Intel xtu is weak for mesh. You need aida cache or hci memtest pro..

Also you seem to be just whacking voltages. A simple question i ask can clear this up.

Whats the voltage for cache 24. (Stock)


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Daily driver is 4.6ghz avg core voltage 1.147v. Rb 2.43 4+ hrs
> 
> Your rams timings looks flawed btw
> 
> Intel xtu is weak for mesh. You need aida cache or hci memtest pro..
> 
> Also you seem to be just whacking voltages. A simple question i ask can clear this up.
> 
> Whats the voltage for cache 24. (Stock)


Ahh good catch. I was tinkering around with the trfc settings earlier. I just like using XTU for the nice colors lol. That's actually RB2.43 stressing it.

Any recommendations on the timings?

Man it's been awhile since i ran cache at 24. It was a little under 1v if I remember correctly. Any advice for tweaking is appreciated.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Ahh good catch. I was tinkering around with the trfc settings earlier. I just like using XTU for the nice colors lol. That's actually RB2.43 stressing it.
> 
> Any recommendations on the timings?
> 
> Man it's been awhile since i ran cache at 24. It was a little under 1v if I remember correctly. Any advice for tweaking is appreciated.


Hmm the thing is asus has a few settings to make sure ram training is spot on and few other which seems to be related between mesh and ram.

If u can run 0.9v at 28.. then u should be able to do [email protected]

Btw then thats got to be the second golden cpu for 7820x i have seen on this thread.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Hmm the thing is asus has a few settings to make sure ram training is spot on and few other which seems to be related between mesh and ram.
> 
> If u can run 0.9v at 28.. then u should be able to do [email protected]
> 
> Btw then thats got to be the second golden cpu for 7820x i have seen on this thread.


Cool man thanks for the tips. Time to tinker some more. I like to credit it to the delidding and the custom loop and monoblock I've got because, as you can tell, I'm not an expert overclocker nor claim to be one, but I do like to tinker. My last two chips a 4790k and a 7700k were just average (could only get them to 4.8 with sane voltages), so i was pretty happy to see this one do as good as it's doing. Never expected to see 4.8 on all cores at these voltages. It's definitely been a lot of fun to play with overclocks again. Skylake X is a great HEDT platform. Not sure why there so much hate for it online.


----------



## T800

I set voltages of the all cores individually and tested stability with Realbench 2.43 seperately for all of them but they passed 2.43 stress test by themselves but failed when they worked all together. Interesting.

But seperate voltage setting is the best by far for lower voltages and temperatures.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Cool man thanks for the tips. Time to tinker some more. I like to credit it to the delidding and the custom loop and monoblock I've got because, as you can tell, I'm not an expert overclocker nor claim to be one, but I do like to tinker. My last two chips a 4790k and a 7700k were just average (could only get them to 4.8 with sane voltages), so i was pretty happy to see this one do as good as it's doing. Never expected to see 4.8 on all cores at these voltages. It's definitely been a lot of fun to play with overclocks again. Skylake X is a great HEDT platform. Not sure why there so much hate for it online.


"Sometimes when I'm trying to understand a person's motives, I play a little game.

I assume the worst."

What's the worst reason you have for turning me against intel?

90% of them think if ppl fall into their rant and stop buying intel cpus so Intel will make it affordable for them. Ultimately They want INTEL.


----------



## DStealth

While doing some benchmarks measured Aida64 speed and latency get very close to 49ns...w/o even optimizations RTL's are 61/63 for 4+Ghz and 57/59 for 3800+ this might also explain almost similar results with both frequencies...

The CPU seem's to throttle of some kind as @5100 and over 1.3v cannot catch my [email protected] CB result(1700+) in multi...single is better tho...


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> While doing some benchmarks measured Aida64 speed and latency get very close to 49ns...w/o even optimizations RTL's are 61/63 for 4+Ghz and 57/59 for 3800+ this might also explain almost similar results with both frequencies...
> 
> The CPU seem's to throttle of some kind as @5100 and over 1.3v cannot catch my [email protected] CB result(1700+) in multi...single is better tho...


Thats the difference between asus and asrock
Asus 4k rtl is the same for 3800 on the same cas.
So its 56/58/56/58 for CL 16


----------



## DStealth

This is on AUTO can be forced with tWCL and IOL's but...seems not very stable with almost 4100 15-15-15-28-290 1T ...so best are 59/61 for this strap


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Skylake X is a great HEDT platform. Not sure why there so much hate for it online.


I guess because of heat and powerdraw. Not everyone here have custom EK loops you know


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> This is on AUTO can be forced with tWCL and IOL's but...seems not very stable with almost 4100 15-15-15-28-290 1T ...so best are 59/61 for this strap


You mean sp32m stable.

You have a total diff definitition of stable aka hci


----------



## aDyerSituation

For some reason prime 26.6 ffts is triggering my AVX offset. Any idea why?


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> For some reason prime 26.6 ffts is triggering my AVX offset. Any idea why?


Throttling?


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> You mean sp32m stable.
> 
> You have a total diff definitition of stable aka hci


Yes bench stable Spi32 etc...of course not pushing them with such frequencies and timings 24/7 as they require 1.45v+ Using them @3840 similar primary(15-15-15-30-300 1T) but reduced sub-timings @1.42v
Quite happy with Asrock actually this is the cheapest x299 board one of the few in sub 250$ range.


----------



## Martin778

I don't get it, I can't boot ANYTHING above my stock XMP 3200c14 profile, it will always hang on POST. Even tried 1.45V 3466 C16 CR2 and it didn't start.

Do you guys tweak other settings like VCCU/VCCSA/VCCIO??


----------



## DStealth

Yes reducing them...as AUTO+OC are getting sky high values for them


----------



## Martin778

So I'm not the only one, auto/XMP sets them to 1.38-1.40V here.
What do you run them on? I've lost stability, get freezes and DPC timeouts on my 7920X.


----------



## DStealth

/VCCSA/VCCIO
Sub 1V(VCCSA) / depends on you controller and frequencies 1-1.1(VCCIO) should be fine/


----------



## Nizzen

3. on HOF 3dmark Physics


----------



## Martin778

What would be the normal VTT voltage? I have it on stock, 1.312V.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Throttling?


no. it changes with the offset


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> 
> 
> 3. on HOF 3dmark Physics


That's not really of any surprise. If you think of how many users are going to opt for a $2000 CPU, then how many of those will be bothered by 3DMark performance, and then finally how many will have theirs yet...

Must be fairly echoey in that room


----------



## GreedyMuffin

2 hours Aida cache only is a good way to stress the mesh?

Almost one hour in at 3000 at 0.900V (Aida64 reports 0.950V..)


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> 2 hours Aida cache only is a good way to stress the mesh?
> 
> Almost one hour in at 3000 at 0.900V (Aida64 reports 0.950V..)


I expected 7800x to be arnd there. Then try hci. Both pass ths. You are good to go.
Y i expected it to be less 7820 cause 7900x can only do [email protected]


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> For some reason prime 26.6 ffts is triggering my AVX offset. Any idea why?


I think I found my problem. Even though I downloaded "26.6" it is actually the newest version that is downloaded

does someone have a link to prime 26.6? Thanks


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I think I found my problem. Even though I downloaded "26.6" it is actually the newest version that is downloaded
> 
> does someone have a link to prime 26.6? Thanks


*
http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=15504*


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I think I found my problem. Even though I downloaded "26.6" it is actually the newest version that is downloaded
> 
> does someone have a link to prime 26.6? Thanks


Bro u can just disable all avx/fma in the local file. Check one of the txt documents on what to type in.

http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=15504


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> *
> http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=15504*


yep that's what it was. thanks!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> I expected 7800x to be arnd there. Then try hci. Both pass ths. You are good to go.
> Y i expected it to be less 7820 cause 7900x can only do [email protected]


Will test HCI later.

Passed two hours Aida without any issues. Added 30mv extra to the Vcore just in case.







Now I can go back to test the core alone.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Thats the difference between asus and asrock


How about this one








http://hwbot.org/newsflash/4823_intel_core_i9_7940x7960x7980xe_launch_7_world_records_27_global_first_places


----------



## Martin778

I think that there are less and less differences between high-end mainboards atm and it's the CPU's that hit the wall first, the VRM's seem to be pretty similar nowadays and should all do well unless a manufacturer fails with PCB design/BIOS'es.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Does these look like normal temperatures for a I7 7800X running 4700 at 1.190V-ish (according to Aida64). Cache is at 0.900-0.950V and at 3000mhz.

Custom EK loop with GPU also folding at 1950/0.900V. EK XT240, D5, Supremacy Evo, EKTXP and a MO-RA3. Ambient is 20'C or so.

I find them a bit high for the voltage I am running and clockspeed..?


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!






Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I think that there are less and less differences between high-end mainboards atm and it's the CPU's that hit the wall first, the VRM's seem to be pretty similar nowadays and should all do well unless a manufacturer fails with PCB design/BIOS'es.


Yeah. I was advised to return my Tomhawk. It is really doing a nice job, even at higher voltages and speeds (5ghz, 1.330V++). I do have a fan blowing on the VRMs.


----------



## MoreGaming

Hey guy's The reason why i'm writing this post is because I'm heavily considering X299 because I will be playing in 4k,5k,8k, Livestreaming, making a video game, 3D modeling, and also maybe music at some point ETC, But before i continue with my journey i will need some help from people who actually own a X299 CPU, So let's get started shall we?







Question: Now i know The 7960X has 44 PCIE lanes and 24 from the chipset so that equals in 68 but i will be using all the CPU lanes for the gpu's i'm planning on going 4 way SLI, but I will be using 3 NVME M.2 Drives so i will need more lanes so i plan too use the chipset lanes so my question here is if i do use the chipset lanes will it decrease the bandwidth and speed between them also what are the negatives by using the chipset lanes?. Okay so off we go again question: Now i will be delidding the CPU (7960X) And be putting a monoblock on top of it (I'l be doing a custom loop) So my question here is how much will this decrease the VRM temps (Asus rampage VI EXTREME) And CPU Temps. Okay Again Last one i promise







Question: Now X299 (DOES NOT SUPPORT) ECC memory, now i'm worried of My PC crashing when i'm livestreaming, playing a game, browsing the web, making a tune, So what will be the probability of My PC crashing And should i be worried?.. Anyway Thank's in advance hopefully i did not offend or anger anyone







PEACE.


----------



## Nikos4Life

As more people is getting in here... I would like to know why did you choose Asus Rampage VI Extreme vs. Apex?
I did buy the apex but I did not opened it yet because 7980XE is still not here. So I would like to know main key points for you to get the first over the APEX?
Overclock headroom should be the same?
Is Power delivery the same? I would love to see RE VI vs APEX just for a moment









Thanks you guys and enjoy your beasts!!!


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nikos4Life*
> 
> As more people is getting in here... I would like to know why did you choose Asus Rampage VI Extreme vs. Apex?
> I did buy the apex but I did not opened it yet because 7980XE is still not here. So I would like to know main key points for you to get the first over the APEX?
> Overclock headroom should be the same?
> Is Power delivery the same? I would love to see RE VI vs APEX just for a moment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks you guys and enjoy your beasts!!!


People love a good Halo product, especially when it looks as great as the Extreme does when looking to build the ultimate w/c system. In terms of overclocking potential, the only small difference will be at the top-end of the spectrum on the DRAM side favouring the Apex.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nikos4Life*
> 
> As more people is getting in here... I would like to know why did you choose Asus Rampage VI Extreme vs. Apex?
> I did buy the apex but I did not opened it yet because 7980XE is still not here. So I would like to know main key points for you to get the first over the APEX?
> Overclock headroom should be the same?
> Is Power delivery the same? I would love to see RE VI vs APEX just for a moment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks you guys and enjoy your beasts!!!


For me - I need 128G... Apex is just not an option. I also like the integrated 10gE since one way or another I would have needed that connectivity, on the board cleans up my system and frees up physical slots if not PCIe slots (that BW has to come from somewhere).

Looking at reviews the ability to hit my targets (in terms of all-core clock rates that make 7980xe look interesting relative to what I have already), the limitation was not 8x4 power, but the TIM. I'm going to have to hem and haw on that one (delid) for a while... 15-20C is HUGE, but even in my price bracket being sure I won't need warranty support/replacement is still "a thing". So, that will be a last resort.

Thought about this one for a long time - bottom line is I'm looking for stability, connectivity and getting the most out of a LOT of ram in a 24/7 heavily loaded setup. Past experience and early reviews say to me that R6E gives me the best shot at that - even among Asus products I have, the R5E was a standout in terms of ram support.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Does these look like normal temperatures for a I7 7800X running 4700 at 1.190V-ish (according to Aida64). Cache is at 0.900-0.950V and at 3000mhz.
> 
> Custom EK loop with GPU also folding at 1950/0.900V. EK XT240, D5, Supremacy Evo, EKTXP and a MO-RA3. Ambient is 20'C or so.
> 
> I find them a bit high for the voltage I am running and clockspeed..?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah. I was advised to return my Tomhawk. It is really doing a nice job, even at higher voltages and speeds (5ghz, 1.330V++). I do have a fan blowing on the VRMs.


eh just updated to hci memtest 6.0..
now i need 1.1v for 32


----------



## D-EJ915

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MoreGaming*
> 
> Hey guy's The reason why i'm writing this post is because I'm heavily considering X299 because I will be playing in 4k,5k,8k, Livestreaming, making a video game, 3D modeling, and also maybe music at some point ETC, But before i continue with my journey i will need some help from people who actually own a X299 CPU, So let's get started shall we?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Question: Now i know The 7960X has 44 PCIE lanes and 24 from the chipset so that equals in 68 but i will be using all the CPU lanes for the gpu's i'm planning on going 4 way SLI, but I will be using 3 NVME M.2 Drives so i will need more lanes so i plan too use the chipset lanes so my question here is if i do use the chipset lanes will it decrease the bandwidth and speed between them also what are the negatives by using the chipset lanes?. Okay so off we go again question: Now i will be delidding the CPU (7960X) And be putting a monoblock on top of it (I'l be doing a custom loop) So my question here is how much will this decrease the VRM temps (Asus rampage VI EXTREME) And CPU Temps. Okay Again Last one i promise
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Question: Now X299 (DOES NOT SUPPORT) ECC memory, now i'm worried of My PC crashing when i'm livestreaming, playing a game, browsing the web, making a tune, So what will be the probability of My PC crashing And should i be worried?.. Anyway Thank's in advance hopefully i did not offend or anger anyone
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PEACE.


ECC is for data integrity not really for stability. In general you do not need ECC memory.


----------



## Iceman2733

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nikos4Life*
> 
> As more people is getting in here... I would like to know why did you choose Asus Rampage VI Extreme vs. Apex?
> I did buy the apex but I did not opened it yet because 7980XE is still not here. So I would like to know main key points for you to get the first over the APEX?
> Overclock headroom should be the same?
> Is Power delivery the same? I would love to see RE VI vs APEX just for a moment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks you guys and enjoy your beasts!!!


I have owned and used both for my little bit of overclocking my 7900x to 4.7 they both have done it at the same voltage and same VRM temps. I have not tried to go higher yet just due to temps getting a little higher than I want seeing 79c at 4.7 with a custom loop and 480mm rad on just it. I regret spending the money on the Extreme had I not already sent my Apex back I would have kept it. I don't have any plans to use the 10g NIC and I don't use wireless at all. The OLED screen is a gimick due to its placement in a bit case like a Caselabs where it is pretty far from plain view. It is pretty cool tho to read what exactly the Q-Code Numbers actually go to such as it will display CPU for CPU codes and GPU for GPU and well you get it lol..... For the price difference FOR ME it was not worth it at all, however a lot of people need the 10g NIC and wireless which leads them to that board. Both extremely good boards for the average one of us on the forum with how we will overclock I dunno that we will be able to push either enough to really show a weakness.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Iceman2733*
> 
> I have owned and used both for my little bit of overclocking my 7900x to 4.7 they both have done it at the same voltage and same VRM temps. I have not tried to go higher yet just due to temps getting a little higher than I want seeing 79c at 4.7 with a custom loop and 480mm rad on just it. I regret spending the money on the Extreme had I not already sent my Apex back I would have kept it. I don't have any plans to use the 10g NIC and I don't use wireless at all. The OLED screen is a gimick due to its placement in a bit case like a Caselabs where it is pretty far from plain view. It is pretty cool tho to read what exactly the Q-Code Numbers actually go to such as it will display CPU for CPU codes and GPU for GPU and well you get it lol..... For the price difference FOR ME it was not worth it at all, however a lot of people need the 10g NIC and wireless which leads them to that board. Both extremely good boards for the average one of us on the forum with how we will overclock I dunno that we will be able to push either enough to really show a weakness.


Solid info, thank you.









I got the Apex for the cheaper price but the same overclock ability in general. Although the Apex should overclock the memory a tad better. The thing that stood out for me the most is the dual cpu pin on the Apex compared to 8 + 4pin for Extreme.

The way these cpus hog the juice , it's more important in my eyes. I could care less about 10g lan, but it's nice the Apex has wireless which I'd use sometimes.

The Extreme looks way better though. But the Apex still looks great.


----------



## Iceman2733

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Solid info, thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got the Apex for the cheaper price but the same overclock ability in general. Although the Apex should overclock the memory a tad better. The thing that stood out for me the most is the dual cpu pin on the Apex compared to 8 + 4pin for Extreme.
> 
> The way these cpus hog the juice , it's more important in my eyes. I could care less about 10g lan, but it's nice the Apex has wireless which I'd use sometimes.
> 
> The Extreme looks way better though. But the Apex still looks great.


I agree! Like I said a lot of Pro and cons for each board a lot of it comes down to what/how the person intends to use them and what there goals are. I should have mention the Apex is only 4 memory vs 8 memory slot. Yet again for me I am a gamer/benchmark whore so 4 slots is more than enough. I think a lot of the stuff these boards offer the normal gamer/streamer/benchmark person will not touch enough to worry. Highest VRM temps I can get is 63c that was at 4.7 1.225v 7900x after 1 hr and my case fans set to 30% only I think around 600ish RPM. We do have members on this forum that will put it to these boards hardcore with chillers and LN2 but for me that is out the question.

Extreme does have a decent look however if you are running SLI you won't see much of it and the bottom part of the board the light is not that bright other than right around the chipset area. They each have there purpose, neither are a bad choice. I think for me the illusion of the stupid Extreme not being able to find made me jump on it, the old saying a person wants what they can't have my goodness I showed them lol and now I regret the extra cash spent lol


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Iceman2733*
> 
> I agree! Like I said a lot of Pro and cons for each board a lot of it comes down to what/how the person intends to use them and what there goals are. I should have mention the Apex is only 4 memory vs 8 memory slot. Yet again for me I am a gamer/benchmark whore so 4 slots is more than enough. I think a lot of the stuff these boards offer the normal gamer/streamer/benchmark person will not touch enough to worry. Highest VRM temps I can get is 63c that was at 4.7 1.225v 7900x after 1 hr and my case fans set to 30% only I think around 600ish RPM. We do have members on this forum that will put it to these boards hardcore with chillers and LN2 but for me that is out the question.
> 
> Extreme does have a decent look however if you are running SLI you won't see much of it and the bottom part of the board the light is not that bright other than right around the chipset area. They each have there purpose, neither are a bad choice. I think for me the illusion of the stupid Extreme not being able to find made me jump on it, the old saying a person wants what they can't have my goodness I showed them lol and now I regret the extra cash spent lol


The aura effect would still be visible with two cards in a water cooled system, due to the designated slot spacing. Anyone building a system with the Extreme and not being on water should rethink their budget


----------



## DStealth

Seems like cheapest board is limiting the CPU or RAM in some kind...past some limits...
Managed to match previous CB score with a couple more MHz seems it Throttles close to 1.3v...or at least degrading performance









Geek looks in intact although...


----------



## GreedyMuffin

So annoying that your CPU is a better overclocker.. lol
















My Tomwahk does not throttle at 1.350-1.370V.

Is that 5.1 ghz stable?


----------



## DStealth

Just bench...for sure not 24/7 stable...just pushing some boundaries


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Alright!

Max 5000mhz on my chip. i want to hook a multimeter to my mobo so I can read the Vcore, but I guess my cheapo Tomhawk won't allow me.

I don't need to delid to have 5 ghz as 24/7. But at 1.340-1.365V, it is getting pretty toasty. 80'C++


----------



## Martin778

I don't get it anymore, I'm getting freezes while I'm in BIOS. WTH.

What's the expected voltage for 3.2GHz mesh, 1.2-1.25V?


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I don't get it anymore, I'm getting freezes while I'm in BIOS. WTH.


Have you tried to go back to previous BIOS version? CMOS reset?


----------



## Martin778

Yeah, what bugs me the most is that setting BCLK under RAM settings to 100 and strap to 133 (to get the 3200MHz) causes the board to hang on POST, every time.

When it crashes under stress testing it doesn't always throw a BSOD, sometimes it just freezes and stays like that.
I'm starting to think that the G.Skill RGB software is partially responsible for this, it's extremely buggy. I was using the "starry night" LED effect and every time the PC froze, the LED effect would stop too.


----------



## T800

How can I test stability of the each individual core for settings under the "By Specific Core" menu.

I used Realbench 2.43, cores are all tested seperately and seperately they all passed the stress test but when they work all together CPU can not complete stress test.

Which CPU stress software is good for this purpose ?


----------



## T800

By the way the CPU is i9 7900X. Mainboard is RVI Apex. All settings auto, except offset voltage settings, SVID disabled, multicore enhancement disabled, VRMs set to optimized.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I don't get it anymore, I'm getting freezes while I'm in BIOS. WTH.
> 
> What's the expected voltage for 3.2GHz mesh, 1.2-1.25V?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Yeah, what bugs me the most is that setting BCLK under RAM settings to 100 and strap to 133 (to get the 3200MHz) causes the board to hang on POST, every time.
> 
> When it crashes under stress testing it doesn't always throw a BSOD, sometimes it just freezes and stays like that.
> I'm starting to think that the G.Skill RGB software is partially responsible for this, it's extremely buggy. I was using the "starry night" LED effect and every time the PC froze, the LED effect would stop too.


Theres a minimum difference needed between mesh and cpu vcore on multiplier and voltage.

Your issues is ram clocking and lack of knowledge on the platform.
No quick fix advice except test methodically.


----------



## SsXxX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MoreGaming*
> 
> Hey guy's The reason why i'm writing this post is because I'm heavily considering X299 because I will be playing in 4k,5k,8k, Livestreaming, making a video game, 3D modeling, and also maybe music at some point ETC, But before i continue with my journey i will need some help from people who actually own a X299 CPU, So let's get started shall we?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Question: Now i know The 7960X has 44 PCIE lanes and 24 from the chipset so that equals in 68 but i will be using all the CPU lanes for the gpu's i'm planning on going 4 way SLI, but I will be using 3 NVME M.2 Drives so i will need more lanes so i plan too use the chipset lanes so my question here is if i do use the chipset lanes will it decrease the bandwidth and speed between them also what are the negatives by using the chipset lanes?. Okay so off we go again question: Now i will be delidding the CPU (7960X) And be putting a monoblock on top of it (I'l be doing a custom loop) So my question here is how much will this decrease the VRM temps (Asus rampage VI EXTREME) And CPU Temps. Okay Again Last one i promise
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Question: Now X299 (DOES NOT SUPPORT) ECC memory, now i'm worried of My PC crashing when i'm livestreaming, playing a game, browsing the web, making a tune, So what will be the probability of My PC crashing And should i be worried?.. Anyway Thank's in advance hopefully i did not offend or anger anyone
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PEACE.


the spec u looking at and then the stuff u plan doing with that super high-end stuff u buying made be like >>> damn ... this guy is a super geek pc expert whom knows what he doing; knows what he wants and been doing pc build and overclocking for decades!

and then comes the last question "X299 (DOES NOT SUPPORT) ECC memory, now i'm worried of My PC crashing when i'm livestreaming, playing a game, browsing the web, making a tune, So what will be the probability of My PC crashing And should i be worried?"

and i was like >>> damn ... never have misjudged people that much in my life!

lol


----------



## Martin778

It has nothing to do with lack of knowledge, sigh. If I wasn't for years on 775, 1156, 1366 and 2011-3 I would have known better.
It's just that every single time I get **** for chips and so the settings 99% of people use don't work here.

Well except for my X5670's, Q6600 G0 and my very special E8400 E0 that booted 5GHz on air


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> It has nothing to do with lack of knowledge, sigh. If I wasn't for years on 775, 1156, 1366 and 2011-3 I would have known better.
> It's just that every single time I get **** for chips and so the settings 99% of people use don't work here.
> 
> Well except for my X5670's, Q6600 G0 and my very special E8400 E0 that booted 5GHz on air


I am guessing this are gskill 3200c16 rams.

Continue dude. I already gave you a big hint
But no. U want to up vccio/vcssa .
You want to use auto clocking knowledge you gain all those years. You fail to see you are not testing this platform methodically and coming in with full of assumptions that what works in ringbus applies in mesh.

If it is 3200c16 one check on the asus thread you can find the full settings i gave to another forumer.

It cant be 3200c14 as samsung bdies are idiot proof on this platform until u hit 4k.

Hint out of the hmm let me see now is october.. 400hrs i spend on x299.. 90% of that time was on memory.
Theres so much to learn on this platform and you cannot use whatever ppl did or what you use to do with ring bus on this platform.


----------



## Martin778

Of course they are 3200 C14, B-dies I said this before.
This platform refuses to boot 3466 even if I put 19-19-19-39 @ 1.5V in it. Something is either broken or the beta BIOS is flawed, could be some secondary settings/voltages not working properly.
I didn't ask about increasing VCCIO or SA but rather to *lower* them as XMP doesn't work correctly and sets both sky-high to almost 1.4V.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Of course they are 3200 C14, B-dies I said this before.
> This platform refuses to boot 3466 even if I put 19-19-19-39 @ 1.5V in it. Something is either broken or the beta BIOS is flawed, could be some secondary settings/voltages not working properly.
> I didn't ask about increasing VCCIO or SA but rather to *lower* them as XMP doesn't work correctly and sets both sky-high to almost 1.4V.


Try 4000 17-18-18-18-41 T2 or T1 1.4V leave vcsa and vccio at default for the test. Edit: actually do 18-19-19-19-39 1.35v or 1.4v with 1T or 2T at 4000MHz


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Try 4000 17-18-18-18-41 T2 or T1 1.4V leave vcsa and vccio at default for the test


Also i should tell him to buy and apex and use the preset which u just stated cause basically thats what it is.


----------



## Martin778

Not interested in ASUS products, might consider the Asrock X299 OC Formula, though








I will give those settings a try, reset the CPU to stock values and only OC RAM just to see if it POSTs.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Of course they are 3200 C14, B-dies I said this before.
> This platform refuses to boot 3466 even if I put 19-19-19-39 @ 1.5V in it. Something is either broken or the beta BIOS is flawed, could be some secondary settings/voltages not working properly.
> I didn't ask about increasing VCCIO or SA but rather to *lower* them as XMP doesn't work correctly and sets both sky-high to almost 1.4V.


Pretty sure you are having issue with secondary timings
Twcl and possibly twtr_L/twtr_S


----------



## Martin778

It could be, I'm using the beta BIOS for Taichi that promised higher memory performance so they might have tightened some timings a bit too much.

+
I've reset the CMOS and only changed the memory settings - 4000MHz CL17 CR2 1.4V. Boots and passes the AIDA64 memory/cache benchmarks.
BUT, again the board sets VCCIO to 1.368V and VCCSA to 1.376V by itself.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> Also i should tell him to buy and apex and use the preset which u just stated cause basically thats what it is.


Yes c17 is a preset and 2nd/3rd timings might be needed but the 2nd one c18 is what I experimented with using primaries only. Why don't you be an angel and give him the rest of the preset timings in case it works for him. Hard to do it on my phone. I posted it somewhere maybe on the R6E or R6A thread. @Martin778


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> It could be, I'm using the beta BIOS for Taichi that promised higher memory performance so they might have tightened some timings a bit too much.
> 
> +
> I've reset the CMOS and only changed the memory settings - 4000MHz CL17 CR2 1.4V. Boots and passes the AIDA64 memory/cache benchmarks.
> BUT, again the board sets VCCIO to 1.368V and VCCSA to 1.376V by itself.


Don't run it like that. I don't remember what the dafault voltages are but one is .891v and the other is 1.008v. Try vcsa at .891v with vccio at 1.008v. Reverse it if it does not work. Gskill support told me once to do voltage opposite from what Asus auto would do and increase them to stability. I would not go over 1.2v on any of them myself even if it stabilizes the ram.


----------



## Martin778

I am aware that it's WAY too high, hope it gets fixed with a BIOS update in the future as even people who aren't into OC will be bashing their CPU with unnecessary high voltages, Taichi does this on stock settings.

Judging by the Asrock's A-tuning utility the board is setting both to 1.35V.
Kind of hilarious since 1.25V is already marked red for VCCIO and 1.35V for VCCSA and yet the board throws both into danger zone by default.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I am aware that it's WAY too high, hope it gets fixed with a BIOS update in the future as even people who aren't into OC will be bashing their CPU with unnecessary high voltages, Taichi does this on stock settings.
> 
> Judging by the Asrock's A-tuning utility the board is setting both to 1.35V.
> Kind of hilarious since 1.25V is already marked red for VCCIO and 1.35V for VCCSA and yet the board throws both into danger zone by default.


I would lock that down ASAP or you might accidentally delid your cpu. I think that's the absolute max voltage.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I don't get it anymore, I'm getting freezes while I'm in BIOS. WTH.
> 
> What's the expected voltage for 3.2GHz mesh, 1.2-1.25V?


You're hitting upper limits probably. I use 1.12v max for 32/33 but it is very close to unstable between the processors that I have tested. Are you stable at 3.1GHz?

Sorry for the double posting.


----------



## Martin778

3.1GHz mesh was 2h RealBench 2.43 stable, yes.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> 3.1GHz mesh was 2h RealBench 2.43 stable, yes.


Up to you if you want to push it further but I would stick with that with the lowest possible voltage. The only thing is that adds more heat so I would be left with a choice of higher core clocks or higher mesh. I would pick higher core clock for myself. You seem to have gotten to know your chip very well.


----------



## Martin778

I don't care much about that extra 100-200MHz on the mesh indeed, I'd rather have fully stable 3GHz on mesh with slightly lower voltage and push the RAM harder.
Also, not sure if the CPU degrading/settling in or it's just a benchmark thing but for Realbench I need ~1.215V Vcore for 4.6GHz. Tried 1.195 and it crashed after few minutes.

+
I'm slowly turning down the IO/SA voltages to less 'critical' levels. 1.2V passed 60 mins of RealBench (which is to be expected, actually) I will now try 1.10V.
Good news is that my RAM now at least runs at 4000MHz. Just need to tune some secondary timings


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> If it is 3200c16 one check on the asus thread you can find the full settings i gave to another forumer.


Would you share again or private message me with it


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I don't care much about that extra 100-200MHz on the mesh indeed, I'd rather have fully stable 3GHz on mesh with slightly lower voltage and push the RAM harder.
> Also, not sure if the CPU degrading/settling in or it's just a benchmark thing but for Realbench I need ~1.215V Vcore for 4.6GHz. Tried 1.195 and it crashed after few minutes.
> 
> +
> I'm slowly turning down the IO/SA voltages to less 'critical' levels. 1.2V passed 60 mins of RealBench (which is to be expected, actually) I will now try 1.10V.
> Good news is that my RAM now at least runs at 4000MHz. Just need to tune some secondary timings


Here is the full timings, finally got to a computer. Hope this helps, it has 1st,2nd,3rd timings.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Anyone tried Rockit 99?


----------



## rv8000

Is there a safe range of voltages spec table somewhere? Having a hard time finding anything online and through intel's PDF.


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Yes c17 is a preset and 2nd/3rd timings might be needed but the 2nd one c18 is what I experimented with using primaries only. Why don't you be an angel and give him the rest of the preset timings in case it works for him. Hard to do it on my phone. I posted it somewhere maybe on the R6E or R6A thread. @Martin778


As expected. Totally unstable timings. You were totally depended on the preset. One look at the secondary timings confirms this.

Hint @JpmBoy 4k c16 secondary timings theres three values there thats important for 4k


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Would you share again or private message me with it


Bro its in the asus thread. Think i gave it to @schoolofmonkey for hynix 3.2kc16 settings with a few advice etc etc.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> As expected. Totally unstable timings. You were totally depended on the preset. One look at the secondary timings confirms this.
> 
> Hint @Jpmboy 4k c16 secondary timings theres three values there thats important for 4k


you feel like listing exactly what @Jpmboy put on his post with C16 post or at least linking it when we were talking about C17 and C18 and how it all relates to each other? Why not tell @[email protected] how the presets are all jacked up that Asus is pushing out trash on their BIOS releases so they can fix it maybe? I kind of feel uncomfy when you throw around words about someone I highly respect that someone like @Silent Scone don't know what he's talking about when it comes to overclocking. The way you handle your self on these boards if you were an Asus rep I would drill holes on all my Asus boards and throw all of them in the trashcan.

I understand that people can't be perfect but the way you present things just offends like you were telling me once how to overclock a 7900x CPU better than everyone else and then I find out you don't even have one but insists that you can help me OC my CPU to 5.0 and 5.1 like I have done but present no actual proof just some promises of some sort of secret sauce we no longer use on these boards. The only thing I asked for if there was something else I change to improve XTU score.

I don't mind getting corrected but the way you do it I feel like I want to nail my tongue to the table.

My proof on those timings? I've been using them on both Apex and R6E, it's not my fault that someone's chip doesn't have and IMC that don't want to cooperate.


----------



## Martin778

Does MemTweakIT work on other manufacturer's boards too? Leaving secondary timings on auto works, though.

lowered both VCCSA/IO again, now to 1.17V, increased mesh to 3.2GHz @ 1.15V = 2h RB pass without problems.


----------



## DStealth

Yes it works. You can also use Asrock Timing Configurator ...but MemtweakIT is far better tool...


----------



## DeathAngel74

Stable as of 2:06 AM. I will do more testing tomorrow. Going to bed due to eyes burning, lol.
4.6GHz @ 1.147v (-4/-6 offsets)
Mesh @ 3200MHz/1.1v
DRAM @ 3200MHx/XMP/Stock voltage (1.36v)



https://valid.x86.fr/9c1ggm

*Edit:*
Oddly enough, 101.4 BCLK screwed with my Intel LAN. I was getting 26Mbps/13Mbps @ 101.4 MHz. Dropped it back down to 100 MHz and boom....260Mbps/13Mbps.
Weird huh?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Okei. I am about to order my Rockit 99 with loctite and Coola. Pro.

What is recommended to use on the caps near the DIE on my 7800X..? In case if a spillover by the LM. Remove the old silicon from both IHS and PCB, or just the IHS? From what I've gathered is it enough to just remove the old silicon on the IHS. I will just your four dots in each corner to make it sit, if I deciede to relid at all.


----------



## DStealth

Give some feedback m8..before and after with closer as possible conditions please.








I'm tempted also but as gaming machine for 24/7 don't hope for much better frequencies....maybe for benching and extend 1.3v limit where I'm right now with 360 EK loop...should withstand it


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Sure mate, no problem.

I will test half an hour folding and several runs of CB R15 (manually doing loops) at both 4.8 ghz and stock. Will write down ambient as well.

Will be fun to see.


----------



## pantsaregood

Is anyone else having issues with their CPU refusing to increase its clock speed under light load?

My i7-7820X at 4.8 GHz "feels" slower than my i5-2500K at 4.4 GHz did. Benchmarks won't show it, but I can definitely perceive a difference. I notice that even at ~15% CPU load, my 7820X is still sitting at 1.2 GHz, whereas my 2500K would immediately boost up to 4.4 GHz.

C-states, EIST, and Speed Shift are enabled - I know I could disable them, but I don't view power savings as inherently bad. The issue really seems to be that the CPU is waiting too long to increase clock speeds.

EDIT: Disabled all power saving features. The issue is definitely that the CPU waits for utilization to be too high before it clocks up. Running at a constant 4.8 GHz, it is as snappy as I would expect.


----------



## adolf512

I am thinking about getting the i9-7940x for rendering and some gaming, i am not really satsfied with any option available. My current cooling and power supplies is limited to only 1100w and i want to reach at least 4.7ghz, actually i want a 5ghz cpu but i also want 14 to 20 cores.

I did check out some benchmark and it seams skylake-x has 9% better ipc than ryzen, you are also able to overclock it much higher given adequate cooling, etc.


----------



## T800

I have a problem with Battlefield 1, this game always %100 loads CPU 1 and not spread the load to cores evenly. Because of that CPU 1 get hotter than usual. My CPU is i9 7900X, anybody have this kind of behaviour too.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> As expected. Totally unstable timings. You were totally depended on the preset. One look at the secondary timings confirms this.
> 
> Hint @Jpmboy 4k c16 secondary timings theres three values there thats important for 4k


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> you feel like listing exactly what @Jpmboy put on his post with C16 post or at least linking it when we were talking about C17 and C18 and how it all relates to each other? Why not tell @[email protected] how the presets are all jacked up that Asus is pushing out trash on their BIOS releases so they can fix it maybe? I kind of feel uncomfy when you throw around words about someone I highly respect that someone like @Silent Scone don't know what he's talking about when it comes to overclocking. The way you handle your self on these boards if you were an Asus rep I would drill holes on all my Asus boards and throw all of them in the trashcan.
> 
> I understand that people can't be perfect but the way you present things just offends like you were telling me once how to overclock a 7900x CPU better than everyone else and then I find out you don't even have one but insists that you can help me OC my CPU to 5.0 and 5.1 like I have done but present no actual proof just some promises of some sort of secret sauce we no longer use on these boards. The only thing I asked for if there was something else I change to improve XTU score.
> 
> I don't mind getting corrected but the way you do it I feel like I want to nail my tongue to the table.
> 
> My proof on those timings? I've been using them on both Apex and R6E, it's not my fault that someone's chip doesn't have and IMC that don't want to cooperate.


I wouldn't pay too much attention to it. Making adjustments to timings for the sake of finding stability isn't all that difficult. So I'm not sure why he feels the need to take that tone in his post as if it's something that eludes those around him. On the other hand, pretending to have an understanding on memory timings is a different matter entirely. Perhaps he can better explain to everyone how the refresh period and tRFC work? Seeing as he's very keen on bringing it up at every opportunity recently.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Yes it works. You can also use Asrock Timing Configurator ...but MemtweakIT is far better tool...


Out of curiosity, what makes you say MemtweakIT is far better than the Asrock Timing Configurator? I actually prefer how the ATC displays the timings.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Does MemTweakIT work on other manufacturer's boards too? Leaving secondary timings on auto works, though.
> 
> lowered both VCCSA/IO again, now to 1.17V, increased mesh to 3.2GHz @ 1.15V = 2h RB pass without problems.


Use HCI memtest make enough instances that test 95% of the total memory. That will put a high load on your IMC and test the memory cells by writing to it and reading it back.


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *adolf512*
> 
> I am thinking about getting the i9-7940x for rendering and some gaming, i am not really satsfied with any option available. My current cooling and power supplies is limited to only 1100w and i want to reach at least 4.7ghz, actually i want a 5ghz cpu but i also want 14 to 20 cores.
> 
> I did check out some benchmark and it seams skylake-x has 9% better ipc than ryzen, you are also able to overclock it much higher given adequate cooling, etc.


It doesn't seem unusual for Skylake-X cores to be able to hit 5.0 GHz. I can get four cores on my 7820X to hit 5.0 GHz with just air cooling. The issue is finding a meaningful way to stress test them.

Trying to push >8 cores to 5.0 GHz isn't likely on ambient cooling. My 7820X breaks into the 90s at 4.8 GHz on air when hitting it with SmallFFTs in Prime95. You might get 5.0 GHz with a good sample AND per-core voltage settings.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

My dream is to have a 7980XE if it was soldered, i cannot delid a 2000$ cpu


----------



## ELIAS-EH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T800*
> 
> I have a problem with Battlefield 1, this game always %100 loads CPU 1 and not spread the load to cores evenly. Because of that CPU 1 get hotter than usual. My CPU is i9 7900X, anybody have this kind of behaviour too.


I will tell you why, because by default, windows 10 creator update install the intel turbo boost 3.0 and enable it, and if you uninstall it, the windows will reinstall it, the solution is to keep it installed, and right click on its icon on the bottom right of the screen and click disable and then, go for windows services, search for it, and double click on intel turbo boost 3.0, stop it, then disable it.


----------



## adolf512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> It doesn't seem unusual for Skylake-X cores to be able to hit 5.0 GHz. I can get four cores on my 7820X to hit 5.0 GHz with just air cooling. The issue is finding a meaningful way to stress test them.
> 
> Trying to push >8 cores to 5.0 GHz isn't likely on ambient cooling. My 7820X breaks into the 90s at 4.8 GHz on air when hitting it with SmallFFTs in Prime95. You might get 5.0 GHz with a good sample AND per-core voltage settings.


I doubt i would be able to take 14 of 14 cores to 5ghz with safe voltages but i am ok with having a few cores only at 4.9ghz. I could replace my eight 800rpm radiator fans with faster ones or disable one GPU as a solution for the thermal issue. I have been able to cool i7-3930K @ 1.5v & 2x r9 290 overclocked when mining cryptocurrencies, it was rather silent too.

I may have killed my 3930k by using too much voltage.. (it started with me only being able to hit 4.7ghz with the same voltage), i do not want to kill or degrade a 1500$ CPU.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Safe voltages.. was it that on Sklake-X? 1.350V, 1.400V, 1.450V..? Skylake is good for at least 1.400V as safe 24/7 voltage.


----------



## Betroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Safe voltages.. was it that on Sklake-X? 1.350V, 1.400V, 1.450V..? Skylake is good for at least 1.400V as safe 24/7 voltage.


Yes, but for how long...? 2-3 years with heavy use?


----------



## EDGERRIES

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> I will tell you why, because by default, windows 10 creator update install the intel turbo boost 3.0 and enable it, and if you uninstall it, the windows will reinstall it, the solution is to keep it installed, and right click on its icon on the bottom right of the screen and click disable and then, go for windows services, search for it, and double click on intel turbo boost 3.0, stop it, then disable it.


Thank you so much man! Fixed my issue with a few games including bf1! + Rep thanks again, been trying to find a fix for this for weeks.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EDGERRIES*
> 
> Thank you so much man! Fixed my issue with a few games including bf1! + Rep thanks again, been trying to find a fix for this for weeks.


FYI, some games like turbo boost enabled. Keep that in mind if later you have a game that seems to be under performing. Dead Rising 1 had some bad fps drops for me with turbo boost 3.0 disabled even though I had my cores manually oc'ed.


----------



## cstkl1

t don't want to cooperate.[/quote]
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> you feel like listing exactly what @JpmBoy put on his post with C16 post or at least linking it when we were talking about C17 and C18 and how it all relates to each other? Why not tell @[email protected] how the presets are all jacked up that Asus is pushing out trash on their BIOS releases so they can fix it maybe? I kind of feel uncomfy when you throw around words about someone I highly respect that someone like @Silent Scone don't know what he's talking about when it comes to overclocking. The way you handle your self on these boards if you were an Asus rep I would drill holes on all my Asus boards and throw all of them in the trashcan.
> 
> I understand that people can't be perfect but the way you present things just offends like you were telling me once how to overclock a 7900x CPU better than everyone else and then I find out you don't even have one but insists that you can help me OC my CPU to 5.0 and 5.1 like I have done but present no actual proof just some promises of some sort of secret sauce we no longer use on these boards. The only thing I asked for if there was something else I change to improve XTU score.
> 
> I don't mind getting corrected but the way you do it I feel like I want to nail my tongue to the table.
> 
> My proof on those timings? I've been using them on both Apex and R6E, it's not my fault that someone's chip doesn't have and IMC that don't want to cooperate.


1. U didnt even bother to advice martin on his issue or even think about it but rather just gave him something to run that doesnt even makes sense. Its the very thing the brit does everyday on this thread. Post a long story that has ZERO info on it. But technically you are better than him cause you actually post screenshots. So for that again i apologize.

2. The settings are easy.. tWtr's for 4k. Its not dependent on CAS.

3. 7900x 5ghz.. u cant even run rb2.43 so whats the point even to tell u. Its simple mesh clock to cpu multiplier scaling. U need to get the mesh voltage correct. Simple.

4. If there was any secret sauce that asus has that the other boards dont have it would be Uncore offset. BUt that i suspect is a mislabeled intel spec to make it easier for ppl to understand what it does.

5. Yeah maybe i was out of line but u quoting some idiotic brit maybe got the better out of me. for that i apologize.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> My dream is to have a 7980XE if it was soldered, i cannot delid a 2000$ cpu


Sure you can, just buy enough beverages in case things don't go well and file the home insurance claim the next day.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EDGERRIES*
> 
> Thank you so much man! Fixed my issue with a few games including bf1! + Rep thanks again, been trying to find a fix for this for weeks.


your are welcome















Dont forget to disable game mode , game bar and game dvr in windows, and hope the fall creator update will fix all the games issue, microsoft has annouced that its windows creator introduce stutters in some situations.

See you in BF1 ?


----------



## ELIAS-EH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> FYI, some games like turbo boost enabled. Keep that in mind if later you have a game that seems to be under performing. Dead Rising 1 had some bad fps drops for me with turbo boost 3.0 disabled even though I had my cores manually oc'ed.


not true, turbo boost 3.0 has never been useful for any games.
it makes most of the work on the fastest best single core of the CPU . and this single core is the one having the most OC capability.
for example: on my 6900K, boost is 3.6 GHz on all cores except on one single core to 4.0 GHz (this is how turbo boost 3.0 work), I OC to 4.3 GHz on all cores, now the turbo boost 3.0 is useless, and not only useless, introduce stutters because most of the work are on single core.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> t don't want to cooperate
> 1. U didnt even bother to advice martin on his issue or even think about it but rather just gave him something to run that doesnt even makes sense. Its the very thing the brit does everyday on this thread. Post a long story that has ZERO info on it. But technically you are better than him cause you actually post screenshots. So for that again i apologize.
> 
> 2. The settings are easy.. tWtr's for 4k. Its not dependent on CAS.
> 
> 3. 7900x 5ghz.. u cant even run rb2.43 so whats the point even to tell u. Its simple mesh clock to cpu multiplier scaling. U need to get the mesh voltage correct. Simple.
> 
> 4. If there was any secret sauce that asus has that the other boards dont have it would be Uncore offset. BUt that i suspect is a mislabeled intel spec to make it easier for ppl to understand what it does.
> 
> 5. Yeah maybe i was out of line but u quoting some idiotic brit maybe got the better out of me. for that i apologize.


Care to answer my question? It was directed at you.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Sure you can, just buy enough beverages in case things don't go well and file the home insurance claim the next day.


? I don't want to have a heart attack while deliding a 2000$ cpu


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Finally got around to order it.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Will post results next weekend I suppose.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Betroz*
> 
> Yes, but for how long...? 2-3 years with heavy use?


Three years are plenty for me. If I know myself right, I'll probably will upgrade to a eight core counterpart when the next gen CPUs are released to X299. I've been trough like what? 10 CPUs for the past three-four years?


----------



## fireedo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Finally got around to order it.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will post results next weekend I suppose.
> Three years are plenty for me. If I know myself right, I'll probably will upgrade to a eight core counterpart when the next gen CPUs are released to X299. I've been trough like what? 10 CPUs for the past three-four years?


yes rockitcool is plain cheap and simple, I have already delided my 7820x using that


----------



## MoreGaming

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SsXxX*
> 
> the spec u looking at and then the stuff u plan doing with that super high-end stuff u buying made be like >>> damn ... this guy is a super geek pc expert whom knows what he doing; knows what he wants and been doing pc build and overclocking for decades!
> 
> and then comes the last question "X299 (DOES NOT SUPPORT) ECC memory, now i'm worried of My PC crashing when i'm livestreaming, playing a game, browsing the web, making a tune, So what will be the probability of My PC crashing And should i be worried?"
> 
> and i was like >>> damn ... never have misjudged people that much in my life!
> 
> lol


I'm Not a PC geek lmao i started too get into pc's a year ago and i quit for a little while i got back into it couple month's ago so yeah, but i did not know ECC memory existed so i researched it more and figured out that i have no need for it, i guess you learn something new everyday. And too this reply i was like >>> damn... how did this help..


----------



## Jpmboy

back from salmon on the fly... and see only one 7980xe posted.








nobody tell nizzen that the Malaysia chips are the worst.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> back from salmon on the fly... and see only one 7980xe posted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nobody tell nizzen that the Malaysia chips are the worst.


It's a vast conspiracy... they won't let us have them because if we did, we could compute the truth and confirm the Illuminati...


----------



## SsXxX

do u think there will be a coffee lake HEDT on the 14nm++ node?

as far as i can tell; intel never made a mainstream series in which they didn't follow it with an HEDT version like in kabylake-x, skylake-x, broadwell-e, haswell-e, ive bridge-e, sandy bridge-e ..... etc and the list goes

im on haswell-e atm and planing to go skylake-x, but i wouldn't mind waiting a few months if there will be coffee lake-x on the new node 14nm++

any thoughts?


----------



## ELIAS-EH

Out of the thread subject but worth watching?


----------



## DeathAngel74

Totally off topic, but mine is better, lol.





Back to topic. These are my findings with my 7820X:
4.765GHz @ 1.188v=85C
4.655GHz @ 1.155v=80C (both at 101.4MHz BCLK)
4.6GHz @ 1.147v=65-75C
4.5GHz @ 1.1v=63C
4.4GHz @ 1.050v=57C (all three at 100MHz BCLK)

https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/13560431/fs/13772655#
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/22479545?


----------



## SsXxX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SsXxX*
> 
> do u think there will be a coffee lake HEDT on the 14nm++ node?
> 
> as far as i can tell; intel never made a mainstream series in which they didn't follow it with an HEDT version like in kabylake-x, skylake-x, broadwell-e, haswell-e, ive bridge-e, sandy bridge-e ..... etc and the list goes
> 
> im on haswell-e atm and planing to go skylake-x, but i wouldn't mind waiting a few months if there will be coffee lake-x on the new node 14nm++
> 
> any thoughts?


thought this would be off topic then u guys came in lol


----------



## SsXxX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> Totally off topic, but mine is better, lol.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Back to topic. These are my findings with my 7820X:
> 4.765GHz @ 1.188v=85C
> 4.655GHz @ 1.155v=80C (both at 101.4MHz BCLK)
> 4.6GHz @ 1.147v=65-75C
> 4.5GHz @ 1.1v=63C
> 4.4GHz @ 1.050v=57C (all three at 100MHz BCLK)


is it stable at those temps and volts? and what stress test; avx or non-avx?

is it delided?


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Finally got around to order it.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I might order that too. BTW I've been trying to figure out if the old glue needs to be removed from the PCB but I guess it should not be done (this link was discussed in our local forum, check the pic...):

https://bbs.io-tech.fi/attachments/upload_2017-9-26_11-8-56-png.44198/


----------



## T800

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> I might order that too. BTW I've been trying to figure out if the old glue needs to be removed from the PCB but I guess it should not be done (this link was discussed in our local forum, check the pic...):
> 
> https://bbs.io-tech.fi/attachments/upload_2017-9-26_11-8-56-png.44198/


You can watch gamersnexus video about that, according to this video and for my understanding at least silicon adhesive on the heat spreader should be removed.

Removing this thing from the PCB part of the CPU could be dangerous. It's about the skill of the applier, more skill less level of danger.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> It's a vast conspiracy... they won't let us have them because if we did, we could compute the truth and confirm the Illuminati...


no confirmation needed, i think I met a coven on the way to Canada....


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> no confirmation needed, i think I met a coven on the way to Canada....


Any ideas when you'll be getting yours?


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SsXxX*
> 
> do u think there will be a coffee lake HEDT on the 14nm++ node?
> 
> as far as i can tell; intel never made a mainstream series in which they didn't follow it with an HEDT version like in kabylake-x, skylake-x, broadwell-e, haswell-e, ive bridge-e, sandy bridge-e ..... etc and the list goes
> 
> im on haswell-e atm and planing to go skylake-x, but i wouldn't mind waiting a few months if there will be coffee lake-x on the new node 14nm++
> 
> any thoughts?


I think this is a certainty... also I wouldn't be surprised to a version similar to kabylake-x processors of this generation soon. At the skylake-x announcement they stated that the x platform wouldn't have to wait to try out the new arcatecture. I think the real question will be if it is a 8700k slapped on to a 2066 pcb like the 7700k was with a higher tdp... if so the R6E may not support it as it doesn't support the 16 lane cpus...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SsXxX*
> 
> is it stable at those temps and volts? and what stress test; avx or non-avx?
> 
> is it delided?


I can see it looks very similar to mine which is stable at 4.7 between 1.75 to 1.80


----------



## xarot

My 7980XE was shipped today. Hopefully getting it this week or in the beginning of next week. No sight of R6E yet.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Any ideas when you'll be getting yours?


right now it's ~ October 23rd... but if SL posts them up first I'll cancel the B&H order. No rush really, I have a lot of "re-configuring" to do prior.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> right now it's ~ October 23rd... but if SL posts them up first I'll cancel the B&H order. No rush really, I have a lot of "re-configuring" to do prior.


hmm, given the way this chip behaves it is a bit penny-wise and pound foolish to not just get a delidded one isn't it...









decisions , decisions.... and all of them taking way too long...


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> hmm, given the way this chip behaves it is a bit *penny-wise* and pound foolish to not just get a delidded one isn't it...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> decisions , decisions.... and all of them taking way too long...


----------



## Mysticial

I'm curious to see how the 7980XE's hold up to overclocks once everyone here starts getting them.

500W+ sustained seems possible when delided with custom water due to the larger die area and contact area with IHS. But the degradation reports that I'm seeing seem to suggest that just the act of pulling such a high current continuously is enough to damage the chip regardless of temperatures or voltages.

IOW, it's possible that nobody will be running 4.5+ GHz overclocks unless they periodically get a new chip or they let the chip sit idle most of the time.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> ... the degradation reports that I'm seeing...


Interesting. Care to share these reports? I have not seen them yet.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> right now it's ~ October 23rd... but if SL posts them up first I'll cancel the B&H order. No rush really, I have a lot of "re-configuring" to do prior.


Thinking of what happened with the 7900X I will not be holding my breath on SL, even if they do post it first it's gone in minutes.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> hmm, given the way this chip behaves it is a bit penny-wise and pound foolish to not just get a delidded one isn't it...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> decisions , decisions.... and all of them taking way too long...


No delid is good for moderate OC I think.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I'm curious to see how the 7980XE's hold up to overclocks once everyone here starts getting them.
> 
> 500W+ sustained seems possible when delided with custom water due to the larger die area and contact area with IHS. But the degradation reports that I'm seeing seem to suggest that just the act of pulling such a high current continuously is enough to damage the chip regardless of temperatures or voltages.
> 
> IOW, it's possible that nobody will be running 4.5+ GHz overclocks unless they periodically get a new chip or they let the chip sit idle most of the time.


I think people overclocking this a lot would be the ones that normally don't keep the chip long so degradation is not going to be a problem. The people that will actually plan to use it a long time would be running it in stock or close to it like I was planning, after I test it for a few off course







.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Interesting. Care to share these reports? I have not seen them yet.


Jay Z's is the only one I remember off the top of my head. He says he degraded it from a couple hours of benchmarking at 4.9 - 5.0 GHz pulling 700 - 800W at the wall. But that's questionable since I haven't seen anything similar from the extreme LN2 overclockers.

There was a couple of forum posts that I don't remember where.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I think people overclocking this a lot would be the ones that normally don't keep the chip long so degradation is not going to be a problem. The people that will actually plan to use it a long time would be running it in stock or close to it like I was planning, after I test it for a few off course
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Agreed, and it'll be idle most of the time except for a few minutes of benchmarking and a few hours at a time of gaming where it'll be using maybe 4 cores. For the rest of the chip's life, it'll be completely idle.

But if the high-current degradation is real, then the distributed computing people are gonna notice it if they try sustaining it.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Motherboards could degrade quickly too


----------



## DeathAngel74

I worry about the i7-6700k in my wife's PC degrading. I ran it @ 4.6GHz/1.37v for almost a year before building a new rig for myself.


----------



## Martin778

I already crash 1.23V 4.6GHz on 7920. I think it loses stability in high 80's.


----------



## xarot

Hard to tell difference between "degradation" and "break-in". I think it is normal to get higher bench clocks to pass from a fresh CPU only later to be stable at a little less which I call the break in period.
I think back in the 980X days LN2 gurus said that it is possible to lose 100-200 MHz from top clocks during only a single run at extreme Vcore. However these CPUs pull juice so much more so I guess we'll be about to see what happens. Intel Tuning Plan will be every 7980XE owner's obvious choice if you're not delidding.

I wouldn't try pushing much more than 4.5 GHz myself.


----------



## T800

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I already crash 1.23V 4.6GHz on 7920. I think it loses stability in high 80's.


Is this a little bit high for 4600MHz ?

Also sustained heat and temperatures higher than 60C lead degradation ? I don't want to degrade a chip priced that high.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Getting my Rockit 99 today. An hour or so until it's here!

Already taken out the CPU. Hopefully I won't crush the DIE as the dude of FB managed.

About temps. I also loose stability very quick at the high 80s. If you're sub 75'C I think you're fine.


----------



## Martin778

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T800*
> 
> Is this a little bit high for 4600MHz ?
> 
> Also sustained heat and temperatures higher than 60C lead degradation ? I don't want to degrade a chip priced that high.


If it degrades hard I'll just finish it off and send it to RMA, no worries about that.
The stability issue could could be connected to Mesh speed, I could pass 2h RB on 4.5GHz 1.17V with mesh at 3.2GHz but 4.6 1.20-1.23 will crash.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Getting my Rockit 99 today. An hour or so until it's here!
> 
> Already taken out the CPU. Hopefully I won't crush the DIE as the dude of FB managed.
> 
> About temps. I also loose stability very quick at the high 80s. If you're sub 75'C I think you're fine.


Let us know how it went. That FB pic was from Splave, the #4th OCer on HWBOT.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Already re-lidded. Waiting on the glue to cure.

The Rockit 99 was as simple and yet very good tool. Will write some more later. It was WELL worth the money and I was not even nervous as a first-timer deliding, applying LM and re-sealing. The CPU from what I can tell now does not even look delidded, so I might still have the warranty.









EDIT: Screw that! Installed the CPU.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Temps while folding is in the high 40s - low 50s at 4800 mhz.

One core is 5*C colder than the others.. Bad LM application, or just random?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> If it degrades hard I'll just finish it off and send it to RMA, no worries about that.
> The stability issue could could be connected to Mesh speed, I could pass 2h RB on 4.5GHz 1.17V with mesh at 3.2GHz but 4.6 1.20-1.23 will crash.


I'm hoping it's just the silicon settling like they normally do.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Thanks @GreedyMuffin for the heads up on the Rockit 99 tool, just ordered one!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Thanks @GreedyMuffin for the heads up on the Rockit 99 tool, just ordered one!


No problem! There is a fail-safe mechanism, so you can't kill a chip with the tool. I used some clear nail polish over the caps and etc. The diffrence at 5 ghz is huge! I am now folding with a max temp of 67'C at the moment on my hottest core. Avg. is lower. This is with 1.365V fed to the CPU. Before it was closer to 90'C.


----------



## BroPhilip

......

An Aorus Gaming 7 x299 PRO??????????

And guess what an updated vrm....


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> No problem! There is a fail-safe mechanism, so you can't kill a chip with the tool. I used some clear nail polish over the caps and etc. The diffrence at 5 ghz is huge! I am now folding with a max temp of 67'C at the moment on my hottest core. Avg. is lower. This is with 1.365V fed to the CPU. Before it was closer to 90'C.


It's well worth it. Think I'll pick up the tool also, but not sure whether I'm going to grab one of the higher core counts yet.


----------



## DuraN1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> My 7980XE was shipped today. Hopefully getting it this week or in the beginning of next week. No sight of R6E yet.


I've got my R6E but not my 7980XE


----------



## Iceman2733

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ......
> 
> An Aorus Gaming 7 x299 PRO??????????
> 
> And guess what an updated vrm....


Shocking lol... You see the fan in the I/O cover?


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> No problem! There is a fail-safe mechanism, so you can't kill a chip with the tool. I used some clear nail polish over the caps and etc. The diffrence at 5 ghz is huge! I am now folding with a max temp of 67'C at the moment on my hottest core. Avg. is lower. This is with 1.365V fed to the CPU. Before it was closer to 90'C.


Very impressive! Congrats on the great results. What processor are you running GreedyMuffin?


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> No problem! There is a fail-safe mechanism, so you can't kill a chip with the tool. I used some clear nail polish over the caps and etc. The diffrence at 5 ghz is huge! I am now folding with a max temp of 67'C at the moment on my hottest core. Avg. is lower. This is with 1.365V fed to the CPU. Before it was closer to 90'C.


Someone on their site wrote that there are no markings at which orientation the CPU must be inserted into the tool (like the marked arrow on the CPU)? True?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Very impressive! Congrats on the great results. What processor are you running GreedyMuffin?


I am only running a I7 7800X. 

It's installed on a MSI X299 Tomhawk and paired with 4x4GB Ripjaws V 3600mhz clocked to 3800 16-18-18-38-1T
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Someone on their site wrote that there are no markings at which orientation the CPU must be inserted into the tool (like the marked arrow on the CPU)? True?


Not true. There is a obvious marking on my sample.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I am only running a I7 7800X.
> 
> It's installed on a MSI X299 Tomhawk and paired with 4x4GB Ripjaws V 3600mhz clocked to 3800 16-18-18-38-1T
> Not true. There is a obvious marking on my sample.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## Jbravo33

just got email from newegg 7980XE will ship in the next 24-48 hours. card was charged.







all thats left is monoblock from EK. but i did get a dark rock 3 to get going.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> It's well worth it. Think I'll pick up the tool also, but not sure whether I'm going to grab one of the higher core counts yet.


ugh.. I have the board, ram, cooling, and the rockit tool already... but no BIG SKL-X


----------



## DeathAngel74

Meh! I do this to myself every year. I get impatient and go for the "deal", then I regret it. Same thing happened when I bought the 6700k, a few weeks later...6850 was out. Now the wife and I are both kicking me in the behind. Gonna be saving for a while with the holidays coming up+$1600 house payment just cleared the bank...


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ugh.. I have the board, ram, cooling, and the rockit tool already... but no BIG SKL-X


Yeah no stock here, either. Although I've no intention on the XE, looking at the 16 core if any of them


----------



## Jbravo33

Edit looks like shipping now


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Edit looks like shipping now


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Edit looks like shipping now


Noice... I noticed newegg is showing a jacked up price - I'm assuming its the usual shenanigan of their "market place" that shows inflated prices when they are out of stock, but in this case, there is no alternate provider shown...

I really need to decide which case I'm using or building...

i have one of these (empty):


I have one of those with a 6950x in and all the goodies that I could re-purpose:


Or I could build another "road-warrior" frame with which I am quite pleased, but its a fair amount of work...




hmmm....

P.S. it handled its road trips flawlessly... Needs a monthly blast of air to manage dust, but nothing terrible. Oh and the 6950x will continue on in another case regardless... That's the easiest solution right now as its just a swap out... Maybe do that and build a frame on the side?


----------



## sblantipodi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I've been needing a second box with AVX512 since about day 10 of my 7900X. And I was seriously considering the 7980XE until it became clear that they wouldn't be soldiered. So that's probably not gonna happen any time soon.
> 
> OTOH, at work, we have some ES 12 - 18 core chips coming our way pending availability from Intel to experiment with. And since I'm the one with the most overclocking experience among my colleagues, it looks like I'll be the lucky one who gets to do it. Intel has this 197 page overclocking guide for Skylake X that's under NDA (with no expiration date) - and it's a definitely a bit more detailed than it needs to be for most people. lol


What software uses AVX512 at the moment? Or at least, what do you use that uses it?


----------



## jm600rr

I just received an email from Newegg that the card has been charged and status changed from backorder to packaging. YES!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Is it normal that the CPU needs far less voltage after a delid..?

I can also bench at a much lower voltage?

I have not testet too much.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Is it normal that the CPU needs far less voltage after a delid..?
> 
> I can also bench at a much lower voltage?
> 
> I have not testet too much.


Normal. Cooler temps equals lower voltage.


----------



## MJB13SRT8

Newegg has the 7960x in stock and ready to ship.

Montrose


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Noice... I noticed newegg is showing a jacked up price - I'm assuming its the usual shenanigan of their "market place" that shows inflated prices when they are out of stock, but in this case, there is no alternate provider shown...
> 
> I really need to decide which case I'm using or building...
> 
> i have one of these (empty):
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have one of those with a 6950x in and all the goodies that I could re-purpose:
> 
> 
> Or I could build another "road-warrior" frame with which I am quite pleased, but its a fair amount of work...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hmmm....
> 
> P.S. it handled its road trips flawlessly... Needs a monthly blast of air to manage dust, but nothing terrible. Oh and the 6950x will continue on in another case regardless... That's the easiest solution right now as its just a swap out... Maybe do that and build a frame on the side?


same conundrum here... I'll likely put the 6950X in this CaseLabs, add a monoblock for looks and use two TXPs. Put the R6A, i9, and 2 TXfps on the microcool bench.


will have to add additional cooling to the CL... 2x360s are just not enough for my liking.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sblantipodi*
> 
> What software uses AVX512 at the moment? Or at least, what do you use that uses it?


There's almost no software that uses AVX512. So I'm not using AVX512 software as much as I'm making them. The y-cruncher benchmark is one of several things I work on - and one of only two I've done so far that supports AVX512.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> same conundrum here... I'll likely put the 6950X in this CaseLabs, add a monoblock for looks and use two TXPs. Put the R6A, i9, and 2 TXfps on the microcool bench.
> 
> 
> will have to add additional cooling to the CL... 2x360s are just not enough for my liking.


Man is that hexagon shaped thing a chiller? What kind of temp differences are you seeing with that? Nice setup BTW. Man and I thought I spent a lot on my rig lol.. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Man is that hexagon shaped thing a chiller? What kind of temp differences are you seeing with that? Nice setup BTW. Man and I thought I spent a lot on my rig lol.. Thanks for sharing.


lol - yeah, that's a 4x480 rad system with a aux pump, single 200mm fan in the center. Keeps a 6950x and everything from 3 780Ti KPs to 2 TXps cool.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Edit looks like shipping now


have you shipped with it the delid tool ?

Congratulation for this beast CPU.









This CPU needs a cooling system, and power supply that total cost approximately the same as this CPU cost.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> have you shipped with it the delid tool ?
> 
> Congratulation for this beast CPU.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This CPU needs a cooling system, and power supply that total cost approximately the same as this CPU cost.


My 7980xe is more easy to cool than 7900x







Bigger die is easier to cool...

Not delidded.
Using ek water and one 480 xtx radiator. Benching and gaming @ 4.8ghz with no problem









Got the cpu 6 days ago









https://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/fire+strike+physics+score/version+1.1


----------



## ELIAS-EH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> My 7980xe is more easy to cool than 7900x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bigger die is easier to cool...
> 
> Not delidded.
> Using ek water and one 480 xtx radiator. Benching and gaming @ 4.8ghz with no problem
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got the cpu 6 days ago
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/fire+strike+physics+score/version+1.1


You mean Intel used better thermal paste for 7980xe than 7900x ?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> My 7980xe is more easy to cool than 7900x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bigger die is easier to cool...
> 
> Not delidded.
> Using ek water and one 480 xtx radiator. Benching and gaming @ 4.8ghz with no problem
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got the cpu 6 days ago
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/fire+strike+physics+score/version+1.1


All the more reason to go for the 7920x over the 7900x if it was between the two.

Congrats on owning the top dog Nizzen.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> All the more reason to go for the 7920x over the 7900x if it was between the two.
> 
> Congrats on owning the top dog Nizzen.


hell - congrats on owning the only dog.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> My 7980xe is more easy to cool than 7900x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bigger die is easier to cool...
> 
> Not delidded.
> Using ek water and one 480 xtx radiator. Benching and gaming @ 4.8ghz with no problem
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got the cpu 6 days ago
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/fire+strike+physics+score/version+1.1


Awesome can't wait to get mine.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Seems like my 7800X does 4800 at 1.215V (Or 1.238V according to Aida).

Don't know 5 ghz at 1.330V (1.360-1.365V) is worth it for only 200 mhz more.. :hmm:


----------



## Artah

It's in stock at newegg I just ordered 7980xe I cancelled my B&H order. When I went back it was out of stock right away. Keep an eye they may have stock trickling in and I hope my order went through









https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117836


----------



## Jbravo33

Say hello to my little friend! (Tony Montana voice)

Gotta go to work tho







no playing till tonight.


----------



## Zurv

work? call in sick sir!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

May I ask what your temps are while running Realbench is..?

Voltage and frequency as well as cooling solution would be very interesting!!


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> work? call in sick sir!


Lol I'd be leaving myself a voicemail then.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> May I ask what your temps are while running Realbench is..?
> 
> Voltage and frequency as well as cooling solution would be very interesting!!


Will bench the hell out of it tonight air cooler (dark rock 3) if I have time I will put on x62 and run again. After those are complete it's going under the knife (rockit tool) for a delid then it will be in its permanent home along side an aquaduct 720xt. Gonna be a fun weekend..... when pcing becomes your definition of fun


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> work? call in sick sir!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Lol I'd be leaving myself a voicemail then.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will bench the hell out of it tonight air cooler (dark rock 3) if I have time I will put on x62 and run again. After those are complete it's going under the knife (rockit tool) for a delid then it will be in its permanent home along side an aquaduct 720xt. Gonna be a fun weekend..... when pcing becomes your definition of fun


For sure, call in sick because your pockets hurt a lot and the meds are not working!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Say hello to my little friend! (Tony Montana voice)
> 
> Gotta go to work tho
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no playing till tonight.


jelly.


----------



## DeathAngel74

Me too! Damn mortgage payment....curse you!


----------



## Zurv

The worst part is waiting for the glue to dry!!! I already delided the cpu and put LM on...


Ideally i should wait 24 hours... but i think 3-4 sounds fine


----------



## Martin778

What's up with availability of the extreme high end X299 boards? Apex, R6E or OC Formula are all vaporware.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> What's up with availability of the extreme high end X299 boards? Apex, R6E or OC Formula are all vaporware.


I see 8 Apex at Newegg


----------



## jm600rr

Mine came in today as well. Will be heading out for vacation tonight so will have to wait 2 weeks till I get back for testing.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> What's up with availability of the extreme high end X299 boards? Apex, R6E or OC Formula are all vaporware.


I got x299 Apex in Norway, so no wapoware here


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> The worst part is waiting for the glue to dry!!! I already delided the cpu and put LM on...
> 
> 
> Ideally i should wait 24 hours... but i think 3-4 sounds fine


Nice!!

I waited 1 1/2 hours and just installed it. I see no reason for waiting longer.

Is there even? Lol


----------



## Zurv

@MrMuffin,

haha.. not really. Honestly it just needs to stay connected long enough to get it in the mobo







(or so i will tell myself)


----------



## DeathAngel74

Got bored since wife and kids are out visiting family and friends:
4.7GHz @ 1.165v./Mesh 3.3GHz @ 1.147v
Offsets -3/-5
I called it stable after about 10 rounds of Cinebench and 45 minutes of prime95 26.6 blend.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!










Any higher and I'd need to delid. Only +3C difference from 4.6GHz, I'll take it!
https://valid.x86.fr/hexvaj
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/22523268?


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> My 7980xe is more easy to cool than 7900x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bigger die is easier to cool...
> 
> Not delidded.
> Using ek water and one 480 xtx radiator. Benching and gaming @ 4.8ghz with no problem
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got the cpu 6 days ago
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/fire+strike+physics+score/version+1.1


what kinda of vcore are you using? i'm at 1.3v and at 4.5ghz the system is crashing even with the ****ty stress test in CPU-z. RE: cooling. I'm seeing the same thing the cpu doesn't get very hot. This is a wide diff in the core temps. from 60 to high 80s.

(not a right away crash, but after lke 10min)
i wonder if it is hitting some volt limit. Let me set all the limiters to the max so that doesn't get in the way.

UPDATE: it looks like it was some power limit. I'm not pretty stable at 4.5 @ 1.25 vcore (just testing using wimpy cpu-z stress test)
I also bumped the mesh back down to the defualt. (i'll worry about that later)


----------



## Zurv

what the hell kinda magic are these chips.
Look how cool they are running...
(4.6g, 1.25vcore, 3000 mesh, quad 4000mhz ram...)

VRM is under 60. (I do have a mono block)

Update:
I have to drop the mesh as the power draw is crazy. I'm trying to low settings the have little impact on perf so i can drop the volts.

right now i'm at 4.7ghz, 1.24 vcore, mesh 2800, quad channel 4000.
4203cb (for whatever that is worth.. darn 17 core is max'n out at 105c when running Cinebench)


----------



## Seijitsu

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> what the hell kinda magic are these chips.
> Look how cool they are running...
> (4.6g, 1.25vcore, 3000 mesh, quad 4000mhz ram...)
> 
> VRM is under 60. (I do have a mono block)


Unless you're under chilled water you're definitely throttling, probably current limited. Give cinebench a run and look at your score to confirm.

Edit: I actually don't know about what temperatures are normal for the XTU "stress test". Try giving P95 26.6 a try instead.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> what the hell kinda magic are these chips.
> Look how cool they are running...
> (4.6g, 1.25vcore, 3000 mesh, quad 4000mhz ram...)
> 
> VRM is under 60. (I do have a mono block)


That pesky core 17...lol. If you are on an asus board you could do per core voltage and see if you can cool that little guy down some.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Are guys getting higher results in Cinebench when you run it multiple times?

Example: I get 1604-1605-1609-1619-1619-1619, singel core is 213-215-215 etc. This is at 4800/3300 with mem at 4000 17-19-19-36-1T (Decent OC on these G.skill Ripjaws V 3600?)


----------



## DeathAngel74

Sometimes yes.....2038-2040-2020-2046-2048-2050(multi)/205-208-207-209(single).


----------



## DeathAngel74

Slightly off topic.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



She thinks my hobbies are too expensive, lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> The worst part is waiting for the glue to dry!!! I already delided the cpu and put LM on...
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ideally i should wait 24 hours... but i think 3-4 sounds fine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> **


don;t tell me you got that off amazon!

edit: I know this is heretical, but this is with day-driver clocks on a 7740X: http://www.overclock.net/t/1235557/official-top-30-heaven-benchmark-4-0-scores/3600_20#post_26375399


----------



## Zurv

@Jpmboy: Got what? the CPU or delid tool? The cpu is from newegg and the tool was rockit cool directly from them. Works well. I used it on the 7900 and 7980.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> @Jpmboy: Got what? the CPU or delid tool? The cpu is from newegg and the tool was rocket cool directly from them. Works well. I used it on the 7900 and 7980.


yeah - I have the the rockit tool... for a week now. Being up north for a few days I guess I missed the newegg stock.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> what the hell kinda magic are these chips.
> Look how cool they are running...
> (4.6g, 1.25vcore, 3000 mesh, quad 4000mhz ram...)
> 
> VRM is under 60. (I do have a mono block)
> 
> Update:
> I have to drop the mesh as the power draw is crazy. I'm trying to low settings the have little impact on perf so i can drop the volts.
> 
> right now i'm at 4.7ghz, 1.24 vcore, mesh 2800, quad channel 4000.
> 4203cb (for whatever that is worth.. darn 17 core is max'n out at 105c when running Cinebench)


buddy - is that core hitting 105C AFTER delid? If yes, best to monitor wattage after delid. May be getting near "flash-bulb" power draw with ambient cooling.


----------



## Zurv

it is only the 17th core. Everything else is pretty low.
also, *** is up with that hacks heaven benchmark







almost 300fps.. blah







i was only getting like 270... so to shameful to post







haha (i'm going with the system isn't fully stable yet!)

check out these prime95 temps

what is core 17 doing. I don't think i could just not be cooling one core.
(yes, avx for prime)


----------



## TahoeDust

I would dial that 105c core back some.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> it is only the 17th core. Everything else is pretty low.
> also, *** is up with that hacks heaven benchmark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> almost 300fps.. blah
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i was only getting like 270... so to shameful to post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> haha (i'm going with the system isn't fully stable yet!)
> 
> check out these prime95 temps
> 
> what is core 17 doing. I don't think i could just not be cooling one core.
> (yes, avx for prime)


yeah -0 that 105C core is like .. danger Will Robinson! When you did the LM, did you _paint_ both the die and underside of the lid?
that said, ... damn fine 18 core you got there.


----------



## Zurv

yeah, both sides.
ugh.. i'm not looking forward taking it out and doing it again. It only jumps like that with some stuff. I'm going to see if that is just a wacky gigabytbe bug or something.

UPDATE: i think it is a bug. I disabled the 17th core and now it is the 16th core that is going crazy on temp.
(but bug in what? to much volt? reading it wrong? gnomes?)


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> yeah, both sides.
> ugh.. i'm not looking forward taking it out and doing it again. It only jumps like that with some stuff. I'm going to see if that is just a wacky gigabytbe bug or something.
> 
> UPDATE: i think it is a bug. I disabled the 17th core and now it is the 16th core that is going crazy on temp.
> (but bug in what? to much volt? reading it wrong? gnomes?)


Did you test it before you delidded? That temp delta sucks.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> yeah, both sides.
> ugh.. i'm not looking forward taking it out and doing it again. It only jumps like that with some stuff. I'm going to see if that is just a wacky gigabytbe bug or something.
> 
> UPDATE: i think it is a bug. I disabled the 17th core and now it is the 16th core that is going crazy on temp.
> (but bug in what? to much volt? reading it wrong? gnomes?)


Hopefully you didn't damage the CPU with the delidding. Maybe you missed a corner with the LM application or something. Or should have waited for the glue to dry lol Just messing with you. Hope you get it sorted out. It could be a bug. Make sure you get the latest BIOS from Gigabyte. I remember dealing with RAID issues on my MSI board because I didnt have the latest BIOS. Couldn't restart Win 10 with my bootable nvme raid.


----------



## Zurv

i re-delided it and reflashed the bios. The random 1 core to hot problem is gone, but ugh.. so much power is coming in to the CPU. Also, the CPU temp is "fine" under prime95 (high 70s/low 80s), but the CPU package (i'm not totally sure what that is) is in the 90s. My guess that is caused by the power. (4.7ghz and 1.25vcore, 18 cores)


----------



## iamjanco

*7940X in stock at Newegg*

I think a few of you were considering getting this chip.


----------



## lutjens

Exactly how in the hell are people able to place backorders for the i9-7980XE on Newegg?!!?! All I see is the totally useless Auto-Notify button.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> i re-delided it and reflashed the bios. The random 1 core to hot problem is gone, but ugh.. so much power is coming in to the CPU. Also, the CPU temp is "fine" under prime95 (high 70s/low 80s), but the CPU package (i'm not totally sure what that is) is in the 90s. My guess that is caused by the power. (4.7ghz and 1.25vcore, 18 cores)


cool - the relid fixed the hot core. good to know. Package temp is the temp of the hottest substructure (which has a DTS). So, core, i/o, i/a, cache, IMC (gt if it had one







) anything in there with a DTS.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> Exactly how in the hell are people able to place backorders for the i9-7980XE on Newegg?!!?! All I see is the totally useless Auto-Notify button.


... and you never get a notification until the product is like EOL.


----------



## district9prawn

Delidded the 7920x.



Temperature drop isn't as dramatic compared to the smaller die parts. Maybe 12-13c.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> Delidded the 7920x.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Temperature drop isn't as dramatic compared to the smaller die parts. Maybe 12-13c.


Ah I could look at those bare die's all day.
Miss those days before the IHS become the standard


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Ah I could look at those bare die's all day.
> Miss those days before the IHS become the standard


i don't miss crushing them or chipping the sides off







That said, the way heat sinks used to mount were BS, hard, and awkward.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> i don't miss crushing them or chipping the sides off
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That said, the way heat sinks used to mount where BS, hard, and awkward.


Honestly I never did that in my whole PC building career, and I've built a lot of PC's since my first computer job in 1990


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Honestly I never did that in my whole PC building career, and I've built a lot of PC's since my first computer job in 1990


You are super safe or i'm a monster. haha







Having to put the heakstink on a clip on one side, then, with much force (and a screw driver) try to connect it to a latch on the other side of the cpu. ugh. I destroyed much in late 90s. Most of it was related to melting ice (peltier coolers, and early vapochill units) - water cooling wasn't as simple then as it is now. oh danger den... some of the stuff you made was kinda crappy.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> You are super safe or i'm a monster. haha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Having to put the heakstink on a clip on one side, then, with much force (and a screw driver) try to connect it to a latch on the other side of the cpu. ugh. I destroyed much in late 90s. Most of it was related to melting ice (peltier coolers, and early vapochill units) - water cooling wasn't as simple then as it is now. oh danger den... some of the stuff you made was kinda crappy.


I learnt to be patient, I was building those Umax Mac clones at one point, bare die soldered on a expensive motherboard, no mistakes allowed









Though I did bend a pin on z97 board when my 3yo son bumped me putting the CPU in.


----------



## Zurv

hurry up people and get some 7980!









I having real problems running the ram at anything above the default. (2133?) in quad channel. (I was running these same chips @ 4000 with he 7800). Even 2400 is locking the system up.

UPDATE: just the crappy bios. It seems i have to keep resetting everything to default after i make to many changes.


----------



## AsusFan30

I am happy to say that I am a Skylake-X Owner. I am almost done with my System. I have a 7800x that is Binned/Delidded from Silicon Lottery. I run it 24/7 @4.9Ghz and have no issues. The voltage is 1.25v, and temps are AMAZING! All I have used to stress test this CPU is XTU. It did not crash after 4 hours, so I am assuming it is stable. I am very happy with my purchase.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AsusFan30*
> 
> I am happy to say that I am a Skylake-X Owner. I am almost done with my System. I have a 7800x that is Binned/Delidded from Silicon Lottery. I run it 24/7 @4.9Ghz and have no issues. The voltage is 1.25v, and temps are AMAZING! All I have used to stress test this CPU is XTU. It did not crash after 4 hours, so I am assuming it is stable. I am very happy with my purchase.


Awesome!

Can you check your temps while running Realbench?

Can you also run Cinebench a few times?

My chip is very similar to yours!

I seem to be memtest stable at 4000 17-19-19-36-1T-300 at 1.380V or so. Is this a decent OC? Kit is a 4x4GB Ripjaws V 3600mhz.


----------



## AsusFan30

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Awesome!
> 
> Can you check your temps while running Realbench?
> 
> Can you also run Cinebench a few times?
> 
> My chip is very similar to yours!
> 
> I seem to be memtest stable at 4000 17-19-19-36-1T-300 at 1.380V or so. Is this a decent OC? Kit is a 4x4GB Ripjaws V 3600mhz.


I will put it on my list of things to do. I will get back to you in the next couple of days. I have not did anything with my Ram yet, I just took my CPU to what Silicon Lottery settings were.


----------



## tistou77

Hello

About "delidded", you advise more the Rockit 99 or the Der8auer tool for a 7920X or 7940X ?
For a 1st delid, so novice









And someone will have a good tutorial for delidded (delid, repast, relid, etc ...)
Cleaning the glue, if you put glue for the relid, etc ...

Thanks so much


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Hello
> 
> About "delidded", you advise more the Rockit 99 or the Der8auer tool for a 7920X or 7940X ?
> For a 1st delid, so novice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And someone will have a good tutorial for delidded (delid, repast, relid, etc ...)
> Cleaning the glue, if you put glue for the relid, etc ...
> 
> Thanks so much


I'd get the rockit. both get the job done, but the rocket is much cheaper. The hardest part is not using to much LM (if you are using LM)
check out a video on gamer nexus, he used to much. The video is too long, but it was nice to see what to look for.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> Delidded the 7920x.
> 
> 
> 
> Temperature drop isn't as dramatic compared to the smaller die parts. Maybe 12-13c.


I concur. I had very similar results with my 7820x compared to my 7700k and 4790k which were giving me 20C delta with LM.

Good to know you're having that experience with the 7920x as well. There were some users reporting the HCC dies ran cooler.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> I concur. I had very similar results with my 7820x compared to my 7700k and 4790k which were giving me 20C delta with LM.
> 
> Good to know you're having that experience with the 7920x as well. There were some users reporting the HCC dies ran cooler.


I think he might mean between the 7900X and below, and the larger core counts. Beyond the 7900X, the die size is larger resulting in better heat dissipation


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> I concur. I had very similar results with my 7820x compared to my 7700k and 4790k which were giving me 20C delta with LM.
> 
> Good to know you're having that experience with the 7920x as well. There were some users reporting the HCC dies ran cooler.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I think he might mean between the 7900X and below, and the larger core counts. Beyond the 7900X, the die size is larger resulting in better heat dissipation


is there a good write up on delidding? I have never done it but want to test out my skills on a 7740x. Need info on exactly what glue, liquid metal, etc


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I think he might mean between the 7900X and below, and the larger core counts. Beyond the 7900X, the die size is larger resulting in better heat dissipation


Ahh right I misread. I guess the better heat dissipation results in lower delta? I was thinking that the more cores you have you start dealing with the effect of diminishing returns with delidding.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> is there a good write up on delidding? I have never done it but want to test out my skills on a 7740x. Need info on exactly what glue, liquid metal, etc


I don't know about a writeup but Gamers Nexus just did a video recently on delidding the i9 which was pretty informative and was good at showing the common mishaps that can happen.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> is there a good write up on delidding? I have never done it but want to test out my skills on a 7740x. Need info on exactly what glue, liquid metal, etc


If using the rockit tool, it's hard to go wrong in truth. I've only done a couple. As long as you're sensible, you'll be fine. It's when one becomes too complacent that bad things happen lol.

Roman has a few good videos on his youtube channel.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> If using the rockit tool, it's hard to go wrong in truth. I've only done a couple. As long as you're sensible, you'll be fine. It's when one becomes too complacent that bad things happen lol.
> 
> Roman has a few good videos on his youtube channel.


is rockit better than der8auer's or about even?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> is rockit better than der8auer's or about even?


I'd get whichever one you can, as stock is limited


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> is there a good write up on delidding? I have never done it but want to test out my skills on a 7740x. Need info on exactly what glue, liquid metal, etc


Never done it but rockit has a video on their site...

https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/pages/using-the-rockit-88


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I'd get whichever one you can, as stock is limited


I don't see any at amazon


----------



## Silent Scone

https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/rockit-99-delid-and-relid-kit-for-skylakex-kabylakex


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> hurry up people and get some 7980!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I having real problems running the ram at anything above the default. (2133?) in quad channel. (I was running these same chips @ 4000 with he 7800). Even 2400 is locking the system up.
> 
> UPDATE: just the crappy bios. It seems i have to keep resetting everything to default after i make to many changes.


Updated all drivers and utilities last night. Well this morning didn't finish till 6am. I ran cinebench quickly and I'm leaving everything bonestock except changing ram to 2666. I'm getting 3320-3380 but do you recall running cinebench stock and seeing the turbo boost work? Running it only gives me 3400 on all cores. Im monitoring on hw and cpuid. Every review I've seen shows around the same stock score but they don't mention core speeds. Unless there is a bug and it's just reading 3400. Also running Intel XTU I can't seem to get a score for the bench. You seeing anything similar?


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Updated all drivers and utilities last night. Well this morning didn't finish till 6am. I ran cinebench quickly and I'm leaving everything bonestock except changing ram to 2666. I'm getting 3320-3380 but do you recall running cinebench stock and seeing the turbo boost work? Running it only gives me 3400 on all cores. Im monitoring on hw and cpuid. Every review I've seen shows around the same stock score but they don't mention core speeds. Unless there is a bug and it's just reading 3400. Also running Intel XTU I can't seem to get a score for the bench. You seeing anything similar?


which mobo are you using? i'm using the gigabyte gaming 9. You should expect some drops in speed when using AVX (if you are using an offset and you will be. I need to use a HUGE offset as power is a huge issue. i'm using AVX offset 12.) That said, that isn't the issue you are bumping into. You'd just really bump into AVX with prime and other random stuff (i'm testing now with x264 which uses avx and and avx 512.)

You might be bumping into a power limiter. I had to pretty much remove all limits not have my system throttle or shutdown.
It might be the VRM getting hot too? I'm using a mono block and under heavy testing (which XTU isn't) i'm getting into the high 80s.

I can give some suggestions if using gigabyte. What are you using for cooling? Mesh settings?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> I don't know about a writeup but Gamers Nexus just did a video recently on delidding the i9 which was pretty informative and was good at showing the common mishaps that can happen.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I'd get whichever one you can, as stock is limited


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BroPhilip*
> 
> Never done it but rockit has a video on their site...
> 
> https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/pages/using-the-rockit-88


Thanks guys, I ordered two of them







. I'll experiment on the 7740x and maybe do the 7980xe


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> which mobo are you using? i'm using the gigabyte gaming 9. You should expect some drops in speed when using AVX (if you are using an offset and you will be. I need to use a HUGE offset as power is a huge issue. i'm using AVX offset 12.) That said, that isn't the issue you are bumping into. You'd just really bump into AVX with prime and other random stuff (i'm testing now with x264 which uses avx and and avx 512.)
> 
> You might be bumping into a power limiter. I had to pretty much remove all limits not have my system throttle or shutdown.
> It might be the VRM getting hot too? I'm using a mono block and under heavy testing (which XTU isn't) i'm getting into the high 80s.
> 
> I can give some suggestions if using gigabyte. What are you using for cooling? Mesh settings?


using Rampage vi extreme. i havent changed anything in bios besides ram. i mean it should be doing its normal boost?? even running the XTU stress every core locks in at 3400. ive updated bios, xtu, cpuid, didnt get much sleep lol but getting same results now.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> I'd get the rockit. both get the job done, but the rocket is much cheaper. The hardest part is not using to much LM (if you are using LM)
> check out a video on gamer nexus, he used to much. The video is too long, but it was nice to see what to look for.


Thanks so much, I will use LM (1st time too)


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> using Rampage vi extreme. i havent changed anything in bios besides ram. i mean it should be doing its normal boost?? even running the XTU stress every core locks in at 3400. ive updated bios, xtu, cpuid, didnt get much sleep lol but getting same results now.


others with that board should know the settings you need, but if no settings are changed for the CPU it won't OC. You'll need to change the CPU multi. I'm running at 4.7ghz with 1.235 vcore. You should get pretty results than I. My board is limited on how much power i can shove thru the VRMs.


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Updated all drivers and utilities last night. Well this morning didn't finish till 6am. I ran cinebench quickly and I'm leaving everything bonestock except changing ram to 2666. I'm getting 3320-3380 but do you recall running cinebench stock and seeing the turbo boost work? Running it only gives me 3400 on all cores. Im monitoring on hw and cpuid. Every review I've seen shows around the same stock score but they don't mention core speeds. Unless there is a bug and it's just reading 3400. Also running Intel XTU I can't seem to get a score for the bench. You seeing anything similar?


Regarding Turbo Boost related issues associated with the 79XX series cpus, you might want to have a look in the comments section *here*. The pertinent excerpts follow:
Quote:


> ExtremeTech were suffering some problems with Intel Speed Boost on the 7980xe - did you experience anything similar?
> 
> Mod 11 days ago
> Oh yea, Turbo Boost 3.0 has been problematic on pretty much every Skylake-X CPU released so far. It actually isn't a CPU issue, but rather an issue with almost all motherboard BIOS's. We have a pretty good relationship with Gigabyte (who we use for most of our motherboards these days), however, so we were able to work with them to get a fixed BIOS from them before we ran our testing. I don't believe the EVGA mATX board we use ever had the issue at all, but I can't speak for ASUS, MSI or any other boards we don't carry as to whether they had the same issue or not.
> 
> At this point, we actually have a quick script that we run to ensure the CPU is running at the right speeds. It applies a load to various cores (checking for both speed on individual cores for Turbo Boost 3.0 and to ensure that the cores are running at the right speeds with all cores loaded) and logs the frequency of each core to ensure they are running at the right speeds. Really, it is just a combination of Prime95, Windows affinity, and CoreTemp. At this point, I know all our workstations are running at the right speeds, although I don't think the BIOS fixes we have are available for public download quite yet. They probably want to get the fix applied to all their boards before putting it up.


----------



## xarot

Got mine too...

I am on Strix board now, so I guess no excessive OC until I get the R6E.


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Got mine too...
> 
> I am on Strix board now, so I guess no excessive OC until I get the R6E.


grats on the new cpu









but it can't hurt to start working on it while you wait on the new mobo. I think any mobo is going to have problem with power.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

How does this Aida64 memory benchmark look..?


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







I'm new to memory OCing. Cache is on 3300 mhz 1.145V.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> grats on the new cpu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but it can't hurt to start working on it while you wait on the new mobo. I think any mobo is going to have problem with power.


Haha guess if I tried already anyway?









The OCP in my AX1500i PSU seems to trip when running Cinebench over 4.5 GHz. I can run CB 4.5 GHz core 1.15V/3 GHz cache 1.15V though. Have to wait for better mobo and disable OCP in the PSU settings.


----------



## Zurv

Here is a quick look at power, heat, etc when running at my 24/7 fan speeds







(which is 10%)

normal stuff like gaming and XTU aren't bad for power draw.. but prime95 and even CB are hitting 400w!


----------



## Silent Scone

That sort of power draw is to be expected, 18 cores are immense. You're getting good temps there, too.


----------



## xarot

Looks like this CPU is very fun to play with. Haven't been this excited since OCing the i7-990X.

Also this CPU seems to be running a lot cooler than my 7900X...


----------



## Zurv

feels odd with a 12 offset for avx, but damn.. even at 3.5ghz (x254 uses both avx and avx512) 18 cores ZOOOM! (by zoom i mean 2-3 hours for 30min of 4k gaming at very slow.... but that was much better than my 10 core 7900 or 6950)


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Looks like this CPU is very fun to play with. Haven't been this excited since OCing the i7-990X.
> 
> Also this CPU seems to be running a lot cooler than my 7900X...


Are you selling your old CPU? Was it just a placeholder?


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> Here is a quick look at power, heat, etc when running at my 24/7 fan speeds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (which is 10%)
> 
> normal stuff like gaming and XTU aren't bad for power draw.. but prime95 and even CB are hitting 400w!


Nice









CPU delidded ?


----------



## Artah

I found a beast lurking around the swamp of empty wallets.....


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I found a beast lurking around the swamp of empty wallets.....


Congrats! (I did watch my stock in Intel climb while you did that though)


----------



## Nizzen




----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> How does this Aida64 memory benchmark look..?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm new to memory OCing. Cache is on 3300 mhz 1.145V.


You can squeeze a couple more MB/s bandwidth and get sub 50ns for 4ghz speed and 3300mesh just pushing some tore timings down...anyway your result seems fine ...maybe also MSI is not pushing the tightest settings with such mem. speeds.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*


Wow...these chips are pretty insane. Come on man...I know you know how to take a screenshot...lol


----------



## lutjens

This is driving me CRAZY!!! Where are people getting these chips?!!???! They are sold out everywhere I look...


----------



## Mysticial

For those of you who are already familiar with y-cruncher or are interested in an AVX512 benchmark, here's a release candidate for version 0.7.4:

*Windows:* http://www.numberworld.org/y-cruncher/y-cruncher%20v0.7.4.9476.zip
*Linux Static:* http://www.numberworld.org/y-cruncher/y-cruncher%20v0.7.4.9476-static.tar.gz
*Linux Dynamic:* http://www.numberworld.org/y-cruncher/y-cruncher%20v0.7.4.9476-dynamic.tar.gz
Main improvements are:

Updated stress-tester. The new "BBP" and "SFT" tests will put a much higher and sustained AVX512 load than the previous version.
Some minor memory optimizations. Benchmarks are a bit faster now on systems that are starved for memory bandwidth. That includes Skylake X.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Are you selling your old CPU? Was it just a placeholder?


I am thinking about delidding it and doing some benching with it on water.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Wow...these chips are pretty insane. Come on man...I know you know how to take a screenshot...lol


Screenshot caused BSOD


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> This is driving me CRAZY!!! Where are people getting these chips?!!???! They are sold out everywhere I look...


I got it from newegg, you can buy mine if I'm not happy with the OC


----------



## lutjens

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I got it from newegg, you can buy mine if I'm not happy with the OC


How do you order it? All I get is an Auto Notify button where the normal Add to Cart is. People seem to be able to put in Backorders...do you have to call up Newegg to do it?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> How do you order it? All I get is an Auto Notify button where the normal Add to Cart is. People seem to be able to put in Backorders...do you have to call up Newegg to do it?


I just kept checking once in a while and one time it said add to cart







immediately bought it with overnight shipping. I only seen the backorder the first time they became available IIRC.


----------



## DeathAngel74

For now, I have to settle at 4.5GHz/3200MHz Mesh @ 1.1v. Anything higher and temps skyrocket into the upper 80's. I also kept getting a 0x124 BSOD, which means not enough vcore? After the holidays, I will delid, apply CLU and get some 3000rpm fans for the Thermaltake AIO. Thank you to everyone from the thread that posted tips and advice. It really helped me out, as I am coming from z170+i7-6700k.




P.S.
Luxmark kept crashing Realbench, so I downloaded it independently, and it works fine by itself.

https://valid.x86.fr/ubnf7w
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/22544464?


----------



## Martin778

124 would be memory, I think. CPU is either 101, or WHEA / Watchdog timeout in Windows 10.


----------



## DeathAngel74

Crud, then it could have been from trying to get the Mesh stable to 3300MHz @ 1.125v. It was too warm @ 1.15v anyway. Weirdly, it would not happen during stress testing or tasks like movies, web browsing, etc. It would happen randomly while playing a game after about an hour or so. *BUZZ*, then boom BSOD! I'm pretty happy with what I've accomplished. CPU max temps were 65-81C during stress testing. GPU's were around 50C during Luxmark.
Thanks for replying.


----------



## DStealth

Inspired from the Coffee Lake thread benchmarked the difference from 2.4 stock mesh and 2400 auto memory timings to 3.2g mesh and 4080mhz 16-16-16-30-300 1T manual timings
[email protected]/12150 for both runs and [email protected] MHz 1.299v non delidded









The difference from average FPS was in 10-11% range, while low 150's(stock) but highest FPS count was almost 23% diff from 250 to 304-306 while mesh and memory Oc'd quite impressive for all remaining the same.


----------



## DeathAngel74

I've always had bad luck running Heaven or Valley. My 1080 Ti is oc'd to 2037/12000 and the 1070 SC2(PhysX) is oc'd to 2037/9000. If you want a laugh besides benchmarking your GPU, download and try Catzilla....its hilarious.
I forgot to mention I was using Arctic MX-4. Maybe I'll try TG Kryonaut or GELID Xtreme after payday.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/22544464?


Something very wrong with your GT1 result 120's is 1080 area, not Ti...Ti is 150+


----------



## DeathAngel74

I'm trying to figure that out. Could be nvidiainspector or something in nvidia control panel locking fps to 120.


----------



## DStealth

Google G-sync nvidiainpector and how disable it ....pushing from default installed drivers even no G-sync monitor available


----------



## DeathAngel74

Thank you! I'll look into it. Just happy to game again for more than 15 minutes without BSOD.








I reflashed the bios and setup everything from scratch again. Good so far. Been playing for almost 3 hours. Time for bed.


----------



## xarot

Anyone else with 7980XE and Corsair AX1500i? My PSU is shutting down at 4.6 GHz 1.22V in Cinebench unless it is a stability issue.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Man my 7820x must be sensitive to load.

Passed 2 hours of Realbench 2.44, AIDA64 and Prime95 26.6, also Cinebench, load up vmware go to install Linux Mint and bam WHEA blue screen.
Increased my core voltage a little and it's fine.

Not 100% trusting these stress testing tools lately, I guess you guys have been saying using it everyday is the best test


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Man my 7820x must be sensitive to load.
> 
> Passed 2 hours of Realbench 2.44, AIDA64 and Prime95 26.6, also Cinebench, load up vmware go to install Linux Mint and bam WHEA blue screen.
> Increased my core voltage a little and it's fine.
> 
> Not 100% trusting these stress testing tools lately, I guess you guys have been saying using it everyday is the best test


I've been seeing some WHEAs lately due to unstable cache.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> I've been seeing some WHEAs lately due to unstable cache.


Yeah I thought that to, but tried to vcore first it seemed to stop it, I did up the mesh voltage a little for safe measure.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

C
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Anyone else with 7980XE and Corsair AX1500i? My PSU is shutting down at 4.6 GHz 1.22V in Cinebench unless it is a stability issue.


Check you UPS if it has a big output power capabilty, ups should be 1600 watt.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> C
> Check you UPS if it has a big output power capabilty, ups should be 1600 watt.


UPS?









You mean PSU? PSU is rated for 1500 watts.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*


does that really say 61,000 PPD from that 18core? something's not right, I get that with a 4c8t kbl-x.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Anyone else with 7980XE and Corsair AX1500i? My PSU is shutting down at 4.6 GHz 1.22V in Cinebench unless it is a stability issue.


are you sure it's the PSU doing the ocp, or your board. If it is the PSU, you may need to plug in the corsair link and configure it to a single rail set up. some shipped with this set to multi rail with "pedestrian" limits.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> are you sure it's the PSU doing the ocp, or your board. If it is the PSU, you may need to plug in the corsair link and configure it to a single rail set up. some shipped with this set to multi rail with "pedestrian" limits.


Hey Jpm, when can we expect for you to join the 7980XE club?









Not sure really about the OCP trigger. All I can see in the Corsair Link is to disable OCP for PCIe #1 - #10...but that didn't do any difference. It could be the board too, since I am on the Strix X299-E board which is not really even designed for these chips.







I was promised to get the R6E in the beginning of next week, hope the retailer don't break their promises.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Hey Jpm, when can we expect for you to join the 7980XE club?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure really about the OCP trigger. All I can see in the Corsair Link is to disable OCP for PCIe #1 - #10...but that didn't do any difference. It could be the board too, since I am on the Strix X299-E board which is not really even designed for these chips.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was promised to get the R6E in the beginning of next week, hope the retailer don't break their promises.


yeah, it's likely the board. you can max out the MB's power limits in bios and see if that helps. Should be joining the club later this month. lol - I can;t sit and hit F5 waiting fo stock. Really considering a SL binned chip this round.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> does that really say 61,000 PPD from that 18core? something's not right, I get that with a 4c8t kbl-x.
> are you sure it's the PSU doing the ocp, or your board. If it is the PSU, you may need to plug in the corsair link and configure it to a single rail set up. some shipped with this set to multi rail with "pedestrian" limits.


I get 34000 on my 4900mhz 7800X..


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> does that really say 61,000 PPD from that 18core? something's not right, I get that with a 4c8t kbl-x.
> are you sure it's the PSU doing the ocp, or your board. If it is the PSU, you may need to plug in the corsair link and configure it to a single rail set up. some shipped with this set to multi rail with "pedestrian" limits.


Are you using chrome nacl or normal cpu folding with [email protected] app?

Try chrome nacl for comparing. It's just for more WU, not pdd...


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> How do you order it? All I get is an Auto Notify button where the normal Add to Cart is. People seem to be able to put in Backorders...do you have to call up Newegg to do it?


Pre-orders are only before it comes out officially. After that it's Auto-notify. Use it, and as soon as you get the e-mail that it's available log on and order before it runs out again. I just did that for a Logitech MX ERGO trackball. Reason I didn't pre-order is you can't use PayPal on pre-orders.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Man my 7820x must be sensitive to load.
> 
> Passed 2 hours of Realbench 2.44, AIDA64 and Prime95 26.6, also Cinebench, load up vmware go to install Linux Mint and bam WHEA blue screen.
> Increased my core voltage a little and it's fine.
> 
> Not 100% trusting these stress testing tools lately, I guess you guys have been saying using it everyday is the best test


Did you also do a memory stress test? Didn't see that mentioned.

Edit: Hmmm, I take it you AIDA as the memory test.


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Anyone else with 7980XE and Corsair AX1500i? My PSU is shutting down at 4.6 GHz 1.22V in Cinebench unless it is a stability issue.


I don't think it is your PS. That is voltage failsafe/protecting shutting your system down. On the gigabyte mobo i'm using i have to change 3 settings to not have the system shut off. The key one was "CPU Vcore Current Protection" see if you have that can jack to to the max setting (extreme in my case).

the other for me was Package Power Limit 1 and 2. the default would throttle me. I set them to 400 now.

Question to the peeps here. Can i safely go higher than 400watts in the CPU package? I thinking no by the amount of heat (that i can't really cool) that is being pumped out at 400.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I found a beast lurking around the swamp of empty wallets.....


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah, it's likely the board. you can max out the MB's power limits in bios and see if that helps. Should be joining the club later this month. lol - I can;t sit and hit F5 waiting fo stock. Really considering a SL binned chip this round.


I am thinking the same thing buying the chip from SL.


----------



## DeathAngel74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Man my 7820x must be sensitive to load.
> 
> Passed 2 hours of Realbench 2.44, AIDA64 and Prime95 26.6, also Cinebench, load up vmware go to install Linux Mint and bam WHEA blue screen.
> Increased my core voltage a little and it's fine.
> 
> Not 100% trusting these stress testing tools lately, I guess you guys have been saying using it everyday is the best test


Except...mine didn't crash until I started gaming....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> I've been seeing some WHEAs lately due to unstable cache.


In my case I think it was unstable vcore and cache


----------



## Pinto

Got my second SK-X awesome cpu!


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> I don't think it is your PS. That is voltage failsafe/protecting shutting your system down. On the gigabyte mobo i'm using i have to change 3 settings to not have the system shut off. The key one was "CPU Vcore Current Protection" see if you have that can jack to to the max setting (extreme in my case).
> 
> the other for me was Package Power Limit 1 and 2. the default would throttle me. I set them to 400 now.
> 
> Question to the peeps here. Can i safely go higher than 400watts in the CPU package? I thinking no by the amount of heat (that i can't really cool) that is being pumped out at 400.


Thanks. I went through all power related settings and either disabled them or set them to the maximum, but it didn't change anything. I have the old AX1200 PSU I could try, that can give 100A to 12V.

BTW. How much input voltage do you use when OCing?


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Thanks. I went through all power related settings and either disabled them or set them to the maximum, but it didn't change anything. I have the old AX1200 PSU I could try, that can give 100A to 12V.
> 
> BTW. How much input voltage do you use when OCing?


i'm only using 1.235 to 1.25 (i'm playing around) for the vcore (@ 4.7ghz/mesh 3000.) Everything else stock other than ram (1.4) and mesh (1.070)

just remember, watch out for stuff using avx. I have an offset of 12! and 15. I'd first focus on what works well for XTU and CB before moving to prime or something else that using avx/avx512.


----------



## Artah

Everyone with 7980XE happy with their purchase so far or is it meh?


----------



## Zurv

I'm happy with it as i'm pretty much getting the same OC as i got with the 7900x... that said.. it is pretty pointless and totally not worth the money.
I'm not super happy with x299 tho..


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pinto*
> 
> Got my second SK-X awesome cpu!


Nice.

It makes me think though, if pretty much every owner of 7980xe bought 7900x those 3 months ago (or another SKL-X chip), i would not be surprised if by next year this staggered release would become a norm. Straight from Nvidia playbook.


----------



## Zurv

@pinto: maybe update cinebench. the version you used is pretty old. It makes it hard to compare


----------



## Martin778

I almost want to say that 7980XE is broken...66*C vs 91*C between cores. Definetely either bad TIM job at the factory or the temp sensors are defective.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

My sensors went to hell today.









Hwinfo is reporting 2.xxxV on CPU core. Aida is now reporting the same vcore as vid, and not 25-40mv higher as it used to.

I see that Intel says the 7800X is a 140 watt TDP CPU, but CPU-Z claims that it is a 122 watt TDP CPU, does anyone know?


----------



## xarot

Alright, ruled out the PSU with the shutdowns, so I guess it is the board. R6E it is when it arrives...currently trying to find lowest Vcore for 4 GHz core and 3 GHz cache to keep it nice and cool.









Time to play some PS4 now instead of tuning.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I almost want to say that 7980XE is broken...66*C vs 91*C between cores. Definetely either bad TIM job at the factory or the temp sensors are defective.


I have not checked my 7980xe but use SIV64 v5.23


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Pre-orders are only before it comes out officially. After that it's Auto-notify. Use it, and as soon as you get the e-mail that it's available log on and order before it runs out again. I just did that for a Logitech MX ERGO trackball. Reason I didn't pre-order is you can't use PayPal on pre-orders.
> Did you also do a memory stress test? Didn't see that mentioned.
> 
> Edit: Hmmm, I take it you AIDA as the memory test.


AIDA64, HCI Memtest and Stressapptest, which it all passed.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> Except...mine didn't crash until I started gaming....


That was happening to me at one point too withe Divinity Original Sin 2, it would pass all tests but crash 5 minutes in game (hard lock).
But that was when I had a 4.6Ghz overclock, turned out I needed over 1.2v to get that stable and it being summer here it wasn't worth the extra heat so dialed it back to 4.5Ghz.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I can run 5 ghz in all games, but once I set it to fold on both CPU and GPU it would crash rather quickly.

GPU or CPU alone is usually always fine!


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> AIDA64, HCI Memtest and Stressapptest, which it all passed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That was happening to me at one point too withe Divinity Original Sin 2, it would pass all tests but crash 5 minutes in game (hard lock).
> But that was when I had a 4.6Ghz overclock, turned out I needed over 1.2v to get that stable and it being summer here it wasn't worth the extra heat so dialed it back to 4.5Ghz.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> Except...mine didn't crash until I started gaming....
> In my case I think it was unstable vcore and cache


My experience has been similar on the 7920x and 7820x. Dial in an overclock to pass RB, prime non avx, hci memtest and aida cache. But would get bsods in games which were cpu and gpu intensive such as bf1.

On the 7820x I was able to get away with cranking up the vcore well above what was needed in stress tests. I also dropped the mesh down to 30 from 32. It was probably the mesh that did it as this chip needs a bit more than average on mesh.

On the 7920x, cranking up the vcore didn't help. Making the chip run hotter by increasing vcore, mesh or vccin actually worsened the stability issues in games. Keep in mind that the chip wasn't exactly overheating with temps in the 60s during games and low 80s in realbench. I ended up using per core overclocking to take 3 cores to 4.7 and the other 9 at 4.3 at 1.03v. Asus rocks


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Awesome!
> 
> Can you check your temps while running Realbench?
> 
> Can you also run Cinebench a few times?
> 
> My chip is very similar to yours!
> 
> I seem to be memtest stable at 4000 17-19-19-36-1T-300 at 1.380V or so. Is this a decent OC? Kit is a 4x4GB Ripjaws V 3600mhz.


Another data point here:

I played around with 128GB of B-dies today. And I seem to be hitting a wall somewhere between 3800 and 4000.

Appears to be Stable:

3800 MT/s (100 x 19)
17-19-19-40-666
DRAM: 1.375v
VCCSA: 0.900v
Unstable:

4000 MT/s (133 x 15)
20-20-20-40-700
DRAM: 1.400v
VCCSA: 1.000v
Not sure what the limiter is. Whether it's the ram, the IMC, or simply the fact that there's 128GB of it.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> My experience has been similar on the 7920x and 7820x. Dial in an overclock to pass RB, prime non avx, hci memtest and aida cache. But would get bsods in games which were cpu and gpu intensive such as bf1.
> 
> On the 7820x I was able to get away with cranking up the vcore well above what was needed in stress tests. I also dropped the mesh down to 30 from 32. It was probably the mesh that did it as this chip needs a bit more than average on mesh.
> 
> On the 7920x, cranking up the vcore didn't help. Making the chip run hotter by increasing vcore, mesh or vccin actually worsened the stability issues in games. Keep in mind that the chip wasn't exactly overheating with temps in the 60s during games and low 80s in realbench. I ended up using per core overclocking to take 3 cores to 4.7 and the other 9 at 4.3 at 1.03v. Asus rocks


Yeah my mesh needs 1.050v for 3Ghz anything under 1.00.v will pass stress tests but not gaming or vmware it seems








I played a bit with per core overclocking before, might do it again, push the lower voltage cores to 4.6Ghz.

It's strange that it's reversed with x299, with x99 I could game all day but not pass a stress test like Prime95 26.6/Realbench


----------



## DeathAngel74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Yeah my mesh needs 1.050v for 3Ghz


Makes sense, since I need 1.075v for 3.1Ghz and 1.1v for 3.2Ghz.


----------



## DStealth

Mine seems cannot get past 3200 where sub 1.1v are fine...
Pushed the little bastard 7800k to [email protected] for Valley benchmark these paired with 4100Mhz 15-14-14-28-280 1T [email protected] Glad to exceed 170fps mark with my crappy 1080ti


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Mine seems cannot get past 3200 where sub 1.1v are fine...
> Pushed the little bastard 7800k to [email protected] for Valley benchmark these paired with 4100Mhz 15-14-14-28-280 1T [email protected] Glad to exceed 170fps mark with my crappy 1080ti


Don't think there's anything crappy about the Ti.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Nice.
> 
> It makes me think though, if pretty much every owner of 7980xe bought 7900x those 3 months ago (or another SKL-X chip), i would not be surprised if by next year this staggered release would become a norm. Straight from Nvidia playbook.


The staggered release was due to it being a late response to AMD's Thread Ripper platform.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Don't think there's anything crappy about the Ti.


Previous card of mine burned with much LM applied on the GPU spilled to the sub surface did 2 to 3 straps from 13Mhz better, that's why i call this replacement crappy...nothing better than 2088 for bench achievable...Somehow it manages 2050 1.05v gaming with above moderate video memory OC.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Previous card of mine burned with much LM applied on the GPU spilled to the sub surface did 2 to 3 straps from 13Mhz better, that's why i call this replacement crappy...nothing better than 2088 for bench achievable...Somehow it manages 2050 1.05v gaming with above moderate video memory OC.


Ah, 2088 for benchmarking stability is pretty poor on the Ti, I'll give you that!


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Don't think there's anything crappy about the Ti.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The staggered release was due to it being a late response to AMD's Thread Ripper platform.


I know why it happened this year. I am saying it may happen next year too, but for different reasons.


----------



## Martin778

Any room for improvements you think? It has to be a 24/7 usable OC.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> Makes sense, since I need 1.075v for 3.1Ghz and 1.1v for 3.2Ghz.


Without a doubt I can confirm the vmware 14 is the best test for a unstable overclock.

I did a per core overclock, the 2 best cores at 4.6Ghz, the rest at 4.5Ghz, passed Realbench 2.44 and Prime95 26.6, tried installing Ubuntu 17.10 64bit on vmware, WHEA bluescreen.
Bumped up the 2 core's 4.6Ghz voltage and stable.

What the heck happened to x299


----------



## Martin778

oops double

p.s.
Do you guys have virtualization enabled? I just installed Ubuntu 17.04 in VMware and no problems whatsoever.
Judging by the core load (which is almost 0%) the stability issue seems to be something else, but what?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any room for improvements you think? It has to be a 24/7 usable OC.


Set trfc lower and other 2. Timings lower







trfc should atleast be lower than 400


----------



## Nizzen




----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*


How much voltage are you running with this?

And what is the TRFC?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Are you using chrome nacl or normal cpu folding with [email protected] app?
> 
> Try chrome nacl for comparing. It's just for more WU, not pdd...


I've used both. (hate chrome tho







)
join OCN's [email protected] team!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I get 34000 on my 4900mhz 7800X..


you and NIzzen are just crushing it.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Everyone with 7980XE happy with their purchase so far or is it meh?


not meh... _mesh_.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

We're on our own team. Team hardware.no (37651)









My CPU at 4800 just about peaks 60'C under gaming. Will see how 4600 is temp wise. I want max temps to be sub 55'C.









Honestly, as long as mesh is clocked high (3200mhz) and with some fast memory (4000mhz) It should make more of a difference.


----------



## DStealth

So close to 5 minutes...32M SuperPI this W10 w/o any optimizations...just real time priority










EditMartin778 Your Aida64 looks very strange just Read is intact... Write, Copy and Latency are way off they should be for 4g memory and your CPU/Mesh frequencies.







Can you post MemtweakIT to see what happens to cause this strange result


----------



## Martin778

The secundary timings are on auto, that's the problem. Write and Copy are way off.
I've already done 4000Mhz 16-18-18-38 T1 and lowered tRFC to 400 but there is something wrong with secondary timings.


Can someone upload the latest MemTweakIT to Google Drive / Dropbox? The ASUS site doesn't work here somhow, I choose the OS and nothing happens.


----------



## DStealth

It works, try this - http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/Utility/MemTweakIt_20170830.zip


----------



## DeathAngel74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Without a doubt I can confirm the vmware 14 is the best test for a unstable overclock.
> 
> I did a per core overclock, the 2 best cores at 4.6Ghz, the rest at 4.5Ghz, passed Realbench 2.44 and Prime95 26.6, tried installing Ubuntu 17.10 64bit on vmware, WHEA bluescreen.
> Bumped up the 2 core's 4.6Ghz voltage and stable.
> 
> What the heck happened to x299


I know this is going to sound like blasphemy, but aren't these chips cut-down Xeons (server chips)? Also installing Linux Mint 18.2 again for 3DS dev. stuff.


----------



## Martin778

Yes, the HCC die CPU's are cut down Xeons.
I did a try with Ubuntu and VMware 14 and had no problems whatsoever, also - VMware on stock settings (at least, for Linux) only uses 1 core and 1GB RAM, not really something that'd crash a PC.


----------



## DeathAngel74

Wow. This is taking forever to install in VirtualBox.

Installing Linux Mint on the abomination laptop.


----------



## T800

If I set the CPU voltage manually to 1.11V for 4500MHz all is fine(Realbench 2.43 stress test) but if I set the voltage to 1.11V for all individual cores with the setting "By Specific Core"(setting all CPUs offset values individually which ends up 1.11V for all of them, of course every core offset value is not same) is different sytem failed and even Windows can not boot.

If I change "By Specific Core" to "Sync All Cores" and set an offset voltage value globally and testing the stability with Realbench 2.43 stress test, Prime95 26.6 small FFT test 1 hour runs system passed these tests but when I run any single game like Battlefront 2 Beta or The Division system fail again immediately. But if I change the offset value for to 1.11V again which is the least amount of voltage for individual cores(and of course weakest core at 1.157V while the other strongest ones at 1.11V) all is fine again.

I can not understand this behaviour.

I try to solve these things for X299 platform, this platform is new for me.

CPU is i9 7900X, mainboard is Rampage VI APEX.

By the way RAM is all fine, HCI Memtest memory test passed at least with %120 coverage.

I use HWinfo for voltage readings.


----------



## DeathAngel74

yep at 4.6ghz/mesh 3300 @ 1.147-1.165v would crash SWBF 2 Open Beta. 1.188v was stable, but too hot.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Yes, the HCC die CPU's are cut down Xeons.


Actually, "unlocked" xeons... ECC has been fused off as well as QPI for multi-processor, but that may also be physically disconnected because of the 2066 socket. As far as I know the "Xeon-W" chips don't support multi-socket either...


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Core 0 is alot cooler than the rest (all from 9-15'C..)

Should I delid the CPU again and re-apply the tim? Core 2 seems to be the hottest of them all.

Core 0 is like 65'C, Core 2 is 80'C under Cinebench at 5 ghz. (This is max peak temps).


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Core 0 is alot cooler than the rest (all from 9-15'C..)
> 
> Should I delid the CPU again and re-apply the tim? Core 2 seems to be the hottest of them all.
> 
> Core 0 is like 65'C, Core 2 is 80'C under Cinebench at 5 ghz. (This is max peak temps).


I find depending on what stress test I use it changes the individual core temperatures.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Almost looks like I used to little when i look at it. Some areas on the IHS are not covered. Looks like the same on the DIE?

Nvm, seems like I good a good job the first time.

How can I remove the loctite from the IHS?


----------



## Martin778

Cover those capacitors with nail polish ASAP. If liquid metal touches them, they will desolder themselves and you may trash the CPU.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

They are SOAKED! Soaked them again. Probably 3-4 layers.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Yes, the HCC die CPU's are cut down Xeons.
> I did a try with Ubuntu and VMware 14 and had no problems whatsoever, also - VMware on stock settings (at least, for Linux) only uses 1 core and 1GB RAM, not really something that'd crash a PC.


You'd think that, but it does here, my overclock will pass all the stress tests, then blue screen in vmware installing any linux 64bit distribution, raise the core voltage and it stops.
Didn't do it while installing Windows 98/2000 though (was showing the teenagers what it actually looked like..lol)


----------



## Martin778

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> They are SOAKED! Soaked them again. Probably 3-4 layers.


Sorry, they look pretty naked on the
photo









@schoolofmonkey,
That's almost like there is 1 certain instruction that triggers it. Ive been monitoring CPU usage when installing Ubuntu 17.04 VM and it's still very low.
Does it also happen when you install Linux in Virtualbox VM?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Sorry, they look pretty naked on the
> photo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @schoolofmonkey,
> That's almost like there is 1 certain instruction that triggers it. Ive been monitoring CPU usage when installing Ubuntu 17.04 VM and it's still very low.
> Does it also happen when you install Linux in Virtualbox VM?


Don't know, don't use it, might give it a try.
It's funny a slight voltage increase stops the bluescreen.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

It looks like it is too much LM, but it is not. My first relid job was perfectly fine.

I find it quite fun to delid now since I've done it twice.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> How much voltage are you running with this?
> 
> And what is the TRFC?


----------



## cgpyos

Hey guys, can you please advice me which features I need to tweak in PRIME-A bios before I move in RAM overclocking? Heard about something called training which can mess things up. Thanks!


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Core 0 is alot cooler than the rest (all from 9-15'C..)
> 
> Should I delid the CPU again and re-apply the tim? Core 2 seems to be the hottest of them all.
> 
> Core 0 is like 65'C, Core 2 is 80'C under Cinebench at 5 ghz. (This is max peak temps).


I had random heat problems too (one was almost 15-20c higher than the rest (under heavy load)) and re-delid'd it and sanded a bit under the lid - now all is good. Ever core is pretty much the same now.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*


24/7 or just for benches?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> I had random heat problems too (one was almost 15-20c higher than the rest (under heavy load)) and re-delid'd it and sanded a bit under the lid - now all is good. Ever core is pretty much the same now.


I just relidded and hopefully it is okey now. I added some more LM as well.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> 24/7 or just for benches?


24/7









4200mhz c15 is for benchmarks







1,55v+


----------



## DeathAngel74

OMG! VirtualBox is so slow.....I might have to repartition the drive and just do clean install


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Almost looks like I used to little when i look at it. Some areas on the IHS are not covered. Looks like the same on the DIE?
> 
> Nvm, seems like I good a good job the first time.
> 
> How can I remove the loctite from the IHS?


erm... what's with that blob of flowable LM??? That's waaay too much liquid metal. Forget everything you know about TIM. LM needs to be _PAINTED_ on both the die and a clean underside of the IHS. Remove all residual sealant and use only a little "dab" at each corner. The LM bondline is much thinner than paste TIM and be sure to clamp down fairly hard with trhe relid tool (think about how much pressure is applied by the socket lack mechanism).


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any room for improvements you think? It has to be a 24/7 usable OC.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> EditMartin778 Your Aida64 looks very strange just Read is intact... Write, Copy and Latency are way off they should be for 4g memory and your CPU/Mesh frequencies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you post MemtweakIT to see what happens to cause this strange result


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> The secundary timings are on auto, that's the problem. Write and Copy are way off.
> I've already done 4000Mhz 16-18-18-38 T1 and lowered tRFC to 400 but there is something wrong with secondary timings.
> 
> 
> Can someone upload the latest MemTweakIT to Google Drive / Dropbox? The ASUS site doesn't work here somhow, I choose the OS and nothing happens.


I had the exact same issue with a 7920x that I had with memory running at 4000 MHz. Read was fine at 110 to 113 GB/s depending on settings, but no matter what I did, write speeds never claim close to what I saw from my 7900x. Writes maxed out at 76 GB/s regardless of anything I tried. Copy was lower than the 7900x, but not nearly as dramatic as the write deficit. Latency was also quite a bit higher than that of the 7900x. ~55ns vs ~48ns. I used identical memory settings between the two CPUs and even tried some different stuff with the 7920x. Nothing I tried improved write bandwidth any higher than 76 GB/s max.

I see that the issues isn't nearly as dramatic in the 7980XE AIDA64 memory shots so I'm left to believe that there is some kind of mesh / core to core latency issue that impacts the larger dies when additional cores are disabled.

Right after giving the 7920x everything I could in the ways of memory adjustments, I gave up and put the 7900x back in. Read, write and copy were all back to normal at will over 100+ GB/s each and latency dropped back down the high 40s.

@Martin778 makes the 3rd person including myself that I've seen with a 7920x experiencing exceptionally low write/copy bandwidth combined with higher mem latency. The other person was using dual rank vs my single rank, which is why I suspect that he was able to achieve higher 80s GB/s, which is still low.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> erm... what's with that blob of flowable LM??? That's waaay too much liquid metal. Forget everything you know about TIM. LM needs to be _PAINTED_ on both the die and a clean underside of the IHS. Remove all residual sealant and use only a little "dab" at each corner. The LM bondline is much thinner than paste TIM and be sure to clamp down fairly hard with trhe relid tool (think about how much pressure is applied by the socket lack mechanism).


Yeah cringed when I saw that. "PAINTED" on is the right word. I remember mine looking like his when I over squirted the LM and tried to spread it. Ended up wiping it off and painting it on. It's easier to squirt the LM onto a piece of tape of something and dab it like a paintbrush and then spread it on the die. Then try to spread out whatever you dabbed on there as far as it will go before you need to dab it again. But hey to each his own. He said the first time worked out ok. I wonder if there are any thermal differences between painting it on vs what he's doing.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> I'm happy with it as i'm pretty much getting the same OC as i got with the 7900x... that said.. it is pretty pointless and totally not worth the money.
> I'm not super happy with x299 tho..


What settings are you using and what OC on Core/Mesh/AVX/AVX512? I'm having a hell of a time overclocking this CPU. I'm hugging my 7900X atm and giving it a lot of TLC and it's happily running on my work computer.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

The blob of LM was there AFTER the IHS went off. It did not look like that when i re-lidded. Maybe the blub got formed as the LM got pushed to one side due to delidding?









I used alot more than enough pressure when I relidded. I did not want to gamble with removing the silicon on the CPU for two reasons.

1. One Overclocked cracked the die.

2. Warranty. You can't even see that the CPU is delidded.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Virtual Box is horrible, but didn't cause the blue screen at the same lower voltage that cause vmware to bluescreen.
I prefer vmware, it allowed me to run this today


----------



## DeathAngel74

I gave in and partitioned the drive to install this:


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> @Martin778 makes the 3rd person including myself that I've seen with a 7920x experiencing exceptionally low write/copy bandwidth combined with higher mem latency. The other person was using dual rank vs my single rank, which is why I suspect that he was able to achieve higher 80s GB/s, which is still low.




I'm getting similar aida results on my 7920x. Write speeds on my 7820x are about 20MB/s higher at the same frequency and primary timings. Better latency on the 7920x but the secondary timings are also far tighter than the stock timings I had on the 7820x.


----------



## DStealth

Maybe it's Aida64 not correctly reading them. Can you guys try Sisoft Sandra or Geeklbench4 to compare the numbers.


----------



## arrow0309

Hi, I'm gonna start soon overclocking my new 7900X @Apex and same good old ram kit (that I have in sig).
Just did a quick Unigine Superposition and a 10' of Realbench at def 4.0 to see the temps and they were OK (core max 42° for the Superposition and 55° for the Realbench).
I'd like to start with a nice 4.6ghz manual vcore, fixed freq, no power savings.
What is a good vcore and vccin value to start with?
Also guys, do I have to leave the vccio and sa to their defaults for the beginning (Xmp 3200 cl 14-14-14-34 values with maybe 1T cr only)?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Hi, I'm gonna start soon overclocking my new 7900X @Apex and same good old ram kit (that I have in sig).
> Just did a quick Unigine Superposition and a 10' of Realbench at def 4.0 to see the temps and they were OK (core max 42° for the Superposition and 55° for the Realbench).
> I'd like to start with a nice 4.6ghz manual vcore, fixed freq, no power savings.
> What is a good vcore and vccin value to start with?
> Also guys, do I have to leave the vccio and sa to their defaults for the beginning (Xmp 3200 cl 14-14-14-34 values with maybe 1T cr only)?


Start at 1.2v Vcore and work up if needed leaving VCCIN in auto. IO and SA rails a CPU dependant, leave in auto for the time being.


----------



## Martin778

I would not leave VCCSA/IO on auto, some boards will bump it very high, for example Asrock board sets both to 1.38V.

I'd set both to 1.10-1.15V for the timr being.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I would not leave VCCSA/IO on auto, some boards will bump it very high, for example Asrock board sets both to 1.38V.
> 
> I'd set both to 1.10-1.15V for the timr being.


Hello

Not the case with ASUS boards.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Start at 1.2v Vcore and work up if needed leaving VCCIN in auto. IO and SA rails a CPU dependant, leave in auto for the time being.


Thanks it's a starting point, will consider and in case (hopefully) will gonna need less than 1.2v.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I would not leave VCCSA/IO on auto, some boards will bump it very high, for example Asrock board sets both to 1.38V.
> 
> I'd set both to 1.10-1.15V for the timr being.


Thanks again, what utility will let you know their exact values?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Not the case with ASUS boards.


R you 100% sure about it?
My old X99M WS I have in sig used to bump the very same 1.38v for the sa by only setting to Xmp.


----------



## Martin778

Yup, Asrocks do exactly the same. Since Asrock/ASUS are 'loosely' related I'd be careful with it. Anyway 1.10-1.15 is a safe starting point.
I don't like seeing "auto" anywhere when overclocking.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> R you 100% sure about it?
> My old X99M WS I have in sig used to bump the very same 1.38v for the sa by only setting to Xmp.


Hello

On both the STRIX and the APEX with the CPU up to 5GHz and memory up to 3733MHz (STRIX) or 4200MHz (APEX) both SA and IO have remained at default voltages if left on auto.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Yup, Asrocks do exactly the same. Since Asrock/ASUS are 'loosely' related I'd be careful with it. Anyway 1.10-1.15 is a safe starting point.
> I don't like seeing "auto" anywhere when overclocking.


Hello

I guess I have misread what you wrote. I'm not understanding how both brands can do exactly the same when you state the asrock board sets 1.38V when left on auto and the ASUS boards remain at default voltages with the auto setting. Regardless a responsible person will always verify voltages when running outside of specifications.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Lol. My temps are exactly the same, if not a degree or two hotter. One core is just 10'C colder than the hottest.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Yeah cringed when I saw that. "PAINTED" on is the right word. I remember mine looking like his when I over squirted the LM and tried to spread it. Ended up wiping it off and painting it on. It's easier to squirt the LM onto a piece of tape of something and dab it like a paintbrush and then spread it on the die. Then try to spread out whatever you dabbed on there as far as it will go before you need to dab it again. But hey to each his own. He said the first time worked out ok. *I wonder if there are any thermal differences between painting it on vs what he's doing*.


the thing is, LM has very poor adhesion/bonding due to high surface tension... so applying it only to the die results in poor "contact" with the IHS (just look how hard it is to paint _into_ the surface of the IHS). When you apply a paint-thin layer to both the die and IHS the thermal bond in making the LM-toLM contact is ideal. Once-sided application is very poor in making the thermal bond. LM is not at all like paste TIM with regard to any of it physical or surface adhesion/adsorption properties. Many folks use it incorrectly. Decades ago, we were breaking open non-mercury thermometers to use the gallium/indium eutectic as a thermal interface material at the Hopkins APL. Same stuff.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Just to be clear. I *painted* it on both IHS and DIE the first time..


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> 24/7 or just for benches?
> I just relidded and hopefully it is okey now. I added some more LM as well.


more? it looks like you had way to much before







if the LM is making "pools" there is to much of it. That said, like with all TIM to much isn't a big deal, it will just push off the sides of the CPU (which for LM might not be a good thing.)

You might want to remove more of the glue tho.









also, try some light sanding on the underside of the cover.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Maybe.. The temp difference is driving me crazy... Folding now at 4700 mhz with GPU also folding on its own.

47-53-55-55-54-55'C.. Why can't them all be sub 50. This is the max peak temperatures. It was not too much on the first time. There were no spillover at all. I might need to remove the silicone on the PCB.. But afraid that it will crack. Der8-something said there is only a 2-3'C improvement.

These temps seems fine I guess..


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Just to be clear. I *painted* it on both IHS and DIE the first time..


yeah - as Zurv said, the sealant/glue is a thickness designed for paste, LM really can't span that wide of a gap (like paste can). Best to remove the old/hard glue from the pcb and ihs, it just borks the relid.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Maybe.. The temp difference is driving me crazy... Folding now at 4700 mhz with GPU also folding on its own.
> 
> 47-53-55-55-54-55'C.. Why can't them all be sub 50. This is the max peak temperatures. It was not too much on the first time. There were no spillover at all. I might need to remove the silicone on the PCB.. But afraid that it will crack. Der8-something said there is only a 2-3'C improvement.
> 
> These temps seems fine I guess..


that's not an "unusual" per core temp delta you are seeing.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - as Zurv said, the sealant/glue is a thickness designed for paste, LM really can't span that wide of a gap (like paste can). Best to remove the old/hard glue from the pcb and ihs, it just borks the relid.


So I should remove it all.. Best way to approach this? Just came home from school so I got some hours to play with it.









Anyone knows how to remove loctite from the PCB? I've removed the silicon on the IHS, but not PCB.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> So I should remove it all.. Best way to approach this? Just came home from school so I got some hours to play with it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone knows how to remove loctite from the PCB? I've removed the silicon on the IHS, but not PCB.


use a cut up credit card-like plastic, your finger nail (if any) or a soft wood scraper. no metal. what loctite? you mean super glue? if yes, only way to remove that is with acetone and a q-tip with scraping. Do not use super glue like rockit recommends.


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> What settings are you using and what OC on Core/Mesh/AVX/AVX512? I'm having a hell of a time overclocking this CPU. I'm hugging my 7900X atm and giving it a lot of TLC and it's happily running on my work computer.


i'm running 4.7gig, 3000 mesh, 1.235 vcore, 12 avx offset, 15 avx512 offset, mesh volt 1.070.

i'm seeing a little self throttle, but that is from the mobo limiting amps i think. But it is minor on a heavy load using all cores. for example XTU is baby stuff and the system runs great on all cores at 4.7 and pretty cool.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> use a cut up credit card-like plastic, your finger nail (if any) or a soft wood scraper. no metal. what loctite? you mean super glue? if yes, only way to remove that is with acetone and a q-tip with scraping. Do not use super glue like rockit recommends.


Too late..







Already used that, twice...
















I got some aceton, will try to make the best out of it.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Too late..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Already used that, twice...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got some aceton, will try to make the best out of it.


yeah - polyacrylamide is a btch. Acetone will do it - gotta be patient tho. To relid, use any RTV silicon from a hardware store. Just apply a slight amount to the 4 corners of the IHS (no more than that). comes off easy when needed.
btw - the pcb will not dissolve in acetone... but better off not soaking the whole thing, just apply it to the old glue.


----------



## Zurv

After cleaning the IHS of the LM i notice a very very very minor speck in the metal. That is why i sanded it. Maybe it was left over glue scrapings? but while very small, it was enough to be felt/catch my nail (but still real small.) Was that the source of the problem? maybe i used to little LM the first time? i'm not sure.









my strategy for LM is paint it, make sure there are no pools, then dab around to make sure nothing looks to thin.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

An hour later and here I am.

The CPU actually works. I did not re-lid as I don't have anything other than Loctite that I am aware of. Will talk to my father and see if we actually got something I could use.

I removed it all. Almost all the glue is gone. If there is something left, it is a layer so thin it won't matter.

EDIT:

And it was not really worth it.. The temps are lower. 3-5*C it seems like. Cores are 50-51-53-52-51-52'C as of now. This is max peak temps. It varies from mid 40 to the lower 50s.


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> An hour later and here I am.
> 
> The CPU actually works. I did not re-lid as I don't have anything other than Loctite that I am aware of. Will talk to my father and see if we actually got something I could use.
> 
> I removed it all. Almost all the glue is gone. If there is something left, it is a layer so thin it won't matter.
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> And it was not really worth it.. The temps are lower. 3-5*C it seems like. Cores are 50-51-53-52-51-52'C as of now. This is max peak temps. It varies from mid 40 to the lower 50s.


but aren't you re-delid'n because of the one hot core? Is that fixed?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Max a 3'C difference between the cores.

If I had known this from the beginning, I would have been much easier removing the glue. I looked at the pictures on my phone and the CPU did not look as bad as I thought..









Core #2 is still the hottest one, and Core#0 is the coldest. But there is not a huge gap as it previously was.

EDIT: Max difference of four degrees. Not too bad. Hottest core is 57'C while folding on CPU and GPU with all fans on 500-600 RPM. I used to have a fan on the VRMs, but I don't think that got much to do with it.

Not too bad considering this is at 4700 mhz.


----------



## Martin778

That 7920X write memory write issue is interesting. Maybe we should make a list of people who have this 'problem' ?
It could be very much Aida64 related as even the latest beta clearly states that it's not yet optimized for this particular CPU.

Are there any other reliable tools for testing memory throughput?


----------



## Timmaigh!

For anyone interested, there is a review of 7920x, pretty much the first/only one for this CPU so far, as far i know. Non-consequential to those, who own it, but it may be of interest to few others. Its in czech language though, but there is always google translate or you can just check the graphs and screenshots









The author states its default Vcore is 1,067V, which is less than that of 7900x. And it can hold stable 4,4 OC with said 1,1V. I have now high hopes for 7940x, which i should get this week.

Anywaym the link:

https://pctuning.tyden.cz/hardware/procesory-pameti/48781-intel-core-i9-7920x-dvanact-jader-skylake-x-v-testu?start=1


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> That 7920X write memory write issue is interesting. Maybe we should make a list of people who have this 'problem' ?
> It could be very much Aida64 related as even the latest beta clearly states that it's not yet optimized for this particular CPU.
> 
> Are there any other reliable tools for testing memory throughput?


sisoft sandra, but it's a PIA to use.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> i'm running 4.7gig, 3000 mesh, 1.235 vcore, 12 avx offset, 15 avx512 offset, mesh volt 1.070.
> 
> i'm seeing a little self throttle, but that is from the mobo limiting amps i think. But it is minor on a heavy load using all cores. for example XTU is baby stuff and the system runs great on all cores at 4.7 and pretty cool.


I take it you have set the current limit in UEFI?


----------



## arrow0309

Speaking of the 7900X default vcore, is the latest cpuz now able to read it correctly?
If not what other utility do you guys recommend?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> That 7920X write memory write issue is interesting. Maybe we should make a list of people who have this 'problem' ?
> It could be very much Aida64 related as even the latest beta clearly states that it's not yet optimized for this particular CPU.
> 
> Are there any other reliable tools for testing memory throughput?


I don't know if this applies to Aida64 or not, but if you see some applications showing similar read and write bandwidth. But others showing only about half the write bandwidth as the read, then it probably means that they are implemented differently.

Writes to memory are indeed usually about half the speed of reads. This is because when you write to memory, you need to first read the data from memory, modify it, then write it back. This is called "read-modify-write". The data makes two trips and therefore consumes twice the bandwidth. This is done automatically by the hardware.

However, there is a way to tell the hardware to skip that read from memory. But the benchmark needs to be written properly to be able to do so. Only if you skip the read from memory is it possible to get writes speeds near that of the read speeds.

Unfortunately, this doesn't just apply to benchmarks. It applies to all applications. So any application that isn't properly written (which is probably >95% of all software) will only achieve half the write bandwidth.


----------



## cekim

Well, ugh... even B&H has bumped up the price of the 7980xe...

Either there is some dark event not being discussed hampering the entire Si manufacturing world or artificial scarcity is being introduced into any product that is not extremely high volume. This is getting silly... DRAM shortages are to be expected owing to their very high volume of physical production required to meet demand, but CPUs, video cards, SSD, DRAM all at once?


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I take it you have set the current limit in UEFI?


i took off the failsafe limits, but capped max power at 400w and processor current limit at 1023amps.
Even then there is a scary amount of power going through the socket (when under unrealistic benchmarks). I have a mono block and the VMR temps still jumps almost to 80c.


----------



## Wries

Hi guys. I'm wondering if anyone else on the x299 platform can verify this. Basically a CPU bound game like WoW runs less than adequately on the platform which one might even expect given the flac it has gotten in gaming tests.

Thing is.. I get significantly better performance if I run the high performance power profile and manually set lowest allowed CPU speed to 100% (the high-performance plan oddly enough doesn't have this as default for me).

I'm wondering if tech publications to anyones recollection picked this up, or if they maybe as a given always run high performance profile when benchmarking?

I'm testing on Asus x299-A and i9 7920X, but only have a 4790K to compare with (which it beats given I set the power plan). I've personally never seen such difference before. But to me the games sometimes doesn't seem to trigger a turbo boost on secondary cores if they aren't reporting a load at above around 50%.

Again maybe this is all normal and accounted for, but thought I would ask.


----------



## Zurv

Wow kinda only wants to use one core (and touch some other ones.) the limit you'd be looking at is single CPU perf. That said, Wow isn't very demanding at all on a modern CPU so you shouldn't have any problems.

play the game and fire up the task manager. Are you hitting 100% on any of the cores (and seeing less perf that you'd expect?)

3-4 years ago when i got my first [email protected] monitor WoW really pissed me off. I had.. hrmm.. 4 titans? but the game ran like crap because single core CPU perf demanded more than my cpu could give. The video cards just sat there while i raged about my raiding FPS


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Well, ugh... even B&H has bumped up the price of the 7980xe...
> 
> Either there is some dark event not being discussed hampering the entire Si manufacturing world or artificial scarcity is being introduced into any product that is not extremely high volume. This is getting silly... DRAM shortages are to be expected owing to their very high volume of physical production required to meet demand, but CPUs, video cards, SSD, DRAM all at once?


I don't think the supply of the 7980XE is being artificially limited. Intel believed they would be a low volume product due to its price. So their first batch of shipments were probably low in quantity.

But apparently Intel under-estimated how price insensitive the high-end market is. So the demand for them far exceeded the current supply. So we'll probably have to wait for the next few batches for the supply to catch up. This was the case for the 7900X. And it took over a month for the supply to catch up enough to where they stayed in stock on all the major online retailers.

I've mentioned this before, but on the topic of price elasticity, it seems like there's a clear market for super high-priced processors. Intel should really try selling overclockable 28-core chips for 5 - 10k. There might even be a market out there for overclockable dual-socket 28-core setups even at the cost of 10 - 20k+ per chip.


----------



## Wries

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> Wow kinda only wants to use one core (and touch some other ones.) the limit you'd be looking at is single CPU perf. That said, Wow isn't very demanding at all on a modern CPU so you shouldn't have any problems.
> 
> play the game and fire up the task manager. Are you hitting 100% on any of the cores (and seeing less perf that you'd expect?)
> 
> 3-4 years ago when i got my first [email protected] monitor WoW really pissed me off. I had.. hrmm.. 4 titans? but the game ran like crap because single core CPU perf demanded more than my cpu could give. The video cards just sat there while i raged about my raiding FPS


With all due respect I don't think you read my post to its end. The performance is fine (and WoW uses quite a significant chunk of a second core ever since mid BC I believe) but the difference between running on balanced power profile and forced 100% CPU clock is dramatic









(Full settings WoW with ultra shadows, environment detail on 10 etc still has any CPU on its knees in raiding and in un-optimized zones such as suramar and so on btw. But that's a discussion best had at mmo-champion where people can verify.)


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> i'm running 4.7gig, 3000 mesh, 1.235 vcore, 12 avx offset, 15 avx512 offset, mesh volt 1.070.
> 
> i'm seeing a little self throttle, but that is from the mobo limiting amps i think. But it is minor on a heavy load using all cores. for example XTU is baby stuff and the system runs great on all cores at 4.7 and pretty cool.


What PSU are you using? My bench only has 1000 watt evga G2, that might be my problem when it sucks up around 500+ watts but it doesn't have a lot of things except for the gtx 980 video card. Also I can't run my 4200MHz memory on it like I can on the 7900X. I tried 3200MHz C15 memory on XMP and it eventually freezes while on the BIOS and the CMOS data keeps getting corrupted. I might have a CPU from the depths of hell and newegg is going to tell me that it works fine when they test boot it....


----------



## Zurv

I don't think so







the x299 isn't running "less than adequately on the platform" and shouldn't really be any issue for a non-demanding game like WoW. You've already seen that it is running fine. 7920x is way overkill for wow. Some could suggest that, if you are running stuff to stock speeds, single core focused new games might be an issue. But it is rare that games are CPU bound by a new CPU these days. Even the slow stock of the 7980 would be fine. That said, hopefully you aren't running at stock speeds.

when i had the 7900x it, in gaming benchmarks, was a little slower than my 6950 system. But nothing that would impact RL. (x299 didn't support SLI at launch and that was BS... but that was fixed.)
The bottleneck these days is the GPU.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I don't think the supply of the 7980XE is being artificially limited. Intel believed they would be a low volume product due to its price. So their first batch of shipments were probably low in quantity.
> 
> But apparently Intel under-estimated how price insensitive the high-end market is. So the demand for them far exceeded the current supply. So we'll probably have to wait for the next few batches for the supply to catch up. This was the case for the 7900X. And it took over a month for the supply to catch up enough to where they stayed in stock on all the major online retailers.
> 
> I've mentioned this before, but on the topic of price elasticity, it seems like there's a clear market for super high-priced processors. Intel should really try selling overclockable 28-core chips for 5 - 10k. There might even be a market out there for overclockable dual-socket 28-core setups even at the cost of 10 - 20k+ per chip.


Indeed... I'm usually the one quoting inelsatic economic realities of high-demand products, but the curious thing here is the systemic nature of it... It's every aspect of a supposedly "past peak" PC market. Trying to wrap my head around what that _really_ means while dealing with the frustration...

p.s. Intel knew very well from the 6950x what the market for this looks like. While they may very well be limited in production capability from their various panic moves relative to AMD, I don't think there was any mystery to what the market wanted at this point, only a question of delivery vs hype indicating more ready products than ability to ship over multiple product lines (8700 cough cough)


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> What PSU are you using? My bench only has 1000 watt evga G2, that might be my problem when it sucks up around 500+ watts but it doesn't have a lot of things except for the gtx 980 video card. Also I can't run my 4200MHz memory on it like I can on the 7900X. I tried 3200MHz C15 memory on XMP and it eventually freezes while on the BIOS and the CMOS data keeps getting corrupted. I might have a CPU from the depths of hell and newegg is going to tell me that it works fine when they test boot it....


I've personally seen little diff in rocking the mesh







(other than pride). Did you pump the mesh volt? try 1.1
I could never get 4200 stable on the 7900x. 4000/3200 mesh was what i had on that.
for the 7980xe 3200 mesh isn't happening so i dropped that to 3000 and i might drop down the 4000 for the ram too. Under long stress tests at 4000 i'm seeing problems (but not at 3800).

i'm running quad channel too. Are you watching you VRM temp? Where are you seeing 500w used (that would be crazy if the CPU package used that much)? if you want to see how much power your CPU package is taking try Core Temp will do that. (It is called power and it is the first line under the readings)

I like HWinfo64 and use that for checking per CPU core speed (and every other stat you want.) I also like to have the VRM temp graph up too.








I like that it does low/high/avg for readings. It helps me a lot when the "auto" settings work, but push WAY to much volts. That way i can manually go in and drop the settings one by one to find what i really need. My mobo was auto settings mesh volts to 1.15 and other settings WAY to high. (In the end all i needed was 1.070)

... but yeah.. i real close to move the ram from 4000 to 3800. I want my system 24/7 100% stable.

I expect to see more of you peeps on this. (also FU LN2 people.. my system is 24/7 at these speeds







)

(fire mark physics test... we are talking CPUs here)


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> I've personally seen little diff in rocking the mesh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (other than pride). Did you pump the mesh volt? try 1.1
> I could never get 4200 stable on the 7900x. 4000/3200 mesh was what i had on that.
> for the 7980xe 3200 mesh isn't happening so i dropped that to 3000 and i might drop down the 4000 for the ram too. Under long stress tests at 4000 i'm seeing problems (but not at 3800).
> 
> i'm running quad channel too. Are you watching you VRM temp? Where are you seeing 500w used (that would be crazy if the CPU package used that much)? if you want to see how much power your CPU package is taking try Core Temp will do that. (It is called power and it is the first line under the readings)
> 
> I like HWinfo64 and use that for checking per CPU core speed (and every other stat you want.) I also like to have the VRM temp graph up too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ... but yeah.. i real close to move from 4000 to 3800. I want my system 24/7 100% stable.


I tried 2400 and 3000 mesh at 1.1v. VRM never goes over 50c. I'm seeing 700W+ used on the wall with a watt meter, the motherboard/gpu does not use more than 200watt generally. At 4000 the memory runs fine, I know the memory is fine because I ran it with the 7900X at over 200% using HCI memtest using 95% of the 64GB of ram.

I'm getting an instant reset sometimes on load. Probably from the instant current issue.

I'm currently extremely dissatisfied with this CPU to a point where I want to use a 7900X for this computer also. This thing is a true frankenchip like I suspected from the beginning.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Well, ugh... even B&H has bumped up the price of the 7980xe...
> 
> Either there is some dark event not being discussed hampering the entire Si manufacturing world or artificial scarcity is being introduced into any product that is not extremely high volume. This is getting silly... DRAM shortages are to be expected owing to their very high volume of physical production required to meet demand, but CPUs, video cards, SSD, DRAM all at once?


I'm going to assume that B&H will honor the pre-order price of $1999


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I tried 2400 and 3000 mesh at 1.1v. VRM never goes over 50c. I'm seeing 700W+ used on the wall with a watt meter, the motherboard/gpu does not use more than 200watt generally. At 4000 the memory runs fine, I know the memory is fine because I ran it with the 7900X at over 200% using HCI memtest using 95% of the 64GB of ram.
> 
> I'm getting an instant reset sometimes on load. Probably from the instant current issue.
> 
> I'm currently extremely dissatisfied with this CPU to a point where I want to use a 7900X for this computer also. This thing is a true frankenchip like I suspected from the beginning.


Did you shut off the over volt protection?


----------



## Wries

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> I don't think so
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the x299 isn't running "less than adequately on the platform" and shouldn't really be any issue for a non-demanding game like WoW. You've already seen that it is running fine. 7920x is way overkill for wow. Some could suggest that, if you are running stuff to stock speeds, single core focused new games might be an issue. But it is rare that games are CPU bound by a new CPU these days. Even the slow stock of the 7980 would be fine. That said, hopefully you aren't running at stock speeds.
> 
> when i had the 7900x it, in gaming benchmarks, was a little slower than my 6950 system. But nothing that would impact RL. (x299 didn't support SLI at launch and that was BS... but that was fixed.)
> The bottleneck these days is the GPU.


Again WoW's famous general fps issues is not something I would discuss here, I reckon most here either don't play WoW, played a long time ago or simply haven't noticed what happens to the fps meter in Suramar







Head to mmo-c or the official wow forums for learning more about that! (Suramar btw is hopeless and a little of a "worst case", but since it's low traffic there now it serves as a better benchmark for me to test this than staying in a town where the amount of people present in a given time would have huge impact.)

The point I was trying to make here, perhaps not clearly enough, is that balanced power scheme screws performance quite significantly for me. And while I could imagine somewhat of a difference we're talking 50fps in front of the suramar gate vs 70. In a scenario like this I can check HWmon to see that all cores except the one WoW uses the most is at 1.2GHz, but if I force them to turbo too (again through power profiles) then I get this notable difference.

I didn't get this SKL-X CPU for gaming primarily but occasionally I do play games. But I don't own many of the games that publications and youtube channels typically benchmark. Wondering if maybe someone want to test out other games which are typically "less" threaded (ie uses more than one core but the secondary threads carry lighter loads) and see if they see something similar.

If no one has time or cares enough to double check this, it's fine for me. I reckon so "far" into this products lifespan with reviews and what not such a shortcoming in how it handles its turbo boost should have been noticed already. Maybe it's my system then but I can replicate the behavior at stock settings as well as my 4.6 overlock.


----------



## Zurv

Wries, Sorry i'm not being helpful








I'm unclear what your issue is? your system should have zero problems with WoW. If you aren't maxing out the CPU or GPU (what GPU are you using? What resolution?) then something else might be the problem. It (mostly likely) isn't x299. I have buddies that didn't break free from that nightmare and still play it on old-ish system (2-3 gen i5s), but with new video cards (gtx 1080)

Can some dumb questions? (which i'm sure you are already solid on







)
Did you do a fresh windows 10 64bit install for this new system? (you shouldn't even been thinking about running windows 7 or a non 64bit OS)
Also, the latest version of Windows 10 (which is 1703, or "creators updates" - the fall update in 2-3 weeks away. I'd suggest installing from a CU ISO and not updating from an older version.)
Did you install drivers from the mobo site?
SSD? WoW is really helped with an SSD.. and cost doesn't matter.. look at the CPU you got!







(If you have an SSD, is it a modern one? ideally, m.2.. but older SSDs had old SATA versions too.
how much ram?
which mobo?
single or quad channel?
(GPU, with latest drivers... nvidia just released some today. No crappy GeForce exp!)









Are you doing benchmarks like 3dmark? are you performing like other like systems?
*Is your system stable*? can you run XTU for some time? (CPU and mem stress tests?)
https://downloadcenter.intel.com/product/66427/Intel-Extreme-Tuning-Utility-Intel-XTU-

Cinebench is nice too, but doesn't run long enough. http://http.maxon.net/pub/benchmarks/CINEBENCHR15.038.zip

The skylake-x is a pretty sweet CPU. Yes, low clock speed.. but if you OC it, Clock-for-Clock it will be faster than a normal skylake. (I think they updated it a little.. but the more mem bandwidth and more pci lines will push it faster.)
(compared to the i7-8700K single core cinebench test from DigitalFoundy at 4.7ghz.. my cpu was still a little faster (which seems off to me.. but maybe the few extra points on my system came from mem stuff...)

also check if you have anything wacky installed. Like Cisco's VPN client. That can do odd stuff.


----------



## arrow0309

After a quick session of (starting) overclock in manual / fixed / no power savings, 4.6Ghz @1.2 vcore / 1.800 vcin (XMP ram) LLC 6 and some Extreme tweakings (also avx -2; 512 -4):





But I've only run 7-8 Xtu benches and the Cinebench.

What do you suggest then, lower the vcore, go up to 4.7, raise the mesh or test even harder before (like Realbench or the Xtu Stresstest)?

Edit:
Did some pubg also, not a single issue.
Downloading BF1


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Lol. My temps are exactly the same, if not a degree or two hotter. One core is just 10'C colder than the hottest.


I find that individual core temperatures change depending on the stress test.


----------



## Zurv

I think someone needs to make some fancy IHS for these skylake X cpu








https://www.techpowerup.com/237649/german-company-to-sell-binned-core-i7-8700k-with-99-9-silver-heatspreader

kinda likes this.. but.. for skylake-x









man those 8700k seem pretty nice. Not enough lanes tho







DARN YOU INTEL!


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> Did you shut off the over volt protection?


I didn't, actually don't even know where it's at. I only had a little bit of time to work on it but so far I wish I never bought it.


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I didn't, actually don't even know where it's at. I only had a little bit of time to work on it but so far I wish I never bought it.


I don't have an asus mobo. But i'm sure 90% of the people on this thread know the how to shut off (or set the limit higher) for voltage.

Once you get that. Go back to the default. set the vcore to 1.3 and 4.7 multi and see what you see








Don't try to do the mesh, cpu and ram at the same time. (but you know these things already







)

what happened to your magic 5ghz 7900? you upgraded just for 2 more cores?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I didn't, actually don't even know where it's at. I only had a little bit of time to work on it but so far I wish I never bought it.


Set the current capability in the Bios to 140%. That should take care of the shutting down when full load is it.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Set the current capability in the Bios to 140%. That should take care of the shutting down when full load is it.


I did that already.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I did that already.


Did you disable SVID?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Did you disable SVID?


Forgot about that, I'll test it when I get home.


----------



## Zurv

Anyone notice their 3d mark benchmarks totally tank after this new nvidia update (today)? I know a bunch of people here use SLI and there is a line in the release notes saying they fixed SLI in x299. My guess is this refers to the fix they put in a few drivers ago.
My stable OC for the cards sent to pooo too. before i was +150 core and +700 mem. Now those settings blue screen me. (i need around 130 and 400)... i can't beat Pinto with stuff like this!!









Anyone else seeing this on their x299 systems?

for example my time spy went from over 2k to around 18k.

Why does this matter? well.. it never matters







but in 2 days 3dmark is releasing a 4k version of Time Spy.


----------



## glnn_23

Sold my 7800x last week and got my 7940x up and running yesterday. Pretty happy so far.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Indeed... I'm usually the one quoting inelsatic economic realities of high-demand products, but the curious thing here is the systemic nature of it... It's every aspect of a supposedly "past peak" PC market. Trying to wrap my head around what that _really_ means while dealing with the frustration...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I'm going to assume that B&H will honor the pre-order price of $1999


Would be pretty nuts if they didn't...

SL not having taken any pre-orders will be starting from Egg's, B&H's et al. inflated retail price I assume.

I really hate feeding the beast.... even more so as now everything seems to be on the same exploitive roller-coaster. Going to be paying premiums on my milk now to get some that isn't going to expire in 2 days? lol....

I have to say that I tend to try to be a good customer and not abuse returns, cancellations, etc.... with retailers who treat me the same way, but B&H jumping on the bandwagon and with the uCenter 8700 thing I guess we are past pleasantries and its dog-eat-dog....


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Would be pretty nuts if they didn't...
> 
> SL not having taken any pre-orders will be starting from Egg's, B&H's et al. inflated retail price I assume.
> 
> I really hate feeding the beast.... even more so as now everything seems to be on the same exploitive roller-coaster. Going to be paying premiums on my milk now to get some that isn't going to expire in 2 days? lol....
> 
> I have to say that I tend to try to be a good customer and not abuse returns, cancellations, etc.... with retailers who treat me the same way, but B&H jumping on the bandwagon and with the uCenter 8700 thing I guess we are past pleasantries and its dog-eat-dog....


lol - sheet, I thought the pleasantries left the building with the 6950X. (IMO, Nvidia started it with >$1000 reference PCBs... OG Titans)
Anywho - tho I will appreciate the core count on the 7980xe, I must admit that with the top IPC/single core performance on this 7740X and running it at 5.3 24/7, I may have to try an 8700K.... while waiting


----------



## MerkageTurk

Just ordered a rampage vi and a 7920x exci


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I guess we are past pleasantries and its dog-eat-dog....


Chuckle, isn't that the case globally, regardless of the topic


----------



## DeathAngel74

WoW should play fine on Skylake-X. In fact, every game I've tried runs @ 120fps/1440p. The only exceptions are FFVII+FFXIII @ 4K/60. Set the power plans to "max performance" for both Windows and Nvidia control panel, otherwise you will get frame drops/low GPU usage. Otherwise set nvcpl to adaptive globally, then max performance for the games you play frequently.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Chuckle, isn't that the case globally, regardless of the topic


It's a vicious cycle... Doesn't have to be... but....here we are


----------



## Zurv

whatever magic is in avx512, it is eating my VRM temps like crazy (ie, almost 100c if i don't super jack up the fans. this is with a mono block!) I have a huge offset too. Is the gain by using it (for encoding video) worth the much slower speeds?

i'm doing a avx offset of 12 and a avx512 offset of 15.
Looking at the core speeds. It looks like some are doing avx2 and some are doing 512.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> whatever magic is in avx512, it is eating my VRM temps like crazy (ie, almost 100c if i don't super jack up the fans. this is with a mono block!) I have a huge offset too. Is the gain by using it (for encoding video) worth the much slower speeds?
> 
> i'm doing a avx offset of 12 and a avx512 offset of 15.
> Looking at the core speeds. It looks like some are doing avx2 and some are doing 512.


12 and 15 are really large offsets. You shouldn't be overheating your VRMs with AVX512 without also overheating them on non-AVX code. (unless you happen to be throttling on the non-AVX loads)

What frequencies are you running each at? By each I mean, all 3 loads (non-AVX, AVX, AVX512). And what tests are you using to stress each of those loads?


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> whatever magic is in avx512, it is eating my VRM temps like crazy (ie, almost 100c if i don't super jack up the fans. this is with a mono block!) I have a huge offset too. Is the gain by using it (for encoding video) worth the much slower speeds?
> 
> i'm doing a avx offset of 12 and a avx512 offset of 15.
> Looking at the core speeds. It looks like some are doing avx2 and some are doing 512.


That seems excessively high with a monoblock installed. Check your loop. My VRMs never go above 60C under stress (EK monoblock). 7820X running at [email protected] Aren't the HCC dies suppose to run cooler? With offsets that high you shouldn't be seeing temps that high at all. If you're clocked at 4500, a -12 offset is effectively 3300 if I'm not mistaken on how the offsets work, which is like running it at stock speeds.


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> 12 and 15 are really large offsets. You shouldn't be overheating your VRMs with AVX512 without also overheating them on non-AVX code. (unless you happen to be throttling on the non-AVX loads)
> 
> What frequencies are you running each at? By each I mean, all 3 loads (non-AVX, AVX, AVX512). And what tests are you using to stress each of those loads?


don't forget this is the 18 core with a stock speed of 2.6ghz







3.5ghz and 3.2ghz with avx/512 is still pretty darn high. The default offset on the 7900 (for gigabyte at least) is 3/5 offsets. I saw able to do 4.4-4.5 on avx from prime on the 7900, but it still blew up the VRMs... add 8 more cores









i'm not questioning the heat.. my question is it worth it? i'm totally not fully clear the gain of use it. I could disable avx in x264 and run at 4.7 without the extra VRM heat (which still is minor as 90 is still under the temp it would down clock.)

without me testing (which i guess i could do)... should i expect avx to be faster even at 1ghz slower speeds? (and not really 1ghz slower and most people not on a 18 core are using offsets of 5-6 anyway.)


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> That seems excessively high with a monoblock installed. Check your loop. My VRMs never go above 60C under stress (EK monoblock). 7820X running at [email protected] Aren't the HCC dies suppose to run cooler? With offsets that high you shouldn't be seeing temps that high at all. If you're clocked at 4500, a -12 offset is effectively 3300 if I'm not mistaken on how the offsets work, which is like running it at stock speeds.


But are you running AVX and AVX512? the loop is fine. I don't know any stress test to even try it. I think prime is only AVX (non 512... maybe). But if you want to test it... get a 500gig 4k 60fps video and encode it with x264







also stock on the 18 core is 2.6ghz

wimpy tests like XTU don't have any core or VRM heat problems.

AVX, even at those slow speeds is sucking in 380w to the CPU package. (to compare, XTU at 4.7gigs uses only 240w-270w)


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> But are you running AVX and AVX512? the loop is fine. I don't know any stress test to even try it. I think prime is only AVX (non 512... maybe). But if you want to test it... first up a 500gig video and encode it with x264
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also stock on the 18 core is 2.6ghz
> 
> wimpy tests like XTU don't have any core or VRM heat problems.
> 
> AVX, even at those slow speeds is sucking in 380w to the CPU package. (to compare, XTU at 4.7gigs uses only 240w-270w)


I don't run any offsets. But I have a really good chip and it's delidded. You can tell there's no offset because the core speeds in HWINFO are all at 4.8 (VRMs at 49C). If i was using a -3 offset its around 4.5-4.6. Actually, that's how I test stability, with a 1-2 hour x264 encode, because if I can't encode movies to put on my wife's ipad, then its not stable lol


----------



## xarot

It seems my 7980XE won't budge over 4.6. I need ~1.23 already to run CB at 4.6 and at 4.7 I need 1.28 V and the scores are worse so the bump is huge. 4.5 is under 1.15 V...the logarithmic curve starts after that.









I guess I am not going to run over 4.5 GHz for daily use, but it would have been nice for benching. Gonna grab the tuning plan for this CPU, always got a better chip from there.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> That seems excessively high with a monoblock installed. Check your loop. My VRMs never go above 60C under stress (EK monoblock). 7820X running at [email protected] Aren't the HCC dies suppose to run cooler?


You cannot really compare 7820X VRM temps to 7980XE VRM temps. The power draw will be ... greater.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> don't forget this is the 18 core with a stock speed of 2.6ghz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3.5ghz and 3.2ghz with avx/512 is still pretty darn high. The default offset on the 7900 (for gigabyte at least) is 3/5 offsets. I saw able to do 4.4-4.5 on avx from prime on the 7900, but it still blew up the VRMs... add 8 more cores
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i'm not questioning the heat.. my question is it worth it? i'm totally not fully clear the gain of use it. I could disable avx in x264 and run at 4.7 without the extra VRM heat (which still is minor as 90 is still under the temp it would down clock.)
> 
> without me testing (which i guess i could do)... should i expect avx to be faster even at 1ghz slower speeds? (and not really 1ghz slower and most people not on a 18 core are using offsets of 5-6 anyway.)


So AVX512 @ 3.2 GHz is drawing more power than non-AVX @ 4.7 GHz? What voltages are you running each of them at? I can see this happening if you're using the same voltage for both.

Quote:


> i'm not questioning the heat.. my question is it worth it?


That depends on the application. If the application gets perfect scaling, then AVX512 will be double the speed as AVX. In which case, AVX512 can run as low as half the frequency of AVX and 1/4 the frequency of non-AVX and still be faster.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> But are you running AVX and AVX512? the loop is fine. I don't know any stress test to even try it. I think prime is only AVX (non 512... maybe). But if you want to test it... first up a 500gig video and encode it with x264
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> also stock on the 18 core is 2.6ghz


Correct, Prime95 is only AVX right now. The author will be working on AVX512 over the winter.

Here are the currently available AVX512 stress-tests:

y-cruncher (v0.7.4 release candidate downloads here) - I own this benchmark. So feel free to ask me questions about it.
The latest LinX (I haven't tried it yet since I can't find a download link for it.)
Firestarter (link seems to be dead, and people say it's currently buggy)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> I don't run any offsets. But I have a really good chip and it's delidded. You can tell there's no offset because the core speeds in HWINFO are all at 4.8 (VRMs at 49C). If i was using a -3 offset its around 4.5-4.6. Actually, that's how I test stability, with a 1-2 hour x264 encode, because if I can't encode movies to put on my wife's ipad, then its not stable lol


You're gonna destroy the chip without offsets if your non-AVX overclock is already maxing out your thermals.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> It seems my 7980XE won't budge over 4.6. I need ~1.23 already to run CB at 4.6 and at 4.7 I need 1.28 V and the scores are worse so the bump is huge. 4.5 is under 1.15 V...the logarithmic curve starts after that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I am not going to run over 4.5 GHz for daily use, but it would have been nice for benching. Gonna grab the tuning plan for this CPU, always got a better chip from there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You cannot really compare 7820X VRM temps to 7980XE VRM temps. The power draw will be ... greater.


True, but the HCC dies are supposed to run cooler, because they're larger and use the more efficient xeon cores. Well that's what other users were reporting on this forum. For an apples to apples comparison maybe check out the gamers nexus video on the 7980xe thermals overclocked: 




In OC3D TV's review of the 7980xe, he also remarked that the 7980XE's thermals were better than his 7900X:


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> Sold my 7800x last week and got my 7940x up and running yesterday. Pretty happy so far.


Nice









But Vcore 1.92v ??


----------



## Martin778

Its still mixed up with VCCIN, it spooked me well the first time I saw it on my 7920.


----------



## glnn_23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But Vcore 1.92v ??


Yeah not sure why it reads vccin. Vcore set to 1.21v in bios.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> True, but the HCC dies are supposed to run cooler, because they're larger and use the more efficient xeon cores. Well that's what other users were reporting on this forum. For an apples to apples comparison maybe check out the gamers nexus video on the 7980xe thermals overclocked:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In OC3D TV's review of the 7980xe, he also remarked that the 7980XE's thermals were better than his 7900X:


Yes, for me it runs also a bit cooler on the cores. But that's not really related to the VRM temps. If you think that in theory, each core requires a fixed amount of power when overcloking, and with 7820X you multiply that power with 8, with the 7980XE you have to multiply that with 18 when using the same voltage and current. So for VRM, that means 1,8x times the power that is going through the VRM. So if the 7820X would use 200W then the 7980XE would use 360W so there's a lot more power to cool down with the monoblock. And the monoblock needs to cool the cores too.









Of course my idea might not be very accurate, so please anyone straighten me out if I am wrong.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> Yeah not sure why it reads vccin. Vcore set to 1.21v in bios.


Need an update of Aida64 maybe (I reported it to Fiery of Aida64)

Your CPU is delid?
Does not it heat up too much in stress test?
And the VRM?

Thanks


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Yes, for me it runs also a bit cooler on the cores. But that's not really related to the VRM temps. If you think that in theory, each core requires a fixed amount of power when overcloking, and with 7820X you multiply that power with 8, with the 7980XE you have to multiply that with 18 when using the same voltage and current. So for VRM, that means 1,8x times the power that is going through the VRM. So if the 7820X would use 200W then the 7980XE would use 360W so there's a lot more power to cool down with the monoblock. And the monoblock needs to cool the cores too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course my idea might not be very accurate, so please anyone straighten me out if I am wrong.


Understood. I thought the same too because that makes logical sense. But check OC3D TV's review (without a monoblock with a corsair AIO on an ASUS Prime running prime95):

https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/intel_core_i9-7980xe_18_core_hedt_cpu_review/2

"Pushing the i9-7980XE through Prime95 is about as stern a test as you can do and it also passes with aplomb here. Our VRM temperatures just hit 85°C which is still way below their thermal limits and, again, we have to mention that the ASUS Prime is hardly designed for this type of abuse. So this is a worst case scenario. Impressive start."

He's hitting 100C with AVX offsets of -12 and -15 with a monoblock and custom loop. Either he's got the worst chip/mobo on the planet or something's wrong with his loop/install/settings lol. No offense Zurv, just trying to help you out


----------



## ottoore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> ... but yeah.. i real close to move the ram from 4000 to 3800. I want my system 24/7 100% stable.
> 
> I expect to see more of you peeps on this. (also FU LN2 people.. my system is 24/7 at these speeds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> (fire mark physics test... we are talking CPUs here)


i9 7900x 10/20 @ 4.7 ghz 29000p
i9 7920x 12/24 @ 4.7 ghz 30100p --> + 3.8% score with +20% core
i9 7980xe 18/36 @ 4.7 ghz 35900p --> +23.8% score with +80% core
.
.
.
Can you run physics test without HT ? Thx.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ottoore*
> 
> i9 7900x 10/20 @ 4.7 ghz 29000p
> i9 7920x 12/24 @ 4.7 ghz 30100p --> + 3.8% score with +20% core
> i9 7980xe 18/36 @ 4.7 ghz 35900p --> +23.8% score with +80% core
> .
> .
> .
> Can you run physics test without HT ? Thx.


7800/8700 are over 20k with 1/3 of core count...seems scaling is not like in Cinebench here...


----------



## tripleflip18

Hi guys, i got the 7940x and asrock Taichi, max stable clocks i can do is 4.5 at 1.2volts with -3/-4 avx2/3. I am custom water cooled with the best waterblock and thermachill 120.3 (getting newer radiator within a week)

So im ok with 4.5 but i'd like to get at least 4.7 to be honest. When i run AIDA64 stress test for CPU only i hit around 85 degrees....which seems like its very high, i've reapplied thermal paste multiple times and this is the best i can get........ Yeah if i turn on FPU i'll go to around Mid 90s degrees...... that is sooooo bad in my opinion.

Do you guys think these high temps are limiting my overclock? and if i delid and use LM will i be able to push higher clocks while keeping voltages low? cause i don't want to run 24/7 voltages 1.25 or even 1.275. I'd like to stick to 1.2volts

So in general im asking if deliding will help me run higher clocks with same/lower volts or i'll still have to push higher volts but i'll be able to cool it off better?

Also if anyone has any tips on voltages and bios settings for the asrock taichi i'm all ears and will try it, thank you guys!


----------



## ottoore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> 7800/8700 are over 20k with 1/3 of core count...seems scaling is not like in Cinebench here...


That' s why i ask him to disable HT. He should have a better scaling on real first 18 cores.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> Sold my 7800x last week and got my 7940x up and running yesterday. Pretty happy so far.


Nice score there.


----------



## xarot

The tuning plan is getting expensive!

https://click.intel.com/tuningplan/purchase-a-plan

$ 150 for 7980XE.


----------



## DStealth

tripleflip18
Delidding is your way to 4.7...


----------



## ottoore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Here are the currently available AVX512 stress-tests:
> 
> y-cruncher (v0.7.4 release candidate downloads here) - I own this benchmark. So feel free to ask me questions about it.
> The latest LinX (I haven't tried it yet since I can't find a download link for it.)
> Firestarter (link seems to be dead, and people say it's currently buggy)


Add 3d mark Timespy extreme, it' s going to use AVX 512 too .
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11895/a-first-look-at-futuremarks-time-spy-extreme-dx12-benchmark-in-4k


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ottoore*
> 
> Add 3d mark Timespy extreme, it' s going to use AVX 512 too .
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/11895/a-first-look-at-futuremarks-time-spy-extreme-dx12-benchmark-in-4k


lol - that will be fairly interesting to run. Although it's Futuremark's job to keep things one (or two) steps ahead, it's doubtful you'll see the instruction sets used outside of synthetics anytime soon. The uptake on previous AVX iterations has been slow in this regard since it's inception, being that it's possible to count games that have utilised them on one hand.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ottoore*
> 
> Add 3d mark Timespy extreme, it' s going to use AVX 512 too .
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/11895/a-first-look-at-futuremarks-time-spy-extreme-dx12-benchmark-in-4k


yeah - I've been watching this development. Should be interesting.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Understood. I thought the same too because that makes logical sense. But check OC3D TV's review (without a monoblock with a corsair AIO on an ASUS Prime running prime95):
> 
> https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/intel_core_i9-7980xe_18_core_hedt_cpu_review/2
> 
> "Pushing the i9-7980XE through Prime95 is about as stern a test as you can do and it also passes with aplomb here. Our VRM temperatures just hit 85°C which is still way below their thermal limits and, again, we have to mention that the ASUS Prime is hardly designed for this type of abuse. So this is a worst case scenario. Impressive start."
> 
> He's hitting 100C with AVX offsets of -12 and -15 with a monoblock and custom loop. Either he's got the worst chip/mobo on the planet or something's wrong with his loop/install/settings lol. No offense Zurv, just trying to help you out


My guess is that Tom from OC3D didn't unlock all power limits from the UEFI and he was probably running Prime95 with AVX/FMA3 disabled anyway. It is easy to hit the thermal throttling even on Rampage VI Extreme without additional cooling.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> My guess is that Tom from OC3D didn't unlock all power limits from the UEFI and he was probably running Prime95 with AVX/FMA3 disabled anyway. It is easy to hit the thermal throttling even on Rampage VI Extreme without additional cooling.


Yeah I hear you. Could just be hype too. Definitely piqued my interest in that chip. But 2k for a chip is a little out of my budget. And like Zurve said in a previous post: "I'm happy with it as i'm pretty much getting the same OC as i got with the 7900x... that said.. it is pretty pointless and totally not worth the money." lol

What clock speeds/voltage are you seeing thermal throttling on your 6E? Are you delidded?


----------



## czin125

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8365/asrock-x299-oc-formula-motherboard-review/index11.html
Sounds like the mesh voltage at 3.2ghz can be as low as up to 500mv lower than other boards


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/8365/asrock-x299-oc-formula-motherboard-review/index11.html
> Sounds like the mesh voltage at 3.2ghz can be as low as up to 500mv lower than other boards


Hello

Actually that is not what was stated. And a 1/2 volt difference points to something wrong somewhere.

Quote:


> I was able to clock the mesh to 3.2GHz with 500mv less set on the mesh voltage rail *compared to another* top-tier X299 motherboard


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Praz*
> 
> Hello
> 
> Actually that is not what was stated. And a 1/2 volt difference points to something wrong somewhere.


Doesn't that just about sum up the journalistic backbone in this industry, when instead of going back and looking at why perhaps there is a massive disparity in voltage needed, they instead simply allude to it as if the board is better than another.

Still, I'm sure he slept well after writing that.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I'm trying to get my 32gb kit at 3600mhz to 4000mhz. I thought I was stable but apparently I'm not.

I have tried 18-18-18-38 and still not stable. I'm guessing I need to mess with sub timings? Is there a trick to adjusting sub timings or is it more trouble than it's worth?
Thanks


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I'm trying to get my 32gb kit at 3600mhz to 4000mhz. I thought I was stable but apparently I'm not.
> 
> I have tried 18-18-18-38 and still not stable. I'm guessing I need to mess with sub timings? Is there a trick to adjusting sub timings or is it more trouble than it's worth?
> Thanks


Need to go here and you will find the answers you seek.









http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread


----------



## tripleflip18

DStealth
will i be able to keep volts low? or will i have to bump them?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Need to go here and you will find the answers you seek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread


thanks


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Understood. I thought the same too because that makes logical sense. But check OC3D TV's review (without a monoblock with a corsair AIO on an ASUS Prime running prime95):
> 
> https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/intel_core_i9-7980xe_18_core_hedt_cpu_review/2
> 
> "Pushing the i9-7980XE through Prime95 is about as stern a test as you can do and it also passes with aplomb here. Our VRM temperatures just hit 85°C which is still way below their thermal limits and, again, we have to mention that the ASUS Prime is hardly designed for this type of abuse. So this is a worst case scenario. Impressive start."
> 
> He's hitting 100C with AVX offsets of -12 and -15 with a monoblock and custom loop. Either he's got the worst chip/mobo on the planet or something's wrong with his loop/install/settings lol. No offense Zurv, just trying to help you out


No offense taken. But this cpu with 18core vs 10 this sucker is a different beast. I also have the 7900 (.. just sitting on my desk now







). With the 7800 i could run avx at 4.4ghz to 4.5ghz. (which is still crazy







)
This setup can displace 2700watts of heat (it is a rad the size of most computer cases and pumping 3.1LMP.) Temps are low for XTU et al.

Hopefully more people will get this CPU.
But, while poking around. If people want a good stress test.. try this:
https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1799988#post1799988

(it goes to this) http://jfl1974.free.fr/Benchmark/Benchmark.zip

It has x264 and and x265 with avx and non- avx.

Just run the auto benchmark. Other than it is interesting look @ how RL video encoding will impact system resources. I'd think too that it would be a nice test to see if your system is stable.
This is perfect for me as i'm trying to work out what volts i can lower and still have the system being rock stable. I can past XTU/BC tests when i know the volts are to low.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> No offense taken. But this cpu with 18core vs 10 this sucker is a different beast. I also have the 7900 (.. just sitting on my desk now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). With the 7800 i could run avx at 4.4ghz to 4.5ghz. (which is still crazy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> This setup can displace 2700watts of heat (it is a rad the size of most computer cases and pumping 3.1LMP.) Temps are low for XTU et al.
> 
> Hopefully more people will get this CPU.
> But, while poking around. If people want a good stress test.. try this:
> https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1799988#post1799988
> 
> (it goes to this) http://jfl1974.free.fr/Benchmark/Benchmark.zip
> 
> It has x264 and and x265 with avx and non- avx.
> 
> Just run the auto benchmark. Other than it is interesting look @ how RL video encoding will impact system resources. I'd think too that it would be a nice test to see if your system is stable.
> This is perfect for me as i'm trying to work out what volts i can lower and still have the system being rock stable. I can past XTU/BC tests when i know the volts are to low.


I love my 7980xe! It is the cpu we all waited for the last 10 years. The cpu good for everything, not just "cinebench" like threadripper is







(I have 1950x too)

7980xe is pretty near endgame cpu for many years. 4-4200mhz memory, 4,7-4,8ghz for gaming with high ipc performance, and 18 cores/36 threads. Can we ask for more?

....Yes









Love from Norway


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> I love my 7980xe! It is the cpu we all waited for the last 10 years. The cpu good for everything, not just "cinebench" like threadripper is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (I have 1950x too)
> 
> 7980xe is pretty near endgame cpu for many years. 4-4200mhz memory, 4,7-4,8ghz for gaming with high ipc performance, and 18 cores/36 threads. Can we ask for more?
> 
> ....Yes
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love from Norway


Would you mind running that benchmark and at a peak at your VRMs too? What AVX offsets are you using?

Here are my results (that said, i was also surfing and looking at email at the same time)











| CPU | x264 | x265 | LAVC | auto | MMX2 | SSE | SSE2 | SSE3 | SSE4 | AVX | AVX2 | All
Core i9-7980XE | 43.08 | 9.08 | 183 | 6.67 | 2.40 | 2.37 | 3.43 | 3.43 | 4.73 | 5.31 | 6.64 | N/A

what mesh are you running? I thinking of hurting my pride and lowering it. I'm not sure the gain (is there any RL gain?







) is worth the heat (and limiting my ram OC)


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> Hi guys, i got the 7940x and asrock Taichi, max stable clocks i can do is 4.5 at 1.2volts with -3/-4 avx2/3. I am custom water cooled with the best waterblock and thermachill 120.3 (getting newer radiator within a week)
> 
> So im ok with 4.5 but i'd like to get at least 4.7 to be honest. When i run AIDA64 stress test for CPU only i hit around 85 degrees....which seems like its very high, i've reapplied thermal paste multiple times and this is the best i can get........ Yeah if i turn on FPU i'll go to around Mid 90s degrees...... that is sooooo bad in my opinion.
> 
> Do you guys think these high temps are limiting my overclock? and if i delid and use LM will i be able to push higher clocks while keeping voltages low? cause i don't want to run 24/7 voltages 1.25 or even 1.275. I'd like to stick to 1.2volts
> 
> So in general im asking if deliding will help me run higher clocks with same/lower volts or i'll still have to push higher volts but i'll be able to cool it off better?
> 
> Also if anyone has any tips on voltages and bios settings for the asrock taichi i'm all ears and will try it, thank you guys!


What is the default stock voltage of 7940x? Could you please try to run it at 4,4 and 1,1V and see if thats doable? Apparently 7920x can do that, per one review, but perhaps there was just a good sample. I have just 240mm AiO, so this is all what i will be shooting for, sadly.

Thanks


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> No offense taken. But this cpu with 18core vs 10 this sucker is a different beast. I also have the 7900 (.. just sitting on my desk now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). With the 7800 i could run avx at 4.4ghz to 4.5ghz. (which is still crazy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> This setup can displace 2700watts of heat (it is a rad the size of most computer cases and pumping 3.1LMP.) Temps are low for XTU et al.
> 
> Hopefully more people will get this CPU.
> But, while poking around. If people want a good stress test.. try this:
> https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1799988#post1799988
> 
> (it goes to this) http://jfl1974.free.fr/Benchmark/Benchmark.zip
> 
> It has x264 and and x265 with avx and non- avx.
> 
> Just run the auto benchmark. Other than it is interesting look @ how RL video encoding will impact system resources. I'd think too that it would be a nice test to see if your system is stable.
> This is perfect for me as i'm trying to work out what volts i can lower and still have the system being rock stable. I can past XTU/BC tests when i know the volts are to low.


Man must be nice to have a 1k CPU sitting on your desk lol. That setup you got sounds crazy. All the more reason to think something weird is going on with your crazy VRM temps. Then you got guys like Nizzen who are hitting 4.7,4.8 on all cores and claiming it's the best CPU in 10 years.


----------



## Jaysend

curious to get people's take on my dilemma,
I am itching to upgrade bad.For my usage, 8700k would work but I really want more pcie lanes. I really don't care about core count. My ideal chip would be 6-8 cores overclocked to ~5.0Ghz with 44+ PCIE lanes.

So I have been looking at the 7900x but with the larger die in 7920x and up I am curious. What would be the best overclocking chip in the lineup that has a full compliment of pcie lanes? I keep seeing 7920-80 hitting roughly the same clocks as the 7900. Albeit with more power draw. For what it's worth, I will likely go with asus RVE and monoblock. I have 2 1080tis in a loop with a 360 and 280 in push/pull. Not really keen on changing out case to add more cooling capacity. So I know that could be a limitation for these chips.

Any thoughts?


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Man must be nice to have a 1k CPU sitting on your desk lol. That setup you got sounds crazy. All the more reason to think something weird is going on with your crazy VRM temps. Then you got guys like Nizzen who are hitting 4.7,4.8 on all cores and claiming it's the best CPU in 10 years.


I've been hunting all day trying to work out what the can i do to lower the cpu package power draw, (most setting have some impact.. but minor)
I think one of the issues we all are bumping into for these skylake-x chips is overvolt protection (ie, system shutting off) - so we all removed or jacked up the limits.
One settings I've not play around with (other than to jack it up!) was CPU wattage limit. So i dropped it from 400+ watts to 350. Wow, that had a big impact on my VRM temps (not shocking), but i'm not seeing any downside to system perf.
I'm looking at a 25C VRM drop in temps!

hrmm.. soo time to jack up volts on other stuff again to see if i can get Mesh to 3200 (for whatever reason!)

i wish some others had the gigabyte boards







(i didn't got with asus because i was sick of redoing the water terminal for the video cards.)

RE: AVX/AVX512, It is just an issue with being stable now vs heat. It looks like offset of 10-11 for AVX (3.9-4.0ghz) and 13-14 for AVX512 (3.6-3.7). Which is still darn good.

It is an amazing chip. I just don't think people are bumping into any AVX. (i wouldn't either, if it wasn't for my YT videos... that no one watches...) Tomorrow will be fun day when it is added to Time Spy









UPDATE: this is a game changer for me!







(lower CPU max power) VRM temps are so much better! what the hell were you using all that power for mr CPU...


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaysend*
> 
> curious to get people's take on my dilemma,
> I am itching to upgrade bad.For my usage, 8700k would work but I really want more pcie lanes. I really don't care about core count. My ideal chip would be 6-8 cores overclocked to ~5.0Ghz with 44+ PCIE lanes.
> 
> So I have been looking at the 7900x but with the larger die in 7920x and up I am curious. What would be the best overclocking chip in the lineup that has a full compliment of pcie lanes? I keep seeing 7920-80 hitting roughly the same clocks as the 7900. Albeit with more power draw. For what it's worth, I will likely go with asus RVE and monoblock. I have 2 1080tis in a loop with a 360 and 280 in push/pull. Not really keen on changing out case to add more cooling capacity. So I know that could be a limitation for these chips.
> 
> Any thoughts?


You're going to have a hard time hitting 5ghz on all cores on Skylake X. 8700k might be better suited for that but you're going to lose the PCIE lanes


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> I've been hunting all day trying to work out what the can i do to lower the cpu package power draw, (most setting have some impact.. but minor)
> I think one of the issues we all are bumping into for these skylake-x chips is overvolt protection (ie, system shutting off) - so we all removed or jacked up the limits.
> One settings I've not play around with (other than to jack it up!) was CPU wattage limit. So i dropped it from 400+ watts to 350. Wow, that had a big impact on my VRM temps (not shocking), but i'm not seeing any downside to system perf.
> I'm looking at a 25C VRM drop in temps!
> 
> hrmm.. soo time to jack up volts on other stuff again to see if i can get Mesh to 3200 (for whatever reason!)
> 
> i wish some others had the gigabyte boards
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (i didn't got with asus because i was sick of redoing the water terminal for the video cards.)
> 
> RE: AVX/AVX512, It is just an issue with being stable now vs heat. It looks like offset of 10-11 for AVX (3.9-4.0ghz) and 13-14 for AVX512 (3.6-3.7). Which is still darn good.
> 
> It is an amazing chip. I just don't think people are bumping into any AVX. (i wouldn't either, if it wasn't for my YT videos... that no one watches...) Tomorrow will be fun day when it is added to Time Spy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UPDATE: this is a game changer for me!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (lower CPU max power) VRM temps are so much better! what the hell were you using all that power for mr CPU...


y-cruncher runs AVX512. Is that what you have been using to tweak AVX512 offset? check the system for throttling after lowering the CPU wattage (power) limit... good to sdee you got the VRM temps down tho.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> I've been hunting all day trying to work out what the can i do to lower the cpu package power draw, (most setting have some impact.. but minor)
> I think one of the issues we all are bumping into for these skylake-x chips is overvolt protection (ie, system shutting off) - so we all removed or jacked up the limits.
> One settings I've not play around with (other than to jack it up!) was CPU wattage limit. So i dropped it from 400+ watts to 350. Wow, that had a big impact on my VRM temps (not shocking), but i'm not seeing any downside to system perf.
> I'm looking at a 25C VRM drop in temps!
> 
> hrmm.. soo time to jack up volts on other stuff again to see if i can get Mesh to 3200 (for whatever reason!)
> 
> i wish some others had the gigabyte boards
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (i didn't got with asus because i was sick of redoing the water terminal for the video cards.)
> 
> RE: AVX/AVX512, It is just an issue with being stable now vs heat. It looks like offset of 10-11 for AVX (3.9-4.0ghz) and 13-14 for AVX512 (3.6-3.7). Which is still darn good.
> 
> It is an amazing chip. I just don't think people are bumping into any AVX. (i wouldn't either, if it wasn't for my YT videos... that no one watches...) Tomorrow will be fun day when it is added to Time Spy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UPDATE: this is a game changer for me!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (lower CPU max power) VRM temps are so much better! what the hell were you using all that power for mr CPU...


Hah cool. Glad to hear you're making progress. I'd be a happy camper if if I could hit 4.6,4.7 all cores with one of those monsters.


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Hah cool. Glad to hear you're making progress. I'd be a happy camper if if I could hit 4.6,4.7 all cores with one of those monsters.


i think 4.6-4.9 is what most people should expect for a 7980. For non AVX stuff it runs cooler than a 7900. I'm fine with 4.7 (but i'm pretty sure (if i wanted massive fan noise) 4.9 would work.
My personal goal is getting the max OC i can when the fans are only @ 10%. (9 120mm







)I need to leave some overhead when just testing the CPU as the 2 titan xp will add alot of the heat of the loop.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> No offense taken. But this cpu with 18core vs 10 this sucker is a different beast. I also have the 7900 (.. just sitting on my desk now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). With the 7800 i could run avx at 4.4ghz to 4.5ghz. (which is still crazy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> This setup can displace 2700watts of heat (it is a rad the size of most computer cases and pumping 3.1LMP.) Temps are low for XTU et al.
> 
> Hopefully more people will get this CPU.
> But, while poking around. If people want a good stress test.. try this:
> https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1799988#post1799988
> 
> (it goes to this) http://jfl1974.free.fr/Benchmark/Benchmark.zip
> 
> It has x264 and and x265 with avx and non- avx.
> 
> Just run the auto benchmark. Other than it is interesting look @ how RL video encoding will impact system resources. I'd think too that it would be a nice test to see if your system is stable.
> This is perfect for me as i'm trying to work out what volts i can lower and still have the system being rock stable. I can past XTU/BC tests when i know the volts are to low.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> Would you mind running that benchmark and at a peak at your VRMs too? What AVX offsets are you using?
> 
> Here are my results (that said, i was also surfing and looking at email at the same time)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> | CPU | x264 | x265 | LAVC | auto | MMX2 | SSE | SSE2 | SSE3 | SSE4 | AVX | AVX2 | All
> Core i9-7980XE | 43.08 | 9.08 | 183 | 6.67 | 2.40 | 2.37 | 3.43 | 3.43 | 4.73 | 5.31 | 6.64 | N/A
> 
> what mesh are you running? I thinking of hurting my pride and lowering it. I'm not sure the gain (is there any RL gain?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) is worth the heat (and limiting my ram OC)




I started slow with the benchmark:
4200mhz and 4000mhz memory and HT=off with "random" voltage 1.15v on core.
Mesh is 3000mhz
VRM peak was 69c and cores was 62-72c. x299 Apex with normal EK evo water, ek 480xtx + noiceblocker fans.

Is the result ok for 4.2 ghz @ Zurv?

4,7ghz is benchmark/bf1 stable 1.23-1,25v, but not testet in AVX workloads that high. Will test more later









PS: I don't do prime all day long like other people here. I use the computer







It is good enough for Autocad and Bf1


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> UPDATE: this is a game changer for me!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (lower CPU max power) VRM temps are so much better! what the hell were you using all that power for mr CPU...


Correct me if I am wrong, but if you lower the the CPU power limit and keep the clock up, you are just throttling clock quickly enough that the usual measures don't show it without close attention.

If it DOES NOT change performance, it suggests you were throttling before too, just not enough to keep VRM temps down...


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Correct me if I am wrong, but if you lower the the CPU power limit and keep the clock up, you are just throttling clock quickly enough that the usual measures don't show it without close attention.
> 
> If it DOES NOT change performance, it suggests you were throttling before too, just not enough to keep VRM temps down...


Now that you mention it, it could also be the phantom throttle. In which case, he wouldn't see a frequency drop at all. So it would only be noticeable in benchmarks.

I have the Gigabyte 7, and when I tested this back in June, I recall seeing the phantom throttle with a low CPU power limit. But that was without the fix for the VCCIN vdroop. At the time, I hadn't understood the VCCIN vdroop phantom throttle enough to isolate it. So I can't say whether exceeding the CPU power limit causes a normal throttle or a phantom throttle. I'll need to retest this to get a definitive answer.

But the Gigabyte boards are very prone to producing "fake overclocks" because of the VCCIN vdroop phantom throttle. I've seen at least 3 or 4 other people on OCN so far with the Gigabyte X299 boards acheive suspiciously high overclocks only to find out that they were actually phantom throttling. These people never noticed it because they only ran stress-tests and no benchmarks.

Once they fixed it either by increasing VRIN or enabling LLC, their temps, power draw, and benchmarks jumped right back in line with everyone else with other motherboards.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Now that you mention it, it could also be the phantom throttle. In which case, he wouldn't see a frequency drop at all. So it would only be noticeable in benchmarks.
> 
> I have the Gigabyte 7, and when I tested this back in June, I recall seeing the phantom throttle with a low CPU power limit. But that was without the fix for the VCCIN vdroop. At the time, I hadn't understood the VCCIN vdroop phantom throttle enough to isolate it. So I can't say whether exceeding the CPU power limit causes a normal throttle or a phantom throttle. I'll need to retest this to get a definitive answer.
> 
> But the Gigabyte boards are very prone to producing "fake overclocks" because of the VCCIN vdroop phantom throttle. I've seen at least 3 or 4 other people on OCN so far with the Gigabyte X299 boards acheive suspiciously high overclocks only to find out that they were actually phantom throttling. These people never noticed it because they only ran stress-tests and no benchmarks.
> 
> Once they fixed it either by increasing VRIN or enabling LLC, their temps, power draw, and benchmarks jumped right back in line with everyone else with other motherboards.


Indeed - trade power throttling for thermal throttling!









I have a pet theory that something like this was/is also happening on my x99-RVE with various settings. I can get a stable 4.5GHz OC on a 6950x with curiously low voltage/temps, but performance is not the best I've seen with a 4.4GHz OC. I dialed back to 4.4 and got my performance back, but ran warmer than 4.5...


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Now that you mention it, it could also be the phantom throttle. In which case, he wouldn't see a frequency drop at all. So it would only be noticeable in benchmarks.
> .


Yeah, that is what i'm worried about. Maybe the gigabyte doesn't handle the load well? There really isn't anyway to put the monoblock on wrong. (temps where pretty bad pre-mono block too)

of course i could just not stress about avx







then all is right in the world!

Mr Mysticial, any idea how well avx512 scales? maybe whatever it is doing doesn't ramp up as the speed does.

If i do a very slow x264 encode it can take 5-7 hours (4k game video)... i can't have that sucker crash.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> After a quick session of (starting) overclock in manual / fixed / no power savings, 4.6Ghz @1.2 vcore / 1.800 vcin (XMP ram) LLC 6 and some Extreme tweakings (also avx -2; 512 -4):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I've only run 7-8 Xtu benches and the Cinebench.
> 
> What do you suggest then, lower the vcore, go up to 4.7, raise the mesh or test even harder before (like Realbench or the Xtu Stresstest)?
> 
> Edit:
> Did some pubg also, not a single issue.
> Downloading BF1


Did some more 2h of XTU's stress test this evening at the same vcore (1.20v) and it run flawless:



Some pics with the rig also:

https://postimg.org/gallery/2xos5szvg/

Now I'm gonna do some gaming, if it still holds well I'll lower the vcore tomorrow


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Indeed - trade power throttling for thermal throttling!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have a pet theory that something like this was/is also happening on my x99-RVE with various settings. I can get a stable 4.5GHz OC on a 6950x with curiously low voltage/temps, but performance is not the best I've seen with a 4.4GHz OC. I dialed back to 4.4 and got my performance back, but ran warmer than 4.5...


I've also noticed some weird throttling cases with specific memory settings. Though I haven't had the time to investigate it under a profiler. In my case, I was testing 19-19-19-39 vs. 18-19-19-39 with all other settings being equal. The 18-19-19-39 caused benchmarks to run 30% slower. I haven't had the yet to investigate this - whether it's screwing just the memory up or if it's affecting the core in a weird way.

Speaking of profilers, I recently got a hold of the latest version Intel's VTune performance profiler. When I ran it under the VCCIN vdroop phantom throttle, I noticed:

Intel's VTune profiler does not detect the phantom throttling. But it does detect all other forms of throttling. Instead it reports it as a massive drop in IPC. But when I look at how it's calculating the IPC, it's using the unthrottled frequency instead of the real frequency.
The profiler confirms that the throttling is not architectural in that it does not turn off or slow-down certain execution units on the processor core. I can see this because everything is proportionally slower. So this supports Raja's statement that the phantom throttle is a simple frequency divider.
In any case, even though VTune is Intel's tool, it isn't able to properly handle the phantom throttling.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> Yeah, that is what i'm worried about. Maybe the gigabyte doesn't handle the load well? There really isn't anyway to put the monoblock on wrong. (temps where pretty bad pre-mono block too)
> 
> of course i could just not stress about avx
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> then all is right in the world!


Check the phantom throttle thread I linked. There's at least 4 settings you need to lift to avoid the throttling. However, HWInfo64 tells me there's one more that I missed. But since it kicks in at > 300W, I've never been able to hit it on my 7900X. So you might have to dig around to figure out how to lift that last one.
Quote:


> Mr Mysticial, any idea how well avx512 scales? maybe whatever it is doing doesn't ramp up as the speed does.


What "scaling" are you referring to? Performance scaling? Power-consumption/temperature scaling?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Correct me if I am wrong, but if you lower the the CPU power limit and keep the clock up, you are just throttling clock quickly enough that the usual measures don't show it without close attention.
> 
> If it DOES NOT change performance, it suggests you were throttling before too, just not enough to keep VRM temps down...


^^ This is very likely.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I've also noticed some weird throttling cases with specific memory settings. Though I haven't had the time to investigate it under a profiler. In my case, I was testing 19-19-19-39 vs. 18-19-19-39 with all other settings being equal. And 18-19-19-39 caused benchmarks to run 30% slower. I haven't had the yet to investigate this - whether it's screwing just the memory up or if it's affecting the core in a weird way.


DDR retry is a possibility here. Not enough loss to trigger error, but every re-try means sending the data 2x and potentially disrupting the DDR controllers optimizations WRT page open/close (which can introduce SUBSTANTIAL overhead).

Basically, your memory or IMC is on the ragged edge of failure to make timing.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> DDR retry is a possibility here. Not enough loss to trigger error, but every re-try means sending the data 2x and potentially disrupting the DDR controllers optimizations WRT page open/close (which can introduce SUBSTANTIAL overhead).
> 
> Basically, your memory or IMC is on the ragged edge of failure to make timing.


correctable... until it's not.


----------



## cheddle

can anyone provide an accurate desciption of the roles that VTT, VCCSA, VCCIO all play on a Skylake-x???

without drawing on assumptions from prior architecture - its not clear to me which of the three is the IMC voltage/s - Context is I would like to push my ram without meling my IMC


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zurv*
> 
> I don't have an asus mobo. But i'm sure 90% of the people on this thread know the how to shut off (or set the limit higher) for voltage.
> 
> Once you get that. Go back to the default. set the vcore to 1.3 and 4.7 multi and see what you see
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't try to do the mesh, cpu and ram at the same time. (but you know these things already
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> what happened to your magic 5ghz 7900? you upgraded just for 2 more cores?


I still have the 7900X I'm using it for my work computer instead of the 7740x or 7820X because my OCD kicked in on not having enough lanes, it's settled







I just didn't know what it was called on other motherboards but turns out I didn't set it high enough.

I went from 10 cores to 18 yo!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Set the current capability in the Bios to 140%. That should take care of the shutting down when full load is it.


I had to go to 200% and I was good, happy with the chip now but man 92c full load on 4.6GHz hurts, either going to delid myself or chicken out and let SL do it for me







I'm getting temp throttled at 4.7 on this AIO so not going to push it more until I plug it in the custom loop.

Either way thanks for the ideas guys +rep for both of you guys!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cheddle*
> 
> can anyone provide an accurate desciption of the roles that VTT, VCCSA, VCCIO all play on a Skylake-x???
> 
> without drawing on assumptions from prior architecture - its not clear to me which of the three is the IMC voltage/s - Context is I would like to push my ram without meling my IMC


Here is a guide for memory overclocking but not sure you need to go through it, there was another I saw somewhere on this website. Maybe we can help you if you're not doing anything that requires a lot of details? What exactly are you looking to do?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1630388/comprehensive-memory-overclocking-guide/0_100


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I still have the 7900X I'm using it for my work computer instead of the 7740x or 7820X because my OCD kicked in on not having enough lanes, it's settled
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just didn't know what it was called on other motherboards but turns out I didn't set it high enough.
> 
> I went from 10 cores to 18 yo!
> I had to go to 200% and I was good, happy with the chip now but man 92c full load on 4.6GHz hurts, either going to delid myself or chicken out and let SL do it for me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm getting temp throttled at 4.7 on this AIO so not going to push it more until I plug it in the custom loop.
> 
> Either way thanks for the ideas guys +rep for both of you guys!
> Here is a guide for memory overclocking but not sure you need to go through it, there was another I saw somewhere on this website. Maybe we can help you if you're not doing anything that requires a lot of details? What exactly are you looking to do?
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1630388/comprehensive-memory-overclocking-guide/0_100


Glad you got that sorted out.









Any idea of what you're pulling from the wall at 4.6?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Glad you got that sorted out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any idea of what you're pulling from the wall at 4.6?


I was recording around 650-700 from the wall but I don't know how much I was dropping for the motherboard and GPU I imagine the difference is around 200. It's spiky though. I'm going to need to buy stock at the local power plant. This is with 0 AVX offsets. I actually need AVX on this computer. The Rig has two highly overclocked TXps wonder how much I'll be pulling from the wall when I put it all together. I have an EVGA T2 1600 watt PSU on it so it should be enough theoretically...


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I was recording around 650-700 from the wall but I don't know how much I was dropping for the motherboard and GPU I imagine the difference is around 200. It's spiky though. I'm going to need to buy stock at the local power plant. This is with 0 AVX offsets. I actually need AVX on this computer. The Rig has two highly overclocked TXps wonder how much I'll be pulling from the wall when I put it all together. I have an EVGA T2 1600 watt PSU on it so it should be enough theoretically...


Thanks, knew you had two 1080Xps, but figured you were benching using one card. My build includes two 1080FTW3s and figure I'll be pushing it using an EVGA 1000T2, once all the ancillaries are figured in (fans, Aqueros, lighting, yada, yada, yada). Been thinking about leaving the 1000 in the bench, and sticking a 1600T2 in the case.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I was recording around 650-700 from the wall but I don't know how much I was dropping for the motherboard and GPU I imagine the difference is around 200. It's spiky though. I'm going to need to buy stock at the local power plant. This is with 0 AVX offsets. I actually need AVX on this computer. The Rig has two highly overclocked TXps wonder how much I'll be pulling from the wall when I put it all together. I have an EVGA T2 1600 watt PSU on it so it should be enough theoretically...


With 2 1080ti @~2000MHz and a 6950x @4.4 I was seeing 850 from the wall in aida64.

From what I've seen the additional power on a 7980 could add ~150W to that and then add some more for the titans...

Should be well under 1600, but could break 1KW would be my guess...


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Thanks, knew you two 1080Xps, but figured you were benching using one card. My build includes two 1080FTW3s and figure I'll be pushing it using an EVGA 1000T2, once all the ancillaries are figured in (fans, Aqueros, lighting, yada, yada, yada). Been thinking about leaving the 1000 in the bench, and sticking a 1600T2 in the case.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Thanks, knew you two 1080Xps, but figured you were benching using one card. My build includes two 1080FTW3s and figure I'll be pushing it using an EVGA 1000T2, once all the ancillaries are figured in (fans, Aqueros, lighting, yada, yada, yada). Been thinking about leaving the 1000 in the bench, and sticking a 1600T2 in the case.


yes I'm benching with a gtx 980 with a 1000watt PSU.

The TXps & 1600W PSU are all in the custom loop separate from the 7980XE tests on the bench at the moment.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> With 2 1080ti @~2000MHz and a 6950x @4.4 I was seeing 850 from the wall in aida64.
> 
> From what I've seen the additional power on a 7980 could add ~150W to that and then add some more for the titans...
> 
> Should be well under 1600, but could break 1KW would be my guess...


Yea I'm thinking this is going to sail way past 1K watt on full GPU/CPU load.


----------



## DeathAngel74

Going to go on a benchmarking bender once my eVGA 1300W G2 comes back from RMA. Main fuse popped....


----------



## cheddle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Here is a guide for memory overclocking but not sure you need to go through it, there was another I saw somewhere on this website. Maybe we can help you if you're not doing anything that requires a lot of details? What exactly are you looking to do?
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1630388/comprehensive-memory-overclocking-guide/0_100


im trying to avoid killing my IMC haha - I want to know what im juciing before turning the knobs. Unfortauntly past definitions do not appear to apply particularly well to Skylake-x as VTT used to be IMC/QPI untill it was replaced by VCCSA - but then skylake-x has both VCCSA and VTT... so yeah...

im trying to get clarity 

im at 4000-17-18-18-40-cr1-350 but I want to drop one on every primary and get secondaries tighter as well.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cheddle*
> 
> im trying to avoid killing my IMC haha - I want to know what im juciing before turning the knobs. Unfortauntly past definitions do not appear to apply particularly well to Skylake-x as VTT used to be IMC/QPI untill it was replaced by VCCSA - but then skylake-x has both VCCSA and VTT... so yeah...
> 
> im trying to get clarity
> 
> im at 4000-17-18-18-40-cr1-350 but I want to drop one on every primary and get secondaries tighter as well.


Ahh, I'm not sure about adjusting VTT but GSkill tech support regarding memory told me to adjust VCSA and VCCIO only until I reach stability. One is usually higher than the other but they will both affect your IMC stability.

Sorry I can't give details on what each voltages affect other than IMC stability. Some of the guys on here will know a lot more than me and may be able to clarify if you need more advanced details. I was able to stabilize 4200 64GB memory with a 4.6GHz OC on a 7900X with minimal AVX offsets. Try not to pass 1.2v on any of those voltages and that should be the ceiling unless you're feeling lucky







some people do it, I don't personally not to be too conservative but I just don't like deliding my CPU accidentally.

I know some may ask then why did I OC my 7900X CPU to 5.0/5.1GHz? Because I did it with reasonable voltages


----------



## tripleflip18

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> What is the default stock voltage of 7940x? Could you please try to run it at 4,4 and 1,1V and see if thats doable? Apparently 7920x can do that, per one review, but perhaps there was just a good sample. I have just 240mm AiO, so this is all what i will be shooting for, sadly.
> 
> Thanks


default volts for 3.1 is around .96, 4.4 at 1.1 is a no go AT ALL........probably needs at least 1.15-1.175. I do have stable 4.5 @ 1.2 for the last 24 hours.


----------



## tripleflip18

Im pulling 420watt max out of the wall with my 850watt power supply 1.2v @ 4.5 (and unable to attain stable OC at 4.6) Im not limited by my power supply for stability am i? Thanks!


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> default volts for 3.1 is around .96, 4.4 at 1.1 is a no go AT ALL........probably needs at least 1.15-1.175. I do have stable 4.5 @ 1.2 for the last 24 hours.


Thank you!

However by stock voltage, i meant stock LOAD voltage, hahaha







I guess 0,96V is stock idle, right?

About the 4,4 and 1,1, that "probably" sounds like its assumption on your part, rather than a fact based on observation... well, maybe i am wrong, but in case i am not, would you actually care to give it a try? You may very well be right, but its not unheard of for the voltage to increase significantly, even 0,1V, just by going 100MHz higher, ... i guess you should know given your issues now to get to 4,6.


----------



## aDyerSituation

I notice for a brief second some of my cores are dropping frequency while stress testing. Should I be worried about this?
It's also dropping to what I have my AVX offset to. Not using AVX tests.

VRM temps are fine (fan on them)
SVID is Disabled and Power Limit set to 140%


----------



## glnn_23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> However by stock voltage, i meant stock LOAD voltage, hahaha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess 0,96V is stock idle, right?
> 
> About the 4,4 and 1,1, that "probably" sounds like its assumption on your part, rather than a fact based on observation... well, maybe i am wrong, but in case i am not, would you actually care to give it a try? You may very well be right, but its not unheard of for the voltage to increase significantly, even 0,1V, just by going 100MHz higher, ... i guess you should know given your issues now to get to 4,6.


I also have a 7940x which I ran 4.4ghz @ 1.1v( in bios) and at stock.

Running P95 26.6 stock voltage fluctuated a little bit but spent most of the time at 1.083v

4.4ghz at 1.1v with cache default but memory up a bit, I could run CB15 but P95 failed.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I notice for a brief second some of my cores are dropping frequency while stress testing. Should I be worried about this?
> It's also dropping to what I have my AVX offset to. Not using AVX tests.
> 
> VRM temps are fine (fan on them)
> SVID is Disabled and Power Limit set to 140%


What tests are you running?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Have anyone tested 4.4ghz vs 4.8 ghz with the same mesh and mem clock?

Wondering what the difference in games might be.

I am folding on both CPU and GPU and if an OC is unstable the machine will reboot. Best test IMHO.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> I also have a 7940x which I ran 4.4ghz @ 1.1v( in bios) and at stock.
> 
> Running P95 26.6 stock voltage fluctuated a little bit but spent most of the time at 1.083v
> 
> 4.4ghz at 1.1v with cache default but memory up a bit, I could run CB15 but P95 failed.


Thank you!

Even non-avx Prime failed? Did you set the vcore to 1,1V manually, or you left it on auto? Did you try to stabilize it, i mean up the vcore somewhat to see, what is needed for it to be even prime-stable?


----------



## kappi1997

Hello everyone

I'am also on my way overclocking my i7 7820x on a aorus x299 gaming 7. Now i can get it stable to 4.9 GHZ but cant get any higher because the voltage has strange habits. I've set the voltage from auto to normal and put an offset off 30mV and the LLC on medium. So now it jumps from the non oc 1.086V to 1.243V. But this isn't strange enough. It changes between 1243v to 1.275V. I'am reading it out with cpu-z and use the cpu-z intern stress test. So i guess before i go further i should fix this but i have no idea where it is coming from. I made the following settings:

VRIN= 1.9V
CPU multiplier= 49
CPU Voltage = Normal
CPU Voltage offset = 0.03V
LLC = Medium(turbo, extreme... doesn't help)
Mesh=3GHZ @ 1V


----------



## glnn_23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> Even non-avx Prime failed? Did you set the vcore to 1,1V manually, or you left it on auto? Did you try to stabilize it, i mean up the vcore somewhat to see, what is needed for it to be even prime-stable?


I set 1.1v manually in bios.

Trying a different approach now and adjusted memory and cache.

Vcore 1.11v and cache up to 30. Memory down to 3733.
Ran P95 at below settings for 30 min before I stopped it.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I know my 7800X is a low-tier SK-X chip, but I am testing 4400/3200 at 1.050V-1.088V, about stock voltage. (I put 1.050V in bios, Aida says 1.088V..)

I am folding Nacl on CPU, and testing my 1080TI at 1800/+440mhz on mem at 0.800V with ordinary folding.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> I set 1.1v manually in bios.
> 
> Trying a different approach now and adjusted memory and cache.
> 
> Vcore 1.11v and cache up to 30. Memory down to 3733.
> Ran P95 at below settings for 30 min before I stopped it.


Nice! 1,11V is as good as 1,1V i guess. If i will be able to run my sample at that voltage and clocks stable and at acceptable temps, i will be happy.


----------



## Zurv

wooo... cpu's playing a big roll in grafix benchmarks are lame.. but.. suck it world


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> I notice for a brief second some of my cores are dropping frequency while stress testing. Should I be worried about this?
> It's also dropping to what I have my AVX offset to. Not using AVX tests.
> 
> VRM temps are fine (fan on them)
> SVID is Disabled and Power Limit set to 140%


Better set bclk to 100.1


----------



## Jaysend

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> You're going to have a hard time hitting 5ghz on all cores on Skylake X. 8700k might be better suited for that but you're going to lose the PCIE lanes


Not sure I follow? When asking which skylake-x chip is likely to overclock best, you say none?


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaysend*
> 
> Not sure I follow? When asking which skylake-x chip is likely to overclock best, you say none?


More cores = lower max overclock. Use that as a general rule of thumb. Results are gonna vary depending on luck of the draw, cooling solution used, whether or not its delidded and the amount of effort you put into tweaking it.

You said you wanted a 5gz overclock so I recommended the 8700k. Not sure what you didn't follow there. You're not going to get a 5ghz stable overclock with skylake-X. You could with an 8700k.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaysend*
> 
> Not sure I follow? When asking which skylake-x chip is likely to overclock best, you say none?


I'm gonna play devil's advocate and disagree with everyone here. But I'll give you an answer that's probably not the one you're looking for.









You want 6-8 cores @ 5 GHz.

The best way to do that is to buy the highest binned 7980XE from SL, then test each core individually to find the 6-8 of them which are best. Then disable the remaining cores and run those 6-8 cores at 5 GHz. Bonus: Since the die is an HCC die, it'll have better heat dissipation.

The probability that a random 7980XE will have at least 6-8 of its 18 cores capable of running at 5 GHz will be higher than the probability of a random 7820X having 6-8 (nearly all) of its cores doing the same.


----------



## Jaysend

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> More cores = lower max overclock. Use that as a general rule of thumb. Results are gonna vary depending on luck of the draw, cooling solution used, whether or not its delidded and the amount of effort you put into tweaking it.
> 
> You said you wanted a 5gz overclock so I recommended the 8700k. Not sure what you didn't follow there. You're not going to get a 5ghz stable overclock with skylake-X. You could with an 8700k.


We seem to have a communication problem. Thanks for trying to help.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaysend*
> 
> We seem to have a communication problem. Thanks for trying to help.


Ahh sorry, I apologize, I went back and reread you original post again. If I could choose, I'd take a 7920 over a 7900 any day of the week lol. But again you're going to have a very hard time getting it to 5ghz all cores.

For what it's worth I was able to bench my [email protected] all cores, but I keep it at 4800 24/7. The voltages needed above 5ghz are not worth the extra few mhz IMO


----------



## Jaysend

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I'm gonna play devil's advocate and disagree with everyone here. But I'll give you an answer that's probably not the one you're looking for.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You want 6-8 cores @ 5 GHz.
> 
> The best way to do that is to buy the highest binned 7980XE from SL, then test each core individually to find the 6-8 of them which are best. Then disable the remaining cores and run those 6-8 cores at 5 GHz. Bonus: Since the die is an HCC die, it'll have better heat dissipation.
> 
> The probability that a random 7980XE will have at least 6-8 of its 18 cores capable of running at 5 GHz will be higher than the probability of a random 7820X having 6-8 (nearly all) of its cores doing the same.


Spectacular idea! I may just try that! No more random
For me, I am a big supporter of SL!

I really just want single core speed and 40+ PCIE lanes. I figured the larger HCC die may offer some advantages over the LCC die.
Basically right now the only way to get the lanes I want is 7900x and up so, whichever chip gives the most single core performance is the one I'll go with. And I like your idea a lot! Hedging my bet so to speak. You just showed me the first applicable advantage to more cores for me!

Only real issue is, I am not thrilled about spending $2500+ on a CPU.  One that will likely have less performance than a $500 CPU for my use,
just to support my PCIE devices.


----------



## 7820x

Lol. Buy a $2500 CPU to disable 10 cores? Nice. SL doesnt even have any 7980XEs for sale. They're probably aren't enough out there to bin.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaysend*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I'm gonna play devil's advocate and disagree with everyone here. But I'll give you an answer that's probably not the one you're looking for.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You want 6-8 cores @ 5 GHz.
> 
> The best way to do that is to buy the highest binned 7980XE from SL, then test each core individually to find the 6-8 of them which are best. Then disable the remaining cores and run those 6-8 cores at 5 GHz. Bonus: Since the die is an HCC die, it'll have better heat dissipation.
> 
> The probability that a random 7980XE will have at least 6-8 of its 18 cores capable of running at 5 GHz will be higher than the probability of a random 7820X having 6-8 (nearly all) of its cores doing the same.
> 
> 
> 
> Spectacular idea! I may just try that! No more random
> For me, I am a big supporter of SL!
> 
> I really just want single core speed and 40+ PCIE lanes. I figured the larger HCC die may offer some advantages over the LCC die.
> Basically right now the only way to get the lanes I want is 7900x and up so, whichever chip gives the most single core performance is the one I'll go with. And I like your idea a lot! Hedging my bet so to speak. You just showed me the first applicable advantage to more cores for me!
> 
> Only real issue is, I am not thrilled about spending $2500+ on a CPU.  One that will likely have less performance than a $500 CPU for my use,
> just to support my PCIE devices.
Click to expand...

What PCI-E devices do you have?


----------



## Jaysend

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Ahh sorry, I apologize, I went back and reread you original post again. If I could choose, I'd take a 7920 over a 7900 any day of the week lol. But again you're going to have a very hard time getting it to 5ghz all cores.
> 
> For what it's worth I was able to bench my [email protected] all cores, but I keep it at 4800 24/7. The voltages needed above 5ghz are not worth the extra few mhz IMO


No worries! I appreciate you taking the time
To respond.
5Ghz is just my imaginary wish list. I really just want the fastest chip with 44pcie lanes. I definitely could have been more clear with that. It made sense in my head ;-p

I know it is fast vs pcie lanes but I want to bridge that gap as much as I can. I have been seeing overclocks on all the i9s very close to each other which surprised me, I thought their would be a more clear. -More cores less speed- trend as you mentioned.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> What tests are you running?


HCI Memtest Pro and Prime 26.6 ffts

actually i'm starting to wonder if it's chrome triggering my AVX offset..


----------



## Jaysend

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What PCI-E devices do you have?


Lol, your really going to think I am nuts now!
I have SLI 1080ti's and it just bugs me hey are 8x and not 16. Yes I know full well I will never notice a difference!

I really want to add a bunch of m2 storage for video capture. I would like to have at least 2 raid 0 m2 setups and with the DMI bottleneck that would be kinda pointless in a z370 platform. Also I would like to have more options as pcie storage develops further. I'd love to have a raid 0 for c:, a raid 0 for video another for gaming and someday perhaps a raid 6. All those avenues of curiosity close down on the mainstream platforms.

TBH, I've been into computers since I built my first 386. I have been wanting to jump in the HEDT platform forever. I think it is time. ;-)


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaysend*
> 
> No worries! I appreciate you taking the time
> To respond.
> 5Ghz is just my imaginary wish list. I really just want the fastest chip with 44pcie lanes. I definitely could have been more clear with that. It made sense in my head ;-p
> 
> I know it is fast vs pcie lanes but I want to bridge that gap as much as I can. I have been seeing overclocks on all the i9s very close to each other which surprised me, I thought their would be a more clear. -More cores less speed- trend as you mentioned.


Hah sure. 5ghz is on everyone's wish list lol. It's like a unicorn. Good luck on your journey







You can't really go wrong with any of the i9s. Get the most expensive one you can afford lol.


----------



## Jaysend

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Hah sure. 5ghz is on everyone's wish list lol. It's like a unicorn. Good luck on your journey
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can't really go wrong with any of the i9s. Get the most expensive one you can afford lol.


I am running a SL 4.8ghz 4790k now and it will do 5ghz but not what I consider 24/7 stable. I have settled on 4.7 as that will run all day everyday anything I throw at it at reasonable votltage and temps. So part of it is at the huge expense, I'd like to see a bit faster than my haswell.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaysend*
> 
> Lol, your really going to think I am nuts now!
> I have SLI 1080ti's and it just bugs me hey are 8x and not 16. Yes I know full well I will never notice a difference!
> 
> I really want to add a bunch of m2 storage for video capture. I would like to have at least 2 raid 0 m2 setups and with the DMI bottleneck that would be kinda pointless in a z370 platform. Also I would like to have more options as pcie storage develops further. I'd love to have a raid 0 for c:, a raid 0 for video another for gaming and someday perhaps a raid 6. All those avenues of curiosity close down on the mainstream platforms.
> 
> TBH, I've been into computers since I built my first 386. I have been wanting to jump in the HEDT platform forever. I think it is time. ;-)


I know this sounds blasphemous on this forum lol, but have you checked out Threadripper? der8auer did a video on 8 m.2s in RAID 0. His findings showed even the 16 core threadripper was nearly maxing out. Now I kind of understand why Intel limited the PCIe lanes for the lower core counts.

On x299 your m.2 options for RAID are going to be really limited.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> I know this sounds blasphemous on this forum lol, but have you checked out Threadripper? der8auer did a video on 8 m.2s in RAID 0. His findings showed even the 16 core threadripper was nearly maxing out. Now I kind of understand why Intel limited the PCIe lanes for the lower core counts.
> 
> On x299 your m.2 options for RAID are going to be really limited.


x299 users buy Intel Optane SSD DC P4800X for OS, and samsung 960pro for storage









...and we use Areca raid 6 for the rest


----------



## Jaysend

Options are still much better than z370 ;-)

But no I hadn't seen that, I will check it out. Thanks.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> I know this sounds blasphemous on this forum lol, but have you checked out Threadripper? der8auer did a video on 8 m.2s in RAID 0. His findings showed even the 16 core threadripper was nearly maxing out. Now I kind of understand why Intel limited the PCIe lanes for the lower core counts.
> 
> On x299 your m.2 options for RAID are going to be really limited.
> 
> 
> 
> x299 users buy Intel Optane SSD DC P4800X for OS, and samsung 960pro for storage
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...and we use Areca raid 6 for the rest
Click to expand...

Wrong
Intel should come up with a new line of M2 ssd, at least at the same level of price / performance like the 960 Pro (or better) so we all high end users could use their new bloody VROC technology.








Otherwise what should I install on my two Dimm2 slots (Apex) and / or the Asus Hyper card?


----------



## Zurv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Wrong
> Intel should come up with a new line of M2 ssd, at least at the same level of price / performance like the 960 Pro (or better) so we all high end users could use their new bloody VROC technology.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Otherwise what should I install on my two Dimm2 slots (Apex) and / or the Asus Hyper card?


there is a new line that should be out.. this week? either way some time real soon. It is the replacement for the 750. I think it is called Optane 900P or something like that. Let's see how much it costs tho...

UPDATE: https://www.techpowerup.com/237747/optane-900p-ssd-successor-to-the-intel-750-series


----------



## tripleflip18

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> However by stock voltage, i meant stock LOAD voltage, hahaha
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess 0,96V is stock idle, right?
> 
> About the 4,4 and 1,1, that "probably" sounds like its assumption on your part, rather than a fact based on observation... well, maybe i am wrong, but in case i am not, would you actually care to give it a try? You may very well be right, but its not unheard of for the voltage to increase significantly, even 0,1V, just by going 100MHz higher, ... i guess you should know given your issues now to get to 4,6.


thats stock .96v load voltage for 3.1ghz....... i did try 4.4 at 1.1 and its an instant reboot........ :/


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> thats stock .96v load voltage for 3.1ghz....... i did try 4.4 at 1.1 and its an instant reboot........ :/


Oh, OK. Thank you. Based on what the other fella (ginn_23) with 7940x wrote, that he actually could get it work, even pass Cinebench, but it was Prime unstable, i assume you just obtained worse sample - sorry to say that :-( Silicon lottery is cruel. I wonder what future holds for my, i should have my chip this Saturday at last.

BTW, i wonder why did you even run at 3,1GHz - i mean, it pretty much never hits those clocks, unless you switch Turbo off completely. I assume Turbo is on by default, in which case you should have been seeing 3,8 even during all-core load scenarios.


----------



## tripleflip18

turbo was on it was jut a few cores, but when under load all 14 cores are at 3.1.........and it was at like .96.... yeah i feel super unlucky!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> I also have a 7940x which I ran 4.4ghz @ 1.1v( in bios) and at stock.
> 
> Running P95 26.6 stock voltage fluctuated a little bit but spent most of the time at 1.083v
> 
> 4.4ghz at 1.1v with cache default but memory up a bit, I could run CB15 but P95 failed.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> I also have a 7940x which I ran 4.4ghz @ 1.1v( in bios) and at stock.
> 
> Running P95 26.6 stock voltage fluctuated a little bit but spent most of the time at 1.083v
> 
> 4.4ghz at 1.1v with cache default but memory up a bit, I could run CB15 but P95 failed.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> I also have a 7940x which I ran 4.4ghz @ 1.1v( in bios) and at stock.
> 
> Running P95 26.6 stock voltage fluctuated a little bit but spent most of the time at 1.083v
> 
> 4.4ghz at 1.1v with cache default but memory up a bit, I could run CB15 but P95 failed.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> I also have a 7940x which I ran 4.4ghz @ 1.1v( in bios) and at stock.
> 
> Running P95 26.6 stock voltage fluctuated a little bit but spent most of the time at 1.083v
> 
> 4.4ghz at 1.1v with cache default but memory up a bit, I could run CB15 but P95 failed.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> I also have a 7940x which I ran 4.4ghz @ 1.1v( in bios) and at stock.
> 
> Running P95 26.6 stock voltage fluctuated a little bit but spent most of the time at 1.083v
> 
> 4.4ghz at 1.1v with cache default but memory up a bit, I could run CB15 but P95 failed.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> I also have a 7940x which I ran 4.4ghz @ 1.1v( in bios) and at stock.
> 
> Running P95 26.6 stock voltage fluctuated a little bit but spent most of the time at 1.083v
> 
> 4.4ghz at 1.1v with cache default but memory up a bit, I could run CB15 but P95 failed.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> I also have a 7940x which I ran 4.4ghz @ 1.1v( in bios) and at stock.
> 
> Running P95 26.6 stock voltage fluctuated a little bit but spent most of the time at 1.083v
> 
> 4.4ghz at 1.1v with cache default but memory up a bit, I could run CB15 but P95 failed.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> I also have a 7940x which I ran 4.4ghz @ 1.1v( in bios) and at stock.
> 
> Running P95 26.6 stock voltage fluctuated a little bit but spent most of the time at 1.083v
> 
> 4.4ghz at 1.1v with cache default but memory up a bit, I could run CB15 but P95 failed.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Oh, OK. Thank you. Based on what the other fella (ginn_23) with 7940x wrote, that he actually could get it work, even pass Cinebench, but it was Prime unstable, i assume you just obtained worse sample - sorry to say that :-( Silicon lottery is cruel. I wonder what future holds for my, i should have my chip this Saturday at last.
> 
> BTW, i wonder why did you even run at 3,1GHz - i mean, it pretty much never hits those clocks, unless you switch Turbo off completely. I assume Turbo is on by default, in which case you should have been seeing 3,8 even during all-core load scenarios.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> turbo was on it was jut a few cores, but when under load all 14 cores are at 3.1.........and it was at like .96.... yeah i feel super unlucky!


Well, thats kinda weird, cause as i said, the turbo with all-core load should have been 3,8. The only explanation is that said load was AVX based and there was off-set in action dropping the clocks down to 3,1.



I understand your frustration, but look at it from the bright-side. You still get it to run stable at 4,5Ghz, its 14-core CPU , that by itself is a very nice accomplishment. You would be super unlucky, if you could not afford to buy it, and even that is stretching it, as there are way worse things in life to feel unlucky about







So enjoy it for what it is, i know i will enjoy my chip, even if i had to run it stock eventually for whatever reason.


----------



## cekim

monoblock finally shipped... CPU, er, maybe, I'll see it when I believe it. ok, time to get super serial about building this darn thing...


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Well, thats kinda weird, cause as i said, the turbo with all-core load should have been 3,8. The only explanation is that said load was AVX based and there was off-set in action dropping the clocks down to 3,1.
> 
> 
> 
> I understand your frustration, but look at it from the bright-side. You still get it to run stable at 4,5Ghz, its 14-core CPU , that by itself is a very nice accomplishment. You would be super unlucky, if you could not afford to buy it, and even that is stretching it, as there are way worse things in life to feel unlucky about
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So enjoy it for what it is, i know i will enjoy my chip, even if i had to run it stock eventually for whatever reason.


There have been numerous reviewer reports of very odd behaviors from various boards' BIOS on these chips along these exact lines. Grab the very, very latest and even then... some tuning and bug fixing may be required.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> There have been numerous reviewer reports of very odd behaviors from various boards' BIOS on these chips along these exact lines. Grab the very, very latest and even then... some tuning and bug fixing may be required.


I'm not sure if *any* of the current motherboards do the offsets correctly. Simply because it's not a fixed offset. Each of the different loads (non-AVX, AVX, AVX512) have different turbo charts.

And then you have ridiculous stuff like:

SL said something about MSI boards not having a functional AVX512 offset.
Gigabyte boards disable the offsets by default because they "got too many complaints" about the frequency dropping on certain workloads.*
Gigabyte has no intention to fix this. And they seem to rely on the phantom throttling to prevent their boards from burning up.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> x299 users buy Intel Optane SSD DC P4800X for OS, and samsung 960pro for storage
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...and we use Areca raid 6 for the rest


Dang! I'm using RAID 6 with my ARC-1882! I'm one less on you across - 950-PRO SSD


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> There have been numerous reviewer reports of very odd behaviors from various boards' BIOS on these chips along these exact lines. Grab the very, very latest and even then... some tuning and bug fixing may be required.


I thought that would be fixed by now... how hard can that be?


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I'm not sure if *any* of the current motherboards do the offsets correctly. Simply because it's not a fixed offset. Each of the different loads (non-AVX, AVX, AVX512) have different turbo charts.
> 
> And then you have ridiculous stuff like:
> 
> SL said something about MSI boards not having a functional AVX512 offset.
> Gigabyte boards disable the offsets by default because they "got too many complaints" about the frequency dropping on certain workloads.*
> Gigabyte has no intention to fix this. And they seem to rely on the phantom throttling to prevent their boards from burning up.


I bought Aorus Gaming 7, as it seemed to be the best board outside the Rampage/Apex, which were too expensive for my liking (not enough RAM slots in case of Apex), and pretty much unavailable over here anyway. I hope i wont regret my decision.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> I thought that would be fixed by now... how hard can that be?


MB manuf's seem pretty overwhelmed this year with all the "sudden" announcements from Intel.

It's showing in their products. They've no doubt got resources spread over new TR bios code, Xeon/Purley, X299, 399, 270, 390, etc....

It's been well more than 2x the usual cycle in terms of significantly new and different architectures.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> MB manuf's seem pretty overwhelmed this year with all the "sudden" announcements from Intel.
> 
> It's showing in their products. They've no doubt got resources spread over new TR bios code, Xeon/Purley, X299, 399, 270, 390, etc....
> 
> It's been well more than 2x the usual cycle in terms of significantly new and different architectures.


^^^ That about sums it up!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> monoblock finally shipped... CPU, er, maybe, I'll see it when I believe it. ok, time to get super serial about building this darn thing...


should be fun... I'm still ~ 2 weeks out on a 7980xe.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> should be fun... I'm still ~ 2 weeks out on a 7980xe.


Patience, Grasshopper!


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Patience, Grasshopper!


You see where that got Carradine? No thanks!







Too soon?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> I bought Aorus Gaming 7, as it seemed to be the best board outside the Rampage/Apex, which were too expensive for my liking (not enough RAM slots in case of Apex), and pretty much unavailable over here anyway. I hope i wont regret my decision.


It's only the default settings that are screwed up on the Gigabyte boards. If you manually fix them, it's all good. I also have the Gigabyte 7 and I have no regrets.

So by default (stock settings), it applies no offsets. So it tries to run AVX512 at the same frequency as non-AVX code. On my 7900X, that's enough to cause the CPU to throttle, BSOD, or hard shutdown when running AVX512.

It throttles because running AVX512 at 4.0 GHz on 10 cores draws over 300W and makes the VCCIN droop into phantom throttle land.
It BSODs because it tries to run AVX512 at 4.5 GHz when only 2 cores are active. But not all the cores on my chip are stable with AVX512 @ 4.5 GHz on the default voltages.
It occasionally hard shutdowns because when it doesn't throttle (or doesn't throttle fast enough), it triggers the over-current protection.
If you turn on multi-core enhancement, then it tries to run AVX512 @ 4.5 GHz on all 10 cores. That's basically a recipe for disaster unless you're under DICE or LN2. Just wonder what will happen on the 7980XE...

I've spoken to Gigabyte about this and they said this is all intentional and is by-design. To them, it is more important to silence the complaints about "workloads running at a lower frequency" than it is to follow Intel's specs and maintain stability.

Of course this matters less to overclockers or anybody who is aware of the problem. But a lot of people don't overclock and run their chips at all default BIOS settings.


----------



## Jaysend

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Lol. Buy a $2500 CPU to disable 10 cores? Nice. SL doesnt even have any 7980XEs for sale. They're probably aren't enough out there to bin.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Lol. Buy a $2500 CPU to disable 10 cores? Nice. SL doesnt even have any 7980XEs for sale. They're probably aren't enough out there to bin.


It gets better, I'll probably like to disable 14-16 cores for daily use ;-)
I don't have anything that uses multiple cores. but I will be set if something comes along!


----------



## BroPhilip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> I bought Aorus Gaming 7, as it seemed to be the best board outside the Rampage/Apex, which were too expensive for my liking (not enough RAM slots in case of Apex), and pretty much unavailable over here anyway. I hope i wont regret my decision.


Only if you regret the fact they are releasing an x299 Aorus 7 pro with updated vrms....


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> You see where that got Carradine? No thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too soon?


OTOH, they worked nicely for Peter Graves


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Ahh sorry, I apologize, I went back and reread you original post again. If I could choose, I'd take a 7920 over a 7900 any day of the week lol. But again you're going to have a very hard time getting it to 5ghz all cores.
> 
> For what it's worth I was able to bench my [email protected] all cores, but I keep it at 4800 24/7. The voltages needed above 5ghz are not worth the extra few mhz IMO


if you are on OCN's bot team, requst the Bot icon for youo sig block (via you profile settings)


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Patience, Grasshopper!
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!




lol - going fishing next week so even if by some miracle one arrived early... silly me for even thinking that.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> OTOH, they worked nicely for Peter Graves


Just don't eat the fish!!!


----------



## 7820x

Cool thanks for the tip. I'm not sure how to even get on OCNs team or even if they'd want me lol. I'm pretty new to all this community stuff but am definitely enjoying it.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> You want 6-8 cores @ 5 GHz.
> 
> The best way to do that is to buy the highest binned 7980XE from SL, then test each core individually to find the 6-8 of them which are best. Then disable the remaining cores and run those 6-8 cores at 5 GHz. Bonus: Since the die is an HCC die, it'll have better heat dissipation.
> 
> The probability that a random 7980XE will have at least 6-8 of its 18 cores capable of running at 5 GHz will be higher than the probability of a random 7820X having 6-8 (nearly all) of its cores doing the same.


Those 8 cores would outperform a normal 7820X by at least 17%+ or greater. 7900X -> 7800X > real 7800X by 17% ( from the 1.66x L3 )
You'd get 2.25x the L3 vs a real 7820X. (


----------



## bmaxa

L3 on Skylake-X is almost useless.


----------



## cekim

uCenter has finally put up a price for the 7980xe - $2400 ($2399)


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - going fishing next week so even if by some miracle one arrived early... silly me for even thinking that.


Where? Fresh or Salt? I like spending money on tackle almost as much as I like spending money on hardware.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bmaxa*
> 
> L3 on Skylake-X is almost useless.


XD


----------



## Jaysend

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Where? Fresh or Salt? I like spending money on tackle almost as much as I like spending money on hardware.


Too funny! I spend way more in tackle. I'll be fishing in Puerto Vallarta next week ;-)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Where? Fresh or Salt? I like spending money on tackle almost as much as I like spending money on hardware.


up north.. salmon-on-the-fly.








(i wet a line in fresh, salt, mix... it don;t matter!)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Cool thanks for the tip. I'm not sure how to even get on OCNs team or even if they'd want me lol. I'm pretty new to all this community stuff but am definitely enjoying it.


register at HWBOT... select your team (OCN of course). and there are dozens of guys here who'll help you get started. Main thing is to read the bench rules, and have fun!
One of our team captains is @mllrkllr88
http://hwbot.org/

If you have an ASUS board, we really need "new guy" help HERE


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaysend*
> 
> Too funny! I spend way more in tackle. I'll be fishing in Puerto Vallarta next week ;-)


Enough tackle talk. Let us not batter the thread with this carp.


----------



## haavard

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> An hour later and here I am.
> 
> The CPU actually works. I did not re-lid as I don't have anything other than Loctite that I am aware of. Will talk to my father and see if we actually got something I could use.
> 
> I removed it all. Almost all the glue is gone. If there is something left, it is a layer so thin it won't matter.
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> And it was not really worth it.. The temps are lower. 3-5*C it seems like. Cores are 50-51-53-52-51-52'C as of now. This is max peak temps. It varies from mid 40 to the lower 50s.


I apologize for the extremely localized post, but I used this to reattach the IHS: https://www.maxbo.no/silikon-varmebestandig-40ml-casco-p849376

It takes longer to cure than super glue, but so far it's been working great for me. I removed all of the old silicon with a nylon poker I have at work, a nylon guitar pick should do the same job.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Enough tackle talk. Let us not batter the thread with this carp.


----------



## Nizzen

Timespy extreme cpu score


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Timespy extreme cpu score


How is that possible that Norway always gets the best chips









Btw where is Mydog? He always had the best chips and scores too.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> How is that possible that Norway always gets the best chips
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Btw where is Mydog? He always had the best chips and scores too.


He retiered for a while. He got married









PS: he is alive and watching you guys


----------



## CptSpig

Newegg has i9-7980Xe in stock again: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117836


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Newegg has i9-7980Xe in stock again: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117836


Check again lol...

Saw that... Already have one in transit, but still had the notify in there.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Check again lol...
> 
> Saw that... Already have one in transit, but still had the notify in there.


I went back to check and out of stock. They must only get two at a time. I am waiting on silicon lottery for my i9-7890Xe.


----------



## arrow0309

What do ya recommend for stress testing stability of 7900X, better if max 2h?
Will Prime95 26.6 1344K do the trick?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> What do ya recommend for stress testing stability of 7900X, better if max 2h?
> Will Prime95 26.6 1344K do the trick?


Play bf1 multiplayer for 2 h


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> register at HWBOT... select your team (OCN of course). and there are dozens of guys here who'll help you get started. Main thing is to read the bench rules, and have fun!
> One of our team captains is @mllrkllr88
> http://hwbot.org/
> 
> If you have an ASUS board, we really need "new guy" help HERE


Good information! When I get my Apex build finish I will be interested in helping. I already have a HWBOT account and currently getting information to help team OCN.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> What do ya recommend for stress testing stability of 7900X, better if max 2h?
> Will Prime95 26.6 1344K do the trick?
> 
> 
> 
> Play bf1 multiplayer for 2 h
Click to expand...

Done it!








You sure about it?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> register at HWBOT... select your team (OCN of course). and there are dozens of guys here who'll help you get started. Main thing is to read the bench rules, and have fun!
> One of our team captains is @mllrkllr88
> http://hwbot.org/
> 
> If you have an ASUS board, we really need "new guy" help HERE


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Good information! When I get my Apex build finish I will be interested in helping. I already have a HWBOT account and currently getting information to help team OCN.


It seems like I'm the only member doing stuff on there, maybe I'm registered in the wrong group!


----------



## DeathAngel74

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Done it!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You sure about it?


I can confirm Battlefield 1, Star Wars Battlefront 2015 and Batman AK will do the trick. Any instability will crash the game to bsod within 15-120 minutes.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Not my experience at all. I won't pass RB nor folding for a long period of time. (30-120mins).. And this is with a 7800X and a 1080Ti.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Enough tackle talk. Let us not batter the thread with this carp.


bah, humbug.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Timespy extreme cpu score
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://w [URL=http://ww.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3132767/width/500/height/1000%5B/IMG]ww.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/3132767/width/500/height/1000[/IMG[/URL]][/QUOTE]
> lol - you need to work on the graphics score. [IMG alt="tongue.gif"]https://www.overclock.net/images/smilies/tongue.gif
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> He retiered for a while. He got married
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS: *he is alive* and watching you guys
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> good to know. look forward to him getting his butt of the shelf. .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> It seems like I'm the only member doing stuff on there, maybe I'm registered in the wrong group!
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> I can confirm Battlefield 1, Star Wars Battlefront 2015 and Batman AK will do the trick. Any instability will crash the game to bsod within 15-120 minutes.


I have the first two, now I have to find some time as well








Any PUBG also?









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Not my experience at all. I won't pass RB nor folding for a long period of time. (30-120mins).. And this is with a 7800X and a 1080Ti.




Two more hours in RB v2.54 avx offset -2


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Basically no point in using V2.54 when you have offset?

I will pass those with a stable OC, but a BF1 stable is far, far, faar away from folding/RB stable.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Basically no point in using V2.54 when you have offset?
> 
> I will pass those with a stable OC, but a BF1 stable is far, far, faar away from folding/RB stable.


Ok, just finished a nice 2h+ round of BF1


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> register at HWBOT... select your team (OCN of course). and there are dozens of guys here who'll help you get started. Main thing is to read the bench rules, and have fun!
> One of our team captains is @mllrkllr88
> http://hwbot.org/
> 
> If you have an ASUS board, we really need "new guy" help HERE


Cool thanks for the help. That was pretty painless to get setup. I don't have an ASUS board but I'll try messing with around with some of these other benchmarks on HWBOT.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Cool thanks for the help. That was pretty painless to get setup. I don't have an ASUS board but I'll try messing with around with some of these other benchmarks on HWBOT.


Enjoy!


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> How is that possible that Norway always gets the best chips
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Btw where is Mydog? He always had the best chips and scores too.


It's also possible Nizzen is the only person that's bagged one that knows all the tricks for that benchmark








. There is a handful...


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> It's also possible Nizzen is the only person that's bagged one that knows all the tricks for that benchmark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . There is a handful...


I vote for that


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *haavard*
> 
> I apologize for the extremely localized post, but I used this to reattach the IHS: https://www.maxbo.no/silikon-varmebestandig-40ml-casco-p849376
> 
> It takes longer to cure than super glue, but so far it's been working great for me. I removed all of the old silicon with a nylon poker I have at work, a nylon guitar pick should do the same job.


Thanks! I'll get some one day. I need to flush my loop soon. I can relied while I'm leak-testing. I can remove the CPU block and the GPU without the need to drain the loop. :-D


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> It's also possible Nizzen is the only person that's bagged one that knows all the tricks for that benchmark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . There is _only_ a handful...


post corrected.









OCN top 30 Time Spy Extreme http://www.overclock.net/t/1606006/3dmark-time-spy-benchmark-top-30/1280_20#post_26389538


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Seems like 4700/3200 and 4000 on mem will be my 24/7 OC. CPU needs 1.160V in bios, and 1.180-1.186V according to Aida64. Temps are low 50s to low 60s depending on the ambient.

That is not a worst chip out there at least.


----------



## DeathAngel74

Gonna try to do a few benches. Cold...
Cpu is 17c. 1080ti is 13c, 1070sc2 is 19c. Brrrrrrr


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathAngel74*
> 
> Gonna try to do a few benches. Cold...
> Cpu is 17c. 1080ti is 13c, 1070sc2 is 19c. Brrrrrrr


5GHz, ambient cooling - Siberia style:


----------



## Jbravo33

Got monoblock today, but won't have pc up and running for at least a week. In the middle of moving, sucks.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Got monoblock today, but won't have pc up and running for at least a week. In the middle of moving, sucks.


ditto and ditto (minus the moving - delayed by lack of CPU until next week I think).

Gonna take the "lazy" route for now and swap out the RVE for R6E and think about a more ambitious case later. Not thrilled about getting in and out of that tight case multiple times - I strongly suspect I will need to delid, so I'm signing up for a lot of wrenching on this by using this guy - upside is quick bring-up and characterize to decide what next with delid and then case...:


----------



## Martin778

Got some new storage, 2x500GB 850EVO's in raid0. What do you think about those speeds?

Seems like X299's SATA controller is pretty decent.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jaysend*
> 
> Too funny! I spend way more in tackle. I'll be fishing in Puerto Vallarta next week ;-)


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> up north.. salmon-on-the-fly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (i wet a line in fresh, salt, mix... it don;t matter!)


Haha...that is awesome. These guys have kept me from going for the 7980xe...for now. I am a G Loomis and Shimano whore...


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Haha...that is awesome. These guys have kept me from going for the 7980xe...for now. I am a G Loomis and Shimano whore...


Who knows. You might hook a 7980XE.

A wild 7980XE has appeared!

Fight
Switch
Items -> Poke Ball
Run
Then you won't have to buy an overpriced one from the Game Corner.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Haha...that is awesome. These guys have kept me from going for the 7980xe...for now. I am a G Loomis and Shimano whore...
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


lol - "Fear no Fish"


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Who knows. You might hook a 7980XE.
> 
> A wild 7980XE has appeared!
> 
> Fight
> Switch
> Items -> Poke Ball
> Run
> Then you won't have to buy an overpriced one from the Game Corner.


How many cores does a salt water i9 require to be legal to keep? You know those F&G guys are just waiting at the docks for folks bringing back 4 and 6 core chips to write tickets and keep the catch for themselves. ;-)

Ready to fillet mine, sautée it in gallium and the serve at 63C


----------



## TahoeDust

Funny stuff gentlemen. One of my fishing buddies sent me this a few weeks ago. I was already stoked about FC5, this was icing on the cake...


----------



## DeathAngel74

There was a really old that had fishing in it,,,,You could use the fish to upgrade weapons and armor....I think it was called Breath Of Fire III.


----------



## Silent Scone

These fish puns are terrible.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Funny stuff gentlemen. One of my fishing buddies sent me this a few weeks ago. I was already stoked about FC5, this was icing on the cake...


"Right, guys. So it's decided. Farcry 5 will be set in the US. What's on the spider diagram so far?"

..."Fishing, bears and guns."

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Got some new storage, 2x500GB 850EVO's in raid0. What do you think about those speeds?
> 
> Seems like X299's SATA controller is pretty decent.


Yeah, that's about what you'd expect for RAID.


----------



## DeathAngel74

Is it weird that my Grandma used to eat the fish eyes? (Japanese delicacy)?


----------



## xarot

OK guys maybe it's time for you to start the OCN 'angler's club' or whatever the correct term







. I love fishing too, but it's been a few years since the kiddo was born and no time in the next few years either.


----------



## tistou77

About EKWB Monoblock, and a "base" like this



There is a loss of "heat dissipation" ?
Especially for the 7920X and + ?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> About EKWB Monoblock, and a "base" like this
> 
> 
> 
> There is a loss of "heat dissipation" ?
> Especially for the 7920X and + ?


It depends if it is smaller base than the normal EK evo block?


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> It depends if it is smaller base than the normal EK evo block?


The base is completely "flat" on the EVO


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> The base is completely "flat" on the EVO


Yes it is! Now I remember.

I ordered ek monoblock for Apex, so I'm a bit worried now







Using EK evo now.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Yes it is! Now I remember.
> 
> I ordered ek monoblock for Apex, so I'm a bit worried now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Using EK evo now.












If some can give their feedback on the temperature difference between a CPU waterblock and a Monoblock


----------



## ottoore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> About EKWB Monoblock, and a "base" like this
> 
> 
> 
> There is a loss of "heat dissipation" ?
> Especially for the 7920X and + ?


Talking about die size the long edge is still longer than the other one on both lcc or hcc processors. Ihs are identical.

LCC 14.3 x 22.4 mm
HCC 21.6 x 22.4 mm

Circle diameter ?


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> If some can give their feedback on the temperature difference between a CPU waterblock and a Monoblock


I've used the supremacy evo and EK monoblock on delidded 7820x and 7920x. Temps seem about the same. Don't worry about it for the hcc parts because you will really want the monoblock for the vrm with the extra power draw and the larger die really helps with temps.



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







Seems big enough, if only just. Yes yes LM everywhere don't judge me.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> I've used the supremacy evo and EK monoblock on delidded 7820x and 7920x. Temps seem about the same. Don't worry about it for the hcc parts because you will really want the monoblock for the vrm with the extra power draw and the larger die really helps with temps.


Thank you for your feedback, you would have a screen of temperatures (CPU, VRM) in load (with Realbench for example)

therefore, the circle on the base will be larger than the die of a 7920X ?


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Thank you for your feedback, you would have a screen of temperatures (CPU, VRM) in load (with Realbench for example)
> 
> therefore, the circle on the base will be larger than the die of a 7920X ?


I'm not using the monoblock any more since I switched motherboards. But I found a hwinfo log of 2h of realbench at 4.6 on 7920x. VID between 1.15 to 1.178. About 240w power draw.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> I'm not using the monoblock any more since I switched motherboards. But I found a hwinfo log of 2h of realbench at 4.6 on 7920x. VID between 1.15 to 1.178. About 240w power draw.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Aa ok thanks

The temperature of the VRM is with the Monoblock
This platform heats up enormously, I am at ~40°C on the VRM in load (with RB, Aida64, etc... and WB for VRM) with a 6950X @4.4ghz








But not the same platform, it's sure


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Aa ok thanks
> 
> The temperature of the VRM is with the Monoblock
> This platform heats up enormously, I am at ~40°C on the VRM in load (with RB, Aida64, etc... and WB for VRM) with a 6950X @4.4ghz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But not the same platform, it's sure


Active cooling with a fan pointed at the VRM goes a long way. Personally, I'm not a fan of adding the VRM to a loop (unless discrete) due to how much it can elevate water temps. Monoblocks do look great, though.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> About EKWB Monoblock, and a "base" like this
> 
> 
> 
> There is a loss of "heat dissipation" ?
> Especially for the 7920X and + ?


if you are getting the R6E, the vrm cooler is said to work better with moderate air flow compared to the apex (which works better with high air flow). either one will do just fine with a simple fan mounted on the VRM.








I'm not a fan








of monoblocks but did just put one on my R5E10... not seeing any real difference in vrm temps vs stock.

apex:

these little gelid fans fit the mounts well and are silent.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Active cooling with a fan pointed at the VRM goes a long way. Personally, I'm not a fan of adding the VRM to a loop (unless discrete) due to how much it can elevate water temps. Monoblocks do look great, though.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if you are getting the R6E, the vrm cooler is said to work better with moderate air flow compared to the apex (which works better with high air flow). either one will do just fine with a simple fan mounted on the VRM.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not a fan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> of monoblocks but did just put one on my R5E10... not seeing any real difference in vrm temps vs stock.


Thanks for your feedback
It will be for an R6E, indeed
I have 2 fans of 140 in extraction in the top of the box (to ~ 6cm of the VRM) it is not enough?

I'm not a fan of Monoblock
The best is to test first with the VRM in aircooling and see the temperatures

@Jpmboy, with the monoblock on the R5E10, you have about the same temperatures at the VRM with the cooling @stock and the Monoblock ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Thanks for your feedback
> It will be for an R6E, indeed
> I have 2 fans of 140 in extraction in the top of the box (to ~ 6cm of the VRM) it is not enough?
> 
> I'm not a fan of Monoblock
> The best is to test first with the VRM in aircooling and see the temperatures
> 
> @Jpmboy, with the monoblock on the R5E10, you have about the same temperatures at the VRM with the cooling @stock and the Monoblock ?


I really think you need to mount a fan directly on the VRM. The Apex comes with a bracket... the R6E must. Yeah, monoblock on the R5E10 i'm not seeing any real difference, but there are two fans than were hitting the vrm heat sink directly on that open bench... I added the mono block only recently... in anticipation of putting iit in my SM8 and moving the R6A to the main bench case. Take the R5E/5960X and move it to a new corsair 570 glass case. Main advantage of the monoblock (besides looks) is the reduction in fan-pasted dust. (and EK had the block on sale)


a bit of musical chairs.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I really think you need to mount a fan directly on the VRM. The Apex comes with a bracket... the R6E must. Yeah, monoblock on the R5E10 i'm not seeing any real difference, but there are two fans than were hitting the vrm heat sink directly on that open bench... I added the mono block only recently... in anticipation of putting iit in my SM8 and moving the R6A to the main bench case. Take the R5E/5960X and move it to a new corsair 570 glass case. Main advantage of the monoblock (besides looks) is the reduction in fan-pasted dust. (and EK had the block on sale)


Ok thanks for your helps









Otherwise for those with have the R6A or R6E, the voltages "Input Voltage" and "Mesh" are not monitored ?
It will be just a bug of the bios or it is "wanted" by Asus ?
1st time I see these voltage "not monitored"

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Ok thanks for your helps
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Otherwise for those with have the R6A or R6E, the voltages *"Input Voltage" and "Mesh" are not monitored* ?
> It will be just a bug of the bios or it is "wanted" by Asus ?
> 1st time I see these voltage "not monitored"
> 
> Thanks


try SIV64.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I really think you need to mount a fan directly on the VRM. The Apex comes with a bracket... the R6E must. Yeah, monoblock on the R5E10 i'm not seeing any real difference, but there are two fans than were hitting the vrm heat sink directly on that open bench... I added the mono block only recently... in anticipation of putting iit in my SM8 and moving the R6A to the main bench case. Take the R5E/5960X and move it to a new corsair 570 glass case. Main advantage of the monoblock (besides looks) is the reduction in fan-pasted dust. (and EK had the block on sale)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> a bit of musical chairs.


Gotta love that CaseLabs! Waiting for my new Mercury S8 + pedestal to move into for better airflow. My current M8A is a bit of a tight squeeze.

But my trashcan bag trim is blue


----------



## MJB13SRT8

for anyone that wanted to know what the circle dia on the ek mono block is, it's 35mm.

Montrose


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if you are getting the R6E, the vrm cooler is said to work better with moderate air flow compared to the apex (which works better with high air flow). either one will do just fine with a simple fan mounted on the VRM.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not a fan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> of monoblocks but did just put one on my R5E10... not seeing any real difference in vrm temps vs stock.
> 
> apex:
> 
> these little gelid fans fit the mounts well and are silent.


I just ordered two of the gelid fans to cool my M.2 and memory.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If some can give their feedback on the temperature difference between a CPU waterblock and a Monoblock


You should check out Romans video where he does this exact comparison on an i9:


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> try SIV64.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> You should check out Romans video where he does this exact comparison on an i9:


I had seen the video, but it's with an MSI
I do not know if the Asus heatsink and more or less performant
I will think that they are more efficient, considering the temperatures of the VRM on the MSI


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Gotta love that CaseLabs! Waiting for my new Mercury S8 + pedestal to move into for better airflow. My current M8A is a bit of a tight squeeze.
> 
> But my trashcan bag trim is blue


easy to build into and very flexible... but yeah, huge!


I used a hole saw to cut a passthru for the reservoir, slit a piece of PVC tubing to make a grommet for the passthru, and that side panel is solid in the lower quarter, so it hides the mess.. but shows a lit-up Aquacomputer res with the "waterfall" effect.
Also cut two holes for panel mount QDCs... gonna add two more out the back so I can plug the chiller in when needed.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I just ordered two of the gelid fans to cool my M.2 and memory.


they work great and can be plugged into the fullspeed fan headers - and still are quiet.


----------



## Nizzen

Is it gelid 50mm fans you are using?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Is it gelid 50mm fans you are using?


yes, 50mm.


----------



## Jpmboy

lol - sitting here 'cause I have to take 6x 50min online "classes" as part of a "bargain" - including a lot of cash - to get a ticket dismissed. like I keep saying, it's not how fast the car is, it is how fast it goes from 130 to 65 mph.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> they work great and can be plugged into the fullspeed fan headers - and still are quiet. smile.gif


I ordered these off your recommendation so I am sure they will do the job. I have a Corsair 140mm blowing on the VRM's so With the two 50mm fans on the M.2 and memory it should be nice and cool.







Talked to Silicon Lottery should have binned 7980's week after next.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I ordered these off your recommendation so I am sure they will do the job. I have a Corsair 140mm blowing on the VRM's so With the two 50mm fans on the M.2 and memory it should be nice and cool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Talked to Silicon Lottery *should have binned 7980's week after next*.


and I'm still....


btw - I was able to find 5mm RGB LEDs that work wit the APEX (and R5E10).

http://www.overclock.net/t/1635159/asus-rampage-vi-apex-x299-owners/620_20#post_26392599


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - sitting here 'cause I have to take 6x 50min online "classes" as part of a "bargain" - including a lot of cash - to get a ticket dismissed. like I keep saying, it's not how fast the car is, it is how fast it goes from 130 to 65 mph.


No kidding, fast braking is the key to fast track times - F1 is awesome, 100->0 in 2 secs ... the Gs!


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> and I'm still....
> 
> 
> btw - I was able to find 5mm RGB LEDs that work wit the APEX (and R5E10).
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1635159/asus-rampage-vi-apex-x299-owners/620_20#post_26392599


The led's look sweet! Blue my is favorite color very nice.


----------



## hrmgamer

Hello Everyone

I've been following along for a while now. I've since changed my plans from a 7900 + Asus Deluxe to a 7980 + R6E. My chip is supposedly going to arrive in about a fortnight (not holding my breath) and the board sometime next week. This will be a long term workstation and gaming rig, so the custom loop is more to keep the chip at cool with a medium OC rather than trying to scrape every last cycle out of it. Given what I've seen in the thread probably a 4.2-4.5 all core, or maybe go for some staggered clocks, we'll see. I have no intention of de-lidding (longevity/warranty concerns).

Anyway, I have a few questions around paste.

1. This is probably a stupid question but has anyone looked at how the various pastes perform on the higher-end chips? Do any of them hit a wall with the amount of heat the need to dissipate and just turn into insulators?

2. I've got a new tube of Noctua NT-H1 I'm planning on using with the an EK EVO block (I don't mind trading a degree or two for paste that lasts longer, or is more stable in the long term). Any thoughts?

3. Has anyone done a paste application comparison for the higher end chips? I get the feeling a pea in the middle won't cover enough (or at least spread evenly enough) with the large silicon footprint on these chips. I could very easily be wrong on this point, so any comments would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
Gamer


----------



## Rex65

Wow delidding gets my vote!
Used the rockit kit on my 7820x.
In RB stress test, temps went from low nineties to low sixties (°C) and all core temps are within a few degrees. It's a cooler day today but at least 15 to 20 deg difference between stock CPU and delidded with liquid metal applied.
Used LM between cooler and IHS which would of helped.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hrmgamer*
> 
> Hello Everyone
> 
> I've been following along for a while now. I've since changed my plans from a 7900 + Asus Deluxe to a 7980 + R6E. My chip is supposedly going to arrive in about a fortnight (not holding my breath) and the board sometime next week. This will be a long term workstation and gaming rig, so the custom loop is more to keep the chip at cool with a medium OC rather than trying to scrape every last cycle out of it. Given what I've seen in the thread probably a 4.2-4.5 all core, or maybe go for some staggered clocks, we'll see. I have no intention of de-lidding (longevity/warranty concerns).
> 
> Anyway, I have a few questions around paste.
> 
> 1. This is probably a stupid question but has anyone looked at how the various pastes perform on the higher-end chips? Do any of them hit a wall with the amount of heat the need to dissipate and just turn into insulators?
> 
> 2. I've got a new tube of Noctua NT-H1 I'm planning on using with the an EK EVO block (I don't mind trading a degree or two for paste that lasts longer, or is more stable in the long term). Any thoughts?
> 
> 3. Has anyone done a paste application comparison for the higher end chips? I get the feeling a pea in the middle won't cover enough (or at least spread evenly enough) with the large silicon footprint on these chips. I could very easily be wrong on this point, so any comments would be appreciated.
> 
> Thanks in advance.
> Gamer


I'd recommend TG Kryonaut if not delidding, however, the paste used will have minimal impact as you're not dealing with the contact between the die and IHS. That said, temps on the larger dies seem to be much better across the board. Plenty of radiator space and decent cooling is a must IMO. If you can spend $2,000 on a CPU, you can afford to put money into cooling, too.


----------



## hrmgamer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I'd recommend TG Kryonaut if not delidding, however, the paste used will have minimal impact as you're not dealing with the contact between the die and IHS. That said, temps on the larger dies seem to be much better across the board. Plenty of radiator space and decent cooling is a must IMO. If you can spend $2,000 on a CPU, you can afford to put money into cooling, too.


I strongly considered Kryonaut, what's its longevity like? Given that I'm going the hard tube route (kinda regretting that decision if I'm honest) not having to re-seat things frequently is a huge plus.

I'm mounting it all in a Corsair 900D...and honestly it's surprisingly cramped, I should of just bought a 24U Rack. I've put in 2x EK 480 XEs, push on both (don't have enough room for push+pull), with 3x 120 intakes at the front, and 1x 140mm intake at the rear. The pump is an EK D5 Dual Serial. In addition to the CPU there will be 2x 1080Tis in the loop (if my second one ever gets shipped...sigh). I'm humming and harring weather to monoblock or not. I think I'll start with the EVO and see how the temps pan out.

Other bits in the case include some M.2s, some 3.5s, an AquaComputer flow meter and temp sensors, AX1500i, 128GB Dominator @ 3466 (I don't think it's B-Die, but the Amazon sale was too good to pass up even if it doesn't clock much higher than what it says on the box). It should come together nicely...at least in theory.


----------



## Rex65

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rex65*
> 
> Wow delidding gets my vote!
> Used the rockit kit on my 7820x.
> In RB stress test, temps went from low nineties to low sixties (°C) and all core temps are within a few degrees. It's a cooler day today but at least 15 to 20 deg difference between stock CPU and delidded with liquid metal applied.
> Used LM between cooler and IHS which would of helped.


One thing I noticed was when rebooting, after reinstalling the cpu, the BIOS showed on screen that a new cpu had been installed.... Is this normal?


----------



## Kenton

Hello. I have problem with one of the memory channels (channel A) with Asus PRIME X299-DELUXE. BIOS version is 0802 and CPU is 7920X.

I am using two kits of 2 x 8GB G.Skill F4-4266C19D-16GTZA (DDR4-4266, CL19-19-19-39 1.4v). I can run single memory stick using 4200CL19-19-19-39 at channels B, C and D with no memory errors. Or total of three memory stick in triple channel (B, C and D) with same setting and no errors. Computer boots to Windows and is stable.

Problem is with channel A. Even with single stick highest frequency I can use is 3800 (tried both A1 and A2 slots). If using higher frequency I get memory error and computer won't post.

What could cause one memory channel to be slower/not as reliable than others? Is it the CPU or motherboard? Is there any other way to test this other than changing one of the mentioned parts?

Memory is not in the QVL list but it shouldn't be the reason as the same stick is working in 3 of 4 memory channels. It took me countless of hours before I got the idea to test each memory channel separately







I tried lowering the clock speeds (3600, 37XX, 3800) and tightening the latencies. That worked to some extent but it seems that the one memory channel is really hurting the memory performance. I was hoping I could get 3800MHz - 4000 MHz with tight timings to decrease the latency.

I also posted this to ASUS X299 support thread.


----------



## Martin778

I'd RMA the board and buy something else, the X99 Deluxe was an absolute PITA.
Enough ASUS beta testing on users.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> The led's look sweet! Blue my is favorite color very nice.


controllable with aura software... "by temperature" works too, but I like blue also.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hrmgamer*
> 
> I strongly considered Kryonaut, *what's its longevity like*? Given that I'm going the hard tube route (kinda regretting that decision if I'm honest) not having to re-seat things frequently is a huge plus.
> 
> I'm mounting it all in a Corsair 900D...and honestly it's surprisingly cramped, I should of just bought a 24U Rack. I've put in 2x EK 480 XEs, push on both (don't have enough room for push+pull), with 3x 120 intakes at the front, and 1x 140mm intake at the rear. The pump is an EK D5 Dual Serial. In addition to the CPU there will be 2x 1080Tis in the loop (if my second one ever gets shipped...sigh). I'm humming and harring weather to monoblock or not. I think I'll start with the EVO and see how the temps pan out.
> 
> Other bits in the case include some M.2s, some 3.5s, an AquaComputer flow meter and temp sensors, AX1500i, 128GB Dominator @ 3466 (I don't think it's B-Die, but the Amazon sale was too good to pass up even if it doesn't clock much higher than what it says on the box). It should come together nicely...at least in theory.


TGK will last as long as you need it to. TIMs like PK-3, IC Diamond and Gelid extreme will too.


----------



## Sobo

Would someone be willing to test memory impact on gaming performance with Skylake-X system and high performance RAM? I'm very interested in seeing if uprage from my Corsair 3200 CL16 modules would be beneficial in terms of higher framerate in CPU bound scenarios. Basically any CPU limited game benchmark will do (for example Far Cry Primal has a really quick one) - comparison between 3200 CL16 and something like 4000 CL16 would be nice.

I know that the difference is usually not that big, but since since Skylake-X has a completely new cache structure with non-inclusive L3, it has to access the memory much more often that previous generations, which leads me to believe that fast memory could have much greater impact on this platform. Would anyone with high performance kit be able to test some gam benches? For science, of course.


----------



## symmetrical

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sobo*
> 
> Would someone be willing to test memory impact on gaming performance with Skylake-X system and high performance RAM? I'm very interested in seeing if uprage from my Corsair 3200 CL16 modules would be beneficial in terms of higher framerate in CPU bound scenarios. Basically any CPU limited game benchmark will do (for example Far Cry Primal has a really quick one) - comparison between 3200 CL16 and something like 4000 CL16 would be nice.
> 
> I know that the difference is usually not that big, but since since Skylake-X has a completely new cache structure with non-inclusive L3, it has to access the memory much more often that previous generations, which leads me to believe that fast memory could have much greater impact on this platform. Would anyone with high performance kit be able to test some gam benches? For science, of course.


I'm also curious about this as well. I was going to do it myself except that the way I have my fans setup I can't fit the higher clocked G.Skill TridentZ RAM because they are too friggin tall.

But if there's a significant difference, that would be nice to know.


----------



## Sgang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *symmetrical*
> 
> I'm also curious about this as well. I was going to do it myself except that the way I have my fans setup I can't fit the higher clocked G.Skill TridentZ RAM because they are too friggin tall.
> 
> But if there's a significant difference, that would be nice to know.


Yes really interesting question. I've seen a lot of differecence in gaming with a 2133 and 2666 mhz RAM on Ryzen (15+ fps in certain games) so curious about ram influence on intel SkylakeX

I've also another question. I recently oc'ed my 7820x, i'm new to the platform so i would like to know if my temperature are ok.

I've a x47 multiplier @1,23v, very stable. The temperature are 87°c on the package using Intel Extreme Tuning Utility, Aida 64 and Cinebench. My case is not the perfect scenario. In Win 101 has very strange air flow: nothing on the front, just one space in the rear, and 3 intake on the bottom (right in front to the VGA). I used 3 fans as intake (1 rear and two at bottom) and a *Liquid freezer 240* pro with 2 fan (exaust)

I oced using the auto oc of my Asrock X299 Fatality K6 because i wasn't able to change the parameters in the BIOS. If i use the same options, it won't post. A strange thing is that the sistem put Vcore voltage to 1.9, vid to 1,35. But on the Intel Extreme Tuning and Aida64 the vcore is 1.35


----------



## symmetrical

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgang*
> 
> Yes really interesting question. I've seen a lot of differecence in gaming with a 2133 and 2666 mhz RAM on Ryzen (15+ fps in certain games) so curious about ram influence on intel SkylakeX
> 
> I've also another question. I recently oc'ed my 7820x, i'm new to the platform so i would like to know if my temperature are ok.
> 
> I've a x47 multiplier @1,23v, very stable. The temperature are 87°c on the package using Intel Extreme Tuning Utility, Aida 64 and Cinebench. My case is not the perfect scenario. In Win 101 has very strange air flow: nothing on the front, just one space in the rear, and 3 intake on the bottom (right in front to the VGA). I used 3 fans as intake (1 rear and two at bottom) and a *Liquid freezer 240* pro with 2 fan (exaust)
> 
> I oced using the auto oc of my Asrock X299 Fatality K6 because i wasn't able to change the parameters in the BIOS. If i use the same options, it won't post. A strange thing is that the sistem put Vcore voltage to 1.9, vid to 1,35. But on the Intel Extreme Tuning and Aida64 the vcore is 1.35


I'm not very familiar with ASrock boards, but I'd be hesitant to use the auto-OC feature. Mostly because I'd be scared of over voltage.

And by chance do you have that backwards? Vcore at 1.9, and VID at 1.35?

Should it be Vcore at 1.35 and VID at 1.9?

VCore at 1.9 would probably instantly kill your CPU, so Intel ET and Aida64 is probably reporting the correct voltage at 1.35


----------



## Sgang

that's what i think
I've found that the correct value is the FIVR menu on the mb bios.

Here from AIDAa64 SENSOR PAGE, the correct value is 1.229


----------



## arrow0309

I think I'm stable enough at 4.7 with 1.225v (1.800, LLC6) and I'd like to raise the cache (Mesh) a bit.
What value do you guys recommend for a daily, 3000, 3200?
Also what to use for testing, HCI, Aida stress cache?


----------



## Martin778

@Sgang,
Try not to use auto OC but rather look what auto is doing and then copy the settings manually...my Taichi does very weird things when I let it auto OC (stuff like 2.1V Vccin right off the bat).
A lot of programs still report Vccin and Vcore wrong, they are mixed up.


----------



## tripleflip18

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> @Sgang,
> Try not to use auto OC but rather look what auto is doing and then copy the settings manually...my Taichi does very weird things when I let it auto OC (stuff like 2.1V Vccin right off the bat).
> A lot of programs still report Vccin and Vcore wrong, they are mixed up.


does your taichi have blck locked? my keeps jumping as high as 106.3 in hwinfo when i lock it down to 100.1. in fact im unable to overclock by each individual core, if i do that max tubro or oc is always 3.8ghz...

thx


----------



## Martin778

Those are readout errors, I sometimes see very wierd things in HWInfo too.


----------



## Sgang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> @Sgang,
> Try not to use auto OC but rather look what auto is doing and then copy the settings manually...my Taichi does very weird things when I let it auto OC (stuff like 2.1V Vccin right off the bat).
> A lot of programs still report Vccin and Vcore wrong, they are mixed up.


Hi Martin i was also very scared about auto oc but when i try to replicate the settings, it won't post.

I will try again

Again, no Luck with manual settings. It simply doesn't boot. I checked the vvcin and i found 2.1 ! I Fixed to 1.6, and i've verified the temperature in the Intel tool. Less 10 degrees at maximum!


----------



## Martin778

Told you







, also check the VCCIO/VCCSA. These are most probably very high too...my Taichi sets them to 1.36V where as stock is something like 0.9 and 1.05V.
1.6V VCCIN is kinda low, I think. I have to keep my 7920X above 1.8V VCCIN under load.

Are you running the latest BIOS? There are some settings like memory BCLK / BCLK "something" that when I change those, it won't post either.


----------



## Sgang

Thank you Martin! Precious informations. I'll check asap
Can you tell me Ther other things to check ? Also with a pic will be ok!

For vvcin i tried a couple of stress test both Intel tool and Aida And seems stable


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> just hit the red button on the MB or hold down the start button on your case for a few seconds until the system restarts - safe mode - all previous settings are not changed in bios, but it posts with optimized defaults (retains drive config and raid settings).


This has not worked for me. It won't restart unless I do a BIOS reset?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jobotoo*
> 
> This has not worked for me. It won't restart unless I do a BIOS reset?


you pressed the red "safe mode" button on the MB or held down the start button on the MB for 3 sec? Safe mode boots with defalts loaded but does not change your settings in bios.


----------



## GXTCHA

2 hour RB 2.54 passed w/ the below settings on a 360 AIO:

7900x
R6 Apex
multi: 48
1.225v adaptive
vccin: 1.81
LLC: 6
avx/512: 3/5
current: 200%
SVID & VRM SS: disabled



How'd I do? Any thoughts on improvement?

I'm dreading setting up my RAM now... I did some very brief testing and it seems like when I OC it I'm introducing a lot of instability which is weird because this kit has served me well on 1151 and x99 running at 3600CL16 and 3200CL16 respectively.

I've also noticed that if I bench in XTU without AVX offsets (set to auto) I have no problem hitting my max clock speed however, as soon as I add in the avx/512 off sets in the bios, I cannot bench above 4.5 to 4.6 in XTU. I didnt think XTU stressed AVX that much or would prohibit you from hitting max clocks.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> 2 hour RB 2.54 passed w/ the below settings on a 360 AIO:
> 
> 7900x
> R6 Apex
> multi: 48
> 1.225v adaptive
> vccin: 1.81
> LLC: 6
> avx/512: 3/5
> current: 200%
> SVID & VRM SS: disabled
> 
> 
> 
> How'd I do? Any thoughts on improvement?
> 
> I'm dreading setting up my RAM now... I did some very brief testing and it seems like when I OC it I'm introducing a lot of instability which is weird because this kit has served me well on 1151 and x99 running at 3600CL16 and 3200CL16 respectively.
> 
> I've also noticed that if I bench in XTU without AVX offsets (set to auto) I have no problem hitting my max clock speed however, as soon as I add in the avx/512 off sets in the bios, I cannot bench above 4.5 to 4.6 in XTU. I didnt think XTU stressed AVX that much or would prohibit you from hitting max clocks.


Try again with Realbench 2.44 (No AVX) and see what happens:
http://dlcdnmkt.asus.com/rog/RealBench_v2.44.zip


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> 2 hour RB 2.54 passed w/ the below settings on a 360 AIO:
> 
> 7900x
> R6 Apex
> multi: 48
> 1.225v adaptive
> vccin: 1.81
> LLC: 6
> avx/512: 3/5
> current: 200%
> SVID & VRM SS: disabled
> 
> 
> 
> How'd I do? Any thoughts on improvement?
> 
> I'm dreading setting up my RAM now... I did some very brief testing and it seems like when I OC it I'm introducing a lot of instability which is weird because this kit has served me well on 1151 and x99 running at 3600CL16 and 3200CL16 respectively.
> 
> I've also noticed that if I bench in XTU without AVX offsets (set to auto) I have no problem hitting my max clock speed however, as soon as I add in the avx/512 off sets in the bios, I cannot bench above 4.5 to 4.6 in XTU. I didnt think XTU stressed AVX that much or would prohibit you from hitting max clocks.


I don't get what's wrong with your ram. And I can see it running at 1.2v but you didn't mention the speed right now.
Confirm about Xtu's bench mode using the avx offsets or at least the first one (I'm at 4.7 using -2 / -4).
Nice vcore for 4.8








Did you also run 2h in stress test (Xtu)?
Mine did 4.7 with 1.225, however I'm testing it again right now with 1.21v (increasing the vccin from 1.80 to 1.81).
But I don't like those temps, I can get more than 10C lower (I mean 1.225v but 4.7).
If 4.8 is getting that much heat than I'll keep the 4.7 for good.
I still need to raise the cache and lastly some extra ram oc (3200 cl14 right now).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Try again with Realbench 2.44 (No AVX) and see what happens:
> http://dlcdnmkt.asus.com/rog/RealBench_v2.44.zip


Nice, I'll try this one too.
Later


----------



## RudeDeltaDude

In the old days overclocking was easy, just up the voltage change multiplier and watch temps with Prime95.

For starters i try to underclock my 7820x. I have it running at 1.07v.

When i run Prime95 (version 29,3) for 10 minutes watertemps from my Kraken X61 rise from 30C to 37C with fans on 100 % speed.
Temps of cores are between 61c - 73c.

My question is if its normal that the temperature difference between the cores should be so big?

Are these temperatures resonable and do more people try to underclock this cpu and i would like to know their Vcore involved?


----------



## Sgang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RudeDeltaDude*
> 
> In the old days overclocking was easy, just up the voltage change multiplier and watch temps with Prime95.
> 
> For starters i try to underclock my 7820x. I have it running at 1.07v.
> 
> When i run Prime95 (version 29,3) for 10 minutes watertemps from my Kraken X61 rise from 30C to 37C with fans on 100 % speed.
> Temps of cores are between 61c - 73c.
> 
> My question is if its normal that the temperature difference between the cores should be so big?
> 
> Are these temperatures resonable and do more people try to underclock this cpu and i would like to know their Vcore involved?


Hi Rude, i can't see the multiplier or the temps, in the pics. I've a 76 max package temp with x47multiplier, Vcore @1.229 stable, VVCIN 1.6, and
VCCIO/VCCSA 0.9 and 1.05V as suggested by Martin.

The problem is that i think that all this heat could influence my VGA, (streess test/gaming 71°) so i think i will slow down to x45 1.18v

This morning i checked with this oc and i received a strange result in 3DMark, just 4700 points CPUscore ( with 4,7 i was over 10000). Can't have enough time to check if everything is ok, but do you know something could influence the result?


----------



## RudeDeltaDude

You should be able to click on the image? Temps are in down right corner. I have everything on auto, except Vcore looking to proper set the rest later.
I think mine is boosting all cores 45X and first core 46x,

Have you run Prime95 and coretemp to monitor? Maybe it is throttling, i dont know if 3dMark is that heavy but i can imagine results drop very fast when it throttles.

I am going for lowest Vcorre stable and then look further because this CPU gets so hot lol.

Reading trough this tread now so guys dont be mad when i ask, there is a lot info in here.


----------



## symmetrical

I have a random issue myself if anyone can help chime in.

In Cinebench doing the single core test I'm seeing the load top out at 50% for the core. Shouldn't it be 100%? And I know something's not right since the score is always ranging from 168-172 when I know it should at least be 185+


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *symmetrical*
> 
> I have a random issue myself if anyone can help chime in.
> 
> In Cinebench doing the single core test I'm seeing the load top out at 50% for the core. Shouldn't it be 100%? And I know something's not right since the score is always ranging from 168-172 when I know it should at least be 185+


Mine does something similar. And while looking at my cores some will hit 4.7(my OC atm) and others will remain around 2ghz. It doesn't load just one core for some reason. It's like the scheduler is confused.

Idk. Maybe it's normal. what's your clockspeed?


----------



## Artah

Guys can we please post CPU along with our posts. I’m finding it difficult to keep going back to find out which CPU someone is referring to on posts. I know I’m guilty of it at some point but with this broad thread we may be trying to help someone with their Apple using Orange as a base in mind.


----------



## Jpmboy

it should be listed in their sig rig(s).


----------



## symmetrical

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Mine does something similar. And while looking at my cores some will hit 4.7(my OC atm) and others will remain around 2ghz. It doesn't load just one core for some reason. It's like the scheduler is confused.
> 
> Idk. Maybe it's normal. what's your clockspeed?


I reverted everything to stock just to see if it helps, but doesn't seem to matter what I do.

It seems to jump up to 4.4ghz like it's supposed to with ITB 3.0, but doesn't hold it.

Maybe you're right, the schedule is confusing it.

It's probably not a big issue, but man my OCD is kicking in seeing all the review sites get the correct single core scores and mine being somewhat gimped.

(For Artah, I'm referring to the 7980XE)


----------



## symmetrical

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *symmetrical*
> 
> I reverted everything to stock just to see if it helps, but doesn't seem to matter what I do.
> 
> It seems to jump up to 4.4ghz like it's supposed to with ITB 3.0, but doesn't hold it.
> 
> Maybe you're right, the schedule is confusing it.
> 
> It's probably not a big issue, but man my OCD is kicking in seeing all the review sites get the correct single core scores and mine being somewhat gimped.
> 
> (For Artah, I'm referring to the 7980XE)


Quoting myself here, I found an interesting result. So I disabled 2 cores (making it 16 cores / 32 threads) and re-ran the single core test. Again it is pegged at 50% but the turbo boost seems to sit at 4.4ghz more consistently. And the score is now 187 where it should be.

I'm starting to think the windows scheduler just gets confused with 18 cores / 36 threads.

This is in line with a lot of the reviews where they had issues with the 7980XE not boosting correctly. Hopefully a future update will address this.

*Throws 7980XE in the garbage* j/k

Oh well, nobody buys a 7980XE to do single threaded stuff anyway.


----------



## ottoore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> About EKWB Monoblock, and a "base" like this
> 
> 
> 
> There is a loss of "heat dissipation" ?
> Especially for the 7920X and + ?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MJB13SRT8*
> 
> for anyone that wanted to know what the circle dia on the ek mono block is, it's 35mm.
> 
> Montrose


So i replicate the pcb of an HCC cpu on a sheet of paper. The wb circle perfectly covers the entire DIE.

I wondered at first, the die is not in the middle of the pcb but i was wrong.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Guys can we please post CPU along with our posts. I'm finding it difficult to keep going back to find out which CPU someone is referring to on posts. I know I'm guilty of it at some point but with this broad thread we may be trying to help someone with their Apple using Orange as a base in mind.


FAT

http://www.overclock.net/t/1639628/october-2017-foldathon-monday-16th-wednesday-18th-1200-et-1600-utc/40_20#post_26395308


----------



## done12many2

I just had a no shlit sherlock moment.

Running RealBench (2.54 in my case) with 1 GPU active as opposed to 2 GPU definitely shapes Vcore requirements for the CPU.

I rarely run SLI when gaming and only have the second GPU for use with certain games, benchmarks and some Adobe Premiere stuff. After testing RealBench with 1 vs 2 GPUs, it's definitely worth my time to create separate profiles for each scenario.

Just thought I'd share this in the event that anyone else was asleep at the wheel like I was.









Well, I thought it did, but I must have been wrong. Back to back testing with 1 and 2 GPUs indicates that my first test of 1 vs 2 must have been unstable in some other way.


----------



## hrmgamer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I'd recommend TG Kryonaut if not delidding, however, the paste used will have minimal impact as you're not dealing with the contact between the die and IHS. That said, temps on the larger dies seem to be much better across the board. Plenty of radiator space and decent cooling is a must IMO. If you can spend $2,000 on a CPU, you can afford to put money into cooling, too.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> TGK will last as long as you need it to. TIMs like PK-3, IC Diamond and Gelid extreme will too.


Thanks for the advice. Rep+.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *symmetrical*
> 
> Quoting myself here, I found an interesting result. So I disabled 2 cores (making it 16 cores / 32 threads) and re-ran the single core test. Again it is pegged at 50% but the turbo boost seems to sit at 4.4ghz more consistently. And the score is now 187 where it should be.
> 
> I'm starting to think the windows scheduler just gets confused with 18 cores / 36 threads.
> 
> This is in line with a lot of the reviews where they had issues with the 7980XE not boosting correctly. Hopefully a future update will address this.
> 
> *Throws 7980XE in the garbage* j/k
> 
> Oh well, nobody buys a 7980XE to do single threaded stuff anyway.


Nobody use 7980xe on stock on OCN either









I run 4700 on 18cores, with no powersave.

Just because


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Try again with Realbench 2.44 (No AVX) and see what happens:
> http://dlcdnmkt.asus.com/rog/RealBench_v2.44.zip


Will do. Is 2.44 considered more / less stressful or just another version that could poke holes in my OC? Is the inference that my OC isn't valid?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> I don't get what's wrong with your ram. And I can see it running at 1.2v but you didn't mention the speed right now.
> Confirm about Xtu's bench mode using the avx offsets or at least the first one (I'm at 4.7 using -2 / -4).
> Nice vcore for 4.8
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Did you also run 2h in stress test (Xtu)?
> Mine did 4.7 with 1.225, however I'm testing it again right now with 1.21v (increasing the vccin from 1.80 to 1.81).
> But I don't like those temps, I can get more than 10C lower (I mean 1.225v but 4.7).
> If 4.8 is getting that much heat than I'll keep the 4.7 for good.
> I still need to raise the cache and lastly some extra ram oc (3200 cl14 right now).
> Nice, I'll try this one too.
> Later


Sorry for the confusion - the RAM I'm using is running at stock, no XMP or OC yet. I was just saying that I am not looking forward to overclocking it. The kit is g.skill: F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR

I did not run the XTU stress test yet. As far as temps go, are you saying all of the temps are bad or just the package? I figured the core temps were pretty decent for a 360 AIO and while I would ideally like my package temp below 80c... I don't think its too terrible at 84c. I know some of the cores are approaching 80c but again, I figured that for a 10core on an AIO, this was pretty good.

Are you running an AIO or a custom loop where you are 10c lower w/ 1.225 @ 4.7? I'm probably going to be putting together a custom loop in a couple months and hopefully that will improve my temps to be closer to yours.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> FAT
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1639628/october-2017-foldathon-monday-16th-wednesday-18th-1200-et-1600-utc/40_20#post_26395308


I know my computer mputers are in shambles atm I'll fire some up later.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Sorry for the confusion - the RAM I'm using is running at stock, no XMP or OC yet. I was just saying that I am not looking forward to overclocking it. The kit is g.skill: F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR
> 
> I did not run the XTU stress test yet. As far as temps go, are you saying all of the temps are bad or just the package? I figured the core temps were pretty decent for a 360 AIO and while I would ideally like my package temp below 80c... I don't think its too terrible at 84c. I know some of the cores are approaching 80c but again, I figured that for a 10core on an AIO, this was pretty good.
> 
> Are you running an AIO or a custom loop where you are 10c lower w/ 1.225 @ 4.7? I'm probably going to be putting together a custom loop in a couple months and hopefully that will improve my temps to be closer to yours.


My mistake, those temps of yours aren't bad at all, for a 7900X @4.8Ghz (but maybe you should set your XMP and test again).
My 4.7 temps were cool for an undelidded cpu (custom loop with ext monsta 420 btw) under Xtu stress however:



[Notice that I've also tested with 1.81v vccin and that allowed me to lower the vcore down to 1.21v (got bsod at 1.20 earlier)].

But then I tried to pass the 2h of Realbench 2.44 (4.7, no avx downclock) and it did.
Yet with some way higher temps like 74C core max an 80C package.









OK, now I'm gonna wait for this last attempt of warm weather here in Manchester to vanish and make room for some more OC friendly chilly one before I'll continue with the cache OC


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I'm running VCCIN at 1.900V... This was fairly normal on HW-E, is this high on SK-X?


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I'm running VCCIN at 1.900V... This was fairly normal on HW-E, is this high on SK-X?


Yeah, it is high
Try to keep it as low as possible (way down to 1.800) to avoid high temps


----------



## aDyerSituation

Someone else said that VCCIN has to be .6 higher than vcore or else you will throttle. Is this true?


----------



## Sobo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *symmetrical*
> 
> I'm also curious about this as well. I was going to do it myself except that the way I have my fans setup I can't fit the higher clocked G.Skill TridentZ RAM because they are too friggin tall.
> 
> But if there's a significant difference, that would be nice to know.


I did some googling and found a couple of tests which really suggest there's a MASSIVE performance benefit in gaming when running really fast RAM:



http://imgur.com/a


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Someone else said that VCCIN has to be .6 higher than vcore or else you will throttle. Is this true?


I don't know exactly but mine is exactly 0.6v higher right now (1.21v / 1.81v)
So far so good


----------



## done12many2

7900x @ 4.9 GHz / 2 hour RealBench 2.54 test. Chip is delidded and *no* AVX offset was used. Memory is a G.Skill TZ 3200 C14 kit (4x8) at 4000 MHz (16-17-17-39-1T). I'm taking it easy on cache (2.7 GHz) until I can understand it a little better. I've burned up some cache in the past.



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Someone else said that VCCIN has to be .6 higher than vcore or else you will throttle. Is this true?


I'm in the process of rerunning the same setup as above, but with VCCIN at 1.75v, which puts me at a .511v difference and I have no throttling or "phantom throttling" at all. I'll also add that I'm seeing no difference in temps ranging from 1.85v to 1.75v on the VCCIN.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Someone else said that VCCIN has to be .6 higher than vcore or else you will throttle. Is this true?


From ASUS EDGE UP:
CPU Input Voltage: This provides the 1.80VDC input to the CPU. All primary internal voltage rails are derived and re-regulated from this voltage source. When the CPU is overclocked, this voltage needs to be increased. We recommend keeping the CPU Input Voltage at least 0.45V higher than CPU Vcore, otherwise the system may become unstable or need a higher level of Vcore for stability. The maximum voltage we use is 1.95V set in UEFI. Do note that the actual voltage supplied to the CPU is affected by the LLC setting within the External DIGI+ Power Control menu.


----------



## Mr-Dark

Hello everyone

i'm building a new gaming pc.. and as i can see the 8700k isn't in stock anywhere so i'm thinking about the 7800X...

how the MSI X299 SLI Plus ? that on discount at 205$ now.. is the VRM enough for the 7800X and average oc ( 4.5GHZ ? ).. ?

i will use single Titan-XP and 2 Nvme drive... so nothing crazy


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> 7900x @ 4.9 GHz / 2 hour RealBench 2.54 test. Chip is delidded and *no* AVX offset was used. Memory is a G.Skill TZ 3200 C14 kit (4x8) at 4000 MHz (16-17-17-39-1T). I'm taking it easy on cache (2.7 GHz) until I can understand it a little better. I've burned up some cache in the past.
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Someone else said that VCCIN has to be .6 higher than vcore or else you will throttle. Is this true?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm in the process of rerunning the same setup as above, but with VCCIN at 1.75v, which puts me at a .511v difference and I have no throttling or "phantom throttling" at all. I'll also add that I'm seeing no difference in temps ranging from 1.85v to 1.75v on the VCCIN.
Click to expand...

Nice score bloody hell








Sooner or late I'll delid mine as well, I don't need more than 4.8 but you never know








I suppose we have the same ram, later I'll try your 4000 settings, what ddr voltage (and other like vccio, sa)?
I'll be following for the mesh too.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Nice score bloody hell
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sooner or late I'll delid mine as well, I don't need more than 4.8 but you never know
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I suppose we have the same ram, later I'll try your 4000 settings, what ddr voltage (and other like vccio, sa)?
> I'll be following for the mesh too.


Thanks bud.









I'm running at my RAM at 1.38v, VCCIO at .925v and VCCSA at .9v

As for cache, it's definitely helped with memory bandwidth and latency all the way up to 3200 MHz, but I don't think I need the additional bandwidth. The improved latency is always welcomed, but I'll need to figure out if it's worth the extra require VCache.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> 7900x @ 4.9 GHz / 2 hour RealBench 2.54 test. Chip is delidded and *no* AVX offset was used. Memory is a G.Skill TZ 3200 C14 kit (4x8) at 4000 MHz (16-17-17-39-1T). I'm taking it easy on cache (2.7 GHz) until I can understand it a little better. I've burned up some cache in the past.
> 
> 
> I'm in the process of rerunning the same setup as above, but with VCCIN at 1.75v, which puts me at a .511v difference and I have no throttling or "phantom throttling" at all. I'll also add that I'm seeing no difference in temps ranging from 1.85v to 1.75v on the VCCIN.


Temps look really good. Yeah there were a few users that burned up quite a lot of cash on the 7980XE









Your rig looks insane lol. 5 360 Rads?


----------



## Martin778

My 7920X is kinda stuck at 4.6GHz 1.215V and 3.0GHz @ 1.10V cache. RAM ticking at 4000 16-17-17-41-400-1T (can do better, surely).

I think the TIM is drying out inside, must be. I hit mid/high 80's after 2h of Aida64 stress test with no AVX offset.
I was looking at the graph and after stopping the test the idle temps don't drop so the water isn't heating up much.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Temps look really good. Yeah there were a few users that burned up quite a lot of cash on the 7980XE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your rig looks insane lol. 5 360 Rads?


Thanks man.

Yeah, cache is fragile so I'll play it safe until we know better.

I went with a larger loop so I can continue to effectively cool parts when I'm in the mood for silence. Even with fans spinning slow, I rarely see water temps much higher than 4c to 6c above ambient temps. Loops, or at least the majority of parts can last several upgrades and builds so I wasn't too worried about the initial investment. I've already run a few platforms through same cooling setup.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> My 7920X is kinda stuck at 4.6GHz 1.215V and 3.0GHz @ 1.10V cache. RAM ticking at 4000 16-17-17-41-400-1T (can do better, surely).
> 
> I think the TIM is drying out inside, must be. I hit mid/high 80's after 2h of Aida64 stress test with no AVX offset.
> I was looking at the graph and after stopping the test the idle temps don't drop so the water isn't heating up much.


I had a 7920X for about a week. It didn't work out for me for other reasons, but temps were pretty good on it stock. How's your flow?


----------



## Martin778

It's good, only single 420mm rad and a D5.

Prime 95 26.6 heats up the package to 98*C...it won't throttle because the Tjmax is at 105*C.
VRM is...well....HOT.





On wednesday I'm getting my second 1080Ti. Hell, the RM1000x will be sweating balls on this.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> It's good, only single 420mm rad and a D5.
> 
> Prime 95 26.6 heats up the package to 98*C...


Based on your CPU temps, I can't say that your package temps are too far out of line at all.

You're right, D5 is plenty for your setup. Are you running it at a moderate or higher speed?

Out of curiosity, is there any reason you're running the VCCIO and VCCSA voltages that you are? They are still safe, but I just never needed that much on either. This is my 3rd Skylake-X chip, one of which was a 7920x and none of them needed much more than 0.9v to run a 4000 MHz mem clock with tightened timings. VTT also defaulted to ~0.96v.

I think you and I talked about this before, but are you seeing a dip in write bandwidth with your 7920x?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> 7900x @ 4.9 GHz / 2 hour RealBench 2.54 test. Chip is delidded and *no* AVX offset was used. Memory is a G.Skill TZ 3200 C14 kit (4x8) at 4000 MHz (16-17-17-39-1T). I'm taking it easy on cache (2.7 GHz) until I can understand it a little better. I've burned up some cache in the past.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm in the process of rerunning the same setup as above, but with VCCIN at 1.75v, which puts me at a .511v difference and I have no throttling or "phantom throttling" at all. I'll also add that I'm seeing no difference in temps ranging from 1.85v to 1.75v on the VCCIN.


That is one impressive CPU


----------



## Martin778

Yes, AIDA64 shows a big hit in memory write speeds indeed. Haven't seen it in other benches though.

If you can tell me where VTT voltage is on my Taichi.

The D5 was running at high speed (it's PWM) and the fans, 3x vardar EVO 2k RPM at max.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ottoore*
> 
> So i replicate the pcb of an HCC cpu on a sheet of paper. The wb circle perfectly covers the entire DIE.
> 
> I wondered at first, the die is not in the middle of the pcb but i was wrong.


Thanks for the feedback
Out of curiosity, the "circle" is larger than the DIE, but it is no larger than the IHS ?


----------



## symmetrical

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sobo*
> 
> I did some googling and found a couple of tests which really suggest there's a MASSIVE performance benefit in gaming when running really fast RAM:
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a


Holy that's a huge difference! Some of the results were 22% better over 3200mhz/stock mesh!

Looks like I need to invest in some faster RAM indeed and try to get the mesh up as high as I can.


----------



## symmetrical

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mr-Dark*
> 
> Hello everyone
> 
> i'm building a new gaming pc.. and as i can see the 8700k isn't in stock anywhere so i'm thinking about the 7800X...
> 
> how the MSI X299 SLI Plus ? that on discount at 205$ now.. is the VRM enough for the 7800X and average oc ( 4.5GHZ ? ).. ?
> 
> i will use single Titan-XP and 2 Nvme drive... so nothing crazy


I'd wait for the 8700K to be available. Not unless you plan to upgrade to the higher core chips in the future will you need the X299 setup. For gaming the 8700K will be a lot easier, cheaper, and faster.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

The Tomhawk handles a 5 ghz 7800X with a fan. 4700-4800 without a fan is no issues.


----------



## ottoore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Thanks for the feedback
> Out of curiosity, the "circle" is larger than the DIE, but it is no larger than the IHS ?


It' s much smaller than the ihs


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ottoore*
> 
> It' s much smaller than the ihs


Ok thanks


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> My mistake, those temps of yours aren't bad at all, for a 7900X @4.8Ghz (but maybe you should set your XMP and test again).
> My 4.7 temps were cool for an undelidded cpu (custom loop with ext monsta 420 btw) under Xtu stress however:
> 
> 
> 
> [Notice that I've also tested with 1.81v vccin and that allowed me to lower the vcore down to 1.21v (got bsod at 1.20 earlier)].
> 
> But then I tried to pass the 2h of Realbench 2.44 (4.7, no avx downclock) and it did.
> 
> Yet with some way higher temps like 74C core max an 80C package.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OK, now I'm gonna wait for this last attempt of warm weather here in Manchester to vanish and make room for some more OC friendly chilly one before I'll continue with the cache OC


With VCCIN set to 1.81v the CPU will be throttling.


----------



## xarot

Doesn't Input voltage need to be set as high as the CPU requires it to be at given frequency and voltage? Otherwise it will act as a handbrake? Just don't go over the suggested limits. That would describe why the Vcore can be tuned down if the CPU is throttling.


----------



## arrow0309

So what do you guys suggest, what vccin?
And how can you know that is throttling?
I'm gonna do some benchmarks however.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> So what do you guys suggest, what vccin?
> And how can you know that is throttling?
> I'm gonna do some benchmarks however.


Do you have a power meter to measure power at the wall?

I'm running 1.80v with an average core voltage of 1.239v (i use per core to adjust each individually, hence average) with no throttling at all. This is going to be chip and case specific I'm sure.

If you can measure power at the wall, spotting "phantom" throttling is easy. If you don't, you can still test for it by measuring work output over time.

Using whatever stress test you use, set your VCCIN to say 1.85v and time how much work is produced. For example, time how long it takes RealBench output 10 x "Result Hash Match!" Then go back into BIOS and set your VCCIN to 1.8v, rinse and repeat. Do this as low as you want to go or until you are unstable. You're obviously looking for a change in work output, which would indicate that your CPU is throttling without you noticing or without it being reported in your hardware monitoring application.

Some will argue that you can't see "phantom" throttling until you place a "real" load such as Prime95 with AVX or LinX on the CPU. If that's the case and that's how you feel, then calculate the work output the same way, but use these instead. I personally don't use those stressing methods.

If your version of stress testing is using real applications that load up the CPU, then grab something like Handbrake and test in the same manner outlined above.

Again, I think measuring power at the wall is the easiest, but these are just alternatives to helping you detect the issue.

Hope that helps.

.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Do you have a power meter to measure power at the wall?
> 
> I'm running 1.80v with an average core voltage of 1.239v (i use per core to adjust each individually, hence average) with no throttling at all. This is going to be chip and case specific I'm sure.
> 
> If you can measure power at the wall, spotting "phantom" throttling is easy. If you don't, you can still test for it by measuring work output over time.
> 
> Using whatever stress test you use, set your VCCIN to say 1.85v and time how much work is produced. For example, time how long it takes RealBench output 10 x "Result Hash Match!" Then go back into BIOS and set your VCCIN to 1.8v, rinse and repeat. Do this as low as you want to go or until you are unstable.
> 
> Some will argue that you can't see "phantom" throttling until you place a "real" load such as Prime95 with AVX or LinX on the CPU. If that's the case and that's how you feel, then calculate the work output the same way, but use these instead. I personally don't use those stressing methods.
> 
> If your version of stress testing is using real applications that load up the CPU, then grab something like Handbrake and test in the same manner outlined above.
> 
> Again, I think measuring power at the wall is the easiest, but these are just alternatives to helping you detect the issue.
> 
> Hope that helps.


Thanks mate








And yes, I do have a power meter, but what do you exactly mean, what wattage am I suppose to get?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Thanks mate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And yes, I do have a power meter, but what do you exactly mean, what wattage am I suppose to get?


Great. Put a load on it with VCCIN set at a moderate level and determine a rough average for power draw. Use this as your starting point. Then start dropping VCCIN as you see fit. Keep in mind that as you lower VCCIN, you may see a small reduction in power. After all, you are lowering VCCIN, but if you see a large drop, you're throttling.

Just make sure that the load and all other variables remain the same as you're testing.


----------



## Nihaan

Anyone with 7940X here ? I'm planning to buy it but sadly there are no reviews of it so i am not so sure if i should pull the trigger or not.

Any suggestions ?


----------



## cekim

Not a terrible start - 4.5 all core @ 1.15v aid64's all day but:
a. a bit warm - pigeon poop is poop - delid toys are on the way, think this testing is convincing me.
b. cinebench thermal throttled at these settings.

280 gtx110 cooler accidently mounted "goofy" for box testing seems to be doing as well as expected.
128G 3200CAS 14 BWE ram running fine at those settings so far - have not tried to push to see if I can trade CAS for clocks and get some nifty headline numbers....

This run is my second pass through the bios after sanity checkes - so just beginning.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nihaan*
> 
> Anyone with 7940X here ? I'm planning to buy it but sadly there are no reviews of it so i am not so sure if i should pull the trigger or not.
> 
> Any suggestions ?


Same as 7920x, but 2 extra cores. Same but different


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Not a terrible start - 4.5 all core @ 1.15v aid64's all day but:
> a. a bit warm - pigeon poop is poop - delid toys are on the way, think this testing is convincing me.
> b. cinebench thermal throttled at these settings.
> 
> 280 gtx110 cooler accidently mounted "goofy" for box testing seems to be doing as well as expected.
> 128G 3200CAS 14 BWE ram running fine at those settings so far - have not tried to push to see if I can trade CAS for clocks and get some nifty headline numbers....
> 
> This run is my second pass through the bios after sanity checkes - so just beginning.


Have to admit, I've only been half-heartedly following specifics on voltages/OC on this chip until now, so I started fresh from "auto" and worked my way down.

4 cores run significantly hotter than the others (2,3,12,15) All approaching if not hitting Tjmax @ 1.18v 4.2GHz while the rest are 65-70C (or less) even at 4.4GHz. Of course, this is not my final cooling setup, but to be honest, from what I _have_ read, the AIO's limit is the TIM, less than the AIO itself. It just isn't that warm.

Curiously 15 is marked as a "good core" by Intel despite being the single worst temp performer. I assume those quals are done pre-TIM (bed-of-nails testing) which leads to a lot of interesting questions about Intel's choices once you throw pigeon poop into the mix...

Well, enough groping around in the dark, I need to get super-serial on my reading up on what voltages to expect, so far 1.1 hangs in windows startup 1.15v is quasi-stable, even under load, 1.18v is "stable so far" in aida and CB provided the hot-cores are clocked down to 4.2. Given Skylake (non-X), those seem like pretty great numbers to see any level of stability, much less surviving CB/aida... So, as prior, I think I'm off to a decent start, but the number of dimensions to this problem with 18 cores - each with their own ratio and voltage is pretty staggering...

p.s. so far I've seen 4300-4400 CB [email protected] all core. Given 4995 for 2x2969v3 @3.4GHz all-core That's pretty impressive... 1/2 the cores with the score in the "ballpark".... FWIW, limiting to 18 total cores in the 2696v3 system (9x9 which runs at all-core turbo of 18x3.8GHz) produces a score of ~3400... I'll eventually down-clock the 7980xe to 3.8GHz to compare clock-for-clock...


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Curiously 15 is marked as a "good core" by Intel despite being the single worst temp performer.


When I saw this my theory was that since it's the best core it gets hammered the most, therefore the temps are higher. You should also notice that core clocking higher and doing more work.
Conversely, the core with the lowest temps should be the worst performer in terms of clock speed.
Make sense you think?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *surfinchina*
> 
> When I saw this my theory was that since it's the best core it gets hammered the most, therefore the temps are higher. You should also notice that core clocking higher and doing more work.
> Conversely, the core with the lowest temps should be the worst performer in terms of clock speed.
> Make sense you think?


Fixed speed in this case - all-core turbo of 4.4/4.5 each baked that core when others were cooler

Even setting individual ratio limits (4.2 on 2,3,12,15 4.5 on everything else) still showed those cores bouncing off Tjmax and 15 in particular throttling. 2,3,12 all had 2-5C of headroom according to hwinfo...


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Fixed speed in this case - all-core turbo of 4.4/4.5 each baked that core when others were cooler
> 
> Even setting individual ratio limits (4.2 on 2,3,12,15 4.5 on everything else) still showed those cores bouncing off Tjmax and 15 in particular throttling. 2,3,12 all had 2-5C of headroom according to hwinfo...


I have all core turbo set to 4.8, but I noticed that some cores (the hottest ones) were peaking at 5.1, even though it shouldn't have gone above 4.8. I'm a bit of a newb with this, but it could have something to do with leaving EIST enabled. When I disable that, my benches go lower as well as lower temps. I never checked the hot cores with EIST disabled.
I run Mac OS x, so usually I don't have access to all the monitoring software, but last time I played with the overclock in windows this is what seemed to be happening.


----------



## Nihaan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Same as 7920x, but 2 extra cores. Same but different


Can you explain your statement a bit more ?







What is the meaning of that ? Do you own one ?

It has a bigger die than 7900x right ? So i guess thermal values are much better compared to 7900x because of that but what about oc and overall performance ?

I am not sure if i should wait a bit more for 7960x or just purchase 7940x right away. Right now only 7900x 7920x and 7940x is in stock and there is no ETA for 7960x. So i am not sure about which one to purchase. I hope we have a 7940x owner among us to share his experience, benchmark and thermal values.

Thanks.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Curiously 15 is marked as a "good core" by Intel despite being the single worst temp performer. I assume those quals are done pre-TIM (bed-of-nails testing) which leads to a lot of interesting questions about Intel's choices once you throw pigeon poop into the mix...


My experience with the Intel marked "best cores" is that they are not necessarily the best cores at all. They may simply meet the minimum requirement for use with TB 3.0. In my case, my coolest AND hottest cores are both marked by Intel as the "best cores".

Interestingly enough, the VID programmed by Intel also leads me to believe that they aren't necessarily the best cores. One of them, the better of the two "best cores" has the lowest VID of all of the cores, while the other of the two "best cores" has one of the worst VIDs of all of the cores.

I tested each core on my CPU individually in order to set up a somewhat accurate "per core" overclock and was able to apply a negative offset within adaptive voltage to all cores, but the worst of the 2 marked as "best cores" was only able to drop a little before becoming unstable. The majority of the other cores responded well to the offset.

This core also remained one of the two worst cores voltage and temp wise after delidding.

I honestly don't think Intel is testing the quality of the cores any further than determining if it's good enough to handle the regular boosting to max rated boost clock. I wish I had better news for you.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Do you have a power meter to measure power at the wall?
> 
> I'm running 1.80v with an average core voltage of 1.239v (i use per core to adjust each individually, hence average) with no throttling at all. This is going to be chip and case specific I'm sure.
> 
> If you can measure power at the wall, spotting "phantom" throttling is easy. If you don't, you can still test for it by measuring work output over time.
> 
> Using whatever stress test you use, set your VCCIN to say 1.85v and time how much work is produced. For example, time how long it takes RealBench output 10 x "Result Hash Match!" Then go back into BIOS and set your VCCIN to 1.8v, rinse and repeat. Do this as low as you want to go or until you are unstable. You're obviously looking for a change in work output, which would indicate that your CPU is throttling without you noticing or without it being reported in your hardware monitoring application.
> 
> Some will argue that you can't see "phantom" throttling until you place a "real" load such as Prime95 with AVX or LinX on the CPU. If that's the case and that's how you feel, then calculate the work output the same way, but use these instead. I personally don't use those stressing methods.
> 
> If your version of stress testing is using real applications that load up the CPU, then grab something like Handbrake and test in the same manner outlined above.
> 
> Again, I think measuring power at the wall is the easiest, but these are just alternatives to helping you detect the issue.
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> .


There are plenty of CPU benchmarks that will trigger the throttle point, doesn't need to be Prime or AVX based.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Not a terrible start - 4.5 all core @ 1.15v aid64's all day but:
> a. a bit warm - pigeon poop is poop - delid toys are on the way, think this testing is convincing me.
> b. cinebench thermal throttled at these settings.
> 
> 280 gtx110 cooler accidently mounted "goofy" for box testing seems to be doing as well as expected.
> 128G 3200CAS 14 BWE ram running fine at those settings so far - have not tried to push to see if I can trade CAS for clocks and get some nifty headline numbers....
> 
> This run is my second pass through the bios after sanity checkes - so just beginning.


Nice! will be watching.. and waiting for mine to arrive.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> There are plenty of CPU benchmarks that will trigger the throttle point, doesn't need to be Prime or AVX based.


Sure there are. Admittedly, I don't run all of the benchmarks available, but I do run Cinebench, 3DMark and a few others. Nothing I run triggers phantom throttling at my daily clocks.

When I do run higher clocks at 5 GHz and higher, I do increase VCCIN.

All I'm simply saying is each setup and each use case varies so much that the answer to the right amount of VCCIN is, it depends.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Nice! will be watching.. and waiting for mine to arrive.


I'm checking Micro Center and Newegg daily and I'm not even sure that I need one yet.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Great. Put a load on it with VCCIN set at a moderate level and determine a rough average for power draw. Use this as your starting point. Then start dropping VCCIN as you see fit. Keep in mind that as you lower VCCIN, you may see a small reduction in power. After all, you are lowering VCCIN, but if you see a large drop, you're throttling.
> 
> Just make sure that the load and all other variables remain the same as you're testing.


OK so I did exactly the way you said and between 1.760 - 1.850v I didn't notice a remarkable power increase / decrease (during the first 5' of Realbench 2.44, no Avx) nor a cpu perf time difference (the first 3 Hash Match):

1.760/1.780: ~545-555W___5 min___core max 70C
1.800/1.810: ~545-555W___5 min___core max 71C
1.830: ~550-560W___5 min___core max 73C
1.850: ~552-562W___5 min___core max 72C

I don't care about avx since I'm not using it in gaming so I used this test for the max OC freq (I'm using avx / 512 offsets of -2 / -4)
And obviously I switched back to 1.810v








What do ya think?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> There are plenty of CPU benchmarks that will trigger the throttle point, doesn't need to be Prime or AVX based.


Can you please be more specific?
Also what vccin would you suggest for 4.7 @1.21v?


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Not a terrible start - 4.5 all core @ 1.15v aid64's all day but:
> a. a bit warm - pigeon poop is poop - delid toys are on the way, think this testing is convincing me.
> b. cinebench thermal throttled at these settings.
> 
> 280 gtx110 cooler accidently mounted "goofy" for box testing seems to be doing as well as expected.
> 128G 3200CAS 14 BWE ram running fine at those settings so far - have not tried to push to see if I can trade CAS for clocks and get some nifty headline numbers....
> 
> This run is my second pass through the bios after sanity checkes - so just beginning.


The fact that you can overclock an 18 core processor to 4.5ghz all cores on a $150 AIO is a pretty amazing accomplishment in and of itself lol


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> OK so I did exactly the way you said and between 1.760 - 1.850v I didn't notice a remarkable power increase / decrease (during the first 5' of Realbench 2.44, no Avx) nor a cpu perf time difference (the first 3 Hash Match):
> 
> 1.760/1.780: ~545-555W___5 min___core max 70C
> 1.800/1.810: ~545-555W___5 min___core max 71C
> 1.830: ~550-560W___5 min___core max 73C
> 1.850: ~552-562W___5 min___core max 72C


AFAIK, the Apex is resistant to the phantom throttling. Asus has implemented something to prevent it - supposedly even when you let VCCIN droop below 1.65v. (which is near the trigger point for other boards)
(http://www.overclock.net/t/1634045/skylake-x-phantom-throttling/20#post_26386342)

On the Gigabyte boards (without any counter-measures enabled), the 7900X will phantom throttle under:

Cinebench @ 5.0 GHz
Prime95 AVX @ 4.5 GHz
y-cruncher AVX512 @ 4.0 GHz
Quote:


> I don't care about avx since I'm not using it in gaming so I used this test for the max OC freq (I'm using avx / 512 offsets of -2 / -4)
> And obviously I switched back to 1.810v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do ya think?
> Can you please be more specific?
> Also what vccin would you suggest for 4.7 @1.21v?


There's a little-known option to people who simply don't care about AVX. It can be disabled in the OS. There's a BCDEDIT option that lets you completely turn off AVX. Then nobody can use it and you won't have to bother with offsets or worry about their thermals.

The catch of course is that some programs may crash if they check for hardware support, but not OS support. There's a very common programming bug where the application sees that the hardware has AVX(512) and proceeds to use it without verifying that the OS allows it. Those programs will crash.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> register at HWBOT... select your team (OCN of course). and there are dozens of guys here who'll help you get started. Main thing is to read the bench rules, and have fun!
> One of our team captains is @mllrkllr88
> http://hwbot.org/
> 
> If you have an ASUS board, we really need "new guy" help HERE


I'm coming for you Jpmboy lol. Just kidding. I'd need a 79080XE and a few more titans to even compete. Must be lonely up there at the top?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> I'm coming for you Jpmboy lol. Just kidding. I'd need a 79080XE and a few more titans to even compete. Must be lonely up there at the top?


that's great! Just bench what you want and when you can, have fun. It's us against the hardware! I stick to ambient cooling, haven't done any cryogenic cooling in decades.


----------



## cekim

ok, best I can do for now on AIO - RB for an hour. Had to gimp 2 cores for heat - they would not sustain > 4.2 even at 1.18v without overheating. 4.2 @ 1.10 keeps them inline with the other cores at 4.4. I got _most_ of the cores up to 4.5 @1.18v but 1 or 2 are dogging me deep into RB and I don't know which... So, 4.4 for now... 75-85C temps sustained in RB stress.

BTW, VCCIN? 1.75 seems to be plenty, but am I holding something back or generating heat? Not sure what this chip wants yet - SOOOO many variables...

CB isn't too bad either:


----------



## cekim

When you see it.... "Asus!" -Colonel Klink



Wonder how many of these gems went out into the wild???


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> When you see it.... "Asus!" -Colonel Klink
> 
> Wonder how many of these gems went out into the wild???


I don't see it. Are you referring to the standoffs?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I don't see it. Are you referring to the standoffs?


Yes, they are installed backwards!


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Yes, they are installed backwards!


They are not backwards. There should be a bag with standoff's and screws for M.2 installation in your box.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> They are not backwards. There should be a bag with standoff's and screws for M.2 installation in your box.


ok, that's just weird... I dug again and found them, but.... why???

Oh well, thx for the heads up...


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> ok, that's just weird... I dug again and found them, but.... why???
> 
> Oh well, thx for the heads up...


When I first looked at the M.2 boards I thought the same exact thing the standoffs are backwards. As to why, I have no idea.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> When I first looked at the M.2 boards I thought the same exact thing the standoffs are backwards. As to why, I have no idea.


Why do I get the feeling they "meant to do that, here are some stand-offs" is what really happened here?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> ok, best I can do for now on AIO - RB for an hour. Had to gimp 2 cores for heat - they would not sustain > 4.2 even at 1.18v without overheating. 4.2 @ 1.10 keeps them inline with the other cores at 4.4. I got _most_ of the cores up to 4.5 @1.18v but 1 or 2 are dogging me deep into RB and I don't know which... So, 4.4 for now... 75-85C temps sustained in RB stress.
> 
> BTW, VCCIN? 1.75 seems to be plenty, but am I holding something back or generating heat? Not sure what this chip wants yet - SOOOO many variables...
> 
> CB isn't too bad either:


looks real good cekim. I'm jelly. hopefully B&H ships mine out on the 23rd.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> looks real good cekim. I'm jelly. hopefully B&H ships mine out on the 23rd.


wringing it out now... I think delid is inevitable, everything is so bound by temps...

VRM too hot, various cores too hot... VRM gets fixed with the monoblock, but dropping ~15C off those core temps will be a game changer I think. playing with auto now using a staged setup - 4x4.5, 8x4.4, 18x4.2. I'm seeing confirmation of the various things I ran into trying to set voltages manually...

Not sure how this VRM fan bracket thing is supposed to work? With the setup above, I'm pulling ~340W per SIV and the VRM is screaming for more air.


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> The fact that you can overclock an 18 core processor to 4.5ghz all cores on a $150 AIO is a pretty amazing accomplishment in and of itself lol


Yes exactly.
I think the headroom for overclocking in all of these i9s is way better than any chip I've had in the past.
So much for the "Intel rushing out an answer to the threadripper" stories...


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *surfinchina*
> 
> Yes exactly.
> I think the headroom for overclocking in all of these i9s is way better than any chip I've had in the past.
> So much for the "Intel rushing out an answer to the threadripper" stories...


Well, the VRM and TIM story is less compelling... They have a fast design, but it is power hungry and lacks the pins to feed it and a means to move the heat away. 100C is not a happy place for a cpu...


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Well, the VRM and TIM story is less compelling... They have a fast design, but it is power hungry and lacks the pins to feed it and a means to move the heat away. 100C is not a happy place for a cpu...


Yes indeed.
I understand the heat. Even my old 5960 produced a lot of it and my 7900 has 2 more cores, so 25% more watts drawn I guess.
I think that it's ok to produce a CPU that needs a basic AIO when not overclocked.
Now, if you want to overclock you need a proper watercool which includes water VRM cooling and if you want to get a great overclock you need to delid. I also don't see a problem with that!
But then I like the hardware thing more than the software thing...


----------



## pantsaregood

So, when I built my 7820X system, I ordered two kits of G.Skill DDR4 3600 15-15-15-35-2T. One of the kits I received was a 16-16-16-36-2T kit, but I dealt with it and used it because one stick in the 15-15-15-35 kit I received was faulty and had to be RMA'd.

I have both sets now, so I have the option to return the 16-16-16-36 kit for the correct kit. Should I bother? I can run the kits together in quad-channel at 1.395V at DDR4 4000 17-17-17-37-1T. The 15-15-15-35 kit doesn't really seem to overclock any better. They're both clearly B-Die.

Also, what's everyone getting for memory latency in AIDA64? At DDR4 4000 17-17-17-37-1T, I'm averaging around 53ns. I've seen as low as 50.7ns. Am I realistically going to drop latency by any meaningful amount?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *surfinchina*
> 
> Yes exactly.
> I think the headroom for overclocking in all of these i9s is way better than any chip I've had in the past.
> So much for the "Intel rushing out an answer to the threadripper" stories...


The "rushing out a response bit" is partially true. The X299 release got pushed forward by two months and resulted in a relatively poor selection of motherboards, most of which had glaring issues. The HCC parts were also not originally on the roadmap, and were almost surely a reaction to Threadripper.

Also, the headroom on the i9s isn't terribly amazing. They're pushing overclocks that are, proportionally, similar to Nehalem and Sandy Bridge. The fact that they all seem like they could hit 5.0 GHz at reasonable voltages if temperatures allowed isn't surprising when you realize they're built on the same process as Kaby Lake.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *surfinchina*
> 
> Yes indeed.
> I understand the heat. Even my old 5960 produced a lot of it and my 7900 has 2 more cores, so 25% more watts drawn I guess.
> I think that it's ok to produce a CPU that needs a basic AIO when not overclocked.
> Now, if you want to overclock you need a proper watercool which includes water VRM cooling and if you want to get a great overclock you need to delid. I also don't see a problem with that!
> But then I like the hardware thing more than the software thing...


Oh, don't get me wrong, I've been pleading out-loud for this chip... Leave the cooling to us! As I suspected, its only a partial solution since the VRM and TIM have to support it...

I've been scrambling to get to a fully functional testbed with this chip today because its been gnawing at me for months to know what their mesh vs ring did to heavy IPC apps...

Answer: It hurt them...

Still need to shake out the potential causes beyond the mesh/L3 configuration (like the potential for micro-throttling), but...

I have this application that scales reasonably well out to 18 cores on my 2x2696v3 system @3.8GHz. FAR from linear as has a lot of IPC. So, by 18 cores you are hitting the law of diminishing returns HARD in terms of adding cores to gain performance. 20 cores still runs at roughly the same clock speed, but is no faster in wall-clock time.

Now, I'm running the same application on this single socket chip @4.2GHz all-core (3GHz mesh, 3200 CAS14 memory). I can run it for 2 minutes or 2 days, that part is entirely linear, so I ran a short one:

Here's the first result:
7980xe 18 cores @ 4.2GHz: 1m:45s
2x2696v3 18 cores @ 3.8Ghz: 1m:27s

Again, lots of variables to remove from this equation before I call it conclusive, but.... It appears my concerns about the mesh being essential for long-term scaleability, but pretty painful right now at this core count for apps with heavy IPC may be justified...

Fun stuff!


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Oh, don't get me wrong, I've been pleading out-loud for this chip... Leave the cooling to us! As I suspected, its only a partial solution since the VRM and TIM have to support it...
> 
> I've been scrambling to get to a fully functional testbed with this chip today because its been gnawing at me for months to know what their mesh vs ring did to heavy IPC apps...
> 
> Answer: It hurt them...
> 
> Still need to shake out the potential causes beyond the mesh/L3 configuration (like the potential for micro-throttling), but...
> 
> I have this application that scales reasonably well out to 18 cores on my 2x2696v3 system @3.8GHz. FAR from linear as has a lot of IPC. So, by 18 cores you are hitting the law of diminishing returns HARD in terms of adding cores to gain performance. 20 cores still runs at roughly the same clock speed, but is no faster in wall-clock time.
> 
> Now, I'm running the same application on this single socket chip @4.2GHz all-core (3GHz mesh, 3200 CAS14 memory). I can run it for 2 minutes or 2 days, that part is entirely linear, so I ran a short one:
> 
> Here's the first result:
> 7980xe 18 cores @ 4.2GHz: 1m:45s
> 2x2696v3 18 cores @ 3.8Ghz: 1m:27s
> 
> Again, lots of variables to remove from this equation before I call it conclusive, but.... It appears my concerns about the mesh being essential for long-term scaleability, but pretty painful right now at this core count for apps with heavy IPC may be justified...
> 
> Fun stuff!


What app?

Great test btw :


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Ah one of the reasons I love Asus.
The free mouse give away for people who bought a Asus x299 motherboard or ROG GTX1080ti, I bought both.

Nice little mouse for free


----------



## Martin778

Apex is finally available here at e500,- . Grrrrr I've had so many problems with ASUS but it's still tempting because it has a monoblock available and the Taichi doesn't.

Btw, are there actually any monoblocks for the R6A yet?!


----------



## Kimir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Apex is finally available here at e500,- . Grrrrr I've had so many problems with ASUS but it's still tempting because it has a monoblock available and the Taichi doesn't.
> 
> *Btw, are there actually any monoblocks for the R6A yet?!*


There is, but no stock at EK
https://www.ekwb.com/shop/catalogsearch/result/?q=R6e


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Apex is finally available here at e500,- . Grrrrr I've had so many problems with ASUS but it's still tempting because it has a monoblock available and the Taichi doesn't.
> 
> Btw, are there actually any monoblocks for the R6A yet?!


EK has one for both RVI Extreme and the RVI Apex, same monoblock works for both.

I have the apex, but will stick to my EK HF and a fan @ the VRMS instead. I prefer the look more.


----------



## Martin778

I've just got a link sent to me that apparently there IS a monoblock for the Taichi too, but from Bitspower. Doesn't seem to be available yet, however.



__ https://www.facebook.com/Bitspower/posts/1463828430350436


Changing the board would be another 250 euro's after selling the Taichi and then another 120 for the monoblock...

+
To everyone who delidded an SKL-X, how much liquid metal did you use, was the 1g tube enough?


----------



## haavard

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> To everyone who delidded an SKL-X, how much liquid metal did you use, was the 1g tube enough?


1g is plenty


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *haavard*
> 
> 1g is plenty


Yep. You won't need more. It is more than enough!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I've just got a link sent to me that apparently there IS a monoblock for the Taichi too, but from Bitspower. Doesn't seem to be available yet, however.
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.facebook.com/Bitspower/posts/1463828430350436
> 
> 
> Changing the board would be another 250 euro's after selling the Taichi and then another 120 for the monoblock...
> 
> +
> To everyone who delidded an SKL-X, how much liquid metal did you use, was the 1g tube enough?


1g is enough for a few dozen delids.


----------



## Martin778

Thanks! I might just order the Rockit tool, see how long it takes to get here from the USA.

I could make something like a wooden cradle to put the cpu in and push the IHS aside with a vice but is this what you want to risk with a 1000+ CPU? Nah.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Thanks! I might just order the Rockit tool, see how long it takes to get here from the USA.
> 
> I could make something like a wooden cradle to put the cpu in and push the IHS aside with a vice but is this what you want to risk with a 1000+ CPU? Nah.


They use DHL, so should take a couple days to get to you.


----------



## haavard

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Thanks! I might just order the Rockit tool, see how long it takes to get here from the USA.
> 
> I could make something like a wooden cradle to put the cpu in and push the IHS aside with a vice but is this what you want to risk with a 1000+ CPU? Nah.


DHL will deliver it within a few days, USPS probably a week or so. I used USPS to Norway and it took 5 days.

I highly recommend the product. Yes it's a bit of a one-trick pony, but it does that one trick really well.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Thanks! I might just order the Rockit tool, see how long it takes to get here from the USA.
> 
> I could make something like a wooden cradle to put the cpu in and push the IHS aside with a vice but is this what you want to risk with a 1000+ CPU? Nah.


Why not waiting for the Delid Die Mate X?

https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-delid-die-mate-x-fsd8-020.html

Btw, what is this Rockit tool exactly, do you have a link?


----------



## haavard

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Why not waiting for the Delid Die Mate X?
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-delid-die-mate-x-fsd8-020.html
> 
> Btw, what is this Rockit tool exactly, do you have a link?


They make two delid tools, the Rockit 88 for LGA-1151 CPUs and the Rockit 99 for LGA-2066 CPUs. They're quite a bit cheaper than the delid mate.


----------



## Martin778

Delid die mate is something like 2x the price of the Rockit? Not really worth it for me for a single delid job.
After I'm done with my own CPU I'll sell the Rockit anyway.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Delid die mate is something like 2x the price of the Rockit? Not really worth it for me for a single delid job.
> After I'm done with my own CPU I'll sell the Rockit anyway.


I'll be in touch then, do you ship it to the UK (while we're still in the EU)?


----------



## Silent Scone

The Die Mate is really designed with multiple delids in mind. German overengineering at it's finest! That doesn't mean it's a bad choice, just you pay more. Rockit delid tool should be fine. I bit the bullet on one earlier today.


----------



## Martin778

Correct, the Die Mate is more of a professional's tool or a PC builder


----------



## DuraN1

Just delidded and relidded a 7980XE. Waiting for the RTV silicone to cure. Also received my R6E monoblock


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DuraN1*
> 
> Just delidded and relidded a 7980XE. Waiting for the RTV silicone to cure. Also received my R6E monoblock


----------



## ccozmo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Why not waiting for the Delid Die Mate X?
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-delid-die-mate-x-fsd8-020.html
> 
> Btw, what is this Rockit tool exactly, do you have a link?


The Rockit 99 is really well built and easy to use, it also hold the IHS in place when you pop it


----------



## Martin778

Shipping is a b#@ch, 29 dollars for DHL 3-5 days delivery. Will be tough to sell it off later because of this.
What did you all use to remove the old glue? Acetone or just a sharpened piece of wood?


----------



## haavard

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> 
> 
> Shipping is a b#@ch, 29 dollars for DHL 3-5 days delivery. Will be tough to sell it off later because of this.
> What did you all use to remove the old glue? Acetone or just a sharpened piece of wood?


I would use a nylon plectrum for example, or the included bamboo stick


----------



## Menthol

7980xe in stock on Newegg


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> 7980xe in stock on Newegg


i9-7940X and 7960X also in stock.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> 7980xe in stock on Newegg


@Jpmboy


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> What app?
> 
> Great test btw :


Um, I'd tell you but then...







It's a large memory image parallel HDL simulation, I'll leave at that. I'm sure it could and should be further optimized, none of this is intended to indict the new architecture, just understand how it differs and how my future code must respond.

More testing to do to see what's going on, but early results seem to confirm what I would expect with their architectural tuning. It makes sense that they'd tune HCC to many isolation applications with minimal IPC which intuitively needs less L3 and more L2.

What I find fascinating is that not only is the E5-v3 chip running a slower clock rate, but it is 2 of them communicating over QPI and with slower memory (2133 ECC). For the older chip(s) to even be in similar much less faster performance-wise is a surprise given things like Cinebench and handbrake are performing very very well with the new chip... Granted they are running outside of the E5-v3 spec, but so too is the 7980xe...

Next test is 3.8GHz for everyone.

2696v3 will keep 3.2 uncore (also outside spec) and 3.8 clock rate for 2x9=18 cores total (2133 CAS15)
7980xe will be 3.8 core and 3.0 mesh which seems stable so far, but 3200CAS14 memory


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> 
> 
> Shipping is a b#@ch, 29 dollars for DHL 3-5 days delivery. Will be tough to sell it off later because of this.
> What did you all use to remove the old glue? Acetone or just a sharpened piece of wood?


The supplied stick is perfect for cleaning, along with some alcohol drops...




Finally Kapton tape and ready to go!!! Have mine unglued


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> @Jpmboy


MaroonDeath mentioned provantage in the binning thread. They are not over charging and their 7-10 business days is more than it took for mine - it shipped in 3 (though it took a round-about route from GA->OH->ME), but had it in a week or so... Was willing to wait on principle.

Make sure you check the description - they also sell tray processors (which ironically as I type this, are priced higher than box).


----------



## Sgang

I’ve oc’d my system (7820x Zotac 1080ti amp extreme) ti 4,7 ghz but i don’t feel comfortable with the temperatures in the stress test, 88 package and 71 gpu Closed case inwin 101. Do you think i’m paranoic or need to Change the oc of the CPU


----------



## Martin778

Temp difference between 4.5GHz 1.16V and 4.6GHz 1.21V is massive on the 7920X:



Whereas 1.21V is already in high 80's. This is after 2h of P95 26.6, avg temps were around 65*C. The high 70's are from the smallFFT part of the blend test.
My sample needs 1.16V for 4.5GHz, 1.15 crashed with DPC WATCHDOG VIOLATION bsod.
Strangely at 1.16 it will pass 2h of P95 but bsod in 5 minutes of RB 2.43.


----------



## 7820x

Great job on cleaning off that glue! That's gotta be one of the cleanest looking PCBs I've ever seen lol


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> Finally Kapton tape and ready to go!!! Have mine unglued


My Rocket 99 turned up yesterday but I'm waiting for the TIM. Hard to get liquid metal here in New Zealand! I got the Thermal Grizzly.
Anyway, I was interested to see that you cleaned all of the silicone off (great job! btw). Are you intending to use silicone to relid? I was going to leave the silicone on the PCB and just use superglue at the corners.
I am interested in your decision to do the full clean thing!
I had also decided to use nail polish to protect the small bits but I'm open to using tape if you have a good reason.
My final choice was to use liquid metal on the lid to monoblock since I bought a 5g tube. Any reasons why I shouldn't?

Looking forward to seeing the results and keep the pics coming!


----------



## Asmodian

I am sure others already know but Windows 10 1709 supports favored cores natively! It uses my two 4.8 GHz cores preferentially all the time now. It is much better than Intel's Turbo boost 3.0 driver.









Uninstall the Intel Turbo Boost 3.0 application and then reboot and switch the CPU power management configuration "MFC Driver Override" option to "OS Native Support". This was in the BIOS of my Asus R5 Apex.

Much improved, I hated that Turbo Boost application.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgang*
> 
> I've oc'd my system (7820x Zotac 1080ti amp extreme) ti 4,7 ghz but i don't feel comfortable with the temperatures in the stress test, 88 package and 71 gpu Closed case inwin 101. Do you think i'm paranoic or need to Change the oc of the CPU


Depends on what you do. If you're just gaming and general use then you're not likely to see those kinds of temps during normal usage.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Depends on what you do. If you're just gaming and general use then you're not likely to see those kinds of temps during normal usage.


What temps are you getting?

I still see around 88c with a 4.5Ghz/3Ghz mesh overclock running Realbench 2.44, gaming in the 60c - 67c range.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sgang*
> 
> I've oc'd my system (7820x Zotac 1080ti amp extreme) ti 4,7 ghz but i don't feel comfortable with the temperatures in the stress test, 88 package and 71 gpu Closed case inwin 101. Do you think i'm paranoic or need to Change the oc of the CPU


In high current stress tests on a CPU that hasn't been delidded, those are the (package) temps you can expect. I wouldn't be concerned if not running at those temperatures day to day


----------



## Sgang

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> In high current stress tests on a CPU that hasn't been delidded, those are the (package) temps you can expect. I wouldn't be concerned if not running at those temperatures day to day


Thank you @silent scone @chargeit, i'm less worried now


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> What temps are you getting?
> 
> I still see around 88c with a 4.5Ghz/3Ghz mesh overclock running Realbench 2.44, gaming in the 60c - 67c range.


That sounds about right. While gaming/streaming and running 100Hz i'm usually in the 60's. When stress testing my temps can get up there but seems like what I normally do doesn't hit that kind of temps.


----------



## xarot

Hmm...with the 7980XE I am not seeing pretty much any difference in CB scores with cache at 2.7 GHz or 3.0 GHz. Anyone else seen the same? On 7900X, the difference is a lot bigger? I think there were some optimizations in HCC chips?


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *surfinchina*
> 
> My Rocket 99 turned up yesterday but I'm waiting for the TIM. Hard to get liquid metal here in New Zealand! I got the Thermal Grizzly.
> Anyway, I was interested to see that you cleaned all of the silicone off (great job! btw). Are you intending to use silicone to relid? I was going to leave the silicone on the PCB and just use superglue at the corners.
> I am interested in your decision to do the full clean thing!
> I had also decided to use nail polish to protect the small bits but I'm open to using tape if you have a good reason.
> My final choice was to use liquid metal on the lid to monoblock since I bought a 5g tube. Any reasons why I shouldn't?
> 
> Looking forward to seeing the results and keep the pics coming!


I delidded some weeks ago, just showed the after cleaning photos, xDDD

Used Conductonaut and then left the IHS unglued:



Then installed the cpu on the Gaming 9, put Conducto on the IHS and block on it, and ready to go!!!



At present I am using the monoblock for the Gaming 9:










I am very pleased with Rockit 99:


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> I am sure others already know but Windows 10 1709 supports favored cores natively! It uses my two 4.8 GHz cores preferentially all the time now. It is much better than Intel's Turbo boost 3.0 driver.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uninstall the Intel Turbo Boost 3.0 application and then reboot and switch the CPU power management configuration "MFC Driver Override" option to "OS Native Support". This was in the BIOS of my Asus R5 Apex.
> 
> Much improved, I hated that Turbo Boost application.


Nice, that's good for anyone who's still using it.
I never liked that application either, still installed but disabled.
I'm using fixed freq (4.7) and fixed vcore instead.

@vmanuelgm
Nice work mate








Can you tell me what is exactly that tape (thermic isolating tape I suppose)?
So, you're saying that you haven't relied the Ihs anymore?
Cause I did the same for some generation of delidded cpus (3770k, 4770k,4790k) and I wasn't pretty sure if its a doable thing with these Skylake X as well.








Btw: it seems to me like you've applied a bit more liquid metal then necessary


----------



## DStealth

Accidentally







bought 8700k combo...will do some tests these days with both platforms with the maximum OC achievable


----------



## Kimir

"Accidentally" lol


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Yesterday it was five people that owned a 8700k, now it's six!


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Yesterday it was five people that owned a 8700k, now it's six!


Make that 7


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Yesterday it was five people that owned a 8700k, now it's six!


Actually I have two of them as aiming at least 100-150+ mhz higher than my 7800x...so some binning is needed...








Edit: The 1st is 29th ...the second 30th week of production.







Hope both doesn't suck hard


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Nice, that's good for anyone who's still using it.
> I never liked that application either, still installed but disabled.
> I'm using fixed freq (4.7) and fixed vcore instead.
> 
> @vmanuelgm
> Nice work mate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you tell me what is exactly that tape (thermic isolating tape I suppose)?
> So, you're saying that you haven't relied the Ihs anymore?
> Cause I did the same for some generation of delidded cpus (3770k, 4770k,4790k) and I wasn't pretty sure if its a doable thing with these Skylake X as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Btw: it seems to me like you've applied a bit more liquid metal then necessary


Thanks mate.

Kapton tape:

https://www.amazon.com/Elegoo-Polyimide-Temperature-Resistant-Multi-Sized/dp/B072Z92QZ2/ref=sr_1_2_sspa?ie=UTF8&qid=1508421882&sr=8-2-spons&keywords=kapton+tape&psc=1

I havent relidded. Not necessary except for rma'ing.

Conductonaut quantity is perfect, it doesnt overflow inside or on the IHS.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asmodian*
> 
> I am sure others already know but Windows 10 1709 supports favored cores natively! It uses my two 4.8 GHz cores preferentially all the time now. It is much better than Intel's Turbo boost 3.0 driver.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uninstall the Intel Turbo Boost 3.0 application and then reboot and switch the CPU power management configuration "MFC Driver Override" option to "OS Native Support". This was in the BIOS of my Asus R5 Apex.
> 
> Much improved, I hated that Turbo Boost application.


That's interesting. Anything official about this? Seems like when I look up new features in the fall update I come up with more quality of life stuff.


----------



## czin125

https://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/topic/review/1086311.html
Another delid tool for Skylake-X. This one happens to have a hole on the other side.


----------



## Frito

picked up a 7820x and Apex last weekend.so far cpu seems pretty good been running it at 4.7 @ 1.225v 3 ghz mesh at 1.1v last night for kicks i tried pushing it some more went up to 4.8 ghz same voltage no problem and 3.2 mesh at 1.15v ran pretty good scored nicely in CB R15 (2133 cb highest) but then after some repeated runs scores started dropping and 2-3 cores started acting funny with temps and immediately skyrocketing to 105c under load causing throttling.. pretty odd considering before all cores would be around 65-75c tops.

I changed some settings (copied one of your guy's settings in this thread for manual mode and vrm settings) and it seems fine again but just curious if anyone has seen this sort of throttling behavior before and what the cause might be? Delidder is coming this weekend hopefully so at that point ill try for more


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Nice, that's good for anyone who's still using it.
> I never liked that application either, still installed but disabled.
> I'm using fixed freq (4.7) and fixed vcore instead.


You should simply change the BIOS option to OS Native instead of Driver Controlled, if you uninstall Turbo Boost 3.0 and then reboot and change that option it will stop reinstalling itself.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> That's interesting. Anything official about this? Seems like when I look up new features in the fall update I come up with more quality of life stuff.


I haven't seen anything official but it is easy to spot. All threads are assigned using the same core priority list Turbo Boost 3.0 used.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Yesterday it was five people that owned a 8700k, now it's six!


Actually, 8700k pretty much stole the show from Skylake-X. If you look at Intel´s Reddit, pretty much every other thread, if not more, is dedicated to Coffee-Lake and there is barely any mention of SKL-X


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Actually, 8700k pretty much stole the show from Skylake-X. If you look at Intel´s Reddit, pretty much every other thread, if not more, is dedicated to Coffee-Lake and there is barely any mention of SKL-X


The internet is proof that most computer users are just porn consumers with a few side hobbies. A handful of cores is all they need...


----------



## Martin778

Just a warning to Rockit buyers, if you're from (western EU), just *DON'T DO IT.* at least not with the DHL express shipping method.
I've paid 60eu for the tool and shipping now now the DHL thieves want 43eu servicing costs (incl. tax), are they out of their minds?
17,55 just stolen off from me, and that's after paying almost 29,00 of shipping costs.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

No problem for me. I'm based in Norway. I asked him if he could say that the package was worth less, so I wouldn't need to pay taxes.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> The supplied stick is perfect for cleaning, along with some alcohol drops...
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Finally Kapton tape and ready to go!!! Have mine unglued


very good work









Is it possible to clean the PCB with this kind of product ?



You will use silicone for "relid" ?
If so, where ?

Thanks


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> very good work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it possible to clean the PCB with this kind of product ?
> 
> 
> 
> You will use silicone for "relid" ?
> If so, where ?
> 
> Thanks


Thanks bro!!!

There's no need to use specific products for cleaning, just some 96º alcohol drops.

I won't relid unless I rma or sell the cpu after purchasing the 7980xe.

If I had to, I would use this silicone:

https://www.amazon.fr/Mastic-silicone-temp%C3%A9rature-46735-UHU/dp/B008YE3ABA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1508438170&sr=8-1&keywords=uhu+silicone


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> Thanks bro!!!
> 
> There's no need to use specific products for cleaning, just some 96º alcohol drops.
> 
> I won't relid unless I rma or sell the cpu after purchasing the 7980xe.
> 
> If I had to, I would use this silicone:
> 
> https://www.amazon.fr/Mastic-silicone-temp%C3%A9rature-46735-UHU/dp/B008YE3ABA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1508438170&sr=8-1&keywords=uhu+silicone


Ok thanks

I only have 90 ° alcohol at home
Otherwise, I have this product in advance (that of the screen) so I can use it if it is good

Thank you for the silicone, it is better to apply it around the pcb or just a few "drops" to the 4 corners?


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Ok thanks
> 
> I only have 90 ° alcohol at home
> Otherwise, I have this product in advance (that of the screen) so I can use it if it is good
> 
> Thank you for the silicone, it is better to apply it around the pcb or just a few "drops" to the 4 corners?


Many mates have said the best way is to use a small quantity in four corners to avoid raising the IHS too much... I agree with them.


----------



## Martin778

Is it strong enough? I wonder how much pressure does the socket put on the CPU itself.


----------



## glnn_23

Stress testing 7940x with delid P95 26.6 4.6Ghz @ 1.172v

Might switch ek supremacy to an ek monoblock I have but not sure if it will make a huge difference as vrm temps ok so far.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## tripleflip18

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> Stress testing 7940x with delid P95 26.6 4.6Ghz @ 1.172v
> 
> Might switch ek supremacy to an ek monoblock I have but not sure if it will make a huge difference as vrm temps ok so far.


thats pretty nice, did you test your cpu before deliding? and what were you results? i just wanna compare my cpu to urs before i delid......deciding to get a new chip maybe and return my current one since its not clocking to well, but perhaps if you were able to lower vcore after deliding, that would be good to know for me... also what are your offsets?

Thank you!


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> Stress testing 7940x with delid P95 26.6 4.6Ghz @ 1.172v
> 
> Might switch ek supremacy to an ek monoblock I have but not sure if it will make a huge difference as vrm temps ok so far.


It does make a huge difference, my VRMs almost halved in temps.
CPU temps were down at least 5deg as well. I don't know if it's better water flow or the new circular contact on the CPU. I had an EK supremacy before. Plus the LED is very shiny









And per another post, the coffee lakes have great single core performance, probably better for games. The skylake X is alive and well and being bought by professionals who need cores for rendering etc.


----------



## xarot

I am thinking this will be my daily overclock, cannot go higher with Prime95 due to temps. Temps on cores are all over the place though. Done maybe 5 mounths with the EK Supremacy EVO block and different TIM applications, the block base is not making a very good contact. Should I grab a new block? I read that the block base is designed to bow a little bit towards the edges? Yeah...it really only makes a good contact in the center. But the temp differences are there even with my 7900X and Alphacool block. Going to order some Kryonaut to see if I can get temps down a few degrees compared to MX-4.

Daily tasks are fine at 4.5 GHz 1.15~1.175 V. The most important thing for me is that this system feels very "snappy", much more snappier than my old 6950X setup for some reason...also games feel a tad smoothier even if the 6950X was faster in games at same clocks. It's amazing how much the temps jump by increasing frequency 100 MHz (x18 = 1800 MHz).











Also ordered the Rockit 99 to delid my i9-7900X! And got my Apex yesterday to play with it. Now I just need some fast RAM for that rig but my pockets are empty.









It seems that SIV64X can read the cache voltage on Rampage VI Extreme, but it always shows around 1.016, regardless of the offset I try. I don't want to end up running 1.5 V on cache accidentally, anyone else know how to read it? Actually, same with latest AIDA64 beta.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Actually, 8700k pretty much stole the show from Skylake-X. If you look at Intel´s Reddit, pretty much every other thread, if not more, is dedicated to Coffee-Lake and there is barely any mention of SKL-X


Considering the lack of CPU availability, I find that hard to believe.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> I am thinking this will be my daily overclock, cannot go higher with Prime95 due to temps. Temps on cores are all over the place though. Done maybe 5 mounths with the EK Supremacy EVO block and different TIM applications, the block base is not making a very good contact. Should I grab a new block? I read that the block base is designed to bow a little bit towards the edges? Yeah...it really only makes a good contact in the center. But the temp differences are there even with my 7900X and Alphacool block. Going to order some Kryonaut to see if I can get temps down a few degrees compared to MX-4.
> 
> Daily tasks are fine at 4.5 GHz 1.15~1.175 V. The most important thing for me is that this system feels very "snappy", much more snappier than my old 6950X setup for some reason...also games feel a tad smoothier even if the 6950X was faster in games at same clocks. It's amazing how much the temps jump by increasing frequency 100 MHz (x18 = 1800 MHz).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also ordered the Rockit 99 to delid my i9-7900X! And got my Apex yesterday to play with it. Now I just need some fast RAM for that rig but my pockets are empty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It seems that SIV64X can read the cache voltage on Rampage VI Extreme, but it always shows around 1.016, regardless of the offset I try. I don't want to end up running 1.5 V on cache accidentally, anyone else know how to read it? Actually, same with latest AIDA64 beta.


Use the Probeit point. Also the disparity in core temps is not likely to be anything to do with poor contact on the block, I wouldn't waste your money.


----------



## DStealth

I have them both SL-X and Coffe...
In almost every aspect 8700k looks better than 7800x ...for some computations Mesh is faster look at Geekbench Multi-Core Performance score and keep in mind 8700k has 160mhz advantage in my results
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/4296636?baseline=4537375


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Use the Probeit point. Also the disparity in core temps is not likely to be anything to do with poor contact on the block, I wouldn't waste your money.


Thanks SS









Have you tried ProbeIt for the cache, does it work? Gotta get me a DMM.


----------



## Scotty99

If anyone is interested in the craziest deal ive ever seen on newegg, they are offering a 7800x with a MSI SLI plus motherboard for 499 bucks. I almost want to do it, but im still kinda holding out for coffee lake.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3615536


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Thanks SS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Have you tried ProbeIt for the cache, does it work? Gotta get me a DMM.


with a 100mv offset AIDA shows a fixed 1.016v, Probeit reads between 0.900v and 1.013v


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> Many mates have said the best way is to use a small quantity in four corners to avoid raising the IHS too much... I agree with them.


Ok thanks


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Considering the lack of CPU availability, I find that hard to believe.


You can check for yourself. People dont have to own it to post about it. They post about the lack of availability instead

Bottom line, its clear which CPUs are new poster boys for the industry, at least for the time being.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> You can check for yourself. People dont have to own it to post about it. They post about the lack of availability instead
> 
> Bottom line, its clear which CPUs are new poster boys for the industry, at least for the time being.


That's a different matter lol. It's not surprising, it's the best choice for gamers. There are a lot of those about


----------



## lutjens

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Yesterday it was five people that owned a 8700k, now it's six!


I have an i7-8700k and Maximus X Hero still in their boxes that I ordered as an upcoming Xmas present for a family member (cousin). Haven't had time to build with them yet....hopefully soon.

Also received my i9-7980XE and still have yet to build my Threadripper system. I'm getting behind...


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> Stress testing 7940x with delid P95 26.6 4.6Ghz @ 1.172v
> 
> Might switch ek supremacy to an ek monoblock I have but not sure if it will make a huge difference as vrm temps ok so far.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> thats pretty nice, did you test your cpu before deliding? and what were you results? i just wanna compare my cpu to urs before i delid......deciding to get a new chip maybe and return my current one since its not clocking to well, but perhaps if you were able to lower vcore after deliding, that would be good to know for me... also what are your offsets?
> 
> Thank you!


Out of curiosity , what are your batch numbers? Given the fact both your chips have different OC headroom / qualities per your reports?

Mine, still in the box, cause reasons, is L719C500







From what i couldve seen, all the HCC SKL-X´s are L719Cs, differing only by the last 3 numbers. And what is news to me, there can be 2 chips with exactly same batch numbers.... i kinda thought until now, this is unique to every single chip.


----------



## lutjens

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Out of curiosity , what are your batch numbers? Given the fact both your chips have different OC headroom / qualities per your reports?
> 
> Mine, still in the box, cause reasons, is L719C500
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From what i couldve seen, all the HCC SKL-X´s are L719Cs, differing only by the last 3 numbers. And what is news to me, there can be 2 chips with exactly same batch numbers.... i kinda thought until now, this is unique to every single chip.


My i9-7980XE is an L717B748...an even older code than the review ES chips that were sent to the major hardware sites...no idea as to how well it'll do though...


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> My i9-7980XE is an L717B748...an even older code than the review ES chips that were sent to the major hardware sites...no idea as to how well it'll do though...


Does CPU with "B" pre-date the C´s, in other words is this time related? But yeah, hardware sites have all C´s from i could gather, something like C216 a C307 for 60x and 80x, or other way around. Thats how i found out different CPUs can have same batch number - to my surprise


----------



## lutjens

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Does CPU with "B" pre-date the C´s, in other words is this time related? But yeah, hardware sites have all C´s from i could gather, something like C216 a C307 for 60x and 80x, or other way around. Thats how i found out different CPUs can have same batch number - to my surprise


It's the L717 that makes it older...a week 17 core vs the typical week 19 cores that most ES and retail chips seem to be (L719).


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> It's the L717 that makes it older...a week 17 core vs the typical week 19 cores that most ES and retail chips seem to be (L719).


Oh, i see, thank you! Any clue what the ABCs mean?


----------



## lutjens

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Oh, i see, thank you! Any clue what the ABCs mean?


Not 100% sure but they may be line numbers (which production line produced the chip). The numbers at the end are probably sequential numbers indicating which batch the chip came from.


----------



## czin125

http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?t=173500
2x 8176M at 3791mhz on water!


----------



## Frito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Oh, i see, thank you! Any clue what the ABCs mean?


the letter code indicates where it was made.
Quote:


> L = Malaysia


this list is outdated but i haven't ever found a more up to date list because its missing codes you can come across these days like X and J etc.
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?278-HOWTO-Read-an-Intel-CPU-FPO-Batch-Code


----------



## lutjens

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Frito*
> 
> the letter code indicates where it was made.
> this list is outdated but i haven't ever found a more up to date list because its missing codes you can come across these days like X and J etc.
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?278-HOWTO-Read-an-Intel-CPU-FPO-Batch-Code


I think he's referring to the letter in position 5 of the sequence. The first letter is absolutely where it was made.


----------



## Frito

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> I think he's referring to the letter in position 5 of the sequence. The first letter is absolutely where it was made.


Ah i got you.

i only have 3 retail boxes on hand to give you an idea but it appears to be tied to the manufacturing plant based date code related on my small sample size.

7820x L716B657
7600k L714B552
6600k X623C489
7700k X713B247
6700k X623C615

also X = Vietnam.

edit: forgot i had a picture of a few older cpus i have sold off.


----------



## tripleflip18

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Out of curiosity , what are your batch numbers? Given the fact both your chips have different OC headroom / qualities per your reports?
> 
> Mine, still in the box, cause reasons, is L719C500
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From what i couldve seen, all the HCC SKL-X´s are L719Cs, differing only by the last 3 numbers. And what is news to me, there can be 2 chips with exactly same batch numbers.... i kinda thought until now, this is unique to every single chip.


i got L719C500


----------



## tripleflip18

I am wondering if any of you were able to lower vcore once you delided? cause right now i can do 4.5 @ 1.2 and 4.6 @ 1.225


----------



## ottoore

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> I am wondering if any of you were able to lower vcore once you delided? cause right now i can do 4.5 @ 1.2 and 4.6 @ 1.225


Electrical resistivity depends on temperature.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> i got L719C500


Well, cheers







Since you said your chip cant do 4,4 at 1,1V, i hope same batch number does not mean same thermal / OC properties







Then again, maybe it will turn out the way i would wish the exact opposite, if my chip turns out to be dud.

Anyway, the more i have it lying here in the box, the more i start considering buying better AiO and sell my current one (Corsair H105) alongside the current CPU and mobo - which is what i am going to do, once i do the hardware swap. Since apparently 240mm AiOs like H105 are insufficient to keep up with Skylake-X once OCed, i thought about 360mm AiO - cause 280mm probably would not make much difference when compared against my current setup and custom loop is out of question because costs, maintenance and space inside case issues.....

The question is, will 360mm AiO be significant upgrade over my 240mm one, i mean the kind of upgrade, which in case of my targeted 4,4GHz OC would keep CPU temps from getting into high 80s/90s, which i suppose could happen now? Or its not going to help much either way and custom is the only solution?

Additionally, if i was about to get one, which one would you recommend? I was looking at Fractal Design Celsius 36 and AlphaCool Eisbear 360mm? These are available over here, at local e-shop i got the CPU from - for acceptable price, no more than 150 EUROs. I would be willing to pay that. Are there any good though? Or is there something better, ideally in the same price-bracket?


----------



## aliquiswe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Scotty99*
> 
> If anyone is interested in the craziest deal ive ever seen on newegg, they are offering a 7800x with a MSI SLI plus motherboard for 499 bucks. I almost want to do it, but im still kinda holding out for coffee lake.
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboBundleDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.3615536


Would get nicer motherboard with the 7800x though.


----------



## tripleflip18

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ottoore*
> 
> Electrical resistivity depends on temperature.


meaning, in theory i should be able to lower voltage?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> meaning, in theory i should be able to lower voltage?


yes... how much "depends", but generally speaking hotter processors require more voltage for stability.


----------



## aliquiswe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> meaning, in theory i should be able to lower voltage?


To reach the same ampere at higher resistance you'd need higher voltage and maybe lower voltage is what you can gain from lower temperatures regardless (the other alternative I guess would be if higher temperature lead to more leakage of electricity or some disturbance or maybe some capacitive or inductive effect) is that the chip can use less power (which also will make it run even cooler..)


----------



## Martin778

Well, except for the outrageous costs, I can say that DHL is crazy fast...
Shipment picked up on *19th Oct* in Houston, TX
Arrived at Delivery Facility in AMSTERDAM - NETHERLANDS, THE on *21st of Oct*, what the?!









So the upcoming week I can delid my 7920X







In the meantime smashing some 3dmarks: https://i.imgur.com/k4F77dz.png


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Well, except for the outrageous costs, I can say that DHL is crazy fast...
> Shipment picked up on *19th Oct* in Houston, TX
> Arrived at Delivery Facility in AMSTERDAM - NETHERLANDS, THE on *21st of Oct*, what the?!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the upcoming week I can delid my 7920X
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In the meantime smashing some 3dmarks: https://i.imgur.com/k4F77dz.png


Yeah, DHL from UK to the US is pretty damn fast. Not quite as expensive as it was for you, but I was impressed with how quickly things moved across the big pond.









Give some thought to running the new Time Spy Extreme as it's been optimized for HCC chips like yours. Firestrike seems to favor moderate core count with high clock speeds.

Good luck man and looking forward to your post delid results!


----------



## GXTCHA

Does anyone know what IA: Max Turbo Limit and IA: Non-Turbo (P1) stand for?

I just noticed these flagged in HWiNFO64... I never had any of these flags with my 7700k.

Could this be causing my clocks to drop to 4.438 - 4.748 when I'm benching @ 4.8 with a -3 avx off set? I'm not hitting any temp limits but maybe there's a problem with my BIOS settings. I raised he current to 200%, LLC 6 and 1.81 vccin.

I can clear the codes by changing the windows power settings to performance (from balanced). So maybe its not important...


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Does anyone know what IA: Max Turbo Limit and IA: Non-Turbo (P1) stand for?
> 
> I just noticed these flagged in HWiNFO64... I never had any of these flags with my 7700k.
> 
> Could this be causing my clocks to drop to 4.438 - 4.748 when I'm benching @ 4.8 with a -3 avx off set? I'm not hitting any temp limits but maybe there's a problem with my BIOS settings. I raised he current to 200%, LLC 6 and 1.81 vccin.
> 
> I can clear the codes by changing the windows power settings to performance (from balanced). So maybe its not important...


You have a AVX offset, that's normal, it's not going to run at 4.8Ghz
IA: Max Turbo Limit was also on the z170 and z270 platform, it's there on my wife's 7700k/Hero machine with a big YES when she hits the turbo max


----------



## cekim

Delidding shenanigans (still using H110i AIO push/pull):
- pigeon poop (poorly applied) after initial delid
- all clean
- first pass (oops too much! NOOB!)
- glad I checked (see above - beware of the blob!
- base-line 3.8GHz all-core RB for 15m (set to 3.8 because I was comparing to 2x2696v3 @ 3.8)
- delid temps - same test - no system changes 3.8Ghz all-core RB for 15m)


----------



## pantsaregood

Playing around with RAM overclocking. Best I can seem to accomplish is 4x8GB DDR4-4000 17-17-17-37-1T. All four of my sticks will individually do 15-15-15-35-1T at DDR4-4000, but attempting to boot with all of them results in random channels dropping out. Throwing voltage at VCCSA seems to help, but it's terribly unstable and doesn't seem worth it - for reference, DDR4-4000/17-17-17-37-1T requires 0.95V VCCSA - getting all four sticks to show up at 15-15-15-35-1T requires 1.2V VCCSA.

Clocking above DDR4-4000 doesn't work regardless of the timings I use.

This is on an X299 OC Formula


----------



## DStealth

OC Formula is the best board for memory overclocking should be your memory controller so bad I have on Gaming k6 board up to 4200 cl15 1T with very low voltages 1 to 1.05v VCCSA


----------



## cekim

Now that I am not baking the CPU (post delid), I can run all core @ 4.4GHz 1.18v here's RB2.44 after 15 minutes (temps have stabilized here...

I was getting throttling before on 2-3 cores trying this with the same AIO:


----------



## tripleflip18

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Now that I am not baking the CPU (post delid), I can run all core @ 4.4GHz 1.18v here's RB2.44 after 15 minutes (temps have stabilized here...
> 
> I was getting throttling before on 2-3 cores trying this with the same AIO:


what were you able to run before delid?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> what were you able to run before delid?


I could run all-core 4.4GHz at the same voltage, but not for long as 2-3 cores would thermal throttle - it was hugely temp limited...

I didn't get much tuning time because of that, just didn't make sense to push it since I knew it was going to run away...

Trying 4.5 now...

15m of RB2.44 passed - 4.5GHz all-core 1.18v.... (temps/volts right at the end):



CB R15 @ 4.5 looking nice too!











Guess its time for 4.6?
EDIT: yes... yes it is time for 4.6 (VCCIN raised to 1.8v Vcore to 1.21v - that peak power tho...







- see bottom of image 450W+):


----------



## arrow0309

Where do I read the current (default) cpu cache voltage?
Under what utility?
What do you guys recommend for a 3000 cache freq (manual mode)?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Where do I read the current (default) cpu cache voltage?
> Under what utility?
> What do you guys recommend for a 3000 cache freq (manual mode)?


Been using SiV - seems reasonable so far.

~1.0-1.1v for 3GHz cache seems typical. Mine is not stable with 1.0 @ 3.0GHz, but I haven't tried to fine-tune down below 1.1v - SAT says [email protected] is stable (1 hour).


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Been using SiV - seems reasonable so far.
> 
> ~1.0-1.1v for 3GHz cache seems typical. Mine is not stable with 1.0 @ 3.0GHz, but I haven't tried to fine-tune down below 1.1v - SAT says [email protected] is stable (1 hour).


Thanks
How do I expand it to get that screen you've posted above?
R you still testing the cache with aida & hci?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Thanks
> How do I expand it to get that screen you've posted above?


Click on the button labeled "Status" Not the most intuitive thing in the world, but a wealth of info and seems to be pretty well updated for system quirks.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Click on the button labeled "Status" Not the most intuitive thing in the world, but a wealth of info and seems to be pretty well updated for system quirks.


+Rep









Well, I can read something between 1.016-1.032 at default.



Should I start with 1.05v?
Aida64 cache & HCI still good for that?


----------



## arrow0309

OK, so I've set the cache to 1.060v manual from bios (30 min and max) and also the cr to 1T, seems to be holding well under aida64 cache:



The SiV status is giving me pretty similar cache voltages to the defaults (and lower than 1.060v however)








Any clues?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> OC Formula is the best board for memory overclocking should be your memory controller so bad I have on Gaming k6 board up to 4200 cl15 1T with very low voltages 1 to 1.05v VCCSA


Looks good, but IS it better than Asus Apex?

That is the real question


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Looks good, but IS it better than Asus Apex?
> 
> That is the real question


Given the context of the original question, I don't think it matters. Last time I checked, CBR15 wasn't a memory stability test


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> 7980xe in stock on Newegg


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> @Jpmboy


Been off the grid fly-fishing since wednesday. B&H still has my preorder tho.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Make that 7


make that 8.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> +Rep
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I can read something between 1.016-1.032 at default.
> 
> 
> 
> Should I start with 1.05v?
> Aida64 cache & HCI still good for that?


I've only just begun here - about a week into thrashing, so I +1 your question, but the answer has been there is no substitute for SAT for memory/cache . The mesh potentially changes that. Personally, I've never found aida64 to be anything more than milquetoast for stress. It's a good sanity check, but..

As for SAT, it seems to be behaving as previously when I press timing or cache frequency.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> OK, so I've set the cache to 1.060v manual from bios (30 min and max) and also the cr to 1T, seems to be holding well under aida64 cache:
> 
> 
> 
> The SiV status is giving me pretty similar cache voltages to the defaults (and lower than 1.060v however)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any clues?


There seem to be some "adjustments" required for this system WRT voltages. Every assertion of droop or incorrect reading eventually circles back to a correct assertion by Asus that if you probe the right spot on the board you will find its doing what it is supposed to do and the software requires new fudge factors for X299.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Would 85'C under stresstesting be too hot for normal usage? Seems like I maybe can run 5.1 ghz on my avg. 7800X.

I'm a temp whore. Everything over 65-70'C is too hot for me.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Would 85'C under stresstesting be too hot for normal usage? Seems like I maybe can run 5.1 ghz on my avg. 7800X.
> 
> I'm a temp whore. Everything over 65-70'C is too hot for me.


Play BF 1 for 2 hours, then report back









5,1GHZ is BADASS !


----------



## Nautilus

Hey there peeps,

Running Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 9 board. Can anybody here tell me why is my 7900x throttled? I disabled every turbo setting in the bios, also disabled power saving features etc... + increased VRIN voltage to 1.9 and still seeing frequency drops in heavy workloads such as x264 stress test or OCCT.

I overclocked it to 4500Mhz and seeing it go as low as 4200Mhz.

This is what hwinfo64 reports:



What is max turbo limit?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

My cheapo Tomhawk is really keeping up! :-D


----------



## Martin778

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> Hey there peeps,
> 
> Running Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 9 board. Can anybody here tell me why is my 7900x throttled? I disabled every turbo setting in the bios, also disabled power saving features etc... + increased VRIN voltage to 1.9 and still seeing frequency drops in heavy workloads such as x264 stress test or OCCT.
> 
> I overclocked it to 4500Mhz and seeing it go as low as 4200Mhz.
> 
> This is what hwinfo64 reports:
> 
> 
> 
> What is max turbo limit?


Dropping from 4500 to 4200 is probably due to AVX offset?
Also, increase the current limits to the CPU to the max.


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you pressed the red "safe mode" button on the MB or held down the start button on the MB for 3 sec? Safe mode boots with defalts loaded but does not change your settings in bios.


I pressed the start button for 3 seconds and no go. I did not try the red "safe mode" button, but will next time I run into this issue. Thanks!


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Play BF 1 for 2 hours, then report back
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5,1GHZ is BADASS !


I've been playing _a lot_ of that game recently







. No issues here. (4.8Ghz 1.235v)


----------



## Nautilus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Dropping from 4500 to 4200 is probably due to AVX offset?
> Also, increase the current limits to the CPU to the max.


I did not set any avx offsets. Also the workload did not contain any avx instructions.

I removed any current limits.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> I did not set any avx offsets. Also the workload did not contain any avx instructions.
> 
> I removed any current limits.


Are you sure x264 and OCCT don't use AVX? What happens if you drop your frequency to 4.0 GHz in the BIOS. Does the actual frequency have random drops to 3.7 GHz?

Also, there's another section in HWiNFO64 that has throttle monitoring:



What do these show?


----------



## Nautilus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Are you sure x264 and OCCT don't use AVX? What happens if you drop your frequency to 4.0 GHz in the BIOS. Does the actual frequency have random drops to 3.7 GHz?
> 
> Also, there's another section in HWiNFO64 that has throttle monitoring:
> 
> 
> 
> What do these show?


Yes, if I decrease my frequency to 4Ghz, it responds by throttling below that, like 3700Mhz or so.

wow thank you for showing that section of hwinfo. Turns out i'm thermal throttling at 4500mhz lol. cores jump to like 95ish degrees.

But how can this be possible? I have a monoblock and full custom loop and my pump+ fans running at full power.

do you think there's a seating issue or this is the normal 7900x temps? (vcore 1.27)


----------



## Martin778

Vcore way too high, try 4.5GHz ~1.16-1.20V. TIM between the IHS and the die is cooking. Delid time!


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> Yes, if I decrease my frequency to 4Ghz, it responds by throttling below that, like 3700Mhz or so.


That's the AVX offset kicking in.
Quote:


> wow thank you for showing that section of hwinfo. Turns out i'm thermal throttling at 4500mhz lol. cores jump to like 95ish degrees.
> 
> But how can this be possible? I have a monoblock and full custom loop and my pump+ fans running at full power.
> 
> do you think there's a seating issue or this is the normal 7900x temps? (vcore 1.27)


My 7900X + Gaming 7 also throttles a bit at 4.5 GHz with 1.23 vcore. It's under a 360 AIO and not delided.

Most people have been able to drop it into the 1.15 - 1.2v range for 4.5 GHz. Though I've found that on my chip, it causes the AVX/AVX512 to go unstable at the lower frequencies. So I'm running mine at a -0.050v global vcore offset. (which comes out to about 1.23v at 4.5 GHz)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> I worked with the ZIH guys to get FIRESTARTER fixed on Windows. The new v1.7.1 runs without a hitch.
> 
> Link: https://tu-dresden.de/zih/forschung/projekte/firestarter?set_language=en


Thanks! I'll check it out the next time my box becomes available again. (It's booted into the Linux atm running a week of tests on Ubuntu 17.10.)


----------



## Nautilus

OK. I think i solved my throttling issues and found the sweetspot OC for me 7900x. It's 4.6Ghz with 1.19v

The hottest core is 88C under AIDA 64 cpu + cache stress test. (no fpu therefore no avx/fma)

It's the highest I can go without delid. The cpu package reaches up to 93C though.


----------



## cekim

Well, this is interesting... I wasn't happy with my insulation of the caps/resistors on my interposer, so I repplied nail polish, tape and LM. I was out of NHT1 so i use Arctic Silver...

It's ~3C warmer ambient, it looks like I may have added ~6C to all my temps...

a few possibilties:
1. LM wants to be a little thicker (I tried to do a much better job of using "less" - maybe too far?)
2. nail polish managed to get between interposer and IHS and add some fractional amount of height? (I cleaned carefully, but maybe I missed a spot)
3. AS << NHT1 by 2-3C?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

@Nautilus

I've been watching the IA: Max Turbo Limit that people are worrying about.

What I've noticed on my 7820x is that when idling it will stay on Yes until a load is put on the CPU then it will change to No.
Same with IA: Non-Turbo (P1)...

Sure it doesn't have anything to do with the power saving?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Well, this is interesting... I wasn't happy with my insulation of the caps/resistors on my interposer, so I repplied nail polish, tape and LM. I was out of NHT1 so i use Arctic Silver...
> 
> It's ~3C warmer ambient, it looks like I may have added ~6C to all my temps...
> 
> a few possibilties:
> 1. LM wants to be a little thicker (I tried to do a much better job of using "less" - maybe too far?)
> 2. nail polish managed to get between interposer and IHS and add some fractional amount of height? (I cleaned carefully, but maybe I missed a spot)
> 3. AS << NHT1 by 2-3C?


After repeatedly testing this with different chips, I've come to the conclusion that a thinker coat on the die with a thin coat on the inside of the IHS works best for me. Anytime I go as thin as possible while maintaining and even coat, I get slightly worse temps than I do with a thicker coat. Seems as if you're seeing the same thing.

I use liquid electrical tape on my caps/resistors these days.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Well, this is interesting... I wasn't happy with my insulation of the caps/resistors on my interposer, so I repplied nail polish, tape and LM. I was out of NHT1 so i use Arctic Silver...
> 
> It's ~3C warmer ambient, it looks like I may have added ~6C to all my temps...
> 
> a few possibilties:
> 1. LM wants to be a little thicker (I tried to do a much better job of using "less" - maybe too far?)
> 2. nail polish managed to get between interposer and IHS and add some fractional amount of height? (I cleaned carefully, but maybe I missed a spot)
> 3. AS << NHT1 by 2-3C?


I had to redo my delid. I was so concerned with putting too much on there that I put too little. Temps are excellent now. I used nail polish to cover the caps and resistors. By the way anyone doing a delid make sure you push the IHS towards the RFC chip on a 7980XE, easier to miss capacitors. This should be on the delid tool in bold letters and in red and on the instructions.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I had to redo my delid. I was so concerned with putting too much on there that I put too little. Temps are excellent now. I used nail polish to cover the caps and resistors. By the way anyone doing a delid make sure you push the IHS towards the RFC chip on a 7980XE, easier to miss capacitors. This should be on the delid tool in bold letters and in red and on the instructions.


Rockit99 has a triangle to indicate this...

I just added some LM and found some NTH1... no change... re-checked the thermostat and oops - I read the wrong number (the setting, not current temp - lights were dimmed). So, my issue is 100% ambients...

All is well... Now for the hard part of all the musical chairs required to get the monoblock on (long story, but lots of parts flying around the room).


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Rockit99 has a triangle to indicate this...
> 
> I just added some LM and found some NTH1... no change... re-checked the thermostat and oops - I read the wrong number (the setting, not current temp - lights were dimmed). So, my issue is 100% ambients...
> 
> All is well... Now for the hard part of all the musical chairs required to get the monoblock on (long story, but lots of parts flying around the room).


Is it in red and bolded?







It was my first time deliding. I have computer parts all over the computer room, kitchen and my wife is assembling a computer for a friend of ours that lives in NY. The house is a huge mess, thinking of calling in sick tomorrow lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> After repeatedly testing this with different chips, I've come to the conclusion that a thinker *coat on the die with a thin coat on the inside of the IHS works best* for me. Anytime I go as thin as possible while maintaining and even coat, I get slightly worse temps than I do with a thicker coat. Seems as if you're seeing the same thing.
> 
> I use liquid electrical tape on my caps/resistors these days.


^^ THIS
painting the LM on both surfaces works best for every (and any) one. LM has poor surface adhesion properties (and high surface tension). The best way to make a thermal flux bond line is to have the two LM painted surfaces come in contact with eachother. LM on the die only is a pretty poor way to affect a good thermal link to the underside of the IHS.









(I think I'l do the LET treatment also this time







)


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ^^ THIS
> painting the LM on both surfaces works best for every (and any) one. LM has poor surface adhesion properties (and high surface tension). The best way to make a thermal flux bond line is to have the two LM painted surfaces come in contact with eachother. LM on the die only is a pretty poor way to affect a good thermal link to the underside of the IHS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (I think I'l do the LET treatment also this time
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Indeed - I did both die and IHS both times - just used less the second time...


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Is it in red and bolded?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was my first time deliding. I have computer parts all over the computer room, kitchen and my wife is assembling a computer for a friend of ours that lives in NY. The house is a huge mess, thinking of calling in sick tomorrow lol.


Just a triangle cut-out...


----------



## Nautilus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> After repeatedly testing this with different chips, I've come to the conclusion that a thinker coat on the die with a thin coat on the inside of the IHS works best for me. Anytime I go as thin as possible while maintaining and even coat, I get slightly worse temps than I do with a thicker coat. Seems as if you're seeing the same thing.
> 
> I use liquid electrical tape on my caps/resistors these days.


How can you be sure that the coat you do on the IHS will align with the die? Is there a mark on the IHS left by pressure or you do it by guessing (which I believe super dangerous).


----------



## Nautilus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Is it in red and bolded?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was my first time deliding. I have computer parts all over the computer room, kitchen and my wife is assembling a computer for a friend of ours that lives in NY. The house is a huge mess, thinking of calling in sick tomorrow lol.


I know the feeling. Sounds like the my drain and refill days on wc loops. I even use toothbrushes in the bath to clean my waterblocks. There are always a different size allen key and some screws on every table, mountains of used paper towels stained with the color of my coolant (also few drops of it on the kitchen floor) and that disgusting smell of Arctic Cooling thermal paste cleaning solution fills the whole house. I thought to myself, if she doesn't ditch me now, she probably loves me.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> How can you be sure that the coat you do on the IHS will align with the die? Is there a mark on the IHS left by pressure or you do it by guessing (which I believe super dangerous).


I just ensure that the coated area on the IHS is larger than that of the die.

As far as whether or not it's "dangerous", it's not. Let me rephrase that. In my experience it's not. The entire process of delidding and using LM is a risk. Not enough of one to stop me from doing it.

Every chip I delid and use LM on has been done in this fashion. The thin coat of LM on the IHS doesn't bead, drip or come off of the IHS in any way. If it were to somehow, I've applied a thick coat of LET (liquid electrical tape) to anything that could short as a result of runoff LM. Of the many chips I've delidded, I've never had runoff.

The point is to not coat the entire inside of the IHS, but just enough to ensure that you have full coverage of the corresponding die mating surface.

If you wanted to be more precise, record the measurement of the IHS to substrate placement prior to delidding. Once delidded you could either properly measure the outline of the factory TIM remaining on the IHS or simply scratch/mark the portion of the IHS surface that corresponds with the die based on the remaining factory TIM. Once you apply your spec'd out LM, make sure your precisely place your IHS back into the exact same place it was prior to delidding and hope it doesn't move even 1/32nd of an inch while you're applying pressure for the curing or as you secure it in the socket for free float. If you were to be off, even slightly, you'd render the entire process of precise measurements useless. Even the Rockit 99 relid tool has a bit of play in it.

There's a bit of sarcasm in that last paragraph, but I've seen people take it this far. In my opinion, it's a waste of time.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> I know the feeling. Sounds like the my drain and refill days on wc loops. I even use toothbrushes in the bath to clean my waterblocks. There are always a different size allen key and some screws on every table, mountains of used paper towels stained with the color of my coolant (also few drops of it on the kitchen floor) and that disgusting smell of Arctic Cooling thermal paste cleaning solution fills the whole house. I thought to myself, if she doesn't ditch me now, she probably loves me.


Your wife assembles PCs?!


----------



## Martin778

Guys, can you post some pics on how you glued the IHS back together and where did you apply the sillicone glue?
I'd like to install my IHS back the same way it was done @ the factory but I'd like to see how much glue did you actually apply.

My rockit arrived today:


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Guys, can you post some pics on how you glued the IHS back together and where did you apply the sillicone glue?
> I'd like to install my IHS back the same way it was done @ the factory but I'd like to see how much glue did you actually apply.
> 
> My rockit arrived today:


I did not glue mine back on. I wanted to be able to pull it back off. The tension of the socket clamp and cooler are more than capable of keeping it in place.

However, if I were, I'd just put a small dab on each of the for feet furthest out (at the corners). There's no need to make it as bomb proof as intel did - yours won't be bouncing around in container ships from now on.


----------



## Martin778

I'd prefer to seal mine, in case of an RMA (Had a bad experience last year).


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I'd prefer to seal mine, in case of an RMA (Had a bad experience last year).


RMA? You've voided the [email protected]#$ out of the warranty by delidding...


----------



## arrow0309

Holy Mother of God!
Look at the temps after only a couple of min in avx512 (Firestarter)


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I'd prefer to seal mine, in case of an RMA (Had a bad experience last year).


This is the stuff I use. Permatex Black Silicone Adhesive Sealant. Available from Amazon or any local car parts store.

https://www.amazon.com/Permatex-81158-Silicone-Adhesive-Sealant/dp/B000AL6WLA

It looks and behaves very similar to the OEM sealant used by Intel, but is a little easier to break free if you need to delid again. Very strong adhesive silicone.

Also, when I apply it, I use lot less than Intel does. On regular mainstream chips, I only apply it to the corners and under the IHS clamping wings. On Skylake-X, I applied it to the corners of the inner sealed section of the IHS and on the corners of the outer sealed section of the IHS.

Hope that helps.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Holy Mother of God!
> Look at the temps after only a couple of min in avx512 (Firestarter)


I haven't done much with AVX512 OC - I put a -10 offset for 512 and -5 for AVX2... Those things are chip cookers... We'll deal with that OC later...


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I haven't done much with AVX512 OC - I put a -10 offset for 512 and -5 for AVX2... Those things are chip cookers... We'll deal with that OC later...


Agreed
I've initially put -2 / -4 on my 7900X not yet delidded (good sample though) and I don't have any issue with the avx/avx2
Have a look at the HWBOT X265 benchmark in 4k & overkill 2x:



But avx512 under Firestarter, that's a hell other kind of stuff.
Gonna put -7 right away (4.0 then) but I'm not using it however


----------



## Martin778

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> RMA? You've voided the [email protected]#$ out of the warranty by delidding...


That's untrue!







They only examine it for visual damage like sticking out glue/PCB/IHS damage and test it - if it doesn't work, you get a replacement.
They don't disassemble or X-Ray scan it (it's metal so they won't see anything anyway).


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Not sure who told you that but that's untrue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They only examine it externally for sitcking out glue/PCB/IHS damage and test it - if it doesn't, the simply do the warranty think.


What you can "get away with" and what is true are often 2 different things...

The more people abuse such things, the more ridiculous countermeasures to tuning we face (witness GPUs with BIOSes we can no longer mod without extreme shenanigans).


----------



## Martin778

That's the art of relidding, to make it look 100% like factory. That's why I got the same black high-temp silicone glue. and will try with a very thin line around the IHS to mimic the original glueing.

On the other hand I can understand Nvidia's point on locking the BIOSés, with Pascal tinkering with the BIOS gives you nothing as Pascals barely react to increased voltage and the big ones hit a wall between 2025 and 2100MHz anyway. Even EVGA doesn't guarantee more than 2025MHz out of the Kingpin Ti.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> What you can "get away with" and what is true are often 2 different things...
> 
> The more people abuse such things, the more ridiculous countermeasures to tuning we face (witness GPUs with BIOSes we can no longer mod without extreme shenanigans).


A different point of view is that Intel bought this on themselves for using pigeon poop in the first place. In other words, Intel started it by being an a$$hole to their customers. And now the customers are returning the favor.

If you put yourself in Intel's shoes acting entirely out of self-interest, this pigeon poop thing makes sense. Overclocking and physical damage both void the warranty. But it's difficult to tell if a dead chip actually died from overclocking for the purpose of determining whether to honor a warranty. So the reasonable solution to prevent users from abusing this is to force the user to physically damage the processor (delid) to be able to overclock.

Also with these HCC chips pulling in excess of 500W over a bunch of very thin pins, I'm surprised we haven't seen more "damage" yet. (Such as the article about the 7800X dying from arc'ing a few months back.)

I'm interested to see the long-term impacts of these 7980XE's pulling 500W+ sustained to see how long they actually last regardless of cooling, termperatures, or voltages. And if a good number of them start dying early, those people will not be able to RMA. Thus Intel just covering their back (at the consumer's expense).


----------



## Jpmboy

just got shipping notice on a 7980xe, should arrive tomorrow... now I just have to get MY sheet together.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> A different point of view is that Intel bought this on themselves for using pigeon poop in the first place. In other words, Intel started it by being an a$$hole to their customers. And now the customers are returning the favor.


I've shaken my fist at the processor gods too - they built an amazing chip, crippled it with garbage TIM and then overcharged for it...

However, my ethical options are:
1. don't buy it
2. buy it and don't modify it
3. buy it, modify it and assume the risk.

SL offers a one-year warranty, so if I were more patient, I'd do that.

2 wrongs don't make a right, but I know that's crazy talk...









"I remember a time when we knew who's @#$ it was on the screen and why it was farting and I believe that time can come again..." -Sure, Not


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> just got shipping notice on a 7980xe, should arrive tomorrow... now I just have to get MY sheet together.


You won't be disappoin.....

no, you will be deeply disappointed that Intel knee-capped such a wonderful chip, then you will take steps to correct their error and then you won't be disappointed.









Try not to even ponder that the die actually has 6 memory channels, not 4, so if it weren't crippled on the 2066 socket, it could do even MOAR. Just put that out of your mind.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> You won't be disappoin.....
> 
> no, you will be deeply disappointed that Intel knee-capped such a wonderful chip, then you will take steps to correct their error and then you won't be disappointed.


intel has been knee capping their cpus for a while now. I must have delidded more than a dozen begining with a 3770K. But yeah, the 7980xe should have been a soldered cpu. I'll work with it initially as shipped then decide whether this sample is worth a delid. Mean time, I've been running this 7740X at 5.3 and higher (after delid) - it has the best IPC today, gonna be a rough act to follow for all but the most threaded apps.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> just got shipping notice on a 7980xe, should arrive tomorrow... now I just have to get MY sheet together.


Awesome







Still debating on buying from Silicon Lottery or B & H Photo. Warranty vs Delid?







I will decide tomorrow one or the other.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> intel has been knee capping their cpus for a while now. I must have delidded more than a dozen begining with a 3770K. But yeah, the 7980xe should have been a soldered cpu. I'll work with it initially as shipped then decide whether this sample is worth a delid. Mean time, I've been running this 7740X at 5.3 and higher (after delid) - it has the best IPC today, gonna be a rough act to follow for all but the most threaded apps.


Other than mono-block and a longer term "case" for this thing, I'm trying to figure out how to get the BIOS to allow me to have a 4,6,8 core 4.7GHz+ A 1.2x and 18 core 4.5GHz @ 1.18v

That's one more level of control than is provided as far as I can tell. I can set a fixed voltage or an adaptive voltage, I can do so for all or by core.

I can tell windows to schedule to faster cores which higher top-end and voltages, but I can't use that approach in linux (where I do my computes). So, I think the only way I could do this in linux is core-by-core adaptive with negative offsets?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I've shaken my fist at the processor gods too - they built an amazing chip, crippled it with garbage TIM and then overcharged for it...
> 
> However, my ethical options are:
> 1. don't buy it
> 2. buy it and don't modify it
> 3. buy it, modify it and assume the risk.
> 
> SL offers a one-year warranty, so if I were more patient, I'd do that.
> 
> 2 wrongs don't make a right, but I know that's crazy talk...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "I remember a time when we knew who's @#$ it was on the screen and why it was farting and I believe that time can come again..." -Sure, Not


Here's a hypothetical scenario where this can go really bad. This is purely hypothetical and I'd only give it maybe a 10% chance it could happen. Furthermore, it would only affect those who put a sustained load on the chip (folding, and workstation users). But it certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility.

The X299 socket is rated for 165W TDP. But the 7980XE pulls 500 - 1000W overclocked. That's 3 - 6x the rated limit.

Let's make these hypothetical assumptions:

Under sustained 165W, the socket/CPU lasts 10 years. (well beyond the warranty)
Under sustained 300W, the socket/CPU lasts 3 years.
Under sustained 500W, it lasts only 6 months.
Intel doesn't tell anyone about the MTTF for pulling 500W since it's considered overclocking and is out-of-spec.
Right now, we all see that 7980XE is an awesome processor (price aside).

If you don't delid it, the chip is severely handicapped and any overclock that pulls over 300W is impossible without subzero.
If you do delid it, the chip is capable of reaching the best overclocks at the cost of 500 - 1000W of power draw.
Because of the potential that's unleashed by deliding, everybody delids and runs 500 - 1000W overclocks. They either do it themselves or through a vendor like SL.

6 months later...

These delided 7980XE's start failing. And they fail for everybody regardless of temperatures or voltage. Anyone pulling above 500W sustained is affected. A further investigation reveals that the power delivery lines degrade from all the current which steadily increases resistance and capacitance. This is exacerbated by the fact that many of those who delided covered the PCB components with heat insulating electrical tape. Eventually, the heat from this melts the pcb and kills the chip.

Those who delided it themselves suddenly realize that they're out $2000. Those who went through a vendor start using their warranties. Those vendors get overwhelmed and go bankrupt.

Either way, somebody is gonna be screwed and it won't be Intel. Intel will be the winner since they don't have to honor any warranties. And they'll get even more money from everyone buying replacements. A lot of people will try to blame Intel that their chip is fragile, and all they'll tell you is that you were running it out of spec.

Again I don't think it's going to happen this way. But something about pulling so much power over such a small cross-sectional area of pins really has me cringing.

Even if it doesn't happen now, it may in the future if AMD forces Intel to bring XCC dies of some later architecture into HEDT that has a gazillion cores that require 5000W and several circuit breaker rails to handle. That's what we get for seeing the end of Dennard Scaling.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Awesome
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still debating on buying from Silicon Lottery or B & H Photo. Warranty vs Delid?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will decide tomorrow one or the other.


got one from B&H. yeah, it's a toss up. if it's a dud, i'll sell it and get one from SL.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Other than mono-block and a longer term "case" for this thing, I'm trying to figure out how to get the BIOS to allow me to have a 4,6,8 core 4.7GHz+ A 1.2x and 18 core 4.5GHz @ 1.18v
> 
> That's one more level of control than is provided as far as I can tell. I can set a fixed voltage or an adaptive voltage, I can do so for all or by core.
> 
> I can tell windows to schedule to faster cores which higher top-end and voltages, but I can't use that approach in linux (where I do my computes). So, I think the only way I could do this in linux is core-by-core adaptive with negative offsets?











once you mentioned linux, I fuzzed out. Sounds like you got it figured out in windows, assign priorities? Sorry, if i could help i would, but not yet bro. my x299 4c8t has a very limited bios.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Here's a hypothetical scenario where this can go really bad. This is purely hypothetical and I'd only give it maybe a 10% chance it could happen. Furthermore, it would only affect those who put a sustained load on the chip (folding, and workstation users). But it certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility.
> 
> The X299 socket is rated for 165W TDP. But the 7980XE pulls 500 - 1000W overclocked. That's 3 - 6x the rated limit.
> 
> Let's make these hypothetical assumptions:
> 
> Under sustained 165W, the socket/CPU lasts 10 years. (well beyond the warranty)
> Under sustained 300W, the socket/CPU lasts 3 years.
> Under sustained 500W, it lasts only 6 months.
> Intel doesn't tell anyone about the MTTF for pulling 500W since it's considered overclocking and is out-of-spec.
> Right now, we all see that 7980XE is an awesome processor (price aside).
> 
> If you don't delid it, the chip is severely handicapped and any overclock that pulls over 300W is impossible without subzero.
> If you do delid it, the chip is capable of reaching the best overclocks at the cost of 500 - 1000W of power draw.


1. I think long term, we are "close" to some pretty impressive performance/watt points that thus far Intel hasn't needed to "reach for" for lack of competition. Given that we are "only " off by 2X something entirely reasonable (200W = reasonable 400W = current for 4.5GHz @1.18v) on this chip for a 4.5GHz, I think you can expect the competition will cause Intel to produce a lower power per IPC next generation. That's one thing Intel does exceedingly well most of the time.

2. You need to take a step back on the above - Intel never promised a chip that could do 18c @4.5GHz to anyone under any circumstances. They promised a chip that could do 2.6GHz worst-case and maybe hit some higher clocks under specific circumstances. So, objectively speaking, why _should_ they be the ones who get screwed when we abuse their chips?

I will grant you that I believe their $2K chip is priced by consumers assuming MUCH higher performance than that, but... frankly that's our mistake/gamble.

Now, if it turns out you can't really, reliably, cost effectively get the sort of performance priced into a $2K chip out of a chip for which you paid $2K, then intel will have its lunch eaten in the marketplace at a later date. AMD, ARM, MIPS, Fujitsu, IBM, Motorola, Sun and DEC have all proven this in spades over the years.

If the scenario you laid out comes to pass, then the market "valuation" of intel's HEDT chips will reflect this and they will be come the CFC light bulbs of the CPU industry until/unless something changes.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> 2. You need to take a step back on the above - Intel never promised a chip that could do 18c @4.5GHz to anyone under any circumstances. They promised a chip that could do 2.6GHz worst-case and maybe hit some higher clocks under specific circumstances. So, objectively speaking, why _should_ they be the ones who get screwed when we abuse their chips?


Ah, I didn't mean to imply that Intel _should_ be the one to blame for anything other than not giving people bigger warnings about drawing high wattage and not releasing their MTTF curves. But it would certainly be a wake up call among the enthusiasts that the CPU isn't as robust as everything thinks it is.
Quote:


> If the scenario you laid out comes to pass, then the market "valuation" of intel's HEDT chips will reflect this and they will be come the CFC light bulbs of the CPU industry until/unless something changes.


Or alternatively, the enthusiast market "catches up" by making products to address whatever the failure point is. So if it goes exactly as my hypothetical case describes (where the PCB components overheat because they aren't cooled and are insulated by tape), we might get direct-die monoblocks that solder themselves to the entire die, PCB, everything so it's a solid hunk of heat conducting mass with no holes anywhere to trap heat.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I've shaken my fist at the processor gods too - they built an amazing chip, crippled it with garbage TIM and then overcharged for it...
> 
> However, my ethical options are:
> 1. don't buy it
> 2. buy it and don't modify it
> 3. buy it, modify it and assume the risk.
> 
> SL offers a one-year warranty, so if I were more patient, I'd do that.
> 
> 2 wrongs don't make a right, but I know that's crazy talk...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "I remember a time when we knew who's @#$ it was on the screen and why it was farting and I believe that time can come again..." -Sure, Not


Sadly, I'm with you. Karma can be such a biach


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Sadly, I'm with you. Karma can be such a biach











Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Ah, I didn't mean to imply that Intel _should_ be the one to blame for anything other than not giving people bigger warnings about drawing high wattage and not releasing their MTTF curves. But it would certainly be a wake up call among the enthusiasts that the CPU isn't as robust as everything thinks it is.
> Or alternatively, the enthusiast market "catches up" by making products to address whatever the failure point is. So if it goes exactly as my hypothetical case describes (where the PCB components overheat because they aren't cooled and are insulated by tape), we might get direct-die monoblocks that solder themselves to the entire die, PCB, everything so it's a solid hunk of heat conducting mass with no holes anywhere to trap heat.










Here's hoping.... Getting "Mr Fusion" ready for my 10KW CPU...


----------



## DMac84

Is there a Skylake-X overclocking guide? Thinks like average voltages, mesh clock speed, memory controller specifics? etc??


----------



## Hydroplane

7940X and 7960X are now in stock at Newegg. No 7980XE yet, that I can see.


----------



## 7820x

Yeah, maybe the pigeon poop is really there to protect you lol. Maybe the pigeon poop has the perfect amount of thermal transfer that safely runs the chip at rated speeds on the most common (90%) coolers used in the market, ie AIOs. That hypothetical scenario might have a higher than 10% chance of happening. You made some great points which probably aren't too far from the truth. And who really buys an 18 core chip that isn't going to put a sustained load on it? It's the only use case that validates having that many cores.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Yeah, maybe the pigeon poop is really there to protect you lol. Maybe the pigeon poop has the perfect amount of thermal transfer that safely runs the chip at rated speeds on the most common (90%) coolers used in the market, ie AIOs. That hypothetical scenario might have a higher than 10% chance of happening. You made some great points which probably aren't too far from the truth. And who really buys an 18 core chip that isn't going to put a sustained load on it? It's the only use case that validates having that many cores.


Well, now there is where I think Intel deserves some flak....

The usual tricks that an "X" MB plays (MCE on by default) will drive you past reasonable temps even on a decent AIO because of their poop...

A number of reviewers pointed out that it takes some doing to get it DOWN to their advertized TDP the chip and just about any bios out there come out of the box clobbering the TDP spec.

I don't think any buyer of the 79XX CPUs would have flinched if Intel said it was a 200-250W CPU with typical settings and just came out with it. 165W is a sad joke given the Xeon 6154 @ 3.7GHz is a 200W TDP...


----------



## Nizzen

5 year "return if broken" in Norway is the best









So I don't delid 7980xe. 4700mhz on all cores in games is good enough


----------



## tripleflip18

Hey guys just delided my 7980 xe, not a great chip.... 4.6 @ 1.275v

Anyway, before deliding i was getting mid 80s temp. after delid, intimiate shot into hundred............. :/
delid again, seems like dthere was bad contct and way too little LM (grizzly)

so i applied quite more and booted up again, some cores are doing from 47c to 61, but then i got a few into 90s and close to 100..... im going to open it up again in a moment but thought i'd get some guidance from you guys. thank you


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> Hey guys just delided my 7980 xe, not a great chip.... 4.6 @ 1.275v
> 
> Anyway, before deliding i was getting mid 80s temp. after delid, intimiate shot into hundred............. :/
> delid again, seems like dthere was bad contct and way too little LM (grizzly)
> 
> so i applied quite more and booted up again, some cores are doing from 47c to 61, but then i got a few into 90s and close to 100..... im going to open it up again in a moment but thought i'd get some guidance from you guys. thank you


What VCCIN?


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> 5 year "return if broken" in Norway is the best
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So I don't delid 7980xe. 4700mhz on all cores in games is good enough


What kind of temps are you getting in Cinebench on those clocks? Voltage?


----------



## tripleflip18

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> What VCCIN?


1.76

only 3 cores now in mid 70's, and 1 core goes into upper 90s.....so annoying!

just ran cinabench, and my temps ranged from lowest of 51, to 1 core 101c!!!!!! god damn it


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> 1.76
> 
> only 3 cores now in mid 70's, and 1 core goes into upper 90s.....so annoying!
> 
> just ran cinabench, and my temps ranged from lowest of 51, to 1 core 101c!!!!!! god damn it


Even at 1.18v 4.5GHz I was over 80C on a couple of cores without my present issues of uneven monoblock pressure (AIO was better for everything but the VRM and noise).

So, I'm not surprised you are seeing issues at such "high" voltages...


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> Hey guys just delided my 7980 xe, not a great chip.... 4.6 @ 1.275v
> 
> Anyway, before deliding i was getting mid 80s temp. after delid, intimiate shot into hundred............. :/
> delid again, seems like dthere was bad contct and way too little LM (grizzly)
> 
> so i applied quite more and booted up again, some cores are doing from 47c to 61, but then i got a few into 90s and close to 100..... im going to open it up again in a moment but thought i'd get some guidance from you guys. thank you


Still sounds like poor contact. Also 4.6 at that voltage on that CPU is nothing to be sniffed at. Depends on the context of stability


----------



## tripleflip18

gosh, so the friggen core 13 or 14 depending if program starts counting from 0 or 1....

have a look, please tell me you know where core 13 is located, on average its at least 8 degrees hotter, all cores running same 1.275 volts, i got custom water system that can take all the heat away........

you guys also think its the LM problem on cpu between die and the little heat spreader or between spreader and my water block?

Thanks!!!!


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> gosh, so the friggen core 13 or 14 depending if program starts counting from 0 or 1....
> 
> have a look, please tell me you know where core 13 is located, on average its at least 8 degrees hotter, all cores running same 1.275 volts, i got custom water system that can take all the heat away........
> 
> you guys also think its the LM problem on cpu between die and the little heat spreader or between spreader and my water block?
> 
> Thanks!!!!


those temps are fine and variance is expected

I have a core that is about 8c hotter also on my 7820x if it makes you feel better


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> those temps are fine and variance is expected
> 
> I have a core that is about 8c hotter also on my 7820x if it makes you feel better


From the screenshot, I'd agree that's perfectly normal. From the other post, however, he's said 40-60, with a few in the 90s to 100s. That's a slightly different story lol


----------



## done12many2

Dialed in a "Per Usage" OC with 4 or less cores running at 5.2 GHz and 10 or less running at 5.1 GHz to pick up a couple more points in Cinebench R15. I'm still amazed that something with more than 4 cores can do this kind of stuff.









Multi 2872cb / Single 233cb


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Dialed in a "Per Usage" OC with 4 or less cores running at 5.2 GHz and 10 or less running at 5.1 GHz to pick up a couple more points in Cinebench R15. I'm still amazed that something with more than 4 cores can do this kind of stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Multi 2872cb / Single 233cb


Nice








Do you guys use the hpet or not?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you guys use the hpet or not?


Thanks man!

I only use HPET when running HWBOTx265 bench and then I disable it afterwards. When I run CB, I do set it to realtime and disable whatever is not needed.

I ran HWBOTx265 last night at 4.9 GHz. I plan to run some higher clocked runs soon.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Dialed in a "Per Usage" OC with 4 or less cores running at 5.2 GHz and 10 or less running at 5.1 GHz to pick up a couple more points in Cinebench R15. I'm still amazed that something with more than 4 cores can do this kind of stuff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Multi 2872cb / Single 233cb


How did you setup this in BIOS? Can you post a screenshot?


----------



## Jpmboy

Thought some of you guys might be interested. ModMyMods.com has both 5mm and 3mm LEDs that fit into the predrilled mount holes on EK plexi blocks. Gonna add 2 more 3mm to the gpu blocks and to the cpu block. The 3mm LEDs run off any fan header.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!








I got my 6950X/R5E10 moved to the caselabs case (2 Titan X Pascals, 64GB 3400c13 ram.. etc), boxed my 5960X/R5E (will probably sell it), moved R6A to the main bench table (4x420 rads, 1x360 fat rad, Chiller, 3 pumps, all sorts of in-line temp and flow sensors.. etc) with 2 TitanXps. 7980XE coming, 7740X running.









So I have some Optane memory.. can;t decided whether yo use it on the x299 rig or the Z370/8700K I gotta set up this week.


----------



## Jobotoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> gosh, so the friggen core 13 or 14 depending if program starts counting from 0 or 1....
> 
> have a look, please tell me you know where core 13 is located, on average its at least 8 degrees hotter, all cores running same 1.275 volts, i got custom water system that can take all the heat away........
> 
> you guys also think its the LM problem on cpu between die and the little heat spreader or between spreader and my water block?
> 
> Thanks!!!!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> those temps are fine and variance is expected
> 
> I have a core that is about 8c hotter also on my 7820x if it makes you feel better


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> From the screenshot, I'd agree that's perfectly normal. From the other post, however, he's said 40-60, with a few in the 90s to 100s. That's a slightly different story lol


Maybe I am looking at this wrong, but from the screenshot one of the cores is 23C hotter than one of the others . . . at Maximum, and almost 20C on average. Is that is normal variance?


----------



## tripleflip18

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jobotoo*
> 
> Maybe I am looking at this wrong, but from the screenshot one of the cores is 23C hotter than one of the others . . . at Maximum, and almost 20C on average. Is that is normal variance?


you are correct, and wondering if you guys think its still a bad contact, its always core 13 that is WAY hotter, any one knows of its location on the die?


----------



## Martin778

Holy nuts, delidded my 7920X, used TG Conductonaut and Kryonaut on the outside, glued it shut and temps dropped by something like 20-25*C....


This are largeFFT's, maximum load.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> How did you setup this in BIOS? Can you post a screenshot?


Absolutely. It should be even more fun with a 7980XE.









I would say that anyone with that many cores who wants to maintain high single-threaded performance should be using a "Per Core Usage" or "By Specific Core" OC. Much more flexibility than "Sync All Cores".

Keep in mind that the multipliers/voltages pictured are just for benching. My daily is a 50/49 type setup.

Good luck man.


----------



## Jpmboy

whoa.. had this up for less than 30 min. just a core OC.. nice XTU score!
ASUS Apex X, 8700K @4.7a4.5


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> whoa.. had this up for less than 30 min. just a core OC.. nice XTU score!
> ASUS Apex X, 8700K @4.7a4.5


That's going to be a beast of a mainstream chip. Thanks for sharing.

That z370 Apex is sweet too. Not sure if they put enough RGB headers on it though.









I like the dual 8-pin for the CPU. Hell, a lot of x299 boards don't even have that.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> That's going to be a beast of a mainstream chip. Thanks for sharing.
> 
> That z370 Apex is sweet too. Not sure if they put enough RGB headers on it though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like the dual 8-pin for the CPU. Hell, a lot of x299 boards don't even have that.


Yeah, I agree... the 8700K could really be a fantastic mainstream cpu! Now, I just need to make time to tune it up (and delid).


----------



## tripleflip18

5th time is the charm.... lol core 13 max 67, and highest overall 70c!!!!!!!!, core 16m byt now its 13c difference between lowest and highest, and in general all cores are pretty close.....

i applied quite a lot more LM to die, spreader, waterblock.... hope this helps someone, the very first time that i applied LM it looked like i painted surfaces with silver, now i got a bit of visible liquid on all of the surfaces


----------



## Martin778

How I did it, works fine from the 1st try:


----------



## tripleflip18

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> How I did it, works fine from the 1st try:


wow, thats a lot more then i have still..... gosh, i have to do it the 6th time? lol whats the range of your temps? my difference once again is like 15c right now from 1 lowest core to the highest, the rest are within 5c difference....

Thanks for the help!


----------



## tripleflip18

Also is there anyone here with Asrock motherboard and maybe x299 Taichi? Im not having any luck overlocking PER CORE. when i do that and i load the system, all cores run max at 3.8ghz...... ?? i have a few cores with really low voltages on auto and 2 cores with really high voltates, i'd love to set those with different multipliers to get more Single Core Performance but when i specify each core its spead and volts all cores run only at 3.8ghz.........

thank you!


----------



## Martin778

Well....ME! I have a Taichi but not for so much longer, probably. I'm already stretching the 8 pin EPS's power limit.
Haven't tried per core OC yet. Want me to check something? It could have something to do with Turbo.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Absolutely. It should be even more fun with a 7980XE.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would say that anyone with that many cores who wants to maintain high single-threaded performance should be using a "Per Core Usage" or "By Specific Core" OC. Much more flexibility than "Sync All Cores".
> 
> Keep in mind that the multipliers/voltages pictured are just for benching. My daily is a 50/49 type setup.
> 
> Good luck man.


Thanks a lot, it was simpler than I had thought. I thought I needed to pick actual core(s) there but it was only the ratio and the amount of cores.

I am using only auto Vcore though. I think there should be an option to set the voltage per the amount of cores too? Because when I dial in 50x multiplier the default VID is set to 1.4 V







. If I try to run it at lower Vcore by tuning the offset, it will affect stability of the lower cores and probably crash at idle if the voltage goes too low?

I set 47x for 6 cores, 46x for 10 cores, and the lowest is 40x for 18 cores.







Then the maximum Vcore is 1.250 V which is very fine.

Also, stability testing is a bit trickier. It would need to be tested first by using all cores and manual setting for Vcore using the all core setting at the same voltage I think. If I set Prime95 to run on 4 threads only, it seems the core frequencies are all over the place, when I think it should run at 4.7 GHz on all those cores.


----------



## Jpmboy

dropped the 7980xe in the socket... and it works.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> How I did it, works fine from the 1st try:


That's going to squirt some out
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> dropped the 7980xe in the socket... and it works.


Let the games begin...


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> dropped the 7980xe in the socket... and it works.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> dropped the 7980xe in the socket... and it works.


That's always a good start


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> That's always a good start


lol - ya never know.









gonna take quite a while to get this tuned up like my 6950X...







just setting up a base to work from . [email protected],2V (1.9VCCIIN, LLC5) holding upo to initial testing.
running while browsing.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - ya never know.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gonna take quite a while to get this tuned up like my 6950X...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> just setting up a base to work from . [email protected],2V (1.9VCCIIN, LLC5) holding upo to initial testing.
> running while browsing.


I could be wrong and I'd love to hear others findings here, but this chip doesn't seem to drink VCCIN like HW/BW. I haven't found anything other than more heat/power beyond 1.75v

You able to cool [email protected] in RB sort of loads with PP TIM?

That took me to brown-town right away pre-delid - 105C with the CPU tactical noping all the way.


----------



## Martin778

@cekim
It looks like much more LM than it really was.


----------



## tripleflip18

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Well....ME! I have a Taichi but not for so much longer, probably. I'm already stretching the 8 pin EPS's power limit.
> Haven't tried per core OC yet. Want me to check something? It could have something to do with Turbo.


would you please try, and tell me the firmware if it works thank you!


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> @cekim
> It looks like much more than it actually was. I already removed quite a bit.


With the LET it won't matter, but that looks similar to my first pass and squirt it did...


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Thanks a lot, it was simpler than I had thought. I thought I needed to pick actual core(s) there but it was only the ratio and the amount of cores.
> 
> I am using only auto Vcore though. I think there should be an option to set the voltage per the amount of cores too? Because when I dial in 50x multiplier the default VID is set to 1.4 V
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . If I try to run it at lower Vcore by tuning the offset, it will affect stability of the lower cores and probably crash at idle if the voltage goes too low?
> 
> I set 47x for 6 cores, 46x for 10 cores, and the lowest is 40x for 18 cores.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then the maximum Vcore is 1.250 V which is very fine.
> 
> Also, stability testing is a bit trickier. It would need to be tested first by using all cores and manual setting for Vcore using the all core setting at the same voltage I think. If I set Prime95 to run on 4 threads only, it seems the core frequencies are all over the place, when I think it should run at 4.7 GHz on all those cores.


You can adjust voltage independently in the "By Specific Core" OC option, but not in "Per Core Usage" OC option.

I run my voltage set to adaptive voltage with a negative offset applied. It does take some tweaking to get it dialed in, but once it is, the chip is a great deal snappier thanks to the single-threaded performance bump without having to worry as much about thermals when all cores are firing. I'd consider this even more important for a chip like the 7980XE.

As far as testing, this too requires a bit of tweaking, but is definitely doable. Try setting affinity as you use your preferred stress applications.

I'm not sure if I mentioned this earlier, but your Turbo Boost Max 3.0 will continue to function as well sending priority single-threaded tasks to the the "favorite" cores.

Good luck man.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> @cekim
> It looks like much more than it actually was. I already removed quite a bit.
> 
> 
> 
> With the LET it won't matter, but that looks similar to my first pass and squirt it did...
Click to expand...

OK, so what did you exactly find out?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> OK, so what did you exactly find out?


Me? Right now I know the block is not mounting flat on my delided/LM'd chip that has no silicon sealant. I've been able to limit the unevenness "tuning" the amount of LM, but it remains until I can get some thinner thermal pads and/or make other adjustments.

I'm digging through my stuff to see if maybe I have some thermal pads, but otherwise I will have to wait until Thursday.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I could be wrong and I'd love to hear others findings here, but this chip doesn't seem to drink VCCIN like HW/BW. I haven't found anything other than more heat/power beyond 1.75v
> 
> You able to cool [email protected] in RB sort of loads with PP TIM?
> 
> That took me to brown-town right away pre-delid - 105C with the CPU tactical noping all the way.


one core hit 90C just during R15.. and yeah, I'm getting there regarding VCCIn. Auto was feeding 2V so I'm lowering it in 100mV increments. Just finished HCi on a base ram clock so can now eliminate that as a root cause of anything failing. Cache next... Can't find cache V in AID64, but SIV64does report it.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> dropped the 7980xe in the socket... and it works.


did you get an SL chip?


----------



## Martin778

Have you noticed something with the SKL-X and P95? It doesn't drop threads anymore, the whole thing just locks up for a minute and then BSODS.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> one core hit 90C just during R15.. and yeah, I'm getting there regarding VCCIn. Auto was feeding 2V so I'm lowering it in 100mV increments. Just finished HCi on a base ram clock so can now eliminate that as a root cause of anything failing. Cache next... Can't find cache V in AID64, but SIV64does report it.


Where's the cache voltage in siv64, I'm either blind or it won't read mine









Found the LLC offset, but not the actual voltage.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Where's the cache voltage in siv64, I'm either blind or it won't read mine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Found the LLC offset, but not the actual voltage.


Hit the Status button


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Hit the Status button


Yeah did that, it's just not showing the actual cache voltage just the offset:


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> did you get an SL chip?


B&H. SL just launched this afternoon.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Yeah did that, it's just not showing the actual cache voltage just the offset:


I think it's VIN9.. I gotta measure again to verify.

just did.. nah, that's not vcache on this rig. Set 1.165V in bios, meaasured 1.18V off the MB.


----------



## Martin778

What is the 'expected' voltage for 4.7GHz on a 7920X? I just ran 1h P95 @ 1.26V but the temps, even delidded, start to hit 90 in Blend test.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> What is the 'expected' voltage for 4.7GHz on a 7920X? I just ran 1h P95 @ 1.26V but the temps, even delidded, start to hit 90 in Blend test.


is there any particular reason you are using p95?


----------



## Martin778

RealBench won't work and Aida64's test seems pretty weak (I had games crash after 2h of Aida64).


----------



## cekim

In the words of the esteemed Mathew McConaughey - "Alright, Alright, Alright..."



Changes:
1. found some 0.5mm bitspower thermal tape - replaced the 1mm tape from EK (to compensate for the slightly lower IHS height (though ideal appears to be a "little thickcer")
2. added a little more LM to die, IHS inner and IHS outer
3. replaced 280 with 420
4. removed from case because tired of going in and out
5. Profit (noticed the vastly reduced max temp spread after 15m of TB - temps aren't going up any more at this point):


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> B&H. SL just launched this afternoon.


Just secured my i9-7980Xe on SL should be here by the weekend.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> one core hit 90C just during R15.. and yeah, I'm getting there regarding VCCIn. Auto was feeding 2V so I'm lowering it in 100mV increments. Just finished HCi on a base ram clock so can now eliminate that as a root cause of anything failing. Cache next... Can't find cache V in AID64, but SIV64does report it.


What kind of power draw are you seeing at 4.6?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> RealBench won't work and Aida64's test seems pretty weak (I had games crash after 2h of Aida64).


did you try x264 encoding stressor?
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7gpMyj43ZFjSzJ4Nm0xT3pobjA
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> In the words of the esteemed Mathew McConaughey - "Alright, Alright, Alright..."
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Changes:
> 1. found some 0.5mm bitspower thermal tape - replaced the 1mm tape from EK (to compensate for the slightly lower IHS height (though ideal appears to be a "little thickcer")
> 2. added a little more LM to die, IHS inner and IHS outer
> 3. replaced 280 with 420
> 4. removed from case because tired of going in and out
> 5. Profit (noticed the vastly reduced max temp spread after 15m of TB - temps aren't going up any more at this point):


wait - wut? Are you using a monoblock?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> did you try x264 encoding stressor?
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7gpMyj43ZFjSzJ4Nm0xT3pobjA
> wait - wut? Are you using a monoblock?


Yes, what is the source of your surprise/concern in that response?

FWIW - even with a monoblock the VRM section wants more airflow than "ambient". The caps in that are were blazing until i put a small fan in that area.


----------



## Martin778

I've read somewhere that you need at least 1.8V VCCIN under load to avoid phantom throttling, is this true?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Just secured my i9-7980Xe on SL should be here by the weekend.


nice!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> What kind of power draw are you seeing at 4.6?


I'm afraid to look... will hook up a killawatt next shutdown.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Yes, what is the source of your surprise/concern in that response?


well.. actually, not really surprised. Monoblocks usually need a bit of _massaging_ to make optimal contact on al lsurfaces. The EK block I put on the R5E10 recently, benefited from removal of the washer-shims and retention of the stock MB insulators.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nice!


I just looked and they sold out 4.2 and 4.4 bin processors and only have 4.3 available. I did not think they would go that quick.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I've read somewhere that you need at least 1.8V VCCIN under load to avoid phantom throttling, is this true?


This doesn't sound unreasonable, but I've not observed it yet... Though I'm not 100% convinced I'd recognize it yet. So far I see nice and linear scaling of Cinebench and the like as I ramp up clocks from 4.2-4.6.
4371 @ 4.5
4444 @ 4.6
2% clocks 1.7% performance - close enough...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nice!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid to look... will hook up a killawatt next shutdown.
> well.. actually, not really surprised. Monoblocks usually need a bit of _massaging_ to make optimal contact on al lsurfaces. The EK block I put on the R5E10 recently, benefited from removal of the washer-shims and retention of the stock MB insulators.


What's SIV say? I see 430-450W @ 4.6 in SIV for the CPU power


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nice!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm afraid to look... will hook up a killawatt next shutdown.
> well.. actually, not really surprised. Monoblocks usually need a bit of _massaging_ to make optimal contact on al lsurfaces. The EK block I put on the R5E10 recently, benefited from removal of the washer-shims and retention of the stock MB insulators.


Yeah, I'm less surprised/concerned as I did not re-seal the IHS so I gave up some height.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> What's SIV say? I see 430-450W @ 4.6 in SIV for the CPU power


That's not to bad....Thanks for the information.


----------



## Martin778

Could be correct, I was seeing up to 360W when I pushed 1.3V into my 12 cores.

x264 uses AVX, doesn't it? I see the -4 offset between the cores. Not really relevant as a stress test with AVX offsets set, isn't it?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> This doesn't sound unreasonable, but I've not observed it yet... Though I'm not 100% convinced I'd recognize it yet. So far I see nice and linear scaling of Cinebench and the like as I ramp up clocks from 4.2-4.6.
> 4371 @ 4.5
> 4444 @ 4.6
> 2% clocks 1.7% performance - close enough...
> What's SIV say? I see 430-450W @ 4.6 in SIV for the CPU power


Lowered VCCIN to 1.75 from 1.80 and got a new high in R15 - didn't even bother to "optimize" (close everything), just ran it after boot:


So, wherever this throttle occurs, I haven't hit it yet.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Lowered VCCIN to 1.75 from 1.80 and got a new high in R15 - didn't even bother to "optimize" (close everything), just ran it after boot:
> 
> 
> So, wherever this throttle occurs, I haven't hit it yet.


Shot in the dark: Try dropping it all the way down to 1.6v and disable any sort of LLC.

On the Gigabyte boards, the phantom throttle doesn't kick in until you go below 1.65v for the 7900X. Not sure what it would be for the other chips.

If you're on the Apex or R6e, it might not be possible to get the phantom throttle even if you try since they do something to counter the throttling. Though according to this, there's a "Vccin tracker" option that might have something to do with it.


----------



## cekim

Playing around with adaptive in prep for trying to find a 4,6,8,16,18 OC setup.

-0.07 offset is producing some very nice results - that average and typical power reading is downright reasonable for 4.5GHz 18 cores:


----------



## Martin778

Looks like I need at least 1.226V to stabilize X264 @ 4.6GHz. This time no cheating with AVX offsets.



But those temps, oh boi






















10/10 would delid.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> This doesn't sound unreasonable, but I've not observed it yet... Though I'm not 100% convinced I'd recognize it yet. So far I see nice and linear scaling of Cinebench and the like as I ramp up clocks from 4.2-4.6.
> 4371 @ 4.5
> 4444 @ 4.6
> 2% clocks 1.7% performance - close enough...
> What's SIV say? I see 430-450W @ 4.6 in SIV for the CPU power


siv when doing what? will do...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Looks like I need at least 1.226V to stabilize X264 @ 4.6GHz.
> 
> 
> 
> But those temps, oh boi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10/10 would delid.


temps are not that bad. your 20xe sure runs a bit cooler than this 80xe.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> siv when doing what? will do...


RB2.44 stress


----------



## Martin778

The temps are amazing considering how they looked like before delidding. On stock TIM it would've been in mid 90's already.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> RB2.44 stress


lol - gotta find 2.44. running 2.54rc2 atm


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - gotta find 2.44. running 2.54rc2 atm


I haven't played with any of betas...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I haven't played with any of betas...


siv has it at 440-ish watts, kilaWATT HAS IT AT 860w (HIGH IDLE IS 255W) max T was 93C - too high. I need ot delid this, and this 870K in the next day or two.








with the gpus switched off on RB
That can;t be right...

R15


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> siv has it at 440-ish watts, kilaWATT HAS IT AT 860w (HIGH IDLE IS 255W) max T was 93C - too high. I need ot delid this, and this 870K in the next day or two.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> with the gpus switched off on RB
> That can;t be right...


All matches quite well to what I've seen... "Feel it! HOT HOT HOT!"


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> All matches quite well to what I've seen... "Feel it! HOT HOT HOT!"


yeah - gotta pop the top on these.

I REALLY miss having voltages reported in bios right next to the setting option.. like CACHE!! Hard to determine an offset without this.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - gotta find 2.44. running 2.54rc2 atm


Easy mate









http://dlcdnmkt.asus.com/rog/RealBench_v2.44.zip

Just copy the link location on Asus's download and change it to the version you want


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Easy mate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://dlcdnmkt.asus.com/rog/RealBench_v2.44.zip
> 
> Just copy the link location on Asus's download and change it to the version you want


THanks, but oh - I have a bunch of versions.. just had to _find_ it on the NAS.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> THanks, but oh - I have a bunch of versions.. just had to _find_ it on the NAS.


You know I should of realized that to start with









What's the lowest VCCIN you can got with a 7820x, I've had mine at 1.9v, but from what I've been reading that a tad high.
Got it down to 1.75v LLC 6 now, doesn't seem to effect any temp changes in anything though...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> You know I should of realized that to start with
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's the lowest VCCIN you can got with a 7820x, I've had mine at 1.9v, but from what I've been reading that a tad high.
> Got it down to 1.75v LLC 6 now, doesn't seem to effect any temp changes in anything though...


I never had the 7820... but this 7980 is good at 1.8V ()and still lowering.).

4.6V at 1.180V is good for x264. Gotta try lower yet. Damn - two cores hitting 90+C. scary.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - gotta pop the top on these.
> 
> I REALLY miss having voltages reported in bios right next to the setting option.. like CACHE!! Hard to determine an offset without this.


Been using SIV to figure that out...

4.6GHz -0.03 is "so far so good", but 400W sustained 444W peak in RB2.44

Haven't been able to get off 1.1v cache and 3GHz, but it eats up 1T memory (stock 1.35v 128G 3200CL14 1T mmmm, mmmm, good...)

Looking good, but that power consumption... I'm sure I can wring out lots of volts on various cores, but its going to take a while...









Socket shake&bake!


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Shot in the dark: Try dropping it all the way down to 1.6v and disable any sort of LLC.
> 
> On the Gigabyte boards, the phantom throttle doesn't kick in until you go below 1.65v for the 7900X. Not sure what it would be for the other chips.
> 
> If you're on the Apex or R6e, it might not be possible to get the phantom throttle even if you try since they do something to counter the throttling. Though according to this, there's a "Vccin tracker" option that might have something to do with it.




That Vccin tracker was on an Asus beta bios. On latest stable bios 0802 for R6A (probably R6E too) there is no option in bios and it looks like phantom throttling has been permanently disabled for good. I saw 1.5 vccin with 1.25vcore and no change in cinebench.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> 
> 
> That Vccin tracker was on an Asus beta bios. On latest stable bios 0802 for R6A (probably R6E too) there is no option in bios and it looks like phantom throttling has been permanently disabled for good. I saw 1.5 vccin with 1.25vcore and no change in cinebench.


Given that I see little correlation with VCCIN and stability, wondering if they are just ignoring our setting?


----------



## Martin778

Passed 40 loops of x264, should be good


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> 
> 
> That Vccin tracker was on an Asus beta bios. On latest stable bios 0802 for R6A (probably R6E too) there is no option in bios and it looks like phantom throttling has been permanently disabled for good. I saw 1.5 vccin with 1.25vcore and no change in cinebench.


yeah - I can drop vccin quite a bit for R15 and x264... but as before, if you want to know a solid VCCIN, use HWBOT x265, 4K and increase "parts" as far as your ram will allow. I just failed x265 after passing R15, x264, RB and HCi memtest for 200%.









This one will flush out any vccin deficiency:
changed vccin from 1.75 to 1.8V and viola!


stil need some tweaking - want the correction factor at 0.99 (but >0.95 is acceptable)


----------



## cekim

Look ma! top10


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Look ma! top10


How are your temps at 4.6? What kind of loop are you running for your chip?

Also, lol @ someone hitting 4.8 with an AIO on there


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Look ma! top10


lol - look ma, top 3! (for now...)


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> How are your temps at 4.6? What kind of loop are you running for your chip?
> 
> Also, lol @ someone hitting 4.8 with an AIO on there


Temps - This is a bit more than 4.6 (BCLK=101 + x46) Temps are ~80-81 for worst core in long RB2.44 runs 440-450W peak - 405-415 typical sustained.

Loop = Ghetto-Fabulous at the moment - EK D5, monoblock, 420 rad (push):


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - look ma, top 3! (for now...)


Chiller?


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Temps - This is a bit more than 4.6 (BCLK=101 + x46) Temps are ~80-81 for worst core in long RB2.44 runs 440-450W peak - 405-415 typical sustained.
> 
> Loop = Ghetto-Fabulous at the moment - EK D5, monoblock, 420 rad (push):


Thanks for the info. What kind of fans on that rad?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Thanks for the info. What kind of fans on that rad?


Vardar 1150


----------



## tripleflip18

why don't i hear anyone using specific per core overclock, my 7980 seems to be stable at 4.6 and 1.275 and not lower, but its too high of watts, around 525 on average, i can see one of my cores requires 1.39 volts to do 4.6 if i set it to adaptive/auto while the rest are at or under 1.28, meaning that core is crap and needs more voltage, how the hell can i make it so that that single core is clocked lower say at 4.2......

if i set it in bios.... max clocks are 4.4, but if its a full 18 core load it drops to 3.4ghz...... playing around with intel overclocking tool has no effect.............WHAT THE......

this is with taichi

My previous 7940x had a few higher voltage cores, so im sure the rest of you have crap core that you can just simply lower the multiplier while raising the other capable cores to higher speed...........

But again i can't get it to work, someone please shine some light for me, thanks!


----------



## district9prawn

On my 7920x and 7820x, I found voltage required for 4.8 to be +/- 15mv. 1.39v seems really out there when the others need only 1.28.


----------



## arrow0309

I've just ordered the Rockit 99 tool as well.
I might still have some CLP left.
So, what LM do you guys use with these hot chicks?


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Can't find cache V in AID64, but SIV64does report it.


Normally it's good with the latest beta version









There is no software that reads the VCCIN ?


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> I've just ordered the Rockit 99 tool as well.
> I might still have some CLP left.
> So, what LM do you guys use with these hot chicks?


Conductonaut or Liquid Ultra.

Conductonaut has better specs.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Chiller?


no, just ambient. not delided yet.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Normally it's good with the latest beta version
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no software that reads the VCCIN ?


SIV64 does. (highlighted in yellow)


btw - i still can;t find cache voltage. best to measure anyway


----------



## Martin778

I don't have cache voltage readout too, that's why I use override voltage (set and forget







)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I don't have cache voltage readout too, that's why I use override voltage (set and forget
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


yeah - my board and bios 802.. set 1.16... measures at 1.18V close enough.


----------



## tistou77

Ok thanks









For Cache Voltage and last beta


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Ok thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For Cache Voltage and last beta


cool - gotta dl the beta!


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> cool - gotta dl the beta!


For VCCIN, SIV needs to update to indicate VCCIN instead of Core, I guess ?


----------



## czin125

Pics from a finnish forum
https://i.imgur.com/T8MAViN.jpg
There's a 7740X with 2x8GB 4300 16-16-16-28 360 CR1

7920X with 4x8GB 4200 16-16-15-28 340 CR1
https://i.imgur.com/FxrnzE9.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/hy143tc.jpg
The ram goes to 41W?

https://i.imgur.com/sdApHDm.jpg
5.5 at 1.360v CB


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Ok thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For Cache Voltage and last beta


okay - that reports ther same value as SIV64 "VIN9". neither are what i set or measured off the MB.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> okay - that reports ther same value as SIV64 "VIN9". neither are what i set or measured off the MB.


What are you setting? On the Apex with the 7900X using offset, I found AIDA was showing as close as you'd expect.


----------



## glnn_23

Thought I might give hwbot x265 a go with my 7940x. Tried 4.7Ghz but haven't got there yet for this benchmark.
Managed to do 4.6Ghz although not much improvement over 4.5Ghz


.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> What are you setting? On the Apex with the 7900X using offset, I found AIDA was showing as close as you'd expect.


I set 1.165V cache in bios, this measures off the MB via DMM as 1.17-1.18V-ish (a little float). Neither AID64 or SIV64 report the set or actual voltage... AFAICT. Trust the DMM.









but that assumes that what's labeled as cache0 on the board is cpu cache:


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *glnn_23*
> 
> Thought I might give hwbot x265 a go with my 7940x. Tried 4.7Ghz but haven't got there yet for this benchmark.
> Managed to do 4.6Ghz although not much improvement over 4.5Ghz
> 
> 
> .


looks good!


----------



## Menthol

Jpmboy,
Have you run any 3D benchmarks yet? I have shied away from SKL X waiting to see some non LN2 results for the big chips


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Jpmboy,
> Have you run any 3D benchmarks yet? I have shied away from SKL X waiting to see some non LN2 results for the big chips


not yet bro... just getting to the point where I think the CPU is ready for that. TSE later today after hooking up the chiller. REally curious to see the graphics score compared to my 6950X. And in th emean time... a bazillion update to W10 on the Apex X/8700K set up, now that looks very promising for 3D performance.









honestly... after having a 24/7 5.3GHz 7740X on this board for a month or so, I'm spoiled by that IPC and instant response to everything.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Ok thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For Cache Voltage and last beta
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> okay - that reports ther same value as SIV64 "VIN9". neither are what i set or measured off the MB.
Click to expand...

It reports indeed as vcache / vin9 on mine:



The weird thing however is that it reports less than I've set (1.060v in manual)
Here with a huge 4.3ghz under Firestarter in avx512 went to a max of 1.048v but everywhere else it reports max 1.032 so I suppose the latest bios does override some settings (al least).


----------



## Martin778

I bit the bullet and ordered the R6 Apex. God dammit





















If it only won't melt my CPU in 6 months...
The Taichi's VRM got a bit too hot to my liking at 1.25V and sustained loads. I mean, it works but I don't want to push my luck.

BTW, so far the OC capabilities of my 7920X look like this:
4.5GHz ~1.165-1.170V
4.6GHz ~1.225V
4.7GHz ~1.27V+
4.8GHz probably not doable or @ +1.3V.

RAM seems to be happy at 4k 17-17-17-39-CR1 1.45V and VCCIO/SA 1.2V.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Testing my 7800X at 4000/3000 at 0.950/0.900V. Max temps under several Cinenench Runs was 39'C.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Testing my 7800X at 4000/3000 at 0.950/0.900V. Max temps under several Cinenench Runs was 39'C.


Your location is helping for sure!!!










I am receiving tomorrow a 7980xe, hope it is a good unit!!!










By the way, in TimeSpy the Skylake X generally get lower scores in Graphics than 6950x, at least with 7900x.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> no, just ambient. not delided yet.


Looks like you have a good chip.







Hope mine is that good.


----------



## Timmaigh!

I ordered Alphacool Eisbear 360 for the 7940x. Should i use it with its own fans (Eiswind 12) or do i replace them with Fractal Design Venturi HP12 PWM, i currently use on my H105? Any idea which ones are better?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> It reports indeed as vcache / vin9 on mine:
> 
> 
> 
> The weird thing however is that it reports less than I've set (1.060v in manual)
> Here with a huge 4.3ghz under Firestarter in avx512 went to a max of 1.048v but everywhere else it reports max 1.032 so I suppose the latest bios does override some settings (al least).


that's the point tho... the report to the OS for VIN9 (SIV) and VCacahe (AID) are not the bios set or multimeter-measured cache voltage... if the probelt "Cache0" read point is cpu Cache. No evidence of an "override", only evidence of wrong report to OS or probelt reading is not cache voltage.

@elmor - can you help to clarify the probelt "Cache0" read point on the Apex IV? Is this the voltage for cpu cache?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Looks like you have a good chip.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hope mine is that good.


seems to be about average - I suspect there is not a large variance for the 7980XE. if it holds up, I'l delid.









one thing I have noticed... I can;t seem to get the same level of GFX performance from my 2 TXps compared to when they were on my 6950X/R5E10 rig. May just be a tuning thing - it's only been less than a day with this setup.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I bit the bullet and ordered the R6 Apex. God dammit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If it only won't melt my CPU in 6 months...
> The Taichi's VRM got a bit too hot to my liking at 1.25V and sustained loads. I mean, it works but I don't want to push my luck.
> 
> BTW, so far the OC capabilities of my 7920X look like this:
> 4.5GHz ~1.165-1.170V
> 4.6GHz ~1.225V
> 4.7GHz ~1.27V+
> 4.8GHz probably not doable or @ +1.3V.
> 
> RAM seems to be happy at 4k 17-17-17-39-CR1 1.45V and VCCIO/SA 1.2V.


Using AVX when overclocked makes a monoblock recommended.

I find a bit high that memory voltage. B-Die sticks???


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> one thing I have noticed... I can;t seem to get the same level of GFX performance from my 2 TXps compared to when they were on my 6950X/R5E10 rig. May just be a tuning thing - it's only been less than a day with this setup.


This is expected...I saw it in June already when I got the platform. I think you need around 4.8 GHz 7900X to match a 4.2 GHz 6950X in 3D.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> This is expected...I saw it in June already when I got the platform. I think you need around 4.8 GHz 7900X to match a 4.2 GHz 6950X in 3D.


hopefully it's not worse with a 7980xe.


----------



## MJB13SRT8

Jpmboy, as far as GFX goes i think it's driver issue or windows 10 FCU issue not playing well together my time spy scores stayed about the same as my 5960x with R5E10, physx went up but my GFX scores dropped with my 7940x/R6A, but in firestrike everything went up and my physx is 32081 but the 7940X is not recognized in 3dmark.

Montrose


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> hopefully it's not worse with a 7980xe.


I never saw higher fps than now with 7900x and 7980xe. Came from 6900k and 6950x @ 4.4.

Msybr cache @ 3000-3200mhz and memory @ 4000 cl16 does the trick?









I mainly play BF1.


----------



## Kimir

If you are unpleased with your 7980xe, you can send it to me.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> I never saw higher fps than now with 7900x and 7980xe. Came from 6900k and 6950x @ 4.4.
> 
> Msybr cache @ 3000-3200mhz and memory @ 4000 cl16 does the trick?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mainly play BF1.


yeah - cache is at 3000, ram is 4000c16 already. http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread/5000_20#post_26412076
This is something different. there are many reports/reviews showing the 6950x/x99 having better fps in several games. But, i don't game all that much. Time is the only thing you can never get more of.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> This is expected...I saw it in June already when I got the platform. I think you need around 4.8 GHz 7900X to match a 4.2 GHz 6950X in 3D.


yeah - i initially considered those reports to be a bit spurious. I stil need to do some tuning, rather than just cranking things up - find a sweetspot.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> If you are unpleased with your 7980xe, you can send it to me.


ha, I like you Kimir, but maybe not that much.








JK - core count on these is nice, but coming off a really good 6950x (which is still here running) and a screaming 7740X (and a new 8700K), the 7980xe has a rough act to follow in all but the most threaded measures. Still - I mean, I dropped this in the socket w/ stock tim yesterday afternoon.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - cache is at 3000, ram is 4000c16 already. http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread/5000_20#post_26412076
> This is something different. there are many reports/reviews showing the 6950x/x99 having better fps in several games. But, i don't game all that much. Time is the only thing you can never get more of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah - i initially considered those reports to be a bit spurious. I stil need to do some tuning, rather than just cranking things up - find a sweetspot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ha, I like you Kimir, but maybe not that much.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JK - core count on these is nice, but coming off a really good 6950x (which is still here running) and a screaming 7740X (and a new 8700K), the 7980xe has a rough act to follow in all but the most threaded measures. Still - I mean, I dropped this in the socket w/ stock tim yesterday afternoon.


I'm not surprised at all on the 3D results. The L3 cache on these Skylake X parts has around half the bandwidth and almost double the latency as the Haswell-E/Broadwell-E generation. So anything that relies on it could be affected.

I really hope Intel improves their mesh design in the next generation. (Ice Lake?) It's turning into a massive bottleneck on the HPC side along with memory bandwidth.


----------



## rt123

Guys, which version of realbench has AVX again? I heard a new version introduced Avx?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rt123*
> 
> Guys, which version of realbench has AVX again? I heard a new version introduced Avx?


Version 2.54 got it at least!


----------



## rt123

Thanks


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Version 2.54 got it at least!


There is a version 2.56. You know what changes were made?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> There is a version 2.56. You know what changes were made?


Nope. I'm using the previous version.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - cache is at 3000, ram is 4000c16 already. http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread/5000_20#post_26412076
> This is something different. there are many reports/reviews showing the 6950x/x99 having better fps in several games. But, i don't game all that much. Time is the only thing you can never get more of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah - i initially considered those reports to be a bit spurious. I stil need to do some tuning, rather than just cranking things up - find a sweetspot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ha, I like you Kimir, but maybe not that much.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JK - core count on these is nice, but coming off a really good 6950x (which is still here running) and a screaming 7740X (and a new 8700K), the 7980xe has a rough act to follow in all but the most threaded measures. Still - I mean, I dropped this in the socket w/ stock tim yesterday afternoon.


See my prior posts on comparing 2x2696v3 @ 3.8GHz over 18 cores (limit to 2x9 to ensure 3.8GHz all-core).

This is the mesh "working" (taking its toll) on apps with heavy IPC.

I see the same in various things where my 2x2696v3 system (as configured above - limited to 18 cores) BEATS the 7980xe @ 4.5GHz all-core in an 18-thread application with heavy IPC.

I suspect games in the early days (in relative terms) of making use of HPC are suffering the same fate...

I ran both the 7980xe @ 3.8GHz and the 2696 @ 3.8 GHz and the 7980xe was a full 20% slower than a Haswell! xeon with its uncore at 3.2 and the 7980xe mesh at 3GHz. Even with 3200CL14 vs 2133CL15 memory the 7980xe got stomped in this instance.

Frankly, its a price we will have to pay for HCC and XCC in the future, but its high right now.

FWIW, [email protected] is 4500 CBR15 vs 3450 for the 2x9=18 core [email protected] setup and 5000 for the 36 core @ 3.4GHz setup... So, its not all tears, but its not 100% win either. The mesh tolls for thee...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> See my prior posts on comparing 2x2696v3 @ 3.8GHz over 18 cores (limit to 2x9 to ensure 3.8GHz all-core).
> 
> This is the mesh "working" (taking its toll) on apps with heavy IPC.
> 
> I see the same in various things where my 2x2696v3 system (as configured above - limited to 18 cores) BEATS the 7980xe @ 4.5GHz all-core in an 18-thread application with heavy IPC.
> 
> I suspect games in the early days (in relative terms) of making use of HPC are suffering the same fate...
> 
> I ran both the 7980xe @ 3.8GHz and the 2696 @ 3.8 GHz and the 7980xe was a full 20% slower than a Haswell! xeon with its uncore at 3.2 and the 7980xe mesh at 3GHz. Even with 3200CL14 vs 2133CL15 memory the 7980xe got stomped in this instance.
> 
> Frankly, its a price we will have to pay for HCC and XCC in the future, but its high right now.
> 
> FWIW, [email protected] is 4500 CBR15 vs 3450 for the 2x9=18 core [email protected] setup and 5000 for the 36 core @ 3.4GHz setup... So, its not all tears, but its not 100% win either. The mesh tolls for thee...


yeah - I read your earlier post - it made me a bit concerned (knowing that you know this sheet). All this factors into whether to delid or not.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - I read your earlier post - it made me a bit concerned (knowing that you know this sheet). All this factors into whether to delid or not.


You will delid of course because this thing runs ludicrously hot otherwise...


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - I read your earlier post - it made me a bit concerned (knowing that you know this sheet). All this factors into whether to delid or not.


Just sac up and delid the beast.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Just sac up and delid the beast.


----------



## Jpmboy

anyone run latency mon on their x299 rig?

LatencyMon.zip 1958k .zip file


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


Hmmm ... that should wring out the VRM ... VRoooooM!


----------



## vmanuelgm

Latency mon after using foobar, cinebench and play a pair of minutes Witcher 3...


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


Oh, that's the way, uh-huh, uh-huh I like it, uh-huh, uh-huh!


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that's the point tho... the report to the OS for VIN9 (SIV) and VCacahe (AID) are not the bios set or multimeter-measured cache voltage... if the probelt "Cache0" read point is cpu Cache. No evidence of an "override", only evidence of wrong report to OS or probelt reading is not cache voltage.


For me in SIV VIN9 isn't even labeled VCache it's VTT, voltage is 2.065v so it's definitely not Cache voltages for me.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> See my prior posts on comparing 2x2696v3 @ 3.8GHz over 18 cores (limit to 2x9 to ensure 3.8GHz all-core).
> 
> This is the mesh "working" (taking its toll) on apps with heavy IPC.
> 
> I see the same in various things where my 2x2696v3 system (as configured above - limited to 18 cores) BEATS the 7980xe @ 4.5GHz all-core in an 18-thread application with heavy IPC.
> 
> I suspect games in the early days (in relative terms) of making use of HPC are suffering the same fate...
> 
> I ran both the 7980xe @ 3.8GHz and the 2696 @ 3.8 GHz and the 7980xe was a full 20% slower than a Haswell! xeon with its uncore at 3.2 and the 7980xe mesh at 3GHz. Even with 3200CL14 vs 2133CL15 memory the 7980xe got stomped in this instance.
> 
> Frankly, its a price we will have to pay for HCC and XCC in the future, but its high right now.
> 
> FWIW, [email protected] is 4500 CBR15 vs 3450 for the 2x9=18 core [email protected] setup and 5000 for the 36 core @ 3.4GHz setup... So, its not all tears, but its not 100% win either. The mesh tolls for thee...


Can you share the applications that you are testing with?

Also, do you feel that the larger L3 cache of the Xeon chips might be impacting the work produced?

Very interesting stuff and thanks for sharing. You've got me wanting to look closer at this stuff.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Hmmm ... that should wring out the VRM ... VRoooooM!


more like booom!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Oh, that's the way, uh-huh, uh-huh I like it, uh-huh, uh-huh!


kool and the...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> For me in SIV VIN9 isn't even labeled VCache it's VTT, voltage is 2.065v so it's definitely not Cache voltages for me.


geeze, I hope that's not Vcache.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> more like booom!\


"Pop! Six! Squish! Uh uh, Cicero"


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> kool and the...


Close KC and the.........


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Can you share the applications that you are testing with?
> 
> Also, do you feel that the larger L3 cache of the Xeon chips might be impacting the work produced?
> 
> Very interesting stuff and thanks for sharing. You've got me wanting to look closer at this stuff.


About all I can say is it is a parallel RTL simulation.

Still a hunch based on which applications slow and which speed and the architectural changes made, but they made a pretty clear trade away from large L3 smaller L1/L2 in the HW/BW chips to a larger L1/L2 and smaller L3. That coupled with the mesh suggested at the time that those details became public that applications that ran in their own little world would benefit, while those that had more synchronization and shared data might suffer.

Again, this isn't a knock on SKL, its a difference in architecture that software now has to account for in its structure. I suspect we are moving pretty inexorably to meshes of LOTS of processors until or unless a significant shift in materials science shakes things up and even then, GPU and AI has shown that you can solve a LOT of valuable problems with such arrays of computes.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> "Pop! Six! Squish! Uh uh, Cicero"


he had it coming... you would have done the same.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Close KC and the.........


lol - damn, i'm the boogie man.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Close KC and the.........


Bang?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> Mesh latency is definitely worse than the ring. Even on the XCC dies, it only reaches parity with dual rings, which was probably the design goal (same latency at lower power). However, your claim about the L3 bandwidth is incomplete. AIDA64 screenshots posted in this thread show exceedingly low bandwidth, similar to DRAM, but the story is more complex. Since the L3 is now a victim cache,


It's also not as fatal/detrimental to HPC generally as suggested.

HPC has or strives to break up problems and minimize IPC/synchronization. SKL rewards this handsomely. The issue is that it punishes the alternative more than the ring/dual-ring did.

Intel is far from deaf to how their chips are used in large-scale computes (frankly, it appears to be the overwhelming driver of their architecture).

I think this example of regression I've run into (and games as well) might be one of the larger I've seen from them in terms of the more "generic use-case" (if you can call 18-thread applications with heavy IPC "generic use case"?







)

It's a bit of a "leap of faith" that such problems can be solved going forward in software, but _usually_ you can make it better. So, we toil away...


----------



## cekim

Decisions, decisions... air 740 is a no-go. I need more rad than will fit.

... build a bigger case to support 2x420 push (one GPU, one CPU) or build a copy of this guy with push-pull 2x360?


With the SSI-EEB MB, I didn't really have room for push-pull, but with EATX, I wouldn't have to change anything.

420s would require a larger frame.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Decisions, decisions... air 740 is a no-go. I need more rad than will fit.
> 
> ... build a bigger case to support 2x420 push (one GPU, one CPU) or build a copy of this guy with push-pull 2x360?
> 
> 
> With the SSI-EEB MB, I didn't really have room for push-pull, but with EATX, I wouldn't have to change anything.
> 
> 420s would require a larger frame.


or.. plumb in an external portable rad


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> or.. plumb in an external portable rad


Cheater...









and a bit of a PITA for me as I will lug one or the other around.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> Mesh latency is definitely worse than the ring. Even on the XCC dies, it only reaches parity with dual rings, which was probably the design goal (same latency at lower power). However, your claim about the L3 bandwidth is incomplete. AIDA64 screenshots posted in this thread show exceedingly low bandwidth, similar to DRAM, but the story is more complex. Since the L3 is now a victim cache, certain access patterns cause traffic amplification, which causes the amount of data transferred to double. One benchmark I ran on day one studied the bandwidth observed when N threads read from N arrays of size 1.0-2.375 MB (L2 + L3) and when N threads read a single array of 13.75 MB. The bandwidth in the latter case was doubled compared to the former, and comparable to Broadwell-E at its default ring frequency of 2.8 GHz, whereas the former had half throughput. This is because accessing a buffer of size 1.0-2.375 MB causes a load-evict cycle that doubles the amount of data being transferred.


That's a reasonable explanation for why the achieved bandwidth is so low. Though I'd imagine that the N threads/N arrays use-case is not uncommon - especially for HPC applications that maintain thread-local scratch buffers.

The other thing that exacerbates this problem the AVX512 since it doubles the compute throughput. So the entire memory subsystem would need to be improved to keep up. Intel did this with the L1 and L2 since the bandwidth for both got doubled in Skylake X. So I've observed no issues scaling up code within the L2 sizes. But when pushing into the L3 sizes, I have several workloads which are not bottlenecked with AVX2, but are (significantly) with AVX512.

So some of the burden will shift back to the software developers to just not use the L3 the same way it's been used in the past.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> It's also not as fatal/detrimental to HPC generally as suggested.
> 
> HPC has or strives to break up problems and minimize IPC/synchronization. SKL rewards this handsomely. The issue is that it punishes the alternative more than the ring/dual-ring did.
> 
> Intel is far from deaf to how their chips are used in large-scale computes (frankly, it appears to be the overwhelming driver of their architecture).
> 
> I think this example of regression I've run into (and games as well) might be one of the larger I've seen from them in terms of the more "generic use-case" (if you can call 18-thread applications with heavy IPC "generic use case"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> It's a bit of a "leap of faith" that such problems can be solved going forward in software, but _usually_ you can make it better. So, we toil away...


I'm sure the decision to switch to a mesh is the correct one - in the long run. In theory, a mesh will give better bandwidth since you have a 2D-grid of connectivity as opposed to 1D. And the trade-off is supposed to be higher latency for higher bandwidth.

Unfortunately that not what we're seeing with Skylake X. IOW, mesh technology is probably still in its "infancy" right now and it'll need time to improve.

But I'm a bit puzzled as to why Intel would make this switch _before_ the mesh could outperform the ring in _some_ aspect. Perhaps they thought it would be better than it is right now, but by the time the design made it into silicon, they realized it wasn't as good as they thought and it was too late to switch back.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> But I'm a bit puzzled as to why Intel would make this switch _before_ the mesh could outperform the ring in _some_ aspect. Perhaps they thought it would be better than it is right now, but by the time the design made it into silicon, they realized it wasn't as good as they thought and it was too late to switch back.


That's what I'm trying to point out - if you look at what a 6-memmory channel 6154 gold can do vs a 18 core v3 or v4, you will see that they've made a pretty big jump in HPC specifically where those applications are large numbers of disjointed threads/processes.

The extra memory channels (2 of which appear to have been provisioned for optane tech not quite out (dimm-based) needed more than the dual ring could provide for 20-72+ core processors (including KNL in that thought).

They could either continue to kludge the dual-ring and mesh for "big xeon" (SKL) and KNL or they could converge the architectures now, reduce their verification load etc...

I don't see that they've done anything wrong here despite the regression. The regression is a corner case in their market (games are a corner case for xeon and SKLX are xeon chips).


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> That's what I'm trying to point out - if you look at what a 6-memmory channel 6154 gold can do vs a 18 core v3 or v4, you will see that they've made a pretty big jump in HPC specifically where those applications are large numbers of disjointed threads/processes.
> 
> The extra memory channels (2 of which appear to have been provisioned for optane tech not quite out (dimm-based) needed more than the dual ring could provide for 20-72+ core processors (including KNL in that thought).
> 
> They could either continue to kludge the dual-ring and mesh for "big xeon" (SKL) and KNL or they could converge the architectures now, reduce their verification load etc...
> 
> I don't see that they've done anything wrong here despite the regression. The regression is a corner case in their market (games are a corner case for xeon and SKLX are xeon chips).


I'd be a bit more careful when looking at "general HPC" benchmarks to judge a single component on the CPU. Just because the benchmarks improved from Broadwell-E to Skylake Purley doesn't mean the mesh didn't make things worse. There's a lot of other improvements in Skylake X which, when put together, will easily overcome minor to moderate regressions in other components (like the mesh).

Using y-cruncher as an example, there is a clear 10 - 20% speed up going from Haswell/Broadwell-E to a Skylake X with the same core count. But that's because of AVX512, higher clocks, and better IPC. But it's "only" 10-20% faster because the mesh and the memory bandwidth is holding it back.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> But that's because of AVX512, higher clocks, and better IPC. But it's "only" 10-20% faster because the mesh and the memory bandwidth is holding it back.


Exactly this...
and with 6 channel memory @2666 memory BW isn't even a thing. It's only mesh and L3 throughput that regressed and only in large memory/heavy IPC situations...

AVX512 is rather profound IF you can use it. Much like Nvidia's FMA "tensor" cores in Volta. Produces MASSIVE speed-ups in specific applications.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> You know I should of realized that to start with
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's the lowest VCCIN you can got with a 7820x, I've had mine at 1.9v, but from what I've been reading that a tad high.
> Got it down to 1.75v LLC 6 now, doesn't seem to effect any temp changes in anything though...


Are you measuring that on the motherboard with a DMM? I'm trying to fire out how you guys are able to use very low VCCIN without crashing with overclocks.


----------



## Jpmboy

lol- folding on 22 threads @ 4.5 avx2 -5 (+2 TXps) and the VRM is holding steady at 60C


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## tripleflip18

what core voltage will start damaging it? i have all 17 cores between 1.22-1.27 but one core needs at least 1.33 for 4.6ghz

temp is under 60c for the core and around 58 max for the rest of cores.

anyone knows if i will damage it running it that high?, im looking to use this processor for at least 2 years i'd say. thank you


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tripleflip18*
> 
> what core voltage will start damaging it? i have all 17 cores between 1.22-1.27 but one core needs at least 1.33 for 4.6ghz
> 
> temp is under 60c for the core and around 58 max for the rest of cores.
> 
> anyone knows if i will damage it running it that high?, im looking to use this processor for at least 2 years i'd say. thank you


I guess nobody knows. But if you want to play it safe, I guess staying under 1.3 V is fine. I am probably going to stay under 1.28 myself, but it seems when I set the per core usage and 4.7 GHz on 6 of the cores as maximum, I can stay at 1.25 V max and that's with auto settings.

If you got a bad chip, a bad thing is to make it look good by pushing high voltages. You'll just end up killing the chip. I guess you delidded already, if you didn't I would have RMAd that CPU if it were mine or used the tuning plan for sure.


----------



## tripleflip18

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> I guess nobody knows. But if you want to play it safe, I guess staying under 1.3 V is fine. I am probably going to stay under 1.28 myself, but it seems when I set the per core usage and 4.7 GHz on 6 of the cores as maximum, I can stay at 1.25 V max and that's with auto settings.
> 
> If you got a bad chip, a bad thing is to make it look good by pushing high voltages. You'll just end up killing the chip. I guess you delidded already, if you didn't I would have RMAd that CPU if it were mine or used the tuning plan for sure.


yeah i delid, this one my 2nd, already rmad one...... pretty much had same thing where 1 core required almost .1 higher voltage then the rest

i wish i could get specific per core overclock to work and just make it run at 4.5 which seems to be stable at 1.25, but when i do that, all cores run at the lowest ghz speed that a one single ore has....... so if i want to run 4.6 17 cores, i have to force that one crappy core to run 4.6 as well, im pretty sure i'd be able to do 4.7 if it wasn't for the core. temps don't even go into middle 60s


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Decisions, decisions... air 740 is a no-go. I need more rad than will fit.
> 
> ... build a bigger case to support 2x420 push (one GPU, one CPU) or build a copy of this guy with push-pull 2x360?
> 
> 
> With the SSI-EEB MB, I didn't really have room for push-pull, but with EATX, I wouldn't have to change anything.
> 
> 420s would require a larger frame.


That's how did I go this time (from a micro-atx big tower, Enthoo Mini XL with 3 rads) got a new big tower with lot of airflow Graphite 780T (the vrm and ram both thanks me), put inside a single XSPC 360 v3 on top (with pull exhaust fans), quick disconnects on the rear of the case and a nice, alphacool monsta 420 external (custom made base) with Thermaltake Riings Rgb and own controller attached to the cpu fan.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1635159/asus-rampage-vi-apex-x299-owners/580#post_26377760

http://www.hwupgrade.it/forum/showpost.php?p=45087678&postcount=83235

Excellent temps for a 4.7GHz 7900X undelidded, liquid temp max 29C and gaming with my TitanX @2050-2075/11k at 40-41C max.
It's like heaven now and I still have to delid the cpu


----------



## vmanuelgm

Have my toy here:



Will a Seasonic 850w Titanium be enough for this hungry???










I am installing it tonight or tomorrow...


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> Have my toy here:
> 
> 
> 
> Will a Seasonic 850w Titanium be enough for this hungry???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am installing it tonight or tomorrow...


What vga?
I'd better take a 1000W Platinum or Titanium


----------



## arrow0309

Once in a while I'm getting a blank screen at startup (power up not restart) with code 40
What could it be?


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> What vga?
> I'd better take a 1000W Platinum or Titanium


TitanXp...

500w or more when delidded and using avx, so for gaming I won't reach that amount.

I am heading to Seasonic 1000 Titanium, in order to avoid modifying the cabling.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Once in a while I'm getting a blank screen at startup (power up not restart) with code 40
> What could it be?


Code 40--Waking from a sleep state???


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> Code 40--Waking from a sleep state???


Yeah, should be
And I'm reading that's not new to Asus mb's
It's like the bios thinks you're waking up from s4 when you're powering up
I'll have to play with some power options or fastboot from the bios
Or wait for a new bios
Or maybe it has something to do with my G502 mouse, it doesn't shut down completely, I can see the rgb lights for the whole night.


----------



## Praz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Yeah, should be
> And I'm reading that's not new to Asus mb's
> It's like the bios thinks you're waking up from s4 when you're powering up
> I'll have to play with some power options or fastboot from the bios
> Or wait for a new bios
> Or maybe it has something to do with my G502 mouse, it doesn't shut down completely, I can see the rgb lights for the whole night.


Hello

Code 40 is not an ASUS thing. With Win10 if Fast Startup has not been disable system power off results in an S4 hybrid shut down. On power up Code 40 would be correct. A blank screen powering up from this state is normally a hardware incompatibility or system instability.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Yeah, should be
> And I'm reading that's not new to Asus mb's
> It's like the bios thinks you're waking up from s4 when you're powering up
> I'll have to play with some power options or fastboot from the bios
> Or wait for a new bios
> Or maybe it has something to do with my G502 mouse, it doesn't shut down completely, I can see the rgb lights for the whole night.


code 40 is wake from a sleep state.. windows fastboot (not bios fastboot) uses Hybrid-sleep or hybernation. cold starts only. google how to disable windows 10 fast boot - should fix it. That said, q-code 40 is a normal operation code.

oops ninja'd by praz.


----------



## arrow0309

OK, than I have to disable the hibernation like I did in the past in a ssd write optimisation view.
However I liked the windows's fast boot as well (till the X299 setup).
But if there's no other way than I'll just have to disable this feature.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> Are you measuring that on the motherboard with a DMM? I'm trying to fire out how you guys are able to use very low VCCIN without crashing with overclocks.


I got curious to all of the talk of the Apex having a fix that prevents VCCIN related issues. Turns out it does sorta. It just runs quite a bit more voltage than what you command in BIOS!

With LLC left on Auto, VCCIN measured at the Probelt via DMM is 500mv (.5v) higher than what is commanded in BIOS. I only tested at two different voltage settings, but I suspect that an inflation to some degree occurs regardless of what voltage you set.


----------



## cekim

Hmm, at least at present, I don't make much use of AVX. IF my code can be vectorized, its moved to a GPU, but... I have ALUs, I wish to ALUse them... heh, heh, heh.....

I had previously set AVX2 offset to -5 (4.0GHz AVX vs 4.5 Core) and AVX512 to -8 (3.7GHz) essentially to remove it from the equation for OC. Doing that I can run all-core 4.5GHz (non-AVX obviously) @1.18v fixed or Adaptive -0.065 which basically straddles 1.165-1.225 on 18 core.

Fired up x265 4K and those settings work, but gave me a "dissapointing" 23.5 FPS. So, I tried to crank AVX2 back up leaving 512 @ 3.7GHz. 4.2GHz AVX2 is fine at 1.18v fixed or offset as above, but higher than that and I'm going to have to raise Vcore...

I got as high as 4.4 leaving Vcore to auto which taps 1.26 on various cores and burns through 460W (not thrilled about running that again).

So, Jpmboy, I'm not sure what voodoo you are using to push a stock chip to 4.6AVX, but your magic is no good here...







[email protected] is more valuable to me than 4.3+ AVX2. Though I would like to understand what I might be doing wrong?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Fired up x265 4K and those settings work, but gave me a "dissapointing" 23.5 FPS. So, I tried to crank AVX2 back up leaving 512 @ 3.7GHz. 4.2GHz AVX2 is fine at 1.18v fixed or offset as above, but higher than that and I'm going to have to raise Vcore...


Quote:


> [email protected] is more valuable to me than 4.3+ AVX2. Though I would like to understand what I might be doing wrong?


I have the same problem on my 7900X. It can do also 4.5 @ 1.18v non-AVX if I apply a -0.10v global vcore offset. But that destabilizes the AVX512 @ 3.8 GHz since it drops the vcore below 1.0v.

In my case I care about the AVX512 more than the non-AVX. So I run with a -0.050v offset which is 1.23v @ 4.5 GHz.

I wonder if and when there will ever be a motherboard/BIOS that lets you customize your own VID table per-core and per-workload for the full range of multipliers. (If we assume 64 multipliers, that would be 64 x 3 x # of cores. So about 3456 total options for an 18-core.)


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I have the same problem on my 7900X. It can do also 4.5 @ 1.18v non-AVX if I apply a -0.10v global vcore offset. But that destabilizes the AVX512 @ 3.8 GHz since it drops the vcore below 1.0v.
> 
> In my case I care about the AVX512 more than the non-AVX. So I run with a -0.050v offset which is 1.23v @ 4.5 GHz.
> 
> I wonder if and when there will ever be a motherboard/BIOS that lets you customize your own VID table per-core and per-workload for the full range of multipliers. (If we assume 64 multipliers, that would be 64 x 3 x # of cores. So about 3456 total options for an 18-core.)


I'm assuming from past forays into these settings that the BIOS is bound by what MSRs Intel exposes as much or more so than BIOS/MB choices.

It would be nice to see a declarative table (freq/voltage N steps) for each core, though I'm not sure how long that would be practical as core counts increase potentially into the 100's or higher. Obviously there is no guarantee that is how Intel will proceed... The other options are specialized cores, FPGAs, etc... all of which we are seeing come to the market. KNL/KNM/etc... did not make much progress unseating CUDA GPU computes despite some pretty obvious selling points (x86 code compatibility, native self-hosting, no block copying of data to process etc... )


----------



## Frito

what's a typical uncore offset range you guys are running? I assume most leave on auto but anyhow my 7820x or Apex died yesterday. there is a small chance it was a very small leak in my water loop at my top radiator but i'm not positive that is the true cause because the leak only appeared after i started dismantling my system last night. whats more concerning though is i was running 1.275v core 1.2v cache (4.8/3.2) fine for the past week on it and i always left uncore offset to auto and the only place i was ever able to see that value was if i opened turbo v core it would report it as being set to +0.450 which seems really high for auto. I did once try to lower that value in windows via turbo v to 0 or even 0.2 and system would freeze up so i left it well enough alone and all seemed well till yesterday.

yesterday it was working fine overnight and in the morning (i leave my pc on at night) i shut it down and headed to work, got home went to boot up and no post at VGA init. every other attempt to post after that fails before VGA LED goes on, CPU and MEM leds always pass and Q-code will stick on various codes depending on various factors but usually it sticks on 00 and sometimes 4F or 09. i've swapped everything but the cpu and mobo sense no other x299 hardware and nothing works, plus all the hardware works fine on my 7600k and apex so its definitely cpu and or motherboard. anyhow going to take them both back to the store i got them from sense it was less than 2 weeks ago should be easy to exchange but definitely curious to hear if others have had crazy uncore voltage settings on auto and if that perhaps was the cause because i'm kinda thinking it was.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I'm assuming from past forays into these settings that the BIOS is bound by what MSRs Intel exposes as much or more so than BIOS/MB choices.
> 
> It would be nice to see a declarative table (freq/voltage N steps) for each core, though I'm not sure how long that would be practical as core counts increase potentially into the 100's or higher. Obviously there is no guarantee that is how Intel will proceed... The other options are specialized cores, FPGAs, etc... all of which we are seeing come to the market. KNL/KNM/etc... did not make much progress unseating CUDA GPU computes despite some pretty obvious selling points (x86 code compatibility, native self-hosting, no block copying of data to process etc... )


From the looks of it, KNL and Xeon Phi is as good as dead at this point.

KNL had some life for the year it existed before Skylake X/Purley. Now that those are out, KNL gets obliterated in the scientific HPC area.
That leaves "deep-learning" as the only thing left - where it has never stood a chance against GPUs.

Knights Mill is doing away with double-precision throughput for more single-precision and targeted AI stuff. IOW, Intel seems to be pulling Xeon Phi out of the scientific HPC market (the double-precision stuff) and doubling down on AI to compete with the GPUs.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> Intel obviously already has this table programmed into each chip, as the stock AVX/AVX-512 frequency behavior can not be implemented with an offset. It is really unfortunate that they do not provide the ability to configure AVX voltage for overclocking. I see a lot of users with "-3/-5" AVX frequency offsets, but they are still using the same voltage as they would for non-AVX, which is way too much.


Agreed/Understood - the issue is the addressing mechanism to write those tables and sundry resources that entails. Depends on how they are implemented as to how radical exposing the entire table as writable would be.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> Do you know something about KNL that we do not? Based on the specifications, I see no reason why an HPC installation would buy Skylake-SP over Phi. The top-end Xeon Platinum 8180 barely matches the KNL 7210F when used in a 2P configuration, but it costs $10000 per unit compared to $2000, and lacks an integrated fabric. Xeon Phi also has dramatically higher memory bandwidth.
> 
> Xeon Platinum 8180:
> 1.5 GHz AVX-512 base * 28-core * 8-wide DP * 2 FMA * 2-wide issue = 1344 GFLOPS
> 
> KNL 7210F:
> 1.3 GHz AVX-512 base * 64-core * 8-wide DP * 2 FMA * 2-wide issue = 2662 GFLOPS
> 
> The most recent TOP500 list shows several KNL installations, but no Skylake-SP.
> 
> Knights Mill on the other hand is stillborn. Even with 4x throughput for "deep learning," it still can not compete with dedicated accelerators. All signs point to it being a stopgap measure until the NERVANA chips are ready.


Not in the sense of NDA information. Most of the stuff I knew that was under NDA is no longer under NDA.

KNL looks great on synthetics, but in reality, it's much more difficult to get high utilization on KNL than Skylake X. A large part of that is having so many threads (256 - 288 vs. 64 - ~100 for a similarly priced Xeon system). So unless the application is very well parallelized, there's going to be problems on KNL. Likewise, Amdahl's law is apparent when single-threaded performance is so poor on KNL.

This leaves KNL best suited for embarrassingly parallel tasks - but that's GPU territory. So if KNL/Xeon Phi is trying to find a sweet spot between CPU and GPU, it's not doing too well right now. (At my workplace here we've declined KNL options because it does nothing well: It sucks at single-threaded performance, and it can't beat GPUs.)

My experience with KNL is that it (with full AVX512 optimizations) falls about 20% short of the high-end dual-socket Haswell/Broadwell systems. While I don't have direct access to one to sort out the bottlenecks, I suspect that it's some combination of Amdahl's law and memory bandwidth. IIRC, the guys on Mersenneforum are doing slightly better than that - but their workload fits into the MCDRAM whereas mine do not.

One more thing that makes high core-count programming that much more difficult - processor groups in Windows. A lot of parallel models assume all-to-all dispatching. But because of Windows' 64-core/group limitation, this becomes a mess. This was bad enough with the 88-vcore Broadwell that I played with last year. And on KNL, you're going to have 4 groups.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Not in the sense of NDA information. Most of the stuff I knew that was under NDA is no longer under NDA.
> 
> KNL looks great on synthetics, but in reality, it's much more difficult to get high utilization on KNL than Skylake X. A large part of that is having so many threads (256 - 288 vs. 64 - ~100 for a similarly priced Xeon system). So unless the application is very well parallelized, there's going to be problems on KNL. Likewise, Amdahl's law is apparent when single-threaded performance is so poor on KNL.
> 
> This leaves KNL best suited for embarrassingly parallel tasks - but that's GPU territory. So if KNL/Xeon Phi is trying to find a sweet spot between CPU and GPU, it's not doing too well right now. (At my workplace here we've declined KNL options because it does nothing well: It sucks at single-threaded performance, and it can't beat GPUs.)
> 
> My experience with KNL is that it (with full AVX512 optimizations) falls about 20% short of the high-end dual-socket Haswell/Broadwell systems. While I don't have direct access to one to sort out the bottlenecks, I suspect that it's some combination of Amdahl's law and memory bandwidth. IIRC, the guys on Mersenneforum are doing slightly better than that - but their workload fits into the MCDRAM whereas mine do not.
> 
> One more thing that makes high core-count programming that much more difficult - processor groups in Windows. A lot of parallel models assume all-to-all dispatching. But because of Windows' 64-core/group limitation, this becomes a mess. This was bad enough with the 88-vcore Broadwell that I played with last year. And on KNL, you're going to have 4 groups.


I'd add to that Intel overhyping "just run it on a Phi card" view of how such resources should be used...

CUDA begins with "yeaaaaa, well, you _could_ automatically vectorize your code with these pragmas, buuuuuut..... what you really want to do is throw out your code and approach the problem our way, but if you do it will run 100x faster." So, you the message and the reality are aligned and the outcome is as expected.

Intel implicitly and explicitly suggests that x86 compatibility means "it just works"TM which as you and I know, is a lie. Parallelizing code is hard work, harder if your dumb. Amdahl's parameters have change with memory, disk and network bandwidth all through the roof compared to years gone by, but the basic idea of diminishing returns hasn't and won't.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I'd add to that Intel overhyping "just run it on a Phi card" view of how such resources should be used...
> 
> CUDA begins with "yeaaaaa, well, you _could_ automatically vectorize your code with these pragmas, buuuuuut..... what you really want to do is throw out your code and approach the problem our way, but if you do it will run 100x faster." So, you the message and the reality are aligned and the outcome is as expected.
> 
> Intel implicitly and explicitly suggests that x86 compatibility means "it just works"TM which as you and I know, is a lie. Parallelizing code is hard work, harder if your dumb. Amdahl's parameters have change with memory, disk and network bandwidth all through the roof compared to years gone by, but the basic idea of diminishing returns hasn't and won't.


Aaahh! The Amdahl Supercomputers!

Memories ...


----------



## Nautilus

Guys today I tried to buy rockit 99 but for unknown reasons my credit card gets declined on rockit website and paypal & amazon pay does not work in my country. I really don't know where to buy a delid tool. Is there any online retailers that sell delid tools? (Apart from derbauer's ridiculously expensive toy)

is there anybody who can sell he me his/her delid tool?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> Guys today I tried to buy rockit 99 but for unknown reasons my credit card gets declined on rockit website and paypal & amazon pay does not work in my country. I really don't know where to buy a delid tool. Is there any online retailers that sell delid tools? (Apart from derbauer's ridiculously expensive toy)
> 
> is there anybody who can sell he me his/her delid tool?


I have an extra unopened one but it might cost 3 arms and 5 legs to ship to you from the US.


----------



## Martin778

Watch out for shipping/tax!
I ended up paying 104 euro for my Rockit........The tool was +-40, shipping 28 and tax./customs were another 43








I suppose you could 'cheat' them by asking Rockit if they'd declare +-$5-10 lower value on the box to avoid those crazy customs costs, shouldnt be a problem.


----------



## Nautilus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Watch out for shipping/tax!
> I ended up paying 104 euro for my Rockit........


lol i know. don't worry. let me tell you a funny story.

did you know i paid customs fee for a product twice? first when i bought it and second when it was returning from rma.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Watch out for shipping/tax!
> I ended up paying 104 euro for my Rockit........The tool was +-40, shipping 28 and tax./customs were another 43
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I suppose you could 'cheat' them by asking Rockit if they'd declare +-$5-10 lower value on the box to avoid those crazy customs costs, shouldnt be a problem.


DHL playing its role...

I thought that only happened here in Spain but in Nederland is similar.

By the way, I was born in Rotterdam.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> I have an extra unopened one but it might cost 3 arms and 5 legs to ship to you from the US.


Very noble of you to make that offer.


----------



## Nautilus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Very noble of you to make that offer.


Indeed! Sent him a pm, i hope we can arrange something.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> Indeed! Sent him a pm, i hope we can arrange something.


Now that's awesome.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Ok how the heck do you stop the idle voltages dropping too low when using offset?

What's limiting me dropping voltages is if I go under 0.6v on idle I'll have a bluescreen.
LLC had no effect.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Ok how the heck do you stop the idle voltages dropping too low when using offset?
> 
> What's limiting me dropping voltages is if I go under 0.6v on idle I'll have a bluescreen.
> LLC had no effect.


you running a large negative offset or something? That's the only way it can drop below the base VID.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Ok how the heck do you stop the idle voltages dropping too low when using offset?
> 
> What's limiting me dropping voltages is if I go under 0.6v on idle I'll have a bluescreen.
> LLC had no effect.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you running a large negative offset or something? That's the only way it can drop below the base VID.


Sounds like adaptive with a smaller offset is in order.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Ok how the heck do you stop the idle voltages dropping too low when using offset?
> 
> What's limiting me dropping voltages is if I go under 0.6v on idle I'll have a bluescreen.
> LLC had no effect.


Don't use - offset use Additional turbo mode CPU core voltage.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Don't use - offset use Additional turbo mode CPU core voltage.


Problem is that 7980xe your issue isn't adding voltage to reach 4.6 it's removing volts to reduce heat. Additional won't override VID unless it's higher.

So you need a negative offset but as he and I have run into it would be nice to have a floor to stop it undervolting at idle or with avx loads at lower frequencies.

So far as I know there is no such limit.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Don't use - offset use Additional turbo mode CPU core voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> Problem is that 7980xe your issue isn't adding voltage to reach 4.6 it's removing volts to reduce heat. Additional won't override VID unless it's higher.
> 
> So you need a negative offset but as he and I have run into it would be nice to have a floor to stop it undervolting at idle or with avx loads at lower frequencies.
> 
> So far as I know there is no such limit.
Click to expand...

OK, that sucks. I have the same settings on my Gigabyte motherboard also.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> *Problem is that 7980xe your issue isn't adding voltage to reach 4.6 it's removing volts to reduce hea*t. Additional won't override VID unless it's higher.
> 
> So you need a negative offset but as he and I have run into it would be nice to have a floor to stop it undervolting at idle or with avx loads at lower frequencies.
> 
> So far as I know there is no such limit.


best way to deal with this is to use manual override... the 2 x299, and even this 8700K seem to "appreciate" manual voltage more so than BWE and recent previous gens


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> best way to deal with this is to use manual override... the 2 x299, and even this 8700K seem to "appreciate" manual voltage more so than BWE and recent previous gens


Only way to deal with it until Intel adds more OC features (R/W access to VID tables discussed earlier and potentially AVX vs !AVX VID tables to go with AVX vs !AVX multipliers).

Downside is small negative offsets are proving a fast way to find a stable OC for so many cores... (except for that whole AVX thing that started this mess







)

This is one of those "high dimensionality" problems...


----------



## vmanuelgm

First Cinebench at 4.8:



And first Spy Extreme:

https://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/timespy+3dmark+score+extreme+preset/version+1.0/1+gpu

My PSU (Seasonic 850Ti) shuts down when trying 4.8 in 3DMark









Tomorrow I am sli'ing with a 650Ti


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> First Cinebench at 4.8:
> 
> 
> 
> And first Spy Extreme:
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame-2/timespy+3dmark+score+extreme+preset/version+1.0/1+gpu
> 
> My PSU (Seasonic 850Ti) shuts down when trying 4.8 in 3DMark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tomorrow I am sli'ing with a 650Ti


Jebus... SIV power reading for 1.3v?

I'd WAG 550W+


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Jebus... SIV power reading for 1.3v?
> 
> I'd WAG 550W+


I will have a look tomorrow when using the 650Ti connected to the TitanXp...

This little monster is very very hungry. Spoke to Seasonic today and they told me to buy a 1200w+ psu to overclock this beast.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> I will have a look tomorrow when using the 650Ti connected to the TitanXp...
> 
> This little monster is very very hungry. Spoke to Seasonic today and they told me to buy a 1200w+ psu to overclock this beast.


What they said LOL...

Awesome run, but this is the first chip that has me actually concerned about burning up a socket/pin(s)... in a very long time.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> What they said LOL...


I thought 1000w Titanium would be enough, but Seasonic guy told me 1200 or more psu, so platinum or purchase another brand.

These skylake x are very powerful but very demanding, too much for my taste.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> I thought 1000w Titanium would be enough, but Seasonic guy told me 1200 or more psu, so platinum or purchase another brand.


For reference, a 6950x @4.4GHz + 2x1080ti @ 2000 pulled 850W from the wall in 100% CPU/GPU load

I think the 6950x was pulling ~300W by itself.

So, add 200W more for a run like that and even a little more for TitanXs over the 1080tis...

Yeah 1KW isn't enough.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> For reference, a 6950x @4.4GHz + 2x1080ti @ 2000 pulled 850W from the wall in 100% CPU/GPU load
> 
> I think the 6950x was pulling ~300W by itself.
> 
> So, add 200W more for a run like that and even a little more for TitanXs over the 1080tis...
> 
> Yeah 1KW isn't enough.


Yep, its better to have some room, talking about watts, so 1200 or more for these puppies.

By the way, anyone tried the new Striders Titanium from Silverstone??? Seen no reviews yet...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Only way to deal with it until Intel adds more OC features (R/W access to VID tables discussed earlier and potentially AVX vs !AVX VID tables to go with AVX vs !AVX multipliers).
> 
> Downside is small negative offsets are proving a fast way to find a stable OC for so many cores... (except for that whole AVX thing that started this mess
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> This is one of those "high dimensionality" problems...


I did a per core... untoward tweaking. Solved the DPC and interrupts I was experiencing yesterday... I have a 7740X(ES) for this board also and by just dropping in a 7980XE there were a zillion ghost APC and kernel drivers in the store and in the devmgr. Clean windows install and all is good. ugh.
AVX2 has not been an issue (running Auto = 0 offset) AVX512 I have not tested to any extent and have that at -8. Guess I'll find out when an AVX512 proc call is made. Haven't gone north of 1.2V yet, word is the ceiling for ambient is low, but you know it's gonna happen.







.
you might find some *useful stuff in this pack*... for LN2 users. Has correct turboVcore (had to delete the OCpanel stuff from the folder...)


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you running a large negative offset or something? That's the only way it can drop below the base VID.


I'm using adaptive with a -0.100v offset.
At 4.5Ghz it's no problem, it's when I drop it down to 4.4Ghz at a lower voltage is where the problem begins.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I'm using adaptive with a -0.100v offset.
> At 4.5Ghz it's no problem, it's when I drop it down to 4.4Ghz at a lower voltage is where the problem begins.


With my chip -0.1 V is also too much, around -0.70~-0.75 it seems stable so far. I think the VIDs are not very far of from what my chip needs up to around 4.5 GHz, but then again it starts to go downhill after 4.7 GHz. 4.7 GHz is 1.25, 4.8 is 1.3, 4.9 is 1.35, 5.0 is 1.4.


----------



## LunaP

Anyone here running their 7980XE OC w/ 128gb of 3600/3200 speed ram? Just curious if it was as simple as just ticking XMP or if you had to finaggle at all. Only gotten feedback from 1 person in the Rampage owners thread so figured I'd ask here as I'm about to pull the trigger on the 3600 set.


----------



## Martin778

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> What they said LOL...
> 
> Awesome run, but this is the first chip that has me actually concerned about burning up a socket/pin(s)... in a very long time.


What really blows my mind is that it's a small piece of silicon is able to pull a few hundreds of amps through millions of tiny, tiny transistors.
Crazy stuff going on there inside


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> With my chip -0.1 V is also too much, around -0.70~-0.75 it seems stable so far. I think the VIDs are not very far of from what my chip needs up to around 4.5 GHz, but then again it starts to go downhill after 4.7 GHz. 4.7 GHz is 1.25, 4.8 is 1.3, 4.9 is 1.35, 5.0 is 1.4.


Yeah my 7820x needs 1.18v for 4.5Ghz and at least 1.22v for 4.6Ghz, but the temps are too high for that.
Trying to find someone locally to help delid it for me.

Now that summer has hit I was thinking of dropping it back to 4.4Ghz, but offset is out of the question as I get the a bluescreen as soon as it idles.


----------



## Martin778

~4.5GHz is where the voltage wall starts occuring on SKL-X.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I'm using adaptive with a -0.100v offset.
> At 4.5Ghz it's no problem, it's when I drop it down to 4.4Ghz at a lower voltage is where the problem begins.


yeah, that's a large - offset. So if i understand the problem, at 4.6 without a -100mV offset it runs too high turbo voltage under load, bsod at idle (and you then must know that it only needs a lower voltage at 4.6 from manual override). And at 4.4 a large offset is not needed - rigght? In bios is there IA AC and IA DC load line?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah, that's a large - offset. So if i understand the problem, at 4.6 without a -100mV offset it runs too high turbo voltage under load, bsod at idle (and you then must know that it only needs a lower voltage at 4.6 from manual override). And at 4.4 a large offset is not needed - rigght? In bios is there IA AC and IA DC load line?


Yep, even at 4.5Ghz it'll run at a voltage of 1.28v, ignoring anything lower in the turbo voltage section.
So I've had to rely on offsets (or manual).

4.4Ghz I can't go any lower than a -0.120v. (1.15v)

Yeah there is a section for IA AC and IA DC.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> What they said LOL...
> 
> Awesome run, but this is the first chip that has me actually concerned about burning up a socket/pin(s)... in a very long time.


I already checked my pins and pads after hammering the chip with Prime95 for hours.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Yep, even at 4.5Ghz it'll run at a voltage of 1.28v, ignoring anything lower in the turbo voltage section.
> So I've had to rely on offsets (or manual).
> 
> 4.4Ghz I can't go any lower than a -0.120v. (1.15v)
> 
> Yeah there is a section for IA AC and IA DC.


okay, go back to adaptive, and like 4.4 settings... check the load voltage in any manner you wish, but repeatable/consistent (so synthetic). Note the load vcore and and delta from set in bios. change IA AC and IA DC load line to 0.001 and see if this tames the over voltage on adaptive. it's a long shot but worth a try.


----------



## tistou77

With Asus Rampage VI, how do you check for VCCIN voltage difference between idle and load (if like for X99, there must be a vdrop) ?
With SIV, in load the voltage is indicated but in idle, it will seem that it is not the case (voltage of Vcore....)

Thanks


----------



## Kimir

With a DMM.


----------



## Hl86

Bought a 7700k, didnt delid it, sat vcore to 1.35v sat cpu to 5.1 ghz. Succes!
Max temp is 50 degrees c under watercooling.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> With a DMM.


Digital Multi-Meter...
aka:
- lab shorting out device
- palm skewer
- battery consumption unit
- last thing dumb electricians or EE held before losing their hands to a high voltage accident


----------



## Kimir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Digital Multi-Meter...
> aka:
> - lab shorting out device
> - palm skewer
> - battery consumption unit
> - last thing dumb electricians or EE held before losing their hands to a high voltage accident


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*


If you haven't been injured playing with electricity, you need more voltage!!!









I'm told that the Navy handbook on basic electricity instruction includes instruction regarding the dangers of multi-meters because someone managed to kill or seriously injure themselves with one, but you never can tell with those guys....









For the record, I have never destroyed hardware with a DVM, probe or even ESD, but I can't say the same for everyone I know... I learned a great deal from lab-techs early in my career about wedding rings, tie clips and the like...


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> I already checked my pins and pads after hammering the chip with Prime95 for hours.


Ditto so far so good...


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> If you haven't been injured playing with electricity, you need more voltage!!!


*Agreed*.


----------



## Jpmboy

shocking discussion


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> If you haven't been injured playing with electricity, you need more voltage!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...


When I was 3 I stuck a fork in an outlet - 220v ... one of the tines got somewhat melted ...


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> When I was 3 I stuck a fork in an outlet - 220v ... one of the tines got somewhat melted ...


We had a pet rabbit that gnawd its way through a number of power cords. She was rather deft at chewing only one line at a time. Somewhere around 6 or 7 I got the bright idea to "fix" one of her creations by stripping the wires, twisting and jamming them into the socket.

Was working great until the dog hit the cable and pulled one side out... I went to fix it, .... and I missed... Fortunately fuses are a thing and the fire was isolated to the face of the light socket.









Come to think of it, this might be one of my many fires as a child that my parents only found out about years or many decades (in this case) later.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Testing a low 4.2 ghz OC at 1.000V. Folding for two hours is no problem, but two minutes in to CS and boom... Insta shutdown. Is my VCCIN at 1.725V too low? I can't manage to stabilize lower clocks.. 4700-5000 is okay though.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Testing a low 4.2 ghz OC at 1.000V. Folding for two hours is no problem, but two minutes in to CS and boom... Insta shutdown. Is my VCCIN at 1.725V too low? I can't manage to stabilize lower clocks.. 4700-5000 is okay though.


Jpmboy mentioned with with x265 and I've since seen it with AVX loads as well, that below 1.8v starts to show some kinks when high-current loads show up (floating point, avx, etc... things you'd see in a game, or codec).

< 1.75 for me is generally iffy as well. I can get away with 1.75 for a lot of things, but between games and codec (as above), 1.8v is better


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> okay, go back to adaptive, and like 4.4 settings... check the load voltage in any manner you wish, but repeatable/consistent (so synthetic). Note the load vcore and and delta from set in bios. change IA AC and IA DC load line to 0.001 and see if this tames the over voltage on adaptive. it's a long shot but worth a try.


NVM the TUF doesn't have those settings for some reason, yet I recall seeing them a while ago (2 BIOS's ago to be exact).

I've just gone back to 4.5Ghz with the -0.100v offset, it's stable, just wasn't overly happy with the 90c Package temps running Realbench 2.44.
90c was on one of the Package temp reading on the second Package temp it's 87c (DTS reading).
Everyday use I nave see over 70c depending on what I'm doing.


----------



## LunaP

Today is a good day at least. CPU arrived, along w/ a nice sheet from SL, I don't have a board yet BUT thanks to the people here, got a few electricians out + elite contractors ( dunno what that means ) for LG / Mitsubishi out to look, and got a good quote for my room, on 20A dedicated lines + a ductless mini AC to put over my PC 12000 BTU 27 SEER
12" tall 34" wide, My room will be ready for my build


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Today is a good day at least. CPU arrived, along w/ a nice sheet from SL, I don't have a board yet BUT thanks to the people here, got a few electricians out + elite contractors ( dunno what that means ) for LG / Mitsubishi out to look, and got a good quote for my room, on 20A dedicated lines + a ductless mini AC to put over my PC 12000 BTU 27 SEER
> 12" tall 34" wide, My room will be ready for my build


you as crazy as ever. (but the 20A line thing is a good idea.







)


----------



## Jpmboy

Tweak bios menu can help with multipliers across cores under a _reasonable_ brief load


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Today is a good day at least. CPU arrived, along w/ a nice sheet from SL, I don't have a board yet BUT thanks to the people here, got a few electricians out + elite contractors ( dunno what that means ) for LG / Mitsubishi out to look, and got a good quote for my room, on 20A dedicated lines + a ductless mini AC to put over my PC 12000 BTU 27 SEER
> 12" tall 34" wide, My room will be ready for my build


This works better than a AC:


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> This works better than a AC:


Hmm but how loud is it? lol
+ heat vent?

Main reason asking since I"m in phoenix it gets hot anwyays, so trying to keep the whole room cool and figured the fan intake would help w/ that, + no way to vent that if it needs an outlet + needs to be cool and quiet cuz kids sleep in the next room.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Hmm but how loud is it? lol
> + heat vent?
> 
> Main reason asking since I"m in phoenix it gets hot anwyays, so trying to keep the whole room cool and figured the fan intake would help w/ that, + no way to vent that if it needs an outlet + needs to be cool and quiet cuz kids sleep in the next room.


as loud as your average refrigerator... and louder than a top end frig.


----------



## Martin778

Loud as hell, you might aswell get a phase change cooler...


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Hmm but how loud is it? lol
> + heat vent?
> 
> Main reason asking since I"m in phoenix it gets hot anwyays, so trying to keep the whole room cool and figured the fan intake would help w/ that, + no way to vent that if it needs an outlet + needs to be cool and quiet cuz kids sleep in the next room.


The mini split you want to install will be as loud as the chiller and more expensive. It was just a thought. What ever you do sounds like it's going to be awesome.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Loud as hell, you might aswell get a phase change cooler...


water chiller cools cpu and gpus. NOt only useful for benching.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Loud as hell, you might aswell get a phase change cooler...


The phase changer will only cool the CPU right? The chiller will cool the whole machine.


----------



## done12many2

Well, one of my local Micro Centers just got a 7980XE in stock, but MC has jacked the price up to $2399.99. Combine that with the fact that it's a local store so taxes apply. $2543.99 is a tough pill to swallow considering that I could probably get one for $2k once the dust clears.









Are any of you lucky 7980XE owners able to get a few cores running at ~5 GHz with "per core" or "by usage" overclocks?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Well, one of my local Micro Centers just got a 7980XE in stock, but MC has jacked the price up to $2399.99. Combine that with the fact that it's a local store so taxes apply. $2543.99 is a tough pill to swallow considering that I could probably get one for $2k once the dust clears.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are any of you lucky 7980XE owners able to get a few cores running at ~5 GHz with "per core" or "by usage" overclocks?


There are plenty of other SKU to choose from, for me justifying the need for an 18 core CPU, let alone the price is difficult.


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> There are plenty of other SKU to choose from, for me justifying the need for an 18 core CPU, let alone the price is difficult.


^+1. It's a lot of money that might be better invested in other parts (or things, for that matter).


----------



## Martin778

You can get either one 7980Xe or a 7920X + 1080TI for roughly the same price, probably even cheaper.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Well, one of my local Micro Centers just got a 7980XE in stock, but MC has jacked the price up to $2399.99. Combine that with the fact that it's a local store so taxes apply. $2543.99 is a tough pill to swallow considering that I could probably get one for $2k once the dust clears.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are any of you lucky 7980XE owners able to get a few cores running at ~5 GHz with "per core" or "by usage" overclocks?


check B&H Photo. they jacked the price since I placed my order, but still under $2100... crazy as that sounds for as CPU. But then again, I recall the moaning was worse when the 6950X came out- what was that? $1600?


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> With a DMM.


Ok thanks









Weird for this kind of motherboard, do not have this voltage reported in a monitoring software


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> The mini split you want to install will be as loud as the chiller and more expensive. It was just a thought. What ever you do sounds like it's going to be awesome.


any videos for the chiller? I just left the AC place and could barely hear anything from the unit theyre gonna install, its super quiet.

Ill google some for that unit when home but again I have no way to vent the heat otherwise, if I got a chiller.

My fridge is silent btw, its the 4 door LG though.


----------



## Kimir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Ok thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weird for this kind of motherboard, do not have this voltage reported in a monitoring software


I said that because it's the most accurate way of doing it, as long as your dmm is accurate ofc.
Have you send report to Aida? I'm sure the sensor is here, it's just that the software isn't updated for it yet.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> any videos for the chiller? I just left the AC place and could barely hear anything from the unit theyre gonna install, its super quiet.
> 
> Ill google some for that unit when home but again I have no way to vent the heat otherwise, if I got a chiller.
> 
> My fridge is silent btw, its the 4 door LG though.


No video. If you are trying to cool the room as well than the AC is a better option. I live in a area where we see 110f in the summer but I have AC in the entire house so heat is not a issue. But my power bill now that is another subject.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> No video. If you are trying to cool the room as well than the AC is a better option. I live in a area where we see 110f in the summer but I have AC in the entire house so heat is not a issue. But my power bill now that is another subject.


Power bill is EXACTLY why I'm getting the mini lol, even w/ solar its up. It gets 120+ here.

I'm all for adding a chiller as well to the mix, just I draw/game/render late into the morning sometimes and don't wanna wake my kids up. Not to mention don't feel good about running a line through my wall outside since no windows ( covered up )


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kimir*
> 
> I said that because it's the most accurate way of doing it, as long as your dmm is accurate ofc.
> Have you send report to Aida? I'm sure the sensor is here, it's just that the software isn't updated for it yet.


I have already discussed with Fiery (Aida64) and Ray (SIV) tried, and the VCCIN does not give info that can be read
There's no separate CPU VRM voltage rail that one could measure on Rampage VI

Asus missed something there...
Hoping that an update of the bios to solve the problem


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> check B&H Photo. they jacked the price since I placed my order, but still under $2100... crazy as that sounds for as CPU. But then again, I recall the moaning was worse when the 6950X came out- what was that? $1600?


Thanks. I checked them out.

I reserved the chip until I can make the drive to pick it up. Hopefully Newegg or someone else gets them into stock before I do so I can price match. If not, I may just wait it out until they are closer to the actual retail pricing.

You're right about the crying during the 6950x release. I think MC was selling them for $1689 or something close, which was lower than other places. Crazy when you consider that I got my 7900x for $899.

Competition is a great thing.


----------



## surfinchina

Sorry if this has been asked before. 477 pages are getting too long to look lol.

I just delidded my 7900x and the temps are great (I can now recommend the rocket 99 - so easy to use!)
I got to 5ghz with 1.32 volts with temps still down around 75 (with cinebench)
I've yet to do major stress tests because ---

What is a safe voltage for the 7900?
Is the danger only from temps, or from actual power in the chip - I've never figured this out...

I'm using a monoblock so VRM is fine.
Have a custom loop with a 420 and a 360 rad.

Thanks in advance...


----------



## aerotracks

Some testing with 7740X and Corsair 4333C19 on the XPower

http://abload.de/image.php?img=20171028-210601lis2g.png

https://abload.de/image.php?img=20171028-23125734sdq.png


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *surfinchina*
> 
> Sorry if this has been asked before. 477 pages are getting too long to look lol.
> 
> I just delidded my 7900x and the temps are great (I can now recommend the rocket 99 - so easy to use!)
> I got to 5ghz with 1.32 volts with temps still down around 75 (with cinebench)
> I've yet to do major stress tests because ---
> 
> What is a safe voltage for the 7900?
> Is the danger only from temps, or from actual power in the chip - I've never figured this out...
> 
> I'm using a monoblock so VRM is fine.
> Have a custom loop with a 420 and a 360 rad.
> 
> Thanks in advance...


High current workloads 1.25v, low current 1.3v as a ceiling. Current is the biggest factor in degradation


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> High current workloads 1.25v, low current 1.3v as a ceiling. Current is the biggest factor in degradation


Thanks!

I'm running 4.9 and 1.3 now. I'll tweak it later.

Here's another small question, or at least something to think about.

With the exact same overclock (same machine):
Cinebench R15 on windows - 2371
Cinebench R15 on OSx - 2569

It's more normal to have the OSx benches a bit slower, so I'm thinking that there's something in windows that's making it a bit unhappy. Which would be pretty typical.
This is why people use the same settings, the same hardware and get wildly different results.
Or maybe the AVX which I have at 3. Cinebench uses this?


----------



## Frito

cinebench doesn't use avx and is more or less a medium workload. try running it in realtime priority in windows it should improve the score a decent amount sense it will basically force halt the rest of the active processes while it runs and your system will look frozen till its done.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> Some testing with 7740X and Corsair 4333C19 on the XPower
> 
> http://abload.de/image.php?img=20171028-210601lis2g.png
> 
> https://abload.de/image.php?img=20171028-23125734sdq.png


What do you get if raised the cache to 5000? It's currently at 37.2.


----------



## Hydroplane

Found a 7980XE in stock for $2200, tempted to put in an order. Funny I almost bought a 1950X yesterday off Newegg for $880, today the sale is over and it's back to $999 lol


----------



## arrow0309

After more than 3h of RealBench 2.54 an instability came out (handbrake); running with -2 avx offset:



Now what, increase the vcore or vcache (3000)? The vcore is 1.210v and vcache 1.060v from bios although I'm not 100% sure about it.
In case I've just ordered a TackLife dmm from amazon.co.uk, I need to see these (real) voltages.









One last thing, I can't get the x264 Stability Test V2 started, tried both with or without log file (x64), at the last (priority setting) enter command the cmd window disappears


----------



## CptSpig

Got my 7980xe late yesterday. Finished my build (I really like my test bench) in about 15 minutes. Setting up the bios was a snap loaded Windows (10 pro 64 1709) with a UEFI USB with GPT partitions on my EVO 960 m.2. Everything went smooth and is running great. Temps on a Predator 360 AIO are around 28 to 30c at idel stock clocks. SL did a great job with the delid.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Got my 7980xe late yesterday. Finished my build (I really like my test bench) in about 15 minutes. Setting up the bios was a snap loaded Windows (10 pro 64 1709) with a UEFI USB with GPT partitions on my EVO 960 m.2. Everything went smooth and is running great. Temps on a Predator 360 AIO are around 28 to 30c at idel stock clocks. SL did a great job with the delid.


what's the load temp at stock (tho I think - no, I know - stock bios settings run a very high VCCIN). Say with even the CPUZ "stressor"?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> what's the load temp at stock (tho I think - no, I know - stock bios settings run a very high VCCIN). Say with even the CPUZ "stressor"?


You are correct. I just ran real bench for 15 min and temps got to 60c+ and it was the VCCIN. I am going to work on my 24/7 OC now and see if I can get things in order.







I love this bios.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> You are correct. I just ran real bench for 15 min and temps got to 60c+ and it was the VCCIN. I am going to work on my 24/7 OC now and see if I can get things in order.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I love this bios.


which board did u end up with? The extreme ?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> which board did u end up with? The extreme ?


Apex. I really like this board.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Apex. I really like this board.


That will be my pick if I can ever find a 7980XE... gotta love the 8+8 pin


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Apex. I really like this board.


Ah damn yeah Idk why the didnt do 8x8 on the EX, it doesnt make sense. I wanna go 128gb ram though so Im stuck either EX or Tai EX.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> That will be my pick if I can ever find a 7980XE... gotta love the 8+8 pin


is the 8x4 bad or only for air?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Ah damn yeah Idk why the didnt do 8x8 on the EX, it doesnt make sense. I wanna go 128gb ram though so Im stuck either EX or Tai EX.
> is the 8x4 bad or only for air?


The justification given so far has been (2nd hand through various reviewers):
- the 8+4 on R6E delivers far more power than the socket can reasonably sustain
- the apex board is the "super-duper" OC board if you want to bake the socket

By the numbers there's a lot of truth to this...


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Ah damn yeah Idk why the didnt do 8x8 on the EX, it doesnt make sense. I wanna go 128gb ram though so Im stuck either EX or Tai EX.
> is the 8x4 bad or only for air?


I don't own one and I certainly am not a Skylake-X expert but electrically the 8+4 can supply enough current, at least up to the motherboard. Jay's 2 cents used the Rampage 6 Extreme for his test and ran 4.8 ghz 1.32v on a 7980XE without issue.


----------



## GosuPl

SLI 2x TITAN X Pascal LC on i7 [email protected] GHz vs i9 [email protected] Ghz

Mem for 6950X - 3200 CL 15.15.15 T1 (above my BW-E have wall ^^ )
Mem for 7900X - 3600 Cl 15.15.15 T1 (SKLX IMC is great )

10 games - 1080p/1440p - CPU bottlenecks ;-) 4k/5k - PC master race delicious meal


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> I don't own one and I certainly am not a Skylake-X expert but electrically the 8+4 can supply enough current, at least up to the motherboard. Jay's 2 cents used the Rampage 6 Extreme for his test and ran 4.8 ghz 1.32v on a 7980XE without issue.


His was clearly throttling with the PE360 in the background I think. His score is like several hundred points lower than another 7980XE at 4.8ghz.


----------



## naved777

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *surfinchina*
> 
> Sorry if this has been asked before. 477 pages are getting too long to look lol.
> 
> I just delidded my 7900x and the temps are great (I can now recommend the rocket 99 - so easy to use!)
> I got to 5ghz with 1.32 volts with temps still down around 75 (with cinebench)
> I've yet to do major stress tests because ---
> 
> What is a safe voltage for the 7900?
> Is the danger only from temps, or from actual power in the chip - I've never figured this out...
> 
> I'm using a monoblock so VRM is fine.
> Have a custom loop with a 420 and a 360 rad.
> 
> Thanks in advance...


I have seen some reporting that the EK monoblock gets worse temps than the EK supremacy. But your temps looks fine to me. Wonder what is wrong with other's monoblock








Is it the installation ,amount of TIM being used ?


----------



## AshBorer

So i'm probably going to delid my 7700k around Christmas when I've got some time off to screw around with my computer. My temps are pretty bad, i'm at 4.8GHz/1.28V and hitting 87C in prime95 version 27.9. Taking off my front panel results in a measly 2C reduction in temps, so its not a huge airflow issue. For reference, my cooler is a Thermalright True Spirit 140 power.

I'm going to use a Rockit delid kit, apply liquid metal of course. I also plan on redlidding it using silicone - would just four dots (one in each corner) be enough to secure it? I mainly just don't want the IHS loose, wile minimizing the impedance on thermal transfer. Ive also read that applying liquid metal to not only the die, but the underside of the IHS can be beneficial. Whats the best way to do this? I'm going to look through this thread to see if I can answer some of my questions, but replies would also be helpful


----------



## ccozmo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AshBorer*
> 
> So i'm probably going to delid my 7700k around Christmas when I've got some time off to screw around with my computer. My temps are pretty bad, i'm at 4.8GHz/1.28V and hitting 87C in prime95 version 27.9. Taking off my front panel results in a measly 2C reduction in temps, so its not a huge airflow issue. For reference, my cooler is a Thermalright True Spirit 140 power.
> 
> I'm going to use a Rockit delid kit, apply liquid metal of course. I also plan on redlidding it using silicone - would just four dots (one in each corner) be enough to secure it? I mainly just don't want the IHS loose, wile minimizing the impedance on thermal transfer. Ive also read that applying liquid metal to not only the die, but the underside of the IHS can be beneficial. Whats the best way to do this? I'm going to look through this thread to see if I can answer some of my questions, but replies would also be helpful


Yeah I just put a thin layer of silicone on each corner of the IHS (put it on some cardboard first, then painted a thing layer on IHS). Cured about 3-4 hours and was fine.

Definitely apply Liquid metal to both die and underside of IHS. What I find easiest for this is to get some painters tape and put it on the base leaving just the die exposed, then making the same size on the IHS. You can then rub the LM around a lot and use the tape to wipe any excess. Then you just peel the tape off carefully.

Between IHS and CPU block I use Thermal Grizlly Kryonaut thermal paste


----------



## AshBorer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ccozmo*
> 
> Yeah I just put a thin layer of silicone on each corner of the IHS (put it on some cardboard first, then painted a thing layer on IHS). Cured about 3-4 hours and was fine.
> 
> Definitely apply Liquid metal to both die and underside of IHS. What I find easiest for this is to get some painters tape and put it on the base leaving just the die exposed, then making the same size on the IHS. You can then rub the LM around a lot and use the tape to wipe any excess. Then you just peel the tape off carefully.
> 
> Between IHS and CPU block I use Thermal Grizlly Kryonaut thermal paste


The painters tape is a great idea, thanks! I don't have any Kryonaut but I have Hydronaut. Would buying some Kryanaut be worth it or not really?


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *naved777*
> 
> I have seen some reporting that the EK monoblock gets worse temps than the EK supremacy. But your temps looks fine to me. Wonder what is wrong with other's monoblock
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it the installation ,amount of TIM being used ?


Right from the beginning my temps were 5deg better. After I delidded I put the cryonaught between the cpu and monoblock as well and now it's not on the same planet. It's working great!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AshBorer*
> 
> So i'm probably going to delid my 7700k around Christmas when I've got some time off to screw around with my computer. My temps are pretty bad, i'm at 4.8GHz/1.28V and hitting 87C in prime95 version 27.9. Taking off my front panel results in a measly 2C reduction in temps, so its not a huge airflow issue. For reference, my cooler is a Thermalright True Spirit 140 power.
> 
> I'm going to use a Rockit delid kit, apply liquid metal of course. I also plan on redlidding it using silicone - would just four dots (one in each corner) be enough to secure it? I mainly just don't want the IHS loose, wile minimizing the impedance on thermal transfer. Ive also read that applying liquid metal to not only the die, but the underside of the IHS can be beneficial. Whats the best way to do this? I'm going to look through this thread to see if I can answer some of my questions, but replies would also be helpful


I used a gel superglue at the corners. That works great as well.
The best way to apply the tim is to first put a bit on a clean object, then transfer a tiny drop to the surface - both the chip and the IHS. Spread it around with the provided applicators rather than a cotton bud to avoid bits of cotton.
Don't put enough on that it gets shiny and moves if you tilt it.


----------



## xarot

Which of these two kits would you choose to pair with 7980XE? I prefer the looks too but I would like trying to break in the 4000 MHz club. Is it easier trying to OC the frequency of the G.Skill kit or tighten the latencies on the Corsair? Mem noob here.







I guess G.Skill is the obvious choice and it's around 150 € cheaper?

https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16q-32gtzr
http://www.corsair.com/en-us/dominator-platinum-series-32gb-4-x-8gb-ddr4-dram-4000mhz-c19-memory-kit-cmd32gx4m4e4000c19


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Which of these two kits would you choose to pair with 7980XE? I prefer the looks too but I would like trying to break in the 4000 MHz club. Is it easier trying to OC the frequency of the G.Skill kit or tighten the latencies on the Corsair? Mem noob here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess G.Skill is the obvious choice and it's around 150 € cheaper?
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16q-32gtzr
> http://www.corsair.com/en-us/dominator-platinum-series-32gb-4-x-8gb-ddr4-dram-4000mhz-c19-memory-kit-cmd32gx4m4e4000c19


Go with the G.Skill they will be easier to OC. I have the 3600 CL 16 in black and they will do 4000. I had the corsair with my X99 setup and did not OC very well. Just my experience.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Which of these two kits would you choose to pair with 7980XE? I prefer the looks too but I would like trying to break in the 4000 MHz club. Is it easier trying to OC the frequency of the G.Skill kit or tighten the latencies on the Corsair? Mem noob here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess G.Skill is the obvious choice and it's around 150 € cheaper?
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16q-32gtzr
> http://www.corsair.com/en-us/dominator-platinum-series-32gb-4-x-8gb-ddr4-dram-4000mhz-c19-memory-kit-cmd32gx4m4e4000c19


the 3600c16 kit!


----------



## LunaP

Gonna go with this 128gb kit for mine https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232587&ignorebbr=1, curious if anyone has the 3200 or 3600 variant and had any success w/ overclocking? Given the size I'm curious if theres still room for it to push, kinda hoping for 4000 or 3866 if anything ( 4133 would be insane )


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Gonna go with this 128gb kit for mine https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232587&ignorebbr=1, curious if anyone has the 3200 or 3600 variant and had any success w/ overclocking? Given the size I'm curious if theres still room for it to push, kinda hoping for 4000 or 3866 if anything ( 4133 would be insane )


I've been eyeing that kit for a while. But given the prices, that's not gonna happen any time soon.

I have an 8 x 16GB 3300 MHz CL16 kit meant for X99. It's B-die and on my 7900X, it's running @ 3800 17-19-19-39 with no issues. At 4000, it would boot fine and ran fine with most applications. But it would bail within a few minutes on any suitably memory-intensive application.

But I wasn't disappointed since it is a fully loaded configuration and I'm not competent enough with memory overclocking to fix the secondary and tertiary timings.

I would certainly imagine that the 3600 CL17 kit would do at least as well.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Gonna go with this 128gb kit for mine https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232587&ignorebbr=1, curious if anyone has the 3200 or 3600 variant and had any success w/ overclocking? Given the size I'm curious if theres still room for it to push, kinda hoping for 4000 or 3866 if anything ( 4133 would be insane )


With 128GB, the reality is... let's hope they can run at the advertised speed and timing. At that density, the CPU IMC strength is in play.
Do you really _need_ 128gb?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Gonna go with this 128gb kit for mine https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232587&ignorebbr=1, curious if anyone has the 3200 or 3600 variant and had any success w/ overclocking? Given the size I'm curious if theres still room for it to push, kinda hoping for 4000 or 3866 if anything ( 4133 would be insane )


The larger kits often have less head-room unless you pull sticks or disable slots. It's just a lot more load on the IMC.

FWIW, in real-world performance the 3200/14 kit may outperform the 3600/17 (really 17+ since the 14 kit is 14-14-14 vs 17-19-19). Ultimately the limit on how fast you can access is described by clock/clock_count. Sequential/synthetic throughput may improve with higher clocks, but real performance is much more bound by this rough estimate of 3200/14 or 3600/17 because real-world access is much more random and thus likely to break memory controller optimizations that target large sequential access (to keep a page open as long as possible so as not to incur the penalty of switching to another).

That divisor also shows you the fundamental limit of the memory cells in question and thus there ability to run at higher frequencies with loser timing (again, a rough assertion, you can't always trade clocks for clock counts, but the higher that number, the better your memory cells are).


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> The larger kits often have less head-room unless you pull sticks or disable slots. It's just a lot more load on the IMC.
> 
> FWIW, in real-world performance the 3200/14 kit may outperform the 3600/17 (really 17+ since the 14 kit is 14-14-14 vs 17-19-19). Ultimately the limit on how fast you can access is described by clock/clock_count. Sequential/synthetic throughput may improve with higher clocks, but real performance is much more bound by this rough estimate of 3200/14 or 3600/17.
> 
> That divisor also shows you the fundamental limit of the memory cells in question and thus there ability to run at higher frequencies with loser timing (again, a rough assertion, you can't always trade clocks for clock counts, but the higher that number, the better your memory cells are).


it's likely that they are the same ICs, just binning 8 sticks to run at 3600 is gonna require some compromises.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> With 128GB, the reality is... let's hope they can run at the advertised speed and timing. At that density, the CPU IMC strength is in play.
> Do you really _need_ 128gb?


and what he said - you should be sure to need it before you pay for it or OC it.

SKLX is MUCH easier than HW and easier than BWE, both of which promised nothing in terms of making sticker timing... but...


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> it's likely that they are the same ICs, just binning 8 sticks to run at 3600 is gonna require some compromises.


It does mean the JEDEC values are not helpful for the higher settings - so you are starting from a blank slate - clocking a 3200/14 kit up to 3400/15 _should_ be pretty straight forward (as it is actually asking less of the DRAM cells on the IC in most regards), but you are going to have to go through and tap a lot of those those little boxes where the XMP profile of a kit with 3400/15 on the sticker _should_ get you most of the way there.

for 8 dimms - tridentZ:
3200 was hard to impossible on HWE with 8 dimms depending on lottery
3200 was _almost_ turnkey on BWE, but there were stinker IMCs out there and you had to play with SA voltage
3200 was a cake-walk on SKLX and does not require SA tuning at all.

I had an 8 dimm ripjawz kit that _worked_, but turned out it was silently eating cycles doing retries a lot of the time with sticker timing. So, I had to slow it down.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I've been eyeing that kit for a while. But given the prices, that's not gonna happen any time soon.
> 
> I have an 8 x 16GB 3300 MHz CL16 kit meant for X99. It's B-die and on my 7900X, it's running @ 3800 17-19-19-39 with no issues. At 4000, it would boot fine and ran fine with most applications. But it would bail within a few minutes on any suitably memory-intensive application.
> 
> But I wasn't disappointed since it is a fully loaded configuration and I'm not competent enough with memory overclocking to fix the secondary and tertiary timings.
> 
> I would certainly imagine that the 3600 CL17 kit would do at least as well.


Good stuff, that makes me happy and ur the 3rd person now, so I"m definitely feeling it being a "less of a coincidence" now that I've at least gotten this much feedback, so I'm gonna go ahead and snag it, tysm!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> With 128GB, the reality is... let's hope they can run at the advertised speed and timing. At that density, the CPU IMC strength is in play.
> Do you really _need_ 128gb?


Yeah I've done enough research on that at least, noone w/ the 3200 or 3600 kit had issues or required setting timings to get them working, just xmp on and worked straight out of the box, given that I instantly began looking more into them.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> The larger kits often have less head-room unless you pull sticks or disable slots. It's just a lot more load on the IMC.
> 
> FWIW, in real-world performance the 3200/14 kit may outperform the 3600/17 (really 17+ since the 14 kit is 14-14-14 vs 17-19-19). Ultimately the limit on how fast you can access is described by clock/clock_count. Sequential/synthetic throughput may improve with higher clocks, but real performance is much more bound by this rough estimate of 3200/14 or 3600/17 because real-world access is much more random and thus likely to break memory controller optimizations that target large sequential access (to keep a page open as long as possible so as not to incur the penalty of switching to another).
> 
> That divisor also shows you the fundamental limit of the memory cells in question and thus there ability to run at higher frequencies with loser timing (again, a rough assertion, you can't always trade clocks for clock counts, but the higher that number, the better your memory cells are).


True, but as you said tightening down can definitely yield better results, seeing as others are able to run at 1T , if I can do that + at least get it down to cas 16 ( or even 15 ) the yield is just that much better.
Its a risk its true, but given the imc/ipc on these chips I'm gonna believeeeeeeeeeeee.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> it's likely that they are the same ICs, just binning 8 sticks to run at 3600 is gonna require some compromises.


Hopefully its just a tad more voltage to the RAM itself and minimal to vcore.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> and what he said - you should be sure to need it before you pay for it or OC it.
> 
> SKLX is MUCH easier than HW and easier than BWE, both of which promised nothing in terms of making sticker timing... but...


I do, I've assessed it out for a while, I use up the current 64gb I have now, Initially around 30-40gb usage but its gone up over time so I'm hitting well over into the 50's and up which is after shutting down other things.
GOTTA HAVE MY CHROME TABS <3


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> True, but as you said tightening down can definitely yield better results, seeing as others are able to run at 1T , if I can do that + at least get it down to cas 16 ( or even 15 ) the yield is just that much better.
> Its a risk its true, but given the imc/ipc on these chips I'm gonna believeeeeeeeeeeee.


Trust but verify:
Kit 1: 3600/17 = 211
Kit 2: 3200/14 = 228

Kit2 has better ICs. they run "faster" - can toggle from one address to the next more often (i.e. in less time). It is more likely that you can run kit 2 at 3600/17 than kit 1 at 3200x14.

Also, note the secondary timings are 19 not 17 - further indication of the quality of the ICs
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> Hopefully its just a tad more voltage to the RAM itself and minimal to vcore.
> I do, I've assessed it out for a while, I use up the current 64gb I have now, Initially around 30-40gb usage but its gone up over time so I'm hitting well over into the 50's and up which is after shutting down other things.
> GOTTA HAVE MY CHROME TABS <3


I have to restart firefox/chrome about once every 3 weeks because it gets up to 4-6G of memory and 100% of a single thread. I usually have 24-30 tabs open in 2 windows during those 3 weeks. Gonna need a better excuse...









but I chew up the gigs elsewhere so I feel your pain...

and HOOOLY Shnikies! $1900 for these kits? I paid $850-900 a ~year ago (for a non-RGB - I'll take timings and cheap over bling any day):
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232562&cm_re=3200_cas_14_tridentZ-_-20-232-562-_-Product


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> It does mean the JEDEC values are not helpful for the higher settings - so you are starting from a blank slate - clocking a 3200/14 kit up to 3400/15 _should_ be pretty straight forward (as it is actually asking less of the DRAM cells on the IC in most regards), but you are going to have to go through and tap a lot of those those little boxes where the XMP profile of a kit with 3400/15 on the sticker _should_ get you most of the way there.
> 
> for 8 dimms - tridentZ:
> 3200 was hard to impossible on HWE with 8 dimms depending on lottery
> 3200 was _almost_ turnkey on BWE, but there were stinker IMCs out there and you had to play with SA voltage
> 3200 was a cake-walk on SKLX and does not require SA tuning at all.
> 
> I had an 8 dimm ripjawz kit that _worked_, but turned out it was silently eating cycles doing retries a lot of the time with sticker timing. So, I had to slow it down.


yeah - 8 sticks can be tricky... I'm still running 8x8GB TZs on my 6950X @ 3400c13 w/ 1.45 volts. happy like that since launch.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Good stuff, that makes me happy and ur the 3rd person now, so I"m definitely feeling it being a "less of a coincidence" now that I've at least gotten this much feedback, so I'm gonna go ahead and snag it, tysm!
> *Yeah I've done enough research on that at least, noone w/ the 3200 or 3600 kit had issues or required setting timings to get them working, just xmp on and worked straight out of the box, given that I instantly began looking more into them.*
> True, but as you said tightening down can definitely yield better results, seeing as others are able to run at 1T , if I can do that + at least get it down to cas 16 ( or even 15 ) the yield is just that much better.
> Its a risk its true, but given the imc/ipc on these chips I'm gonna believeeeeeeeeeeee.
> Hopefully its just a tad more voltage to the RAM itself and minimal to vcore.
> I do, I've assessed it out for a while, I use up the current 64gb I have now, Initially around 30-40gb usage but its gone up over time so I'm hitting well over into the 50's and up which is after shutting down other things.
> GOTTA HAVE MY CHROME TABS <3


oh.. XMP... oh no!








lol - sounds like you've already decided. POst back with your findings plz.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Trust but verify:
> Kit 1: 3600/17 = 211
> Kit 2: 3200/14 = 228
> 
> Kit2 has better ICs. they run "faster" - can toggle from one address to the next more often (i.e. in less time). It is more likely that you can run kit 2 at 3600/17 than kit 1 at 3200x14.
> 
> Also, note the secondary timings are 19 not 17 - further indication of the quality of the ICs
> I have to restart firefox/chrome about once every 3 weeks because it gets up to 4-6G of memory and 100% of a single thread. I usually have 24-30 tabs open in 2 windows during those 3 weeks. Gonna need a better excuse...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but I chew up the gigs elsewhere so I feel your pain...
> 
> and HOOOLY Shnikies! $1900 for these kits? I paid $850-900 a ~year ago (for a non-RGB - I'll take timings and cheap over bling any day):
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232562&cm_re=3200_cas_14_tridentZ-_-20-232-562-_-Product


Yeah prices are gonna keep going up for a while on RAM due to the whole price fixing collusion issue going on. They were 200$ cheaper 2 weeks ago. The non RGB are like a 40$ diff at most, its just ******ed, not to mention the SSD market is joining in on this.

32tabs is light, teach me your ways, 1 window alone usually has 96 tabs at any given time. Though Chrome doesn't eat up much ram for me, I don't know if its the version or what, FF on the other hand, I could leave google open alone for an hour and it'd max out and just die, despite the version I have, so I rarely use it since it can't handle more than simple pages given the poor coding.

I'm definitely hoping to be able to tighten down on timings a bit though since I"ve never had issues w/ G skill as far as that goes, though granted keeping these timings at a higher clock would be nice too. Good note though on the eating cycles part, I'll have to definitely run some tests on that, any programs you recommend for reading dropped cycles?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Yeah prices are gonna keep going up for a while on RAM due to the whole price fixing collusion issue going on. They were 200$ cheaper 2 weeks ago. The non RGB are like a 40$ diff at most, its just ******ed, not to mention the SSD market is joining in on this.
> 
> 32tabs is light, teach me your ways, 1 window alone usually has 96 tabs at any given time. Though Chrome doesn't eat up much ram for me, I don't know if its the version or what, FF on the other hand, I could leave google open alone for an hour and it'd max out and just die, despite the version I have, so I rarely use it since it can't handle more than simple pages given the poor coding.
> 
> I'm definitely hoping to be able to tighten down on timings a bit though since I"ve never had issues w/ G skill as far as that goes, though granted keeping these timings at a higher clock would be nice too. Good note though on the eating cycles part, I'll have to definitely run some tests on that, any programs you recommend for reading dropped cycles?


just remember, DS sticks are nothing like SS sticks when tuning things up


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Yeah prices are gonna keep going up for a while on RAM due to the whole price fixing collusion issue going on. They were 200$ cheaper 2 weeks ago. The non RGB are like a 40$ diff at most, its just ******ed, not to mention the SSD market is joining in on this.
> 
> 32tabs is light, teach me your ways, 1 window alone usually has 96 tabs at any given time. Though Chrome doesn't eat up much ram for me, I don't know if its the version or what, FF on the other hand, I could leave google open alone for an hour and it'd max out and just die, despite the version I have, so I rarely use it since it can't handle more than simple pages given the poor coding.
> 
> I'm definitely hoping to be able to tighten down on timings a bit though since I"ve never had issues w/ G skill as far as that goes, though granted keeping these timings at a higher clock would be nice too. Good note though on the eating cycles part, I'll have to definitely run some tests on that, any programs you recommend for reading dropped cycles?


I found it empirically...

It is counted by the IMC, but what and whether you can read it out on this architecture I don't know without digging through datasheets. Not aware of any monitoring program that makes that a push-button exercise.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> just remember, DS sticks are nothing like SS sticks when tuning things up


I can't even find which these are, aren't B-die kits SS? Though technically since 16gb probably DS in this case, if I could stick to 64gb I'd get the 4000 kit and call it a day.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> just remember, DS sticks are nothing like SS sticks when tuning things up


"Tragic and cruel" shenanigans, not "cheeky and fun"...


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> "Tragic and cruel" shenanigans, not "cheeky and fun"...


Bite it Rook!


----------



## iamjanco

*That same set today*.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Go with the G.Skill they will be easier to OC. I have the 3600 CL 16 in black and they will do 4000. I had the corsair with my X99 setup and did not OC very well. Just my experience.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the 3600c16 kit!


Yeah, gonna go with that kit. I'll have to snag them before the RAM prices go boom.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> 
> 
> *That same set today*.


That's the kit i have running on my R5E10/6050X at 3400c13. v good sticks


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> That's the kit i have running on my R5E10/6050X at 3400c13. v good sticks


Yup, it's a good kit and I'll be using it with the 7900x. It also leaves me with ~$900 I can spend on other things (brass is expensive; the powder, not so much







).

Not looking to break any land speed records here as I got that out of my system long ago during my hog riding daze, in a galaxy far, far, away.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Yup, it's a good kit and I'll be using it with the 7900x. It also leaves me with ~$900 I can spend on other things (brass is expensive; the powder, not so much
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ).
> 
> Not looking to break any land speed records here as I got that out of my system long ago during my hog riding daze, in a galaxy far, far, away.


damn shame - nothing like some time behind bars.


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> damn shame - nothing like some time behind bars.


Lol, the only bars I ever did time behind were some of my favorite hangouts


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Lol, the only bars I ever did time behind were some of my favorite hangouts


maybe now, but ride a hog... handle bars


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> maybe now, but ride a hog... handle bars


ah, those bars, lol... I guess you knew where my mind was at.


----------



## ccozmo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AshBorer*
> 
> The painters tape is a great idea, thanks! I don't have any Kryonaut but I have Hydronaut. Would buying some Kryanaut be worth it or not really?


Yeah Hydronaut should be fine, any decent thermal past between IHS and CPU block.

Also when you are using the liquid metal, I find it good to point the tube up and press very slowly till you get a drop come out the end, you can either place this drop on the die/IHS although I prefer to put it on some plastic (the pack the LM / TIM comes in is fine). Then you can paint as much or little as needed onto the die/IHS using the q tip.

Often when people try to squeeze a drop on directly, too much comes out.


----------



## Martin778

Pretty much any Bdie based RAM will do.
My 3200C14 run 4000 c17.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Pretty much any Bdie based RAM will do.
> My 3200C14 run 4000 c17.


Chuckle... Your cited example happens to be one of the fastest DDR4 memory ICs on the market. In terms of the bottleneck of total turn-around from address to drive on the DDR cell, the 3200/14 is equivalent to 4000/17.5 (17.5 isn't a thing - you can't have half a cycle, but that's how the math works out - 1/2 way between 17 and 18 cycles - so you'd need to use 18 to not ask more of the cell than it has already been binned to do).

Yes, b-die are good but even with them they are binned higher and lower based ultimately on this limitation. Which is why you need to look closely at secondary timing when buying, particularly if you plan on tightening timing or raising clocks.

Of course, this time is not a guarantee of the higher clock rate - other factors of the circuit may make higher frequency operation difficult (any part of the circuit from CPU to dimm to die and back may ultimately create a frequency limit of operation, but its a good start on getting a ballpark level of capability.


----------



## elderan

So got my 7980XE this weekend and this was the power consumption for my system under a stress test at 4.4Ghz. This includes the 2 1080ti STRIX OC I have.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Pretty much any Bdie based RAM will do.
> My 3200C14 run 4000 c17.


Can you post your timings/voltage for that 4000 c17?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elderan*
> 
> So got my 7980XE this weekend and this was the power consumption for my system under a stress test at 4.4Ghz. This includes the 2 1080ti STRIX OC I have.


Mine not as bad: 4.4 core 3.0 cashe no OC on one TitanXp 406 watts.


----------



## The Stilt

Has anyone been able to install Windows 7 on their SKL-X system?

The installer says it is the missing drivers (which it isn't) and there doesn't seem to be any way around it.
I've included all of the available drivers (and different versions of them) to the media, but still nothing.

There were no issues in installing it on Ryzen, Threadripper or Z370 boards however I'm utterly stuck on X299.

It's almost as if the installation is blocked by the system.

The best thing is that the installer is able to access both the installation media (tried ODD, HDD and USB) and the target drive as well, so it definitely isn't lacking any of the drivers.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Has anyone been able to install Windows 7 on their SKL-X system?
> 
> The installer says it is the missing drivers (which it isn't) and there doesn't seem to be any way around it.
> I've included all of the available drivers (and different versions of them) to the media, but still nothing.
> 
> There were no issues in installing it on Ryzen, Threadripper or Z370 boards however I'm utterly stuck on X299.
> 
> It's almost as if the installation is blocked by the system.
> 
> The best thing is that the installer is able to access both the installation media (tried ODD, HDD and USB) and the target drive as well, so it definitely isn't lacking any of the drivers.


Yeah that change went into effect a while back theres supposedly a workaround though.

https://www.theverge.com/2016/1/16/10780876/microsoft-windows-support-policy-new-processors-skylake

https://wccftech.com/intel-skylake-remove-support-usb-based-windows-7-installation-platform-specs/


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Has anyone been able to install Windows 7 on their SKL-X system?
> 
> The installer says it is the missing drivers (which it isn't) and there doesn't seem to be any way around it.
> I've included all of the available drivers (and different versions of them) to the media, but still nothing.
> 
> There were no issues in installing it on Ryzen, Threadripper or Z370 boards however I'm utterly stuck on X299.
> 
> It's almost as if the installation is blocked by the system.
> 
> The best thing is that the installer is able to access both the installation media (tried ODD, HDD and USB) and the target drive as well, so it definitely isn't lacking any of the drivers.


yes - i used a sata DVD drive and a stock plain-jane OEM installation disk. Can't say it's 100% tho... no matter how many times I've tried, I cant load openCL dll correctly. Tried Intel and AMD. IDK what's with that.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

There is a new stress tester which seems to be the best called : Assassin's Creed: Origins
Use denuvo + VMProtect which is linked to the player movement in the game and run non-stop?


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes - i used a sata DVD drive and a stock plain-jane OEM installation disk. Can't say it's 100% tho... no matter how many times I've tried, I cant load openCL dll correctly. Tried Intel and AMD. IDK what's with that.


Managed to install the OS, but now I don't have any USBs









The installation issue was caused by MS NVM hotfix added to the boot image.

The USBs work during the installation, but stop working immediately once the OS has been installed.
Both ASMedia and Intel controllers are flagged with "Code 19". I've tried all of the different driver versions I can find, without any success.

The only way to have any kind of input devices is to enable PS2 emulation from the bios.

I curse the day I sold my X99 Xeon platform and wasted 1700€ on a 7960X


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Managed to install the OS, but now I don't have any USBs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The installation issue was caused by MS NVM hotfix added to the boot image.
> 
> The USBs work during the installation, but stop working immediately once the OS has been installed.
> Both ASMedia and Intel controllers are flagged with "Code 19". I've tried all of the different driver versions I can find, without any success.
> 
> The only way to have any kind of input devices is to enable PS2 emulation from the bios.
> 
> I curse the day I sold my X99 Xeon platform and wasted 1700€ on a 7960X


yeah, I need to plug in my W7 drive again to check/remember... you are using the bios USB-PS2 emulator, oh no. Lag is a gentle description (same problem on Z370).


----------



## Jbravo33

Finally got around to building the 7980. Not having the best of times overclocking this monstrosity. temps are off the charts. Hoping it's the fact I'm testing on this X62 kraken. Time for delid and external rad. I could have sworn I saw a overclock guide here or the r6e post?? I can't seem to find. if anyone has link that would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Finally got around to building the 7980. Not having the best of times overclocking this monstrosity. temps are off the charts. Hoping it's the fact I'm testing on this X62 kraken. Time for delid and external rad. I could have sworn I saw a overclock guide here or the r6e post?? I can't seem to find. if anyone has link that would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.


Black OBT on a tilt.









only thing I have in an LN2 guide for the Apex atm.

R6AXOCGuidev11.pdf 511k .pdf file


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Finally got around to building the 7980. Not having the best of times overclocking this monstrosity. temps are off the charts. Hoping it's the fact I'm testing on this X62 kraken. Time for delid and external rad. I could have sworn I saw a overclock guide here or the r6e post?? I can't seem to find. if anyone has link that would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.


What kind of temperature and clockspeed are you getting?


----------



## Hydroplane

Looks like stock is getting better on the HCC chips. I'm seeing the 7960X in stock most places and close to MSRP. 7940X is around about half the time. Still tough to find the 7980XE. I am seeing them in stock at NextWarehouse right now.


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Black OBT on a tilt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> only thing I have in an LN2 guide for the Apex atm.
> 
> R6AXOCGuidev11.pdf 511k .pdf file


Thanks dude!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> What kind of temperature and clockspeed are you getting?


Well from watching all the youtubers vids again and briefly browsing past pages. I tried to run adaptive at 1.2 but that's not working for me at all. So instead for a base I'm running 45 all cores @ a manual 1.2 and temps are from the 80's up to over 1 hundo. I was under assumption 1.200 was a pretty safe voltage. Might need to read up some more. Been out loop for 3 weeks. Also for those who delid how long did you wait for the silicon to cure? I'm so anxious. Lol I just wanna get this thing back on and strike it with Thor's hammer.


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Thanks dude!
> Well from watching all the youtubers vids again and briefly browsing past pages. I tried to run adaptive at 1.2 but that's not working for me at all. So instead for a base I'm running 45 all cores @ a manual 1.2 and temps are from the 80's up to over 1 hundo. I was under assumption 1.200 was a pretty safe voltage. Might need to read up some more. Been out loop for 3 weeks. Also for those who delid how long did you wait for the silicon to cure? I'm so anxious. Lol I just wanna get this thing back on and strike it with Thor's hammer.


Probably keep it under 1.1v without delid. Can you see if you can hold 4.2ghz stable on that?

Also my chip is one of the B Batch, so we will see how it OCs.


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> Probably keep it under 1.1v without delid. Can you see if you can hold 4.2ghz stable on that?
> 
> Also my chip is one of the B Batch, so we will see how it OCs.


I've already taken the plunge or else I would have.


----------



## xarot

Hello,

How hot are your 7900Xs running when delidded? I am testing my delidded 7900X on EK XE360 rad and DDC pump and at 4.7 [email protected]25, cache 3.0 [email protected] V, Prime95 (AVX disabled) seems to get the hottest core to well over 90c after something like 20-30 minutes. The rad is not really even pumping very hot let alone warm air.







It is an improvement over the temps I got earlier; it was pumping around 101-102c on the hottest core before delid only at 4.5 [email protected] V. So I guess the delid is fine and definitely there is an improvement.

Used CLU on the die/bottom IHS and Kryonaut on top of the IHS. I popped the IHS after first test and I think it was fine, but added just a very small drop of CLU with a toothpick on the center of the die to spread just in case the contact was bad. Components on the PCB are sealed with liquid tape.

Did I just have my hopes too high or am I actually running out of cooling capacity? I didn't test it yet at the same frequency and voltage as before, where I should see an improvement. Just wondering since der8auer was running Prime95 on his chip at 5.0 at 1.32 and that was on AIO. Don't know about his cache settings though as that seems to be a driving factor for the temps as well.

I can run CB at 4.9 1.32 V but not Prime95 stable. That voltage is like hitting the CPU with the hammer already.







I guess [email protected] V is where my chip likes to be after delid. 4.8 is possible but I need to find the bad core(s) that need more voltage than the rest.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Hello,
> 
> How hot are your 7900Xs running when delidded? I am testing my delidded 7900X on EK XE360 rad and DDC pump and at 4.7 [email protected], cache 3.0 [email protected] V, Prime95 (AVX disabled) seems to get the hottest core to well over 90c after something like 20-30 minutes. The rad is not really even pumping very hot let alone warm air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is an improvement over the temps I got earlier; it was pumping around 101-102c on the hottest core before delid only at 4.5 [email protected] V. So I guess the delid is fine and definitely there is an improvement.
> 
> Used CLU on the die/bottom IHS and Kryonaut on top of the IHS. I popped the IHS after first test and I think it was fine, but added just a very small drop of CLU with a toothpick on the center of the die to spread just in case the contact was bad. Components on the PCB are sealed with liquid tape.
> 
> Did I just have my hopes too high or am I actually running out of cooling capacity? I didn't test it yet at the same frequency and voltage as before, where I should see an improvement. Just wondering since der8auer was running Prime95 on his chip at 5.0 at 1.32 and that was on AIO. Don't know about his cache settings though as that seems to be a driving factor for the temps as well.
> 
> I can run CB at 4.9 1.32 V but not Prime95 stable. That voltage is like hitting the CPU with the hammer already.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess [email protected] V is where my chip likes to be after delid. 4.8 is possible but I need to find the bad core(s) that need more voltage than the rest.


Honest answer, stop running Prime. AVX or not. You might benefit from additional rad space, however, I'd invest in an inline temp sensor so you can see how far you're straying from Delta-T.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Honest answer, stop running Prime. AVX or not. You might benefit from additional rad space, however, I'd invest in an inline temp sensor so you can see how far you're straying from Delta-T.


Thanks SS, I know, but...few years ago, we gave up Prime95 with AVX instructions because it ran too hot. Now we're giving up on Prime95 with non-AVX (Pentium4 FFTs) because it runs too hot. Soon, we'll give up on AIDA64 stressing if it runs too hot...







It's just that it's been the baseline for my CPU stability since 2004 or so and rarely given false results when combined with other stress testing too.

So what's the recommended stress-test on X299 these days to detect instability in individual cores? This is my test bench setup, so limited rad space only. My main rig is running the 7980XE and 480+360mm.


----------



## carlhil2

Is the Deluxe mobo any good for the 7980xe? thanks in advance.


----------



## cg4200

I am new with a 7800x coming from 6850K 4.5-4.6.
It seems easier to oc on skylake-x................?
I know asus realbench is not prime 95 but passed 2 hours 4.8 1.265 volts 1.9 vcin 3000 cache on auto hit 77 C high .
I tried 4.9 @1.30 ran 15 minutes crash hit 88 C before I saw crash..
Whipped out my rocket delid took my time prepped everything ..scuff surface apply tim reseal lid ..wait 24hrs .
Boom this morning same 76 C ambient same 4.9 1.30 passed 1/2 hr realbench max temp 71c and shaved 11 watts off..
I need to run more testing tonight usually If I pass realbench for 2hrs I call it game stable ..
I also run aidaa 64
Is there a better test for x299 stability ??
Max safe volts for core ?? would like 5.0 all cores
Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Thanks SS, I know, but...few years ago, we gave up Prime95 with AVX instructions because it ran too hot. Now we're giving up on Prime95 with non-AVX (Pentium4 FFTs) because it runs too hot. Soon, we'll give up on AIDA64 stressing if it runs too hot...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's just that it's been the baseline for my CPU stability since 2004 or so and rarely given false results when combined with other stress testing too.
> 
> *So what's the recommended stress-test on X299* these days to detect instability in individual cores? This is my test bench setup, so limited rad space only. My main rig is running the 7980XE and 480+360mm.


that depends on the cpu. for a 7980XE which you want a decent OC, stick to x264 .. even hwbot x265 for the core/vccin, use HCi memtest (36 instances) for RAM - this also loads the cpu and cache, and I ran 1h of AID64 cache stress. Looped Real bench Image processing and ran 30 min of the Stress test (sans GPU module). I have not had a bsod in any futuremark bench, or some gaming (tho I was not the one gaming







)


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Hello,
> 
> How hot are your 7900Xs running when delidded? I am testing my delidded 7900X on EK XE360 rad and DDC pump and at 4.7 [email protected], cache 3.0 [email protected] V, Prime95 (AVX disabled) seems to get the hottest core to well over 90c after something like 20-30 minutes. The rad is not really even pumping very hot let alone warm air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is an improvement over the temps I got earlier; it was pumping around 101-102c on the hottest core before delid only at 4.5 [email protected] V. So I guess the delid is fine and definitely there is an improvement.


If you provide more details about your Prime95 testing method (version, blend or custom, ambient temp?) I'm sure someone could get you a more realistic 1:1 comparison. I personally don't use it other than in limited capacity, but I'd be glad to help.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Used CLU on the die/bottom IHS and Kryonaut on top of the IHS. I popped the IHS after first test and I think it was fine, but added just a very small drop of CLU with a toothpick on the center of the die to spread just in case the contact was bad. Components on the PCB are sealed with liquid tape.


It has been my personal experience through numerous delids to not be shy with the amount of LM used. I don't pour the stuff on, but I don't spread it as thin as possible anymore either. I do spread the coat on the IHS as thin as possible, but the coat that I apply to the die is very generous.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Did I just have my hopes too high or am I actually running out of cooling capacity? I didn't test it yet at the same frequency and voltage as before, where I should see an improvement. Just wondering since der8auer was running Prime95 on his chip at 5.0 at 1.32 and that was on AIO. Don't know about his cache settings though as that seems to be a driving factor for the temps as well.


When derbauer made his video showing the 7900x running non AVX Prime95 @ 5GHz with an AIO, he did so using the 1344 VCore test. That's not exactly what most people are thinking when someone tells them "it's Prime95 stable". If you are running blend mode, you will come across hotter and more stressful segments of testing than simply running 1344.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> I can run CB at 4.9 1.32 V but not Prime95 stable. That voltage is like hitting the CPU with the hammer already.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess [email protected] V is where my chip likes to be after delid. 4.8 is possible but I need to find the bad core(s) that need more voltage than the rest.


I've done CB testing as high 1.36v (manual) with 5.1 GHz on all cores and 4 boosting to 5.2 GHz. At that voltage, I was seeing high 70's/low 80s on the cores, which I personally believe is already too high for a delidded chip. Temps that high on a delidded 7900x with my current loop indicates to me that there's a lot of current flowing through that poor little chip, which is my real concern.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Thanks SS, I know, but...few years ago, we gave up Prime95 with AVX instructions because it ran too hot. Now we're giving up on Prime95 with non-AVX (Pentium4 FFTs) because it runs too hot. Soon, we'll give up on AIDA64 stressing if it runs too hot...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's just that it's been the baseline for my CPU stability since 2004 or so and rarely given false results when combined with other stress testing too.


I'm not sure that anyone that actually uses their PC for anything more than editing Microsoft Word docs will ever drop down to AIDA64 only testing, but I don't personally see the need of pushing so much current through a CPU just because it used to be a thing. No doubt, Prime95 is great at what it does. I just ask myself, what does any of that have to do with how I actually use my rig? Even if I were to add a water chiller to my loop and could manage to keep the CPU cool during high voltage/high clock Prime95 testing, I can't significantly reduce the current that is required to keep it running stable. It's the amount of power that concerns me. Not the heat.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> So what's the recommended stress-test on X299 these days to detect instability in individual cores? This is my test bench setup, so limited rad space only. My main rig is running the 7980XE and 480+360mm.


When I was trying to determine minimum required voltage for a "per core" overclock, I did so testing each core individually by shutting off the others and subjecting the individual cores to a battery of tests including Prime95 (2688). It was a lot of work to repeat multiple test for 10 individual cores at different clock speeds. I tracked all of this stuff in a spreadsheet and came up with an average voltage that worked for each individual core. As an example of how much VCore varied from worst to best core, the difference to keep each running in Prime95 2688 was 35mv (0.035) for my chip. Not as bad as I initially thought it might be. I also learned that the voltage for each core scaled pretty evenly in relation to each other as I increased clock speed. Slight adjustments were needed, but it was only 5 or 10mv at most.

In the end I determined that the temp/power improvement with a "per core" OC with individually dialed-in cores was there, but not nearly as much as I hoped.







I suspect that this level of tweaking might actually matter more to the bigger chips like the 7980XE.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Thanks SS, I know, but...few years ago, we gave up Prime95 with AVX instructions because it ran too hot. Now we're giving up on Prime95 with non-AVX (Pentium4 FFTs) because it runs too hot. Soon, we'll give up on AIDA64 stressing if it runs too hot...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's just that it's been the baseline for my CPU stability since 2004 or so and rarely given false results when combined with other stress testing too.
> 
> So what's the recommended stress-test on X299 these days to detect instability in individual cores? This is my test bench setup, so limited rad space only. My main rig is running the 7980XE and 480+360mm.


Almost *everything* runs too hot on X299. And IMO, if you're avoiding everything because they run too hot, you're defeating the purpose of stress-testing.

Also, this whole "avoid Prime95 AVX" doesn't apply to Skylake X since it has offsets. It only made sense back in the Haswell and desktop Skylake gens where everything ran at the same speed and you didn't want to sacrifice performance of normal code for AVX stability.

If you don't want to be "held back" by any stress-tests running too hot, set your Tj.Max to something you're comfortable with. Then let it throttle if you ever run something that's "too hot" whether intentionally or unintentionally.

I currently do this with an 85C Tj.Max for my 4.5 GHz non-AVX OC. Most of my non-AVX workloads stay below 85C. But there's a couple (less important) workloads I do that would otherwise push it above 100C. So I simply let those throttle when they exceed 85C.

AVX and AVX512 I run at 4.1 and 3.8 GHz respectively. Both of those will just scratch 85C under the worst respective loads.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I feel that my 7800X is running wayy too hot.

At 4700/3200 at 1.190V/1.118V and 1.856V VCCIN, the temps are in the low 60s and it is delidded. Package peaking 70'C.

This is while running Realbench 2.56V. I would think that my temps should be at least a five-six degree cooler considering I'm running a MO-RA420 (LT), XT240, D5 pump at max speed, Evo supremacy and a GTX 1080TI with an EK block.

VRMs are in the mid 50s with a fan mounted. 1.4V++ is far too hot, and that can be said about 1.300V++ as well.

Am I expecting too much?

Package power is at around 145-150 watts. Fans are at 700-800 RPM under load.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I feel that my 7800X is running wayy too hot.
> 
> At 4700/3200 at 1.190V/1.118V and 1.856V VCCIN, the temps are in the low 60s and it is delidded. Package peaking 70'C.
> 
> This is while running Realbench 2.56V. I would think that my temps should be at least a five-six degree cooler considering I'm running a MO-RA420 (LT), XT240, D5 pump at max speed, Evo supremacy and a GTX 1080TI with an EK block.
> 
> VRMs are in the mid 50s with a fan mounted. 1.4V++ is far too hot, and that can be said about 1.300V++ as well.
> 
> *Am I expecting too much?*
> 
> Package power is at around 145-150 watts. Fans are at 700-800 RPM under load.


Yes.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I feel that my 7800X is running wayy too hot.
> 
> At 4700/3200 at 1.190V/1.118V and 1.856V VCCIN, the temps are in the low 60s and it is delidded. Package peaking 70'C.
> 
> This is while running Realbench 2.56V. I would think that my temps should be at least a five-six degree cooler considering I'm running a MO-RA420 (LT), XT240, D5 pump at max speed, Evo supremacy and a GTX 1080TI with an EK block.
> 
> VRMs are in the mid 50s with a fan mounted. 1.4V++ is far too hot, and that can be said about 1.300V++ as well.
> 
> Am I expecting too much?
> 
> Package power is at around 145-150 watts. Fans are at 700-800 RPM under load.


Lol temps in the low 60s with Realbench and you think you're running hot? I think you're just being a little greedy muffin there







Those are great temps. You can probably get lower by dialing down that mesh if low 60s bothers you.


----------



## tripleflip18

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Hello,
> 
> How hot are your 7900Xs running when delidded? I am testing my delidded 7900X on EK XE360 rad and DDC pump and at 4.7 [email protected], cache 3.0 [email protected] V, Prime95 (AVX disabled) seems to get the hottest core to well over 90c after something like 20-30 minutes. The rad is not really even pumping very hot let alone warm air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is an improvement over the temps I got earlier; it was pumping around 101-102c on the hottest core before delid only at 4.5 [email protected] V. So I guess the delid is fine and definitely there is an improvement.
> 
> Used CLU on the die/bottom IHS and Kryonaut on top of the IHS. I popped the IHS after first test and I think it was fine, but added just a very small drop of CLU with a toothpick on the center of the die to spread just in case the contact was bad. Components on the PCB are sealed with liquid tape.
> 
> Did I just have my hopes too high or am I actually running out of cooling capacity? I didn't test it yet at the same frequency and voltage as before, where I should see an improvement. Just wondering since der8auer was running Prime95 on his chip at 5.0 at 1.32 and that was on AIO. Don't know about his cache settings though as that seems to be a driving factor for the temps as well.
> 
> I can run CB at 4.9 1.32 V but not Prime95 stable. That voltage is like hitting the CPU with the hammer already.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess [email protected] V is where my chip likes to be after delid. 4.8 is possible but I need to find the bad core(s) that need more voltage than the rest.


i had similar issue applying too little of LM, apply more try again


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah, I need to plug in my W7 drive again to check/remember... you are using the bios USB-PS2 emulator, oh no. Lag is a gentle description (same problem on Z370).


Got it solved.
It had nothing to do with the drivers, but with an update patch MS has at some point released.
Hard to tell which one, because the media I used had over 500 updates in total. Never had issues with it with any other platform (Ryzen, TR, Z370, etc), but on X299 all of the USB controllers (both Intel and ASMedia) went dodo (Code 19) if it was installed.

Using a stock, non-updated original media fixed the issue. USB drivers had to be included of course to avoid the need for PS2 and ODD.


----------



## arrow0309

What utilities do you guys think are best /proper to stress test the Skylake X stability (gaming and benchmark only, no heavy workloads) and why?


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> What utilities do you guys think are best /proper to stress test the Skylake X stability (gaming and benchmark only, no heavy workloads) and why?


Realbench, stress testing about as long as you tend to stress your computer. Once you have that settled play some games you play and see what happens. I'd also test any other stressful activities. Realize your realbench temps will be well over your gaming temps.

For games try gta v. Found gta v was able to pull out instabilities other games missed.


----------



## Martin778

Don't do RealBench to test stability unless it has an option to turn off GPU's...also if you have SLI it will always BSOD with BAD POOL CALLER on exit.
I use x264/x265 stress test.


----------



## Chargeit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Don't do RealBench to test stability unless it has an option to turn off GPU's...also if you have SLI it will always BSOD with BAD POOL CALLER on exit.
> I use x264/x265 stress test.


Most here use realbench for some level of stress testing and it works great. Make sure to disable Afterburner since that will cause crashes. I haven't heard of realbench having issues with sli though I don't have sli and haven't tested it myself.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chargeit*
> 
> Realbench, stress testing about as long as you tend to stress your computer. Once you have that settled play some games you play and see what happens. I'd also test any other stressful activities. Realize your realbench temps will be well over your gaming temps.
> 
> For games try gta v. Found gta v was able to pull out instabilities other games missed.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Don't do RealBench to test stability unless it has an option to turn off GPU's...also if you have SLI it will always BSOD with BAD POOL CALLER on exit.
> I use x264/x265 stress test.


Agreed for both, no issues with the Realbench ever (all the versions) and I'll continue to use it for the avx (on) stress (offset -2).
As for the x264 / x265 you mean the x264 Stability test v2 (no avx)?
What is this X265?
How about Handbrake?


----------



## Martin778

This is X265, with AVX:
http://www.mediafire.com/file/nm5n7xg2nb22zl7/x265_FHD_Benchmark.7z

You can choose loop it as a stress test.

I had Afterburner disabled but it still crashes BTW.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> This is X265, with AVX:
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/nm5n7xg2nb22zl7/x265_FHD_Benchmark.7z
> 
> You can choose loop it as a stress test.
> 
> I had Afterburner disabled but it still crashes BTW.


+Rep
Thanks!
Gonna try them soon after the delid.
I still don't get how many loops do I need to proper set for the X264 v2, I mean nr of loops = time of the whole test?


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Hello,
> 
> How hot are your 7900Xs running when delidded? I am testing my delidded 7900X on EK XE360 rad and DDC pump and at 4.7 [email protected], cache 3.0 [email protected] V, Prime95 (AVX disabled) seems to get the hottest core to well over 90c after something like 20-30 minutes. The rad is not really even pumping very hot let alone warm air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is an improvement over the temps I got earlier; it was pumping around 101-102c on the hottest core before delid only at 4.5 [email protected] V. So I guess the delid is fine and definitely there is an improvement.
> 
> Used CLU on the die/bottom IHS and Kryonaut on top of the IHS. I popped the IHS after first test and I think it was fine, but added just a very small drop of CLU with a toothpick on the center of the die to spread just in case the contact was bad. Components on the PCB are sealed with liquid tape.
> 
> Did I just have my hopes too high or am I actually running out of cooling capacity? I didn't test it yet at the same frequency and voltage as before, where I should see an improvement. Just wondering since der8auer was running Prime95 on his chip at 5.0 at 1.32 and that was on AIO. Don't know about his cache settings though as that seems to be a driving factor for the temps as well.
> 
> I can run CB at 4.9 1.32 V but not Prime95 stable. That voltage is like hitting the CPU with the hammer already.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess [email protected] V is where my chip likes to be after delid. 4.8 is possible but I need to find the bad core(s) that need more voltage than the rest.


I'll throw in my 2 cents for what its worth...

I'm running my 7900x @ 4.8 delidded on a Fractal S36 AIO and my hottest core hits 79c with a package temp of 84c after 2 hours of RB 2.54. My avx off sets are 3/5 and an adaptive voltage of 1.225v.

Like others have said, you probably need more LM under the hood and potentially a better reseat for the IHS.

Totally unrelated to your comment though, I'm looking at putting my first custom loop together to try and tame these temps a bit more. Hopefully I can bring the cores down another 10c and keep the package under 80c with a single 360 rad, D5 pump and an EK supremacy block.


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> I'll throw in my 2 cents for what its worth...
> 
> I'm running my 7900x @ 4.8 delidded on a Fractal S36 AIO and my hottest core hits 79c with a package temp of 84c after 2 hours of RB 2.54. My avx off sets are 3/5 and an adaptive voltage of 1.225v.
> 
> Like others have said, you probably need more LM under the hood and potentially a better reseat for the IHS.
> 
> Totally unrelated to your comment though, I'm looking at putting my first custom loop together to try and tame these temps a bit more. Hopefully I can bring the cores down another 10c and keep the package under 80c with a single 360 rad, D5 pump and an EK supremacy block.


I'll throw in my 2 cents worth as well. For what it's worth.
A 360 is pretty well minimum for the 7900x, custom loop or aio. You'll still be constrained by the cooling.
I'm running a 360 plus a 420 for my delidded 7900x and that seems to be above the point where cooling is not the issue any more when I'm trying to get good clocks. It boils down to (no pun intended) the 'goodness' of the chip, which for me is 5ghz @ 1.3 volts.
I'd say that cooling point is a 360 + 240 - educated guess.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Almost *everything* runs too hot on X299. And IMO, if you're avoiding everything because they run too hot, you're defeating the purpose of stress-testing.
> 
> Also, this whole "avoid Prime95 AVX" doesn't apply to Skylake X since it has offsets. It only made sense back in the Haswell and desktop Skylake gens where everything ran at the same speed and you didn't want to sacrifice performance of normal code for AVX stability.
> 
> If you don't want to be "held back" by any stress-tests running too hot, set your Tj.Max to something you're comfortable with. Then let it throttle if you ever run something that's "too hot" whether intentionally or unintentionally.
> 
> I currently do this with an 85C Tj.Max for my 4.5 GHz non-AVX OC. Most of my non-AVX workloads stay below 85C. But there's a couple (less important) workloads I do that would otherwise push it above 100C. So I simply let those throttle when they exceed 85C.
> 
> AVX and AVX512 I run at 4.1 and 3.8 GHz respectively. Both of those will just scratch 85C under the worst respective loads.


The state of affairs on these CPU forces you to adapt to the workload that's relevant to you. There is no point running Prime AVX with an offset as a means to test stability if you have no intention of running application that use those instructions. Moreover, you're still throwing a lot of current at it. This is no more than common sense. Prime with or without I haven't ran on my 7900x system once, and I don't intend to. There's more efficient ways to stress the system without compromise. This is especially applicable to those who are not willing to delid.


----------



## xarot

Hey, awesome and detailed reply!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> If you provide more details about your Prime95 testing method (version, blend or custom, ambient temp?) I'm sure someone could get you a more realistic 1:1 comparison. I personally don't use it other than in limited capacity, but I'd be glad to help.


I am using P95 28.5 with AVX/FMA3 instructions disabled and ambient is around 22-23 degrees.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> It has been my personal experience through numerous delids to not be shy with the amount of LM used. I don't pour the stuff on, but I don't spread it as thin as possible anymore either. I do spread the coat on the IHS as thin as possible, but the coat that I apply to the die is very generous.


I need some more CLU or grab the Conductonaut. The CLU I used was never opened but it seems I ran out of it already although I didn't reapply it even at once. Only a small fractions were lost at first application when I took some of it out with a Q-tip from the die. Maybe more CLU then just to check if I have enough applied already. If I ever delid my 7980XE (probably after a year or when next chips are announced), then I'll use Conductonaut.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> When derbauer made his video showing the 7900x running non AVX Prime95 @ 5GHz with an AIO, he did so using the 1344 VCore test. That's not exactly what most people are thinking when someone tells them "it's Prime95 stable". If you are running blend mode, you will come across hotter and more stressful segments of testing than simply running 1344.
> I've done CB testing as high 1.36v (manual) with 5.1 GHz on all cores and 4 boosting to 5.2 GHz. At that voltage, I was seeing high 70's/low 80s on the cores, which I personally believe is already too high for a delidded chip. Temps that high on a delidded 7900x with my current loop indicates to me that there's a lot of current flowing through that poor little chip, which is my real concern.


I usually run blend. When the stress switches to small FFTs, then the temps will usually get to the highest point. I'll try the 1344K too when I have more time.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> I'm not sure that anyone that actually uses their PC for anything more than editing Microsoft Word docs will ever drop down to AIDA64 only testing, but I don't personally see the need of pushing so much current through a CPU just because it used to be a thing. No doubt, Prime95 is great at what it does. I just ask myself, what does any of that have to do with how I actually use my rig? Even if I were to add a water chiller to my loop and could manage to keep the CPU cool during high voltage/high clock Prime95 testing, I can't significantly reduce the current that is required to keep it running stable. It's the amount of power that concerns me. Not the heat.


Nothing really. But that's how Prime95 has always been. If I want to be stable in Prime95 I'll have to dial back my settings. But then again there are people who still only run IBT for 10 rounds and call it stable and post into forums when they run into issues.







I have abused my chips, even degraded two Extreme processors back in the day. But both were degraded when given voltage was too high, so it was my fault. I am always try to set a combination of reasonable voltage and frequency, and then throw everything at the CPU. Anyway the 7900X/Apex is my "bench rig", so I am just trying different things with it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> When I was trying to determine minimum required voltage for a "per core" overclock, I did so testing each core individually by shutting off the others and subjecting the individual cores to a battery of tests including Prime95 (2688). It was a lot of work to repeat multiple test for 10 individual cores at different clock speeds. I tracked all of this stuff in a spreadsheet and came up with an average voltage that worked for each individual core. As an example of how much VCore varied from worst to best core, the difference to keep each running in Prime95 2688 was 35mv (0.035) for my chip. Not as bad as I initially thought it might be. I also learned that the voltage for each core scaled pretty evenly in relation to each other as I increased clock speed. Slight adjustments were needed, but it was only 5 or 10mv at most.
> 
> In the end I determined that the temp/power improvement with a "per core" OC with individually dialed-in cores was there, but not nearly as much as I hoped.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I suspect that this level of tweaking might actually matter more to the bigger chips like the 7980XE.


Could you give me a hint on how you shut other cores down or how did you set the affinity ie. how did you figure out which core was which? When I use Prime95 for just one or two cores, I am not getting the max turbo boost to kick in on any of the cores when I am using Per Core Usage OC. Using latest Windows 10 build and no ITBM program installed. Did you use it? Actually I am trying to test this on my 7980XE which has been setup in BIOS in the following way.

47 - 4 cores
46 - 10 cores
44 - 12 cores
40 - 18 cores

So far working great, but I have no idea how I should test it.







Also using AUTO voltage, seems to be working alright, last time I tried lowering the voltage via offset problems started arising. It's a PITA to test anyway with so many cores.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Almost *everything* runs too hot on X299. *And IMO, if you're avoiding everything because they run too hot, you're defeating the purpose of stress-testing.*
> 
> Also, this whole "avoid Prime95 AVX" doesn't apply to Skylake X since it has offsets. It only made sense back in the Haswell and desktop Skylake gens where everything ran at the same speed and you didn't want to sacrifice performance of normal code for AVX stability.
> 
> If you don't want to be "held back" by any stress-tests running too hot, set your Tj.Max to something you're comfortable with. Then let it throttle if you ever run something that's "too hot" whether intentionally or unintentionally.
> 
> I currently do this with an 85C Tj.Max for my 4.5 GHz non-AVX OC. Most of my non-AVX workloads stay below 85C. But there's a couple (less important) workloads I do that would otherwise push it above 100C. So I simply let those throttle when they exceed 85C.
> 
> AVX and AVX512 I run at 4.1 and 3.8 GHz respectively. Both of those will just scratch 85C under the worst respective loads.


Also defeating the actual purpose of overclocking. I am not trying to sacrifice stability for unstable performance. I am trying to get what's left on the table and still call it somewhat stable. I am disabling AVX and FMA3 instructions in Prime95 to rule them out. I usually set the AVX clocks to around 3 - 3.5 GHz, since I don't use it pretty much at all.

My 7900X before delid could barely run Cinebench at 4.7 GHz without the temps nearing 100c. CB is a realistic workload after all.

Setting TjMax lower will trigger the CPU to drop clocks down to 1.2 GHz when hitting the throttling point?


----------



## WingZero30

Anyone using 7980XE on Gigabyte Aorus Gaming 9 mobo ?

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Got it solved.
> It had nothing to do with the drivers, but with an update patch MS has at some point released.
> Hard to tell which one, because the media I used had over 500 updates in total. Never had issues with it with any other platform (Ryzen, TR, Z370, etc), but on X299 all of the USB controllers (both Intel and ASMedia) went dodo (Code 19) if it was installed.
> 
> Using a stock, non-updated original media fixed the issue. USB drivers had to be included of course to avoid the need for PS2 and ODD.


lol - I just experienced a zillion MSW7 updates and restarts... working well here too (tho I still have the USB-PS2 emulator enabled - have you now disabled this?)
I can slip the USB drivers in...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Agreed for both, no issues with the Realbench ever (all the versions) and I'll continue to use it for the avx (on) stress (offset -2).
> As for the x264 / x265 you mean the x264 Stability test v2 *(no avx)?*
> What is this X265?
> How about Handbrake?


x264 uses AVX and AVX2. Not AVX512.


----------



## DuraN1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> The state of affairs on these CPU forces you to adapt to the workload that's relevant to you. There is no point running Prime AVX with an offset as a means to test stability if you have no intention of running application that use those instructions. Moreover, you're still throwing a lot of current at it. This is no more than common sense. Prime with or without I haven't ran on my 7900x system once, and I don't intend to. There's more efficient ways to stress the system without compromise. This is especially applicable to those who are not willing to delid.


So much this. Haven't been using Prime or anything similar to stresstest for years. Stress test what you will use.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Hello,
> 
> How hot are your 7900Xs running when delidded? I am testing my delidded 7900X on EK XE360 rad and DDC pump and at 4.7 [email protected], cache 3.0 [email protected] V, Prime95 (AVX disabled) seems to get the hottest core to well over 90c after something like 20-30 minutes. The rad is not really even pumping very hot let alone warm air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is an improvement over the temps I got earlier; it was pumping around 101-102c on the hottest core before delid only at 4.5 [email protected] V. So I guess the delid is fine and definitely there is an improvement.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Hey, awesome and detailed reply!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am using P95 28.5 with AVX/FMA3 instructions disabled and ambient is around 22-23 degrees.
> I need some more CLU or grab the Conductonaut. The CLU I used was never opened but it seems I ran out of it already although I didn't reapply it even at once. Only a small fractions were lost at first application when I took some of it out with a Q-tip from the die. Maybe more CLU then just to check if I have enough applied already. If I ever delid my 7980XE (probably after a year or when next chips are announced), then I'll use Conductonaut.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I usually run blend. When the stress switches to small FFTs, then the temps will usually get to the highest point. I'll try the 1344K too when I have more time.
> Nothing really. But that's how Prime95 has always been. If I want to be stable in Prime95 I'll have to dial back my settings. But then again there are people who still only run IBT for 10 rounds and call it stable and post into forums when they run into issues.


I ran Prime95 28.5 for 30 minutes with AVX/FMA3 disabled as you did. At least I think I disabled AVX/FMA3. I never turn that stuff off so please check the screen shots and let me know if I did that right. It's nice and cool in my office so ambient average for test 1 was 18.1c and test 2 was 18.6c. I ran two different tests to show the difference between simply running manual or adaptive voltage the same for all cores versus running a "per core" overclock with voltages adjusted to requirements of each individual core.

You can see that despite a slight rise in ambient temp, the "per core" over clock with individually tweaked voltages is slightly cooler as expected. Peak core dropped from 75c to 72c and peak package temp dropped from 81c to 77c. Average power from the wall dropped about 40w as well.

With all cores running at the same voltage, the absolute minimum that I could run Prime95 blend at was 1.195v, but with individually tweaked cores, that minimum window ranged from 1.155v to a max of 1.19v for the worst core. Even the worst core runs slightly better, which I suspect is do to the overall reduction of power and heat.

Shortly after delidding, I went through a lot of testing to arrive at the stable individual core voltages, but they scale beautifully as you change clocks. Most, to include myself sometimes, will not see much value in going through this much work to reduce temps by 3c or 4c. I guess it could be of some help if you were running on the ragged edge.

As I was running these tests I was reminded of why I don't care to do this too much. Test 1 was pulling ~630w from the wall during certain FFTs and Test 2 was pulling ~590w during the same tests. I do have just over ~110w of cooling draw, but the rest is system. Not good for CPU life at all.

With all of this said, I suspect that you may need to look at reapplying your LM and possibly adding more surface area (rads) to your water loop.


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Hey, awesome and detailed reply!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I need some more CLU or grab the Conductonaut.
> 
> If I want to be stable in Prime95 I'll have to dial back my settings.
> 
> My 7900X before delid could barely run Cinebench at 4.7 GHz without the temps nearing 100c. CB is a realistic workload after all.


I used the conductonaut and it's outstanding. For some reason I got the 5g tube and it should be good for about 50 delids lol.
Even worse, the fleabay shop I ordered from took 2 months to deliver, meanwhile I'd ordered another one from performance pcs, which took 5 days across the world btw.
So now I have enough for 100 delids.
You need less than a rice grain of it on the chip.
Maybe I'll open up a delid service in New Zealand.

Anyway, to the point.
Being stable in Prime 95 is great if that's the software you use every day.
Which obviously it isn't.
I use Cinebench because my CAD software uses Cinerender. The best stress testing is using the software you usually use.

It seems like theres this element of "look how cool (no pun intended) I am I can run Prime 95 for 1 year solid" sort of mentality here. Which is complete rubbish unless your only objective is to overclock, not actually use the computer for anything useful.
I overclock, use the computer for a month and monitor it properly. If it's stable it's a good clock.
If you want my advice, delete Prime 95 from your computer and your temps will get way better. Cheaper than Conductonaut anyway.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Setting TjMax lower will trigger the CPU to drop clocks down to 1.2 GHz when hitting the throttling point?


No it doesn't. When a core goes over Tj.Max it doesn't drop to 1.2 GHz. It drops by just enough multiplier buckets to get it back under Tj.Max. If you're on adaptive voltage, that goes down as well. So in practice, it only drops about 100 - 300 MHz. It's VRM throttling that drops it all the way down to 1.2 GHz.

What I'm trying to say here is that you can tune your overclock so it doesn't throttle under the workloads you care about. And for everything else that's more stressful, let them go over Tj.Max and throttle down the ~300 MHz. That way all workloads run at the same temperature with only the clock speed being the factor that compensates for their stress differential.

You could even probably get away without any AVX offsets if your system is able to handle the momentary current spike before the chip hits Tj.Max and throttles down to compensate.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> No it doesn't. When a core goes over Tj.Max it doesn't drop to 1.2 GHz. It drops by just enough multiplier buckets to get it back under Tj.Max. If you're on adaptive voltage, that goes down as well. So in practice, it only drops about 100 - 300 MHz. It's VRM throttling that drops it all the way down to 1.2 GHz.
> 
> What I'm trying to say here is that you can tune your overclock so it doesn't throttle under the workloads you care about. And for everything else that's more stressful, let them go over Tj.Max and throttle down the ~300 MHz. That way all workloads run at the same temperature with only the clock speed being the factor that compensates for their stress differential.
> 
> You could even probably get away without any AVX offsets if your system is able to handle the momentary current spike before the chip hits Tj.Max and throttles down to compensate.


I've never tried this "tuning" method - have you?

I theory it sounds pretty ideal, but theory/=practice.

More parts arrived today, once I have something back together, I may try this. Particularly for longer (multi-day) runs, this is my ideal product from Intel/AMD - "just peg it as high as it can go making timing within the temp/power limits I spec".


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I've never tried this "tuning" method - have you?
> 
> I theory it sounds pretty ideal, but theory/=practice.
> 
> More parts arrived today, once I have something back together, I may try this. Particularly for longer (multi-day) runs, this is my ideal product from Intel/AMD - "just peg it as high as it can go making timing within the temp/power limits I spec".


I was also skeptical at first. But when I tried it, it worked out well pretty well. So I've been running with that "tuning" for 2 months now.

Compiling Code: 4.5 GHz, temps at 80 - 85C - occasional throttle to 4.4 GHz on hottest core.
Any sort of heavy SSE application (non-AVX): instant throttle to 4.3 - 4.4 GHz via Tj.Max 85C
Prime95 AVX/FMA: 4.1 GHz (-4 offset) - no throttle (temps at 80C-ish)
y-cruncher AVX512: 3.8 GHz (-7 offset) - 80 - 85C, occasional throttle to 3.7 GHz on hottest core.
What is also great about this approach is that it inherently compensates for any "hot cores".

Presumably, this is exactly what the purpose of turbo and throttling is. But in the past, the Tj.Max was locked to 100C+ which is uselessly high for anyone wanting to run at Tj.Max for 24/7.

There's two catches though:

Some temperature monitors start giving out bad readings when you change Tj.Max since they don't expect Tj.Max to be changed. Core Temp reads it correctly.
The temp monitors cannot show a number higher than Tj.Max since the sensors give "distance to Tj.Max" which cannot be negative. So the real temperature might be a bit higher from the time it exceeds Tj.Max to when the CPU can respond by throttling.
Since the performance is now a function of the temperatures and environment, you'll lose benchmark consistency if the workload is hitting the throttle point.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I was also skeptical at first. But when I tried it, it worked out well pretty well. So I've been running with that "tuning" for 2 months now.
> 
> Compiling Code: 4.5 GHz, temps at 80 - 85C - occasional throttle to 4.4 GHz on hottest core.
> Any sort of heavy SSE application (non-AVX): instant throttle to 4.3 - 4.4 GHz via Tj.Max 85C
> Prime95 AVX/FMA: 4.1 GHz (-4 offset) - no throttle (temps at 80C-ish)
> y-cruncher AVX512: 3.8 GHz (-7 offset) - 80 - 85C, occasional throttle to 3.7 GHz on hottest core.
> What is also great about this approach is that it inherently compensates for any "hot cores".
> 
> Presumably, this is exactly what the purpose of turbo and throttling is. But in the past, the Tj.Max was locked to 100C+ which is uselessly high for anyone wanting to run at Tj.Max for 24/7.
> 
> There's two catches though:
> 
> Some temperature monitors start giving out bad readings when you change Tj.Max since they don't expect Tj.Max to be changed. Core Temp reads it correctly.
> The temp monitors cannot show a number higher than Tj.Max since the sensors give "distance to Tj.Max" which cannot be negative. So the real temperature might be a bit higher from the time it exceeds Tj.Max to when the CPU can respond by throttling.
> Since the performance is now a function of the temperatures and environment, you'll lose benchmark consistency if the workload is hitting the throttle point.


Yeah, this would be a DD setup so precise consistency of benchmarks would not be a big concern. I like the idea of not having to monitor temps so closely for multi-day runs depending on the time of year. If you tune up your system in November, come July/August, you "gon' learn" what it really does under sustained load with the case heat soaked (even more so when the entire basement (cough, server room) is warmed up by Terra-FLOP goodness... )


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I was also skeptical at first. But when I tried it, it worked out well pretty well. So I've been running with that "tuning" for 2 months now.
> 
> Compiling Code: 4.5 GHz, temps at 80 - 85C - occasional throttle to 4.4 GHz on hottest core.
> Any sort of heavy SSE application (non-AVX): instant throttle to 4.3 - 4.4 GHz via Tj.Max 85C
> Prime95 AVX/FMA: 4.1 GHz (-4 offset) - no throttle (temps at 80C-ish)
> y-cruncher AVX512: 3.8 GHz (-7 offset) - 80 - 85C, occasional throttle to 3.7 GHz on hottest core.
> What is also great about this approach is that it inherently compensates for any "hot cores".
> 
> Presumably, this is exactly what the purpose of turbo and throttling is. But in the past, the Tj.Max was locked to 100C+ which is uselessly high for anyone wanting to run at Tj.Max for 24/7.
> 
> There's two catches though:
> 
> Some temperature monitors start giving out bad readings when you change Tj.Max since they don't expect Tj.Max to be changed. Core Temp reads it correctly.
> The temp monitors cannot show a number higher than Tj.Max since the sensors give "distance to Tj.Max" which cannot be negative. So the real temperature might be a bit higher from the time it exceeds Tj.Max to when the CPU can respond by throttling.
> Since the performance is now a function of the temperatures and environment, you'll lose benchmark consistency if the workload is hitting the throttle point.


I don't know if all X299 bios' have it, but I use the max watts setting on my Gigabyte. I set it to 300 watts which is about 80deg with my cooling. Works a treat because there is no throttling and under load the CPU just ramps up to that wattage and sits there.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *surfinchina*
> 
> I don't know if all X299 bios' have it, but I use the max watts setting on my Gigabyte. I set it to 300 watts which is about 80deg with my cooling. Works a treat because there is no throttling and under load the CPU just ramps up to that wattage and sits there.


My 300, 350, 400 and 450 W limit settings didn't seem to do anything at all on R6E - at least according to SIV.

I moved it over that range and nothing seemed to change - the wattage was a reflection of core voltage*freqeuncy*load.

DIdn't notice any fall-off in benchmarks at 4.5 (~390W peak 420W) or 4.6 (405W peak 450W) with any of those settings.

I might try again with better cooling now installed. Maybe I missed it in all the permutation?


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> My 300, 350, 400 and 450 W limit settings didn't seem to do anything at all on R6E - at least according to SIV.
> 
> I moved it over that range and nothing seemed to change - the wattage was a reflection of core voltage*freqeuncy*load.
> 
> DIdn't notice any fall-off in benchmarks at 4.5 (~390W peak 420W) or 4.6 (405W peak 450W) with any of those settings.
> 
> I might try again with better cooling now installed. Maybe I missed it in all the permutation?


Hmmm. Some of the new bios' seem to be a bit unfinished.
It'd be a brilliant solution because watts = amps x volts and amps is the killer, so you could do a simple sum to calculate max amps.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *surfinchina*
> 
> Hmmm. Some of the new bios' seem to be a bit unfinished.
> It'd be a brilliant solution because watts = amps x volts and amps is the killer, so you could do a simple sum to calculate max amps.


This was the 0802 bios - I haven't tried the 1xxx bios yet.... been waiting for some parts to more closely approximate the final form of this machine.

Ideally, I'd like to stick to two dedicated-loop 360XE rads (cpu + gpu). Testbed is a 420 push on the CPU (air-cooled GPU) which works VERY well, but the 360XE setup affords me a smaller form-factor. 360XE (60mm) push/pull should be comparable/superior to the 420 (45mm) push.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *surfinchina*
> 
> Hmmm. Some of the new bios' seem to be a bit unfinished.
> It'd be a brilliant solution because watts = amps x volts and amps is the killer, so you could do a simple sum to calculate max amps.


Yep...

and Intel, if you are listening - next HEDT chip, where you put the 100G Fabric connector on the Xeon chips, add pads, screws, posts, connector, etc... for "ludicrous current" paths to the inter-poser pretty please...









I more than understand the desire to keep "consumer" sockets to a reasonable pin count - so there's the compromise. Some franken bolts on the neck for added current.









The liquid helium crowd will hit 10GHz and 2kW. water coolers will hit 5GHz and 500-600W. Ln2 something in betweeen. Everybody wins lol...


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> This was the 0802 bios - I haven't tried the 1xxx bios yet.... been waiting for some parts to more closely approximate the final form of this machine.
> 
> Ideally, I'd like to stick to two dedicated-loop 360XE rads (cpu + gpu). Testbed is a 420 push on the CPU (air-cooled GPU) which works VERY well, but the 360XE setup affords me a smaller form-factor. 360XE (60mm) push/pull should be comparable/superior to the 420 (45mm) push.


In any loop the temp at any point only differs by a tiny amount - on account of the speed of the fluid through it.
So, unless you want the dedicated loop for aesthetic reasons, you'd be way better off to share the rads.
I don't game so I never have load to GPU and CPU at the same time. In fact my GPU never loads up, I have a good one only for the number of shaders it has (I can fit a big model in it without shifting it out to normal memory).
However, 2 loops with different fluids might look very nice...
As an aside, I'm hanging out for the upcoming Primochill Vue (aurora type) fluid. Looks great!


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *surfinchina*
> 
> In any loop the temp at any point only differs by a tiny amount - on account of the speed of the fluid through it.
> So, unless you want the dedicated loop for aesthetic reasons, you'd be way better off to share the rads.
> I don't game so I never have load to GPU and CPU at the same time. In fact my GPU never loads up, I have a good one only for the number of shaders it has (I can fit a big model in it without shifting it out to normal memory).
> However, 2 loops with different fluids might look very nice...
> As an aside, I'm hanging out for the upcoming Primochill Vue (aurora type) fluid. Looks great!


71.82% aesthetic the remainder is my own anecdotal observations that the dedicated loops were just easier to tune and performed better.

Also easier to manage since I tend to move things around a lot.


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> 71.82% aesthetic the remainder is my own anecdotal observations that the dedicated loops were just easier to tune and performed better.
> 
> Also easier to manage since I tend to move things around a lot.


Yes true that. My fans all ramp up with CPU but if GPU gets hot they won't do that.
However, I just changed to hard tubing and that, with the monoblock, means it's a major job to change anything. Which is great because now I have to spend more time making money for all this stuff instead of playing


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I've never tried this "tuning" method - have you?
> 
> I theory it sounds pretty ideal, but theory/=practice.
> 
> More parts arrived today, once I have something back together, I may try this. Particularly for longer (multi-day) runs, this is my ideal product from Intel/AMD - "just peg it as high as it can go making timing within the temp/power limits I spec".


we had the ASUS Thermal Control Tool for x99 which allowed you to tame this issue. Would be great on this platform!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Tested a quick 4600/3000 at 1.134V/0.970V on core/cache. Seemed fine for a short RB 2.56 run. Max temp was 56'C (Package max was on 58'C) on full AVX load. Package power was 130 watts or so. Not bad for a AVX stresstest? VRMs was around 50-52'C.

I'm wondering if the performance difference between a 5 ghz 8700K would be big at 1440P/144hz, or if I would notice it if I turned the mesh up to 3.3 ghz (1.200V) compared to 3.0ghz at sub 1.000V.

Mem is already: 4x4 4000mhz-17-19-19-36-1t-300


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> we had the ASUS Thermal Control Tool for x99 which allowed you to tame this issue. Would be great on this platform!


Not a fan of windows apps for this stuff:
1. linux computes
2. windows not stable, I don't want it controlling this stuff...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Tested a quick 4600/3000 at 1.134V/0.970V on core/cache. Seemed fine for a short RB 2.56 run. Max temp was 56'C (Package max was on 58'C) on full AVX load. Package power was 130 watts or so. Not bad for a AVX stresstest? VRMs was around 50-52'C.
> 
> I'm wondering if the performance difference between a 5 ghz 8700K would be big at 1440P/144hz, or if I would notice it if I turned the mesh up to 3.3 ghz (1.200V) compared to 3.0ghz at sub 1.000V.
> 
> Mem is already: 4x4 4000mhz-17-19-19-36-1t-300


8700K vs what?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Not a fan of windows apps for this stuff:
> 1. linux computes
> 2. windows not stable, I don't want it controlling this stuff...


it was incorporated into the bios on Z270 (Apex) - so ASUS recognized your concern.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 8700K vs what?
> it was incorporated into the bios on Z270 (Apex) - so ASUS recognized your concern.


Yep - win10 was a step forward when it came out, but they've destabilized it in increasing degrees since that time with each update.

That and OS-level control is not ideal here - the CPU itself can switch this sort of thing on a mS boundary (1mS if memory serves for this arch). The OS will "get there when we get there" subject to load, interrupt latency, etc... last I read, best case was 20mS via the OS, but a delayed procedure call can be 100-300mS just to service the interrupt.

It's best handled via tables/registers in the chip in terms of responsiveness.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 8700K vs what?
> it was incorporated into the bios on Z270 (Apex) - so ASUS recognized your concern.


This 7800X I have.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> This 7800X I have.


ah... I think the 8700K at 5.0 would impress you.


----------



## Jpmboy

hey - anyone have an issue with Rrealbench OpenCL dll "not found" after 1709 Creature Update? I tried reinstalling it with the Intel openCL loader, but no change. ????

same on 2 machines here.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> hey - anyone have an issue with Rrealbench OpenCL dll "not found" after 1709 Creature Update? I tried reinstalling it with the Intel openCL loader, but no change. ????
> 
> same on 2 machines here.


Using Real Bench 2.56 on 1709 and no issues. Did not update to 1709 but installed iso from a uefi usb.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> hey - anyone have an issue with Rrealbench OpenCL dll "not found" after 1709 Creature Update? I tried reinstalling it with the Intel openCL loader, but no change. ????
> 
> same on 2 machines here.


I ran into this at one point - I think I ended up doing a clean install of the Nvidia drivers to resolve it.


----------



## HeyThereGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ah... I think the 8700K at 5.0 would impress you.


How about 7900X vs 8700K for 1440p at 144hz?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Using Real Bench 2.56 on 1709 and no issues. Did not update to 1709 but installed a iso from a uefi usb.


I wish I had... delayed all updates with gpedit.msc (feature and quality) until I move the rig and installed the 7980XE with a fresh install off the windows loader. ugh.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I ran into this at one point - I think I ended up doing a clean install of the Nvidia drivers to resolve it.


will do.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeyThereGuy*
> 
> How about 7900X vs 8700K for 1440p at 144hz?


10 vs 6 core? depends on the game. A 5.0+ 6-core is pretty daum quick.


----------



## djgar

I can start the OpenCL bench with 2.56 no problem, Windows 1709 build 16299.19.


----------



## carlhil2

I was finally able to reserve for pickup a 7980xe at my local Microcenter, they want $2550, , lolz, good luck getting that from me for a chip that should cost me $2150, including tax. here's hoping for a price match.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I ran into this at one point - I think I ended up doing a clean install of the Nvidia drivers to resolve it.


yeah - ddu and new driver did it.








+1
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I was finally able to reserve for pickup a 7980xe at my local Microcenter, they want $2550, , lolz, good luck getting that from me for a chip that should cost me $2150, including tax. here's hoping for a price match.


I got one from B&H Photo for $1999, no tax. Preorder tho... they held the money for almost 30d before delivery.







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> I can start the OpenCL bench with 2.56 no problem, Windows 1709 build 16299.19.


yeah - zero issue with the x99 rig. it was this x299 and the new(er) Z370


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> hey - anyone have an issue with Rrealbench OpenCL dll "not found" after 1709 Creature Update? I tried reinstalling it with the Intel openCL loader, but no change. ????
> 
> same on 2 machines here.


To fix the problem reload the Video card drivers.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I got one from B&H Photo for $1999, no tax. Preorder tho... they held the money for almost 30d before delivery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yeah - zero issue with the x99 rig. it was this x299 and the new(er) Z370


I might just order from Amazon for $2000 and wait for them to ship it. I still need mobo, so....I was hoping to get chip +mobo for $2500+ at MC,, lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I might just order from Amazon for $2000 and wait for them to ship it. I still need mobo, so....I was hoping to get chip +mobo for $2500+ at MC,, lol.


MC is really jacking the price. THat's usually not their m.o..


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> MC is really jacking the price. THat's usually not their m.o..


Yeah, I am really "disappoint" with them...

If I can find the chip at or below MSRP in a reasonable time, then [email protected]#$ anyone who's charging $2500 for them... (deliidded/binned/value added not included)


----------



## HeyThereGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 10 vs 6 core? depends on the game. A 5.0+ 6-core is pretty daum quick.


Yeah I know it is kind of a strange comparison... I do some moderate 3D modelling & video editing so the 10 core would help me there with render times I just wasn't sure how much I would lose single core wise for gaming. Haven't kept up much on SL-X as to how close it is in IPC to Coffee Lake to really know how much the performance dip of 200-300mhz will make.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HeyThereGuy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 10 vs 6 core? depends on the game. A 5.0+ 6-core is pretty daum quick.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah I know it is kind of a strange comparison... I do some moderate 3D modelling & video editing so the 10 core would help me there with render times I just wasn't sure how much I would lose single core wise for gaming. Haven't kept up much on SL-X as to how close it is in IPC to Coffee Lake to really know how much the performance dip of 200-300mhz will make.
Click to expand...

It is around 2% loss in performance with every 100Hz. For gaming MESH on the skylake X is lower performance in gaming compared to ring bus in Coffee lake.


----------



## ESRCJ

In terms of overclockability, is there much variation between the 7920X, 7940X, 7960X, and 7980XE? I'm currently torn between the 7920X and 7960X. The additional cores would be nice, but I don't want to sacrifice single-core performance once overclocked. I plan on running a custom loop with a 360mm and 480mm rad combo.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ah... I think the 8700K at 5.0 would impress you.


A 5 ghz 7800X vs a 5 ghz 8700K then? I can run my chip at 5000, and bench at 5.1 ghz, but I don't notice the difference expect in Cinebench R15.

I'm sad that I didn't wait for CF-L, but then again. The cost of the 8700K alone is 36-37% higher than what I paid for my 7800X, so not really that sad.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I might just order from Amazon for $2000 and wait for them to ship it. I still need mobo, so....I was hoping to get chip +mobo for $2500+ at MC,, lol.


B&H Photo has them in stock for $2,089.89 right now.


----------



## Nautilus

7900x owner here.

Do you guys recommend applying Conductonaut tim both under and *on* the lid? How much extra temp gain vs non conductive Kryonaut on the lid?

I've used a liquid metal tim on cpu lid before. I know it leaves a darkish stain on the IHS and cooler block. My 6700K's IHS went darker so did the copper block of my Corsair H110i. What about the nickel plated EK Water blocks though? Anybody applied it and observed the results?

It is kind of bad if you wanna sell the cpu and/or waterblock afterwards.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> A 5 ghz 7800X vs a 5 ghz 8700K then? I can run my chip at 5000, and bench at 5.1 ghz, but I don't notice the difference expect in Cinebench R15.
> 
> I'm sad that I didn't wait for CF-L, but then again. The cost of the 8700K alone is 36-37% higher than what I paid for my 7800X, so not really that sad.


6 core and 6 core.. it's a side-grade. Enjoy the 7800X








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> 7900x owner here.
> 
> Do you guys recommend applying Conductonaut tim both under and *on* the lid? How much extra temp gain vs non conductive Kryonaut on the lid?
> 
> I've used a liquid metal tim on cpu lid before. I know it leaves a darkish stain on the IHS and cooler block. My 6700K's IHS went darker so did the copper block of my Corsair H110i. What about the nickel plated EK Water blocks though? Anybody applied it and observed the results?
> 
> It is kind of bad if you wanna sell the cpu and/or waterblock afterwards.


IMO, there is no reason to use LM at the IHS-block interface once you delid the cpu. Just6 use a good TIM like TGK or PK-3, Gelid EX... etc.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> IMO, there is no reason to use LM at the IHS-block interface once you delid the cpu. Just6 use a good TIM like TGK or PK-3, Gelid EX... etc.


100% this


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 6 core and 6 core.. it's a side-grade. Enjoy the 7800X
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMO, there is no reason to use LM at the IHS-block interface once you delid the cpu. Just6 use a good TIM like TGK or PK-3, Gelid EX... etc.


"If more is better, then way too much oughta be just right..." -Carroll Shelby

LM on the IHS might buy you a little - far less so than replacing the goop underneath in this case.

That few degrees might matter, it might not. Depends on:
a. your personal comfort level
b. where you are on the knee of the curve of leakage current/thermals/voltage/timing
c. your ambient starting point for liquid or air cooling

The difference between 51 and 57 is not important.

The difference between 75 and 81 often matters in my experience WRT the knee in the curve mentioned above.

If you've already delidded and don't care about discoloration/warranty issues with the IHS (including SL's requirements) and you have as much left over as you should, then "why not?"

The only reason is slightly more difficult application technique and aluminum, but you shouldn't have AL directly in contact with your IHS anyway - cut that out...


----------



## CptSpig

i9-7980Xe, 7960X and 7940X are in stock at B&H Photo.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=intel%20core%20i9&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=hist-ma&Top+Nav-Search=


----------



## Asus11

any 7740x enthusiasts here?

Team OCN needs your help to submit a decent score on INTEL XTU

it could jump us 20 points if you can score 1600 or more

we are currently 12th, if we had another submission preferably 7740x we would be 2nd










http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/rogocs17_teamedition2/3960/xtu_5ghz

for more information

http://www.overclock.net/t/1638741/hwbot-competition-rog-oc-showdown-team-edition-2-is-live


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Who needs a chiller...?










Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









Window is barerly open, so sucking in cold air. The room is not cold, so a win-win. Just tried out this swtup today as previously the rad would produce alot heat under my desk.


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> any 7740x enthusiasts here?
> 
> Team OCN needs your help to submit a decent score on INTEL XTU
> 
> it could jump us 20 points if you can score 1600 or more
> 
> we are currently 12th, if we had another submission preferably 7740x we would be 2nd
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://oc-esports.io/#!/round/rogocs17_teamedition2/3960/xtu_5ghz
> 
> for more information
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1638741/hwbot-competition-rog-oc-showdown-team-edition-2-is-live


@Jpmboy has one that runs at 5.4 or 5.5GHz, I have one that I ran at 5.1GHz and have not delided it yet until maybe next week.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Artah*
> 
> @Jpmboy has one that runs at 5.4 or 5.5GHz, I have one that I ran at 5.1GHz and have not delided it yet until maybe next week.


Jpm cannot compete only in stage 5

theres like 2 days left on the competition

im going to do stage 2 & 3 tomorrow (Geekbench 3 & WPrime 32)

5.1GHz is more than enough.. with a few tweaks etc you will easily get 1650


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> Jpm cannot compete only in stage 5
> 
> theres like 2 days left on the competition
> 
> im going to do stage 2 & 3 tomorrow (Geekbench 3 & WPrime 32)
> 
> 5.1GHz is more than enough.. with a few tweaks etc you will easily get 1650


built my nephew a rig im suppose to give it to him tomorrow (long overdue). i can sign up now and run it, but after tomorrow i wont have rig. i delid it and its running @5.2.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> built my nephew a rig im suppose to give it to him tomorrow (long overdue). i can sign up now and run it, but after tomorrow i wont have rig. i delid it and its running @5.2.


that would be great, if you need any help with tweaks etc let me know

would be great if you could try stage 1, stage 2, stage 3!

stage 1 is the top 3 submission(we only have 2 atm), stage 2 is top 5! yet we only have 2 submission bringing our average way too low, stage 3 its back to top 3 submission


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> built my nephew a rig im suppose to give it to him tomorrow (long overdue). i can sign up now and run it, but after tomorrow i wont have rig. i delid it and its running @5.2.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


For XTU, use win10 (unless you happen to have a copy of 32bit win8 around







). If you get to doing it post back or PM me for some pointers.








Team OCN can use the subs!


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> For XTU, use win10 (unless you happen to have a copy of 32bit win8 around
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). If you get to doing it post back or PM me for some pointers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Team OCN can use the subs!


first run.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> first run.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


flip to the benchmark tab - what's your max T?
what board, what ram sticks?


----------



## cekim

360XE push/pull does well - better than 420 push - though louder at these numbers, but the drop in temps is nice. So, I'm sticking with 360 dedicated... Will tune down fans for typical loads eventually.

Not sure if what I'm going to do with voltages - this adaptive -0.065 works well so long as AVX is kept low (-8/-5 is my default, I haven't tried to find the limit). Trying to do apples:apples with my 420 setup before I tune more there.

Loving the spread of max temps now:


----------



## DooRules

Been following this thread and trying to get some good pointers from it. Just got my 7980x up and running in the Asus Apex6 mobo.

Currently running 4.5 sync all cores, Vc at 1.17. Tried adaptive but some cores shoot up in Vc and consequently so do temps of course. Tried manual Vc at 1.17 and that seemed better, kept overall temps down.

So with manual mode and Vc @ 1.17 I am getting all around 4400 in Cinebench, 4-5 cores getting up to 95'. No delid yet but I do have the Rockit99 tool here.









I have AVX at stock, AVX512 is -8 offset. VCCIN @ 1.75.

Just tried adaptive with a negative offset as cekin mentioned and that seems to be better for temps as well. Using the EK monoblock for chip and Vrm's. 3 fan Coolstream XE rad.

Don't think I will be waiting too much lomger to delid. Just figured it best to get some sort of baseline before doing so.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> Been following this thread and trying to get some good pointers from it. Just got my 7980x up and running in the Asus Apex6 mobo.
> 
> Currently running 4.5 sync all cores, Vc at 1.17. Tried adaptive but some cores shoot up in Vc and consequently so do temps of course. Tried manual Vc at 1.17 and that seemed better, kept overall temps down.
> 
> So with manual mode and Vc @ 1.17 I am getting all around 4400 in Cinebench, 4-5 cores getting up to 95'. No delid yet but I do have the Rockit99 tool here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have AVX at stock, AVX512 is -8 offset. VCCIN @ 1.75.
> 
> Just tried adaptive with a negative offset as cekin mentioned and that seems to be better for temps as well. Using the EK monoblock for chip and Vrm's. 3 fan Coolstream XE rad.
> 
> Don't think I will be waiting too much lomger to delid. J*ust figured it best to get some sort of baseline before doing so*.


^^ Smart. I still have not delidded mine. Haven't really got to a "must do" for that yet.


----------



## DooRules

Running CB with that negative offset, 0.065 I am still getting all around 4400 for score, Vc running at 1.114 @ 4.5 all cores. High core temp was 92'.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> Running CB with that negative offset, 0.065 I am still getting all around 4400 for score, Vc running at 1.114 @ 4.5 all cores. High core temp was 92'.


keep an eye on package temp when seeing any core hitting the 90s. And after delid, it's _really_ important to watch the package T.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> You have a AVX offset, that's normal, it's not going to run at 4.8Ghz
> IA: Max Turbo Limit was also on the z170 and z270 platform, it's there on my wife's 7700k/Hero machine with a big YES when she hits the turbo max


Thanks for the reply. For whatever reason I dont remember seeing it before but oh well!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

How long would you guys run RB 2.56V to call it stable?

I ran 1 hour on my 7800X with no AVX offset at 4800/3200 at only 1.199V/1.115V with VCCIN at 1.900V I believe. Max temp was 63'C on cores, and 66'C on Package. I don't think I want to push it further. This chip would last a long time, even under heavy load at these settings.










Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## DarknightOCR

Hello.

I come here to ask if anyone has ever had something identical.
For many years I have not burned a CPU, even using LN2.
but now I have a code 00 in the debug.

my 7820x, already used in ln2 1.6V until, alright.
Today I was on the PC normally, at 4.7Ghz, I went overclocking the Asrock program, I up the vcore to 1.45V just to test 2D bench and crash.
no more boot, and still always at 00.

board asrock x299 OC formula.
I suppose it's the cpu that died, but only at 1.45V was instant death.


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarknightOCR*
> 
> Hello.
> 
> I come here to ask if anyone has ever had something identical.
> For many years I have not burned a CPU, even using LN2.
> but now I have a code 00 in the debug.
> 
> my 7820x, already used in ln2 1.6V until, alright.
> Today I was on the PC normally, at 4.7Ghz, I went overclocking the Asrock program, I up the vcore to 1.45V just to test 2D bench and crash.
> no more boot, and still always at 00.
> 
> board asrock x299 OC formula.
> I suppose it's the cpu that died, but only at 1.45V was instant death.


Code 00 and nothing else at post does suggest dead cpu. But 1.45v should not be anywhere near being able to cause instant death. Hopefully it is the board and your cpu is ok.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarknightOCR*
> 
> Hello.
> 
> I come here to ask if anyone has ever had something identical.
> For many years I have not burned a CPU, even using LN2.
> but now I have a code 00 in the debug.
> 
> my 7820x, already used in ln2 1.6V until, alright.
> Today I was on the PC normally, at 4.7Ghz, I went overclocking the Asrock program, I up the vcore to 1.45V just to test 2D bench and crash.
> no more boot, and still always at 00.
> 
> board asrock x299 OC formula.
> I suppose it's the cpu that died, but only at 1.45V was instant death.


Pull the cpu and reset it in the socket... worth a try. And I really would not use OS based tools (like the Asrock or asus tools) to jack up voltages on this platform (yet) - I think after this you wouldn't do that again. do it from bios.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> Code 00 and nothing else at post does suggest dead cpu. But 1.45v should not be anywhere near being able to cause instant death. Hopefully it is the board and your cpu is ok.


Doesn't necessarily have to be instant death. If you're pushing those sorts of volts through these CPU, it's not that much of a surprise that on occasion they will let go


----------



## LunaP

I've also gotten 00 from having just 2 pins unplugged from my 24, as well as accidentally flipping the LN2 switch when I was troubleshooting GPUs.

Not to mention if you're cleaning or updating/disconnecting your loop for anything ( IF WC ) and water somehow gets somewhere u gotta leave it off for a while till its completely dry, since it will also push a 00.


----------



## Martin778

_my 7820x, already used in ln2 *1.6V* until, alright.

_There is the answer, most probably fried CPU. These things are damn fragile since HW-E/BW-E.
You could do just about anything with a Nehalem or a Westmere, even Sandy/Ivy were tough buggers to kill but after that I'd say the reliability went downhill.


----------



## Testier

What would be the maximum voltage for running a 7980XE at 24/7 loading condition(running at peak load for 24/7)? Not delidded if that matters.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> What would be the maximum voltage for running a 7980XE at 24/7 loading condition(running at peak load for 24/7)? Not delidded if that matters.


Temps would limit you before voltage. But 1.25 - 1.275v should be the max for 24/7.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Temps would limit you before voltage. But 1.25 - 1.275v should be the max for 24/7.


Would you say that would be the case for the lower end SK-X SKUS as well?


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Temps would limit you before voltage. But 1.25 - 1.275v should be the max for 24/7.


Thats fair, mostly going to be running at sub 1.1v for stability and temperature reasons.
Also its nice to see someone else from Edmonton here, I actually picked up the one 7980XE from memory express.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Would you say that would be the case for the lower end SK-X SKUS as well?


These chips are pretty new so the knowledge is limited, but I'd think the lower core count cpus like the 7800x can take a tad more 24/7. Probably stick to 1.3v.

Myself would keep the 7820x and 7800x @1.3v. Higher core count, 1.275v max. Have to consider the VRMs too. Just my opinion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> Thats fair, mostly going to be running at sub 1.1v for stability and temperature reasons.
> Also its nice to see someone else from Edmonton here, I actually picked up the one 7980XE from memory express.


Yep would have been nice to buy one, but not enough funds at this time. Have the Apex 299x and 4x8gb 3200MHz cl14 ram, just need the cpu. I'm going 8700k for the time being. Have the cpu in hand, new faster ram coming, just waiting for the Apex.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> These chips are pretty new so the knowledge is limited, but I'd think the lower core count cpus like the 7800x can take a tad more 24/7. Probably stick to 1.3v.
> 
> Myself would keep the 7820x and 7800x @1.3v. Higher core count, 1.275v max. *Have to consider the VRMs too.* Just my opinion
> Yep would have been nice to buy one, but not enough funds at this time. Have the Apex 299x and 4x8gb 3200MHz cl14 ram, just need the cpu. I'm going 8700k for the time being. Have the cpu in hand, new faster ram coming, just waiting for the Apex.


yeah - with a sustained high amperage/watt load, the package and vrm temp start to call the shots.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Temps would limit you before voltage. But 1.25 - 1.275v should be the max for 24/7.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> What would be the maximum voltage for running a 7980XE at 24/7 loading condition(running at peak load for 24/7)? Not delidded if that matters.


As others have said, temps and VRM are going to be much more limiting than core voltage.

We, Intel and BIOS writers need to start thinking in terms of current limits rather than voltage limits. In terms of keeping chips alive with 24/7 settings, voltage has become secondary to the point of silly in the face of AVX512 and 18 (and beyond) cores. The ability to toggle the sheer quantity of gates that we now can in the time that we now can is staggering in terms of the current it moves through the chip.

That said for now, the knobs presented are primarily voltage and temp.

Without delidding, you are going to struggle to cool the 7980xe at those voltages if you seek all-core turbos of 4.4 and beyond (which so far the limited sample I have and have seen on the web 1.25 is 4.6-4.7GHz sort of voltage or 4.5 for lower binned chip. You will need an effective fan, not case air-flow on the VRM even for lower voltages than that.

1.15-1.22 seems to be a typical range for 4.4/4.5 OC - the lower you can get away with the better.

AVX2/512 will push back on that as the 1.15-1.22 will not be enough without ~4+ negative AVX offsets (as much as double that for 512 for me, but I have not tried to find the absolute wall). Delid on custom water, so far, I'm running 4.5 all-core -5 AVX -8 AVX512 either adaptive -0.065 or fixed 1.18v (adaptive has slightly better temps - higher volts on some cores, lower on other, higher peak power, but lower average).

Prior to delid, I could not really get away with a 24/7 OC higher than all-oore 4.4 @ 1.15 and even that pressing the bounds of comfort temp-wise - 85C core happened a lot and I'm not OK with that.

So, short version - shoot for lower volts and lower AVX clocks if you are finding you need those volts and pay more attention to VRM temps and power than those volts to find a "24/7" setup.


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> As others have said, temps and VRM are going to be much more limiting than core voltage.
> 
> We, Intel and BIOS writers need to start thinking in terms of current limits rather than voltage limits. In terms of keeping chips alive with 24/7 settings, voltage has become secondary to the point of silly in the face of AVX512 and 18 (and beyond) cores. The ability to toggle the sheer quantity of gates that we now can in the time that we now can is staggering in terms of the current it moves through the chip.
> 
> That said for now, the knobs presented are primarily voltage and temp.
> 
> Without delidding, you are going to struggle to cool the 7980xe at those voltages if you seek all-core turbos of 4.4 and beyond (which so far the limited sample I have and have seen on the web 1.25 is 4.6-4.7GHz sort of voltage or 4.5 for lower binned chip. You will need an effective fan, not case air-flow on the VRM even for lower voltages than that.
> 
> 1.15-1.22 seems to be a typical range for 4.4/4.5 OC - the lower you can get away with the better.
> 
> AVX2/512 will push back on that as the 1.15-1.22 will not be enough without ~4+ negative AVX offsets (as much as double that for 512 for me, but I have not tried to find the absolute wall). Delid on custom water, so far, I'm running 4.5 all-core -5 AVX -8 AVX512 either adaptive -0.065 or fixed 1.18v (adaptive has slightly better temps - higher volts on some cores, lower on other, higher peak power, but lower average).
> 
> Prior to delid, I could not really get away with a 24/7 OC higher than all-oore 4.4 @ 1.15 and even that pressing the bounds of comfort temp-wise - 85C core happened a lot and I'm not OK with that.
> 
> So, short version - shoot for lower volts and lower AVX clocks if you are finding you need those volts and pay more attention to VRM temps and power than those volts to find a "24/7" setup.


I have no plan of using AVX or AVX 512 applications so I will be running with a -8/-10 offset on both. I am not going to worry about features that I will never use.

I am planning on active cooling the VRM bank on the MSI gaming carbon that I will be using. I will first test memory speeds and such for a month with an AIO and moving to a monoblock later on.

I am planning no more than 4.3ghz.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> I have no plan of using AVX or AVX 512 applications so I will be running with a -8/-10 offset on both.
> 
> I am planning on active cooling the VRM bank on the MSI gaming carbon that I will be using. I will first test memory speeds and such for a month with an AIO and moving to a monoblock later on.
> 
> I am planning no more than 4.3ghz.


AVX2 is SIGNIFICANTLY less taxing than AVX512, -8 (particularly with 4.3GHz) is likely overkill,

Again, its a small sample yet of what you can glean from the internet and your personal experience, but 4.3 should be "easy" and require less than, if not significantly less than 1.20v.

You should have an easier time than I described at 4.3GHz. Even the stock VIDs for my chip have 4.3 under 1.2v on most if not all cores WITHOUT a negative offset. 4.3 was also relatively easy to cool with a 280 rad (push/pull - corsair H110), so you should not have significant issues there. I think I can run 4.3 at ~1.10-1.12 but I need more time with it to be sure of stability.

FWIW, even with a mono-block I'm finding the large caps on the edge of the CPU 8+4 pin connectors are very, very warm during 380-400W continuous load. Need to put an IR thermometer on there next time to decide if the fan I have there even on a monoblock is overkill.


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> AVX2 is SIGNIFICANTLY less taxing than AVX512, -8 (particularly with 4.3GHz) is likely overkill,
> 
> Again, its a small sample yet of what you can glean from the internet and your personal experience, but 4.3 should be "easy" and require less than, if not significantly less than 1.20v.
> 
> You should have an easier time than I described at 4.3GHz. Even the stock VIDs for my chip have 4.3 under 1.2v on most if not all cores WITHOUT a negative offset. 4.3 was also relatively easy to cool with a 280 rad (push/pull - corsair H110), so you should not have significant issues there. I think I can run 4.3 at ~1.10-1.12 but I need more time with it to be sure of stability.
> 
> FWIW, even with a mono-block I'm finding the large caps on the edge of the CPU 8+4 pin connectors are very, very warm during 380-400W continuous load. Need to put an IR thermometer on there next time to decide if the fan I have there even on a monoblock is overkill.


I am going to be running with a kraken x61. I am hoping for sub 1.1v 4.2-4.3ghz. I am concerned about temperature and power draw. I do not want to exceed 330-380w on the power draw.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> I am going to be running with a kraken x61. I am hoping for sub 1.1v 4.2-4.3ghz. I am concerned about temperature and power draw. I do not want to exceed 330-380w on the power draw.


Other than the 1.1v limit (which seems to be a bit of a magic number for various parts of the chip), that all seems very achievable.

Even at 4.5 I'm averaging 350W under "stress test" load (peaks at 402W, but they are momentary). If I drop that to 4.4 all-core, non-AVX, I can easily get that peak down into your range.

BTW on the R6E "Auto" seems to drive VCCIN quite high for no good reason (above 1.85 doesn't seem to offer any stability anywhere in the < 4.7GHz range for me so far). In your experiments, make sure you try clamping that to 1.80-1.85 (LLC5 in my case). Below 1.80, I can find failure points - particularly with AVX, but non-AVX is happy with 1.75v.

If I were trying to set up like yours, I'd look to "by usage" and tier the max multiplier. example: 4.5 for 4-6 cores 4.4 for ~ 8 cores 4.2 for 18 cores.

The individual cores can tolerate much higher voltages per core than the whole chip can handle (current) with all cores running at any given setting. That arrangement runs cool and keeps power in check for 24/7 setups. That's roughly what I did on an AIO waiting for custom loop parts to show up.


----------



## Hydroplane

Looks like I'll be joining the club.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Looks like I'll be joining the club.










Meanwhile, my local Microcenter wants me to pay $2550, lol.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Meanwhile, my local Microcenter wants me to pay $2550, lol.


I had been checking Newegg, Amazon, BHPhoto, and some other sites regularly. Found it new in box (still sealed) on Ebay for 99 cents over MSRP. No tax, free shipping


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> I had been checking Newegg, Amazon, BHPhoto, and some other sites regularly. Found it new in box (still sealed) on Ebay for 99 cents over MSRP. No tax, free shipping


I just need Amazon to get them in so that, hopefully, MC will price-match....might just end up with the 7960x anyways now..if I didn't have this $750 MC gift card to get off....


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I just need Amazon to get them in so that, hopefully, MC will price-match....might just end up with the 7960x anyways now..if I didn't have this $750 MC gift card to get off....


Amazon would have dinged me with $160 in sales tax







I am seeing the 7960X in stock everywhere though. MC wants $1999 for it (plus your local sales tax) when it's $1700 on Newegg and in stock, lol


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> As others have said, temps and VRM are going to be much more limiting than core voltage.
> 
> We, Intel and BIOS writers need to start thinking in terms of current limits rather than voltage limits. In terms of keeping chips alive with 24/7 settings, voltage has become secondary to the point of silly in the face of AVX512 and 18 (and beyond) cores. The ability to toggle the sheer quantity of gates that we now can in the time that we now can is staggering in terms of the current it moves through the chip.
> 
> That said for now, the knobs presented are primarily voltage and temp.
> 
> Without delidding, you are going to struggle to cool the 7980xe at those voltages if you seek all-core turbos of 4.4 and beyond (which so far the limited sample I have and have seen on the web 1.25 is 4.6-4.7GHz sort of voltage or 4.5 for lower binned chip. You will need an effective fan, not case air-flow on the VRM even for lower voltages than that.
> 
> 1.15-1.22 seems to be a typical range for 4.4/4.5 OC - the lower you can get away with the better.
> 
> AVX2/512 will push back on that as the 1.15-1.22 will not be enough without ~4+ negative AVX offsets (as much as double that for 512 for me, but I have not tried to find the absolute wall). Delid on custom water, so far, I'm running 4.5 all-core -5 AVX -8 AVX512 either adaptive -0.065 or fixed 1.18v (adaptive has slightly better temps - higher volts on some cores, lower on other, higher peak power, but lower average).
> 
> Prior to delid, I could not really get away with a 24/7 OC higher than all-oore 4.4 @ 1.15 and even that pressing the bounds of comfort temp-wise - 85C core happened a lot and I'm not OK with that.
> 
> So, short version - shoot for lower volts and lower AVX clocks if you are finding you need those volts and pay more attention to VRM temps and power than those volts to find a "24/7" setup.
> 
> 
> 
> I have no plan of using AVX or AVX 512 applications so I will be running with a -8/-10 offset on both. I am not going to worry about features that I will never use.
> 
> I am planning on active cooling the VRM bank on the MSI gaming carbon that I will be using. I will first test memory speeds and such for a month with an AIO and moving to a monoblock later on.
> 
> I am planning no more than 4.3ghz.
Click to expand...

Chrome browser and some games use AVX.


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Chrome browser and some games use AVX.


Thats fine. I am not concerned about games and browser. Its pretty easy to turbo 4-6 core to a bit higher as well.

AVX2 should be around -5 offset? And AVX512 at -8 offset.


----------



## gijs007

I'm curious does the 7820X have two memory controllers? I see the mesh architecture has two controllers, but I'm not certain if this is the case for all CPU's or only the ones with many cores?

What about Sub-NUMA Clustering? Is this available on the consumer models?


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gijs007*
> 
> I'm curious does the 7820X have two memory controllers? I see the mesh architecture has two controllers, but I'm not certain if this is the case for all CPU's or only the ones with many cores?
> 
> What about Sub-NUMA Clustering? Is this available on the consumer models?


I believe so. The 7800X, 7820X, and 7900X are all based off the same die. The die is 3x4 with 10 spots taken up by cores and the other two by the memory controllers. The 7820X also uses quad channel memory.

Only the 7740X and 7640X are limited to one controller and use dual channel, since they're based on the Kaby Lake die.


----------



## gijs007

I see, I couldn't find any information on this in reviews/Intel website.
I currently have dual-channel memory on my 7820X, would this mean it's only using one memory controller?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> I believe so. The 7800X, 7820X, and 7900X are all based off the same die. The die is 3x4 with 10 spots taken up by cores and the other two by the memory controllers. The 7820X also uses quad channel memory.
> 
> Only the 7740X and 7640X are limited to one controller and use dual channel, since they're based on the Kaby Lake die.


I see, I couldn't find any information on this in reviews/Intel website.
I currently have dual-channel memory on my 7820X, would this mean it's only using one memory controller?


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gijs007*
> 
> I see, I couldn't find any information on this in reviews/Intel website.
> I currently have dual-channel memory on my 7820X, would this mean it's only using one memory controller?
> I see, I couldn't find any information on this in reviews/Intel website.
> I currently have dual-channel memory on my 7820X, would this mean it's only using one memory controller?


I think the controller used would depend on what slots the ram sticks are in. But whether one or two controllers are used, you would still need 4 sticks to get the full quad channel speed.


----------



## Jpmboy

Hey guys - for those of you who take the "Don't taze me bro" approach to stability testing your CPU, this *x264 version* when run with 1.5x the CPU's thread count (so, 54 threads for a 7980XE) for 20 loops gives a pretty good assessment of stability, especially when combined with HCi memtest/GSAT to test the ram and cache (HCi). With a stock TIMed (pigeon pooped) CPU, at 4.4 (AVX -2) with 1.175V vcore, 1.165V cache (30X) and 1.79V VCCIN , LLC 5 on the APEX, (ambient water cooled) Max core T was 81C, package was 85C with a peak of 450W system power (SIV64 - idle is 40W). So far, after this with continuous gaming by a nephew invasion today (~5 hours - how they do that IDK)... no problems at all. This version uses AVX and AVX2, no AVX512.

So - x264V2 run at 1.5x actual thread count seems to be a reasonable way to establish stability without tazing the CPU.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Hey guys - for those of you who take the "Don't taze me bro" approach to stability testing your CPU, this *x264 version* when run with 1.5x the CPU's thread count (so, 54 threads for a 7980XE) for 20 loops gives a pretty good assessment of stability, especially when combined with HCi memtest/GSAT to test the ram and cache (HCi). With a stock TIMed (pigeon pooped) CPU, at 4.4 (AVX -2) with 1.175V vcore, 1.165V cache (30X) and 1.79V VCCIN , LLC 5 on the APEX, (ambient water cooled) Max core T was 81C, package was 85C with a peak of 450W system power (SIV64 - idle is 40W). So far, after this with continuous gaming by a nephew invasion today (~5 hours - how they do that IDK)... no problems at all. This version uses AVX and AVX2, no AVX512.
> 
> So - x264V2 run at 1.5x actual thread count seems to be a reasonable way to establish stability without tazing the CPU.


Thanks for the info.


----------



## Hydroplane

7980XE has shipped, that was fast


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gijs007*
> 
> I see, I couldn't find any information on this in reviews/Intel website.
> I currently have dual-channel memory on my 7820X, would this mean it's only using one memory controller?
> I see, I couldn't find any information on this in reviews/Intel website.
> I currently have dual-channel memory on my 7820X, would this mean it's only using one memory controller?


do yoiu have it configured as dual channel (by slot population) or are you saying you populated the slots with memory sold as a dual channel kit... what MB? what ram kit? what Slots?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Thanks for the info.


hopefully helpful to someone... and CPU-sparing.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Thanks for the info.


CptSpig, how do you like the Trident Z ram? Which specific kit do you have? I will probably go with the same setup as you (4 x 8GB on the Apex)


----------



## Section31

I am wondering if anyone is encountering such issues. My motherboard (x299 apex) is having issues with its voltage. Currently i am running negative offset voltage to correct running adaptive voltage of 1.30 volts with either an 7900x (at 4.6ghz) and 7920x (delidded at 4.6ghz). Even i drop the frequency it still runs at near 1.30 volts. My ram kit (32GB DDR4-4000Mhz Trident Z 18-19-19-39)) was running at 1.37volts at starts and now runs at 1.39 volts to run. I am trying to nail down the source of the voltage issues.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> CptSpig, how do you like the Trident Z ram? Which specific kit do you have? I will probably go with the same setup as you (4 x 8GB on the Apex)


I have this kit https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16q-32gtzkk I really like this memory. I would recommend it in a heart beat.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Section31*
> 
> I am wondering if anyone is encountering such issues. My motherboard (x299 apex) is having issues with its voltage. Currently i am running negative offset voltage to correct running adaptive voltage of 1.30 volts with either an 7900x (at 4.6ghz) and 7920x (delidded at 4.6ghz). Even i drop the frequency it still runs at near 1.30 volts. My ram kit (32GB DDR4-4000Mhz Trident Z 18-19-19-39)) was running at 1.37volts at starts and now runs at 1.39 volts to run. I am trying to nail down the source of the voltage issues.


need more info - post some bios screen shots.. when using adaptive, disable Autonomous C-States , and disable Speed Shift. Disable VR Fault


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I have this kit https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16q-32gtzkk I really like this memory. I would recommend it in a heart beat.


Thanks, looks like it's out of stock everywhere though







I'm looking at these or these, just have to decide whether I want white to match everything else or a hint of orange to match my GPUs.

Pretty bizarre how the 3200 is $413 vs $376 for the 3466, same timings and everything


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Thanks, looks like it's out of stock everywhere though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm looking at these or these, just have to decide whether I want white to match everything else or a hint of orange to match my GPUs.
> 
> Pretty bizarre how the 3200 is $413 vs $376 for the 3466, same timings and everything


you are better off getting a 3200c14-14-14 kit than either of the two you linked. Basically these are the same ICs as the 3600c16-16-16 kits.


----------



## gijs007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> do yoiu have it configured as dual channel (by slot population) or are you saying you populated the slots with memory sold as a dual channel kit... what MB? what ram kit? what Slots?
> hopefully helpful to someone... and CPU-sparing.


I'm having G.Skill Trident Z RGB F4-3200C16D-16GTZR (2 dimms) installed in dual channel mode (A1 and C1 channel). I'm considering selling them and getting a 4 dimm kit or buying another 2 dimm kit.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gijs007*
> 
> I'm having G.Skill Trident Z RGB F4-3200C16D-16GTZR (2 dimms) installed in dual channel mode (A1 and C1 channel). I'm considering selling them and getting a 4 dimm kit or buying another 2 dimm kit.


what does the cpuZ memory tab say for channel config? wouldn't dual channel be slots a1 and B1? (I think you have 2 sticks in quad channel config?)
yeah - get 4 sticks.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> what does the cpuZ memory tab say for channel config? wouldn't dual channel be slots a1 and B1? (I think you have 2 sticks in quad channel config?)
> yeah - get 4 sticks.


Dang Jpmboy. JayzTwoCents just broke your single GPU Timespy world record with the help of kingpin lol...and he called you out on it too: 




20 mins in lol


----------



## arrow0309

Thinking to get a new ram kit, those TridentZ RGB, so swapping from these I'm using right now:

https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7834/skill-tridentz-ddr4-3200-32gb-ram-kit-review/index.html

To these 3600 c16 rgb:

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/g.skill-trident-z-rgb-32gb-4x8gb-ddr4-pc4-28800c16-3600mhz-quad-channel-kit-f4-3600c16q-32gtzr-my-10m-gs.html

Will it be an upgrade really (I do like the rgb effect)?
Performance wise as well?


----------



## vmanuelgm

Wolfenstein II gameplay on 7980xe.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Dang Jpmboy. JayzTwoCents just broke your single GPU Timespy world record with the help of kingpin lol...and he called you out on it too:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20 mins in lol


Several OC.NET mates are in that list!!! xDDD


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> Wolfenstein II gameplay on 7980xe.


Looks smooth. I noticed almost perfect load balancing across all threads on my 7920x. Don't see that very often in games.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> Wolfenstein II gameplay on 7980xe.
> 
> 
> 
> Looks smooth. I noticed almost perfect load balancing across all threads on my 7920x. Don't see that very often in games.
Click to expand...

The (cpu wise) lightest goty lmao
You guys should try the new ACO, put your hcc cpus at work please


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Dang Jpmboy. JayzTwoCents just broke your single GPU Timespy world record with the help of kingpin lol...and he called you out on it too:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20 mins in lol


Even I have better timespy extreme cpu score


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> Looks smooth. I noticed almost perfect load balancing across all threads on my 7920x. Don't see that very often in games.


Yep, the gameplay is smooth.

Tried several games including Divinity 2, Crysis 3, Witcher 3, and very happy.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> The (cpu wise) lightest goty lmao
> You guys should try the new ACO, put your hcc cpus at work please


Gonna download the ACO and record a gameplay.


----------



## arrow0309

Prior to the delid (cause I just did it the day before yesterday) I saw 65°C on this game.
Now it's lower by 10°


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Prior to the delid (cause I just did it the day before yesterday) I saw 65°C on this game.
> Now it's lower by 10°


Very nice.

Did u relid or leave it unglued?


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Prior to the delid (cause I just did it the day before yesterday) I saw 65°C on this game.
> Now it's lower by 10°
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very nice.
> 
> Did u relid or leave it unglued?
Click to expand...

Unglued, lots of CLP








More infos, pics and results here (in Italian):

http://www.hwupgrade.it/forum/showpost.php?p=45149673&postcount=1382

http://www.hwupgrade.it/forum/showpost.php?p=45150365&postcount=1394

I've lost a nice 15° on both X264 v2 and Realbench v2.56.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Unglued, lots of CLP
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More infos, pics and results here (in Italian):
> 
> http://www.hwupgrade.it/forum/showpost.php?p=45149673&postcount=1382
> 
> http://www.hwupgrade.it/forum/showpost.php?p=45150365&postcount=1394
> 
> I've lost a nice 15° on both X264 v2 and Realbench v2.56.


Great!!!

Why using CLP over CLU or Conducto???


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> Great!!!
> 
> Why using CLP over CLU or Conducto???


Well, I've always been using Coollaboratory liquid metals, lately only CLP and I simply continue to think it's the best all around.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Well, I've always been using Coollaboratory liquid metals, lately only CLP and I simply continue to think it's the best all around.


But it has worse specs than CLU and Conducto... These ones should bring a bit better temperatures.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> But it has worse specs than CLU and Conducto... These ones should bring a bit better temperatures.


What is better? 1-2'C or 5-6'C?


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> What is better? 1-2'C or 5-6'C?


Which is the specific question???

ambient degrees for human beings???

xDDD

http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/liquid-metal-showdown-thermal-grizzly-conductonaut-vs-cool-laboratory-liquid-ultra-pro.791489/

http://www.overclock.net/t/1351984/coollaboratory-liquid-ultra-vs-liquid-pro-vs-phobya-liquid-metal


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I got CLP on my 7800X.. Would you advise to re-paste..?


----------



## gijs007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> what does the cpuZ memory tab say for channel config? wouldn't dual channel be slots a1 and B1? (I think you have 2 sticks in quad channel config?)
> yeah - get 4 sticks.


Yup, according to the manual this is for dual channel. The ASUS x299 E-gaming board has 8 slots.
CPU-Z and AIDA64 reports dual channel mode being used.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I got CLP on my 7800X.. Would you advise to re-paste..?


Asking me???

Most of mates use Conducto or CLU to delid. Very few CLP...

But some say CLP works better than CLU in their systems. So u'd better try for yourself.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1351984/coollaboratory-liquid-ultra-vs-liquid-pro-vs-phobya-liquid-metal

http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/liquid-metal-showdown-thermal-grizzly-conductonaut-vs-cool-laboratory-liquid-ultra-pro.791489/


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I might try to re-paste once I'm doing my yearly maintenance. I need to glue the IHS back to the PCB one time. So I might try it one day.

Under Realbench V2.56 with no AVX offset, cores are at sub 70'C on max peak, and package is sub 75'C at 4900/3200 at 1.270-1.275/1.115V. Might go back to 4800mhz... 7-9'C colder for only 100mhz less in speed.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I might try to re-paste once I'm doing my yearly maintenance. I need to glue the IHS back to the PCB one time. So I might try it one day.
> 
> Under Realbench V2.56 with no AVX offset, cores are at sub 70'C on max peak, and package is sub 75'C at 4900/3200 at 1.270-1.275/1.115V. Might go back to 4800mhz... 7-9'C colder for only 100mhz less in speed.


U have nice temperatures.

As u said, u can try when repasting in the near future.










http://www.overclock.net/t/1351984/coollaboratory-liquid-ultra-vs-liquid-pro-vs-phobya-liquid-metal/100#post_20492214


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Dang Jpmboy. JayzTwoCents just broke your single GPU Timespy world record with the help of kingpin lol...and he called you out on it too:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20 mins in lol


lol, jayz needed the help.. and LN2.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I got CLP on my 7800X.. Would you advise to re-paste..?


CLP is fine. CLU and TGC are gonna perform the same and each is only as good as the application.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gijs007*
> 
> Yup, according to the manual this is for dual channel. The ASUS x299 E-gaming board has 8 slots.
> CPU-Z and AIDA64 reports dual channel mode being used.


ah, for some reason I thought you were running the Apex. again.. yeah, get 4 sticks.


----------



## vmanuelgm

In my experience, Conductonaut brings better temps in case of application over the IHS than CLU, 2-3 celsius degrees.

Talking about the DIE, I only made a comparison in gpus, obtaining the same temperatures between the CLU and Conducto.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Thinking to get a new ram kit, those TridentZ RGB, so swapping from these I'm using right now:
> 
> https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7834/skill-tridentz-ddr4-3200-32gb-ram-kit-review/index.html
> 
> To these 3600 c16 rgb:
> 
> https://www.overclockers.co.uk/g.skill-trident-z-rgb-32gb-4x8gb-ddr4-pc4-28800c16-3600mhz-quad-channel-kit-f4-3600c16q-32gtzr-my-10m-gs.html
> 
> Will it be an upgrade really (I do like the rgb effect)?
> Performance wise as well?


I have that 3600 c16 kit able to do 4000 1.410 Vdimm .8000 vsa and 1.0100 vccio 16-17-16-36 cr1 great kit highly recommended.


----------



## Martin778

But why would you? They are identical inside.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> But why would you? They are identical inside.


wut?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> wut?


All sand and metal inside amiright?


----------



## Jpmboy




----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


All sand and metal inside? Care to test that hypothesis


----------



## Jpmboy

_"good boy"_


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> All sand and metal inside? Care to test that hypothesis


ok, but you first....









Per Heisenberg and Schrodinger, it cannot be directly tested, only approximated or expressed probabilistically...









There is magic smoke in there per Motorola which we must not let out...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> ok, but you first....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Per Heisenberg and Schrodinger, it cannot be directly tested, only approximated or expressed probabilistically...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is magic smoke in there per Motorola which we must not let out...


I know where this is going, but I don't know where it is.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I know where this is going, but I don't know where it is.


Where ever that is, it will be $200 higher tomorrow if it involves DDR4...









Need to do more, but this regression of performance of SKLX (slower than HW/BW) WRT heavy IPC (shared memory/thread-to-thread communication) is pretty painful if you run into it. I can crank the mesh speed and watch it reduce, but stability is hard to come by beyond 3.1GHz (vs BW's 3.7 wall and HW 4.2-4.4 depending on the chip).

I need to play around more with memory, which intuitively should not matter much if the mesh is the bottleneck, but 1T vs 2T got me to near parity between 4.5GHz SKLX x18 cores x 3200C14 and 3.8GHz HW x18 cores x 2133C15 (though that's a pretty horrifying "parity" given the core and memory speed disparity).

The real question I have is whether the 6-channel memory of the 6154 could possible restore anything here or whether this architecture is just gonna blow for such applications and needs either AVX or completely disjointed threads to be worth it?

Given the regression above, a 3.7GHz 6154 would a very painful drop in real throughput... Hey, maybe I'll save some money and stick with my herd of 2696v3's and wait for the next xeon generation. I really never pondered the thought of a regression of this magnitude. I figured it might not get too much faster, but... yikes...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Where ever that is, it will be $200 higher tomorrow if it involves DDR4...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Need to do more, but this regression of performance of SKLX (slower than HW/BW) WRT heavy IPC (shared memory/thread-to-thread communication) is pretty painful if you run into it. I can crank the mesh speed and watch it reduce, but stability is hard to come by beyond 3.1GHz (vs BW's 3.7 wall and HW 4.2-4.4 depending on the chip).
> 
> I need to play around more with memory, which intuitively should not matter much if the mesh is the bottleneck, but 1T vs 2T got me to near parity between 4.5GHz SKLX x18 cores x 3200C14 and 3.8GHz HW x18 cores x 2133C15 (though that's a pretty horrifying "parity" given the core and memory speed disparity).
> 
> The real question I have is whether the 6-channel memory of the 6154 could possible restore anything here or whether this architecture is just gonna blow for such applications and needs either AVX or completely disjointed threads to be worth it?
> 
> Given the regression above, a 3.7GHz 6154 would a very painful drop in real throughput... Hey, maybe I'll save some money and stick with my herd of 2696v3's and wait for the next xeon generation. I really never pondered the thought of a regression of this magnitude. I figured it might not get too much faster, but... yikes...


it's gotta be related to your specific use needs. But hey - what a first world problem... "stick with my herd of 2696v3's"


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> it's gotta be related to your specific use needs. But hey - what a first world problem... "stick with my herd of 2696v3's"


Yeah, yeah.... It's a small herd and ebay is a wonderful thing...

Have you looked at what it costs to hanger a private Jet?


----------



## DMac84

Thinking about picking up a 7980XE to replace my 6950X since I cannot for the life of me get my broadwell-e stable past 4.3Ghz. Are there any Skylake-X OC guides out there? Comparison charts? Im noticing a severe lack of content for overclocking these things around here.

If I can get the 7980XE (non-delid) 4.4 Stable on all cores with a 280mm AIO, i'd be a happy camper.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DMac84*
> 
> Thinking about picking up a 7980XE to replace my 6950X since I cannot for the life of me get my broadwell-e stable past 4.3Ghz. Are there any Skylake-X OC guides out there? Comparison charts? Im noticing a severe lack of content for overclocking these things around here.
> 
> If I can get the 7980XE (non-delid) 4.4 Stable on all cores with a 280mm AIO, i'd be a happy camper.


4.4 on an AIO stable to what?


----------



## czin125

SL does sell a 4.4ghz bin via AIO if you don't want to play the lottery so to speak.


----------



## nersty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


I finally convinced my 2 year old to do that.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DMac84*
> 
> Thinking about picking up a 7980XE to replace my 6950X since I cannot for the life of me get my broadwell-e stable past 4.3Ghz. Are there any Skylake-X OC guides out there? Comparison charts? Im noticing a severe lack of content for overclocking these things around here.
> 
> If I can get the 7980XE (non-delid) 4.4 Stable on all cores with a 280mm AIO, i'd be a happy camper.


I have no plans of delidding mine, I'll let you know how I do. I do have a 280... and a 420 as well, with 3000 rpm fans... so not the best comparison on cooling lol.

My goal is 4.5 24/7 with fans nice and quiet. I wonder if I could get to 5 GHz at full blast. At that point the TIM might simply not be able to transfer the heat to the loop quickly enough, even if the loop could handle more.

Edit: Looks like mine will be here Thursday. I bought the Apex tonight, that will take another week. Still need to pick a few more parts.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> SL does sell a 4.4ghz bin via AIO if you don't want to play the lottery so to speak.


SL does sell great stuff.. but read the testing carefully.. only the core multiplier is raised. Cache, uncore, dram/IMC are all at defaults. That said, a 240 should be enough with good ambient temp. But why spend $2000 on a cpu and hook it up to fischer-price "water cooling"? A custom loop is very easy to assemble.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> SL does sell great stuff.. but read the testing carefully.. only the core multiplier is raised. Cache, uncore, dram/IMC are all at defaults. That said, a 240 should be enough with good ambient temp. But why spend $2000 on a cpu and hook it up to fischer-price "water cooling"? A custom loop is very easy to assemble.


Yeah pay an extra $599 for them to hook it up to AIO and up the multiplier to 44. The delid is really what gets these things to clock higher on limited cooling. Lol lots of users on this thread running "fischer-price" water cooling. I guess spending all that money on the chip itself leaves less budget for cooling. Or people just don't like spending the extra time and effort it takes to build a custom loop. I think I had the most fun building my custom loop more than anything else. I probably could have gotten a 7980XE with my custom loop budget lol.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> need more info - post some bios screen shots.. when using adaptive, disable Autonomous C-States , and disable Speed Shift. Disable VR Fault


@jpmboy, I just came across this and was wondering about the "why"... im using adaptive but have never come across this recommendation.

Thanks in advance!


----------



## DMac84

What is everyone getting their Mesh speed up to on the 7980XE's besides thermals, is there a wall?


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DMac84*
> 
> Thinking about picking up a 7980XE to replace my 6950X since I cannot for the life of me get my broadwell-e stable past 4.3Ghz. Are there any Skylake-X OC guides out there? Comparison charts? Im noticing a severe lack of content for overclocking these things around here.
> 
> If I can get the 7980XE (non-delid) 4.4 Stable on all cores with a 280mm AIO, i'd be a happy camper.


From what Ive seen the 7980s are not clocking very well at all. There are one or two instances of hitting 5GHz but its not on a 280MM AIO when you look at the CPU validate and see a core of 56C. Someone is using phase change or a subzero chiller.Most that are getting these anywhere are dropping a few cores which IMO doesnt count, its all or none. Now get a 7900X to 5GHz on all cores with an uncore up over 3GHz without it crashing and you have done something. This takes delidding and its still pushing the edge of thermal overload with an overkill custom loop.

Even SL is using a 360 AIO.

This is still too new for guides and charts, you are looking at the vast majority in this thread. Der8auer has an X99 guide on ROG website that is pretty close except the uncore to 34. Ive tried many times and mine hasnt passed 33 and raises the package temp too much there so Ive left it at 32. 34 is a guaranteed black screen after post.

Im running Adaptive and have not done any of that mentioned above. If you disable Cstates and speed shift what the point in using adaptive? Thats the whole point isnt it? So your Vcore will stay down while you are not using it? 7900X My Adaptive is set at 1.225V and when idle multi goes to 12X and Vcore to 0.8. Load it up and It does its job to 5GHz and Vcore to 1.225


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Im running Adaptive and have not done any of that mentioned above. If you disable Cstates and speed shift what the point in using adaptive? Thats the whole point isnt it? So your Vcore will stay down while you are not using it? 7900X My Adaptive is set at 1.225V and when idle multi goes to 12X and Vcore to 0.8. Load it up and It does its job to 5GHz and Vcore to 1.225


Speed shift is hardware controlled clock reduction. Disable it and you can still use speed step with OS control. That way you can use windows power plans to control when to maintain turbo frequencies and when to clock down. I think that is the point jpm is trying to make.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> From what Ive seen the 7980s are not clocking very well at all. There are one or two instances of hitting 5GHz but its not on a 280MM AIO when you look at the CPU validate and see a core of 56C. Someone is using phase change or a subzero chiller.Most that are getting these anywhere are dropping a few cores which IMO doesnt count, its all or none. Now get a 7900X to 5GHz on all cores with an uncore up over 3GHz without it crashing and you have done something. This takes delidding and its still pushing the edge of thermal overload with an overkill custom loop.
> 
> Even SL is using a 360 AIO.
> 
> This is still too new for guides and charts, you are looking at the vast majority in this thread. Der8auer has an X99 guide on ROG website that is pretty close except the uncore to 34. Ive tried many times and mine hasnt passed 33 and raises the package temp too much there so Ive left it at 32. 34 is a guaranteed black screen after post.
> 
> Im running Adaptive and have not done any of that mentioned above. If you disable Cstates and speed shift what the point in using adaptive? Thats the whole point isnt it? So your Vcore will stay down while you are not using it? 7900X My Adaptive is set at 1.225V and when idle multi goes to 12X and Vcore to 0.8. Load it up and It does its job to 5GHz and Vcore to 1.225


Why use AIOon a 1800-2000$ cpu?

I'm using EK water monoblock, and run 7980xe @ 4.7ghz. 18core @ 4,7ghz is a dream come true.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Why use AIOon a 1800-2000$ cpu?
> 
> I'm using EK water monoblock, and run 7980xe @ 4.7ghz. 18core @ 4,7ghz is a dream come true.


Yeah my point exactly.
Would love to see a CPUID verification of a 7980 on water.
Im running the same block, 2 480 rads, 240 rads, 2 D5 pumps in series and 19 fans.


----------



## ocvn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Yeah my point exactly.
> Would love to see a CPUID verification of a 7980 on water.
> Im running the same block, 2 480 rads, 240 rads, 2 D5 pumps in series and 19 fans.





4.6G un-delid yet. Batch: L717B735, earlier than review/ sample batch.


----------



## Martin778

Of course they (3200c14/3600c16) are the same, same PCB and Bdie IC's. The only thing you pay premium for is for letting Gskill upload a different XMP profile to them at the factory. Seriosly don't let the 'binning' myth fool you...it's all in proper setup. Just get the cheapest ones you know 100% have Bdie chips.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ocvn*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.6G un-delid yet. Batch: L717B735, earlier than review/ sample batch.


Cooling?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol, jayz needed the help.. and LN2.


Vince did all the leg work, obviously lol


----------



## ocvn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Cooling?


dual Monsta 480 push-pull 1300rpm, D4 pump for CPU only. EK block with 5mm fan for vrm.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DMac84*
> 
> What is everyone getting their Mesh speed up to on the 7980XE's besides thermals, is there a wall?


I find my wall at 31x. 32x in my 7980xe is a no go, whatever voltage is applied.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I can do 32, but I need like 1.150V. 31 is fine at 1.015-1.020V. 33 is a no go though. It will crash. Maybe stable with like 1.200V, but I won't such a high voltage.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I can do 32, but I need like 1.150V. 31 is fine at 1.015-1.020V. 33 is a no go though. It will crash. Maybe stable with like 1.200V, but I won't such a high voltage.


With your 7800x???


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> With your 7800x???


Yes?


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Yeah my point exactly.
> Would love to see a CPUID verification of a 7980 on water.
> Im running the same block, 2 480 rads, 240 rads, 2 D5 pumps in series and 19 fans.


And how many all those blocks, rads, pumps and fans cost over those 2000 for CPU?

Not everyone´s funds are unlimited.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> And how many all those blocks, rads, pumps and fans cost over those 2000 for CPU?
> 
> Not everyone´s funds are unlimited.


It's only like 150-200 USD for https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/Fancoil_1.jpg
It'd work even better outside the house.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> I have no plans of delidding mine, I'll let you know how I do. I do have a 280... and a 420 as well, with 3000 rpm fans... so not the best comparison on cooling lol.
> 
> My goal is 4.5 24/7 with fans nice and quiet. I wonder if I could get to 5 GHz at full blast. At that point the TIM might simply not be able to transfer the heat to the loop quickly enough, even if the loop could handle more.
> 
> Edit: Looks like mine will be here Thursday. I bought the Apex tonight, that will take another week. Still need to pick a few more parts.


By any chance you'd replace the thermal pads with fujipoly's 17.0? What about a fan behind the socket + fan over vrms? Some people seemed to have nice results with that one on other components ( gpus ).


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> And how many all those blocks, rads, pumps and fans cost over those 2000 for CPU?
> 
> Not everyone´s funds are unlimited.


You have to lift your leg high if you want to run with the big dogs. Would you buy bald tires for your new Bugatti? If you want budget like a Hyundai Santa Fe then x299 then stick with the Strix and a KabylakeX. If you want performance and you can afford $2000 on a CPU $1500 to $2000 more on graphics $1000+ on a MOBO and PSU what's an extra $300 extra over a POS AIO that will let your $$$$ invested fry? Lemme guess, no true sine wave UPS with surge protection either?


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Yes?


My 7900x reached 33x in benchs and 32x totally stable. I find the 7980xe is a bit more difficult in mesh aspect, at least these first units.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Of course they (3200c14/3600c16) are the same, same PCB and Bdie IC's. The only thing you pay premium for is for letting Gskill upload a different XMP profile to them at the factory. Seriosly don't let the 'binning' myth fool you...it's all in proper setup. Just get the cheapest ones you know 100% have Bdie chips.


The higher binned ones use less voltage even if you used the same settings I think. 4266CL19 1.40v vs 4400CL19 1.40v ( the second one should be able to run 4266CL19 at 1.37-1.38v )


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> You have to lift your leg high if you want to run with the big dogs. Would you buy bald tires for your new Bugatti? If you want budget like a Hyundai Santa Fe then x299 then stick with the Strix and a KabylakeX. If you want performance and you can afford $2000 on a CPU $1500 to $2000 more on graphics $1000+ on a MOBO and PSU what's an extra $300 extra over a POS AIO that will let your $$$$ invested fry? Lemme guess, no true sine wave UPS with surge protection either?


It is a computer, not a fancy sportscar. Granted, it can be a thing of passion, just like bugatti. But you see, i would hazard a guess, whoever can afford that Bugatti, has those "unlimited" funds. But not everyone, who can afford 2000 CPU, can spend another 300+ on what would you consider adequate cooling method.

Myself i got 7940x alongside Eisbaer 360... they were already 1500 together, so not so far off 2000.... if i followed yor logic, i could have bought 7960x, cause it was only 300 more. And then few hundred bucks on top of that for custom loop...and i would be at those 2000. I wish it was as simple as that, but it is not. And frankly, if i was willing to "lift my leg" and to pay up to those 2000, i would rather buy 7980xe and run it on air and stock if needed, than 7960x with a loop and OC it sky-high. You can bet i am not the only one in similar situation, who sees it the same way.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> My 7900x reached 33x in benchs and 32x totally stable. I find the 7980xe is a bit more difficult in mesh aspect, at least these first units.


Same here. I am Realbench stable at 1.130V for 32x (in bios) and Aida reports 1.150V. But I run it at 31x as the voltage decrease is high. I don't like running the mesh/cache at high voltages after my goodie 5820K got halfway defective.. That chip did 4750/4500 at 1.320/1.250V. Cache would freeze on windows boot at stock, but worked once overclocked. Go figure. So RMAed it and got a full refund.

I really like my 7800X. Good OCer (1.200V/1.220V in Aida for 4800mhz seems to work well), at least a pretty decent one. More than enough cores for gaming and folding. (I fold 90% of the time on my 1080TI) Temps (Including Package) is sub 65'C under Realbench full AVX. Low 50s when folding on the CPU. So it's cold and does not use alot of wattage considering the performance.

Only thing is my mem. 4000 17-19-19-36-1t-300 1.400V.. It could be better, but I bought the kit dirt cheap second hand, considering todays prices are sky-high, I'm more than happy! (G.skill Ripjaws V 3600).


----------



## DStealth

For 1.4v you memory seems good cl17 4k 1T in quad channel is nice. Try to 1.45-1.5v for improved timings...not gonna happen other way


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> For 1.4v you memory seems good cl17 4k 1T in quad channel is nice. Try to 1.45-1.5v for improved timings...not gonna happen other way


Yeah, I don't want to push it. I plan on keeping the CPU until the refresh of X299 if they are at least 15% better. I doubt it, but we'll see.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



My plan is on keeping this computer for the next few years, but I've said that all the times, and now I've been trough 4670K, 4770K, 5820K, 5960X, 4790K, 6700K, 7700K, 1700 and now this 7800X.







Been trough every top-end card from the 780 and beyond, some in sli (980Tis) and tri sli (980s). But now I'm eighteen and can't keep doing this. I just need a good education and then I can begin again.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> From what Ive seen the 7980s are not clocking very well at all. There are one or two instances of hitting 5GHz but its not on a 280MM AIO when you look at the CPU validate and see a core of 56C. Someone is using phase change or a subzero chiller.Most that are getting these anywhere are dropping a few cores which IMO doesnt count, its all or none. Now get a 7900X to 5GHz on all cores with an uncore up over 3GHz without it crashing and you have done something. This takes delidding and its still pushing the edge of thermal overload with an overkill custom loop.
> 
> Even SL is using a 360 AIO.
> 
> This is still too new for guides and charts, you are looking at the vast majority in this thread. Der8auer has an X99 guide on ROG website that is pretty close except the uncore to 34. Ive tried many times and mine hasnt passed 33 and raises the package temp too much there so Ive left it at 32. 34 is a guaranteed black screen after post.
> 
> *Im running Adaptive and have not done any of that mentioned above. If you disable Cstates and speed shift what the point in using adaptive?* Thats the whole point isnt it? So your Vcore will stay down while you are not using it? 7900X My Adaptive is set at 1.225V and when idle multi goes to 12X and Vcore to 0.8. Load it up and It does its job to 5GHz and Vcore to 1.225


you are confusing speed _shift_ and speed _step_. Leave speed step enabled (for his particular problem shooting issue)
now... what's the purpose of c-states, the lower ones, when using adaptive? (ans - none really).
Read up on the C6 state and turbo boost 3 max.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Vince did all the leg work, obviously lol


lol - "gimme that torch"
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> The higher binned ones use less voltage even if you used the same settings I think. 4266CL19 1.40v vs 4400CL19 1.40v ( the second one should be able to run 4266CL19 at 1.37-1.38v )


yes, the ram ICs get binned too. that 4400c19 kit is happy running 4266c17 on the Z370 Apex.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Same here. I am Realbench stable at 1.130V for 32x (in bios) and Aida reports 1.150V. But I run it at 31x as the voltage decrease is high. I don't like running the mesh/cache at high voltages after my goodie 5820K got halfway defective.. That chip did 4750/4500 at 1.320/1.250V. Cache would freeze on windows boot at stock, but worked once overclocked. Go figure. So RMAed it and got a full refund.
> 
> I really like my 7800X. Good OCer (1.200V/1.220V in Aida for 4800mhz seems to work well), at least a pretty decent one. More than enough cores for gaming and folding. (I fold 90% of the time on my 1080TI) Temps (Including Package) is sub 65'C under Realbench full AVX. Low 50s when folding on the CPU. So it's cold and does not use alot of wattage considering the performance.
> 
> Only thing is my mem. 4000 17-19-19-36-1t-300 1.400V.. It could be better, but I bought the kit dirt cheap second hand, considering todays prices are sky-high, I'm more than happy! (G.skill Ripjaws V 3600).


I needed 1.10 in 7900x for 32x, and 1.15v for 33x.

I also had a 5960x which died after forcing cache voltage to 1.35v on a RVE (Had to rma several Asus RVE for usb failures and 00 code). The OC Socket did have to do with it for sure. The new unit was kept at 1.3v and had that problem u are commenting, at stock voltage it was unstable, but I corrected it by raising the voltage a little bit (maybe the bios wasn't applying enough).

For 4000 CL17 and below, better to have some B-Die nice modules. I can do 17-17-17-38-1T totally stable at 1.38v, but Gigabyte board doesn't like clocks 16-16-16-36-1T, xDDD


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> You have to lift your leg high if you want to run with the big dogs. Would you buy bald tires for your new Bugatti? If you want budget like a Hyundai Santa Fe then x299 then stick with the Strix and a KabylakeX. If you want performance and you can afford $2000 on a CPU $1500 to $2000 more on graphics $1000+ on a MOBO and PSU what's an extra $300 extra over a POS AIO that will let your $$$$ invested fry? Lemme guess, no true sine wave UPS with surge protection either?


Lol too funny.


----------



## Silent Scone

Personally, don't see the need to push Mesh all that far and it helps with temps (especially non delidded). Currently at 4.8Ghz on all cores @ 1.25v (non AVX) and Mesh at 3.0Ghz @ 1v.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> It is a computer, not a fancy sportscar. Granted, it can be a thing of passion, just like bugatti. But you see, i would hazard a guess, whoever can afford that Bugatti, has those "unlimited" funds. But not everyone, who can afford 2000 CPU, can spend another 300+ on what would you consider adequate cooling method.
> 
> Myself i got 7940x alongside Eisbaer 360... they were already 1500 together, so not so far off 2000.... if i followed yor logic, i could have bought 7960x, cause it was only 300 more. And then few hundred bucks on top of that for custom loop...and i would be at those 2000. I wish it was as simple as that, but it is not. And frankly, if i was willing to "lift my leg" and to pay up to those 2000, i would rather buy 7980xe and run it on air and stock if needed, than 7960x with a loop and OC it sky-high. You can bet i am not the only one in similar situation, who sees it the same way.


Yes, it's called living beyond your means. If you followed my logic you would have stuck with the kabylakeX if you can't afford SkylakeX and all that comes with it. What's the point of spending the first investment on the chip if you are going to run it at half throttle. Much more expensive venture for the SkylakeX . You are still running a Bugatti with bald tires. Reminds me of a young man that spent $5K on tires and rims for a 10 year old mini truck with 300K miles on it and smoke pouring out the back. Said he couldn't afford to replace the $500 engine.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> Speed shift is hardware controlled clock reduction. Disable it and you can still use speed step with OS control. That way you can use windows power plans to control when to maintain turbo frequencies and when to clock down. I think that is the point jpm is trying to make.


Windows OS power plans do that already with them enabled. Not trying to be difficult. I want to get as many clock cycles as the next guy yet have it scale back when not in use which is what I have now


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Personally, don't see the need to push Mesh all that far and it helps with temps (especially non delidded). Currently at 4.8Ghz on all cores @ 1.25v (non AVX) and Mesh at 3.0Ghz @ 1v.


When are u jumping to 7980xe???


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Yes, it's called living beyond your means. If you followed my logic you would have stuck with the kabylakeX if you can't afford SkylakeX and all that comes with it. What's the point of spending the first investment on the chip if you are going to run it at half throttle. Much more expensive venture for the SkylakeX . You are still running a Bugatti with bald tires. Reminds me of a young man that spent $5K on tires and rims for a 10 year old mini truck with 300K miles on it and smoke pouring out the back. Said he couldn't afford to replace the $500 engine.
> Windows OS power plans do that already with them enabled. Not trying to be difficult. *I want to get as many clock cycles as the next guy yet have it scale back when not in use which is what I have now*


does the same with speed STEP enabled and speed SHIFT disabled. One manages P-states and I have yet to find a reason to keep SHIFT enabled once overclocked using dynamic frequency (STEP) and adaptive or manual override. Shift may be better at default clocks, but is anyone convinced (with data) that is is beneficial once you Synch All Cores? I'm not even sure it works with Synch'd cores.


----------



## vmanuelgm

AC Origins at 3440x1440p Ultra Settings. 388.13 drivers.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> When are u jumping to 7980xe???


Probably won't be. Plenty of better things to spend the money on. HDR panels, VR, GPUs. I don't need 18 cores. Will wait for gen2.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> AC Origins at 3440x1440p Ultra Settings. 388.13 drivers.


One of the more CPU intensive games I've played.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Probably won't be. Plenty of better things to spend the money on. HDR panels, VR, GPUs. I don't need 18 cores. Will wait for gen2.
> One of the more CPU intensive games I've played.


Ok, u are right, plenty of toys to purchase... If u like Star Wars, one could be this:

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/nvidia-announces-two-star-wars-collectors-edition-nvidia-titan-xp-gpus.html

Gonna try more games to compare and determine which is the most core demanding!!!


----------



## Silent Scone

I was hoping that announcement was a Volta Titan. Waiting on Q1.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I was hoping that announcement was a Volta Titan. Waiting on Q1.


I also hoped it, but this collector's edition is very nice. If I hadn't the card, I would go for it!!!


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> does the same with speed STEP enabled and speed SHIFT disabled. One manages P-states and I have yet to find a reason to keep SHIFT enabled once overclocked using dynamic frequency (STEP) and adaptive or manual override. Shift may be better at default clocks, but is anyone convinced (with data) that is is beneficial once you Synch All Cores? I'm not even sure it works with Synch'd cores.


Thanks for your take on it. I'll try both ways and see what works best for me.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> I also hoped it, but this collector's edition is very nice. If I hadn't the card, I would go for it!!!


The performance difference between the regular Pascal Titan X and the Xp was no where near enough to warrant an upgrade. Maybe I've just grown a little more sensible lol


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> The performance difference between the regular Pascal Titan X and the Xp was no where near enough to warrant an upgrade. Maybe I've just grown a little more sensible lol


Pocket sensible xDDDD

Nvidia likes to milk us and Xmas are coming...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> The performance difference between the regular Pascal Titan X and the Xp was no where near enough to warrant an upgrade. Maybe I've just grown a little more sensible lol


uh-oh. gone to the dark (sensible) side. Soon you'll be team RED!


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> uh-oh. gone to the dark (sensible) side. Soon you'll be team RED!


Before you know it, you will be buying i5's and 16G of memory... pulling belt above your belly-button... It's all down here from there.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> . Soon you'll be team RED!


heh, I'd rather put hot pins in my eyes considering what's available currently







. Truth is, the higher SKUs were a knee jerk response to Thread Ripper. It's a lot of money to throw down on a CPU that won't get used to it's potential. I may reconsider in the new year, but for now the 7900X @ 4.8 suits my needs better


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> heh, I'd rather put hot pins in my eyes considering what's available currently
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Truth is, the higher SKUs were a knee jerk response to Thread Ripper. It's a lot of money to throw down on a CPU that won't get used to it's potential. I may reconsider in the new year, but for now the 7900X @ 4.8 suits my needs better


Haven't u delidded it yet?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> Haven't u delidded it yet?


No, although I likely will soon. Does 4.8 at 1.23v without.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> heh, I'd rather put hot pins in my eyes considering what's available currently
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Truth is, the higher SKUs were a knee jerk response to Thread Ripper. It's a lot of money to throw down on a CPU that won't get used to it's potential. I may reconsider in the new year, but for now the *7900X @ 4.8 suits my needs* better


lol, gotta wonder what needs a 4.8 7900X would not meet.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> No, although I likely will soon. Does 4.8 at 1.23v without.


But delidded will run cooler and u'll be able to reach 5GHz for 24/7.

Yeah, I know, not that much difference between those clocks, but I like the 5, xDDD


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> But delidded will run cooler and *u'll be able to reach 5GHz for 24/7*.


Doubtful, 4.9 perhaps


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Doubtful, 4.9 perhaps


5 and 4.8avx, I guess, if u are reaching 4.8 at 1.23v. These 1.23v are enough for avx??? Probably the temps are very high.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> 5 and 4.8avx, I guess, if u are reaching 4.8 at 1.23v. These 1.23v are enough for avx??? Probably the temps are very high.


No, that's non AVX. 3 and 5 offsets in that instance.

EDIT: Yes it's enough for RB load


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> No, that's non AVX. 3 and 5 offsets in that instance.
> 
> EDIT: Yes it's enough for RB load


Those offsets help a lot to maintain stability and temps under control.

However, if I were u, i would have delidded that beasty long ago...


----------



## carlhil2

Has anyone bought a 7980xe from Microcenter and paid less than the $2550(including tax) that they are asking? I was supposed to pick mine up Sunday, but, not at that price.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> Those offsets help a lot to maintain stability and temps under control.
> 
> However, if I were u, i would have delidded that beasty long ago...


Yes, well we're all aware of your fiery Spanish passion lol







.

Rockit tool only arrived on Friday. 4.8 is ample, really. I do not need AVX on this system, so the offset is of no concern. System is stable and temps aren't an issue at the applied settings. I'll be sure to post when it's done.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Yes, well we're all aware of your fiery Spanish passion lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Rockit tool only arrived on Friday. 4.8 is ample, really. I do not need AVX on this system, so the offset is of no concern. System is stable and temps aren't an issue at the applied settings. I'll be sure to post when it's done.


How are u gonna protect the near transistors???

Do u like my method=Kapton tape???


----------



## Nautilus

Whoa just received my rockit99 guys! Too excited. Now waiting on Conductonaut & Kryonaut. I'll also buy transparent nail polish and then start delidding.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> Whoa just received my rockit99 guys! Too excited. Now waiting on Conductonaut & Kryonaut. I'll also buy transparent nail polish and then start delidding.


Are u using nail polish in these puppies???


----------



## DooRules

Have not done the delid on mine yet either. But only had it for less than a week. Figured I would use this when the time comes.

https://www.amazon.ca/Permatex-85120-Liquid-Electrical-Tape/dp/B01MQLY5MB/ref=sr_1_30?ie=UTF8&qid=1510093327&sr=8-30&keywords=liquid+electrical+tape

Also going to use silicone as opposed to super glue.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> Have not done the delid on mine yet either. But only had it for less than a week. Figured I would use this when the time comes.
> 
> https://www.amazon.ca/Permatex-85120-Liquid-Electrical-Tape/dp/B01MQLY5MB/ref=sr_1_30?ie=UTF8&qid=1510093327&sr=8-30&keywords=liquid+electrical+tape
> 
> Also going to use silicone as opposed to super glue.


Good choice!!!


----------



## Nautilus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> Are u using nail polish in these puppies???


Yes i will. Would never forgive myself, if I destroy this cpu.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Doubtful, 4.9 perhaps


What he said -
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Has anyone bought a 7980xe from Microcenter and paid less than the $2550(including tax) that they are asking? I was supposed to pick mine up Sunday, but, not at that price.


Better Places to buy a 7980xe than MC:
1. Provantage
2. Silicon Lottery
3. Newegg
4. B&H
5. Amazon
6. Pretty much anywhere that isn't MicroCenter...


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> Yes i will. Would never forgive myself, if I destroy this cpu.


I would choose the electrical or Kapton tape over nail polish to apply on Skylake's x. Nail is suitable for mainstreams.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> Have not done the delid on mine yet either. But only had it for less than a week. Figured I would use this when the time comes.
> 
> https://www.amazon.ca/Permatex-85120-Liquid-Electrical-Tape/dp/B01MQLY5MB/ref=sr_1_30?ie=UTF8&qid=1510093327&sr=8-30&keywords=liquid+electrical+tape
> 
> Also going to use silicone as opposed to super glue.


Hi
Yeah I at least waited 29 days before sending it off to SL








I flipped a coin actually
Tails take it back to MicroCenter I did get the 15 day return policy changed to 30 days to try the EK-280 with it
Heads was to send it to silicon lottery
Heads came up


----------



## DooRules

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi
> Yeah I at least waited 29 days before sending it off to SL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I flipped a coin actually
> Tails take it back to MicroCenter I did get the 15 day return policy changed to 30 days to try the EK-280 with it
> Heads was to send it to silicon lottery
> Heads came up


On my chip it seems like the CPU package is what I really have to get under control. It shoots up fast on the temps. I will see how it does in the cold air tom morning. That will be the deciding factor in how quickly I delid it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> On my chip it seems like the CPU package is what I really have to get under control. It shoots up fast on the temps. I will see how it does in the cold air tom morning. That will be the deciding factor in how quickly I delid it.


Hi,
I've seen your cooling system and know the temp outside








It's return or delid time bro


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> Have not done the delid on mine yet either. But only had it for less than a week. Figured I would use this when the time comes.
> 
> https://www.amazon.ca/Permatex-85120-Liquid-Electrical-Tape/dp/B01MQLY5MB/ref=sr_1_30?ie=UTF8&qid=1510093327&sr=8-30&keywords=liquid+electrical+tape
> 
> Also going to use silicone as opposed to super glue.


Liquid electrical tape is exactly what I use. Very easy to apply and even easier to remove if you ever need to.

Good luck bud.


----------



## DooRules

It was how neat and tidy it looked in your pic that made me go that route. So thankyou


----------



## Silent Scone

Just picked up a 7940X. Not sure why, guess I'm not as sensible as I thought lol.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Just picked up a 7940X. Not sure why, guess I'm not as sensible as I thought lol.


WOW, u changed your mind very fast!!! xDDD










Waiting for your impressions and stability tests.


----------



## Silent Scone

LOL.

Touché, totally sane.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> LOL.
> 
> Touché, totally sane.


Funny thing you are the op in a stability thread!!!

Now seriously, wish u good luck with that 7940x in the sense of being a good clocker.


----------



## xarot

How many days till he upgrades to 7980XE?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> How many days till he upgrades to 7980XE?


You question my willpower?

Rightly so.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Just picked up a 7940X. Not sure why, guess I'm not as sensible as I thought lol.


musta had nightmares about team red.








didn't go full non-sensible tho.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> Have not done the delid on mine yet either. But only had it for less than a week. Figured I would use this when the time comes.
> 
> https://www.amazon.ca/Permatex-85120-Liquid-Electrical-Tape/dp/B01MQLY5MB/ref=sr_1_30?ie=UTF8&qid=1510093327&sr=8-30&keywords=liquid+electrical+tape
> 
> Also going to use silicone as opposed to super glue.
> 
> 
> 
> Liquid electrical tape is exactly what I use. Very easy to apply and even easier to remove if you ever need to.
> 
> Good luck bud.
Click to expand...

+Rep








Makes me regret for the choice I made to use the 3D Top Coat instead








Maybe on my next repaste


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> musta had nightmares about team red.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> didn't go full non-sensible tho.


Yeah, maybe next gen. Or if anything I do remotely requires half the core count lol.

Yeah, then I dreamt Raja Koduri resigned. Oh, wait


----------



## czin125

Is that 40% more cooling along with 40% more cores over the 7900X? Or only 40% more cores?


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Just picked up a 7940X. Not sure why, guess I'm not as sensible as I thought lol.


SL, or are you going to delid yourself?

If I were going to upgrade from the 7900x, the 7940x is the one I'd choose, even if doing so won't make the electrons flow faster through my rig (unless I short something out somehow during the replacement process).


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Yeah, maybe next gen. Or if anything I do remotely requires half the core count lol.
> 
> Yeah, then I dreamt Raja Koduri resigned. Oh, wait


not funny.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> You question my willpower?
> 
> Rightly so.


Just say goodbye to your next month's salary already.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not funny.


edit... lol he did resign!


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> edit... lol he did resign!


lol, yeah he did.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Just picked up a 7940X. Not sure why, guess I'm not as sensible as I thought lol.


Silicon Lottery?


----------



## Nautilus

It's on. My conductonaut and 1$ nail polish is here


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> 
> 
> It's on. My conductonaut and 1$ nail polish is here


Rockit is making cash!!!









Buy electrical or Kapton tape and be safe!!!


----------



## Nautilus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vmanuelgm*
> 
> Rockit is making cash!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buy electrical or Kapton tape and be safe!!!


That's what nail polish is for; insulation.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> That's what nail polish is for; insulation.


To shield any exposed contacts under the IHS from contact with liquid metal...
Really good stuff for this purpose: MG Chemicals Silicone Modified Conformal Coating (clear)


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Silicon Lottery?


Nope, retail.


----------



## Skybluedk

What to get?

My box is getting old. My I7 980x has served me well, for now 7 and a half years. I9 is the thing. Im not gaming much, and when I do, its mostly singleplayer games. What I do do is develop code having a several visual studio 2017, sql servers and more..

I have my eyes on the 7920x and above, thinking the larger chips are of a better quality and could possibly overclock/cool better. Mb would be the Apex, and I need 32-64gb of good ram. Disk will be either Intel 900p or Samsung 960 evo pro 1tb. Possibly the new Samsung evo whenever it arrives.

Of course I could wait another year for Icelake.

What would you recommend?


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skybluedk*
> 
> What to get?
> 
> My box is getting old. My I7 980x has served me well, for now 7 and a half years. I9 is the thing. Im not gaming much, and when I do, its mostly singleplayer games. What I do do is develop code having a several visual studio 2017, sql servers and more..
> 
> I have my eyes on the 7920x and above, thinking the larger chips are of a better quality and could possibly overclock/cool better. Mb would be the Apex, and I need 32-64gb of good ram. Disk will be either Intel 900p or Samsung 960 evo pro 1tb. Possibly the new Samsung evo whenever it arrives.
> 
> Of course I could wait another year for Icelake.
> 
> What would you recommend?


The quality of a CPU is the same, there all made the same way. If you want guaranteed overclocking link https://siliconlottery.com/

WHAT IS THE SILICON LOTTERY?
When it comes to overclocking processors, every CPU is different. Imperfections during fabrication cause each CPU to have different limits in terms of clock speed. Our processors have been binned according to their overclocking capabilities, so you are able to purchase a sample that meets your needs.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skybluedk*
> 
> What to get?
> 
> My box is getting old. My I7 980x has served me well, for now 7 and a half years. I9 is the thing. Im not gaming much, and when I do, its mostly singleplayer games. What I do do is develop code having a several visual studio 2017, sql servers and more..
> 
> I have my eyes on the 7920x and above, thinking the larger chips are of a better quality and could possibly overclock/cool better. Mb would be the Apex, and I need 32-64gb of good ram. Disk will be either Intel 900p or Samsung 960 evo pro 1tb. Possibly the new Samsung evo whenever it arrives.
> 
> Of course I could wait another year for Icelake.
> 
> What would you recommend?


You have the patience of a monk.... How do you go 7.5 years on one PC?









Buy anything, you will be pleased with the upgrade lol....


----------



## Skybluedk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> You have the patience of a monk.... How do you go 7.5 years on one PC?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buy anything, you will be pleased with the upgrade lol....


Well, a 6 core 980x 4.5 ghz is still a fairly fast cpu. But next you're going to tell me that my pci 1.5x will hold me back?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> You have the patience of a monk.... How do you go 7.5 years on one PC?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buy anything, you will be pleased with the upgrade lol....


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skybluedk*
> 
> Well, a 6 core 980x 4.5 ghz is still a fairly fast cpu. But next you're going to tell me that my pci 1.5x will hold me back?


My 960? (been so long I forgot) is an ESXi vm host for mundane tasks on my home network... does well...

I haven't seen enough to know if there is any scaling for 7920-7980xe OC. It's conceivable there would be binning by Intel that would favor the higher skews, but I'm seeing similar numbers everywhere for the 7980xe - 4.4 @ 1.12-1.15 4.5 @1.15-1.20 4.6 @ 1.2-1.25 and so on... At that point you are now 400-450W (4.6GHz), so things are getting ugly in your VRM and socket and you've gone past what an AIO can sustain (and might need a delid)

Haven't seen enough for the 7920/40/60

I have to assume a keeper of a PC for 7.5 years isn't planning on delidding?

Do you need lots of cores or want to OC? If you just want to OC, the 8700K may be more fun (5GHz+)


----------



## Skybluedk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> My 960? (been so long I forgot) is an ESXi vm host for mundane tasks on my home network... does well...
> 
> I haven't seen enough to know if there is any scaling for 7920-7980xe OC. It's conceivable there would be binning by Intel that would favor the higher skews, but I'm seeing similar numbers everywhere for the 7980xe - 4.4 @ 1.12-1.15 4.5 @1.15-1.20 4.6 @ 1.2-1.25 and so on... At that point you are now 400-450W (4.6GHz), so things are getting ugly in your VRM and socket and you've gone past what an AIO can sustain (and might need a delid)
> 
> Haven't seen enough for the 7920/40/60
> 
> I have to assume a keeper of a PC for 7.5 years isn't planning on delidding?
> 
> Do you need lots of cores or want to OC? If you just want to OC, the 8700K may be more fun (5GHz+)


8700 is an alternative. Either way Im ordering it delidded I think. Don't feel confident doing it myself


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skybluedk*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> You have the patience of a monk.... How do you go 7.5 years on one PC?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Buy anything, you will be pleased with the upgrade lol....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, a 6 core 980x 4.5 ghz is still a fairly fast cpu. But next you're going to tell me that my pci 1.5x will hold me back?
Click to expand...

The other evening, a friend of mine (and pubg team-mate) asked me to advise him a method in order to find out if he's or he isn't cpu limited with his Gtx 1070, on an old P6T and a 6c xeon x5650 (overclocked to 3.8GHz)








He doesn't play so many games so I've just told him to run the benchmark on The Division and write down the result, he made 83fps on Ultra in 1080p.
Then I found him the guru3d Asus 1070 Strix's review (they've also tested TD).
And you know what fps score they've achieved on their bench test using a 8 core 5960X @4.4ghz overclocked?
Yeah, 83 fps LMAO


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> My 960? (been so long I forgot) is an ESXi vm host for mundane tasks on my home network... does well...
> 
> I haven't seen enough to know if there is any scaling for 7920-7980xe OC. It's conceivable there would be binning by Intel that would favor the higher skews, but I'm seeing similar numbers everywhere for the 7980xe - 4.4 @ 1.12-1.15 4.5 @1.15-1.20 4.6 @ 1.2-1.25 and so on... At that point you are now 400-450W (4.6GHz), so things are getting ugly in your VRM and socket and you've gone past what an AIO can sustain (and might need a delid)
> 
> Haven't seen enough for the 7920/40/60
> 
> I have to assume a keeper of a PC for 7.5 years isn't planning on delidding?
> 
> Do you need lots of cores or want to OC? *If you just want to OC, the 8700K may be more fun (5GHz+)*


and that's on 6 cores. Honestly, I have a [email protected] and a [email protected] 5.2 side-by-side here. Unless you can justify 18core/36 threads (or 12 core/24 threads) in a specific use-scenario, the 8700K is just ridiculously fast at anything (and everything) else.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> and that's on 6 cores. Honestly, I have a [email protected] and a [email protected] 5.2 side-by-side here. Unless you can justify 18core/36 threads (or 12 core/24 threads) in a specific use-scenario, the 8700K is just ridiculously fast at anything (and everything) else.


and you'll have $2K left over.


----------



## Hydroplane

Special delivery...





Now I just need a motherboard to put it in


----------



## WingZero30

From my own purchase of 7980XE and looking around the web there seem to be four batch numbers so far for this cpu :

L717B735
L717B748
L719C307(ES/review sample)
L719C521

Seems a bit strange that some people are getting 7980XEs produced earlier than ES


----------



## vmanuelgm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WingZero30*
> 
> From my own purchase of 7980XE and looking around the web there seem to be four batch numbers so far for this cpu :
> 
> L717B735
> L717B748
> L719C307(ES/review sample)
> L719C521
> 
> Seems a bit strange that some people are getting 7980XEs produced earlier than ES


Mine is L719C521


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WingZero30*
> 
> Seems a bit strange that some people are getting 7980XEs produced earlier than ES


Which week are the ES chips from?


----------



## WingZero30

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> Which week are the ES chips from?


Week19

L is location Malaysia
7 is year 2017
19 is week 19


----------



## czin125

How does the 7980XE perform with the disabled cores? Since you simulate a 7920X with extra cache and all...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skybluedk*
> 
> What to get?
> My box is getting old. My I7 980x has served me well, for now 7 and a half years. I9 is the thing. Im not gaming much, and when I do, its mostly singleplayer games. What I do do is develop code having a several visual studio 2017, sql servers and more..
> 
> I have my eyes on the 7920x and above, thinking the larger chips are of a better quality and could possibly overclock/cool better. Mb would be the Apex, and I need 32-64gb of good ram. Disk will be either Intel 900p or Samsung 960 evo pro 1tb. Possibly the new Samsung evo whenever it arrives.
> 
> Of course I could wait another year for Icelake.
> What would you recommend?


https://i.imgur.com/FxrnzE9.jpg pic from diff site
You could try this board? It's cheaper and built around the same idea with only 4 slots of ram.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *WingZero30*
> 
> From my own purchase of 7980XE and looking around the web there seem to be four batch numbers so far for this cpu :
> 
> L717B735
> L717B748
> L719C307(ES/review sample)
> L719C521
> 
> Seems a bit strange that some people are getting 7980XEs produced earlier than ES


L717B749 here

(was benching futuremark stuff at 5.0 last night with just 1.3V vcore, chilled, not delidded)


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> L717B749 here
> 
> (was benching futuremark stuff at 5.0 last night with just 1.3V vcore, chilled, not delidded)


Did it help your scores very much? Once I get passed 4.7 does not seem to be much of a impact...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Did it help your scores very much? Once I get passed 4.7 does not seem to be much of a impact...


some for FS, (the combined score in FS is very "picky")


----------



## Skybluedk

Thanks for the suggestion...All sense say I should just get a 8700K. But when I sat down to order, I thought: But .. but I need an Intel 900p or the new Samsung 980 (formerly known as evo pro)... Oh and pcie4. ... And now I know why it took so many years..

Actually, I had set my eyes on Skylake very early. Skylake was supposed to be released in 2015. And I guess they've now released it 4 times in a row. We really should have had icelake by now. Icelake+pcie4. .. ?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skybluedk*
> 
> Thanks for the suggestion...All sense say I should just get a 8700K. But when I sat down to order, I thought: But .. but I need an Intel 900p or the new Samsung 980 (formerly known as evo pro)... Oh and pcie4. ... And now I know why it took so many years..
> 
> Actually, I had set my eyes on Skylake very early. Skylake was supposed to be released in 2015. And I guess they've now released it 4 times in a row. We really should have had icelake by now. Icelake+pcie4. .. ?


Given Intel's mastery of "anticipointment" lately, it would not surprise me one bit to see another gen of PCIE 3.0

I hope I'm wrong, but...


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> L717B749 here
> 
> (was benching futuremark stuff at 5.0 last night with just 1.3V vcore, chilled, not delidded)


Nice







what temp did you have the chiller set at?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what temp did you have the chiller set at?


8C


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> L717B749 here
> 
> (was benching futuremark stuff at 5.0 last night with just 1.3V vcore, chilled, not delidded)


Nice! Same batch as me! Whats your voltage for 4.5ghz? My 7980XE might be up and running tomorrow. Busy testing the new memory on my 5960x right now. A long and grueling process of tuning memory.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 8C


brrr....


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 8C


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> brrr....


Kind of gives you the chills ...


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> L717B749 here
> 
> (was benching futuremark stuff at 5.0 last night with just 1.3V vcore, chilled, not delidded)


18 cores, 18 cores at 5.0, all 18 of them at 5.0, now you have my attention

How did it go?


----------



## ESRCJ

I just got my 7920X in on Wednesday and I'm just doing some preliminary testing before my custom water loop parts come in (waiting on availability of that monoblock). X299 seems like an entirely different animal when it comes to stress testing. What do you guys recommend for stress tests these days?

Prime95 seems to be a bit much with its AVX support. I was able to do 4.7GHz with everything else set to auto and memory to XMP except in these AVX-intensive stress tests. I set both AVX offsets to -5.

I also noticed that my clocks weren't always at 4.7 in some of these stress tests, but rather closer to my AVX offsets (not all cores though). I know the VRM temps can be an issue and can lead to throttling, but I'm not sure if these stress tests genuinely just work this way (fluctuating clock speeds between cores) or if there is some throttling going on. For reference, my mobo is the RVIE and I'm currently using an EK Predator 360 for the cooling. The VRM are not getting dedicated cooling currently.


----------



## Martin778

I don't offset AVX, only AVX512 -3. I used Aida64 with all CPU/FPU/cache/RAM settings enabled.
P95 w. AVX is a no go, I'd rather use the 26.6 version or something more 'real life' like x264 stress test.
Delidding and using LM like TGC drops the temps by a good 20-25*C on this CPU.

I checked the energy consumption on idle and stress @225VAC and I know for sure I won't be stress testing this thing for more than 2h in one run. This is with 2x GTX1080Ti, D5 pump, 3 HDD's and 6 fans:

Idle, no OC: 160W
Idle, OC 4.7GHz but with C-States: +-170-180W
Youtube 4k, OC, +-250W
AIDA64 w. GPU's enabled, OC: 910W (~950W when the TI's are OC'ed)
AIDA64 w. GPU's enabled no OC: 720W


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> I just got my 7920X in on Wednesday and I'm just doing some preliminary testing before my custom water loop parts come in (waiting on availability of that monoblock). *X299 seems like an entirely different animal when it comes to stress testing.* What do you guys recommend for stress tests these days?
> 
> Prime95 seems to be a bit much with its AVX support. I was able to do 4.7GHz with everything else set to auto and memory to XMP except in these AVX-intensive stress tests. I set both AVX offsets to -5.
> 
> I also noticed that my clocks weren't always at 4.7 in some of these stress tests, but rather closer to my AVX offsets (not all cores though). I know the VRM temps can be an issue and can lead to throttling, but I'm not sure if these stress tests genuinely just work this way (fluctuating clock speeds between cores) or if there is some throttling going on. For reference, my mobo is the RVIE and I'm currently using an EK Predator 360 for the cooling. The VRM are not getting dedicated cooling currently.


Its not the x299, its the testing software. Last year you would test with OCCT, RealBench, IBT, non-AVX Prime95.... this year the holy grail of stability is AVX-512 enabled Prime, which can take any system to its knees.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> Nice! Same batch as me! Whats your voltage for 4.5ghz? My 7980XE might be up and running tomorrow. Busy testing the new memory on my 5960x right now. A long and grueling process of tuning memory.


1.185-ish, with 1.8 VCCIN
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Kind of gives you the chills ...


that's the idea.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> 18 cores, 18 cores at 5.0, all 18 of them at 5.0, now you have my attention
> 
> How did it go?


better physics scores, but the combined scores are weak relative to a 6950X. it's that mesh-network in there and L3 I suspect. Then again, Fire Strike has never been my friend.









.. and very easy to OCP/prochot the rig in something like the GB3 benchmark without tuning AVX carefully.


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Its not the x299, its the testing software. Last year you would test with OCCT, RealBench, IBT, non-AVX Prime95.... this year the holy grail of stability is AVX-512 enabled Prime, which can take any system to its knees.


Sounds nice, except there's no AVX-512 stress routines in prime95


----------



## Jpmboy

^^


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> Sounds nice, except there's no AVX-512 stress routines in prime95


Because the fire department ask for it to be removed? JK LOL


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> Sounds nice, except there's no AVX-512 stress routines in prime95


Except there is, since the version 29.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> Because the fire department ask for it to be removed? JK LOL


Fighting climate change... lol


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Except there is, since the version 29.


Prime95 v29 does not support AVX512 for stress-testing. The author plans to work on that over this winter. (source: http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=469222#post469222)

So anybody who's using Prime95 v29 is using at most AVX2.

Prime95 v29 adds AVX512 for trial-factoring. It still only uses AVX2/FMA3 for FFTs. And Prime95's stress-tester is the FFTs. Trial-factoring and FFT are not the same thing.


----------



## czin125

8C water on an undelidded cpu ( liquid metal can't be used at 10C or less ), but you'd wouldn't need as low water temp with delidded though ). Maybe 12C water + delid?

https://blog-imgs-114.fc2.com/i/k/k/ikki210jp/20170715060329252.jpg
https://blog-imgs-114.fc2.com/i/k/k/ikki210jp/201707150603275f6.jpg
https://blog-imgs-114.fc2.com/i/k/k/ikki210jp/201707150603171cb.jpg
If you got a spare block, you could do this.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Prime95 v29 does not support AVX512 for stress-testing. The author plans to work on that over this winter. (source: http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=469222#post469222)
> 
> So anybody who's using Prime95 v29 is using at most AVX2.
> 
> Prime95 v29 adds AVX512 for trial-factoring. It still only uses AVX2/FMA3 for FFTs. And Prime95's stress-tester is the FFTs. Trial-factoring and FFT are not the same thing.


I have been "mystified" by this guy then, my apology:




cca 2:30 in he says "version 29.2 has AVX-512 in it".


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> I have been "mystified" by this guy then, my apology:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cca 2:30 in he says "version 29.2 has AVX-512 in it".


Yes, a lot of people seem to make that mistake. They see "AVX512" in the changelog and assume it applies to the entire program.

He's correct that it _has_ AVX512. But he's wrong to believe that it _uses_ AVX512 in the stress-test.


----------



## Nihaan

Can any 7940X owner share their oced and non oc results of Cinebench please ?


----------



## Nihaan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> 8C water on an undelidded cpu ( liquid metal can't be used at 10C or less ), but you'd wouldn't need as low water temp with delidded though ). Maybe 12C water + delid?
> 
> https://blog-imgs-114.fc2.com/i/k/k/ikki210jp/20170715060329252.jpg
> https://blog-imgs-114.fc2.com/i/k/k/ikki210jp/201707150603275f6.jpg
> https://blog-imgs-114.fc2.com/i/k/k/ikki210jp/201707150603171cb.jpg
> If you got a spare block, you could do this.


Both sides ? Uhm does that actually help ? Do you have any thermal results of it ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> 8C water on an undelidded cpu ( liquid metal can't be used at 10C or less ), but you'd wouldn't need as low water temp with delidded though ). Maybe 12C water + delid?
> 
> https://blog-imgs-114.fc2.com/i/k/k/ikki210jp/20170715060329252.jpg
> https://blog-imgs-114.fc2.com/i/k/k/ikki210jp/201707150603275f6.jpg
> https://blog-imgs-114.fc2.com/i/k/k/ikki210jp/201707150603171cb.jpg
> If you got a spare block, you could do this.


old news.. there's been socket coolers for years now. Used a peltier on one board a while ago








and oh, I've been using LM on multiple delids with a couple of chillers (since 3770K) - no problem if you do not goober it on. A thin painted surface on both the die and underside of the lid works fine.


----------



## aerotracks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Except there is, since the version 29.


There is no AVX512 in prime95 stress routines no matter which version








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> cca 2:30 in he says "version 29.2 has AVX-512 in it".


Youtuber is good at youtubeing, not necessarily at overclocking


----------



## MJB13SRT8

In Cinebench r15 I got 3560 multi thread and 207 single thread my 7940x is overclocked to 4.6ghz.

Montrose


----------



## Nautilus

Guys,

Here are my delidded temps, tell me if they are too high because i believe i might have seating issues with monoblock and cpu. I tried reseating it a few times and saw the IHS and monoblock are in partial contact by observing thermal paste marks left on the IHS.

What about the big variation of temps between the core temps? Can this also be about seating problems?

Keep in mind that I run full custom loop with moboblock.

my settings:
multiplier: 47
cpu mesh multiplier: 32
vcore: 1.27
cpu mesh voltage: 1.07
VR IN: 1.75
LLC: Turbo

X264 STRESS TEST 1 LOOP:



P.S. Any tips for better contact?


----------



## ocvn

my modded linX AVX512, anyone wanna try








http://www.mediafire.com/file/342dbelmml5odux/LinX_v0.8.0_%28x64%29_AVX512.zip

Get around 1.1T with DF setting and 3466 c15 ram.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Tested two hours with Realbench 2.56V with no AVX offset at 4700/3100 (1.168V/1.024V). Max temps are sub 60'C, with the package being at 58-60'C.

Good temps and a decent overclock. This seems to be the sweetspot.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aerotracks*
> 
> There is no AVX512 in prime95 stress routines no matter which version
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Youtuber is good at youtubeing, not necessarily at overclocking


Yeah, it seems like it.









Again, my apologies for spewing misinformed BS


----------



## iamjanco

Not sure where to post this, so I'll post it here (mods feel free to move it and/or propagate it elsewhere):

NewEgg is offering active duty, reserves, veterans, and their families up to $20 off this holiday weekend. There's a verification process you have to go through to get the code, which I used myself last year:



*Link*

Lastly, the code cannot be combined with other coded offers.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> I just got my 7920X in on Wednesday and I'm just doing some preliminary testing before my custom water loop parts come in (waiting on availability of that monoblock). *X299 seems like an entirely different animal when it comes to stress testing.* What do you guys recommend for stress tests these days?
> 
> Prime95 seems to be a bit much with its AVX support. I was able to do 4.7GHz with everything else set to auto and memory to XMP except in these AVX-intensive stress tests. I set both AVX offsets to -5.
> 
> I also noticed that my clocks weren't always at 4.7 in some of these stress tests, but rather closer to my AVX offsets (not all cores though). I know the VRM temps can be an issue and can lead to throttling, but I'm not sure if these stress tests genuinely just work this way (fluctuating clock speeds between cores) or if there is some throttling going on. For reference, my mobo is the RVIE and I'm currently using an EK Predator 360 for the cooling. The VRM are not getting dedicated cooling currently.
> 
> 
> 
> Its not the x299, its the testing software. Last year you would test with OCCT, RealBench, IBT, non-AVX Prime95.... this year the holy grail of stability is AVX-512 enabled Prime, which can take any system to its knees.
Click to expand...

Intel Linpack is a lot more stressful than prime95.


----------



## gijs007

Just upgraded my dual channel 3200MHz kit to 3600MHz quad channel kit.

Dual channel 3200 MHz (16-18-18-38 CR1)

Quad channel 3600MHz (16-16-16-36 CR1)


I'm a bit disappointed, I thought the memory latency would be lower considering the higher clockspeed and tighter timings. They memory latency is only 4,7% lower, while the clockspeed increase alone is 12,5%..
I'm surprised to see that the L3 bandwidth is substantially higher, especially on the write and copy tests.

Overall I can't say the upgrade is worth it or noticeable. Then again it might prevent bandwidth starvation in heavy 8 core benchmarks/workloads and I can experiment with a ramdrive now that I have 32GB RAM.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> Guys,
> 
> Here are my delidded temps, tell me if they are too high because i believe i might have seating issues with monoblock and cpu. I tried reseating it a few times and saw the IHS and monoblock are in partial contact by observing thermal paste marks left on the IHS.
> 
> What about the big variation of temps between the core temps? Can this also be about seating problems?
> 
> Keep in mind that I run full custom loop with moboblock.
> 
> my settings:
> multiplier: 47
> cpu mesh multiplier: 32
> vcore: 1.27
> cpu mesh voltage: 1.07
> VR IN: 1.75
> LLC: Turbo
> 
> X264 STRESS TEST 1 LOOP:
> 
> 
> 
> P.S. Any tips for better contact?


Pretty high temps
Here's mine at 4.7 - 4.8 (10c - 4c) after 2.5H Realbench v.2.56 (no avx/avx2 offset):


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gijs007*
> 
> Just upgraded my dual channel 3200MHz kit to 3600MHz quad channel kit.
> 
> Dual channel 3200 MHz (16-18-18-38 CR1)
> 
> Quad channel 3600MHz (16-16-16-36 CR1)
> 
> 
> I'm a bit disappointed, I thought the memory latency would be lower considering the higher clockspeed and tighter timings. They memory latency is only 4,7% lower, while the clockspeed increase alone is 12,5%..
> I'm surprised to see that the L3 bandwidth is substantially higher, especially on the write and copy tests.
> 
> Overall I can't say the upgrade is worth it or noticeable. Then again it might prevent bandwidth starvation in heavy 8 core benchmarks/workloads and I can experiment with a ramdrive now that I have 32GB RAM.


Crank up that mesh....


----------



## gijs007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Crank up that mesh....


Interesting my trfc was set to 631.
Lowering it to 300 resulted in a crash during the test, but at 351 it seems stable. Latency has dropped to 59,8ns.

Mesh was already set to 3.2GHz, should I set the minimum mesh to 3.2 as well?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gijs007*
> 
> Interesting my trfc was set to 631.
> Lowering it to 300 resulted in a crash during the test, but at 351 it seems stable. Latency has dropped to 59,8ns.
> 
> Mesh was already set to 3.2GHz, should I set the minimum mesh to 3.2 as well?


I don't think I set a min for Mesh. I did change tREFI to 30000.


----------



## gijs007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I don't think I set a min for Mesh. I did change tREFI to 30000.


Thanks for the help, I've set the same tREFI and lowered the srfc.


That's a lot better









I should run some memory stability tests tomorrow.
Do you have any other recommendations? Would be nice to go below the magical 50ns


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gijs007*
> 
> Thanks for the help, I've set the same tREFI and lowered the srfc.
> 
> That's a lot better
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I should run some memory stability tests tomorrow.
> Do you have any other recommendations? Would be nice to go below the magical 50ns


Nice. That is as far as I went, and called it good. I only know of one person that went under 50ns. I don't remember what kit and settings he was running.

@done12many2 ??


----------



## Testier

What type of Cache voltage is safe for a 7980XE?


----------



## Artah

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> What type of Cache voltage is safe for a 7980XE?


I don't know about safe when overclocking but I use 1.1v for 3000MHz


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Not sure where to post this, so I'll post it here (mods feel free to move it and/or propagate it elsewhere):
> 
> NewEgg is offering active duty, reserves, veterans, and their families up to $20 off this holiday weekend. There's a verification process you have to go through to get the code, which I used myself last year:
> 
> 
> 
> *Link*
> 
> Lastly, the code cannot be combined with other coded offers.


Pisses me off I missed this since I could saved 210$ + on my RAM.... appreciate the link though.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I used to get 52ns on latency, now I get 58,4ns on the same settings..?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I used to get 52ns on latency, now I get 58,4ns on the same settings..?


I had an issue like this once. Had to reflash the bios and reenter my settings to get my speeds back.

After lot's of benching and blue screens pushing to bleeding edge, might have caused a corrupt bios chip.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> I had an issue like this once. Had to reflash the bios and reenter my settings to get my speeds back.
> 
> After lot's of benching and blue screens pushing to bleeding edge, might have caused a corrupt bios chip.


Okei, thanks! Will try it right away if I can find a flashdrive around here.

Only difference is core clock speed (only 200mhz), but that should not matter as long as memory and cache is the same I guess.


----------



## carlhil2

Microcenter finally got their HCC prices in line with other places, just a waiting game now. starting to lean towards the 7960x now though, hmmm...


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Max mesh voltage for 24/7 operation?

I can do 3000 at 0.950V, 3100 at 1.010V and testing 3400 at 1.150V.. Is that too much for 24/7 operation? Temps don't exceed 65'C under any circumstance. Max I've seen the package and temps go to is 60'C and 58'C.

3.4 ghz on the mesh should be a pretty good mesh OC.

Core is at 4700 mhz 1.168V. VCCIN at 1.820-1.825


----------



## Silent Scone

Personally don't see the performance benefit to pushing this rail too far. Keep things under 1.15v. Also, I doubt many CPU will do 3.4 mesh and beyond. This 7940x needs around 1.04v for 3Ghz.


----------



## Nihaan

Hello

I just switched from 5930K to 7940x and finished up my installation. So i was running some benchmarks and tests under default settings before getting into overclock again unless i am doing something wrong i was wondering why is it that cpu turbo boost is stuck at 3.8 ? Shouldn't it be 4.3 (turbo boost 2.0 and 4.4 (turbo boost 3.0)

or am i missing something about the new terms or knowledge with the new series ?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nihaan*
> 
> Hello
> 
> I just switched from 5930K to 7940x and finished up my installation. So i was running some benchmarks and tests under default settings before getting into overclock again unless i am doing something wrong i was wondering why is it that cpu turbo boost is stuck at 3.8 ? Shouldn't it be 4.3 (turbo boost 2.0 and 4.4 (turbo boost 3.0)
> 
> or am i missing something about the new terms or knowledge with the new series ?


I had to set "per core OC" and set all cores to adaptive. Then turboboost 3.0 worked for me. *by core usage


----------



## Nihaan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> I had to set "per core OC" and set all cores to adaptive. Then turboboost 3.0 worked for me. *by core usage


Thank you i will try this as soon as my installations and downloads are done









Did it have any effect on the thermals when you made that change ? If yes, how was it ?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Personally don't see the performance benefit to pushing this rail too far. Keep things under 1.15v. Also, I doubt many CPU will do 3.4 mesh and beyond. This 7940x needs around 1.04v for 3Ghz.


Okei, thanks!!

I have my cores at only 4700mhz (1.168V), so 3.4 ghz on mesh seems rather pointless, but I can easily cool it. Temps are sub 60'C, so I'll keep it under 1.150V. I can perhaps do 3300 at closer to 1,100V if 3400 is stable at 1.150V.


----------



## czin125

There's a person selling a copper IHS for Kabylake-X/Skylake-X on ebay ( not nickel plated on either side ). Could still be lapped too?


----------



## Net1Raven

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nihaan*
> 
> Hello
> 
> I just switched from 5930K to 7940x and finished up my installation. So i was running some benchmarks and tests under default settings before getting into overclock again unless i am doing something wrong i was wondering why is it that cpu turbo boost is stuck at 3.8 ? Shouldn't it be 4.3 (turbo boost 2.0 and 4.4 (turbo boost 3.0)
> 
> or am i missing something about the new terms or knowledge with the new series ?


Please post non oc benchmarks I'm on the same boat with a 5930k wanting to upgrade to a 7940x but need to see if it will be worth it. Thanks.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nihaan*
> 
> Hello
> 
> I just switched from 5930K to 7940x and finished up my installation. So i was running some benchmarks and tests under default settings before getting into overclock again unless i am doing something wrong i was wondering why is it that cpu turbo boost is stuck at 3.8 ? Shouldn't it be 4.3 (turbo boost 2.0 and 4.4 (turbo boost 3.0)
> 
> or am i missing something about the new terms or knowledge with the new series ?


The stock all-core turbos are fairly conservative/low. You have to enable MCE in the bios to get all code loads up to the sticker values and depenending on the chip even this might behave like a significant OC (cooling/voltage).


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Personally don't see the performance benefit to pushing this rail too far. Keep things under 1.15v. Also, I doubt many CPU will do 3.4 mesh and beyond. This 7940x needs around 1.04v for 3Ghz.


1.10 so far for 3.1 but I have. It pushed it. Only tried 1.0 and 1.1 so it could be between there.

Still wondering how "uncore" vs mesh voltage plays here. So far tweaks to it have not changed the refusal to do 3.2 or higher. I get machine checks eventually.


----------



## arrow0309

Could be enough (core clock)?


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Could be enough (core clock)?


More than plenty. Nice work.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> More than plenty. Nice work.


Thanks bro


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> 1.10 so far for 3.1 but I have. It pushed it. Only tried 1.0 and 1.1 so it could be between there.
> 
> Still wondering how "uncore" vs mesh voltage plays here. So far tweaks to it have not changed the refusal to do 3.2 or higher. I get machine checks eventually.


yeah man, lower the uncore voltage enough (to still run apparently "normally") and MCEs do show up. So far for cache @ 3.0 I've taken the uncore offset to .350V... uneventfully. May have lowered the package T a bit (but that's all)


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah man, lower the uncore voltage enough (to still run apparently "normally") and MCEs do show up. So far for cache @ 3.0 I've taken the uncore offset to .350V... uneventfully. May have lowered the package T a bit (but that's all)


Whats your method of OCing cache?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> Whats your method of OCing cache?


you mean, how do I test a cache OC? (the OC part - just up the cache multi and set a raesonable cache voltage)
for stability testing, HCi memtest and AID64 cache stability test for 1-2 hours.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I can get a 7820X for a cheap price, to change out my 7800X. I'm gonna have to spend perhaps 80-100 USD inbetween.

Full warranty and everything for less than what a 8700K is MSRP.

I will delid that later on.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I can get a 7820X for a cheap price, to change out my 7800X. I'm gonna have to spend perhaps 80-100 USD inbetween.
> 
> Full warranty and everything for less than what a 8700K is MSRP.
> 
> I will delid that later on.


Nice. The 7820x is a great all around chip. 80-100 for 2 more cores is sweet.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Nice. The 7820x is a great all around chip. 80-100 for 2 more cores is sweet.


Hi,
Yep I came so close to getting one
But decided to go i9-7900x instead + a delid
Now things are nice and cool.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Yep I came so close to getting one
> But decided to go i9-7900x instead + a delid
> Now things are nice and cool.


I was so tempted to go for the 7900x. I am really happy with my 7820x...it has been delided and runs 4.8GHz @ 1.285v everyday...nice and cool. If I knew that I would get a 7900x capable of the same for a good price, I would probably go for it.


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you mean, how do I test a cache OC? (the OC part - just up the cache multi and set a raesonable cache voltage)
> for stability testing, HCi memtest and AID64 cache stability test for 1-2 hours.


What kind of unicore volts and cache clock you run? I am having a heck of time trying to get good cache clocks.


----------



## Martin778

No idea how Aida64's stress test works but really it is rubbish..I passed 1:30h @ 4.7GHz and X264/5 crash within 1s from hitting the start button.


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> No idea how Aida64's stress test works but really it is rubbish..I passed 1:30h @ 4.7GHz and X264/5 crash within 1s from hitting the start button.


Are you running FPUon AIDA64? Rrgular dont uses AVX2. x264 does.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> What kind of unicore volts and cache clock you run? I am having a heck of time trying to get good cache clocks.


on 7900X I have my cache at 3.2 with the Volts at 1.116. its a trade off as once you get the core up the cache is harder to raise. Add too much juice and the package temps get pretty darn toasty. For 24x7 I backed off my OC to 4.8 to ge the cache up a bit more. Seems to help with anything that pings the ram a lot.


----------



## ESRCJ

Has anyone tried Forza Motorsport 7 with their Skylake-X builds? I noticed that with my 6850K, I was able to get to 96-97% GPU usage out of my Titan XP. However, with my 7920X clocked even higher than that 6850K, the GPU usage goes all over the place. It fluctuates between the 70s and mid 90s. As a result, my benchmark average is a whopping 25FPS lower.

I just want to know if this is standard for many games. Across the board it seems like my gaming performance is a little lower, but Forza takes the cake for the largest drop.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Has anyone tried Forza Motorsport 7 with their Skylake-X builds? I noticed that with my 6850K, I was able to get to 96-97% GPU usage out of my Titan XP. However, with my 7920X clocked even higher than that 6850K, the GPU usage goes all over the place. It fluctuates between the 70s and mid 90s. As a result, my benchmark average is a whopping 25FPS lower.
> 
> I just want to know if this is standard for many games. Across the board it seems like my gaming performance is a little lower, but Forza takes the cake for the largest drop.


Sky lake X just does not do as good in gaming as the older generation do to the change in MESH and Cache.

LINK: https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intel-Core-i9-7900X-10-core-Skylake-X-Processor-Review/1080p-Gaming-Performance-a


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Has anyone tried Forza Motorsport 7 with their Skylake-X builds? I noticed that with my 6850K, I was able to get to 96-97% GPU usage out of my Titan XP. However, with my 7920X clocked even higher than that 6850K, the GPU usage goes all over the place. It fluctuates between the 70s and mid 90s. As a result, my benchmark average is a whopping 25FPS lower.
> 
> I just want to know if this is standard for many games. Across the board it seems like my gaming performance is a little lower, but Forza takes the cake for the largest drop.


Post the result and settings, an we compare


----------



## Nihaan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> I had to set "per core OC" and set all cores to adaptive. Then turboboost 3.0 worked for me. *by core usage


Cpu Core Ratio = By Core Usage

is default setting for me already but it is still stuck at 3.8 under load.

You talked about setting all cores to adaptive but when i go into details of By Core Usage there is no adaptive option there are you talking about another setting ?


----------



## ESRCJ

Here is a FireStrike comparison:

https://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/14115738/fs/11579151#



The graphics score is almost 1000 points lower.

However, in TimeSpy, I was able to break my previous graphics record.

https://www.3dmark.com/compare/spy/2716700/spy/1128212#



I'll post the Forza stuff in a bit. From what I can see, when the FPS is very high, Skylake-X does a worse job than Broadwell-E at the same clocks. I heard some Skylake-X owners mention their gaming performance is better than at launch. I also have seen opposite results from various reviewers, so it doesn't seem so clear cut across users. Let me know what you all have to say about the matter.


----------



## ESRCJ

Here are the Forza 7 results with the 6850K and Titan XP:



Here are the results with the 7920X and Titan XP:



And here are the settings:




They did add "Ultra" to the car model details and liveries, but I kept those at High for consistency across tests.

I changed my Windows power management settings to "High Performance," which gave me almost 10FPS in the Forza benchmark... which is quite odd. Notice that the gap is still quite large though. This is true not only for the average, but the min and max as well. I'll also note that changing the power settings in Windows increased GPU usage to 97% average, so that's not the issue anymore. Unless the recent Nvidia drivers made things worse or if the recent Forza update made things worse, then I think it's safe to say the 6850K is a better CPU in gaming than the 7920X. Obviously you wouldn't buy a 12-core for gaming, but having worse performance at a higher clock speed and to where it is this noticeable is a bit of a bummer.


----------



## xarot

That is somewhat expected. When I got my first gear in June and going through some reviews, I concluded that for games, a 7900X needs to be at 4.7~4.8 GHz to match my older 6950X at only 4.2 GHz.







BW-E chips are still strong in gaming too.


----------



## DStealth

And Coffee is godlike...
Exceeding both upper results with less clock speeds on 1080ti...
33+k GPU FS @2088


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Here are the Forza 7 results with the 6850K and Titan XP:
> 
> Here are the results with the 7920X and Titan XP:
> 
> And here are the settings:
> 
> They did add "Ultra" to the car model details and liveries, but I kept those at High for consistency across tests.
> 
> I changed my Windows power management settings to "High Performance," which gave me almost 10FPS in the Forza benchmark... which is quite odd. Notice that the gap is still quite large though. This is true not only for the average, but the min and max as well. I'll also note that changing the power settings in Windows increased GPU usage to 97% average, so that's not the issue anymore. Unless the recent Nvidia drivers made things worse or if the recent Forza update made things worse, then I think it's safe to say the 6850K is a better CPU in gaming than the 7920X. Obviously you wouldn't buy a 12-core for gaming, but having worse performance at a higher clock speed and to where it is this noticeable is a bit of a bummer.


What frequency do you use for the 7920x? All cores @? Try the same frequency as 6850k


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> What frequency do you use for the 7920x? All cores @? Try the same frequency as 6850k


I have them all at 4.5GHz currently. The 6850K was at 4.4GHz.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Nice. The 7820x is a great all around chip. 80-100 for 2 more cores is sweet.


Yeah, I thought so too so I jumped on it.

Now.. Wondering what I could get for my 7800X here in Norway. Seems to be a good overclocker, but perhaps many does not care about it over here.


----------



## Martin778

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> Are you running FPUon AIDA64? Rrgular dont uses AVX2. x264 does.


Yes, FPU enabled.


----------



## ESRCJ

More gaming results for anyone interested. These are from the Ghost Recon Wildlands benchmark at max settings, 1080p. From left to right are TXP paired with (i) i9 7920X @ 4.5GHz, (ii) i9 7920X @ 4.7GHz, (iii) i7 6850K @ 4.5GHz.



This is yet another title where clock-for-clock Broadwell-E pulls ahead with half the cores/threads. However, once the 7920X is at 4.7GHz, it pulls ahead by a tiny bit.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Yes, FPU enabled.


imo, there's no single package that does it all - well.
running only the cache stress is jst about the only thing that's worked for that domain.. across 3 generations of cpus now. but yeah, the full package is a good first shot. x264 with 1.5x the thread count is pretty good. 20+ loops.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> What kind of unicore volts and cache clock you run? I am having a heck of time trying to get good cache clocks.


uncore/ring and cache/mesh are not the same thing - right? but if running high core and cache frequencies and voltages... increasing uncore offset can help (and help raise temps too







)


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> More gaming results for anyone interested. These are from the Ghost Recon Wildlands benchmark at max settings, 1080p. From left to right are TXP paired with (i) i9 7920X @ 4.5GHz, (ii) i9 7920X @ 4.7GHz, (iii) i7 6850K @ 4.5GHz.
> This is yet another title where clock-for-clock Broadwell-E pulls ahead with half the cores/threads. However, once the 7920X is at 4.7GHz, it pulls ahead by a tiny bit.


What's you mesh speed at and memory OC...these two settings are crucial for the gaming performance...Once pushed it's not slower clock for clock than any previous generation


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> More gaming results for anyone interested. These are from the Ghost Recon Wildlands benchmark at max settings, 1080p. From left to right are TXP paired with (i) i9 7920X @ 4.5GHz, (ii) i9 7920X @ 4.7GHz, (iii) i7 6850K @ 4.5GHz.
> 
> 
> 
> This is yet another title where clock-for-clock Broadwell-E pulls ahead with *half the cores/threads*. However, once the 7920X is at 4.7GHz, it pulls ahead by a tiny bit.


What if the problem lies in here, that more cores/threads is actually detrimental to the game than less?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> What if the problem lies in here, that more cores/threads is actually detrimental to the game than less?


then get an 8700K


----------



## Mumriken

Disable HT for skylake-x if you use it for gaming only and you will see fps skyrocket!!
My theory is core to core latency with HT on. On my system it is 600 times lower with HT off!

I had the same problem with my 5Ghz 7820x vs my 4,5 Ghz 5960x.

TLDR; [email protected]/3,2 with ht off gives me godlike fps when gpu bottleneck is removed..


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mumriken*
> 
> Disable HT for skylake-x if you use it for gaming only and you will see fps skyrocket!!
> My theory is core to core latency with HT on. On my system it is 600 times lower with HT off!
> 
> I had the same problem with my 5Ghz 7820x vs my 4,5 Ghz 5960x.
> 
> TLDR; [email protected]/3,2 with ht off gives me godlike fps when gpu bottleneck is removed..


Interesting. What games, resolution and GPU when you observed this?


----------



## Nihaan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nihaan*
> 
> Hello
> 
> I just switched from 5930K to 7940x and finished up my installation. So i was running some benchmarks and tests under default settings before getting into overclock again unless i am doing something wrong i was wondering why is it that cpu turbo boost is stuck at 3.8 ? Shouldn't it be 4.3 (turbo boost 2.0 and 4.4 (turbo boost 3.0)
> 
> or am i missing something about the new terms or knowledge with the new series ?


Can anyone help me with this ?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I am probably going to delid my new 7820X some time after testing.

I got a tube of Coollaboratory Liquid Pro, is the Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut better and worth buying instead..?

I was thinking of using permatex to isolate all those tiny components near the die, and when re-sealing. Any reason not to? I will also try to find kapton tape. Easier and cleaner compared to nail polish (which works fine).


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nihaan*
> 
> Can anyone help me with this ?


And what is the problem again? The CPU is not supposed to boost to more than 3800 MHz, when all cores are loaded - at stock settings. You shall see 4,3 and 4,4 only when one or maybe 2 cores are loaded.


----------



## Nizzen

7980xe with "per core OC" and adaptive on all cores= 4200mhz on 16 cores, 4400mhz on 2 cores


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mumriken*
> 
> Disable HT for skylake-x if you use it for gaming only and you will see fps skyrocket!!
> My theory is core to core latency with HT on. On my system it is 600 times lower with HT off!
> 
> I had the same problem with my 5Ghz 7820x vs my 4,5 Ghz 5960x.
> 
> TLDR; [email protected]/3,2 with ht off gives me godlike fps when gpu bottleneck is removed..


Interesting, following
As the matter of fact, I've often thought of disabling it, I've just delayed it waiting for some other user{s) feedback.
So, what exactly did you test with?
Would be great if (for example) that would give some fps boost in some ugly games like PUBG.









I think I'm gonna give it a try.


----------



## Nihaan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> And what is the problem again? The CPU is not supposed to boost to more than 3800 MHz, when all cores are loaded - at stock settings. You shall see 4,3 and 4,4 only when one or maybe 2 cores are loaded.


I received a different reply on the other page thats why i was confused.

So 3.8 ghz is the real turbo boost for all cores but how many cores can go up to 4.3 and 4.4

Only 1 or 2 ?


----------



## Mumriken

Testing was done with 720p _highest_ settings and 1080p low using a [email protected] and a [email protected]

Following games where tested: Rise of the tomb raider, Forza motorsport 7, BF1(200fps cap removed) and FC primal. All games showed significant gain.
Pubg was for the most part running at 144fps(cap) before HT was disabled.

A friend of mine has made an pdf with the games tested with ht on/off and a [email protected],9Ghz.
Bottom line, Vs Ht on, 8600k won in all games and HT off 7820x won in all games.

I could post the pdf, but I have to ask him.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mumriken*
> 
> Testing was done with 720p high settings and 1080p low using a [email protected] and a [email protected]
> 
> Following games where tested: Rise of the tomb raider, Forza motorsport 7, BF1(200fps cap removed) and FC primal. All games showed significant gain.
> Pubg was for the most part running at 144fps(cap) before HT was disabled.
> 
> A friend of mine has made an pdf with the games tested with ht on/off and a [email protected],9Ghz.
> Bottom line, Vs Ht on, 8600k won in all games and HT off 7820x won in all games.
> 
> I could post the pdf, but I have to ask him.


Really, those are pretty silly settings. I am not saying the findings are not interesting, but I wish I could see results with at least 1080p Ultra/Highest. Maybe I will do some testing myself with my 7820x and 1080ti.


----------



## Vlada011

Guys is it possible someone to compare i7-6950X and i9-7900X both on 4.3GHz, performance and powerconsumption.
Reviews make unfair comparison 4.3GHz with 3.5GHz. That's 800MHz difference.
Somehow i7-6950X look me more stable and proven option or even i7-5960X/i7-6900K vs i7-7820X.
Sitution is even worse, epoxy and 40 PCI-E lanes vs 28 and thermal paste.
I have X99 but just think about upgrade on more cores and OC.
Budget variants of Skylake-X completely fail, under i9-7900X should be avoided.
i7-7800X because i7-8700K and i7-7820X because i7-6900K. They should be compared on 4.3GHz both + add 300-400MHz higher clock Skylake-X after OC than Brodwell-E.


----------



## Mumriken

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Really, those are pretty silly settings. I am not saying the findings are not interesting, but I wish I could see results with at least 1080p Ultra/Highest. Maybe I will do some testing myself with my 7820x and 1080ti.


Why? When the gpu is maxed out they all show equal performance


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mumriken*
> 
> Why? When the gpu is maxed out they all show equal performance


I understand what you are saying and trying to show. It is emphasizing the CPU performance. It is just a very unrealistic usage scenario. There is a reason that 1080p High is more or less industry standard for gaming benchmarks. With a 1080 ti CPU performance is still a factor at that res/settings and is seen in testing...


----------



## Mumriken

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I understand what you are saying and trying to show. It is emphasizing the CPU performance. It is just a very unrealistic usage scenario. There is a reason that 1080p High is more or less industry standard for gaming benchmarks. With a 1080 ti CPU performance is still a factor at that res/settings and is seen in testing...


5ghz cpus can easly max out 1080ti at 1080p highest (not all the time, but yeah I hit the wall more than [email protected] highest). We are not testing Ryzen here








As for me, I am interested in a 240hz monitor, but care less for maxing out every posible setting


----------



## arrow0309

Ok, so I've just disabled the ht and have only run a Single Cpu Cinebench.
It indeed increased the score from 211 to 212.
Gonna test it with PUBG @2k highest right away (since a day or two there are some lousy fps / gpu loads).


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mumriken*
> 
> 5ghz cpus can easly max out 1080ti at 1080p highest (not all the time, but yeah I hit the wall more than [email protected] highest). We are not testing Ryzen here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for me, I am interested in a 240hz monitor, but care less for maxing out every posible setting


That's cool man. What you tested shows there is improvement when turning HT off. I was just curious how big of a difference it would make in a more realistic use case...so maybe I will test it myself. I doubt most people that bought Sky-x and a 1080ti plan on gaming at 720p or 1080p low.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> That's cool man. What you tested shows there is improvement when turning HT off. I was just curious how big of a difference it would make in a more realistic use case...so maybe I will test it myself. I doubt most people that bought Sky-x and a 1080ti plan on gaming at 720p or 1080p low.


1080p 240hz monitor


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> 1080p 240hz monitor


Yep. I saw.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

So in what universe does it cost more for a 8700k/Motherboard setup over a 7820x/Motherboard, here in Australia it does..









Guess you pay more for those higher overclocks over more cores now


----------



## ESRCJ

I disabled HT and the gaming performance is more or less the same as it was with it on. From what I've experienced thus far, Broadwell-E is 1-2 percent faster in most games and gaming-oriented benchmarks, OC vs. OC. My comments, for what they're worth:

Forza Motorsport 7: The difference here was extreme and a clear outlier. 17% on average FPS is insane. My GPU usage was a rock solid 97% with my 7920X. Maybe something has changed with the game since I tested in with my 6850K. Either that, or Nvidia's newer drivers made Forza performance worse. I honestly can't see Skylake-X losing out THAT much.

Fire Strike: This is an old test. The smallest gap I could produce in graphics score was 1.8%. For all I know, it could simply be a driver thing.

TimeSpy: Skylake-X won here when comparing graphics scores (CPU score is obvious).

Ghost Recon Wildlands: Skylake-X did quite well here and won.

I haven't tested any other games yet. Overall, I'm fine with +/- 1-2% over my X99 setup since I'm getting a massive leap forward with any of my code that utilizes parallel loops.

For reference, my mesh is at 3GHz and memory is at 3200MHz. I wanted to upgrade my memory, but prices are double even for the same kit I got a year ago. Pure insanity.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> I disabled HT and the gaming performance is more or less the same as it was with it on. From what I've experienced thus far, Broadwell-E is 1-2 percent faster in most games and gaming-oriented benchmarks, OC vs. OC. My comments, for what they're worth:
> 
> Forza Motorsport 7: The difference here was extreme and a clear outlier. 17% on average FPS is insane. My GPU usage was a rock solid 97% with my 7920X. Maybe something has changed with the game since I tested in with my 6850K. Either that, or Nvidia's newer drivers made Forza performance worse. I honestly can't see Skylake-X losing out THAT much.
> 
> Fire Strike: This is an old test. The smallest gap I could produce in graphics score was 1.8%. For all I know, it could simply be a driver thing.
> 
> TimeSpy: Skylake-X won here when comparing graphics scores (CPU score is obvious).
> 
> Ghost Recon Wildlands: Skylake-X did quite well here and won.
> 
> I haven't tested any other games yet. Overall, I'm fine with +/- 1-2% over my X99 setup since I'm getting a massive leap forward with any of my code that utilizes parallel loops.
> 
> For reference, my mesh is at 3GHz and memory is at 3200MHz. I wanted to upgrade my memory, but prices are double even for the same kit I got a year ago. Pure insanity.


Interesting stuff. Thanks for posting it. Can you do me a favor? Will you run the AIDA64's Cache and Memory Benchmark? The more tweaking I did and the better latency I saw, the better gaming performance I saw. Here is mine for reference...


----------



## cekim

PSA for any Nvidia users 388.13 botched SLI such that if you run monitors in the background that poll power (at least, it may be other status), it will cause bad stutter/frame drop on SLI systems. Not sure if it affects single cards. Before I found that, I disabled SLI and got decent performance even with Afterburner still running. Once I disabled afterburner, I was able to re-enable SLI and get my performance back...

280-200FPS in BF1 1440p ultra - 144Hz screen, so pegged at 144Hz for the final config. Never dips now.









... and gaming 18 cores @ 4.5Ghz ~40-45C package temp...









Obviously the game (BF1) is not making use of all these cores...


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Interesting stuff. Thanks for posting it. Can you do me a favor? Will you run the AIDA64's Cache and Memory Benchmark? The more tweaking I did and the better latency I saw, the better gaming performance I saw. Here is mine for reference...


I'm using the trial version, so some of the results are unfortunately hidden:



I also dialed the OC back down to 4.5GHz. I won't be running it at 4.7 or above until my custom loop is set up.


----------



## carlhil2

Lol, I see more 7980xe chips than 7960x. I am going to have to do something about that...(hurry up Microcenter). in all honesty though, whichever pops up on their site first I will be ordering...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Lol, I see more 7980xe chips than 7960x. I am going to have to do something about that...(hurry up Microcenter). in all honesty though, whichever pops up on their site first I will be ordering...


very limited stock here in Philly:


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> I'm using the trial version, so some of the results are unfortunately hidden:
> 
> 
> 
> I also dialed the OC back down to 4.5GHz. I won't be running it at 4.7 or above until my custom loop is set up.


I bet if you can get that memory latency down in the low 50s you will close that gap with your 6850k. It would probably take some tweaking of both your primary and secondary timing. What exact memory kit is that?


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> very limited stock here in Philly:


I wish..


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> I bet if you can get that memory latency down in the low 50s you will close that gap with your 6850k. It would probably take some tweaking of both your primary and secondary timing. What exact memory kit is that?


It's two of these:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01HKF450S/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> It's two of these:
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01HKF450S/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1


Hmmm. I don't think those are Samsung B-Die. I think they use Hynix. You may not get much more out of them. Someone with more experience may chime in.


----------



## fato22

Can you guys help me OC my cpu? I am a little bit of a noob and I just don't want to do any disaster. I have a 7700k cooled by a corsair H105. As of right now I set the core to 4500 from the bios without touching voltage. Temps are fine since it's a really minor oc.
I would like to push it to 4.8 and I wonder if you guys can guide me through it.
As a mobo I have a Asus Maximus Hero IX.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *fato22*
> 
> Can you guys help me OC my cpu? I am a little bit of a noob and I just don't want to do any disaster. I have a 7700k cooled by a corsair H105. As of right now I set the core to 4500 from the bios without touching voltage. Temps are fine since it's a really minor oc.
> I would like to push it to 4.8 and I wonder if you guys can guide me through it.
> As a mobo I have a Asus Maximus Hero IX.


best to ask *here*


----------



## fato22

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> best to ask *here*


Thanks!!!


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> very limited stock here in Philly:


Oh look at all that money you save once they strip off their gouge (taking it back to MSRP)? How sweet of them.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Oh look at all that money you save once they strip off their gouge (taking it back to MSRP)? How sweet of them.


lol - you've obviously not been in retail.









anyway - had some time tonight to play with OC.. did a "by core number" OC using the 2 stared cores with +1 multi vs the other 16 (yes, a campaign). Took the individual VIDs from SIV, and running each Vcore at the VID by adaptive for its applied multiplier. Working very well so far. The 2 stared cares wil lrun +1 at only 15 to 25mV higher vcore than the other 16. Kinda a little free bonus in there.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

For the last few days I've been seeing my 7820x temps hit 95c, if I lower my overclock it would still hit the same temp.
A week ago it was like in the mid 80's.

Today I found out what the problem was, the Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut dried out, yes dried out, it was like dried toothpaste.
Is this normal for Kryonaut, it's meant to be the best of the best....


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - you've obviously not been in retail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> anyway - had some time tonight to play with OC.. did a "by core number" OC using the 2 stared cores with +1 multi vs the other 16 (yes, a campaign). Took the individual VIDs from SIV, and running each Vcore at the VID by adaptive for its applied multiplier. Working very well so far. The 2 stared cares wil lrun +1 at only 15 to 25mV higher vcore than the other 16. Kinda a little free bonus in there.


Not too surprising, but I'm finding much more stability with a single fixed voltage that end up being lower than the worst VIDs

No crashes so far in anything 1.18v 4.5GHz. RB stress, my work cases that often exposed problems in the past, etc... Gamed all weekend on this setting as well. (though with 18 cores, BF1 is a cake-walk because it uses so relatively little - 40-45C package temp nearly silent operation - SWEET!). For all its faults relative to BWE in gaming and heavy IPC apps, a 6950x ran hot under BF1 in its 24/7 trim. This chip is barely jogging.

With -0.065 offset its only "mostly stable". I've still hit random application errors that suggest _something_ is amiss including one blue screen with multi-day usage over this past week.

That offset has a few stinker cores auto up to 1.23v. So, it seems those cores tolerate being taken down to 1.18v much better than the others that end up at 1.16v as a result of that offset.

So, the "optimal" (as good as it gets with the tools I have) might be a smaller offset for the better cores which seems counter intuitive to say the least. All for lack of a "floor" or curve to set offset voltages - the fixed offset is applied to the entire range.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - you've obviously not been in retail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> anyway - had some time tonight to play with OC.. did a "by core number" OC using the 2 stared cores with +1 multi vs the other 16 (yes, a campaign). Took the individual VIDs from SIV, and running each Vcore at the VID by adaptive for its applied multiplier. Working very well so far. The 2 stared cares wil lrun +1 at only 15 to 25mV higher vcore than the other 16. Kinda a little free bonus in there.


Did you notice a reduction in temps, or not? Currently running fire and forget with 1.25v adaptive 4.7Ghz synced for all 14 cores.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> For the last few days I've been seeing my 7820x temps hit 95c, if I lower my overclock it would still hit the same temp.
> A week ago it was like in the mid 80's.
> 
> Today I found out what the problem was, the Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut dried out, yes dried out, it was like dried toothpaste.
> Is this normal for Kryonaut, it's meant to be the best of the best....


TGK is really good for cryo cooling, but yeah, gelid and pk-3 seem to hold up longer in normal, every-day use.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Did you notice a reduction in temps, or not? Currently running fire and forget with 1.25v adaptive 4.7Ghz synced for all 14 cores.


certainly lower than running all the cores at 46, but about the same as with all 18 cores at 45... so a bit of benefit for the 2 "good" cores.


----------



## lutjens

Build is finally in progress...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> 
> 
> Build is finally in progress...


Nice. I should have a 900P here tomorrow.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> 
> 
> Build is finally in progress...


Quadro?


----------



## lutjens

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Quadro?


Yes, P6000. Will probably end up with two of them in SLi. The SSDs are Optane 900p 480GB (will be in a RAID 0 VROC). CPU is the i9-7980XE.


----------



## Skybluedk

What are you going to use all that for?


----------



## lutjens

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skybluedk*
> 
> What are you going to use all that for?


Minesweeper....


----------



## chibi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skybluedk*
> 
> What are you going to use all that for?


Minecraft


----------



## Pume91

1.23 vcore and 1.02v cache. Little over 2100 cb score.



Chased for that 11k combined for ages.


----------



## Skybluedk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> Yes, P6000. Will probably end up with two of them in SLi. The SSDs are Optane 900p 480GB (will be in a RAID 0 VROC). CPU is the i9-7980XE.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> Minesweeper....


I say: Keep you C64. The games were better


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Did you notice a reduction in temps, or not? Currently running fire and forget with 1.25v adaptive 4.7Ghz synced for all 14 cores.


IDK bud... I got one hot package.










this is at 46x2, 45x16 - still OEM TIM


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> Yes, P6000. *Will probably end up with two of them in SLi*. *The SSDs are Optane 900p 480GB (will be in a RAID 0 VROC). CPU is the i9-7980XE*.


Expected nothing less


----------



## lutjens

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Expected nothing less


The puny H90 is only temporary...my plan to use my current H110 fell through when the Arctic Freezer 120 that I bought to replace it in my present gaming machine refused to fit with my Dominator Platinums. So an alternative will have to be decided on...either get a different 120mm with a thinner radiator for my old system or a new 280mm (say an H115i) for the new one. But at least the H90 will get it on it's feet while I mull it over...


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> TGK is really good for cryo cooling, but yeah, gelid and pk-3 seem to hold up longer in normal, every-day use.
> certainly lower than running all the cores at 46, but about the same as with all 18 cores at 45... so a bit of benefit for the 2 "good" cores.


I've been using Noctua NT-H1 prior to trying the Kryonaut, never had the HT-H1 dry up after 2 months, rather concerning if you ask me.

I can't find any GELID locally, is the Hydronaut any better or stick with the NT-H1?


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I've been using Noctua NT-H1 prior to trying the Kryonaut, never had the HT-H1 dry up after 2 months, rather concerning if you ask me.
> 
> I can't find any GELID locally, is the Hydronaut any better or stick with the NT-H1?


Hmmmm...I am using Kyronaut for the first time too. It has been a little over 4 months. Maybe I should pull my pump/block and check on things. I have not noticed any temp increases.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Hmmmm...I am using Kyronaut for the first time too. It has been a little over 4 months. Maybe I should pull my pump/block and check on things. I have not noticed any temp increases.


First time for me, unless I didn't put enough on to start with, but I didn't have any temperature problems until recently there was a nice smear pattern across the chip, it was just dried out.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> I've been using Noctua NT-H1 prior to trying the Kryonaut, never had the HT-H1 dry up after 2 months, rather concerning if you ask me.
> 
> I can't find any GELID locally, is the Hydronaut any better or stick with the NT-H1?


NT-H1 is always a good choice if you want to try something else. You can reapply the TGK and see if it happens again.

lol - I saw your post and pulled the block on this 7980XE - TGK was fine, but used PK-3 this time. I mean.. under test conditions a 0.8C delta difference is not gonna be something I'd notice in any use. I need like a 20C drop!


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> NT-H1 is always a good choice if you want to try something else. You can reapply the TGK and see if it happens again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol - I saw your post and pulled the block on this 7980XE - TGK was fine, but used PK-3 this time. I mean.. under test conditions a 0.8C delta difference is not gonna be something I'd notice in any use.


Yeah I did, temps went back to normal (around 85c Realbench compared to 97c yesterday), used the last of the 1g tube, so I was going to order some more paste, I don't know whether to go back to what I know works, or just buy a bigger tube of Kryonaut


----------



## cekim

7980xe'ers: What current limit are you using?

I found a small increase in performance and heat by going from 140% to 240%. Which makes intuitive sense since we are well more than 2X TDP @ 400-450W (if utterly horrifying if you think about it too much







)

AND indicates that it was throttling slightly before. The performance/heat difference is small but consistent. For me it produces the same CBR15 score @ 4.5GHz as it did previously (@140% because I forgot to bump it up further) @ 4.6GHz.

I still cannot get linear performance increases from 3.8->4.5 on "real" applications, but CBR15 seems to scale linearly until 4.5. then 4.5->4.6 offers virtually no increase in performance (suggesting another current throttle?)

BTW: VRM is cool now in my permanent "case" with no active airflow (though the 360 push/pull DOES move some air). The very open nature of the top of the case appears to be performing as I'd hoped. Short version is the throttle above is not VRM temp - not even close... even the power caps on the 8 and 4 pin connectors that previously got very warm even with the mono-block are cool enough to hold your finger on them indefinitely under 100% load:


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Yeah I did, temps went back to normal (around 85c Realbench compared to 97c yesterday), used the last of the 1g tube, so I was going to order some more paste, I don't know whether to go back to what I know works, or just buy a bigger tube of Kryonaut


I've had some TIMs (not yours specifically) separate in the tube over time.... So, if you got a batch at the very end of its shelf life and then baked it in the land down under?

That's the upside of buying in little tubs - you can re-stir at least.


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> For the last few days I've been seeing my 7820x temps hit 95c, if I lower my overclock it would still hit the same temp.
> A week ago it was like in the mid 80's.
> 
> Today I found out what the problem was, the Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut dried out, yes dried out, it was like dried toothpaste.
> Is this normal for Kryonaut, it's meant to be the best of the best....


I had a tube of kyronaut which was extremely difficult to spread. Cooler mounting pressure wasn't enough and when spreading manually it had a tendency to clump and come off the ihs entirely. Temps were good. A few months later the consistency of what remained in the tube was unusable. I bought another tube and it was thick but spread fine under the mounting pressure of the cooler. After that experience I've decided to stick with easier to spread pastes like nt-h1, hydronaut and cooler master mastergel.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> 7980xe'ers: What current limit are you using?


CPU Current Capability [200%] for my 7890Xe.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> 7980xe'ers: What current limit are you using?
> 
> I found a small increase in performance and heat by going from 140% to 240%. Which makes intuitive sense since we are well more than 2X TDP @ 400-450W (if utterly horrifying if you think about it too much
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )
> 
> AND indicates that it was throttling slightly before. The performance/heat difference is small but consistent. For me it produces the same CBR15 score @ 4.5GHz as it did previously (@140% because I forgot to bump it up further) @ 4.6GHz.
> 
> I still cannot get linear performance increases from 3.8->4.5 on "real" applications, but CBR15 seems to scale linearly until 4.5. then 4.5->4.6 offers virtually no increase in performance (suggesting another current throttle?)
> 
> BTW: VRM is cool now in my permanent "case" with no active airflow (though the 360 push/pull DOES move some air). The very open nature of the top of the case appears to be performing as I'd hoped. Short version is the throttle above is not VRM temp - not even close... even the power caps on the 8 and 4 pin connectors that previously got very warm even with the mono-block are cool enough to hold your finger on them indefinitely under 100% load:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


IN addition to cpu current % (I have it at 200 - not delidded) should increase VR current limit also if the thermals will allow.









and ... damn handsome rig! 64 or 128 GB?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> IN addition to cpu current % (I have it at 200 - not delidded) should increase VR current limit also if the thermals will allow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and ... damn handsome rig! 64 or 128 GB?


VRM is 65-75C under RB stress, so should have plenty of room there (mono-block). I think I already cranked that, but I should check again...

Thanks! I'm glad I went with this one - I debated for a while, but it turned out well. Now the 2x2696v3 that lived there needs a new home - working on it...

128G 32000C14-1T that needs more tuning. I've just so far lacked the patience required. Just about any OC and you start losing channels with 16Gx8 setups so it can be frustrating.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> VRM is 65-75C under RB stress, so should have plenty of room there (mono-block). I think I already cranked that, but I should check again...
> 
> Thanks! I'm glad I went with this one - I debated for a while, but it turned out well. Now the 2x2696v3 that lived there needs a new home - working on it...
> 
> 128G 32000C14-1T that needs more tuning. I've just so far lacked the patience required. Just about any OC and you start losing channels with 16Gx8 setups so it can be frustrating.


128GB at 3200c14T1 is an accomplishment. 8x16GB is loading any IMC to the max.

extreme guide, but some useful info to be gleaned: http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?p=496066#post496066

I dropped CPU AUX1 to 0.000V (default runs this at 2.5V, with a recommended max of 2.7V). Stabililty and CB or and yes, skydiver combined score unchanged.

____________________________________________________________
Edit: for any of you guys that want an AVX512 test to tune your offsets without extreme "ageing" of your processor, Time Spy Extreme CPU test with AVX512 selected does a good job:
2x46, 16x45, avx -5, AVX -10 daily clocks, 1.18 to 1.21V on cores. 1.79 VCCIN; 6, 4, 2, 1 Turbo tweaks (4000c16 ram)

AVX2

AVX512

HOW:


with AVX -4 and AVX512 - 8, I get these results:

Instruction set / physics score / maxT (off OC panel)

Auto / 10,772 / 40C
AVX512 / 17,379 / 36C
AVX2 / 14,020 / 40C
AVX/FMA / 13,711 / 42C
SSE3 / 8,737 / 53C

daaum, AVX512 is very efficient!


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> VRM is 65-75C under RB stress, so should have plenty of room there (mono-block). I think I already cranked that, but I should check again...
> 
> Thanks! I'm glad I went with this one - I debated for a while, but it turned out well. Now the 2x2696v3 that lived there needs a new home - working on it...
> 
> 128G 32000C14-1T that needs more tuning. I've just so far lacked the patience required. Just about any OC and you start losing channels with 16Gx8 setups so it can be frustrating.


There were 2 people in here ( or the DDR4 thread ) earlier that had the 128gb c14 gskill kit (3200) that they pushed to 3600 w/ a 4.5-4.6 cpu clock earlier, is your kit 3200 by default or lower? Also what board are you using?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> There were 2 people in here ( or the DDR4 thread ) earlier that had the 128gb c14 gskill kit (3200) that they pushed to 3600 w/ a 4.5-4.6 cpu clock earlier, is your kit 3200 by default or lower?


It is binned/marked as 3200C14 (TridentZ). I've gotten partial functionality as 3600C16, but one channel dropped out. I didn't have time to play with it long enough to find a voltage or swizzle slots to get around that.

So, I put it back to 3200C14-1T for now to get work done.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> It is binned/marked as 3200C14 (TridentZ). I've gotten partial functionality as 3600C16, but one channel dropped out. I didn't have time to play with it long enough to find a voltage or swizzle slots to get around that.
> 
> So, I put it back to 3200C14-1T for now to get work done.


To fast I literally edited my comment as I hit submit , which board are you using?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> To fast I literally edited my comment as I hit submit , which board are you using?


R6E


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> R6E


Damn, hopefully its something as simple as power limit, vcssa or dram voltage.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Damn, hopefully its something as simple as power limit, vcssa or dram voltage.


I literally only gave it one boot cycle to try it out... could be anything...

One of the inner channels failed training so the BIOS disabled it. Didn't even notice until the benchmarks showed the performance drop, so there's some promise there.


----------



## Jpmboy

900P just arrived. Gotta finish up a few things then see how this plays on the APEX with SLI cards and w/wo CPU DIMM.2 (44 lane cpu). Clone my OS drive (hopefully) and migrate all other stuff to a 960 NVMe raid 0. What fun.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 900P just arrived. Gotta finish up a few things then see how this plays on the APEX with SLI cards and w/wo CPU DIMM.2 (44 lane cpu). Clone my OS drive (hopefully) and migrate all other stuff to a *960 NVMe raid 0*. What fun.


How long is Windows going to take to boot - 2 seconds?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> How long is Windows going to take to boot - 2 seconds?


that's not the question... how long will it take PONG to load?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that's not the question... how long will it take PONG to load?


----------



## djgar

I had a thing for Intellivision - it talked!


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> How long is Windows going to take to boot - 2 seconds?


3-4 on mine


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 900P just arrived. Gotta finish up a few things then see how this plays on the APEX with SLI cards and w/wo CPU DIMM.2 (44 lane cpu). Clone my OS drive (hopefully) and migrate all other stuff to a 960 NVMe raid 0. What fun.


Wasn't the nvme raid on X299 a vroc intel drives exclusivity?

@cekim, lol nice!








LMAO


----------



## The Stilt

SKL-X appears to be quite fragile.

My 7960X kicked the dust while idling, without ever been subjected to real abuse during the week it lived.
Got a "IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL" BSOD while typing mails and it never posted after that (0xD5 post code).


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> SKL-X appears to be quite fragile.
> 
> My 7960X kicked the dust while idling, without ever been subjected to real abuse during the week it lived.
> Got a "IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL" BSOD while typing mails and it never posted after that (0xD5 post code).


MB? Settings?


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Wasn't the nvme raid on X299 a vroc intel drives exclusivity?


No you can run nvme raid 0 but you're going to be limited by the DMI bus as far as transfer speeds go (x4 PCIe lanes total), which kinda makes it pointless, unless you just want to merge the drives and get a little more life out of them. I've got my 2 960 Pros in RAID 0 as a bootable windows drive.

With VROC I believe you can run RAID 0 and get the full PCIe x4 lanes for each drive (you also have to buy a key), but I think you still have to use a PCIe nvme card. Someone correct me if I"m wrong.

This is what a saturated x299 DMI bus looks like with 2 960 Pros lol:


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> MB? Settings?


Apex.
4.0GHz / 1.0500V for 16C, 4.5GHz / 1.2000V for 1T (undervolted by 75mV).
All voltages were set manually and none of them were high, let alone unsafe.

VCCSA 0.950V, VCCIO 1.100V, Cache / Mesh 1.025V, VCCIN 1.900V.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*


saved that pic.







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Wasn't the nvme raid on X299 a vroc intel drives exclusivity?
> 
> @cekim, lol nice!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LMAO


yes, that's what I read also.. I have 2 intel 600s (for that reason). But a PCH raid for "sheet" would be fine too. wil lfind out later if any of this works.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> SKL-X appears to be quite fragile.
> 
> My 7960X kicked the dust while idling, without ever been subjected to real abuse during the week it lived.
> Got a "IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL" BSOD while typing mails and it never posted after that (0xD5 post code).


oh man sorry to hear that... damn fragile! ITP time...


----------



## DooRules

ITP has saved my behind on two occasions so far.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> ITP has saved my behind on two occasions so far.


Can they deny you a replacement as part of regular warranty in case like this? I mean, even without Tuning Plan...


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Can they deny you a replacement as part of regular warranty in case like this? I mean, even without Tuning Plan...


Its supposed to save you from bad OC even if its your fault. Cheap as heck too.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Its supposed to save you from bad OC even if its your fault. Cheap as heck too.


Well, they've jacked up the price a bit for 7980xe, but still relatively cheap insurance....


----------



## The Stilt

What's the additional value ITP actually provides, unless it covers physical damage as well?
I mean K & X-SKUs are essentially meant to be overclocked anyway, so warranty being void due to overclocking doesn't sound exactly right to me.

If it covered physical damage / modifications (delid) as well, then it would be another story entirely.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Its supposed to save you from bad OC even if its your fault. Cheap as heck too.


But can they somehow prove that the chip died by your fault (bad OC?). It seems this was a case, when he did nothing really wrong and the chip died anyway? How do they differentiate between this and someone who killed it by overvolting?


----------



## cekim

Anyone VCCSA
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> What's the additional value ITP actually provides, unless it covers physical damage as well?
> I mean K & X-SKUs are essentially meant to be overclocked anyway, so warranty being void due to overclocking doesn't sound exactly right to me.
> 
> If it covered physical damage / modifications (delid) as well, then it would be another story entirely.


Hardly...

There are knobs in most unlocked MBs these days easily able to fry your CPU. Either via your setting or a botched "auto" as we saw with the X99 generation.

Intel cannot realistically cover delids - it just doesn't make sense for them. That they are willing to say the chip will protect itself well enough to eat whatever comes back because Gigabyte, Asus, Asrock, MSI cooked it with a bios setting is impressive enough...


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> But can they somehow prove that the chip died by your fault (bad OC?). It seems this was a case, when he did nothing really wrong and the chip died anyway? How do they differentiate between this and someone who killed it by overvolting?


As a practical matter, I don't think they care much until the insurance claims outstrip the premiums collected.

In reality, they have the tools to understand the mode of failure of a semiconductor - that's their specialty to put it lightly. The question is whether it is worth the resources for any given claim or claims.


----------



## cekim

hmm, I think this nvidia bug is showing up in my stress tests... I'm seeing screen stuttering that I was not before with an older driver in real-bench. In BF1, this turned out to be the polling of power/temp in Nvidia's 388.13 driver.

All my prior tuning was with a single 1080 and now with 2x1080ti I'm seeing windows itself "stutter" at about the same interval (the polling rate of the monitoring software) during stress tests...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Wasn't the nvme raid on X299 a vroc intel drives exclusivity?


for enterprise and datacenters - no key required with intel SSDs
you need a vroc key (std one) for non-intel SSDs


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> What's the additional value ITP actually provides, unless it covers physical damage as well?
> I mean K & X-SKUs are essentially meant to be overclocked anyway, so warranty being void due to overclocking doesn't sound exactly right to me.
> 
> If it covered physical damage / modifications (delid) as well, then it would be another story entirely.


benefit is - no questions asked and happens very quickly. The std warranty will require you to ans questions like... "Have you discussed this with your system integrator? or .. did you try to reboot? you know, the standard Helpless desk questions.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> But can they somehow prove that the chip died by your fault (bad OC?). It seems this was a case, when he did nothing really wrong and the chip died anyway? How do they differentiate between this and someone who killed it by overvolting?


Yes. the chip's internal registers can (usually) stil lbe interrogated, unless you gave it a Viking funeral.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Yes. the chip's internal registers can (usually) stil lbe interrogated, unless you gave it a Viking funeral.


You can also see voltage damage with various equipment depending on the degree of damage.

There is also that little RFID guy on the corner, but they super swear that isn't being used or even connected. Much like they super swore there was most definitely not a deal with AMD to put their GPUs on mobile chips...









VCCSA on HCC chips? Anyone played with it? Also RB used to have horrendous problems with SLI - are those fixed now or should I expect it to be bad? I've gotten some driver buffer overruns at stock settings until I disabled it... Still on 2.44 - I guess I should upgrade. I had forgotten about all those issues...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> VCCSA on HCC chips? Anyone played with it? Also RB used to have horrendous problems with SLI - are those fixed now or should I expect it to be bad? I've gotten some driver buffer overruns at stock settings until I disabled it... Still on 2.44 - I guess I should upgrade. I had forgotten about all those issues...


I still get a luxmark fail with SLI.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I still get a luxmark fail with SLI.


I've seen various things...

I actually disabled SLI and I'm running down Vcore again.... I'm at 4.5GHz 1.165v passing RB with SLI disabled...

I was getting luxmark fails and stack overruns as high as 1.22v, then I dropped to stock and saw the same thing... Then I remembered this (SLI) never worked LOL....

Played with SA, thought maybe it was an interaction with the two cards vs one previously, looks like I've ruled that out now. Software issue. Which explains why I have been hammering it in linux without issue this whole time.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> for enterprise and datacenters - no key required with intel SSDs
> you need a vroc key (std one) for non-intel SSDs


Good to know
So if you just get a Standard Vroc key you should be able to have a 960 Pro raid 0 on dimm2?
And where can you buy it from?

Edit:
Found it

https://geizhals.de/intel-virtual-raid-on-cpu-standard-model-key-vrocstanmod-a1724824.html


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> No you can run nvme raid 0 but you're going to be limited by the DMI bus as far as transfer speeds go (x4 PCIe lanes total), which kinda makes it pointless, unless you just want to merge the drives and get a little more life out of them. I've got my 2 960 Pros in RAID 0 as a bootable windows drive.
> 
> With VROC I believe you can run RAID 0 and get the full PCIe x4 lanes for each drive (you also have to buy a key), but I think you still have to use a PCIe nvme card. Someone correct me if I"m wrong.
> 
> This is what a saturated x299 DMI bus looks like with 2 960 Pros lol:


Haha...looks familiar. My 2 960 EVOs...



If the board manufacturers, bios writers, and Intel ever get their **** together, I would like to try VROC. Apparently the Samsung drives are going to be supported.


----------



## 7820x

Hah nice speeds. There you have it. 2 960 Evos outperforming 2 960 Pros in raid 0.


----------



## Jpmboy

I think the only real difference between the evo and pro is MTBF.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I think the only real difference between the evo and pro is MTBF.


Not according to Newegg lol...the pros are suppose to be a lilttle faster as well:


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Not according to Newegg lol...the pros are suppose to be a lilttle faster as well:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


yeah, SAmsung has to justify the price somehow. Anyway, once in use, only SSD benchmarks know it uses Grecian formula.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Good to know
> So if you just get a Standard Vroc key you should be able to have a 960 Pro raid 0 on dimm2?
> And where can you buy it from?
> 
> Edit:
> Found it
> 
> https://geizhals.de/intel-virtual-raid-on-cpu-standard-model-key-vrocstanmod-a1724824.html


the keys may be board specific... hopefully ASUS makes them available.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Haha...looks familiar. My 2 960 EVOs...
> 
> 
> If the board manufacturers, bios writers, and Intel ever get their **** together, I would like to try VROC. Apparently the Samsung drives are going to be supported.


single 960 EVO on a Z370 Apex...


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Hah nice speeds. There you have it. 2 960 Evos outperforming 2 960 Pros in raid 0.


lol...I would call that within the margin of error.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I still get a luxmark fail with SLI.


You don't get that failure with multiple cards sli disabled do you?


----------



## Sobo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Hah nice speeds. There you have it. 2 960 Evos outperforming 2 960 Pros in raid 0.


And my single 960 Pro outperfoming all of them (X299 TUF Mark 1):



What I find a bit shocking is tha the most important thing by far on this bench (random read 4K QD1) is almost 50% faster on my drive, which means that my system will realistically feel snappier. Sequential speeds pretty much don't matter as you're almost never going to reach them (unless you move tons of large files around like during video editing), because almost no software is able to paralelize workload to such a degree that the drives are able to saturate multiple queues. For a desktop system, the most important metric of performance is still queue depth of 1, where the drive has to finish one operation before it can start another. That's the main reason why Optane SSDs are so good - they vastly outperform anything.

Speaking of RAID 0 - guys, whel will you learn that raiding SSDs (especially fast NVME drives) is completely and utterly pointless? As you can see your performance is worse (and can never be better unless chasing sequential speeds in unrealistic benchmark scenarios is your thing) then my single drive, but the main problem is that you are DOUBLING the chance of a failure. If even one of the drives fails or has some issue - you're screwed.

Anyway, how are the temperatures of your 960s when under load? I compared my drive to this guy using the entire run of ATTO: 




Without the cooler, his drive spikes up to some 58°C towards the end of the test and goes down to 38 with the cooler. My drive peaked at 40°C when using the horizontal M.2 slot under the "heat shield" of my TUF Mark 1 and normally has around 29 degress or so, so I would like to think that is pretty good and there's zero risk of throttling for me.


----------



## Nizzen

My sm961nvme 1TB


----------



## AndreTM

Hey guys what do you suggest for testing the OC stability with Skylake-X? With X99 I did 2 hours of ASUS Realbench and I was okay, can I do the same also with this platform? Thanks in advance.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> You don't get that failure with multiple cards sli disabled do you?


no, just with sli enabled.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sobo*
> 
> And my single 960 Pro outperfoming all of them (X299 TUF Mark 1):
> 
> 
> 
> What I find a bit shocking is tha the most important thing by far on this bench (random read 4K QD1) is almost 50% faster on my drive, which means that my system will realistically feel snappier. Sequential speeds pretty much don't matter as you're almost never going to reach them (unless you move tons of large files around like during video editing), because almost no software is able to paralelize workload to such a degree that the drives are able to saturate multiple queues. For a desktop system, the most important metric of performance is still queue depth of 1, where the drive has to finish one operation before it can start another. That's the main reason why Optane SSDs are so good - they vastly outperform anything.
> 
> Speaking of RAID 0 - guys, whel will you learn that raiding SSDs (especially fast NVME drives) is completely and utterly pointless? As you can see your performance is worse (and can never be better unless chasing sequential speeds in unrealistic benchmark scenarios is your thing) then my single drive, but the main problem is that you are DOUBLING the chance of a failure. If even one of the drives fails or has some issue - you're screwed.
> 
> Anyway, how are the temperatures of your 960s when under load? I compared my drive to this guy using the entire run of ATTO:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Without the cooler, his drive spikes up to some 58°C towards the end of the test and goes down to 38 with the cooler. My drive peaked at 40°C when using the horizontal M.2 slot under the "heat shield" of my TUF Mark 1 and normally has around 29 degress or so, so I would like to think that is pretty good and there's zero risk of throttling for me.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> My sm961nvme 1TB


C'mon, you guys do know that NAND drives slow down as they hold data - right (this is why larger NAND drives are faster than lower capacity drives)? There is Zero use in testing empty drives - Tells you nothing about how they perform once they hold data. Post results with it as your C: or OS drive, especially after some use.


----------



## Sobo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> no, just with sli enabled.
> 
> C'mon, you guys do know that NAND drives slow down as they hold data - right (this is why larger NAND drives are faster than lower capacity drives)? There is Zero use in testing empty drives - Tells you nothing about how they perform once they hold data. Post results with it as your C: or OS drive, especially after some use.


Well, that's true, but from my experience the performance difference is within the margin of error. Back in the day my X-25M 80GB had about the same performance on day 1 as it had 5 years later when it was 80% full i.e. within the margin of error. Generally, I always leave at least 20% of free space left on all of my SSDs - while it helps performance, my main concern is reliability and logetivity of the drive. The disk's lifespan is simply much longer if you leave some space free. Also, the NAND type and the used controller have a huge effect.

I will be reinstalling the OS to the NVME drive (had it for a couple of days only), hopefully sometimes this week. Still, I don't expect any major changes.


----------



## Jpmboy

There is not much "margin of error" in crystal mark, or AS-SSD, they measure the performance with good precision. The issue is accuracy, it is nearly impossible to create identical test conditions with windows 10 (best shot before was W7 diagnostic mode). Too many background services.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sobo*
> 
> And my single 960 Pro outperfoming all of them (X299 TUF Mark 1):
> 
> What I find a bit shocking is tha the most important thing by far on this bench (random read 4K QD1) is almost 50% faster on my drive, which means that my system will realistically feel snappier. Sequential speeds pretty much don't matter as you're almost never going to reach them (unless you move tons of large files around like during video editing), because almost no software is able to paralelize workload to such a degree that the drives are able to saturate multiple queues. For a desktop system, the most important metric of performance is still queue depth of 1, where the drive has to finish one operation before it can start another. That's the main reason why Optane SSDs are so good - they vastly outperform anything.
> 
> Speaking of RAID 0 - guys, whel will you learn that raiding SSDs (especially fast NVME drives) is completely and utterly pointless? As you can see your performance is worse (and can never be better unless chasing sequential speeds in unrealistic benchmark scenarios is your thing) then my single drive, but the main problem is that you are DOUBLING the chance of a failure. If even one of the drives fails or has some issue - you're screwed.


I wouldn't say it's utterly pointless. You could say custom water loops, chillers, 18 core processors, overclocking, sli, etc are utterly pointless, but they're not. We're all enthusiasts here and we like to tinker. You say we're doubling the chance of a failure but I look at it as I'm doubling the chance of success by spreading the workload over 2 drives. I probably had way more fun building my custom loop, delidding my processor then you did slapping your h110i on your processor and calling it a day. Do you look at your build everyday in awe because you spent days and hours meticulously planning, designing your loop like it was a work of art? lol I do. So when I see guys on this forum like jpmboy and done12many2 who have these ridiculous setups I don't think man, they wasted all that money on all that gear so they could get the highest benchmarks. How utterly pointless. I think man, those guys are really passionate about their computers and that's inspiring. I enjoyed trying to setup raid because all the reviewers were saying you can't without vroc like another user mentioned earlier, even though there weren't any tutorials online at the time, and even though i knew performance would be degraded and I'd be limited by DMI.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sobo*
> 
> Anyway, how are the temperatures of your 960s when under load? I compared my drive to this guy using the entire run of ATTO:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Without the cooler, his drive spikes up to some 58°C towards the end of the test and goes down to 38 with the cooler. My drive peaked at 40°C when using the horizontal M.2 slot under the "heat shield" of my TUF Mark 1 and normally has around 29 degress or so, so I would like to think that is pretty good and there's zero risk of throttling for me.


I'm seeing about about the same temps ...60C under load. 43C under normal usage. Just using the stock heatsinks on my M7 ACK


----------



## Jpmboy

lool - just for clarity... running 2 or 4 or any number of drives in a Raid 0 does not change the "chance" that a single drive failure breaks the raid, any more than the chance that a single drive will fail. Having 4 drives with the same MTBF does not mean the raid 0 MTBF is 4x lower. Raid 0's fail for a host of other reasons. This is why there is Raid 10


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> My sm961nvme 1TB


Which is which.
The lower looks about right, a little sub par on the reads.
The top looks like ramcache and not a drive at all. Ramcache is great for overall menial task performance but as soon as you need to pull data at a faster rate than the amount of cache allotted its actually slower after that cache saturates. Rerun that bench with 32GB packets and watch it nose dive.

You want fast, How about a pair of 900P PCIe drives as bootable raid0 array that isnt supposed to be bootable across spanned VMDs? The 3D Xpoint does not slow down as it fills or ages. What you get with an empty new drive is the same you get with a full drive 5 years later. Failure would take continuous reads and writes for 5 years to get to the 1,600,000 hours MTBF and 5.11 PB Written.









Faster 4K as a single drive though



As for raiding Nand drives such as a 960 pro its all about how you do it. If its PCH behind a DMI bottleneck it is a bit pointless, you will gain a little write speed but thats about it. Also watch your 4K sheet the bed when you raid them and add the latency. Now you have large files and doing it as a data array on PCIe with something like the Hyper M2 X16 card? well then you can get some serious speed but still hurt in the 4K Dept. Its all dependent on the individual use. Regardless of whether you have a single drive or a pair raided, it fails you are not screwed if and only if you follow the cardinal rule of regular back ups to another drive or preferably another device whether it be cloud or a NAS or portable drive. If you have nothing thats really sensitive and only run the machine for the fun of it whats it matter when you crash hard from pushing too hard? Simply stuff the magic smoke back in it and try again!


----------



## djgar

RAID 10 & RAID 6


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Which is which.
> The lower looks about right, a little sub par on the reads.
> The top looks like ramcache and not a drive at all. Ramcache is great for overall menial task performance but as soon as you need to pull data at a faster rate than the amount of cache allotted its actually slower after that cache saturates. Rerun that bench with 32GB packets and watch it nose dive.
> 
> You want fast, How about a pair of 900P PCIe drives as bootable raid0 array that isnt supposed to be bootable across spanned VMDs? The 3D Xpoint does not slow down as it fills or ages. What you get with an empty new drive is the same you get with a full drive 5 years later. Failure would take continuous reads and writes for 5 years to get to the 1,600,000 hours MTBF and 5.11 PB Written.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faster 4K as a single drive though
> 
> 
> 
> As for raiding Nand drives such as a 960 pro its all about how you do it. If its PCH behind a DMI bottleneck it is a bit pointless, you will gain a little write speed but thats about it. Also watch your 4K sheet the bed when you raid them and add the latency. Now you have large files and doing it as a data array on PCIe with something like the Hyper M2 X16 card? well then you can get some serious speed but still hurt in the 4K Dept. Its all dependent on the individual use. Regardless of whether you have a single drive or a pair raided, it fails you are not screwed if and only if you follow the cardinal rule of regular back ups to another drive or preferably another device whether it be cloud or a NAS or portable drive. If you have nothing thats really sensitive and only run the machine for the fun of it whats it matter when you crash hard from pushing too hard? Simply stuff the magic smoke back in it and try again!


First is 2x sm961nvme raid-0. No ram cache.
Second is single.

I'm waiting for 2x optane 900p 480GB. Have now one optane m.2 32GB in one pc.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> RAID 10 & RAID 6


I running raid-0 and Raid-6. Areca ftw ?


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> First is 2x sm961nvme raid-0. No ram cache.
> Second is single.
> 
> I'm waiting for 2x optane 900p 480GB. Have now one optane m.2 32GB in one pc.


How did you raid the 2 Sammy's? Hyper M2?

Optane NVMe cards are totally useless IMO unless you are living in the last millennium running spinners and even then they aren't very good. I raided 2 of them and the writes were nothing short of HORRENDOUS!!

The 900Ps are looking good. By some freak event I'm able to do what is not supposed to be possible and boot from two of the PCIe slots. I've seen 4 of the U2-M2 2.5 inch models on a Hyper card getting some awesome results. Don't think they have tried bootable. My issue with that is to do this you have to leave the heat sink off the Hyper card and have 4 cables running to the card. A bit unsightly for my tastes but if you need that speed for a data array and don't care what it looks like it's all good.


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lool - just for clarity... running 2 or 4 or any number of drives in a Raid 0 does not change the "chance" that a single drive failure breaks the raid, any more than the chance that a single drive will fail. Having 4 drives with the same MTBF does not mean the raid 0 MTBF is 4x lower. Raid 0's fail for a host of other reasons. This is why there is Raid 10


Exactly what I think to myself every time someone gives me the "You're increasing your risk" speech.

Anyone who relies solely on any single drive or any single RAID is setting themselves up for failure anyways.


----------



## Skybluedk

Seems to me that the Skylake X cpus benefits from high speed ram. What ram should I get?


----------



## LunaP

still waiting on the 128gb 3200 c14's to be back in stock, they keep flying out faster than the R6E's, if the shortage keeps up might be force to grab the 3600 17's and downclock...


----------



## Skybluedk

Why would you downclock? It seems to me that theres a lot of advantage to higherspeed ram.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Getting my second-hand 7820X. Owner had a 7960X and a 7900X. He didn't do any OCing on this chip, so we'll see, I'll likely get my new retail 7820X as well. Going to bin those two and return the worst one.









Still have to get rid of this 7800X.

What would be the best steps for binning?

Cinebench R15 at 1.25V and test 45x, 46x, 47x etc? Something as simple as that?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Which is which.
> The lower looks about right, a little sub par on the reads.
> The top looks like ramcache and not a drive at all. Ramcache is great for overall menial task performance but as soon as you need to pull data at a faster rate than the amount of cache allotted its actually slower after that cache saturates. Rerun that bench with 32GB packets and watch it nose dive.
> 
> You want fast, How about a pair of 900P PCIe drives as bootable raid0 array that isnt supposed to be bootable across spanned VMDs? The 3D Xpoint does not slow down as it fills or ages. What you get with an empty new drive is the same you get with a full drive 5 years later. Failure would take continuous reads and writes for 5 years to get to the 1,600,000 hours MTBF and 5.11 PB Written.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Faster 4K as a single drive though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for raiding Nand drives such as a 960 pro its all about how you do it. If its PCH behind a DMI bottleneck it is a bit pointless, you will gain a little write speed but thats about it. Also watch your 4K sheet the bed when you raid them and add the latency. Now you have large files and doing it as a data array on PCIe with something like the Hyper M2 X16 card? well then you can get some serious speed but still hurt in the 4K Dept. Its all dependent on the individual use. Regardless of whether you have a single drive or a pair raided, it fails you are not screwed if and only if you follow the cardinal rule of regular back ups to another drive or preferably another device whether it be cloud or a NAS or portable drive. If you have nothing thats really sensitive and only run the machine for the fun of it whats it matter when you crash hard from pushing too hard? Simply stuff the magic smoke back in it and try again!


the last two pics are with different versions and different queues and thread counts.








C'mon guys, what's next photo-shopped metrics?


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skybluedk*
> 
> Why would you downclock? It seems to me that theres a lot of advantage to higherspeed ram.


Because at the current timings the 3200 are faster than the 3600
14-14-14-34 vs 17-19-19-39

(lower is better)
(14 / 1600) * 1000 = 8.75
vs
(17 / 1800 ) * 1000 = 9.44
(not to mention the 2ndary timings are higher further decreasing ( not by an insane amount but never the less )


----------



## 7820x

Fool me once...shame on ....you? fool me you can't get fooled again...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Because at the current timings the 3200 are faster than the 3600
> 14-14-14-34 vs 17-19-19-39
> 
> (lower is better)
> (14 / 1600) * 1000 = 8.75
> vs
> (17 / 1800 ) * 1000 = 9.44
> (not to mention the 2ndary timings are higher further decreasing ( not by an insane amount but never the less )


I think that calc is only good for 8-bits or lower. once you get to 32bits or 64 bits , 3600c17 pulls ahead. (first bit + 63*ns/cycle, first bit = cas* ns/cycle)

castimings2.xls 21k .xls file


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I think that calc is only good for 8-bits or lower. once you get to 32bits or 64 bits , 3600c17 pulls ahead. (first bit + 63*ns/cycle, first bit = cas* ns/cycle)
> 
> castimings2.xls 21k .xls file


But based on
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Trust but verify:
> Kit 1: 3600/17 = 211
> Kit 2: 3200/14 = 228
> 
> Kit2 has better ICs. they run "faster" - can toggle from one address to the next more often (i.e. in less time). It is more likely that you can run kit 2 at 3600/17 than kit 1 at 3200x14.
> 
> Also, note the secondary timings are 19 not 17 - further indication of the quality of the ICs


And
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the 3200c14 kits have been very cooperative and overclock very well. save some cash and invest a little time to tune them up.


Ugh this is killing me, since you guys were the ones that pointed me at 3200 14 being the higher cycle / better binned if anything, ones due to the straight timings vs secondary lol....I can buy the 3600 now though...just wanna make sure I'm getting the best bang for my buck between the 2...

If you HAD to choose between either kit ( for the 128 ) and you did rendering,OBS, 3d renders, gaming, and drawing etc ( not like it'd require much other than large ram ) which would you choose.

Also I don't have office installed on here since i got lazy waiting to build my new upgrade, so I'll try uploading that to google.

Greatly appreciate the input/info btw.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> But based on
> And
> Ugh this is killing me, since you guys were the ones that pointed me at 3200 14 being the higher cycle / better binned if anything, ones due to the straight timings vs secondary lol....I can buy the 3600 now though...just wanna make sure I'm getting the best bang for my buck between the 2...
> 
> If you HAD to choose between either kit ( for the 128 ) and you did rendering,OBS, 3d renders, gaming, and drawing etc ( not like it'd require much other than large ram ) which would you choose.
> 
> Also I don't have office installed on here since i got lazy waiting to build my new upgrade, so I'll try uploading that to google.
> 
> Greatly appreciate the input/info btw.


To be honest, I don't expect you are going to see a huge difference in real-world performance, but... hey "trust but verify".

anyone have a decent set of reasonable first swag 3600/17 secondary timings handy? I can try it out on the 3200/14 and run cinebench or any reasonable to set up benchmark.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> To be honest, I don't expect you are going to see a huge difference in real-world performance, but... hey "trust but verify".
> 
> anyone have a decent set of reasonable first swag 3600/17 secondary timings handy? I can try it out on the 3200/14 and run cinebench or any reasonable to set up benchmark.


I have 3600 16-16-16-36 with my 7820x...


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> To be honest, I don't expect you are going to see a huge difference in real-world performance, but... hey "trust but verify".
> 
> anyone have a decent set of reasonable first swag 3600/17 secondary timings handy? I can try it out on the 3200/14 and run cinebench or any reasonable to set up benchmark.


3600-17-19-19-39-1T 1.35 boots up - lessee how it does...

pass 1 - SAT errors right away - so something in the deeper timings is borken

pass 2 - SAT errors cleared up with fat-thumbed guesses at appropriate timings... lots of "auto" based on 3200/14 down there which doesn't work well with 3600/17 - whodathunkit?

Thought I caught them all the first time, but I guess I missed some.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> But based on
> And
> Ugh this is killing me, since you guys were the ones that pointed me at 3200 14 being the higher cycle / better binned if anything, ones due to the straight timings vs secondary lol....I can buy the 3600 now though...just wanna make sure I'm getting the best bang for my buck between the 2...
> 
> If you HAD to choose between either kit ( for the 128 ) and you did rendering,OBS, 3d renders, gaming, and drawing etc ( not like it'd require much other than large ram ) which would you choose.
> 
> Also I don't have office installed on here since i got lazy waiting to build my new upgrade, so I'll try uploading that to google.
> 
> Greatly appreciate the input/info btw.


cekim is right - latency/switching. Then data moves. As he said, always best to test.
And yeah... the 3200c14-14-14 kits have been very cooperative - single sided. You are not gonna find much experience here with 16GB sticks at the 128GB level. Cekim is one of a few.
Sorry if you miss understood me... I'm saying, the 8x8GB 3200c14 kits (which is what I linked - right?) are good kits, and will OC the best at that density. At 128GB, others here know better (cekim, kedarwolf for example). at 128GB levels, the CPU IMC is gonna be the key to doing any ram OC at that loading.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the last two pics are with different versions and different queues and thread counts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C'mon guys, what's next photo-shopped metrics?


Are you accusing me of falsifying?
Two different version ran at exactly the same settings yes becuse the single was done before a clean install and on the clean install version was available. The only thing that changed is the order of the test.

Cmon what's next, auto posts of conjecture? I don't appreciate being called a liar!
This was not a competitive cash out. This was simply sharing some 900P results butt munch.
Get a life and stop trying to be the OCN police because you ain't all that!


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Because at the current timings the 3200 are faster than the 3600
> 14-14-14-34 vs 17-19-19-39
> 
> (lower is better)
> (14 / 1600) * 1000 = 8.75
> vs
> (17 / 1800 ) * 1000 = 9.44
> (not to mention the 2ndary timings are higher further decreasing ( not by an insane amount but never the less )


Hi,
I believe on xmp profile 2 defaulted to 15-17-17-17-37
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Because at the current timings the 3200 are faster than the 3600
> 14-14-14-34 vs 17-19-19-39
> 
> (lower is better)
> (14 / 1600) * 1000 = 8.75
> vs
> (17 / 1800 ) * 1000 = 9.44
> (not to mention the 2ndary timings are higher further decreasing ( not by an insane amount but never the less )


Hi,
I was using xmp profile 2 on my trident z 3200c16 and it was set on 15-17-17-17-37


----------



## cekim

ok, prelim results:
4.5GHz/3.1 7980xe

CBR15:
3200/C14/1T - 4413 (14-14-14-34-1T)
3600C17/1T - 4302 (17-19-19-39-1T)

Here we have a case where a "real" application (CBR15 is a bit synthetic compared to many, but it is a real render app) is faster with 3200/14 than 3600/17, but aida shows the 3600/17 outpacing the 3200/14 in absolute throughput:


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> To be honest, I don't expect you are going to see a huge difference in real-world performance, but... hey "trust but verify".
> 
> anyone have a decent set of reasonable first swag 3600/17 secondary timings handy? I can try it out on the 3200/14 and run cinebench or any reasonable to set up benchmark.


Yeah harder to test since once I open it newegg will not let me return it, thats why I wanna go w/ whats best recommended for all rounded needs.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> cekim is right - latency/switching. Then data moves. As he said, always best to test.
> And yeah... the 3200c14-14-14 kits have been very cooperative - single sided. You are not gonna find much experience here with 16GB sticks at the 128GB level. Cekim is one of a few.
> Sorry if you miss understood me... I'm saying, the 8x8GB 3200c14 kits (which is what I linked - right?) are good kits, and will OC the best at that density. At 128GB, others here know better (cekim, kedarwolf for example). at 128GB levels, the CPU IMC is gonna be the key to doing any ram OC at that loading.


Yeah but at this point I'm looking at only 16gb sticks since IF I did the 64gb I'd run the 4000 sets but since I'm already nearly maxing out my current 64 as I'm improving my workload, I'm getting 128gb to be on the safe side moving forward + I don't really wanna make a spare 64gb page file either to compensate when going over 50% usage...and no worries I just wanted to be sure, you guys are the gurus I'm just here to learn and listen + ask questions when things pop out.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> I believe on xmp profile 2 defaulted to 15-17-17-17-37
> Hi,
> I was using xmp profile 2 on my trident z 3200c16 and it was set on 15-17-17-17-37


Ahh yeah but thats for the c16's I'm only looking at the 3200 c14's and 3600 c17's but thank you!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> ok, prelim results:
> 4.5GHz/3.1 7980xe
> 
> CBR15:
> 3200/C14/1T - 4413 (14-14-14-34-1T)
> 3600C17/1T - 4302 (17-19-19-39-1T)
> 
> Here we have a case where a "real" application (CBR15 is a bit synthetic compared to many, but it is a real render app) is faster with 3200/14 than 3600/17, but aida shows the 3600/17 outpacing the 3200/14 in absolute throughput:


Ahh so based on that which would you recommend then? U have the 3200 C15 kits right? I'm curious if you're about to hit straight 17-17-17 on your 3600 clock, and or 16-16-16-38 as that would technically make it better correct? Or am I looking at this wrong still. I really wanna pull the trigger and since 3200's been constantly out of stock thats why I'm reaffirming now on the diff if any.

I sincerely appreciate all the assistance w/ this.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Yeah harder to test since once I open it newegg will not let me return it, thats why I wanna go w/ whats best recommended for all rounded needs.
> Yeah but at this point I'm looking at only 16gb sticks since IF I did the 64gb I'd run the 4000 sets but since I'm already nearly maxing out my current 64 as I'm improving my workload, I'm getting 128gb to be on the safe side moving forward + I don't really wanna make a spare 64gb page file either to compensate when going over 50% usage...and no worries I just wanted to be sure, you guys are the gurus I'm just here to learn and listen + ask questions when things pop out.
> Ahh yeah but thats for the c16's I'm only looking at the 3200 c14's and 3600 c17's but thank you!
> Ahh so based on that which would you recommend then? U have the 3200 C15 kits right? I'm curious if you're about to hit straight 17-17-17 on your 3600 clock, and or 16-16-16-38 as that would technically make it better correct? Or am I looking at this wrong still. I really wanna pull the trigger and since 3200's been constantly out of stock thats why I'm reaffirming now on the diff if any.


All of the above is with a 3200/14 (14-14-14-34 sticker) 16x8 kit.

As previously, for real work, I'd go with the 3200/14 kit if you can get it over the 3600/17.

I'll try to tighten the timing, but at this point I'm playing catchup to the 3200/14 on all but aida.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Are you accusing me of falsifying?
> Two different version ran at exactly the same settings yes becuse the single was done before a clean install and on the clean install version was available. The only thing that changed is the order of the test.
> 
> Cmon what's next, auto posts of conjecture? I don't appreciate being called a liar!
> This was not a competitive cash out. This was simply sharing some 900P results butt munch.
> Get a life and stop trying to be the OCN police because you ain't all that!


You are free to post all the BS you like and no, not deliberately falsifying, just not knowing what you are saying. But so you might understand... "Check yourself".

Versions 5 and 6 run differently: v5 "4k" is 32QT1, all tests in v5 are 32QT1 at defaults. Version 6 is not. In simple terms the bottom rows are not the same test - even if they happen to give close numbers in some instances.
and then you need to grow a dck.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Ahh yeah but thats for the c16's I'm only looking at the 3200 c14's and 3600 c17's but thank you!
> Ahh so based on that which would you recommend then? U have the 3200 C15 kits right? I'm curious if you're about to hit straight 17-17-17 on your 3600 clock, and or 16-16-16-38 as that would technically make it better correct? Or am I looking at this wrong still. I really wanna pull the trigger and since 3200's been constantly out of stock thats why I'm reaffirming now on the diff if any.
> 
> I sincerely appreciate all the assistance w/ this.


CBR15 not distinguishable @ 3600-17-17-17-38-CR1.

Aida shows a little bump up (CBR15 was 4292 vs 4302 which I'd write off to test variance):


----------



## D2ultima

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> All of the above is with a 3200/14 (14-14-14-34 sticker) 16x8 kit.
> 
> As previously, for real work, I'd go with the 3200/14 kit if you can get it over the 3600/17.
> 
> I'll try to tighten the timing, but at this point I'm playing catchup to the 3200/14 on all but aida.


That's because as far as I know AIDA64 memory test only tests the speed for the read/write/etc numbers. It doesn't give a bandwidth readout. For that 3600 is better than 3200 because timings are agnostic there. I'd like you to check possibly a game set to get the highest possible FPS though, maybe Evolve Stage 2 (which is free, only requires you to download it). There is no useful benchmark in it, but the tutorial for playing as the monster is present and has little variance. Simply check that there's scaling between say 2133 or 2400 cl14 and 3200 cl14 (per-core CPU load in real-time, and possibly total load though I expect that will be too low to distinguish with an 18-core chip), then once you note that there is a big difference (there should be, anyway), test 3600 17-19-19 against it. Synthetics have their use, but I find they don't tell what actual user usage scenarios will do most of the time.

Frostbite 3 games also scale very well with memory.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *D2ultima*
> 
> That's because as far as I know AIDA64 memory test only tests the speed for the read/write/etc numbers. It doesn't give a bandwidth readout. For that 3600 is better than 3200 because timings are agnostic there. I'd like you to check possibly a game set to get the highest possible FPS though, maybe Evolve Stage 2 (which is free, only requires you to download it). There is no useful benchmark in it, but the tutorial for playing as the monster is present and has little variance. Simply check that there's scaling between say 2133 or 2400 cl14 and 3200 cl14 (per-core CPU load in real-time, and possibly total load though I expect that will be too low to distinguish with an 18-core chip), then once you note that there is a big difference (there should be, anyway), test 3600 17-19-19 against it. Synthetics have their use, but I find they don't tell what actual user usage scenarios will do most of the time.
> 
> Frostbite 3 games also scale very well with memory.


Actually, it showed a repeatable bump via lowering the 3600 timings (see above). 17-17-17-38 vs 17-19-19-39 both 3600.

EDIT: hmmm, actually hit a SAT error on 17-17, so some of lack of performance improvement may have been correctable errors. Noodling a little on this setup.

The 17-19-.... setup did NOT have any SAT errors (at least not in a 10m test - which is hardly "stability", but a good sanity check).


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> You are free to post all the BS you like and no, not deliberately falsifying, just not knowing what you are saying. But so you might understand... "Check yourself".
> 
> Versions 5 and 6 run differently: v5 "4k" is 32QT1, all tests in v5 are 32QT1 at defaults. Version 6 is not. In simple terms the bottom rows are not the same test - even if they happen to give close numbers in some instances.
> and then you need to grow a dck.


So what's your point? You want a cookie? Maybe a hug from your Mommy?
Whose to say I even ran the two at default nimrod?
Do you have a pair of 900P PCIe drives running as a boot drive to prove me wrong or just going off of google searches again? Just in case you were wondering you are not the authority. You should grow up, grow a pair of bawls, and stop being the OCN bully. If you wanted to see the results of the raid0 repeated a nice request of hey can you repeat that with version 5? But no, you can't do that can you? You are too hell bent on trying to prove your worth but all you are proving is your ability to be a jacka$$ and attempting to put others down like you are a god of sorts. I know your type to well, living a cyber life with thousands of posts in a cyber world from fear of a real life. Probably live in your mother's basement.

Unless you have the hardware to show anything different what you have to say about it is less important than the color of my Labrador's ? this afternoon. Suggesting people you know nothing about are falsifying tests about hardware you also know nothing about is childish at best.

If anyone but monkey boy would like to see the raid repeated with the previous version feel free to ask or just take what you know about the two different versions and make your own conclusions. I was simply sharing the results I have with what I have to test it with, nothing open for a different interpretation regardless of what basement dwellers want to make of it by calling people liars.


----------



## D2ultima

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Actually, it showed a repeatable bump via lowering the 3600 timings (see above). 17-17-17-38 vs 17-19-19-39 both 3600.


Mmm that one I can't explain. I know it isn't raw bandwidth since the 3200 DOES have more.

Maybe we should just ask the AIDA64 people.


----------



## cekim

Luna, to answer your question 17-17-17 is going to require more tuning and/or voltage than 17-19-19.... I'm getting correctable/corrected errors (which consume BW). 17-19-19-39 produces zero errors @ 1.35v even CR1 (again, a 3200CL14-14-14-34 kit).

@1.37v I get fewer errors, but still seeing some so some of my other timings must need some alignment hygiene...


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> So what's your point? You want a cookie? Maybe a hug from your Mommy?
> Whose to say I even ran the two at default nimrod?
> Do you have a pair of 900P PCIe drives running as a boot drive to prove me wrong or just going off of google searches again? Just in case you were wondering you are not the authority. You should grow up, grow a pair of bawls, and stop being the OCN bully. If you wanted to see the results of the raid0 repeated a nice request of hey can you repeat that with version 5? But no, you can't do that can you? You are too hell bent on trying to prove your worth but all you are proving is your ability to be a jacka$$ and attempting to put others down like you are a god of sorts. I know your type to well, living a cyber life with thousands of posts in a cyber world from fear of a real life. Probably live in your mother's basement.
> 
> Unless you have the hardware to show anything different what you have to say about it is less important than the color of my Labrador's ? this afternoon. Suggesting people you know nothing about are falsifying tests about hardware you also know nothing about is childish at best.
> 
> If anyone but monkey boy would like to see the raid repeated with the previous version feel free to ask or just take what you know about the two different versions and make your own conclusions. I was simply sharing the results I have with what I have to test it with, nothing open for a different interpretation regardless of what basement dwellers want to make of it by calling people liars.


Man it's getting heated up in here lol.

Not taking sides here because it was my original crystalmark posting that got all this started but I think he was just being facetious with the comment about photoshopping and not really calling you a liar. You kinda went ape **** on him though. He's actually really helpful on these forums in my limited experience being here and not really a bully at all. That cstkl dude use to be a bully on here but I havent seen him around after he got called out on it lol.

I did appreciate you sharing your 900p single and raid results though. Now I know what my next upgrade is going to be. Thanks for that. But the way you presented the images and direct commentary on them was a little misleading since they were from different versions, and that's all he was pointing out. But you did clear it up by saying that was all that was available at the time you tested.

I'm curious how the vroc key works though since i've apparently got a slot on my motherboard for it, but it clearly states in my manual that you have to purchase the key separately. Did your 900ps comes with a key? Or did you have to buy it from somewhere?


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> I did appreciate you sharing your 900p single and raid results though. Now I know what my next upgrade is going to be. Thanks for that. But the way you presented the images and direct commentary on them was a little misleading since they were from different versions, and that's all he was pointing out. But you did clear it up by saying that was all that was available at the time you tested.
> 
> I'm curious how the vroc key works though since i've apparently got a slot on my motherboard for it, but it clearly states in my manual that you have to purchase the key separately. Did your 900ps comes with a key? Or did you have to buy it from somewhere?


What was misleading? Here it is in raid, here is what I got before i raided them up and they are fast as hell. Pretty straight up regardless. I don't go around trying to mislead or spend my days trying to poke holes in other people's posts. Like I said no one needed to be a jerk and make wise a$$ comments that I saw as a direct insult, no other way to see it IMO. A simple hey dude, those two are different can you post them using the same would have been fine. I would have just said my bad and posted the raid array in the old version.

Now moving right along seeing how you are acting like brother and not talking down on people....

There is no VROC key involved and they didn't come with one unless Intels take on it being available with drives is coded into the controller but they are in pass through mode so that doesn't hold true either. I've been riding ASUS support hard to where I'm getting updates every few days. Whether it's BS or not, they are at least telling me something. Last thing was they are working with intel to get a solution and we should know something in a few weeks. I've been riding them because they advertised and marketed that keys would be available for purchase yet Intel is saying they will never be for purchase by the public. Only bundled by OEM and systems integrators.

Whether or not this was intentional is anyone's guess. I'm thinking not as the two latest BIOS release show the drives as unsupported in the raid selection. I saw differently in an older BIOS and rolled back and they are there again. What's even more puzzling is according to Intel these drives are not supposed to be bootable key or not because they are spanned on two different VMD controllers. Yet here they are bootable in VROC with no key on spanned volumes. That was the big takeaway from my first post, not nit picking crystal diskmarks like I was cheating in a competition. I was just sharing for others and comments that were made are enough to make people not want to share. Honestly I was expecting someone to say it's impossible to run a boot array from drives on different VMD controllers which is why I posted up the rest to show it's there and it's happening on two different controllers and with no HW key.


----------



## TahoeDust

So, are you going to run both tests with the same version or what?


----------



## carlhil2

Nearly every Microcenter across the Country has HCC chips for sale, good old Boston? stiiiiiiill waiting...


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Nearly every Microcenter across the Country has HCC chips for sale, good old Boston? stiiiiiiill waiting...


MIT and Harvard students got them all!


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> MIT and Harvard students got them all!


Lol, that MUST be it. I am on that site refreshing, work or home, all day. wish that I didn't have this $750 gift card to spend there..


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Luna, to answer your question 17-17-17 is going to require more tuning and/or voltage than 17-19-19.... I'm getting correctable/corrected errors (which consume BW). 17-19-19-39 produces zero errors @ 1.35v even CR1 (again, a 3200CL14-14-14-34 kit).
> 
> @1.37v I get fewer errors, but still seeing some so some of my other timings must need some alignment hygiene...


Thanks, I was expecting to run the kit at 1.4-1.42 anyways w/ a higher clock this makes the 3200's pretty promising and makes me htink the 3600's are just 3200's pushed a bit.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> What was misleading? Here it is in raid, here is what I got before i raided them up and they are fast as hell. Pretty straight up regardless. I don't go around trying to mislead or spend my days trying to poke holes in other people's posts. Like I said no one needed to be a jerk and make wise a$$ comments that I saw as a direct insult, no other way to see it IMO. A simple hey dude, those two are different can you post them using the same would have been fine. I would have just said my bad and posted the raid array in the old version.
> 
> Now moving right along seeing how you are acting like brother and not talking down on people....
> 
> There is no VROC key involved and they didn't come with one unless Intels take on it being available with drives is coded into the controller but they are in pass through mode so that doesn't hold true either. I've been riding ASUS support hard to where I'm getting updates every few days. Whether it's BS or not, they are at least telling me something. Last thing was they are working with intel to get a solution and we should know something in a few weeks. I've been riding them because they advertised and marketed that keys would be available for purchase yet Intel is saying they will never be for purchase by the public. Only bundled by OEM and systems integrators.
> 
> Whether or not this was intentional is anyone's guess. I'm thinking not as the two latest BIOS release show the drives as unsupported in the raid selection. I saw differently in an older BIOS and rolled back and they are there again. What's even more puzzling is according to Intel these drives are not supposed to be bootable key or not because they are spanned on two different VMD controllers. Yet here they are bootable in VROC with no key on spanned volumes. That was the big takeaway from my first post, not nit picking crystal diskmarks like I was cheating in a competition. I was just sharing for others and comments that were made are enough to make people not want to share. Honestly I was expecting someone to say it's impossible to run a boot array from drives on different VMD controllers which is why I posted up the rest to show it's there and it's happening on two different controllers and with no HW key.


I don't think it was intentionally misleading at all...it was just being shown as an apples to apples comparison of 4k speeds with a single drive vs two drives and it was more like an apples 5.0 vs apples 6.0 comparison lol. And noone knows its impossible to run a boot array from drives on different VMD controllers because noone knows yet because they're so new. This information is really valuable to all potential 900p buyers.

But thanks for the great info on VROC brother. That really clears things up for me. Did you still have to load the Intel raid driver manually during windows installation or did the install automatically see the array as a partition to install to?


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> So, are you going to run both tests with the same version or what?


Lol. I was waiting for schoolofmonkey to ask because that woulld have fit his monkey boy comment perfectly.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> So, are you going to run both tests with the same version or what?


You couldnt pay me to run it now.
Wanna see it it run both in 6.0? Buy two cards then test them before and after. I cant find 5.2 any longer as all they have up is 5.5 and thats not the same now is it? Not going to kill myself, over it. It is what it is and Im not going to destroy my array to post them both on 6 as Ive spent most of the day loading up software.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> And noone knows its impossible to run a boot array from drives on different VMD controllers because noone knows yet because they're so new. This information is really valuable to all potential 900p buyers.
> 
> But thanks for the great info on VROC brother. That really clears things up for me. Did you still have to load the Intel raid driver manually during windows installation or did the install automatically see the array as a partition to install to?


According to Intel you cant run bootable raid on two VMD controllers. Data only . When you create the array in the BIOS you get a warning saying such and if you do it in the IRSTe software you get the same there as well. When raided HW info only shows one drive and the size of a single drive.

Yes drivers have to be loaded same as any other array. I tried to clone it over, it went but would not boot. On the support page you get two drivers, One is labeled iaVROC and the other is labeled iaStorE. I was actually bummed when I read the intel statement about not working on two VMD controllers. But I got them to raid up in the BIOS and figured wut da fut, got nothing to lose. First thing I did was yank all other drives and tried what I thought would be the right choice, iaVROC. It loaded but no dirves listed. Loaded it again, no drives. Loaded the iaStorE and BAM I waas looking at the array, full size, no partitions and unformatted just one would think it should be. So non bootable on drivers that should not be but here it is. No 90 day trial on the IRSte either, that went away with the 900Ps, it was there for 960 pros and 32GB optane drives. Im thinking, and just pure speculation so OCN police dont go jumping my back, that this is all possible with simple BIOS manipulation with no keys. Im no BIOS modder by any means but my guess is it can all be done. Im also betting that there were items missing from the changelogs on the last two BIOS update for the RVIE as the drives show as being supported on 0602, 0802, 1002 but not on 1003 and 1004. My GUESS is this is at the hands of intel demanding this be made where you have to gt a key (cant buy one) and use only intel drives. The enterprise keys on enterprise boards and Xeon CPUs can run a lot more then just intel drives. Its looking like Intel is doing the back stroke to prevent enterprise customer from buying cheaper boards and processors to do the same thing that they are now paying a lot more for.

Another screenie, hope everything is revsion correct, if it isnt......I really dont care. informational only. First post was again more about here it is and that the scaling was pretty much in point for two drives. On an X299 you can get up to ten of them if you want to give up both X16 slots and an X8 and run a single GPU on X8. If thats what you need for a work station and just putting a quatro on an X8 then it will do all data arrays like that. One member on ROG forums has 8 of the U2-M2 2.5 inch drives with two ASUS Hyper M2 x16 card with stupid fast sequential results, the 4K isnt bad either.



Here is anothers results from 8x 2.5 inch 900P u2-M2 (that particular sku comes with an M2 cable)


----------



## LunaP

Alright ended up going w/ the 3200 c14 128gb kit, just ordered they're back in stock at newegg, I"ll post results when I get it along w/ clocks thanks again for the boost of confidence.

Should arrive friday then I can tear down my current loop and put the new board/cpu/monoblock + ram in and rebuild it.

N/m bank declined it thinking it was fraud called it to fix it and now its out of stock...***


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> So what's your point? You want a cookie? Maybe a hug from your Mommy?
> Whose to say I even ran the two at default nimrod?
> Do you have a pair of 900P PCIe drives running as a boot drive to prove me wrong or just going off of google searches again? Just in case you were wondering you are not the authority. You should grow up, grow a pair of bawls, and stop being the OCN bully. If you wanted to see the results of the raid0 repeated a nice request of hey can you repeat that with version 5? But no, you can't do that can you? You are too hell bent on trying to prove your worth but all you are proving is your ability to be a jacka$$ and attempting to put others down like you are a god of sorts. I know your type to well, living a cyber life with thousands of posts in a cyber world from fear of a real life. Probably live in your mother's basement.
> 
> Unless you have the hardware to show anything different what you have to say about it is less important than the color of my Labrador's ? this afternoon. Suggesting people you know nothing about are falsifying tests about hardware you also know nothing about is childish at best.
> 
> If anyone but monkey boy would like to see the raid repeated with the previous version feel free to ask or just take what you know about the two different versions and make your own conclusions. I was simply sharing the results I have with what I have to test it with, nothing open for a different interpretation regardless of what basement dwellers want to make of it by calling people liars.


I wouldn't be so quick to judge, JP likely has more equity than anyone in this thread combined lol. That, however, is by the by. You're accusing him of calling you out for falsifying when the reality is you've posted comparisons that are little more than apples to oranges. Which is what JP was stipulating. If you're comparing performance data, then you want to be using the same software revision at the very least, leave alone anything else that isn't uniform. That much should go without saying









Besides, if we're pointing fingers here regarding twisting the truth, just only this morning you took something that was said and posted it out of context.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?96170-Rampage-VI-Extreme-build-thread&p=679803&viewfull=1#post679803

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?97480


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Alright ended up going w/ the 3200 c14 128gb kit, just ordered they're back in stock at newegg, I"ll post results when I get it along w/ clocks thanks again for the boost of confidence.
> 
> Should arrive friday then I can tear down my current loop and put the new board/cpu/monoblock + ram in and rebuild it.
> 
> N/m bank declined it thinking it was fraud called it to fix it and now its out of stock...***


Hi,
That's a heck of a lot of ram :shock:
What does one need with that much ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Nearly every Microcenter across the Country has HCC chips for sale, good old Boston? stiiiiiiill waiting...


yeah, what's with that? Bud, I'd buy one here and ship it to ya. Did that with a few 5960X's for some of our EU members way back when.








... tho, then you are testing my lottery luck.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Alright ended up going w/ the 3200 c14 128gb kit, just ordered they're back in stock at newegg, I"ll post results when I get it along w/ clocks thanks again for the boost of confidence.
> 
> Should arrive friday then I can tear down my current loop and put the new board/cpu/monoblock + ram in and rebuild it.
> 
> N/m bank declined it thinking it was fraud called it to fix it and now its out of stock...***


Ugh that's no good.

Supposedly Samsung has ramped up or is ramping up dram production finally. Hopefully the shortage will ease. I need to build out some server stuff but it's so ludicrous right now I'm limping until next year on a few things.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> That's a heck of a lot of ram :shock:
> What does one need with that much ?


Keeping your entire cat photo collection resident in memory for instant access...









Seriously though - large renders, models, DBs, lots of VMs, ZFS, all or any combination of the above...

1. 128G/18 = 7.1G per core - not all that much if your algo can scale that way
2. I'll very often prototype or debug an application that uses horrendous amounts of memory - its much easier to regress things after fixing to chip away at excessive memory usage if you have a valid result to which to compare.
- bug was often initially found from an exception or bus-error because prior execution ran out of memory and handled it poorly.
3. profile and debug tools can balloon up already large things to absurd levels
4. large, greedy filesystem caches such as linux's default mode of operation are a beautiful thing.
5. See list - some models, VM use/test scenarios and DBs benefit tremendously from a boat-load of ram. If you need it, you need it. If you don't, you don't.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Man it's getting heated up in here lol.
> 
> Not taking sides here because it was my original crystalmark posting that got all this started but I think he was just being facetious with the comment about photoshopping and not really calling you a liar. You kinda went ape **** on him though. He's actually really helpful on these forums in my limited experience being here and not really a bully at all. That cstkl dude use to be a bully on here but I havent seen him around after he got called out on it lol.
> 
> I did appreciate you sharing your 900p single and raid results though. Now I know what my next upgrade is going to be. Thanks for that. But the way you presented the images and direct commentary on them was a little misleading since they were from different versions, and that's all he was pointing out. But you did clear it up by saying that was all that was available at the time you tested.
> 
> I'm curious how the vroc key works though since i've apparently got a slot on my motherboard for it, but it clearly states in my manual that you have to purchase the key separately. Did your 900ps comes with a key? Or did you have to buy it from somewhere?


If you use Intel SSDs you won't need a VROC key (cute of Intel to configure it this way). Apparently, some drives (the SM951 it seems and a few others) are also supported there is a list, for what it is worth, in the product description page FAQ section.
Keys may likely be board specific, so the OEMs would be the providers.

But yeah, VROC seems to be not ready for prime time.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I wouldn't be so quick to judge, JP likely has more equity than anyone in this thread combined lol. That, however, is by the by. You're accusing him of calling you out for falsifying when the reality is you've posted comparisons that are little more than apples to oranges. Which is what JP was stipulating. If you're comparing performance data, then you want to be using the same software revision at the very least, leave alone anything else that isn't uniform. That much should go without saying
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Besides, if we're pointing fingers here regarding twisting the truth, just only this morning you took something that was said and posted it out of context.
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?96170-Rampage-VI-Extreme-build-thread&p=679803&viewfull=1#post679803
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?97480


Firstly please don't try to twist what was said and take it out of context. I didnt accuse him of anything, accusations is what I got. Again had some one said Hey buddy, those are two different versions would you mind posting up the same things would have transpired much differently. Instead I got a condescending smart a$$ remark and its context was nothing but a jab.

If you are going to try to say I posted something out of context at least read ALL of it and ALL of the conversation, not only what you feel is out of context. I posted nearly verbatim! If you are going on a witch hunt at least search out all of the posts and also what you cant see, the PMs asking for clarification. I find it hilarious that you spent the time to go to another forum and search out and drag in things here to point fingers to try and prove a pointless point. that has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation. Speaks a lot about someones character. Troll much?

I was not comparing two different drives and making an argument that one was better than the other. I simply posted what I found with the same drives. Would it make you feel better if I said I really wasn't paying attention to the version of crystal marks because I installed a single drive and benched it while I was waiting for the second and 5.2 is just what i happened to have installed then the non bootable array that I installed and booted windows on was a new install and the latest version of Crystal marks? If we are going to talk about taking things out of context what does it matter which was which in the context of my post? Did I say anywhere in that post that one of the two was faster? Let me answer that for you...NO! Why do cyber warriors have to try and poke holes in things instead of taking the post for what its worth, A freindly show of 900p drives in raid0? Would it matter to you if I told you that the single drive comparison was an after thought and only intended to show people reading it that as with any other drive the latency of the raid0 causes loss of 4K performance? That not disputable and you can run that test in 1000 different utilities as many times as you like and come up with the same conclusion even though every single run will be different.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> If you use Intel SSDs you won't need a VROC key (cute of Intel to configure it this way). Apparently, some drives (the SM951 it seems and a few others) are also supported there is a list, for what it is worth, in the product description page FAQ section.
> Keys may likely be board specific, so the OEMs would be the providers.
> 
> But yeah, VROC seems to be not ready for prime time.


This is still highly debatable. Its all dependent on which specifications you read. This table comes from an intel white paper for enterprise VROC and also stipulates it runs only on Xeon processors and that it supports selected 3rd party drives as you stated like the Sammy OEMs. While the Sammys have run on X299 in a trial mode of the IRSTe software as data only they will not run once a key is installed according to the gentleman at PCper and are unsupported in the UEFI of the X299 boards completely. I cant speak for any other manufacturer but ASUS but they are contending that its always been stated by them that VROC will only work on intel drives on the X299 platform. Ive asked Intel, no response. Ive been going back and for with ASUS and their latest is they are in discussions with Intel on how they are going to be able to provide keys that they said were available for purchase. At any rate all parties are not saying a whole lot about VROC and giving carefully worded responses to reveal as little as possible. IMO intel does not want to lose the higher $$ enterprise business over to HEDT that is cheaper.

Accoding to ASUS's last statement on this a key is required regardless of the drive used on their X299 platforms and that only Intel drives will work as stated in all of their manuals. Intel says the key will be bundled with the drives and other than that available through OEM bundles and SI only, not for sale to the general public. There is no key with the drives and no X299 OEM is bundling them at this point in time. ASUS documentation states the keys are to be purchased separately but you cant purchase something that cannot be sold.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Damn... Both of these 7820Xs seems to OC worse than my 7800X. My 7800X is delidded but still..

Wellwell... Sold my 7800X for half the retail price. I only gave 80% of the retail price myself, so wasen't a big loss.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Damn... Both of these 7820Xs seems to OC worse than my 7800X. My 7800X is delidded but still..
> 
> Wellwell... Sold my 7800X for half the retail price. I only gave 80% of the retail price myself, so wasen't a big loss.


A lot of folks have been complaining about going the OCs on the higher core counts. Its been pretty much the same with the 7900s as well. Only 5GHz clocks Ive seen on the 7980s is with chillers and per core clocks with multiple cores turned down to like 12X. Ive seen multiple people say they dumped the 7980XE and went back to the 7900X.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Damn... Both of these 7820Xs seems to OC worse than my 7800X. My 7800X is delidded but still..
> 
> Wellwell... Sold my 7800X for half the retail price. I only gave 80% of the retail price myself, so wasen't a big loss.


Hi,
Looked at a pretty good youtube video on oc'ing the 7820x it worked well for my 7900x too
I believe the video oc'ed to about 46 all core possibly 47 with under 1.3v
Heck I did 49 all core with only 1.275v.
https://valid.x86.fr/tzfeen


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Yeah. I payed a little bit more for the switch, since I sold the 7800X extremely cheap IMHO. But I've seen that the 7820X gets higher FPS at the same core clock? Could the cache difference do that?

I can do 4700 at around 1.220V straight maybe, and definetly after delidding, so not too bad. Not the worst tud out there.







I dropped 30-40mv per 100mhz after delidding on my 7800X.. Maybe this one can do the same?

After all, it only requires 40-50mv more on the same clockspeed. Or, I can do 100 mhz more on the same voltage. But in the end, it is only a couple of percent difference, and this one got 8 cores.









But the temps are actually quite decent on this. The older 7820X was 6-8'C hotter and had a bigger difference between the cores. So I might just stick with this stock since it won't go far anyways..


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I do adaptive for the cache with + 0.125
Sometimes I use the same for the turbo + 0.125
Seems to work although I never worked on the 49 all core to stabilize it enough to run realbench so it still needed work to tune it in
But the temperature was looking good


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Yeah. I don't think I'm going to delid. I don't want to go much over 1.225V for 24/7... and this one stays at the mid 50s to low 60s when folding on all eight cores. This is with 3.2 ghz on mesh and 4x4 gb 4000 17-19-19-36-1T-300 on mem. So a OK chip I guess..

Maybe I'll do that later when exploring more on the OC part.. Want to play AC:O now









EDIT: My 7800X needed 30-40 mv less after delid and was 15-20'C colder... Hmm... He he


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Firstly please don't try to twist what was said and take it out of context. I didnt accuse him of anything, accusations is what I got. Again had some one said Hey buddy, those are two different versions would you mind posting up the same things would have transpired much differently. Instead I got a condescending smart a$$ remark and its context was nothing but a jab.
> 
> If you are going to try to say I posted something out of context at least read ALL of it and ALL of the conversation, not only what you feel is out of context. I posted nearly verbatim! If you are going on a witch hunt at least search out all of the posts and also what you cant see, the PMs asking for clarification. I find it hilarious that you spent the time to go to another forum and search out and drag in things here to point fingers to try and prove a pointless point. that has absolutely nothing to do with the conversation. Speaks a lot about someones character. Troll much?
> 
> I was not comparing two different drives and making an argument that one was better than the other. I simply posted what I found with the same drives. Would it make you feel better if I said I really wasn't paying attention to the version of crystal marks because I installed a single drive and benched it while I was waiting for the second and 5.2 is just what i happened to have installed then the non bootable array that I installed and booted windows on was a new install and the latest version of Crystal marks? If we are going to talk about taking things out of context what does it matter which was which in the context of my post? Did I say anywhere in that post that one of the two was faster? Let me answer that for you...NO! Why do cyber warriors have to try and poke holes in things instead of taking the post for what its worth, A freindly show of 900p drives in raid0? Would it matter to you if I told you that the single drive comparison was an after thought and only intended to show people reading it that as with any other drive the latency of the raid0 causes loss of 4K performance? That not disputable and you can run that test in 1000 different utilities as many times as you like and come up with the same conclusion even though every single run will be different.
> This is still highly debatable. Its all dependent on which specifications you read. This table comes from an intel white paper for enterprise VROC and also stipulates it runs only on Xeon processors and that it supports selected 3rd party drives as you stated like the Sammy OEMs. While the Sammys have run on X299 in a trial mode of the IRSTe software as data only they will not run once a key is installed according to the gentleman at PCper and are unsupported in the UEFI of the X299 boards completely. I cant speak for any other manufacturer but ASUS but they are contending that its always been stated by them that VROC will only work on intel drives on the X299 platform. Ive asked Intel, no response. Ive been going back and for with ASUS and their latest is they are in discussions with Intel on how they are going to be able to provide keys that they said were available for purchase. At any rate all parties are not saying a whole lot about VROC and giving carefully worded responses to reveal as little as possible. IMO intel does not want to lose the higher $$ enterprise business over to HEDT that is cheaper.
> 
> 
> According to ASUS's last statement on this a key is required regardless of the drive used on their X299 platforms and that only Intel drives will work as stated in all of their manuals. Intel says the key will be bundled with the drives and other than that available through OEM bundles and SI only, not for sale to the general public. There is no key with the drives and no X299 OEM is bundling them at this point in time. ASUS documentation states the keys are to be purchased separately but you cant purchase something that cannot be sold.


I'm wondering if somehow that last bit about bundling the keys with the drives somehow got lost in translation as far as which Intel drives that pertained to (consumer vs. pro/enterprise). The XEON vs X299 HCC CPU (a watered down XEON?) thing also makes me wonder. Whatever the case, between what Intel spec'd, what ASUS is doing hardware/software/firmware -wise, and what we've actually seen thus far, I tend to liken the situation to _confusion worse confounded being interpreted as smoke and mirrors_.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> I'm wondering if somehow that last bit about bundling the keys with the drives somehow got lost in translation as far as which Intel drives that pertained to (consumer vs. pro/enterprise). The XEON vs X299 CPU (a watered down XEON?) thing also makes me wonder. Whatever the case, between what Intel spec'd, what ASUS is doing hardware/software/firmware -wise, and what we've actually seen thus far, I tend to liken the situation to _confusion worse confounded being interpreted as smoke and mirrors_.


There in lies the problem. Both Intel and ASUS are not saying a whole lot about anything but leaving people diving miles deep into intel white papers while ASUS gives you a 3 Step method where step one is impossible...

1) purchase and install Vroc key
2) install in ASUS X299 MOBO
3) install up to 4 Intel SSDs into Hyper M2 X16

Problem with this is there are no intel M2 drives you can install in the Hyper card that are worth having unless the 3D Xpoint does some serious shrinking. You can put 32GB optane sticks in there but the write results are terrible! Heres a single screen I did with just two to see if it was worth getting 4 fror a 120GB boot only drive in VROC. Not only were these drives unsupported in the BIOS they just flat out stink in everything but 4k reads and did I mention terrible writes across the boad?

_DISCLAIMER!! From my personal experience only for decision making purposes, no reference is given to any performance values derived by using specific versions of of bench-marking software. Adobe Photoshop was not used in the creation._


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> This is still highly debatable. Its all dependent on which specifications you read. This table comes from an intel white paper for enterprise VROC and also stipulates it runs only on Xeon processors and that it supports selected 3rd party drives as you stated like the Sammy OEMs. While the Sammys have run on X299 in a trial mode of the IRSTe software


Dumpster Fire is burning hot and smelly...

These boards have been out for how long now? This is really sad Intel - fix your [email protected]#$


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Dumpster Fire is burning hot and smelly...
> 
> These boards have been out for how long now? This is really sad Intel - fix your [email protected]#$


Lol... it is not your grand-daddy's Intel anymore (though I whole-heartedly agree).


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Dumpster Fire is burning hot and smelly...
> 
> These boards have been out for how long now? This is really sad Intel - fix your [email protected]#$


As always the finger pointing war continues. ASUS blaming it on Intel like they were blind sided and Intel saying nothing. Intel holds all the cards. Their chipset, their controllers, the only thing they don't control is the BIOS and I think I have seen somewhat of a hole. I cant say if its by design or error or what I received the first 900P (the egg was the only vendor I saw selling them and limit of 1 per houshold so I had to wait to order the second) and the drive showed up in the BIOS raid creation as supported so Im like hey, this is great! this was on BIOS 1002. Then in between the second drive arriving I flashed to 1003. When the second drive arrives I install it and go into the BIOS and its listed as unsupported now. I cursed for a bit then saw 1004 and loaded it, same deal. Unsupported. I have 0802 on my other BIOS ROM so I switch and BAM, supported again. Why it changed I can only speculate on but guessing ASUS getting pressure from Intel. Not that they have ever made a decent change log but what was listed has nothing to do with VROC but it changed all the same.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> As always the finger pointing war continues. ASUS blaming it on Intel like they were blind sided and Intel saying nothing. Intel holds all the cards. Their chipset, their controllers, the only thing they don't control is the BIOS and I think I have seen somewhat of a hole. I cant say if its by design or error or what I received the first 900P (the egg was the only vendor I saw selling them and limit of 1 per houshold so I had to wait to order the second) and the drive showed up in the BIOS raid creation as supported so Im like hey, this is great! this was on BIOS 1002. Then in between the second drive arriving I flashed to 1003. When the second drive arrives I install it and go into the BIOS and its listed as unsupported now. I cursed for a bit then saw 1004 and loaded it, same deal. Unsupported. I have 0802 on my other BIOS ROM so I switch and BAM, supported again. Why it changed I can only speculate on but guessing ASUS getting pressure from Intel. Not that they have ever made a decent change log but what was listed has nothing to do with VROC but it changed all the same.


Honestly, I have to excuse OEMs from 99.99% of this if not more in terms of causing the problem.

They may have a big part of fixing Intel's [email protected]@$, but in terms of who lit this fire, it was Intel pulling in devel schedules and frankly, scrambling wildly to maintain and increase very complex market segmentation scheme between consumer, prosumer, and enterprise.

AMD forced their hand, but they chose where to move it.

The xeon-W appears to have been MUCH more planned out as a segmentation of "workstation" and "server" into not only different boards as in the past, but a different socket.

HCC HEDT and VROC less so...


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Honestly, I have to excuse OEMs from 99.99% of this if not more in terms of causing the problem.
> 
> They may have a big part of fixing Intel's [email protected]@$, but in terms of who lit this fire, it was Intel pulling in devel schedules and frankly, scrambling wildly to maintain and increase very complex market segmentation scheme between consumer, prosumer, and enterprise.
> 
> AMD forced their hand, but they chose where to move it.
> 
> The xeon-W appears to have been MUCH more planned out as a segmentation of "workstation" and "server" into not only different boards as in the past, but a different socket.
> 
> HCC HEDT and VROC less so...


Excellent point but I do have to place more blame on the OEMs. Intel rushed out this platform to answer back to AMD but the OEMs didn't have to rush their products to market before they knew what was going on. They only do so for the same reason Intel does, to beat down the competition. Waiting to produce a solid product was not as important as going to market with it the very day the Intel NDA was lifted so as not to miss out on the volume of sales on the initial wave that is actually still in progress.

Really nothing new and we are just experiencing the woes of early adoption of any new release.
My only hope is its not obsolete in 6 months!


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Excellent point but I do have to place more blame on the OEMs. Intel rushed out this platform to answer back to AMD but the OEMs didn't have to rush their products to market before they knew what was going on. They only do so for the same reason Intel does, to beat down the competition. Waiting to produce a solid product was not as important as going to market with it the very day the Intel NDA was lifted so as not to miss out on the volume of sales on the initial wave that is actually still in progress.
> 
> Really nothing new and we are just experiencing the woes of early adoption of any new release.
> My only hope is its not obsolete in 6 months!


I'm pretty much of the same mind with one addition: the consumer who's screaming "where's the hardware for this?"

From that perspective, I blame the Internet and those equipped with their IOT devices.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> A lot of folks have been complaining about going the OCs on the higher core counts. Its been pretty much the same with the 7900s as well. Only 5GHz clocks Ive seen on the 7980s is with chillers and per core clocks with multiple cores turned down to like 12X. Ive seen multiple people say they dumped the 7980XE and went back to the 7900X.


I know I will not be dumping my i9-7980Xe for a 7900X.










Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## iamjanco

I'm perfectly happy with my 7900X and see no need to spend an additional ~$1,000 on a cpu simply because it might earn me bragging rights. Doing so won't make my hands any larger


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> That's a heck of a lot of ram :shock:
> What does one need with that much ?


Was about to explain but, then cekim below pretty much nailed it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Ugh that's no good.
> 
> Supposedly Samsung has ramped up or is ramping up dram production finally. Hopefully the shortage will ease. I need to build out some server stuff but it's so ludicrous right now I'm limping until next year on a few things.


Yeah though most of these shortages are just falsified due to the whole price collusion crap given sales have been through the roof.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Keeping your entire cat photo collection resident in memory for instant access...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously though - large renders, models, DBs, lots of VMs, ZFS, all or any combination of the above...
> 
> 1. 128G/18 = 7.1G per core - not all that much if your algo can scale that way
> 2. I'll very often prototype or debug an application that uses horrendous amounts of memory - its much easier to regress things after fixing to chip away at excessive memory usage if you have a valid result to which to compare.
> - bug was often initially found from an exception or bus-error because prior execution ran out of memory and handled it poorly.
> 3. profile and debug tools can balloon up already large things to absurd levels
> 4. large, greedy filesystem caches such as linux's default mode of operation are a beautiful thing.
> 5. See list - some models, VM use/test scenarios and DBs benefit tremendously from a boat-load of ram. If you need it, you need it. If you don't, you don't.


Don't forget chrome!









But yeah also animation and heavy canvas sizes ranging 20-45gb

Also got lucky and it wasn't out of stock just on hold since card declined after fixing w/ bank clicked the link newegg sent and it went through, order some kryonaut and should be building my RIG this friday.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I know I will not be dumping my i9-7980Xe for a 7900X.


Glad to hear you are happy with it. Most I've seen that are dumping it is a result of not being able to get the higher clocks resulting in worse performance in applications not using all the cores, which at this point is pretty much everything but competitive bench tests.

I'm happy with my 7900X and it's OC ability on a custom loop without having to break out the chillers, phase change, LN2 or LHe. I bought the chip as an interim with the intention of upgrading to the 7980XE later when they are more available and pending the real world results. At this point in time I'm not convinced it's time to make any change in CPUs based on my personal needs.

Nice placing BTW in the Timespy CPU, howd the overall score do?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I know I will not be dumping my i9-7980Xe for a 7900X.


Yeah, not sure who this throng of 7980xe regretters are who expected 5GHz on 18 cores lol...

They were wrong... and should feel bad. Also, if you can stomach the 7980xe's price, you can have one of each and then run your games on a 5.3GHz 8700k as you sip butthurt tears from your "ask if I care?" mug....


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> A lot of folks have been complaining about going the OCs on the higher core counts. Its been pretty much the same with the 7900s as well. Only 5GHz clocks Ive seen on the 7980s is with chillers and per core clocks with multiple cores turned down to like 12X. Ive seen multiple people say they dumped the 7980XE and went back to the 7900X.


My guess is that they never had the 7980xe in the firs place









"Internet white lying"


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Glad to hear you are happy with it. Most I've seen that are dumping it is a result of not being able to get the higher clocks resulting in worse performance in applications not using all the cores, which at this point is pretty much everything but competitive bench tests.
> 
> I'm happy with my 7900X and it's OC ability on a custom loop without having to break out the chillers, phase change, LN2 or LHe. I bought the chip as an interim with the intention of upgrading to the 7980XE later when they are more available and pending the real world results. At this point in time I'm not convinced it's time to make any change in CPUs based on my personal needs.
> 
> Nice placing BTW in the Timespy CPU, howd the overall score do?


Thanks, everyone should get the processor that suites own their needs. For me it's about going as fast as possible with this particular machine. It's a hobby that I love.










Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> My guess is that they never had the 7980xe in the firs place
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Internet white lying"


^^^^


----------



## iamjanco

I imagine it boils down to whatever wets your whistle (especially if money is no object). For me it's also a hobby, one I enjoy, while keeping in mind I'll be using my build as my daily worker as well. I don't game much anymore, but I do so love toying with a lot of apps, mostly geared toward the work that I do.

Btw, for the sake of clarity, I never bought any of the HCC cpus. Just didn't see the need to do so.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> I'm pretty much of the same mind with one addition: the consumer who's screaming "where's the hardware for this?"
> 
> From that perspective, I blame the Internet and those equipped with their IOT devices.


Cant say too much as Im one of the screamers only demanding what I bought to work as it was specified.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> My guess is that they never had the 7980xe in the firs place
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Internet white lying"


Quite possible and Im sure a lot will tell the internet stores of being a french model. After all you cant post it on the internet if its not true.

While the sources Im referring to have not posted anything to prove or disprove their choices or proof that they even own either chip or a HEDT at all they have always been pretty straight up people and I have no reason to believe they are being less than truthful. Pretty much every internet reviewing mogul comes up with the same conclusions at this point in time. The 7980XE is king when it comes to pure CPU computing in applications that can make use of all cores, it had damn well better be with an 18 core count. But lags behind in everything else.

PC gamer went on to say

From a non-gaming perspective, this is a questionable processor-it's only marginally faster than the 16C/32T i9-7960X. You can make an argument for something like the i9-7900X, where there's a sizeable jump in performance from the i7-7700K (sometimes over twice as fast), but beyond that scaling with core counts really starts to slow down. The extra eight cores end up improving overall performance in CPU-intensive applications by around 30 percent, which might sound good, but the six extra cores on the i9-7960X gives a similar 27 percent performance improvement.

Fundamentally, the Core i9-7980XE is about bragging rights, on multiple levels. There are the bragging rights for anyone wealthy enough to buy one, and bragging rights for anyone crazy enough to overclock one with an extreme cooling solution (I can't wait to see the LN2 and LHe results that will inevitably appear!) But most importantly I think, this is about bragging rights for Intel. "Yes, AMD, we see your 8C/16T Ryzen 7 processors, and your 16C/32T Threadripper 1950X. We can beat you on per-core performance, clockspeeds, and core counts, because we have 18C/36T!"

If it works for you then that's great. Its just not a viable option for my use and it has nothing to do with cost (I spent the extra $$ to get a Silicon Lottery binned 7900X to keep the guess work out) and everything to do with no need for the extra cores at lower clocks for my needs. If there were samples showing 5Ghz on all cores with something less than extreme cooling Id be all over it. Maybe the manufacturing process will improve and provide better samples but at this point in time its just not happening.


----------



## ABeta

I noticed my CPU cores would downclock. There's no voltage or thermal throttle going on. However, according to HWinfo, the 'Max Turbo Limit' gets triggered and this causes my cpu cores to downclock.

I am using a Rampage VI extreme with a 7900x. Any idea whats going on?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Cant say too much as Im one of the screamers only demanding what I bought to work as it was specified.
> Quite possible and Im sure a lot will tell the internet stores of being a french model. After all you cant post it on the internet if its not true.
> 
> While the sources Im referring to have not posted anything to prove or disprove their choices or proof that they even own either chip or a HEDT at all they have always been pretty straight up people and I have no reason to believe they are being less than truthful. Pretty much every internet reviewing mogul comes up with the same conclusions at this point in time. The 7980XE is king when it comes to pure CPU computing in applications that can make use of all cores, it had damn well better be with an 18 core count. But lags behind in everything else.
> 
> PC gamer went on to say
> 
> From a non-gaming perspective, this is a questionable processor-it's only marginally faster than the 16C/32T i9-7960X. You can make an argument for something like the i9-7900X, where there's a sizeable jump in performance from the i7-7700K (sometimes over twice as fast), but beyond that scaling with core counts really starts to slow down. The extra eight cores end up improving overall performance in CPU-intensive applications by around 30 percent, which might sound good, but the six extra cores on the i9-7960X gives a similar 27 percent performance improvement.
> 
> Fundamentally, the Core i9-7980XE is about bragging rights, on multiple levels. There are the bragging rights for anyone wealthy enough to buy one, and bragging rights for anyone crazy enough to overclock one with an extreme cooling solution (I can't wait to see the LN2 and LHe results that will inevitably appear!) But most importantly I think, this is about bragging rights for Intel. "Yes, AMD, we see your 8C/16T Ryzen 7 processors, and your 16C/32T Threadripper 1950X. We can beat you on per-core performance, clockspeeds, and core counts, because we have 18C/36T!"
> 
> If it works for you then that's great. Its just not a viable option for my use and it has nothing to do with cost (I spent the extra $$ to get a Silicon Lottery binned 7900X to keep the guess work out) and everything to do with no need for the extra cores at lower clocks for my needs. If there were samples showing 5Ghz on all cores with something less than extreme cooling Id be all over it. Maybe the manufacturing process will improve and provide better samples but at this point in time its just not happening.


I can agree with most of what you say but some of the reviews out there are running stock clocks. When over clocked even single core performance is pretty good. See below [email protected] GHz 24/7 on 360 AIO 216 single core CB.










Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Cant say too much as Im one of the screamers only demanding what I bought to work as it was specified.


I think those expectations are perfectly justified and screaming about their not being met are as well. Personally, I agree with what I believe you (and a few others?) implied earlier about OEMs rushing things out the door.


----------



## LunaP

Dunno why people default to bragging rights, clearly there's a use for people that prefer the additional cores for their workloads, no need to crap on them. Why can't the mentality change to "a case of diff usage scenarios".


----------



## Jpmboy

Interesting to see the prime/halo/premier product bashing going on here, and not only in the Titan XP threads.









Anywho, of the 8 CPUs I have here right now (*5 running):

*[email protected] 4.6 (or higher when needed)
7740X @5.3
*8700K @ 5.3+
*[email protected] 4.5
*[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]+
*[email protected]

For all but computation/compilation/rendering - where an OC'd 7980XE just crushes everything else, and runs the hottest - the 8700K (running 4266c17 ram) on the Max X Apex is amazingly responsive... More so than a 5.3GHz 7740X which has the first or second best IPC available today







For a 1440P game rig, SLI pascal on a Max X APEX and a 8700K is pretty daum quick. Let's see a 12 to 18 core coffee lake.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ABeta*
> 
> I noticed my CPU cores would downclock. There's no voltage or thermal throttle going on. However, according to HWinfo, the 'Max Turbo Limit' gets triggered and this causes my cpu cores to downclock.
> 
> I am using a Rampage VI extreme with a 7900x. Any idea whats going on?


VRM temps? CPU current limit?

If you hit either one of those, it would downclock without indicating CPU thermal throttle.....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Dunno why people default to bragging rights, clearly there's a use for people that prefer the additional cores for their workloads, no need to crap on them. Why can't the mentality change to "a case of diff usage scenarios".


I had one dude somewhere on here get angry that I would have a DB on my local machine accessible only to me for the purposes of my use of it.

I tried to explain with what I can say publicly, but I don't get the emotional component here either. I'm always pleased to have my mind expanded as to different ways things can be done. I may never use them, I may find them to be without merit or sub-optimal, but they don't make me angry unless its MY resources they waste.

Biting my tongue to keep politics off a page like this and a thread like this, but this strange behavior shows up in other domains as well. Jealousy and rage at people are different or exercising liberty you have chosen to forgo....

Anywho... Humans.... can't live with them..... can't advise that you eat them either...


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Interesting to see the prime/halo/premier product bashing going on here, and not only in the Titan XP threads.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anywho, of the 8 CPUs I have here right now (*5 running):
> 
> *[email protected] 4.6 (or higher when needed)
> 7740X @5.3
> *8700K @ 5.3+
> *[email protected] 4.5
> *[email protected]
> [email protected]
> [email protected]+
> *[email protected]
> 
> For all but computation/compilation/rendering - where an OC'd 7980XE just crushes everything else, and runs the hottest - the 8700K (running 4266c17 ram) on the Max X Apex is amazingly responsive... More so than a 5.3GHz 7740X which has the first or second best IPC available today
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For a 1440P game rig, SLI pascal on a Max X APEX and a 8700K is pretty daum quick. Let's see a 12 to 18 core coffee lake.


ZOMG! A Assault computer network! Why do you NEEEEED?!?! that?!?!?! [mental note, add RGB to AR....]


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I only got to 5117 :/
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/23213696?
Probably never get used to adding so many screen shots for a single score that this forum requires.


----------



## Jpmboy

Need?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Need?


eeeexactly.... "Who are you to judge or control my needs.... back off T-Rex..."


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Need?


Need?









I now have 6900k,7900x,7980xe, 8700k and 1950x TR. I don't need, but my hobby need









I had to sell 1800x and 6850k, because of no more space in my "room of nerd!"


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Need?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I now have 6900k,7900x,7980xe, 8700k and 1950x TR. I don't need, *but my hobby need*


lol - it really goes "off the reservation" when you have as many hobbies as CPUs!


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol - it really goes "off the reservation" when you have as many hobbies as CPUs!


"Hobbies" sounds so cheap and non-essential... I prefer the term "avocation"...









EDIT: but looking at the image list on the upper right of the thread - I do NEED 200MB/s 4k random throughput... on 4TB of data for $1K or less please... Santa?


----------



## ABeta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> VRM temps? CPU current limit?


I will report back later when I get the chance to monitor the temps.

What are the VRM and CPU current limit designation names on HWinfo?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> "Hobbies" sounds so cheap and non-essential... I prefer the term "avocation"...


putting that in the lexicon for the next argument with my wife on this subject - tho her "avocations" are much more expensive than this stuff is.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ABeta*
> 
> I will report back later when I get the chance to monitor the temps.
> 
> What are the VRM and CPU current limit designation names on HWinfo?


Hmm, been using SiV latestly - will have to fire them up. As I recall VRM has "VRM" in it... Not sure about CPU current, but I was speaking of your BIOS setting....

Have you lifted the limit from default? If not, you are VERY likely hitting it and quickly...


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> "Hobbies" sounds so cheap and non-essential... I prefer the term "avocation"...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EDIT: but looking at the image list on the upper right of the thread - I do NEED 200MB/s 4k random throughput... on 4TB of data for $1K or less please... Santa?


Nissen/Nizzen = Santa on Norwegian language


----------



## ABeta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Hmm, been using SiV latestly - will have to fire them up. As I recall VRM has "VRM" in it... Not sure about CPU current, but I was speaking of your BIOS setting....
> 
> Have you lifted the limit from default? If not, you are VERY likely hitting it and quickly...


I increased my CPU current limit to 140% and it was still behaving as such. When I get home I will increase this further and see what happens.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Nissen/Nizzen = Santa on Norwegian language


I've been super-super-good... my stocking awaits your benevolence...


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> I was not comparing two different drives and making an argument that one was better than the other. I simply posted what I found with the same drives.


With two different software versions.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Would it make you feel better if I said I really wasn't paying attention to the version of crystal marks because I installed a single drive and benched it while I was waiting for the second and 5.2 is just what i happened to have installed then the non bootable array that I installed and booted windows on was a new install and the latest version of Crystal marks?


It wouldn't make me feel any better, no. But at least you admit it was a flawed comparison. Which is what JP was saying, thus he was right. So the insults could have been left at the door.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> I find it hilarious that you spent the time to go to another forum and search out and drag in things here to point fingers to try and prove a pointless point.


I'd responded to the thread on ROG not 20 minutes ago, so I didn't have to dig much if at all lol. You're right, though. It was a pointless point - because you completely misunderstood what was being said. Much like you did here.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> A lot of folks have been complaining about going the OCs on the higher core counts. Its been pretty much the same with the 7900s as well. Only 5GHz clocks Ive seen on the 7980s is with chillers and per core clocks with multiple cores turned down to like 12X. Ive seen multiple people say they dumped the 7980XE and went back to the 7900X.


Not really all that surprising. Although 4.7-4.8 with 14 cores is better here than 10 cores at the same, so I'm not complaining personally.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Excellent point but I do have to place more blame on the OEMs. Intel rushed out this platform to answer back to AMD but the OEMs didn't have to rush their products to market before they knew what was going on


Then you don't really understand how these release schedules operate.


----------



## lutjens

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Need?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I now have 6900k,7900x,7980xe, 8700k and 1950x TR. I don't need, but my hobby need
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I had to sell 1800x and 6850k, because of no more space in my "room of nerd!"


Amen to that. I have more CPUs at the moment than one can shake a stick at. 6950x, 1950X TR, 7980XE, E5-1680V3, i7-8700K...do I NEED absolutely all of them? No. I play with the hardware, and see what it can and can't do and expand my knowledge. The older, lesser parts I gift to family or sell to them at a negligible cost...my cousin will be inheriting my 6950X rig in a few weeks.

Do I really need these two monitors that showed up today? I could make do with much less, and far more economical models, but considering I'm still running ancient DVI-input 30" 2560x1600 screens, it's high time for an upgrade...and these screens should do me for a while...











We are essential to the industry because we push the boundaries and drive overall performance and innovation in the industry forward due to our passion for it. One can argue that the reason why we haven't seen better threading support in many applications is the refusal of Intel to increase the core count for consumer chips for many, many years. Now that we have competition again, we've had a quantum leap in terms of available consumer core count in a single year, and with the proliferation of these higher core count chips, more and more attention will be paid to optimizing software for them, driving performance forward. By being vocal and demanding better, we push advancements and progress forward as well.


----------



## Jpmboy

lol - post back with the wow on those monitors.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> Amen to that. I have more CPUs at the moment than one can shake a stick at. 6950x, 1950X TR, 7980XE, E5-1680V3, i7-8700K...do I NEED absolutely all of them? No. I play with the hardware, and see what it can and can't do and expand my knowledge. The older, lesser parts I gift to family or sell to them at a negligible cost...my cousin will be inheriting my 6950X rig in a few weeks.
> 
> Do I really need these two monitors that showed up today? I could make do with much less, and far more economical models, but considering I'm still running ancient DVI-input 30" 2560x1600 screens, it's high time for an upgrade...and these screens should do me for a while...


Useless, those pixels are so tiny can you even use them????









For many years, I generally bought the most expensive monitor I could afford to get decent refresh and the highest resolution possible...

Now I have a 40" 4K TV and I'm pleased with it.

I actually want [email protected] more than I want 8K.... so I don't have to have a separate gaming monitor...

Though I am still jealous... so much drool on my shirt - sorry...


----------



## Silent Scone

I'm a little jealous here, too!

Even if you can't really drive that many pixels properly yet, doesn't change the envy lol


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> I'm a little jealous here, too!


Joke's on him, his porn is going to need 4x the scaling every else will...


----------



## Silent Scone

Ugh, up-scaled nips.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Interesting to see the prime/halo/premier product bashing going on here, and not only in the Titan XP threads.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anywho, of the 8 CPUs I have here right now (*5 running):
> 
> *[email protected] 4.6 (or higher when needed)
> 7740X @5.3
> *8700K @ 5.3+
> *[email protected] 4.5
> *[email protected]
> [email protected]
> [email protected]+
> *[email protected]


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Need?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I now have 6900k,7900x,7980xe, 8700k and 1950x TR. I don't need, but my hobby need
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I had to sell 1800x and 6850k, because of no more space in my "room of nerd!"


We could start an AA-type club.

I have 980X, 990X, 4820K, 4930K, 4960X, 6950X, 7900X, 7980XE. But only 2-3 of them running at a time in a small apartment.







Got a full Skulltrail rig in the closet...and some older XE CPUs I've given to my family. Also I have more Asus/ROG boards than CPUs.

Maybe 7740X and 8700K at some point.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> With two different software versions.
> It wouldn't make me feel any better, no. But at least you admit it was a flawed comparison. Which is what JP was saying, thus he was right. So the insults could have been left at the door.
> I'd responded to the thread on ROG not 20 minutes ago, so I didn't have to dig much if at all lol. You're right, though. It was a pointless point - because you completely misunderstood what was being said. Much like you did here.
> Not really all that surprising. Although 4.7-4.8 with 14 cores is better here than 10 cores at the same, so I'm not complaining personally.
> Then you don't really understand how these release schedules operate.


I understand completely how character assassination and trolling works. An entire post of taking jabs with zero added substance? Really? Not going to further entertain your endeavors on either so knock yourself out and consider it silent shadow boxing. Now if you want to actually participate in the discussion instead of petty jabs I might actually consider replying. Other than that you are pi$$ing into the wind.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> I understand completely how character assassination and trolling works. An entire post of taking jabs with zero added substance? Really? Not going to further entertain your endeavors on either so knock yourself out and consider it silent shadow boxing. Now if you want to actually participate in the discussion instead of petty jabs I might actually consider replying. Other than that you are pi$$ing into the wind.


Depends what you mean by substance. It's difficult to substantiate something that's not valid, like the comparison that started this nonsense lol

No problem!







I see you opted for the ROG SLI bridge in the end


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> VRM temps? CPU current limit?
> 
> If you hit either one of those, it would downclock without indicating CPU thermal throttle.....
> I had one dude somewhere on here get angry that I would have a DB on my local machine accessible only to me for the purposes of my use of it.
> 
> I tried to explain with what I can say publicly, but I don't get the emotional component here either. I'm always pleased to have my mind expanded as to different ways things can be done. I may never use them, I may find them to be without merit or sub-optimal, but they don't make me angry unless its MY resources they waste.
> 
> Biting my tongue to keep politics off a page like this and a thread like this, but this strange behavior shows up in other domains as well. Jealousy and rage at people are different or exercising liberty you have chosen to forgo....
> 
> Anywho... Humans.... can't live with them..... can't advise that you eat them either...


Agreed

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> ZOMG! A Assault computer network! Why do you NEEEEED?!?! that?!?!?! [mental note, add RGB to AR....]


I'm more curious on the power bill or if they live in a diff country w/ better energy sourcing lmao, unless they're all not running at once, either way envious, my 4960 only hit 4.5 sadly.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lutjens*
> 
> Amen to that. I have more CPUs at the moment than one can shake a stick at. 6950x, 1950X TR, 7980XE, E5-1680V3, i7-8700K...do I NEED absolutely all of them? No. I play with the hardware, and see what it can and can't do and expand my knowledge. The older, lesser parts I gift to family or sell to them at a negligible cost...my cousin will be inheriting my 6950X rig in a few weeks.
> 
> Do I really need these two monitors that showed up today? I could make do with much less, and far more economical models, but considering I'm still running ancient DVI-input 30" 2560x1600 screens, it's high time for an upgrade...and these screens should do me for a while...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We are essential to the industry because we push the boundaries and drive overall performance and innovation in the industry forward due to our passion for it. One can argue that the reason why we haven't seen better threading support in many applications is the refusal of Intel to increase the core count for consumer chips for many, many years. Now that we have competition again, we've had a quantum leap in terms of available consumer core count in a single year, and with the proliferation of these higher core count chips, more and more attention will be paid to optimizing software for them, driving performance forward. By being vocal and demanding better, we push advancements and progress forward as well.


Damn, 8k @ 32" that's gonna look insane, I figured 8k was more for the 75" + range lol LUCKY, I'd love to see you surround them for just 5 minutes to see Terraria full screen lmao.

OT

Also jesus, why are people so god damned defensive, IF You THINK they're attacking you ASK, don't assume and then feel like you now have immunity to attack everyone that's attempting to calmly explain the situation, then sit there like a child and scream at everyone. Most people ( thankfully ) here are mature enough to just ignore the trolling/jabs and focus on what we're here for, most of the other trolls have already died off or made new accounts anyways.


----------



## lutjens

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> We could start an AA-type club.
> 
> I have 980X, 990X, 4820K, 4930K, 4960X, 6950X, 7900X, 7980XE. But only 2-3 of them running at a time in a small apartment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got a full Skulltrail rig in the closet...and some older XE CPUs I've given to my family. Also I have more Asus/ROG boards than CPUs.
> 
> Maybe 7740X and 8700K at some point.


A 12-step program to recover from hardware addiction...lol


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> We could start an AA-type club.
> 
> I have 980X, 990X, 4820K, 4930K, 4960X, 6950X, 7900X, 7980XE. But only 2-3 of them running at a time in a small apartment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got a full Skulltrail rig in the closet...and some older XE CPUs I've given to my family. Also I have more Asus/ROG boards than CPUs.
> 
> Maybe 7740X and 8700K at some point.


ahh - 990X and skultrail. there's a dx48bt2 in my AV closet... an HTPC that we never use anymore.









PS, those 12 step programs...


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> putting that in the lexicon for the next argument with my wife on this subject - tho her "avocations" are much more expensive than this stuff is.


 ? Been there done this $$$$$$$$$$$$$$


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> We could start an AA-type club.
> 
> I have 980X, 990X, 4820K, 4930K, 4960X, 6950X, 7900X, 7980XE. But only 2-3 of them running at a time in a small apartment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got a full Skulltrail rig in the closet...and some older XE CPUs I've given to my family. Also I have more Asus/ROG boards than CPUs.
> 
> Maybe 7740X and 8700K at some point.


That might be a good idea......I will start I was abandoned as a child......


----------



## iamjanco

Opinions are like, well, you know. Everybody's got at least one. I know I do, and it helps me feel refreshed first thing in the morning when I'm done clearing things up and out.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> That might be a good idea......I will start I was abandoned as a child......


holy crap me 2, I'm starting to see a connection here!


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> holy crap me 2, I'm starting to see a connection here!


Negative - I have all the computers. Happy home life. I can quit any time I choose lol....


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Yeah, not sure who this throng of 7980xe regretters are who expected 5GHz on 18 cores lol...
> 
> They were wrong... and should feel bad. Also, if you can stomach the 7980xe's price, you can have one of each and then run your games on a 5.3GHz 8700k as you sip butthurt tears from your "ask if I care?" mug....


butthurt tears, this thread is getting better every day


----------



## czin125

http://www.tomshardware.com/picturestory/773-amd-threadripper-hands-on-test-unboxing.html
https://img.purch.com/rc/600x450/aHR0cDovL21lZGlhLmJlc3RvZm1pY3JvLmNvbS9aL1UvNjk4NTM4L29yaWdpbmFsLzIyLmpwZw==

https://overclock3d.net/gfx/articles/2017/08/25162042860l.JPG
X399 is ~7 chokes wide and the X299 is ~8 chokes wide

https://images.anandtech.com/doci/11847/boardfront_575px.jpg
https://overclock3d.net/gfx/articles/2017/09/05093144554l.JPG
Since the socket is wider on the X299, couldn't the components be placed closer to socket on X299 boards?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> butthurt tears, this thread is getting better every day


lol - join the party!


----------



## ABeta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ABeta*
> 
> I noticed my CPU cores would downclock. There's no voltage or thermal throttle going on. However, according to HWinfo, the 'Max Turbo Limit' gets triggered and this causes my cpu cores to downclock.
> 
> I am using a Rampage VI extreme with a 7900x. Any idea whats going on?


Figured out the issue. My AVX offset resulted in downclocks when I was playing CSGO.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I can't get adaptive voltage to work?

Both 7820Xs auto injects 1.275V or so when using the adaptive preset. I've tried re-flashing the BIOS. It worked flawlessly on my 7800X.

I also get a much higher latency in Aida64, but 4% higher score overal on the same mem configuration.

Seems like 4.5 ghz needs 1.140-1.150V.. Wellwell..


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I can't get adaptive voltage to work?
> 
> Both 7820Xs auto injects 1.275V or so when using the adaptive preset. I've tried re-flashing the BIOS. It worked flawlessly on my 7800X.
> 
> I also get a much higher latency in Aida64, but 4% higher score overal on the same mem configuration.
> 
> Seems like 4.5 ghz needs 1.140-1.150V.. Wellwell..


How doesn't it work? Do you mean it's too high? You cannot set adaptive lower than specific core VID if that's your problem. The solution is use the negative offset there...but then again, adaptive is pretty useless then because you may start crashing when idle as the Vcore dips too low. Manual works best if you're conservative with the Vcore.


----------



## cekim

My "24/7" setup this week has been [email protected] / 3.0 @ 1.10v (cache). I really have not been able to get 3.1GHz cache fully stable. Windows is "fine" with it - able to bench and run RB, but heavy work in linux produces MCEs... Up to 1.15v so far trying to sort that out, but at this point I'm ready to give up on 3.1 mesh... which is ashame as every one of those MHz shows up in heavy IPC/threaded applications.

3600/16 @ 1.35v working with 128G, BUT, only at CR2... CR1 produces errors in SAT up to 1.39v

3600/16/CR2 _almost_ achieves parity with 3200/14/CR1 in real workloads, but... alas... faster is not really faster...

Given how easy 3600/16 was, I may try to pull it in further at CR2 and see if I can beat 3200/14.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

At any voltage it ramps itself up.. So I simply can't use it.

This chip is pretty cool to have poop tim. At 1.250V and it stays mostly under 70'C with a few peaks to 70-71'C.

It draws 200 watts at 1.250V. My cache seems be stable at 3.0ghz at 0.950V. Need to stresstest properly later today.

A bit bummed because of the poor OC, but last time I delidded I needed way less voltage for the same clock.

Maybe if I'm careful, I can make the chip look un-delidded and keep the warranty.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> At any voltage it ramps itself up.. So I simply can't use it.
> 
> This chip is pretty cool to have poop tim. At 1.250V and it stays mostly under 70'C with a few peaks to 70-71'C.
> 
> It draws 200 watts at 1.250V. My cache seems be stable at 3.0ghz at 0.950V. Need to stresstest properly later today.
> 
> A bit bummed because of the poor OC, but last time I delidded I needed way less voltage for the same clock.
> 
> Maybe if I'm careful, I can make the chip look un-delidded and keep the warranty.


What the prior poster was trying to tell you is you need to use a negative offset to adaptive to control it as you cannot set an adaptive voltage lower than the pre-progroammed VID. You can only use a negative offset to try to tame it, but it has numerous problems (AVX and idle voltages).


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I know that. But I wanted to point out that it is the case at all voltages.

If the pre-programmed VID is at 1.275V.. shouldn't they both ve able to do that voltage as 24/7.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I know that. But I wanted to point out that it is the case at all voltages.
> 
> If the pre-programmed VID is at 1.275V.. shouldn't they both ve able to do that voltage as 24/7.


VID makes no promises for safety or stability beyond specified/marked clock rates.

They can and will bake the chip outside those values...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> My "24/7" setup this week has been [email protected] / 3.0 @ 1.10v (cache). I really have not been able to get 3.1GHz cache fully stable. Windows is "fine" with it - able to bench and run RB, but heavy work in linux produces MCEs... Up to 1.15v so far trying to sort that out, but at this point I'm ready to give up on 3.1 mesh... which is ashame as every one of those MHz shows up in heavy IPC/threaded applications.
> 
> 3600/16 @ 1.35v working with 128G, BUT, only at CR2... CR1 produces errors in SAT up to 1.39v
> 
> 3600/16/CR2 _almost_ achieves parity with 3200/14/CR1 in real workloads, but... alas... faster is not really faster...
> 
> Given how easy 3600/16 was, I may try to pull it in further at CR2 and see if I can beat 3200/14.


Data... good stuff. For 3600161T, which "Tweak Mode" are you using? 1 or 2? Praz may be able to help with DSQs/ODTs for the 1T settings.

BTW - My 6950X running a 64GB 3200c14 8x8 kit could never (and still can;t) run 3400c13 at 1T, only 2T. There was little difference in the long term.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I know that. But I wanted to point out that it is the case at all voltages.
> 
> If the pre-programmed VID is at 1.275V.. shouldn't they both ve able to do that voltage as 24/7.


Basically, If the CPU runs stable well below the VID for the set peak turbo multiplier, only way I've found to deal with that is manual override. Just enable all c-states and you retain the power savings in idle mode - ignore the OS reported idle vcore once you do.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Basically, If the CPU runs stable well below the VID for the set peak turbo multiplier, only way I've found to deal with that is manual override. Just enable all c-states and you retain the power savings in idle mode - ignore the OS reported idle vcore once you do.


That's my 7820x in a nutshell, runs under the programmed VID, but I am using offsets.
I've just switched to per core overclocking due to warmer weather, still stuck with offsets, 4.5Ghz on the good cores 4.4Ghz on the bad, that brought Realbench 2.44 cpu package temps down from 93c to 81c.
Will crank it back up when I delid soon.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

l
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> VID makes no promises for safety or stability beyond specified/marked clock rates.
> 
> They can and will bake the chip outside those values...


Lol. I know that. Of course they can't guantee stability and longevity when runned outside spec.

I've already tried adaptive with a negative offset and it didn't work. The 7800X does not support Intel turbo 3.0 I belive. So might be the reason why it worked on that chip.

I've been folding for about 9 hours now.. This is at 1.240-1.260V and at 4700 mhz.. Not bad considering that it is NOT delidded.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> l
> Lol. I know that. Of course they can't guantee stability and longevity when runned outside spec.
> 
> I've already tried adaptive with a negative offset and it didn't work. The 7800X does not support Intel turbo 3.0 I belive. So might be the reason why it worked on that chip.
> 
> I've been folding for about 9 hours now.. This is at 1.240-1.260V and at 4700 mhz.. Not bad considering that it is NOT delidded.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Hi,
I uninstall turbo 3 and just use the turbo clock on all cores which is 4500 for a daily clock
Doesn't take much juice but I do use the same 1.240 voltage override with adaptive 0.125 also on the bios turbo
I've gone to 1.275v for 4900 on all cores too but haven't stabilized much but temps were 74c on cpuid verify.


----------



## czin125

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> A lot of folks have been complaining about going the OCs on the higher core counts. Its been pretty much the same with the 7900s as well. Only 5GHz clocks Ive seen on the 7980s is with chillers and per core clocks with multiple cores turned down to like 12X. Ive seen multiple people say they dumped the 7980XE and went back to the 7900X.


Some people said it'd only max out at 4.0-4.2 before launch but even SL with a 360mm could get up to 4.4

It's not like the 7980XE OCs any worse even on watercooling provided the motherboard and other stuff is capable. It seems like one could always just scale up the cooling system equal to the number of cores and add a little extra to it.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1635159/asus-rampage-vi-apex-x299-owners/840#post_26444393


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Data... good stuff. For 3600161T, which "Tweak Mode" are you using? 1 or 2? Praz may be able to help with DSQs/ODTs for the 1T settings.
> 
> BTW - My 6950X running a 64GB 3200c14 8x8 kit could never (and still can;t) run 3400c13 at 1T, only 2T. There was little difference in the long term.
> Basically, If the CPU runs stable well below the VID for the set peak turbo multiplier, only way I've found to deal with that is manual override. Just enable all c-states and you retain the power savings in idle mode - ignore the OS reported idle vcore once you do.


BIOS default on the tweak mode... I should play with that... the errors on 3600/16/CR1 are sparse... It's right on the edge of working, but doesn't change as voltage goes up....

The other problem is it doesn't improve performance either, at least on many-thread applications... (not too surprising given the turn-around time math at work here... that math seems to predict real performance for me quite accurately).

Other curiosity from last night and more "boy this is tough to prove stable", but easy to OC...

1.18v 4.7x4/4.5/18 worked like a champ using "real work" loads limited to 4 threads. 4.7x6 was a bridge too far though. Adds more than a couple of watts to the 18 core loads though... Also without some brutal iterations on core affinity, I can't be sure if I just got lucky with which 4 cores it picked. I know I have ~6 cores that have VIDs values well above 1.2 even for 4.5 much less [email protected] That said, I'm growing convinced that VID assessment by Intel is a function of AVX since 1.165 seems to be fine for non-avx @ 4.5 on this chip.

In single/few threaded apps, it body slams my [email protected] (up to 2X faster with warm FS caches). A 3.5-4.0GHz mesh would do wonders for this chip, but cross-die latency is cross-die latency...


----------



## Pyounpy-2

I use i9-7980XE and Rampage VI Apex.
If SVID is enable, the cpu power consumptiion is limitted less than 300W.
In this case, the score of cinebench R15 becomes less than 4000.
So, I searched minimum voltage setting by core and found best setting around 5GHz.



The checked data were set data actually.
As a result, the cinebench score increased to 4350 for multi core at the power consumption of 290W, which wa read by HWiNFO64 (350W by SIV64).
Additionally, the single core score was 226, because maximum clocks of each core were set at 5GHz or 5.1GHz.


The minimum voltages for stable operation depends on each core.
And minus off set voltage is very efficient for low low power operation (it also depends on core, strongly).

I can use this cpu without SVID @5GHz, however I feel avobe the way to use is better for 24/7 use and for actual applications.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> I use i9-7980XE and Rampage VI Apex.
> If SVID is enable, the cpu power consumptiion is limitted less than 300W.
> In this case, the score of cinebench R15 becomes less than 4000.
> So, I searched minimum voltage setting by core and found best setting around 5GHz.
> 
> 
> 
> The checked data were set data actually.
> As a result, the cinebench score increased to 4350 for multi core at the power consumption of 290W, which wa read by HWiNFO64 (350W by SIV64).
> Additionally, the single core score was 226, because maximum clocks of each core were set at 5GHz or 5.1GHz.
> 
> 
> The minimum voltages for stable operation depends on each core.
> And minus off set voltage is very efficient for low low power operation (it also depends on core, strongly).
> 
> I can use this cpu without SVID @5GHz, however I feel avobe the way to use is better for 24/7 use and for actual applications.


1. As far as I know, SVID (auto - thus enabled I thought) does not absolutely limit power to < 300W - you can extend that with bios settings. I've hit almost 500W with that setting on auto and the system behaving as if it is indeed enabled.

2. I believe you are power throttling quite a lot to get to 350W. Your 4350 score is quite a bit below the max I've produced at 4.6gHz 4503 and very similar to the 4300-4400 I can produce with 4.5GHz despite 10%+ more clock on a benchmark that scales well with clocks.

3. At that point even at 1.165v I am consuming 350-380W typical with 400W peak to do so.

The 400W figure is empirically confirmed by what it takes to cool this processor. Both 420 push and 360 push/pull data on my rads indicates that the required fan curves map quite well to the values that SiV is reporting. I have not yet put an inductive current clamp on the rails to confirm it (because I have no reason to doubt it as it matches empirical evidence otherwise).

What is your ram speed/timing? That also factors into cinebench...


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> 1. As far as I know, SVID (auto - thus enabled I thought) does not absolutely limit power to < 300W - you can extend that with bios settings. I've hit almost 500W with that setting on auto and the system behaving as if it is indeed enabled.
> 
> 2. I believe you are power throttling quite a lot to get to 350W. Your 4350 score is quite a bit below the max I've produced at 4.6gHz 4503 and very similar to the 4300-4400 I can produce with 4.5GHz despite 10%+ more clock on a benchmark that scales well with clocks.
> 
> 3. At that point even at 1.165v I am consuming 350-380W typical with 400W peak to do so.
> 
> The 400W figure is empirically confirmed by what it takes to cool this processor. Both 420 push and 360 push/pull data on my rads indicates that the required fan curves map quite well to the values that SiV is reporting. I have not yet put an inductive current clamp on the rails to confirm it (because I have no reason to doubt it as it matches empirical evidence otherwise).
> 
> What is your ram speed/timing? That also factors into cinebench...


IF you set 4.5GHz, you can obtained same score as my case for multi-core or more. But it is difficult to obtain the high single-core score.
For also conventional application, they are using less than 4 cores or it loads very light. In my setting, if the load for each core is light, every 18 cores can work more than 5GHz.
I think this is advantage.
My memory setting was shown in HWiNFO64, 4200MHz 16-16-16-1T.
And thank you for your comments, I know the difference betweeen the actual power consumption and indicated power by HWiNFO & SIV, so I mentioned my result was based on HWiNFO64.
Thank you.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Some people said it'd only max out at 4.0-4.2 before launch but even SL with a 360mm could get up to 4.4
> 
> It's not like the 7980XE OCs any worse even on watercooling provided the motherboard and other stuff is capable. It seems like one could always just scale up the cooling system equal to the number of cores and add a little extra to it.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1635159/asus-rampage-vi-apex-x299-owners/840#post_26444393


Something I'm finding the these chips is scaling the cooling is only part of the battle delidding is a must and it's still hard getting the heat off the die fast enough. If you have a chiller or phase change where you can get subzero or a row or radiators in subzero you have a better chance.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> IF you set 4.5GHz, you can obtained same score as my case for multi-core or more. But it is difficult to obtain the high single-core score.
> For also conventional application, they are using less than 4 cores or it loads very light. In my setting, if the load for each core is light, every 18 cores can work more than 5GHz.
> I think this is advantage.
> My memory setting was shown in HWiNFO64, 4200MHz 16-16-16-1T.
> And thank you for your comments, I know the difference betweeen the actual power consumption and indicated power by HWiNFO & SIV, so I mentioned my result was based on HWiNFO64.
> Thank you.


Ok, I think I see where you are going with that....

FWIW, I was quoting sustained load (from RB for instance), I see only 185W for CBR15, but it only takes a few seconds, so I'm guessing it may not have even capture the real peak power usage...

4.6 produces ~4500/204 for me. So, to summarize with what you are doing is intentionally power throttling mult-core for the sake of single core performance. You can set the power threshold's for these in your BIOS. I assume the Apex and R6E have similar bios settings:

1. 200, 240% CPU current
2. "power limit 1" and "power limit 2" (aka: Long Duration Package Power Limit and Short Duration Package Power Limit - as well as CPU IVR Currrent Limit)

I've accomplished what you are going for via a higher vcore than I need for 4.5 and then allowing 4 cores to go to 4.7. I'm trying to find the minimum over-voltage of 4.5 to accomplish this ... It doesn't get me all the way to 5GHz, but I tend to ask/need more out of my system at 18 cores than I do out of 4. The gain in games is not noticeable since I'm pegged at G-sync 144 with 2x1080ti's at ultra in BF1







It does ~180-200FPS if un-capped.

The downside of your approach _may_ be that the constant throttling of high core count loads creates a lot of start/stop so it punishes them, but both approaches are balances of less than perfect controls we have available to us...

Also, not thrilled about those voltages in terms of instantaneous current. Speaking of "imperfect" the response of the logic that controls these things may or may not be able to completely filter the instantaeous spikes in current that result from switching from one state to another (in fact, I'd be surprised if they did), so you may find that average power consumption is kept in check, but instantanous spikes are much higher than with steady operation.

That switching also means more "noise" on your VRM which means more heat.

All trade-offs...


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> I use i9-7980XE and Rampage VI Apex.
> If SVID is enable, the cpu power consumptiion is limitted less than 300W.
> In this case, the score of cinebench R15 becomes less than 4000.
> So, I searched minimum voltage setting by core and found best setting around 5GHz.
> 
> 
> 
> The checked data were set data actually.
> As a result, the cinebench score increased to 4350 for multi core at the power consumption of 290W, which wa read by HWiNFO64 (350W by SIV64).
> Additionally, the single core score was 226, because maximum clocks of each core were set at 5GHz or 5.1GHz.
> 
> 
> The minimum voltages for stable operation depends on each core.
> And minus off set voltage is very efficient for low low power operation (it also depends on core, strongly).
> 
> I can use this cpu without SVID @5GHz, however I feel avobe the way to use is better for 24/7 use and for actual applications.


Those SVID reported power figures are useless.
On my 7960X the actual power draw was 57% higher.

During video encoding my CPU pulled < 280W at 4.0GHz / 1.050V when measured directly from the VRM controller. At the same time SVID reported ~175W.

So no, your 7980XE running at 5.0GHz doesn't pull < 290W, even if you cooled it with LHe.
450W+ is closer.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Those SVID reported power figures are useless.
> On my 7960X the actual power draw was 57% higher.
> 
> During video encoding my CPU pulled < 280W at 4.0GHz / 1.050V when measured directly from the VRM controller. At the same time SVID reported ~175W.
> 
> So no, your 7980XE running at 5.0GHz doesn't pull < 290W, even if you cooled it with LHe.
> 450W+ is closer.


and FWIW - I re-ran and saw power from CBR15 hitting 415W @ 4.6 where the previous run showed 185W... So, my suspicion that the tool may be sampling and missing real peak power in such a short run as CBR15 represents appears to be valid.

Sustained encoding as Stilt mentions is going to produce a much higher average power reading than CBR15 as it runs on a 7980Xe (pretty much instantly).


----------



## tistou77

Hello

During the delid, I saw that we could use nail polish on pcb components, but there must be nitrocellulose (and not benzene / toluene), right ?

Thanks


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I just borrowed some nail polish from my litte sister. Worked like a charm!


----------



## Jawnathin

For anyone who purchased a 7820X from SL that was binned at 4.8ghz, have you been able to get any more out of it? I sent my retail purchased 7820X to SL for delidding and binning and it was binned at 4.8ghz @ 1.262v (the current top bin). 1.262v gives me some additional voltage headroom to play with as long as I can keep temps in check. Curious to hear if that is what people run or if they've been able to get more. Thanks.


----------



## pantsaregood

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> For anyone who purchased a 7820X from SL that was binned at 4.8ghz, have you been able to get any more out of it? I sent my retail purchased 7820X to SL for delidding and binning and it was binned at 4.8ghz @ 1.262v (the current top bin). 1.262v gives me some additional voltage headroom to play with as long as I can keep temps in check. Curious to hear if that is what people run or if they've been able to get more. Thanks.


14nm+ seems to handle voltages up to around 1.4V fairly well, so there's probably some headroom left over - the issue is keeping the CPU cool. My 7820X was binned at 4.8 GHz - it absolutely works, but temperatures are absurd. I wouldn't be surprised to find that a lot of the 4.8 GHz binned CPUs could hit 4.9 GHz. Silicon Lottery briefly offered a 4.9 GHz bin, actually.


----------



## Jawnathin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *pantsaregood*
> 
> 14nm+ seems to handle voltages up to around 1.4V fairly well, so there's probably some headroom left over - the issue is keeping the CPU cool. My 7820X was binned at 4.8 GHz - it absolutely works, but temperatures are absurd. I wouldn't be surprised to find that a lot of the 4.8 GHz binned CPUs could hit 4.9 GHz. Silicon Lottery briefly offered a 4.9 GHz bin, actually.


Thanks for the feedback. Is yours delidded? What absurd temps are you seeing? I am still testing mine but so far I've seen big drops in temp.

Previous OC setting was 4.8ghz @ 1.285v. It would run into the thermal limit during stress tests, basically 95-100C, but it was 100% stable.

After an SL delid with the same settings I was running in the 80s, so a 15-20C drop. Since temps were lower and I was getting less power leakage, I decided to try to see if I can run the same OC but at lower volts. I am still validating the stability but its looking like 4.8ghz @ 1.225v. A nice big drop in voltage which gives even lower temps. Stress testing has the cores showing high 60s to low 70s. Basically a 25-30C drop over previous settings at the same clock speed.

With the chip running 4.8ghz with reasonable volts/temps I am sure that leaves some room for 4.9ghz and possibly 5.0ghz. No way that was possible before the delid since 4.8ghz was pretty much pushing it. But I will keep it at 4.8ghz for now because I am really enjoying these low temps.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> SVID power measurement is used to enforce CPU power limits, and it is highly reliable. If your measurements are wrong, it is because your board is using some "overclocking" feature to spoof it.


I know that it should be reliable, since the information is sourced from the VRM controller itself. The information that leaves the controller is correct, however what emerges from the PCU (as the reported power draw) is totally off (~57% like I said). Maybe there is a mailbox command or something that can be used to skew these figures.


----------



## AndreTM

How are you setting cache voltage? Same value of the VCore?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndreTM*
> 
> How are you setting cache voltage? Same value of the VCore?


Max 1.150V, pref. around 1.050V. This for 2.9-3.1 ghz depending on how your mesh is clokcing.


----------



## cg4200

I have a few quetions on 7800x.
My broadwell 6850k my vccin was 1.910 for 6850 4.6 @34 cache
With my 7800x just delided 4.9 is stable core temp pretty even I am happy with my delid.. rb 1 hr not prime with 1.820 running cache 30 @ auto 0.954 or so..

Just to clarify before I get bashed I game mostly so when I say stable for me not everyone's prime 95 ..lol
I was ocing my cache and could only get to 33 @ 1.15 ring or so ..
Does vccin play into ocing cache also ??
Should i be running 1.910 same as my broadwell ?
Also what is max safe volts for ring everyday use ?
What is max core volts for benching mabe try 5.0??
Mesh makes a big difference on fps gaming correct?
Anyone want to chime in wHat there running 7800x Big Thanks


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndreTM*
> 
> How are you setting cache voltage? Same value of the VCore?


The default is significantly lower than the core voltage (=< 0.950V).
1.025V was enough for 3000MHz on my 7960X.

Apex (and probably other ASUS boards as well) set it to fixed 1.100V if you increase the cache speed beyond the default OC (2.7GHz).


----------



## AndreTM

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> The default is significantly lower than the core voltage (=< 0.950V).
> 1.025V was enough for 3000MHz on my 7960X.
> 
> Apex (and probably other ASUS boards as well) set it to fixed 1.100V if you increase the cache speed beyond the default OC (2.7GHz).


Thanks man, [email protected] 24/7 with your 7960x?


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AndreTM*
> 
> Thanks man, [email protected] 24/7 with your 7960x?


Was, until the chip kicked the dust.
Surely it had nothing to do with the cache thou


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Deliddet it anyways.. I'm weak.

This time around I did a really good job. Compared it with my non delidded 7820X and you can't even see the difference.


----------



## Pume91

Im wonderin can i reach 4.9 or 5.0 ghz on my 7820x after delid. Its atm 4.7 1.23v non delidded.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pume91*
> 
> Im wonderin can i reach 4.9 or 5.0 ghz on my 7820x after delid. Its atm 4.7 1.23v non delidded.


What are your current temps?

Even non-deliddet it only was at the high 70s, low 80s under ex. Cinebench R15. This was at 1.360V and 4.9 ghz.


----------



## Pume91

90c 100% stress, 60c gaming.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pume91*
> 
> Im wonderin can i reach 4.9 or 5.0 ghz on my 7820x after delid. Its atm 4.7 1.23v non delidded.


Hi,
Not enough info on your cooling system or any of your system except you have a 7820x








Delid one should gain 20c less
Depending whom did the delid silicon lottery 20c less.

Use the RigBuilder !


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Funny. Cinebench would crash at 85'C at 4900. Now it is 70'C and can run many paces.

Will need to reseat the block. I used too little tim and removed the block, added some more, removed it again, added some more and installed.

Because the temp between the cores are now higher..

EDIT: I just think one of the cores are hotter than the others.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> BIOS default on the tweak mode... I should play with that... the errors on 3600/16/CR1 are sparse... It's right on the edge of working, but doesn't change as voltage goes up....
> 
> The other problem is it doesn't improve performance either, at least on many-thread applications... (not too surprising given the turn-around time math at work here... that math seems to predict real performance for me quite accurately).
> 
> Other curiosity from last night and more "boy this is tough to prove stable", but easy to OC...
> 
> 1.18v 4.7x4/4.5/18 worked like a champ using "real work" loads limited to 4 threads. 4.7x6 was a bridge too far though. Adds more than a couple of watts to the 18 core loads though... Also without some brutal iterations on core affinity, I can't be sure if I just got lucky with which 4 cores it picked. I know I have ~6 cores that have VIDs values well above 1.2 even for 4.5 much less [email protected] That said, *I'm growing convinced that VID assessment by Intel is a function of AVX* since 1.165 seems to be fine for non-avx @ 4.5 on this chip.
> 
> In single/few threaded apps, it body slams my [email protected] (up to 2X faster with warm FS caches). A 3.5-4.0GHz mesh would do wonders for this chip, but cross-die latency is cross-die latency...


I'm completely convinced. I mean, I was running 5.0 with just 1.22V... this would have required an AVX offset of at least 12 to pass x265. AVX512 would be just silly high offset values. There are several down-bin "triggers" in these XE chips, temp, current, VR current etc. too many dials!


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> Was, until the chip kicked the dust.
> Surely it had nothing to do with the cache thou


warranty claim with Intel done?


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> warranty claim with Intel done?


With the reseller.
It was impossible to exchange the CPU directly with Intel, because their warranty portal has been broken for several months.
Their online chat support said they cannot help, since I'm not living in NA. Intel has no local support (except for SW products) either, so I had to send the chip abroad for the reseller to exchange.

It was pretty sad to see that Intel essentially has no warranty services accessible online for customers living outside the NA. Even more shocking is that until now the issue hasn't been fixed, despite tons of people have reported it in their own support forums since may


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ...
> . too many dials!
> 
> warranty claim with Intel done?


Are you using a mike for each core?


----------



## Pume91

im gonna delid myself ordered the delid die mate x


----------



## Martin778

Just don't do it in public, will ya?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> With the reseller.
> It was impossible to exchange the CPU directly with Intel, because their warranty portal has been broken for several months.
> Their online chat support said they cannot help, since I'm not living in NA. Intel has no local support (except for SW products) either, so I had to send the chip abroad for the reseller to exchange.
> 
> It was pretty sad to see that Intel essentially has no warranty services accessible online for customers living outside the NA. Even more shocking is that until now the issue hasn't been fixed, despite tons of people have reported it in their own support forums since may


Ugh! Good thing the reseller was cooperative. Something you don't see here in NA after 30 days (at best).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Are you using a mike for each core?


hey, you gotta be _adaptive_.









___________________________________________________________________________________________
New member of the family (third Corgi in-da-house).


----------



## done12many2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> New member of the family (third Corgi in-da-house).


Congrats man. I showed my wife pics of your other two months ago. She loved them.

After many years of not having a dog, we got a GSD and couldn't be happier. He was 82.7 lbs at his 6 month vet visit and is visibly bigger now at 7 months. Some days the wife and I wonder what we may have gotten ourselves into, but then we see him playing with the kids and all concerns of his size fade fast.

He serves well as an early detection system, which gives me enough lead time to wake up and obtain a firm grip of my 2nd Amendment.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *done12many2*
> 
> Congrats man. I showed my wife pics of your other two months ago. She loved them.
> 
> After many years of not having a dog, we got a GSD and couldn't be happier. He was 82.7 lbs at his 6 month vet visit and is visibly bigger now at 7 months. Some days the wife and I wonder what we may have gotten ourselves into, but then we see him playing with the kids and all concerns of his size fade fast.
> 
> He serves well as an early detection system, which gives me enough *lead time to wake up and obtain a firm grip of my 2nd Amendment*.


"you got that right"... (RVZ)


----------



## Jawnathin

Just got my 7820x back from delidding and right now it's looking stable at 4.8ghz @1.225v with temps in the high 60s to low 70s. Seems like I've got a bit of voltage and temp headroom to play with.

So I had done some quick testing earlier and while I can bench at 5.0ghz it doesn't pass my stability testing with 1.4v and VCCIN at 1.8 though it feels close. New test this afternoon, I bumped VCCIN up to 1.9 and vcore to 1.385 and so far it is passing my stability testing but its pretty early. Its gotten further than the other settings. Temps are getting up there (90s) but still below throttle point, not sure I can give it much more voltage before its no longer worth it. So in case this latest stability testing fails I am wondering if there is anything else I should be trying besides vcore and vccin to improve stability.

Thanks.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Just got my 7820x back from delidding and right now it's looking stable at 4.8ghz @1.225v with temps in the high 60s to low 70s. Seems like I've got a bit of voltage and temp headroom to play with.
> 
> So I had done some quick testing earlier and while I can bench at 5.0ghz it doesn't pass my stability testing with 1.4v and VCCIN at 1.8 though it feels close. New test this afternoon, I bumped VCCIN up to 1.9 and vcore to 1.385 and so far it is passing my stability testing but its pretty early. Its gotten further than the other settings. Temps are getting up there (90s) but still below throttle point, not sure I can give it much more voltage before its no longer worth it. So in case this latest stability testing fails I am wondering if there is anything else I should be trying besides vcore and vccin to improve stability.
> 
> Thanks.


Probably need more vccin but that sounds like a golden chip. I'll probably need 1.32vcore to get even 4.8 on my chip


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Just got my 7820x back from delidding and right now it's looking stable at 4.8ghz @1.225v with temps in the high 60s to low 70s. Seems like I've got a bit of voltage and temp headroom to play with..


Nice. What kind of stability testing have you done? Mine passed a lot of stability tests around the same voltage, but to get it 100% 12hr+ Prime stable took 1.285v. Like you I have been able to get 5GHz bench stable, but not stress test stable.


----------



## Martin778

I ran 3.5h P95 on my 7920X - needs 1.16V for 4.5GHz ATM, 4.7 @ 1.245V locked up after ~40 minutes.
Very irritating when it just locks up without BSOD


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Just got my 7820x back from delidding and right now it's looking stable at 4.8ghz @1.225v with temps in the high 60s to low 70s. Seems like I've got a bit of voltage and temp headroom to play with.
> 
> So I had done some quick testing earlier and while I can bench at 5.0ghz it doesn't pass my stability testing with 1.4v and VCCIN at 1.8 though it feels close. New test this afternoon, I bumped VCCIN up to 1.9 and vcore to 1.385 and so far it is passing my stability testing but its pretty early. Its gotten further than the other settings. Temps are getting up there (90s) but still below throttle point, not sure I can give it much more voltage before its no longer worth it. So in case this latest stability testing fails I am wondering if there is anything else I should be trying besides vcore and vccin to improve stability.
> 
> Thanks.


Yeah try running vcore below 1.385 if you want long term stability lol. That's really high. I try to keep mine under 1.25. Had one user on this forum his chip died doing 1.275. 4.8 is nothing to be ashamed of.


----------



## Jawnathin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Probably need more vccin but that sounds like a golden chip. I'll probably need 1.32vcore to get even 4.8 on my chip


Thank you, still pretty early in my testing but its looking like a nice chip. I did have to bump it up after testing Small FFTs in Prime, so its at 1.235v now. Wouldn't be too surprised if I have to bump it up a little more but so far its looking pretty good. Is yours delidded? Mine before delid required 1.285v to be stable at 4.8ghz. The high temps and power leakage required me to run way more vcore than it should have needed to be stable before the delid. But since the delid I was able to run much lower volts and have much less heat for the same 4.8ghz. Before the delid I thought my chip was just so-so, to the point where I was debating if it was worth sending in for a delid. But I did it anyway and I was surprised when SL binned it at their current highest tier (4.8ghz @ 1.262v) and even more surprised that its looking like it'll need even less voltage than that. Hard to say if my experience is universal but consider a delid if you haven't already.

Going to give up on 5.0ghz. Not a big deal, just wanted to see if it was reachable. Feels very close, got it to the point where it wasn't crashing during stress tests but I found an error registered in HWInfo and that was enough for me to say it isn't working. I don't want to cram anymore volts or heat into it so I'll go back to testing 4.8. I think with better cooling 5.0ghz is possible but with my 280mm AIO the temps just gets too warm and power leakage becomes too much.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Nice. What kind of stability testing have you done? Mine passed a lot of stability tests around the same voltage, but to get it 100% 12hr+ Prime stable took 1.285v. Like you I have been able to get 5GHz bench stable, but not stress test stable.


I am still in the middle of testing so just preliminary so far but I use the following when finalizing the overclock.

20 continuous back to back Cinebench R15 runs (quick and easy way to crash an unstable system)
6 hours of AIDA64 (CPU, FPU Cache, & Memory)
6 hours of OCCT
6 hours of Intel XTU CPU
6 hours of Intel XTU Memory
3 hours (500%) HCI Memtest (when testing memory)

I've done all but the OCCT & XTU CPU test (just got the chip back yesterday)

It ends up being close to 30 hours of testing using a few different programs to try to stress it in different ways. But it is taking a lot of time and I think Prime catches instability better, so I think I want to simplify it to using Prime 95 Small FFTs & Blend for the CPU and then HCI Memtest for the memory. Maybe a shortened version of those other tests just to be sure but I would expect those to be easy to pass if it passes Prime.

I've got Small FFT on the latest version of Prime 95 running now, so AVX stuff and everything. It did crash in the middle of writing this post after about 20 minutes at 1.225v. So I've bumped to 1.235v and retesting it now. I'll try 1.25v next if it crashes again. But man the small FFTs make the CPU run really hot, 20C higher than the other stress tests.

Currently testing the following:

4.8ghz cpu @ 1.235v vcore & 1.800v VCCIN (-3 AVX & AVX 512 offset, so 4.5ghz)
3.2ghz mesh @ 1.100v
3600mhz DDR4, 16-16-16-36 (still need to dial this in some more, but after the CPU is done)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Yeah try running vcore below 1.385 if you want long term stability lol. That's really high. I try to keep mine under 1.25. Had one user on this forum his chip died doing 1.275. 4.8 is nothing to be ashamed of.


Haha, for sure. 4.8ghz is quite fast, I am very happy with it. I've stopped trying to mess with 5.0ghz since it was just getting way too hot. It feels very close but with my current cooling I don't wanna put anymore heat or volts into it. Wasn't a big deal if I can't get there, just wanted to see if there was anything else I should be trying before giving up on it. I figure the CPU was good up to 1.4 vcore so kind of scary to hear that his died at only 1.275v.


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you, still pretty early in my testing but its looking like a nice chip. I did have to bump it up after testing Small FFTs in Prime, so its at 1.235v now. Wouldn't be too surprised if I have to bump it up a little more but so far its looking pretty good. Is yours delidded? Mine before delid required 1.285v to be stable at 4.8ghz. The high temps and power leakage required me to run way more vcore than it should have needed to be stable before the delid. But since the delid I was able to run much lower volts and have much less heat for the same 4.8ghz. Before the delid I thought my chip was just so-so, to the point where I was debating if it was worth sending in for a delid. But I did it anyway and I was surprised when SL binned it at their current highest tier (4.8ghz @ 1.262v) and even more surprised that its looking like it'll need even less voltage than that. Hard to say if my experience is universal but consider a delid if you haven't already.
> 
> Going to give up on 5.0ghz. Not a big deal, just wanted to see if it was reachable. Feels very close, got it to the point where it wasn't crashing during stress tests but I found an error registered in HWInfo and that was enough for me to say it isn't working. I don't want to cram anymore volts or heat into it so I'll go back to testing 4.8. I think with better cooling 5.0ghz is possible but with my 280mm AIO the temps just gets too warm and power leakage becomes too much.
> I am still in the middle of testing so just preliminary so far but I use the following when finalizing the overclock.
> 
> 20 continuous back to back Cinebench R15 runs (quick and easy way to crash an unstable system)
> 6 hours of AIDA64 (CPU, FPU Cache, & Memory)
> 6 hours of OCCT
> 6 hours of Intel XTU CPU
> 6 hours of Intel XTU Memory
> 3 hours (500%) HCI Memtest (when testing memory)
> 
> I've done all but the OCCT & XTU CPU test (just got the chip back yesterday)
> 
> It ends up being close to 30 hours of testing using a few different programs to try to stress it in different ways. But it is taking a lot of time and I think Prime catches instability better, so I think I want to simplify it to using Prime 95 Small FFTs & Blend for the CPU and then HCI Memtest for the memory. Maybe a shortened version of those other tests just to be sure but I would expect those to be easy to pass if it passes Prime.
> 
> I've got Small FFT on the latest version of Prime 95 running now, so AVX stuff and everything. It did crash in the middle of writing this post after about 20 minutes at 1.225v. So I've bumped to 1.235v and retesting it now. I'll try 1.25v next if it crashes again. But man the small FFTs make the CPU run really hot, 20C higher than the other stress tests.
> 
> Currently testing the following:
> 
> 4.8ghz cpu @ 1.235v vcore & 1.800v VCCIN (-3 AVX & AVX 512 offset, so 4.5ghz)
> 3.2ghz mesh @ 1.100v
> 3600mhz DDR4, 16-16-16-36 (still need to dial this in some more, but after the CPU is done)
> Haha, for sure. 4.8ghz is quite fast, I am very happy with it. I've stopped trying to mess with 5.0ghz since it was just getting way too hot. It feels very close but with my current cooling I don't wanna put anymore heat or volts into it. Wasn't a big deal if I can't get there, just wanted to see if there was anything else I should be trying before giving up on it. I figure the CPU was good up to 1.4 vcore so kind of scary to hear that his died at only 1.275v.


I think//hope that 1.275v is an outlier. I have been running 1.285v far around 3 months so far. Like you, my chip is delidded. The temps max to 85c in Prime95 under a push/pull H115i. I do run a higher AVX offset though...-5 AVX/AVX512. Good Luck with it man. They are strong.


----------



## Jawnathin

Yeah I thought these 14nm chips were good through 1.4v and even 1.45v. That's what a lot of the Skylake and Kaby Lake guys ran for a while, so surprising to hear anything less is a problem. Not too worried as I am back to sub 1.3v now.

Thanks, appreciate it. I remember seeing your delidding posts on Reddit and came away quite impressed by your results. Delidding really does unlock the potential in these chips. My latest test crashed Small FFTs with 1.235v after about 2 hours. Bumped it up to 1.25v and retesting now. Hope to see it still running when I get up to go check on it. I will probably run 6 hours of Small FFTs, 6 hours of Blend, and a few hours on the other tests to round things out. If it passes all that I will call it good.

If it fails this I may consider a similar AVX offset like yours and what SL does for their binned chips to help keep temps down. They do -3 AVX and -5 AVX 512. I am thinking it may be able to pass at 1.235v at those settings.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Yeah I thought these 14nm chips were good through 1.4v and even 1.45v. That's what a lot of the Skylake and Kaby Lake guys ran for a while, so surprising to hear anything less is a problem. Not too worried as I am back to sub 1.3v now.
> 
> Thanks, appreciate it. I remember seeing your delidding posts on Reddit and came away quite impressed by your results. Delidding really does unlock the potential in these chips. My latest test crashed Small FFTs with 1.235v after about 2 hours. Bumped it up to 1.25v and retesting now. Hope to see it still running when I get up to go check on it. I will probably run 6 hours of Small FFTs, 6 hours of Blend, and a few hours on the other tests to round things out. If it passes all that I will call it good.
> 
> If it fails this I may consider a similar AVX offset like yours and what SL does for their binned chips to help keep temps down. They do -3 AVX and -5 AVX 512. I am thinking it may be able to pass at 1.235v at those settings.


They've clearly made some changes - SKL!=SKLX

1. mesh on HCC - I ran uncore on 6700K @ 4.0GHz - HCC SKL-X struggles to exceed 3.0GHz
2. clocks vs voltages, its a pretty different animal - 4.5GHz @ 1.16-1.18 - some will do 5.0GHz @ 1.25-1.30v
3. binning for HCC - maybe this explains some or all of #2, but bottom line, my 6700K and 7980XE are from completely different planets

So, I'm taking NOTHING I learned from 6700K to use on this chip.


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Yeah I thought these 14nm chips were good through 1.4v and even 1.45v. That's what a lot of the Skylake and Kaby Lake guys ran for a while, so surprising to hear anything less is a problem. Not too worried as I am back to sub 1.3v now.
> 
> Thanks, appreciate it. I remember seeing your delidding posts on Reddit and came away quite impressed by your results. Delidding really does unlock the potential in these chips. My latest test crashed Small FFTs with 1.235v after about 2 hours. Bumped it up to 1.25v and retesting now. Hope to see it still running when I get up to go check on it. I will probably run 6 hours of Small FFTs, 6 hours of Blend, and a few hours on the other tests to round things out. If it passes all that I will call it good.
> 
> If it fails this I may consider a similar AVX offset like yours and what SL does for their binned chips to help keep temps down. They do -3 AVX and -5 AVX 512. I am thinking it may be able to pass at 1.235v at those settings.


Found a more appropriate thread... lol Just as info I am currently running my 7820X at 4.7 with 1.22v and 1.840 VCCIN with avx-3, avx512 -5, I had my mesh up to 3.2 at 1.15 but I backed it off to continue testing, it is rock steady at these settings, so I'm going to up the multiplier to 48 and try again. If I can get to 4.8 stable under 1.275v I'll run it 24/7, if not then 4.7 1.22v is pretty good. Its especially good for heat. It never goes over 80c in prime with the avx offsets.

My next step is custom loop, I am actually getting a parts list together now and then pricing it out. Looks like it could be over $500 to go that route. But hey, I'm bored and love to build so c'est la vie.

My system is like this"
7820X 4.7 1.22v adaptive voltage, SVID-disabled
Mesh: 3.2 1.15v
Vccin: 1.840v
Vccio: 1.015
Vccsa: 0.908
Ram: 3800 T1 16-16-16-36-375(stability untested) 1.38v (If I goto 4000 I have to go dual channel CL17 or even 18 to get a post)

As a note: if I push mesh over 32 it becomes unstable no matter the voltage, what is causing this or how could I push past the 32 wall?

Does anyone know where uncore voltage offset should be? Currently at auto settings, the mobo puts it at .4490 and anything lower makes the system unstable, but that seems really high to me, and when I contacted MSI, they said it was normal for such a high oc.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> Found a more appropriate thread... lol Just as info I am currently running my 7820X at 4.7 with 1.22v and 1.840 VCCIN with avx-3, avx512 -5, I had my mesh up to 3.2 at 1.15 but I backed it off to continue testing, it is rock steady at these settings, so I'm going to up the multiplier to 48 and try again. If I can get to 4.8 stable under 1.275v I'll run it 24/7, if not then 4.7 1.22v is pretty good. Its especially good for heat. It never goes over 80c in prime with the avx offsets.
> 
> My next step is custom loop, I am actually getting a parts list together now and then pricing it out. Looks like it could be over $500 to go that route. But hey, I'm bored and love to build so c'est la vie.
> 
> My system is like this"
> 7820X 4.7 1.22v adaptive voltage, SVID-disabled
> Mesh: 3.2 1.15v
> Vccin: 1.840v
> Vccio: 1.015
> Vccsa: 0.908
> Ram: 3800 T1 16-16-16-36-375(stability untested) 1.38v (If I goto 4000 I have to go dual channel CL17 or even 18 to get a post)
> 
> As a note: if I push mesh over 32 it becomes unstable no matter the voltage, what is causing this or how could I push past the 32 wall?
> 
> Does anyone know where uncore voltage offset should be? Currently at auto settings, the mobo puts it at .4490 and anything lower makes the system unstable, but that seems really high to me, and when I contacted MSI, they said it was normal for such a high oc.


default uncore offset on the APEX is .45V also... I have mine at +0.3V with no issues.


----------



## Jawnathin

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> Found a more appropriate thread... lol Just as info I am currently running my 7820X at 4.7 with 1.22v and 1.840 VCCIN with avx-3, avx512 -5, I had my mesh up to 3.2 at 1.15 but I backed it off to continue testing, it is rock steady at these settings, so I'm going to up the multiplier to 48 and try again. If I can get to 4.8 stable under 1.275v I'll run it 24/7, if not then 4.7 1.22v is pretty good. Its especially good for heat. It never goes over 80c in prime with the avx offsets.
> 
> My next step is custom loop, I am actually getting a parts list together now and then pricing it out. Looks like it could be over $500 to go that route. But hey, I'm bored and love to build so c'est la vie.
> 
> My system is like this"
> 7820X 4.7 1.22v adaptive voltage, SVID-disabled
> Mesh: 3.2 1.15v
> Vccin: 1.840v
> Vccio: 1.015
> Vccsa: 0.908
> Ram: 3800 T1 16-16-16-36-375(stability untested) 1.38v (If I goto 4000 I have to go dual channel CL17 or even 18 to get a post)
> 
> As a note: if I push mesh over 32 it becomes unstable no matter the voltage, what is causing this or how could I push past the 32 wall?
> 
> Does anyone know where uncore voltage offset should be? Currently at auto settings, the mobo puts it at .4490 and anything lower makes the system unstable, but that seems really high to me, and when I contacted MSI, they said it was normal for such a high oc.






Hah, yeah, this is the thread to talk about this stuff. Welcome. One thing I'd recommend is determine stability for each component one at time. CPU, Mesh, and Memory. Problem with doing it all at once is that if it crashes you don't know what caused it and what to change. It is time consuming but I think it saves time and frustration in the end if you're looking to get the most out of the system. In your case I'd back the memory out to something you know is good, figure out the CPU, and then go back to the memory. You have to tune and test the memory later anyway so may as well do that after you figured out the CPU.

I'd also recommend seeing if a fixed voltage helps with stability. I prefer adaptive when possible too but I think fixed helps with stability. Don't think it contributes much heat with no load or any wear at these low voltages anyway, so not much to lose. Anyway, yeah, try to go for 4.8. Maybe start at 1.25, if it fails, then keep bumping up. I prefer to start low then moving up. If volts and temps get too high then 4.7 @ 1.22 is very good balance of performance and power.

BTW, did you see any benefit to bumping up the vccin to 1.840v? Were you getting phantom throttling or instability at 1.800v? Mine is at 1.800v, don't know/think it is phantom throttling but its stable. Just wondering if I should also be trying something like 1.850v if it helps with anything.

For me right now, my settings so are...

4.8ghz cpu @ 1.250v vcore & 1.800v VCCIN (-3 AVX & AVX 512 offset, so 4.5ghz)
3.2ghz mesh @ 1.100v
3600mhz DDR4, 16-16-16-36 (still need to dial this in after the CPU but it is HCI stable)

Stability testing so far...

6 hours of Prime95 Small FFT
6 hours of Prime95 Blend
3 hours of AIDA64 (CPU, FPU, Cache, Memory)

Still need to do...

3 hours of OCCT
3 hours of Intel XTU CPU
3 hours of Intel XTU Memory

Not too worried about the remaining tests since it already passed the hardest Prime tests (and it passes with lower voltages) but it'll give me over 24 hours of testing and they stress the CPU in different ways than Prime so it is still worth doing. Once it passes these I will go back to tuning the memory but it will be nice knowing the CPU is solid.


----------



## Ezric

I have been told by many overclockers that vccin needs to be at least .6 higher than vcore. So that's why mine was set at that. I haven't backed it down to match that ratio. And yes the other oc stuff was after I settled at 4.7. I've been testing this rig for almost a month now, the ram I've tested some, but i read something new and back it stock to test something I've learned and then go back to it.

There is quite a lot to learn, and I still have more to go but it's a lot of fun.


----------



## Jawnathin

Cool, thanks. Once I've completed my rounds of stability testing I will do some Cinebench runs between 1.800v and 1.850v VCCIN to see if it helps improve performance any. I don't think I will need to retest stability when going UP in voltage









Oh, and I know the feeling for extended testing... I've been doing this for what feels like months and I feel like I am getting to the other side...

I did all my testing on the first setup, got a different motherboard, retested with that. Then sent my CPU out to delid and retesting again. It is fun to tinker around but I'm ready to finish it up


----------



## Ezric

@Jawnathin, I just saw your comment about my reddit posts, I'm betting that was my other processor. I have since sent that one back and received a different one, that I delidded myself. Got much better performance.

As far as delidding, I did not seal the ihs back to the pcb, and with lm I had the best results. My cpu idles at 29°. Pretty remarkable, I lowered my temps 5-6° just by letting the ihs float on the die.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> @Jawnathin, I just saw your comment about my reddit posts, I'm betting that was my other processor. I have since sent that one back and received a different one, that I delidded myself. Got much better performance.
> 
> As far as delidding, I did not seal the ihs back to the pcb, and with lm I had the best results. My cpu idles at 29°. Pretty remarkable, I lowered my temps 5-6° just by letting the ihs float on the die.


Thinner TIM and less distance between IHS and die often lowers temps noticeably - that can make not re-gluing worth it (though it is a hassle if you need to re-socket and it changes your IHS height so depending on your mounting, it can cause other problems).


----------



## LunaP

Ok guys, its been ages (since x79)

I got my rig up and going supposedly, 7980XE , 128gb C14 3200 ram, and 960 1tbpro using the R6E

Whats first?

Can I set XMP then work on CPU or just leave RAM at default and work on CPU first, also what apps should I download? I saw Real bench, what others as well as the ones that come w/ the asus setup should I install and mess with ? Just for stability.

Currently at 4.4 using vcore 1.112

AVX -3
AVX512 -5

XMP on and memory at 1t
Load calibration set to 140% for both cpu and memory, Windows is booting so I need to test


----------



## Ezric

Scroll back a few pages and read some of our posts earlier. Some really good info there. You will need several different programs. Some for monitoring and some for testing.

For monitoring I would suggest:
Hwinfo64
Cpuz

For stability:
Aida64 for ram and cpu and avx
Realbench
Prime95 for burn-in and avx stress
Cinebench R15
XTU by intel

And whatever else you'd like, your mobo may have some good utilities for monitoring.

When overclocking, go one thing at a time:
1st your cpu overclock.
2nd Ram
3rd Mesh

I would leave avx offset off at first, find what your cpu can clock to within reasonable heat and note that. Say it is 4.4 for avx loads. Then you could goto 4.5 and set avx at -1, so your avx loads run at 4.4. The avx offset downclocks your cpu by the number of multiplies so it won't run as hot. But first you have to find that magic clock that your cpu can avx in the first place.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> Scroll back a few pages and read some of our posts earlier. Some really good info there. You will need several different programs. Some for monitoring and some for testing.
> 
> For monitoring I would suggest:
> Hwinfo64
> Cpuz
> 
> For stability:
> Aida64 for ram and cpu and avx
> Realbench
> Prime95 for burn-in and avx stress
> Cinebench R15
> XTU by intel
> 
> And whatever else you'd like, your mobo may have some good utilities for monitoring.
> 
> When overclocking, go one thing at a time:
> 1st your cpu overclock.
> 2nd Ram
> 3rd Mesh
> 
> I would leave avx offset off at first, find what your cpu can clock to within reasonable heat and note that. Say it is 4.4 for avx loads. Then you could goto 4.5 and set avx at -1, so your avx loads run at 4.4. The avx offset downclocks your cpu by the number of multiplies so it won't run as hot. But first you have to find that magic clock that your cpu can avx in the first place.


Thanks, I'm going back through but wanted to verify and state my progression as well, I'm completely new to mesh and the other settings as well as avx. The above settings are based on SL's when they sold the chip, Only terminology I remmeber messing with was vcore,load line calibration, dram voltage, vcssa, vtt and 2ndary vtt, so all these new dials are definitely new to me.


----------



## Ezric

Sure thing, I haven't overclocked since the mid to late 90's so everything has changed. I just recently built a skylake-x as well, albeit I went with 7820x because I didn't need that many cores and the less cores you have the easier it is to overclock. I wanted the best of both worlds, Single-core and multicore. But we are all here to help out, so any questions someone will know an answer. I may not be the best to ask, but I can help with what I've had experience with.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Thanks, I'm going back through but wanted to verify and state my progression as well, I'm completely new to mesh and the other settings as well as avx. The above settings are based on SL's when they sold the chip, Only terminology I remmeber messing with was vcore,load line calibration, dram voltage, vcssa, vtt and 2ndary vtt, so all these new dials are definitely new to me.


hey Luna, i just dropped htis text file as an example (of the crtl-F2 function) in another thread... may help with some ideas anyway.
grab a copy of x264 stresstestv2 (i have a link somew*here*) and hwbot x265 (helps with vccin tuning). otherr than that, Mesh/Cache and Ring can stay stock until you get other domains "settled".









46bycore_setting.txt 68k .txt file


see also:
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?53533-Overclocking-Guide


----------



## Ezric

I would love to know how hwbot 265 helps with vccin tuning. Do tell!


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> hey Luna, i just dropped htis text file as an example (of the crtl-F2 function) in another thread... may help with some ideas anyway.
> grab a copy of x264 stresstestv2 (i have a link somew*here*) and hwbot x265 (helps with vccin tuning). otherr than that, Mesh/Cache and Ring can stay stock until you get other domains "settled".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 46bycore_setting.txt 68k .txt file
> 
> 
> see also:
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?53533-Overclocking-Guide


THAT, is a ton to go through lol, this process looks looooong...

Update btw, I ran

Real bench:



Cinebench



AIDA64



hw64info after running said tests.



So atm though I'm pretty sure I'm wrong, x44 seems good at 1.112v, what should I mess with next, I kinda wanna test 4.7 to see temps since I wanna find a good 24/7 I can run, since at times I'll be setting 10-12 cores to OBS for high processing so I want to keep it within max temps.

I'm studying up on the new terms and how it affects things as well as theres a lot of new information to process.

****edit**

@ 1.175 core V it boots @ 4.7 and runs AIDA64 fine, but crashes after the first second of Cinebench... as in Cinebench crashes is all nothing else. I bumped SA to .905 as well.

Whats the max voltage I should be avoiding for 24/7 usage?


----------



## Martin778

I wouldn't personally use AIDA64's stress test, don't know why but for me it's unreliable. I had 2h passes on A64 and instant freezes in X264/5.

So far it seems like my CPU won't do 4.7 fully stable, no way. Tried 1.27V / 1.87 VCCIN but it crashed after around ~1-1.5h P95 and after ~15 minutes of x264.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> I wouldn't personally use AIDA64's stress test, don't know why but for me it's unreliable. I had 2h passes on A64 and instant freezes in X264/5.
> 
> So far it seems like my CPU won't do 4.7 fully stable, no way. Tried 1.27V / 1.87 VCCIN but it crashed after around ~1-1.5h P95 and after ~15 minutes of x264.


Whats weird was at 1.175 @ 4.7 I could start cinebench and cinebench would just error, Prime would run for a full test with 1 error, the moment I pumped more voltage in the system would auto shutdown then reboot.

I was trying offset increments of 0.001 -> 0.025 for the past hour but no luck. Got up to 1.205v so far


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I noticed that my memory performance went up quite a bit with the excatly same RAM kit running the excatly same timings, speed and voltages. Only difference is that I now use it on a 7820X instead of a 7800X.

The 7800X ran at 4900/3200 and 4000 on mem, and the 7820X ran at 4700/3200 and 4000 on mem. The picture says 2700 mhz on cache for some reason, I don't know why. It was at 3200 mhz. Never ran 2700mhz at all.


----------



## DStealth

Your result is normal 8 cores are addressing better 4 dimms than 6 cores


----------



## arrow0309

What would you guys accept as max core temp on a (cpu intensive) game like Assassin's Creed Origins?
With a 4.8ghz 7900X @3.1ghz cache.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> What would you guys accept as max core temp on a (cpu intensive) game like Assassin's Creed Origins?
> With a 4.8ghz 7900X @3.1ghz cache.


~80


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> What would you guys accept as max core temp on a (cpu intensive) game like Assassin's Creed Origins?
> With a 4.8ghz 7900X @3.1ghz cache.
> 
> 
> 
> ~80
Click to expand...

Really? Lmao








Than should I be OK with my 65 max?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Really? Lmao
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Than should I be OK with my 65 max?


Then you're OC is too low


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Personally I like to stay in the sub 70'C range. 80'C is too hot for me, even under something like Cinebench or folding.


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Personally I like to stay in the sub 70'C range. 80'C is too hot for me, even under something like Cinebench or folding.


Yeah, I do like it too. Gaming side I'll have to consider the gpu (+ vrm) heat (Txp oc up to 2100) added to the loop as well. And if I also sometimes forget to lower the heaters inside the house and also decreasing the fans rpm late in the evening than it's normal that a Cpu demanding game like ACO touches the 65C on one core (the *preferred one).
Otherwise I'm staying in the sub 60C range with every game and bench.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> I would love to know how hwbot 265 helps with vccin tuning. Do tell!


okay, I'll tell... it runs very high current demand when set up properly (eg, 4K 4x overkill or higher). it's not whether it completes, it is whether the correction factor is >0.95.
(was the same for BWE and HWE)
now ya know.


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> okay, I'll tell... it runs very high current demand when set up properly (eg, 4K 4x overkill or higher). it's not whether it completes, it is whether the correction factor is >0.95.
> (was the same for BWE and HWE)
> now ya know.


Well thanks for that tidbit, the more you know!


----------



## robvoip

Hey everyone,

I am looking for some tips to bring my temps down on my delidded 7820x

Current setup:
Asus together Strix x299-E
7820x from SL @ 4.7/1.237v
3200 MHz mesh/auto voltage
Corsairs dominator 32gb kit 3200mhz running at xmp profile
-3 avx
-5 avx512

Current temps running aida64 fpu and cpu stress test peaks at 89 degrees and vrms are around 65-70 degrees.

I was able to push the oc to 4.8 with a 1.269 vcore, all other settings remained the same as my 4.7 oc. Stability is fine but Aida test reach 100 degrees at this voltage even with the AIO on max.

Any tips to fine tune my 4.8 oc and bring my temps down?

Edit: forgot the AIO, Corsair H110i

Thanks!


----------



## TahoeDust

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robvoip*
> 
> Hey everyone,
> 
> I am looking for some tips to bring my temps down on my delidded 7820x
> 
> Current setup:
> Asus together Strix x299-E
> 7820x from SL @ 4.7/*1.237v*
> 3200 MHz mesh/auto voltage
> Corsairs dominator 32gb kit 3200mhz running at xmp profile
> -3 avx
> -5 avx512
> 
> Current temps running aida64 fpu and cpu stress test peaks at 89 degrees and vrms are around 65-70 degrees.
> 
> I was able to push the oc to 4.8 with a *1.269* vcore, all other settings remained the same as my 4.7 oc. Stability is fine but Aida test reach 100 degrees at this voltage even with the AIO on max.
> 
> Any tips to fine tune my 4.8 oc and bring my temps down?
> 
> Edit: forgot the AIO, Corsair H110i
> 
> Thanks!


Which of these voltages is a Typo?


----------



## robvoip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TahoeDust*
> 
> Which of these voltages is a Typo?


None, this is what i am worried about.


----------



## surfinchina

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robvoip*
> 
> Hey everyone,
> 
> I am looking for some tips to bring my temps down on my delidded 7820x
> 
> Current setup:
> Asus together Strix x299-E
> 7820x from SL @ 4.7/1.237v
> 3200 MHz mesh/auto voltage
> Corsairs dominator 32gb kit 3200mhz running at xmp profile
> -3 avx
> -5 avx512
> 
> Current temps running aida64 fpu and cpu stress test peaks at 89 degrees and vrms are around 65-70 degrees.
> 
> I was able to push the oc to 4.8 with a 1.269 vcore, all other settings remained the same as my 4.7 oc. Stability is fine but Aida test reach 100 degrees at this voltage even with the AIO on max.
> 
> Any tips to fine tune my 4.8 oc and bring my temps down?
> 
> Edit: forgot the AIO, Corsair H110i
> 
> Thanks!


Probably just get a better cooling system.
I've been looking and theorising, and for my 7900x at least, a 360 rad will get you to 4.8, a 420 rad will get you to 4.9, and a win in the silicone lottery will get you more, or going over 1.3v of course.
I guess that means that a 280 will get you to 4.7


----------



## robvoip

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *surfinchina*
> 
> Probably just get a better cooling system.
> I've been looking and theorising, and for my 7900x at least, a 360 rad will get you to 4.8, a 420 rad will get you to 4.9, and a win in the silicone lottery will get you more, or going over 1.3v of course.
> I guess that means that a 280 will get you to 4.7


Would need a new case for anything larger than a 280









Everything I tried is 100% stable @4.8 (games + synthetic benches), even though temps will never hit that high for day to day use, I just have a worried feeling about it. I am a novice at overclocking, but was thinking if I can get it stable with a reduced vcore but a higher vcin, would it reduce my temps?


----------



## LunaP

@CptSpig if you're here what was your end result for your cpu settings and clock? Still waiting for a response here from others while tinkering, but I seriously have no idea what settings require other things to change as well, so its nonstop offsets to get ideas...

I'd really love to know

1) What a healthy / max voltage to stay under for 24/7 usage
2) Temps ( stay under 80? or )

Also for CPU VCCIN do I start with 1.8 1.9? how to tell on this?

At my current settings for 4.4 no issues in tests etc, however running OBS and setting to slow, slower, slowest etc for some reason the CPU keeps jumping back and forth from 4.1-4.4ghz on random cores as if it can't hold, temps aren't going any higher than the high 60's so I'm wondering whats causing the CPU not to be able to hold a steady run.

@jpmboy I ran through the list and changed quite a few settings for stuff to have on/off on mine, I see the adaptive voltage per core and guessing that must've taken a while on there, did you use offsets to achieve this via prime or?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> @CptSpig if you're here what was your end result for your cpu settings and clock? Still waiting for a response here from others while tinkering, but I seriously have no idea what settings require other things to change as well, so its nonstop offsets to get ideas...
> 
> I'd really love to know
> 
> 1) What a healthy / max voltage to stay under for 24/7 usage
> 2) Temps ( stay under 80? or )
> 
> Also for CPU VCCIN do I start with 1.8 1.9? how to tell on this?
> 
> At my current settings for 4.4 no issues in tests etc, however running OBS and setting to slow, slower, slowest etc for some reason the CPU keeps jumping back and forth from 4.1-4.4ghz on random cores as if it can't hold, temps aren't going any higher than the high 60's so I'm wondering whats causing the CPU not to be able to hold a steady run.
> 
> @jpmboy I ran through the list and changed quite a few settings for stuff to have on/off on mine, I see the adaptive voltage per core and guessing that must've taken a while on there, did you use offsets to achieve this via prime or?


1. I haven't used OBS, but it compresses and encodes, does it use AVX instructions to do so?
2. Windows is really terrible at resource management, it both under and over subscribes CPU resources such that the default behavior has high core count processors failing to reach full speed when load is uneven. I have no issue testing "by usage" setups in linux. Windows often loads up "unused cores" for reasons I can't explain or predict and drives things to the "all cores" clock rate.
3. Even when its working well, you are going to see fluctuation based on I/O bottlenecks (disk, network, filesystem, etc... ) So, some of this is normal.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> @CptSpig if you're here what was your end result for your cpu settings and clock? Still waiting for a response here from others while tinkering, but I seriously have no idea what settings require other things to change as well, so its nonstop offsets to get ideas...
> 
> I'd really love to know
> 
> 1) What a healthy / max voltage to stay under for 24/7 usage
> 2) Temps ( stay under 80? or )
> 
> Also for CPU VCCIN do I start with 1.8 1.9? how to tell on this?
> 
> At my current settings for 4.4 no issues in tests etc, however running OBS and setting to slow, slower, slowest etc for some reason the CPU keeps jumping back and forth from 4.1-4.4ghz on random cores as if it can't hold, temps aren't going any higher than the high 60's so I'm wondering whats causing the CPU not to be able to hold a steady run.
> 
> *@jpmboy* I ran through the list and changed quite a few settings for stuff to have on/off on mine, I see the adaptive voltage per core and guessing that must've taken a while on there, did you use offsets to achieve this via prime or?


the adaptive per core settings are based upon the individual core's VID. Remember, adaptive cannot run below the VID for a given core and I was able t get the *cores to 4.6 with only a slight bump in the 4.5VID. Yeah - it's an odd setup, but had to try. Synching all cores is very straight forward. When pushing things a bit more than 24/7 work, I go with manual override running below the VIDs, c-states and the turbo residence settings in that screen pack.








RUns fine as a per core.. and free benefit is 2 cores at one notch higher with little more voltage. I wnat to try a per core manual override and drop the vcore for each as far as stability will allow.
And.. I do not use p95 on this processor. It's a left over from the Jurassic cpu epoc.








x264, x265, HCi memtest, GSAT (which uses AVX). For me, getting really solid ram stability is the most important. I can adjust core voltage on the fly if ever needed.
Edit: VCCIN... stay (well) below 2V. I have not needed more than 1.8 for normal use, 1.95 for some benches (like the final two modules in geekbench 3 (x64).


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> 1. I haven't used OBS, but it compresses and encodes, does it use AVX instructions to do so?
> 2. Windows is really terrible at resource management, it both under and over subscribes CPU resources such that the default behavior has high core count processors failing to reach full speed when load is uneven. I have no issue testing "by usage" setups in linux. Windows often loads up "unused cores" for reasons I can't explain or predict and drives things to the "all cores" clock rate.
> 3. Even when its working well, you are going to see fluctuation based on I/O bottlenecks (disk, network, filesystem, etc... ) So, some of this is normal.


OBS doesn't utilize AVX to my knowledge, I'll double check w/ the creator though gimme a few hes away atm.

Shouldn't be any bottlenecks as far as filesystem / disk go since 960 pro however I could try making it utilize the 850 pro instead but no drops in the write times and only testing for 1 -3 minutes at a time.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the adaptive per core settings are based upon the individual core's VID. Remember, adaptive cannot run below the VID for a given core and I was able t get the *cores to 4.6 with only a slight bump in the 4.5VID. Yeah - it's an odd setup, but had to try. Synching all cores is very straight forward. When pushing things a bit more than 24/7 work, I go with manual override running below the VIDs, c-states and the turbo residence settings in that screen pack.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RUns fine as a per core.. and free benefit is 2 cores at one notch higher with little more voltage. I wnat to try a per core manual override and drop the vcore for each as far as stability will allow.
> And.. I do not use p95 on this processor. It's a left over from the Jurassic cpu epoc.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> x264, x265, HCi memtest, GSAT (which uses AVX). For me, getting really solid ram stability is the most important. I can adjust core voltage on the fly if ever needed.
> Edit: VCCIN... stay (well) below 2V. I have not needed more than 1.8 for normal use, 1.95 for some benches (like the final two modules in geekbench 3 (x64).


Ah ok thanks, noted for VCCIN as I've seen a few variance between 1.8 and 1.9 with some people. Also I noticed you're running at 200% vs 140% is that safe I thought 200+ was for LN2? ( based on the text file you uploaded )

As for OC wise, any settings I could try offhand just to test this thing, ie vcore, SA , VCCIO, and cache? and or whats safe to try?

I'm grabbing those apps you mentioned now, already grabbed cinebench, realbench, handbrake, and purchasing HCI. Also grabbed h264


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> okay, I'll tell... it runs very high current demand when set up properly (eg, 4K 4x overkill or higher). it's not whether it completes, it is whether the correction factor is >0.95.
> (was the same for BWE and HWE)
> now ya know.


Nice, am I good?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Have anyone tested the difference with different core speeds in games?

I was wondering if I should test the difference between let's say 4.2 ghz, 4.4, 4.6 and 4.8 ghz with the same mesh OC (3.0-3.2ghz) and mem OC (4000mhz CL17). Wondering if the difference would be noticable at all..

I am now trying to find the best power to wattage clock. I am around 155 watts at 4.5 ghz under Cinebench. (Which seems to be almost as heavy as RB temp/power wise) 4.9 ghz at 1.350V peaked 80'C on one core and 250 watts..


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> OBS doesn't utilize AVX to my knowledge, I'll double check w/ the creator though gimme a few hes away atm.
> 
> Shouldn't be any bottlenecks as far as filesystem / disk go since 960 pro however I could try making it utilize the 850 pro instead but no drops in the write times and only testing for 1 -3 minutes at a time.
> Ah ok thanks, noted for VCCIN as I've seen a few variance between 1.8 and 1.9 with some people. Also I noticed you're running at 200% vs 140% is that safe I thought 200+ was for LN2? ( based on the text file you uploaded )


Even the super-duper-awesoms 960 in nasty 4K random block mixed read/write can slow down to 10's of MB/s. So, on the scale of the processor able saturate PCIEx4, this means it has to wait "a little".

Beyond that Windows (or any OS, but Windows in particular has never been strong with I/O scheduling) can get bound up servicing I/O in various instances which don't present as fatal performance bottlenecks, but on the mS scale window to choose a clock rate the i7/i9 will throttle down "a little".

The reported frequency is effectively a sample of state taken periodically, so the blip can be tiny, but you see it on a 1-3 second interval depending on the tool. I see this all the time in linux - even "pegged" (100% load reported to the OS) the processors are wandering frequency-wise. This is key to how Intel et al. save power these days.

BTW - there are parameters in the BIOS as well as power settings in windows that set these. You can manipulate the windows that the chip uses to determine when the throttle down due to load. I haven't played with them in windows - in linux, I set the "performance" governor if it matters, but the difference is usually quite small in real-world performance. I think I saw them in "Tweaker's Paradise", they are actually better presented in many xeon bios setups as they very much influence a server's performance depending on what it does and how it is configured.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Nice, am I good?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I'd say so. It's a good high current synthetic encode.


----------



## Jpmboy

derped


----------



## eatthermalpaste

The wandering you see in Linux.. if you have perf gov set and C-states disabled and EIST disabled / etc...

is not as much as you think. Depending on the tool you are using , you should assume the BCLK reading is not that precise. So if your tool is reading a variation of 40-60MHz from your set speed.. i.e. 4480MHz-4520MHz.. you should see how much the multipler is changing and how much the bclk reading is changing on the tool.

That's less than 1% difference/error in set speed.. it could very easily just be a problem of not being able to read it Exactly.

This isn't saving power. Has nothing to do with it. If you use the correct settings and disable the power saving functions the frequency is hardset. It is the tool not being 100% precise, and possibly the BIOS/board having an issue. It isn't some huge conspiracy.

Intel isn't trying to jip me by reducing my core frequency by 6MHz every few seconds. That isn't how it works.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eatthermalpaste*
> 
> The wandering you see in Linux.. if you have perf gov set and C-states disabled and EIST disabled / etc...
> 
> is not as much as you think. Depending on the tool you are using , you should assume the BCLK reading is not that precise. So if your tool is reading a variation of 40-60MHz from your set speed.. i.e. 4480MHz-4520MHz.. you should see how much the multipler is changing and how much the bclk reading is changing on the tool.
> 
> That's less than 1% difference/error in set speed.. it could very easily just be a problem of not being able to read it Exactly.
> 
> This isn't saving power. Has nothing to do with it. If you use the correct settings and disable the power saving functions the frequency is hardset. It is the tool not being 100% precise, and possibly the BIOS/board having an issue. It isn't some huge conspiracy.
> 
> Intel isn't trying to jip me by reducing my core frequency by 6MHz every few seconds. That isn't how it works.


For me its 4.1 - 4.4 ghz on the cores
power states are disabled, and I'm still rummaging through the bios and online for answers on this on settings I can disable/enable to help this.

Tool being used was throttle stop and HWinfo64


----------



## eatthermalpaste

what motherboard are you using?


----------



## Mike211

I bought my i9-7980XE from Micro Center $1,999.00


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eatthermalpaste*
> 
> what motherboard are you using?


R6E


----------



## eatthermalpaste

well maybe our boards have the same problem. No harm in trying.

Set Turbo Boost Max 3.0 to Legacy mode
Speed Shift Enabled
Enhanced Multi-Core Perf Enable
C -States - Enable
EIST - Enable
Energy Efficient Turbo - Disable

in windows set power options to Performance mode

this fixes a certain kind of frequency problem I'm currently having but it is not that similar.

The other problem I have is related to AVX. Have you defined AVX Offsets? If your AVX Offsets are still at Auto.. I'd suggest hard setting them to 0. Or 1 if you like. I am not sure about R6E BIOS but a few boards I've used so far the Auto setting for the AVX and AVX512 Offset will be 2-3 and I have to hardset to 0.

Also if there is a Max CPU temp option and it is set to Auto.. hardset that to what you'd like as well. Some have the mistake of having these set to 86C instead of 96C.

so 1. make sure its not overheating.. cpu or vrms

2. make sure iti s not due to avx offset

3. see if it is due to skylake-x/kabylake-x issue to do with the power saving options. C-states and EIST do not work properly for me which is why I have to enable them currently in the BIOS and disable on my own in OS.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eatthermalpaste*
> 
> well maybe our boards have the same problem. No harm in trying.
> 
> Set Turbo Boost Max 3.0 to Legacy mode
> Speed Shift Enabled
> Enhanced Multi-Core Perf Enable
> C -States - Enable
> EIST - Enable
> Energy Efficient Turbo - Disable
> 
> in windows set power options to Performance mode
> 
> this fixes a certain kind of frequency problem I'm currently having but it is not that similar.
> 
> The other problem I have is related to AVX. Have you defined AVX Offsets? If your AVX Offsets are still at Auto.. I'd suggest hard setting them to 0. Or 1 if you like. I am not sure about R6E BIOS but a few boards I've used so far the Auto setting for the AVX and AVX512 Offset will be 2-3 and I have to hardset to 0.
> 
> Also if there is a Max CPU temp option and it is set to Auto.. hardset that to what you'd like as well. Some have the mistake of having these set to 86C instead of 96C.
> 
> so 1. make sure its not overheating.. cpu or vrms
> 
> 2. make sure iti s not due to avx offset
> 
> 3. see if it is due to skylake-x/kabylake-x issue to do with the power saving options. C-states and EIST do not work properly for me which is why I have to enable them currently in the BIOS and disable on my own in OS.


AVX is -3 and 512 is -5

Already stated that not overheating VRMS are well within 50C tops CPU temps max hitting are mid 70's for the hottest core mostly high 50's and 60's

Power plan is on performance

Setting the other values now.


----------



## eatthermalpaste

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> AVX is -3 and 512 is -5
> 
> Already stated that not overheating VRMS are well within 50C tops CPU temps max hitting are mid 70's for the hottest core mostly high 50's and 60's
> 
> Power plan is on performance
> 
> Setting the other values now.


If your AVX offset is -3

and your frequency is going between 4100 to 4400 in OBS.. doesn't it kind of answer itself.. this sounds like AVX offset in effect.

Or is it going through a massive range between those 2 frequencies?


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eatthermalpaste*
> 
> If your AVX offset is -3
> 
> and your frequency is going between 4100 to 4400 in OBS.. doesn't it kind of answer itself.. this sounds like AVX offset in effect.
> 
> Or is it going through a massive range between those 2 frequencies?


You'd think but since OBS doesn't use AVX it wouldn't make sense either,

Intel speed shift tech doens't have legacy option, just disabled, enabled or Auto, its currently disabled. i'll set it to Auto for now.

Unable to find EIST or energy efficient turbo though.


----------



## eatthermalpaste

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> You'd think but since OBS doesn't use AVX it wouldn't make sense either,
> 
> Intel speed shift tech doens't have legacy option, just disabled, enabled or Auto, its currently disabled. i'll set it to Auto for now.
> 
> Unable to find EIST or energy efficient turbo though.


Speed shift does not, Intel Max Turbo Boost Technlology 3.0 was the setting with Legacy / Native.. let me know if that has the option

EIST - Enhanced Intel Speed Step.. speed step option should be in there but if you can't find it the nits already on auto.

Energy Efficient Turbo might be under a different name with asus.. wherever it is it def needs to be disabled.

through some quick googling every thing I've clicked so far is confirming that OBS uses AVX instructions... are you sure it doesn't?


----------



## carlhil2

Has anyone ran their oc'ed 7980xe with hyperthreading off?


----------



## LunaP

@jpmboy

btw wanted to follow up on this how many loops do you recommend,

I"m at vcore 1.15 now for 4.5 on all cores same AVX sets as 4.4 and running tests good so far but wanted to verify what i need to do with these, that was the 64bit bat +


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *eatthermalpaste*
> 
> This isn't saving power. Has nothing to do with it. If you use the correct settings and disable the power saving functions the frequency is hardset. It is the tool not being 100% precise, and possibly the BIOS/board having an issue. It isn't some huge conspiracy.
> 
> Intel isn't trying to jip me by reducing my core frequency by 6MHz every few seconds. That isn't how it works.


Not a vast conspiracy and very much geared towards saving power.

I don't disable that stuff because the fluctuations don't bother me and the cost is minimal compared to the gain when you have a basement full of these things running...

As I mentioned, I usually have the balanced/demand government enabled because the gain of performance is small, particularly with sustained loads.

Running a sim right now on 18 cores with all those measures enabled and its relatively steady because this load has virtually no blocking:


but other loads do have some bottlenecks so it bounces around as it should and as I want it to... I don't need to use 200W doing nothing when I can use 60-90W....

FWIW - there is still some breakage on SKLX and linux WRT frequency reporting. Hence the use of cpupower instead of grepping /proc/cpuinfo... cpuinfo shows 2600 not the actual frequency where on HW/BW it showed the actual frequency...

cpupower shows some odd numbers given the math/fudge factors and BCLK reporting accuracy as you mentioned... The above is a 45X multiplier to a BCLK=100...

For contrast - here's a 36 core system under much more uneven load - showing only those cores above 3GHz (white terminal - sorry about the image above - transparent terminals don't capture well):


----------



## eatthermalpaste

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Has anyone ran their oc'ed 7980xe with hyperthreading off?


yes, it works fine


----------



## eatthermalpaste

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Not a vast conspiracy and very much geared towards saving power.
> 
> I don't disable that stuff because the fluctuations don't bother me and the cost is minimal compared to the gain when you have a basement full of these things running...
> 
> As I mentioned, I usually have the balanced/demand government enabled because the gain of performance is small, particularly with sustained loads.
> 
> Running a sim right now on 18 cores with all those measures enabled and its relatively steady because this load has virtually no blocking:
> 
> 
> but other loads do have some bottlenecks so it bounces around as it should and as I want it to... I don't need to use 200W doing nothing when I can use 60-90W....
> 
> FWIW - there is still some breakage on SKLX and linux WRT frequency reporting. Hence the use of cpupower instead of grepping /proc/cpuinfo... cpuinfo shows 2600 not the actual frequency where on HW/BW it showed the actual frequency...
> 
> cpupower shows some odd numbers given the math/fudge factors and BCLK reporting accuracy as you mentioned... The above is a 45X multiplier to a BCLK=100...
> 
> For contrast - here's a 36 core system under much more uneven load - showing only those cores above 3GHz (white terminal - sorry about the image above - transparent terminals don't capture well):


1. https://github.com/ajaiantilal/i7z.git

2. why are you showing the 36 core for contrast? The Xeon Scalable microcode essentially forces an AVX offset and an AVX2 offset. Those speed variations can also be explained by using EIST/other power saving options. It is not showing on the 7980XE because all of those are disabled.. not sure what point is being made there? From your full response just looks like we're talking about 2 different things and I misunderstood your first post about the "speed variation". Yes, EIST and AVX/AVX2 offsets work as intended.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Has anyone ran their oc'ed 7980xe with hyperthreading off?


yes.. just for a few tests tho.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> @jpmboy
> 
> btw wanted to follow up on this how many loops do you recommend,
> 
> I"m at vcore 1.15 now for 4.5 on all cores same AVX sets as 4.4 and running tests good so far but wanted to verify what i need to do with these, that was the 64bit bat +


with x264 it's best to run 1.5X the total # of threads - so for a 7980XE use" 54 threads, and as many loops as you want to run. For me, 10 loops is plenty (with 54 threads).


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes.. just for a few tests tho.
> with x264 it's best to run 1.5X the total # of threads - so for a 7980XE use" 54 threads, and as many loops as you want to run. For me, 10 loops is plenty (with 54 threads).






Hmm crash aside once I clicked close it continued on the loops then finished at 10, what would you recommend adjusting at this point? I might back it down to 4.4 since the temps are a bit high for some cores oddly given that this was delidded.


----------



## Jawnathin

Completed my round of stability testing last night. Lots of good news but also a bad one.

OC specs as a reminder...

7820X @ 4.8ghz (48x100.1), 1.25vcore, 1.800vccin, LLC 5, -3 AVX & -3 AVX512 offset
3.2ghz mesh @ 1.100v
3600mhz 16-16-16-36-1-300 @ 1.4v
Stability test was the following...

6 Hours of Prime95 Small FFT
6 Hours of Prime95 Blend
3 Hours of AIDA64 (CPU, FPU, Cache, Memory)
3 Hours of OCCT
3 Hours of Intel XTU Memory
3 Hours of Intel XTU CPU
500% Coverage HCI Memtest
20 runs back to back of Cinebench R15

That is over 24 hours of testing without a hiccup and I figured I covered the all the bases. I was thrilled that I've finally figured it out. This morning I wanted to finish it up with the 20 back to back runs of Cinebench. *About the 5th run in I get a crash!* This was very surprising since I've done this test several times and what has been probably hundreds of runs, even with a lower vcore without problem. I rebooted back into Windows and I was able to do 50 runs back to back without any problems and I was not able to crash it again. Thermals were fine, in the high 60s, low 70s. No reported WHEA errors throughout any of the testing either.

The error I got was called something to the effect of 'KMODE EXCEPTION NOT HANDLED'. I didn't catch anything else since it rebooted quickly. Did a quick search online and the reasons for this are all over the place. Some seem to suggest it is driver related, SSD failure, RAM issue, or overclock. I had to leave the house before I could truly dig into it but I will take a look at the event logs to see if it can tell me more when I get home.

Has anyone run into a random crash like that before on what seems like an otherwise stable system? I've got plenty of voltage and thermal headroom for the CPU so I can bump up if I need to but from the rest of the testing I would think this it is fine. What I was doing that caused it wasn't able to cause it again. I think it could be memory related since that is the one piece I am having the most trouble getting the most out of but I figure the Prime Blend, AIDA, Intel Memory Test, and HCI would stress the memory stability enough.

*Am I overthinking this or should I reevaluate whether my setup really is stable?* The one thing I want to do is tweak my memory speeds but my goal with all this testing was to get a solid baseline on the CPU and Mesh side before I do that. Then I think I will probably reinstall Windows just to be safe since who knows has happened to it when the CPU/memory is still being tested for stability.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm crash aside once I clicked close it continued on the loops then finished at 10, what would you recommend adjusting at this point? I might back it down to 4.4 since the temps are a bit high for some cores oddly given that this was delidded.


Cancel a run (anytime in a cmnd window) with cntl-Pause.
did it crash during the run or after you closed the cmnd window with it running?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Completed my round of stability testing last night. Lots of good news but also a bad one.
> 
> OC specs as a reminder...
> 
> 7820X @ 4.8ghz (48x100.1), 1.25vcore, 1.800vccin, LLC 5, -3 AVX & -3 AVX512 offset
> 3.2ghz mesh @ 1.100v
> 3600mhz 16-16-16-36-1-300 @ 1.4v
> Stability test was the following...
> 
> 6 Hours of Prime95 Small FFT
> 6 Hours of Prime95 Blend
> 3 Hours of AIDA64 (CPU, FPU, Cache, Memory)
> 3 Hours of OCCT
> 3 Hours of Intel XTU Memory
> 3 Hours of Intel XTU CPU
> 500% Coverage HCI Memtest
> 20 runs back to back of Cinebench R15
> 
> That is over 24 hours of testing without a hiccup and I figured I covered the all the bases. I was thrilled that I've finally figured it out. This morning I wanted to finish it up with the 20 back to back runs of Cinebench. *About the 5th run in I get a crash!* This was very surprising since I've done this test several times and what has been probably hundreds of runs, even with a lower vcore without problem. I rebooted back into Windows and I was able to do 50 runs back to back without any problems and I was not able to crash it again. Thermals were fine, in the high 60s, low 70s. No reported WHEA errors throughout any of the testing either.
> 
> The error I got was called something to the effect of 'KMODE EXCEPTION NOT HANDLED'. I didn't catch anything else since it rebooted quickly. Did a quick search online and the reasons for this are all over the place. Some seem to suggest it is driver related, SSD failure, RAM issue, or overclock. I had to leave the house before I could truly dig into it but I will take a look at the event logs to see if it can tell me more when I get home.
> 
> Has anyone run into a random crash like that before on what seems like an otherwise stable system? I've got plenty of voltage and thermal headroom for the CPU so I can bump up if I need to but from the rest of the testing I would think this it is fine. What I was doing that caused it wasn't able to cause it again. I think it could be memory related since that is the one piece I am having the most trouble getting the most out of but I figure the Prime Blend, AIDA, Intel Memory Test, and HCI would stress the memory stability enough.
> 
> *Am I overthinking this or should I reevaluate whether my setup really is stable?* The one thing I want to do is tweak my memory speeds but my goal with all this testing was to get a solid baseline on the CPU and Mesh side before I do that. Then I think I will probably reinstall Windows just to be safe since who knows has happened to it when the CPU/memory is still being tested for stability.


Yes, you are over thinking this. I think the best thing to do is use the rig at this point... I mean, unless it is holding the launch codes or doing microsecond stock trading, I think you've (over) done all the testing necessary. Remember, these high current stress tests age a CPU pretty quickly. 6 hours of small FFTs is basically useless for demonstrating stability to anything but p95 sm FFTs - repetition of the same procedure call is not what trips up the logic... which is basically what a kmode bugcheck is. This can come from a ram error, and 500% is kinda a minimum.
Windows is fine. if you are worried issue the following command in a powershell admin prompt:
_dism /online /cleanup-image /restorehealth_


----------



## Jawnathin

Okay thank you. I thought I read people typically use a 400% coverage so I thought I'd go a little more with 500%. I will go ahead and rerun it for even longer, I'll go for 1000% instead.

I was able to take a look at the logs a little more and this is what Blue Screen View shows...

ntoskrnl.exe
nvlddmkm.sys

Looks like related to Nvidia drivers somehow but maybe caused by memory instability. I will reseat the memory and rerun HCI. Thanks.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> @CptSpig if you're here what was your end result for your cpu settings and clock? Still waiting for a response here from others while tinkering, but I seriously have no idea what settings require other things to change as well, so its nonstop offsets to get ideas...
> 
> I'd really love to know
> 
> 1) What a healthy / max voltage to stay under for 24/7 usage
> 2) Temps ( stay under 80? or )
> 
> Also for CPU VCCIN do I start with 1.8 1.9? how to tell on this?
> 
> At my current settings for 4.4 no issues in tests etc, however running OBS and setting to slow, slower, slowest etc for some reason the CPU keeps jumping back and forth from 4.1-4.4ghz on random cores as if it can't hold, temps aren't going any higher than the high 60's so I'm wondering whats causing the CPU not to be able to hold a steady run.
> 
> @jpmboy I ran through the list and changed quite a few settings for stuff to have on/off on mine, I see the adaptive voltage per core and guessing that must've taken a while on there, did you use offsets to achieve this via prime or?


Sorry Luna, I was bench marking if you want to ping me use the @ symbol in quote menu. My 24/7 settings are (sync all cores) adaptive [email protected] core, manual [email protected] cashe, VCCIN 1.800v [email protected] and [email protected] Temps you want to stay below 80c when stress testing in RealBench at least 30 minutes.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Cancel a run (anytime in a cmnd window) with cntl-Pause.
> did it crash during the run or after you closed the cmnd window with it running?
> Yes, you are over thinking this. I think the best thing to do is use the rig at this point... I mean, unless it is holding the launch codes or doing microsecond stock trading, I think you've (over) done all the testing necessary. Remember, these high current stress tests age a CPU pretty quickly. 6 hours of small FFTs is basically useless for demonstrating stability to anything but p95 sm FFTs - repetition of the same procedure call is not what trips up the logic... which is basically what a kmode bugcheck is. This can come from a ram error, and 500% is kinda a minimum.
> Windows is fine. if you are worried issue the following command in a powershell admin prompt:
> _dism /online /cleanup-image /restorehealth_


During on the 7th phase you can see it stopped @ 75% then started the next one after I hit ok.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Sorry Luna, I was bench marking if you want to ping me use the @ symbol in quote menu. My 24/7 settings are (sync all cores) adaptive [email protected] core, manual [email protected] cashe, VCCIN 1.800v [email protected] and [email protected] Temps you want to stay below 80c when stress testing in RealBench at least 30 minutes.


Ah thanks no worries, sorry for that too I'll figure out the @ thing then since the previous didn't work.

I got my 128gb kit up to 4000 @ 16-18-18-38-2t to run at least 5+ minutes on HCI before first error lol Voltage was 1.43 for Ram and 1.15 for cpu vcore everything else untouched, does this sound like something worth pursuing or nah?

Also anyone here with OBS and a 7980XE run into issues when streaming at higher presets of Hx264?


----------



## tripleflip18

Hello friends, just wanted to give something back to the forums

I got a pretty bad 7980xe which has 1 core that needs much higher volts to run stable, so over the last 3 weeks or saw i've been using intels extreme tuning utility to overclock on the *Per-Core Basis*

Before that, i had to run ALL my cores at least at 1.25volts for 4.5 ghz to stay stable., but overtime i've lowered and lowered and lowered where now im averaging at 1.17 Volts and Stable!. The difference in temps is pretty big, at least 10c,

So if you're not in a rush and are interested in lowering your temps/volts try the Per Core overclocking.

BTW, the reason why im using Intels Extreme Tuning Utility is because if i set the volts/and cpu speed at 4.5 in Bios, it will not actually run all cores at 4.5ghz, if all cores are under load then it will max out at like 3.8ghz.... but if i enter windows and set it using Intel Extreme Tuning Utility, i can get all cores to run 4.5ghz,.. I guess its some bug in Asrock Taichi Bios.... and its pretty annoying!

Also im not done lowering my volts, i've been lowering my volts little by little for 3 week every 2-3 days without a single crash, so its possible i'll go even lower before system becomes unstable.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> During on the 7th phase you can see it stopped @ 75% then started the next one after I hit ok.
> Ah thanks no worries, sorry for that too I'll figure out the @ thing then since the previous didn't work.
> 
> I got my 128gb kit up to 4000 @ 16-18-18-38-2t to run at least 5+ minutes on HCI before first error lol Voltage was 1.43 for Ram and 1.15 for cpu vcore everything else untouched, does this sound like something worth pursuing or nah?
> 
> Also anyone here with OBS and a 7980XE run into issues when streaming at higher presets of Hx264?


Need to post a screen shot of your ASRock timing configuration. Also what is your vas and vccio?


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Need to post a screen shot of your ASRock timing configuration. Also what is your vas and vccio?


I have the Asus not asrock but thats the timing thing I think? I'll reset it up in a bit and repost, everything else was auto. I did try mesh at 3000 and 2800 but that was for 1t, system wouldn't have it. 2T it ran fine Put things back on auto so juts the vcore and dram voltage, I'll get it going again in a bit though.


----------



## Jawnathin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> I will go ahead and rerun it for even longer, I'll go for 1000% instead.


Just about wrapping that test up. Lowest instance is at 978% right now, no errors. I will consider that crash as one off and continue to use the PC like normal. If it happens again I will dig into it more but I think with all the testing I've done it should be good now. Thanks again.


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Just about wrapping that test up. Lowest instance is at 978% right now, no errors. I will consider that crash as one off and continue to use the PC like normal. If it happens again I will dig into it more but I think with all the testing I've done it should be good now. Thanks again.


What ram kit do you have?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Okay thank you. I thought I read people typically use a 400% coverage so I thought I'd go a little more with 500%. I will go ahead and rerun it for even longer, I'll go for 1000% instead.
> 
> I was able to take a look at the logs a little more and this is what Blue Screen View shows...
> 
> ntoskrnl.exe
> nvlddmkm.sys
> 
> Looks like related to Nvidia drivers somehow but maybe caused by memory instability. I will reseat the memory and rerun HCI. Thanks.


these were the last two to fail (most simple bug-checks only tell you this, BSV and "whocrashed") and may not be the root-cause of the bsod.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> I have the Asus not asrock but thats the timing thing I think? I'll reset it up in a bit and repost, everything else was auto. I did try mesh at 3000 and 2800 but that was for 1t, system wouldn't have it. 2T it ran fine Put things back on auto so juts the vcore and dram voltage, I'll get it going again in a bit though.


Asrock tool works for Asus boards and much as I love Asus hardware, as someone else said, Asus should not write software.

The asrock software may fail to all you to set values but it displays them nicely and rant crash even on a stable system like some other software we know.


----------



## Jawnathin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> What ram kit do you have?


32GB (4x8gb) of GSkill 4266mhz (2x F4-4266C19D-16GTZR)

BTW, my test was successful at 1000% coverage and no errors. Not sure if it stacks with my earlier test but if so then it would be 1500% coverage on this memory speed/timings. I will consider that crash a one off. If it comes up again I will troubleshoot further but I can't reproduce and the computer hasn't shown any instability otherwise.

Still need to tweak the memory but its been challenging trying to get the most out of it. I will be doing more of that tuning later tonight and tomorrow. Hoping to get something in the 4000mhz range with timings in the 17s but not clear if I can get that stable. May have to go looser on timings to get it stable but can't go too far or it'll be slower than my 3600mhz @ 16 with tighter secondary timings.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Just about wrapping that test up. Lowest instance is at 978% right now, no errors. I will consider that crash as one off and continue to use the PC like normal. If it happens again I will dig into it more but I think with all the testing I've done it should be good now. Thanks again.


Just out of curiosity, how much variance in temps are you seeing across all the cores? I'm wondering if i need to redo my delidding.


----------



## Jawnathin

I'd have to do some testing to be 100% sure, but it is probably around 5 C between the hottest and coldest. My Core 4 is the warmest. So lets say on a particular test it peaks at 72C, a few will be around 69-70C and then the rest are like 67-68. I haven't monitored closely enough to know how that scales at lower or higher temps, but that is the range that I recall seeing when doing some of my stability testing. Again I'd have to do some tests when I get back to the PC to be sure. I can do that for you later.


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> 32GB (4x8gb) of GSkill 4266mhz (2x F4-4266C19D-16GTZR)
> 
> BTW, my test was successful at 1000% coverage and no errors. Not sure if it stacks with my earlier test but if so then it would be 1500% coverage on this memory speed/timings. I will consider that crash a one off. If it comes up again I will troubleshoot further but I can't reproduce and the computer hasn't shown any instability otherwise.
> 
> Still need to tweak the memory but its been challenging trying to get the most out of it. I will be doing more of that tuning later tonight and tomorrow. Hoping to get something in the 4000mhz range with timings in the 17s but not clear if I can get that stable. May have to go looser on timings to get it stable but can't go too far or it'll be slower than my 3600mhz @ 16 with tighter secondary timings.


Okay yeah I've got the 32 3600C15QGTZR kit, I can get 3800 with CL16-16-16-36-374 at 1.38v, I can't seem to get to 4000 and have all my sticks be recognized, I can get 2 sticks at CL17-17-17-39-630 1.4v but that's it.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> Okay yeah I've got the 32 *3600C15QGTZR* kit, I can get 3800 with CL16-16-16-36-374 at 1.38v, I can't seem to get to 4000 and have all my sticks be recognized, I can get 2 sticks at CL17-17-17-39-630 1.4v but that's it.


which kit is that? And which board are you using?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

The difference between my hottest and coldest core are 10'C... Re-did the delid and removed the glue on the PCB (almost all of it. Left the outer edges so it looks like it is untouched)
Same results..



Hottest core was 76'C, coldest was 65'C.

Rest was around 69-72'C.

I am going crazy. I just tried one round of CB R15 at like 1.360V and turned off the machine.

The machine won't turn off, it just restart itself, so I had to use the power button.


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> which kit is that? And which board are you using?


G.Skill F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR on an msi x299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC.


----------



## Jawnathin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> The difference between my hottest and coldest core are 10'C... Re-did the delid and removed the glue on the PCB (almost all of it. Left the outer edges so it looks like it is untouched)
> Same results..
> 
> 
> 
> Hottest core was 76'C, coldest was 65'C.
> 
> Rest was around 69-72'C.
> 
> I am going crazy. I just tried one round of CB R15 at like 1.360V and turned off the machine.
> 
> The machine won't turn off, it just restart itself, so I had to use the power button.


I've never delidded myself but from the videos/tutorials I've watched online but when LM pools up like that it is too much LM. It should be a very thin layer brushed on the die.

1.360v sounds pretty high for a 7820x unless you really need it. What are your clocks at?


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> I've never delidded myself but from the videos/tutorials I've watched online but when LM pools up like that it is too much LM. It should be a very thin layer brushed on the die.
> 
> 1.360v sounds pretty high for a 7820x unless you really need it. What are your clocks at?


I delidded mine and yes that is too much lm, maybe just need to sponge some of that off. I did not reglue my ihs back down. Got about an 5delta out of that.

I wouldn't go above 1.3v for daily use, and ideally not above 1.25. I've ran as high as 1.40v for 5.2 to bench something but immediately bring it down.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> G.Skill F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR on an msi x299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC.


ah.. yeah, your original post had 3600c15 as a 32GB kit... unfortunately there's not a kit like that. Going off the reservation, I did mix 2 3600c15 2x8GB kits on this APEX. Took some tweaking to get to 4000c16-17-16-38-1T.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

This is just for benching, besides the chip sucks OCing wise.. Needs around that for 4900mhz...









Yeah, too much LM. I removed the pools before I installed it. So no worries.


----------



## Martin778

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> This is just for benching, besides *the chip sucks OCing wise*.. Needs around that for *4900mhz*...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, too much LM. I removed the pools before I installed it. So no worries.


Sigh....


----------



## Jawnathin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ah.. yeah, your original post had 3600c15 as a 32GB kit... unfortunately there's not a kit like that. Going off the reservation, I did mix 2 3600c15 2x8GB kits on this APEX. Took some tweaking to get to 4000c16-17-16-38-1T.


I'm sure you've posted it somewhere, but can you share the rest of your memory OC specs or a link to a post with it? I'll be messing with my memory later today and would like to try yours.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> This is just for benching, besides the chip sucks OCing wise.. Needs around that for 4900mhz...


4.9ghz is pretty nice for a 7820x. 1.36v isn't crazy but at those volts I can see temps becoming an issue when stressing.

What do you need for 4.8? Probably a lot more reasonable.


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ah.. yeah, your original post had 3600c15 as a 32GB kit... unfortunately there's not a kit like that. Going off the reservation, I did mix 2 3600c15 2x8GB kits on this APEX. Took some tweaking to get to 4000c16-17-16-38-1T.


I thought it was since I got it to those timings at 3600, but when I looked at the box I was like oh...I wrote 15, but it's actually 16. Sorry about that.


----------



## Ezric

@Jpmboy, had a question regarding competition, may I pm you?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> I'm sure you've posted it somewhere, but can you share the rest of your memory OC specs or a link to a post with it? I'll be messing with my memory later today and would like to try yours.
> 4.9ghz is pretty nice for a 7820x. 1.36v isn't crazy but at those volts I can see temps becoming an issue when stressing.
> 
> What do you need for 4.8? Probably a lot more reasonable.




Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> I thought it was since I got it to those timings at 3600, but when I looked at the box I was like oh...I wrote 15, but it's actually 16. Sorry about that.


np.. I was hopeful there actually was a binned 32GB 3600c15 kit.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> @Jpmboy, had a question regarding competition, may I pm you?


sure.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> The difference between my hottest and coldest core are 10'C... Re-did the delid and removed the glue on the PCB (almost all of it. Left the outer edges so it looks like it is untouched)
> Same results..
> 
> 
> 
> Hottest core was 76'C, coldest was 65'C.
> 
> Rest was around 69-72'C.
> 
> I am going crazy. I just tried one round of CB R15 at like 1.360V and turned off the machine.
> 
> The machine won't turn off, it just restart itself, so I had to use the power button.


That's good to know. I'm getting like a 14C difference from hottest to coldest. I probably need to try reapply LM again. Even though I'm getting pretty decent OC/voltage lol. It kinda bugs me that there's that much variance. [email protected] prime 26.6 stable. No AVX offsets.


----------



## GXTCHA

4.8 @ 1.220v adaptive
vccin @ 1.84
LLC 6
200% power
SVID/VRM SS = disabled
IO/SA = 1.000 / .800

XMP profile for 3600C16, 32gb gskill kit @ 1.35v

Passed 1hr RB 2.56



Pkg and core temps are higher than I would like but this is all running on a 360 AIO. I'm looking at putting a custom 360 loop together for just the cpu to help bring down the temps. Anyone have any thoughts on this config? Hopefully this will bring the temps down around 10c or more...

EKWB Supremacy Evo
D5 pump/res combo
Hardware Labs Black Ice Nemesis GTX 360


----------



## Jawnathin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*


Thank you! Doesn't look like my computer likes 4000mhz. I can get it to run high and bench but I have to loosen the timings where I think its slower than 3600 CL16. I decided I will try 3600 CL15 instead.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Just out of curiosity, how much variance in temps are you seeing across all the cores? I'm wondering if i need to redo my delidding.


This is about after 30 minutes of running AIDA64. Again not sure how that scales at higher or lower temps/loads. Looks like I have one warm core (4) and one cold core (0).

Sorry for the phone pic, easier for me


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Thank you! Doesn't look like my computer likes 4000mhz. I can get it to run high and bench but I have to loosen the timings where I think its slower than 3600 CL16. I decided I will try 3600 CL15 instead.
> This is about after 30 minutes of running AIDA64. Again not sure how that scales at higher or lower temps/loads. Looks like I have one warm core (4) and one cold core (0).
> 
> Sorry for the phone pic, easier for me


dont give up
just dont auto oc. start with manual training your 3600c16 lowering the voltage all the way down to 1.25v

some recent oc adventures


and the tuning learned works for 7980xe r6e 128gb 3600c17 kit.. ram running at 3800c17-17-17-37 1t @1.3v

just for da lolz for 5ghz screenshot

this cpu is not bad cause it does 4.4ghz @1.08v (average)
almost a direct replica of my 7820x which made life a littlebit easier..

takes too long to tweak this. might be done after 6 months.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> 4.8 @ 1.220v adaptive
> vccin @ 1.84
> LLC 6
> 200% power
> SVID/VRM SS = disabled
> IO/SA = 1.000 / .800
> 
> XMP profile for 3600C16, 32gb gskill kit @ 1.35v
> 
> Passed 1hr RB 2.56
> 
> 
> 
> Pkg and core temps are higher than I would like but this is all running on a 360 AIO. I'm looking at putting a custom 360 loop together for just the cpu to help bring down the temps. Anyone have any thoughts on this config? Hopefully this will bring the temps down around 10c or more...
> 
> EKWB Supremacy Evo
> D5 pump/res combo
> Hardware Labs Black Ice Nemesis GTX 360


Hi,
If you set the voltage of VCCSA was 0.8V, please ckeck actual the memory speed of reading and writing rate.
At such low voltage @3600MHz or more, the memory works as single or dual channel memory.


----------



## LunaP

I noticed a lot of people are using 200% power is that safe/recommended? I'm currently at 140%

Also could anyone w/ a 7980 and OBS test at slower or lower settings to see if they're having issues with chipset modulation? Throttle stop was showing only 87.5% at the highest but it was maxing out regardless, this chip should definitely be able to run at slow/slower, placebo is a diff story.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Sigh....


My 7800X could probably do 5 ghz at less voltage..









Could high memory speed inflict when overclocking the core high? I will try to test on friday.

I just tok the RAM settings I had on my 7800X, which were 4000 17-19-19-36-1t-300 1.400V. Pretty OK for a G.skill Ripjaws V 3600mhz CL17 kit (I believe).

I pull around 250 watt at 4900mhz, and closer to 200 watt on 4800 (Under RB AVX), so 4.9 ghz is not suitable for 24/7 although the temps are under 80'C even under most stresstests.

No point in getting the extra 2.5% performance when the COU can degrade and require more voltage at a lower clockspeed, so better play it safe from the beginning. That's how I see it.

Will back down to either 4.6 or 4.8.

Sometimes I wish that I'd actually had use for it. I don't often game, but you know. It is nice to have..









Only thing now is saving up some money for the new gen cards. 1440P 144hz needs more power!


----------



## arrow0309

How do you guys set the Turbo Boost Max 3.0 (if enabled)?


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> How do you guys set the Turbo Boost Max 3.0 (if enabled)?


In UEFI, option of "native OS" is selected, and Win10 ver.1709 or later is installed.
In this case, automatic install of Turbo Boost Max 3.0 and intel's driver can be kept away.

So, I don't use it, now.
Before that,Turbo Boost Max 3.0 is an obstruction for me.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Testing the CPU at 4.4 ghz at something like 1.080-1.100V. I don't think I would gain any more FPS for daily usage compared to 4.6 og 4.8 ghz. Also the temps are in the low 40s to mid 40s (with package at high 40s) under Cinebench.









The mesh is at 3 ghz and the mem is at 4 ghz. So I guess I'm good for normal gaming 24/7 stuff.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> I noticed a lot of people are using 200% power is that safe/recommended? I'm currently at 140%


Testing 4.5 I found a consistent increase in benchmark performance going from 140-200% which means it was power throttling. Given that 350W is more than 2X TDP, this makes sense.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> Also could anyone w/ a 7980 and OBS test at slower or lower settings to see if they're having issues with chipset modulation? Throttle stop was showing only 87.5% at the highest but it was maxing out regardless, this chip should definitely be able to run at slow/slower, placebo is a diff story.


I don't know the first thing about running OBS - so I'm not sure I can help there...

See above - do you still see issues with CPU current limit set higher or clock set lower?

As for "recommended" - no easy answer to that. Only time and body count will tell what is "safe"... Raja's informal, don't hold me or him to this, suggestion (here or ROG forums, don't recall) was try to keep it less than 2xTDP.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Testing the CPU at 4.4 ghz at something like 1.080-1.100V. I don't think I would gain any more FPS for daily usage compared to 4.6 og 4.8 ghz. Also the temps are in the low 40s to mid 40s (with package at high 40s) under Cinebench.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The mesh is at 3 ghz and the mem is at 4 ghz. So I guess I'm good for normal gaming 24/7 stuff.


Been running some tests on my 7820x as well, trying to lower the temps during summer and while I'm wait for the guy to get back to delid this thing for me.

I can do 4.4Ghz with 1.12v, 1.1v fails Realbench.
What I find interesting is I can do 4.5Ghz on all cores with manual 1.15v, if I use a negative offset I have to use -0.090v which runs at 1.191v on the worst core.
Even at the [email protected] I still hit 91c, so I'm thinking of dropping it back to the [email protected] for now.

Running manual voltages for 24/7 is fine.

Stupid brain keeps thinking the temps are getting worse, but I have to keep in mind I bought this in the middle of winter so temps were bound to be good


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Been running some tests on my 7820x as well, trying to lower the temps during summer and while I'm wait for the guy to get back to delid this thing for me.
> 
> I can do 4.4Ghz with 1.12v, 1.1v fails Realbench.
> What I find interesting is I can do 4.5Ghz on all cores with manual 1.15v, if I use a negative offset I have to use -0.090v which runs at 1.191v on the worst core.
> Even at the [email protected] I still hit 91c, so I'm thinking of dropping it back to the [email protected] for now.
> 
> Running manual voltages for 24/7 is fine.
> 
> Stupid brain keeps thinking the temps are getting worse, but I have to keep in mind I bought this in the middle of winter so temps were bound to be good


Damn, our temps are not in the same world, nor dimension.







My temps are *half* of yours. Ambient is not hot at the moment here though, and it's started snowing sadly. Hate it.









The core temperature difference is much, much smaller as well now. Only 5-6'C or so when comparing the hottest core to the coldest core. 5-6'C between the cores are not bad on a 8C 7820X. I'm also running manual voltage. With these low voltages the chip doesn't use too much power. I think I am around 155 watts or so under Cinebench.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Damn, our temps are not in the same world, nor dimension.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My temps are *half* of yours. Ambient is not hot at the moment here though, and it's started snowing sadly. Hate it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The core temperature difference is much, much smaller as well now. Only 5-6'C or so when comparing the hottest core to the coldest core. 5-6'C between the cores are not bad on a 8C 7820X. I'm also running manual voltage. With these low voltages the chip doesn't use too much power. I think I am around 155 watts or so under Cinebench.


Yeah, running a H115i on a non delidded 7820x temps those are...









Plus it's like 27c inside at the moment and I haven't turned on the air con (only 8am in the morning).

In all honesty, there's only 5c difference between [email protected] and [email protected] with a Realbench run.
10c difference from the hottest to the coolest core though.

I've got the delid all organized, doesn't get back till next week though, I'm sure I'll get better temps and voltages then.

I have been thinking about swapping back to my H440 to front mount the RAD (leaving the front panel off), running a Enthoo Primo ATM and the RAD only reaches to the top mount


----------



## GXTCHA

Been playing around some more today and think I've finally got a pretty decent config going:

7900x @ 4.8 w/ 1.220v adaptive
vccin @ 1.84v
LLC 5
SVID/VRM SS = disabled
current capability = 200%
stock cache / auto voltage
IO/SA @ 1.050 and 0.900

RAM: 4,000 w/ 17-17-17-41 1T @ 1.40v
gskill kit: F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR

Passed 1 hour RB 2.56
Passed 500% hci memtest









If anyone has any feedback on where you think I can improve, please let me know!


----------



## Jawnathin

Looks good, OCing your mesh seems like a logical next step to get more performance. 3.0-3.2ghz is what most people tend to get.

BTW, did you find your memory OC to be more stable with your VCCIO at 1.050 and VCCSA at 0.900? I have both of mine at 1.0v and can't get to 4000mhz memory without having loose timings. Kind of tired of messing with it but lowering my VCCSA is something I didn't try yet.


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Looks good, OCing your mesh seems like a logical next step to get more performance. 3.0-3.2ghz is what most people tend to get.
> 
> BTW, did you find your memory OC to be more stable with your VCCIO at 1.050 and VCCSA at 0.900? I have both of mine at 1.0v and can't get to 4000mhz memory without having loose timings. Kind of tired of messing with it but lowering my VCCSA is something I didn't try yet.


Ill say, I couldn't get anything above dual channel at 4000 without largely loosening the timings. I am currently running my 32 quad kit at 3800-t1-16-16-16-39-374 at 1.38v. My VCCSA is at auto currently running at .0805 and VCCIO at 1.010.


----------



## Jawnathin

Thanks. I've currently got 3600mhz, 16-16-16-36-1-300. The secondary and tertiary timings were set using a profile on my motherboard, they are tighter than auto and improved bench scores a lot. I only have the trial version of AIDA64 so I don't get all the info but read bandwidth was around 100GB/s and memory latency was around 53ms. So far these are the best settings I could get stable.

Not bad but I feel like there is more left in it, just a little frustrating that it has become so elusive. Do you have AIDA64 bench results?


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> Ill say, I couldn't get anything above dual channel at 4000 without largely loosening the timings. I am currently running my 32 quad kit at 3800-t1-16-16-16-39-374 at 1.38v. My VCCSA is at auto currently running at .0805 and VCCIO at 1.010.


Hey quesiton on that, I'm using asrock timing configurator, and even at stock its showing DUAL for channels, is that just an error? I'm running 8x16gb sticks @ 128gb


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Looks good, OCing your mesh seems like a logical next step to get more performance. 3.0-3.2ghz is what most people tend to get.
> 
> BTW, did you find your memory OC to be more stable with your VCCIO at 1.050 and VCCSA at 0.900? I have both of mine at 1.0v and can't get to 4000mhz memory without having loose timings. Kind of tired of messing with it but lowering my VCCSA is something I didn't try yet.


Thanks. Yes, mesh is next (last) on the list). I'm only using 360 AIO and I'm not sure the extra heat is worth it right now.

Regarding the memory OC, yes, I found that IO & SA at those voltages helped tremendously. I've been trying to get my kit to run @ 4k for a couple weeks with no success. I reached out to a couple members with the same kit and they pointed me to increasing SA to .9 to .95 as a starting point. Before that I was trying to run at around .8 (SA) and .1000 (IO) but was unsuccessful at 4k. I was also trying hard to match some other members timings here with 16-17-16-38(ish) however, I beat my head against a wall and today I just tried straight 17's which yielded great results for me. I know its not "the best" and I'm sure there is room for improvement but I spent more time down the rabbit hole than I expected and am going to enjoy where I'm at for a bit.

Something to consider with IO and SA is that they are fickle beasts. Every IMC is different and there is a bell curve; too much can be bad and too little can be just as bad. As the more senior members here have said (a million times I'm sure) memory OC'ing takes a lot of trial & error as well as patience!

EDIT: I guess I screwed up... I only used 10 instances of HCI memtest instead of the 20 needed for correct validation. I'll have to re-run the test tomorrow and see if I'm still in the clear. ugh!


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Hey quesiton on that, I'm using asrock timing configurator, and even at stock its showing DUAL for channels, is that just an error? I'm running 8x16gb sticks @ 128gb


When you open cpu-z memory tab, what does it say? What does bios say, they should all read quad. And yes aida should as well.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Thanks. I've currently got 3600mhz, 16-16-16-36-1-300. The secondary and tertiary timings were set using a profile on my motherboard, they are tighter than auto and improved bench scores a lot. I only have the trial version of AIDA64 so I don't get all the info but read bandwidth was around 100GB/s and memory latency was around 53ms. So far these are the best settings I could get stable.
> 
> Not bad but I feel like there is more left in it, just a little frustrating that it has become so elusive. Do you have AIDA64 bench results?


Would you share the timings you've got. Ill show you mine, but I think yours are way better. I get somewhere around 100Gbs read with my settings.

edit: i have the trial of aida as well, so its not much of use to post a screen grab


----------



## LunaP

Ok so been running prime past couple hours and despite voltage, settings and stock, I'm getting a hardware failure saying count should be 5 fatal hardware detected. Also even after applying the AVX disabled line in the config it still runs using AVX since I'm seeing my Offset being used.

Using prime 26.6 only allows 32 threads max, and was using 29.4b prior any suggestions on what to test, no bsod's or anything realbench runs fine for 2 hours along w/ xh264 loops x 10


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Ok so been running prime past couple hours and despite voltage, settings and stock, I'm getting a hardware failure saying count should be 5 fatal hardware detected. Also even after applying the AVX disabled line in the config it still runs using AVX since I'm seeing my Offset being used.
> 
> Using prime 26.6 only allows 32 threads max, and was using 29.4b prior any suggestions on what to test, no bsod's or anything realbench runs fine for 2 hours along w/ xh264 loops x 10


Paste your local.txt here, also which P95 version? Never seen that when correctly set. Maybe throttling? Try setting the CPU Current Capability to 240 % and setting long- and short duration power limits to their max settings.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Paste your local.txt here, also which P95 version? Never seen that when correctly set. Maybe throttling? Try setting the CPU Current Capability to 240 % and setting long- and short duration power limits to their max settings.


Running R6E how to dump to text? Also p95 29.4b and 26.6

is 240% even safe? LOL I thought that was for LN2 only, I have it at 200% atm.

Here we go.

443800.txt_setting.txt 66k .txt file


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Running R6E how to dump to text? Also p95 29.4b and 26.6
> 
> is 240% even safe? LOL I thought that was for LN2 only, I have it at 200% atm.
> 
> Here we go.
> 
> 443800.txt_setting.txt 66k .txt file


safevoltage.net









BTW - 1004 bios + slight tweaks now has my heavily threaded 18 core app running as good or slightly better on 7980xe @ 4.5GHz as it does on 18 cores of a 2x2696v3 @ 3.8GHz system. Previously the HW Xeon could beat it. So, again, I've definitely lost 1T by changing nothing but the bios, but I've gained some headroom on the ram in 2T and overall greater performance. Guess I'll have to run some windows benchmarks again.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> safevoltage.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW - 1004 bios + slight tweaks now has my heavily threaded 18 core app running as good or slightly better on 7980xe @ 4.5GHz as it does on 18 cores of a 2x2696v3 @ 3.8GHz system. Previously the HW Xeon could beat it. So, again, I've definitely lost 1T by changing nothing but the bios, but I've gained some headroom on the ram in 2T and overall greater performance. Guess I'll have to run some windows benchmarks again.


Alright I'll set 240% then + the long/short power duration settings.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Alright I'll set 240% then + the long/short power duration settings.


You should do what you are comfortable with... The reality of 18 cores @4.5GHz is ~350-400W peak which is well past 200% the design spec of the socket and the chip.

The MB manufacturers might have cooked enough chips by now to have an idea - they certainly did in the past, but can be forgiven for being careful sharing such info for risk of encouraging their customers to cook their boards...


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> You should do what you are comfortable with... The reality of 18 cores @4.5GHz is ~350-400W peak which is well past 200% the design spec of the socket and the chip.
> 
> The MB manufacturers might cooked enough chips by now to have an idea - they certainly did in the past, but can be forgiven for being careful sharing such info for risk of encouraging their customers to cook their boards...


I don't know anything thats why I'm asking, and since you siad it was safe along w/ others here I'm going to trust you lol


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> I don't know anything thats why I'm asking, and since you siad it was safe along w/ others here I'm going to trust you lol


and I'm going on record saying this is a very bad idea (trusting us) - just so we are clear.









It is the practical reality of 4.5GHz x 18 x ~1.16v So, that's the choice you and everyone else is making and corresponding risk.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> and I'm going on record saying this is a very bad idea (trusting us) - just so we are clear.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is the practical reality of 4.5GHz x 18 x ~1.16v So, that's the choice you and everyone else is making and corresponding risk.


1.12v but not like it makes a diff I guess..


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> 1.12v but not like it makes a diff I guess..


Every little bit helps (power is directly proportional to voltage)... I'm checking out the new BIOS to get back to stable and then I'm going to see if I can lower non-AVX voltage...

Definitely some tantalizing discoveries on memory... That I can even boot 128G-3400/[email protected] is pretty nifty - "we'll see"TM on stability...

EDIT: lol - the moment I type that - I get an error in SAT... but it wasn't right away... took a few minutes and it was one error...


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> 
> this cpu is not bad cause it does 4.4ghz @1.08v (average)
> almost a direct replica of my 7820x which made life a littlebit easier..
> 
> takes too long to tweak this. might be done after 6 months.


What kit are you running 4k 17-17-17-37-374 1T with such tFAW and tCWL is impressive with only 1.3volts stable in quad


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> What kit are you running 4k 17-17-17-37-374 1T with such tFAW and tCWL is impressive with only 1.3volts stable in quad


gskill quad 32gb trident rgb 3600c16.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Running R6E how to dump to text? Also p95 29.4b and 26.6
> 
> is 240% even safe? LOL I thought that was for LN2 only, I have it at 200% atm.
> 
> Here we go.
> 
> 443800.txt_setting.txt 66k .txt file


I meant local.txt from Prime95 folder in which you are seeing the downclocking.


----------



## DStealth

Very nice binned b-dies it seems


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Very nice binned b-dies it seems


to be honest. its not. but ty for noticing it. and da mesh 32 1.02 ?????...


----------



## DStealth

You mesh is good but best kits on the market are:
DDR4-4000 (PC4-32000)
CL18-19-19-39
1.35 Volt

Your 17-17-17-37 1T 1.3v is very good. You should be able to run 4200/4333 cl15 with ~1.5v


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> You mesh is good but best kits on the market are:
> DDR4-4000 (PC4-32000)
> CL18-19-19-39
> 1.35 Volt
> 
> Your 17-17-17-37 1T 1.3v is very good. You should be able to run 4200/4333 cl15 with ~1.5v


"Best"

3600 c15 and 4600c19 is "best" too


----------



## DStealth

I mean sold as 4000 kits....
There are 3200c14 doing 4200c15 and vise versa, but highly binned chips are for hi frequency models IMO could not be so...but 4000 17-17-17 for quad channel and only 1.3v is very good achievement not to mention sub-timings and Mesh OC memtest stable. Not many kits out there are capable doing this with such low Vdimm


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> You mesh is good but best kits on the market are:
> DDR4-4000 (PC4-32000)
> CL18-19-19-39
> 1.35 Volt
> 
> Your 17-17-17-37 1T 1.3v is very good. You should be able to run 4200/4333 cl15 with ~1.5v


thats how one 8700k died. was doing [email protected]

god rest his soul.


----------



## DStealth

It wasn't voltage that killed him rather than my finger pushing the SMD while delidding...(If you're mentioning of course my previous CPU







)
Anyway since almost 30 years overclocking experience didn't killed many components with overvolting them rather than my own stupidity/neglect









Not a pity for this CPU the new one is better delidded and it's just a plain HW and hobby for me throwing money on it ... sometimes more or less ... let it be ...: D


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> It wasn't voltage that killed him rather than my finger pushing the SMD while delidding...(If you're mentioning of course my previous CPU)
> Anyway since almost 30 years overclocking experience didn't killed many components with overvolting them rather than my own stupidity/neglect
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not a pity for this CPU the new one is better delidded and it's just a plain HW and hobby for me throwing money on it ... sometimes more or less ... let it be ...: D


lol
8700k u got to redo the skews/training for every multiplier after 50 if i dont want to compensate with overvolting the cpu/vccio/vcssa .. was at 5.3ghz 1.36v at time pronounced dead..

currently got another low vid cpu but this one the imc even more pickier than the cpu that was decaying.. so just plugged it a 3200 c16 kit ( god damn hyundai) .. n just call it a day.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cstkl1*
> 
> 8700k u got to redo the skews/training for every multiplier after 50 if i dont want to compensate with overvolting the cpu/vccio/vcssa .. .


Would you mind elaborate this with more details please, not sure understand what you mean


----------



## cstkl1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Would you mind elaborate this with more details please, not sure understand what you mean


sorry reread what u wrote. too sleepy.

well trying to maintain a multiplier scaling of 0.04 each 0.1ghz after 50.. u will run into alot of ram related errors that indicate issues with ringbus etc etc.
u can solve it by going more than 0.04v or overvolting the vccio/vcssa that was stable for your ram speed on a lower cpu multiplier
but if you are more invested. skews/odt/rtl helps a ton without the need of overvolting those three voltages.
the headache in z370 is disable default training settings. alot of them are on certain scenario basis only. turning the irrelevant ones.. u get a faster boot up, higher stability. that part was a nightmare for z370.


----------



## DStealth

Wouldn't be easier for you to get the maximum stable desired OC with overvolting them(vccio/vcssa) to let say 1.25/1.3v and after this reducing to stability levels than finding stability @5ghz and increasing them for each 100mhz with 0.04v . Don't get it sorry. Maybe you too sleepy and your explanation for:
Quote:


> 8700k u got to redo the skews/training for every multiplier after 50 if i dont want to compensate with overvolting the cpu/vccio/vcssa .. .


Is not understandable to me. Anyway thanks for trying maybe tomorrow you can write better explanation for this "skews/training"


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Wouldn't be easier for you to get the maximum stable desired OC with overvolting them(vccio/vcssa) to let say 1.25/1.3v and after this reducing to stability levels than finding stability @5ghz and increasing them for each 100mhz with 0.04v . Don't get it sorry. Maybe you too sleepy and your explanation for:
> *Is not understandable to me*. Anyway thanks for trying maybe tomorrow you can write better explanation for this "skews/training"


you're gonna get a lot of that... but ct can be helpful.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Ok so running manual voltages, what's the best C-States to enable c0/c1 or c6?

Finally settled on [email protected] manual, temps maxed out at 89c with Realbench 2.44, gaming and everyday it never goes over 76c.
AC: Origins gives me the hottest temps for any game I've played..


----------



## Hydroplane

On Newegg right now:

7800X $310
7820X $500

Might be even cheaper tomorrow


----------



## Asus11

is the i7-6950x still considered a good choice? I can find them pretty cheap

what would it be compared to in the kaby -X line? I know they have a 10 core also but the 6950x has 25mb cache which should perform better than its direct competitor? i.e i9-7900x 13.75mb cache


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> is the i7-6950x still considered a good choice? I can find them pretty cheap
> 
> what would it be compared to in the kaby -X line? I know they have a 10 core also but the 6950x has 25mb cache which should perform better than its direct competitor? i.e i9-7900x 13.75mb cache


Depends on the price, 7900X is faster for $970 now, I've been seeing used 6950X for $900 on Ebay, it would probably need to be cheaper to be a good deal.


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Depends on the price, 7900X is faster for $970 now, I've been seeing used 6950X for $900 on Ebay, it would probably need to be cheaper to be a good deal.


I can pick one up for 640 which is tempting me.









I heard its better than the 7900x once its overclocked under water?

edit: just found this vid from another user off this forum


----------



## carlhil2

I just reserved a 7960x at $1500 for pickup at my local microcenter, still no 7980xe and I am tired of waiting. do they OC well?


----------



## Asus11

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I just reserved a 7960x at $1500 for pickup at my local microcenter, still no 7980xe and I am tired of waiting. do they OC well?


crazy, they're easily available here in Europe

https://www.alza.co.uk/intel-core-i9-7980xe-d5096380.htm?o=5


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> crazy, they're easily available here in Europe
> 
> https://www.alza.co.uk/intel-core-i9-7980xe-d5096380.htm?o=5


If it weren't for the $750 gift card, I would have gotten one online...now, to order an Apex mobo from the egg.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I just reserved a 7960x at $1500 for pickup at my local microcenter, still no 7980xe and I am tired of waiting. do they OC well?


Hi,
I'd wait for the 7980xe heck get it from silicon lottery
Yes it does if you control the heat you can oc it @DooRules will say


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> I'd wait for the 7980xe heck get it from silicon lottery
> Yes it does if you control the heat you can oc it @DooRules will say


I see all 7980xe chips here, no 7960x, I hope that it isn't a sign, lol....


----------



## Gadfly

Hey guys,

I am shopping right now for a new build, and I am looking for some information from real owners about the OC potential of the 7960X and the 7980XE.

On a well built Custom loop, and with a de-lid, what kind of OC potential in these CPUs?

What kind of memory speeds and timings are people getting out of B-Die memory in quad channel?

Is there a general consensus as to the best MB for overclocking?


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gadfly*
> 
> Hey guys,
> 
> I am shopping right now for a new build, and I am looking for some information from real owners about the OC potential of the 7960X and the 7980XE.
> 
> On a well built Custom loop, and with a de-lid, what kind of OC potential in these CPUs?
> 
> What kind of memory speeds and timings are people getting out of B-Die memory in quad channel?
> 
> Is there a general consensus as to the best MB for overclocking?


I went with the Asus Rampage VI Apex, it can definitely supply enough current to the big chips when overclocked. There are some folks in here running as high as 5 GHz under water with delid. I'd say 4.5 - 4.7 is very likely.

Nothing wrong with the 7960X, it's just that if I'm already gonna spend $1700, I felt like I might as well spend $300 more and get the absolute best lol

Although the 7960X will likely be a rare chip, so it's got that going for it


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> I went with the Asus Rampage VI Apex, it can definitely supply enough current to the big chips when overclocked. There are some folks in here running as high as 5 GHz under water with delid. I'd say 4.5 - 4.7 is very likely.
> 
> Nothing wrong with the 7960X, it's just that if I'm already gonna spend $1700, I felt like I might as well spend $300 more and get the absolute best lol
> 
> Although the 7960X will likely be a rare chip, so it's got that going for it


Microcenter has them for $1500....still, I would rather have the 7980xe, oh wells...


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Microcenter has them for $1500....still, I would rather have the 7980xe, oh wells...


That is a better value, I saw the 7980XE on Newegg for $2100 today, so a $600 difference could be worth it.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> That is a better value, I saw the 7980XE on Newegg for $2100 today, so a $600 difference could be worth it.


Because them joints are selling like hotcakes..


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> I just reserved a 7960x at $1500 for pickup at my local microcenter, still no 7980xe and I am tired of waiting. do they OC well?


Haven't been many of them...

7980xe OC's "well" and sips voltage, BUT, the scale of it results in enormous power consumption, power throttling without extreme settings and corresponding heat (both VRM and CPU).

These are all manageable and I expect the 7960x to have similar problems but more head-room for absolute OC with its TDP (though it may be binned such that it consumes more mV/GHz).

Be prepared to:
1. provide a ton of cooling including active cooling of VRM
2. be prepared to be thermal limited by one or a few cores with stock TIM (non-delid)
3. Understand that ~4.5-4.6GHz is likely going to put you at or above 400W even with 16 cores
4. try to push voltages as low as possible and treat AVX and non-AVX completely differently. AVX-512 represents a vast increase in compute power, if actually used, from AVX2, so its ok if it _only_ runs at 3.5-3.7GHz - see heat above)
5. We've not seen any 7960's in this thread OC'ing that I know of and I haven't seen many - there is a risk that Intel binned from the top-down so any given 7960x _may_ have slightly less head-room than a given 7980xe since they started life as the same chip and one ended up 18 cores and the other 16. There is a huge amount of unknown, theory and inference in this statement except for the reality that they did indeed start life as the same chip and for whatever reason (including just needing more 7960x's for the allotment so gimping perfectly good 18 core chips).

4.4-4.5GHz all-core OC @ 1.15-1.20v with some/many able to hit 4.6 is impressive no matter how you cut it if you understand what you are dealing with. If you expected 5GHz (or even 4.7-4.9) for 24/7, then your expectations were irrational.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Haven't been many of them...
> 
> 7980xe OC's "well" and sips voltage, BUT, the scale of it results in enormous power consumption, power throttling without extreme settings and corresponding heat (both VRM and CPU).
> 
> These are all manageable and I expect the 7960x to have similar problems but more head-room for absolute OC with its TDP (though it may be binned such that it consumes more mV/GHz).
> 
> Be prepared to:
> 1. provide a ton of cooling including active cooling of VRM
> 2. be prepared to be thermal limited by one or a few cores with stock TIM (non-delid)
> 3. Understand that ~4.5-4.6GHz is likely going to put you at or above 400W even with 16 cores
> 4. try to push voltages as low as possible and treat AVX and non-AVX completely differently. AVX-512 represents a vast increase in compute power, if actually used, from AVX2, so its ok if it _only_ runs at 3.5-3.7GHz - see heat above)
> 5. We've not seen any 7960's in this thread OC'ing that I know of and I haven't seen many - there is a risk that Intel binned from the top-down so any given 7960x _may_ have slightly less head-room than a given 7980xe since they started life as the same chip and one ended up 18 cores and the other 16. There is a huge amount of unknown, theory and inference in this statement except for the reality that they did indeed start life as the same chip and for whatever reason (including just needing more 7960x's for the allotment so gimping perfectly good 18 core chips).
> 
> 4.4-4.5GHz all-core OC @ 1.15-1.20v with some/many able to hit 4.6 is impressive no matter how you cut it if you understand what you are dealing with. If you expected 5GHz (or even 4.7-4.9) for 24/7, then your expectations were irrational.










:thumb:Thanks for info. was hoping for 4.5+ without delid, it will be in it's own loop with 1500mm of rad.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :thumb:Thanks for info. was hoping for 4.5+ without delid, it will be in it's own loop with 1500mm of rad.


Enormous rad surface will help, but @4.5 it will be hit or miss if you can keep all your cores at a reasonable temp. The TIM is a limiting factor prior to delid.

2 fewer cores might give you the bump you'd need over a 7980xe and make it easier? Will be interesting to see.


----------



## carlhil2

Enormous rad surface will help, but @4.5 it will be hit or miss if you can keep all your cores at a reasonable temp. The TIM is a limiting factor prior to delid.

2 fewer cores might give you the bump you'd need over a 7980xe and make it easier? Will be interesting to see.[/quote] I will be doing per core OC...


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> Enormous rad surface will help, but @4.5 it will be hit or miss if you can keep all your cores at a reasonable temp. The TIM is a limiting factor prior to delid.
> 
> 2 fewer cores might give you the bump you'd need over a 7980xe and make it easier? Will be interesting to see.
> 
> 
> 
> I will be doing per core OC...
Click to expand...

more than most, its not the individual cores that will determine your limits, but the sum of them... and/or the hotter cores among them.


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> more than most, its not the individual cores that will determine your limits, but the sum of them... and/or the hotter cores among them.


----------



## LukkyStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Been playing around some more today and think I've finally got a pretty decent config going:
> 
> 7900x @ 4.8 w/ 1.220v adaptive
> vccin @ 1.84v
> LLC 5
> SVID/VRM SS = disabled
> current capability = 200%
> stock cache / auto voltage
> IO/SA @ 1.050 and 0.900
> 
> RAM: 4,000 w/ 17-17-17-41 1T @ 1.40v
> gskill kit: F4-3600C16Q-32GTZR
> 
> Passed 1 hour RB 2.56
> Passed 500% hci memtest
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If anyone has any feedback on where you think I can improve, please let me know!


Can you run a single core run on those settings?

I am trying to figure out which exact chip I am going to run.


----------



## Jawnathin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> When you open cpu-z memory tab, what does it say? What does bios say, they should all read quad. And yes aida should as well.
> Would you share the timings you've got. Ill show you mine, but I think yours are way better. I get somewhere around 100Gbs read with my settings.
> 
> edit: i have the trial of aida as well, so its not much of use to post a screen grab


Hey there, sorry, offline for a few days. The secondary and tertiary timings are from a profile already pre-loaded into my motherboard's BIOS (Asus Rampage Apex), I am in the middle of stress testing but I'll try to get you a screenshot of the settings. It did help improve scores a lot over 'auto' but being tighter I can't be as aggressive with the primary settings as I would be without them, so its a bit of a trade off.

Speaking of memory I had a very intermittent error at 3600 CL16 (1 error at around 800% coverage in HCI) that more volts didn't seem to fix and I was tired of messing with it, so I backed off to 3600 CL17. Haven't retested via AIDA64 but bandwidth is probably still around 100gbs, latency probably around 54. Very frustrating that a good motherboard and memory kit is struggling to get any better. Maybe my CPU's IMC sucks?

Anyway, question for the experts here. Do I need to retest memory stability if I am just messing with the CPU? In my scenario I've confirmed 3600 CL17 is stable (1500% HCI). I decided I would poke around my CPU a little more, seeing what it needs for 4.9ghz. Do I need to retest memory if I'm not changing VCCIO, VCCSA, or memory voltages/timings?


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Hey there, sorry, offline for a few days. The secondary and tertiary timings are from a profile already pre-loaded into my motherboard's BIOS (Asus Rampage Apex), I am in the middle of stress testing but I'll try to get you a screenshot of the settings. It did help improve scores a lot over 'auto' but being tighter I can't be as aggressive with the primary settings as I would be without them, so its a bit of a trade off.


That would be awesome, no hurry. I would just like to see what my bios is doing compared to others, since Asus seems to have the most support for higher timed ram.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Speaking of memory I had a very intermittent error at 3600 CL16 (1 error at around 800% coverage in HCI) that more volts didn't seem to fix and I was tired of messing with it, so I backed off to 3600 CL17. Haven't retested via AIDA64 but bandwidth is probably still around 100gbs, latency probably around 54. Very frustrating that a good motherboard and memory kit is struggling to get any better. Maybe my CPU's IMC sucks?


I had the same issue, I corrected it by increasing tRAS, I ended up at 3800 CL16-16-16-39 completely stable 1.38v


----------



## Jawnathin

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*






BTW wanted to follow up to this. I have noticed it scales differently with temps. Lower temps they stay closer together, higher temps they spread out more. I have seen 10-12C difference between the hottest and coldest when overall CPU temps are in the 90s. Don't think I am in a position to say what is normal or unusual but I would say that if you have a large difference at low temps then maybe ought to dig into it further, maybe reapply TIM or LM. At very high temps/loads it may be more normal that the difference increases. On my CPU, it seems like 6C difference in the 70s and around 10-12C in the 90s.

Speaking of temps, I am experimenting with my CPU a bit and I've stumbled into what seems like a useful setting - auto vcore. One thing I do not like about auto vcore is that it sets voltages a little too high for the multiplier setting. At 4.8ghz my CPU needs about 1.25-1.26v but auto sets it at 1.3v, too much. At 4.9ghz it sets it at 1.35v. I don't know exactly whats the minimum vcore required for 4.9ghz as I haven't tried it but while a little high its not completely unreasonable and should be stable.

Ok auto vcore isn't anything new, so what's my point? Well I bring this up is because with my AVX offsets (-4), in Prime95 clocks are at 4.5ghz and auto vcore drops volts to the 1.22-1.23 range. It is actually running cooler than my earlier setting of 4.8ghz @ 1.25v fixed with -3 offset (still 4.5ghz). VRMs are running cooler too. So same clocks (4.5ghz) but auto vcore is less volts and less heat. I anticipate it'll run warmer on non-AVX tests where it'll run full speed at 4.9ghz @ 1.35v vs 4.8ghz @ 1.25v but since temps on non-AVX stress tests are much lower and haven't been a problem and I may be better off leaving it on auto vcore than trying to set a fixed vcore even if it is lower. In other words, temps are probably worse on workloads where it isn't a problem but it is better on workloads where it could be a problem. I think I am OK with that and worth the trade. The other bonus is that when idle it'll drop volts too which is not a big deal but nice.

I've got a a lot more testing to do but so far it is going well.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> I had the same issue, I corrected it by increasing tRAS, I ended up at 3800 CL16-16-16-39 completely stable 1.38v


Thanks, I could try that. Just got frustrated with it yesterday so I backed everything off to a setting I knew was good. It is one thing for it to fail right away and its another to have something 99% of the way there that fails 5 hours into a test. Maybe once I get to the other side of this 4.9ghz thing I'll revisit the memory.


----------



## Asus11

anyone seen the 7740x? black friday deal on amazon £188


----------



## Mr-Dark

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> anyone seen the 7740x? black friday deal on amazon £188


also the 7800X at 309$ and 7820x at 444$ on amazon.com


----------



## Jawnathin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> That would be awesome, no hurry. I would just like to see what my bios is doing compared to others, since Asus seems to have the most support for higher timed ram.


Here you go. Sorry about the phone pic, just was quicker and easier to get up. I am trying out the 16-16-16-38 like you have setup. Don't know why it says Single Channel up top. CPUZ shows Quad Channel.


----------



## GXTCHA

Looking for some feedback on how to tame my 7900x. I'm thinking of putting together my first custom loop (CPU only for now) and think I've narrowed down the critical parts list:

Radiator - Hardware Labs Black Ice Nemesis GTX 360
Pump/Res Combo - D5 combo
CPU block - Aquacomputer Cuplex Kryos NEXT w/ VISION or EKWB Supremacy EVO (full nickel)

I'm leaning heavily towards the aquacomputer since it has the integrated display with temp/flow sensors and I wouldnt need to purchase a separate sensor(s) but am really looking for people experience or opinions. The Fractal S36 360 AIO just doesn't cut it. Bench temps in the mid to high 80's and gaming in the low to mid 60's.

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Chris123NT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Looking for some feedback on how to tame my 7900x. I'm thinking of putting together my first custom loop (CPU only for now) and think I've narrowed down the critical parts list:
> 
> Radiator - Hardware Labs Black Ice Nemesis GTX 360
> Pump/Res Combo - D5 combo
> CPU block - Aquacomputer Cuplex Kryos NEXT w/ VISION or EKWB Supremacy EVO (full nickel)
> 
> I'm leaning heavily towards the aquacomputer since it has the integrated display with temp/flow sensors and I wouldnt need to purchase a separate sensor(s) but am really looking for people experience or opinions. The Fractal S36 360 AIO just doesn't cut it. Bench temps in the mid to high 80's and gaming in the low to mid 60's.
> 
> Thanks in advance!


If you're going to go that far with a cooling system then delid the CPU as well. This thing is tough to tame even under water if you don't delid it. I got a 25C drop in load temps on my custom water loop by doing the delid.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chris123NT*
> 
> If you're going to go that far with a cooling system then delid the CPU as well. This thing is tough to tame even under water if you don't delid it. I got a 25C drop in load temps on my custom water loop by doing the delid.


Thanks for the reply and its actually already delidded. Running at 4.8 w/ 1.220v adaptive

Seems like the AIO just cannot keep up. Ideally I'd like to see temps in the 60's/70's during stress tests with this setup but I'm not sure if one 360 in a custom loop will be sufficient.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Looking for some feedback on how to tame my 7900x. I'm thinking of putting together my first custom loop (CPU only for now) and think I've narrowed down the critical parts list:
> 
> Radiator - Hardware Labs Black Ice Nemesis GTX 360
> Pump/Res Combo - D5 combo
> CPU block - Aquacomputer Cuplex Kryos NEXT w/ VISION or EKWB Supremacy EVO (full nickel)
> 
> I'm leaning heavily towards the aquacomputer since it has the integrated display with temp/flow sensors and I wouldnt need to purchase a separate sensor(s) but am really looking for people experience or opinions. The Fractal S36 360 AIO just doesn't cut it. Bench temps in the mid to high 80's and gaming in the low to mid 60's.
> 
> Thanks in advance!


That is a good combo, depending on fan speed you may want to consider the Nemesis GTR series as well, below 1650 RPM the GTX cools better, above, the GTR. But you can't go wrong with either one.


----------



## Chris123NT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Thanks for the reply and its actually already delidded. Running at 4.8 w/ 1.220v adaptive
> 
> Seems like the AIO just cannot keep up. Ideally I'd like to see temps in the 60's/70's during stress tests with this setup but I'm not sure if one 360 in a custom loop will be sufficient.


That's a good clock, what's your AVX offset?


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> That is a good combo, depending on fan speed you may want to consider the Nemesis GTR series as well, below 1650 RPM the GTX cools better, above, the GTR. But you can't go wrong with either one.


Thanks! I've been debating between the GTR and GTX... just seems like the benefit at lower RPM was bigger than the top end benefit of the GTR.

Any feedback on the Aquacomputer vs. EK blocks? they seem very close in performance but the integrated sensors are nice - doesnt really "save" any money but figured it would be a nice to have instead of picking up sensors separately. I dont have any of this already so its not like im replacing anything.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chris123NT*
> 
> That's a good clock, what's your AVX offset?


avx/512 are -3/-5


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Thanks! I've been debating between the GTR and GTX... just seems like the benefit at lower RPM was bigger than the top end benefit of the GTR.
> 
> Any feedback on the Aquacomputer vs. EK blocks? they seem very close in performance but the integrated sensors are nice - doesnt really "save" any money but figured it would be a nice to have instead of picking up sensors separately. I dont have any of this already so its not like im replacing anything.
> avx/512 are -3/-5


It all depends how you want to set up your fans, for me I run the fans at low speeds day to day but when I'm benching or stress testing I'll turn them up to 1800+ so that is where I wanted the best cooling power.

I have the EK Monoblock, it's a very good product.







The VRM cooling on the Apex is probably enough for the 7900X though, so a normal waterblock would be fine as well.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> It all depends how you want to set up your fans, for me I run the fans at low speeds day to day but when I'm benching or stress testing I'll turn them up to 1800+ so that is where I wanted the best cooling power.
> 
> I have the EK Monoblock, it's a very good product.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The VRM cooling on the Apex is probably enough for the 7900X though, so a normal waterblock would be fine as well.


No doubt. Thanks for the insight.

So far I haven't really seen a need for a monoblock. VRM's in my case don't get above the mid 60's while benching.


----------



## djgar

I set up Q-Fan manually in the BIOS of my Strix so they run depending on the CPU temperature. Nice an quiet until they're needed.


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Here you go. Sorry about the phone pic, just was quicker and easier to get up. I am trying out the 16-16-16-38 like you have setup. Don't know why it says Single Channel up top. CPUZ shows Quad Channel.


I tried most of what I could decipher in the msi bios, only got 2 sticks to recognize. So I'm going to play around with the timings to see what I can do. Thanks man I do appreciate it.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Thanks for the reply and its actually already delidded. Running at 4.8 w/ 1.220v adaptive
> 
> Seems like the AIO just cannot keep up. Ideally I'd like to see temps in the 60's/70's during stress tests with this setup but I'm not sure if one 360 in a custom loop will be sufficient.


You're probably going to need more than one 360 if you want those kinda temps. I get those temps while stressing but I've also got 2 480s and 12 fans and 2 less cores than you do. The system stays nice and quiet during stress testing though which is cool. [email protected] all cores I'm in the 90s with fans blasting. Even a custom loop with dual 480s and a monoblock can't do much above 4.8 without struggling. I don't use any AVX offsets though. Here's a screenshot with a handbrake x264 encode running in the background:


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Thanks for the reply and its actually already delidded. Running at 4.8 w/ 1.220v adaptive
> 
> Seems like the AIO just cannot keep up. Ideally I'd like to see temps in the 60's/70's during stress tests with this setup but I'm not sure if one 360 in a custom loop will be sufficient.


AIOs dont cut the mustard for these chips if you plan on any kind of OC that's worth chasing.

Im running 2 480s both with pushpull for a total of 16 rad fans then 3 more in the front pushing air in and one in the back for a total of 20 fans.

EK monoblock whether you think you need it or not. Not all that much more than just the CPU block.

EK 480XE
Ek 480CE

2 D5 pumps in serial with a bitspower pump top.

Im also running my 2x 1080Ti cards in the same loop with EK blocks on those too.

It actually stays nearly silent until I load it up and the liquid temp starts to rise as I have it set on a max of 32C liquid temp.If Im going to loading it up 100% for any duration I go ahead and set the fans and pumps to max before hand.


----------



## cekim

Spent most of the day re-configuring the server room (aka: basement). Almost done.

Did get some gaming and tiny bit of tuning. Here's where I am right now:
7980XE
- 4.5GHz non-AVX 1.175v
( @LunaP, I have no idea how you are getting < 1.12v to work - that's a fantastic chip you have there - with enough time, I can find subtle errors with anything < 1.175 now)
- SA 0.92v
- VCCIO 1.05
- VDIMM 1.37 (initial and eventual)
- 3200C14CR2 (1004 bios no longer lets me do CR1 - but overall performance and stability are improved over 08xx bios)
- tRFC down to 250 makes a big difference on mesh-bound parallel apps
(the 4507 run was an old 4.6GHz run, so I'm closing in @4.5 with memory tuning)
- 7980XE @ 4.5 now exceeding performance of 18 cores of 2696v3 @ 3.8 where previously xeon was beating it even at lower speed in heavy IPC apps.


I can run this setup at 3400/14 (with slower RFC) and 3600/15 (slower RFC again) and get higher synthetic throughput, but requires higher voltages and still getting errors after hours of SAT for < 0.5% real-world gain if that (in the case of 3400/14 - 3600/15 provides no benefit. Note the latency #.... 3400/14 or 3600/15 will produce > 100GB/s but see above - all pain and no gain in real-world apps.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Spent most of the day re-configuring the server room (aka: basement). Almost done.
> 
> Did get some gaming and tiny bit of tuning. Here's where I am right now:
> 7980XE
> - 4.5GHz non-AVX 1.175v
> ( @LunaP, I have no idea how you are getting < 1.12v to work - that's a fantastic chip you have there - with enough time, I can find subtle errors with anything < 1.175 now)
> - SA 0.92v
> - VCCIO 1.05
> - VDIMM 1.37 (initial and eventual)
> - 3200C14CR2 (1004 bios no longer lets me do CR1 - but overall performance and stability are improved over 08xx bios)
> - tRFC down to 250 makes a big difference on mesh-bound parallel apps
> (the 4507 run was an old 4.6GHz run, so I'm closing in @4.5 with memory tuning)
> - 7980XE @ 4.5 now exceeding performance of 18 cores of 2696v3 @ 3.8 where previously xeon was beating it even at lower speed in heavy IPC apps.
> 
> 
> I can run this setup at 3400/14 (with slower RFC) and 3600/15 (slower RFC again) and get higher synthetic throughput, but requires higher voltages and still getting errors after hours of SAT for < 0.5% real-world gain if that (in the case of 3400/14 - 3600/15 provides no benefit. Note the latency #.... 3400/14 or 3600/15 will produce > 100GB/s but see above - all pain and no gain in real-world apps.


Do you think the 7980XE was worth it over the 2696v3?


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Do you think the 7980XE was worth it over the 2696v3?


It would depends on what you do. Certain things benefit from mesh, certain things dont.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Do you think the 7980XE was worth it over the 2696v3?
> 
> 
> 
> It would depends on what you do. Certain things benefit from mesh, certain things dont.
Click to expand...

What benefits from MESH?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Do you think the 7980XE was worth it over the 2696v3?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> It would depends on what you do. Certain things benefit from mesh, certain things dont.


What he said - warm cache single threaded DB access can be as much as 2X faster on the 7980xe @ 4.5GHz (table walk on a 40G DB)

Then again, I can run my 2x2696v3 systems at full bore for 2 weeks on a long sim and no exotic cooling, delidding and less power is required.

The 2696v3 system can still beat it in some instance (36 cores cinebench is ~5000 vs 4444 as my best so far on 7980xe)

I will say a 2x6154 xeon system at full price doesn't make sense given what I am seeing here for my needs. even 3 generations old the 2696v3 is still holding up because of the ucode exploit.

One exception is VMs - BW fixed some VM bugs of HW, so I could potentially get much closer to bare metal performance form a VM on the new arch.

I'm also curious what the hex-channel memory does for this, but at this point the gains are bound to be incremental vs the 2696v3, so I'll wait for either the next gen or ebay'd hardware.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What benefits from MESH?


At this point, its more fair to ask what doesn't get hurt by the mesh on 18 core cpus. That is things with many dissociated threads are not harmed by the mesh and benefit from the larger L1/L2 vs L3 arrangement.

The mesh will shine with higher core counts, more memory channels, etc... "things to come" for the consumer space and things in use at the XCC level.

Example: Cinebench - we have an 18 core processor within 10% of 36cores (4500 vs 5000 - of course with a 20% higher clock, but still)


----------



## jacknhut

From what I’m seeing in here, most people can achieve 4.9- 5 ghz but not for everyday use on these 8 cores +. Do you think it’s more suitable to go for 8700k to get 5ghz for everyday use if I’m not into rendering and the like ?


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jacknhut*
> 
> From what I'm seeing in here, most people can achieve 4.9- 5 ghz but not for everyday use on these 8 cores +. Do you think it's more suitable to go for 8700k to get 5ghz for everyday use if I'm not into rendering and the like ?


Only with a delid and custom water.
Mine can only do [email protected] due to thermals (90c max in Realbench), with a delid it'll be better I'm sure.

If you're not going to be doing anything that needs 2 extra cores and want higher clocks the 8700k is more suited.
I did toss up the idea of swapping out my 7820x/TUF Mark 1 for a 8700k but I'd loose money on the sale and it wouldn't cover the cost of the 8700k/Hero, so it's not worth it in the long run.


----------



## jacknhut

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Only with a delid and custom water.
> Mine can only do [email protected] due to thermals (90c max in Realbench), with a delid it'll be better I'm sure.
> 
> If you're not going to be doing anything that needs 2 extra cores and want higher clocks the 8700k is more suited.
> I did toss up the idea of swapping out my 7820x/TUF Mark 1 for a 8700k but I'd loose money on the sale and it wouldn't cover the cost of the 8700k/Hero, so it's not worth it in the long run.


What is the max stable overclock that most people can achieve on a 7820x with a custom loop on a nondelid cpu? 4.6-4.7 ghz ?

Right now I'm considering 7820x with a rampage vi extreme vs 8700k + rampage x formula. The cost difference is 300 bucks. I'm using a full custom water loop with 1x480mm, 1x420mm, 1x240mm rad with a dual pump. Current setup i7 5820k at 4.5ghz 1080ti SLI. Not sure which setup will yield the highest difference.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jacknhut*
> 
> What is the max stable overclock that most people can achieve on a 7820x with a custom loop on a nondelid cpu? 4.6-4.7 ghz ?


Yeah around that it seems.
As I'm running a Corsair H115i and can do a fairly warm 90c under stress testing, so a decent custom loop would cool 4.6Ghz/4.7Ghz fine without a delid.
Delidding would lower temps and voltages more


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Spent most of the day re-configuring the server room (aka: basement). Almost done.
> 
> Did get some gaming and tiny bit of tuning. Here's where I am right now:
> 7980XE
> - 4.5GHz non-AVX 1.175v
> ( @LunaP, I have no idea how you are getting < 1.12v to work - that's a fantastic chip you have there - with enough time, I can find subtle errors with anything < 1.175 now)
> - SA 0.92v
> - VCCIO 1.05
> - VDIMM 1.37 (initial and eventual)
> - 3200C14CR2 (1004 bios no longer lets me do CR1 - but overall performance and stability are improved over 08xx bios)
> - tRFC down to 250 makes a big difference on mesh-bound parallel apps
> (the 4507 run was an old 4.6GHz run, so I'm closing in @4.5 with memory tuning)
> - 7980XE @ 4.5 now exceeding performance of 18 cores of 2696v3 @ 3.8 where previously xeon was beating it even at lower speed in heavy IPC apps.
> 
> 
> I can run this setup at 3400/14 (with slower RFC) and 3600/15 (slower RFC again) and get higher synthetic throughput, but requires higher voltages and still getting errors after hours of SAT for < 0.5% real-world gain if that (in the case of 3400/14 - 3600/15 provides no benefit. Note the latency #.... 3400/14 or 3600/15 will produce > 100GB/s but see above - all pain and no gain in real-world apps.


1.112v not 1.12v but yeah weird I didn't see any diff between the 3200 and 3600 settings I achieved, as I was getting lower latency on my 3600 than I was on my 3200 (albeit only 1-2 ns ) and saw no change really on C15 If I boost to 4.6 I'll hit 4500-4600+ on c15

I'd love to run mine at 4.5 24/7 just need to do more tests and tweaking to ensure nothing I do / long term encodes push it over 90, the ONLY push over 90 I saw was 10 minutes into the real bench stress test which at the end 1-2 cores had hit 96C

I can do 4.5 fully stable at 1.125 1.130+ when pushing RAM higher Try pushing your SA to .95 we've both got 128gb kits .95 seems to be a nice starting point before working downwards back to .9

Also any settings to cache voltage / mesh?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> AIOs dont cut the mustard for these chips if you plan on any kind of OC that's worth chasing.
> 
> Im running 2 480s both with pushpull for a total of 16 rad fans then 3 more in the front pushing air in and one in the back for a total of 20 fans.
> 
> EK monoblock whether you think you need it or not. Not all that much more than just the CPU block.
> 
> EK 480XE
> Ek 480CE
> 
> 2 D5 pumps in serial with a bitspower pump top.
> 
> Im also running my 2x 1080Ti cards in the same loop with EK blocks on those too.
> 
> It actually stays nearly silent until I load it up and the liquid temp starts to rise as I have it set on a max of 32C liquid temp.If Im going to loading it up 100% for any duration I go ahead and set the fans and pumps to max before hand.


Nice it appears you and I both have nearly identical setups, I have 4x 480 RAD's all in push pull along w/ 4 fans on the front of my tower and 1 on the back near the chipset, also 2x 1080ti's ( probably removing the 980ti this weekend once my parts arrive )

also thanks for the reminder, I keep my fans at 60-70% gonna boost and see if theres any noticable dips in temps, I completely forgot about that ( using an aquareos 6 )

*Edit*

Damn only made like .5 - 1 degree C diff if an.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> 1.112v not 1.12v but yeah weird I didn't see any diff between the 3200 and 3600 settings I achieved, as I was getting lower latency on my 3600 than I was on my 3200 (albeit only 1-2 ns ) and saw no change really on C15 If I boost to 4.6 I'll hit 4500-4600+ on c15
> 
> I'd love to run mine at 4.5 24/7 just need to do more tests and tweaking to ensure nothing I do / long term encodes push it over 90, the ONLY push over 90 I saw was 10 minutes into the real bench stress test which at the end 1-2 cores had hit 96C
> 
> I can do 4.5 fully stable at 1.125 1.130+ when pushing RAM higher Try pushing your SA to .95 we've both got 128gb kits .95 seems to be a nice starting point before working downwards back to .9
> 
> Also any settings to cache voltage / mesh?
> Nice it appears you and I both have nearly identical setups, I have 4x 480 RAD's all in push pull along w/ 4 fans on the front of my tower and 1 on the back near the chipset, also 2x 1080ti's ( probably removing the 980ti this weekend once my parts arrive )
> 
> also thanks for the reminder, I keep my fans at 60-70% gonna boost and see if theres any noticable dips in temps, I completely forgot about that ( using an aquareos 6 )
> 
> *Edit*
> 
> Damn only made like .5 - 1 degree C diff if an.


I can't tell you how many fan controllers I've tried over the years, including onboard solutions. None of them come close to the aquaero. I'm running the 6 Pro. Rad fans and pumps reference liquid temp from an inline probe and case fans reference a sensor hiding between the GPUs.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> 1.112v not 1.12v but yeah weird I didn't see any diff between the 3200 and 3600 settings I achieved, as I was getting lower latency on my 3600 than I was on my 3200 (albeit only 1-2 ns ) and saw no change really on C15 If I boost to 4.6 I'll hit 4500-4600+ on c15
> 
> I'd love to run mine at 4.5 24/7 just need to do more tests and tweaking to ensure nothing I do / long term encodes push it over 90, the ONLY push over 90 I saw was 10 minutes into the real bench stress test which at the end 1-2 cores had hit 96C
> 
> I can do 4.5 fully stable at 1.125 1.130+ when pushing RAM higher Try pushing your SA to .95 we've both got 128gb kits .95 seems to be a nice starting point before working downwards back to .9
> 
> Also any settings to cache voltage / mesh?


mesh: 1.05v 30x

I've tried 0.95 and up to 1.15v on mesh and doesn't seem to matter or allow 31x for ram or vcore stability requirements...

I wasn't able to do 4.5 24/7 prior to delid either because of temps. Just not ok with seeing 80C+...

After delid, I'm always below 75C and usually below 65C. I'll see blips to 61-65C, but under my day-to-day work-load running sims and big compiles its more like 45-55C.

I have this system mechanically rigged up for the aquaero that was on the the 2696v3 dual system that lived in this chassis before, but I'm not using it (yet). On board is doing "good enough" though rebooting to mod fan curves is annoying.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> mesh: 1.05v 30x
> 
> I've tried 0.95 and up to 1.15v on mesh and doesn't seem to matter or allow 31x for ram or vcore stability requirements...
> 
> I wasn't able to do 4.5 24/7 prior to delid either because of temps. Just not ok with seeing 80C+...
> 
> After delid, I'm always below 75C and usually below 65C. I'll see blips to 61-65C, but under my day-to-day work-load running sims and big compiles its more like 45-55C.
> 
> I have this system mechanically rigged up for the aquaero that was on the the 2696v3 dual system that lived in this chassis before, but I'm not using it (yet). On board is doing "good enough" though rebooting to mod fan curves is annoying.


How does the Gold series for XCC xeons compare to the 7980XE in performance would you say ? I get they're up to 3.6 which is still good for a xeon of their core status.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> You're probably going to need more than one 360 if you want those kinda temps. I get those temps while stressing but I've also got 2 480s and 12 fans and 2 less cores than you do. The system stays nice and quiet during stress testing though which is cool. [email protected] all cores I'm in the 90s with fans blasting. Even a custom loop with dual 480s and a monoblock can't do much above 4.8 without struggling. I don't use any AVX offsets though. Here's a screenshot with a handbrake x264 encode running in the background:


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> AIOs dont cut the mustard for these chips if you plan on any kind of OC that's worth chasing.
> 
> Im running 2 480s both with pushpull for a total of 16 rad fans then 3 more in the front pushing air in and one in the back for a total of 20 fans.
> 
> EK monoblock whether you think you need it or not. Not all that much more than just the CPU block.
> 
> EK 480XE
> Ek 480CE
> 
> 2 D5 pumps in serial with a bitspower pump top.
> 
> Im also running my 2x 1080Ti cards in the same loop with EK blocks on those too.
> 
> It actually stays nearly silent until I load it up and the liquid temp starts to rise as I have it set on a max of 32C liquid temp.If Im going to loading it up 100% for any duration I go ahead and set the fans and pumps to max before hand.


Thanks for the replies and I appreciate the in depth look into your setups.

I figured 1x 360 loop would be pretty good after reading this article: https://www.techspot.com/review/1437-overclocking-core-i9/

They were running a non-delidded chip at a higher voltage (lower clock) and saw almost a 20c drop just from moving to a custom loop vs the AIO.

At this point im debating the custom 360 loop and an EK MLC 360 cpu only setup. Custom loop would probably still be better...


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Thanks for the replies and I appreciate the in depth look into your setups.
> 
> I figured 1x 360 loop would be pretty good after reading this article: https://www.techspot.com/review/1437-overclocking-core-i9/
> 
> They were running a non-delidded chip at a higher voltage (lower clock) and saw almost a 20c drop just from moving to a custom loop vs the AIO.
> 
> At this point im debating the custom 360 loop and an EK MLC 360 cpu only setup. Custom loop would probably still be better...


Custom will always come out ahead. Well almost always, so long as we're not discussing a single 120 rad.
The more rad surface area you can pack in, or even out of your case the better. If you do go with a single 360 just make sure it has the most fins per inch and surface area as in a deep as you can fit. High static pressure fans are a must.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Custom will always come out ahead. Well almost always, so long as we're not discussing a single 120 rad.
> The more rad surface area you can pack in, or even out of your case the better. If you do go with a single 360 just make sure it has the most fins per inch and surface area as in a deep as you can fit. High static pressure fans are a must.


I'm either gonna go with the Hardware Labs 360 GTX or GTR (54mm thick) and pair that with 3x noctua NF-12's.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> I'm either gonna go with the Hardware Labs 360 GTX or GTR (54mm thick) and pair that with 3x noctua NF-12's.


Hardware labs makes decent rads. One of my top picks. I'm not a big fan (no pun intended) of the Noctura fans for rads. The particular model you listed is better than most of them but there are a lot of fans on the market that outperform them..... it to mention they really need to expand their color palette. That brown color scheme pretty much goes with NOTHING!

Me, I'm using mostly the Corsair SP 120s with 4 ML 120s in the mix.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> How does the Gold series for XCC xeons compare to the 7980XE in performance would you say ? I get they're up to 3.6 which is still good for a xeon of their core status.


Identical or lower in most cases. Benefits from higher total memory throughput, but at a lower speed/higher latency.

I suspect it might do better at its all-core 3.7 peak (i.e. both locked at 3.7) because of that memory throughput in heavy IPC apps, but the loss of clock would hamper it and likely make it a draw.

If the past is any guide, there will be some OEM chips that clock a little higher, but... I'm in no hurry given what I've seen with the 7980xe. Next gen will be fun if AMD, Qualcom, Marvel (just bought Cavium) and the like (with ARM @ 3GHz+) all keep the pressure on.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Thanks for the replies and I appreciate the in depth look into your setups.
> 
> I figured 1x 360 loop would be pretty good after reading this article: https://www.techspot.com/review/1437-overclocking-core-i9/
> 
> They were running a non-delidded chip at a higher voltage (lower clock) and saw almost a 20c drop just from moving to a custom loop vs the AIO.
> 
> At this point im debating the custom 360 loop and an EK MLC 360 cpu only setup. Custom loop would probably still be better...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Thanks for the replies and I appreciate the in depth look into your setups.
> 
> I figured 1x 360 loop would be pretty good after reading this article: https://www.techspot.com/review/1437-overclocking-core-i9/
> 
> They were running a non-delidded chip at a higher voltage (lower clock) and saw almost a 20c drop just from moving to a custom loop vs the AIO.
> 
> At this point im debating the custom 360 loop and an EK MLC 360 cpu only setup. Custom loop would probably still be better...


Looks like he's stress testing with just the "Stress CPU" checked in AIDA64 which is a piece of cake. Once you start stressing with AVX instruction sets, temps go way out of control. So that's another thing to consider. If you don't plan on running anything with AVX, a custom loop with a 360 will probably be sufficient. The screenshot I posted was without any AVX offsets.

You didn't mention what type of stress testing you were doing. You could probably tame those temps on that AIO with a higher AVX offset.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Having trouble to stabilize 4.8 ghz. Temps are sub 70'C on cores. I can boot and run CB at 5 ghz, so the chip can't be that bad.

Not sure since if it's the AVX on RB 2.56 that does it, or my mem OC which did 800% on HCI before I closed it. Ran 1400% with my old 7800X. Worked like a charm. Just used the excact same settings.

Any tips?


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Having trouble to stabilize 4.8 ghz. Temps are sub 70'C on cores. I can boot and run CB at 5 ghz, so the chip can't be that bad.
> 
> Not sure since if it's the AVX on RB 2.56 that does it, or my mem OC which did 800% on HCI before I closed it. Ran 1400% with my old 7800X. Worked like a charm. Just used the excact same settings.
> 
> Any tips?


What's your SA voltage at? Maybe try upping that to 1.0-1.1ish. RB 2.56 is brutal.


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> How does the Gold series for XCC xeons compare to the 7980XE in performance would you say ? I get they're up to 3.6 which is still good for a xeon of their core status.


Worse for the most part compared with 7980XE overclock after factoring in Amdahl's law. Hexa channel at 2666mhz CL17 isnt really much better than 3600mhz quad channel.

For example, for a 98% parallel efficiency task, a 4.5ghz 7980XE would be better than a top end Platinum 8180 with 28 cores clocked at max core turbo speed of 3.2ghz.

https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Estimating-CPU-Performance-using-Amdahls-Law-619/#Conclusion

You buy Xeons for the Xeon specific features.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Asus11*
> 
> I can pick one up for 640 which is tempting me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I heard its better than the 7900x once its overclocked under water?
> 
> edit: just found this vid from another user off this forum
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


yeah - pretty much everything I've looked at has he 7980XE(@4.5) running behind the 6950X (@4.4) in "everything graphics".


----------



## LukkyStrike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - pretty much everything I've looked at has he 7980XE(@4.5) running behind the 6950X (@4.4) in "everything graphics".


Saw the same vid, still ended up at Fry's and getting myself a 7920x. (BTW they had it for $880.00, it was a good price for a 12c if you ask me)

I am not done dialing everything in, but i am close. Running at 4.7GHz right now, looks like it may be my landing frequency. Having some issues with my 1080Ti's running at the same OC as my previous chip on X99. But it may be a blessing because they seem to be running better.

I believe this guy, but there seems to be some platform issues from X99 to X299. I am benching with 3d mark right now and i will have runs in Fire strike Ultra and Time Spy Ultra that will show better CPU scores (by a ton compared to both my 5930k and 6850k) but then my 7920x will get a lower "combined" score. I think there may be some teething issues with PCI/SLI/DX11 and 12? for some reason. I will report back.

Running CB i am showing: MC: 3070 and SC: 207, and I am very happy with the SC run. I used to be stuck in the 160 range with my 4.6ghz 5930k, this means there is a good amount of IPC improvements here as well for me.

(the 6850k is in a mackintosh for my wife, Micro Center had the chip for $380 combo with a motherboard, jumped on it as a good desktop for her).

Edit: 6850k*


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> Worse for the most part compared with 7980XE overclock after factoring in Amdahl's law. Hexa channel at 2666mhz CL17 isnt really much better than 3600mhz quad channel.
> ....
> You buy Xeons for the Xeon specific features.


Provided one of those features in question is the ability to run more than one of them in a system. ECC is "nice to have", and gives me more confidence to run multi-day/week simulations, but those are about the only xeon only features I make use of. Also, that memory assertion depends on interleaving and randomness. See aida image below - it takes a lot to make use of it, but multi-socket does have up and down sides.

The comparison has gotten complicated given the spread of OC vs Xeon clock (and chips like the 6154), but on the multi-socket front, I've found multiple cases where the effect of 2 CPU/sockets is, despite the handicap of QPI between them, a benefit in terms of cache thrashing with larger memory image applications.

2 E5-v3 chips can run an N-thread parallel application faster than N-thread haswell chip (xeon or not) depending on the shape of that application - even if the single chip has higher clocks (caches work and 2x the memory channels don't hurt).


Of course, having spent more time that I'd ever even want to add up profiling, debugging and restructuring code, the brutal truth is that bloat is EVERYWHERE. Parallelism though, often offers far more bang for the buck than cleaning up 25 layers of C++ cruft the compiler wasn't able to optimize out. and/or amplifies incremental cleanups of said 25 layers.


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Provided one of those features in question is the ability to run more than one of them in a system. ECC is "nice to have", and gives me more confidence to run multi-day/week simulations, but those are about the only xeon only features I make use of. Also, that memory assertion depends on interleaving and randomness. See aida image below - it takes a lot to make use of it, but multi-socket does have up and down sides.
> 
> The comparison has gotten complicated given the spread of OC vs Xeon clock (and chips like the 6154), but on the multi-socket front, I've found multiple cases where the effect of 2 CPU/sockets is, despite the handicap of QPI between them, a benefit in terms of cache thrashing with larger memory image applications.
> 
> 2 E5-v3 chips can run an N-thread parallel application faster than N-thread haswell chip (xeon or not) depending on the shape of that application - even if the single chip has higher clocks (caches work and 2x the memory channels don't hurt).
> 
> 
> Of course, having spent more time that I'd ever even want to add up profiling, debugging and restructuring code, the brutal truth is that bloat is EVERYWHERE. Parallelism though, often offers far more bang for the buck than cleaning up 25 layers of C++ cruft the compiler wasn't able to optimize out. and/or amplifies incremental cleanups of said 25 layers.


I agree with you ABSOLUTELY on multi socket feature. I find the Xeon Golds to be the best of the line. However, I consider EPYC servers chip to be better than Xeon Scalable in a lot of aspects. In terms of price and memory bandwidth, the EPYC platform is better.

Gold 6154 is a very great chip in that it can turbo to all core 3.7, I think it is a very worthy competitor to a 7980XE. Its a shame though that the Xeon W line does not have hexa channel.

Certain Xeons also have Omni Path which can be used to replaced Mellanox if there are needs such as multi-node.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LukkyStrike*
> 
> Saw the same vid, still ended up at Fry's and getting myself a 7920x. (BTW they had it for $880.00, it was a good price for a 12c if you ask me)
> 
> I am not done dialing everything in, but i am close. Running at 4.7GHz right now, looks like it may be my landing frequency. Having some issues with my 1080Ti's running at the same OC as my previous chip on X99. But it may be a blessing because they seem to be running better.
> 
> I believe this guy, but there seems to be some platform issues from X99 to X299. I am benching with 3d mark right now and i will have runs in Fire strike Ultra and Time Spy Ultra that will show better CPU scores (by a ton compared to both my 5930k and 6850k) but then my 7920x will get a lower "combined" score. I think there may be some teething issues with PCI/SLI/DX11 and 12? for some reason. I will report back.
> 
> Running CB i am showing: MC: 3070 and SC: 207, and I am very happy with the SC run. I used to be stuck in the 160 range with my 4.6ghz 5930k, this means there is a good amount of IPC improvements here as well for me.
> 
> (the 6850k is in a mackintosh for my wife, Micro Center had the chip for $380 combo with a motherboard, jumped on it as a good desktop for her).
> 
> Edit: 6850k*


BIG jump in IPC from a HWE to SKL-E. Or to a BWE for that matter. I've yet to match a graphics score using the same TXps going from x99/6950X to x299 7980XE. Of course the overall scores are higher as are the combined scores (mostly) - maybe due to ram now at 4000c16 which is needed to make up for the cache (L3) deficit.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> I agree with you ABSOLUTELY on multi socket feature. I find the Xeon Golds to be the best of the line. However, I consider EPYC servers chip to be better than Xeon Scalable in a lot of aspects. In terms of price and memory bandwidth, the EPYC platform is better.
> 
> Gold 6154 is a very great chip in that it can turbo to all core 3.7, I think it is a very worthy competitor to a 7980XE. Its a shame though that the Xeon W line does not have hexa channel.
> 
> Certain Xeons also have Omni Path which can be used to replaced Mellanox if there are needs such as multi-node.


I was pretty disappointed specifically in the clocking scheme of the EPYC line.

Where Intel had filled out pretty much the entire spread of cores-vs-clocks spectrum (to the point of making it tough to pick the right one), EPYC scaled cores and clocks together over their line. You have to buy the highest of high SKUs to get the highest GHz and that GHz is not very high.

There's no direct equivalent of TR in the EPYC line - 16 cores @ 3.5-4.0GHz. The 16 core EPYC part is gimped severely in clock rate.

I end up doing "both" (single/few thread and spread it around) so I want the highest clock "high" core count chip I can get my hands on.


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I was pretty disappointed specifically in the clocking scheme of the EPYC line.
> 
> Where Intel had filled out pretty much the entire spread of cores-vs-clocks spectrum (to the point of making it tough to pick the right one), EPYC scaled cores and clocks together over their line. You have to buy the highest of high SKUs to get the highest GHz and that GHz is not very high.
> 
> There's no direct equivalent of TR in the EPYC line - 16 cores @ 3.5-4.0GHz. The 16 core EPYC part is gimped severely in clock rate.
> 
> I end up doing "both" (single/few thread and spread it around) so I want the highest clock "high" core count chip I can get my hands on.


Absolutely! Thats was similar to my mentality as well. However, you cannot deny the value of EPYC 16 cores. For 700 usd, you can get a 7281 with 16 cores clocked at 2.5ghz with octachannel and scalable up to 2 CPUs. EPYC "P" are also great for value.

Single socket EPYC have great IOs as well. Its not as flexible as Xeon Scalable but its pretty good at what its designed to do.

Xeon Scalable is too overpriced IMO. And I dont like the Silver/Bronze line.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> Absolutely! Thats was similar to my mentality as well. However, you cannot deny the value of EPYC 16 cores. For 700 usd, you can get a 7281 with 16 cores clocked at 2.5ghz with octachannel and scalable up to 2 CPUs. EPYC "P" are also great for value.


Indeed - I'm thrilled...









If DDR prices would calm the [email protected]#$ down, I would likely pick up a 2nd gen TR style CPU. For my purposes, the platform bugs are still a real issue in linux and it requires following RC kernels closer than I have time to do at the moment. No blame or hate, its all as expected, just the reality of a new arch. Been there done that with sparc, alpha, arm, etc... (though this is a far smaller delta from the old)


----------



## LunaP

Whats a safe deficit to stay in for cache voltage when pushing mesh for the 7980? Running R6E @ 1.05v on cache voltage @ 30 for mesh.


----------



## Jawnathin

My 7820x is good at 1.05v for 30x. Needs 1.1v for 32x.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Weird... I can bench at 5 ghz, but I can't get over 4.7 ghz on RB 2.56V with full AVX.. Normal?

At higher clocks my PC will either freeze, and twice it has shut down. VRM temps are about 55'C and package is 70-75'C max.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Weird... I can bench at 5 ghz, but I can't get over 4.7 ghz on RB 2.56V with full AVX.. Normal?
> 
> At higher clocks my PC will either freeze, and twice it has shut down. VRM temps are about 55'C and package is 70-75'C max.


You definitely need an AVX offset when running RB since it utilizes it during encodes.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> My 7820x is good at 1.05v for 30x. Needs 1.1v for 32x.


Same as my 7820x..


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> My 7820x is good at 1.05v for 30x. Needs 1.1v for 32x.


1.05 for 30x mesh here... haven't yet found a stable 31x (at least in linux - SAT finds the problem ASAP).

Not sure what "safe"TM is there yet only that beyond 1.05/30x has gone exponential relative to prior, so that's where it's going to stay for now.


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> 1.05 for 30x mesh here... haven't yet found a stable 31x (at least in linux - SAT finds the problem ASAP).
> 
> Not sure what "safe"TM is there yet only that beyond 1.05/30x has gone exponential relative to prior, so that's where it's going to stay for now.


What are the mesh clock on the Xeon Golds?


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Whats a safe deficit to stay in for cache voltage when pushing mesh for the 7980? Running R6E @ 1.05v on cache voltage @ 30 for mesh.


Im running from the cheap seats with a 7900X but...
To get mine @32 it took 1.116


----------



## Raven.7

I'm coming from an i5 3570K, what's everyone's experience with the 7800X? It seems to be catching a lot of flak with the Ryzen comparisons (and the 7700K), but I went ahead and ordered one anyway. It was $400 for the 7800X + asRock x299 Killer (still cheaper than the 8600K + a good mb), which I thought was a great deal. Several benchmarks show a better single-core performance over R7 1700X and 1800X at stock frequency. I'm hoping this late inventory has better thermal performance than earlier production units. I plan on using a Corsair H100 AIO. Everything I've read so far indicates a stable 4.5GHz OC with 70C~ MaxTemp? Have there been any software, BIOS, or firmware updates since the initial review wave that improved overall performance?


----------



## DStealth

Get 8600k or even better 8700k and overclock them to 5+ 7800x is no match to them in terms of gaming performance. x299 are expensive boards and if you need more cores get 7820x or higher... 7800x is not a wise buy right now...


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I'd get a 7800X over a 8600K.


----------



## DStealth

Cheapest x299 board + 7800x are 500$ combo
Good z370 like Asrock extreme4 + 8600k is sub 450$ combo
7800x is hotter and has advantage only from HT point of view. 8600k will get 500+Mhz higher and even clock per clock is faster than 7800x in games.


----------



## Raven.7

Again, I picked up the combo for $400 clean. The cheapest 7700/8600 setup was $60-70 more expensive with an entry level performance board.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Cheapest x299 board + 7800x are 500$ combo
> Good z370 like Asrock extreme4 + 8600k is sub 450$ combo
> 7800x is hotter and has advantage only from HT point of view. 8600k will get 500+Mhz higher and even clock per clock is faster than 7800x in games.


----------



## DStealth

Ah ok in this case you're fine...Just need 4 dimms to use quad channel also pricey if you come from z170/270 have to be considered.


----------



## Raven.7

I got a single 16GB DDR4 3200 DIMM. I plan to add more when memory prices go down.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Ah ok in this case you're fine...Just need 4 dimms to use quad channel also pricey if you come from z170/270 have to be considered.


----------



## Jawnathin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> 7800x is hotter and has advantage only from HT point of view. 8600k will get 500+Mhz higher and even clock per clock is faster than 7800x in games.
> [/IMG]


The picture you posted doesn't have a 7800X but I think you can fill in the blanks on where it'd show up. It would be less than 2% slower than an 8700k and these are at stock clocks where the 7800X has a big disadvantage. Once you OC the 7800X it'll be very close.


----------



## Nautilus

Guys, I'm trying to overclock my 3466Mhz corsair 17-18-18-38 kit.

So far only tightened timings to 15-16-15-36.

Now looking into bumping frequency up to 3600Mhz.

What should my max safe dram, vccio and system agent voltage should be with 7900x?


----------



## Martin778

Most people use stock - 1.05 / 0.85V for VCCIO/SA. I'd put 1.45V on those sticks and see how high they will go, it's not B-Die anyway.


----------



## Nautilus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> Most people use stock - 1.05 / 0.85V for VCCIO/SA. I'd put 1.45V on those sticks and see how high they will go, it's not B-Die anyway.


Thanks. I gave 'em 1.45v and maximum they could run was 3600Mhz - CL17-17-17-38 2T. Prime95 Blend test & TechPowerUP Memtest64 stable.

According to HWINFO64 all 4 sticks consumed maximum 35 watts of power and they reached up to 50 celcius degrees after 10 minutes of heavy memory stress test.

Now I see how awesome GSKILL is, I read that they'll release their latest binned Samsung B-Die based kit in January 2018 running at 4266Mhz CL17-17-17. Incredible, should make a noticeable difference in 1080TI SLI or better setups.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nautilus*
> 
> Thanks. I gave 'em 1.45v and maximum they could run was 3600Mhz - CL17-17-17-38 2T. Prime95 Blend test & TechPowerUP Memtest64 stable.
> 
> According to HWINFO64 all 4 sticks consumed maximum 35 watts of power and they reached up to 50 celcius degrees after 10 minutes of heavy memory stress test.
> 
> Now I see how awesome GSKILL is, I read that they'll release their latest binned Samsung B-Die based kit in January 2018 running at 4266Mhz CL17-17-17. Incredible, *should make a noticeable difference in 1080TI SLI or better setups.*


Crap, forgot about that, might try to go back to 4000/4200 @ 17 again...


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Made the switch to Z370 it seems like.. Impulsive decision, lost nearly nothing ln selling my CPU/MEM and mobo as I bought the first two cheaply. Made a

Is the G.skill 3200 CL14 the best bang for your buck?


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Made the switch to Z370 it seems like..
> 
> Is the G.skill 3200 CL14 the best ng for your buck?


Seems so for the low latency, I own the 3200 128gb kit and pushed up to 4000 @ 17, just hit some errors late into HCI so needed to tweak more, currently running flawlessy (1600% hci ) @ cl15 @ 3600 and low trfc settings. These chips are gold, I can still boot at 4200 but have to loosen timings up to 19 for stability, though I haven't tried 18 yet.

I went back and forth over the 3600 and 3200 kits for a while, so I can vouch as well as a few others here on their 3200 kits, great starting points.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Made the switch to Z370 it seems like.. Impulsive decision, lost nearly nothing ln selling my CPU/MEM and mobo as I bought the first two cheaply. Made a
> 
> Is the G.skill 3200 CL14 the best bang for your buck?


for z370 and a 8700K, take a look at the GS 4400c19 kit. This readily runs 4266c17 on the z370 Apex. I have it, as does MrT. Seems to be a good SKU.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> for z370 and a 8700K, take a look at the GS 4400c19 kit. This readily runs 4266c17 on the z370 Apex. I have it, as does MrT. Seems to be a good SKU.


Awesome thanks!

Would GS 4133 (F4-4133C19D-16GTZR) be OK if not? Best I can do within my budget.

Unless some of you have some beast RAM you don't use anymore.









I can't afford the Apex, so the Z370 Strix-F is top for me, he he.

I just want a all around good gaming machine. That's the only thing I do. And I have the cooling for it.^

Rockit 88 is the best choice I guess. I think someone locally has it.

Thanks!!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Awesome thanks!
> 
> Would GS 4133 (F4-4133C19D-16GTZR) be OK if not? Best I can do within my budget.
> 
> Unless some of you have some beast RAM you don't use anymore.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't afford the Apex, so the Z370 Strix-F is top for me, he he.
> 
> I just want a all around good gaming machine. That's the only thing I do. And I have the cooling for it.^
> 
> Rockit 88 is the best choice I guess. I think someone locally has it.
> 
> Thanks!!


Nothing wrong with that kit that I know of... but I have not used that specific one.
how about 3600c16... would likely do 4133c19 easy.


----------



## Vlada011

This new memory timmings and frequency are absurd.
CORSAIR Dominator Platinum 2133MHz C10 cost more than 3000MHz C15, and we understand why.
DDR4 will bring nothing more than 3200MHz C10 could give you, for me people need to wait DDR5.

I understand why Intel build Skylake-X with thermal paste.
They want to make people angry and use that feeling later.
Plan is to new generation build with thermal paste and properly soldered CPU for 100$ more.
I give you warranty, they would profit. After little complains people would start to invest 100$ more rather than delidding, buying kits, thermal paste, tools, risk with warranty.
Intel could make100$ from nothing, for building CPU properly... like they sell hardware for donkeys. Haahahahaa Haahahahaa


----------



## bmaxa

DDR5 will bring double frequency and capacity. They haven't said nothing about latency. CL matters when there are lot of cache misses on random access patterns, like traversing linked list or tree in memory. So it's pretty much specific usage when CL matters. People try to avoid such usage like hell as then one can get 0.25 instructions per cycle instead of 3-4.


----------



## Raven.7

What's the minimum recommended memory speed to get a decent overclock on quad channel 7800X? Is 3000/3200 even necessary?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I'd usually just use a xmp profile
My 3200 trident z only has one xmp profile.

Other times I just set it manually to default clocks and voltage/ timings to run at the cpu and boards known compatibility speeds which is 2666MHz.
As far as I know yes it's worth it









On another note to any kind soul here
I keep hearing about the mesh settings "Increase it" but I do not see anything descriptive in bios named Mesh








Anyone with an exact name and location of the bigfoot named Mesh please point it out








Cheers.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> The picture you posted doesn't have a 7800X but I think you can fill in the blanks on where it'd show up. It would be less than 2% slower than an 8700k and these are at stock clocks where the 7800X has a big disadvantage. Once you OC the 7800X it'll be very close.


I have both platforms [email protected] 4040c16-16-16-30-300 1T and 3200 Mesh...there is a huge difference in games much more than 2% playing maxed @1600p monitor...with [email protected] 3800c15-14-14-30-300 2T 5100 Cache


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> I'd usually just use a xmp profile
> My 3200 trident z only has one xmp profile.
> 
> Other times I just set it manually to default clocks and voltage/ timings to run at the cpu and boards known compatibility speeds which is 2666MHz.
> As far as I know yes it's worth it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On another note to any kind soul here
> I keep hearing about the mesh settings "Increase it" but I do not see anything descriptive in bios named Mesh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone with an exact name and location of the bigfoot named Mesh please point it out
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers.


On my MSI board, I think they call it Ring ratio and I think it's defaulted to 24. You're most likely going to be capped at around 31-32 for that around 1.1V


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I have both platforms [email protected] 4040c16-16-16-30-300 1T and 3200 Mesh...there is a huge difference in games much more than 2% playing maxed @1600p monitor...with [email protected] 3800c15-14-14-30-300 2T 5100 Cache


Try farcry primal benchmark in 1440p a d 1080p


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> On my MSI board, I think they call it Ring ratio and I think it's defaulted to 24. You're most likely going to be capped at around 31-32 for that around 1.1V


I've seen a few people claim they got more than 3.2mesh for 7820x and like. I for one have not seen proof of anything greater than 32 which is where mine is at, even attempting a BCLK push with it at 32 will fail.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> I've seen a few people claim they got more than 3.2mesh for 7820x and like. I for one have not seen proof of anything greater than 32 which is where mine is at, even attempting a BCLK push with it at 32 will fail.


http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=132407&d=1503073527


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=132407&d=1503073527


Okay, yes it can be accomplished. But look at the voltage for a 50 multiplier, that's a well binned chip, or its being cooled by phase change or Ln2. Is this your cpu? If it is, you are one lucky sob!


----------



## cg4200

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I have both platforms [email protected] 4040c16-16-16-30-300 1T and 3200 Mesh...there is a huge difference in games much more than 2% playing maxed @1600p monitor...with [email protected] 3800c15-14-14-30-300 2T 5100 Cache


Hey I have a 7800x running 50 33 mesh I bought combo msi sli plus for 470.00 last month when no stock and gouging on 8700k
I also had crucial ballistix 4x4-16gb 3200 16-18-18-36 kit so it was a no brainer.. price of ram is crazy.
Gaming at 4k between your two systems what do you think
difference would be 1-2 fps ??
Also I have my ram oc at 4000 17-19-19-36 gaming is fine would aida64 be fine for ram stability??
I had been considering getting some 4000 ram or best bang b-die without spending a grand any suggestions thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cg4200*
> 
> Hey I have a 7800x running 50 33 mesh I bought combo msi sli plus for 470.00 last month when no stock and gouging on 8700k
> I also had crucial ballistix 4x4-16gb 3200 16-18-18-36 kit so it was a no brainer.. price of ram is crazy.
> Gaming at 4k between your two systems what do you think
> difference would be 1-2 fps ??
> Also I have my ram oc at 4000 17-19-19-36 gaming is fine *would aida64 be fine for ram stability*??
> I had been considering getting some 4000 ram or best bang b-die without spending a grand any suggestions thanks


No, not really. see the OP in *this thread*


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I'm guessing that mesh is the cpu's min/ max cache ratio shown here from a x99 bios screen someone shared with me a while back
Bios name is a lot clearer to me


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> I'm guessing that *mesh is the cpu's min/ max cache ratio* shown here from a x99 bios screen someone shared with me a while back
> Bios name is a lot clearer to me


yes.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Money is on my account now. Since I bought the RAM and CPU used, I only lost 12 USD on selling..







(Exluding a few bucks on shipping).

So more than happy about it. Have some benches on both Ryzen and X299. Will test that up against the 8700K when I recieve it. Thought that might be interesting.


----------



## DStealth

This would be humiliating


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Looks like he's stress testing with just the "Stress CPU" checked in AIDA64 which is a piece of cake. Once you start stressing with AVX instruction sets, temps go way out of control. So that's another thing to consider. If you don't plan on running anything with AVX, a custom loop with a 360 will probably be sufficient. The screenshot I posted was without any AVX offsets.
> 
> You didn't mention what type of stress testing you were doing. You could probably tame those temps on that AIO with a higher AVX offset.


Primarily running RealBench as my stress test app.

I don't utilize any AVX applications so I guess I could increase the AVX off sets...


----------



## Silent Scone

AIDA64 CPU test uses AVX instruction sets.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> AIDA64 CPU test uses AVX instruction sets.


Isn't that the FPU checkbox that uses AVX?


----------



## Jpmboy

IME, the "CPU only" test will not trigger the AVX offset, but the "cache only" test will. Yes, the FPU test does too, of course.


----------



## Silent Scone

CPU test has AVX instructions now, too. That post from Fiery is 4 years old. Might be worth posing the question on the forum, however, when I've tried recently the CPU test independently triggers the offset.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> CPU test has AVX instructions now, too. That post from Fiery is 4 years old. Might be worth posing the question on the forum, however, when I've tried recently the CPU test independently triggers the offset.


I'll check on x299 later today (rig is folding) - on z370, data coming

Z370


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Idle

cpu

cache

fpu




AVX is -2. BUt x299 may be different. The CPU tests could use AVX but not trip the offset?


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I'll check on x299 later today (rig is folding) - on z370, data coming
> 
> Z370
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Idle
> 
> cpu
> 
> cache
> 
> fpu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AVX is -2. BUt x299 may be different. The CPU tests could use AVX but not trip the offset?


What are you using to display the info on the right side of the screen?


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I'll check on x299 later today (rig is folding) - on z370, data coming
> 
> Z370
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Idle
> 
> cpu
> 
> cache
> 
> fpu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AVX is -2. BUt x299 may be different. The CPU tests could use AVX but not trip the offset?


Thanks for testing that. Your temps and offset when using cache and fpu tell the whole story. 370 vs x299 should be irrelevant. I'm going to agree to disagree with you on this one Silent Scone lol

When I stress using AVX my temps are usually in the 90s with a package power of about 270W. I'm not seeing that using the CPU test of AIDA64:


----------



## JustinThyme

Stressing FPU tells the story. CPU test no, Cache and FPU triggers the hell out of it and drives my temps to near throttling.

Clearly the -3AVX offset in action on X299 for FPU and Cache and not on CPU


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> What are you using to display the info on the right side of the screen?


The AIDA OSD, been part of it for a few years now.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Thanks for testing that. Your temps and offset when using cache and fpu tell the whole story. 370 vs x299 should be irrelevant. I'm going to agree to disagree with you on this one Silent Scone lol
> 
> When I stress using AVX my temps are usually in the 90s with a package power of about 270W. I'm not seeing that using the CPU test of AIDA64:


I've just tested it again on X299 and it's not triggering - might be something to do with the version of the ucode I was using on Z370 at the time.


----------



## Raven.7

I took apart my machine last night in preparation for getting my new setup in the mail. Can anyone give me some basic guidelines for starting out with overclocking this setup? Freq. Multiplier, mesh multiplier, voltages, memory speed, etc. It's my first time with an X platform.

7800X
AsRock Killer X299
Quad Channel Corsair LPX 3000mhz C15 15-17-17-35
Corsair H100 AIO


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> AVX is -2. BUt x299 may be different. The CPU tests could use AVX but not trip the offset?


That is possible. On Skylake X, not all AVX instructions trigger the AVX offset. And not all AVX512 instructions trigger the AVX512 offset.

To oversimplify things, there's 3 relevant power domains here:

The lower-half 128-bit FPU and 256-bit integer ALU.
The upper-half 128-bit FPU execution units and upper-half 256-bit ALU.
The dedicated 512-bit FMA.
#1 is always on as long as the core isn't idling. All instructions use it.
#2 turns on only when executing 256-bit FPU* AVX instructions or any 512-bit AVX512.
#3 turns on only when executing 512-bit FPU AVX512.

These 3 power domains correspond to the non-AVX/AVX/AVX512 frequencies. And they are inclusive. (If #3 is on, #1 and #2 are also on.) The reason why FPU is different from ALU is because the FPU contains the hardware multipliers which are much more transistor and power-hungry than the ALU. Because the ALU is so light-wight, Intel opted to let them run at one speed bin higher.

Depending on the specific application, it's likely that integer-only AVX512 will run at the AVX frequency. This would be the case for non-RSA crypto.

So if you want to properly stress-test a Skylake X setup, you need to test all of these:

Non-AVX code. (runs at normal frequency)
Non-FPU AVX. (runs at normal frequency)
FPU AVX. (runs at AVX frequency)
non-FPU AVX512. (runs at AVX frequency)
FPU AVX512. (runs at AVX512 frequency)
Have run stress-testing!









*FPU instructions includes all floating-point as well as integer multiplication.


----------



## Silent Scone

Only, not many users will be able to run the FPU routine on X299


----------



## 7820x

Lol that really oversimplifies it. Thanks for sharing Mystical.


----------



## Raven.7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven.7*
> 
> I took apart my machine last night in preparation for getting my new setup in the mail. Can anyone give me some basic guidelines for starting out with overclocking this setup? Freq. Multiplier, mesh multiplier, voltages, memory speed, etc. It's my first time with an X platform.
> 
> 7800X
> AsRock Killer X299
> Quad Channel Corsair LPX 3000mhz C15 15-17-17-35
> Corsair H100 AIO


Guess I'll just follow the X299 overclocking guide if no one can push me in the right direction here.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> The AIDA OSD, been part of it for a few years now.
> I've just tested it again on X299 and it's not triggering - might be something to do with the version of the ucode I was using on Z370 at the time.


speaking of microcodes... we're overdue on a new one








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> That is possible. On Skylake X, not all AVX instructions trigger the AVX offset. And not all AVX512 instructions trigger the AVX512 offset.
> 
> To oversimplify things, there's 3 relevant power domains here:
> 
> The lower-half 128-bit FPU and 256-bit integer ALU.
> The upper-half 128-bit FPU execution units and upper-half 256-bit ALU.
> The dedicated 512-bit FMA.
> #1 is always on as long as the core isn't idling. All instructions use it.
> #2 turns on only when executing 256-bit FPU* AVX instructions or any 512-bit AVX512.
> #3 turns on only when executing 512-bit FPU AVX512.
> 
> These 3 power domains correspond to the non-AVX/AVX/AVX512 frequencies. And they are inclusive. (If #3 is on, #1 and #2 are also on.) The reason why FPU is different from ALU is because the FPU contains the hardware multipliers which are much more transistor and power-hungry than the ALU. Because the ALU is so light-wight, Intel opted to let them run at one speed bin higher.
> 
> Depending on the specific application, it's likely that integer-only AVX512 will run at the AVX frequency. This would be the case for non-RSA crypto.
> 
> So if you want to properly stress-test a Skylake X setup, you need to test all of these:
> 
> Non-AVX code. (runs at normal frequency)
> Non-FPU AVX. (runs at normal frequency)
> FPU AVX. (runs at AVX frequency)
> non-FPU AVX512. (runs at AVX frequency)
> FPU AVX512. (runs at AVX512 frequency)
> Have run stress-testing!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *FPU instructions includes all floating-point as well as integer multiplication.


yeah ^^ what he said.









(not doing any testing, just looking in to the question posed earlier. As an FYI, you can select AVX512 in the Timespy extreme custom set up, for another 512 "test")


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven.7*
> 
> Guess I'll just follow the X299 overclocking guide if no one can push me in the right direction here.


ASrock will use a different scaling of LLC (like high numbers is less compensation - more vdroop, which is on VCCIN on this platform.)
there's nothing magical, just ferret out a good OC using manual voltages.. then you can switch to adaptive or offset on those rails where they are available.


----------



## Mysticial

@Jpmboy What kind of voltages did you need to do 5.0+ on your Kaby Lake X?

I have an ES 7940X in front of me atm. And 5/6 cores I've tested seem to be stable at 5.0 with 1.4v on the Apex under Prime (no AVX).


----------



## ESRCJ

Now that my custom loop is set up, I want to get serious about my CPU overclocking. With my previous EK 360 predator, I was able to hit 4.8GHz with the voltage in offset mode at auto. With my X79 and X99 builds, I always set a manual voltage since the BIOS seemed to add more Voltage than needed. Would you guys consider this to still be the case? If so, what are your recommendations for voltages: manual, offset, or adaptive?

Also, what would you guys consider to be the max voltage for everyday use? I know this is subjective, but any sort of opinion on the matter from those with experience on this platform would be great. Here are some details about my setup if that helps:

CPU: 7920X
Mobo: RVIE
Cooling: 360mm + 480mm rad, EK monoblock


----------



## Ezric

Hope no one minds me segwaying into another topic, does anyone use a RamDisk, and why? Are there any benefits to it?


----------



## Raven.7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> Hope no one minds me segwaying into another topic, does anyone use a RamDisk, and why? Are there any benefits to it?


If you have to ask, you don't need it. Lol. It's usually a niche personal use technology, although it's very popular in modern cloud computing data processing/storage applications.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> Hope no one minds me segwaying into another topic, does anyone use a RamDisk, and why? Are there any benefits to it?


Only time I used it was to bench RealBench from it, get a little higher score


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> @Jpmboy What kind of voltages did you need to do 5.0+ on your Kaby Lake X?
> 
> I have an ES 7940X in front of me atm. And 5/6 cores I've tested seem to be stable at 5.0 with 1.4v on the Apex under Prime (no AVX).


KBL-X? like the 7740K? the ES sample I have would run 5.4 in the mid 1.3 range. I have to look it up. (it is a really quick processor - best IPC available i believe). I don't have any p95. JUst grabbed these off of the bot...


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!







I'd have to fire up a different rig to search for realbench data etc. (again - I rarely use p95 w or w/o AVX enabled).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> Hope no one minds me segwaying into another topic, does anyone use a RamDisk, and why? Are there any benefits to it?


as Menthol said, if used only for some benchmarks or "volatile" programs. In the past it they did help with large architectural drawings (layered), but with today's SSDs (and things like this Intel optane 900P) ram disks have only nominal benefit.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Now that my custom loop is set up, I want to get serious about my CPU overclocking. With my previous EK 360 predator, I was able to hit 4.8GHz with the voltage in offset mode at auto. With my X79 and X99 builds, I always set a manual voltage since the BIOS seemed to add more Voltage than needed. Would you guys consider this to still be the case? If so, what are your recommendations for voltages: manual, offset, or adaptive?
> 
> Also, what would you guys consider to be the max voltage for everyday use? I know this is subjective, but any sort of opinion on the matter from those with experience on this platform would be great. Here are some details about my setup if that helps:
> 
> CPU: 7920X
> Mobo: RVIE
> Cooling: 360mm + 480mm rad, EK monoblock


a lot depends on the temps you see. but stay well under 2V VCCIN with a healthy amount of vdroop under load. For 24/7, under 1.3V vcore.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> KBL-X? like the 7740K? the ES sample I have would run 5.4 in the mid 1.3 range. I have to look it up. (it is a really quick processor - best IPC available i believe). I don't have any p95. JUst grabbed these off of the bot...


Oh that's low. Of the 14 cores on this 7940X, I picked the one with the lowest base VID and while it was stable at 5.0 GHz with 1.4v VID, it errored instantly under Prime95 at 5.1 with 1.4v. Perhaps it's drooping, but none of the hardware monitors I had available were able to read the actual voltage.


----------



## Raven.7

What voltage offset should I use to set the mesh to 3000Mhz. I have my 7800X stable at 4.4Ghz with a +0.020 vcore offset @62C Under load.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Oh that's low. Of the 14 cores on this 7940X, I picked the one with the lowest base VID and while it was stable at 5.0 GHz with 1.4v VID, it errored instantly under Prime95 at 5.1 with 1.4v. Perhaps it's drooping, but none of the hardware monitors I had available were able to read the actual voltage.


ah - so on this 7980XE, I used the "*" cores in a per-core OC. they run at 4.6, while the other 16 are at 4.5. all set at their VID: 1.18 to 1.2V. (use SIV64 to see the vids). this is good up to 2x49, 16x4.7, all at 1.35V (and waaay too hot for p95, but fine for x264 with 54 threads in and chilled water. My cpu is not delidded (yet). With non AVX p95 you can figure 10-12mV per core per 100MHz, so up one multi and this XE would need an additional 180 to 220 additional mV vcore working from a p95 stable base. JUst a general rule, but has held true across several generations. When I see 15mV per, the chip is going non-linear and getting out of it's sweet spot on the MHz/mV "S-curve"


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ah - so on this 7980XE, I used the "*" cores in a per-core OC. they run at 4.6, while the other 16 are at 4.5. all set at their VID: 1.18 to 1.2V. (use SIV64 to see the vids). this is good up to 2x49, 16x4.7, all at 1.35V (and waaay too hot for p95, but fine for x264 with 54 threads in and chilled water. My cpu is not delidded (yet). With non AVX p95 you can figure 10-12mV per core per 100MHz, so up one multi and this XE would need an additional 180 to 220 additional mV vcore working from a p95 stable base. JUst a general rule, but has held true across several generations. When I see 15mV per, the chip is going non-linear and getting out of it's sweet spot on the MHz/mV "S-curve"


Probably not so coincidentally, the two "*" cores (the Turbo 3.0 cores) are also the two with the lowest base VID on this chip.

Both of those do 5.0 GHz at 1.4v. But unfortunately, those two cores are also among the leakier ones, so they overheat. There's at least 2 other cores that will do 5.0 GHz @ 1.4v, but with lower temps.


----------



## Raven.7

I'm running my cores at 4.4Ghz at +0.020V offset and my cache at 3000Mhz at +0.050V offset. Can someone comment whether this is a generally stable set of parameters, specially to the cache? There's really not a lot of reference information out there for the 7800X, if you guys could comment at all, it would be helpful. It's hard to compare the settings on this chip against the settings on th stuff you guys have...


----------



## bmaxa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> Hope no one minds me segwaying into another topic, does anyone use a RamDisk, and why? Are there any benefits to it?


On Linux it is used all the time:
eg (all tmpfs are ramdisk):
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
dev 16G 0 16G 0% /dev
run 16G 26M 16G 1% /run
/dev/sda1 220G 44G 174G 21% /
tmpfs 16G 203M 16G 2% /dev/shm
tmpfs 16G 0 16G 0% /sys/fs/cgroup
tmpfs 16G 196K 16G 1% /tmp
/dev/sdb1 1.8T 1.5T 298G 84% /home
bmaxa_data/Steam 495G 201G 295G 41% /home/bmaxa/Steam
bmaxa_data/clang 296G 1.2G 295G 1% /home/bmaxa/clang
bmaxa_data/gcc-trunk 296G 1.5G 295G 1% /home/bmaxa/gcc-trunk
bmaxa_data/ghc 296G 1.7G 295G 1% /home/bmaxa/ghc
bmaxa_data/go 295G 413M 295G 1% /home/bmaxa/go
bmaxa_data/projects 331G 37G 295G 11% /home/bmaxa/projects
bmaxa_data/rust 295G 87M 295G 1% /home/bmaxa/rust
bmaxa_data 339G 45G 295G 14% /home/bmaxa/zfs/bmaxa_data
bmaxa_data/public 295G 22M 295G 1% /public
bmaxa_data/boinc 295G 279M 295G 1% /var/lib/boinc
bmaxa_data/mysql 295G 284M 295G 1% /var/lib/mysql
bmaxa_data/postgres 295G 646M 295G 1% /var/lib/postgres
bmaxa_cache 20G 465M 19G 3% /home/bmaxa/.cache
tmpfs 3.2G 48K 3.2G 1% /run/user/1000
/dev/sdd1 466G 312G 154G 67% /run/media/bmaxa/Natasa
bmaxa_backup 1.8T 1.3T 489G 73% /home/bmaxa/zfs/bmaxa_backup

*note /tmp dir. It is used for applications temporary data.
I also use tmpfs (ramdisk) for storing logs that I don't need persistent. These are in /run
/dev/shm is used by the system, I don't know what's that for.


----------



## DStealth

Run fixed values. Also VCCin on Asrock auto is 2.1v...VCCSA/IO 1.3+ etc
For Mesh usually 0.95-1.05 are fine for 3000-3200 you have to test. Just set all you can manually not let AUTO while Asrock are very conservative with voltages while OCed


----------



## Raven.7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Run fixed values. Also VCCin on Asrock auto is 2.1v...VCCSA/IO 1.3+ etc
> For Mesh usually 0.95-1.05 are fine for 3000-3200 you have to test. Just set all you can manually not let AUTO while Asrock are very conservative with voltages while OCed


Where do you see mesh voltage? I have hwinfo, CPU-z, and xtu. None of them display the actual cache voltage, just the offset.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven.7*
> 
> Where do you see mesh voltage? I have hwinfo, CPU-z, and xtu. None of them display the actual cache voltage, just the offset.


Mesh voltage in HWINFO is called VRING


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven.7*
> 
> Where do you see mesh voltage? I have hwinfo, CPU-z, and xtu. None of them display the actual cache voltage, just the offset.


Install this tool and test them from Windows
http://asrock.pc.cdn.bitgravity.com/Utility/A-Tuning/A-Tuning(v3.0.177).zip
ftp://europe.asrock.com/Utility/A-Tuning/A-Tuning(v3.0.177).zip
There's also the actual values and monitoring tools


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bmaxa*
> 
> On Linux it is used all the time:
> ....
> *note /tmp dir. It is used for applications temporary data.
> I also use tmpfs (ramdisk) for storing logs that I don't need persistent. These are in /run
> /dev/shm is used by the system, I don't know what's that for.


/dev/shm is "shared memory" to be used by multiple programs or processes that need a place to pass data.

Ramdisks in windows are clumsy comparatively and it shows in their performance. As others have pointed out - in the era of SSDs and large caches, their value as they are implemented in windows is limited to put it lightly.


----------



## chrisk2305

Hi Guys,

I would need some advice in overclocking my 7900X. I am using a Rampage VI Apex Mainboard and a massive custom loop for CPU und GPU. CPU is delidded as well.

I am using an offset of 0.025V and manage to get 4,8Ghz stable (XTU and Prime95 without AVX). But even with a negative AVX offset of 7 which results in 4,1Ghz under AVX Load the overclock is not stable (tested with linpack and Prime95 with AVX).

Can somebody give me advice how to get this thing stable with AVX Load?

Thanks in advance!
Chris


----------



## bmaxa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> /dev/shm is "shared memory" to be used by multiple programs or processes that need a place to pass data.
> 
> Ramdisks in windows are clumsy comparatively and it shows in their performance. As others have pointed out - in the era of SSDs and large caches, their value as they are implemented in windows is limited to put it lightly.


Well, tmp dir can be ram disk as in this way wearing of SSD is reduced. I don't know about Windows but on Linux /tmp dir is not expected to survive reboot and applications know that.
If they need persistent tmp then there is /var/tmp. Also, lot of logging does not needs to be written to SSD as well.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bmaxa*
> 
> Well, tmp dir can be ram disk as in this way wearing of SSD is reduced. I don't know about Windows but on Linux /tmp dir is not expected to survive reboot and applications know that.
> If they need persistent tmp then there is /var/tmp. Also, lot of logging does not needs to be written to SSD as well.


Yeah, I've done this as well - also as a means of running a server from a USB stick as a pretty standard thing to do.

I guess I assumed the question was from the perspective of performance rather than wear-leveling and "diskless" servers, but good point.


----------



## ESRCJ

Have any of you been able to take your Skylake-X CPUs to 4.9GHz without delidding? My limit seems to be 4.8GHz at 1.3V with my 7920X and a custom loop (360 + 480 rad / RVIE / EK monoblock). I can't even finish a run of Cinebench at 4.9GHz and the voltage offset set to auto, which brings two cores to 1.35V! It's insane how this CPU requires so much more voltage for that extra 100MHz.


----------



## Carillo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Have any of you been able to take your Skylake-X CPUs to 4.9GHz without delidding? My limit seems to be 4.8GHz at 1.3V with my 7920X and a custom loop (360 + 480 rad / RVIE / EK monoblock). I can't even finish a run of Cinebench at 4.9GHz and the voltage offset set to auto, which brings two cores to 1.35V! It's insane how this CPU requires so much more voltage for that extra 100MHz.


My 7820x did 5ghz before delidd,but needed 1,33v for Realbench with custum loop 360+240 rads. But i got hot as hell(94 degree), and the fans started ramping up when just reading the news in chrome browser, so had to settle for 4,8ghz. After delidd it does Realbench with only 1.255v @5ghz and temperatures are at least 20 degree lower.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Probably not so coincidentally, the two "*" cores (the Turbo 3.0 cores) are also the two with the lowest base VID on this chip.
> 
> Both of those do 5.0 GHz at 1.4v. *But unfortunately, those two cores are also among the leakier ones, so they overheat*. There's at least 2 other cores that will do 5.0 GHz @ 1.4v, but with lower temps.


sounds like how it works. I had a 4930K that was very low voltage ... but ran way hotter than others running the same clocks at higher voltage.
There's no doubt these high core count CPUs are beasts, but from a pure performance perspective, a good 7740X or 8700K (either running 5.2+) is very hard to beat for OC fun.








Coffee Lake -X !


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Have any of you been able to take your Skylake-X CPUs to 4.9GHz without delidding? My limit seems to be 4.8GHz at 1.3V with my 7920X and a custom loop (360 + 480 rad / RVIE / EK monoblock). I can't even finish a run of Cinebench at 4.9GHz and the voltage offset set to auto, which brings two cores to 1.35V! *It's insane how this CPU requires so much more voltage for that extra 100MHz*.


Hi,
Not sure about that I was mostly running 1.250v until I got to 4.9 and went to 1.275v
5.0 I tried 1.3v but still didn't boot into windows :/
Might need to juice uncore it seemed a lot lower than others @ 5.0
Mine showed @ 2702 on auto or at least what showed on cpuid verify
Everyone else was 3000+ :/
Not exactly sure how to increase it
Would I just enter 2800.... ?

Link I refer too
https://valid.x86.fr/tzfeen


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Yeah, I've done this as well - also as a means of running a server from a USB stick as a pretty standard thing to do.
> 
> I guess I assumed the question was from the perspective of performance rather than wear-leveling and "diskless" servers, but good point.


That was the point I was alluding to, how could I minimize the wear to my m.2 ssd with all the constant read/write that happens. However if there was a significant benefit in performance then why not as well.


----------



## Jpmboy

I seriously doubt you are gonna wear out your SSD. If that does concern you (like very high page file use) pick up a cheap 32GB ssd and move the page file to it. The 16GB optane sticks ae good for that (if you have 16GB of ram)


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I seriously doubt you are gonna wear out your SSD. If that does concern you (like very high page file use) pick up a cheap 32GB ssd and move the page file to it. The 16GB optane sticks ae good for that (if you have 16GB of ram)


This...

Frankly, I don't expect that by the time I actually kill any NVMe drives from my usual thrashing of large DBs and temp files that they will be renedered obsolete anyway by new tech whether Intel's or Samsung's (or someone else).

Coming from the days (and still my experience with disk servers - (8+1)x8T on my primary NFS) of drives popping like popcorn on the day their warranty is up (and a few prior), kids today just don't know how good they have it.









1 of 8 already down for the count after 18 months - swapped it out for the spare a few weeks ago - need to go through the warranty nonsense to get my spare back... mirror your mirrors, then back those up too...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> This...
> 
> Frankly, I don't expect that by the time I actually kill any NVMe drives from my usual thrashing of large DBs and temp files that they will be renedered obsolete anyway by new tech whether Intel's or Samsung's (or someone else).
> 
> Coming from the days (and still my experience with disk servers - (8+1)x8T on my primary NFS) of drives popping like popcorn on the day their warranty is up (and a few prior), kids today just don't know how good they have it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1 of 8 already down for the count after 18 months - swapped it out for the spare a few weeks ago - need to go through the warranty nonsense to get my spare back... mirror your mirrors, then back those up too...


Oh man... I've stuck with WD RE3 (yeah, i'm old... RE3) drives for NAS, and Raptors too in several big arrays. So far only one RE3 has failed in like 6 years. and... i just jinked it.


----------



## netman

used 7800X delided needs 1,228V for 4,8 ghz prime stable without avx - is it worth 250 euros ?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

How much is a retail at MSRP now? Would not pay extra for that one in terms of OC capabilities.


----------



## netman

cheapest (not delided) new from the shops in our area is about 330 euros. If i go for a new one and delid it myself how are the chances to get at least an as good one as this with its 1,228 for 4,8 Ghz ?

my problem is i cannot place all the results with the new skylake-x and coffeelake cpus as i run 6 years happily with my 3770K but now i need a change


----------



## Jawnathin

Question for all your HCC guys, have you run into any compatibility problems with the high number of cores/threads? I recall during the Threadripper reviews that some reviewers had to disable some cores for some games and applications to run. Any of you seeing the same thing? Not seeing that with my 7820X but 8C/16T isn't exactly HCC


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Question for all your HCC guys, have you run into any compatibility problems with the high number of cores/threads? I recall during the Threadripper reviews that some reviewers had to disable some cores for some games and applications to run. Any of you seeing the same thing? Not seeing that with my 7820X but 8C/16T isn't exactly HCC


I have a 7980Xe and have not had to disable cores for any reason so far and actually games better than my 6950X. The single core performance is not bad considering 18 cores


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> Question for all your HCC guys, have you run into any compatibility problems with the high number of cores/threads? I recall during the Threadripper reviews that some reviewers had to disable some cores for some games and applications to run. Any of you seeing the same thing? Not seeing that with my 7820X but 8C/16T isn't exactly HCC


I don't ask much of windows - only that it not catch my house on fire when I'm not looking.

Haven't had any issues with this either with 18 cores or 36 prior to that. Here's a list of the typical things I've done:
BF1
Quake (the latest one)
Project Cars
Cinebench
RealBench
Aida64
SIv64
hwmon
msoffice
chrome
firefox
blender

Trying to think if there are other apps I've used? I saw the same thing you did with specific games that blew up, but I haven't run them or run into them.

TR/Ryzen still have a pretty fundamental architectural issue that makes if beneficial to disable cores to improve game performance that the Intel architecture does not have. Instead, wink, they gimped everything with the same mesh







1/2 kidding. They did and it shows in comparisons with the 6950x, but it doesn't improve with fewer cores and is a reality of HCC/XCC going forwards. We need faster memory and higher mesh clocks.

The penalty isn't a big deal though - I have no issue averaging 1440p 144Hz with a ~2000 (the bin under that is what it usually defaults to) 1080ti. It dips to 120-130 now and then. SLI takes me to 180-200 @1440p.

So, I'm not exactly suffering from the mesh, I only know it hurts because I can directly compare it to a 6700K, 5960x, 6950x, 2696v3 and 2690v4.

p.s. those same reviews will show you that its only intel vs intel as the 7980xe beats the TR in games stock for stock and then it OC's higher. TR wins hands down on "value", but if your question is whether the mesh is voiding your membership in the PC Master Race, then no.... no it is not.


----------



## Raven.7

I'm not in front of my computer right now, but maybe someone can clarify if I missed something...when I change the OC multiplier on my chip to 44 and turn off Intel Turbo Boost...XTU and CPU-Z show the chip runs at stock frequency (3500Mhz for the 7800X)? Am I stupid, am I missing something, or is this how this new architecture functions? My last CPU was an Ivy Bridge, so I've been out of the overclocking game for a while...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven.7*
> 
> I'm not in front of my computer right now, but maybe someone can clarify if I missed something...when I change the OC multiplier on my chip to 44 and turn off Intel Turbo Boost...XTU and CPU-Z show the chip runs at stock frequency (3500Mhz for the 7800X)? Am I stupid, am I missing something, or is this how this new architecture functions? My last CPU was an Ivy Bridge, so I've been out of the overclocking game for a while...


that's because multipliers above 35 are turbo multipliers and you disabled them.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

is the i5 7640x or a i7 7740x a good choice for overclocking and gaming?This is one my curiousity!!!!


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven.7*
> 
> I'm not in front of my computer right now, but maybe someone can clarify if I missed something...when I change the OC multiplier on my chip to 44 and turn off Intel Turbo Boost...XTU and CPU-Z show the chip runs at stock frequency (3500Mhz for the 7800X)? Am I stupid, am I missing something, or is this how this new architecture functions? My last CPU was an Ivy Bridge, so I've been out of the overclocking game for a while...


Hi,
You would want to leave turbo enabled
You can however disable turbo 3 if you have it in the os without any problems.

It's like when you switch to an xmp profile and you see a popup saying do you want to enable all core enhancements and you click no instead of hell yes


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> is the i5 7640x or a i7 7740x a good choice for overclocking and gaming?This is one my curiousity!!!!


Hi,
I haven't seen anything about the 7640
But the 7740 and 7900 were reviewed and the 7740 looked pretty darn good
http://www.overclockers.com/intel-skylake-x-i9-7900x-and-kaby-lake-x-i7-7740k-cpu-review/

For the record the 7900 games pretty darn good too it just needs a all core 4.5 clock to do well which is a pretty basic clock to me


----------



## Jawnathin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> is the i5 7640x or a i7 7740x a good choice for overclocking and gaming?This is one my curiousity!!!!


If you're going X299 and want to avoid Skylake-X and are going to stick to Kaby then at least get the i7-7740x. You will want the extra threads.

It should be quite good for overclocking and gaming but if that is all you want then Coffee Lake is probably a better choice. The reason to go X299 is for the higher core count CPUs and broad upgrade path. You still have a nice upgrade path with the 7740x (can upgrade to a high core CPU later) but you aren't going to get the rest of the platform's benefits and additional cores available to you by going with Kaby.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Carillo*
> 
> My 7820x did 5ghz before delidd,but needed 1,33v for Realbench with custum loop 360+240 rads. But i got hot as hell(94 degree), and the fans started ramping up when just reading the news in chrome browser, so had to settle for 4,8ghz. After delidd it does Realbench with only 1.255v @5ghz and temperatures are at least 20 degree lower.


Man that's one hell of a chip you got there. [email protected]? What kind of offsets are you using?


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> I haven't seen anything about the 7640
> But the 7740 and 7900 were reviewed and the 7740 looked pretty darn good
> http://www.overclockers.com/intel-skylake-x-i9-7900x-and-kaby-lake-x-i7-7740k-cpu-review/
> 
> For the record the 7900 games pretty darn good too it just needs a all core 4.5 clock to do well which is a pretty basic clock to me


My choice will be one i7 7740x delidded tray what do you think?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> My choice will be one i7 7740x delidded tray what do you think?


yeah - they clock well and have the best IPC ( >= 8700K) available. Good choice.


----------



## Jawnathin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I have a 7980Xe and have not had to disable cores for any reason so far and actually games better than my 6950X. The single core performance is not bad considering 18 cores


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> ....
> Haven't had any issues with this either with 18 cores or 36 prior to that. Here's a list of the typical things I've done:
> BF1
> Quake (the latest one)
> Project Cars
> Cinebench
> RealBench
> Aida64
> SIv64
> hwmon
> msoffice
> chrome
> firefox
> blender
> 
> Trying to think if there are other apps I've used? I saw the same thing you did with specific games that blew up, but I haven't run them or run into them.
> 
> TR/Ryzen still have a pretty fundamental architectural issue that makes if beneficial to disable cores to improve game performance that the Intel architecture does not have. Instead, wink, they gimped everything with the same mesh
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1/2 kidding. They did and it shows in comparisons with the 6950x, but it doesn't improve with fewer cores and is a reality of HCC/XCC going forwards. We need faster memory and higher mesh clocks.


Thanks both of you. Just wondering. Don't think I am ready for more cores just yet as 8C/16T is plenty for what I do but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't looking for any deals on one of those HCC i9s. Trying to remain strong and seeing what comes along with the Icelake-X or whatever refresh we should be getting on X299 in 2018 or 2019 or so.


----------



## Raven.7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> that's because multipliers above 35 are turbo multipliers and you disabled them.


Well, I figured that much. I just wanted to make sure it was the right way to overclock these things. This is my first X platform chip and like I said, the last time I overclocked anything was in 2013


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - they clock well and have the best IPC ( >= 8700K) available. Good choice.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> My choice will be one i7 7740x delidded tray what do you think?


HI,
I believe Jpmboy say it all








If it weren't for my insistence on win-7 compatibility I too might of gone 7740


----------



## ESRCJ

Hey guys, so I'm worried that the massive air pocket I have in my RVIE monoblock is preventing adequate cooling. The air pocket is on the plastic piece at the inlet and above the fins. My temps are a bit insane for a 480 + 360 rad combo, one graphics card in the loop, and a D5 pump.

At 4.6GHz and 1.25V on the worst cores, I'm hitting a max of 84C in Realbench. My CPU temps seems pretty much the same as they were with the EK Predator 360 that cooled both my 7920X and Titan XP. My GPU on the other hand is significantly cooler. It only hit 37C at a maximum during the TimeSpy Stress test and with a heavy OC.



The "air pocket" as I'm calling it is causing part of the block to be empty and I can see some of the fins in the back without any water flow, which clearly must be limiting the block's cooling capacity, right? Do my temps seem a little too high for my setup? I'll note that my CPU is not delidded.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Hey guys, so I'm worried that the massive air pocket I have in my RVIE monoblock is preventing adequate cooling. The air pocket is on the plastic piece at the inlet and above the fins. My temps are a bit insane for a 480 + 360 rad combo, one graphics card in the loop, and a D5 pump.
> 
> At 4.6GHz and 1.25V on the worst cores, I'm hitting a max of 84C in Realbench. My CPU temps seems pretty much the same as they were with the EK Predator 360 that cooled both my 7920X and Titan XP. My GPU on the other hand is significantly cooler. It only hit 37C at a maximum during the TimeSpy Stress test and with a heavy OC.
> 
> 
> 
> The "air pocket" as I'm calling it is causing part of the block to be empty and I can see some of the fins in the back without any water flow, which clearly must be limiting the block's cooling capacity, right? Do my temps seem a little too high for my setup? I'll note that my CPU is not delidded.


This is why i have a couple air release valves to push in once I seal it up u can kinda hear the slight burst of air ( or sometimes a straight shot of water depending if you fill it up to much ) Really activates the almonds. THey're pretty cheap and you can replace and fitting cover w/ them on a rad.


----------



## Carillo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Man that's one hell of a chip you got there. [email protected]? What kind of offsets are you using?


Im using a NON-AVX version of Realbench for stresstesting. I dont use AVX , so i have the offset set to -10


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> This is why i have a couple air release valves to push in once I seal it up u can kinda hear the slight burst of air ( or sometimes a straight shot of water depending if you fill it up to much ) Really activates the almonds. THey're pretty cheap and you can replace and fitting cover w/ them on a rad.


I'll have to look into that. Do you think my CPU cooling capabilities could be limited by the fact that the block isn't completely filled with coolant near the CPU? It's getting some flow there, but not entirely.


----------



## DooRules

One sure fire way to get rid of that air in block is to remove block while still hooked to water lines if you can. You can remove 24 pin power plug from mobo and short it to power just pumps and fans.

Moving the block around slowly should allow you to get rid of all bubbles in monoblock.

This only works of course if you have enough slack in lines to do this.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Hey guys, so I'm worried that the massive air pocket I have in my RVIE monoblock is preventing adequate cooling. The air pocket is on the plastic piece at the inlet and above the fins. My temps are a bit insane for a 480 + 360 rad combo, one graphics card in the loop, and a D5 pump.
> 
> At 4.6GHz and 1.25V on the worst cores, I'm hitting a max of 84C in Realbench. My CPU temps seems pretty much the same as they were with the EK Predator 360 that cooled both my 7920X and Titan XP. My GPU on the other hand is significantly cooler. It only hit 37C at a maximum during the TimeSpy Stress test and with a heavy OC.
> 
> 
> 
> The "air pocket" as I'm calling it is causing part of the block to be empty and I can see some of the fins in the back without any water flow, which clearly must be limiting the block's cooling capacity, right? Do my temps seem a little too high for my setup? I'll note that my CPU is not delidded.


question: I see the center port is connected to your GPU. Is the flow to the GPU first, then the cpu block? If yes, NVM, otherwise the monoblock has the flow in the wrong direction.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Indeed the manual clearly states the center port is the inlet and should be coming from the rad.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Indeed the manual clearly states the center port is the inlet *and should be coming from the rad*.


yeah - it's generally best to cool the cpu first.. but that was from a time when cpus did not throw that much heat into a loop. With high core-count cpus it may not matter. Regardless, the direction of flow in a given block can be very critical to performance.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Hey guys, so I'm worried that the massive air pocket I have in my RVIE monoblock is preventing adequate cooling. The air pocket is on the plastic piece at the inlet and above the fins. My temps are a bit insane for a 480 + 360 rad combo, one graphics card in the loop, and a D5 pump.
> 
> At 4.6GHz and 1.25V on the worst cores, I'm hitting a max of 84C in Realbench. My CPU temps seems pretty much the same as they were with the EK Predator 360 that cooled both my 7920X and Titan XP. My GPU on the other hand is significantly cooler. It only hit 37C at a maximum during the TimeSpy Stress test and with a heavy OC.
> 
> 
> 
> The "air pocket" as I'm calling it is causing part of the block to be empty and I can see some of the fins in the back without any water flow, which clearly must be limiting the block's cooling capacity, right? Do my temps seem a little too high for my setup? I'll note that my CPU is not delidded.


Do you have an air bleed on your res fill cap?
Sometimes it takes moving the case around quite a bit during the fill and bleed stage to get the bubbles and pockets out. Don't be afraid to tilt the case to do it.
I cant see your entire loop but the big thing is the direction of flow through the block is correct. If you have sufficient flow the liquid temps measured throughout the loop don't vary by more than 1C from point to point so order of components is really irrelevant. Minimizing tubing runs and bends, elbows etc to maximize flow is far more important towards performance.

What kind of GPU block is that? If its an EK one of the two is reverse flow. On mine the left ports are the inlets.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Do you have an air bleed on your res fill cap?
> Sometimes it takes moving the case around quite a bit during the fill and bleed stage to get the bubbles and pockets out. Don't be afraid to tilt the case to do it.
> I cant see your entire loop but the big thing is the direction of flow through the block is correct. If you have sufficient flow the liquid temps measured throughout the loop don't vary by more than 1C from point to point so order of components is really irrelevant. Minimizing tubing runs and bends, elbows etc to maximize flow is far more important towards performance.
> 
> *What kind of GPU block is that?* If its an EK one of the two is reverse flow. On mine the left ports are the inlets.


Hi,
EK mono block center is inlet I have one
https://www.ekwb.com/shop/water-blocks/motherboard-blocks/monoblocks/intel-x299-series


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Hey guys, so I'm worried that the massive air pocket I have in my RVIE monoblock is preventing adequate cooling. The air pocket is on the plastic piece at the inlet and above the fins. My temps are a bit insane for a 480 + 360 rad combo, one graphics card in the loop, and a D5 pump.
> 
> At 4.6GHz and 1.25V on the worst cores, I'm hitting a max of 84C in Realbench. My CPU temps seems pretty much the same as they were with the EK Predator 360 that cooled both my 7920X and Titan XP. My GPU on the other hand is significantly cooler. It only hit 37C at a maximum during the TimeSpy Stress test and with a heavy OC.
> 
> 
> 
> The "air pocket" as I'm calling it is causing part of the block to be empty and I can see some of the fins in the back without any water flow, which clearly must be limiting the block's cooling capacity, right? Do my temps seem a little too high for my setup? I'll note that my CPU is not delidded.


The air pocket is by design. I had bubbles that would float to the top of the monoblock, but you can fix those by tilting the case.

I think your temps are inline with where it's suppose to be. Your CPU temps are suppose to go up with the monoblock a few degrees due to VRMs being cooled on the same block. der8auer did a test with a monoblock vs evo vs AIO with a delidded 7900x. You'll see a better thermal delta with a delid then going from a Predator 360 to a custom loop. I bet your VRMs are a lot cooler.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> The air pocket is by design. I had bubbles that would float to the top of the monoblock, but you can fix those by tilting the case.
> 
> I think your temps are inline with where it's suppose to be. Your CPU temps are suppose to go up with the monoblock a few degrees due to VRMs being cooled on the same block. der8auer did a test with a monoblock vs evo vs AIO with a delidded 7900x. You'll see a better thermal delta with a delid then going from a Predator 360 to a custom loop. I bet your VRMs are a lot cooler.


bubbles are not by design (once bled , they should never appear there), but they can get trapped in there.... though I share the concern of others that it suggests potential other problems in the loops (flow backwards).

So, if flow direction is confirmed and flow is good, tilt and shake until they are gone. Once they are gone, they should not come back unless there is a problem with the design of your loop that allows air to come in somewhere it should not.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> EK mono block center is inlet I have one
> https://www.ekwb.com/shop/water-blocks/motherboard-blocks/monoblocks/intel-x299-series


Yes EK monoblock is center. I was referring to the GPU block feeding that. If it's an EK the left is the inlet which would mean either the CPU or the GPU is getting reverse flow.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Just took a good look see and I have 2 little bitty bubbles
Probably have to flip the case or just the block upside down to get rid of them
To get most I laid the case on it's back holding the reservoir vertical
Otherwise I tried tilting too every which way but on it's back worked the best


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> bubbles are not by design (once bled , they should never appear there), but they can get trapped in there.... though I share the concern of others that it suggests potential other problems in the loops (flow backwards).
> 
> So, if flow direction is confirmed and flow is good, tilt and shake until they are gone. Once they are gone, they should not come back unless there is a problem with the design of your loop that allows air to come in somewhere it should not.


I was referring to the perceived air pocket. That's not going away no matter how much tilting and shaking you do.



Nevermind....upon further inspection that does look like an air bubble lol. I stand corrected. Yeah just start tiliting that sucker till it goes away. I've found tilting it almost parallel to the ground really helps with bubbles.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> I was referring to the perceived air pocket. That's not going away no matter how much tilting and shaking you do.
> 
> Nevermind....upon further inspection that does look like an air bubble lol. I stand corrected. Yeah just start tiliting that sucker till it goes away. I've found tilting it almost parallel to the ground really helps with bubbles.


I see what you meant, the insert can make it appear as if there is air in there with lighter colored fluids.


----------



## ESRCJ

Thanks for your responses thus far. Here are pictures of the loop:





Loop order is as follows: Res to pump to 480 rad to graphics card to monoblock to 360 rad and back to res.

For those with the same monoblock, what are your temps when running Realbench or Prime95? And what voltages for those temps?


----------



## ThrashZone

HI,
At least the direction is correct to the ek block it was tough to really tell with out the entire case posted which looks pretty freaking cool








Just get rid of the air bubble and you should be good to go









I personally haven't done any benchmarks yet
Only one 280 ek rad so you're going to be a lot cooler









I don't personally use prime95.
Here's shot 3 weeks ago with the stock ek 280 performance loop kit block which was at 82c I believe at 4650.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> HI,
> At least the direction is correct to the ek block it was tough to really tell with out the entire case posted which looks pretty freaking cool
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just get rid of the air bubble and you should be good to go
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I personally haven't done any benchmarks yet
> Only one 280 ek rad so you're going to be a lot cooler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't personally use prime95.
> Here's shot 3 weeks ago with the stock ek 280 performance loop kit block which was at 82c I believe at 4650.


Yeah but what the other guys had mentioned was that the flow on the GPU block is backwards. So try flipping those. Inlet port should be on the left.


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> HI,
> At least the direction is correct to the ek block it was tough to really tell with out the entire case posted which looks pretty freaking cool
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just get rid of the air bubble and you should be good to go
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I personally haven't done any benchmarks yet
> Only one 280 ek rad so you're going to be a lot cooler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't personally use prime95.
> Here's shot 3 weeks ago with the stock ek 280 performance loop kit block which was at 82c I believe at 4650.


Thanks! Those are some good temps (better than mine currently).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Yeah but what the other guys had mentioned was that the flow on the GPU block is backwards. So try flipping those. Inlet port should be on the left.


This is from my water block's installation manual:



Which is odd since the 1080 Ti has the same PCB layout if what you're showing me is an FE card. I wonder if the water blocks are different for the 1080 Ti? I can't imagine EK would get the inlet/outlet instructions wrong for my block.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Thanks can't duplicate the clock or even the score
I was using different ram/ board/ cpu block
Here's a new one tad higher temp
I should probably ask a new question on how to oc this new hardware the other seemed so easy







:


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

So if i want more RAM (128) instead of (64) i must buy 7800x or 7820x right?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> sounds like how it works. I had a 4930K that was very low voltage ... but ran way hotter than others running the same clocks at higher voltage.
> There's no doubt these high core count CPUs are beasts, but from a pure performance perspective, a good 7740X or 8700K (either running 5.2+) is very hard to beat for OC fun.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coffee Lake -X !


So we ordered a 7980XE which came in this morning and I was also tasked with OC'ing it. I tested around 10 of the cores for 5 GHz, and not a single one could do it in under 1.4v. (prime95 no AVX) I tested all 18 cores for 4.8 GHz @ 1.350v and 8 of them passed with 5 of them hitting Tj.Max.

So it seems like the ES 7940X that Intel sent us was a golden chip in terms of cores (5/6 cores tested stable @ 5 GHz 1.4v). However, the cache wasn't stable above 2.7, the left side memory channels wouldn't post above 2800, and the right side needed a VCCSA boost just to hit 3200 MT/s.

Now I know what Intel does with their "unbalanced" bin chips.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> So we ordered a 7980XE which came in this morning and I was also tasked with OC'ing it. I tested around 10 of the cores for 5 GHz, and not a single one could do it in under 1.4v. (prime95 no AVX) I tested all 18 cores for 4.8 GHz @ 1.350v and 8 of them passed with 5 of them hitting Tj.Max.
> 
> *So it seems like the ES 7940X that Intel sent us was a golden chip* in terms of cores (5/6 cores tested stable @ 5 GHz 1.4v). However, the cache wasn't stable above 2.7, the left side memory channels wouldn't post above 2800, and the right side needed a VCCSA boost just to hit 3200 MT/s.
> 
> Now I know what Intel does with their "unbalanced" bin chips.


4.8 @ 1.35V is daaum good for day 1.








I'm not surprised that p95 with AVX disabled hit Tj Max (or tripped prochot). THe bond line just can't transfer the heat. Maybe a delid would help, but then the current flow is getting very high. Once these things get above 2x TDP, "ageing" accelerates pretty quickly.
And ES chips.. yeah, it's the general opinion that they tend to OC higher. Guess it all comes down to the quality of the substrate and maybe ES just get hand-picked substrates?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> 4.8 @ 1.35V is daaum good for day 1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not surprised that p95 with AVX disabled hit Tj Max (or tripped prochot). THe bond line just can't transfer the heat. Maybe a delid would help, but then the current flow is getting very high. Once these things get above 2x TDP, "ageing" accelerates pretty quickly.


Only 8/18 cores handled it. (actual speed was 4.85 GHz since I was testing with 101 bclk as a safety margin with the intent to drop it to 100 for production) And to avoid overrunning the currents, I tested them no more than 4 cores at a time with all other cores dropped down to 2 GHz.

We have a very weird usecase where the application has a small number of very performance-critical main threads and a lot of non-performance-critical support threads. So this became a legitimate case of per-core overclocking. Get the biggest chip possible, find a couple of really good cores and see how high they go. No risk of going over power limits.
Quote:


> And ES chips.. yeah, it's the general opinion that they tend to OC higher. Guess it all comes down to the quality of the substrate and maybe ES just get hand-picked substrates?


The fact that this ES chip couldn't even do 2800 MT/s tells me that Intel couldn't sell it retail. Since it seems like every single retail SKX is hitting 3600+ on B-dies. (Our 7980XE will do 3800 cl16.) If the 2 inactive memory channels weren't working, then Intel couldn't sell it on the LGA-3647 line - leaving only their Xeon-W line.


----------



## ESRCJ

I see a lot of recommendations online to use offset mode for CPU voltages. However, I find offset mode to set voltages too high on some cores. For example, for 4.6GHz, I set the offset to +0.001, which is added to 1.25V on some cores. I'm able to achieve the same clocks at 1.225V on all cores. I used Realbench and Prime95 (AVX on and off) along with a few games to confirm stability at a first pass. So I'm probably going to avoid offset mode from now on. However, I do like the idea of voltages dynamically lowering themselves when idle.

Are you guys sticking to manual fixed voltages or are you using offset or adaptive?


----------



## Ezric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> I see a lot of recommendations online to use offset mode for CPU voltages. However, I find offset mode to set voltages too high on some cores. For example, for 4.6GHz, I set the offset to +0.001, which is added to 1.25V on some cores. I'm able to achieve the same clocks at 1.225V on all cores. I used Realbench and Prime95 (AVX on and off) along with a few games to confirm stability at a first pass. So I'm probably going to avoid offset mode from now on. However, I do like the idea of voltages dynamically lowering themselves when idle.
> 
> Are you guys sticking to manual fixed voltages or are you using offset or adaptive?


I personally use adaptive for my everyday. I have 7820x running 4.7 dynamic at 1.21v adaptive. My voltages drop to below .7v and 12 multipliers on idle. That's EIST at work.

I did try offset voltages, they did tend to be more stable at higher clocks, but that was just to get through benchmarks, not run 24/7. Someone with more experience can explain why and when to use offsets. It has something to do with load line voltages and ripple effects when under load, or so I think.


----------



## Jawnathin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> So if i want more RAM (128) instead of (64) i must buy 7800x or 7820x right?


You will want a Skylake X CPU if you want to use all of the DIMM slots on your motherboard. Kaby Lake only has access to one side so you can get more memory with Skylake-X than Kaby.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> I see a lot of recommendations online to use offset mode for CPU voltages. However, I find offset mode to set voltages too high on some cores. For example, for 4.6GHz, I set the offset to +0.001, which is added to 1.25V on some cores. I'm able to achieve the same clocks at 1.225V on all cores. I used Realbench and Prime95 (AVX on and off) along with a few games to confirm stability at a first pass. So I'm probably going to avoid offset mode from now on. However, I do like the idea of voltages dynamically lowering themselves when idle.
> 
> Are you guys sticking to manual fixed voltages or are you using offset or adaptive?


When I was doing some experimenting between 4.8ghz and 4.9ghz, I've decided auto vcore was better. The downside to auto vcore is that it sets voltage too high for the multiplier. At 48x my CPU needs about 1.25v but auto sets it at 1.3v, so too much. At 49x it sets it at 1.35v. I don't know what's the stable vcore for 49x as I haven't tried it manually but it is probably 1.3v-ish. So 1.35v is probably a bit high but not completely unreasonable.

But I did find an upside to this. With an AVX offset to run at 4.5ghz auto vcore sets voltages 1.22-1.23v compared to the fixed 1.25v at the same 4.5ghz. With less voltage, auto vcore runs cooler than it did when it was fixed which helps since AVX tend to run hot. On non-AVX testing without an offset it is warmer at 4.9ghz @ 1.35v vs 4.8ghz @ 1.25v but temps with non-AVX workloads are less of an issue since it is cooler and still within my comfort range.

In other words, by switching from 4.8ghz @ 1.25v to 4.9ghz @ auto, I lowered temps where it was the hottest (AVX) at the expense of slightly warmer temps when it wasn't a problem (non-AVX). And I get the extra 100mhz on non-AVX workloads too. Never thought I'd run auto vcore but overall it turns out to be very useful in optimizing my overclock. A side bonus is that it drops vcore when the CPU is idling too.

I did try using a negative offset but it just doesn't seem to work right, at least when trying to do a negative offset, so for now it is on auto.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ezric*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> I see a lot of recommendations online to use offset mode for CPU voltages. However, I find offset mode to set voltages too high on some cores. For example, for 4.6GHz, I set the offset to +0.001, which is added to 1.25V on some cores. I'm able to achieve the same clocks at 1.225V on all cores. I used Realbench and Prime95 (AVX on and off) along with a few games to confirm stability at a first pass. So I'm probably going to avoid offset mode from now on. However, I do like the idea of voltages dynamically lowering themselves when idle.
> 
> Are you guys sticking to manual fixed voltages or are you using offset or adaptive?
> 
> 
> 
> I personally use adaptive for my everyday. I have 7820x running 4.7 dynamic at 1.21v adaptive. My voltages drop to below .7v and 12 multipliers on idle. That's EIST at work.
> 
> I did try offset voltages, they did tend to be more stable at higher clocks, but that was just to get through benchmarks, not run 24/7. Someone with more experience can explain why and when to use offsets. It has something to do with load line voltages and ripple effects when under load, or so I think.
Click to expand...

Adaptive only changes Vcore with turbo multipliers. Offset changes the Vcore through all the range of CPU multipliers like idle to base clock and turbo.


----------



## carlhil2

Getting my per core OC on..


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> You will want a Skylake X CPU if you want to use all of the DIMM slots on your motherboard. Kaby Lake only has access to one side so you can get more memory with Skylake-X than Kaby.
> When I was doing some experimenting between 4.8ghz and 4.9ghz, I've decided auto vcore was better. The downside to auto vcore is that it sets voltage too high for the multiplier. At 48x my CPU needs about 1.25v but auto sets it at 1.3v, so too much. At 49x it sets it at 1.35v. I don't know what's the stable vcore for 49x as I haven't tried it manually but it is probably 1.3v-ish. So 1.35v is probably a bit high but not completely unreasonable.
> 
> But I did find an upside to this. With an AVX offset to run at 4.5ghz auto vcore sets voltages 1.22-1.23v compared to the fixed 1.25v at the same 4.5ghz. With less voltage, auto vcore runs cooler than it did when it was fixed which helps since AVX tend to run hot. On non-AVX testing without an offset it is warmer at 4.9ghz @ 1.35v vs 4.8ghz @ 1.25v but temps with non-AVX workloads are less of an issue since it is cooler and still within my comfort range.
> 
> In other words, by switching from 4.8ghz @ 1.25v to 4.9ghz @ auto, I lowered temps where it was the hottest (AVX) at the expense of slightly warmer temps when it wasn't a problem (non-AVX). And I get the extra 100mhz on non-AVX workloads too. Never thought I'd run auto vcore but overall it turns out to be very useful in optimizing my overclock. A side bonus is that it drops vcore when the CPU is idling too.
> 
> I did try using a negative offset but it just doesn't seem to work right, at least when trying to do a negative offset, so for now it is on auto.


I ran into the same issue. I've managed to successfully go through a quick pass of stability testing with 1.21V now for 4.6GHz across all cores. What I'll probably do is per core fixed voltages once I start the higher frequencies. When I was running 4.8GHz with offset set the auto, the problem cores were using 1.31V, which was just not possible to stress test in Prime95 with my previous setup. I don't use AVX for anything aside from benchmarking and stress testing (for now), so I'm willing to sacrifice a few degrees when using AVX for a few degrees less in non-AVX workloads.


----------



## crpcookie

Amazon shipped me a 7980XE. It was not only used but someone switched the CPU with a 2012 quadcore Xeon. Amazon selling used stuff as new...


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Getting my per core OC on..


noice!


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crpcookie*
> 
> Amazon shipped me a 7980XE. It was not only used but someone switched the CPU with a 2012 quadcore Xeon. Amazon selling used stuff as new...


Wow that's insanity. So they didn't check to make sure the 7980XE someone sent back was actually a 7980XE? Not to mention, selling it to someone else after that... yikes.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jawnathin*
> 
> You will want a Skylake X CPU if you want to use all of the DIMM slots on your motherboard. Kaby Lake only has access to one side so you can get more memory with Skylake-X than Kaby.
> When I was doing some experimenting between 4.8ghz and 4.9ghz, I've decided auto vcore was better. The downside to auto vcore is that it sets voltage too high for the multiplier. At 48x my CPU needs about 1.25v but auto sets it at 1.3v, so too much. At 49x it sets it at 1.35v. I don't know what's the stable vcore for 49x as I haven't tried it manually but it is probably 1.3v-ish. So 1.35v is probably a bit high but not completely unreasonable.
> 
> But I did find an upside to this. With an AVX offset to run at 4.5ghz auto vcore sets voltages 1.22-1.23v compared to the fixed 1.25v at the same 4.5ghz. With less voltage, auto vcore runs cooler than it did when it was fixed which helps since AVX tend to run hot. On non-AVX testing without an offset it is warmer at 4.9ghz @ 1.35v vs 4.8ghz @ 1.25v but temps with non-AVX workloads are less of an issue since it is cooler and still within my comfort range.
> 
> In other words, by switching from 4.8ghz @ 1.25v to 4.9ghz @ auto, I lowered temps where it was the hottest (AVX) at the expense of slightly warmer temps when it wasn't a problem (non-AVX). And I get the extra 100mhz on non-AVX workloads too. Never thought I'd run auto vcore but overall it turns out to be very useful in optimizing my overclock. A side bonus is that it drops vcore when the CPU is idling too.
> 
> I did try using a negative offset but it just doesn't seem to work right, at least when trying to do a negative offset, so for now it is on auto.


Hi,
Yep been a while since I set to auto and all core48 1.3v just like you said








https://valid.x86.fr/ln32tg

Not sure I can do anything else though


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crpcookie*
> 
> Amazon shipped me a 7980XE. It was not only used but someone switched the CPU with a 2012 quadcore Xeon. Amazon selling used stuff as new...


Yeah we've had that multiple times at work ordering either heatsyncs when gutting servers to make some test equipment or other server stuff, we'd get the heatsync in a box w/ no plastic and the paste still all over it from the last cpu it was on, we've also gotten harddrives in the box w/o any protection or a box w/ the sata cable ripped off it ( i.e the connector broke off in the slot ) which gave hte impression they tried to break it out in a hurry.

Make sure you posts pics on their facebook too and light them up they'll respond faster that way.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Wow that's insanity. So they didn't check to make sure the 7980XE someone sent back was actually a 7980XE? Not to mention, selling it to someone else after that... yikes.


That's quite common, when the new Cintiq MSP 16 came out I ordered it and they sent me last years model was was 2000$ cheaper, I raised such a huge fuss they deleted my comment and refunded me THEN sent me a new one. The MSP 16 was 3k.

QC is scarce, not to mention alot of this stuff goes to amazon lockers where nothing is checked.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Wow that's insanity. So they didn't check to make sure the 7980XE someone sent back was actually a 7980XE? Not to mention, selling it to someone else after that... yikes.


They don't care. People will always be dishonest till the end of time.


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> They don't care. People will always be dishonest till the end of time.


And still people buy expensive hardware from Amazon


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> I see a lot of recommendations online to use offset mode for CPU voltages. However, I find offset mode to set voltages too high on some cores. For example, for 4.6GHz, I set the offset to +0.001, which is added to 1.25V on some cores. I'm able to achieve the same clocks at 1.225V on all cores. I used Realbench and Prime95 (AVX on and off) along with a few games to confirm stability at a first pass. So I'm probably going to avoid offset mode from now on. However, I do like the idea of voltages dynamically lowering themselves when idle.
> 
> Are you guys sticking to manual fixed voltages or are you using offset or adaptive?


offset adds/substracts and adaptive ADDs voltage to the VID, so if the cpu can run stable below the pre-programmed VID, then there's 2 ways to go: 1) use a negative offset with or without adaptive turbo voltage or 2) use manual override. Adaptive is the way to go when the CPU cooperates. Actually - adaptive per-core OC (all 18 of them ) works great for a modest OC. Once you dial things up, I'd stick with manual override.


----------



## carlhil2

2 cores @4.8.., 12 @4.6, 2 @4.4..


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> 2 cores @4.8.., 12 @4.6, 2 @4.4..


voltage control... adaptive on each core?


----------



## carlhil2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> voltage control... adaptive on each core?


Adaptive on the 8 cores that use the highest voltages.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> And still people buy expensive hardware from Amazon


If you have prime and order from Amazon itself or a reasonably large outfit using them, then the only issue is patience waiting for them to "make it right". They will.

Of course it may cost you time and gas to send boxes back, and you have to wait twice for your toys.

I've actually not run into this yet (tough I know people who hae) even buying scratch-n-dent stuff from Amazon Warehouse which is just asking for trouble. Again through, they have an excellent return policy, so you are trading time for money, but honestly a decent amount of the stuff I buy sits in a box for a bit until I can get around to it.

I always check the company behind the order and make sure they have decent reviews or the "thing" is sufficiently hard to obtain that I'm willing to take the risk. A large step up form Ebay frankly, but the same idea.


----------



## LunaP

Whats a good accurate method of finding an adequate amount of voltage per core? I remember reading on Intel XTU but no mention oh steps to do so, I can only imagine it involves rebooting hundreds of times though. Also is there a downside to having X amount of cores running at one speed while others at a higher/lower? Curious if that trips any software up or anything.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Whats a good accurate method of finding an adequate amount of voltage per core? I remember reading on Intel XTU but no mention oh steps to do so, I can only imagine it involves rebooting hundreds of times though. Also is there a downside to having X amount of cores running at one speed while others at a higher/lower? Curious if that trips any software up or anything.


The reality of speed-step is that is perfectly normal to have clock speeds all over the place. Everything from 1200-4500MHz is entirely normal depending on load. So, 4400, 4500, 4600, 4700, etc... in that mix on a given core isn't going to matter.

The "downside" is determinism, but that only matters in a tiny hand-full of circumstances:
1. real-time processing (as in mS and uS sensitive trading algos and the like)
2. benchmarking apples:apples - having different cores at different speeds means you are now at the whim of your OS scheduler as to how long any given thing requires...

All that said, enabling those features vs running at a fixed clock may very well expose instability that would not have otherwise been seen with fixed clocks and voltages (either for a long time, or ever).


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Whats a good accurate method of finding an adequate amount of voltage per core? I remember reading on Intel XTU but no mention oh steps to do so, I can only imagine it involves rebooting hundreds of times though. Also is there a downside to having X amount of cores running at one speed while others at a higher/lower? Curious if that trips any software up or anything.


I actually did this last week for both a 7940X and 7980XE. There's no harm in having unbalanced core speeds.

The most straightforward way is to test one core at a time. Either disable all the other cores, or clock them all the way down.

If you're careful enough, it's faster to test multiple cores at once. So load up a stress-tester that pins threads to cores (like Prime95). Cores that are just slightly unstable will error there which tells you which core is the bad core. Extremely unstable cores will simply hard-lock or BSOD.

So start from a known stable configuration. Then start pushing towards instability (dropping vcore or raising clock) while testing in P95. So once a core goes slightly unstable it'll usually error in P95 (and tell you which core it is).

Even if it BSODs, sometimes the windows event log will record which core it was on.

If P95 stability is not suitable for your purposes (too stressful or not stressful enough), the method will still give you a relative indicator of which cores are better than others.

If temperatures are a factor, then that can be very difficult to test individually. The problem with testing each of them alone or in groups with other cores if that you don't know where they are physically located on the die. And the heat from an active core will "spill over" into adjacent cores. So unless you spend to time to work out the mapping, the only reliable way to test temperatures is to test all cores at once.

I found out this last week that even this method doesn't always work. Leakage at low volts/clocks has very poor correlation with leakage at high volts/clocks. So I can't "bin" the cores at low speeds for high-speed performance.


----------



## cekim

Backed off to 200% current from 240%. eye-ball noticeable drop in peak numbers I can get from benchmarks, but less than 0.5% and no application level drop.

The important take away is that the reproduceable change means that it is actually bouncing off that limit (200%), but not enough to matter and not enough to leave it @ 240%. It seems to do so sufficiently gracefully that I'd rather have it do that than spike up with no real gain in performance.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> 2 cores @4.8.., 12 @4.6, 2 @4.4..


Hi,
Very impressive








Please teach me


----------



## Testier

So my board accidentally turned on boost mode and OVed my 7980XE to 1.434v. I think its just idle voltage and it wasnt being stressed. Should I be very concerned about the 3min it run at that voltage? Fairly sure its fine as thats not really bad for idle voltage....


----------



## GreedyMuffin

You're fine. Don't worry.

Voltage does not kill, current does. At idle there's no problem.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Man what's with my 7820x, even at optimal defaults I'm hitting 80c (3.9Ghz all core).
I've mounted the H115i again, still no change.

I had this problem the other week, I thought it might of been the Thermal Grizzly as replacing it help, not this time.

Could the paste between the die and IHS be drying out?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Man what's with my 7820x, even at optimal defaults I'm hitting 80c (3.9Ghz all core).
> I've mounted the H115i again, still no change.
> 
> I had this problem the other week, I thought it might of been the Thermal Grizzly as replacing it help, not this time.
> 
> Could the paste between the die and IHS be drying out?


Has it been delidded? If not, that's likely the only real solution. It won't be the original TIM drying out, it's not a compound that will quickly.


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Has it been delidded? If not, that's likely the only real solution. It won't be the original TIM drying out, it's not a compound that will quickly.


No delid, temps have slowly gotten worse the longer I have it, but I did buy the system in Winter, it's now summer so could be a reason too.
Temps at stock were stupid, how the hell are these things ever going to hit 4.5Ghz on 2 cores at stock like Intel claim...


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Although I had beefier cooling, even non-delidded my 7820X did 4700 fine at well below 80'C. Even in something like Cinebench R15. At completely stock, it never went above 40'C if I remember correctly. That was after a delid tho.


----------



## carlhil2

Here is one of my profiles that I have put stress on just to show the clocks... 

 This is from a different profile..


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Here is one of my profiles that I have put stress on just to show the clocks..


Hi,
Yep at least one toasty core at 90c :hot:
That is what I was wondering about "it was missing" unless I missed what the temperatures was on your previous score


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
This was really bugging me that hwmonitor was showing so many cores
But I finally realized it skipped 5-7 I assume those 3 were binned
One also shows it's being utilized


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> This was really bugging me that hwmonitor was showing so many cores
> But I finally realized it skipped 5-7 I assume those 3 were binned
> One also shows it's being utilized


These are secretly 26 core processors, now we know Intel's secret


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> This was really bugging me that hwmonitor was showing so many cores
> But I finally realized it skipped 5-7 I assume those 3 were binned
> One also shows it's being utilized


Even on a 2699/2696v3 that has all architectural cores active, it appears Intel is assuming software will sort-out the core enumeration. I've seen this in linux since haswell with HCC dies. The ID that software that does not try to filter by CPU type, finds ordinal (sparse) core ID values.

The presumption is that the other IDs are the other "nodes" on the ring (haswell/broadwell) and now mesh (SKL and beyond). So, the memory controllers, PCIe, etc...


----------



## ESRCJ

Hey guys, so I'm returning my memory to Newegg since I've had some minor but noticeable stability issues, especially when I OC my 7920X to 4.8GHz (I have to dial my memory speed down to 3200MHz just to run Cinebench). These were the modules:

https://gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c17q-32gtzr

Which are not on the RVIE QVL list and are considered a dual channel kit on G.Skill's own website. With that said, I'm looking for a new kit. The actual quad channel 3600MHz kit has better timings, but is $559.99. I figured I might as well go all out at this price point, so I'm putting 4000MHz on the table. Should I pull the trigger on the latter? I've heard that stability is harder to achieve with higher memory speeds on X299. Can anyone confirm the validity of these claims?

Also, I always hear that memory overclocking won't limit CPU overclocking, but as I mentioned, I had to dial my memory speed down to 3200MHz from 3600MHz just to run Cinebench at 4.8GHz. So now I wonder if I'd have to do the same with a kit from the QVL, but is 3600MHz or above.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Hey guys, so I'm returning my memory to Newegg since I've had some minor but noticeable stability issues, especially when I OC my 7920X to 4.8GHz (I have to dial my memory speed down to 3200MHz just to run Cinebench). These were the modules:
> 
> https://gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c17q-32gtzr
> 
> Which are not on the RVIE QVL list and are considered a dual channel kit on G.Skill's own website. With that said, I'm looking for a new kit. The actual quad channel 3600MHz kit has better timings, but is $559.99. I figured I might as well go all out at this price point, so I'm putting 4000MHz on the table. Should I pull the trigger on the latter? I've heard that stability is harder to achieve with higher memory speeds on X299. Can anyone confirm the validity of these claims?
> 
> Also, I always hear that memory overclocking won't limit CPU overclocking, but as I mentioned, I had to dial my memory speed down to 3200MHz from 3600MHz just to run Cinebench at 4.8GHz. So now I wonder if I'd have to do the same with a kit from the QVL, but is 3600MHz or above.


What were ur setting, normally for higher clocked ram ( above xmp) u need to boost SA , VCCIN, dram voltage and cache voltage, not to mention sometimes u have to give vcore a small boost since IMC.


----------



## carlhil2

I have my old @3200 cas16 sticks @3600 cas16..


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Hey guys, so I'm returning my memory to Newegg since I've had some minor but noticeable stability issues, especially when I OC my 7920X to 4.8GHz (I have to dial my memory speed down to 3200MHz just to run Cinebench). These were the modules:
> 
> https://gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c17q-32gtzr
> 
> Which are not on the RVIE QVL list and are considered a dual channel kit on G.Skill's own website. With that said, I'm looking for a new kit. The actual quad channel 3600MHz kit has better timings, but is $559.99. I figured I might as well go all out at this price point, so I'm putting 4000MHz on the table. Should I pull the trigger on the latter? I've heard that stability is harder to achieve with higher memory speeds on X299. Can anyone confirm the validity of these claims?
> 
> Also, I always hear that memory overclocking won't limit CPU overclocking, but as I mentioned, I had to dial my memory speed down to 3200MHz from 3600MHz just to run Cinebench at 4.8GHz. So now I wonder if I'd have to do the same with a kit from the QVL, but is 3600MHz or above.


The 3600 kit is a higher bin and a great kit. I run the same kit at 4000 MHz 16-17-16-36 1T @1.410 Vdimm, .800v Vsa and 1.010v vccio


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> What were ur setting, normally for higher clocked ram ( above xmp) u need to boost SA , VCCIN, dram voltage and cache voltage, not to mention sometimes u have to give vcore a small boost since IMC.


I first had it at XMP settings, then set the timings to mimic the C16 kit. Memtest86 showed stability,but I ran into some issues with games like Forza Motorsport 7, so I went back to XMP. It's stable for 4.6GHz at 1.21V, but 4.7 and above becomes troublesome. I didn't tweak much else, which may help. I'm just going to get the higher binned kit and then I'll look into deeper tweaking.


----------



## toncij

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Hey guys, so I'm returning my memory to Newegg since I've had some minor but noticeable stability issues, especially when I OC my 7920X to 4.8GHz (I have to dial my memory speed down to 3200MHz just to run Cinebench). These were the modules:
> 
> https://gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c17q-32gtzr
> 
> Which are not on the RVIE QVL list and are considered a dual channel kit on G.Skill's own website. With that said, I'm looking for a new kit. The actual quad channel 3600MHz kit has better timings, but is $559.99. I figured I might as well go all out at this price point, so I'm putting 4000MHz on the table. Should I pull the trigger on the latter? I've heard that stability is harder to achieve with higher memory speeds on X299. Can anyone confirm the validity of these claims?
> 
> Also, I always hear that memory overclocking won't limit CPU overclocking, but as I mentioned, I had to dial my memory speed down to 3200MHz from 3600MHz just to run Cinebench at 4.8GHz. So now I wonder if I'd have to do the same with a kit from the QVL, but is 3600MHz or above.
> 
> 
> 
> The 3600 kit is a higher bin and a great kit. I run the same kit at 4000 MHz 16-17-16-36 1T @1.410 Vdimm, .800v Vsa and 1.010v vccio
Click to expand...

Can you, please, link to your post with what are you cooling this with and whole setup? Thanks.

I'm soon finally getting a board for 7980XE but not yet sure how to setup it...


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> Can you, please, link to your post with what are you cooling this with and whole setup? Thanks.
> 
> I'm soon finally getting a board for 7980XE but not yet sure how to setup it...


I have two different methods of cooling. This screen shot was with a chiller at 10c. I have another screen shot at 4.4 GHz CPU and the same Aida benchmark score but cooled with a Predator 360 push/pull.


----------



## Silent Scone

Bit of a contrast, that's how you shatter peoples dreams when they try the same settings lol


----------



## Jpmboy

So I delidded my 7980XE this morning, used TGC on the die and underside of the IHS. Sealed the "little thingies" with MG conformal coating. Resealed IHS w/ silicon gasket (Loctite). Back in the socket. Running the same OC as before delid and testing with x264, cores have dropped 10-12C, Package at least 10C (which would hit the mid 80s before, now mid 70s). Looks good to go.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> So I delidded my 7980XE this morning, used TGC on the die and underside of the IHS. Sealed the "little thingies" with MG conformal coating. Resealed IHS w/ silicon gasket (Loctite). Back in the socket. Running the same OC as before delid and testing with x264, cores have dropped 10-12C, Package at least 10C (which would hit the mid 80s before, now mid 70s). Looks good to go.











What took you so long


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> So I delidded my 7980XE this morning, used TGC on the die and underside of the IHS. Sealed the "little thingies" with MG conformal coating. Resealed IHS w/ silicon gasket (Loctite). Back in the socket. Running the same OC as before delid and testing with x264, cores have dropped 10-12C, Package at least 10C (which would hit the mid 80s before, now mid 70s). Looks good to go.


Nice! LGA pads look ok after all your 5GHz shenanigans?


----------



## toncij

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> So I delidded my 7980XE this morning, used TGC on the die and underside of the IHS. Sealed the "little thingies" with MG conformal coating. Resealed IHS w/ silicon gasket (Loctite). Back in the socket. Running the same OC as before delid and testing with x264, cores have dropped 10-12C, Package at least 10C (which would hit the mid 80s before, now mid 70s). Looks good to go.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What took you so long
Click to expand...

Maybe parts? I'm waiting for 4 weeks now to get my Apex...


----------



## toncij

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> Can you, please, link to your post with what are you cooling this with and whole setup? Thanks.
> 
> I'm soon finally getting a board for 7980XE but not yet sure how to setup it...
> 
> 
> 
> I have methods of cooling. This screen shot was with a chiller at 10c. I have another screen shot at 4.4 GHz CPU and the same Aida benchmark score but cooled with a Predator 360 push/pull.
Click to expand...

Chillers are extremely noisy from my exp. Still the case?

I'm going to see what it can do under LN2, but for a longer test I need an employee to sip LN2 all the time.








Predator 360 can run 7980XE at 4.4? At what RPM for the fans and what temps?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Nice! LGA pads look ok after all your 5GHz shenanigans?


yeah - this was one reason for doing this now. All pins and pads were shiny as new. So no issues there. (and was at 5100 for one evening of fun).
Was hoping for a larger drop - maybe I should have used my standard LM, CLP.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> Maybe parts? I'm waiting for 4 weeks now to get my Apex...


Nah, really needed some "quiet time", which has been very hard to come by the past few weeks.


----------



## netman

hi does anyone have an idea what this discoloration of the 7820x could be you can see on the picture i attached ?



within the red mark ? overheating ?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> So I delidded my 7980XE this morning, used TGC on the die and underside of the IHS. Sealed the "little thingies" with MG conformal coating. Resealed IHS w/ silicon gasket (Loctite). Back in the socket. Running the same OC as before delid and testing with x264, cores have dropped 10-12C, Package at least 10C (which would hit the mid 80s before, now mid 70s). Looks good to go.


Finally sacked up


----------



## schoolofmonkey

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *netman*
> 
> hi does anyone have an idea what this discoloration of the 7820x could be you can see on the picture i attached ?
> 
> 
> 
> within the red mark ? overheating ?


Hardware Unboxing found something similar:

__
http://instagr.am/p/BWysDUalr2k%2F/


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Hardware Unboxing found something similar:
> 
> __
> http://instagr.am/p/BWysDUalr2k%2F/


Wow @1.25V.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - this was one reason for doing this now. All pins and pads were shiny as new. So no issues there. (and was at 5100 for one evening of fun).
> Was hoping for a larger drop - maybe I should have used my standard LM, CLP.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nah, really needed some "quiet time", which has been very hard to come by the past few weeks.


Part of the reason I put up with the need to "adjust" geometry of the VRM cooling on my monoblock vs just getting out the silicon glue is that I've seen improvement with lower IHS (less distance between IHS and die). Not having it glued is a bit of a hassle on the rare occaisions that things come apart, but until then, no one knows or cares, so I take the temp improvement.

I've changed so much about my tune since then, but I am reasonably sure I've seen more than 10-12C on my hotter cores. More like 15C+


----------



## arrow0309

Hi, where to get the latest Mem tweak it?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Bit of a contrast, that's how you shatter peoples dreams when they try the same settings lol


He was only inquiring about the memory. Hence the reference to 4.4 GHz with the 360 AIO. I will post a screen shot when I get home tonight.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> Chillers are extremely noisy from my exp. Still the case?
> 
> I'm going to see what it can do under LN2, but for a longer test I need an employee to sip LN2 all the time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Predator 360 can run 7980XE at 4.4? At what RPM for the fans and what temps?


Chiller is about as loud as a refrigerator with three fans. The temps on the 360 fans (PWM CPU) with a 4.4 core and 3.0 cashe are 27c idle and 40c max gaming Wildlands and The Division.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Hi, where to get the latest Mem tweak it?


right from the ASUS site for your MB... or the DVD that came with the MB.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Chiller is about as loud as a refrigerator with three fans. The temps on the 360 fans (PWM CPU) with a 4.4 core and 3.0 cashe are 27c idle and 40c max gaming Wildlands and The Division.


some aquarium chillers are not nearly as loud as the EXC-800... but they need a slight mod to run as cold.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> some aquarium chillers are not nearly as loud as the EXC-800... but they need a slight mod to run as cold.


The dew point here was 7c last weekend so I ran my EXC-800 at 7c and had no condensation. The GPU started to have audible coil wine when running it at this temperature.


----------



## Mysticial

If anyone is interested, I'm seeing some evidence that our retail 7980XE might actually be an XCC die with 10 cores disabled rather than an HCC with 18 working cores.

The reasons why I suspect this is because I have the thing booted into Linux. And the APIC ID assignments of each of the cores is very intriguing. Our 7980XE has assignments going up to #27. But our 7940X only has assignments going up to #14.

When I measure the per-core memory latencies on the 7940X, there's one core (core 13/APIC #14) that is noticeably slower than the rest. I suspect this core may be one of the 4 cores in the "bottom row" of the HCC die, and the other 3 are disabled (possibly #15, #16, and #17). That bottom row is the furthest from the memory controllers.

I will need to run memory latency tests on the 7980XE to see if there's any additional insight. But based on the APIC assignments, the active cores look pretty spread out. And depending on how the APIC IDs map to the physical cores on the chip, it's possible that both "center columns" on the XCC die are disabled.

If I haven't completely misinterpreted the data I'm seeing:

Does the 28-core XCC die actually fit in the X299 socket? Perhaps the dies that everybody sees while delidding an HCC chip are actually big enough to fit the XCC. But of course Intel doesn't say anything about it.
Is Intel doing this to meet what appears to be an unexpectedly high demand for the 7980XE? Based on yields and probabilities, you'd expect there to be a lot more 7960Xs and 7940Xs than 7980XEs. But I see a lot more 7980XE's floating around than the lower HCC parts. So if the demand for the 18-core is much higher than the other chips, I see a motive for Intel to pull XCC dies down to meet the demand. (thereby compensating for the yield/demand mismatch for the HCC dies)


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Chiller is about as loud as a refrigerator with three fans. The temps on the 360 fans (PWM CPU) with a 4.4 core and 3.0 cashe are 27c idle and 40c max gaming Wildlands and The Division.


What temps are you seeing with your franken-predator while benching?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> If anyone is interested, I'm seeing some evidence that our retail 7980XE might actually be an XCC die with 10 cores disabled rather than an HCC with 18 working cores.
> 
> The reasons why I suspect this is because I have the thing booted into Linux. And the APIC ID assignments of each of the cores is very intriguing. Our 7980XE has assignments going up to #27. But our 7940X only has assignments going up to #14.
> 
> When I measure the per-core memory latencies on the 7940X, there's one core that is noticeably slower than the rest. I suspect this core may be one of the 4 cores in the "bottom row" of the HCC die, and the other 3 are disabled (possibly #15, #16, and #17). That bottom row is the furthest from the memory controllers.
> 
> I will need to run memory latency tests on the 7980XE to see if there's any additional insight. But based on the APIC assignments, the active cores look pretty spread out. And depending on how the APIC IDs map to the physical cores on the chip, it's possible that both "center columns" on the XCC die are disabled.


I didn't follow up on this - but someone pointed out/asked if/how/why there were retail 7980XEs that pre-dated ES by their marked date of manufacture...

One assumes that they don't mark/stamp them until they are packaged, but.... maybe not?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> If anyone is interested, I'm seeing some evidence that our retail 7980XE might actually be an XCC die with 10 cores disabled rather than an HCC with 18 working cores.
> 
> The reasons why I suspect this is because I have the thing booted into Linux. And the APIC ID assignments of each of the cores is very intriguing. Our 7980XE has assignments going up to #27. But our 7940X only has assignments going up to #14.
> 
> When I measure the per-core memory latencies on the 7940X, there's one core (core 13/APIC #14) that is noticeably slower than the rest. I suspect this core may be one of the 4 cores in the "bottom row" of the HCC die, and the other 3 are disabled (possibly #15, #16, and #17). That bottom row is the furthest from the memory controllers.
> 
> I will need to run memory latency tests on the 7980XE to see if there's any additional insight. But based on the APIC assignments, the active cores look pretty spread out. And depending on how the APIC IDs map to the physical cores on the chip, it's possible that both "center columns" on the XCC die are disabled.
> 
> If I haven't completely misinterpreted the data I'm seeing:
> 
> Does the 28-core XCC die actually fit in the X299 socket? Perhaps the dies that everybody sees while delidding an HCC chip are actually big enough to fit the XCC. But of course Intel doesn't say anything about it.
> Is Intel doing this to meet what appears to be an unexpectedly high demand for the 7980XE? Based on yields and probabilities, you'd expect there to be a lot more 7960Xs and 7940Xs than 7980XEs. But I see a lot more 7980XE's floating around than the lower HCC parts. So if the demand for the 18-core is much higher than the other chips, I see a motive for Intel to pull XCC dies down to meet the demand. (thereby compensating for the yield/demand mismatch for the HCC dies)


Anandtech lists the die sizes as:

LCC 14.3 x 22.4 mm
HCC 21.6 x 22.4 mm
XCC 21.6 x 32.3 mm
Looking at this measurement:


It will fit in the socket, but it's a very tight fit. A 32.3mm die will definitely be larger than the what's shown there. So if Intel is sneaking in cut-down XCCs to meet the 7980XE demand, it's something that @Silicon Lottery would probably notice.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> What temps are you seeing with your franken-predator while benching?


With the 7890Xe @ 4.4/3.0 OC and Titan XP 182/698 OC full cover block idle 27c and gaming 40c max. Real bench streets test 30min. 85c max.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> With the 7890Xe @ 4.4/3.0 OC and Titan XP 182/698 OC full cover block idle 27c and gaming 40c max. Real bench streets test 30min. 85c max.


Cool, thanks.

I'm trying to figure out if I want to go full custom with a simple CPU setup for my first custom loop or if I get EK's new MLC for my 7900x.

I'm on the fence but leaning towards full custom with an EK supremacy evo, HWL gtx 360 and d5.


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Cool, thanks.
> 
> I'm trying to figure out if I want to go full custom with a simple CPU setup for my first custom loop or if I get EK's new MLC for my 7900x.
> 
> I'm on the fence but leaning towards full custom with an EK supremacy evo, HWL gtx 360 and d5.


I used to have an EK Predator 360 for my 7920X and Titan XP. Temps were decent for both with that. I now have a full custom loop and my GPU temps are dramatically lower (gaming in the high 20s, low 30s for most games). My CPU temps are a little better, but that's mostly because I'm using a monoblock and my CPU isn't delidded. If I ditched the monoblock and just went with a CPU block, then my temps might be a little lower. I think the MLC would be a good buy, assuming there aren't any early adopter issues. I'm personally really loving my custom loop and will never go back to AIO or air.


----------



## Silicon Lottery

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> It will fit in the socket, but it's a very tight fit. A 32.3mm die will definitely be larger than the what's shown there. So if Intel is sneaking in cut-down XCCs to meet the 7980XE demand, it's something that @Silicon Lottery would probably notice.


All 7920Xs through 7980XEs have the exact same die size (HCC 21.6 x 22.4 mm)

Nothing other than that has passed through here.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> Can you, please, link to your post with what are you cooling this with and whole setup? Thanks.
> 
> I'm soon finally getting a board for 7980XE but not yet sure how to setup it...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Bit of a contrast, that's how you shatter peoples dreams when they try the same settings lol


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Cool, thanks.
> 
> I'm trying to figure out if I want to go full custom with a simple CPU setup for my first custom loop or if I get EK's new MLC for my 7900x.
> 
> I'm on the fence but leaning towards full custom with an EK supremacy evo, HWL gtx 360 and d5.


Here is a screen shot on the predator 360.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silicon Lottery*
> 
> All 7920Xs through 7980XEs have the exact same die size (HCC 21.6 x 22.4 mm)
> 
> Nothing other than that has passed through here.


Thanks for that info.

So it seems more likely that the APIC ID # assignments are either meaningless, or intentionally misleading. But it does seem too coincidental that our 7980XE's highest core is mapped to core #27. (Which is the last # on a 28-core layout since these are zero-indexed.)


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Hardware Unboxing found something similar:
> 
> __
> http://instagr.am/p/BWysDUalr2k%2F/


Hi,
Heck the default clock/ turbo pretty much does that voltage


----------



## Chargeit

I've been btc mining 24/7 cpu/gpu on my main rig for the last month with the oddball shut down for updates. Current up time is 8d 13h. I'm going to call my 7280's oc pretty damned stable.


----------



## netman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Hardware Unboxing found something similar:
> 
> __
> http://instagr.am/p/BWysDUalr2k%2F/


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Wow @1.25V.


well the one in my picture never got more then 1,235V and is still working fine @4,9Ghz with 1,217V on a
MSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon so maybe its just cosmetics - an optical thing and no real damage ?

i was just wondering as i never saw this before on a cpu substrate (my 3770K i got before was running with 1,28V @ 4,7 for the last 5 Years but nothing like this to see)


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> right from the ASUS site for your MB... or the DVD that came with the MB.


Thanks for the info, that's the only place I didn't check








Yesterday evening I was starting to oc my ram at 4000.
So started with 1.40v and 16-18-16-36-1T but then I've got errors in Hci Memtest after a while.
So I've increased a bit to 17-18-17-38-1T (tRfc still ****ty for now, 701) but at least I've succeeded to pass Hci to ~200% then I stopped (it was late).
The ram max temp was 50C.
Any tips / hints?
I don't know what tRfc to set as well.







:


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *arrow0309*
> 
> Thanks for the info, that's the only place I didn't check
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yesterday evening I was starting to oc my ram at 4000.
> So started with 1.40v and 16-18-16-36-1T but then I've got errors in Hci Memtest after a while.
> So I've increased a bit to 17-18-17-38-1T (tRfc still ****ty for now, 701) but at least I've succeeded to pass Hci to ~200% then I stopped (it was late).
> The ram max temp was 50C.
> Any tips / hints?
> I don't know what tRfc to set as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :


ram help *here*
need to know the exact ram kit


----------



## idahosurge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Stop using Memtest86, it's irrelevant. Use HCI Memtest Pro or Google Stress app test


Will HCI Memtest find problems with individual sticks or individual slots if you run it within Windows with four sticks populated on the board at the same time?

It was four years ago, but I was told on a new build to boot into Memtest86 and test each stick and slot individually to see if there were any problems with either a particular stick or slot and do this before you even installed Windows so you knew that you did not have a memory problem before you installed Windows.

My R6E is waiting for me to pick it up when I get back to town and I will build my rig Saturday and be ready to start testing and install Windows.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *idahosurge*
> 
> Will HCI Memtest find problems with individual sticks or individual slots if you run it within Windows with four sticks populated on the board at the same time?
> 
> It was four years ago, but I was told on a new build to boot into Memtest86 and test each stick and slot individually to see if there were any problems with either a particular stick or slot and do this before you even installed Windows so you knew that you did not have a memory problem before you installed Windows.
> 
> My R6E is waiting for me to pick it up when I get back to town and I will build my rig Saturday and be ready to start testing and install Windows.


if you want to ferret out a bad stick - memtect86+ will work for the OOB test you describe. But, any modern bios will quickly identify a bad stick/slot too - so MT86+_ etc are pretty much dinosaurs. To test the stability of a ram OC, Scone is right.


----------



## idahosurge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if you want to ferret out a bad stick - memtect86+ will work for the OOB test you describe. But, any modern bios will quickly identify a bad stick/slot too - so MT86+_ etc are pretty much dinosaurs. To test the stability of a ram OC, Scone is right.


Thanks!


----------



## arrow0309

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ram help *here*
> need to know the exact ram kit


Those I have i sig








However I'm close (and gonna post there also), stable with 17-18-17 (which are performance wise in aida cachemem better than 16-18-18).
I was previously having errors at 16-18-16.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schoolofmonkey*
> 
> Hardware Unboxing found something similar:
> 
> __
> http://instagr.am/p/BWysDUalr2k%2F/


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Wow @1.25V.


I don't think that should be taken as an evidence, I saw some posts suspecting earlier that he had used a mobo with misaligned pins and that would well explain the burn marks due to poor contact. I've only once seen this myself, with my Core 2 Extreme [email protected] V on a cheapo mobo.







Just be reasonable with Vcore and I don't think this will happen. I already checked my 7980XE pins after torturing it with Prime95 for hours and all has been good. I would think delidding a 7980XE + running higher clocks then with Prime95 = extreme current through pins and possible burn marks . So the TIM kinda works as a safety measure, at least for me.


----------



## crpcookie

What does everyone's 7980XE @ stock clock score in CPU-Z's bench? Mine only gets 6700 and the referenced score is much higher than that. My Cinebench score is around 3300 so that's on par with the norm. Either my system is throttling or something is up.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crpcookie*
> 
> What does everyone's 7980XE @ stock clock score in CPU-Z's bench? Mine only gets 6700 and the referenced score is much higher than that. My Cinebench score is around 3300 so that's on par with the norm. Either my system is throttling or something is up.


a. what version (cpuz)
b. Windows updated on me, so I had to remove Intel's Turbo Boost again...
c. cpuz is a pretty lame measure of anything...
d. check your power settings - peg it to 100% minimum processor state for benchmarking

4.5Ghz:
535.6/8903 (did not disable apps, set real-time, etc.... just ran it as-is)

CBR15 is ~4350-4450 for this setup depending on how careful I am when I run it.


----------



## crpcookie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> a. what version (cpuz)
> b. Windows updated on me, so I had to remove Intel's Turbo Boost again...
> c. cpuz is a pretty lame measure of anything...
> d. check your power settings - peg it to 100% minimum processor state for benchmarking
> 
> 4.5Ghz:
> 535.6/8903 (did not disable apps, set real-time, etc.... just ran it as-is)
> 
> CBR15 is ~4350-4450 for this setup depending on how careful I am when I run it.


CPU-Z 1.82.0
I'm just using CPU-Z to compare to the baseline. Their referenced 7980XE gets 8899 at supposedly stock clocks and mine only got 6700.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crpcookie*
> 
> CPU-Z 1.82.0
> I'm just using CPU-Z to compare to the baseline. Their referenced 7980XE gets 8899 at supposedly stock clocks and mine only got 6700.


disable intel turbo-boost (uninstall, actually configure or kill the ITBM*.exe - don't recall the exact name) and set minimum processor state/frequency to 100%.

Then re-run.

I have no idea if that cpuz submission is actually stock. It seems odly close to my significantly OC'd setup. So, either confirming the crap nature of the benchmark, or perhaps the "reference" submission was not stock?

I confirmed just now that my CBR15 is as advertized in my prior post after the windows update.


----------



## crpcookie

Oh I did all of that already. Cinebench score is fine; only CPU-Z has a much lower score.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crpcookie*
> 
> Oh I did all of that already. Cinebench score is fine; only CPU-Z has a much lower score.


Well, I call Shenanigans on that "reference"... I'm guessing it is a 4.4-4.5GHz OC submission not stock.

I just F5'd my bios and disabled MCE and got this:


However, it does suggest something is a amiss with your setup...

Cleaned up your running processes and services? Bloat-ware? Clean windows install?


----------



## Hydroplane

Got my system all fired up, temps with the EK Monoblock on the 7980XE so far are as low as 24C idle (barely above room temperature) and a max of 50C on one core in prime95. Not bad for a stock 18 core


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Got my system all fired up, temps with the EK Monoblock on the 7980XE so far are as low as 24C idle (barely above room temperature) *and a max of 50C on one core in prime95.* Not bad for a stock 18 core


what did you do, break p95's knees? Somethin' ain't right.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> what did you do, break p95's knees? Somethin' ain't right.


If you disable MCE and don't OC, its tough to find a pulse on this puppy... Heat sink? Never heard of her...









but... but.... why would you do that? If I wanted 18 slow cores, I'd buy 3 Ryzen 5's heh, heh, heh...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> If you disable MCE and don't OC, its tough to find a pulse on this puppy... Heat sink? Never heard of her...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but... but.... why would you do that? If I wanted 18 slow cores, I'd buy 3 Ryzen 5's heh, heh, heh...


ah... I only boot once at stock.









yo - what do you think about that Volta surprise?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ah... I only boot once at stock.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yo - what do you think about that Volta surprise?


"because they can" LOL

That's about it. No need for it right now for me. That could change, but until it does...


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> "because they can" LOL
> 
> That's about it. No need for it right now for me. That could change, but until it does...


I want to see some ISV Certification or at least some type of support before I can consider it.

I rather pay 2k more for quadro at that point if there is a need tbh. The lack of certifications concerns me.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> I want to see some ISV Certification or at least some type of support before I can consider it.
> 
> I rather pay 2k more for quadro at that point if there is a need tbh. The lack of certifications concerns me.


Yeah, its in that dead-zone of not expensive enough to be worth it and not cheap enough to not care about the added cost.

As I said, that could change if I find I can find a use-case that justifies it, but until then 4 ti's is more appealing.


----------



## Jpmboy

I got one incoming monday. If it a WOW, i'll keep it. If not, I'll eat the shipping costs.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I got one incoming monday. If it a WOW, i'll keep it. If not, I'll eat the shipping costs.


Not sure how I'd define "wow enough" right now, but again that may change - we'll see...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Not sure how I'd define "wow enough" right now, but again that may change - we'll see...


been expecting volta as a 2018 thing, but with no SLI support and very unlikely to see water blocks any time soon, lets see if it's worth the 3Gs for anything outside compute. I'll have same rig comparisons to TXp and TXP.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> been expecting volta as a 2018 thing, but with no SLI support and very unlikely to see water blocks any time soon, lets see if it's worth the 3Gs for anything outside compute. I'll have same rig comparisons to TXp and TXP.


I will be curious to see if it can beat 1080 Ti SLI, then I will have to join the club


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> I will be curious to see if it can beat 1080 Ti SLI, then I will have to join the club


well.. I can only tell ya if it beats TXp and TXP SLi.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> been expecting volta as a 2018 thing, but with no SLI support and very unlikely to see water blocks any time soon, lets see if it's worth the 3Gs for anything outside compute. I'll have same rig comparisons to TXp and TXP.


I am going to wait and see if it's worth 3K. They will probably come out with one twice as fast and half the price in the first quarter of next year. Besides I need new speakers for my theater before I get a new card. Looking forward to your review.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> been expecting volta as a 2018 thing, but with no SLI support and very unlikely to see water blocks any time soon, lets see if it's worth the 3Gs for anything outside compute. I'll have same rig comparisons to TXp and TXP.


I was contemplating ordering this morning, decided to let the caffeine start working before making a decision and wait to see someone else test it first


----------



## Hydroplane

Doing some preliminary testing. I set the voltage at 1.000V and the multi at 40. Here are the results running P95 small FFTs:



Vdroop down to 0.93, lol. Here is the power draw at the wall:



I tried in-place large FFTs as well:



Amazing how much cooler it runs, plus this test only pulls 360W at the wall! Funny enough, I could run the hotter small FFTs all day, but the large FFTs will BSOD after about a minute.

My water comes out of the CPU into the GPUs, core temps there were 27C so the water is staying nice and cool, probably don't need to keep these fans at 3000 rpm lol

Edit: These tests were with 0 on the avx offsets.I added -3/-5 and now the prime95 tests run at 3.7 GHz. Cinebench runs at the full 4 GHz. Guess I will need to find a new stress test that doesn't use AVX


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I am going to wait and see if it's worth 3K. They will probably come out with one twice as fast and half the price in the first quarter of next year. Besides I need new speakers for my theater before I get a new card. Looking forward to your review.


Hi,
Indeed 3k plus tax and possibly shipping is free but still a large pill to swallow








https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/titan/titan-v/


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I am going to wait and see if it's worth 3K. They will probably come out with one twice as fast and half the price in the first quarter of next year. Besides I need new speakers for my theater before I get a new card. Looking forward to your review.


and then twice as fast as that in the third quarter. welcome to the bleeding edge of HEDT.








I do feel bad for any "star wars" edition buyers tho.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I was contemplating ordering this morning, decided to let the caffeine start working before making a decision and wait to see someone else test it first


lol - I think I had too much caffeine and just said fkit, and hit the buy now button. Unfortunately I was hoping volta would be 2018 and support multiple gpus. You did buy 4 TXps , yes?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> and then twice as fast as that in the third quarter. welcome to the bleeding edge of HEDT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do feel bad for any "star wars" edition buyers tho.
> lol - I think I had too much caffeine and just said fkit, and hit the buy now button. Unfortunately I was hoping volta would be 2018 and support multiple gpus. You did buy 4 TXps , yes?


I was expecting 2018 first quarter also but I am sure once you tell me how fast this card is I will brake down and buy.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I was expecting 2018 first quarter also but I am sure once you tell me how fast this card is I will brake down and buy.


not sure it's gonna be that simple - I'm not sure how to get a cold plate or waterblock on the core....


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not sure it's gonna be that simple - I'm not sure how to get a cold plate or waterblock on the core....


From the picture it sure looks different than the Titan Xp. Might have to wait.....


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not sure it's gonna be that simple - I'm not sure how to get a cold plate or waterblock on the core....


If you care to run a specperfwise 12 test for me, that would be awesome! Just stock will do.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> If you care to run a specperfwise 12 test for me, that would be awesome! Just stock will do.


no idea what you are asking for. specperfwise?


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> no idea what you are asking for. specperfwise?


https://www.spec.org/gwpg/gpc.static/vp12info.html

Sorry, typo.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> https://www.spec.org/gwpg/gpc.static/vp12info.html
> 
> Sorry, typo.


\

which one?


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> \
> 
> which one?


You should be able to batch run all of them with the official run option.


----------



## Hydroplane

Turned off the AVX in prime95, runs a lot cooler now, lol. Needed to test it at the full clock speed.

I'm up to 4.2 GHz 1.05v


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> and then twice as fast as that in the third quarter. welcome to the bleeding edge of HEDT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do feel bad for any "star wars" edition buyers tho.
> lol - I think I had too much caffeine and just said fkit, and hit the buy now button. Unfortunately I was hoping volta would be 2018 and support multiple gpus. You did buy 4 TXps , yes?


I had 4 TXP's, then 2 TXp's, only keep one TXp.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> You should be able to batch run all of them with the official run option.


so you are referring to the general benchmark, not teh 3ds or other app-specific ones. yeah - I'll get to it. (it's a 3.7GB download wth?)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I had 4 TXP's, then 2 TXp's, only keep one TXp.


... I'm thinking little Indians there. (great old sherlock movie)


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I had 4 TXP's, then 2 TXp's, only keep one TXp.


4 calling birds, 3 french hens... 2 turtle doves.... and a beer! in a tree.

At least for my very specific purposes the tensor cores are not as valuable as they might be for pure AI work - though again - that might change.

So, I'll be patient for now. If [email protected] panels finally become a thing, then I might become less patient.


----------



## Hydroplane

Up to 4.3 GHz now with 1.10 vcore in the bios, well almost 4.4 sometimes lol because the bclk keeps bouncing around, that's probably not good for stability, gonna see if there's a setting in the bios to stabilize it.

Temps look good (large FFTs no AVX, seems to stress stability the most) not bad for no delid, I bet with further tweaking I can get to 4.5


----------



## ESRCJ

So my new memory kit came in today. It's 32GB (4x8) Trident Z RGB at 3600MHz with timings C16 16-16-36 for XMP. My previous stability has gone out the window. Previously, I has 4.7GHz on my 7920X stable with the voltage offset at 0.001. I can't even run 15 minutes of the Realbench stress test anymore with those voltages. I dialed things back down to 4.6GHz with 1.21V across all cores (for now). Stability isn't an issue anymore, but I can't help but ask if my temps are a little too high for my cooling. Below are the max temps during a 15 minute stress test in Realbench with 8GB of memory tested:



For cooling, I have a custom loop with a 480 rad and a 360 rad. I have a RVIE monoblock cooling the CPU and VRM. Am I crazy or are these temps a little absurd?


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> So my new memory kit came in today. It's 32GB (4x8) Trident Z RGB at 3600MHz with timings C16 16-16-36 for XMP. My previous stability has gone out the window. Previously, I has 4.7GHz on my 7920X stable with the voltage offset at 0.001. I can't even run 15 minutes of the Realbench stress test anymore with those voltages. I dialed things back down to 4.6GHz with 1.21V across all cores (for now). Stability isn't an issue anymore, but I can't help but ask if my temps are a little too high for my cooling. Below are the max temps during a 15 minute stress test in Realbench with 8GB of memory tested:
> 
> 
> 
> For cooling, I have a custom loop with a 480 rad and a 360 rad. I have a RVIE monoblock cooling the CPU and VRM. Am I crazy or are these temps a little absurd?


With a clock of 5.0 Ghz and a Vcore of 1.225 and My temps are nowhere near yours, as in not that low! My package temps are peaking about 92C and average core loaded around 80C with 3.2 Ghz and 1.116V on the cache. Im running a 7900X
Im running 2x 480 rads with dual D5s in series.


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> With a clock of 5.0 Ghz and a Vcore of 1.225 and My temps are nowhere near yours, as in not that low! My package temps are peaking about 92C and average core loaded around 80C with 3.2 Ghz and 1.116V on the cache. Im running a 7900X
> Im running 2x 480 rads with dual D5s in series.


Only a Vcore of 1.225 across all cores for 5GHz across all cores?! That makes my chip look like an extreme lottery loser because I can't even hit 4.9 across all cores. Is yours delidded?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> and then twice as fast as that in the third quarter. welcome to the bleeding edge of HEDT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do feel bad for any "star wars" edition buyers tho.
> lol - I think I had too much caffeine and just said fkit, and hit the buy now button. Unfortunately I was hoping volta would be 2018 and support multiple gpus. You did buy 4 TXps , yes?


Which is why you really should wait, but that's easier said than done







.

NVIDIA said publicly that Volta was too expensive for consumer grade solutions at a reasonable price. Buying this TITAN, you're throwing money at NVIDIA in a charitable fashion. I suppose the upshot is the values will retain much like they did with Kepler. On the flip side, it's likely for gaming this card will have a fairly short shelf life indeed in terms of being top dog.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> So my new memory kit came in today. It's 32GB (4x8) Trident Z RGB at 3600MHz with timings C16 16-16-36 for XMP. My previous stability has gone out the window. Previously, I has 4.7GHz on my 7920X stable with the voltage offset at 0.001. I can't even run 15 minutes of the Realbench stress test anymore with those voltages. I dialed things back down to 4.6GHz with 1.21V across all cores (for now). Stability isn't an issue anymore, but I can't help but ask if my temps are a little too high for my cooling. Below are the max temps during a 15 minute stress test in Realbench with 8GB of memory tested:
> 
> For cooling, I have a custom loop with a 480 rad and a 360 rad. I have a RVIE monoblock cooling the CPU and VRM. Am I crazy or are these temps a little absurd?


I think those temps are fine, that's about where mine tops out in the more stressful tests.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Which is why you really should wait, but that's easier said than done
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> NVIDIA said publicly that Volta was too expensive for consumer grade solutions at a reasonable price. Buying this TITAN, you're throwing money at NVIDIA in a charitable fashion. I suppose the upshot is the values will retain much like they did with Kepler. On the flip side, it's likely for gaming this card will have a fairly short shelf life indeed in terms of being top dog.


Yep - this is not a rationale purchase. But you know, if it is a dog, it goes back. I'll get the first hand info. also, Jab333, Callsignvega and Zurv have 'em coming in this week.
besides - when you're my age, waiting is not an option 'cause there's always something on the horizon to wait for.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Only a Vcore of 1.225 across all cores for 5GHz across all cores?! That makes my chip look like an extreme lottery loser because I can't even hit 4.9 across all cores. Is yours delidded?


Hi,
At least you Mesh/ LLC clock maxed at 3000.1 MHz but yours seems to fluctuate from min at 895.9
Not sure I want the fluctuating but I would want the 3k








Also it's min is 9x max 30x

Mine is frozen at 2700MHz and 27x but is the same across min and max :/
http://www.overclock.net/t/1643516/oc-advice-on-settings-for-i9-7900x/0_20


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Only a Vcore of 1.225 across all cores for 5GHz across all cores?! That makes my chip look like an extreme lottery loser because I can't even hit 4.9 across all cores. Is yours delidded?


I cheated and bought a delidded binned chip from silicon lottery. Yes 5GHz on all cores.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Yep - this is not a rationale purchase. But you know, if it is a dog, it goes back. I'll get the first hand info. also, Jab333, Callsignvega and Zurv have 'em coming in this week.
> besides - when you're my age, waiting is not an option 'cause there's always something on the horizon to wait for.


Jp, have you deilidded your 7980 yet?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Jp, have you deilidded your 7980 yet?


yes. a few days ago.


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> At least you Mesh/ LLC clock maxed at 3000.1 MHz but yours seems to fluctuate from min at 895.9
> Not sure I want the fluctuating but I would want the 3k
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also it's min is 9x max 30x
> 
> Mine is frozen at 2700MHz and 27x but is the same across min and max :/
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1643516/oc-advice-on-settings-for-i9-7900x/0_20


It's at 3000 during the stress test and clocks down at idle I believe. I have everything set to auto for the mesh except the max speed.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> I cheated and bought a delidded binned chip from silicon lottery. Yes 5GHz on all cores.


Worth it. That's a golden chip.


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes. a few days ago.


Did that allow higher clocks?
What mem kit are you using?
How are you going to fell when I beat your benchmark scores?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> Did that allow higher clocks?
> What mem kit are you using?
> How are you going to fell when I beat your benchmark scores?


yes
2 3600c15 kits
wouldn't be the first time.


----------



## Batboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> It's at 3000 during the stress test and clocks down at idle I believe. I have everything set to auto for the mesh except the max speed.
> Worth it. That's a golden chip.


There's quite a few sellers on Ebay selling some nicely binned chips...seem to alll clock and will hit 5ghz. More like stuff with different mobos and with voltage. the Strix was more like 1.35v with heavy LLC, I don't see any LLC control in the Bios for this Gigabyte board. guess it don't have any so it's more like 1.38-1.4v beastin along with 3200mhz some decent radness.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yes. a few days ago.


I'll be interested to see how many MHz can be gained with a delid


----------



## ESRCJ

Has anyone here given per core overclocking a try? I just gave it a shot starting last night since I figured I might as well boost my single core performance for a few applications that aren't multithreaded. I had my two best cores at 4.8, two others at 4.7, and the rest at 4.6. Temps were more or less the same for the package as my 4.6 OC on all cores. I had no issues with Prime95 small or large FFTs. However, when I gave Realbench a try, I ran into instability. I found this odd, since it's usually the other way around: stability with RB, but instability with Prime.

I ran each core in offset mode, with negative and positive offsets depending on the core. My goal was to keep all of the 4.6 cores at 1.21V, while giving the 4.7 and 4.8 cores whatever they needed for stability. The highest voltage on a core is 1.25, whereas the lowest is 1.21. I always run these tests with my power management set to "balanced." Does anyone see any issues with the way I'm going about this? I'm thinking I shouldn't even bother with RealBench if I don't run into issues anywhere else.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Worth it. That's a golden chip.


Its a 4.8Ghz bin but turns out it does much better. Yes well worth it IMO. I watched what they were doing what for awhile before spending the extra $$$. After seeing the 4.5 and 4.6 Delidded chips pile up and the fact that he now offers a 1 year warranty is what ultimately made my mind up. I delid it and its on me. No option for replacement on a $1000 chip. For these guys you cant tell what its going to do with a level of certainty until you pop the lid. If they were showing up with most of them being able to hit a decent clock I may have gone a different route.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Has anyone here given per core overclocking a try? I just gave it a shot starting last night since I figured I might as well boost my single core performance for a few applications that aren't multithreaded. I had my two best cores at 4.8, two others at 4.7, and the rest at 4.6. Temps were more or less the same for the package as my 4.6 OC on all cores. I had no issues with Prime95 small or large FFTs. However, when I gave Realbench a try, I ran into instability. I found this odd, since it's usually the other way around: stability with RB, but instability with Prime.
> 
> I ran each core in offset mode, with negative and positive offsets depending on the core. My goal was to keep all of the 4.6 cores at 1.21V, while giving the 4.7 and 4.8 cores whatever they needed for stability. The highest voltage on a core is 1.25, whereas the lowest is 1.21. I always run these tests with my power management set to "balanced." Does anyone see any issues with the way I'm going about this? I'm thinking I shouldn't even bother with RealBench if I don't run into issues anywhere else.


Im the other way around. If it wont make it through realbench its not going to be able to make it though heavy workloads. Prime95=how to turn a CPU into a space heater and is good for testing out your cooling solution....Thats my opion anyhow.


----------



## Batboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Its a 4.8Ghz bin but turns out it does much better. Yes well worth it IMO. I watched what they were doing what for awhile before spending the extra $$$. After seeing the 4.5 and 4.6 Delidded chips pile up and the fact that he now offers a 1 year warranty is what ultimately made my mind up. I delid it and its on me. No option for replacement on a $1000 chip. For these guys you cant tell what its going to do with a level of certainty until you pop the lid. If they were showing up with most of them being able to hit a decent clock I may have gone a different route.
> Im the other way around. If it wont make it through realbench its not going to be able to make it though heavy workloads. Prime95=how to turn a CPU into a space heater and is good for testing out your cooling solution....Thats my opion anyhow.


Probaly needs more vcore, probably need to be closer to 1.3v, I think should just throw 1.375-1.4v at it and see if it will do 5ghz it should. Raddddd man...Gigabyte winssss man Raddd the Red Fusion RGB strip is coolllll.


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Batboy*
> 
> Probaly needs more vcore, probably need to be closer to 1.3v, I think should just throw 1.375-1.4v at it and see if it will do 5ghz it should. Raddddd man...Gigabyte winssss man Raddd the Red Fusion RGB strip is coolllll.


It's doing 5GHz on 1.225 Vcore and 3.2 GHz cache on 1.116V memory at XMP 3800 MHz. No need to cook it! ?


----------



## Batboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> It's doing 5GHz on 1.225 Vcore and 3.2 GHz cache on 1.116V memory at XMP 3800 MHz. No need to cook it! ?


well it it's taking me still like 1.38-1.4v volt to pass Realbench it froze and got a whea error...that's definitely the volts lol...it passes now man. is this a bad chip? or just the mobo? idk. Find somebody that can fix the strix man, think with that other chip and it passed at 1.35-1.375v. idk didn't run it or have it long.. with liquid pro fell off the lid on to the dram pins part of the socket used wayyyy too much man...****ty luck man...maybe it like leaked down into the socket or something idk and definitely fell off onto the board and ****.....

More interested in the Crack speed Rock LOL EVGA superSc here...3200mhz and board and xmp auto it to like 1.36v I think i'll just leave it alone..what like 16-18-18-38? it is dopeee dude rock stable...still tempting what the headroom is. assuming could get 3400-3500mhz out of it?


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Batboy*
> 
> well it it's taking me still like 1.38-1.4v volt to pass Realbench it froze and got a whea error...that's definitely the volts lol...it passes now man. is this a bad chip? or just the mobo? idk. Find somebody that can fix the strix man, think with that other chip and it passed at 1.35-1.375v. idk didn't run it or have it long.. with liquid pro fell off the lid on to the dram pins part of the socket used wayyyy too much man...****ty luck man...maybe it like leaked down into the socket or something idk and definitely fell off onto the board and ****.....
> 
> More interested in the Crack speed Rock LOL EVGA superSc here...3200mhz and board and xmp auto it to like 1.36v I think i'll just leave it alone..what like 16-18-18-38? it is dopeee dude rock stable...still tempting what the headroom is. assuming could get 3400-3500mhz out of it?


Dunno what chip you are running at those voltages but that would cook a SkylakeX chip unless your using LN2. I don't even think phase change could keep up with it. I'm running a 7900X and 1.3V at 5.1 GHz is too hot to tame on liquid loops. I can get it through one round of real bench with 20 fans screaming but that puts it teetering on a thermal shut down.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
If anyone wants a new test
Blender rendering is pretty good BMW and Classroom








https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/


----------



## Hydroplane

I went from a 440 cinebench on a Q9550 to a 4400 cinebench on the 7980XE, it's pretty crazy to realize my CPU is now 10 times faster


----------



## DualCpuUser

PLEASE POST largest pics possible. @ 4k monitors the pics are to small to see.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DualCpuUser*
> 
> PLEASE POST largest pics possible. @ 4k monitors the pics are to small to see.


You do know the pics in the thread are thumbnails?

Click on them, then click the "show original" at the lower right in the photo viewer that comes up when you click on the photo.


----------



## cekim

@LunaP @Jpmboy

(and any 7980xe tuners)

I bumped my VCCIN to 2.0 (then back to 1.9v because it doesn't seem to matter) and VCCSA to 0.95v
The result was:
Core: 4.5GHz (non-AVX - same as before - it will do 4.6 and 4.7 at higher Vcore, but not at 24/7 power/temp levels AFAIC)
Cache: 3.1 (previously 3.0 - even 1.15v would not allow > 3.0GHz)

VCORE: 1.16v (previously required 1.175v)
VCACHE: 1.10v (previously 1.05v for 3.0 --- > 3.0 was not stable)
VCCIN: 1.9v
VCCSA: 0.95v

LunaP in particular - you have ludicrously low VCORE (1.10-1.12v last I heard). Can I ask what your VCCIN is these days?

The bump from 3.1GHz mesh/cache is nice... That's become such a choke point that even 100MHz shows up quickly in real and synthetic numbers.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> @LunaP @Jpmboy
> 
> (and any 7980xe tuners)
> 
> I bumped my VCCIN to 2.0 (then back to 1.9v because it doesn't seem to matter) and VCCSA to 0.95v
> The result was:
> Core: 4.5GHz (non-AVX - same as before - it will do 4.6 and 4.7 at higher Vcore, but not at 24/7 power/temp levels AFAIC)
> Cache: 3.1 (previously 3.0 - even 1.15v would not allow > 3.0GHz)
> 
> VCORE: 1.16v (previously required 1.175v)
> VCACHE: 1.10v (previously 1.05v for 3.0 --- > 3.0 was not stable)
> VCCIN: 1.9v
> VCCSA: 0.95v
> 
> LunaP in particular - you have ludicrously low VCORE (1.10-1.12v last I heard). Can I ask what your VCCIN is these days?
> 
> The bump from 3.1GHz mesh/cache is nice... That's become such a choke point that even 100MHz shows up quickly in real and synthetic numbers.


thanks. Yeah, VCCIN supplies all the on die rails, I'd keep it at 1.9-ish. 2.0 is.. danger Will Robinson.








I'll see if it helps here too.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> thanks. Yeah, VCCIN supplies all the on die rails, I'd keep it at 1.9-ish. 2.0 is.. danger Will Robinson.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll see if it helps here too.


Funny thing is R6E bios "auto" is 2.0v... So, yeah... there's that.

EDIT1:
Looking like LLC6 vs LLC5 might have the same effect with VCCIN @ 1.85v.

So, that suggests the ultimate issue for me is droop.

EDIT2: eventual miscompare, but better than the MCEs I used to get... so maybe 1.87v? trying now


----------



## crpcookie

Anyone messed with these before?
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Skylake-X-Delid-i7-i9-Kupfer-IHS-HCC-7920x-7940x-7960x-7980xe/192389719034?hash=item2ccb5223fa:guYAAOSwLdBaKTQw


----------



## Batboy

Afraid to even try with the Delid Tool...one little nick in the top of the pcb is all it takes man...


----------



## crpcookie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Batboy*
> 
> Afraid to even try with the Delid Tool...one little nick in the top of the pcb is all it takes man...


My first delid was with a 7980XE. It ain't that hard actually.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Batboy*
> 
> Afraid to even try with the Delid Tool...one little nick in the top of the pcb is all it takes man...


What motherboard model do you have and what is your overclock?


----------



## Batboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What motherboard model do you have and what is your overclock?


It's the Z270x Ultra gaming and I'm at 5ghz. so far so good and temps are not too bad.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Batboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> What motherboard model do you have and what is your overclock?
> 
> 
> 
> It's the Z270x Ultra gaming and I'm at 5ghz. so far so good and temps are not too bad.
Click to expand...

Wow that is great.


----------



## Batboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Wow that is great.


Yeah, pretty nice but on big Air I just don't know if that's going to stay cool it warms back up or not. fearing it might go to 90-100c again or something. Validated and confirmed man passes approval 100% Lol


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> You do know the pics in the thread are thumbnails?
> 
> Click on them, then click the "show original" at the lower right in the photo viewer that comes up when you click on the photo.


Actually that rarely works at least at my work or at home with my ISP resulting in a blank page. I always have to right-click on the "show original" and then "open link in another tab". I guess that's because it uses some redirecting service...which almost never works and this workaround seems to bypass the redirecting service.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Actually that rarely works at least at my work or at home with my ISP resulting in a blank page. I always have to right-click on the "show original" and then "open link in another tab". I guess that's because it uses some redirecting service...which almost never works and this workaround seems to bypass the redirecting service.


Browser issue? Chrome and FF seem to work fine for me as does safari come to think of it.


----------



## Silent Scone

Never had that issue in any browser. You sure you don't have some kind of popup blocker enabled?


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Browser issue? Chrome and FF seem to work fine for me as does safari come to think of it.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Never had that issue in any browser. You sure you don't have some kind of popup blocker enabled?


Hmm...might actually be adblock blocking viglink. Thanks.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Actually that rarely works at least at my work or at home with my ISP resulting in a blank page. I always have to right-click on the "show original" and then "open link in another tab". I guess that's because it uses some redirecting service...which almost never works and this workaround seems to bypass the redirecting service.


I used to get that same symptom with Firefox, not with Opera which I'm using now.


----------



## Hydroplane

So far stable results for this 7980XE have been:

4.3 @ 1.1v
4.4 @ 1.13v
4.5 @ 1.19v

At 4.5 three of the cores are over 100c so that's about the limit of a non-delidded chip. Though two of the cores are still at 70c so it's very inconsistent. And this is with 26c water through the block, lol. Also managed to pull 665W from the wall.

I did manage to hit 4467 in cinebench though. With some mesh/memory tweaking I should hit 1 point per mhz. Single core score is 202, faster than an 8700K at the stock 4.7 boost









Any settings that would help lower vcore? Gonna try setting the vccin to 1.9v.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> So far stable results for this 7980XE have been:
> 
> 4.3 @ 1.1v
> 4.4 @ 1.13v
> 4.5 @ 1.19v
> 
> At 4.5 three of the cores are over 100c so that's about the limit of a non-delidded chip. Though two of the cores are still at 70c so it's very inconsistent. And this is with 26c water through the block, lol. Also managed to pull 665W from the wall.
> 
> I did manage to hit 4467 in cinebench though. With some mesh/memory tweaking I should hit 1 point per mhz. Single core score is 202, faster than an 8700K at the stock 4.7 boost
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any settings that would help lower vcore? Gonna try setting the vccin to 1.9v.


Your results seem roughly inline with what I've seen before and after delidding.

Your slightly higher VCore requirements are no doubt aggravated by high core temp (non-delid). I needed 1.185 for 4.5GHz prior to delidding and mid-to-high 90's on 2 hot cores. high 70's on others. I can do 1.16v post delid for 4.5GHz

Post delid and LM (monoblock) - I see VERY tight typical temps (everything within 2-4C on all 18 cores when running identical loads), but I have a 10C spread from top-to-bottom for the peak temp.

With a 360XE push/pull at 100% fans, I barely break 70C on any core under any load. Of course, I tend to keep the fans MUCH lower than that normally as at that speed, it sounds like a rack-mount server during boot-up.

Typical 18-core compute load is more like 55-60C peak.
BF1 is 43-46C, but so far as I'm aware, no game is making use of all these cores, so that's not a surprise.

Looks like the read-out on the OLED I/O shield of the R6E is core0 temp? Not packge (its lower than package), that seems like a poor choice.


----------



## ESRCJ

It seems like the only instability I come across is when I set the mesh ratio to 30. Leaving it at Auto puts it at 27. I'd like to keep it at 30 though or even go for 32. I've kept the voltage at Auto. Does anyone have any recommendations for the cache voltage at a ratio of 30-32? I also can't seem to find the voltages in any of my monitoring software.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> It seems like the only instability I come across is when I set the mesh ratio to 30. Leaving it at Auto puts it at 27. I'd like to keep it at 30 though or even go for 32. I've kept the voltage at Auto. Does anyone have any recommendations for the cache voltage at a ratio of 30-32? I also can't seem to find the voltages in any of my monitoring software.


For me (7980xe):
30: 1.05v (VCCIN 1.85 UNCORE Auto)
31: 1.10-1.15 with VCCIN 1.9+ and UNCORE +0.100 (not stable to where I trust it yet, just discovered that VCCIN and UNCORE hikes can help me here - but I need more run-time to trust it).

Others have reported as high as 32 @ 1.10v so your mileage may vary lower core-count may tolerate higher mesh.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> For me (7980xe):
> 30: 1.05v (VCCIN 1.85 UNCORE Auto)
> 31: 1.10-1.15 with VCCIN 1.9+ and UNCORE +0.100 (not stable to where I trust it yet, just discovered that VCCIN and UNCORE hikes can help me here - but I need more run-time to trust it).
> 
> Others have reported as high as 32 @ 1.10v so your mileage may vary lower core-count may tolerate higher mesh.


Thanks for sharing your numbers. I have VCCIN set to auto in the bios and I'm seeing it at 1.968 in HWinfo. I'm considering lowering it for the sake of thermals, especially since auto settings always seem to overshoot.

Update: So I lowered VCCIN to 1.85 and this lowered max core temps by 4 degrees in the Realbench stress test (15 minutes). I then increased the cache voltage to 1.05 and the ratio to 30, which was stable in Realbench (my previous attempts always failed after 8 minutes of RB stress test). However, this increased max core temp by 6 degrees. So all-in-all, I've managed to get my precious mesh to 30 at a 2 degree cost. I will see if I can hit 3.1 at the same voltage and lower VCCIN a little more. I know stress test temps don't really matter, but I want it all dammit.


----------



## nyxagamemnon

So how feasible would it be to run a 7980XE @ 4.5ghz without delid? R6E? Or would a 7960x be a safer bet with 2 less cores?

I need to get more cores than the 7900x I have but want to maintain as high clock speeds as possible as well.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyxagamemnon*
> 
> So how feasible would it be to run a 7980XE @ 4.5ghz without delid? R6E? Or would a 7960x be a safer bet with 2 less cores?
> 
> I need to get more cores than the 7900x I have but want to maintain as high clock speeds as possible as well.


Hi,
All of the x line is hot even the kabylake x series
So as long as you don't skimp on cpu coolers you should be okay although once you start at a cpu with a default clock as low as 2.6 it's a long way to 4.5








My 7900x default clock is 3.3 so 4.5 isn't all that far away but temps are pretty high just going that distance on a corsair h115i temps were still too high for me
Even a EK 280 performance didn't make it all that much better maybe 5-10c

But 5 0 without a delid is not going to happen not without a expensive chiller and one would probably still need to live in the arctic


----------



## nyxagamemnon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> All of the x line is hot even the kabylake x series
> So as long as you don't skimp on cpu coolers you should be okay although once you start at a cpu with a default clock as low as 2.6 it's a long way to 4.5
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My 7900x default clock is 3.3 so 4.5 isn't all that far away but temps are pretty high just going that distance on a corsair h115i temps were still too high for me
> Even a EK 280 performance didn't make it all that much better maybe 5-10c
> 
> But 5 0 without a delid is not going to happen not without a expensive chiller and one would probably still need to live in the arctic


I'm already running a 7900x @ 4.7Ghz with a custom loop none delid. I need to reduce build times and Right now it's taking about 12 hours to do a build if I can cut that down with more cores I'd go for it. I'm just debating the 7960x vs 7980xe and the terrible power usage and crap temps Using an AX1500i with a R6E, It's just I know how hot these chips get and frankly the 16-18 cores scare me cause this 7900x is at the limits and it's 10 cores.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyxagamemnon*
> 
> I'm already running a 7900x @ 4.7Ghz with a custom loop none delid. I need to reduce build times and Right now it's taking about 12 hours to do a build if I can cut that down with more cores I'd go for it. I'm just debating the 7960x vs 7980xe and the terrible power usage and crap temps Using an AX1500i with a R6E, It's just I know how hot these chips get and frankly the 16-18 cores scare me cause this 7900x is at the limits and it's 10 cores.


Hi,
Indeed to get the same clock "as you say 4.7" on something that has a lower default clock speed would be even more difficult was all I was saying









More cores more heat
Although I have been playing around with by core usage and limiting the active cores at one time to 5 at 4.7 and the rest at 4.4 temps are better than running all cores at 4.7.


----------



## nyxagamemnon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Indeed to get the same clock "as you say 4.7" on something that has a lower default clock speed would be even more difficult was all I was saying
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More cores more heat
> Although I have been playing around with by core usage and limiting the active cores at one time to 5 at 4.7 and the rest at 4.4 temps are better than running all cores at 4.7.


Oh yeah I don't expect 4.7, but I'd want 4.5 at least.

Just going back and forth from the 7960x vs 7980xe.


----------



## Silent Scone

7940X @ 4.7 is looking pretty good right now







.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyxagamemnon*
> 
> Oh yeah I don't expect 4.7, but I'd want 4.5 at least.
> 
> Just going back and forth from the 7960x vs 7980xe.


Hi,
Use rig builder and add a picture of your loop
I'd love to see it


----------



## Menthol

What is better for 3D benching purposes with a 7980, all core overclock or per core?
What clock do you need to reach on custom water to make delidding one worthwhile or just sell and try again?


----------



## czin125

https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f139/intel-skylake-x-und-kaby-lake-x-sockel-2066-oc-ergebnis-thread-kein-quatschthread-1172691.html
Some cpus seem to perform better at different clocks?

4900mhz 1.180v L716B767
5000mhz 1.250v L716B767

4900mhz 1.195v L716B651
5000mhz 1.245v L716B651


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> What is better for 3D benching purposes with a 7980, all core overclock or per core?
> What clock do you need to reach on custom water to make delidding one worthwhile or just sell and try again?


Hi,
All core is going to create more heat than using by core usage and only using half cores at say 4.7 and the rest at 4.4 or so
That is what I've been testing with and seeing good temps with a little lower oc scores
I doubt it would be any different with higher cores counts like the 7980...

Delid is something to think about and it wasn't easy for me to do
I got my return warranty extended to 30 days instore while I worked out a cooling system
Last day I just flipped a coin and delid came up 2 out of 3


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> 7940X @ 4.7 is looking pretty good right now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


The 7940x seems to be the best value on the big slx cpu's.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> The 7940x seems to be the best value on the big slx cpu's.


yep - 2 more cores than a 6950X... and can hit the needed clocks to actually perform better than the 6950X.


----------



## Martin778

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yep - *2* 4 more cores than a 6950X... and can hit the needed clocks to actually perform better than the 6950X.











I'd say 7920X is the sweetspot


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd say 7920X is the sweetspot


Nah. 7940x all the way









That said, its close between these 2. 7930x would be sweetspot


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Nah. 7940x all the way
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That said, its close between these 2. 7930x would be sweetspot


I heard value and i9 in the same sentence and spit my dew....









If I wanted value, I'd buy a TR and wait longer for my sims/compiles/models/dbs to finish. I want to literally heat my house burning $100 bills to say I can.







(kidding of course)


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yep - 2 more cores than a 6950X... and can hit the needed clocks to actually perform better than the 6950X.


Hi,
I know at least one friend on another forum that has a 6950x and my 7900xe beats his scores some not by much but some by quite a bit








I haven't looked at any of ocn benchmarks or posted on any here though too many hoops to jump through to post scores here.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I heard value and i9 in the same sentence and spit my dew....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If I wanted value, I'd buy a TR and wait longer for my sims/compiles/models/dbs to finish. I want to literally heat my house burning $100 bills to say I can.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (kidding of course)


Hi,
Boy you sure are in the wrong thread lol


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> I know at least one friend on another forum that has a 6950x and my 7900xe beats his scores some not by much but some by quite a bit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't looked at any of ocn benchmarks or posted on any here though too many hoops to jump through to post scores here.


Here are some of my old scores with a 6950X for you to compare. I know Jpmboy's score are faster than mine.

FS: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13542383
FSE: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13535792
FSU: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13499488
TS: http://www.3dmark.com/spy/2292442
3D Mark11: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/12163276


----------



## ABeta

Man, the core bug has bitten me. I started out with a 7900x, now I have a 7920x and now I am eyeing a 7960x - just waiting to pick up one for $1100 max. There was one on Ebay that sold for $1250 brand spanking new - lowest price sold ever I think. IThe 7980xe is just too costly, even in the resale scene. I am buying processors at a rate more than I can off load them!


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Here are some of my old scores with a 6950X for you to compare. I know Jpmboy's score are faster than mine.
> 
> FS: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13542383
> FSE: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13535792
> FSU: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/13499488
> TS: http://www.3dmark.com/spy/2292442
> 3D Mark11: http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/12163276


Hi,
I don't expect to come even close to people using chillers









Or even better expect to come close to a titan xp either lol


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> I don't expect to come even close to people using chillers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or even better expect to come close to a titan xp either lol


No chiller with that setup. Predator 360 AIO CPU/GPU loop. Just look at the Physics scores.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Martin778*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd say 7920X is the sweetspot


it's that new math. I need to deconstruct the problem.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> I know at least one friend on another forum that has a 6950x and my 7900xe beats his scores some not by much but some by quite a bit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't looked at any of ocn benchmarks or posted on any here though too many hoops to jump through to post scores here.


I'd really refer to the graphics performance of x99 vs x299,, gaming included. every comparo I've seen requires the SKL-X to run much higher clocks to keep pace. But yeah, at the limits, the SKL-X IPC will win out.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Your results seem roughly inline with what I've seen before and after delidding.
> 
> Your slightly higher VCore requirements are no doubt aggravated by high core temp (non-delid). I needed 1.185 for 4.5GHz prior to delidding and mid-to-high 90's on 2 hot cores. high 70's on others. I can do 1.16v post delid for 4.5GHz
> 
> Post delid and LM (monoblock) - I see VERY tight typical temps (everything within 2-4C on all 18 cores when running identical loads), but I have a 10C spread from top-to-bottom for the peak temp.
> 
> With a 360XE push/pull at 100% fans, I barely break 70C on any core under any load. Of course, I tend to keep the fans MUCH lower than that normally as at that speed, it sounds like a rack-mount server during boot-up.
> 
> Typical 18-core compute load is more like 55-60C peak.
> BF1 is 43-46C, but so far as I'm aware, no game is making use of all these cores, so that's not a surprise.
> 
> Looks like the read-out on the OLED I/O shield of the R6E is core0 temp? Not packge (its lower than package), that seems like a poor choice.


Thanks







Yeah having a 35C spread seems kind of crazy. Core 2 is at 105C and core 3 is at 70C LOL. Is 4.5 1.16 your current 24/7 OC with those temps? I'm at 4.4 1.13 right now, worst core hits 89C running p95 small FFTs with AVX off. Seems like a good compromise but I'd love to go 4.5-4.6. My Vccin is at 1.9v right now and I think that dropped temps. I'm gonna try 1.85 and see if that helps. It's funny when I started I thought Vccin was what they were calling Vcore now and I couldn't figure out why my system wouldn't boot at 1.1v LOL


----------



## Hydroplane

Dropping vccin to 1.85v seems to have been very helpful, stability increased for 4.4 and power draw from 665W to 580W.

Windows 10 seems to like to install updates at the worst possible time, like when I'm trying to test a new unstable overclock for the first time


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Dropping vccin to 1.85v seems to have been very helpful, stability increased for 4.4 and power draw from 665W to 580W.
> 
> Windows 10 seems to like to install updates at the worst possible time, like when I'm trying to test a new unstable overclock for the first time


Go to advanced options in update and set no updates for 35 days while testing.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> it's that new math. I need to deconstruct the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd really refer to the graphics performance of x99 vs x299,, gaming included. every comparo I've seen requires the SKL-X to run much higher clocks to keep pace. But yeah, at the limits, the SKL-X IPC will win out.


Hi,
Definitely not speaking clock per clock =
This is pushing as hard as possible on both our parts
GPU wise we both have 1080ti's and pushing them as hard as possible too 7900xe gets the prize all except one
Performance test 9 scrud bench test he kill me with his 960 pro verses my 850 pro hell just about everyone does









Really can't wait for the new samsung's to come out to compete with the 900P


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Dropping vccin to 1.85v seems to have been very helpful, stability increased for 4.4 and power draw from 665W to 580W.
> 
> Windows 10 seems to like to install updates at the worst possible time, like when I'm trying to test a new unstable overclock for the first time


Turn off your LAN device while testing - it's what I do


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## GreedyMuffin

RMA the parts...?


----------



## Hydroplane

I dropped my vccin to 1.8v and really odd things started happening. Power consumption running smallFFT no AVX dropped to 335w. Several of the cores were bouncing between 4.4 ghz and lower speeds. Temps dropped a ton, but so did performance, my cinebench went down to 2195. Seems like it's some sort of throttling.

At 1.85 vccin I noticed one of the cores would sometimes drop to 3.9, with the other 17 at 4.4. But temps are about 10c lower than yesterday with no other changes. Cinebench goes back up to 4350 yet oddly now it pulls 660w compared to 510w for smallFFT. They used to be equal









Remained totally stable the whole time too.


----------



## DarkIdeals

So anyone having RAM issues on X299 systems? Got my new R6E and 7980XE and it won't load with more than 1 RAM stick, I did have some problems with this kit on my old X99 setup (3 sticks worked but one didn't. Figured it was related to a water cooling spill i had on the board previously, but seems issues are following me to X299 as well).

When i put more than one stick in it either recognizes the stick won't post properly (usually giving either a straight up "Post Error" on the LCD screen or "Check NVRAM" etc.. ) or it'll run by not recognize the stick.

So i'm figuring the RAM may be busted.

I'm considering purchasing a replacement kit. Trying to decide between 32GB of 3333mhz or a admittedly high priced 3466mhz 64GB kit; I'm wondering if an 18 core CPU with SLI TITAN XP would really take advantage of 64GB or if i'd just be better of with 32 for video editing and AI training plus gaming on the side etc.. Thinking of getting a 1TB 960 Evo as well since all i have for storage is 500GB PNY CS2211 SSD and 500GB WD Blue on this system.

Opinions?


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Menthol

I have 2 2x8 gb kits, one 3600c15 and one 4266 c19, on the Apex I used the 1.4 volt 4000 preset in the bios without any issues I don't recommend this for anybody, I haven't ran any stability tests except benchmarks


----------



## carlhil2

My chip isn't the best, but, love the per core OCing so that I can set my strongest cores at high clocks and my weakest cores at lower clocks. @4.6-2 cores @4.5, 2 @4.8..  testing my 3200 cas 16 ram with it now @3700+...


----------



## Lucius5nm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> I replaced all my burnt-out parts with new ones (replaced CPU, cooler, and motherboard) after something fried them. The sad part is that I am $1500 poorer. However, the glass-half-full part is that my new 7900X is way better than my old one!
> 
> I am only drawing 230 W running prime95 non-AVX at 4.5 GHz, which my 280 mm AIO easily handles. Temperatures are 38 C liquid and 82 C package. The dead chip was drawing around 280 W under the same load and completely unstable. I bet I could get this new one to 4.6 or even 4.7 GHz with a delid. According to SL, reaching 4.7 GHz is pretty average, so I suppose the old chip actually did me a favor by dying.


Why did you replace the cpu cooler?


----------



## ABeta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> I dropped my vccin to 1.8v and really odd things started happening. Power consumption running smallFFT no AVX dropped to 335w. Several of the cores were bouncing between 4.4 ghz and lower speeds. Temps dropped a ton, but so did performance, my cinebench went down to 2195. Seems like it's some sort of throttling.
> 
> At 1.85 vccin I noticed one of the cores would sometimes drop to 3.9, with the other 17 at 4.4. But temps are about 10c lower than yesterday with no other changes. Cinebench goes back up to 4350 yet oddly now it pulls 660w compared to 510w for smallFFT. They used to be equal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Remained totally stable the whole time too.


http://www.overclock.net/t/1634045/skylake-x-phantom-throttling


----------



## DarkIdeals

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> Of course I am working on it, but RMAs take a very long time, even when the support does not "forget" your ticket. In the end, the best you can do is resell the RMA replacements on eBay for about half of the replacement cost.
> Does it only happen in certain slots? It could also be your CPU that is broken.


On my old board (X99 RVE10) and old CPU (6950X) it ended up with one stick not working right but it only happened in one dimm slot which had a water cooling spill happen not long before that near that slot; so i figured that was the problem. Just recently another stick acted up (like 2-3 days ago) and even changing slots didn't help me get more than 2 sticks working. So i figured might as well swap in the new mobo (R6E X299) and CPU (i9 7980XE). After changing it now only 1 will boot properly and 2 is recognized but gives errors like "VGA Driver Loading" or "Post Error" or "Check NVRAM" etc.. On this new cpu/board it doesn't matter what slot it is really.


----------



## DarkIdeals

Hmm, was debating 32gb vs 64gb for a replacement kit but I guess its too late; amazon had already shipped the 32gb kit i had ordered within like an hour of ordering. Was hoping it wouldn't ship till morning so i could change if i decided to. I wasn't 100% sure if 64gb was really needed, especially since i could get a 2nd 1TB 960 Evo M.2 SSD for the same cost as moving from 32 to 64gb ram.


----------



## biZuil

Heyo, i just got my skylake x system running, i did a little oc up to 4.7ghz 1.22v, 3200mhz cl16 ram at 1.35v, and 3200mhz mesh with 1.07v. It is stable as per IBT, and i havent run into any issues regarding performance, or temperatures. I hover 65-75c during load, obviously depending on the task. Id love to get 5ghz on this chip. Anyone can point me in the right direction, or if its even possible without delid. Temps seem like they might be an issue with getting full potential out of my chip, id like to avoid delidding... Also, does mesh go above 3200mhz? I see everyone stop there so i just kinda imitated. What are the safe voltage limits for mesh and Vcore on this platform? Once i know whats safe i can really start pushing :B

Lastly here is my current cinebench score

Maybe with some guidelines i can push to 1500 :b


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarkIdeals*
> 
> So anyone having RAM issues on X299 systems? Got my new R6E and 7980XE and it won't load with more than 1 RAM stick, I did have some problems with this kit on my old X99 setup (3 sticks worked but one didn't. Figured it was related to a water cooling spill i had on the board previously, but seems issues are following me to X299 as well).
> 
> When i put more than one stick in it either recognizes the stick won't post properly (usually giving either a straight up "Post Error" on the LCD screen or "Check NVRAM" etc.. ) or it'll run by not recognize the stick.
> 
> So i'm figuring the RAM may be busted.
> 
> I'm considering purchasing a replacement kit. Trying to decide between 32GB of 3333mhz or a admittedly high priced 3466mhz 64GB kit; I'm wondering if an 18 core CPU with SLI TITAN XP would really take advantage of 64GB or if i'd just be better of with 32 for video editing and AI training plus gaming on the side etc.. Thinking of getting a 1TB 960 Evo as well since all i have for storage is 500GB PNY CS2211 SSD and 500GB WD Blue on this system.
> 
> Opinions?


check the 32GB 3200c14 samsung B-die kit in my sig.


----------



## idahosurge

What will be the most accurate at showing core temps on a 7820X/R6E, HWMonitor Pro, Core Temp or SIV64?

Also for HWMonitor Pro and SIV64 would someone post a screenshot that shows what voltages are what.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## DarkIdeals

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> check the 32GB 3200c14 samsung B-die kit in my sig.


Unfortunately Amazon went crazy and shipped the 32GB 3333mhz C16 Dom Platinum kit i had on order like 10 minutes after i ordered so I'm kinda stuck with that set for now. I was debating either a G Skill 3200 kit like yours or a 64GB 3466mhz C16 Dom Platinum kit that was on a decent sale with the same 16-18-18-36-2T timings as the 32GB 3333mhz one, but this one shipped before I could consider anything else. Normally I'd just cancel it immediately but I also had a 1TB 960 EVO SSD there since i had some drive failure leaving me with only two 500GB drives (WD Blue and PNY SSD)

Do you do any video editing and such? I'm kinda curious of whether programs like After Effects which can be kinda RAM hungry would benefit from 64GB especially since I'm using an 18 core i9 what with how you can assign 2gb+ per core in AE options etc.. I mostly do 3440x1440 60fps 35mbps renders with the occasional 4K 60fps 45mbps render so I was kinda on the fence of whether a 64GB kit would be worthwhile.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarkIdeals*
> 
> Unfortunately Amazon went crazy and shipped the 32GB 3333mhz C16 Dom Platinum kit i had on order like 10 minutes after i ordered so I'm kinda stuck with that set for now. I was debating either a G Skill 3200 kit like yours or a 64GB 3466mhz C16 Dom Platinum kit that was on a decent sale with the same 16-18-18-36-2T timings as the 32GB 3333mhz one, but this one shipped before I could consider anything else. Normally I'd just cancel it immediately but I also had a 1TB 960 EVO SSD there since i had some drive failure leaving me with only two 500GB drives (WD Blue and PNY SSD)
> 
> Judging from your sig, you're using 32GB of Trident Z i take it? Do you do any video editing and such? *I'm kinda curious of whether programs like After Effects which can be kinda RAM hungry would benefit from 64GB especially since I'm using an 18 core i9 what with how you can assign 2gb+ per core in AE options etc.*. I mostly do 3440x1440 60fps 35mbps renders with the occasional 4K 60fps 45mbps render so I was kinda on the fence of whether a 64GB kit would be worthwhile.


sorry bud, I don't know the answer to that.. but someone else here must know. @Zurv


----------



## Hydroplane

Gonna try some per-core overclocking tonight. My thinking is I could reduce the voltage on some of the better cores to reduce temps.


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Gonna try some per-core overclocking tonight. My thinking is I could reduce the voltage on some of the better cores to reduce temps.


Per core overclocking is the way to go on the high-core-count CPUs in my opinion. My worst 2 cores of my 7920X are pretty bad... both hitting 10-15C more than my best cores at the same clock speeds and voltages. Keeping the worst at 4.6GHz and running the rest at 4.7-4.8GHz is a happy medium and gives you that top-notch single core performance when you need it. Mileage will vary of course. If only I was a lottery winner.


----------



## Nihaan

Can anyone share cpu-z and cinebench results of 7960x @stock ?


----------



## ESRCJ

I was saving the memory tuning for last in my overclocking adventure, so I just set the profile to XMP for the time being. I kept getting instability with certain overclocks that were perfectly stable with my previous memory kit's XMP profile. I turned XMP off and manually set the timings to what the XMP profile had and all of a sudden my old overclocks are stable. So I guess XMP is just bad altogether for overclocking. Something in that profile was leading to instability. I wonder what it was.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> @LunaP @Jpmboy
> 
> (and any 7980xe tuners)
> 
> I bumped my VCCIN to 2.0 (then back to 1.9v because it doesn't seem to matter) and VCCSA to 0.95v
> The result was:
> Core: 4.5GHz (non-AVX - same as before - it will do 4.6 and 4.7 at higher Vcore, but not at 24/7 power/temp levels AFAIC)
> Cache: 3.1 (previously 3.0 - even 1.15v would not allow > 3.0GHz)
> 
> VCORE: 1.16v (previously required 1.175v)
> VCACHE: 1.10v (previously 1.05v for 3.0 --- > 3.0 was not stable)
> VCCIN: 1.9v
> VCCSA: 0.95v
> 
> LunaP in particular - you have ludicrously low VCORE (1.10-1.12v last I heard). Can I ask what your VCCIN is these days?
> 
> The bump from 3.1GHz mesh/cache is nice... That's become such a choke point that even 100MHz shows up quickly in real and synthetic numbers.


It was 1.112v for vcore, but I've bumped it to 1.115 just in case for stability given my ram timings/clock, since 1.37v now on RAM @ 15-15-15-35 and 300 tRFC and 32 tfaw

I did manage to get 3.2 on mesh around 1.19 I haven't messed around w/ it too much since though since I got busy with other stuff, ended up trying to update my display rig, grabbed a 43" LG then calibrated that for a few days, then ended up getting a q7f 55" tv and made that my main monitor, (Display cal takes days I swear since theres so much fine tuning...) now building up 32" monitors around it and setting my art studio back up, might have to get a desk thats slightly 6-12 inches wider than mine since hte TV takes up the full width = monitor bars for the monitor arms are kinda blocking a bit of the view so can't angle the monitors out perfectly unless I move the TV back. Can't seem to find a stand alone option to just put on the floor near em.

Back on topic...
I'm def curious on the vdroop, as iirc I'm at lvl 5 and was tempted on 6 ( will have to recheck ) I was trying for a bit to push avx but 4.2ghz for avx2 seems to be the safe area since at most I'll hit high 70's, at 4.3 I can dip into the upper 80's its a huge spike. Though if other things like vdroop and vccin could help that I'm all down for it as I wanna get to tweaking more, especially since its winter. Any tips or things to test lemme know.

VCCIN atm is sitting at 1.81

Gonna try some actual render sessions w/ some speed paints and OBS to verify just how much vs benching/stressing they utilize in comparison as I'm hoping to possibly bump avx further.

Would be GREAT if there was a utility like Process lasso that'd upclock/downclock ur AVX based upon programs you're running.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Funny thing is R6E bios "auto" is 2.0v... So, yeah... there's that.
> 
> EDIT1:
> Looking like LLC6 vs LLC5 might have the same effect with VCCIN @ 1.85v.
> 
> So, that suggests the ultimate issue for me is droop.
> 
> EDIT2: eventual miscompare, but better than the MCEs I used to get... so maybe 1.87v? trying now


Which would you recommend, higher or lower droop for these?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> So far stable results for this 7980XE have been:
> 
> 4.3 @ 1.1v
> 4.4 @ 1.13v
> 4.5 @ 1.19v
> 
> At 4.5 three of the cores are over 100c so that's about the limit of a non-delidded chip. Though two of the cores are still at 70c so it's very inconsistent. And this is with 26c water through the block, lol. Also managed to pull 665W from the wall.
> 
> I did manage to hit 4467 in cinebench though. With some mesh/memory tweaking I should hit 1 point per mhz. Single core score is 202, faster than an 8700K at the stock 4.7 boost
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any settings that would help lower vcore? Gonna try setting the vccin to 1.9v.


If you're getting some cores over 100, I'd def look into clocking per core as some may not require as much voltage as others, but also gotta remember TJ etc since closest, its a game of patience. Though I'm sure people have already answewred by now as I'm still catching up on the last 5+ days worth of chat.


----------



## Radox-0

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> It was 1.112v for vcore, but I've bumped it to 1.115 just in case for stability given my ram timings/clock, since 1.37v now on RAM @ 15-15-15-35 and 300 tRFC and 32 tfaw
> 
> I did manage to get 3.2 on mesh around 1.19
> 
> .


Is there a limit to the sort of daily Mesh voltages you know of by any chance?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radox-0*
> 
> Is there a limit to the sort of daily Mesh voltages you know of by any chance?


Just replied to you on OCUK regarding this


----------



## biZuil

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Just replied to you on OCUK regarding this


Id like to know aswell :B


----------



## Radox-0

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Just replied to you on OCUK regarding this


You did indeed, cheers bud


----------



## DarkIdeals

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> sorry bud, I don't know the answer to that.. but someone else here must know. @Zurv


Well I managed to fix the weird RAM problems. Two of my 4gb 2666mhz sticks were faulty apparently, and only one of the remaining two could be installed and allow proper post and booting; if i added the 2nd it'd freeze. I bought that new 3333mhz 32GB Dom-Plat kit and all 4 dimms were recognized but same deal, constant "check NVRAM" or "Load VGA Bios" etc.. errors. But doing theh EZ Flash BIOS update to 1004 fixed it all seemingly, as now all 32GB is running fine.

Still haven't figured out about whether I should have gone for 64GB however, but thanks for taking time to respond and ask @Zurv about it.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> a. what version (cpuz)
> b. Windows updated on me, so I had to remove Intel's Turbo Boost again...
> c. cpuz is a pretty lame measure of anything...
> d. check your power settings - peg it to 100% minimum processor state for benchmarking
> 
> 4.5Ghz:
> 535.6/8903 (did not disable apps, set real-time, etc.... just ran it as-is)
> 
> CBR15 is ~4350-4450 for this setup depending on how careful I am when I run it.


Sorry my very late reply.
The low score of CPU-Z benchmark comes from "phantom throttling" on Skylake X.
You can avoid this using mod bios in "http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?t=171986", if you use Rampage VI Apex.
I used Bios "0026" there.
As a result, my score becomes 605/14004 @5.1GHz for Cpu-z ver. 1.82.0 x64.

https://valid.x86.fr/23hkns


----------



## czin125

giant loop or chilled water? voltage for that 5.1 == ?


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> giant loop or chilled water? voltage for that 5.1 == ?


My cooling system was water with large reservoir.
In this season, water temp. is less than 15 degrees C.
The core voltage is set by core in adaptive mode.
LLC was level 7. minus offsets for each cores were from 35mv to 130mv.
And total voltages for each cores were from 1.32 V to 1.41V.
The best values for each cores were found by single core operation;
Namely, in the setting of 17 cores disable and only 1 core enable I searched stabel value @5.1 GHz and 5.0GHz.
About half numbers of cores in them had the stable voltage of [email protected] and [email protected]
This way (by core setting) is not efficientt for 7900X but for 7980XE. I feel large difference FIVR in them.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> My cooling system was water with large reservoir.
> In this season, water temp. is less than 15 degrees C.
> The core voltage is set by core in adaptive mode.
> LLC was level 7. minus offsets for each cores were from 35mv to 130mv.
> And total voltages for each cores were from 1.32 V to 1.41V.
> The best values for each cores were found by single core operation;
> Namely, in the setting of 17 cores disable and only 1 core enable I searched stabel value @5.1 GHz and 5.0GHz.
> About half numbers of cores in them had the stable voltage of [email protected] and [email protected]
> This way (by core setting) is not efficientt for 7900X but for 7980XE. I feel large difference FIVR in them.


How stable is the [email protected]?

We have a retail 7980XE in our lab where none of the 18 cores are able to Prime95 (no-AVX) at [email protected]
Yet we have an ES 7940X where at least 5 of the cores will Prime95 (no-AVX) at [email protected]

We also have an unopened retail 7940X which I intend to test some time next week.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Per core overclocking is the way to go on the high-core-count CPUs in my opinion. My worst 2 cores of my 7920X are pretty bad... both hitting 10-15C more than my best cores at the same clock speeds and voltages. Keeping the worst at 4.6GHz and running the rest at 4.7-4.8GHz is a happy medium and gives you that top-notch single core performance when you need it. Mileage will vary of course. If only I was a lottery winner.


I have some cores at 90C and some others at 70C so this actually works well to maximize performance








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> If you're getting some cores over 100, I'd def look into clocking per core as some may not require as much voltage as others, but also gotta remember TJ etc since closest, its a game of patience. Though I'm sure people have already answewred by now as I'm still catching up on the last 5+ days worth of chat.


Are you named after Luna P from Sailor Moon?









I've had good luck with the per core overclock so far, right now I've got:

3 cores at 4.3 1.10
4 cores at 4.4 1.14
11 cores at 4.5 1.17

Very stable and the temps are good, like high 80s. My basic technique is to push a group of cores up by 100 mhz, then when each core gets to the target temp, I stop overclocking it. For example, I started by taking the 15 "cool" cores up to 4.4 then figured out the voltage needed to get it stable. Next step was to take the remaining 11 "cool" cores up to 4.5, etc. Many are still in the 70C range so I can get to 4.6-4.7+.

It was -12C this morning, so I bet I could get to 5 ghz if I put the computer outside







Heck I could probably freeze my cooling water lol. I might put it in the kitchen window and go for 5k on cinebench, I hit 4400 so far and my cache is still at 2.4 (stock). Bumping that should help my score.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarkIdeals*
> 
> Well I managed to fix the weird RAM problems. Two of my 4gb 2666mhz sticks were faulty apparently, and only one of the remaining two could be installed and allow proper post and booting; if i added the 2nd it'd freeze. I bought that new 3333mhz 32GB Dom-Plat kit and all 4 dimms were recognized but same deal, constant "check NVRAM" or "Load VGA Bios" etc.. errors. But doing theh EZ Flash BIOS update to 1004 fixed it all seemingly, as now all 32GB is running fine.
> 
> Still haven't figured out about whether I should have gone for 64GB however, but thanks for taking time to respond and ask @Zurv about it.


good to see you sorted it out.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> *How stable is the [email protected]?*
> 
> We have a retail 7980XE in our lab where none of the 18 cores are able to Prime95 (no-AVX) at [email protected]
> Yet we have an ES 7940X where at least 5 of the cores will Prime95 (no-AVX) at [email protected]
> 
> We also have an unopened retail 7940X which I intend to test some time next week.


it's not. You can post and run low core count stuff but any significant load will crash. I've had mine up to 5.2 (for Super Pi). The extreme bios in Elmor's thread is not really for day-driver use.








http://hwbot.org/submission/3723741_jpmboy_superpi___32m_core_i9_7980xe_5min_57sec_803ms
for country cup


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> good to see you sorted it out.
> it's not. You can post and run low core count stuff but any load will crash. I've had mine up to 5.2 (for Super Pi). The extreme bios in Elmor's thread is not really for day-driver use.


My two best cores (#0 and #1, incidentally) will run 4.7 1.2v all day but did not even want to boot at 1.25 5.0, lol. Or even 1.275, 1.3, or 1.35.


----------



## DarkIdeals

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> good to see you sorted it out.


Thanks. Just need to figure out how to adjust my timings from 3333mhz C16 15-18-18-36-2T. Would love to see a 3400mhz C16 14-14-14-35-1T if possible.

You have two 16GB kits at 3600/C15 correct?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarkIdeals*
> 
> Thanks. Just need to figure out how to adjust my timings from 3333mhz C16 15-18-18-36-2T. Would love to see a 3400mhz C16 14-14-14-35-1T if possible.
> 
> You have two 16GB kits at 3600/C15 correct?


Yes, 2 3600c15 kits.


----------



## DarkIdeals

Oops, totally f'd up those timings. Has C16 with 14 latency listed lol.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> How stable is the [email protected]?
> 
> We have a retail 7980XE in our lab where none of the 18 cores are able to Prime95 (no-AVX) at [email protected]
> Yet we have an ES 7940X where at least 5 of the cores will Prime95 (no-AVX) at [email protected]
> 
> We also have an unopened retail 7940X which I intend to test some time next week.


I have chcked two times cinebench R15 and Realbench 2.56 (nomal bench).
I fixed it is enough stable of one core operation above these benches.
I have two 7980XE and these tables is my checked results.
In my way to use, I feel heavy benchmark is not necessary.
thank you many comments.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> good to see you sorted it out.
> it's not. You can post and run low core count stuff but any significant load will crash. I've had mine up to 5.2 (for Super Pi). The extreme bios in Elmor's thread is not really for day-driver use.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/3723741_jpmboy_superpi___32m_core_i9_7980xe_5min_57sec_803ms
> for country cup


I have got colse time of super_pi 32M @5.2GHz 7980XE.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> I have got colse time of super_pi 32M @5.2GHz 7980XE.


well.. join HWBOT and sub it for your country's team!


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> I have chcked two times cinebench R15 and Realbench 2.56 (nomal bench).
> I fixed it is enough stable of one core operation above these benches.
> I have two 7980XE and these tables is my checked results.
> In my way to use, I feel heavy benchmark is not necessary.
> thank you many comments.


Wow, some pretty fascinating data there. Seems like a voltage wall starts to develop past 5 GHz since each step is a significant jump. But still amazing that it can be done with 15C water. I am assuming your chip is delidded or direct die cooled?


----------



## Pyounpy-2

Thank you. Both chips were delidded and I used liquid metal both sides of H.T..
Today, I chage the bios from 0026(mod) to ver.1004 (new&by asus) on Rampage VI Apex.
The CPU-Z score increased drastically.
Ver1.82.0 x64 : single/multi = 618.5/14267.6









https://valid.x86.fr/l88660


----------



## DarkIdeals

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> Thank you. Both chips were delidded and I used liquid metal both sides of H.T..
> Today, I chage the bios from 0026(mod) to ver.1004 (new&by asus) on Rampage VI Apex.
> The CPU-Z score increased drastically.
> Ver1.82.0 x64 : single/multi = 618.5/14267.6
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/l88660


Yeah the early BIOS from ASUS are pretty mucky, just changing to 1004 fixed the ridiculous post errors I was having with more than 1 RAM stick and I've heard of several others having issues. It also seemed to raise the boost clock on my 7980XE.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyounpy-2*
> 
> I have got colse time of super_pi 32M @5.2GHz 7980XE.


Run with HT off it'll cut a couple of seconds.








Quad channel is very efficient for 32M my 8700k needs additional ~200Mhz to get x299 results...


----------



## Nihaan

Can anyone share cpu-z and cinebench results of 7960x @stock clocks ?

I feel like it performs poorly compared to my 7940x


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nihaan*
> 
> Can anyone share cpu-z and cinebench results of 7960x @stock clocks ?
> 
> I feel like it performs poorly compared to my 7940x


PM carl:

*http://www.overclock.net/t/1635170/asus-x299-motherboard-series-official-support-thread/1340#post_26473372*

He has one.


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> My two best cores (#0 and #1, incidentally) will run 4.7 1.2v all day but did not even want to boot at 1.25 5.0, lol. Or even 1.275, 1.3, or 1.35.


Mine probably can't do 5GHz either. My best core is happy with 4.8GHz at 1.24V. I will try 4.9 once I finish up with the others. I'm trying to stay under 1.25V on most cores for daily use and maybe push things to 1.3V for benchmarks. This is definitely the most time-consuming overclocking stability testing I've gone through.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DarkIdeals*
> 
> Yeah the early BIOS from ASUS are pretty mucky, just changing to 1004 fixed the ridiculous post errors I was having with more than 1 RAM stick and I've heard of several others having issues. It also seemed to raise the boost clock on my 7980XE.


Hi @DarkIdeals
Did the new bios 1004 fix the IME security issue ?
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000025619/software.html


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Mine probably can't do 5GHz either. My best core is happy with 4.8GHz at 1.24V. I will try 4.9 once I finish up with the others. I'm trying to stay under 1.25V on most cores for daily use and maybe push things to 1.3V for benchmarks. This is definitely the most time-consuming overclocking stability testing I've gone through.


Hi,
Yeah 5.0 is a tough one
4.9 I did but not much else besides cpu-z








https://valid.x86.fr/tzfeen


----------



## Hydroplane

1.17v on the 4.5 cores would pass prime95 small FFT no AVX but would crash cinebench after a couple runs. Same with 1.18 so I had to go up to 1.19v.

What's bizarre to me is that I've never, ever had a prime thread fail, the whole computer just freezes instead. I wonder why - could indicate an issue somewhere else.

So right now I've got:
3 x 4.3 @ 1.10v
4 x 4.4 @ 1.14v
11 x 4.5 @ 1.19v

Maxing out most of the cores where I want to be tempwise, 4-5 of them have room left for 4.6-4.7.



It's getting warm in here







At least I know there's no phantom throttling.




Looks like I may need to install that 240V circuit I was thinking of, lol

So far max CB score is 4421 and 201 single core, that's with the cache at 2.4, it should go up once I get that closer to 3.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

what do you think of one skylake x/kaby lake x with one asus prime x299-a/deluxe is a great combo?


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> what do you think of one skylake x/kaby lake x with one asus prime x299-a/deluxe is a great combo?


Which CPU in specific?


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> Which CPU in specific?


7740x 7800x and 7820x @Testier


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> 7740x 7800x and 7820x @Testier


You are probably fine. With any of them.


----------



## carlhil2

Someone wanted 7960x benches? 





most were ran with to cores @[email protected], rest at 4.6. ny chips need more voltages than the average it seems, I am using 1.26v. I have 3DMark scores uploaded on their website. I have 2 cores for sure that can do 5.0 @1.30v so far. still testing my chip...


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I've had 7800X and a 7820X. Currently own a 8700K. Best CPU of them all imho.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I've had 7800X and a 7820X. Currently own a 8700K. Best CPU of them all imho.


you think that is a good cpu 7740x 7800x and 7820x this?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> you think that is a good cpu 7740x 7800x and 7820x this?


Honestly I think that the 8700K is a faaar better for gaming and general usage. Cooler, uses less power and overclocks better.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> 1.17v on the 4.5 cores would pass prime95 small FFT no AVX but would crash cinebench after a couple runs. Same with 1.18 so I had to go up to 1.19v.
> 
> What's bizarre to me is that I've never, ever had a prime thread fail, the whole computer just freezes instead. I wonder why - could indicate an issue somewhere else.
> 
> So right now I've got:
> 3 x 4.3 @ 1.10v
> 4 x 4.4 @ 1.14v
> 11 x 4.5 @ 1.19v
> 
> Maxing out most of the cores where I want to be tempwise, 4-5 of them have room left for 4.6-4.7.
> 
> 
> 
> It's getting warm in here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least I know there's no phantom throttling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like I may need to install that 240V circuit I was thinking of, lol
> 
> So far max CB score is 4421 and 201 single core, that's with the cache at 2.4, it should go up once I get that closer to 3.


Hi,
Yep or at least a 15/ 20 amp breaker with nothing else on it in the house


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> what do you think of one skylake x/kaby lake x with one asus prime x299-a/deluxe is a great combo?


Hi,
I don't believe there is a prime x299-a deluxe
Those are 2 different boards as far as I know
Prime deluxe or prime-a
Either way the apex is a little less than the prime deluxe and is based as the premium flagship oc board if that's what you're after.
The deluxe has more usb ports and some other bells and whistles


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> I don't believe there is a prime x299-a deluxe
> Those are 2 different boards as far as I know
> Prime deluxe or prime-a
> Either way the apex is a little less than the prime deluxe and is based as the premium flagship oc board if that's what you're after.
> The deluxe has more usb ports and some other bells and whistles


yes i was intended x299-a and x299 deluxe so anyway thanxs for the information you say that the x299 deluxe is the best of the best and the apex and the deluxe is 2 awesome motherboard right?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah the rog and deluxe are top of the line mobo's in any series
That's pretty much why they cost so much








Apex is the ultimate oc board if my local micro center had one in stock I would gotten one instead of the deluxe.
https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-RAMPAGE-VI-APEX/


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Yeah the rog and deluxe are top of the line mobo's in any series
> That's pretty much why they cost so much
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apex is the ultimate oc board if my local micro center had one in stock I would gotten one instead of the deluxe.
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-RAMPAGE-VI-APEX/


for stability gaming and overclock is perfect right?


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> for stability gaming and overclock is perfect right?


HI,
That's another way to word it yes








Gaming is gaming on x299 just set all cores to 46-47 and boogie


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Ok thanxs i make the order of the motherboard!!!!


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> yes i was intended x299-a and x299 deluxe so anyway thanxs for the information you say that the x299 deluxe is the best of the best and the apex and the deluxe is 2 awesome motherboard right?


The Rampage APEX and Extreme are top tier boards. The deluxe is better than the cheap seats but not top dog aka best of the best by any means.
what you choose is dependent on what the use is. The APEX is primarily designed for overclocking. Id recommend one of the two top tier boards. Review the features of each and decide from there. They are both EATX boards.The extreme has some additional features that some dont want or need.


----------



## Nihaan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *carlhil2*
> 
> Someone wanted 7960x benches?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> most were ran with to cores @[email protected], rest at 4.6. ny chips need more voltages than the average it seems, I am using 1.26v. I have 3DMark scores uploaded on their website. I have 2 cores for sure that can do 5.0 @1.30v so far. still testing my chip...


Hello

It was me who needed them but i need those tests at stock clocks. Are you able to share cinebench and cpu-z benchmarks @ stock ? I used 7940x for a few days and then i replaced it with 7960x but i feel like it is underperforming compared to my 7940x. Thats why i need those benchmarks at stock speeds.

Thank you.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> The Rampage APEX and Extreme are top tier boards. The deluxe is better than the cheap seats but not top dog aka best of the best by any means.
> what you choose is dependent on what the use is. The APEX is primarily designed for overclocking. Id recommend one of the two top tier boards. Review the features of each and decide from there. They are both EATX boards.The extreme has some additional features that some dont want or need.


my use will be soft and medium overclock cpu i7 7740x (delidded tray) 7800x (delidded tray) 7820x (delidded tray/normal tray) and ram a corsair platinum or a tridentz 3200 but i don't know, gaming, some photo and video editing and water cooling but for PSU my indecision of evga g3 750/850 or sesonic prime ultra 750/850 gold !!!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Why not go for 8700K?


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Why not go for 8700K?


you say that is minus expensive that skylake x or kaby lake x?i have thinked so i take skylake x or kaby lake x for 4-6 years and so i am ok but if i take 8700k and 6 month later i want a new cpu i must change again my hardware is wrong second you?


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> water cooling but for PSU my indecision of evga g3 750/850 or sesonic prime ultra 750/850 gold !!!


Hi,
Do not get a G3 series
Only look at P2 series 850w minimum or above gold is best in other brands
Yes you will need some sort of water cooling


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Do not get a G3 series
> Only look at P2 series 850w minimum or above gold is best in other brands
> Yes you will need some sort of water cooling


I have the T2, the P2 is quite similar and a little easier on the wallet, great PSU. I'm down to 109V out of the wall and the voltage on all of my rails stays constant.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

So t2 or p2 850w you say is ok and for the case midi tower or full tower or bench case/open case @Hydroplane?For the CPU is question of few hour!!!!


----------



## JustinThyme

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> you say that is minus expensive that skylake x or kaby lake x?i have thinked so i take skylake x or kaby lake x for 4-6 years and so i am ok but if i take 8700k and 6 month later i want a new cpu i must change again my hardware is wrong second you?


Well with those CPU choices you can't run the Exteme, they are not supported. If you don't intend to push it with high end components you actually will be better served from the cheap seats. IMO you can't buy tickets that are on the border between the nose bleed section and box seats as they just don't exist. So if you are on a tight budget there is no sense in going any higher than the deluxe. However if you really want to see what X299 is about then stick with one of the top tier boards and go 7900X minimum.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JustinThyme*
> 
> Well with those CPU choices you can't run the Exteme, they are not supported. If you don't intend to push it with high end components you actually will be better served from the cheap seats. IMO you can't buy tickets that are on the border between the nose bleed section and box seats as they just don't exist. So if you are on a tight budget there is no sense in going any higher than the deluxe. However if you really want to see what X299 is about then stick with one of the top tier boards and go 7900X minimum.


So for soft/medium overclock 4/6/8 core is minimum right?My intention is take this CPU and then years later take the 7900x!!!!


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> So t2 or p2 850w you say is ok and for the case midi tower or full tower or bench case/open case @Hydroplane?For the CPU is question of few hour!!!!


Hi,
I personally didn't feel good about having a 850P2 on my 7900x
Luckily I had a 1200 P2 in my x99 rig and swapped them out it was over kill anyway more of I could get one than I really needed that much wattage









A lot of people say 850w is enough for 7900x and unless going to 7940x then go 1000w.

Actually Prime x299 is pretty good too it just has fewer usb port than the deluxe and doesn't come with some extra goodies like the thunderbolt card and wifi antennas..

Yep T2 series is the newer ones very good


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> I personally didn't feel good about having a 850P2 on my 7900x
> Luckily I had a 1200 P2 in my x99 rig and swapped them out it was over kill anyway more of I could get one than I really needed that much wattage
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of people say 850w is enough for 7900x and unless going to 7940x then go 1000w.
> 
> Actually Prime x299 is pretty good too it just has fewer usb port than the deluxe and doesn't come with some extra goodies like the thunderbolt card and wifi antennas..
> 
> Yep T2 series is the newer ones very good


So you say x299-a?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yes prime-a but I'd stick with the apex








https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132993


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Yes prime-a but I'd stick with the apex
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813132993


ah you have choose the apex instead the x299-a!!!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep the prime-a is the same price as the tuf mark 2 oddly enough
I did briefly have a mark 2 but bent a socket pin and it died pretty much
So I upped to the prime deluxe pretty much because it was the only one they had besides another mark 2 to swap out
I did have the in store warranty and they honored it


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Yep the prime-a is the same price as the tuf mark 2 oddly enough
> I did briefly have a mark 2 but bent a socket pin and it died pretty much
> So I upped to the prime deluxe pretty much because it was the only one they had besides another mark 2 to swap out
> I did have the in store warranty and they honored it


So for soft/medium overclock 4/6/8 core is minimum right?My intention is take this CPU and then years later take the 7900x!!!!


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I'd say that it is not worth it. Within a few years something much better is going to be released.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I'd expect all to do all core 45 fairly easy but yeah I almost got a 7820k 6 core it's a good cpu although the 7740k is also good too
Price is really the only limitation

I believe I posted already here a review of the 7740k verses the 7900x I was impressed with the 7740k


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> I'd expect all to do all core 45 fairly easy but yeah I almost got a 7820k 6 core it's a good cpu although the 7740k is also good too
> Price is really the only limitation
> 
> I believe I posted already here a review of the 7740k verses the 7900x I was impressed with the 7740k


ok 7740x will be and for the thermal grease https://www.newegg.com/global/it/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835426020 or https://www.newegg.com/global/it/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA0AJ3KE4303 or https://www.newegg.com/global/it/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA8UC3E70970 or this https://www.newegg.com/global/it/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA2W03RB4351?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
None of those although I do have some arctic silver 5 always if I ever run out of thermal grizzly kryonaut or NT-H1
Doesn't look like newegg has any but amazon does
https://www.amazon.com/Thermal-Grizzly-Kryonaut-Grease-Paste/dp/B011F7W3LU

It's either that or Noctua NT-H1 is my second choice


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> None of those although I do have some arctic silver 5 always if I ever run out of thermal grizzly kryonaut or NT-H1
> Doesn't look like newegg has any but amazon does
> https://www.amazon.com/Thermal-Grizzly-Kryonaut-Grease-Paste/dp/B011F7W3LU
> 
> It's either that or Noctua NT-H1 is my second choice


Yeah I used the Kryonaut on mine.

So far my per clock OCs are up to the following:

3 x 4.3 @ 1.10v
4 x 4.4 @ 1.14v
6 x 4.5 @ 1.19v
2 x 4.6 @ 1.23v
3 x 4.8 @ 1.27v

Not sure the time spent was worth an extra 206 mhz average, lol. Two cores had temp left over for 4.9, but were not stable even at 1.33v. I'm testing 1.34, but I think there's some sort of throttling. With those cores at 4.8 the system drew like 30W more and temps were higher. I probably will be out of thermal headroom anyway.


----------



## ThrashZone

HI,
I've been using by core usage in my case 5 at 4.6 or 4.7 and the rest at 4.4
Temps wise I like it a lot buit those are mostly everyday clocks

If I want to benchmark it all cores all the way
I can do okay at 4.8 but 4.9 and above is tough to get stable.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

why there is more skylake x and minimus kaby lake x?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FedeX299I57640X*
> 
> why there is more skylake x and minimus kaby lake x?


EDIT: oops - reading too many threads at once...

You mean "less Kaby lake?"

If so, because its an odd chip that really shouldn't exist. It cripples the platform. A curiosity for OC.


----------



## Hydroplane

Update:

Using the settings above, hit as high as 4475 in cinnamon bench lol. Crashed running smallFFT so I dropped the thermal throttling back in. I pulled as much as *790 watts* without it! Back down to 675 now and smallFFTs are stable again with lower temps. Still have the cache at 2.4, gonna try to raise it and see how much the CB score goes up. I predict it'll have a significant impact.


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

So for medium oc an ideal motherboard is x299-xe x299 deluxe fatality xe for the 7740x 7800x 7820x right?


----------



## DStealth

You don't need to pay XE board for LCC processors. XE boards are designed to take the load from HCC CPU's i.e. 7920/40/60/80xe . You'll see no benefits from them instead future-proof upgrade paths


----------



## FedeX299I57640X

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> You don't need to pay XE board for LCC processors. XE boards are designed to take the load from HCC CPU's i.e. 7920/40/60/80xe . You'll see no benefits from them instead future-proof upgrade paths


Ok i have eliminated the xe in my list but the rest of the motherboard are ok?


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I still don't understand why you want to go X299 for futureproofing when you're getting a low core-count CPU first, then some years later getting a 7900X?..









If I were to get X299 again, It would need to be a higher core-count CPU. At least the 7920X.


----------



## DStealth

Yes z370+8700k made LCC obsolete


----------



## tistou77

When applying the liquid metal on the DIE and IHS, really need to put a little bit?
I have the impression that I have not put enough (I had to put less than 1/3 of a grain of rice)
It's just a very thin and smooth layer

When I see videos on the net, I have the impression that there are a few more
Like that



Me, it does not make me these kinds of "waves", it's really smooth
If there is not enough liquid metal, the temperatures will not be good, I guess?

Thanks


----------



## GreedyMuffin

With LM it is better to have a little too much, than too little. Just isolate around the die, so the excees doesn't short anything.


----------



## tistou77

Ok, I'll have to remove the IHS, clean and reapply the LM then...








With what can I clean the LM ?

Thanks


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Don't need to clean it. I didn't. I just added some more.


----------



## tistou77

OK








I have "opened" the CPU, that's what there is like LM (sorry for the quality of the photos)




Is it good or not ?
I feel that the "contact" is only in the center


----------



## Hydroplane

On vacation today and forgot to change the auto thermostat. Dropping my ambient from 71F to 66F gave a pretty linear reduction in temps. Gives me hope for 5 ghz if I stick it in the garage or the kitchen window. I'll wait til next week when the temps get back into the teens. Wonder if condensation would be a concern, or is the winter air dry enough?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> On vacation today and forgot to change the auto thermostat. Dropping my ambient from 71F to 66F gave a pretty linear reduction in temps. Gives me hope for 5 ghz if I stick it in the garage or the kitchen window. I'll wait til next week when the temps get back into the teens. Wonder if condensation would be a concern, or is the winter air dry enough?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


You just need to keep it above the dew point and you will not have condensation.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> You just need to keep it above the dew point and you will not have condensation.


The dew point outside is always a little below the ambient, so I should be okay. Only worry is if that air mixes with the warmer house air. I'll keep an eye on the tubing/fittings while testing to see if any condensation develops.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
lol always love to hear about natures cooling


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> OK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have "opened" the CPU, that's what there is like LM (sorry for the quality of the photos)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it good or not ?
> I feel that the "contact" is only in the center


I re put a little LM, it's good now ?



If so, I will put the CPU in the socket (waiting for me to mount it all) so that the pressure is uniform


----------



## Hydroplane

Tried 3.0 on the cache, it increased my cinebench from 4475 to 4507. Not much of a difference, plus it draws 30W more and crashes more.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> OK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have "opened" the CPU, that's what there is like LM (sorry for the quality of the photos)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it good or not ?
> I feel that the "contact" is only in the center


you really should remove the black silicon sealant - you will get better contact.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Or do what I did. I just removed the inner silicon and let the thicker, outer layer stay on. Best contact and looked un-delidded. :-D


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you really should remove the black silicon sealant - you will get better contact.


Thanks








When removing the IHS, it is not necessary to clean and re-put the LM (like thermal paste), I can leave as is ?
The easiest way to remove the silicone on the pcb is isopropyl alcohol ?
And to re-glue the IHS, 1 point of "high temperature black silicone" on each side is enough ?

Thanks for your help

PS: and for the LM, is it good (picture above) ?


----------



## DooRules

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When removing the IHS, it is not necessary to clean and re-put the LM (like thermal paste), I can leave as is ?
> The easiest way to remove the silicone on the pcb is isopropyl alcohol ?
> And to re-glue the IHS, 1 point of "high temperature black silicone" on each side is enough ?
> 
> Thanks for your help
> 
> PS: and for the LM, is it good (picture above) ?


I used a combo of the wooden tool that came with Rockit tool and fingernail to remove silicone.









I then used silicone on the corners only, far less than it came with. Just enough to hold the IHS in place. I also used liquid electrical tape on all the components around the die, just in case some of the LM reached that far.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> I used a combo of the wooden tool that came with Rockit tool and fingernail to remove silicone.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I then used silicone on the corners only, far less than it came with. Just enough to hold the IHS in place. I also used liquid electrical tape on all the components around the die, just in case some of the LM reached that far.


guitar pick, spudger, wooden kabob stick - all good for silicon removal... (i.e. scrape it off - carefully not to damage those tiny, tiny surface mount items)

As for LM, I add a micro-drop more to account for that which I am going to loose re-spreading it, but no need to clean it off unless its contaminated with debris. Just re-spread it around and go.


----------



## tistou77

Leaving the silicone on the pcb, the temperature is good I find with a 7920x @ 4.7



And for
Quote:


> When removing the IHS, it is not necessary to clean and re-put the LM (like thermal paste), I can leave as is ?
> 
> PS: and for the LM, is it good (picture above) ?


Thanks


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Tried 3.0 on the cache, it increased my cinebench from 4475 to 4507. Not much of a difference, plus it draws 30W more and crashes more.


What is your CPU OC / voltage and Cashe voltage? You may have to increase your core and cashe voltages for stability.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> What is your CPU OC / voltage and Cashe voltage? You may have to increase your core and cashe voltages for stability.


Right now I have a per core OC with the following settings:

3 x 4.3 @ 1.10v
4 x 4.4 @ 1.14v
6 x 4.5 @ 1.19v
2 x 4.6 @ 1.23v
3 x 4.8 @ 1.27v

Works for benching, but not totally stable. It would freeze once every ~30 cinebench runs or every ~15 minutes of small FFTs. I will probably lower the 4.8 cores down to 4.7 or 4.6, that would eliminate the 1.27V level and should help lower the temps. Would give me a nice 24/7 OC of 4.5 average.

I had the cache on auto voltage, wasn't sure of a good setting. But 2.4 up to 3.0 didn't help my performance much.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Right now I have a per core OC with the following settings:
> 
> 3 x 4.3 @ 1.10v
> 4 x 4.4 @ 1.14v
> 6 x 4.5 @ 1.19v
> 2 x 4.6 @ 1.23v
> 3 x 4.8 @ 1.27v
> 
> Works for benching, but not totally stable. It would freeze once every ~30 cinebench runs or every ~15 minutes of small FFTs. I will probably lower the 4.8 cores down to 4.7 or 4.6, that would eliminate the 1.27V level and should help lower the temps. Would give me a nice 24/7 OC of 4.5 average.
> 
> I had the cache on auto voltage, wasn't sure of a good setting. But 2.4 up to 3.0 didn't help my performance much.


Auto setting for Cashe is not good it sets it way to high. I have a 4.4 all cores sync 1.120v with Cashe @ 3.0 1.100v. Try setting CPU Cache Voltage [Manual Mode] CPU Cache Voltage Override 1.150v. Check for stability.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Auto setting for Cashe is not good it sets it way to high. I have a 4.4 all cores sync 1.120v with Cashe @ 3.0 1.100v. Try setting CPU Cache Voltage [Manual Mode] CPU Cache Voltage Override 1.150v. Check for stability.


Thanks, I will try that. Yeah the auto probably went higher than necessary. I tried the auto at all cores 4.3 to see what it would do and it gave me 1.2 vcore lol. Yours is delidded correct? Is it retail or a silicon lottery bin?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Thanks, I will try that. Yeah the auto probably went higher than necessary. I tried the auto at all cores 4.3 to see what it would do and it gave me 1.2 vcore lol. Yours is delidded correct? Is it retail or a silicon lottery bin?


Silicon Lottery 4.3 bin.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Silicon Lottery 4.3 bin.


Nice







I figure mine would go into the 4.3 bin there. I can do 4.3 1.10v but not 4.4 1.112v that they list for each bin.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Nice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I figure mine would go into the 4.3 bin there. I can do 4.3 1.10v but not 4.4 1.112v that they list for each bin.


I have been able to bench at 5.0 / 3.0 (memory 4000MHz 16-17-16-36 1T) with 1.365v /1.150v manual on the chiller. Very happy with this chip.


----------



## cekim

This chip continues to confound, but in a good way...

Lowered VCCIN to 1.70 to reproduce the throttling described elsewhere... Don't see any... Also, still stable









4.5GHz x 18
VCCIN: 1.70v
VCORE: 1.17v
VCCSA: 0.92v
VCCIO: 1.05v

Speedup from ram tuning (~18% speed up in multi-process-large-memory apps) added some heat - my 24/7 fan-curve let things get a little warm (75C hottest core peak average 60-65C during RB2.44 non-avx)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When removing the IHS, it is not necessary to clean and re-put the LM (like thermal paste), I can leave as is ?
> The easiest way to remove the silicone on the pcb is isopropyl alcohol ?
> And to re-glue the IHS, 1 point of "high temperature black silicone" on each side is enough ?
> 
> Thanks for your help
> 
> PS: and for the LM, is it good (picture above) ?


by removing all the OEM silicon you lower the IHS just enough to get optimal contact between the IHS and DIE. LM is/should be a much thinner interface compared to the TIM Intel uses. To remove the glue, I use a cut credit card 0 rounded edge for open areas, and the square/acute corner for tight spots.

lol - No one is gonna be fooled by leaving the OEM silicon in place. Delid is easy to tell without even removing the chip from the socket, and, well, obvious once removed.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> This chip continues to confound, but in a good way...
> 
> Lowered VCCIN to 1.70 to reproduce the throttling described elsewhere... Don't see any... Also, still stable
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.5GHz x 18
> VCCIN: 1.70v
> VCORE: 1.17v
> VCCSA: 0.92v
> VCCIO: 1.05v
> 
> Speedup from ram tuning (~18% speed up in multi-process-large-memory apps) added some heat - my 24/7 fan-curve let things get a little warm (75C hottest core peak average 60-65C during RB2.44 non-avx)


Interesting... +1


----------



## Abaidor

And how good lowering the height of the IHS (after removing the OEM silicon) works with a Monoblock waterblock then? I.e. the EK monoblock for the Rampage Extremen VI...You might lose contact due to the VRMs. Unless you use thinner thermal pads on that side.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Abaidor*
> 
> And how good lowering the height of the IHS (after removing the OEM silicon) works with a Monoblock waterblock then? I.e. the EK monoblock for the Rampage Extremen VI...You might lose contact due to the VRMs. Unless you use thinner thermal pads on that side.


This and that. Yes it is a problem, yes you can use thinner pads to fix it.

monoblock requires "tuning" if you don't glue it back on. It looks like 0.75mm would be ideal. 0.5 with NO stretching is "good enough". Stock is 1mm.

The upside is "that spread":


----------



## Abaidor

I am ordering several pads with the monoblock so I have room to play. For the moment I still need several parts to complete my build. Mostly cooling though..


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Interesting... +1


LLC6 and CPU current 200% BTW with that VCCIN 1.70v

Slightly lowered total power - keeps the whole mess under 400W peak in RB2.44 stress.

Room to crank it a little









I am sorely temped to setup a quick-disconnect chiller with all the 5.0GHz nonsense I see around here with these chips at 10-12C...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Abaidor*
> 
> And how good lowering the height of the IHS (after removing the OEM silicon) works with a Monoblock waterblock then? I.e. the EK monoblock for the Rampage Extremen VI...You might lose contact due to the VRMs. Unless you use thinner thermal pads on that side.


yeah - the problem with a monoblock... but a few microns? (the OEM bondline is compressible). Besides, a MonoB may require massaging anyway due to component mounting variances.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> LLC6 and CPU current 200% BTW with that VCCIN 1.70v
> 
> Slightly lowered total power - keeps the whole mess under 400W peak in RB2.44 stress.
> 
> Room to crank it a little
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am sorely temped to setup a quick-disconnect chiller with all the 5.0GHz nonsense I see around here with these chips at 10-12C...


LC 6 is giving any droop? I had some poor results (performance wise) with VCCIN set too low. Yeah, you'll want a chiller for 5.0 or higher if only for some dts comfort... not sure if even 0C keeps the microenvironment all that much better. But damn, once at like 5C or lower and spinning the thing up, it is real easy to OCP the board unless to remove all safeties!


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - the problem with a monoblock... but a few microns? (the OEM bondline is compressible). Besides, a MonoB may require massaging anyway due to component mounting variances.
> LC 6 is giving any droop? I had some poor results (performance wise) with VCCIN set too low. Yeah, you'll want a chiller for 5.0 or higher if only for some dts comfort... not sure if even 0C keeps the microenvironment all that much better. But damn, once at like 5C or lower and spinning the thing up, it is real easy to OCP the board unless to remove all safeties!


LLC6 loaded shows 1.63-.1.65 for a 1.70 bios setting according to SIV. Idle reads 1.696.

I haven't cracked out the multi-meter yet.

EDIT: looks like I need VCCIN=1.80 for 4.6GHz


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> OK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have "opened" the CPU, that's what there is like LM (sorry for the quality of the photos)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it good or not ?
> I feel that the "contact" is only in the center


I would use liquid tape or something else to cover those capacitors to prevent any accidents with liquid metal? Cheers.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> I would use liquid tape or something else to cover those capacitors to prevent any accidents with liquid metal? Cheers.


I used nail polish


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> I used nail polish


Alright, didn't see it from the picture.


----------



## tistou77

there is enough LM or not?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> by removing all the OEM silicon you lower the IHS just enough to get optimal contact between the IHS and DIE. LM is/should be a much thinner interface compared to the TIM Intel uses. To remove the glue, I use a cut credit card 0 rounded edge for open areas, and the square/acute corner for tight spots.
> 
> lol - No one is gonna be fooled by leaving the OEM silicon in place. Delid is easy to tell without even removing the chip from the socket, and, well, obvious once removed.


Ok, i will removed the silicone on the pcb with a credit card
Hoping not to put "residues" on the LM
You confirm me that if I open the CPU again, I do not need to clean and put the LM again ?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Alright, didn't see it from the picture.


The photos are not very good
On the last, we see better

Thanks for your help


----------



## DooRules

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> This chip continues to confound, but in a good way...
> 
> Lowered VCCIN to 1.70 to reproduce the throttling described elsewhere... Don't see any... Also, still stable
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.5GHz x 18
> VCCIN: 1.70v
> VCORE: 1.17v
> VCCSA: 0.92v
> VCCIO: 1.05v
> 
> Speedup from ram tuning (~18% speed up in multi-process-large-memory apps) added some heat - my 24/7 fan-curve let things get a little warm (75C hottest core peak average 60-65C during RB2.44 non-avx)


Been playing around with my 24/7 OC as well. Very similar in some respects to your settings. Trying it at manual instead of adaptive. Have speedstep on, Cstates on, just figured I would see if it made any difference. Just been trying CB till I see where it will crap out. CB seems to really like these settings.

4.5GHz x 18
VCCIN @ 1.75 Bios
Vc @ 1.15 manual
VCCSA @ 0.95
VCCIO @ 1.05


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> 
> 
> there is enough LM or not?
> Ok, i will removed the silicone on the pcb with a credit card
> Hoping not to put "residues" on the LM
> *You confirm me that if I open the CPU again, I do not need to clean and put the LM again* ?
> The photos are not very good
> On the last, we see better
> 
> Thanks for your help


well... scraping off the glue with LM on the die? It's likely you would get contamination (dust, glue) on there and that would really screw up the contact. Why did you open it up a second time anyway?


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> well... scraping off the glue with LM on the die? It's likely you would get contamination (dust, glue) on there and that would really screw up the contact. Why did you open it up a second time anyway?


I opened it a second time to add a little LM (as recommended on the previous pages)

Before



After



For that I ask if now there is enough LM, picture just above

In fact if I clean the old glue, I'll clean the LM before (it's better







)


----------



## ABeta

How do we find out what the best cores are? I remember watching and video and reading that the x299 platform will identify for you what the best cores are for further overclocking of specific cores?

For the Rampage VI extreme I noticed two cores have an asterisk on them - does that mean these are the processor's best cores?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ABeta*
> 
> How do we find out what the best cores are? I remember watching and video and reading that the x299 platform will identify for you what the best cores are for further overclocking of specific cores?
> 
> For the Rampage VI extreme I noticed two cores have an asterisk on them - does that mean these are the processor's best cores?


Correct, those are the two Turbo 3.0 cores. But do be aware that Asus BIOS numbers the cores starting from #1 whereas as Windows (and everything else) numbers them from #0. So everything is shifted by 1.

From an overclocking standpoint, the two Turbo 3.0 cores are not necessarily the best cores to push to higher frequencies. They are simply the ones with the lowest voltage needed to reach 4.4 or 4.5 GHz. It says nothing about how leaky those cores are.

And from what I've seen with per-core overclocking, there's only a weak correlation between the turbo 3 cores and cores that are actually able to hit 4.9-5.0 GHz without going over 1.4v or Tj.Max.


----------



## ABeta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Correct, those are the two Turbo 3.0 cores. But do be aware that Asus BIOS numbers the cores starting from #1 whereas as Windows (and everything else) numbers them from #0. So everything is shifted by 1.
> 
> From an overclocking standpoint, the two Turbo 3.0 cores are not necessarily the best cores to push to higher frequencies. They are simply the ones with the lowest voltage needed to reach 4.4 or 4.5 GHz. It says nothing about how leaky those cores are.
> 
> And from what I've seen with per-core overclocking, there's only a weak correlation between the turbo 3 cores and cores that are actually able to hit 4.9-5.0 GHz without going over 1.4v or Tj.Max.


Thank you for confirming and clarifying.

Per core overclocking is awesome, but also pure madness! Lol. I guess now it's gonna take more time to find out which are my two best cores so I can further OC those for gaming.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ABeta*
> 
> Thank you for confirming and clarifying.
> 
> Per core overclocking is awesome, but also pure madness! Lol. I guess now it's gonna take more time to find out which are my two best cores so I can further OC those for gaming.


A quick way to get a rough feel is to put all the cores to the same speed and stress them with a steady load (like P95).

While it's under load, open up HWiNFO64 and write down the VIDs for each of the cores. Once it's under load for a few minutes, record the temperatures for each core.

Once you have this information, compare them and look for cores that have both a low VID _and_ a low temperature.

Depending on what speed you're running at, the two cores with the lowest VID will usually be the two Turbo 3 cores. But quite often one (or both) of those cores will be extremely leaky and run hotter than other cores.

At this point forward, I usually test them 4 cores at a time running at 4.8 GHz at 1.40v*. The vast majority of cores will be able to do this (especially if you've already pre-binned them as described above). Then I push the frequency upwards from there. I'll start dialing back the vcore for cores that hit Tj.Max.

*Non-AVX loads only. Don't even try to do this with AVX or AVX512. If you want to target those loads, drop down to something safer.


----------



## ABeta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> A quick way to get a rough feel is to put all the cores to the same speed and stress them with a steady load (like P95).
> 
> While it's under load, open up HWiNFO64 and write down the VIDs for each of the cores. Once it's under load for a few minutes, record the temperatures for each core.
> 
> Once you have this information, compare them and look for cores that have both a low VID _and_ a low temperature.
> 
> Depending on what speed you're running at, the two cores with the lowest VID will usually be the two Turbo 3 cores. But quite often one (or both) of those cores will be extremely leaky and run hotter than other cores.
> 
> At this point forward, I usually test them 4 cores at a time running at 4.8 GHz at 1.40v*. The vast majority of cores will be able to do this (especially if you've already pre-binned them as described above). Then I push the frequency upwards from there. I'll start dialing back the vcore for cores that hit Tj.Max.
> 
> *Non-AVX loads only. Don't even try to do this with AVX or AVX512. If you want to target those loads, drop down to something safer.


Thanks for the tip.

Also just a general question on how windows allocates core usage.. when I end up finding my best cores and OC them above the rest and launch a game, would windows even give those higher frequency cores priority for the game? Or would the processes be spread out evenly, regardless?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ABeta*
> 
> Thanks for the tip.
> 
> Also just a general question on how windows allocates core usage.. when I end up finding my best cores and OC them above the rest and launch a game, would windows even give those higher frequency cores priority for the game? Or would the processes be spread out evenly, regardless?


I've only seen that work on the turbo 3.0 cores while the system is running at stock (or close to stock) settings. Beyond that, I don't think Windows knows which are the "real" good cores.

This unfortunately leaves you few viable alternatives. If the game uses very few cores, you can manually pin the entire process to the "good" cores using Task Manager. But you'd need to do it every single time you start the program, so it's not convenient. And in a lot of cases, an application (like a game) has many threads, but only 1 or 2 of them are actually important. Ideally, those important threads run on the fast cores. But there's no non-programmatic way to do that.

This whole concept of "unequal" cores is still new and is going to take years to reach full adoption. So for now, it's mainly useful only to the software developers themselves.


----------



## ABeta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I've only seen that work on the turbo 3.0 cores while the system is running at stock (or close to stock) settings. Beyond that, I don't think Windows knows which are the "real" good cores.
> 
> This unfortunately leaves you few viable alternatives. If the game uses very few cores, you can manually pin the entire process to the "good" cores using Task Manager. But you'd need to do it every single time you start the program, so it's not convenient. And in a lot of cases, an application (like a game) has many threads, but only 1 or 2 of them are actually important. Ideally, those important threads run on the fast cores. But there's no non-programmatic way to do that.
> 
> This whole concept of "unequal" cores is still new and is going to take years to reach full adoption. So for now, it's mainly useful only to the software developers themselves.


Got it, thanks for that insight. Well, I guess an workaround would be to use process lasso and specifically set what cores to use for a program/game.

Off to overclocking now!!


----------



## ESRCJ

I keep reading that 1344K in Prime95 is the heaviest on vcore. However, I'm able to run it for hours with too little vcore on a few cores, while it takes 8K or 16K to flush out the unstable cores. So it seems like the small FFTs are also a necessity for intermediate stability testing (intermediate as in in-between each bump up in clock speeds). Am I missing something here?


----------



## district9prawn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> I've only seen that work on the turbo 3.0 cores while the system is running at stock (or close to stock) settings. Beyond that, I don't think Windows knows which are the "real" good cores.


I've found that turbo boost 3.0 still works fine overclocked. The core list in the intel turbo boost 3.0 utility gets reshuffled, prioritizing faster cores. Games will then put the main threads on the fastest cores instead. I've found some games to respond terribly to tb 3.0. Battlefield 4 comes to mind, with extreme stutter and fps halved. Disabling tb 3.0 and using process lasso instead works fine.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> I've found that turbo boost 3.0 still works fine overclocked. The core list in the intel turbo boost 3.0 utility gets reshuffled, prioritizing faster cores. Games will then put the main threads on the fastest cores instead. I've found some games to respond terribly to tb 3.0. Battlefield 4 comes to mind, with extreme stutter and fps halved. Disabling tb 3.0 and using process lasso instead works fine.


Oh that's neat. Admittedly, I tested this back in July and I've been running all-core turbo since then. So I wouldn't have noticed if I picked up any newer drivers that did this.

Though the performance drops seem like they shouldn't be happening.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> I've found that turbo boost 3.0 still works fine overclocked. The core list in the intel turbo boost 3.0 utility gets reshuffled, prioritizing faster cores. Games will then put the main threads on the fastest cores instead. I've found some games to respond terribly to tb 3.0. Battlefield 4 comes to mind, with extreme stutter and fps halved. Disabling tb 3.0 and using process lasso instead works fine.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh that's neat. Admittedly, I tested this back in July and I've been running all-core turbo since then. So I wouldn't have noticed if I picked up any newer drivers that did this.
> 
> Though the performance drops seem like they shouldn't be happening.
Click to expand...

Boost 3.0 Gaming trouble.


----------



## crpcookie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Boost 3.0 Gaming trouble.


Techreport also tested with Turbo Boost 3.0:
https://techreport.com/review/32607/intel-core-i9-7980xe-and-core-i9-7960x-cpus-reviewed/8

Simply awful.


----------



## Radox-0

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *district9prawn*
> 
> I've found that turbo boost 3.0 still works fine overclocked. The core list in the intel turbo boost 3.0 utility gets reshuffled, prioritizing faster cores. Games will then put the main threads on the fastest cores instead. I've found some games to respond terribly to tb 3.0. Battlefield 4 comes to mind, with extreme stutter and fps halved. Disabling tb 3.0 and using process lasso instead works fine.


Yup I see similar. I have 6 cores on my 7980 XE clocked at 4.8 GHz (2 of the main highlighted ones, then the other 4 which use less volts) and the other 12 at 4.6 GHz on my daily use profile. Enabling Turbo boost 3.0 means tests like cinebench single thread or games will tend to focus on one of the 4.8 GHz cores first. Once I disable TB 3.0, it seems the workload is happy to shift around between core's including the 4.6 GHz core's when the 4.8 GHz cores are idling.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> Boost 3.0 Gaming trouble.


Interesting, will try later to see if I notice a difference in actual performance and frame times. To date only thing I have looked at when enabling / disabling TB 3.0 is which cores were primarily being used.


----------



## ThrashZone

HI,
Bloody hell
No need for turbo boost 3.0 if using 4.5-4.6-4.7 all core tb 3.0 should be disabled.
Turbo boost has never been any good in any platform.

Use By core usage set the high core 4.6x5 and low core 4.4x5 and there is your turbo and lower temps too


----------



## ESRCJ

What is the highest vdimm you folks would recommend for 24/7 use on this platform?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> What is the highest vdimm you folks would recommend for 24/7 use on this platform?


1.45v.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I would guess it depends on what the default speed is and what speed one was trying to achieve.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> I would guess it depends on what the default speed is and what speed one was trying to achieve.


the vdimm ceiling is really a cpu-based value. Intel sets the value for each cpu architecture. Sticks themselves can handle much higher and not suffer damage.. .a cpu imc will go well before ram sticks burn.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> the vdimm ceiling is really a cpu-based value. Intel sets the value for each cpu architecture. Sticks themselves can handle much higher and not suffer damage.. .a cpu imc will go well before ram sticks burn.


Hi,
Thanks for that
But would one find any improvement runnning say 3200 as the default speed which is 1.35v but use 1.45 instead ?
Or would that 1.45v be better served attempting 3600 ?


----------



## Crazy9000

Higher voltage causes more wear. There's no reason to have it any higher than what's needed to be stable, even if your CPU would last 20 years with those voltages.


----------



## Hydroplane

Used the kitchen window and its curtains to make a coldbox







please excuse my ugly wallpaper, spent all my money on a cpu now I can't afford to remove it











Worked ok but some room temperature air still got in, this was with -3C air outside. Got the water temp down to 14C, no condensation at all.

I was able to run cinebench ~10 times each with the following settings:

4.4 @ 1.112v
4.5 @ 1.16v
4.6 @ 1.22v
4.7 @ 1.27-1.3v, would pass about two runs then lock up, the two hottest cores would reach nuclear meltdown temps at this point. Hit 877W of wall power at 1.3v









cache 3.0 @ 1.15v the whole time.

This is actually a pretty good chip then based on Silicon Lottery's results, my temps were probably holding me back before.

Best cinebench at 4.7:



Gonna try again either when it gets down to -13C out next week or just put the whole thing outside. Should be able to hit 4.9, maybe even 5.0. Not sure if I will hit my goal of 5k in cinebench


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Used the kitchen window and its curtains to make a coldbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> please excuse my ugly wallpaper, spent all my money on a cpu now I can't afford to remove it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gonna try again either when it gets down to -13C out next week or just put the whole thing outside. Should be able to hit 4.9, maybe even 5.0. Not sure if I will hit my goal of 5k in cinebench


Condensation? Never heard of her...


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Used the kitchen window and its curtains to make a coldbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> please excuse my ugly wallpaper, spent all my money on a cpu now I can't afford to remove it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Worked ok but some room temperature air still got in, this was with -3C air outside. Got the water temp down to 14C, no condensation at all.
> 
> I was able to run cinebench ~10 times each with the following settings:
> 
> 4.4 @ 1.112v
> 4.5 @ 1.16v
> 4.6 @ 1.22v
> 4.7 @ 1.27-1.3v, would pass about two runs then lock up, the two hottest cores would reach nuclear meltdown temps at this point. Hit 877W of wall power at 1.3v
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cache 3.0 @ 1.15v the whole time.
> 
> This is actually a pretty good chip then based on Silicon Lottery's results, my temps were probably holding me back before.
> 
> Best cinebench at 4.7:
> 
> Gonna try again either when it gets down to -13C out next week or just put the whole thing outside. Should be able to hit 4.9, maybe even 5.0. Not sure if I will hit my goal of 5k in cinebench


5.0 Cinebench has been tough the best I could due is 4.9. When I try 5.0 I am hitting thermal limits and this is on 7c water temperature. I am going try a different bios to see if that will get me over the 5.0 hump.


----------



## Testier

Holy Crap!

Intel XTU just auto OVed one of my core to 1.562v!!!! While I am testing on Prime95. Instanted hit 90ish. Tried again without noticing it, hit 90ish again. That was insane!

Good thing my CPU still runs fine but man! That was scary!

@cekim

How concerned I should be? The whole time probably is less than 2min.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Looking at your build in your signature
I wouldn't worry about it it's just a surge compatible with your cpu and board


----------



## aDyerSituation

What do you guys think is the max 24/7 voltage for a 7820x? Assuming I keep the chip for ~2 years and it's delidded


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> What do you guys think is the max 24/7 voltage for a 7820x? Assuming I keep the chip for ~2 years and it's delidded


I'm running 1.4v on a 7940X and 1.38v on a 7980XE in our research lab. But I don't think anybody will care if they die. They understand the risks.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Okay. I'm at 4.7 at 1.26v right now with 3.2 mesh stable.

Not the best chip in the world but I would really like to hit 4.8


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> What do you guys think is the max 24/7 voltage for a 7820x? Assuming I keep the chip for ~2 years and it's delidded


Hi,
Post a cpu-z validate link so we might see where you're at now at 4.7
Make sure you uncheck the Private boxes first.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Another question, what do you guys recommend as the max voltage on the mesh/cache? 1.2v?


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Another question, what do you guys recommend as the max voltage on the mesh/cache? 1.2v?


The 7940X and 7980XE in our lab that I mentioned earlier are both running 1.25v cache. I'll post here if either of those chips burn out in the next year. (if I remember to)


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> The 7940X and 7980XE in our lab that I mentioned earlier are both running 1.25v cache. I'll post here if either of those chips burn out in the next year. (if I remember to)


Gotcha. I'm at 3.2 @ 1.15.

But you know. Always want more


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> Holy Crap!
> 
> Intel XTU just auto OVed one of my core to 1.562v!!!! While I am testing on Prime95. Instanted hit 90ish. Tried again without noticing it, hit 90ish again. That was insane!
> 
> Good thing my CPU still runs fine but man! That was scary!
> 
> @cekim
> 
> How concerned I should be? The whole time probably is less than 2min.


That's a bunch - no way to know for sure... That it didn't shut-down for thermal is a good sign, but not conclusive either way.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> 5.0 Cinebench has been tough the best I could due is 4.9. When I try 5.0 I am hitting thermal limits and this is on 7c water temperature. I am going try a different bios to see if that will get me over the 5.0 hump.


1.335v on all cores is not bad at all for 4.9. Well if the ROG CPU-Z reads it correctly. The regular CPU-Z tells me I'm at like 0.91v







I have not updated bios yet, getting there. Gonna put the PC in the garage shortly. We'll see how far Intel's pigeon poop can go. Not stopping until I see slush in the reservoir







At this rate my chip might de-lid itself lol


----------



## LunaP

Would up to 1.3v be safe for 24/7 usage on a 7980XE? I'm currently pushing to see what I can get out of this, From what I've been noting from most peoples 24/7 builds the average seems around 1.225-1.250 ( for those pushing that is )

I want the CPU to last for at least 3 years before I swap it up.


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Would up to 1.3v be safe for 24/7 usage on a 7980XE? I'm currently pushing to see what I can get out of this, From what I've been noting from most peoples 24/7 builds the average seems around 1.225-1.250 ( for those pushing that is )
> 
> I want the CPU to last for at least 3 years before I swap it up.


I did 1.3 on my non-delidded 7980XE with 14C water, 4.7 GHz. Just to benchmark. Below is my power consumption at 1.28v. I saw as high as 877W at 1.3v! It's a lot of current for 24/7 usage. We haven't had CPUs with this high current draw until recently so not sure it would hold up long term.


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> That's a bunch - no way to know for sure... That it didn't shut-down for thermal is a good sign, but not conclusive either way.


The package hit 95c, it didnt go up much more I believe. The CPU still runs perfectly fine a day after. I think its all good. It was bouncing between 1.1v to 1.562v as well. I do not believe any degradation has happened. You?


----------



## ESRCJ

This is my best score after overclocking my memory to 4000MHz. All cores are at 4.8GHz for this run. My worst core hit 94C on that run. My best core was at 73C. Per core overclocking is definitely the way to go for everyday use.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Would up to 1.3v be safe for 24/7 usage on a 7980XE? I'm currently pushing to see what I can get out of this, From what I've been noting from most peoples 24/7 builds the average seems around 1.225-1.250 ( for those pushing that is )
> 
> I want the CPU to last for at least 3 years before I swap it up.


VCCIN may be the more critical rail. vcore has multiple step-down points on the die, VCCIN is board to die
for day-driver uses, which may have "episodic" AVX... I keep mine at 4.5 on all cores with 1.215V vcore, vccin 1.85 llc5. Chip is delidded. I've run higher but not when the system is on for days working.
Folks need to recognize that R15 will tolerate settings (especially cache) that can fail simple workloads. It really is a pretty poor way to assess a cpu.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Thanks for that
> But would one find any improvement runnning say 3200 as the default speed which is 1.35v but use 1.45 instead ?
> Or would that 1.45v be better served attempting 3600 ?


there's zero reason to run higher voltage than required.. and with some ram ICs, high(er) voltage than needed can result is instability not related to operating temperature .


----------



## duganator

Can someone with a 7960x/7980xe run a test for me? I've looked at all available benchmarks and I can't find the scenario I'm looking for. I'm trying to see what gaming at 1440p 144hz and streaming at 1080p medium/slow does to the CPU. I want to make sure there's enough horsepower there before I drop 2 Grand on an upgrade


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> 
> 
> This is my best score after overclocking my memory to 4000MHz. All cores are at 4.8GHz for this run. My worst core hit 94C on that run. My best core was at 73C. Per core overclocking is definitely the way to go for everyday use.


Seems like a decent improvement in score. What type of sticks are those? And what voltage do you run through them?


----------



## Radox-0

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> VCCIN may be the more critical rail. vcore has multiple step-down points on the die, VCCIN is board to die
> for day-driver uses, which may have "episodic" AVX... I keep mine at 4.5 on all cores with 1.215V vcore, vccin 1.85 llc5. Chip is delidded. I've run higher but not when the system is on for days working.
> Folks need to recognize that R15 will tolerate settings (especially cache) that can fail simple workloads. It really is a pretty poor way to assess a cpu.
> there's zero reason to run higher voltage than required.. and with some ram ICs, high(er) voltage than needed can result is instability not related to operating temperature .


Yup, would be nice if Cinebench was indicative of stability, My CPU can do 4.6 GHz at 1.17v on 14 cores and 4.8 GHz at 1.21v on the remaining 4 manual cores (Cache at 31 with 1.075v and CPU voltage at 1.88 and pass cinebench with multiple runs when the water is cool enough, so based on that alone, my CPU would be amazing.



Yet it will crash on occasions when opening some games at those settings or crash on run number 14 of cinebench yet pass 15-20 again







(If only it was fully stable at those voltages accross the board







)


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Radox-0*
> 
> Yup, would be nice if Cinebench was indicative of stability, My CPU can do 4.6 GHz at 1.17v on 14 cores and 4.8 GHz at 1.21v on the remaining 4 manual cores (Cache at 31 with 1.075v and CPU voltage at 1.88 and pass cinebench with multiple runs when the water is cool enough, so based on that alone, my CPU would be amazing.
> 
> 
> 
> Yet it will crash on occasions when opening some games at those settings or crash on run number 14 of cinebench yet pass 15-20 again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (If only it was fully stable at those voltages accross the board
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Hi,
Try blender rendering
The BMW benchmark is a darn good one to start with
Ending with Classroom








https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Seems like a decent improvement in score. What type of sticks are those? And what voltage do you run through them?


It's this kit:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232492&cm_re=Trident_Z_RGB-_-20-232-492-_-Product

I have them at 1.42V currently, but I just confirmed that my memory OC is not perfectly stable after running Prime95. I need to do some tweaking. The best I've been able to boot and run benchmarks is 4000MHz CL16 16-16-36 1T and tRFC at 300 (this one makes the biggest difference from what I've seen) at 1.4V. However, this gets confirmed to be unstable VERY quickly when running Memtest86. Such a shame.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Would up to 1.3v be safe for 24/7 usage on a 7980XE? I'm currently pushing to see what I can get out of this, From what I've been noting from most peoples 24/7 builds the average seems around 1.225-1.250 ( for those pushing that is )
> 
> I want the CPU to last for at least 3 years before I swap it up.


Depends on the workload, but it's a lot of voltage on that CPU. Personally would keep the ceiling at 1.25v. On ambient, 1.3v will be fairly hard to keep cool if not delidding (and even then).


----------



## xarot

It seems manual voltage is the way to go with 7980XE? I can run [email protected] V manual, if I try to use adaptive I need to set way too high offset so then I will be unstable at idle and probably overshooting voltage under full load.







The VRM on the R6E runs ridiculously hot, I tried [email protected] V and it ran fine for 20 minutes in Prime95 SmallFFTs but the VRM went up to 108c and this was with a 40mm fan blowing over the VRM at 4500 RPM.









Is the chip worth delidding? I really wouldn't like to do it, I delid my 7740X this week and actually got the LM to burst a partial spill over the components which I had painted with liquid tape so all is good after cleaning but still...that chip is just so small. Maybe I should wait tfor the next chips to release and be like I didn't care if I kill the chip? I've delidded my 7900X and couldn't make any spills.

I am just thinking that if I am going to risk and delid it I am going to need a monoblock too. I cannot fit a larger fan over the VRM. I wonder if any manufacturer comes up with a VRM block w/ heatsink over the Aquantia chip only. I could see that Slinky has reused an old EK block but I don't know if it was PnP or PITA. Anyway he's using it like this: https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u50670/image_id_1951386.jpeg


----------



## Raven.7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *duganator*
> 
> Can someone with a 7960x/7980xe run a test for me? I've looked at all available benchmarks and I can't find the scenario I'm looking for. I'm trying to see what gaming at 1440p 144hz and streaming at 1080p medium/slow does to the CPU. I want to make sure there's enough horsepower there before I drop 2 Grand on an upgrade


I was playing PUBG at 1440p/144hz @ +/- 120 FPS and streaming 1080p to YouTube just fine the other night, and I only have the 7800X.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> It seems manual voltage is the way to go with 7980XE? I can run [email protected] V manual, if I try to use adaptive I need to set way too high offset so then I will be unstable at idle and probably overshooting voltage under full load.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The VRM on the R6E runs ridiculously hot, I tried [email protected] V and it ran fine for 20 minutes in Prime95 SmallFFTs but the VRM went up to 108c and this was with a 40mm fan blowing over the VRM at 4500 RPM.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is the chip worth delidding? I really wouldn't like to do it, I delid my 7740X this week and actually got the LM to burst a partial spill over the components which I had painted with liquid tape so all is good after cleaning but still...that chip is just so small. Maybe I should wait tfor the next chips to release and be like I didn't care if I kill the chip? I've delidded my 7900X and couldn't make any spills.
> 
> I am just thinking that if I am going to risk and delid it I am going to need a monoblock too. I cannot fit a larger fan over the VRM. I wonder if any manufacturer comes up with a VRM block w/ heatsink over the Aquantia chip only. I could see that Slinky has reused an old EK block but I don't know if it was PnP or PITA. Anyway he's using it like this: https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u50670/image_id_1951386.jpeg


I have my 7980Xe delided running adaptive 4.4 GHz 1.120v core / manual 3.0 GHz 1.10v cashe on a Predator 360 push/pull AIO temps 25c idle and below 40c gaming Wildlands. Can go 5.0 GHz core benchmarking on chilled water.


----------



## Hydroplane

Put my PC in the garage today, at 21F, to see how far I could go:



The water temp went down to 4C, didn't get any slush in the water disappointingly lol

The colder water stabilized 4.7 1.28v, I was able to get my best CB bench in at that speed:



That was with the help of the RAM, I just set the voltage to 1.45v and the speed to 3600, left all the timings at the stock CL14 and it worked. Not sure if it would pass a longer memory test at those settings, but I was surprised at how easy it was.

It took 1.35v to get 4.8 to pass cinebench, and the scores were actually lower than at 4.7. This is how much power 1.35v drew from the wall:


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> I opened it a second time to add a little LM (as recommended on the previous pages)
> 
> Before
> 
> 
> 
> After
> 
> 
> 
> For that I ask if now there is enough LM, picture just above
> 
> In fact if I clean the old glue, I'll clean the LM before (it's better
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


With 7940X, I have 2 cores, (3 and 13) which are ~ 30° warmer for others (stress test)







, the others have very good temperature
the application of the LM to redo ?
If so, do I have to clean the LM (how ?) first before putting it back ?

Thanks


----------



## duganator

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven.7*
> 
> I was playing PUBG at 1440p/144hz @ +/- 120 FPS and streaming 1080p to YouTube just fine the other night, and I only have the 7800X.


What quality preset are you using at 1080p?


----------



## mattschia

Hi everyone, I have a delidded 7980XE and an EK Monoblock on the way so I would like to understand a few things based on your experience.

I'm going to use it as a rendering workstation turned on 24/7 so I'm looking for the sweet spot for performance/thermals/power.. can anyone advise what frequency/voltage you think would be best?

Ram frequency in my field is totally useless so it's not relevant, what I don't understand however is the mesh frequency, will it make a difference? Thanks!


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mattschia*
> 
> Hi everyone, I have a delidded 7980XE and an EK Monoblock on the way so I would like to understand a few things based on your experience.
> 
> I'm going to use it as a rendering workstation turned on 24/7 so I'm looking for the sweet spot for performance/thermals/power.. can anyone advise what frequency/voltage you think would be best?
> 
> Ram frequency in my field is totally useless so it's not relevant, what I don't understand however is the mesh frequency, will it make a difference? Thanks!


Hi,
Delidded I doubt you'll have to worry about anything
All default would be fine
The main issue was the crap assembly and now it is gone










Bumping the mesh is overrated it makes very little difference and mostly only for benchmarking and maybe gaming but setting a different multiplier does a lot more performance wise than setting a min/ max cache auto works fine but will never go over 27 or 2700 so there is your minimum cache 27.
Max you can use 30 if you really want too.


----------



## mattschia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Delidded I doubt you'll have to worry about anything
> All default would be fine
> The main issue was the crap assembly and now it is gone
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bumping the mesh is overrated it makes very little difference and mostly only for benchmarking and maybe gaming but setting a different multiplier does a lot more performance wise than setting a min/ max cache auto works fine but will never go over 27 or 2700 so there is your minimum cache 27.
> Max you can use 30 if you really want too.


Thanks for the clarification regarding the mesh. However I have no intention to run that beast at stock, I want to overclock obviously









I just wonder what's the best frequency/voltage for a rock solid daily system without crazy thermals or power consumption. Ideally I'd like to hit the 4000 on cinebench or something similar


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mattschia*
> 
> Thanks for the clarification regarding the mesh. However I have no intention to run that beast at stock, I want to overclock obviously
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just wonder what's the best frequency/voltage for a rock solid daily system without crazy thermals or power consumption. Ideally I'd like to hit the 4000 on cinebench or something similar


Power/heat scale pretty linearly until 4.4. 4.5 and beyond tends to be the "knee in the curve".

You _should_ be able to hit 4000 CBR15 with 4.2-4.3 all-core which is relatively tame heat/power-wise and can be cooled with an AIO.

You might be able to hit 4000 at 4.0-4.1 depending on memory/mesh speeds. Going to 3.0Ghz mesh a. shouldn't require more than 1.10v and b. shouldn't produce ridiculous thermals/power either. It also produces noticeable improvements in CBR15 as well as highly threaded apps generally that have any sort of inter-thread/process communication. I have to disagree with the prior poster there. It may not matter in games, but the "slow" mesh of this processor is its Achilles heal and why it under-performs clock-for-clock-core-for-core the same and older architectures. Every little bit helps to remove/restore that handicap.

If you want it stupidly cool and quiet, cap it at 4.0GHz and see how it performs for you. Push to 4.3-4.4 if you can cool it with your setup. As above, with memory tuning, even 4.0-4.2 can produce some amazing results. I was able to bump real-world application performance of an 18-thread simulation by ~18% with memory tuning alone - again speaking to the criticial nature of the mesh and memory as the bottleneck of this generation of processor.

Also, be aware that all of the above assumes AVX2 and 512 are kept ~4.0GHz or less. AVX512 adds a pretty enormous amount of raw throughput from prior gens and frankly, it is not well used by software yet, so you can dial it down for heat/power and not miss it for now. AVX2 requires less handi-capping, but @4.0Ghz it still performs well on reasonable power budgets.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mattschia*
> 
> Thanks for the clarification regarding the mesh. However I have no intention to run that beast at stock, I want to overclock obviously
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just wonder what's the best frequency/voltage for a rock solid daily system without crazy thermals or power consumption. Ideally I'd like to hit the 4000 on cinebench or something similar


Hi,
Just change the multiplier and leave most items on auto see how it goes
Like I said you can use 27 and 30 for cache too
Whether all core x45 or by core usage is used you just have to test it out and see what your temperatures are like
All core is the best way to see how things are which ever multiplier is used


----------



## cekim

Oops - correction:
Was: Fresh win10 install - prior to "Fall Creator's Update"... Thought I'd check the performance difference.
New: Seems it already updated overnight.... So, I can't check...

Fresh Win10 install @12/25/2017 and then update (and update to the update):


Prior to this, it seems things had bloated up a bit - here was a recent score with these same settings prior to the fresh install:


----------



## mattschia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Power/heat scale pretty linearly until 4.4. 4.5 and beyond tends to be the "knee in the curve".
> 
> You _should_ be able to hit 4000 CBR15 with 4.2-4.3 all-core which is relatively tame heat/power-wise and can be cooled with an AIO.
> 
> You might be able to hit 4000 at 4.0-4.1 depending on memory/mesh speeds. Going to 3.0Ghz mesh a. shouldn't require more than 1.10v and b. shouldn't produce ridiculous thermals/power either. It also produces noticeable improvements in CBR15 as well as highly threaded apps generally that have any sort of inter-thread/process communication. I have to disagree with the prior poster there. It may not matter in games, but the "slow" mesh of this processor is its Achilles heal and why it under-performs clock-for-clock-core-for-core the same and older architectures. Every little bit helps to remove/restore that handicap.
> 
> If you want it stupidly cool and quiet, cap it at 4.0GHz and see how it performs for you. Push to 4.3-4.4 if you can cool it with your setup. As above, with memory tuning, even 4.0-4.2 can produce some amazing results. I was able to bump real-world application performance of an 18-thread simulation by ~18% with memory tuning alone - again speaking to the criticial nature of the mesh and memory as the bottleneck of this generation of processor.
> 
> Also, be aware that all of the above assumes AVX2 and 512 are kept ~4.0GHz or less. AVX512 adds a pretty enormous amount of raw throughput from prior gens and frankly, it is not well used by software yet, so you can dial it down for heat/power and not miss it for now. AVX2 requires less handi-capping, but @4.0Ghz it still performs well on reasonable power budgets.


Thanks man for the nice explanation,I have a very very good water-cooling setup, the only bottleneck potentially could be the EK full cover that I'm not sure how it performs, buy I guess it won't be so bad.

One more thing, based on your experience, let's say I cap the all core multi at 42, how can I expect the single or dual core multi to scale? I'm coming from a x99 setup so this new per-core-multi is a new thing for me and actually could be quite useful when I don't use the CPU for Rendering


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mattschia*
> 
> Thanks man for the nice explanation,I have a very very good water-cooling setup, the only bottleneck potentially could be the EK full cover that I'm not sure how it performs, buy I guess it won't be so bad.
> 
> One more thing, based on your experience, let's say I cap the all core multi at 42, how can I expect the single or dual core multi to scale? I'm coming from a x99 setup so this new per-core-multi is a new thing for me and actually could be quite useful when I don't use the CPU for Rendering


EK full-cover here too...

You might try setting up a 4.5-4.6 on say 6-8 cores then 4.2-4.4 on all 18. That will produce a very manageable system power/heat-wise, particularly on water.

The difference between 4.0 and 4.4 is 10% and you can expect to see exactly that.

Play around with it for a bit to find what temps you are comfortable with...


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mattschia*
> 
> Hi everyone, I have a delidded 7980XE and an EK Monoblock on the way so I would like to understand a few things based on your experience.
> 
> I'm going to use it as a rendering workstation turned on 24/7 so I'm looking for the sweet spot for performance/thermals/power.. can anyone advise what frequency/voltage you think would be best?
> 
> Ram frequency in my field is totally useless so it's not relevant, what I don't understand however is the mesh frequency, will it make a difference? Thanks!


I agree with cekim, 4.4-4.5 with the ek monoblock on a delidded chip should be very comfortable 24/7.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I'm liking By core usage personally a lot opposed to all core much easier to deal with and temps are good
I'm using half cores at 4.6 and the rest at 4.4
All cores will eventually hit 4.6 just not at the same time


----------



## cekim

@matschia - here's a temp capture in siv64 while I was playing BF1 with all-core 45x multiplier a little while ago.

Note the maximum's - I've been idle for a little while prior to grabbing that - so the average and current dropped down. Note the max power as well - this specific setup peaks @ 390-400W CPU power under synthetic all-core non-AVX load.

It gets warmer with heaver load than BF1 - but this is my 24/7 setup w/quiet fan-profiles, etc...


----------



## mattschia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> @matschia - here's a temp capture in siv64 while I was playing BF1 with all-core 45x multiplier a little while ago.
> 
> Note the maximum's - I've been idle for a little while prior to grabbing that - so the average and current dropped down. Note the max power as well - this specific setup peaks @ 390-400W CPU power under synthetic all-core non-AVX load.
> 
> It gets warmer with heaver load than BF1 - but this is my 24/7 setup w/quiet fan-profiles, etc...


those are very nice temps, power consumption is acceptable but I'm not sure battlefield is actually pushing all the cores. From the screen it looks like you're using manual voltages, not offset or adaptive, am I right?


----------



## mattschia

Anyone using Corona Benchmark here? It's actually more useful both for quick stressing and comparing results, it scales better than cinebench. https://corona-renderer.com/benchmark


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mattschia*
> 
> Anyone using Corona Benchmark here? It's actually more useful both for quick stressing and comparing results, it scales better than cinebench. https://corona-renderer.com/benchmark


Hi,
Nope I use blender rending BMW benchmark and Classroom
https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mattschia*
> 
> those are very nice temps, power consumption is acceptable but I'm not sure battlefield is actually pushing all the cores. From the screen it looks like you're using manual voltages, not offset or adaptive, am I right?


BF1 is definitely NOT stressing the CPU to its fullest - more indicative of "every day use".

Those peaks in temp are momentary - it spends most of its time in the mid-to-high 40's during game play.

55-65 during real-world sustained all-core load.


----------



## duganator

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> BF1 is definitely NOT stressing the CPU to its fullest - more indicative of "every day use".
> 
> Those peaks in temp are momentary - it spends most of its time in the mid-to-high 40's during game play.
> 
> 55-65 during real-world sustained all-core load.


Do you stream at all when you play?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *duganator*
> 
> Do you stream at all when you play?


Nope...


----------



## Raven.7

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *duganator*
> 
> What quality preset are you using at 1080p?


I should have mentioned I use ShadowPlay, but yes, 1080p on Medium streaming quality.


----------



## jacknhut

For those who use adaptive voltage, does your vcore goes up automatically with the core ratio despite what you set in the "additional turbo voltage value" ?

ie I set my voltage to adaptive, offset + 0.001 and I set "addiontal turbo Voltage to 1.05V" and everytime I increase core ratio from 38 to 40 to 42 to 44 the vcore increases from 1.05V to 1.15V to 1.2V and keep on going up. What am I doing wrong? I want to test to see at 1.05V how high I can push the core ratio but the voltage keeps going up automatically...

Rampage VI Apex
i9 7920x


----------



## changboy

Mine i overclock it bycore some at 4.7, some at 4.8, some at 4.9, and some at 5.0ghz.



temp are like this :


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> With 7940X, I have 2 cores, (3 and 13) which are ~ 30° warmer for others (stress test)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , the others have very good temperature
> the application of the LM to redo ?
> If so, do I have to clean the LM (how ?) first before putting it back ?
> 
> Thanks


deja vu. remove all the old LM (rubbing alcohol). Let the die dry completely (evaporating isopropanol will wet the evaporated surface), then remove the Si glue from the PCB and paint a very thin layer on the die AND underside of the IHS. LM has a very high surface tension, simply smearing some on both surfaces does not net a quality interface with the die or IHS. You can easily see this by how a drop beads up and by how tedious it is to paint on.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> deja vu. remove all the old LM (rubbing alcohol). Let the die dry completely (evaporating isopropanol will wet the evaporated surface), then remove the Si glue from the PCB and paint a very thin layer on the die AND underside of the IHS. LM has a very high surface tension, simply smearing some on both surfaces does not net a quality interface with the die or IHS. You can easily see this by how a drop beads up and by how tedious it is to paint on.


thanks so much for your help
I thought, indeed, clean the LM with isopropyl/isopropanol alcohol and the old "glue" on the PCB also
But I can not find it next to my house, maybe in a pharmacy


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> thanks so much for your help
> I thought, indeed, clean the LM with isopropyl/isopropanol alcohol and the old "glue" on the PCB also
> But I can not find it next to my house, maybe in a pharmacy


regular "rubbing" alcohol from the pharmacy/chemist.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> regular "rubbing" alcohol from the pharmacy/chemist.


Highest percentage you can find - the "other" in there is distilled water. More alcohol, more better.


----------



## jacknhut

Does anyone with a R6A got the EK monoblock aura thing to work ? The cable from EK monoblock is for a 5v LED header only, and the Aura headers on the R6A are 12V. How do you guys got it to work ? I can’t imagine plugging the cable into the 12v Aura header despite the instruction says its 5v only ?


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> regular "rubbing" alcohol from the pharmacy/chemist.


Thanks









I found that at home, it's good or not?
Modified medical alcohol Hansaplast (70%)


----------



## tistou77

And in pharmacy, there is only alcohol with the composition

Butyl alcohol: 4%
Isopropyl alcohol: 2.5%
Ethyl alcohol: 90%

No good

But with this, is good ?



Thanks


----------



## changboy

I use this 2 bottle and it work good for any metal liquid or paste. I also have the same bottle for last 2 years and still have inside for many clean up. Just couple of drop and you good.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *changboy*
> 
> I use this 2 bottle and it work good for any metal liquid or paste. I also have the same bottle for last 2 years and still have inside for many clean up. Just couple of drop and you good.


Thanks for your feedback
And for remove old silicon glue on the pcb (CPU), is good ?


----------



## changboy

Not for silicone, me i use a liitle knife like this and i do it carefully : Do not touch the little modules around the chip.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *changboy*
> 
> Not for silicone, me i use a liitle knife like this and i do it carefully : Do not touch the little modules around the chip.


ok thanks, I will do with an old VISA to remove the silicone on the pcb and clean with this product at the end (what I did for the IHS)


----------



## changboy

Why i use this lil knife ? Coz of its precision to rub exactly where you want and it remove the silicone in a verry easy way. To me a old visa card is a way too big and can go hit the modules around the chip coz its not precise as the head of the small knife.

Use what you will be comfort with. I understand the small knife can be scary at the first view hehehe but its easy to done the job with it hehehe. Thats make me laugh coz i imagine your face when you saw the picture knife hahaha.

When a doctor do a surgery he not use an allen key hahahah


----------



## changboy

I also use the liquid electrical tape to protect the small modules around the chip from the liquid metal. To me its a lot better then the polish nail. I have done 3 times my i9-7900x lol. I never broken it and it work perfectly. Use the Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut liquid metal, never use collaboratory coz it will dry verry fast (6 month). I tried many time the collaboratory liquid and its garbage liquid coz after it dry, you need to rub the surface to take it off.


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> And in pharmacy, there is only alcohol with the composition
> 
> Butyl alcohol: 4%
> Isopropyl alcohol: 2.5%
> Ethyl alcohol: 90%
> 
> No good
> 
> But with this, is good ?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


I imagine finding the purest of alcohols in France and other EU countries could be somewhat problematic, especially if your resources are limited to a local pharmacy. Here in the states, we can *order it in larger quantities via Amazon*; that said, the *ArtiClean kit* is somewhat better than the typically available rubbing alcohol compounds at cleaning such residues, though it does involve a two step/solution process.

*Indigo Extreme Clean* might also work, but be advised that it should only be used in a well ventilated area. Additionally, when using it, care should be taken to avoid getting it on anything like plastic, acrylic, etc. It can damage such surfaces.

Then there are acetone and trichloroethylene (TCE), in a vein similar to Indigo Extreme Clean. Used properly/carefully, they might also work. It should be noted that TCE is a known human carcinogen; I used variants of the compound (1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane) while I was in the military working on electrical equipment (e.g., cleaning flux off of pcbs, etc.) back in the '70s and '80s, before its use was prohibited. Back then it was commonly known as type cleaner, and also used by--you guessed it--folks wanting to clean the ink off their typewriter keys. It was/is very good at doing that.

Lastly, the following article might of interest: *Removing Cured Silicone Adhesive from Electronic Components*, which approaches the task from a scientific perspective.


----------



## tistou77

Thank you very much for those explanations
Indeed I could buy isopropyl alcohol on Amazon, but I will have received too late
I have to do this tomorrow or after tomorrow at the latest (after, I give back the Rockit99 to my friend)


----------



## duganator

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Raven.7*
> 
> I should have mentioned I use ShadowPlay, but yes, 1080p on Medium streaming quality.


Yeah I was more looking for a usage scenario involving the cpu. Shadowplay only looks good to me on bit rates way higher than twitch will allow.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> ok thanks, I will do with an old VISA to remove the silicone on the pcb and clean with this product at the end (what I did for the IHS)


Whoa. DO NOT use a blade to remove the OEm sealant. Just use a cut up credit card or any plastic like that. Even a thick tooth pick (called : sandwich picks).


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Whoa. DO NOT use a blade to remove the OEm sealant. Just use a cut up credit card or any plastic like that. Even a thick tooth pick (called : sandwich picks).


Yes, old VISA (credit card)


----------



## crpcookie

Supposedly a 10nm Icelake with 18cores:



Seems like Intel will bump up the default mesh clock to 4200 MHz. Hurray lower latency.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crpcookie*
> 
> Supposedly a 10nm Icelake with 18cores:
> 
> 
> 
> Seems like Intel will bump up the default mesh clock to 4200 MHz. Hurray lower latency.


oh yeah


----------



## changboy

Jpmboy you write DO NOT USE A blade but didn't write why ?

I use this each time and its work perfectly without demage the his, also on youtube many use it and Gamers Nexus use a metal blade.

If it was bad i done my cpu 3 times so i already broke it ???


----------



## Menthol

What ever you use be very careful, your wife may come up from behind and tap you on the shoulder, your dog may run by and bump your chair, an earthquake. If your comfortable with a blade use it, I have used a pocket knife on the smaller dies, if my finger nail is long enough I use it.


----------



## changboy

Ya this is what i think, just to be carefull and even with a credit card if you slide and crush a module its a risk to brake ur cpu.

Just take the time to do it and never hurry to do this, just that. I also use a magnifying glass to look closer....maybe my age have to do with this lol.


----------



## cgpyos

At last, finished my 24/7 overclock for my 7820x (delid) + Prime-A + AIO Silent Loop 240mm
Mesh offset +.150
AVX offset to 4Ghz


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!









Any tips for further improvements?
Beside changing RAM Kit (this HyperX Predator DDR4 3200MHz kit almost inoperable in term of overclocking)
Maybe there's someone who knows how to make this sheity kit to run AIDA memory latency for at least 60ns?
Also, even with this RAM settings i got errors is memtest86 even tho system is fully stable. Should i care about that fact?

Thanks for tips in advance!


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cgpyos*
> 
> At last, finished my 24/7 overclock for my 7820x (delid) + Prime-A + AIO Silent Loop 240mm
> Mesh offset +.150
> AVX offset to 4Ghz
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any tips for further improvements?
> Beside changing RAM Kit (this HyperX Predator DDR4 3200MHz kit almost inoperable in term of overclocking)
> Maybe there's someone who knows how to make this sheity kit to run AIDA memory latency for at least 60ns?
> Also, even with this RAM settings i got errors is memtest86 even tho system is fully stable. Should i care about that fact?
> 
> Thanks for tips in advance!


Hi,
You have the newer bios do you now pass the IME security test ?
https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/27150?v=t


----------



## mattschia

I've finally received my delidded 7980xe and i've ran a few tests, I've targeted 4.2 on all core and 3.0 on cache as you suggested and it gives nice numbers.
I'm attaching a screen to understand what you think about this chip regarding voltages, It runs rock solid with 0,100 negative offset with an average voltage of 1,060 on the cores.

How do you suggest I move forward to optimize it? I'm not looking for extreme scores, the room is pretty warm all year and water temperature stabilized runs at 33 deg anyway.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mattschia*
> 
> I've finally received my delidded 7980xe and i've ran a few tests, I've targeted 4.2 on all core and 3.0 on cache as you suggested and it gives nice numbers.
> I'm attaching a screen to understand what you think about this chip regarding voltages, It runs rock solid with 0,100 negative offset with an average voltage of 1,060 on the cores.
> 
> How do you suggest I move forward to optimize it? I'm not looking for extreme scores, the room is pretty warm all year and water temperature stabilized runs at 33 deg anyway.


It will be a little harder to test stability, but you can set up core-usage clock scenarios (ex: 8 core @ 4.5 GHz 18 core @ 4.2 GHz). You should expect 4.5 may require 1.15-1.22v (YMMV), so a negative smaller offset or a fixed voltage.

FWIW - I ran variations of this basic setup pre-delid on an AIO and it was fine for 24/7 IMO if a little loud (fan noise). In terms of temps, it was very tame.

BTW - "auto" will generally run VCCSA, VCCIN quite high which needlessly consumes more power. So, move those down to 0.90-0.95v and 1.70-1.75v respectively until you start doing heavier or memory OC (which may require 1.85v VCCIN).

Delidded and water cooled, provided AVX offsets keep those clocks at or below 4.0GHz, you should have no problem running 4.4GHz all-core with decent temps if you tune the other voltages down. 4.4 will generally require 1.10-1.15v from what I've seen on mine and out there generally. So, you can set AVX2 @ -4 and AVX512 @ -9 to be sure they won't really impact your non-AVX OC in terms of heavy voltage requirements. That's still running them faster than stock BTW, but they just won't require much current/power at those clocks. You can ramp them up separately after you are happy with your non-AVX OC.

EDIT: I've had trouble with hwinfo's power readings - SIVX has been good for giving you an idea of how absurd or not any given OC is in terms of total package power consumption.


----------



## darkinners

I just upgraded from 7700K(Delidded)@4.8 to 7940X + Asus PRIME X299- Deluxe motherboard
I am yet to install them though. I am using Corsair H115i at the moment but I am not sure it can handle a TDP 165W CPU..

I am targeting to OC my 7940X to 4.2-4.5Ghz range and under 100% load of all cores Max temp do not exceed 85C(or 50-55C delta T)
under non AVX load.
not planning to Delid this time, as I am not sure if I can handle the loss of a $1399 CPU if anythings went wrong.

Anyone here tried to OC their 7940X? Do I need a custom loop? if I am targeting that 4.2-4.5 OC range?


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> I just upgraded from 7700K(Delidded)@4.8 to 7940X + Asus PRIME X299- Deluxe motherboard
> I am yet to install them though. I am using Corsair H115i at the moment but I am not sure it can handle a TDP 165W CPU..
> 
> I am targeting to OC my 7940X to 4.2-4.5Ghz range and under 100% load of all cores Max temp do not exceed 85C(or 50-55C delta T)
> under non AVX load.
> not planning to Delid this time, as I am not sure if I can handle the loss of a $1399 CPU if anythings went wrong.
> 
> Anyone here tried to OC their 7940X? Do I need a custom loop? if I am targeting that 4.2-4.5 OC range?


Hi,
We have the same mother board









The H115i was not good enough on my 7900x it was scary hot realbench at 4.6 all core was hitting 90c








I returned it and had little choice but to try a ek 280 performance loop kit
Works pretty good I only have a mid tower case so a 280 rad was as big as I could fit it is 45mm thick though.









H115i rads are super thin 25mm max thick.
360mm rad might be better but Corsair doesn't have one I don't believe.


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> We have the same mother board
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The H115i was not good enough on my 7900x it was scary hot realbench at 4.6 all core was hitting 90c
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I returned it and had little choice but to try a ek 280 performance loop kit
> Works pretty good I only have a mid tower case so a 280 rad was as big as I could fit it is 45mm thick though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> H115i rads are super thin 25mm max thick.
> 360mm rad might be better but Corsair doesn't have one I don't believe.


May I ask what voltage you running at 4.6? and what temp you getting with EK 280 kit?(ambient temp as well)
I am using 750D and just had a custom loop quoted to me yesterday, I am thinking should I do it(I don't like the hassle of custom loop since I change hardware quite often)
Thanks man!


----------



## changboy

I have a corsair 750D and i put a 280mm rad in front, 360mm on top and on a bracket a 360mm in the back ;


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> May I ask what voltage you running at 4.6? and what temp you getting with EK 280 kit?(ambient temp as well)
> I am using 750D and just had a custom loop quoted to me yesterday, I am thinking should I do it(I don't like the hassle of custom loop since I change hardware quite often)
> Thanks man!


Hi,
Being in Texas ambient is usually always 25c 450D case
Here's the clock the VID is probably more than I need for 4.6 I just changed the multiplier from 4.8 I was trying to get it stable
https://valid.x86.fr/2i9ek7


I'll post what I would normally use for 4.6 in a little while.

I wish everyone used rig builder like we have


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Being in Texas ambient is usually always 25c 450D case
> Here's the clock the VID is probably more than I need for 4.6 I just changed the multiplier from 4.8 I was trying to get it stable
> https://valid.x86.fr/2i9ek7
> 
> 
> I'll post what I would normally use for 4.6 in a little while.
> 
> I wish everyone used rig builder like we have


WOW Thanks ThrashZone!
And yes rig builder is cool, love it!


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> WOW Thanks ThrashZone!
> And yes rig builder is cool, love it!


Hi,
No problem
You'll like this one a little more I know I like the max temperature in realbench it dropped 12c @76c going to my 4.6 based clock instead of the other
This one is at 1.240v with adaptive at +0.125 and turbo with 0.050
Can't do another cpu-z the thing is stuck giving me the same voltage as before not sure why it does that :/


I might go ahead a try a 1.2v to see if everything still passes
If not I'll get a watchdog violation = bsod because it needs more core voltage


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> WOW Thanks ThrashZone!
> And yes rig builder is cool, love it!


Hi,
Okay last one at 1.190v score going down but so is temperatures realbench says 71c








I've also added a mono block to my cpu not sure it's any better than my original but it sure looks cooler








cpu-z in win-7 shows correct VID








https://valid.x86.fr/2p58me


----------



## jacknhut

After hours of tuning and testing I finally get a stable per core overclock for my 7920x.

2 best cores at 4.9 Ghz 1.253V
4 next best cores at 4.8 Ghz 1.218V
6 remaining cores at 4.6 Ghz 1.16V

Temps peak 70C highest core, surprisingly all cores stay within 5-10C of each other, with the highest cores at 4.9 Ghz at 70C and the lowest cores at 4.6 Ghz also at 55-60C. Think I'm done tinkering for now. My goal is to keep it below 1.25V for longevity.

Realbench stable for 8 hours
Intel Extreme Tuning stable 8 hours
Prime95 stable 8 hours

7920x (delid myself)
Rampage VI Apex
16GB DDR4 3200Mhz CAS 16 ( ordered 8GBx4 stick of Gskill 4266 Mhz CAS 19)
GTX 1080Ti x2
Samsung 950 Pro 512GB
10TB Hitachi 7200 RPM storage
EVGA Supernova 1200W Platinum

My cinebench score fluctuate in the 3100-3200 range. Is this where its supposed to be for a non throttle system?


----------



## tistou77

@Jpmboy, you have the fan reference that you use for VRM ?

Thanks


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> @Jpmboy, you have the fan reference that you use for VRM ?
> 
> Thanks


http://gelidsolutions.com/thermal-solutions/case-fan-silent-5/


----------



## tistou77

@Jpmboy, you have the fan reference that you use for VRM

Thanks
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> http://gelidsolutions.com/thermal-solutions/case-fan-silent-5/


Ok thanks, I thought it was a 60








they are very quiet or not ?


----------



## Nizzen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> @Jpmboy, you have the fan reference that you use for VRM
> 
> Thanks
> Ok thanks, I thought it was a 60
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they are very quiet or not ?


http://www.overclock.net/t/1635159/asus-rampage-vi-apex-x299-owners/510#post_26353411

Quiet enough with fancontroll ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *changboy*
> 
> Jpmboy
> you write DO NOT USE A blade but didn't write why ?
> 
> I use this each time and its work perfectly without demage the his, also on youtube many use it and Gamers Nexus use a metal blade.
> 
> If it was bad i done my cpu 3 times so i already broke it ???


a metal blade "can" gouge the PCB and render the part useless... a plastic tool, any material softer than the pcb will not. Sure, you can knock off an SMD with either. Think of it this way... would you scrape tar or yellow line paint off your car's paint with a knife? That's all. using the right tool just removes one more route to screw-up.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> What ever you use be very careful, your wife may come up from behind and tap you on the shoulder, your dog may run by and bump your chair, an earthquake. If your comfortable with a blade use it, I have used a pocket knife on the smaller dies, if my finger nail is long enough I use it.


yep, finger nail works.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> @Jpmboy, you have the fan reference that you use for VRM
> 
> Thanks
> Ok thanks, I thought it was a 60
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> they are very quiet or not ?


I have mine plugged into the FS fan port... not loud to my ear.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1635159/asus-rampage-vi-apex-x299-owners/510#post_26353411
> 
> *Quiet enough with fancontroll* ?


^^ this!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
lol yeah the most deadly tool I have is an exacto knife
Can't count how many oops's I've had with one leaving blood trails


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> lol yeah the most deadly tool I have is an exacto knife
> Can't count how many oops's I've had with one leaving blood trails


yeah -0 it's one thing to "leave blood on the ice"... it's another to leave it on a CPU.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I have mine plugged into the FS fan port... not loud to my ear.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ^^ this!


Ok thanks


----------



## carlhil2

Broke down and delidded my chip last night, ..no more 80's.. 2x4.9-12x4.7-2x4.5..  EDIT: 12 cores @4.7..


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Okay last one at 1.190v score going down but so is temperatures realbench says 71c
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've also added a mono block to my cpu not sure it's any better than my original but it sure looks cooler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cpu-z in win-7 shows correct VID
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/2p58me


Hey Thanks again man. I installed the motherboard and cpu today with h115i, setting up some basic starting point oc(4.4Ghz 1.1v, avx/avx512 offset to 4Ghz) 4 hours Realbench highest temp wss 74c with H115i and room temp 23c. I think I don't need custom loop or delid at all. I will run Prime95 tonight overnight and probably try to fine tune it tomorrow see if I can squeeze extra 1 or 2 Ghz with manageable temp!

One thing is very weird though, the temp actually better than my 7700k (delid, coollab LM ULTRA). oc to 4.8Ghz, 4 hours realbench it would go up to 85c. and h115i watrler temp never went over 38c..probably somethings wrong with the IHS...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> Hey Thanks again man. I installed the motherboard and cpu today with h115i, setting up some basic starting point oc(4.4Ghz 1.1v, avx/avx512 offset to 4Ghz) 4 hours Realbench highest temp wss 74c with H115i and room temp 23c. I think I don't need custom loop or delid at all. I will run Prime95 tonight overnight and probably try to fine tune it tomorrow see if I can squeeze extra 1 or 2 Ghz with manageable temp!
> 
> One thing is very weird though, the temp actually better than my 7700k (delid, coollab LM ULTRA). oc to 4.8Ghz, 4 hours realbench it would go up to 85c. and h115i watrler temp never went over 38c..probably somethings wrong with the IHS...


check for frequency throttling since the temps seem low as you say.


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> check for frequency throttling since the temps seem low as you say.


Thanks for the heads up! What causes frequency throttling and how to avoid it?Thanks!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> Thanks for the heads up! What causes frequency throttling and how to avoid it?Thanks!


mainly power limit settings in bios... before thermal throttling.








But do get familiar with the chip and bios before removing these safeties.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> Thanks for the heads up! What causes frequency throttling and how to avoid it?Thanks!


Hi,
Make sure you're using a performance power plan in windows minimum processor state 100%
Disable hibernation in win-10 also disable Fast start feature if you don't disable hibernation using command prompt as admin with
powercfg -h off

With Manual mode and cpu core voltage override @ 1.1v
Did you also use cpu cache voltage on adaptive mode + a little more 0.150 and cache Turbo + a little more 0.050
I'd also use cache min @ 27 and max @ 30 no matter what that will get your Uncore at 3000 instead of probably 2700


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> mainly power limit settings in bios... before thermal throttling.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But do get familiar with the chip and bios before removing these safeties.


thanks !
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Make sure you're using a performance power plan in windows minimum processor state 100%
> Disable hibernation in win-10 also disable Fast start feature if you don't disable hibernation using command prompt as admin with
> powercfg -h off
> 
> With Manual mode and cpu core voltage override @ 1.1v
> Did you also use cpu cache voltage on adaptive mode + a little more 0.150 and cache Turbo + a little more 0.050
> I'd also use cache min @ 27 and max @ 30 no matter what that will get your Uncore at 3000 instead of probably 2700


I will try that now thanks!
And did you connect the 4pin power on the x299 deluxe?
If you do, did your psu comes with a 4pin cable?
I am using Corsair AX1200i and it didnt comes with a 4 pin cable..I am still thibking how can I connect that 4pin power on motherboard..


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> thanks !
> I will try that now thanks!
> And did you connect the 4pin power on the x299 deluxe?
> If you do, did your psu comes with a 4pin cable?
> I am using Corsair AX1200i and it didnt comes with a 4 pin cable..I am still thibking how can I connect that 4pin power on motherboard..


Hi,
Yes both 8 pin and 4 pin is connected although I don't believe the 4 pin is used unless a jumper is used to activate over voltage
psu came with 2- 8 pin cpu cables they are split on one end so one can use just the 4 to connect to the board.
Yeah Corsair sucks I actually asked and they said cut it I did I sent it back and cut the cord lol








EVGA rules


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Yes both 8 pin and 4 pin is connected although I don't believe the 4 pin is used unless a jumper is used to activate over voltage
> psu came with 2- 8 pin cpu cables they are split on one end so one can use just the 4 to connect to the board.
> Yeah Corsair sucks I actually asked and they said cut it I did I sent it back and cut the cord lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EVGA rules


Yeah my AX1200i comes with bunch of cables, but none 4pin one...sigh


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> Yeah my AX1200i comes with bunch of cables, but none 4pin one...sigh


Hi,
Here's the jumper to use the power from the 4 pin so you really don't need it connected but chicken**** of Corsair none the less


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Here's the jumper to use the power from the 4 pin so you really don't need it connected but chicken**** of Corsair none the less


Thanks.I don't think I've ever gonna need it then. I just want some mild OC


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
If you haven't already gotten it the web manual is a lot easier to read








https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/PRIME-X299-DELUXE/HelpDesk_Download/


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> Yeah my AX1200i comes with bunch of cables, but none 4pin one...sigh


The cables on both my ax1200's have dual 8pin cables, both split apart to make 2 4pi per cable if needed, nothing has to be cut or broken


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> Yeah my AX1200i comes with bunch of cables, but none 4pin one...sigh


Should be easy enough to address swapping out one of the eight pin cable's connector housings for a four pin housing. You can then terminate the connections of the four pins that aren't being used (e.g., insulate them so they don't short, remove the four non-used wires from the cable completely, etc.).

A pinout diagram for the AX1200 follows (disregard):

Edit: image removed

Edit: just noted that the diagram above is for the AX version, no the AX1200I version. Should know shortly if they're wired the same or not.

Strike that above. There is some info regarding the AX1200I on the first page of the *Repository Of Power Supply Pin Outs*, but you actually don't necessarily need a pinout diagram if all you're going to do is what I suggested above.


----------



## mattschia

Hi Guys, i use my delidded 7980 mostly under heavy AVX loads, clocked at 4.0 GHz it runs with 1.050v (average) at 68/70 deg and VRM goes up to 73deg. The system drains 340W under full load and water temperature stabilizes at 38deg with a Delta of 10deg from room temperature.. I'm wondering if those temperatures are good for long term operations and if there something I could do to improve them. CPU input voltage is 1.70 and Loadline is on level 2, Asus x299- with EK fullcover. Any advice?

Also, the sensors report two different temperature for CPU package in HWInfo64 and Aida64, both have the same name but one is the same of CPU MAX Core while the other is 5/6 deg hotter.. what is that?


----------



## wingman99

On Asus X299 motherboards can the AVX offset be set to 0?


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> On Asus X299 motherboards can the AVX offset be set to 0?


Leaving the function in Auto means there is no AVX offset applied.


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> The cables on both my ax1200's have dual 8pin cables, both split apart to make 2 4pi per cable if needed, nothing has to be cut or broken


For some reasons AX1200i only comes with non split 8pin and 6+2 split....
No 4+4 split at all....
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Should be easy enough to address swapping out one of the eight pin cable's connector housings for a four pin housing. You can then terminate the connections of the four pins that aren't being used (e.g., insulate them so they don't short, remove the four non-used wires from the cable completely, etc.).
> 
> A pinout diagram for the AX1200 follows (disregard):
> 
> Edit: image removed
> 
> Edit: just noted that the diagram above is for the AX version, no the AX1200I version. Should know shortly if they're wired the same or not.
> 
> Strike that above. There is some info regarding the AX1200I on the first page of the *Repository Of Power Supply Pin Outs*, but you actually don't necessarily need a pinout diagram if all you're going to do is what I suggested above.


Thanks man I will look into it.


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> If you haven't already gotten it the web manual is a lot easier to read
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/PRIME-X299-DELUXE/HelpDesk_Download/


Yes I downloaded the e-manual and read it before the motherboard arrives lol.

By the way, After some fiddling today morning. I settled on 4.4 1.09v/3G uncore/avx and avx512 -3
This setting passed 4hrs real bench and 8 hrs P95 small fft (non avx) with max temp 75C(highest core ) and 78C (cpu package)
With H115i fan speed set to fix 960RPM(absolutely silent)

I tried to oc 4.5Ghz but it needed 1.13v and 30 mins P95 small fft CPU package went up to 92C max ..And room temp was 25C. Can't imagine the CPU temp in summer ..I might able to keep it down with h115i fan spinning at 1300-1600rpm but it's too loud for what I use the computer for...


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> deja vu. remove all the old LM (rubbing alcohol). Let the die dry completely (evaporating isopropanol will wet the evaporated surface), then remove the Si glue from the PCB and paint a very thin layer on the die AND underside of the IHS. LM has a very high surface tension, simply smearing some on both surfaces does not net a quality interface with the die or IHS. You can easily see this by how a drop beads up and by how tedious it is to paint on.


Re do "relid" ans apply LM and I think it's good now ?



tested with Aida64 (CPU, FPU, Cache, Memory) at 4.4ghz (AVX in AUTO) and 1.16v (Vcore not refine) during 10mn for see
Temperatures seem good or not ?



Thanks


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mattschia*
> 
> Hi Guys, i use my delidded 7980 mostly under heavy AVX loads, clocked at 4.0 GHz it runs with 1.050v (average) at 68/70 deg and VRM goes up to 73deg. The system drains 340W under full load and water temperature stabilizes at 38deg with a Delta of 10deg from room temperature.. I'm wondering if those temperatures are good for long term operations and if there something I could do to improve them. CPU input voltage is 1.70 and Loadline is on level 2, Asus x299- with EK fullcover. Any advice?
> 
> Also, the sensors report two different temperature for CPU package in HWInfo64 and Aida64, both have the same name but one is the same of CPU MAX Core while the other is 5/6 deg hotter.. what is that?


Those temps sound perfectly fine, I run mine much hotter


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> Yeah my AX1200i comes with bunch of cables, but none 4pin one...sigh


yeah, it comes with 4x4 CPU cables.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> The cables on both my ax1200's have dual 8pin cables, both split apart to make 2 4pi per cable if needed, nothing has to be cut or broken


^^ This
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Re do "relid" ans apply LM and I think it's good now ?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tested with Aida64 (CPU, FPU, Cache, Memory) at 4.4ghz (AVX in AUTO) and 1.16v (Vcore not refine) during 10mn for see
> Temperatures seem good or not ?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks


looks about right for temperatures... still looks like a lot of LM to me, but if it works - don't fix it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> Yes I downloaded the e-manual and read it before the motherboard arrives lol.
> 
> By the way, After some fiddling today morning. I settled on 4.4 1.09v/*3G uncore*/avx and avx512 -3
> This setting passed 4hrs real bench and 8 hrs P95 small fft (non avx) with max temp 75C(highest core ) and 78C (cpu package)
> With H115i fan speed set to fix 960RPM(absolutely silent)
> *
> I tried to oc 4.5Ghz but it needed 1.13v and 30 mins P95 small fft CPU package went up to 92C max ..And room temp was 25C. Can't imagine the CPU temp in summer* ..I might able to keep it down with h115i fan spinning at 1300-1600rpm but it's too loud for what I use the computer for...


Hi,
Not sure what 3G is








But yeah AIO's can't quite keep up can you imagine an air cooler








Just have to find a happy spot and go with it for a while
Silicon lottery does have a 1 year warranty but that alone will drop temps 20c or at least is what I got so it was well worth another 100.us


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> For some reasons AX1200i only comes with non split 8pin and 6+2 split....
> No 4+4 split at all....
> Thanks man I will look into it.


NP. If you order one of *these* and perhaps a *pin removal tool*, it would make the job even easier. You would only have to swap the wires out between the old connector and the new housing one at a time. No messing with bare wire terminations, and typically done in a few minutes.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> On Asus X299 motherboards can the AVX offset be set to 0?
> 
> 
> 
> Leaving the function in Auto means there is no AVX offset applied.
Click to expand...

I read somewhere the default AVX offset was 3?


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I read somewhere the default AVX offset was 3?


No, it's 0.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> No, it's 0.


In fact, so far as I know, that's the only way to get "0" on some MBs... as typing 0 will change to 1. Auto on R6E defaults to non-AVX mulitplier (i.e. -0)


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> looks about right for temperatures... still looks like a lot of LM to me, but if it works - don't fix it.


Ok









At 4.6ghz, the max difference between 2 cores in load is 12°C
The delid allows to have temperatures quite close between the cores, I think

Too many LM (as you say) or it can be the application of the thermal paste (I put a big grain of rice in the center)
If it's the LM, I can always do it again when I put the fan on the VRM (obliged to remove the MB from the case)

Thanks


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## tistou77

By browsing a bit this topic, I saw a difference in temperatures of 10, 12°C between the cores (delid), is very common, I worried for nothing








Maybe I'll clean up the old glue a bit better and less LM, next time










@Jpmboy I saw one of your screens, it's your 7980XE "no delid"
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> IDK bud... I got one hot package.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is at 46x2, 45x16 - still OEM TIM


What temperature with the CPU delid ?


----------



## Hydroplane

I disabled HT and ran on the 4 coolest cores to see how well I could do in single thread performance. Got these cores up to 5.1 at 1.4v fairly easily for a score of 229. 5.2 did not want to complete the run even at crazy high voltages so I bumped the bclk to 101 for 5151 MHz. Still 1.4v. This got me to 232 and the #3 place in the cinebench single thread records here


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> I disabled HT and ran on the 4 coolest cores to see how well I could do in single thread performance. Got these cores up to 5.1 at 1.4v fairly easily for a score of 229. 5.2 did not want to complete the run even at crazy high voltages so I bumped the bclk to 101 for 5151 MHz. Still 1.4v. This got me to 232 and the #3 place in the cinebench single thread records here


----------



## tistou77

I can not find my post about VCCIN

Should there be a vdrop in load ?

Currently, with LLC5
Idle : 1.87v
load : 1.84v

With a higher LLC, no vdrop

Thanks


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> I can not find my post about VCCIN
> 
> Should there be a vdrop in load ?
> 
> Currently, with LLC5
> Idle : 1.87v
> load : 1.84v
> 
> With a higher LLC, no vdrop
> 
> Thanks


Yes there will be droop under load. Higher LLC on ASUS MBs means less droop (more overshoot and heat though). IIRC, Asrock and some others may be the opposite (lower LLC is less droop).

That amount of droop (provided its stable) is not a concern...


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Yes there will be droop under load. Higher LLC on ASUS MBs means less droop (more overshoot and heat though). IIRC, Asrock and some others may be the opposite (lower LLC is less droop).
> 
> That amount of droop (provided its stable) is not a concern...


Ok thanks so much for your help









It was to be sure it was better to have a vdrop
I leave with these settings then (LLC5, at 6, no vdrop)


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Ok thanks so much for your help
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was to be sure it was better to have a vdrop
> I leave with these settings then (LLC5, at 6, no vdrop)


The hazard/downside to "no droop" is that accomplishing no droop means fairly significant overshoot required to counter the droop. This won't be visible to software monitoring, but if you put a scope on the pins, you'd see spikes as voltage changed in response to load. They are very short spikes time-wise, but:

a. The represent large current swings in parts of the device.
b. They contribute to transients/noise in the system and thus heat.

It's not a sufficient concern to cause you to not use it, but it is sufficient to use as little as you require to achieve stability. Asus has stated in the past that LLC5 should be fine for 24/7 usage on x99. I'm not aware of a specific/equivalent statement on x299 yet though.


----------



## Hydroplane

It's 1F outside right now so if I swapped out the water in my loop for propylene glycol I bet I could hit 5 GHz / 5K in CB. Would just need to order some. My guess is that would lower my coolant temp from 4c before to -10C. They just updated the CB single core charts and I'm in #9 now, but #4 is only 8 points away. It's kind of funny that:

51 x 100 = 5.1 GHz 1.4v works
51 x 101 = 5.151 GHz 1.4v works
52 x 100 = 5.2 GHz nothing from 1.4 to 1.5v works, at 1.51 I got like 1 out of 10 runs to pass, but frankly I think above 1.45v is getting into dangerous territory. When testing at these voltages I was browsing threadripper motherboards just in case I killed it, lmao. So I think I'll stick to bumping bclk at this point.

My goal is 240 or at least 237, I think it's possible with enough setting tweaks. This is running on 4 cores / 4 threads. Score seems to go up slightly from 2 to 3 to 4 cores, since I think Windows can offload its background tasks better.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> For some reasons AX1200i only comes with non split 8pin and 6+2 split....
> No 4+4 split at all....
> Thanks man I will look into it.


Did you buy it used? I have 2x AX1200i's in my system and both can w/ 4x4 cables, though I went custom cables right after for the looks.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah, it comes with 4x4 CPU cables.
> ^^ This
> looks about right for temperatures... still looks like a lot of LM to me, but if it works - don't fix it.


n/m beat me to it.


----------



## changboy

It's curious coz with 2 cores at 5.1ghz and others at 4.6ghz with my 7900x i have single core cinebench of 224


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Did you buy it used? I have 2x AX1200i's in my system and both can w/ 4x4 cables, though I went custom cables right after for the looks.
> n/m beat me to it.


ah noo. it was brand new.. I might check again but I remember I can't find a 4x4 cable..


----------



## darkinners

So I settle with this setting for a 7x24 computer

Tested:
P95 small FFT 24hrs pass
Realbench 8 hours stress test (32GB ram) pass

4.4Ghz 1.1v vcore/vccin 1.7v/vssa 0.9v
AVX offset -4
Cache/Mesh: 3Ghz
Max temp core:76C
Max temp package: 75C
H115i fan speed: [email protected]



https://valid.x86.fr/g7h26g

But since I upgrade to 7940X, 960 PRO benchmark dropped significantly. I don't know why.

7940X + ASUS PRIME X299-DELUXE


7700K + Gigabyte AORUS Gaming 7


----------



## scc28

New to x299 and only have a 7820x, how does the below look?



Im only running on Corsair AIO so she warms up quite quickly!


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Did you buy it used? I have 2x AX1200i's in my system and both can w/ 4x4 cables, though I went custom cables right after for the looks.
> n/m beat me to it.


Wait..I am the dumbest person ever lived. and deserves a massive facepalm.....You guys were right!
There's a 4x4 cable!! And I found it was a 8x1..it's very hard to see the seam..I didn't thought it was a split cable...


----------



## changboy

On my asus strix x299 my 960 evo at 62% full got this result :


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
What are you running your memory at
The cpu-z showing looks pretty odd
Slow memory clock will slow read and writes


----------



## changboy

Ya mine its evo not a pro but its seam asus board with m.2 are lil slower then other brand


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> What are you running your memory at
> The cpu-z showing looks pretty odd
> Slow memory clock will slow read and writes


I run them at stock XMP speed 3000Mhz 17/17/17/35 CR2 (Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4 3000Mhz 16GBx4 kit)
For some reasons motherboard and corsair link both doesn't show the correct ram speed...


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *changboy*
> 
> Ya mine its evo not a pro but its seam asus board with m.2 are lil slower then other brand


seems that;s the case..I believe it won't affect the user experience though..still it's plenty fast..


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> I run them at stock XMP speed 3000Mhz 17/17/17/35 CR2 (Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4 3000Mhz 16GBx4 kit)
> For some reasons motherboard and corsair link both doesn't show the correct ram speed...


Hi,
Not sure about the timings you posted
My C15 shows 15-17-17-37 2P


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Not sure about the timings you posted
> My C15 shows 15-17-17-37 2P


Oh sorry I meant 15-17-17-35 CR2
I am using this kit
http://www.corsair.com/en-us/dominator-platinum-series-64gb-4-x-16gb-ddr4-dram-3000mhz-c15-memory-kit-cmd64gx4m4c3000c15


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> Oh sorry I meant 15-17-17-35 CR2
> I am using this kit
> http://www.corsair.com/en-us/dominator-platinum-series-64gb-4-x-16gb-ddr4-dram-3000mhz-c15-memory-kit-cmd64gx4m4c3000c15


Hi,
Okay









Either way the odd reading in cpu-z shows an issue and also you saying CL .. also showing weird might be the read/ write slow down :/

Could be a quirk with the 1004 bios ?
I'm on 0802 still
Yeah do you pass IME security test on the newer bios ??
https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/27150?v=t


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Okay
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Either way the odd reading in cpu-z shows an issue and also you saying CL .. also showing weird might be the read/ write slow down :/
> 
> Could be a quirk with the 1004 bios ?
> I'm on 0802 still
> Yeah do you pass IME security test on the newer bios ??
> https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/27150?v=t


I tried to reseat and rearrange the memories but doesn't help..
However the memory speeds seem normal and they actually running in QUAD channel mode.


No, BIOS 1004 doesn't pass the Intel IME test. Should I roll back to 0802?

Doesn't even show the correct info in System Information at Windows


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> I tried to reseat and rearrange the memories but doesn't help..
> However the memory speeds seem normal and they actually running in QUAD channel mode.
> 
> 
> No, BIOS 1004 doesn't pass the Intel IME test. Should I roll back to 0802?
> 
> Doesn't even show the correct info in System Information at Windows


Hi,
Yeah that is what I suspected = no pass









I would try the 0802 bios
Not on corsair links misreading because version by version is buggy at best
cpu-z and if bios is also showing weird than yes if it's no big deal to flash for you ?


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Yeah that is what I suspected = no pass
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would try the 0802 bios
> Not on corsair links misreading because version by version is buggy at best
> cpu-z and if bios is also showing weird than yes if it's no big deal to flash for you ?


Yeah I will try that now. It's easy


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> Yeah I will try that now. It's easy


Hi,
Not sure it matters but you might also make sure windows is actually using the Intel 200 series chip set driver instead of a MS standard controller
Open device manager and IDE.....
Also see if there are any Other device listing that would mean some missing drivers


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Not sure it matters but you might also make sure windows is actually using the Intel 200 series chip set driver instead of a MS standard controller
> Open device manager and IDE.....
> Also see if there are any Other device listing that would mean some missing drivers


Yeah, it's using the Intel driver and no missing driver at all.
Also I flash the BIOS back to 0802 and CPU-Z/Corsair Link still not recognizing the memories.. Also not passing the IME test as well...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Very odd :/
You're using all 4 gray memory slots ?


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Very odd :/
> You're using all 4 gray memory slots ?


It's very odd indeed, yes I put them in the grey slots.
I also tried separately installs only 1 or 2 or 3 rams in different slots combination like the manual suggests.
It's the same..Both CPU-Z/Corsair Link/AIDA64 can recognize the correct Memory model number and the XMP profile.
It's just both CPU-Z and Corsair Link cannot report the correct running timing..AIDA64 does report correct configuration in cache and memory benchmark though.
Very weird. I've never ran into this problem with 10 or 15 computers I've own or used to own...


----------



## Hydroplane

What's the maximum safe voltage for Skylake-X? (more so short term than 24/7) Anyone kill their chip at 1.5V+ ?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
For the record
System manufacture and system model are reserved for oem to fill out although one can write to those files manually








https://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/76570-customize-oem-support-information-windows-10-a.html


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> So I settle with this setting for a 7x24 computer
> 
> Tested:
> P95 small FFT 24hrs pass
> Realbench 8 hours stress test (32GB ram) pass
> 
> 4.4Ghz 1.1v vcore/vccin 1.7v/vssa 0.9v
> AVX offset -4
> Cache/Mesh: 3Ghz
> Max temp core:76C
> Max temp package: 75C
> H115i fan speed: [email protected]
> 
> 
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/g7h26g
> 
> 
> 
> But since I upgrade to 7940X, 960 PRO benchmark dropped significantly. I don't know why.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 7940X + ASUS PRIME X299-DELUXE
> 
> 
> 7700K + Gigabyte AORUS Gaming 7


WIth my 950 Pro I found if I OC the CPU over 4500 it drops from 2600 to 1500 Reads. Go figure.

Thank you, Samsung.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> WIth my 950 Pro I found if I OC the CPU over 4500 it drops from 2600 to 1500 Reads. Go figure.
> 
> Thank you, Samsung.


No problem with my 960 Pro and EVO and 7940X OC at 4.6ghz (but AVX2 at 4.4)
I'll test with 0 Offset


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> No problem with my 960 Pro and EVO and 7940X OC at 4.6ghz (but AVX2 at 4.4)
> I'll test with 0 Offset


Interesting. I'll try -2 AVX on my side


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> What's the maximum safe voltage for Skylake-X? (more so short term than 24/7) Anyone kill their chip at 1.5V+ ?


Hi,
Sure your nature cooling system would apply to anyone else unless they lived near the arctic circle too


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Sure your nature cooling system would apply to anyone else unless they lived near the arctic circle too


It's only good this time of year and only when I carry my heavy computer out to the garage and hook everything up again


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> It's only good this time of year and only when I carry my heavy computer out to the garage and hook everything up again


Hi,
Yeah I was expecting to see a cool dolly system on it last I looked as many miles it's getting moving it around


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Yeah I was expecting to see a cool dolly system on it last I looked as many miles it's getting moving it around


Would not help me get it down the stairs, lol. The 5.2 GHz was on room temperature air


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> No problem with my 960 Pro and EVO and 7940X OC at 4.6ghz (but AVX2 at 4.4)
> I'll test with 0 Offset


Same thing for my 950 PRO with offset of 2. However, on a hunch I tried a different approach.

I'm currently using BCLK of 101.1 and mult. of 45 to get 4550GHz CPU and 3438 RAM. I switched BCLK to 100 and mult to 46 to get 4600GHZ and no more 950 PRO slowdown, so it's the BCLK not the overall speed. Could be linked to the M.2 interface in the MB which I guess runs off the BCLK.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Same thing for my 950 PRO with offset of 2. However, on a hunch I tried a different approach.
> 
> I'm currently using BCLK of 101.1 and mult. of 45 to get 4550GHz CPU and 3438 RAM. I switched BCLK to 100 and mult to 46 to get 4600GHZ and no more 950 PRO slowdown, so it's the BCLK not the overall speed. Could be linked to the M.2 interface in the MB which I guess runs off the BCLK.


Hi,
I've noticed not a lot of people show using bclk and if they do it's just a tad say 100.1 maybe that is why ?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> It's 1F outside right now so if I swapped out the water in my loop for propylene glycol I bet I could hit 5 GHz / 5K in CB. Would just need to order some. My guess is that would lower my coolant temp from 4c before to -10C. They just updated the CB single core charts and I'm in #9 now, but #4 is only 8 points away. It's kind of funny that:
> 
> 51 x 100 = 5.1 GHz 1.4v works
> 51 x 101 = 5.151 GHz 1.4v works
> 52 x 100 = 5.2 GHz nothing from 1.4 to 1.5v works, at 1.51 I got like 1 out of 10 runs to pass, but frankly I think above 1.45v is getting into dangerous territory. When testing at these voltages I was browsing threadripper motherboards just in case I killed it, lmao. So I think I'll stick to bumping bclk at this point.
> 
> My goal is 240 or at least 237, I think it's possible with enough setting tweaks. This is running on 4 cores / 4 threads. Score seems to go up slightly from 2 to 3 to 4 cores, since I think Windows can offload its background tasks better.


Did you delid?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> What's the maximum safe voltage for Skylake-X? (more so short term than 24/7) Anyone kill their chip at 1.5V+ ?


It is ok as long as you can keep your temp's in check (benchmarking short runs). Need to watch your VCCIN voltages that will kill your chip. Just remember when using these kinds of voltages there is always a risk.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> It's only good this time of year and only when I carry my heavy computer out to the garage and hook everything up again


Sounds like you need a chiller?


----------



## darkinners

Ok..I think I found the root cause of slower 960 Pro speed on Asus board.
I change BLK from 100 to 100.1 and the speed back to normal!


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Sounds like you need a chiller?


Quite cheaper compared to top radiator+fan setups ...Just added one prevoius week and was impressed from the performance 20+*C water temperature drop...and can stay in my standart ambients while benching







)


----------



## Hydroplane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Sounds like you need a chiller?


Maybe







Tried everything I did yesterday and nothing would work at 5.15, I must have been at 1.45v yesterday instead of 1.4v and got it mixed up, lol

I imagine 1.45v is safe on these chips considering this is a low current situation with only 4 cores running, I mean 6700K through 8700K can run at that voltage 24/7 with the same basic architecture, just not sure beyond that.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> Maybe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tried everything I did yesterday and nothing would work at 5.15, I must have been at 1.45v yesterday instead of 1.4v and got it mixed up, lol
> 
> I imagine 1.45v is safe on these chips considering this is a low current situation with only 4 cores running, I mean 6700K through 8700K can run at that voltage 24/7 with the same basic architecture, just not sure beyond that.


Should not be a problem I have had all 18 cores at 5.2 GHz 1.485v for benching with chilled water at 7c. My chip is delided so I have to make sure I don't go below 10c CPU temperature for to long because of max temp for LM.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Hydroplane*
> 
> What's the maximum safe voltage for Skylake-X? (more so short term than 24/7) Anyone kill their chip at 1.5V+ ?


only kills I've heard of were due to high VCCIN (>>2.0V board to chip). Vcore is controlled on die and has multiple step-downs along the way. That said, this is a new unlocked for this architecture, so there is very little experience with high vcore at ambient or chilled temperatures.


----------



## Testier

Hey did you guys ever had voltage reading errors with HWINFO 64?

Because I am thinking maybe XTU voltage spike to 1.5ish V issue I had before might be due to a HWINFO reading error.


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Should not be a problem I have had all 18 cores at 5.2 GHz 1.485v for benching with chilled water at 7c. My chip is delided so I have make sure I don't go below 10c CPU temperature for to long because of max temp for LM.


I have the same problem with LM(Conductonout) they recommend 10+C but I run 3* my idle temps are high 9-10-11* while 7800x with Cryonout is having 1-2*C (diffusion effect) But anyway my loaded temperatures are fine CB15 are both in low 40s....and don't know how to proceed to re-paste the 8700k with Crynnout or just leave it like this


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Same thing for my 950 PRO with offset of 2. However, on a hunch I tried a different approach.
> 
> I'm currently using BCLK of 101.1 and mult. of 45 to get 4550GHz CPU and 3438 RAM. I switched BCLK to 100 and mult to 46 to get 4600GHZ and no more 950 PRO slowdown, so it's the BCLK not the overall speed. Could be linked to the M.2 interface in the MB which I guess runs off the BCLK.


Good to know, thanks for your feedback


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> Hey did you guys ever had voltage reading errors with HWINFO 64?
> 
> Because I am thinking maybe XTU voltage spike to 1.5ish V issue I had before might be due to a HWINFO reading error.


if you have both XTU and HWi open, you could get a polling clash on the vcore report. so yeah, it may just be a glitch. was the 1.5V "spike" during an xtu run?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> I have the same problem with LM(Conductonout) they recommend 10+C but I run 3* my idle temps are high 9-10-11* while 7800x with Cryonout is having 1-2*C (diffusion effect) But anyway my loaded temperatures are fine CB15 are both in low 40s....and don't know how to proceed to re-paste the 8700k with Crynnout or just leave it like this





Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!




[/quote]



I have the LM between the die and IHS. Grizzly Kryonaut between the IHS and cold Plate. If I have the chiller at 7c I dip down below 10c at idle for a second or two don't think this is a big deal imo.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> [/SPOILER]
> 
> I have the LM between the die and IHS. Grizzly Kryonaut between the IHS and cold Plate. If I have the chiller at 7c I dip down below 10c at idle for a second or two don't think this is a big deal imo.


The low temp spec for LM is conservative. As long as the system is on, there's plenty of heat flux to keep the LM from cracking. I wouldn't let it sit at subzero with the system off for any length of time,


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> The low temp spec for LM is conservative. As long as the system is on, there's plenty of heat flux to keep the LM from cracking. I wouldn't let it sit at subzero with the system off for any length of time,


Thanks for the insight.....


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Thanks for the insight.....


nothing very insightful about heat and these high-core count CPus.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> nothing very insightful about heat and these high-core count CPus.


Oh but knowing that you can push the cooling a little further because of the conservative spec's for the LM is very insightful.


----------



## Abaidor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Quite cheaper compared to top radiator+fan setups ...Just added one prevoius week and was impressed from the performance 20+*C water temperature drop...and can stay in my standart ambients while benching
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


I have been thinking about it for the last couple of years but power consumption and noise hold me back. What about those? Does it need to be in a separate room?


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Oh but knowing that you can push the cooling a little further because of the conservative spec's for the LM is very insightful.


I benched a 3770K delidded with LM on SS without issue, just light her up and let her fly
Best if you have some presets on water so you aren't fooling around idling


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> I benched a 3770K delidded with LM on SS without issue, just light her up and let her fly
> Best if you have some presets on water so you aren't fooling around idling


When benching I keep an eye on the water temperature and set Windows to performance mode. Seems to keep things moving so temps don't drop down to low. Our dew point is low this time of year so I can keep things cold without condensation.


----------



## Menthol

CptSpig, got to love California winters, over 80 today, summertime run for the air-conditioner


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> CptSpig, got to love California winters, over 80 today, summertime run for the air-conditioner


funny.. very funny.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Menthol*
> 
> CptSpig, got to love California winters, over 80 today, summertime run for the air-conditioner


You are south of where I reside. Mid 60's about 8 degrees above normal.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah Texas got a nice cold front


----------



## djgar

Chiller? Who needs a chiller? My cores were at 15c when I booted. Still there ... I think I'll do some stress testing


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Chiller? Who needs a chiller? My cores were at 15c when I booted. Still there ... I think I'll do some stress testing


Yes, but 6c makes all the difference when benching.


----------



## mattschia

Hi guys, I'm still testing the 7980xe but I've run into a wall. Although for daily use I have found my sweet spot, I'm trying now to understand the best frequency for benchmark. I can easily run 4.5Ghz with 1.15v but at 4600 the system is unstable even with 1.20. (1.8 input. However my main problem is the AVX frequency, If I go higher than 4.00 GHz the system immediately shuts down. Is it only a matter of voltage? I have a seasonic 1000w Platinum


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Yes, but 6c makes all the difference when benching.


The chilling truth


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Chiller? Who needs a chiller? My cores were at 15c when I booted. Still there ... I think I'll do some stress testing


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Yes, but 6c makes all the difference when benching.


^^ he's in NYC... high temp has been like -5C for the past week or so. I haven;t seen double digit (F) temps in the morning for ... too long now.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ^^ he's in NYC... high temp has been like -5C for the past week or so. I haven;t seen double digit (F) temps in the morning for ... too long now.


Went down to 7F two nights ago ... BRRR!


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> Went down to 7F two nights ago ... BRRR!


Chicago here. -3F Monday night. Quit complaining!


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> ^^ he's in NYC... high temp has been like -5C for the past week or so. I haven;t seen double digit (F) temps in the morning for ... too long now.


The mid west and east cost have below average temps right now. I could only bench in the winter before I purchased my chiller it gets to 110f in the summer. My rig is in my media room with a separate mechanical system to keep all the equipment cool. So in the summer I can crank the A/C and chiller down then bench all year long.


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Chicago here. -3F Monday night. Quit complaining!


Not complaining - on the contrary, nice low core temps









And we didn't get 50+ inches of snow! Talk about BRRR!


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Chicago here. -3F Monday night. Quit complaining!


.. yeah, but ChiPeeps are use to that.


----------



## iamjanco

-16F when I woke up yesterday morning, a dry cold. Not quite as chilly as the remote regions of AK.


----------



## cekim

So, how bout that Intel bug!









Gonna spend the next few years re-compiling kernels and taking notes so that outer machines are patched and inner machines are not crippled if that turns out to be the case...

as of HWE we already had the new feature that supposedly helps limit the hit to single digits... sigh....


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> So, how bout that Intel bug!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gonna spend the next few years re-compiling kernels and taking notes so that outer machines are patched and inner machines are not crippled if that turns out to be the case...
> 
> as of HWE we already had the new feature that supposedly helps limit the hit to single digits... sigh....


Hi,
Just sounds like 2 installs
1 without the patch for benchmarking...
1 with the patch for everyday stuff


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> So, how bout that Intel bug!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gonna spend the next few years re-compiling kernels and taking notes so that outer machines are patched and inner machines are not crippled if that turns out to be the case...
> 
> as of HWE we already had the new feature that supposedly helps limit the hit to single digits... sigh....


okay.. wut?


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> okay.. wut?


It will all be made clear soon


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> okay.. wut?


http://www.overclock.net/t/1645071/computerbase-intel-serious-vulnerability-speculation-in-all-cpus


----------



## iamjanco

Lol, it's just a plan by Intel to draw attention away from things like VROC:


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1645071/computerbase-intel-serious-vulnerability-speculation-in-all-cpus


ah... thx!


----------



## xormac

Hi Guys,

So I've been reading through a ton of forum posts and am still confused.

I'm struggling to find any of the new revision motherboards (with heatpipe between VRM heatsink and IO ports) both in SA as well as AUS.

Which motherboards should I be considering? I am thinking of getting a 7900X and intend on delidding it and hopefully be able to overclock it as far as feasibly possible without breaking the bank on cooling that costs more than a rig.

Any suggestions? ASRock motherboards appear to be quite affordable, but again I'm stuck with only being able to find ones that don't have the heatpipe from the VRM heatsink.

OR should one just go for the Z370 and a 8700K?

Thanks a million.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

I went from a 7820X delidded to a 8700K delidded. Very satisfied.

X299 is good, but for me I don't need the extra features and I prefer a faster, colder and more power efficent chip. I am pulling 520 watts (max peak) from the wall while mining on a 1080Ti, 1070 and the CPU. CPU is overclocked, mem and core OCed on the GPUs, but voltage is at 0.900V.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xormac*
> 
> Hi Guys,
> 
> So I've been reading through a ton of forum posts and am still confused.
> 
> I'm struggling to find any of the new revision motherboards (with heatpipe between VRM heatsink and IO ports) both in SA as well as AUS.
> 
> Which motherboards should I be considering? I am thinking of getting a 7900X and intend on delidding it and hopefully be able to overclock it as far as feasibly possible without breaking the bank on cooling that costs more than a rig.
> 
> Any suggestions? ASRock motherboards appear to be quite affordable, but again I'm stuck with only being able to find ones that don't have the heatpipe from the VRM heatsink.
> 
> OR should one just go for the Z370 and a 8700K?
> 
> Thanks a million.


Hi,
I believe this one had the best VRM thermal cooling although I can not find the thermal review :/
https://www.asrock.com/MB/Intel/X299%20Taichi/index.asp

Of course any ROG would be a fine choice too
EK has some reasonable loop kits
I got the EK 280 performance and it was nowhere near the cost of the build


----------



## Radox-0

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xormac*
> 
> Hi Guys,
> 
> So I've been reading through a ton of forum posts and am still confused.
> 
> I'm struggling to find any of the new revision motherboards (with heatpipe between VRM heatsink and IO ports) both in SA as well as AUS.
> 
> Which motherboards should I be considering? I am thinking of getting a 7900X and intend on delidding it and hopefully be able to overclock it as far as feasibly possible without breaking the bank on cooling that costs more than a rig.
> 
> Any suggestions? ASRock motherboards appear to be quite affordable, but again I'm stuck with only being able to find ones that don't have the heatpipe from the VRM heatsink.
> 
> OR should one just go for the Z370 and a 8700K?
> 
> Thanks a million.


What is your use case is if your also contemplating a 8700k on the z370 platform? If that is is in contention and your just a gamer or something then z370 would be my pick.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I went from a 7820X delidded to a 8700K delidded. Very satisfied.
> 
> X299 is good, but for me I don't need the extra features and I prefer a faster, colder and more power efficent chip. I am pulling 520 watts (max peak) from the wall while mining on a 1080Ti, 1070 and the CPU. CPU is overclocked, mem and core OCed on the GPUs, but voltage is at 0.900V.


yeah - a 5.0+ 8700K is a tough act to beat.


----------



## magnusfl

I go with the EVGA black as you can get a 10 year warranty for an extra 50 on there products if you get there extended warranty


----------



## Menthol

Wake up in the morning and have a cup of coffee with your coffee, does it get any better


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - a 5.0+ 8700K is a tough act to beat.


Hi,
Depends on what you call tough act to "beat"








The only benefit is saying it can oc to 5.0+.....

Other benchmarks skylake xe series is ruling and is the tough act to beat


----------



## DStealth

Ring bus and higher frequency makes them perform marginally better in Games and many other tasks where single core performance is dependent. Don't get me wrong i have SLX near me also for heavy workloads and high core count are very good. But will never trade my 5.5 8700k for any 79xx CPU for everyday tasks and games it's just way better and smoother/faster.
That's it.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Depends on what you call tough act to "beat"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only benefit is saying it can oc to 5.0+.....
> 
> Other benchmarks skylake xe series is ruling and is the tough act to beat


Well sure... and my V12 is more powerful than a V6.
On an IPC basis (single core perf) only thing close and I think better, is the 7740X (4c8t). DStealth is right.
I run this 8700K at 5.2 24/7 with 1.36V highest core temp is below 60C. It's so low I thought the DTS was broken. 5.2 on my 7980XE is flash-bulb territory.


----------



## robvoip

Overclocking the mesh and reducing memory latency has a much bigger effect on skylake-x than any other Intel processor in regards to gaming. With the latest microcode, fast ram with tight timings the gaming issues people saw in very early benchmarks have been alleviated. Benchmarking my [email protected] vs a friends [email protected] in games really showed no major differences in frames and a same clocked 8700k is about 2% better than a 7700k depending on game. Don't get me wrong my first choice was a 8700k, but due to not being able to find one in stock I went skylake-x.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Well sure... and my V12 is more powerful than a V6.
> On an IPC basis (single core perf) only thing close and I think better, is the 7740X (4c8t). DStealth is right.
> I run this 8700K at 5.2 24/7 with 1.36V highest core temp is below 60C. It's so low I thought the DTS was broken. *5.2 on my 7980XE is flash-bulb territory.*


Hi,
Does that mean faster than the speed of light or hot as the sun








Probably both lol


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Does that mean faster than the speed of light or hot as the sun
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Probably both lol


----------



## toncij

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Here is a screen shot on the predator 360.


This is all cooled by a single 360mm radiator?? Do GPUs go under the same or you need more?

Because, I was under impression I need 480 for 7980XE alone.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I went from a 7820X delidded to a 8700K delidded. Very satisfied.
> 
> X299 is good, but for me I don't need the extra features and I prefer a faster, colder and more power efficent chip. I am pulling 520 watts (max peak) from the wall while mining on a 1080Ti, 1070 and the CPU. CPU is overclocked, mem and core OCed on the GPUs, but voltage is at 0.900V.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Ring bus and higher frequency makes them perform marginally better in Games and many other tasks where single core performance is dependent. Don't get me wrong i have SLX near me also for heavy workloads and high core count are very good. But will never trade my 5.5 8700k for any 79xx CPU for everyday tasks and games it's just way better and smoother/faster.
> That's it.


8700K on its own is fine, but you still miss PCIE lanes for, well, anything. Dual GPU maybe? M2 drive? PCIE drive? - Only 16x is a single GPU and that's it.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Here is a screen shot on the predator 360.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is all cooled by a single 360mm radiator?? Do GPUs go under the same or you need more?
> 
> Because, I was under impression I need 480 for 7980XE alone.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> I went from a 7820X delidded to a 8700K delidded. Very satisfied.
> 
> X299 is good, but for me I don't need the extra features and I prefer a faster, colder and more power efficent chip. I am pulling 520 watts (max peak) from the wall while mining on a 1080Ti, 1070 and the CPU. CPU is overclocked, mem and core OCed on the GPUs, but voltage is at 0.900V.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Ring bus and higher frequency makes them perform marginally better in Games and many other tasks where single core performance is dependent. Don't get me wrong i have SLX near me also for heavy workloads and high core count are very good. But will never trade my 5.5 8700k for any 79xx CPU for everyday tasks and games it's just way better and smoother/faster.
> That's it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 8700K on its own is fine, but you still miss PCIE lanes for, well, anything. Dual GPU maybe? M2 drive? PCIE drive? - Only 16x is a single GPU and that's it.
Click to expand...

I have not seen a compelling benchmark where 16x16x SLI beats 8x8x SLI.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> This is all cooled by a single 360mm radiator?? Do GPUs go under the same or you need more?
> 
> Because, I was under impression I need 480 for 7980XE alone.


This is a single Predator 360 with a DDC 3.2 PWM pump upgrade and push / pull fans. I have a 7980Xe and Titan Xp on the loop.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> This is all cooled by a single 360mm radiator?? Do GPUs go under the same or you need more?
> 
> Because, I was under impression I need 480 for 7980XE alone
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 8700K on its own is fine, but you still miss PCIE lanes for, well, anything. Dual GPU maybe? M2 drive? PCIE drive? - Only 16x is a single GPU and that's it.


2 TXps run fine on the M10 Apex with an 8700K (1 TXp drives anything at 1400P anyway). I have 2 PCIEx4 M.2 drives on the DIMM.2 card,. Sure, for 4K surround, streaming, SLI and M.2 Slot adaptor cards (intel 750, to the 600P I have here) a HEDT platrform is probably better, but for a solid (and really much more responsive) gaming rig, the z370/8700K is the best available today. I mean... I had a Titan V on the 8700K and it was just stupid fast.


----------



## iamjanco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I had a Titan V on the 8700K and it was just stupid fast.


I might have missed it, did you return the Volta?


----------



## toncij

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> This is all cooled by a single 360mm radiator?? Do GPUs go under the same or you need more?
> 
> Because, I was under impression I need 480 for 7980XE alone.
> 
> 
> 
> This is a single Predator 360 with a DDC 3.2 PWM pump upgrade and push / pull fans. I have a 7980Xe and Titan Xp on the loop.
Click to expand...

I'm baffled.
What fans and at what RPM?

Also, what "case" is that? I see it's open, but what is the base?

Can't believe you can cool 7980XE at 4.4 and a TXp with a fat 360 and not have those fans ramped up like insane?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> This is all cooled by a single 360mm radiator?? Do GPUs go under the same or you need more?
> 
> Because, I was under impression I need 480 for 7980XE alone
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 8700K on its own is fine, but you still miss PCIE lanes for, well, anything. Dual GPU maybe? M2 drive? PCIE drive? - Only 16x is a single GPU and that's it.
> 
> 
> 
> 2 TXps run fine on the M10 Apex with an 8700K (1 TXp drives anything at 1400P anyway). I have 2 PCIEx4 M.2 drives on the DIMM.2 card,. Sure, for 4K surround, streaming, SLI and M.2 Slot adaptor cards (intel 750, to the 600P I have here) a HEDT platrform is probably better, but for a solid (and really much more responsive) gaming rig, the z370/8700K is the best available today. I mean... I had a Titan V on the 8700K and it was just stupid fast.
Click to expand...

Hmm...I was thinking of going 8700K, 32GB G.Skill at about 4400CL19 or 4000CL17, dual 1080Ti, dual M2 960Pro on the DIMM and single Intel 900p on PCIE... Probably chipset will be enough.

edit: or not - it seems that Z370 PCH, while offering 24 lanes in total, can't communicate faster than x4 with the CPU so, both drives in the DIMM slot actually work as each being on x2, not x4. If anything more is connected, it's being choked by that.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I had a Titan V on the 8700K and it was just stupid fast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I might have missed it, did you return the Volta?
Click to expand...

And why did you?


----------



## superV

hi guys.
got an 7980xe+ gigabyte gaming 9,and 32gb tridenz rgb f4-3600c16q-32gtzr cl 16-16-16-36 1.35v.is this ram good?is it samsung chips?
my question is what voltages for a quick and dirty oc of 4ghz on all cores?i still have to install everything,i need to test some obs settings,since will be streaming rig only.
For cooling i have this:

240 in the front + 280 on top,the pump is a bit trash,it's slow,it's xspc Maximum Flow: 600 lph (12V)
the chip is new just opened non delided.
and what voltages should have at stock to be considered good chip?
thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iamjanco*
> 
> I might have missed it, did you return the Volta?


yep. No problems sending it back to nvidia
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> I'm baffled.
> What fans and at what RPM?
> 
> Also, what "case" is that? I see it's open, but what is the base?
> 
> Can't believe you can cool 7980XE at 4.4 and a TXp with a fat 360 and not have those fans ramped up like insane?
> Hmm...I was thinking of going 8700K, 32GB G.Skill at about 4400CL19 or 4000CL17, dual 1080Ti, dual M2 960Pro on the DIMM and single Intel 900p on PCIE... Probably chipset will be enough.
> 
> edit: or not - it seems that Z370 PCH, while offering 24 lanes in total, can't communicate faster than x4 with the CPU so, both drives in the DIMM slot actually work as each being on x2, not x4. If anything more is connected, it's being choked by that.
> And why did you?


compute issues.. and I have 5 other pascal cards here.








but make no mistake, it is a monster card.

cheapo 960 evo OS drive on the dimm.2 card, other side has a pcie m.2 storage drive


x2?

anywho... you should get x299 and enjoy!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> hi guys.
> got an 7980xe+ gigabyte gaming 9,and 32gb tridenz rgb f4-3600c16q-32gtzr cl 16-16-16-36 1.35v.is this ram good?is it samsung chips?
> my question is what voltages for a quick and dirty oc of 4ghz on all cores?i still have to install everything,i need to test some obs settings,since will be streaming rig only.
> For cooling i have this:
> 
> 240 in the front + 280 on top,the pump is a bit trash,it's slow,it's xspc Maximum Flow: 600 lph (12V)
> the chip is new just opened non delided.
> and what voltages should have at stock to be considered good chip?
> thanks


they are most likely sammy B-die with those primaries, but if you want to know for sure AID64 (thiaphoon burner etc) can retrieve the mf info from the chips.


you should be able to to 4.3 or 4.4 on all cores with 1.15-1.2V vcore.. and 1.8-1.85V vccin (which is the more critical rail)


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> I'm baffled.
> What fans and at what RPM?
> 
> Also, what "case" is that? I see it's open, but what is the base?
> 
> Can't believe you can cool 7980XE at 4.4 and a TXp with a fat 360 and not have those fans ramped up like insane?
> Hmm...I was thinking of going 8700K, 32GB G.Skill at about 4400CL19 or 4000CL17, dual 1080Ti, dual M2 960Pro on the DIMM and single Intel 900p on PCIE... Probably chipset will be enough.


PrimoChill Praxis Wet Bench See picture below and look at the OC panel it shows the OC, Temperature and average fan speed.


----------



## ELIAS-EH

For final stability, i do the most hard stress test in my opinion to verify the absolutes stability: CPU+GPU
OCCT large data set + heaven benchmark runs at the same time. (Heaven benchmark purpose is not to test gpu stability. cpu stable alone does not means stable when gpu is working)
First time 2 hours then i restart my pc and restart the combined test for 3hours.
I passed all the test real bench, occt , hci , gsat, ... but crash in games after 2 weeks.
when i run both tests mentioned above, occt catch errors after the second run or from the first run, i need to increase my vcore and fine tune vccsa/vccio.
Realbench do the same thing but I don't trust it, occt is the best for finding instability especially large data set


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> For final stability, i do the most hard stress test in my opinion to verify the absolutes stability: CPU+GPU
> OCCT large data set + heaven benchmark runs at the same time. (Heaven benchmark purpose is not to test gpu stability. cpu stable alone does not means stable when gpu is working)
> First time 2 hours then i restart my pc and restart the combined test for 3hours.
> I passed all the test real bench, occt , hci , gsat, ... but crash in games after 2 weeks.
> when i run both tests mentioned above, occt catch errors after the second run or from the first run, i need to increase my vcore and fine tune vccsa/vccio.
> Realbench do the same thing but I don't trust it, occt is the best for finding instability especially large data set


depending on the vcore you are running with OCCT, it is also a good processor aging program. But, needing additional vcore o a new cpu after 2 weeks of use is not uncommon (burn-in or break-in).


----------



## ELIAS-EH

no burn in or break-in
If i repeat the test without gpu load on occt large data set, i can pass 8 hours without errors without increasing voltage.
What i am trying to say that if a cpu is stable without gpu load, it can crash in games because it is not stable with gpu load.


----------



## wingman99

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ELIAS-EH*
> 
> For final stability, i do the most hard stress test in my opinion to verify the absolutes stability: CPU+GPU
> OCCT large data set + heaven benchmark runs at the same time. (Heaven benchmark purpose is not to test gpu stability. cpu stable alone does not means stable when gpu is working)
> First time 2 hours then i restart my pc and restart the combined test for 3hours.
> I passed all the test real bench, occt , hci , gsat, ... but crash in games after 2 weeks.
> when i run both tests mentioned above, occt catch errors after the second run or from the first run, i need to increase my vcore and fine tune vccsa/vccio.
> Realbench do the same thing but I don't trust it, occt is the best for finding instability especially large data set
> 
> 
> 
> depending on the vcore you are running with OCCT, it is also a good processor aging program. But, needing additional vcore o a new cpu after 2 weeks of use is not uncommon (burn-in or break-in).
Click to expand...

A program can't make a trsistor run faster or longer, the only difference in programs is transistors utilization.

This is a very simplified example prime95 FMA3 verses Gaming usage transistor cycles and watts.

Prime95 FMA3---- GHz speed transistors cycling, on off on off on off on off on off on off on off on off on off = 99 watts.

Gaming Battlefield GHz speed transistors cycling, on on off off on on off off on on off off on on off off on on = 55 watts.

So you can see from the example above prime95 FMA3 cycles the transistors more often then Gaming using more watts with no increased load on the transistors, however more utilization.

So 8 hours of gaming is about equal to 4 hours of prime95 FMA3 with the temperatures in check.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> depending on the vcore you are running with OCCT, it is also a good processor aging program. But, needing additional vcore o a new cpu after 2 weeks of use is not uncommon (burn-in or break-in).


Hi,
Didn't want to quote the other response
But what was wrong with the new gpu ?
It was supposed to be the new cats meow


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> I have not seen a compelling benchmark where 16x16x SLI beats 8x8x SLI.


Scaling it does, and most newer games, as well as games unoptimized for SLI is where 16x16 shines. I went through a phase of testing it as well.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wingman99*
> 
> A program can't make a trsistor run faster or longer, the only difference in programs is transistors utilization.


He didn't say faster or longer.


----------



## Mumriken

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *robvoip*
> 
> Overclocking the mesh and reducing memory latency has a much bigger effect on skylake-x than any other Intel processor in regards to gaming. With the latest microcode, fast ram with tight timings the gaming issues people saw in very early benchmarks have been alleviated. Benchmarking my [email protected] vs a friends [email protected] in games really showed no major differences in frames and a same clocked 8700k is about 2% better than a 7700k depending on game. Don't get me wrong my first choice was a 8700k, but due to not being able to find one in stock I went skylake-x.


Fast ram/mesh and low latency seems to be the key for good fps i games.
Could you run your tests again without HT and powersaving etc? Can't belive I'm the only one getting a substantial fps increase with this disabled.


----------



## toncij

SLI is pretty much dead in the water so less and less incentive for it every day. It rarely works correctly if at all and thus, going for a single card, gaming-wise, is not silly at all.


----------



## superV

guys i'm having some issues with the x299 gaming 9,my hd7870 wont display,but it works on my gaming rig.i tested a 1080ti on the x299 and it does display.it looks like the motherboard is not recognizing the gpu,i have the orange led on the mobo on,that led on means gpu problems.
gigabyte motherboards have become a disgrace,it simply spits out the hd7870.
working now after testing with a riser card.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Didn't want to quote the other response
> But what was wrong with the new gpu ?
> It was supposed to be the new cats meow


absolutely nothing... I just had to decide what to do with it absent a proper water block.
It is the cat's meow, and sounded like one with the fan at 100%.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mumriken*
> 
> Fast ram/mesh and low latency seems to be the key for good fps i games.
> Could you run your tests again without HT and powersaving etc? Can't belive I'm the only one getting a substantial fps increase with this disabled.


several game sand benchmarks do better with HT off. You are not the only one.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Okay sound OC...D hitting you I get it now


----------



## superV

now working everything fine.
i have at stock 1.041v in the bios.did at stock cinebench and i got 3.3k.
now i will try 4ghz with 1.15v and see what happens.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> absolutely nothing... I just had to decide what to do with it absent a proper water block.
> It is the cat's meow, and sounded like one with the fan at 100%.


I take it the EK universal vga block would not work?


----------



## toncij

Quote:


> I take it the EK universal vga block would not work?


Probably would, but it covers only the gpu... You need to cool the power supply part.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I take it the EK universal vga block would not work?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> Probably would, but it covers only the gpu... You need to cool the power supply part.


The dimensions of the core block mounting holes are completely different on the TXV, a uniblock (and I have a few) was not even close, some grinding on a 2066 cpu waterblock would likely let you massage one on. Best chance is with something like I have on this modded 1030 (for cheap azchips comp).


but yeah - you can be sure I tried a standard uni


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Patience is a virtue
I'm sure sooner or later a water block will be made for the titan v


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> SLI is pretty much dead in the water so less and less incentive for it every day. It rarely works correctly if at all and thus, going for a single card, gaming-wise, is not silly at all.


wut?


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> wut?


I guess he's trying to tell that not many new games support SLI at all, from the games I myself played through last year maybe 1-2 supported SLI and even those had some issues with inconsistent scaling etc. I keep SLI disabled now when not benchmarking


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> I guess he's trying to tell that not many new games support SLI at all, from the games I myself played through last year maybe 1-2 supported SLI and even those had some issues with inconsistent scaling etc. I keep SLI disabled now when not benchmarking


Yeah still scratching my head, since alot of games work well with it, and while I agree off the bat they don't always because of lack of profiles, a quick 30 second google will give you the correct compatibility bits to pop in, I've fixed numerous games with that, since its just utilizing the same compatibility set usually from the same engine. I own 100's of games on steam, from recent to 10 years back and most of them are insanely SLI friendly , and those that don't scale , once you pop the bits in your set, 90-100% scaling easily.

You're definitely missing out







, I can't be w/o it due to this lol.

Just google "gamename SLI profile fix" all you need is Nvidia Profile inspector.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Yeah still scratching my head, since alot of games work well with it, and while I agree off the bat they don't always because of lack of profiles, a quick 30 second google will give you the correct compatibility bits to pop in, I've fixed numerous games with that, since its just utilizing the same compatibility set usually from the same engine. I own 100's of games on steam, from recent to 10 years back and most of them are insanely SLI friendly , and those that don't scale , once you pop the bits in your set, 90-100% scaling easily.
> 
> You're definitely missing out
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , I can't be w/o it due to this lol.


Yes some games can be fixed with bits but not all, currently playing AC Origins and no SLI support in the horizon. I tend to play anything from 1980s to current games depending on the mood, 2D or 3D, so SLI is not necessary in all cases. Sometimes SLI supports comes when I have already finished the game months ago...







I just have a feeling devs and NVIDIA worked harder with SLI support in the GTX 580 days, even in lower budget games.

I just hate to remove my second card as it makes the case soooo empty.







Maybe I should try mining with it.


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Yeah still scratching my head, since alot of games work well with it, and while I agree off the bat they don't always because of lack of profiles, a quick 30 second google will give you the correct compatibility bits to pop in, I've fixed numerous games with that, since its just utilizing the same compatibility set usually from the same engine. I own 100's of games on steam, from recent to 10 years back and most of them are insanely SLI friendly , and those that don't scale , once you pop the bits in your set, 90-100% scaling easily.
> 
> You're definitely missing out
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , I can't be w/o it due to this lol.
> 
> Just google "gamename SLI profile fix" all you need is Nvidia Profile inspector.


SLI have nothing but trouble in my experience.

I bought 2 AORUS GTX 1080 ti Xtreme Edition on the spot when they came out.
I even bought the AORUS SLI HB bridge.


Some games that doesn't support SLI is one thing, I can live with that.
But the most DEVASTATING problem of SLI are

1. Micro stuttering <--you have no way to get rid of it, you can reduce it to minimum impact with Nvidia inspector settings (per game) and/or try
different SLI profiles and/or tweak some settings in NV Panel.

2. Random DPC Latency spike <---this I cannot live with. My computer serves for audio production workstation as well.
With SLI enabled, whenever the GPU changes it's clock
from idle to 3d or 3d to idle clock. it generates 2000-3000us latency spike, which will generate click/pop in any audio.
Literally unusable for me.I pull one card out, problem instantly solved.


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Yes some games can be fixed with bits but not all, currently playing AC Origins and no SLI support in the horizon. I tend to play anything from 1980s to current games depending on the mood, 2D or 3D, so SLI is not necessary in all cases. Sometimes SLI supports comes when I have already finished the game months ago...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just have a feeling devs and NVIDIA worked harder with SLI support in the GTX 580 days, even in lower budget games.
> 
> I just hate to remove my second card as it makes the case soooo empty.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe I should try mining with it.


Idk, I mean I get OCN isn't the place for it ( though it should have a thread for it )

There are other forums that are dedicated behind this, where 100's of games are updated with info on the thread for the proper SLI compatibility bits, I get older games won't even see it or make use of it so it'd just be bruteforcing if anything ( not like it'd need to ) but that's where 16x16 comes in and or 8x8 vs 16x8

So far every game I've purchased that had crappy SLI support ( over 30 since ports are crap and make up 50% of them ) I've never had an issue w/ SLI after finding the proper bits.

I agree dev's are either lazy af or rushed af by management, however the good news is usually that it can still be overstepped by finding the right setting and the communities great at that given the compatibility of the gaming engines utilized.

For AC origins though you can set the AC Syndicate profile to activate SLI for it.

SLI is beastly when used, I try to asisst by grabbing games as well and finding the fix, though as far as AC guys Ubi'quittin has always hated the PC market from the way I've seen it, so that's on the dev's there.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> SLI have nothing but trouble in my experience.
> 
> I bought 2 AORUS GTX 1080 ti Xtreme Edition on the spot when they came out.
> I even bought the AORUS SLI HB bridge.
> 
> 
> Some games that doesn't support SLI is one thing, I can live with that.
> But the most DEVASTATING problem of SLI are
> 
> 1. Micro stuttering <--you have no way to get rid of it, you can reduce it to minimum impact with Nvidia inspector settings (per game) and/or try
> different SLI profiles and/or tweak some settings in NV Panel.
> 
> 2. Random DPC Latency spike <---this I cannot live with. My computer serves for audio production workstation as well.
> With SLI enabled, whenever the GPU changes it's clock
> from idle to 3d or 3d to idle clock. it generates 2000-3000us latency spike, which will generate click/pop in any audio.
> Literally unusable for me.I pull one card out, problem instantly solved.


If you're on 10 the microstuttering is an issue w/ FCU as proven, and its been years since I've heard of anything of the microstuttering issues.

As far as DPC latency spikes, that can be a multitude of things, especially since y our'e getting the audio pop there are fixes, and doesn't require pulling out a card, but this is often due to other components not playing well or boards.

I get at the end of hte day its a case of user ownership and luck, however the stuttering and DPC issues are definitely based on other hardware aspects and or defective cards/drivers. Though I'm definitely hearing you on your bad experience there, it can happen to anyone.

I spent a good 3 weeks troubleshooting the same issue w/ a friend w/ their cards till we found out it was their wifi, despite it fixing if the 2nd GPU was removed. Just a crappy motherboard.

Not trying to start a debate here, just wanted to point out that SLI support is far more vast in the community due to lazy companies, every game I play I ensure its on for it, because I want the highest settings as well as additional ones set in the panel, which you can't really get w/ single cards for long periods of time 2-3 years.

I can't be without high quality.


----------



## Silent Scone

SLI simply isn't compatible with certain engines unless reworked vigorously. It is what it is...

Best off simply hoping that DX12 becomes more mainstream so that explicit MGPU support can take precedence.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
SLI sort of insult to injury to me flipping gpu's so often it just doubles losses on resell


----------



## toncij

Well, it's not that easy. There are several things you're missing here:

Games have changed in engine design, renderer in particular. SLI the old way is not really good and doesn't work sometimes, since many effects are temporal in nature, which means you need a previous frame info. AFR makes it dodgy, since you have to buffer and use older frames. That generates lag, artifacts, etc. Sometimes, you have stuttering that has nothing to do with performance, but visual discrepancies in sampled frames. Coding a game for SLI means some more work, even it's not mainly game dev who is responsible for the SLI profile, but NVidia. Implementing manual multi-GPU is even more complex and in context of limitations, added work contrasted with the market share of SLI gamers, makes almost no sense. Sometimes isn't even possible without killing some rendering features. Sometimes, when implemented you can't avoid artifacts, slowdown or other issues (tried Battlefield 1 GUI?).

Game companies and NV are lagging with SLI support for months, sometimes more. More and more games I force to a single GPU in driver properties, because it's annoying how buggy these got: RS Siege, BF1, Diablo 3 off the top of my mind. Last game I saw with a good SLI implementation was SW:Battlefront (1st game, not the recent one).

That's why I think SLI lost a lot of value. And I'm not optimistic. All until we move to multi-GPU on a single substrate (similar what Intel is now doing with Vega) and are forced to code for huge cards with 2,4 or more GPU units on the board without the PLX chip, but direct pathways to shared HBM and cache, we'll be loosing SLI quality and availability.

Yes, you can sometimes hack some games with the settings, but most of the time you'll introduce the very issues that were the reason there is no SLI profile in the first place. You may not care, but...

Anyway, that's my personal opinion. YMMV. I personaly CBA to SLI any more. I do run one (dual 1080Tis), I had dual Titan Xps, but my next gaming and game dev machine (I'm a game developer) will have a single GPU (fastest Volta/Ampere I can get),


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> SLI sort of insult to injury to me flipping gpu's so often it just doubles losses on resell


Now that's the most valid point made thus far.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Now that's the most valid point made thus far.


Hi,
Wish I thought about gpu relevance 3 years ago I would of saved a lot of money just by buying a titan xp back then
Instead 980/ 1080/ 1080ti geez 1080ti is the only close match to the titan xp and it still falls short unless under water :/

Although I almost bought a titan x hybrid glad I canceled that one it was not a titan xp








Titan z was freaking out of sight priced at the time.


----------



## toncij

TITAN V is the current king if you're willing to go hybrid and pay $3k for only 50% of the card you'll actually use (tensor and fp64 unusable for games). The ideal card at 2GHz (stable under water).


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
The biggest sell point for the titan line was 4k-8k ready
Hell after looking at the prices of those monitors back then it was insane lol = never going to happen


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> *TITAN V is the current king* if you're willing to go hybrid and pay $3k for only 50% of the card you'll actually use (tensor and fp64 unusable for games). The ideal card at 2GHz (stable under water).


yep, it is. Hybrid? eh, fischer-price cooling on a $3K card? Heresy, even with gamersnexus force fitting one.


----------



## toncij

Monitors are less of a problem. There is no 4K capable single card yet. Even Titan V is unable to do it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> *TITAN V is the current king* if you're willing to go hybrid and pay $3k for only 50% of the card you'll actually use (tensor and fp64 unusable for games). The ideal card at 2GHz (stable under water).
> 
> 
> 
> yep, it is. Hybrid? eh, fischer-price cooling on a $3K card? Heresy, even with gamersnexus force fitting one.
Click to expand...

Well, as long it cools, doesn't really matter what's on it. Volta is easier because HBM is on the chip so you actually need only that cooled. VRM etc. is less relevant and can be done the other way.
Even EKWB block that fits would be fine as long as it covers the whole chip.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> Monitors are less of a problem. *There is no 4K capable single card yet.* Even Titan V is unable to do it.
> Well, as long it cools, doesn't really matter what's on it. Volta is easier because HBM is on the chip so you actually need only that cooled. VRM etc. is less relevant and can be done the other way.
> Even EKWB block that fits would be fine as long as it covers the whole chip.


I know at least one (very) high-end gamer that has his Titan V hooked to a 60+ inch OLED 4k/60 monitor. Says it works fine with good frame rates. EK has been very vague as to whether or not they are machining a block of any kind, or even a mount plate for a thermosphere... if one shows up, I'll consider buying a TXV again.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
When they released the titan z it was used to project the huge screen at the release benefit/ seminar what ever you want to call it
If that giant screen wasn't 4-8k I don't know what is








Can't find the youtube video of it though :/


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I know at least one (very) high-end gamer that has his Titan V hooked to a 60+ inch OLED 4k/60 monitor. Says it works fine with good frame rates. EK has been very vague as to whether or not they are machining a block of any kind, or even a mount plate for a thermosphere... if one shows up, I'll consider buying a TXV again.


You should seen but there're water blocks able to mount on them from Xeon CPU - LGA 3647 Waterblock...btw


----------



## LunaP

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I know at least one (very) high-end gamer that has his Titan V hooked to a *60+ inch OLED 4k/60 monitor*. Says it works fine with good frame rates. EK has been very vague as to whether or not they are machining a block of any kind, or even a mount plate for a thermosphere... if one shows up, I'll consider buying a TXV again.


Oh man, hoping he doesn't get BI.... are you talking about Vega?

I have my 1080ti hooked up the same just went VA vs OLED cuz of that, I would be curious to hear their experience though.


----------



## toncij

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I know at least one (very) high-end gamer that has his Titan V hooked to a 60+ inch OLED 4k/60 monitor. Says it works fine with good frame rates. EK has been very vague as to whether or not they are machining a block of any kind, or even a mount plate for a thermosphere... if one shows up, I'll consider buying a TXV again.


A 1080Ti gets about 30-35 FPS in AC: Origins at 4K. Titan V would have to be 100% faster to maintain 60. It's not. It's about 15-20%. We'll wait a very long time until games from 2017 are playable on a single card at 60 FPS.

Reducing detail can run it on 1060 tho...

We're in times when we can safely find a single card that can run 16:9 or 21:9 display at 1440px above 60 FPS at all times in most games. When we can do it with 4K, that's the day.









Still, an *8700K*, 32GB of CL17 RAM and a Titan V are still the best gaming machine one can get.


----------



## toncij

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I know at least one (very) high-end gamer that has his Titan V hooked to a 60+ inch OLED 4k/60 monitor. Says it works fine with good frame rates. EK has been very vague as to whether or not they are machining a block of any kind, or even a mount plate for a thermosphere... if one shows up, I'll consider buying a TXV again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You should seen but there're water blocks able to mount on them from Xeon CPU - LGA 3647 Waterblock...btw
Click to expand...

Xeon WB to a Titan V?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LunaP*
> 
> Oh man, hoping he doesn't get BI.... are you talking about Vega?
> 
> I have my 1080ti hooked up the same just went VA vs OLED cuz of that, I would be curious to hear their experience though.


and Zurv.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> A 1080Ti gets about 30-35 FPS in AC: Origins at 4K. Titan V would have to be 100% faster to maintain 60. It's not. It's about 15-20%. We'll wait a very long time until games from 2017 are playable on a single card at 60 FPS.
> Reducing detail can run it on 1060 tho...
> We're in times when we can safely find a single card that can run 16:9 or 21:9 display at 1440px above 60 FPS at all times in most games. When we can do it with 4K, that's the day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still, an *8700K*, 32GB of CL17 RAM and a Titan V are still the best gaming machine one can get.


any online comparo of the TxV really fell short imo, none knew how to OC the card in those early pubs. Mine ran 2062 all day with the HBM just crushing video ram benches when overclocked. With my hands on experience at 4K/60, the TxV handled it just fine (although min fps with a [email protected] was lower than with a [email protected] as you might expect)... except for the 100% fan noise, unbearable! Sure, my SLi TXps are way faster mainly because they hit an absolute max of 40C when gaming (and either card is much better at 4k than any 1080Ti I had my hands on), The TxV cooler could barely keep it under 80C which cause 4-5 clock bin drops.
Guys like vega and zurv would need to chime in on this, most gaming here is done by other generation users (and how they can spend an entire holiday weekend at it is beyond me - but welcome.







)


----------



## toncij

Mostly I CBA to juggle around a single card for a whole weekend too, that's why I'm still staying away. But, there are ways to do it. HBM is a special snowflake with overclocking, it can't OC as high as GDDR, numbers are significantly smaller.

What beats me is - with 5120 cores and HBM, a Titan V should devastate Titan Xp and 1080Ti at the same ~2GHz clocks. Average 15% is puzzling. Is there a problem with driver? I'm pretty sure we're saturating 3840 cores and could use any more you throw at it. Is there an issue with cache? Are cores stalled somehow... can't test because don't have the card yet and *******s in NVidia don't sell everywhere over here (EU).


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
fps means very little if a game looks and operates well at any display size as long as it's smooth/ clear/...








People get really weird about frame rates :/


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> fps means very little if a game looks and operates well at any display size as long as it's smooth/ clear/...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People get really weird about frame rates :/


I am very sensitive to motion so when I go from 144+ fps and drop down to say, 80. It's quite nauseating


----------



## toncij

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> fps means very little if a game looks and operates well at any display size as long as it's smooth/ clear/...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> People get really weird about frame rates :/


FPS is the most significant metric.







As much as you can get, but mostly you can live with 60. 50 is usable, 40ish is sluggish, 30 is crap. You can make 30 work if you have a fantastically stable 30 and a perfect motion blur algorithm. Unfortunately, the only usable motion blur I've seen is the one from DOOM 2016.

And I apologize for steering this significantly off-topic.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> You should seen but there're water blocks able to mount on them from Xeon CPU - LGA 3647 Waterblock...btw


yeah... toyed with that idea before returning it.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah... toyed with that idea before returning it.


Would you have done it if the Platinums were multiplier unlocked?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Would you have done it if the *Platinums* were multiplier unlocked?


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Would you have done it if the Platinums were multiplier unlocked?


The golds are close enough. Get a pair of 6154 and you are set. All core turbo 3.7 on 18 core.

Speaking of TITAN V, it is fairly impressive. I been getting constant 60fps for the most part on 5k at PUBG with a mix of mostly high/ultra settings. Funny how that is an achievement nowadays......


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> The golds are close enough. Get a pair of 6154 and you are set. All core turbo 3.7 on 18 core.


But 18 is less than 28...


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> But 18 is less than 28...


A third of the price....

8180 is fairly stupid. If you do get platinum, get like 8168 or 8176 or something....


----------



## DStealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Testier*
> 
> A third of the price....
> 
> 8180 is fairly stupid. If you do get platinum, get like 8168 or 8176 or something....


For benchmarks for sure not very wise choice ...but for the purpose these CPUs are build 1300$ difference is nothing keeping in mind the whole system with SW is 40-50k$ trowing 2600 more(for 2 of them) on 8180 instead of 8176 will give you 20% higher base frequency on 112 threads meaning almost 20% computing power and more machines running for let say ~5% higher price:thumb:
Edit: Not even mention if 8176 are on the edge the only solution is expanding to 8180s or buying additional 40-50k Machine


----------



## Testier

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DStealth*
> 
> For benchmarks for sure not very wise choice ...but for the purpose these CPUs are build 1300$ difference is nothing keeping in mind the whole system with SW is 40-50k$ trowing 2600 more(for 2 of them) on 8180 instead of 8176 will give you 20% higher base frequency on 112 threads meaning almost 20% computing power and more machines running for let say ~5% higher price:thumb:
> Edit: Not even mention if 8176 are on the edge the only solution is expanding to 8180s or buying additional 40-50k Machine


With a lot of applications, you are licensed per core anyways. So you want the highest clocking cores as well. Hence the point for things like 6154.

Your licensing is probably more expensive than the machine anyways.


----------



## LunaP

2x 1080ti's will still run circles around the TV though for *most* _(not all )_games, brand new ones from ubi/EA probably not so much till community pops em, + 1/3rd the price too. 2k+ for a few brand new games isn't worth it imo.


----------



## ESRCJ

Is anyone else experiencing phantom throttling? I just noticed it today for the first time, which is something that was never an issue before. Here is a screenshot from hwinfo after some Cinebenching:



I have VCCIN set to 1.85 in the bios. It used to actually sit above 1.85 at all times on its own. What I've noticed is my Cinebench scores are extremely volatile. They used to be almsot identical every run, but now I see a lot of variation between each run.

The only changes that have been made are that I have a clean install of Windows as of a few days ago and I have my old Corsair Vengeance 3200MHz kit installed while my Trident Z RGB replacements are on their way.

Update: I noticed in hwinfo under "Performance limit reasons," I see a Yes next to "IA: Max Turbo Limit." I don't recall ever seeing this marked before. If I set my power management in Windows to "Balanced," then another limit reason triggers. IA: Non-Turbo (P1). IA: Max Turbo has a "Yes" next to it at all times.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Is anyone else experiencing phantom throttling? I just noticed it today for the first time, which is something that was never an issue before. Here is a screenshot from hwinfo after some Cinebenching:
> 
> 
> 
> I have VCCIN set to 1.85 in the bios. It used to actually sit above 1.85 at all times on its own. What I've noticed is my Cinebench scores are extremely volatile. They used to be almsot identical every run, but now I see a lot of variation between each run.
> 
> The only changes that have been made are that I have a clean install of Windows as of a few days ago and I have my old Corsair Vengeance 3200MHz kit installed while my Trident Z RGB replacements are on their way.
> 
> Update: I noticed in hwinfo under "Performance limit reasons," I see a Yes next to "IA: Max Turbo Limit." I don't recall ever seeing this marked before. If I set my power management in Windows to "Balanced," then another limit reason triggers. IA: Non-Turbo (P1). IA: Max Turbo has a "Yes" next to it at all times.


What level of LLC are you using?


----------



## ESRCJ

Ic
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> What level of LLC are you using?


I have it set to auto, which is how it was before the phantom throttling started occurring. The main difference between then and now is the fresh Windows install and the temporary Corsair memory.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Ic
> I have it set to auto, which is how it was before the phantom throttling started occurring. The main difference between then and now is the fresh Windows install and the temporary Corsair memory.


you need to change the bios settings for VRM and cpu power/current limits.
what MB? Fill out rigbuilder and add it to your sig block.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Is anyone else experiencing phantom throttling? I just noticed it today for the first time, which is something that was never an issue before. Here is a screenshot from hwinfo after some Cinebenching:
> 
> 
> 
> I have VCCIN set to 1.85 in the bios. It used to actually sit above 1.85 at all times on its own. What I've noticed is my Cinebench scores are extremely volatile. They used to be almsot identical every run, but now I see a lot of variation between each run.
> 
> The only changes that have been made are that I have a clean install of Windows as of a few days ago and I have my old Corsair Vengeance 3200MHz kit installed while my Trident Z RGB replacements are on their way.
> 
> Update: I noticed in hwinfo under "Performance limit reasons," I see a Yes next to "IA: Max Turbo Limit." I don't recall ever seeing this marked before. If I set my power management in Windows to "Balanced," then another limit reason triggers. IA: Non-Turbo (P1). IA: Max Turbo has a "Yes" next to it at all times.


Set your LLC to 5 or 6. You shouldn't see much droop if any at those settings.

Also, the IA: Non-Turbo (P1). IA: Max Turbo has a "Yes" is something I've noticed myself however, if you set your windows power mode to performance, they should go away. Also, I've noticed that if I remove my AVX offsets, they go away as well.


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> you need to change the bios settings for VRM and cpu power/current limits.
> what MB? Fill out rigbuilder and add it to your sig block.


RVIE. I have my current capability to 140% and VRM spread spectrum disabled. That's all I've touched in the DIGI+ power control. I've never had to touch anything else.. until now I guess.

I'll fill that out when I'm on a PC again.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GXTCHA*
> 
> Set your LLC to 5 or 6. You shouldn't see much droop if any at those settings.
> 
> Also, the IA: Non-Turbo (P1). IA: Max Turbo has a "Yes" is something I've noticed myself however, if you set your windows power mode to performance, they should go away. Also, I've noticed that if I remove my AVX offsets, they go away as well.


They both say yes once I change Windows power to maximum performance. I'll try the LLCs you suggested. It's odd because I've always left it at auto since I never experienced phantom throttling before. My VCCIN used to never budge.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> RVIE. I have my current capability to 140% and VRM spread spectrum disabled. That's all I've touched in the DIGI+ power control. I've never had to touch anything else.. until now I guess.
> 
> I'll fill that out when I'm on a PC again.
> They both say yes once I change Windows power to maximum performance. I'll try the LLCs you suggested. It's odd because I've always left it at auto since I never experienced phantom throttling before. My VCCIN used to never budge.


I think there are two separate things being discussed: 1) LLC wil affect vdroop on VCCIN, this is not "phantom throttling". But yes, you should use a mid-level setting for LLC and allow for some vdroop of VCCIN - eg, it lowers when under load. 2) Power limit throttling - aka phantom throttling: set CPU IVR Fault Management to disabled, set CPU current limit to 200+ %... see the picture:

you can get away with LDPPL of around 500. CPU IVR Current limit on Auto should be fine, but it can be set as high as shown (these SS are from this 7980XE set to 5.2GHz for a short time). In some cases the system will just shut down and restart if the OCP is triggered.


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I think there are two separate things being discussed: 1) LLC wil affect vdroop on VCCIN, this is not "phantom throttling". But yes, you should use a mid-level setting for LLC and allow for some vdroop of VCCIN - eg, it lowers when under load. 2) Power limit throttling - aka phantom throttling: set CPU IVR Fault Management to disabled, set CPU current limit to 200+ %... see the picture:
> 
> you can get away with LDPPL of around 500. CPU IVR Current limit on Auto should be fine, but it can be set as high as shown (these SS are from this 7980XE set to 5.2GHz for a short time). In some cases the system will just shut down and restart if the OCP is triggered.


Thanks for the suggestions. I will definitely give these a try and post back with the results later today.

Since I've always set LLC to auto, I wonder if something triggered it to set itself to a lower level than whatever it was automatically selecting previously when I had no vdroop. Regardless, it would be best for me to just manually set this from now on to avoid the issue moving forward.


----------



## GXTCHA

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> RVIE. I have my current capability to 140% and VRM spread spectrum disabled. That's all I've touched in the DIGI+ power control. I've never had to touch anything else.. until now I guess.
> 
> I'll fill that out when I'm on a PC again.
> They both say yes once I change Windows power to maximum performance. I'll try the LLCs you suggested. It's odd because I've always left it at auto since I never experienced phantom throttling before. My VCCIN used to never budge.


@jpmboy is right, lots of other settings will need to be adjusted as well. I have an R6A and run my power setting at 200+ and mirror many of the settings that he's shown in his screen shot. I'd send screen shots but am at work right now.

What AVX offsets are you running? Also, what stress tests are you running that you're now seeing this throttle? is it just CB R15 or are you running XTU, RB, Aida, etc.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I think there are two separate things being discussed: 1) LLC wil affect vdroop on VCCIN, this is not "phantom throttling"


Depending on what LLC is being used at a given voltage for VCCIN, it's possible to trigger the throttling mechanism


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Depending on what LLC is being used at a given voltage for VCCIN, it's possible to trigger the throttling mechanism


because of a current or power limit set elsewhere - right?
anyhow, LLC is one of the last things I would leave to Auto rules on any MB.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> because of a current or power limit set elsewhere - right?
> anyhow, LLC is one of the last things I would leave to Auto rules on any MB.


Not necessarily. If VCCIN is insufficient, it's possible to trip Intel's mechanism as the voltage drops below the threshold in tandem with a lower LLC (AFAIK)


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Not necessarily. If VCCIN is insufficient, it's possible to trip Intel's mechanism as the voltage drops below the threshold in tandem with a lower LLC (AFAIK)


ah, yes - that makes sense. i think we've seen that undervolt down clock occur.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Silent Scone*
> 
> Not necessarily. If VCCIN is insufficient, it's possible to trip Intel's mechanism as the voltage drops below the threshold in tandem with a lower LLC (AFAIK)


It seems HCC (and should not be surprising) makes it possibly to quickly drag VCCIN down below what the chip needs. LLC seems more at the fore-front of HCC OC than it was with HW/BW where it gave you another knob to refine everything else.

That's the bottom line though - whatever your settings, your loaded VCCIN needs to be above ~1.75 or your gonna have a bad time. 1.80 for higher OCs from what I've seen on my setup.


----------



## superV

guys i'm trying to do some simulations with my 7980xe.
i want to try to tun 14 cores [email protected]
what voltages do you recommend?
cpu vcore
cpu vrin
vccio
system agent voltage
i tried running at 1.2/1.25/1.3/1.35 vcore and 1.85/1.9vrin and will crash as soon goes under load.
mesh is at [email protected] from previous 18 [email protected] with 1.10v and 1.8vrin and the rest of the voltages are at default.
thanks


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> guys i'm trying to do some simulations with my 7980xe.
> i want to try to tun 14 cores [email protected]
> what voltages do you recommend?
> cpu vcore
> cpu vrin
> vccio
> system agent voltage
> i tried running at 1.2/1.25/1.3/1.35 vcore and 1.85/1.9vrin and will crash as soon goes under load.
> mesh is at [email protected] from previous 18 [email protected] with 1.10v and 1.8vrin and the rest of the voltages are at default.
> thanks


You might be aiming too high. On our 7980XE, only a subset of the cores will do 4.8 GHz even at 1.40v. So either you back off to something more reasonable, or you bin your cores and pick only the best ones to push up to 4.8. I'd recommend starting from 4.5 and working up from there.


----------



## superV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> You might be aiming too high. On our 7980XE, only a subset of the cores will do 4.8 GHz even at 1.40v. So either you back off to something more reasonable, or you bin your cores and pick only the best ones to push up to 4.8. I'd recommend starting from 4.5 and working up from there.


ok.but how do i individuate the best cores?
thanks


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> ok.but how do i individuate the best cores?
> thanks


Depends on your motherboard. If it supports per-core overclocking, then you can test each core individually. If not, then you're stuck with enabling and disabling cores completely.


----------



## superV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> Depends on your motherboard. If it supports per-core overclocking, then you can test each core individually. If not, then you're stuck with enabling and disabling cores completely.


tried different settings,but my pc will simply shut down no matter what voltage when going under load,it will not freeze.i did rise power options and amps but nothing.
the only oc i could do was [email protected] without ht on all cores,but higher than that will make the pc shutdown when going under load.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> tried different settings,but my pc will simply shut down no matter what voltage when going under load,it will not freeze.i did rise power options and amps but nothing.
> the only oc i could do was [email protected] without ht on all cores,but higher than that will make the pc shutdown when going under load.


What motherboard do you have? It sounds like you're exceeding the power limits of the system and it's shutting down intentionally to protect itself.

There should be settings to lift this limit, but it varies by motherboard.


----------



## superV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> What motherboard do you have? It sounds like you're exceeding the power limits of the system and it's shutting down intentionally to protect itself.
> 
> There should be settings to lift this limit, but it varies by motherboard.


i have the gigabyte x299 gaming 9.
yes there is something wrong,i did rise the power limits but still it will shut down.
oh ye,it's not the psu to blame,it's 1500w corsair ax1500i.
it's sort of some protection if i rise the voltage,it happened the same with the mesh at 1.10v for 3ghz,then i did set it to 1.05v and it worked for the 4.2ghz all cores oc.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> i have the gigabyte x299 gaming 9.
> yes there is something wrong,i did rise the power limits but still it will shut down.
> oh ye,it's not the psu to blame,it's 1500w corsair ax1500i.
> it's sort of some protection if i rise the voltage,it happened the same with the mesh at 1.10v for 3ghz,then i did set it to 1.05v and it worked for the 4.2ghz all cores oc.


Ahh, the Gigabyte boards...

Have you lifted all of these?

Package Power Limit 1: *400W* (prevent throttling due to over-current)
Package Power Limit 2: *400W* (prevent throttling due to over-current)
CPU VCore Loadline Calibration = *Medium* (prevent the vdroop on VCCIN)
CPU VCore Current Protection = *High* (prevent the hard shutdown due to over-current)
(taken from here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1634045/skylake-x-phantom-throttling#post_26214754)

For the 7980XE, you might need to set these even higher. (600W, high LLC, etc...) Of course be aware of the limit of your cooling.

This list is incomplete as HWInfo64 still shows another limit. But I haven't bothered to find which is the relevant BIOS option.


----------



## ESRCJ

Alright, so I set LLC to level 6 and my VCCIN no longer drops at all under heavy load. Thanks again for the help. It's still odd that this only became an issue recently since I've been running this 24/7 OC for about a month without any vdroop.


----------



## darkinners

Anyway to enable SVID and able to manually adjust VCCIN?
I am on ASUS board(PRIME X299-DELUXE in particular)

I am currently setting my 7940X with SVID enabled and vcore offset -0.105 (which all core running at 1.09-1.12v under load with LLC level 2)
VCCIN however running at 1.69v idle and 1.65v underload
CPU pulling 285W max
VRM does went up to 109C with P95 blend test in 30 mins and throttle the CPU to 3.1Ghz from time to time.

It's stable though (P95 blend 24 hours and realbench 4 hrs pass)

I am hearing VCCIN too low could induce phantom throttling

So I am thinking if I can keep my CPU vcore at 1.1v and SVID enable
But increase VCCIN to 1.75-1.8v ish.


----------



## Silent Scone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Alright, so I set LLC to level 6 and my VCCIN no longer drops at all under heavy load. Thanks again for the help. It's still odd that this only became an issue recently since I've been running this 24/7 OC for about a month without any vdroop.


It may be that you simply didn't notice it beforehand. Happened to me on the earlier builds, but the rules changed to try and prevent this.


----------



## tistou77

Hello

I had a problem with Windows 10, which had to restart (automatic restart message in 1 minute), related to DWM (error message in the Event Viewer about the graphics card)
And shortly after, I had a BSOD linked to win32kfull.sys

Is it related to the stability of the OC or is it related to Windows (drivers, etc ...)?

Thanks

PS: for information, I changed the power supply today (Seasonic 750W that a friend had lent me against the same model in 850W)


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Hello
> 
> I had a problem with Windows 10, which had to restart (automatic restart message in 1 minute), related to DWM (error message in the Event Viewer about the graphics card)
> And shortly after, I had a BSOD linked to win32kfull.sys
> 
> Is it related to the stability of the OC or is it related to Windows (drivers, etc ...)?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> PS: for information, I changed the power supply today (Seasonic 750W that a friend had lent me against the same model in 850W)


Hi,
Higher wattage for a 7940xe I believe would be best
Might not have seen the issue on the 850w but what oc were you using exactly ?


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Higher wattage for a 7940xe I believe would be best
> Might not have seen the issue on the 850w but what oc were you using exactly ?


Hi,

So, 4600mhz (-2, -2) and 1.19v (not tested not tested with less), Cache at 3100 and 1.05v and it's good with Realbench and Aida64
I increased the Cache to 1.075v to see
Maybe the ram, 4000 17-18-18-35 in AUTO in bios (just tested with RB and Aida64) at 1.36v (varies between 1.36 and 1.37v under Windows)?



Thanks


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Hi,
> 
> So, 4600mhz (-2, -2) and 1.19v (not tested not tested with less), Cache at 3100 and 1.05v and it's good with Realbench and Aida64
> I increased the Cache to 1.075v to see
> Maybe the ram, 4000 17-18-18-35 in AUTO in bios (just tested with RB and Aida64) at 1.36v (varies between 1.36 and 1.37v under Windows)?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks


Hi,
Could be the cache at 31
I'd try 30 max personally see how it goes for awhile

Not sure why you down graded your wattage but that was not a good deal


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Could be the cache at 31
> I'd try 30 max personally see how it goes for awhile
> 
> Not sure why you down graded your wattage but that was not a good deal


I had not finished testing the ram and the problem comes from there, I think

For the PSU, my friend had to recover his, and there was only the 850W in stock (750W not available) so I took the 850W, even if indeed it is useless for my PC


----------



## darkinners

For some reasons, the L1 and L2 cache speed on my 7940x got a huge dive this week
Was this caused by the M$ meltdown patch? Is this normal?
Also in both bench, BCLK was setting at 100.1Mhz, for some reasons. Last week's bench shown the correct BCLK speed in AIDA64 bench
In today's bench it shown 100BCLK instead of 100.1..

Last week bench


Today's bench


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *darkinners*
> 
> For some reasons, the L1 and L2 cache speed on my 7940x got a huge dive this week
> Was this caused by the M$ meltdown patch? Is this normal?
> Also in both bench, BCLK was setting at 100.1Mhz, for some reasons. Last week's bench shown the correct BCLK speed in AIDA64 bench
> In today's bench it shown 100BCLK instead of 100.1..
> 
> Last week bench
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Today's bench
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Hi,
Yep I saw another person saying their 960 evo got almost cut in half :/
Different benchmark


----------



## ESRCJ

After much testing and a discussion on the Asus forums, I've come to the conclusion that the 7920X has a worse IMC than every other Skylake-X processor. While this will be negligible in real-world applications, it will definitely reveal itself in some benchmarks. Here is an example with AIDA64. Specifically, look at the memory write speed:



Regardless of how much timings are tightened, 76K MB/s seems to be the limit unless I increase mesh frequency. I'll note that every result I've seen on here with 3800MHz or higher OC with any other Skylake-X part has a much higher memory write speed. Furthermore, I've tinkered with memory overclocking for almost a month now and this processor is not capable of 4000MHz with "100%" stability (I use HCI memtest for stability testing). I've used 3 different Trident Z RGB kits and this was true for all of them. I think this once again falls on the IMC of the 7920X.

As I said, the real-world performance difference is negligible, but if this is something that will bother you, spend a little less and get the 7900X or spend a bit more for a 7940X. If I knew this ahead of time, I probably would have gotten a 7960X since little things like this bother me and I love overclocking. It also is a little sad knowing that the 7920X probably has the worst IMC of the pack, even when compared to the 7820X, which is almost half the price. This might partially explain why Intel never sent out review samples to anyone.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> After much testing and a discussion on the Asus forums, I've come to the conclusion that the 7920X has a worse IMC than every other Skylake-X processor. While this will be negligible in real-world applications, it will definitely reveal itself in some benchmarks. Here is an example with AIDA64. Specifically, look at the memory write speed:
> 
> 
> 
> Regardless of how much timings are tightened, 76K MB/s seems to be the limit unless I increase mesh frequency. I'll note that every result I've seen on here with 3800MHz or higher OC with any other Skylake-X part has a much higher memory write speed. Furthermore, I've tinkered with memory overclocking for almost a month now and this processor is not capable of 4000MHz with "100%" stability (I use HCI memtest for stability testing). I've used 3 different Trident Z RGB kits and this was true for all of them. I think this once again falls on the IMC of the 7920X.
> 
> As I said, the real-world performance difference is negligible, but if this is something that will bother you, spend a little less and get the 7900X or spend a bit more for a 7940X. If I knew this ahead of time, I probably would have gotten a 7960X since little things like this bother me and I love overclocking. It also is a little sad knowing that the 7920X probably has the worst IMC of the pack, even when compared to the 7820X, which is almost half the price. This might partially explain why Intel never sent out review samples to anyone.


1. Latency indicates you aren't done tuning
2. Read being good and write bad has two possible explanations
a. Loss of cores is really hurting relative to 7960/80 which is a little surprising but mesh v1.0 is 1.0... (needs improvement)
b. Error recovery cutting into BW (retries)? Do you see linear improvement when you ramp up settings? Or do they reach a hump and stop going up or even down? Take a step back.


----------



## superV

can someone explain me how the avx offset works?
from what other users told me,is to be set when having temp issues,because it down clocks the frequency when avx it's used to decrease cpu temps.
the problem i have is on obs,i can't run the slow preset at stock avx at 4.2ghz1.10v on the 7980xe because i get encoder overload when i have good temps and cpu power according to hwinfo and core temp is 160w,so temp issue can be excluded.but if i set avx offset to 10 i can run the slow preset with a peak or two of encoder overload with the same cpu power of 160w,obviously i did set the threads command to 27 in both cases,since there is the problem with the thread counter.
thanks


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
You might read through this thread
http://www.overclock.net/t/1641867/avx-offset-bug/0_20


----------



## superV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> You might read through this thread
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1641867/avx-offset-bug/0_20


in that thread is contrary to my problem,in their case the cpu will drop frequency when small uses of avx will happen.
in my case i get better performance on obs by setting the avx offset to 10,when at stock avx with no frequency drops it performs worse.
this means by default the avx runs at very low frequency(?),and applying the offset to 10 =3.2ghz since the cpu it's clocked at 4.2 ghz and get better performance,but again it performs better than the offset to 5.
dunno what's going on.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> in that thread is contrary to my problem,in their case the cpu will drop frequency when small uses of avx will happen.
> in my case i get better performance on obs by setting the avx offset to 10,when at stock avx with no frequency drops it performs worse.
> this means by default the avx runs at very low frequency(?),and applying the offset to 10 =3.2ghz since the cpu it's clocked at 4.2 ghz and get better performance,but again it performs better than the offset to 5.
> dunno what's going on.


Since you mentioned having a Gigabyte board, it sounds like the Phantom Throttling: http://www.overclock.net/t/1634045/skylake-x-phantom-throttling


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> 1. Latency indicates you aren't done tuning
> 2. Read being good and write bad has two possible explanations
> a. Loss of cores is really hurting relative to 7960/80 which is a little surprising but mesh v1.0 is 1.0... (needs improvement)
> b. Error recovery cutting into BW (retries)? Do you see linear improvement when you ramp up settings? Or do they reach a hump and stop going up or even down? Take a step back.


1. The lowest I've seen latency on this platform is 47-48ms. The lowest I've been able to achieve is ~52, but those settings didn't pass HCI for even 100%.

2a. I think this is the case. I was talking with another 7920X owner and they were having the same issue.
2b. The only improvements I've seen are when going from stock to XMP and from XMP to tighter timings, but eventually once you hit 76-80K, there's no going higher. Either there's something odd with the 7920X when running AIDA64 or there definitely is an IMC issue when it comes to memory write. Given that I can't manage 4000MHz with a good kit, I think the IMC is likely the culprit.

If there are any 7920X owners that don't have this issue, please share!


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> You would normally expect to see memory bandwidth go down with a larger die, since the distance between the cores and the memory controllers increases, which affects scheduling efficiency. The largest XCC dies support NUMA partitioning of the left and right-hand memory controllers to improve bandwidth. Is there such an option in the BIOS for your HCC processor? In the grand scheme of things, write bandwidth is less important than read, and 100:70 read:write is hardly a deal-breaker.
> 
> By the way, I have no idea how forum members manage to get latency in the low-50 ns. I can only get 66-68 ns with DDR4-3200 CL15 and a 3 GHz uncore overclock.


Where in the BIOS would I find such an option?

As for the low latency, I managed 52.5ns with my current configuration due to tighter secondary timings. Here is what I'm using currently:



My tertiaries are manually set to what my XMP profile would normally put in.


----------



## darkinners

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> You would normally expect to see memory bandwidth go down with a larger die, since the distance between the cores and the memory controllers increases, which affects scheduling efficiency. The largest XCC dies support NUMA partitioning of the left and right-hand memory controllers to improve bandwidth. Is there such an option in the BIOS for your HCC processor? In the grand scheme of things, write bandwidth is less important than read, and 100:70 read:write is hardly a deal-breaker.
> 
> By the way, I have no idea how forum members manage to get latency in the low-50 ns. I can only get 66-68 ns with DDR4-3200 CL15 and a 3 GHz uncore overclock.




Mine is even worse
7940X 4.4Ghz ， Mesh 3Ghz
Corsair Dominator Platinum 3000Mhz 15-17-17-35 OC to 3200Mhz 16-18-18-36

The latency and L2 cache speed are SUPER bad. I don't know what's wrong with it.


----------



## superV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> Where in the BIOS would I find such an option?
> 
> As for the low latency, I managed 52.5ns with my current configuration due to tighter secondary timings. Here is what I'm using currently:
> 
> 
> 
> My tertiaries are manually set to what my XMP profile would normally put in.


this is interesting....
this is with my 32gb kit g.skill trident z 3600 c16 xmp


then i tried with your timings and it crashes during the benchmark,but i had one almost complete and i saw a latency of 57ns and 105 GB/s for read and 95k MB/s or write.
but from what @darkinners is posting and with his ram and then looking at my test with the ram at default i have the same latency's with the mesh at 3.1ghz,it looks like cpus with less cores have more latency.shouldn't be the opposite?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Is there a free version of AIDA64 all I've seen is the 30 trial :/


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## superV

then looking at the amd 1950x,they are doing well since have 2 dies


http://www.overclock.net/t/1636550/amd-ryzen-threadripper-owners-club-1950x-1920x-1900x/2690#post_26522158


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Is there a free version of AIDA64 all I've seen is the 30 trial :/


That is the free version - for 30 days


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> this is interesting....
> this is with my 32gb kit g.skill trident z 3600 c16 xmp


I have the same kit G.Skill Trident Z 32 gb 3600 cl16 on a Asus Apex with manual Timings. The Cashe is 30 GHz Aida64 needed a update. The second pic is OC 5.0 GHz / 31 Cashe result about the same. This is a very good kit.


----------



## superV

@CptSpig thanks for your reply.i may give it a try with your timings.
from what i see my gigabyte mobo is so trash,since i see u got 50ns.no way the latency will go bellow 57ns on my board with your timings.
can't wait to get that apex.


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *djgar*
> 
> That is the free version - for 30 days


Hi,
Seems like a silly thing to pay for


----------



## djgar

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Seems like a silly thing to pay for


Maybe you should try it free then make the judgment


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
No reason to while Crystal disk mark is free so is winsat mem


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> @CptSpig thanks for your reply.i may give it a try with your timings.
> from what i see my gigabyte mobo is so trash,since i see u got 50ns.no way the latency will go bellow 57ns on my board with your timings.
> can't wait to get that apex.


That 5.0 GHz is on chilled water to 7c.







The timings in the picture are for benchmarking. For 24/7 Everything is the same except tRCD is 17. See below this is on a Predator 360 AIO.


----------



## superV

ops


----------



## superV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> That 50 GHz is on chilled water to 7c.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The timings in the picture are for benchmarking. For 24/7 Everything is the same except tRCD is 17. See below this is on a Predator 360 AIO.


ok ty,
haha lol 5g,what i'm interested is the timings,no way i'm going that high with HT on.
i'll give it a try later on,best i can hope go under 60


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> ok ty,
> haha lol 5g,what i'm interested is the timings,no way i'm going that high with HT on.
> i'll give it a try later on,best i can hope go under 60


Hi,
Yeah you can't go by him he's chilled looks even past dew point too


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> ok ty,
> haha lol 5g,what i'm interested is the timings,no way i'm going that high with HT on.
> i'll give it a try later on,best i can hope go under 60


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Yeah you can't go by him he's chilled looks even past dew point too


What I gave you is 24/7 on the Predator 360 AIO. Same Aida score you have a great kit just have some patience. Check out the link for more on memory. Read all the spoilers.









http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread


----------



## DooRules

here is my 3200 C14 GSkill with chip @ 4.5, also on the Apex VI mobo, good o/cing kit


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> then looking at the amd 1950x,they are doing well since have 2 dies
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1636550/amd-ryzen-threadripper-owners-club-1950x-1920x-1900x/2690#post_26522158


doing well? at what?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Seems like a silly thing to pay for


has many capabilities others do not. well worth the price for a top product. But wait, we're here on a thread where the average CPU costs $1000, mobo costs $350 (or more) and there's a debate about AID64 pricing? really?







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> That 50 GHz is on chilled water to 7c.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The timings in the picture are for benchmarking. For 24/7 Everything is the same except tRCD is 17.* See below this is on a Predator 360 AIO.


lol - yeah - I was gonna say...


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> @CptSpig thanks for your reply.i may give it a try with your timings.
> from what i see my gigabyte mobo is so trash,since i see u got 50ns.no way the latency will go bellow 57ns on my board with your timings.
> can't wait to get that apex.


good ram info and example timings *here*


----------



## superV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> What I gave you is 24/7 on the Predator 360 AIO. Same Aida score you have a great kit just have some patience. Check out the link for more on memory. Read all the spoilers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1569364/official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread


it's a no go for me.it won't let me set the tREFI by default with xmp is 14041.
and what voltage are u using ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> it's a no go for me.it won't let me set the tREFI by default is 14041.
> and what voltage are u using ?


what MB won;lt let you set tREFI?

24/7. stable to HCi memtest, RamTest, and GSAT... and everything else I've thrown at it.
7980XE 2x4.6, 16x4.5 per core adaptive, [email protected]


----------



## superV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> what MB won;lt let you set tREFI?
> 
> 24/7. stable to HCi memtest, RamTest, and GSAT... and everything else I've thrown at it.
> 7980XE 2x4.6, 16x4.5 per core adaptive, [email protected]


x299 gigabyte gaming 9,i write the number and when i press enter it turns auto again.
and yes i have the timigs set to advanced manual.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> x299 gigabyte gaming 9,i write the number and when i press enter it turns auto again.
> and yes i have the timigs set to advanced manual.


honestly, tREFI is not gonna make a meaningful difference, and is not a dependent timing. Fact is that until you know the main timings are stable, let the board handle tREFI. A long trefi can lead to signal loss, data corruption and the worst kind of instability. Get everything else stable then worry about tREFI. I'm sure the gigabyte boards allow this to be set manually - but yeah,m I do hate their bios layout! Testing tREFI stability is not easy... you can try to see if suspend-to-ram fouls


----------



## superV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> honestly, tREFI is not gonna make a meaningful difference, and is not a dependent timing. Fact is that until you know the main timings are stable, let the board handle tREFI. A long trefi can lead to signal loss, data corruption and the worst kind of instability. Get everything else stable then worry about tREFI. I'm sure the gigabyte boards allow this to be set manually - but yeah,m I do hate their bios layout! Testing tREFI stability is not easy... you can try to see if suspend-to-ram fouls


ok i'll give it another try.for ram voltage 1.45v is ok for that clock ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> ok i'll give it another try.for ram voltage 1.45v is ok for that clock ?


depends on the ram sticks. 1.4V is all that should be needed for good samsung B-die sticks. IDK if any other ICs will do 4000c16 on this platform (stable) at that voltage


----------



## aDyerSituation

Question for you all.

I have this kit:
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232584

and no matter what I do I cannot get it to overclock nor can I tighten the main timings at all.
Right now I have it stable at 3600 16-16-16-36-1T

Did I really just get that unlucky? I was working with Spig and he was helpful but I was wondering if you all had any other ideas
Motherboard limitation? CPU limitation?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Wow got are you a robot off that link to newegg lol


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ThrashZone*
> 
> Hi,
> Wow got are you a robot off that link to newegg lol


hmm. it's this kit model F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah ram can be a bummer I just had one of my corsair dominator 2666C15 go wonkey
Started a few weeks ago no more xmp profile 1 or 2
RMA is a pain









One stick just drops off a cliff in any slot bought at newegg 4/15/17 4x4gb 180.us cheap then but still bites.


----------



## superV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> depends on the ram sticks. 1.4V is all that should be needed for good samsung B-die sticks. IDK if any other ICs will do 4000c16 on this platform (stable) at that voltage


no go,it's simply a no go,of course it won't boot with a trefi of 8k.
dunno what's wrong with this mobo.
ty for sharing your timings,when i'll get the apex,will give it another try.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Question for you all.
> 
> I have this kit:
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232584
> 
> and no matter what I do I cannot get it to overclock nor can I tighten the main timings at all.
> Right now I have it stable at 3600 16-16-16-36-1T
> 
> Did I really just get that unlucky? I was working with Spig and he was helpful but I was wondering if you all had any other ideas
> Motherboard limitation? CPU limitation?


I would guess both. You are on a X299 Strix with a i7-7820x I am on a X299 Apex with a i9-7980Xe. We have the same memory kit. Did you ever try 3866 or maybe 3800?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> I would guess both. You are on a X299 Strix with a i7-7820x I am on a X299 Apex with a i9-7980Xe. We have the same memory kit. Did you ever try 3866 or maybe 3800?


I tried looser timings for 3800 and still no luck. Trying any higher timings would probably defeat the purpose. I'm pretty sure I tried 17-17-17-40-2T and still failed memtest


----------



## ThrashZone

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> here is my 3200 C14 GSkill with chip @ 4.5, also on the Apex VI mobo, good o/cing kit
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Hi,
I finally bought that exact set of mem
Chicken out and sent it back unopened
It was way too much nearly 500.us
Good news is newegg has some now I got the last set


----------



## ESRCJ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Question for you all.
> 
> I have this kit:
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232584
> 
> and no matter what I do I cannot get it to overclock nor can I tighten the main timings at all.
> Right now I have it stable at 3600 16-16-16-36-1T
> 
> Did I really just get that unlucky? I was working with Spig and he was helpful but I was wondering if you all had any other ideas
> Motherboard limitation? CPU limitation?


I've seen a 7820X manage 4000MHz memory stable, so it's possible with that model CPU. You have a good kit as well.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gridironcpj*
> 
> I've seen a 7820X manage 4000MHz memory stable, so it's possible with that model CPU. You have a good kit as well.


yeah I'm more bummed about it then I should be.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> hmm. it's this kit model F4-3600C16Q-32GTZKK


that is a fine ram kit... need more info: post bios screenshots in a zip file. let's have a look at your settings.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *superV*
> 
> no go,it's simply a no go,of course it won't boot with a trefi of 8k.
> dunno what's wrong with this mobo.
> ty for sharing your timings,when i'll get the apex,will give it another try.


the apex should make life a little easier.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> yeah I'm more bummed about it then I should be.


On the same topic, the 3800 MT/s that I ran on my 8 x 16GB set started erroring about once a day to a week. I ended up having to dial it all the way back down to 3200.

After several months of nearly sustained 24/7 load, there seems to be some burn-in either in the IMC or the DIMMs themselves. Voltages were all reasonable. (1.0v VCCSA, 1.38v memory)


----------



## Mumriken

My 7820 can do 4k,but fails at hci with better primary timings. If i increase my voltage(above 1.41) HCI fails at these settings. Don't get it..?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mumriken*
> 
> 
> 
> My 7820 can do 4k,but fails at hci with better primary timings. If i increase my voltage(above 1.41) HCI fails at these settings. Don't get it..?


yeah no idea. getting into RAM ocin is super tedious and doesn't make much sense to me so far.

What is your voltage for 5ghz?

side note: i'll try to post sceenshots of bios later


----------



## Mumriken

Ram oc is so time consuming!
1,246Vcore and 1,86input


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mumriken*
> 
> Ram oc is so time consuming!
> 1,246Vcore and 1,86input


***. I need like 1.27 just for 4.7ghz









congrats


----------



## Mumriken

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> ***. I need like 1.27 just for 4.7ghz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> congrats


Tnx, it's a good chip


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> yeah no idea. g*etting into RAM ocin is super tedious* and doesn't make much sense to me so far.
> 
> What is your voltage for 5ghz?
> 
> side note: i'll try to post sceenshots of bios later


if only tedious.. it can be THE rabbit hole.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mumriken*
> 
> 
> 
> My 7820 can do 4k,but fails at hci with better primary timings. If i increase my voltage(above 1.41) HCI fails at these settings. Don't get it..?


what other voltages have been "tuned" trying to get 4000 stable?


----------



## crpcookie

Are you guys able to get 7980XE stable with mesh @ 3000 after the Windows 10 and Intel microcode update? Mine is crashing left and right with everything at default and only the mesh that's overclocked. 1.1v is already pushing too high for what was stable before at 1.04v.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Both my old 7800X and my old 7820X did 4000 17-19-19-36-1t-400 1.400V 1300% HCI stable before I stopped it.

This was with some really old G.skill 3600 CL17 sticks I believe. On a cheapo Tomhawk motherboard.


----------



## GreedyMuffin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *crpcookie*
> 
> Are you guys able to get 7980XE stable with mesh @ 3000 after the Windows 10 and Intel microcode update? Mine is crashing left and right with everything at default and only the mesh that's overclocked. 1.1v is already pushing too high for what was stable before at 1.04v.


Ouch.. Sounds like degradation?

I would back it off a bit if I were you. My good 5820K started to crap out on the cache. I always ran 45/45 at 1.25/1.25V on core/cache (so 1:1 ratio). Started getting booting problems at stock clocks and the machine would hang, eventually the CPU needed ridiculous amount of cache voltage in order to boot.


----------



## Mumriken

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> if only tedious.. it can be THE rabbit hole.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what other voltages have been "tuned" trying to get 4000 stable?


To get it stable at 4k i had to up SA to 1,1312 and IO to 1,125. It will freeeze in games with lower voltages.
Now i want to tighten my timings, but increasing the dram voltage just makes it worse for some wierd reason.


----------



## tistou77

Speaking VCCSA and VCCIO, usually with the ram @ 4000mhz, you have to have what voltages ?

Thanks


----------



## Mumriken

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Speaking VCCSA and VCCIO, usually with the ram @ 4000mhz, you have to have what voltages ?
> 
> Thanks


Not to be HCI stable. It will freeze in games without


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mumriken*
> 
> To get it stable at 4k i had to up SA to 1,1312 and IO to 1,125. It will freeeze in games with lower voltages.
> Now i want to tighten my timings, but increasing the dram voltage just makes it worse for some wierd reason.


dl a cpoy of asrock timing configurator (v4.0.4) and let's see what your current (good) timings are.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Speaking VCCSA and VCCIO, usually with the ram @ 4000mhz, you have to have what voltages ?
> 
> Thanks


this will depend on the CPU and sku. for this 7980xe,m I have vsa at 0.795, vccio at 1.02V. (two 2x8GB 3600c15 kits at 4000c16, 1.4V)


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> dl a cpoy of asrock timing configurator (v4.0.4) and let's see what your current (good) timings are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this will depend on the CPU and sku. for this 7980xe,m I have vsa at 0.795, vccio at 1.02V. (two 2x8GB 3600c15 kits at 4000c16, 1.4V)


Thanks







I will test by lowering the VCCSA


----------



## Mumriken

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> dl a cpoy of asrock timing configurator (v4.0.4) and let's see what your current (good) timings are.




I have not messed with tertiary timings, but I might be at the limit for the primary and secondary


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mumriken*
> 
> 
> 
> I have not messed with tertiary timings, but I might be at the limit for the primary and secondary


and these are the stable timings which will freeze in games etc? If yes, freezing is usually cache related, even the default cache frequency will need additional mV at this ram frequency. I'd bet you can lower VSA and VCCIO, increase cache V (and probably relax tWR a bit closer to tCWL) with good results.


----------



## Mumriken

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> and these are the stable timings which will freeze in games etc? If yes, freezing is usually cache related, even the default cache frequency will need additional mV at this ram frequency. I'd bet you can lower VSA and VCCIO, increase cache V (and probably relax tWR a bit closer to tCWL) with good results.


Nope, this settings don't freeze. If i tight it further it will fail HCI.
My high sa/io voltage is due to high cpu clock and it will freeze with lower voltages.

My goal is to get lower latency, but I am kinda stuck now.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mumriken*
> 
> Nope, this settings don't freeze. If i tight it further it will fail HCI.
> My high sa/io voltage is due to high cpu clock and it will freeze with lower voltages.
> 
> My goal is to get lower latency, but I am kinda stuck now.


VSA and VCCIO really don;t need to scale with CPU frequency (eg, even running this 7980XE at 5.2 does not require any higher SA/IO than 4.6 with 4000c16). When you tighten up timings it not unusual to need to increase cache voltage, and system freezing is typical of undervolted cache/mesh.. VPPDDR voltage can help, as can tuning the phase lock (PLL). IS there an uncore offset on that board? (this is not cache voltage)
For VSA and PLL, more voltage is not necessarily better and they can have an inverted U-shaped response curve. Beyond that, transmitter clock DQ/DSQ.


----------



## darkinners

TIL, If you enable Hyper-V in "Turn Windows Features On or Off"

Regardless you use it or not
It will fluctuate your BCLK clock for no reasons, in my experience it ranging from 95.8 - 99.8 when I set the BCLK clock 100 in BIOS. Even if I disabled Spread Spectrum in BIOS
(Probably Hyper-V force spread spectrum enabled on hardware level？ I don't know)

What's worse, this BCLK clock fluctuation sabotage my NvME SSD performance and overall computer performance (not much, probably 1-2%)

So, if you do not need Hyper-V, do not enable it.

This is Hyper-V enabled


This is Hyper-V disabled


CrystalDiskMark has even more difference
4K Read and Write has up to 10-20% performance difference.


----------



## Jpmboy

I believe Hyper-V is not enabled by Default in win10.


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> I believe Hyper-V is not enabled by Default in win10.


I see bclock bounce around any time I have min cpu state below 100% in the power plan...

I also see that Asus has installed a bclock app... honestly not sure what that thinks it's supposed to do without their AISuite/


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> I see bclock bounce around any time I have min cpu state below 100% in the power plan...


is speed shift enabled w/ bclk spreadspectrum "allowed"?


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> is speed shift enabled w/ bclk spreadspectrum "allowed"?


Shift/Step/c-states all enabled... SS is auto I think, whatever stock is... since I didn't play with bclk OC on this system, I didn't mess with it...

I didn't worry about it, the impact was negligible... just an observation.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Shift/Step/c-states all enabled... SS is auto I think, whatever stock is... since I didn't play with bclk OC on this system, I didn't mess with it...
> 
> I didn't worry about it, the impact was negligible... just an observation.


yeah - I think that, unless you are taking advantage of TB3, shift is best left disabled. I;m not seeingt the b-clock range that far with shift disabled. I have TB3 disabled.


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> yeah - I think that, unless you are taking advantage of TB3, shift is best left disabled. I;m not seeingt the b-clock range that far with shift disabled. I have TB3 disabled.


Do you still have TB3 enabled in the UEFI and disable via Windows power shell?


----------



## Timmaigh!

Can please someone enlighten me in following matters regarding X299?

Starting today, i finally have my X299 build running - 7940x on Gigabyte X299 Aorus Gaming 7... right now installing back my apps, as clean Windows re-install needed to be done. So far, everything seems to be running OK, there are however 2 little issues i need to solve:

- the more important one, i had issues adding another HDD. Is there some limit how many devices you can connect to the MOBO? I am totally lost in all that PCI-E/DMI link stuff. Currently, i have 2 GPUs (thats 2x16 PCI-E), then 2x M2 SSDs (here starts the fun, as i have no clue, whether any of them is actually connected straight to PC via PCI-E or not), then 2x SATA SSD, then 2x 2TB HDDs. Wanted add another 6TB HDD - it turned out to be no go. Even BIOS wont see it. The HDD itself is fine, as it was used in other machine to check whether its functional and it indeed it is. If i unplug one of the 2TB HDDs and plug this one instead, it will work. Bottom line, it seems i cant have third HDD, and not cause its HDD faulty, neither i think its broken SATA ports on motherboard, it simply seems like some limit... is it possible? Could anyone please enlighten me, how this works?

-the less important issue, i installed Samsung Magician to update my M2 SSDs firmware (950PRO and 960EVO) and i tried built in performance benchmark and the numbers are not what are they supposed to be, the SEQUENTIAL READ and write ones i mean. I had this issue before on my previous X99 system, the 950PRO was supposed to read at 2200MB/s, when in reality it was more like 900/1000. Now its even 600/700! Now the sequential write, which were supposedly OK before, around 900, which was the number to have per the Magician itself, is now down to 600/700 too.... on other hand, i had lower random IOPS for read before, about 130000, when i should have had 270000 - now this number is fine, actually above 270000.... so any clue what is going on?

Thanks for help


----------



## Abaidor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Can please someone enlighten me in following matters regarding X299?
> 
> -the less important issue, i installed Samsung Magician to update my M2 SSDs firmware (950PRO and 960EVO) and i tried built in performance benchmark and the numbers are not what are they supposed to be, the SEQUENTIAL READ and write ones i mean. I had this issue before on my previous X99 system, the 950PRO was supposed to read at 2200MB/s, when in reality it was more like 900/1000. Now its even 600/700! Now the sequential write, which were supposedly OK before, around 900, which was the number to have per the Magician itself, is now down to 600/700 too.... on other hand, i had lower random IOPS for read before, about 130000, when i should have had 270000 - now this number is fine, actually above 270000.... so any clue what is going on?
> 
> Thanks for help


As far the Samsung drives are concerned have a look at this Samsung Forum
https://us.community.samsung.com/t5/Memory-Storage/bd-p/memoryandstorage

Some firmware released about 1 month ago resulted into serious issues with Samsung SSDs even botched ones (slow downs, freezes). Samsung is even accepting RMAs so check it out since if you have gotten the "bad firmware" you should either wait for Samsung to release a new one (they said in January) or RMA the disk. You cannot downgrade to older firmware.


----------



## djgar

And you can get the latest Magician software - maybe, if you can get past the lame Samsung web site "downloads exceeded limit" thinghy.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> X299 uses the Z270 PCH. This means that M.2 slots share bandwidth with some other device on the board, usually USB or SATA. Chances are that your board does not simultaneously allow using M.2 and all 6(?) SATA ports. You have to either use an LSI PCIe SATA controller or move your M.2 drives to PCIe with a HYPER M.2 card or equivalent.


kingofblog is correct. You should read your motherboard manual. It should clearly tell you what slots are available and in what combination.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Question for you all.
> 
> I have this kit:
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232584
> 
> and no matter what I do I cannot get it to overclock nor can I tighten the main timings at all.
> Right now I have it stable at 3600 16-16-16-36-1T
> 
> Did I really just get that unlucky? I was working with Spig and he was helpful but I was wondering if you all had any other ideas
> Motherboard limitation? CPU limitation?


Good news guys! I believe I was able to get 3800mhz stable at 16-17-16-37-1T.
Ran HCI overnight and no errors.

What should I try for 4000mhz? Thanks

vccio: 1.05
SA: .95
dram voltage: 1.4
secondary timings are still auto for now


----------



## Timmaigh!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingofblog*
> 
> X299 uses the Z270 PCH. This means that M.2 slots share bandwidth with some other device on the board, usually USB or SATA. Chances are that your board does not simultaneously allow using M.2 and all 6(?) SATA ports. You have to either use an LSI PCIe SATA controller or move your M.2 drives to PCIe with a HYPER M.2 card or equivalent.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> kingofblog is correct. You should read your motherboard manual. It should clearly tell you what slots are available and in what combination.


Thanks, both of you! Yeah, you are right, i should RTFM next time, LOL. I checked Gigabyte forums and someone had the same issue, cause apparently putting the M2 in the bottom position cuts off 4 of the SATA ports - which now confirms that table of yours - i assume U2 is supposed to be the bottom M2 slot. Seems i shall move the M2 into the top slot, to have both M2s working and access to all available SATA ports as well - in other words the 5th column of that table.

On another note, i tried Cinebench too, just to see whether the CPU runs as supposed (on stock clocks), and indeed i got the MT score of cca 2890 - which is pretty much in line with what is expected. The ST score though, was rather low, just 169. I was expecting something like 190+.... The thing is, for whatever reason, CPU-Z claimed the CPU to run just on base clock (3,1GHz), not turbo clocks (i suppose 4,3GHz - 4,4GHz)... it showed 3,8GHz during MT test as it should have, so any clue, what am i missing?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> Good news guys! I believe I was able to get 3800mhz stable at 16-17-16-37-1T.
> Ran HCI overnight and no errors.
> 
> What should I try for 4000mhz? Thanks
> 
> vccio: 1.05
> SA: .95
> dram voltage: 1.4
> secondary timings are still auto for now


Yes, set [email protected] If stable you can lower until you have errors and then raise 10mv. Now you can play with secondary timings.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CptSpig*
> 
> Yes, set [email protected] If stable you can lower until you have errors and then raise 10mv. Now you can play with secondary timings.


still trying to get 4000mhz.

I noticed that before my vdimm wast at 1.42 and I wasn't stable at these timings. Can having too much voltage cause errors?


----------



## CptSpig

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> still trying to get 4000mhz.
> 
> I noticed that before my vdimm wast at 1.42 and I wasn't stable at these timings. Can having too much voltage cause errors?


Yes, try 1.40v if not stable try 1.410v.


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Thanks, both of you! Yeah, you are right, i should RTFM next time, LOL. I checked Gigabyte forums and someone had the same issue, cause apparently putting the M2 in the bottom position cuts off 4 of the SATA ports - which now confirms that table of yours - i assume U2 is supposed to be the bottom M2 slot. Seems i shall move the M2 into the top slot, to have both M2s working and access to all available SATA ports as well - in other words the 5th column of that table.
> 
> On another note, i tried Cinebench too, just to see whether the CPU runs as supposed (on stock clocks), and indeed i got the MT score of cca 2890 - which is pretty much in line with what is expected. The ST score though, was rather low, just 169. I was expecting something like 190+.... The thing is, for whatever reason, CPU-Z claimed the CPU to run just on base clock (3,1GHz), not turbo clocks (i suppose 4,3GHz - 4,4GHz)... it showed 3,8GHz during MT test as it should have, so any clue, what am i missing?


That table was from my MSI manual so it might be different for your Gigabyte board.

I get around 197 with CB single thread but I'm overclocked to 4.8. So yours might be inline with stock clocks.


----------



## crpcookie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GreedyMuffin*
> 
> Ouch.. Sounds like degradation?
> 
> I would back it off a bit if I were you. My good 5820K started to crap out on the cache. I always ran 45/45 at 1.25/1.25V on core/cache (so 1:1 ratio). Started getting booting problems at stock clocks and the machine would hang, eventually the CPU needed ridiculous amount of cache voltage in order to boot.


I think it's just a bug from the recent Intel microcode. I rollbacked the BIOS and everything is smooth sailing with the same ol' settings. Intel is expected to release another microcode to fix this.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> That table was from my MSI manual so it might be different for your Gigabyte board.
> 
> I get around 197 with CB single thread but I'm overclocked to 4.8. So yours might be inline with stock clocks.


on a 7820x I'm guessing? I get around 208 at 4.7. weird


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> on a 7820x I'm guessing? I get around 208 at 4.7. weird


Whats you're multithreaded @? Maybe you're running higher memory clocks? I'm only at 3200


----------



## tistou77

Nobody tested that ?

https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-skylake-x-direct-die-frame-fsd8-021.html?sPartner=112


----------



## superV

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Nobody tested that ?
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-skylake-x-direct-die-frame-fsd8-021.html?sPartner=112


interesting,but not compatible with monoblocks.so u can push the cpu on water but leaver the vrm on air?or i'm missing vrm waterblocks?
it's very interesting,doing direct die cooling myself on my gaming rigs since 2014.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Whats you're multithreaded @? Maybe you're running higher memory clocks? I'm only at 3200


multithreaded is at 2050 but i don't really close everything out

just ran again at 4.6ghz, mt: 1997(b03) st:202(ran once)

ram at 3800mhz
mesh at 3.2ghz


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aDyerSituation*
> 
> multithreaded is at 2050 but i don't really close everything out
> 
> just ran again at 4.6ghz, mt: 1997(b03) st:202(ran once)
> 
> ram at 3800mhz
> mesh at 3.2ghz


Yeah must be the ram speed then. Well at least I hope it is lol


----------



## ZeroC00L

Can someone quickly tell me where I can grab a delidding tool for the i9-7900X? The one I bought recently is terrible!


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZeroC00L*
> 
> Can someone quickly tell me where I can grab a delidding tool for the i9-7900X? The one I bought recently is terrible!


No complaints with this one:
https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/rockit-99-delid-and-relid-kit-for-skylakex-kabylakex

Which one is horrible?


----------



## toncij

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> ....


Was it you who said he was cooling a 7980XE oc to 4.8 with only a 360 XE EKWB? What fans RPM and what fans config?


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ Nope. weren't me.


----------



## xarot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Nobody tested that ?
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/en/der8auer-skylake-x-direct-die-frame-fsd8-021.html?sPartner=112


Nice find, I am going to get that soon. This might fit for the VRM on R6E, but need to cool the Aquantia chip too. I guess EK won't sell their Aquantia heatsink separately?

http://shop.watercool.de/epages/WatercooleK.sf/de_DE/?ObjectPath=/Shops/WatercooleK/Products/11560


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *toncij*
> 
> Was it you who said he was cooling a 7980XE oc to 4.8 with only a 360 XE EKWB? What fans RPM and what fans config?


4.5 w/360XE here... not 4.8... that would be one hot tamale...

Have a peek here:
http://www.xtremerigs.net/2015/05/31/ek-coolstream-xe-360mm-radiator-review/4/

4.8 all-core on this chip would easily be over 500W... I see 430W @ 4.6 under various circumstances.

ML120 can go well over 1800rpm as well, so there's a bump there in top-end, but that would be full-blast/unpleasantly loud...


----------



## aDyerSituation

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Yeah must be the ram speed then. Well at least I hope it is lol


that's probably the case.


----------



## Jpmboy

I have a single EK xe360 in this rig... manages a 4 core + a 1080 (running full bore) with ease. Good rads. And microcenter has then on sale once ion a while.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> Nice find, I am going to get that soon.


I will be interested too, think to give the comparisons, feedback when you have tested


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> I will be interested too, think to give the comparisons, feedback when you have tested


not sold or shipped to the US at this point.








otherwise I would try it today!


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not sold or shipped to the US at this point.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> otherwise I would try it today!


I created a post box in Germany (by a company) to buy a product only shipped to Germany
And the company received the parcel in Germany and sent it back to me

Not possible to do the same in the US?


----------



## der8auer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> not sold or shipped to the US at this point.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> otherwise I would try it today!


OCUK will have stock next week and I think they ship to the US.

But we will also have it on Amazon US soon together with my other tools. In urgent cases I can sell it directly from Caseking to you guys but shipping is not cheap with around 40 USD.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *der8auer*
> 
> OCUK will have stock next week and I think they ship to the US.
> 
> But we will also have it on Amazon US soon together with my other tools. In urgent cases I can sell it directly from Caseking to you guys but shipping is not cheap with around 40 USD.


With this product, you will advise using "classic" paste (not liquid metal) ?
I saw that there was no danger for the die

But we can use it in h24 without problem ?

Thanks


----------



## der8auer

I would only use it with LM. From my experience conventional paste doesn't work great on silicon especially after a longer time period. I think the expansion rate of copper and silicon is too different and over time the tim will work its way out between the surfaces and the thermal transfer becomes bad


----------



## tistou77

Thanks so much for the information
if I remember correctly, no problem with the LM and the Koolance Waterblocks


----------



## Menthol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *der8auer*
> 
> OCUK will have stock next week and I think they ship to the US.
> 
> But we will also have it on Amazon US soon together with my other tools. In urgent cases I can sell it directly from Caseking to you guys but shipping is not cheap with around 40 USD.


Thanks for the info, it should sell really well


----------



## tistou77

In fact, I was asking for thermal paste and LM because I thought that the die of a GPU was "the same" as that of a CPU
And no problem with a GPU and thermal paste

What is the difference ?


----------



## carlhil2

I have been wishing/waiting for something like that..?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *der8auer*
> 
> OCUK will have stock next week and I think they ship to the US.
> 
> But we will also have it on Amazon US soon together with my other tools. In urgent cases I can sell it directly from Caseking to you guys but shipping is not cheap with around 40 USD.


Overseas shipping is a bit much, same issue with EK when I buy direct. I'll check OCUK, and keep an eye on Amazon. And congrats on getting product on Amazon! That's a pretty big deal.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> Thanks so much for the information
> if I remember correctly, no problem with the LM and the Koolance Waterblocks


Koolance blocks are nickel plated, LM is fine., Copper surfaces can/will form a gallium-based amalgam stain which looks bad, but still works fine.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> Koolance blocks are nickel plated, LM is fine., Copper surfaces can/will form a gallium-based amalgam stain which looks bad, but still works fine.


OK thanks








You will use the LM you (Koolance block for you too, I believe) ?

And for that, you can tell me
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> In fact, I was asking for thermal paste and LM because I thought that the die of a GPU was "the same" as that of a CPU
> And no problem with a GPU and thermal paste
> 
> What is the difference ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tistou77*
> 
> OK thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You will use the LM you (Koolance block for you too, I believe) ?
> 
> And for that, you can tell me


got several koolance and Ek here. the x299 is running an Ek atm, but easy to change to koolance (all QDCs).








Yeah, you ask a reasonable question... paste can squeeze out. It depends on the contact pressure and uniformity. de8auer would have to expand upon his recommendation.


----------



## xarot

I ordered mine. I am also wondering why it wouldn't work with normal thermal paste? We had Athlons without any IHS as standard around 15? years ago and we always used just thermal paste between the die and cooler?







Those chips didn't run this hot of course. But some laptops use thermal paste too and run hot constantly (maybe some use more like of a thermal pad material)?

I guess I am going to try first with my 7900X, as I have removed all glue from it, before trying with 7980XE. I have EK Supremacy EVO acetal copper and Alphacool Xp3 light blocks, should work fine I guess. I also got a Watercool VRM block incoming for my R6E (or R6A). Don't know which board to use yet as I have both. I would like to use the Extreme, but I'd need a solution for the Aquantia 10G chip cooling when I remove the heatsinks from board...maybe some copper heatsinks and glue should work.

Exciting


----------



## DooRules

I will be ditching the monoblock, get a new cpu block and try this as well. Another 5-10' cooler sounds good to me.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DooRules*
> 
> I will be ditching the monoblock, get a new cpu block and try this as well. Another 5-10' cooler sounds good to me.


you put a monoblock on the Apex in your sig rig?


----------



## DooRules

I did. First time I ever used a monoblock.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> I ordered mine. I am also wondering why it wouldn't work with normal thermal paste? We had Athlons without any IHS as standard around 15? years ago and we always used just thermal paste between the die and cooler?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those chips didn't run this hot of course. But some laptops use thermal paste too and run hot constantly (maybe some use more like of a thermal pad material)?
> 
> I guess I am going to try first with my 7900X, as I have removed all glue from it, before trying with 7980XE. I have EK Supremacy EVO acetal copper and Alphacool Xp3 light blocks, should work fine I guess. I also got a Watercool VRM block incoming for my R6E (or R6A). Don't know which board to use yet as I have both. I would like to use the Extreme, but I'd need a solution for the Aquantia 10G chip cooling when I remove the heatsinks from board...maybe some copper heatsinks and glue should work.
> 
> Exciting


lol, de8auer should be convincing Intel that paste does not work well on bare silicon!








Kidding aside, Roman certainly knows this stuff, so his advice is appreciated!


----------



## cekim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> lol, de8auer should be convincing Intel that paste does not work well on bare silicon!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kidding aside, Roman certainly knows this stuff, so his advice is appreciated!


Chuckle....

Yep dies are dies, paste is paste, thermal interfaces are interfaces. They have their limits (typical paste doesn't do well with ln2, nor does LM - they both freeze and become insulators or destructive to the surfaces around them - LM long before paste to put it mildly). No difference between cpu and gpu here, just a question of your temp usage, longevity and conductivity needs and wants.

I think what makes this a bit more complicated is the additional steps one is taking here. If you are going this far, then you are trying to get the most out of it. A single TIM to sink interface is better than TIM to IHS to TIM to sink, but LM to sink is even better, so....

No one puts sensible tires with 50k mile tread wear warranties on a Ferrari.


----------



## cekim

The commentary from der8aur that intels latest dies are often quite irregular “bent” or otherwise not flat is interesting regarding their use of paste... certainly softer TIM is going to give them much more margin here if any given die is not as flat as the next...


----------



## 7820x

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cekim*
> 
> Chuckle....
> 
> Yep dies are dies, paste is paste, thermal interfaces are interfaces. They have their limits (typical paste doesn't do well with ln2, nor does LM - they both freeze and become insulators or destructive to the surfaces around them - LM long before paste to put it mildly). No difference between cpu and gpu here, just a question of your temp usage, longevity and conductivity needs and wants.
> 
> I think what makes this a bit more complicated is the additional steps one is taking here. If you are going this far, then you are trying to get the most out of it. A single TIM to sink interface is better than TIM to IHS to TIM to sink, but LM to sink is even better, so....
> 
> No one puts sensible tires with 50k mile tread wear warranties on a Ferrari.


Agreed. If you are going to these lengths to get lower temps, why even bother with paste. You want the most thermally conductive stuff you can get.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *7820x*
> 
> Agreed. If you are going to these lengths to get lower temps, why even bother with paste. You want the most thermally conductive stuff you can get.


I know... down to bare die and these things still hit the 70's. 5-ish degrees C is meaningful tho.


----------



## tistou77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> got several koolance and Ek here. the x299 is running an Ek atm, but easy to change to koolance (all QDCs).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, you ask a reasonable question... paste can squeeze out. It depends on the contact pressure and uniformity. de8auer would have to expand upon his recommendation.


Ok, That's why I was wondering if the die (silicon) of a GPU is "the same" as that of the CPU, there should be no contraindication to use the thermal paste on the CPU

Indeed, if Der8auer could develop, it would be great
It's true that if Der8auer advises LM, it's better
Just know why in fact (compared to a GPU die for example, or there is no problem in longevity)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xarot*
> 
> I ordered mine. I am also wondering why it wouldn't work with normal thermal paste? We had Athlons without any IHS as standard around 15? years ago and we always used just thermal paste between the die and cooler?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those chips didn't run this hot of course. But some laptops use thermal paste too and run hot constantly (maybe some use more like of a thermal pad material)?
> 
> I guess I am going to try first with my 7900X, as I have removed all glue from it, before trying with 7980XE. I have EK Supremacy EVO acetal copper and Alphacool Xp3 light blocks, should work fine I guess. I also got a Watercool VRM block incoming for my R6E (or R6A). Don't know which board to use yet as I have both. I would like to use the Extreme, but I'd need a solution for the Aquantia 10G chip cooling when I remove the heatsinks from board...maybe some copper heatsinks and glue should work.
> 
> Exciting


Looking forward to having your return with this "kit"








I will order next week I think, with a VRM block too


----------



## Jbravo33

Got my board back and trying to lock in a good overclock for 7980. My best cores are cores 4 and 13. Now if I remember correctly those core should require less voltage? But those cores are also in the top 5 hottest cores. That a bad LM job? Should I reapply? Seeing 25 degrees between hottest and coolest core.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Got my board back and trying to lock in a good overclock for 7980. My best cores are cores 4 and 13. Now if I remember correctly those core should require less voltage? But those cores are also in the top 5 hottest cores. That a bad LM job? Should I reapply? Seeing 25 degrees between hottest and coolest core.


That's normal. The two best cores are the ones that require the least voltage, but that does not necessarily mean they have the least leakage.

From my sample size of 4 chips tested, there's a pretty poor correlation between "low voltage" cores and "low leakage" cores. If anything, the correlation seems to be slightly negative.

OTOH, the 25c differential that you're seeing is a bit extreme. So that could be a contact issue.


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Got my board back and trying to lock in a good overclock for 7980. My best cores are cores 4 and 13. Now if I remember correctly those core should require less voltage? But those cores are also in the top 5 hottest cores. That a bad LM job? Should I reapply? Seeing 25 degrees between hottest and coolest core.


as mystical said - 25C is quite wide. May need to redo the cooling solution (die-ihs-block). That said, yes the two * cores can be viewed that way, I actually do a per core (adaptive) with those at 46 and the 16 others at 45 1.26 and 1.2V resp. So far so good. No core-related BSOD or WHEA. (avx 5, avx512 10 though for daily driving).


----------



## Jbravo33

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mysticial*
> 
> That's normal. The two best cores are the ones that require the least voltage, but that does not necessarily mean they have the least leakage.
> 
> From my sample size of 4 chips tested, there's a pretty poor correlation between "low voltage" cores and "low leakage" cores. If anything, the correlation seems to be slightly negative.
> 
> OTOH, the 25c differential that you're seeing is a bit extreme. So that could be a contact issue.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jpmboy*
> 
> as mystical said - 25C is quite wide. May need to redo the cooling solution (die-ihs-block). That said, yes the two * cores can be viewed that way, I actually do a per core (adaptive) with those at 46 and the 16 others at 45 1.26 and 1.2V resp. So far so good. No core-related BSOD or WHEA. (avx 5, avx512 10 though for daily driving).


Thanks guys I will reapply the tim. I'm about to replace my x99 (6850 dual Xp) in my inwin 909 case with this 7980. I'm a bit skeptical as my x99 is rock solid stable. I'm not looking for a balls to the Wall overclock on 7980 as I will be using for streaming/content. No hardline either so will be giving up on aesthetics. Probably pair with collectors Xp on air. Wanna be able to add sound card, capture card etc without hardline being in way. I was going to pair this with Titan V but I'm enjoying it more with 8700k. Difficult parting ways with my cherry poppin x99 build.







#pcproblems


----------



## Jpmboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jbravo33*
> 
> Thanks guys I will reapply the tim. I'm about to replace my x99 (6850 dual Xp) in my inwin 909 case with this 7980. I'm a bit skeptical as my x99 is rock solid stable. I'm not looking for a balls to the Wall overclock on 7980 as I will be using for streaming/content. No hardline either so will be giving up on aesthetics. Probably pair with collectors Xp on air. Wanna be able to add sound card, capture card etc without hardline being in way. I was going to pair this with Titan V but I'm enjoying it more with 8700k. Difficult parting ways with my cherry poppin x99 build.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #pcproblems


can;t pair up Titan Vs. SLI is disabled for that card, which is a downer. One TXV is very strong, not anywhere near 2 TXps. The 7980 will be as stable with proper tuning.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Posted this into Gigabyte X299 thread, but since its related, to get more attention:

I tried to OC higher, meager 4,4GHz and failed miserably. I tried 2x, once very simple approach with just enabling MultiCore Enhancement, other time bit more elaborate, manually increasing turbo ratios, vcore, vrin, mesh, mesh voltage....to numbers i read around or in the Gigabyte X299 OCing manual.....both time the computer would shut-down the moment i would try to run Cinebench! So what is this? Some kind of those protective measures? I admit, i did not touch those, cause i dont know what i can/should switch off....

Right now i am running just with XMP on and planning to do so, for few more days, just to be sure, its not the culprit in the first place, but eventually i would love to give a shot to that 4,4GHz OC, so any input would be appreciated.


----------



## Mysticial

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Posted this into Gigabyte X299 thread, but since its related, to get more attention:
> 
> I tried to OC higher, meager 4,4GHz and failed miserably. I tried 2x, once very simple approach with just enabling MultiCore Enhancement, other time bit more elaborate, manually increasing turbo ratios, vcore, vrin, mesh, mesh voltage....to numbers i read around or in the Gigabyte X299 OCing manual.....both time the computer would shut-down the moment i would try to run Cinebench! So what is this? Some kind of those protective measures? I admit, i did not touch those, cause i dont know what i can/should switch off....


Yes, that's the over-current protection that's shutting off the system. The option to lift it is: "CPU VCore Current Protection"

I set mine to "high".

Quote:


> Right now i am running just with XMP on and planning to do so, for few more days, just to be sure, its not the culprit in the first place, but eventually i would love to give a shot to that 4,4GHz OC, so any input would be appreciated.


Referring to your post in the other thread, I'm also seeing random BIOS resets when the system goes unstable or if the power is cut out in a manner that looks similar to the CMOS battery being dead (even though the battery show 3V on the voltmeter). Sometimes, the reset is partial and you end up booting with settings that are not what you think it is. Furthermore, the BIOS rolls back some of the saved profiles.

I'm starting to get a little ticked off by this. So I've been saving my profiles on a flash drive instead. Later on, I'll try replacing the CMOS battery even if it's reading in at full voltage.

Likewise, I've had an XMP profile that worked for several months that no longer works. After spending a week to track it down, it was able to confirm it was the memory frequency. Now I run it at 3200 instead of 3800 as the latter will error once a day or so.

I don't know if there was some degradation somewhere or if the system was unstable the whole time. The workload that I run on it has been getting more and more optimized so it's certainly possible that it's now able to put sufficient stress to expose the instability.


----------



## Jbravo33

The battle has begun


----------



## Timmaigh!

Mysticial said:


> Quote:Originally Posted by *Timmaigh!*
> 
> Posted this into Gigabyte X299 thread, but since its related, to get more attention:
> 
> 
> I tried to OC higher, meager 4,4GHz and failed miserably. I tried 2x, once very simple approach with just enabling MultiCore Enhancement, other time bit more elaborate, manually increasing turbo ratios, vcore, vrin, mesh, mesh voltage....to numbers i read around or in the Gigabyte X299 OCing manual.....both time the computer would shut-down the moment i would try to run Cinebench! So what is this? Some kind of those protective measures? I admit, i did not touch those, cause i dont know what i can/should switch off....
> 
> 
> Yes, that's the over-current protection that's shutting off the system. The option to lift it is: "CPU VCore Current Protection"
> 
> I set mine to "high".
> 
> Quote:Right now i am running just with XMP on and planning to do so, for few more days, just to be sure, its not the culprit in the first place, but eventually i would love to give a shot to that 4,4GHz OC, so any input would be appreciated.
> 
> 
> Referring to your post in the other thread, I'm also seeing random BIOS resets when the system goes unstable or if the power is cut out in a manner that looks similar to the CMOS battery being dead (even though the battery show 3V on the voltmeter). Sometimes, the reset is partial and you end up booting with settings that are not what you think it is. Furthermore, the BIOS rolls back some of the saved profiles.
> 
> I'm starting to get a little ticked off by this. So I've been saving my profiles on a flash drive instead. Later on, I'll try replacing the CMOS battery even if it's reading in at full voltage.
> 
> Likewise, I've had an XMP profile that worked for several months that no longer works. After spending a week to track it down, it was able to confirm it was the memory frequency. Now I run it at 3200 instead of 3800 as the latter will error once a day or so.
> 
> I don't know if there was some degradation somewhere or if the system was unstable the whole time. The workload that I run on it has been getting more and more optimized so it's certainly possible that it's now able to put sufficient stress to expose the instability.



Thank you for your response! Wanted to answer sooner, but had no time and then the boards went down.

I ran 3 days with just XMP on and no boot-up failures and BIOS resetting, so i guess the issues before were down to me OCing the CPU to 4GHz from 3,8 and not cause of XMP. Might be just luck and require actual stress testing, but so far machine has been stable.

I see you have Aorus Gaming 7 too, so that CPU Vcore Current Protection is a "switch"/option on this specific board, right? Is it safe to use it? I dont have custom cooling, just AiO - although one of the better ones i guess, Eisbaer 360.

Should i change the maximum package Watt setting? Its set to 165 and i saw in some video on utube, it might have been Der Bauer, although on different board /MSI XPower, who changed the value on the very same setting to higher one - like 400 or so...

I have a question about Vcore too - when i had it OCed to 4GHz, with everything else at Auto, including voltages, under Cinebench load, the CoreTemp would report VID up to 1,17 (but on other times i saw the number fluctuate even more, up to 1,3 or so) and CPU-Z would report core voltage at the same time as 1,12...why the dicrepancy? I know VID is not actual voltage, rather what CPU is asking for (or something like that, if i understand it correctly) - so is CoreTemp reporting VID and CPU-Z actual voltage?

Another thing, in BIOS, what is the Normal Setting, when changing Vcore value? Should i use that or rather fixed number? Or maybe that Offset setting? Originally i wanted to use fixed value (say 1,15 for that 4,4GHz...thats what i tried, when the computer shut down), cause this is how i had it set up with my Broadwell-E CPU and it seemed to work fine that way...

Finally, what does the MultiCore Enhancement do? I mean, i know its supposed to bring all cores to the max Turbo frequency automatically, without setting stuff manually, while i guess keeping the power saving stuff, the thing is, i thought its exactly only to that purpose, for people who dont want to deal with settings and just have it OCed by single click. I dowloaded some Gigabyte X299 manual for OCing though, and it says to Enable it, even if you do manual overclock (change the multis, voltages and other stuff manually...) I wonder why.

One last thing, when on stock setting, do you actually ever see the CPU to turbo higher than its multi-core turbo value (in case of 7900x, to a speed higher than 4GHz...) I am yet to see the reporting apps to show higher value than 3,8 at stock, even if i tried Cinebench single core...


----------



## carlhil2

Did you install the TB3 driver?


----------



## Mysticial

Ugh... my first post after the migration. Looks like there's gonna be a lot of stuff for them to fix...





Timmaigh! said:


> Thank you for your response! Wanted to answer sooner, but had no time and then the boards went down.
> 
> I ran 3 days with just XMP on and no boot-up failures and BIOS resetting, so i guess the issues before were down to me OCing the CPU to 4GHz from 3,8 and not cause of XMP. Might be just luck and require actual stress testing, but so far machine has been stable.
> 
> I see you have Aorus Gaming 7 too, so that CPU Vcore Current Protection is a "switch"/option on this specific board, right? Is it safe to use it? I dont have custom cooling, just AiO - although one of the better ones i guess, Eisbaer 360.


The "CPU VCore Current Protection" is just another BIOS option - under "Advanced CPU Voltage Settings" or something like that if I remember correctly.

I'm also using 360 AIOs.




> Should i change the maximum package Watt setting? Its set to 165 and i saw in some video on utube, it might have been Der Bauer, although on different board /MSI XPower, who changed the value on the very same setting to higher one - like 400 or so...


That package watt setting is there to do exactly what it says. It places a limit on the power draw that the CPU is allowed to pull. If it exceeds the limit, it throttles the processor to stay under the limit.

So if you don't increase it past 165, it's just going to throttle on any heavy load with an overclock.




> I have a question about Vcore too - when i had it OCed to 4GHz, with everything else at Auto, including voltages, under Cinebench load, the CoreTemp would report VID up to 1,17 (but on other times i saw the number fluctuate even more, up to 1,3 or so) and CPU-Z would report core voltage at the same time as 1,12...why the dicrepancy? I know VID is not actual voltage, rather what CPU is asking for (or something like that, if i understand it correctly) - so is CoreTemp reporting VID and CPU-Z actual voltage?


Different cores have different VID curves. The variance between different cores running at the same clock speed can vary by more than 0.100v at the higher clocks (4.0+ GHz).

Which core it reports depends on the application. If you fire up HWInfo64, it will show you the VIDs of all the cores.

Also, different applications have different delays in reporting the VID as they sample at different rates.




> Another thing, in BIOS, what is the Normal Setting, when changing Vcore value? Should i use that or rather fixed number? Or maybe that Offset setting? Originally i wanted to use fixed value (say 1,15 for that 4,4GHz...thats what i tried, when the computer shut down), cause this is how i had it set up with my Broadwell-E CPU and it seemed to work fine that way...


I've never tried to figure out how normal works. Offset is clear though. It unconditionally adds the offset to the entire VID curve (including the lower clocks).

I currently use offset mode with a negative offset on my 7900X. The default voltages are higher than it needs to be for my overclock.



> Finally, what does the MultiCore Enhancement do? I mean, i know its supposed to bring all cores to the max Turbo frequency automatically, without setting stuff manually, while i guess keeping the power saving stuff, the thing is, i thought its exactly only to that purpose, for people who dont want to deal with settings and just have it OCed by single click. I dowloaded some Gigabyte X299 manual for OCing though, and it says to Enable it, even if you do manual overclock (change the multis, voltages and other stuff manually...) I wonder why.


Yes, you described what MultiCore Enhancement does correctly. They encourage using it probably because it's a very easy and lazy way to overclock. For the bigger chips, this will overrun the CPU's thermals, but that's what all the TDP throttling and current overprotection is for.

These X299 mobos (I've personally tested Gigabyte and Asus R6A) seem to encourage you to do crazy overclocks along with stupid stuff like having no AVX(512) offsets. This makes the casual overclockers very happy. But they keep all the throttling in place to keep the thing from blowing up under any sort of real load.

A lot of casual builders/overclockers don't actually pay enough attention to realize the throttling when it happens. So they get "tricked into happiness" if that's the right way to put it.




> One last thing, when on stock setting, do you actually ever see the CPU to turbo higher than its multi-core turbo value (in case of 7900x, to a speed higher than 4GHz...) I am yet to see the reporting apps to show higher value than 3,8 at stock, even if i tried Cinebench single core...


Yes. But you may need to try pinning the thread to a specific core.

The problem is that Windows bounces threads around so much that they rarely stay on a single core long enough for it to turbo all the way up and get a high clock reading under CPUz. If you have the latest drivers (with TB3), then it will (usually) be smarter about that.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Thank you again for response. 

Regarding the Vcore Current Protection, i checked the BIOS and there actually 2 settings like that: one called exactly CPU Vcore Current Protection and then another option above it, called just CPU Vcore Protection... see link to the picture...so which one is it again? And how do i change it from Auto to High? I know by pressing +/- it changes numerical values, but that did not work here...how do you do that? Should i literally type HIGH? 

https://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Gigabyte-X299-Aorus-Gaming-UEFI-10.jpg

The other thing, TurboBoost 3.0.... as carlhil2 suggested...i thought this is by now integrated into BIOS, so no need for any drivers to install within Windows...i checked BIOS and its set in Native mode, whatever that means. Anyway, i found the ITBM driver installation on the Intel website and followed the release notes, how to install it... ran some inf. file, it said it installation successfully completed, then i rebooted, then i checked Device Manager and Start Menu, to check whether its there, as suggested, and funnily, its NOT there... so i guess something is truly broken regarding this.

I dont have HWinfo installed, just CPU-Z and CoreTemp, which report just a single frequency a voltage, so i will install HWinfo, if it reports these things for each core separately, to check to be sure, no core really clocks higher than 3,8...to be sure its not just me and it really does not work...and we will see from there. I would like to OC all the cores to 4,4 anyway, but i am curious what is going on anyway.


----------



## Timmaigh!

OK then,

i installed HWinfo64 and for sure, the CPU would not clock past 3,8 on any of its cores, even during Cinebench single core runs.

Anyway, i OCed it using following settings:

all cores to 44x
AVX -4, AVX512 -6
power efficient turbo disabled
package power limits 300W
external VRIN 1,85
LLC turbo
CPU vcore current protection high
vcore - static value of 1,15

Did not touch Mesh clocks/voltages yet.


...yet to try realbench, OCCT or AIDA or whatever stresstest, but Cinebench runs just fine, i tried Ashes of Singularity built in benchmark and passed, OctaneBench...and overall desktop stuff for past 2 hours has been stable. Highest core temperature has been 80C on core no.1, all other cores were between 69-79C. With VID set strictly set to 1,15 i actually feel its less power demanding and better temp-wise than before, when i OCed it to just 4GHz, but left everything on Auto. The cooler certainly does not seem to be as noisy under load as before, maybe cause before VID would shoot randomly up to 1,25V.

Ofc it means nothing without proper stresstest, maybe just dumb luck, but from my previous experience, i have fairly good feeling about this - if my overclocks have been unstable, they would usually manifest even quickly even during basic desktop tasks. So hopefully i am not wrong. Actually, if this proves to be stable, i now think maybe i could go even for 4,5 or 4,6 

The only thing that worries me, is the fairly low Cinebench single core score - now 172. Expected something in 180 range, with those 4,7GHz+ overclocks fetching 190-200+ afaik... the multicore score though, is as expected, beautiful 3318 points (highest run so far). Very happy with that.


----------



## Mysticial

Timmaigh! said:


> Thank you again for response.
> 
> Regarding the Vcore Current Protection, i checked the BIOS and there actually 2 settings like that: one called exactly CPU Vcore Current Protection and then another option above it, called just CPU Vcore Protection... see link to the picture...so which one is it again? And how do i change it from Auto to High? I know by pressing +/- it changes numerical values, but that did not work here...how do you do that? Should i literally type HIGH?
> 
> https://www.kitguru.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Gigabyte-X299-Aorus-Gaming-UEFI-10.jpg


It's the second one, "CPU VCore Current Protection".

I have no idea what the first one is. Perhaps it shuts off the system if the VCore exceeds a certain (unknown) threshold - which I'm not willing to test.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Mysticial said:


> It's the second one, "CPU VCore Current Protection".
> 
> I have no idea what the first one is. Perhaps it shuts off the system if the VCore exceeds a certain (unknown) threshold - which I'm not willing to test.


Thanks.

Anyway, i was dead wrong in my previous post, eventually it would freeze even Cinebench at 1,15 and i then, when i tried RealBench, i had to take it to 1,2 and it would still crash. At 1,2 it would actually finish 4 or 5 of those hash runs, but then it would BSOD... i thought i had it after all. The hottest core got up to 99C though and iMO it was throttling, cause not all the cores would run at 4,4 all the time during the test, actually on average it was cca 4,15... 

so i tried different approach, instead of 1,2 static vcore i tried normal and -01 offset. Saw it on utube by some guy, so i followed it. Then most interesting thing happened - as i saved the setting to reboot and go to Windows, the machine would actually shut down completely, then switched back on - i took it to BIOS and found out the BIOS version to be F7 instead of F6, as it was before the reboot. It was actually supposed to be F7 all the way, and i would have sweared i saw it to be first 2 times i entered the BIOS, but since one of those shutdowns during my initial OC trials and CMOS reset, it said F6... so i actually thought my eyes were failing me and it was always F6. Anyway, now with F7, my overclock to just 4GHz was back, actually all the settings i listed in my previous reply were gone and had to redo them...what on earth is going on? 

Right now i entered Win with that Normal/-0,1 offset setting and during load some cores report VID up to 1,22, others about 1,19. So about the middle point compared to my previous static 1,2V setting for all cores. Only tried Cinebench, which is stable, gonna test Realbench tomorrow.


----------



## Mysticial

Timmaigh! said:


> Thanks.
> 
> Anyway, i was dead wrong in my previous post, eventually it would freeze even Cinebench at 1,15 and i then, when i tried RealBench, i had to take it to 1,2 and it would still crash. At 1,2 it would actually finish 4 or 5 of those hash runs, but then it would BSOD... i thought i had it after all. The hottest core got up to 99C though and iMO it was throttling, cause not all the cores would run at 4,4 all the time during the test, actually on average it was cca 4,15...
> 
> so i tried different approach, instead of 1,2 static vcore i tried normal and -01 offset. Saw it on utube by some guy, so i followed it. Then most interesting thing happened - as i saved the setting to reboot and go to Windows, the machine would actually shut down completely, then switched back on - i took it to BIOS and found out the BIOS version to be F7 instead of F6, as it was before the reboot. It was actually supposed to be F7 all the way, and i would have sweared i saw it to be first 2 times i entered the BIOS, but since one of those shutdowns during my initial OC trials and CMOS reset, it said F6... so i actually thought my eyes were failing me and it was always F6. Anyway, now with F7, my overclock to just 4GHz was back, actually all the settings i listed in my previous reply were gone and had to redo them...what on earth is going on?
> 
> Right now i entered Win with that Normal/-0,1 offset setting and during load some cores report VID up to 1,22, others about 1,19. So about the middle point compared to my previous static 1,2V setting for all cores. Only tried Cinebench, which is stable, gonna test Realbench tomorrow.


That BIOS reset thing is probably the bane of the Gigabyte X299 boards. It has all the symptoms of a dead CMOS battery, but the battery measures in at the full 3.0 volts. I plan on replacing them anyway just to see if that does anything since someone in the Gigabyte thread said it fixed it.

Fortunately, the resets only happen when you crash the system from instability or if you unplug it.

Interestingly, I never observed these resets back in June. But now, both my 6-month old Gaming 7 and my brand new Designare have the reset problem.

If there's something wrong with the batteries, they would've all have to have been manufactured at the same time or something.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Mysticial said:


> That BIOS reset thing is probably the bane of the Gigabyte X299 boards. It has all the symptoms of a dead CMOS battery, but the battery measures in at the full 3.0 volts. I plan on replacing them anyway just to see if that does anything since someone in the Gigabyte thread said it fixed it.
> 
> Fortunately, the resets only happen when you crash the system from instability or if you unplug it.
> 
> Interestingly, I never observed these resets back in June. But now, both my 6-month old Gaming 7 and my brand new Designare have the reset problem.
> 
> If there's something wrong with the batteries, they would've all have to have been manufactured at the same time or something.



Thanks. But if BIOS is once flashed to newer version, as F7 in this particular case, how its possible for it to revert to older version during crash. I understand that when it resets, all the previously made changes like changed CPU multi or increased Vcore go away, pretty much the same way as when you hit Load Optimized Defaults, but how does the BIOS version itself go away completely? I guess it does keep somewhere the older F6 version too, perhaps the board is dual-bios? i actually have to check - but if it at some point reverts to it again, how do i return to F7 on my own. Do you get to choose with dual BIOS boards which BIOS version you want to use at any particular moment?

Anyway, as i said i am about to test RealBench with latest settings from my previous post, but safe to say, i dont expect too much, as the VIDs are going to be even higher than with that previous 1,2V overclock, so the temps are for sure going to get to 100C and more... so even if it will pass RealBench finally, its gonna throttle some cores for sure. 

Gotta say though, i am bit dissapointed, seeing people OCing this CPU to 4,4 with as less as 1,1 and i could not do even be stable with my chip at 1,2V...maybe i am not doing it right way and it may for sure require more fiddling and patience, but i pretty much followed steps made by other people, so i dont think i can do much else here. Seems i could really use delid for the temps to go down. You said you use 360 AIOs yourself and have 7940x OCed to 4,7 - how did you even manage to get there?


----------



## Mysticial

Timmaigh! said:


> Thanks. But if BIOS is once flashed to newer version, as F7 in this particular case, how its possible for it to revert to older version during crash. I understand that when it resets, all the previously made changes like changed CPU multi or increased Vcore go away, pretty much the same way as when you hit Load Optimized Defaults, but how does the BIOS version itself go away completely? I guess it does keep somewhere the older F6 version too, perhaps the board is dual-bios? i actually have to check - but if it at some point reverts to it again, how do i return to F7 on my own. Do you get to choose with dual BIOS boards which BIOS version you want to use at any particular moment?


It's pretty clear that it is a dual BIOS, but I don't see a way to control it.



> Anyway, as i said i am about to test RealBench with latest settings from my previous post, but safe to say, i dont expect too much, as the VIDs are going to be even higher than with that previous 1,2V overclock, so the temps are for sure going to get to 100C and more... so even if it will pass RealBench finally, its gonna throttle some cores for sure.
> 
> Gotta say though, i am bit dissapointed, seeing people OCing this CPU to 4,4 with as less as 1,1 and i could not do even be stable with my chip at 1,2V...maybe i am not doing it right way and it may for sure require more fiddling and patience, but i pretty much followed steps made by other people, so i dont think i can do much else here. Seems i could really use delid for the temps to go down. You said you use 360 AIOs yourself and have 7940x OCed to 4,7 - how did you even manage to get there?


Not all cores are running at 4.7. Only 9 of them are. The remaining 5 (weaker) cores run as slow as 4.3, but they are not limited by temperature or heat. They're limited by voltage as they have excessively high VID curves on the high end which push them over 1.320v. So while they are stable at higher speeds (potentially up to 4.7 with all the other cores), they'd be pushing absurdly high voltages. And unlike the Asus boards, the Gigabyte boards don't have per-core voltage control. (OTOH, the Asus boards/BIOS have a serious bug that makes it impossible to properly do per-core AVX(512) clocks.)

Also, the thermals on this 7940X are much better than my 7900X. My 7900X has trouble going above 4.2 GHz all-core non-AVX without hitting 90C. Yet, this 7940X seems to do 4.7 while staying below that. The 7940X does have a significantly bigger die (and therefore contact area). Neither chip is delidded. My 7900X hits Tj.Max pulling just ~250W. My 7940X hits Tj.Max pulling 350 - 380W.

Last thing is that this 7940X I have is an ES chip. So there might be a bit of an advantage here. When I did a side-by-side comparison with a retail 7940X, the ES seemed to clock 100 - 200MHz higher before hitting thermal limits and can do about 100 MHz higher at the same voltages with several cores being able to hit 5.0 GHz Prime-stable non-AVX at 1.40v. But unfortunately, the cache and memory on this ES chip are so weak that they won't go much higher than stock. So it's probably a reject that they couldn't sell as retail.


----------



## Jpmboy

Mysticial said:


> It's pretty clear that it is a dual BIOS, but I don't see a way to control it.
> 
> 
> 
> Not all cores are running at 4.7. Only 9 of them are. The remaining 5 (weaker) cores run as slow as 4.3, but they are not limited by temperature or heat. They're limited by voltage as they have excessively high VID curves on the high end which push them over 1.320v. So while they are stable at higher speeds (potentially up to 4.7 with all the other cores), they'd be pushing absurdly high voltages. And unlike the Asus boards, the Gigabyte boards don't have per-core voltage control. (*OTOH, the Asus boards/BIOS have a serious bug that makes it impossible to properly do per-core AVX(512) clocks.*)
> 
> Also, the thermals on this 7940X are much better than my 7900X. My 7900X has trouble going above 4.2 GHz all-core non-AVX without hitting 90C. Yet, this 7940X seems to do 4.7 while staying below that. The 7940X does have a significantly bigger die (and therefore contact area). Neither chip is delidded. My 7900X hits Tj.Max pulling just ~250W. My 7940X hits Tj.Max pulling 350 - 380W.
> 
> Last thing is that this 7940X I have is an ES chip. So there might be a bit of an advantage here. When I did a side-by-side comparison with a retail 7940X, the ES seemed to clock 100 - 200MHz higher before hitting thermal limits and can do about 100 MHz higher at the same voltages with several cores being able to hit 5.0 GHz Prime-stable non-AVX at 1.40v. But unfortunately, the cache and memory on this ES chip are so weak that they won't go much higher than stock. So it's probably a reject that they couldn't sell as retail.


Really? Damn... I've been running 2x4.6 and 16x4.5 adaptive per-core with 5/10 AVX/AVX512 offsets for weeks now (on 3 different bioses). What's the bug you refer to?


----------



## Mysticial

Jpmboy said:


> Really? Damn... I've been running 2x4.6 and 16x4.5 adaptive per-core with 5/10 AVX/AVX512 offsets for weeks now (on 3 different bioses). What's the bug you refer to?


When you go into per-core mode, the AVX/AVX512 offsets are relative to the highest target clock of all the cores. Not the target clock of the same core.

So say I decide to set 4 cores to 5.0 GHz and leave the other cores at 3.0 GHz. I then set an AVX offset of -5.

- If I run non-AVX code, 4 cores will run at 5.0 GHz, the rest will run at 3.0 GHz. That's what I expected.
- If I run AVX code, all the cores will try to run at 4.5 GHz.

So in the second case, the AVX offset causes the slow cores to run at a much higher speed than non-AVX. Running 18 cores at 4.5 GHz AVX will blow up the thermals and crash the system if the AVX isn't stable. So the only option is to set the AVX/AVX512 offsets so large that it makes it useless. And it's impossible to set a different AVX/AVX512 speed on a per-core basis.*

*Tested on the Apex with the September BIOS IIRC.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I've been mostly using By core usage for daily use it works just fine performance and thermal wise 
I'm using 4.6 = sort of docile for now with half of the cores and the rest at 4.4 on a 7900x

Now that I have added another 240 rad I might push it a little more but not till I get my x99 operational again 
Added another ek 280 performance loop kit to it and just waiting for ram to return from rma = one stick went wonky


----------



## Jpmboy

Mysticial said:


> When you go into per-core mode, the AVX/AVX512 offsets are relative to the highest target clock of all the cores. Not the target clock of the same core.
> 
> So say I decide to set 4 cores to 5.0 GHz and leave the other cores at 3.0 GHz. I then set an AVX offset of -5.
> 
> - If I run non-AVX code, 4 cores will run at 5.0 GHz, the rest will run at 3.0 GHz. That's what I expected.
> - If I run AVX code, all the cores will try to run at 4.5 GHz.
> 
> So in the second case, the AVX offset causes the slow cores to run at a much higher speed than non-AVX. Running 18 cores at 4.5 GHz AVX will blow up the thermals and crash the system if the AVX isn't stable. So the only option is to set the AVX/AVX512 offsets so large that it makes it useless. And it's impossible to set a different AVX/AVX512 speed on a per-core basis.*
> 
> *Tested on the Apex with the September BIOS IIRC.


ah.. that's a bit scary for the hypothetical 3.0 cores (probably not a big deal for 4.5 vs 4.6 with a 10 offset going here). the only AVX 512 load I've run (knowingly) is the timespy AVX512 physics benchmark. Are you using y-cruncher to test this out?


----------



## Mysticial

Jpmboy said:


> ah.. that's a bit scary for the hypothetical 3.0 cores (probably not a big deal for 4.5 vs 4.6 with a 10 offset going here). the only AVX 512 load I've run (knowingly) is the timespy AVX512 physics benchmark. Are you using y-cruncher to test this out?


Prime95 AVX. I have not tested AVX512 on the Apex.

I also cannot test y-cruncher on the Apex because that was at work, and there's some conflict of interest fine-print that prevents me from using "my own inventions" for work without giving up the IP to it unless covered in writing by a license.

OTOH, they let me keep the ES 7940X since we replaced it with a retail one and therefore had no use for the ES one anymore. (And also because I was the only one enthusiastic enough to spend a grand to fire it up at home.)


----------



## Jpmboy

figured there was a reason why you were not using y-cruncher for this.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Mysticial

kingofblog said:


> Does it work if you configure it with XTU instead of using the BIOS? Curious if this is a BIOS bug or just how the CPU behaves.


I can't try it anymore since the boxes have been moved into a server farm and cut-off from both physical access as well as internet.

My Gigabyte Designare does the offsets relative to the core itself. So it can't be a CPU thing.


----------



## xarot

So I tried the der8auer direct die kit today.

Some observations only at this point. I tried first with my 7900X before my 7980XE, and I am glad I did. Put it in under my "AIO" customloop with EK 360 XE radiator and Alphacool XP3 light block.

- Installation was very easy.
- Thermal paste only (MX4) didn't really work at all. I spread the TIM with a toothpick and made an even surface. Bad contact anyway, maybe too thick layer of paste still? Didn't have enough time to try again, but I was very disappointed with the result. Couldn't run Prime95 at stock without throttling...
- Moved to liquid metal on the die only. One core went straight to 90c while other cores were 60c. 
- Applied TIM to block base too. All good now. Running Prime95 AVX disabled and hottest core is 63c and lowest 55c at stock clocks. Maybe a few degrees drop from using IHS? Can't really tell. Will try some OCing soon.

So, it seems TIM/LM application and perhaps even block pressure is very crucial with this kit. I had very limited time so there might be some variables in my testing  Anyway, I don't know if I want to even delid my 7980XE and lose the warranty. I am getting bored of trying different things with SK-X...all time taken away from other things (like gaming).  Actually running the [email protected] MHz on the Apex w/4000 RAM in my gaming rig and this thing is blazing-fast (delidded). And my 7980XE can run Prime95 successfully till 4.2 GHz and easily 4.5~4.6 everyday when not running stress testing. 

Please others share your results when you get the direct die kit.

BTW, GG on OCN the platform upgrade.  Might have to move away to other forums.


----------



## Timmaigh!

OK then, i passed 15 minutes of RealBench with 32GB setting, at last, at my current settings: Vcore normal -0,1V offset, VRIN 1,9V, LLC Turbo, CPU current protection High. Since everything else seems working fine and i saw no other crashes otherwise, i am willing to consider this stable enough for me - at least until i get some random crash in the future while playing games or working.

The only worry are the temps though, i got few of the cores up to 98C - i am attaching screenshot here:

https://imgur.com/a/XmTGU

is that bad and do i risk damaging the CPU under these temps or degrading it fast, so should i better clock it down to more reasonable clocks, 43x, 42x, 41x...whatever will it take to get those max temps at least under 90? Or is it normal and OK, given the fact this is stress test and in real world apps, at least the one i would use (most demanding being games and CAD stuff - not for rendering though, just drawing/modeling), i wont see them anyway? Not even multiple consecutive runs of cinebench can any of the cores past 90....

Or now, when it seems to be stable, should i try to dial back some voltages, perhaps the VRIN to lower value like 1,85V and see whether it wont stay stable while less hot? What would you do?


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Jpmboy

Mysticial said:


> I can't try it anymore since the boxes have been moved into a server farm and cut-off from both physical access as well as internet.
> 
> My Gigabyte Designare does the offsets relative to the core itself. So it can't be a CPU thing.


Ok - I did a quick test and replicated your observation. The AVX offset is applied to the highest multiplier in a per core OC and the remaining cores synch to that number. Thanks!
pict attached below. idle, high idle, cpu (non-AVX) and cpu+cache (AVX) AID64
AVX offset is 5. 2x4.6 16x4.5 per core.



xarot said:


> So I tried the der8auer direct die kit today.
> 
> Some observations only at this point. I tried first with my 7900X before my 7980XE, and I am glad I did. Put it in under my "AIO" customloop with EK 360 XE radiator and Alphacool XP3 light block.
> 
> - Installation was very easy.
> - Thermal paste only (MX4) didn't really work at all. I spread the TIM with a toothpick and made an even surface. Bad contact anyway, maybe too thick layer of paste still? Didn't have enough time to try again, but I was very disappointed with the result. Couldn't run Prime95 at stock without throttling...
> - Moved to liquid metal on the die only. One core went straight to 90c while other cores were 60c.
> - Applied TIM to block base too. All good now. Running Prime95 AVX disabled and hottest core is 63c and lowest 55c at stock clocks. Maybe a few degrees drop from using IHS? Can't really tell. Will try some OCing soon.
> 
> So, it seems TIM/LM application and perhaps even block pressure is very crucial with this kit. I had very limited time so there might be some variables in my testing  Anyway, I don't know if I want to even delid my 7980XE and lose the warranty. I am getting bored of trying different things with SK-X...all time taken away from other things (like gaming).  Actually running the [email protected] MHz on the Apex w/4000 RAM in my gaming rig and this thing is blazing-fast (delidded). And my 7980XE can run Prime95 successfully till 4.2 GHz and easily 4.5~4.6 everyday when not running stress testing.
> 
> *Please others share your results when you get the direct die kit.*
> 
> BTW, GG on OCN the platform upgrade.  Might have to move away to other forums.


absolutely will do. ... if I can get one here in the US. 
And yes.. the 7740X is an amazingly quick CPU. I'll have mine back in this rig very soon for some 4 core-limited play. It is a rough act to follow (I'd say the 8700K is a snappy, IPCs look very similar in my hands)



kingofblog said:


> If Gigabyte can apply an offset to each core's frequency, while ASUS applies it to the highest core's frequency, that hints at the possibility of programming the voltage-frequency table for each AVX state (non-AVX, AVX, AVX-512). Perhaps only those with the insider documentation will ever know.


huh?


----------



## Nihaan

Something is odd, my cinebench score is fine on my 7960X but my cpu-z score is lower than what it suppose to be, is this normal ?

Can anyone test and share their non-oc result ?


----------



## Timmaigh!

Timmaigh! said:


> OK then, i passed 15 minutes of RealBench with 32GB setting, at last, at my current settings: Vcore normal -0,1V offset, VRIN 1,9V, LLC Turbo, CPU current protection High. Since everything else seems working fine and i saw no other crashes otherwise, i am willing to consider this stable enough for me - at least until i get some random crash in the future while playing games or working.
> 
> The only worry are the temps though, i got few of the cores up to 98C - i am attaching screenshot here:
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/XmTGU
> 
> is that bad and do i risk damaging the CPU under these temps or degrading it fast, so should i better clock it down to more reasonable clocks, 43x, 42x, 41x...whatever will it take to get those max temps at least under 90? Or is it normal and OK, given the fact this is stress test and in real world apps, at least the one i would use (most demanding being games and CAD stuff - not for rendering though, just drawing/modeling), i wont see them anyway? Not even multiple consecutive runs of cinebench can any of the cores past 90....
> 
> Or now, when it seems to be stable, should i try to dial back some voltages, perhaps the VRIN to lower value like 1,85V and see whether it wont stay stable while less hot? What would you do?


So, any opinion on the matter please?


----------



## tistou77

xarot said:


> So I tried the der8auer direct die kit today.
> 
> Some observations only at this point. I tried first with my 7900X before my 7980XE, and I am glad I did. Put it in under my "AIO" customloop with EK 360 XE radiator and Alphacool XP3 light block.
> 
> - Installation was very easy.
> - Thermal paste only (MX4) didn't really work at all. I spread the TIM with a toothpick and made an even surface. Bad contact anyway, maybe too thick layer of paste still? Didn't have enough time to try again, but I was very disappointed with the result. Couldn't run Prime95 at stock without throttling...
> - Moved to liquid metal on the die only. One core went straight to 90c while other cores were 60c.
> - Applied TIM to block base too. All good now. Running Prime95 AVX disabled and hottest core is 63c and lowest 55c at stock clocks. Maybe a few degrees drop from using IHS? Can't really tell. Will try some OCing soon.
> 
> So, it seems TIM/LM application and perhaps even block pressure is very crucial with this kit. I had very limited time so there might be some variables in my testing  Anyway, I don't know if I want to even delid my 7980XE and lose the warranty. I am getting bored of trying different things with SK-X...all time taken away from other things (like gaming).  Actually running the [email protected] MHz on the Apex w/4000 RAM in my gaming rig and this thing is blazing-fast (delidded). And my 7980XE can run Prime95 successfully till 4.2 GHz and easily 4.5~4.6 everyday when not running stress testing.
> 
> Please others share your results when you get the direct die kit.
> 
> BTW, GG on OCN the platform upgrade.  Might have to move away to other forums.


Thanks for the feedback
Must really use the LM and a very thin layer then on both sides (as for the DIE and IHS)
You had not watched the temperatures with the IHS before ?


----------



## Timmaigh!

One more question about process affinity - i guess i am gonna to dial back my OC to 41x, as it keeps the temps under 80C even during Realbench. However, i am thinking about keeping the 2 coolest cores (83C when others have 90 and more, up to 96 under RL load) to 44. Pretty much as i were to use TurboBoost 3.0, which does not seem to work. My question is, is there a way to force the apps to prefer these 2 cores? By "prefer" i mean, that for example Cinebench would use strictly one of these cores when running Single Core test, but all of the cores when running multicore? Or, if i set the affinity to just 2 cores, it will only use those no matter what, even when more cores are required?


----------



## ccozmo

Timmaigh! said:


> OK then, i passed 15 minutes of RealBench with 32GB setting, at last, at my current settings: Vcore normal -0,1V offset, VRIN 1,9V, LLC Turbo, CPU current protection High. Since everything else seems working fine and i saw no other crashes otherwise, i am willing to consider this stable enough for me - at least until i get some random crash in the future while playing games or working.
> 
> The only worry are the temps though, i got few of the cores up to 98C - i am attaching screenshot here:
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/XmTGU
> 
> is that bad and do i risk damaging the CPU under these temps or degrading it fast, so should i better clock it down to more reasonable clocks, 43x, 42x, 41x...whatever will it take to get those max temps at least under 90? Or is it normal and OK, given the fact this is stress test and in real world apps, at least the one i would use (most demanding being games and CAD stuff - not for rendering though, just drawing/modeling), i wont see them anyway? Not even multiple consecutive runs of cinebench can any of the cores past 90....
> 
> Or now, when it seems to be stable, should i try to dial back some voltages, perhaps the VRIN to lower value like 1,85V and see whether it wont stay stable while less hot? What would you do?


Sounds like you don't have adequate cooling - these things run hot.

What is your CPU module & what cooling are you using ?

And quite importantly, have you delidded and replace Liquid Metal or the crap TIM intel uses ?


----------



## Radox-0

Nihaan said:


> Something is odd, my cinebench score is fine on my 7960X but my cpu-z score is lower than what it suppose to be, is this normal ?
> 
> Can anyone test and share their non-oc result ?


I think its just a CPU-Z thing. Get same with my 7980XE. Overclocked/ stock no matter what comes in lower the reference and know a few others it happens too. Not bothered looking into it further as I am sure its just a quirk as all the other scores seem to line up as expected.


----------



## xarot

tistou77 said:


> Thanks for the feedback
> Must really use the LM and a very thin layer then on both sides (as for the DIE and IHS)
> You had not watched the temperatures with the IHS before ?


Not really on this rig, the 7900X is my "test bench" rig I run every now and then. Actually just added just a little bit more LM, it looked like the contact had not been really great and the Conductonaut looked a bit "dried" already due to ?excessive? heat. 

Already I could say that getting the amount of LM and mount with the waterblock might take a few tries or even more. Currently my problem was that the 7900X ran very 'cool' until some phases of Prime95 (non-AVX) SmallFFTs suddendly the temps go through the roof on some cores (over 100c). It just happens on some FFT size. It might just be the 7900X as it's nearly impossible to cool properly due to the small area of the die unfortunately, not really impressed with this 7900X chip. Larger chips are a lot easier to cool and I would think the HCC chips will be easier to mount too because the die is larger. 

Anyway here's some data, IMO temps look really good with a single 360 rad and Alphacool XP3 simple block (copper base). 

What's the correct html tag now to add a pic here? Anyway here's a linky: https://i.imgur.com/4rAr0Kh.png

One thing to be clear about when using the direct-die kit is that you need to remove all the glue from the PCB, in case you later on want to use the IHS, the IHS will be touching the top of the die only, something to remember. It's a lot easier to keep the IHS steady and in place when the glue is on the PCB, there is always a risk of cracking the die when tightening down the levers on the socket (or tightening the waterblock on the die for that matter). That's why I am probably still gonna hold off with my 7980XE until new chips pop up in the market and probably only going to delid it the usual way using the IHS.


----------



## tistou77

Sorry for my "bad" english, overall you're not very happy with the Direct Die and the 7900X ?
To see with a 7920X+ maybe

Thanks


----------



## tistou77

Bug forum...


----------



## xarot

tistou77 said:


> Sorry for my "bad" english, overall you're not very happy with the Direct Die and the 7900X ?
> To see with a 7920X+ maybe
> 
> Thanks


No I didn't mean I am disappointed, because it's way too early to say anything, just posting some experiences so far, after all I installed the die kit just yesterday night.  After applying more LM a while ago, things seems better now. I am just doing some testing with my 7900X, so I can decide if I want to do it with 7980XE later on, although I guess doing 7980XE delid the 'old' way would be well enough for my use so I could keep the glue on for easier handling. Also going to wait if anyone else tries it with a HCC chip. Hopefully someone who's got a bit more time than me these days.  I guess a few others get their kits soon so we will see it'll work for them.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Timmaigh!

Nihaan said:


> Something is odd, my cinebench score is fine on my 7960X but my cpu-z score is lower than what it suppose to be, is this normal ?
> 
> Can anyone test and share their non-oc result ?


My current Cinebench score is too as expected, but cpu-z score (v 1.82) is too low compared to the reference CPUs. I got just got 6476 multi and 490 single score for 4,1 all core /4,6 TB3 clock.


----------



## Timmaigh!

ccozmo said:


> Sounds like you don't have adequate cooling - these things run hot.
> 
> What is your CPU module & what cooling are you using ?
> 
> And quite importantly, have you delidded and replace Liquid Metal or the crap TIM intel uses ?


Thanks for response. Its 7940x/eisbaer 360 and no, no delid. 
Anyway, i clocked it back to 41x with 2 cores at 46 and now i wont get past 79C during Realbench, while getting 198 single core score in Cinebench, so i guess i stick to these settings. BTW, is there a way to test that 4,6GHz turbo boost of those 2 best cores with Realbench? I mean, if i run it, obviously it taxes all the cores and their frequency is just 4100 MHz. Can i test just those 2 cores, whether they wont cause lock-up, when stressed at 4,6 and adjacent VID (which is higher than 4,1 GHz one?)


----------



## Mysticial

Timmaigh! said:


> Thanks for response. Its 7940x/eisbaer 360 and no, no delid.
> Anyway, i clocked it back to 41x with 2 cores at 46 and now i wont get past 79C during Realbench, while getting 198 single core score in Cinebench, so i guess i stick to these settings. BTW, is there a way to test that 4,6GHz turbo boost of those 2 best cores with Realbench? I mean, if i run it, obviously it taxes all the cores and their frequency is just 4100 MHz. Can i test just those 2 cores, whether they wont cause lock-up, when stressed at 4,6 and adjacent VID (which is higher than 4,1 GHz one?)


There has to be something wrong with your setup. My 7940X has no issues with:


9 cores @ 4.7
3 cores @ 4.4
2 cores @ 4.3

It's not delided and it's running with a 360 AIO, though the temps will reach into the 90s under sustained Prime95 small FFTs (non-AVX). The ES might be helping a bit, but it can't be this much.


----------



## wingman99

Mysticial said:


> There has to be something wrong with your setup. My 7940X has no issues with:
> 
> 
> 9 cores @ 4.7
> 3 cores @ 4.4
> 2 cores @ 4.3
> 
> It's not delided and it's running with a 360 AIO, though the temps will reach into the 90s under sustained Prime95 small FFTs (non-AVX). The ES might be helping a bit, but it can't be this much.


How does the program know how to utilize the fastest cores?


----------



## Mysticial

wingman99 said:


> How does the program know how to utilize the fastest cores?


The only time I actually need the performance is when I'm compiling - which is all-core anyway. So I haven't been paying attention. And since there's 9 cores at 4.7 GHz, it's hard to say whether anything running on them is intentional or by luck. Though I see a small amount of affinity for the two Turbo 3 cores even they're running at the same 4.7 GHz with the other ones. Though this could be coincidence. Again, I haven't been paying too much attention.

Interestingly enough, background programs seem to prefer the two slow (4.3 GHz) cores. This seems a bit too much of a coincidence. Perhaps Windows is trying to reserve the fast cores for programs that need it.


----------



## wingman99

Mysticial said:


> The only time I actually need the performance is when I'm compiling - which is all-core anyway. So I haven't been paying attention. And since there's 9 cores at 4.7 GHz, it's hard to say whether anything running on them is intentional or by luck. Though I see a small amount of affinity for the two Turbo 3 cores even they're running at the same 4.7 GHz with the other ones. Though this could be coincidence. Again, I haven't been paying too much attention.
> 
> Interestingly enough, background programs seem to prefer the two slow (4.3 GHz) cores. This seems a bit too much of a coincidence. Perhaps Windows is trying to reserve the fast cores for programs that need it.


How can one tell what tasks are using the faster or slower cores?


----------



## Jpmboy

kingofblog said:


> I am thinking about how two BIOSes can create these different behaviours for AVX offset. If the offset were just a control register that the BIOS programmed, it should be impossible for this to happen. It seems to me that the BIOS is instead programming a target AVX/AVX-512 frequency (per-core). If this is the case, it may be possible to also recreate the stock behavior of a target AVX frequency based on the number of active cores.


Yeah, unfortunately the offset is working as a synch-core decrement from the max turbo multiplier set (programmed) in bios. This issue has been noted. In my particular case the two 46 cores are the intel * cores and these then will receive higher vcore of 1.26V tho they are running at 4.1, the 16 cores at 45 are receiving 1.18V at running at 4.1... the two * cores therefore get much hotter than they should at that load and frequency.


----------



## Mysticial

wingman99 said:


> How can one tell what tasks are using the faster or slower cores?


Kill the task and see where the CPU usage disappears from. Or attach a debugger and break all threads.

And if the task is the only thing running, then it's obvious.


----------



## wingman99

Mysticial said:


> Kill the task and see where the CPU usage disappears from. Or attach a debugger and break all threads.
> 
> And if the task is the only thing running, then it's obvious.


When I run prime95 with one thread it shows on the CPU graph all cores are in use. Do you have the same showing?


----------



## Timmaigh!

Mysticial said:


> There has to be something wrong with your setup. My 7940X has no issues with:
> 
> 
> 9 cores @ 4.7
> 3 cores @ 4.4
> 2 cores @ 4.3
> 
> It's not delided and it's running with a 360 AIO, though the temps will reach into the 90s under sustained Prime95 small FFTs (non-AVX). The ES might be helping a bit, but it can't be this much.



There are several possible explanations for that:

- i am for sure not as experienced in OCing as you are
- my chip or maybe the TIM job on it is not as good preventing me to do better, silicon lottery at its finest
- perhaps i should have done my cooling setup differently, i have the rad up top, but as intake rather than exhaust. Then 2 more fans upfront as intakes and one in behind as exhaust. I wanted to cool the rad with air from outside, but now i am dumping hotter air through it back on the CPU...perhaps should have make it exhaust after all.
- i did not try Prime95 smallFFT, i assume its as demanding as Realbench (which pretty much renders Luxmark while encoding Handbrake at the same time?) What are your temps under 15min RL 32GB setting (one i used) with your chip and OC?

Right now, i am at 4,1 multi, 4,6 top 2 cores and 2,7 mesh...and i am gonna get satisfied with that i guess. I could probably do better with further testing, those two 4,6 cores have the same VID at 4,6 as at 4,4 (1,189) so perhaps i could have more cores at that frequency and still be fine. After all, when you say you have 2 weakest cores at 4,3, surely that means all of them are at 4,3 during Prime (when all of them are loaded) including the 4,7 ones...? And you see 4,7 only when 9 cores are at use max?


----------



## ThrashZone

Timmaigh! said:


> There are several possible explanations for that:
> 
> - i am for sure not as experienced in OCing as you are
> - my chip or maybe the TIM job on it is not as good preventing me to do better, silicon lottery at its finest
> - perhaps i should have done my cooling setup differently,* i have the rad up top, but as intake rather than exhaust. Then 2 more fans upfront as intakes and one in behind as exhaust. I wanted to cool the rad with air from outside, but now i am dumping hotter air through it back on the CPU...perhaps should have make it exhaust after all.*
> - i did not try Prime95 smallFFT, i assume its as demanding as Realbench (which pretty much renders Luxmark while encoding Handbrake at the same time?) What are your temps under 15min RL 32GB setting (one i used) with your chip and OC?
> 
> Right now, i am at 4,1 multi, 4,6 top 2 cores and 2,7 mesh...and i am gonna get satisfied with that i guess. I could probably do better with further testing, those two 4,6 cores have the same VID at 4,6 as at 4,4 (1,189) so perhaps i could have more cores at that frequency and still be fine. After all, when you say you have 2 weakest cores at 4,3, surely that means all of them are at 4,3 during Prime (when all of them are loaded) including the 4,7 ones...? And you see 4,7 only when 9 cores are at use max?


Hi,
I have mine setup the same way it's perfectly fine I doubt it would make any difference switching the top to exhaust.

You should try By core usage 
Use half the cores at 4.6 and the rest at 4.4 
All it means is only half the cores at one time use 4.6 
They will all eventually hit 4.6 just not at the same time and will be the best for temps.


----------



## Timmaigh!

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I have mine setup the same way it's perfectly fine I doubt it would make any difference switching the top to exhaust.
> 
> You should try By core usage
> Use half the cores at 4.6 and the rest at 4.4
> All it means is only half the cores at one time use 4.6
> They will all eventually hit 4.6 just not at the same time and will be the best for temps.


Hey, thanks for the response.

I know what you mean and i could probably get away with half the cores at 4,6GHz (at least for regular workloads), but setting the other half to 4,4 would mean under Realbench all of them would run at 4,4GHz, which is something i tried already and it meant temps above 90C for majority of cores. I think, what i can do now, is to set few more cores to 4,6 or 4,5 or 4,4...but i would have to stick to 41x as the limit for the situation, when all of them are loaded at once. 

BTW, i just found that by clicking "Tools" on CPU-Z i can choose "clocks" and it will show me clocks for all the cores. 2 of them are in red color, any idea what that means? I would think its the 2 prefered turbo boost 3 cores, but those are different, so?


----------



## Mysticial

wingman99 said:


> When I run prime95 with one thread it shows on the CPU graph all cores are in use. Do you have the same showing?


Prime95 and any other "active" application seems to bounce around the fast cores. But FireFox, and system kernel from stuff like copying files seem to really like the two slow cores.

Again, this isn't a 100% scientific observation. I'm just eyeballing it in Task Manager.




Timmaigh! said:


> There are several possible explanations for that:
> 
> - i am for sure not as experienced in OCing as you are
> - my chip or maybe the TIM job on it is not as good preventing me to do better, silicon lottery at its finest
> - perhaps i should have done my cooling setup differently, i have the rad up top, but as intake rather than exhaust. Then 2 more fans upfront as intakes and one in behind as exhaust. I wanted to cool the rad with air from outside, but now i am dumping hotter air through it back on the CPU...perhaps should have make it exhaust after all.
> - i did not try Prime95 smallFFT, i assume its as demanding as Realbench (which pretty much renders Luxmark while encoding Handbrake at the same time?) What are your temps under 15min RL 32GB setting (one i used) with your chip and OC?
> 
> Right now, i am at 4,1 multi, 4,6 top 2 cores and 2,7 mesh...and i am gonna get satisfied with that i guess. I could probably do better with further testing, those two 4,6 cores have the same VID at 4,6 as at 4,4 (1,189) so perhaps i could have more cores at that frequency and still be fine. After all, when you say you have 2 weakest cores at 4,3, surely that means all of them are at 4,3 during Prime (when all of them are loaded) including the 4,7 ones...? And you see 4,7 only when 9 cores are at use max?


All cores active. I just tested it with Tj.Max lifted and several of the leaky cores did manage to creep up to 100C once the AIO warmed up enough to steady state.

The cooler is the Floe Riing 360 in push/pull. The pull side are the stock RGB Riing fans. The push side are 3 of the Corsair ML120s. It's mounted as an intake at the front of the case.

Normally, I run Tj.Max at 85C so it throttles way before it gets up there. The only thing that gets it up there is Prime95 (non-AVX) and family. The use-case I care about (compiling code) doesn't get anywhere near that level. AVX and AVX512 aren't an issue since I have larger offsets on them. I don't use this machine for "running code" anyway, I do that on my 7900X - which has better cache/memory and an overclock specifically tuned for AVX/AVX512.


----------



## cekim

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah, unfortunately the offset is working as a synch-core decrement from the max turbo multiplier set (programmed) in bios. This issue has been noted. In my particular case the two 46 cores are the intel * cores and these then will receive higher vcore of 1.26V tho they are running at 4.1, the 16 cores at 45 are receiving 1.18V at running at 4.1... the two * cores therefore get much hotter than they should at that load and frequency.


Is this specific to Asus? I frankly assumed this was due to having only one register in the CPU to set the offset, but I haven’t:
A. Looked at other X299 platforms
B. Looked at the SKYLX register documentation.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Mysticial said:


> Prime95 and any other "active" application seems to bounce around the fast cores. But FireFox, and system kernel from stuff like copying files seem to really like the two slow cores.
> 
> Again, this isn't a 100% scientific observation. I'm just eyeballing it in Task Manager.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All cores active. I just tested it with Tj.Max lifted and several of the leaky cores did manage to creep up to 100C once the AIO warmed up enough to steady state.
> 
> The cooler is the Floe Riing 360 in push/pull. The pull side are the stock RGB Riing fans. The push side are 3 of the Corsair ML120s. It's mounted as an intake at the front of the case.
> 
> Normally, I run Tj.Max at 85C so it throttles way before it gets up there. The only thing that gets it up there is Prime95 (non-AVX) and family. The use-case I care about (compiling code) doesn't get anywhere near that level. AVX and AVX512 aren't an issue since I have larger offsets on them. I don't use this machine for "running code" anyway, I do that on my 7900X - which has better cache/memory and an overclock specifically tuned for AVX/AVX512.


Uh, and how do you do that again so different cores run at different speeds under load? Is it that "Turbo per Core Limit Control" option in BIOS?

And BTW, you said before your CPU wont go past 90C during Prime, but now seeing that screenshot, with multiple cores over 90 and some even above 100, does that those under 90C temps were down to your lower TjMax setting? I have it set at default setting, 100C. 

Finally, i found out that those red cores in CPU-Z are indeed the TB3 designated ones. Its interesting they are different from those which are top of the chain within the TB3 app in BIOS.


----------



## Mysticial

Timmaigh! said:


> Uh, and how do you do that again so different cores run at different speeds under load? Is it that "Turbo per Core Limit Control" option in BIOS?


Yes, that's correct.



> And BTW, you said before your CPU wont go past 90C during Prime, but now seeing that screenshot, with multiple cores over 90 and some even above 100, does that those under 90C temps were down to your lower TjMax setting? I have it set at default setting, 100C.
> 
> Finally, i found out that those red cores in CPU-Z are indeed the TB3 designated ones. Its interesting they are different from those which are top of the chain within the TB3 app in BIOS.


I didn't say they didn't go past 90C. But they would reach into the 90s. Admittedly, that was a couple weeks ago when it was a lot colder. The default Tj.Max on my mine is also 100C. I lifted it higher just for this test.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Mysticial said:


> Yes, that's correct.
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't say they didn't go past 90C. But they would reach into the 90s. Admittedly, that was a couple weeks ago when it was a lot colder. The default Tj.Max on my mine is also 100C. I lifted it higher just for this test.


Thanks and sorry, i misread that post regarding those 90C.

How do i set up that per core limit turbo? I mean, i tried it, by default all the cores were set to 43x bar 2, which were 44x. I guess those were the TB3 designated ones. I changed that 43x to 41x and 44x to 46x. Except i gave 46x to different cores than the originally designated, i gave it to the ones i observed to run coolest before. Anyway, all the cores would run under CB or Realbench at 41x anyway. However, i had the regular Active Core Turbo ratio set at 46x,46x, and the rest 41x at the same time... should i have disabled the option or set all the values to Auto or what?


----------



## Mysticial

Timmaigh! said:


> Thanks and sorry, i misread that post regarding those 90C.
> 
> How do i set up that per core limit turbo? I mean, i tried it, by default all the cores were set to 43x bar 2, which were 44x. I guess those were the TB3 designated ones. I changed that 43x to 41x and 44x to 46x. Except i gave 46x to different cores than the originally designated, i gave it to the ones i observed to run coolest before. Anyway, all the cores would run under CB or Realbench at 41x anyway. However, i had the regular Active Core Turbo ratio set at 46x,46x, and the rest 41x at the same time... should i have disabled the option or set all the values to Auto or what?


It's not documented, but after playing around with it long enough, I was able to determine the logic (for Gigabyte) goes like this:


Apply per-Core Limits: Clock all cores to their maximum per-core multiplier.
Apply Active Core Limit: Using the active core multiplier limit to determine what the highest multiplier is. If any core is clocked higher than that multiplier, drop it down to the active-core multiplier limit.
Apply AVX and AVX512 offsets for each core individually.


So even if you set the per-core limits very high, they will still be clipped by the active-core limit. So you need to raise the active core limit as well.


The stock settings are implemented as:


Per-core limit for all cores is 43x, except for the two TB3 cores which are 44x.
The active-core limit is 44x for 2 cores.
This prevents any core from reaching 44x unless there are only 2 cores active and they are specifically the TB3 cores.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Mysticial said:


> It's not documented, but after playing around with it long enough, I was able to determine the logic (for Gigabyte) goes like this:
> 
> 
> Apply per-Core Limits: Clock all cores to their maximum per-core multiplier.
> Apply Active Core Limit: Using the active core multiplier limit to determine what the highest multiplier is. If any core is clocked higher than that multiplier, drop it down to the active-core multiplier limit.
> Apply AVX and AVX512 offsets for each core individually.
> 
> 
> So even if you set the per-core limits very high, they will still be clipped by the active-core limit. So you need to raise the active core limit as well.
> 
> 
> The stock settings are implemented as:
> 
> 
> Per-core limit for all cores is 43x, except for the two TB3 cores which are 44x.
> The active-core limit is 44x for 2 cores.
> This prevents any core from reaching 44x unless there are only 2 cores active and they are specifically the TB3 cores.


So if i wanted to set say 4 cores (my 2 coolest ones + 2 originally designated TB3 ones) to 46x and the rest to 41x, i set the per core limit this way, but how do i set-up the active cores limit? Should i set even 14-core active ratio to 46x and the per core limit will then bump the ones set to 41x down to run at 41x?


----------



## wingman99

Mysticial said:


> Prime95 and any other "active" application seems to bounce around the fast cores. But FireFox, and system kernel from stuff like copying files seem to really like the two slow cores.
> 
> Again, this isn't a 100% scientific observation. I'm just eyeballing it in Task Manager.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All cores active. I just tested it with Tj.Max lifted and several of the leaky cores did manage to creep up to 100C once the AIO warmed up enough to steady state.
> 
> The cooler is the Floe Riing 360 in push/pull. The pull side are the stock RGB Riing fans. The push side are 3 of the Corsair ML120s. It's mounted as an intake at the front of the case.
> 
> Normally, I run Tj.Max at 85C so it throttles way before it gets up there. The only thing that gets it up there is Prime95 (non-AVX) and family. The use-case I care about (compiling code) doesn't get anywhere near that level. AVX and AVX512 aren't an issue since I have larger offsets on them. I don't use this machine for "running code" anyway, I do that on my 7900X - which has better cache/memory and an overclock specifically tuned for AVX/AVX512.


How do you embed that large screenshot? Also I was wondering does the benchtests come out the same if you clock the processor even multipliers at your maximum preferred temperature compared to uneven multipliers at the same processor maximum temperature?


----------



## Mysticial

Timmaigh! said:


> So if i wanted to set say 4 cores (my 2 coolest ones + 2 originally designated TB3 ones) to 46x and the rest to 41x, i set the per core limit this way, but how do i set-up the active cores limit? Should i set even 14-core active ratio to 46x and the per core limit will then bump the ones set to 41x down to run at 41x?


Yes, set the 14-core active ratio to 46x.



wingman99 said:


> How do you embed that large screenshot?


I attach as an attachment first. Then in the preview, I grab the URL and then insert it as an image to that URL.



> Also I was wondering does the benchtests come out the same if you clock the processor even multipliers at your maximum preferred temperature compared to uneven multipliers at the same processor maximum temperature?


I actually haven't done any serious benchmarking on the 7940X. It is my primary machine right now and I need to use it.

Normally, there's more "overlap" between getting a new machine running and actually switching to it during which I usually run benchmarks. But with the ram and GPU prices this high, I had to salvage them from my 5960X and take it offline. So I had to make the switch all at once and I haven't had the chance to really play with it yet.

So the stability of the 4.7 GHz overclock itself isn't entirely certain. Instead of doing a multi-hour stress-test, I tested it at higher speeds for a shorter amount of time.


----------



## Jpmboy

cekim said:


> Is this specific to Asus? I frankly assumed this was due to having only one register in the CPU to set the offset, but I haven’t:
> A. Looked at other X299 platforms
> B. Looked at the SKYLX register documentation.


good question(s)... I was hoping other MB brand owners would pony up on this. I suspect it may be a single register thing.


----------



## ThrashZone

Timmaigh! said:


> Hey, thanks for the response.
> 
> I know what you mean and i could probably get away with half the cores at 4,6GHz (at least for regular workloads), but setting the other half to 4,4 would mean under Realbench all of them would run at 4,4GHz, which is something i tried already and it meant temps above 90C for majority of cores. I think, what i can do now, is to set few more cores to 4,6 or 4,5 or 4,4...but i would have to stick to 41x as the limit for the situation, when all of them are loaded at once.
> 
> BTW, i just found that by clicking "Tools" on CPU-Z i can choose "clocks" and it will show me clocks for all the cores. 2 of them are in red color, any idea what that means? I would think its the 2 prefered turbo boost 3 cores, but those are different, so?


Hi,
Mine show that too but turbo boost always list the best cores on top and those are the ones cpu-z shows too in red


----------



## Timmaigh!

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Mine show that too but turbo boost always list the best cores on top and those are the ones cpu-z shows too in red


Thanks. This was however not true in my case, CPU-Z would show red cores 8 and 12, while Intel TB3 app cores 5 and 10 on top of that list. 
However, i realized the reason for this was me meddling with the Gigabyte´s "Turbo Per Core Limit" option in BIOS - i changed the cores with highest multi from the default 8 and 12 to 5 and 10...even though i then decided not to use the option and set it to default "Auto" setting instead of "Enabled". It still had influence on that core list within TB3 app in Windows...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Okay I see 
Interesting thing for me is using By core usage I only see 8 cores
The 2 shown in TB I suppose are reserved and have to be set as all core first to say 4.6 or 4.7 first then switch to by core usage and adjust the rest the way I want them 
I was wondering about why it only showed 8 cores out of 10


----------



## darkinners

I just ran a 8hr Realbench for new OC setting (offset voltage and with speedshift/speedstep/c-state)

After the benchmark I check the HWINFO64 data see if anything wrong with it.
I found the BCLK jumping at high at 107Mhz! I left the BCLK @ default 100Mhz
I have this problem with manual voltage too but with less degree ， jumped to 104Mhz
This is extremely concerning, as I am afraid those BCLk bump would kill my onboard NIC and worse the SSDs.
Anyone know why this happened? I already disabled VRM and BCLK Spread Spectrum in BIOS


Also my 7940X able to run 4.4Ghz with 1.12V core voltage(manual voltage) and with NO AVX/AVX512 offset at all.
I tried so hard to stress that setting both theoretical stress tests and real world application tests (CREO and Premiere heavy/multitask rendering) 
No matter how hard I tried, it just so rock solid stable and won't crash/error.

However now I switched to offset voltage and with those energy stuff to reduce idle temp and power
The core voltage require at least 1.15-1.16V and "AVX offset -3" "AVX512 offset -4" to achieve same stability as my manual voltage OC setting
both offset and manual share the exactly the same settings except Vcore and Vccin (since I have to enable SVID to make Offset voltage work and once you enabled SVID you cannot change VCCIN in bios)
With Offset voltage the auto VCCIN reading 1.96-2.00V in HWINFO64 versure 1.8V I manually set with manual vcore (I am not sure if 2.00v VCCIN is safe anyways)
However, I can manually set VCCIN in AISUITE 3 even I enabled SVID, which is very weird. Why ASUS didn't include this function in BIOS is beyond me...

So anyone also have experience on why Manual Voltage and Offset voltage require that dramatic difference in vcore and AVX/AVX512 offset to work?


----------



## darkinners

*delete


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Which offset are you using + or - ?
- I have tried vcore as as adaptive and used it that way @DooRules suggested that one can't remember the actual - amount though 0...?

To get out of the double post error use go advanced and then submit.


----------



## Timmaigh!

darkinners said:


> I just ran a 8hr Realbench for new OC setting (offset voltage and with speedshift/speedstep/c-state)
> 
> After the benchmark I check the HWINFO64 data see if anything wrong with it.
> I found the BCLK jumping at high at 107Mhz! I left the BCLK @ default 100Mhz
> I have this problem with manual voltage too but with less degree ， jumped to 104Mhz
> This is extremely concerning, as I am afraid those BCLk bump would kill my onboard NIC and worse the SSDs.
> Anyone know why this happened? I already disabled VRM and BCLK Spread Spectrum in BIOS
> 
> 
> Also my 7940X able to run 4.4Ghz with 1.12V core voltage(manual voltage) and with NO AVX/AVX512 offset at all.
> I tried so hard to stress that setting both theoretical stress tests and real world application tests (CREO and Premiere heavy/multitask rendering)
> No matter how hard I tried, it just so rock solid stable and won't crash/error.
> 
> However now I switched to offset voltage and with those energy stuff to reduce idle temp and power
> The core voltage require at least 1.15-1.16V and "AVX offset -3" "AVX512 offset -4" to achieve same stability as my manual voltage OC setting
> both offset and manual share the exactly the same settings except Vcore and Vccin (since I have to enable SVID to make Offset voltage work and once you enabled SVID you cannot change VCCIN in bios)
> With Offset voltage the auto VCCIN reading 1.96-2.00V in HWINFO64 versure 1.8V I manually set with manual vcore (I am not sure if 2.00v VCCIN is safe anyways)
> However, I can manually set VCCIN in AISUITE 3 even I enabled SVID, which is very weird. Why ASUS didn't include this function in BIOS is beyond me...
> 
> So anyone also have experience on why Manual Voltage and Offset voltage require that dramatic difference in vcore and AVX/AVX512 offset to work?


You won the lottery it seems  

I tried static manual vcore OC at first too and while at first i thought its stable (for regular use, including Cinebench runs as the hardest form of stress), eventually maybe on 20th consecutive Cinebench run it would freeze. I had to bump it to 1,17 to fix that (well, maybe 1,16 would have been enough, i jumped right onto 1,17). Anyway, then it would freeze Realbench at those volts, even at 1,18 and then i think 1,20. Only when changing the approach for normal + negative offset i finally passed it. Some cores show this way to have VID in 1,21 and 1,22 range, so i guess thats the reason why it would crash even at 1,20.

Bottom line, no, in my case these offsets seem to be inline with what i needed for manual static vcore. Then again, i am total newb in this stuff and mostly following what others do and tinkering around it.

BTW, regarding all the CPU-z like apps, which show clocks - coretemp, hwinfo... do these always show the supposed clocks in your case? I only very rarely show them the TB3 clock (4,6GHz), even during the supposed single thread loads, like Cinebench single core run...the score, however, would be OK, in 195-199 range, but when i stare at clock-counter for the entire time, it tends to show 4599/4600 like for half second here and there, otherwise its almost constatly showing 4,1GHz (my all-core turbo). Is is just lack of precision on the side of these apps, not refreshing fast enough, or am i missing something?


----------



## pantsaregood

Does anyone think switching to a 240mm or 360mm AIO from an NH-D15S with NF-A14 iPPC-3000 fans attached will meaningfully reduce temperatures on my i7-7820X?

It runs at 4.6 GHz without issue at 1.15V, but 4.8 GHz requires 1.25V, at which point some cores begin going out of control with heat - the CPU also pulls about 100W more just to manage the extra 200 MHz. At 4.6 GHz, temperatures will not exceed 80°C. At 4.8 GHz, they'll easily break 95°C. 4.7 GHz peaks at about 90°C.

CPU is delidded.


----------



## Mysticial

darkinners said:


> Also my 7940X able to run 4.4Ghz with 1.12V core voltage(manual voltage) and with NO AVX/AVX512 offset at all.
> I tried so hard to stress that setting both theoretical stress tests and real world application tests (CREO and Premiere heavy/multitask rendering)
> No matter how hard I tried, it just so rock solid stable and won't crash/error.



What AVX512 stress-tests did you run? 

Stability aside, 14 cores @ 4.4 GHz on any sort of real AVX512 is likely to require sub-zero cooling.


----------



## truehighroller1

pantsaregood said:


> Does anyone think switching to a 240mm or 360mm AIO from an NH-D15S with NF-A14 iPPC-3000 fans attached will meaningfully reduce temperatures on my i7-7820X?
> 
> It runs at 4.6 GHz without issue at 1.15V, but 4.8 GHz requires 1.25V, at which point some cores begin going out of control with heat - the CPU also pulls about 100W more just to manage the extra 200 MHz. At 4.6 GHz, temperatures will not exceed 80°C. At 4.8 GHz, they'll easily break 95°C. 4.7 GHz peaks at about 90°C.
> 
> CPU is delidded.



I have a custom loop setup outside of my case that only cools my CPU " 7900x at 5ghz 1.325v delidded as well " It consist of a 480 radiator and two 360's and two pumps and I hit 78c under realbench.


----------



## cekim

Mysticial said:


> What AVX512 stress-tests did you run?
> 
> Stability aside, 14 cores @ 4.4 GHz on any sort of real AVX512 is likely to require sub-zero cooling.


If it doesn't then either your app is not really doing much or you are seeing power throttling... AVX512 @ 4.4 is shake and bake!


----------



## Timmaigh!

Weirdest thing happened to me, at least i dont know why...

i decided to increase the number of 4600 MHz cores from 2 to 6. The rest i keep at 41x. So i did set active core turbo ratio to 46x up to six active cores and then in the "per core turbo limit" i set the cores 5,10,8,12,0 and 2 (the coolest ones i have, in that order) to 46x, the rest to 41x. However, as i said before, i left the option at Auto, rather than Enabled, as i did not mean to run the cores under all core load at different speeds, i just wanted to use this to specify which cores should be the one to clock to 46x - as i observed doing this changes their order within the TB3 app in Windows.

Now in Windows, i wanted to try some kind of app, which would tax more than 2 cores, but not all of them - i assumed Ashes of Singularity might be such application, so i ran its inbuilt benchmark. It turns out it probably can use all the cores, but the weird thing, check this screenshot please:

https://imgur.com/a/wSIxL

now not only all cores would run at some point at more than 4100MHz, even the ones i set in the "per core limit turbo option" to 41x - i guess i would need to fully enable it, for the limit to work...but some of the cores actually crossed the 4600 MHz limit, going as far as 4959 MHz! How, why? Even the mesh, which i had set to 2700 MHz, was at some point at 2911 Mhz....

any idea what happened there? Should not be happening, right?

Then again, the VIDs for various cores did not go higher than the value for 4600 MHz... so am i safe running it this way? The temps were not higher than usual 50-65C either. When i subsequently ran Realbench across all the cores and 4,1GHz, the CPU would still run hotter than this...

One more thing, new forums suck big time! At least under Opera. What is the point of having awesome hardware, if you gotta wait several seconds for every page to load. Other sites load fairly instantly, this one takes ages.


----------



## Timmaigh!

doublepost


----------



## toncij

Does anyone know of a test where someone benchmarked a Skylake-X and a Coffee Lake head to head at the same clock? To see the impact of the mesh architecture and supposedly worse IMC in the SKL-X?


----------



## ThrashZone

pantsaregood said:


> Does anyone think switching to a 240mm or 360mm AIO from an NH-D15S with NF-A14 iPPC-3000 fans attached will meaningfully reduce temperatures on my i7-7820X?
> 
> It runs at 4.6 GHz without issue at 1.15V, but 4.8 GHz requires 1.25V, at which point some cores begin going out of control with heat - the CPU also pulls about 100W more just to manage the extra 200 MHz. At 4.6 GHz, temperatures will not exceed 80°C. At 4.8 GHz, they'll easily break 95°C. 4.7 GHz peaks at about 90°C.
> 
> CPU is delidded.


Hi,
240 won't do jack unless it's a second addition to a 280 or 360 rad loop 
360 will give it a better chance for sure to get down a bit.
Most AIO's are 280 rads = 2x140mm fans I believe this is the minimum AIO I would use but Corsair has some new 360's well worth getting instead.


----------



## toncij

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 240 won't do jack unless it's a second addition to a 280 or 360 rad loop
> 360 will give it a better chance for sure to get down a bit.
> Most AIO's are 280 rads = 2x140mm fans I believe this is the minimum AIO I would use but Corsair has some new 360's well worth getting instead.


I'm not sure if the new AIO is any better than a 280 one.


----------



## ThrashZone

toncij said:


> I'm not sure if the new AIO is any better than a 280 one.


Hi,
Not sure either 360 with 3x120mm fans verses 2x140mm fans 
3x120mm would have more rad surface so it should do the best if it can be fitted 
280's are pretty easy to fit in older mid towers

I can't get a 360 rad in my case a corsair 450D or D450


----------



## Mysticial

Timmaigh! said:


> Weirdest thing happened to me, at least i dont know why...
> 
> i decided to increase the number of 4600 MHz cores from 2 to 6. The rest i keep at 41x. So i did set active core turbo ratio to 46x up to six active cores and then in the "per core turbo limit" i set the cores 5,10,8,12,0 and 2 (the coolest ones i have, in that order) to 46x, the rest to 41x. However, as i said before, i left the option at Auto, rather than Enabled, as i did not mean to run the cores under all core load at different speeds, i just wanted to use this to specify which cores should be the one to clock to 46x - as i observed doing this changes their order within the TB3 app in Windows.
> 
> Now in Windows, i wanted to try some kind of app, which would tax more than 2 cores, but not all of them - i assumed Ashes of Singularity might be such application, so i ran its inbuilt benchmark. It turns out it probably can use all the cores, but the weird thing, check this screenshot please:
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/wSIxL
> 
> now not only all cores would run at some point at more than 4100MHz, even the ones i set in the "per core limit turbo option" to 41x - i guess i would need to fully enable it, for the limit to work...but some of the cores actually crossed the 4600 MHz limit, going as far as 4959 MHz! How, why? Even the mesh, which i had set to 2700 MHz, was at some point at 2911 Mhz....
> 
> any idea what happened there? Should not be happening, right?
> 
> Then again, the VIDs for various cores did not go higher than the value for 4600 MHz... so am i safe running it this way? The temps were not higher than usual 50-65C either. When i subsequently ran Realbench across all the cores and 4,1GHz, the CPU would still run hotter than this...
> 
> One more thing, new forums suck big time! At least under Opera. What is the point of having awesome hardware, if you gotta wait several seconds for every page to load. Other sites load fairly instantly, this one takes ages.


No, your system never ran at 4.9 GHz or 107 base clock. If it did, it probably would've crashed instantly.

What you're seeing is transient sampling error in the monitoring app.

Monitoring apps generally work by periodically polling the hardware at fixed intervals and then calculating/extrapolating the differences between the samples. If for some reason, the app gets the timing wrong (like it gets delayed or CPU-starved), it may "think" that only 1 second has passed when in reality, it was 1.07 seconds. This proportionally skews all other readings that depend on time.

The app is recording the maximum value it ever saw. So all it takes is one bad reading to mess up the max.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Mysticial said:


> No, your system never ran at 4.9 GHz or 107 base clock. If it did, it probably would've crashed instantly.
> 
> What you're seeing is transient sampling error in the monitoring app.
> 
> Monitoring apps generally work by periodically polling the hardware at fixed intervals and then calculating/extrapolating the differences between the samples. If for some reason, the app gets the timing wrong (like it gets delayed or CPU-starved), it may "think" that only 1 second has passed when in reality, it was 1.07 seconds. This proportionally skews all other readings that depend on time.
> 
> The app is recording the maximum value it ever saw. So all it takes is one bad reading to mess up the max.


Thank you, i am glad everything works as it should then.


----------



## toncij

Someone said a 7980XE overclocked can be run on a custom 360mm rad so it could be enough.


----------



## CptSpig

toncij said:


> Someone said a 7980XE overclocked can be run on a custom 360mm rad so it could be enough.


That would be me I run a EK Predator 360 with a DDC 3.2 PWM pump upgrade. Temps 25c idle and 40c max while gaming.


----------



## cekim

CptSpig said:


> That would be me I run a EK Predator 360 with a DDC 3.2 PWM pump upgrade. Temps 25c idle and 40c max while gaming.


Ditto - dual dedicated 360XE 7980XE 4.5GHz:


----------



## Jpmboy

cekim said:


> Ditto - dual dedicated 360XE 7980XE 4.5GHz:


Hey bud, remind me.. what open case is that again?


----------



## cekim

Jpmboy said:


> Hey bud, remind me.. what open case is that again?


Um, its the "order maker beam, fire up the table saw, drill, cnc machine - 9000"? (oh, RGB, forgot about the RGB) ;-)

Homegrown. Got tired of modding cases to ho-hum result. 

Once you add all that water cooling gear, pre-whacked cases either get structurally questionable, too heavy to move or gigantic. This one travels nicely now and then when I need it to.


----------



## Jpmboy

cekim said:


> Um, its the "order maker beam, fire up the table saw, drill, cnc machine - 9000"? (oh, RGB, forgot about the RGB) ;-)
> 
> Homegrown. Got tired of modding cases to ho-hum result.
> 
> Once you add all that water cooling gear, pre-whacked cases either get structurally questionable, too heavy to move or gigantic. This one travels nicely now and then when I need it to.


thanks. now I remember you mentioning that before. Yeah, CL cases are nice, but damn, mine needs bigger (preferably pneumatic) wheels! :blinksmil:


----------



## cekim

Jpmboy said:


> thanks. now I remember you mentioning that before. Yeah, CL cases are nice, but damn, mine needs bigger (preferably pneumatic) wheels! :blinksmil:


Yeah, it doesn't go for drives too often, but when it does, it goes with lots of other "stuff" and between hefting it all out to be packed and fitting it in, its very nice to have a solid, small brick that with some minor forethought travels well even without the acrylic panels I had planned to add. 

I put dust filters on the front fans so its been relatively low maintenance both with the xeon system that was in it before and now this guy. 

I've been collecting parts to build another so that I don't have to scavenge as I did this time.

Debating building a 2x420 version next go around:
a. because
b. I have the rads
c. With those you don't really have to tune the fan curve - it has enough capacity to just spin them at 50% and call it a day

It would not travel as well through given the added height/width. Just an inch or two here and there, but it adds up.


----------



## Jpmboy

That is what I like about the 4x420 (external "GiGant") I have here... 1x200mm fan pulling a gentle breeze thru the center is all it needs to keep the loop at most +5 to 6C over ambient at full load. Whereas the dual 360 in the BWE rig can get +10C or more over inlet air. I have to take a few pics, but I added a Koolance ERM-3K3U that QDCs in when needed ( thru a loop "in/out QDC thru-panel pair) in the back of the case.


----------



## toncij

CptSpig said:


> That would be me I run a EK Predator 360 with a DDC 3.2 PWM pump upgrade. Temps 25c idle and 40c max while gaming.


What RPM? What clock is that on all cores and cache?



Jpmboy said:


> That is what I like about the 4x420 (external "GiGant") I have here... 1x200mm fan pulling a gentle breeze thru the center is all it needs to keep the loop at most +5 to 6C over ambient at full load. Whereas the dual 360 in the BWE rig can get +10C or more over inlet air. I have to take a few pics, but I added a Koolance ERM-3K3U that QDCs in when needed ( thru a loop "in/out QDC thru-panel pair) in the back of the case.


Pic? 




cekim said:


> Yeah, it doesn't go for drives too often, but when it does, it goes with lots of other "stuff" and between hefting it all out to be packed and fitting it in, its very nice to have a solid, small brick that with some minor forethought travels well even without the acrylic panels I had planned to add.
> 
> I put dust filters on the front fans so its been relatively low maintenance both with the xeon system that was in it before and now this guy.
> 
> I've been collecting parts to build another so that I don't have to scavenge as I did this time.
> 
> Debating building a 2x420 version next go around:
> a. because
> b. I have the rads
> c. With those you don't really have to tune the fan curve - it has enough capacity to just spin them at 50% and call it a day
> 
> It would not travel as well through given the added height/width. Just an inch or two here and there, but it adds up.





Jpmboy said:


> Hey bud, remind me.. what open case is that again?


Case is fantastic... I'd love to know too, tho I'm probably going for an outside mount and totally skip the case rads. Wasting 1k€ on a case just to block air can be avoided


----------



## Timmaigh!

Regarding VRM temps, i did not give any attention to it before while OCing, concentrated just on CPU temps. Yesterday i checked HWinfo64 more closely for the various info it provides, and i found out the VRM MOS temps, and then some kind of VR T1 and T2 temps are even at idle already at around 55C - 57C! (mosfet at 57, those t1/t2 temps 55C...and these tend to keep this 2C less offset even throughut load. 

Anyway, i fired up RealBench to see what will they be under load and at the end of 15 minute long stress test they were at 92C...and god knows where would it rise if i choose longer stress test than 15 minutes. Is 92C way too much? 

If yes, what can i do about it? Now i can try to play around with voltages etc in BIOS, try to lower them - i guess i kept VRIN currently on AUTO, since its reports its max value up to 1,88V...i could try to set it manually to 1,8V, but that may make things unstable... i have read recommendations to cool VRMs actively, but i have hard time even imagining where i would put another fan to blow directly on them and especially how woud i screw/fit/mount it there...


----------



## Pepillo

Timmaigh! said:


> i have read recommendations to cool VRMs actively, but i have hard time even imagining where i would put another fan to blow directly on them and especially how woud i screw/fit/mount it there...












Easy and very useful, it lowers the temperatures a lot


----------



## CptSpig

toncij said:


> What RPM? What clock is that on all cores and cache?
> 
> [/mQUOTE]
> 
> PWM on CPU. [email protected], [email protected] and memory 3600cl16 oc'd to 4000 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]


----------



## cekim

Timmaigh! said:


> Regarding VRM temps, i did not give any attention to it before while OCing, concentrated just on CPU temps. Yesterday i checked HWinfo64 more closely for the various info it provides, and i found out the VRM MOS temps, and then some kind of VR T1 and T2 temps are even at idle already at around 55C - 57C! (mosfet at 57, those t1/t2 temps 55C...and these tend to keep this 2C less offset even throughut load.
> 
> Anyway, i fired up RealBench to see what will they be under load and at the end of 15 minute long stress test they were at 92C...and god knows where would it rise if i choose longer stress test than 15 minutes. Is 92C way too much?
> 
> If yes, what can i do about it? Now i can try to play around with voltages etc in BIOS, try to lower them - i guess i kept VRIN currently on AUTO, since its reports its max value up to 1,88V...i could try to set it manually to 1,8V, but that may make things unstable... i have read recommendations to cool VRMs actively, but i have hard time even imagining where i would put another fan to blow directly on them and especially how woud i screw/fit/mount it there...


92 for a VRM is not ridiculous. 

You can reduce it with lower VCCIN, lower LLC (lower overshoot/current some MBs use higher and lower LLC #'s to mean the opposite) and lower switching frequencies. Clean/good PSU will reduce temps there as well - noise means heat. 

But, as above, 92 is means its working hard, but well within its normal range. VRMs are designed to run much hotter than CPUs. As for cooling it, a little airflow goes a long way. Even if you have a water block on the VRM, a fan on the back and the input CAPs will often drop things even more.


----------



## cekim

toncij said:


> Case is fantastic... I'd love to know too, tho I'm probably going for an outside mount and totally skip the case rads. Wasting 1k€ on a case just to block air can be avoided


Mine? If so, thank you... 
As I mentioned above, its a custom job. I really like the "idea" of the Air740, but it doesn't even come close to being able to actually do what its form-factor suggests. It's primarily just makerbeam-XL cut to size. The mounting flanges are 1/2x1/2 and 1/2x3/4 AL angle brackets cut, drilled, tapped, bent as needed. 

Pics used to be up here (perhaps even in this thread) - here's the xeon board... (Same case/rads with a pull-only setup - its now push/pull with ML120 fans on both sides - and filters on each intake). As you might have noticed from the earlier shot of the R6E in this chassis, I had to change the rear-I/O setup. The notched strut that holds the PCIe card brace was replaced with a floating "L" of beams to clear the sound I/O on the R6E (no space between the audio jacks and the left-most PCIe slot)

I built it originally with a dual xeon system and then upgraded it to the 7980XE setup:


----------



## djgar

Hey, what's with the tiny pics??!


----------



## Timmaigh!

Pepillo said:


> Easy and very useful, it lowers the temperatures a lot


Oh, very nice, thank you. But how did you "fix" the fan to stay in that place? Or does it stay there just so and wont fall out from there unless you would move the case?

I have alphacool eisbaer with that funny looking blocky pump:

http://www.hw4all.com/wp-content/up...er-240-water-cooling-system-hw4all.com-06.jpg

do you think i could literally glue the fan in the same position as you have to the side of the pump?


----------



## Timmaigh!

cekim said:


> 92 for a VRM is not ridiculous.
> 
> You can reduce it with lower VCCIN, lower LLC (lower overshoot/current some MBs use higher and lower LLC #'s to mean the opposite) and lower switching frequencies. Clean/good PSU will reduce temps there as well - noise means heat.
> 
> But, as above, 92 is means its working hard, but well within its normal range. VRMs are designed to run much hotter than CPUs. As for cooling it, a little airflow goes a long way. Even if you have a water block on the VRM, a fan on the back and the input CAPs will often drop things even more.


Thanks. As i said, i have currently VRIN/VCCIN on auto and LLC currently on Turbo... i may try to lower it to High or Medium and check, whether it does affect stability and temps... and then put small 40mm fan in similar position as on the pic posted above...only need to find a way to somehow fix it there.


----------



## cekim

djgar said:


> Hey, what's with the tiny pics??!


Chuckle - new forum is making embedding pics hard... 
Gallery of these here - I think?


----------



## djgar

Ahh! That's more like it :thumb:


----------



## Pepillo

Timmaigh! said:


> Oh, very nice, thank you. But how did you "fix" the fan to stay in that place? Or does it stay there just so and wont fall out from there unless you would move the case?
> 
> I have alphacool eisbaer with that funny looking blocky pump:
> 
> http://www.hw4all.com/wp-content/up...er-240-water-cooling-system-hw4all.com-06.jpg
> 
> do you think i could literally glue the fan in the same position as you have to the side of the pump?


Is this little fan:

http://gelidsolutions.com/thermal-solutions/case-fan-silent-5/

It is held on the block only with one of those plastic-lined wires that come with many cables. It won't be very fancy, but it works...


----------



## Jpmboy

cekim said:


> Chuckle - new forum is making embedding pics hard...
> Gallery of these here - I think?


what! Where is the centerfold!!


----------



## cekim

Jpmboy said:


> what! Where is the centerfold!!


lol, I really want to take some better shots of the current setup in all of its unicorn vomit RGB glory... Last, wow, er, um, 4 months have been nuts... ___almost there... "NIAGRA FALLS!"


----------



## cgpyos

cekim said:


> lol, I really want to take some better shots of the current setup in all of its unicorn vomit RGB glory... Last, wow, er, um, 4 months have been nuts... ___almost there... "NIAGRA FALLS!"


Guys, what cache voltage offset you normally do for x32 multiplier?
Is there any software able to monitor MESH related parameters at all?
Thanks!


----------



## DeathAngel74

I'm using 1.1v for 3200 MHz Mesh.


----------



## cekim

cgpyos said:


> Guys, what cache voltage offset you normally do for x32 multiplier?
> Is there any software able to monitor MESH related parameters at all?
> Thanks!


My 7980 hasn't been able to do 32x and still survive memory intensive loads. It can bench and game, but if I try to do real-work or GSAT, I find issues with anything beyond 30x so far. So, I'm at 1.05v for 30x for DD.

I plan on experimenting more in the coming weeks on that front.


----------



## Jpmboy

cgpyos said:


> Guys, what cache voltage offset you normally do for x32 multiplier?
> Is there any software able to monitor MESH related parameters at all?
> Thanks!





DeathAngel74 said:


> I'm using 1.1v for 3200 MHz Mesh.


on what processor??


----------



## toncij

cekim said:


> Chuckle - new forum is making embedding pics hard...
> Gallery of these here - I think?


The new forum software is so slow and fiddly... it's a disaster...

Anyway, what material is this? How did you cut it?


----------



## cekim

toncij said:


> The new forum software is so slow and fiddly... it's a disaster...
> 
> Anyway, what material is this? How did you cut it?


The beams are "makerbeamXL" they are an aluminum extrusion (X-shaped tube, so shaped to fit a t-nut that makes it easy to use t-nuts to fasten everything together).

I cut them primarily on a table-saw with a metal cutting blade (12in fiberglass/resin/silica style blade/wheel). The angle brackets holding the PSU, pumps, rads and PCIe cards were cut to length with a band-saw (also a metal cutting blade), and then I used a mill to drill the holes because I am catastrophically bad at drilling lots of accurate holes by hand and I have a machine readily accessible.


----------



## djgar

cekim said:


> The beams are "makerbeamXL" they are an aluminum extrusion (X-shaped tube, so shaped to fit a t-nut that makes it easy to use t-nuts to fasten everything together).
> 
> I cut them primarily on a table-saw with a metal cutting blade (12in fiberglass/resin/silica style blade/wheel). The angle brackets holding the PSU, pumps, rads and PCIe cards were cut to length with a band-saw (also a metal cutting blade), and then I used a mill to drill the holes because I am catastrophically bad at drilling lots of accurate holes by hand and I have a machine readily accessible.


Sounds like a labor of love :thumb:


----------



## cekim

djgar said:


> Sounds like a labor of love :thumb:


I enjoyed it... wish I had a little more time (as always), but it came out well and in the end, I put less time and suffering into it than I did version 0.9 that made me decide to give up on modding cases (and build from scratch) - this came out well too, but man was it a lot of work and hard to work-with. Really tight and I wanted more rad than I could fit:

















p.s. if you want to have someone else do this sort of thing for you - these guys use similar/the same materials and basic approach. 
http://spotswoodcomputercases.com/wp/?page_id=1405

I don't own any of their stuff, but were I not as far down this rabbit hole as I am, I'd have been sorely tempted to get something from them. The only reason I didn't was my desire to fit so exactly.

They donated hardware to an OCN folding to so there's that :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

cekim said:


> The beams are "makerbeamXL" they are an aluminum extrusion (X-shaped tube, so shaped to fit a t-nut that makes it easy to use t-nuts to fasten everything together).
> 
> I cut them primarily on a table-saw with a metal cutting blade (12in fiberglass/resin/silica style blade/wheel). The angle brackets holding the PSU, pumps, rads and PCIe cards were cut to length with a band-saw (also a metal cutting blade), and then I used a mill to drill the holes because *I am catastrophically bad at drilling lots of accurate holes by hand *and I have a machine readily accessible.


^^This is why I put a platform drill press in my garage. Mill would be great, but damn. the properly tooled bits cost as much as the press!


----------



## cekim

Jpmboy said:


> ^^This is why I put a platform drill press in my garage. Mill would be great, but damn. the properly tooled bits cost as much as the press!


For such jobs, I use normal hand-drill bits in chuck/arbor in the CNC mill. No need for more/better than that when drilling such small quantities of soft aluminum, but of course, the machine and those chucks weren't free - they just have other uses.. 

I over-think precision when doing it by hand, so CNC saves me from outsmarting myself... plugin the numbers, zero the part, hit go... gasp as it dives in for the first cut and you wonder if you really, really, really set your Z-depth correctly.... and.... profit!

Or pick up the pieces of your shattered drill bit and start over.


----------



## xarot

@Jpmboy

I read from the past that you used 1.165 [email protected] MHz cache on the 7980XE. I just delidded my 7980XE a few days ago and I am having problems reaching 3000 MHz cache, the system freezes or BSODs in Prime95 blend (non-AVX). Tried 1.1 - 1.15 V, but no dice. 2.7 GHz cache at AUTO seems to be OK when OCing and all cores at 4.4 GHz. How did you test cache stability? Maybe my chip just needs another nudge.


----------



## Jpmboy

I mainly use AID64 Cache stability test, and HCi Memtest ( which works the cache quite a bit). Did not use p95, what FFT are you using, 1344 or higher? AID64 cache has been my go-to for several generations now (for Cache, ~ 2h). No cache issues after that.


----------



## xarot

Jpmboy said:


> I mainly use AID64 Cache stability test, and HCi Memtest ( which works the cache quite a bit). Did not use p95, what FFT are you using, 1344 or higher? AID64 cache has been my go-to for several generations now (for Cache, ~ 2h). No cache issues after that.




I used blend only, have to try AIDA64 but I guess I'll need a license because the trial is over. Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

xarot said:


> I used blend only, have to try AIDA64 but I guess I'll need a license because the trial is over. Thanks


FFT 1344 is a good one.


----------



## DeathAngel74

Jpmboy said:


> on what processor??


Sorry for the late reply. 7820X - 4.5GHz/3200MHz Mesh @ 1.1v for both.


----------



## Jpmboy

DeathAngel74 said:


> Sorry for the late reply. 7820X - 4.5GHz/3200MHz Mesh @ 1.1v for both.


nice. most higher core count CPUs don;t seem to be able to do that. :thumb:


----------



## Timmaigh!

I found out today, my overclock was not as stable as i thought - it turns out it will cause BSOD on GeekBench single core CPU benchmark - SGEMM, SPFFT or one of the other subsequent parts of the bench will crash the computer. Since this happens during the single core part, i assume its the 4,6GHz overclock on 2 cores, which is unstable - after all, i passed the Realbench all core stress test, however, i run all core OC only at 4,1GHz...

I played with the BIOS settings then (previously vcore set to Normal with -0,1V) and to eventually gain stability even during Geekbench, i had to change the -0,1V value down to -0,02. I tried numbers inbetween, -0,07, -0,05, -0,04, -0,03.... all caused BSOD. The thing however, this increases the voltages across the board, even under all core load, which was otherwise stable. Before, under Cinebench, or Realbench, the VIDs would fall into 1,08V - 1,12 bracket (the 2 top cores at 4,6GHz at single core load would be like 1,189V).... now its more like 1,16 - 1,19V (the 2 top cores at 4,6GHz at single core load are now like 1,27V, which is i guess what it takes to be stable at 4,6 even under geekbench), at the same 4,1GHz overclock, even if its clearly not needed, just to have stability in a situation, where just 2 cores are loaded. Ridiculous.

Obviously, these heightened VIDS have negative influence on temps and power-draw. Before, the max temp on hottest core was 80C, the VRM MOS temp was 92, power was in 230-240W range. Now, its 88C for the hottest core, 104C for VRM and power is 270-280W. Once again, its for the same clocks. 

So my question, is there a way to solve this? Or the only way would be separate vcore setting for the cores, like Asus boards have (where i would keep that -0,1V offset for the 41x cores and set -0,02 for those 2 46x cores?) I have Gigabyte board.


If i cant solve it, what would you do?

- Keep these settings to be fully stable and ignore Realbench temps/load, as its more of a outlier, not realistic load, as i am not going ever to run Luxmark and Handbrake at the same time? Or incur similar loads on the CPU... The temps under Cinebench, which is more realistic workload, are about 10C less overall (77C on hottest core or so, although it would probably be somewhat higher too, if it lasted longer)....

- Or alternatively, fall back the previous setting, ignoring the Geekbench instability, since otherwise all my other apps were fine (including Cinebench single core, AutoCAD, 3dsmax, Ashes of Singularity, etc...) even under those settings - well at least until i run into situation, where i would find to be unstable even within my normal usage, and not just some kind of synthetic bench....


Regarding the VRM temps, 92C or 104C, i am going to improve this by adding small 40mm/50mm fan above them, either way. BTW, i am looking at Noctua 40mm fans here, one is called FLX, another PWM. Which one to order?


----------



## ottoore

http://www.overclex.net/articles/delid-7900x-et-skylake-x-direct-die-frame/


----------



## andrvas

What's the max "safe" VCCIN voltage? Cause I need 2.0v to avoid phantom throttling when overclocking my 7820x (Asus TUF MK2 motherboard).


----------



## Jpmboy

only thing to say is... I haven;t seen any CPU killed by VCCIN under 2.0V


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Jpmboy

kingofblog said:


> You can also test the cache by mining Monero. Might as well pay for the electricity used.
> 
> 
> GeekBench 4 has AVX and AVX-512 (new) code paths for GEMM and FFT. Try disabling AVX with BCDEDIT.
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> bcdedit /set xsavedisable 1


lol - would take a month to mine a few bucks. 

I think disabling AVX will kill the GB4 and GB3 score - right?


----------



## Timmaigh!

kingofblog said:


> You can also test the cache by mining Monero. Might as well pay for the electricity used.
> 
> 
> GeekBench 4 has AVX and AVX-512 (new) code paths for GEMM and FFT. Try disabling AVX with BCDEDIT.
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> bcdedit /set xsavedisable 1





Jpmboy said:


> lol - would take a month to mine a few bucks.
> 
> I think disabling AVX will kill the GB4 and GB3 score - right?



Hahaha, what the....

Now that could be the reason why Geekbench fails, when everything else runs fine. I have AVX2/512 offsets set to usual 3 and 5, might need to increase those numbers. BTW, how it works, do you know? Do the offsets apply to the actual frequency during AVX load, i mean at 4,6GHz and AVX load they drop it to 4,3GHz, during 4,1GHz they drop it to 3,8GHz? etc... Or is it always offset from the highest possible frequency the CPU is allowed run?

I am going to try something like 5 and 10 offsets at those previous lower voltages to see if that helps. Thank you!


----------



## Jpmboy

Timmaigh! said:


> Hahaha, what the....
> 
> Now that could be the reason why Geekbench fails, when everything else runs fine. I have AVX2/512 offsets set to usual 3 and 5, might need to increase those numbers. BTW, how it works, do you know? Do the offsets apply to the actual frequency during AVX load, i mean at 4,6GHz and AVX load they drop it to 4,3GHz, during 4,1GHz they drop it to 3,8GHz? etc... Or is it always offset from the highest possible frequency the CPU is allowed run?
> 
> I am going to try something like 5 and 10 offsets at those previous lower voltages to see if that helps. Thank you!


the offset is applied to the highest multiplier you have in bios for core. If you synch all cores, then just substract the offset from that number. If you have a Per-Core OC, the offest is applied to the highest multi in a Synch-cores manner. so with a 5 offset my 2x46 16x45 runs axv on all cores at 41, NOT 2x41 16x40.


----------



## ABeta

What do you guys recommend for cooling off the VRM for a Rampage Extreme VI? I bought a 80 x 25mm fan and have clearance issues, but now I am looking at 60 x 10mm, 50 x 10mm or 40 x 10mm. What option do you guys think would be most fitting?


----------



## Timmaigh!

Jpmboy said:


> the offset is applied to the highest multiplier you have in bios for core. If you synch all cores, then just substract the offset from that number. If you have a Per-Core OC, the offest is applied to the highest multi in a Synch-cores manner. so with a 5 offset my 2x46 16x45 runs axv on all cores at 41, NOT 2x41 16x40.


Thank you! 

In the end i had to apply -10 offset for the AVX2, cause bump from -3 to -5 was not enough and still caused BSOD. Well i am yet to try all the other values inbetween these 2, maybe already -6 will do the trick and 10 is not needed.... anyway, this finally let me finish Geekbench (at not so much worse score), while keeping my lower voltage settings... so it all seemed nice and rosy.

Until i switched computer today and after getting to Windows i found out the Intel Turbo Boost 3.0 utility wont work - out of blue - ITBM driver wont load or whatever. Apparently, somehow, once again i booted with F6 BIOS instead of F7...so i lost all my OC settings. Aaaaaargh - Gigabyte!

Worst thing there is no way to return to F7 BIOS on my own...at least i have no clue, how to do it - i checked the interwebz for solution and apparently, you can copy main BIOS over backup, initiating the process by pressing Alt + F12 during start-up... this does not work for me at all, i just get normally to Win. Additionally, apparently if you hold F9 in BIOS, it will show you properties including BOTH BIOS version - i can see only one, the current one.... anyway, i am not even sure if it would be a good idea to have both versions the same. Apparently, the board reverts to F6 BIOS, when it fails to boot up with F7...i have no clue why would it fail, but clearly it happens - so if i had both version F7, i guess the motherboard would not boot up ever again? Can BIOS corrupt itself somehow during boot cause of the OC? If yes, would it be like corrupted main F7 BIOS and good F7 BIOS?

I downloaded F8 version and flashed it, so now i am running that one. Re-applied and saved the OC settings. I wonder, if i randomly find myself at some later time running F6 again. Gonna download it to USB disk now with all the current OC settings, if i had to reflash it back again in future.


----------



## Helgaiden

Trying to get my i9-7900x to what i thought was an easy 4.5ghz. CPU is under custom loop cooling. I cant seem to get the voltage over 1.184 even though i specify 1.23 in BIOS. Not sure whats going on. p95 smallFFT absolutely spikes the temps though, but blend runs pretty well. Motherboard is an EVGA x299 FTWK. I have the multi per core set to 45 yet when i activate p95 blend, the frequency jumps to 4.5 for a second then settles to 4.2. Not sure whats happening but feel like its not getting enough voltage and thus its throttling itself?

I've attached an image of the BIOS settings available to me


----------



## wingman99

Helgaiden said:


> Trying to get my i9-7900x to what i thought was an easy 4.5ghz. CPU is under custom loop cooling. I cant seem to get the voltage over 1.184 even though i specify 1.23 in BIOS. Not sure whats going on. p95 smallFFT absolutely spikes the temps though, but blend runs pretty well. Motherboard is an EVGA x299 FTWK. I have the multi per core set to 45 yet when i activate p95 blend, the frequency jumps to 4.5 for a second then settles to 4.2. Not sure whats happening but feel like its not getting enough voltage and thus its throttling itself?
> 
> I've attached an image of the BIOS settings available to me


Try increasing the power limits, the VRM might be throttling.


----------



## Helgaiden

wingman99 said:


> Try increasing the power limits, the VRM might be throttling.


Which settings are those?


Also, i figured out why it was giving me a lower clock. I forgot p95 is AVX heavy and i noticed the AVX offset in BIOS were -3. 45 - 3 = 42 = 4200mhz, which was what i was seeing. I changed the offset to 0 and am back in windows running p95 blend, at 4.5ghz, specified 1.2v and VID is reporting that but VCORE is reporting 1.192. I may continue lowering VCORE if its stable here to try to bring temps further down.

edit/update: temps got into the 80s and i saw the CPU downclock itself to 1.2ghz. Thought that was weird. Stopped all stress testing, then restarted stress testing, and the clocks didnt come back up. Not until it was rebooted at least. Played a match of PUBG and watched the clocks, stayed at 4.5 the entire time though, so thats nice.


----------



## wingman99

Helgaiden said:


> Which settings are those?
> 
> 
> Also, i figured out why it was giving me a lower clock. I forgot p95 is AVX heavy and i noticed the AVX offset in BIOS were -3. 45 - 3 = 42 = 4200mhz, which was what i was seeing. I changed the offset to 0 and am back in windows running p95 blend, at 4.5ghz, specified 1.2v and VID is reporting that but VCORE is reporting 1.192. I may continue lowering VCORE if its stable here to try to bring temps further down.
> 
> edit/update: temps got into the 80s and i saw the CPU downclock itself to 1.2ghz. Thought that was weird. Stopped all stress testing, then restarted stress testing, and the clocks didnt come back up. Not until it was rebooted at least. Played a match of PUBG and watched the clocks, stayed at 4.5 the entire time though, so thats nice.


Sounds like it is working well, gad you found the AVX offset setting that caused the problem. Here is a link if you want to do more. http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1634045-skylake-x-phantom-throttling.html


----------



## Helgaiden

wingman99 said:


> Sounds like it is working well, gad you found the AVX offset setting that caused the problem. Here is a link if you want to do more. http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1634045-skylake-x-phantom-throttling.html



ehhhh idk. Looks like there is another issue...

https://imgur.com/a/xOJZT

the bottom middle....
"Motherboard VR Thermal Throttle..."


----------



## wingman99

Helgaiden said:


> ehhhh idk. Looks like there is another issue...
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/xOJZT
> 
> the bottom middle....
> "Motherboard VR Thermal Throttle..."


I would check the VRM temperature with HWiNFO64. This page has VRM Tj temp http://www.overclock.net/forum/6-in...665-intel-x299-socket-2066-vrm-thread-15.html


----------



## Helgaiden

wingman99 said:


> I would check the VRM temperature with HWiNFO64. This page has VRM Tj temp http://www.overclock.net/forum/6-in...665-intel-x299-socket-2066-vrm-thread-15.html


Alright i'll check in over there and see whats up, thanks.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Helgaiden said:


> Trying to get my i9-7900x to what i thought was an easy 4.5ghz. CPU is under custom loop cooling. I cant seem to get the voltage over 1.184 even though i specify 1.23 in BIOS. Not sure whats going on. p95 smallFFT absolutely spikes the temps though, but blend runs pretty well. Motherboard is an EVGA x299 FTWK. I have the multi per core set to 45 yet when i activate p95 blend, the frequency jumps to 4.5 for a second then settles to 4.2. Not sure whats happening but feel like its not getting enough voltage and thus its throttling itself?
> 
> I've attached an image of the BIOS settings available to me


What software do you use to monitor frequency? I found out the ones i use (coretemp, hwinfo, cpu-z) or not exactly to be trusted all the time, when it comes to core frequencies they show. I run 41x for all core load and 46x for 2 cores and during Cinebench single core runs they would frequently show just 4100 MHz on the core that is working, instead of 4600...there would be occasional spikes, but most of the times its 4100.... but then the resulting score would be in line with what is expected from 4600 MHz frequency.

I guess in your case its more likely something related to throttling or AVX stuff, but you never know...


----------



## Legnumvr4

Hello,

I would like to overclock my delidded i9 7900x. However, I don't know where to start. Which guides do you use? 

I've read a few and maybe I know something, but I'm not sure. Can you give your settings - voltage, mesh and which Mode (adaptive or offset)? 

I know that we have different units, but your settings would allow me to learn the values ​​that need to be changed under my processor.

Sorry, I'm not experienced


----------



## warbucks

*Direct Die Cooling*

I was bored and needed something to tinker with so I bought and received this today. We'll see how much better I can control temperatures with my 7820X using this.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## truehighroller1

warbucks said:


> I was bored and needed something to tinker with so I bought and received this today. We'll see how much better I can control temperatures with my 7820X using this.


I can't wait to hear how much of a difference it makes for you. Hopefully you take a screen by shot of temps before and after. I delidded my 7900x and was able to get about 18 - 20C difference.


----------



## ThrashZone

Legnumvr4 said:


> Hello,
> 
> I would like to overclock my delidded i9 7900x. However, I don't know where to start. Which guides do you use?
> 
> I've read a few and maybe I know something, but I'm not sure. Can you give your settings - voltage, mesh and which Mode (adaptive or offset)?
> 
> I know that we have different units, but your settings would allow me to learn the values ​​that need to be changed under my processor.
> 
> Sorry, I'm not experienced


Hi,
What type of cooling do you use ?
Easiest place to dive in is use an xmp profile either profile one or two depending on the memory purchased 

Depending on cooling a docile oc on the cpu I would guess is all core 45 and see how your temps are doing 
You can monitor them easily at a glance of the taskbar using this
http://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/core_temp.html

Mesh = cache so the 7900x uses mostly 2700 or 27 so the minimum cache you can enter 27
Max cache you can use 30 
Let us know how temps are after the above


----------



## tistou77

warbucks said:


> I was bored and needed something to tinker with so I bought and received this today. We'll see how much better I can control temperatures with my 7820X using this.


Looking forward to seeing the difference with and without (Direct Die vs IHS)


----------



## Jpmboy

still not available in the US??


----------



## truehighroller1

Double post sorry.


----------



## truehighroller1

ThrashZone said:


> Mesh = cache so the 7900x uses mostly 2700 or 27 so the minimum cache you can enter 27
> Max cache you can use 30
> Let us know how temps are after the above


I'm running at 3.3 on my 7900x which is the point where it catches up with the old architecture speed wise. Cache scales with voltage. I could probably go higher.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Mysticial

kingofblog said:


> How high can you get your cache frequency? In this thread, most posters have stopped at 3.2 GHz, but it is not clear if this is because of a silicon limitation. My own 7900X needs considerable voltage (+150 mV) to reach 3.2 GHz, at which point it starts contributing around 10 W to the power draw. My ASUS X299-A board does not support monitoring cache voltage, so I stopped at this point for safety reasons.


Here's my cache + memory experience so far. This is a mix of hardware both at home and at work.

*7900X + Gigabyte Gaming 7 + F4-3300C16Q2-128GTZKW*

Initially bench-stable at 3.2 cache. After running at 3.0 for 6 months, it BSODs at startup at 3.2.
Initially 24/7 stress-stable at 3800 MT/s and bootable at 4000 MT/s. After running at 3800 (1.39v, 1.0v VCCSA) for 6 months, it is no longer stable above 3200 MT/s.


*7940X (ES) + Gigabyte Designare + F4-3300C16Q2-128GTZKW*

Bench stable at 2.9 cache + 3400 memory. BSODs with 3.0 cache on boot. Also BSODs with 3600 memory. All voltages left at stock curves.

This is the same set of memory as above.


*7940X (ES) + Asus Apex + F4-3200C14Q-64GTZSW*

Prime-stable at 2.8 cache + 2800 memory. Marginally unstable at 3.0 cache @ 1.2v. No post with memory above 2800. Will run at 3200 with right-side channels empty and VCCSA at 1.2v.

This is the same chip as above. It failed to post at 2933 (all channels) on both of our Apex boards with different sets of (identical model) ram. Yet it's stress-stable at 3400 with a different mobo and different set of sticks.


*7940X (retail) + Asus Apex + F4-3200C14Q-64GTZSW*

Prime-stable at 3.0 cache + 3800 memory. Unstable at 3.2 cache. No post at 4000 memory even with very relaxed timings, VCCSA above 1.2v, and DRAM above 1.4v.


*7980XE (retail) + Asus Apex + F4-3200C14Q-64GTZSW*

Prime-stable at 3.0 cache + 3800 memory. Unstable at 3.2 cache. No post at 4000 memory even with very relaxed timings, VCCSA above 1.2v, and DRAM above 1.4v.

-----

I have a pair of these coming tomorrow which I'm eager to play with. They're on sale right now (which brings them back down to their launch price last year). I'll be paying attention to what the XMP settings are to see if they give any insight on the sub-timings needed to make >3600 stable.


----------



## warbucks

I purchased from ocuk directly. They just received a shipment earlier this week.


----------



## Legnumvr4

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> What type of cooling do you use ?
> Easiest place to dive in is use an xmp profile either profile one or two depending on the memory purchased
> 
> Depending on cooling a docile oc on the cpu I would guess is all core 45 and see how your temps are doing
> You can monitor them easily at a glance of the taskbar using this
> http://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/core_temp.html
> 
> Mesh = cache so the 7900x uses mostly 2700 or 27 so the minimum cache you can enter 27
> Max cache you can use 30
> Let us know how temps are after the above


Thank you very much. Tonight I will try and let you know what the temperatures are 


I have the last problem. I don't understand LLC :thumbsdow I would like to have two profiles - "4.5ghz eco" and extreme 4.8 ghz. So 1-5 are for an extreme oc, and 6-8 for a small oc? I understand correctly? :/


----------



## truehighroller1

Legnumvr4 said:


> Thank you very much. Tonight I will try and let you know what the temperatures are
> 
> 
> I have the last problem. I don't understand LLC :thumbsdow I would like to have two profiles - "4.5ghz eco" and extreme 4.8 ghz. So 1-5 are for an extreme oc, and 6-8 for a small oc? I understand correctly? :/


The strength builds up starting from one up to ten being the strongest. LLC negates vdroop. Vdroop being when you set a voltage and that voltage kicks in finally it is actually lower then what you set. LLC bumps the voltage up a tiny bit to negate that effect, called vdroop.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## warbucks

I got the der8auer direct die frame installed and have been benching and tweaking. I'm sitting at 4.8Ghz right now with the following settings:

vcore: 1.262V
vcache: 1.000V
vdimm: 1.400V (3600Mhz @ 16-16-16-36-1T)
vccio/sa: 1.05V/1.00V

Running Prime 95 In-place large FFT's, temperatures are hovering around 74-76C. I'm seeing roughly a 6-8C difference using the der8auer direct die frame.

I believe I still have room to go higher on the core. Will try 4.9Ghz today. I'm also interested in bringing the memory overclock up to 4000Mhz. I'm using G.Skill a b-die kit which I'm loving.


----------



## Mysticial

kingofblog said:


> I did not know the cache/IMC was subject to degradation like that (only 6 months!). Can you also list the voltages you used for the uncore OC?
> 
> Maybe I should set my chip back to the stock configuration...


The cache part is definitely concerning. IIRC, the motherboard has been running at around 0.950 - 1.000 with the auto voltage. Though I haven't done a more comprehensive test. And it might just be the initial "burn-in" instead of long-term degradation.

There have also been a couple BIOS updates along the way (all without the Spectre patches). So that might've had something to do with it.

The chip has been running sustained AVX512-heavy memory-intensive loads average of about 8-hours a day for the 6 months. But the usage is bursty. Sometimes it'll run for 2 weeks straight on said workload. Other times, it's off for 2 weeks straight. Temps in the 70 - 85C range. (Tj.Max set to 85C so that it throttles.) Vcore is undervolted with offset -0.050v.

The memory part is perhaps more perplexing. Since I've been running it at 3800 MT/s for the full 6 months, I watched it steadily go unstable over time. The memory stability has never really been responsive to VCCSA increases. Even 0.800 was enough to be bench-stable at 3600 when it was new IIRC. As the degradation became apparent, increasing VCCSA didn't help at all.

If there is degradation in the memory itself, it can't be the only factor as the same sticks are stable at 3400 in my other machine whereas it errors under load on this setup.

Seeing as how memory stability can be so sensitive to the mobo (2800 on the Apex 4 DIMMs vs. 3400 on the Designare 8 DIMMs), I'm starting to wonder if it's the mobo itself that might be degrading.

Once my 8 x 16GB (X299 3600) sticks come in, I'll be able to test it further. Though given the storms, it's looking like they won't arrive before the weekend.


----------



## Jpmboy

warbucks said:


> I got the der8auer direct die frame installed and have been benching and tweaking. I'm sitting at 4.8Ghz right now with the following settings:
> 
> vcore: 1.262V
> vcache: 1.000V
> vdimm: 1.400V (3600Mhz @ 16-16-16-36-1T)
> vccio/sa: 1.05V/1.00V
> 
> Running Prime 95 In-place large FFT's, temperatures are hovering around 74-76C. I'm seeing roughly a 6-8C difference using the der8auer direct die frame.
> 
> I believe I still have room to go higher on the core. Will try 4.9Ghz today. I'm also interested in bringing the memory overclock up to 4000Mhz. I'm using G.Skill a b-die kit which I'm loving.


LM or tim between the die and cooler?


----------



## warbucks

Jpmboy said:


> LM or tim between the die and cooler?


Liquid Metal. My ambient temp is higher than usual given it's winter here (-35C outside) and my wife has the heat cranked


----------



## toncij

warbucks said:


> I got the der8auer direct die frame installed and have been benching and tweaking. I'm sitting at 4.8Ghz right now with the following settings:
> 
> vcore: 1.262V
> vcache: 1.000V
> vdimm: 1.400V (3600Mhz @ 16-16-16-36-1T)
> vccio/sa: 1.05V/1.00V
> 
> Running Prime 95 In-place large FFT's, temperatures are hovering around 74-76C. I'm seeing roughly a 6-8C difference using the der8auer direct die frame.
> 
> I believe I still have room to go higher on the core. Will try 4.9Ghz today. I'm also interested in bringing the memory overclock up to 4000Mhz. I'm using G.Skill a b-die kit which I'm loving.


Where did you buy G.Skill b-die kit? Nowhere to be found and they never answer emails.


----------



## truehighroller1

toncij said:


> Where did you buy G.Skill b-die kit? Nowhere to be found and they never answer emails.


Last I checked Newegg had some. I just bought some gskill 4 x 8gb ddr4 4000 my self the other week. I just ordered the r6e to put it in which will be here Tuesday then I'm returning my strix e gaming. I can't wait!


----------



## warbucks

toncij said:


> Where did you buy G.Skill b-die kit? Nowhere to be found and they never answer emails.


I picked it up from Newegg; however, I purchased it some time ago(September) but only got around to installing it about a month ago when I swapped the motherboard, cpu and ram out.


----------



## truehighroller1

warbucks said:


> I picked it up from Newegg; however, I purchased it some time ago(September) but only got around to installing it about a month ago when I swapped the motherboard, cpu and ram out.


The memory I purchased is b die. Just purchased few weeks ago and as far as I know it's still there in stock.


----------



## warbucks

Could someone point me to a thread or post with some standard secondary memory timings for G.Skill b-die? I'd like to start tweaking them and it would be helpful if I had a place to start from.


----------



## Jpmboy

warbucks said:


> I was bored and needed something to tinker with so I bought and received this today. We'll see how much better I can control temperatures with my 7820X using this.





warbucks said:


> Could someone point me to a thread or post with some standard secondary memory timings for G.Skill b-die? I'd like to start tweaking them and it would be helpful if I had a place to start from.


http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-in...el-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread-129.html


----------



## Timmaigh!

I have quick question, i started to have random mouse cursor lock-ups - the only solution to fix it is to unplug the mouse and plug it again. 

Do you think it can have something to do with my CPU/RAM OC or its more likely this is down to software/driver issue?.... i have Razer Lachesis and 3 days ago i installed original Razer driver for it, which however is for Win 8 version (and i use Win10)...did not have any such issues before with Windows default driver, but with that one for whatever reason the mouse would not stop glowing when computer was off.


----------



## RichKnecht

I think I am going to finally retire my OC'ed X5675 (4.6GHz) and go Skylake. My issue is do I get a 7820X or is it really worth the extra $300 for a 7900X? Judging from what I have found on google, both seem to overclock pretty well. I am running a EK custom loop with 2 240mm radiators. Love some input.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ good post! I'd +1 if that were activated again!


----------



## RichKnecht

kingofblog said:


> The i7-7820X costs $570 on Newegg right now, compared to $970 for the i9-7900X, which looks like a pretty poor deal for two cores. However, once you add the mandatory platform cost, the calculation favors moving up one grade.
> 
> ASUS X299 STRIX-XE ($370)
> Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB DDR4 3200 C16 ($428)
> CPU cooler ($0, already provisioned)
> 850 W PSU ($170, already provisioned?)
> 
> Total platform cost:
> i7-7820X: $1538
> i9-7900X: $1938
> i9-7940X: $2369
> i9-7960X: $2563
> i9-7980XE: $2947
> 
> Cost per GHz*core, non-overclocked:
> i7-7820X: $48.0 (4 GHz * 8)
> i9-7900X: $48.5 (4 GHz * 10)
> i9-7940X: $44.5 (3.8 GHz * 14)
> i9-7960X: $44.5 (3.6 GHz * 16)
> i9-7980XE: $48.2 (3.4 GHz * 18)
> 
> Cost per GHz*core, Silicon Lottery 50% probable OC:
> i7-7820X: $40.9 (4.7 GHz)
> i9-7900X: $41.2 (4.7 GHz)
> i9-7940X: $38.5 (4.4 GHz)
> i9-7960X: $36.4 (4.4 GHz?)
> i9-7980XE: $38.1 (4.3 GHz)
> 
> In other words, the CPUs cost the same after accounting for the "TCO". In fact, the optimal choice is actually the i9-7940X/i9-7960X. If you use cheaper components, the choice may favor the i7-7820X.
> 
> 
> By the way, the compute density of an OC HCC Skylake-X is immense. The i9-7980XE ($2000) has the same throughput as a Xeon Platinum 8176 ($7000).
> 
> i9-7980XE: 4.3 * 18 = 77.4 GHz
> Xeon Platinum 8176: 2.8 * 28 = 78.4 GHz
> 
> So there is great "value" from the emotional point of view as well.



Thanks for that comparison. I have a Microcenter 10 minutes away and the 7820X is $499 and the 7900X is $799. They have the Strix for $319 when you buy a processor. Memory is about 450 for 32GB. Really having a hard time justifying $300 for 2 cores. I am so ready to pull the trigger.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Mysticial

kingofblog said:


> It does not change the conclusion at all.
> 
> i7-7820X: $500+$320+$450 = $1270 = $39.69 / core*GHz
> i9-7900X: $800+$320+$450 = $1570 = $39.25 / core*GHz
> 
> The more parts you need to buy, the more you should spend on CPU. Otherwise, you are flushing the platform cost down the drain. As I showed above, if you have the money, you should buy the top bin parts.


I guess the assumption is that the application scales perfectly. (i.e. mining) If the use-case is gaming, then the bigger chip is just a waste of money unless you want the extra PCIe lanes.

I know of some people who got the bottom-end Threadrippers with maxed out ram configurations just for PCIe and the database caching/storage.


----------



## toncij

The problem is, from my experience with 3 chips: 7980XE overclocks better than 7900X. That's.. bizarre and probably has something to do with the chip type...


----------



## ThrashZone

kingofblog said:


> It does not change the conclusion at all.
> 
> i7-7820X: $500+$320+$450 = $1270 = $39.69 / core*GHz
> i9-7900X: $800+$320+$450 = $1570 = $39.25 / core*GHz
> 
> The more parts you need to buy, the more you should spend on CPU. Otherwise, you are flushing the platform cost down the drain. As I showed above, if you have the money, you should buy the top bin parts.


Hi,
Buying all parts at one place never works out


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## ThrashZone

kingofblog said:


> Of course, you should only buy as much performance as you can use. What these calculations show is that there is no reason to buy less CPU than you could effectively utilize. For playing games, the *i7-8700K is better than any Skylake-X.*
> .


Hi,
More nonsense
Any cpu can game


----------



## Jpmboy

toncij said:


> The problem is, from my experience with 3 chips: 7980XE overclocks better than 7900X. That's.. bizarre and probably has something to do with the chip type...


I feel like they should make an emoji from your avatar - A new WTH one.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I just find the claims that the 8700 games better than skylake-x since I've gamed with it on a 980-1080-1080ti and now on a titan Xp and it games quite well on all of those gpu's 
Better is in the eye of the user but I find the open claim nothing but nonsense that 8700 is better Mr. Strawman


----------



## djgar

Jpmboy said:


> I feel like they should make an emoji from your avatar - A new WTH one.


Hmmm ... that might incur the wrath of the Space Federation, the mutants or both ... :gunner:


----------



## Mysticial

Mysticial said:


> The cache part is definitely concerning. IIRC, the motherboard has been running at around 0.950 - 1.000 with the auto voltage. Though I haven't done a more comprehensive test. And it might just be the initial "burn-in" instead of long-term degradation.
> 
> There have also been a couple BIOS updates along the way (all without the Spectre patches). So that might've had something to do with it.
> 
> The chip has been running sustained AVX512-heavy memory-intensive loads average of about 8-hours a day for the 6 months. But the usage is bursty. Sometimes it'll run for 2 weeks straight on said workload. Other times, it's off for 2 weeks straight. Temps in the 70 - 85C range. (Tj.Max set to 85C so that it throttles.) Vcore is undervolted with offset -0.050v.
> 
> The memory part is perhaps more perplexing. Since I've been running it at 3800 MT/s for the full 6 months, I watched it steadily go unstable over time. The memory stability has never really been responsive to VCCSA increases. Even 0.800 was enough to be bench-stable at 3600 when it was new IIRC. As the degradation became apparent, increasing VCCSA didn't help at all.
> 
> If there is degradation in the memory itself, it can't be the only factor as the same sticks are stable at 3400 in my other machine whereas it errors under load on this setup.
> 
> Seeing as how memory stability can be so sensitive to the mobo (2800 on the Apex 4 DIMMs vs. 3400 on the Designare 8 DIMMs), I'm starting to wonder if it's the mobo itself that might be degrading.
> 
> Once my 8 x 16GB (X299 3600) sticks come in, I'll be able to test it further. Though given the storms, it's looking like they won't arrive before the weekend.


My ram finally arrived. Two kits of 4 x 16GB each. But since I ordered them together, I got lucky and the serial numbers are consecutive through all 8 sticks. (adjacent kits off the same batch/assembly line) So hopefully that's as good as a native 8-stick kit.

They are Samsung, but I can't confirm if they are B-die since Thaiphoon doesn't work on that system.

The stock XMP 3600 seems to be stable on my 7900X which degraded from 3800 to 3200 on my other kit.

Haven't tried overclocking it or playing with it yet. Gonna do an extended stress-test on it first.

-----

EDIT:

Spoke too soon. The stock XMP 3600 failed on a slightly longer test.

The stock VCCSA with the XMP seems to be around 0.900v in the BIOS and 0.850v under load. Which seems a bit low.

EDIT2:

Both 3600 and 3466 with VCCSA @ 1.0v failed after about 3 hours each. This is consistent with my older kit. So the degradation is almost certainly CPU or mobo related and not the memory or a bad DIMM seating.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## KimbaWLion

*Chose an 7820X Should I delid and Bin?*

Living near a Microcenter makes choices for a CPU rather decent because of pricing...
My choices came down to a [email protected]$799 or a [email protected]$499.

I chose the 7820x because I had other things to buy and it SEEMS to be the sweet spot in the terms of the Intel Line.
I play games, I encode, and I do lots of other things so the Skylake X for me is a better long term solution. I got 6 years out of my X79 and would STILL have it were it not for EVGA running out of X79 Dark Motherboards to give me, they "upgraded" me to an X299 Micro for free..
The foreseeable future shows me that I will NOT needing more than the 28 lanes and when and IF I do there is a clear path for me. @$499USD, Intel SHOULD have provided the 44 lanes PERIOD... 

I do have a question though. I was looking at Silicon Lottery's delidding and Binning Service. The Options end up costing $100 plus shipping.. I am sure the answer is here somewhere here but at 677 pages I can get yelled out for not searching and get a fast answer. I have not even opened the CPU. I am using 32gig of Corsair Dominator Platinum 3000mhz memory, and Microcenter made it a deal to buy the EVGA 480 CLC for $90 with any Intel CPU purchase so there is my cooling solution... ( the EK Phoenix looks awesome but not at what they are charging...)


----------



## toncij

Jpmboy said:


> I feel like they should make an emoji from your avatar - A new WTH one.


It's partly a joke. I had bad experience. My first 7900X was a nightmare, couldn't reach 4.6 stable with insane voltage. Second and third were absolute disaster. 7980XE first got to 4.65, my last 4.8 and has more room voltage-wise. 

Half that is not a joke: Intel manufactures CPUs from different silicons in sets of cores taped. LCC, HCC and XCC (low, high and extreme core count). Now, I might be wrong, but I'd bet some money on that Intel manfuactures i9 from all of these, making 7900X an LCC or HCC and I'd bet a lot of money 7980XE comes from both, HCC and XCC, no matter the fact that HCC is enough.

From there, I tend to think XCC in a form of 7980XE might overclock better than HCC due to die space and different hot spots, leakage etc.

I might be wrong, but well... 



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I just find the claims that the 8700 games better than skylake-x since I've gamed with it on a 980-1080-1080ti and now on a titan Xp and it games quite well on all of those gpu's
> Better is in the eye of the user but I find the open claim nothing but nonsense that 8700 is better Mr. Strawman


8700K games better simply because of the per-core performance and better fit for games cache core communication. (google ring, mesh bus).


----------



## Jpmboy

toncij said:


> It's partly a joke. I had bad experience. My first 7900X was a nightmare, couldn't reach 4.6 stable with insane voltage. Second and third were absolute disaster. 7980XE first got to 4.65, my last 4.8 and has more room voltage-wise.
> 
> *Half that is not a joke: Intel manufactures CPUs from different silicons in sets of cores taped. LCC, HCC and XCC (low, high and extreme core count). Now, I might be wrong, but I'd bet some money on that Intel manfuactures i9 from all of these, making 7900X an LCC or HCC and I'd bet a lot of money 7980XE comes from both, HCC and XCC, no matter the fact that HCC is enough.
> 
> From there, I tend to think XCC in a form of 7980XE might overclock better than HCC due to die space and different hot spots, leakage etc.
> 
> I might be wrong, but well... *
> 
> 
> 
> 8700K games better simply because of the per-core performance and better fit for games cache core communication. (google ring, mesh bus).


yeah - perfect Avatar!


----------



## RichKnecht

KimbaWLion said:


> Living near a Microcenter makes choices for a CPU rather decent because of pricing...
> My choices came down to a [email protected]$799 or a [email protected]$499.
> 
> I chose the 7820x because I had other things to buy and it SEEMS to be the sweet spot in the terms of the Intel Line.
> I play games, I encode, and I do lots of other things so the Skylake X for me is a better long term solution. I got 6 years out of my X79 and would STILL have it were it not for EVGA running out of X79 Dark Motherboards to give me, they "upgraded" me to an X299 Micro for free..
> The foreseeable future shows me that I will NOT needing more than the 28 lanes and when and IF I do there is a clear path for me. @$499USD, Intel SHOULD have provided the 44 lanes PERIOD...
> 
> I do have a question though. I was looking at Silicon Lottery's delidding and Binning Service. The Options end up costing $100 plus shipping.. I am sure the answer is here somewhere here but at 677 pages I can get yelled out for not searching and get a fast answer. I have not even opened the CPU. I am using 32gig of Corsair Dominator Platinum 3000mhz memory, and Microcenter made it a deal to buy the EVGA 480 CLC for $90 with any Intel CPU purchase so there is my cooling solution... ( the EK Phoenix looks awesome but not at what they are charging...)


Looks like we go to the same Microcenter judging on your location. I don't do any gaming, but I process a lot of photos as I am a photographer. I am still running a X58 system I built in 2007 which started with an i920 OC'ed to 4GHz and recently upgraded to a X5675 Xeon running at 4.6GHz. The 5675 was an awesome upgrade for $50. However, I am going to Microcenter this morning and I am still not sure what I am coming home with. Chances are it will be a 7900X. The more I think about it, the more it makes more sense.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I doubt budget is why anyone bought into skylake x lol so a price annalists is pretty funny 
Personally my ultimate reason was win-7 
Buying into a win-10 only platform wasn't going to happen and didn't want to jump through any hoops to install 7 

Either way my 7900x has been fine delidded of course in the first 30 days of having it so Intel made off like a bandit in the night on their warranty obligations but yeah 8700k owners are mostly in the same boat so we are all morons for buy into either pigeon poop platform 

Either way I've had little problems oc'ing it 
I haven't gone past 4.9 though there really is no need for that much 4.8 @2.65v seems stable for benchmarks and 4.6 @1.90v for daily driver so I let it go at that.

This whole mesh/ ring crap is another funny one I wish people would call a duck a duck it is cache for crying out loud in both 

Some benchmarks even a 5930k can keep up with a 8700 other benchmarks even a 7900x blows a 8700 out of the water so gaming who cares if cache is different I say gaming is fine as a bottle of wine on skylake x and could care a less if someone says otherwise


----------



## toncij

Jpmboy said:


> yeah - perfect Avatar!


<3 Well, ok.


----------



## toncij

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I doubt budget is why anyone bought into skylake x lol so a price annalists is pretty funny
> Personally my ultimate reason was win-7
> Buying into a win-10 only platform wasn't going to happen and didn't want to jump through any hoops to install 7
> 
> Either way my 7900x has been fine delidded of course in the first 30 days of having it so Intel made off like a bandit in the night on their warranty obligations but yeah 8700k owners are mostly in the same boat so we are all morons for buy into either pigeon poop platform
> 
> Either way I've had little problems oc'ing it
> I haven't gone past 4.9 though there really is no need for that much 4.8 @2.65v seems stable for benchmarks and 4.6 @1.90v for daily driver so I let it go at that.
> 
> This whole mesh/ ring crap is another funny one I wish people would call a duck a duck it is cache for crying out loud in both
> 
> Some benchmarks even a 5930k can keep up with a 8700 other benchmarks even a 7900x blows a 8700 out of the water so gaming who cares if cache is different I say gaming is fine as a bottle of wine on skylake x and could care a less if someone says otherwise


Well, yes, unless you're gaming into high 140s and need every single MHz out of the CPU, it's true. If you play at 4K, even years old will do, let alone a HEDT beast. 

Love your voltages tho.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Like most platforms if one can cool it one can oc it with low voltages but I have been leaving it on auto now that my cooling system has been improved 
Even added the titan Xp to the loop still looking good temps wise and titan isn't throttling like a little baby


----------



## Haans249

Hate to be THAT guy if this has already been posted, but there are 678 pages in here.....

Question: Is there a good Core i9 Overclocking guide for Asus ROG bios? Primarily I'd like to understand how to overclock my 7940X while maintaining adaptive frequencies but turbo all cores under load to 4.4Ghz (or higher depending on heat/stability). 

With an AVX offset of -500mhz, I have a stable overclock currently of 4.4Ghz all core with voltages around 1.12V. I'm using adaptive voltage with a -.15V offset and +.25V during turbo. What I found strange is that this shows to net a +.1V during turbo, but HWInfo is not showing any change to voltages, so who knows, it may already be applying the offset because my all core overclock has all the cores at 4.4Ghz regardless of CPU load.

What am I missing?


----------



## Mysticial

kingofblog said:


> I did not know the cache/IMC was subject to degradation like that (only 6 months!). Can you also list the voltages you used for the uncore OC?
> 
> Maybe I should set my chip back to the stock configuration...


Turns out my original assessment was wrong. It's not the IMC/motherboard that degraded from 3800 to 3200 (and now to < 3000). It's CPU core itself.

This was what I was observing:


3600 failed within 3 hours
3400 failed within 3 hours
3200 failed within 10 hours
3000 failed within ~16 hours
There's no way it should be failing at 3000. So I started to suspect something else. The vcore had been running with an offset of -0.040v. So I put it back to stock and lowered the AVX512 overclock from 3.6 GHz to 3.4 GHz (almost entirely getting rid of it).

With the memory back at stock XMP 3600, the rig has to far survived overnight 12+ hours.

-----

From this, my new assessment is:

The IMC was never unstable to begin with. This explains why VCCSA increases had absolutely no effect on stability.

In the past 6 months one of two things has happened:


The CPU core has degraded enough that it is no longer stable with vcore offset -0.040v.
The workload has been optimized enough that the increased stress-level is exposing flaws in the original CPU overclock from July.*
As for why a higher memory speed would make it fail faster. The workload is bottlenecked by memory bandwidth. So the higher the memory speed, the faster the code runs and the more stress it places on the CPU core itself.

*Right now, the optimized workload pulls up to 250W at 3.4 GHz AVX512. Back in July, it couldn't do that below 3.8 GHz AVX512.


----------



## ThrashZone

Haans249 said:


> Hate to be THAT guy if this has already been posted, but there are 678 pages in here.....
> 
> Question: Is there a good Core i9 Overclocking guide for Asus ROG bios? Primarily I'd like to understand how to overclock my 7940X while maintaining adaptive frequencies but turbo all cores under load to 4.4Ghz (or higher depending on heat/stability).
> 
> With an AVX offset of -500mhz, I have a stable overclock currently of 4.4Ghz all core with voltages around 1.12V. I'm using adaptive voltage with a -.15V offset and +.25V during turbo. What I found strange is that this shows to net a +.1V during turbo, but HWInfo is not showing any change to voltages, so who knows, it may already be applying the offset because my all core overclock has all the cores at 4.4Ghz regardless of CPU load.
> 
> What am I missing?


Hi,
There are a few oc youtube videos 
Here's one of some stuff to disable 





This is I believe the first I watched it was okay and worked pretty well





Also here this was an interesting read
http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1634045-skylake-x-phantom-throttling.html


----------



## cekim

Mysticial said:


> The CPU core has degraded enough that it is no longer stable with vcore offset -0.040v.
> The workload has been optimized enough that the increased stress-level is exposing flaws in the original CPU overclock from July.*
> As for why a higher memory speed would make it fail faster. The workload is bottlenecked by memory bandwidth. So the higher the memory speed, the faster the code runs and the more stress it places on the CPU core itself.


I haven't seen this in form of degredation, but I definitely did see it in the form of higher v-core requirements and heat as I tightened memory timing.

Performance rose linearly with % decreases in memory latency and corresponding increase in real-world (random access) throughput. 

After a few steps I found my vcore needed a little more to be completely stable. 

I don't do much with AVX and even less with AVX512. It would not surprise me at all that, particular AVX512 roasts gates as you approach or exceed 4.0GHz. That's a massive amount of synchronous switching of a massive number of gates. The same issue with OC cache - its just a lot of gates toggling all at once. The heat-density can be enormous.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Mysticial

kingofblog said:


> Wow, so the chip was degraded without even going to extreme voltages? I have put 270 W through a i9-7900X for several minutes (prime95 non-AVX at 4.5-4.6 GHz OC), which would be even higher thermal/power density than your i9-7980XE. I wonder if Silicon Lottery is going to be seeing a lot of unexpected warranty claims when the chips reach 1 year old.


It's a 7900X, not a 7980XE. And I'm only listing degradation as a "possibility". So it doesn't mean it's necessarily the case, just that I can't rule out.

The thing is that very few people actually run their chips the way I do. Nobody outside of GIMPS runs Prime95 24/7. So even if they're running dangerous overclocks, they won't be burning out their chips any time soon.

I'm doing maybe 8-12 hours/day of:

AVX512 at 3.6 - 3.80 GHz
CPU power draw of around 200 - 250W sustained with spikes of 300W.
Temps in the range of 70 - 85C with spikes of 95C.

So if there is degradation, it could simply be from the temps.

I have this thing dialed almost back to stock for the time-being. I suspect there might be something up with the mounting since the temps weren't this bad back in July and it's Winter right now. Perhaps my 8-year-old mega tube of Arctic Silver 5 is degrading faster than anything else.

-----

My 7940X is running a much more aggressive overclock at all-core 4.7 non-AVX, 3.7 AVX512 and max vcore of 1.350v. The temps are better there despite pulling up to 380W. But I'm also using a better cooler along with newer thermal paste.

But I don't grind my 7940X the same way I do with my 7900X.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Mysticial

kingofblog said:


> Is 3.8 GHz the limit for AVX-512 clocking? What voltage is it running at that frequency? The single-core AVX and AVX-512 frequencies are 4 GHz, so there is a pre-programmed voltage setting up to at least 4 GHz for AVX. My first i9-7900X sample drew 220 W at base frequency in FIRESTARTER, but a newer sample only needs 170 W.


IIRC, something like 1.000 - 1.050v @ 3.8 GHz depending on the core. I can definitely go higher than 3.8 GHz for AVX512. Back in July, I ran some benchmarks at 4.0 GHz and it topped 300W and 100C.

But 3.8 GHz AVX512 was the limit of my cooling back in July. Now that has dropped to ~3.4 GHz since the workload has gotten much more optimized and possibly because my paste sucks. I tried benching it at 3.8 GHz last month with the new code and the temps slammed right into the 115C Tj.Max that I had temporarily set (with the -0.040v vcore offset). So I'm not doing that again.

The preprogrammed VID table goes up to the highest turbo multiplier (or perhaps 1 above it). And I believe it's the same regardless of the workload (non-AVX, AVX, AVX512). On the Gigabyte boards using offset mode, if you go above the highest multiplier, it uses the VID entry for that highest multiplier. It doesn't try to extrapolate it like the Asus boards. But on my 7900X I never went above the highest multiplier anyway since there wasn't enough thermal headroom to even do 4.5 GHz (non-AVX) on all 10 cores.


----------



## Jpmboy

Mysticial said:


> IIRC, something like 1.000 - 1.050v @ 3.8 GHz depending on the core. I can definitely go higher than 3.8 GHz for AVX512. Back in July, I ran some benchmarks at 4.0 GHz and it topped 300W and 100C.
> 
> But 3.8 GHz AVX512 was the limit of my cooling back in July. Now that has dropped to ~3.4 GHz since the workload has gotten much more optimized and possibly *because my paste sucks*. I tried benching it at 3.8 GHz last month with the new code and the temps slammed right into the 115C Tj.Max that I had temporarily set (with the -0.040v vcore offset). So I'm not doing that again.
> 
> The preprogrammed VID table goes up to the highest turbo multiplier (or perhaps 1 above it). And I believe it's the same regardless of the workload (non-AVX, AVX, AVX512). On the Gigabyte boards using offset mode, if you go above the highest multiplier, it uses the VID entry for that highest multiplier. It doesn't try to extrapolate it like the Asus boards. But on my 7900X I never went above the highest multiplier anyway since there wasn't enough thermal headroom to even do 4.5 GHz (non-AVX) on all 10 cores.


I can tell ya that on a delidded CPU, TGK and Gelid both dried out in a few weeks (I mean, crispy hard... practically glued the block to the IHS). I'm trying PK-3 right now and ICD24ct is next. Never saw TGK harden like that before.


----------



## Mysticial

Jpmboy said:


> I can tell ya that on a delidded CPU, TGK and Gelid both dried out in a few weeks (I mean, crispy hard... practically glued the block to the IHS). I'm trying PK-3 right now and ICD24ct is next. Never saw TGK harden like that before.


I wonder if winter could have anything to do with it drying out.

I just changed both the thermal paste and the AIO component of the cooler. And it looks like a drop in temps of at least 5 - 10C.

The original paste (Arctic Silver 5 bought in 2009) hadn't really dried or hardened since July. Though it was thick to begin with - probably from having been on the shelf for so long. I still have half the tube left. But I guess it's not worth using the rest of it.

I'm now using a tube of Antec Formula 7 which I bought back in December.

-----

The test I started yesterday with:


7900X @ 3.4 GHz AVX512
Stock vcore
Stock XMP (3600, 17-19-19-40)
VCCSA of 1.0v
still ended up failing after about 26 hours.

For those of you who are running your memory at 3600+, what VCCSA are you using?


----------



## truehighroller1

Spoiler






Mysticial said:


> I wonder if winter could have anything to do with it drying out.
> 
> I just changed both the thermal paste and the AIO component of the cooler. And it looks like a drop in temps of at least 5 - 10C.
> 
> The original paste (Arctic Silver 5 bought in 2009) hadn't really dried or hardened since July. Though it was thick to begin with - probably from having been on the shelf for so long. I still have half the tube left. But I guess it's not worth using the rest of it.
> 
> I'm now using a tube of Antec Formula 7 which I bought back in December.
> 
> -----
> 
> The test I started yesterday with:
> 
> 
> 7900X @ 3.4 GHz AVX512
> Stock vcore
> Stock XMP (3600, 17-19-19-40)
> VCCSA of 1.0v
> still ended up failing after about 26 hours.
> 
> For those of you who are running your memory at 3600+, what VCCSA are you using?






I'm running at 4000 and was able to get mine stable at 1.15vtt or "vccio" 1.1 vccsa.. anything lower it blue screens. I've been adjusting in increments of .05. I'm running at 5 GHz CPU 7900x and 3.3 cache.


----------



## Martin778

Do you think I could get a 7980XE cooled enough with a BQ Silent Loop 360mm?
7920X will have to go to RMA probably, its hitting 100s on 6 of the 12 cores.


----------



## Jpmboy

Mysticial said:


> I wonder if winter could have anything to do with it drying out.
> 
> I just changed both the thermal paste and the AIO component of the cooler. And it looks like a drop in temps of at least 5 - 10C.
> 
> The original paste (Arctic Silver 5 bought in 2009) hadn't really dried or hardened since July. Though it was thick to begin with - probably from having been on the shelf for so long. I still have half the tube left. But I guess it's not worth using the rest of it.
> 
> I'm now using a tube of Antec Formula 7 which I bought back in December.
> 
> -----
> 
> The test I started yesterday with:
> 
> 
> 7900X @ 3.4 GHz AVX512
> Stock vcore
> Stock XMP (3600, 17-19-19-40)
> VCCSA of 1.0v
> still ended up failing after about 26 hours.
> 
> *For those of you who are running your memory at 3600+, what VCCSA are you using*?












As for TIM, you'll probably do better with one of the new(er) formula compounds like PK1 or 3, NT-H1, or even TGK (drying noted). Each will do 2-5C better than AS5.


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> I can tell ya that on a delidded CPU, TGK and Gelid both dried out in a few weeks (I mean, crispy hard... practically glued the block to the IHS). I'm trying PK-3 right now and ICD24ct is next. Never saw TGK harden like that before.


You think it has any thing to do with the chilled water?


----------



## Jpmboy

CptSpig said:


> You think it has any thing to do with the chilled water?


It might, but the chiller has been on for only a few hours since the TGK was applied. Strange, I know. So far, the PK-3 is doing well. I'll give it a little time then pull the block and see if it crisped too.


----------



## Mysticial

truehighroller1 said:


> I'm running at 4000 and was able to get mine stable at 1.15vtt or "vccio" 1.1 vccsa.. anything lower it blue screens. I've been adjusting in increments of .05. I'm running at 5 GHz CPU 7900x and 3.3 cache.





Jpmboy said:


>


That's quite a difference in VCCSA needed for 4000 MT/s...


----------



## truehighroller1

Mysticial said:


> That's quite a difference in VCCSA needed for 4000 MT/s...


I don't know what his uncore is or what CPU he has or his CPU speed plus differences in chips etc. Plus his timings might be looser then mine..

I was wondering why he didn't post what hes using for those settings etc as that info helps. I can probably lower my vccsa I'll give you that but the vccio is spot on for sure as I was messing with it all day yesterday and settled stable at that setting.


----------



## Haans249

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> There are a few oc youtube videos
> Here's one of some stuff to disable
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeITi8DrlTI
> 
> This is I believe the first I watched it was okay and worked pretty well
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOO6cAgmOfo
> 
> Also here this was an interesting read
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1634045-skylake-x-phantom-throttling.html


Thanks for posting this. I have seen all of the above already and was specifically looking for P-State C-State options on the Asus Board since once you sync all cores it appears the Asus board defaults to all of those disabled. 

I have figured it out and would consider myself an idiot because the options are there under Advanced\CPU Power Management. You have to set all the corresponding P-state/C-State items to "Enable" instead of "Auto", since Auto defaults to disabled when overclocking on Asus boards. Of course, you can enable them after finding stable overclock and then fine tuning overclocks for transition to turbo.

Hope this can help someone on the X299 platform when overclocking on an Asus board!


----------



## Jpmboy

truehighroller1 said:


> I don't know what his uncore is or what CPU he has or his CPU speed plus differences in chips etc. Plus his timings might be looser then mine..
> 
> I was wondering why he didn't post what hes using for those settings etc as that info helps. I can probably lower my vccsa I'll give you that but the vccio is spot on for sure as I was messing with it all day yesterday and settled stable at that setting.


7980XE. 2x4.6, 16x4.5 GHz per specific core OC 1.26/1.2V resp.. Cache @ 3.0 1.17V. All timings are there in the picture. Gear is in my sig. Remember, vccsa is not a linear thing when it comes to alignment... the voltage needs to be ranged up and down to find the sweet spot (especially on this platform).


----------



## truehighroller1

Jpmboy said:


> 7980XE. 2x4.6, 16x4.5 GHz per specific core OC 1.26/1.2V resp.. Cache @ 3.0 1.17V. All timings are there in the picture. Gear is in my sig. Remember, vccsa is not a linear thing when it comes to alignment... the voltage needs to be ranged up and down to find the sweet spot (especially on this platform).


Thank you I didn't know which rig you were talking about bub. I would thank you but I don't see the option anymore or atleast on my phone I can't find it.. 

The vccio is linear though right? I'll turn down my vccsa tonight and play with it. Thanks again. I need to find my volt meter and get my cache voltage reading, I have no clue what it's set to as I'm just using offset. I have it set to .2 or .18 off set to be stable. I have mine running at 3.3.


----------



## Jpmboy

truehighroller1 said:


> Thank you I didn't know which rig you were talking about bub. I would thank you but I don't see the option anymore or atleast on my phone I can't find it..
> 
> The vccio is linear though right? I'll turn down my vccsa tonight and play with it. Thanks again. I need to findmy volt meter and get my cache voltage reading, I have no clue what it's set to as I'm just using offset. I have it set to .2 or .18 off set to be stable. I have mine running at 3.3.


what I mean by VSA being not-linear is that the response curve is an inverted-U... eg, there is a point where it all clicks and will fall off either side (higher or lower). IO voltage is not much different in that too much can lead to instability also and too little will fail post. Try the voltages I posted in the screenshot of Turbo Vcore. I'd just run cache voltage as a manual (fixed value) set min multi to Auto and max multi to the value you want. Cache and ram are linked so, first set changes t either really need ot be stability tested. So, changing cache multi or voltage - test the ram stability again.


----------



## truehighroller1

Spoiler






Jpmboy said:


> what I mean by VSA being not-linear is that the response curve is an inverted-U... eg, there is a point where it all clicks and will fall off either side (higher or lower). IO voltage is not much different in that too much can lead to instability also and too little will fail post. Try the voltages I posted in the screenshot of Turbo Vcore. I'd just run cache voltage as a manual (fixed value) set min multi to Auto and max multi to the value you want. Cache and ram are linked so, first set changes t either really need ot be stability tested. So, changing cache multi or voltage - test the ram stability again.






That makes sense. Then I might actually need a little more vccio because I just came out of failing where it sits now. I would want to find the failure point that is to high and the point that is to low and hit between those two. I should have said it scales with voltages, memory speed wise. Thank you again, is the thank you button gone? I don't even see it on my pc.


----------



## Mysticial

Jpmboy said:


> what I mean by VSA being not-linear is that the response curve is an inverted-U... eg, there is a point where it all clicks and will fall off either side (higher or lower). IO voltage is not much different in that too much can lead to instability also and too little will fail post. Try the voltages I posted in the screenshot of Turbo Vcore. I'd just run cache voltage as a manual (fixed value) set min multi to Auto and max multi to the value you want. Cache and ram are linked so, first set changes t either really need ot be stability tested. So, changing cache multi or voltage - test the ram stability again.


Oh now I see what you mean. You used the word "non-linear" and I was thinking that voltage scaling was never "linear" to begin with.

From my somewhat mathematical mindset, I'd have used the word, "non-increasing function" or "non-increasing curve".

Either way, it makes me wonder about the physics that would cause this effect.

In my case, I can't easily test out the entire curve since the instabilities are subtle enough that it takes 10+hours to fail. So it would take a good week or so to "scan" a variety of voltage combinations to find that curve - with a high error rate due to the high MTTF.


----------



## truehighroller1

I was able to run your settings jpmboy. I'm pulling a 7 day work week this week so I'm going to bed but those settings you posted worked for me. I'll test more sometime tomorrow.

Are uncore voltage and cache voltage different? I tried googling it but everything makes it seem like there one in the same but they have two different sliders even in turbo v. In turbo v it shows that my uncore is offset .486 which i have set to auto in the bios right now by the way and then I have my cache offset at .180. 

I'll go with setting the cache voltage manually next I suppose like you said but, doesn't that make it run constant at that voltage though? Wouldn't it be better to set an offset so it scales back down?


----------



## ThrashZone

Haans249 said:


> Thanks for posting this. I have seen all of the above already and was specifically looking for P-State C-State options on the Asus Board since once you sync all cores it appears the Asus board defaults to all of those disabled.
> 
> I have figured it out and would consider myself an idiot because the options are there under Advanced\CPU Power Management. You have to set all the corresponding P-state/C-State items to "Enable" instead of "Auto", since Auto defaults to disabled when overclocking on Asus boards. Of course, you can enable them after finding stable overclock and then fine tuning overclocks for transition to turbo.
> 
> Hope this can help someone on the X299 platform when overclocking on an Asus board!


Hi,
Thanks I just leave ..states alone 
But then again I use by core usage quite a bit too instead of all core


----------



## GXTCHA

I recently just switched from a Fractal S36 AIO to a full custom loop with 2x 360 rads, a D5 and an EK Supremacy Evo CPU block.

I was expecting some better results for my SL binned 7900x (4.8) however, I'm a little bummed right now and I don't know if its just the nature of these chips or if there is a mounting issue after the delid. My core temps seem to be better however, my package temps are the same or worse. 

Config is:

7900x @ 4.8 w/ 1.220v adaptive
1.84v input
LLC 5
200% power
svid & vrm ss = disabled
avx/512 = 3/5

pkg temps before custom loop were in the mid 80's and a recent test with my new custom loop are the same or worse. Highest I've seen is the package hitting 91c.

My question is, has anyone else experienced an issue mounting the delidded chips with an EK block? does the delid process drop the height of the IHS enough to cause issues with correct contact and mounting?

It may just be winter and with the heat on things are warmer than they were a few months ago however, I'd have assumed id at least be seeing a 5 to 10c drop in temps, not increase. It might also be that my new case with the configuration (Define R6) has worse airflow across the PCB and is causing the package to overheat...

Anyone else with this bin have results for custom water? I'd love to see some feedback or if its just the nature of the beast or if there is potentially something wrong with my setup. For reference, I dont think my pump loop are the issue as my gpu stay at 30c or below under full load.

I can increase my avx off sets but when comparing before and after tests, its apples to oranges. 

Thanks in advance


----------



## Jpmboy

your are seeing those package temperatures when running what?


----------



## GXTCHA

Jpmboy said:


> your are seeing those package temperatures when running what?


Whoops, my bad. I'm seeing those temps in RB 2.56


----------



## warbucks

GXTCHA said:


> Whoops, my bad. I'm seeing those temps in RB 2.56


RB 2.56 uses AVX so the CPU is working hard which drives temps up. These CPUs have so many cores and just generate a lot of heat. I ended up buying a der8auer skylake-x direct die frame and have my waterblock cooling the cpu die directly. It's worked out really good. Depending on how comfortable you are with that you could look into doing the same.


----------



## GXTCHA

warbucks said:


> RB 2.56 uses AVX so the CPU is working hard which drives temps up. These CPUs have so many cores and just generate a lot of heat. I ended up buying a der8auer skylake-x direct die frame and have my waterblock cooling the cpu die directly. It's worked out really good. Depending on how comfortable you are with that you could look into doing the same.


Thanks for the reply. I've benched 2.56 before and had slightly better results before I was under custom water which has me a little perplexed. 

I agree these chips run hot but I would have assumed more positive results. Maybe this is an incorrect assumption. My core temps are better on custom water but the package seems unchanged or worse. I'm going to try and set up some thermal sensors outside the case to get a reading on ambient more accurately.

In the meantime, I've adjusted my avx off set to 8 on both avx and 512. 

Maybe my chip is degrading. Maybe my board is gone bad. Maybe my mount is bad or too much TIM. I've had the loop setup for a week, not looking forward to tearing it apart.


----------



## Pepillo

GXTCHA said:


> Thanks for the reply. I've benched 2.56 before and had slightly better results before I was under custom water which has me a little perplexed.
> 
> I agree these chips run hot but I would have assumed more positive results. Maybe this is an incorrect assumption. My core temps are better on custom water but the package seems unchanged or worse. I'm going to try and set up some thermal sensors outside the case to get a reading on ambient more accurately.
> 
> In the meantime, I've adjusted my avx off set to 8 on both avx and 512.
> 
> Maybe my chip is degrading. Maybe my board is gone bad. Maybe my mount is bad or too much TIM. I've had the loop setup for a week, not looking forward to tearing it apart.


My 7900X has no appreciable difference in the package.

With a custom RL, 480 radiator, D5 pump, etc., I take a disappointment to make delid, yes, temperatures improved, but not what I thought. It was not until I put liquid metal, Conductonaut, between the IHS and the block, when I achieved what I was looking for.

At 4,800 Mhz all cores, with AVX offset 0 and 1.269 V had these unsustainable temperatures with RB 2.56:










After the delid with Conductonaut:










And currently, adding Conductonaut between the block and the IHS, a longer pass of half an hour and 32 GB of RAM, which now requires a little less voltage, 1,265 V:










With each step given the improvement has been greater, the RL, the delid, the liquid metal paste, in case they are not enough to obtain satisfactory results, in my opinion. Better combine everything.


----------



## Jpmboy

GXTCHA said:


> Thanks for the reply. I've benched 2.56 before and had slightly better results before I was under custom water which has me a little perplexed.
> 
> I agree these chips run hot but I would have assumed more positive results. Maybe this is an incorrect assumption. My core temps are better on custom water but the package seems unchanged or worse. I'm going to try and set up some thermal sensors outside the case to get a reading on ambient more accurately.
> 
> In the meantime, I've adjusted my avx off set to 8 on both avx and 512.
> 
> Maybe my chip is degrading. Maybe my board is gone bad. Maybe my mount is bad or too much TIM. I've had the loop setup for a week, not looking forward to tearing it apart.





Pepillo said:


> My 7900X has no appreciable difference in the package.
> 
> With a custom RL, 480 radiator, D5 pump, etc., I take a disappointment to make delid, yes, temperatures improved, but not what I thought. It was not until I put liquid metal, Conductonaut, between the IHS and the block, when I achieved what I was looking for.
> 
> At 4,800 Mhz all cores, with AVX offset 0 and 1.269 V had these unsustainable temperatures with RB 2.56:
> 
> 
> 
> After the delid with Conductonaut:
> 
> 
> 
> And currently, adding Conductonaut between the block and the IHS, a longer pass of half an hour and 32 GB of RAM, which now requires a little less voltage, 1,265 V:
> 
> 
> 
> With each step given the improvement has been greater, the RL, the delid, the liquid metal paste, in case they are not enough to obtain satisfactory results, in my opinion. Better combine everything.



it's an x299 power delivery thing. the package temps are just crazy.


----------



## GXTCHA

Pepillo said:


> My 7900X has no appreciable difference in the package.
> 
> With a custom RL, 480 radiator, D5 pump, etc., I take a disappointment to make delid, yes, temperatures improved, but not what I thought. It was not until I put liquid metal, Conductonaut, between the IHS and the block, when I achieved what I was looking for.
> 
> At 4,800 Mhz all cores, with AVX offset 0 and 1.269 V had these unsustainable temperatures with RB 2.56:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After the delid with Conductonaut:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And currently, adding Conductonaut between the block and the IHS, a longer pass of half an hour and 32 GB of RAM, which now requires a little less voltage, 1,265 V:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With each step given the improvement has been greater, the RL, the delid, the liquid metal paste, in case they are not enough to obtain satisfactory results, in my opinion. Better combine everything.


Thanks, Pepillo. I'll post some pics of my runs in a bit but it looks like we are very much in the same boat. Like you (and others have said), the LCC have a harder time bleeding the heat than the HCC's. I stopped myself from tearing my loop apart last night and I'll see how things go over the next couple weeks.

I appreciate the insight very much. It's my first go round with a custom loop so I wasn't sure what to expect.


----------



## GXTCHA

Jpmboy said:


> it's an x299 power delivery thing. the package temps are just crazy.


Thanks, jpmboy.

BTW, I used some of your settings from the APEX forum and was able to dial in my OC a little more as well as bring my IO/SA down on my RAM/Cache OC.

Is it typical for a CPU sample to require LESS voltage over time? I've only seen comments of degradation where it requires more....

Maybe I was just too high before but ever since I set my Mesh/Cache to 3.0 @ 1.17v I've been able to drop my IO/SA down to 1.025 and .80 respectively. We'll see if it holds up long term but so far so good.


----------



## DeathAngel74

ZOMG DELETED!


----------



## Jpmboy

GXTCHA said:


> Thanks, jpmboy.
> 
> BTW, I used some of your settings from the APEX forum and was able to dial in my OC a little more as well as bring my IO/SA down on my RAM/Cache OC.
> 
> *Is it typical for a CPU sample to require LESS voltage over time*? I've only seen comments of degradation where it requires more....
> 
> Maybe I was just too high before but ever since I set my Mesh/Cache to 3.0 @ 1.17v I've been able to drop my IO/SA down to 1.025 and .80 respectively. We'll see if it holds up long term but so far so good.


I wouldn't say it's typical.. but it's not impossible. Did you change bios during the time were you see this? Or other voltage rails? For sure, cache generates heat... more than the perforce effect is worth after 2.9-3.0 on this architecture (and coffeelake is the same). On the tweaker menu (APEX) there are two CPu AUX voltages. These default to 2.0V, but I have been running these at 0.000V for a long time now. No loss of 24/7 stability with a 2x4.6, 16x4.5 OC on this 7980XE. I think it helps with pkg temp.


----------



## truehighroller1

Jpmboy said:


> I wouldn't say it's typical.. but it's not impossible. Did you change bios during the time were you see this? Or other voltage rails? For sure, cache generates heat... more than the perforce effect is worth after 2.9-3.0 on this architecture (and coffeelake is the same). On the tweaker menu (APEX) there are two CPu AUX voltages. These default to 2.0V, but I have been running these at 0.000V for a long time now. No loss of 24/7 stability with a 2x4.6, 16x4.5 OC on this 7980XE. I think it helps with pkg temp.



What do they control exactly? I've noticed them as well but didn't know that I could turn them off or to 0v rather.


----------



## eatthermalpaste

Anyone seen random temp spikes on Skylake-X in windows 10? i.e. at idle cores jumping to 50+ when all cores are normally sitting under 26C?


----------



## Jpmboy

truehighroller1 said:


> What do they control exactly? I've noticed them as well but didn't know that I could turn them off or to 0v rather.


I know thgis is gonna sound snide, but those rails provide voltage to components that are not on these HCC chips AFAIK. Anyway, running 2V or 0V makes no difference in my hands.


eatthermalpaste said:


> Anyone seen random temp spikes on Skylake-X in windows 10? i.e. at idle cores jumping to 50+ when all cores are normally sitting under 26C?


can you correlate the spike to any service or background app in your specific install? Enable Intel speedSHIFT (which MB?) and set the power saver plan. still happens?


----------



## truehighroller1

Jpmboy said:


> I know thgis is gonna sound snide, but those rails provide voltage to components that are not on these HCC chips AFAIK. Anyway, running 2V or 0V makes no difference in my hands.


Answer I was looking for, not snide. I'll try to feed mine 0 when I get home. I would like less heat.


----------



## GXTCHA

Jpmboy said:


> I wouldn't say it's typical.. but it's not impossible. Did you change bios during the time were you see this? Or other voltage rails? For sure, cache generates heat... more than the perforce effect is worth after 2.9-3.0 on this architecture (and coffeelake is the same). On the tweaker menu (APEX) there are two CPu AUX voltages. These default to 2.0V, but I have been running these at 0.000V for a long time now. No loss of 24/7 stability with a 2x4.6, 16x4.5 OC on this 7980XE. I think it helps with pkg temp.


I originally noticed the increase when I made a move to 1102 and 1004. I've since reverted to 0802 and that's where I am now. I didnt make any other changes to my set up besides swapping blocks to a Supremacy Evo which I've since remounted a couple times. I'm really thinking the environmental factors are playing a big part. Its winter so the heat is on and its about 2c warmer and my case (Define R6) now has 2x 360 rads (Hardware Labs GTS up top and GTX in front) so my air flow is a lot more restricted. There might be a little heat soak going on...

Thank you very much for the CPU AUX rail suggestion. I'm going to give that a try when I can this week and report back once I can get some free time and do some more testing.


----------



## josephimports

7820X / OC Formula 48x 1.23v 
RB 2.56 stress 1hr 225w 
x265 4k bench 230w

Default values for vccin, vccio, vccsa are high. The x299 oc formula thread states leaving them on auto does no harm but may result in higher temps. 
Asrock has VCCSA option in the voltage config. settings and System Agent offset under FIVR settings. 
I haven't found any screenshots of other x299 boards with both of these options. Does anyone know how these are related? Is the offset affecting vccsa directly? +.100 results in no boot and +.200 causes instability.

Found my answer in a recently published sky-x oc guide by sin0822. Fortunately he used an Asrock board for it and went on to say
"Some of ASRock's motherboards have an internal VCCSA as well, and you can set that offset to around +0.4v if you are clocking really high."

Read more: https://www.tweaktown.com/guides/8513/skylake-overclocking-guide/index3.html


----------



## Martin778

Can someone explain me this? Broken software, CPU, cooling, or? 
This is a brand new fresh 7980XE @ 4.2 1.13V after 30 mins of P95 26.6









This shows EXACTLY the same hotspot behaviour as my delidded 7920X (which i killed by ripping of one of the caps  ), how come?
The cooler is a brand new Silent Loop 360mm...I even swapped a noctua NH-D15S:


----------



## josephimports

Martin778 said:


> Can someone explain me this? Broken software, CPU, cooling, or?
> This is a brand new fresh 7980XE @ 4.2 1.13V after 30 mins of P95 26.6
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This shows EXACTLY the same hotspot behaviour as my delidded 7920X (which i killed by ripping of one of the caps  ), how come?
> The cooler is a brand new Silent Loop 360mm...


Yes, it can be the surface mounting or just an inadequacy of the cooler. Also check airflow of the rad and area near socket. Delidding would def. help. What is hwinfo reporting as max cpu package power?


----------



## Martin778

It shows gibberish values like 1.824W peak because SVID reporting is disabled (as per ASUS's recommendation).

I've edited my post with another screenshot, D15S vs that BQ SL 360mm. For my taste the AIO should've been muuuuch hotter if the CPU was at 100 deg but I've tried reseating it and it did nothing. The TIM was also neatly spread.

I can't understand what's going on, 7920X showed the same results = 2 big hotspots. You could say the BQ has a hollow or at least non even base but the D15S is showing the same issue.
Tried updating the BIOS and reinstalling Windows too but the temps are the same.


----------



## Jpmboy

Martin778 said:


> *It shows gibberish values like 1.824W peak because SVID reporting is disabled *(as per ASUS's recommendation).
> 
> I've edited my post with another screenshot, D15S vs that BQ SL 360mm. For my taste the AIO should've been muuuuch hotter if the CPU was at 100 deg but I've tried reseating it and it did nothing. The TIM was also neatly spread.
> 
> I can't understand what's going on, 7920X showed the same results = 2 big hotspots. You could say the BQ has a hollow or at least non even base but the D15S is showing the same issue.
> Tried updating the BIOS and reinstalling Windows too but the temps are the same.


set SVID on Auto whether using manual override, adaptive or offset.


----------



## Martin778

What should I do with VCCIN? Set to 1.88, LLC=5 and enable the tracker?


----------



## Jpmboy

1.88 is fine. Vin tracker to auto. LLC 5 is what I use, but i like some droop of vccin. on the tweaker menu. scroll down to CPU AUX voltgaes and setr these to 0.000V. I need to see the voltage on each core. VID means nothing... especially when you have SVID disabled.


----------



## Martin778

I'm trying 4.3GHz 1.105V now, using manual voltage in BIOS, all cores synced. Passed 1h 20min of OCCT's stress test. Still need to do some tweaking on the mesh, tried 3.0 @ 1.135V but that froze. 2.9 is fine.
My VCCIN is set to 1.88 in bios and in HWinfo it fluctuates between 1.808V and 1.872V with LLC5. Haven't seen any phantom throttling yet:



Spoiler


----------



## wingman99

Martin778 said:


> I'm trying 4.3GHz 1.105V now, using manual voltage in BIOS, all cores synced. Passed 1h 20min of OCCT's stress test. Still need to do some tweaking on the mesh, tried 3.0 @ 1.135V but that froze. 2.9 is fine.
> My VCCIN is set to 1.88 in bios and in HWinfo it fluctuates between 1.808V and 1.872V with LLC5. Haven't seen any phantom throttling yet:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


How are you checking for phantom throttling?


----------



## Martin778

Locked the clock by disabling all energy saving features. You'll see it drop in HWinfo64 if it throttles.


----------



## Mysticial

Martin778 said:


> Locked the clock by disabling all energy saving features. You'll see it drop in HWinfo64 if it throttles.


That doesn't detect or prevent phantom throttling. It's called "phantom" because you can't see it. When it happens, you will not see a drop in the frequency in CPUz or any of the hardware monitors. (unless they have been updated to do so in the past few months)

The reason why you don't see a frequency drop is because the CPU turns on a frequency divider that cuts the frequency. But hardware monitors don't know about this divider. So they still report the (undivided) frequency.

The only way to detect it is to watch the power consumption and benchmark scores drop.

It's a very crude way to throttle the processor. But looking at it more and more, it seems to be some sort of "emergency trigger" that cuts the thermals regardless of any user input to prevent it.

-----

That said, based on what you're reporting so far, I don't think you are actually hitting it.


----------



## cekim

Mysticial said:


> That said, based on what you're reporting so far, I don't think you are actually hitting it.


This... approach your clocks from the low-side and check for performance scaling. If it stops increasing, yet your settings are higher, then you've been slimed...


----------



## wingman99

How well does the memory overclock or XMP on skylake-x? Like G.Skill F4-4133C19Q-32GTZRF on ASUS Rampage VI Extreme, I9 7980XE?


----------



## Martin778

I have no luck with jpmboy's 4k settings yet. I will leave my 3200C14's on XMP settings for now and focus on the CPU.
The 7980 is indeed a different beast to tame, you can't just set 1.15 or 1.2V and try to lower it because it will throttle/crash anyway  With the big SKU's you have to work the other way round.


----------



## CptSpig

Martin778 said:


> I have no luck with jpmboy's 4k settings yet. I will leave my 3200C14's on XMP settings for now and focus on the CPU.
> The 7980 is indeed a different beast to tame, you can't just set 1.15 or 1.2V and try to lower it because it will throttle/crash anyway  With the big SKU's you have to work the other way round.


You can't just throw settings at any machine and expect it to be stable. You need to overclock your machine systematically. Clear c'mos, OC your CPU first and get it stable. Now OC your memory and get that stable then you are ready to OC Cashe/Ring/Mesh. See Jpmboy's OC guides they are very good.


----------



## axiumone

Figured I'd share my chip as well. Freshly delided. I'm using the direct die frame and conductonaut. Very happy with the temperature drop, it runs substantially cooler than the delided 6850k I had before.

Edit - Forgot to mention. This is on a corsair 360 AIO.


----------



## ThrashZone

axiumone said:


> Figured I'd share my chip as well. Freshly delided. I'm using the direct die frame and conductonaut. Very happy with the temperature drop, it runs substantially cooler than the delided 6850k I had before.


Hi,
Nice I get a little better temperature readings using 1.2v than 1.18v with cache at adaptive.


----------



## Martin778

Yeah, of course jpm's profile wouldn't work out of the box, it did however work on my previous 7920X.
The XE really bugs me, even at 4.2GHz 1.10V it's hitting 93*C peak in P95 non-AVX and finally it will freeze and stay like that. Cache?


----------



## vmanuelgm

Martin778 said:


> Yeah, of course jpm's profile wouldn't work out of the box, it did however work on my previous 7920X.
> The XE really bugs me, even at 4.2GHz 1.10V it's hitting 93*C peak in P95 non-AVX and finally it will freeze and stay like that. Cache?



Is it delidded and watercooled???


----------



## Martin778

Not delidded, cooled by BQ Silent Loop 360MM on max rpm in an open case.


----------



## CptSpig

Martin778 said:


> Yeah, of course jpm's profile wouldn't work out of the box, it did however work on my previous 7920X.
> The XE really bugs me, even at 4.2GHz 1.10V it's hitting 93*C peak in P95 non-AVX and finally it will freeze and stay like that. Cache?


Set your AVX offsets to -3 / -5 and use RealBench for stress testing not P95. Try to keep temps below 80c. What is your ambient temperature?


----------



## Martin778

Around 20-21*C. The problem is 20*C difference between cores, it acts the same as my delidded 7920X - 4/6 cores that are much hotter than the others 

I don't use RB because it stresses GPU's too. My case would glow red when trying to cope with 1000-1100W inside.

But uhm...keeping the hottest core below 80*C means almost no OC headroom, shame. I think that besides delidding, the 360mm rad just doesn't have the capacitiy to cope with the immense heat of the 7980.


----------



## CptSpig

Martin778 said:


> Around 20-21*C. The problem is 20*C difference between cores, it acts the same as my delidded 7920X - 4/6 cores that are much hotter than the others
> 
> I don't use RB because it stresses GPU's too. My case would glow red when trying to cope with 1000-1100W inside.
> 
> But uhm...keeping the hottest core below 80*C means almost no OC headroom, shame. I think that besides delidding, the 360mm rad just doesn't have the capacitiy to cope with the immense heat of the 7980.


I have my [email protected]/3.0 on a Predator 360 AIO temps 25 at idle and gaming never goes above 40c. Did you try reseating your CPU and using another TP Like Grizzly Kryonaut?


----------



## Martin778

I sure did, my TIM is GC-Extreme and thats why I broke my 'old' 7920...couldn't believe the temps were so bad on that delidded 7920 so I started fiddling with it, reapplying LM and eventually managed to snap one of those tiny caps off the pcb...that's why I bought the 7980XE.

I even tried my Noctua D15S but that one was much worse than the Silent Loop 360.

At stock/XMP settings the peak temps were 51*C peak after 1h of OCCT, as always for stress testing, the fans were set to 100%:
https://i.imgur.com/0p5Gn8E.png


----------



## cekim

Martin778 said:


> I sure did, my TIM is GC-Extreme and thats why I broke my 'old' 7920...couldn't believe the temps were so bad on that delidded 7920 so I started fiddling with it, reapplying LM and finally managed to snap one of those tiny caps off the pcb...


Next time/if you have it apart, snap some picks of your TIM application... 

It's cumbersome, but you can learn a lot by putting it all together and then pulling it apart to see how things settled in.

Without delid, the 79xx where xx > 00, but even the 7900 are really, really limited by non-metal TIM and the thickness of that TIM in terms of their core temp uniformity. 20C is a lot, but it depends on the load (it needs to be uniform without throttling).


----------



## Martin778

I've just edited my previous post and added a link to a pic. When it's on stock settings the difference is only ~5*C between cores but when you overclock, some cores tend to run away very quickly.

When you push it a bit, this happens: https://i.imgur.com/JxqJ4tH.png


----------



## cekim

Martin778 said:


> I've just edited my previous post and added a link to a pic. When it's on stock settings the difference is only ~5*C between cores but when you overclock, some cores tend to run away very quickly.


That's actually pretty normal too - "stock" is VERY conservative with these chips. They are basically snoozing with any decent cooling solution.


----------



## Martin778

I wonder why this is, maybe there is some kind of VID-core factor so when it's running on stock/auto voltages it somehow balances itself out?

Anyways, the 360 gets pretty hot within a couple of minutes. It has not enough capacity for an OC'ed 7980.
I've been looking for a 360 Predator but these things are EOL already and EK seems to have given up on AIO kits that don't need any extra assembly.


----------



## cekim

Martin778 said:


> I wonder why this is, maybe there is some kind of VID-core factor so when it's running on stock/auto voltages it somehow balances itself out?
> 
> Anyways, the 360 gets pretty hot quick. It has not enough capacity for the 7980.
> I've been looking for a 360 Predator but these things are EOL already and EK seems to have given up on AIO kits that don't need any extra assembly.


Power/heat is related to clock-speed/area via exponential equations... 

As you increase the clocks, you are moving to steeper and steeper parts of those exponential curves thus the delta from one gate to another (and thus from one core to another) can increase rapidly.

I only see a pic of your OCCT and HWINFO, no pics of TIM


----------



## Martin778

I have only 1 picture when I tried the D15S to check whether the SL360 maybe had a warped base.
The imprint is not so good (I used too much TIM on purpose, to see what the imprint would be) but didn't get better no matter what I tried - more TIM, less TIM, a blob in the middle or spread evenly before mounting the cooler.

https://i.imgur.com/jX7ub4y.jpg


----------



## tistou77

for delidded, this isopropyl alcohol is good ?



Spoiler
























Thanks


----------



## KJx89

Is that possible to have thermal throttling with a delidded 7900x (GC Extreme applied and I didn't seal it), custom loop with 2x EK PE360 at 1.3v???
I managed to have nearly stable 48x AVX -5 AVX512 -5 1.3v, but core 2-3-6 goes on throttling. The other cores are from 10 to 20°C less.
Regards
Kappa


----------



## vmanuelgm

Martin778 said:


> Not delidded, cooled by BQ Silent Loop 360MM on max rpm in an open case.


You should delid and custom watercool (or above) that 7980xe to release the beast. U can't go further in that state with your present cooler.

I delidded my 7900x and now 7980xe using Kapton tape to protect the circuits around and no problems at all.

In order to achieve the max clock Direct Die Frame should be in the equation. But it needs to be installed uniformly with the precise strength to avoid problems like overheat or socket excessive pressure.



















In spite of this image, I have the block with goofy orientation right now since it offers better thermals.

At 4.6avx prime95 29.4 makes my wall meter exceed 1000w, xDDD, getting the cpu and vrm (with 8cms fan over it) to 100 degrees.





KJx89 said:


> Is that possible to have thermal throttling with a delidded 7900x (GC Extreme applied and I didn't seal it), custom loop with 2x EK PE360 at 1.3v???
> I managed to have nearly stable 48x AVX -5 AVX512 -5 1.3v, but core 2-3-6 goes on throttling. The other cores are from 10 to 20°C less.
> Regards
> Kappa


I had my 7900x at 4.9-4.9avx:


















At 43avx with that offset u shouldn´t have any thermal problems if delidding and pasting has been done ok and the cpu is also in good state. Check your loop too.


----------



## toncij

Martin778 said:


> I wonder why this is, maybe there is some kind of VID-core factor so when it's running on stock/auto voltages it somehow balances itself out?
> 
> Anyways, the 360 gets pretty hot within a couple of minutes. It has not enough capacity for an OC'ed 7980.
> I've been looking for a 360 Predator but these things are EOL already and EK seems to have given up on AIO kits that don't need any extra assembly.


They did not, there's a new AIO called Phoenix now.


----------



## Martin778

Good to know, though I've just bought a new Predator 360  
I will probably tweak it soon to get rid of the QDC and add another 360 rad on top.


----------



## tistou77

Out of curiosity, with a PSU 850W, how much can we hope to OC a 7980XE (with a GTX1080) ?

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> Out of curiosity, with a PSU 850W, how much can we hope to OC a 7980XE (with a GTX1080) ?
> 
> Thanks


Way farther than most cooling systems can handle.


----------



## vmanuelgm

tistou77 said:


> Out of curiosity, with a PSU 850W, how much can we hope to OC a 7980XE (with a GTX1080) ?
> 
> Thanks



U wont be able to pass prime95 29.1 at 4.4avx and above or realbench at 4.5avx and above, unless it throttles.

With avx512 things get worse, u need to set a higher offset.

Vrm efficiency can help. Thats why Intersil is preferred, producing less heat and power consumption.


----------



## Martin778

If it won't trip the OCP first! /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif I had my CPU at 140% current limit, others set to ~750W long term/900W short and at 1.10V it switched right off when I tried to run LinX /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif


----------



## KJx89

vmanuelgm said:


> You should delid and custom watercool (or above) that 7980xe to release the beast. U can't go further in that state with your present cooler.
> 
> I delidded my 7900x and now 7980xe using Kapton tape to protect the circuits around and no problems at all.
> 
> In order to achieve the max clock Direct Die Frame should be in the equation. But it needs to be installed uniformly with the precise strength to avoid problems like overheat or socket excessive pressure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In spite of this image, I have the block with goofy orientation right now since it offers better thermals.
> 
> At 4.6avx prime95 29.4 makes my wall meter exceed 1000w, xDDD, getting the cpu and vrm (with 8cms fan over it) to 100 degrees.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I had my 7900x at 4.9-4.9avx:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At 43avx with that offset u shouldn´t have any thermal problems if delidding and pasting has been done ok and the cpu is also in good state. Check your loop too.


Screens are not clear, but I suppose you had no throttling at x49=avx. How many volts? 
I don't know why I have throttle. I own a D5 pump, 2x EK PE360 (one in push and one in p&p), EK Supremacy EVO brand new and the 1080ti FE EK WB.
My MB is an Asrock Fatal1ty i9 XE.
Regards
Kappa


----------



## truehighroller1

KJx89 said:


> Screens are not clear, but I suppose you had no throttling at x49=avx. How many volts?
> I don't know why I have throttle. I own a D5 pump, 2x EK PE360 (one in push and one in p&p), EK Supremacy EVO brand new and the 1080ti FE EK WB.
> My MB is an Asrock Fatal1ty i9 XE.
> Regards
> Kappa


I have a 7900x at 5Ghz at 1.325v, 3.3Ghz Cache 1.2v with two d5 pumps and two, 360's and one 480 radiator all in pull and they're externally setup and then the cpu block, EK Supremacy EVO runs in. I have my avx512 at 4.1ghz and my avx at 4.3ghz. I hit 87 Celsius package temp 81 Celsius highest core temp under real bench 4 hours and about 82 Celsius package temp and 79 Celsius highest core temp under hci, 100% stable. It takes a lot to cool these things.


----------



## wingman99

vmanuelgm said:


> U wont be able to pass prime95 29.1 at 4.4avx and above or realbench at 4.5avx and above, unless it throttles.
> 
> With avx512 things get worse, u need to set a higher offset.
> 
> Vrm efficiency can help. Thats why Intersil is preferred, producing less heat and power consumption.


How much does Intersil reduce the heat and power of the VRM?


----------



## truehighroller1

wingman99 said:


> How much does Intersil reduce the heat and power of the VRM?



It depends on where you apply it to the vrm and how much really but, I've heard it can deliver up to a twenty Celsius drop in max temps under full load....


----------



## Mike211

Intel Core i9-7980XE Skylake X 18-Core @ 4.7GHz 
Asus Rampage VI Extreme Motherboard
64GB G.SKILL TridentZ RGB DDR4 ram @ 4000 mhz 
2x NVIDIA Titan Xp
2x Samsung 960 PRO NVMe M.2 2TB Raid 0
2x Crucial 960gb ssd
EVGA SuperNOVA 1600 G2 Power Supply 
Cooler Master - MasterCase H500P Case


----------



## vmanuelgm

truehighroller1 said:


> I have a 7900x at 5Ghz at 1.325v, 3.3Ghz Cache 1.2v with two d5 pumps and two, 360's and one 480 radiator all in pull and they're externally setup and then the cpu block, EK Supremacy EVO runs in. I have my avx512 at 4.1ghz and my avx at 4.3ghz. I hit 87 Celsius package temp 81 Celsius highest core temp under real bench 4 hours and about 82 Celsius package temp and 79 Celsius highest core temp under hci, 100% stable. It takes a lot to cool these things.


U can run Realbench with my same settings and compare the obtained hashes. I used 1.32v for the cpu, 1.82v for input in my 7900x at 4.9avx.

Another image at 4.8avx...














wingman99 said:


> How much does Intersil reduce the heat and power of the VRM?


I've seen a decrease between 100 and 150w comparing the Gaming 7 pro (Intersil) to Gaming 9 (Infineon) I had, at the same clock.

Gaming 9 has a worse Infineon VRM than Asus Rampage's, less efficient.


----------



## cekim

Mike211 said:


> Intel Core i9-7980XE Skylake X 18-Core @ 4.7GHz
> Asus Rampage VI Extreme Motherboard
> 64GB G.SKILL TridentZ RGB DDR4 ram @ 4000 mhz
> 2x NVIDIA Titan Xp
> 2x Samsung 960 PRO NVMe M.2 2TB Raid 0
> 2x Crucial 960gb ssd
> EVGA SuperNOVA 1600 G2 Power Supply
> Cooler Master - MasterCase H500P Case


Voltage? Cooling? Don't tease! ;-)


----------



## truehighroller1

Mike211 said:


> Intel Core i9-7980XE Skylake X 18-Core @ 4.7GHz
> Asus Rampage VI Extreme Motherboard
> 64GB G.SKILL TridentZ RGB DDR4 ram @ 4000 mhz
> 2x NVIDIA Titan Xp
> 2x Samsung 960 PRO NVMe M.2 2TB Raid 0
> 2x Crucial 960gb ssd
> EVGA SuperNOVA 1600 G2 Power Supply
> Cooler Master - MasterCase H500P Case


HCI test showing 2000% and memory timings or it isn't true.


----------



## josephimports

Martin778 said:


> I have only 1 picture when I tried the D15S to check whether the SL360 maybe had a warped base.
> The imprint is not so good (I used too much TIM on purpose, to see what the imprint would be) but didn't get better no matter what I tried - more TIM, less TIM, a blob in the middle or spread evenly before mounting the cooler.
> 
> https://i.imgur.com/jX7ub4y.jpg



Its possible a custom IHS can help. 

https://www.ebay.com/i/192454960140?ul_noapp=true


----------



## vmanuelgm

josephimports said:


> Its possible a custom IHS can help.
> 
> https://www.ebay.com/i/192454960140?ul_noapp=true



Direct Die Frame is a better option, no IHS and straight contact to DIE.


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> Way farther than most cooling systems can handle.


Thanks :thumb:

About Direct Die, some who have installed the Direct Die (der8auer) have not put the pellets to better tighten the plate
It is better to put them, if der8auer considered it good to add them in the packaging ?

And also, some put an insulator (electrical insulation) between the backplate and the motherboard to avoid possible short circuit (and between the plate and motherboard, CPU side)
What do you think ?

Thanks


----------



## 86JR

I'm seriously looking at upgrading now but part of me says to wait more...

2500k @ 4.8ghz normally, currently stock as priorities have changed (to silent as possible build) so currently running noctua D14 completely passive. 

Think I should concentrate on converting my hdd's into ssds first, because I have really sensitive hearing.


----------



## vmanuelgm

tistou77 said:


> Thanks :thumb:
> 
> About Direct Die, some who have installed the Direct Die (der8auer) have not put the pellets to better tighten the plate
> It is better to put them, if der8auer considered it good to add them in the packaging ?
> 
> And also, some put an insulator (electrical insulation) between the backplate and the motherboard to avoid possible short circuit (and between the plate and motherboard, CPU side)
> What do you think ?
> 
> Thanks


Someone??? 

Its me who talks about the tool right now, xDDD, Vive la France!!!

Have u seen der8auer video??? The stickers come to be used in the back part of the motherboard and serve as electrical insulators. Der8auer also advises to maintain the covers in three of them to allow separation of the backplate if u wanna deinstall the tool.

In regards to front side, there are no provided stickers, so this one must be installed without them. I have it this way and no problems at all.

The most difficult part is putting the screws uniformly with the exact pressure. A bad installation can cause overtemperatures or memory misbehaviours.

Best regards from Spain. 

PS: PSG can be defeated by Real Madrid today!!!


----------



## tistou77

vmanuelgm said:


> Someone???
> 
> Its me who talks about the tool right now, xDDD, Vive la France!!!
> 
> Have u seen der8auer video??? The stickers come to be used in the back part of the motherboard and serve as electrical insulators. Der8auer also advises to maintain the covers in three of them to allow separation of the backplate if u wanna deinstall the tool.
> 
> In regards to front side, there are no provided stickers, so this one must be installed without them. I have it this way and no problems at all.
> 
> The most difficult part is putting the screws uniformly with the exact pressure. A bad installation can cause overtemperatures or memory misbehaviours.
> 
> Best regards from Spain.
> 
> PS: PSG can be defeated by Real Madrid today!!!




Yes that's what I thought, for that I asked for an opinion 
For tightening, it's better to tighten a little bit less than to tighten too much I guess

For the LM, just a thin layer on the DIE and the waterblock
I'm going to use it with a Koolance 390i, no problem I think


----------



## vmanuelgm

tistou77 said:


> Yes that's what I thought, for that I asked for an opinion
> For tightening, it's better to tighten a little bit less than to tighten too much I guess
> 
> For the LM, just a thin layer on the DIE and the waterblock
> I'm going to use it with a Koolance 390i, no problem I think



Its easier if u directly say, "vmanuelgm, what's your experience with Direct Die", isn't it??? xDDD

I've been experiencing with the Direct Tool and I can say that if u set it loose, u can also have problems.

The exact point is that in which the tool cant be moved from its position, without more and less pressure than required.


----------



## ocvn

passed 8h with RB [email protected] vccin 1.95 LLC5.


----------



## pantsaregood

Has anyone managed to overclock their mesh further than 3.2 GHz? That's where mine is sitting now, but I'm wondering if there is significant performance left to gain above that.

Also, does anyone think I'd see appreciably lower temperatures switching from an NH-D15 to some AIO on a delidded 7820X? It's binned for 4.8 GHz, but the 1.25V required to stabilize that results in temperatures hitting up to 97°C. Running at 4.5 GHz at 1.15V doesn't even break 75°C.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Max mash/ cache 30 is fine 
Cooling AIO or clc Not a lot of difference 
Only meaningful cooling upgrade would be a custom loop
You can try a H115i I didn't have a lot of luck with one personally 7820 might have better results.


----------



## Jpmboy

pantsaregood said:


> Has anyone managed to overclock their mesh further than 3.2 GHz? That's where mine is sitting now, but I'm wondering if there is significant performance left to gain above that.
> 
> Also, does anyone think I'd see appreciably lower temperatures switching from an NH-D15 to some AIO on a delidded 7820X? It's binned for 4.8 GHz,* but the 1.25V required to stabilize that results in temperatures hitting up to 97°C*. Running at 4.5 GHz at 1.15V doesn't even break 75°C.


really? seems quite hot even for the nh-d15 (which is as good as an AIO when you give it air). It the chip an SL delid?



ocvn said:


> passed 8h with RB [email protected] vccin 1.95 LLC5.


what's the XTU or R15 score with those settings?


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## cekim

Jpmboy said:


> really? seems quite hot even for the nh-d15 (which is as good as an AIO when you give it air). It the chip an SL delid?
> what's the XTU or R15 score with those settings?


Within limits... When you hit 250+ watts, either a 280 AIO or a D15 are going to need full-blast fans to keep up...


----------



## truehighroller1

kingofblog said:


> It is pointless to talk about temperature without discussing power. How many watts are going through the D15? What are the D15 intake and exhaust temperatures? Maybe your 1.25 V chip needs 300 W and someone else's only needs 250 W.
> 
> For uncore, I saw one person here with a 3.3 GHz overclock, but the voltage difference from 3.0 to 3.2 GHz is already immense. The power increase from 3.0 to 3.2 GHz is already over 15 W. That power would be better spent increasing the core frequency.


I only need 1.2v for 3.3ghz cache. I also have three radiators and two pumps and I'm running my 7900x at 5ghz 1.325v. I watched my Through put for my Memory jump up a decent amount and my memory latency dropped to from going from 3.2 to 3.3 cache but, I'm running 32Gb at 3800mhz to so..


----------



## surfinchina

cekim said:


> Within limits... When you hit 250+ watts, either a 280 AIO or a D15 are going to need full-blast fans to keep up...


I've noticed quite a lot of these questions lately. People with a D15 or similar thinking they can overclock on the 2066 platform.
It'd be quite useful to compile some sort of cooling table for the X299.
For me, 300 watts on my 7900x takes a 360 EK at full noise. With delidding - temps stay below 80. I couldn't recommend anything less than that.
This is not Prime 95, but normal stressing with Cinerender on my software. 10 min renders.
With my Vega in the loop a 360 plus 420 still has plenty of headroom and I can keep the fans quiet.

If you want air cooling or anything under a 360 rad you shouldn't overclock imho.


----------



## surfinchina

truehighroller1 said:


> I only need 1.2v for 3.3ghz cache. I also have three radiators and two pumps and I'm running my 7900x at 5ghz 1.325v. I watched my Through put for my Memory jump up a decent amount and my memory latency dropped to from going from 3.2 to 3.3 cache but, I'm running 32Gb at 3800mhz to so..


I've never been brave enough to go over 1.3V. Do you see any issues long term?


----------



## Martin778

D15 is no match for a 7980XE...it gets hot like fire in seconds.
I've sent my 7980XE for professional delidding/relidding and I'm surprised that it didn't do THAT much.


----------



## Mike211

Intel Core i9-7980XE Skylake X 18-Core @ 4.7GHz 1.25v
Asus Rampage VI Extreme Motherboard
64GB G.SKILL TridentZ RGB DDR4 ram @ 4000 mhz 
2x NVIDIA Titan Xp
2x Samsung 960 PRO NVMe M.2 2TB Raid 0
2x Crucial 960gb ssd
Thermaltake Floe Riing RGB 360 TT Premium Edition Liquid Cooling System
EVGA SuperNOVA 1600 G2 Power Supply 
Cooler Master - MasterCase H500P Case


----------



## Martin778

What Vcore, 1.25? I hit tjmax right away when I try 1.21V 4.6GHz and then it freezes. And that's a delidded chip.

By the way, what causes the screen to go blank and the Q-Code LED to go "EE" when stress testing OC? Too low CPU input V? I've also noticed that the 4 orange LED's also go out then.


----------



## truehighroller1

surfinchina said:


> I've never been brave enough to go over 1.3V. Do you see any issues long term?



Nope. I ran a 2700k for five years at 1.45v and everyone was freaking out about that at first too. It still runs fine at 5ghz to this day. Sold it to my buddy for $150. I was running a 5820k at 5ghz 1.45v no issues with it either just sold it for $200. I'm a firm believer in if you keep the temperatures under control it will run fine forever. I've never had one die on me or degrade. I, delidded it too so temperatures dropped for me 19c across the board.


----------



## Mysticial

surfinchina said:


> I've never been brave enough to go over 1.3V. Do you see any issues long term?





truehighroller1 said:


> Nope. I ran a 2700k for five years at 1.45v and everyone was freaking out about that at first too. It still runs fine at 5ghz to this day. Sold it to my buddy for $150. I was running a 5820k at 5ghz 1.45v no issues with it either just sold it for $200.


I ran my 2600K at 4.6 GHz with 1.380v. After 6 months of 24/7 WCG, it wasn't stable anymore. So I upped it to 1.400v. After another month, that wasn't stable anymore. So I upped it to 1.420. That failed in a couple of weeks.

I ended up dropping it to 4.4 GHz, and then down to 4.2 GHz (~1.2 V) for the rest of its life. The stock vcore was something like 1.1v-ish. So I was effectively running it with +0.300 offset (more than +20%).

I currently run my 7940X @ 4.7 GHz with two of the cores pushing 1.35 - 1.36. So while I am a bit worried about it, I don't sustain it 24/7. Furthermore, it reaches 1.30v stock anyways. So I assume the current chips are more tolerable to high vcore.


----------



## Martin778

Yeah, at this pace I will keep sending them back to RMA one after another. 
Core 2, 3 and 15 are totally off the charts. I buy my CPU's from a big and well know retailer but this is getting suspicious. 6950X ded after a few months, 7920X also massive core temp. differences and 7980XE is just crazy.


----------



## cekim

Mysticial said:


> I ran my 2600K at 4.6 GHz with 1.380v. After 6 months of 24/7 WCG, it wasn't stable anymore. So I upped it to 1.400v. After another month, that wasn't stable anymore. So I upped it to 1.420. That failed in a couple of weeks.
> 
> I ended up dropping it to 4.4 GHz, and then down to 4.2 GHz (~1.2 V) for the rest of its life. The stock vcore was something like 1.1v-ish. So I was effectively running it with +0.300 offset (more than +20%).
> 
> I currently run my 7940X @ 4.7 GHz with two of the cores pushing 1.35 - 1.36. So while I am a bit worried about it, I don't sustain it 24/7. Furthermore, it reaches 1.30v stock anyways. So I assume the current chips are more tolerable to high vcore.


Lottery is lottery... That one chip can do it provides near zero information as to what your likelihood is and even then, its a probability, not a promise.


----------



## truehighroller1

Mysticial said:


> I ran my 2600K at 4.6 GHz with 1.380v. After 6 months of 24/7 WCG, it wasn't stable anymore. So I upped it to 1.400v. After another month, that wasn't stable anymore. So I upped it to 1.420. That failed in a couple of weeks.
> 
> I ended up dropping it to 4.4 GHz, and then down to 4.2 GHz (~1.2 V) for the rest of its life. The stock vcore was something like 1.1v-ish. So I was effectively running it with +0.300 offset (more than +20%).
> 
> I currently run my 7940X @ 4.7 GHz with two of the cores pushing 1.35 - 1.36. So while I am a bit worried about it, I don't sustain it 24/7. Furthermore, it reaches 1.30v stock anyways. So I assume the current chips are more tolerable to high vcore.



Only thing I can think is temperatures some how got you or you ran it hard a lot perhaps. I've had three radiators running with two pumps for awhile now, like 7 years. They will be fine running where we have them no doubt about it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Martin778 said:


> Yeah, at this pace I will keep sending them back to RMA one after another.
> Core 2, 3 and 15 are totally off the charts. I buy my CPU's from a big and well know retailer but this is getting suspicious. 6950X ded after a few months, 7920X also massive core temp. differences and 7980XE is just crazy.


Hi,
Seeing the base clock is 2.6 you're a long way from Kansas at nearly 4.5 
Even turbo's clock is based on only 2 core at by core usage and you're on all core


----------



## Martin778

Its more about core temp differences that severely limit OC. That 4.5 @ 1.2 hits tjmax almost straight away on core #2 
Even 1.15V is as good as unusable, 1 run of cine and the Core #0 peaks at 69c, core #2 at 87c.


----------



## Mysticial

truehighroller1 said:


> Only thing I can think is temperatures some how got you or you ran it hard a lot perhaps. I've had three radiators running with two pumps for awhile now, like 7 years. They will be fine running where we have them no doubt about it.


Temperatures were in the low 70's.

But while I'm not an expert in the area, I'm also not convinced that temperatures are as damaging as voltage. Both voltage and temperature are in the exponent of the Black's Equation for electromigration. But voltage is relative to zero and temperature is relative to absolute zero.

So increasing voltage from 1.1 -> 1.4v (27%) will (theoretically) do much more damage than increasing temps from 50C -> 70C (323k -> 343k i.e. 6%)

From my own sample size of only about 10 boxes over the past 10 years, I've never had any (obvious) degradation on low-voltage/high-temperature overclocks.


----------



## truehighroller1

Mysticial said:


> Temperatures were in the low 70's.
> 
> But while I'm not an expert in the area, I'm also not convinced that temperatures are as damaging as voltage. Both voltage and temperature are in the exponent of the Black's Equation for electromigration. But voltage is relative to zero and temperature is relative to absolute zero.
> 
> So increasing voltage from 1.1 -> 1.4v (27%) will (theoretically) do much more damage than increasing temps from 50C -> 70C (323k -> 343k i.e. 6%)
> 
> From my own sample size of only about 10 boxes over the past 10 years, I've never had any (obvious) degradation on low-voltage/high-temperature overclocks.



I've never had any degrade on higher voltage been doing this for about 23 years now. I've never allowed higher temperatures.


----------



## truehighroller1

Martin778 said:


> Its more about core temp differences that severely limit OC. That 4.5 @ 1.2 hits tjmax almost straight away on core #2
> Even 1.15V is as good as unusable, 1 run of cine and the Core #0 peaks at 69c, core #2 at 87c.


What cooler setup are you running? If water, do you have air in the loop somehow? Perhaps a clog of some type in the block in sections of it? Have you taken the water block apart to look at the grid in it to verify you don't have build up in it?


----------



## Jpmboy

cekim said:


> Within limits... When you hit 250+ watts, either a 280 AIO or a D15 are going to need full-blast fans to keep up...


lol - more like you'd need to strap screaming Delta fans to either. (great fans for making the dogs sing tho  )


----------



## truehighroller1

Jpmboy said:


> lol - more like you'd need to strap screaming Delta fans to either. (great fans for making the dogs sing tho  )


Funny because mine hits about 290 watts lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

truehighroller1 said:


> Funny because mine hits about 290 watts lol.


what hits 290W?
Damn bro, this 7980XE will hit the high 400s just doing 2d work.


----------



## Mysticial

truehighroller1 said:


> I've never had any degrade on higher voltage been doing this for about 23 years now. I've never allowed higher temperatures.


Question: Do you run your machines 100% CPU 24/7 for weeks/months on end?

I do that on a subset of my machines. (With workloads similar to Prime95 for 24/7 months on end.)
If you don't, then maybe that's why your hardware is lasting much longer.

You can throw all the volts and temps you want at it. But if it's idle 90% of the time, there isn't much chance for it to degrade.


----------



## truehighroller1

Mysticial said:


> Question: Do you run your machines 100% CPU 24/7 for weeks/months on end?
> 
> I do that on a subset of my machines. (Imagine Prime95 24/7 for a months on end.)
> If you don't, then maybe that's why your hardware is lasting much longer.
> 
> You can throw all the volts and temps you want at it. But if it's idle 90% of the time, there isn't much chance for it to degrade.



Just games and normal use. So yeah running it like a server, will degrade it. Hell running it like a server will degrade it stock.


----------



## truehighroller1

Jpmboy said:


> what hits 290W?
> Damn bro, this 7980XE will hit the high 400s just doing 2d work.


7900x, I don't need that amount of cores so I spent that extra money else where. New case, best mother board I could get in the long run ended up being the r6e, memory, another solid state, bunch of new fans.


----------



## Martin778

truehighroller1 said:


> What cooler setup are you running? If water, do you have air in the loop somehow? Perhaps a clog of some type in the block in sections of it? Have you taken the water block apart to look at the grid in it to verify you don't have build up in it?


360mm BeQuiet AIO. Tried a D15S too but got similar temp. pattern.


----------



## wingman99

Mysticial said:


> Temperatures were in the low 70's.
> 
> But while I'm not an expert in the area, I'm also not convinced that temperatures are as damaging as voltage. Both voltage and temperature are in the exponent of the Black's Equation for electromigration. But voltage is relative to zero and temperature is relative to absolute zero.
> 
> So increasing voltage from 1.1 -> 1.4v (27%) will (theoretically) do much more damage than increasing temps from 50C -> 70C (323k -> 343k i.e. 6%)
> 
> From my own sample size of only about 10 boxes over the past 10 years, I've never had any (obvious) degradation on low-voltage/high-temperature overclocks.


I have been overclocking for 17 years and I agree with Black's Equation of current and temperatur for electromigration, voltage is more of a concern than CPU heat, I have never had any degradation with low Vcore and processor Tj 80-95c.


----------



## truehighroller1

Martin778 said:


> 360mm BeQuiet AIO. Tried a D15S too but got similar temp. pattern.


According to their site for the D15S, it can handle 165 watts + a medium overclock.

Aio you mentioned states 450 watts but I don't believe it can handle it well imo.. I would go with a custom loop man.


----------



## wingman99

Mysticial said:


> Question: Do you run your machines 100% CPU 24/7 for weeks/months on end?
> 
> I do that on a subset of my machines. (With workloads similar to Prime95 for 24/7 months on end.)
> If you don't, then maybe that's why your hardware is lasting much longer.
> 
> You can throw all the volts and temps you want at it. But if it's idle 90% of the time, there isn't much chance for it to degrade.


How true it takes time to reach MTTF with a solid sample, not a weak imperfection in manufacturing. What do your run that is similar to Prime95 24/7?


----------



## truehighroller1

wingman99 said:


> I have been overclocking for 17 years and I agree with Black's Equation of current and temperatur for electromigration, voltage is more of a concern than CPU heat, I have never had any degradation with low Vcore and processor Tj 80-95c.



We figured it out without you but thanks for your jumping in on that one in support of him and not me.... It's because I'm not running my stuff like it's a server in a server farm. Thanks again bub...


----------



## wingman99

truehighroller1 said:


> We figured it out without you but thanks for your jumping in on that one in support of him and not me.... It's because I'm not running my stuff like it's a server in a server farm. Thanks again bub...


I was not talking to you bud.


----------



## Martin778

I don't have space for a custom loop, just sold a 420mm loop after I went with different case  
I wanted to get a 360mm EK loop but my predator cracked after an hour of testing...


----------



## Mysticial

wingman99 said:


> How true it takes time to reach MTTF with a solid sample, not a weak imperfection in manufacturing. What do your run that is similar to Prime95 24/7?


I develop and maintain the y-cruncher benchmark. So lots of heavily optimized AVX, AVX512, etc... The very things that overclockers are *not* supposed to run in a sustained manner without throttling it.

I usually have 1 or 2 boxes running continuous regression tests and performance benchmarks. (normal part of software development) And those boxes get taxed hard.

My 7900X has been getting worked like this for the better part of 8 months now. Because of the AVX512, the conditions are:

Low voltage (~1.1)
High current (~250W)
High temps (80 - 90C)

While there are _some_ signs of degradation, it's no where near enough for me to definitively say it has degraded. (Note that current density is a major factor in Black's Equation.)


----------



## wingman99

Mysticial said:


> I develop and maintain the y-cruncher benchmark. So lots of heavily optimized AVX, AVX512, etc... The very things that overclockers are *not* supposed to run in a sustained manner without throttling it.
> 
> I usually have 1 or 2 boxes running continuous regression tests and performance benchmarks. (normal part of software development) And those boxes get taxed hard.
> 
> My 7900X has been getting worked like this for the better part of 8 months now. Because of the AVX512, the conditions are:
> 
> Low voltage (~1.1)
> High current (~250W)
> High temps (80 - 90C)
> 
> While there are _some_ signs of degradation, it's no where near enough for me to definitively say it has degraded. (Note that current density is a major factor in Black's Equation.)


Impressive, thanks for the information.:specool:


----------



## truehighroller1

Mysticial said:


> I develop and maintain the y-cruncher benchmark. So lots of heavily optimized AVX, AVX512, etc... The very things that overclockers are *not* supposed to run in a sustained manner without throttling it.
> 
> I usually have 1 or 2 boxes running continuous regression tests and performance benchmarks. (normal part of software development) And those boxes get taxed hard.
> 
> My 7900X has been getting worked like this for the better part of 8 months now. Because of the AVX512, the conditions are:
> 
> Low voltage (~1.1)
> High current (~250W)
> High temps (80 - 90C)
> 
> While there are _some_ signs of degradation, it's no where near enough for me to definitively say it has degraded. (Note that current density is a major factor in Black's Equation.)


 Great information. I went to college too.


----------



## truehighroller1

wingman99 said:


> I was not talking to you bud.


You said you were siding with him so, yeah you were talking to both of us that's how conversations work.


----------



## wingman99

truehighroller1 said:


> You said you were siding with him so, yeah you were talking to both of us that's how conversations work.


Bud I did not Quote and talk to you until you quoted me that is how a forum works. And I did not say I was siding with him. I said how true is his information is. The information Mysticial provided is based on facts you can look up.:thumb:


----------



## truehighroller1

wingman99 said:


> Bud I did not Quote and talk to you until you quoted me that is how a forum works. And I did not say I was siding with him. I said how true is his information is. The information Mysticial provided is based on facts you can look up.:thumb:



Which equals you siding with him.. which brings me back into the equation because it was our conversation to begin with not yours.. You're American right? Maybe there's a disconnect in English?. Either way.. [thumbsup]?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I remember when I first got my 7900x and simply went to 4.5 not delidded yet
I was hitting 85-90c easily with realbench 
That was on a h115i pos.


----------



## hrmgamer

Hi Everyone

I posted here back in October (?), my parts arrived but I'm really only just getting time to fiddle with it all now and I need some advice. 

Build: 7980/R6E/128GB Corsair Dominator 3466/2x 1080TI/2TB 960 Pro/Custom EK Loop with 2x 480 XE and 2x D5s. Currently on Win10 LTSB 2016 (basically 1607 Enterprise). 

Purpose: I'm a bit of a jack of all trades. This will be everything from a normal workstation (code, media editing, office), to a render box (both 3D and video), to a dev/test rig for apps and games, to being my day-to-day gaming rig. It will also have a bunch of VMs hanging off it that need faster per-thread performance than what my servers deliver (again, mostly for temp test environments). 

1. I seem to be having a stability issues. Under high RAM usage the system will either reset or hard lock up. Does this even at stock settings. HCI will sometimes crash in minutes, sometimes it takes hours (had crash with coverage over 200%). My next move is going to be to start pulling individual modules out, which is going to take a long time to test given the 8 modules and long testing times. Before I do that I was wondering if there is something obvious I'm overlooking?

2. This should probably get cross-posted into the R6E owners thread, but I thought it was worth asking here anyway---and either way this is probably BS from people who don't know what they are talking about---but I've seen a few suggestions the R6E is a little unstable at stock settings ("because the R6E is made for OC, who would bother with stock? Why would ASUS bother getting is stable?"), which in turn means that you need to tweak it in order to get it to behave. Any truth to the rumour? If there is that seems rather silly because when I've overclocked I've always gone from a stable system so I could easily verify if I was buggering things up! 

3. I was expecting by now there would be a consensus among the overclock community on how best to go about overclocking x299/SL-X. When I stopped following there were still some serious debates over offset v. adaptive v. manual voltage, what constitutes safe voltage limits, LLC limits for long term usage, SVID on or off, etc. Is there a decent Skylake-X guide, or do we just go off something like Asus' Broadwell-E one while knowing the few necessary changes for SK-X? (Apologies if I missed the sticky somewhere)

Thanks for the help
HRMGamer


----------



## RichKnecht

So, I have been reading through this thread and lots of interesting stuff going on here with 7900x chips. Seems to be a lot of variation from chip to chip when it comes to votage and overclocking ability. I have mine at 4.7 on all cores at 1.23V. This nets me ~81C under full load without delidding. I am only running an EK L240kit, but just ordered a second 240mm PE radiator and the D5 RGB PWM pump/res combo. Hoping the additional radiator and flow will help temps a little. I did manage to get it to 4.8 at 1.32V, but it only improved my CB score by ~35 points ([email protected] vs. 2301 @ 4.8) and a lot more heat. Performance is very respectable with what I do (photo editing). Still trying to tweak voltages to get it stable at 1.2V. Anything in particular (other than delidding) that I may be overlooking? Other settings include:

Board: Strix 299e gaming
LLC= Level 3
AVX offset= 1
AVX512 offset= 1
Cache+ 3000MHz
CPU input V= 1.9
Speed step C-states= disabled


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> So, I have been reading through this thread and lots of interesting stuff going on here with 7900x chips. Seems to be a lot of variation from chip to chip when it comes to votage and overclocking ability. I have mine at 4.7 on all cores at 1.23V. This nets me ~81C under full load without delidding. I am only running an EK L240kit, but just ordered a second 240mm PE radiator and the D5 RGB PWM pump/res combo. Hoping the additional radiator and flow will help temps a little. I did manage to get it to 4.8 at 1.32V, but it only improved my CB score by ~35 points ([email protected] vs. 2301 @ 4.8) and a lot more heat. Performance is very respectable with what I do (photo editing). *Still trying to tweak voltages to get it stable at 1.2V.* Anything in particular (other than delidding) that I may be overlooking? Other settings include:
> 
> Board: Strix 299e gaming
> LLC= Level 3
> AVX offset= 1
> AVX512 offset= 1
> Cache+ 3000MHz
> CPU input V= 1.9
> Speed step C-states= disabled


Hi,
4.8 will probably need 1.26v to be stable or at least for me with cache on adaptive +0.150
At low voltages forget about llc 
Both AVX at 3


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 4.8 will probably need 1.26v to be stable or at least for me with cache on adaptive +0.150
> At low voltages forget about llc
> Both AVX at 3


I have tried that, even with 1.31V and it is not stable at all. even CB immediately stops when I hit rum.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> I have tried that, even with 1.31V and it is not stable at all. *even CB immediately stops* when I hit rum.


stops? crashes, or does the system restart with no bug-check?


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> stops? crashes, or does the system restart with no bug-check?


It boots fine into W10. I can run benchmarks within CPU-z without an issue. If I try Cinebench, it starts going them an error pops up and CB closes. PC still works fine when this happens. No BSOD.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> It boots fine into W10. I can run benchmarks within CPU-z without an issue. If I try Cinebench, it starts going them an error pops up and CB closes. PC still works fine when this happens. No BSOD.


sounds like it could be a power limit thing. R15 pulls a lot of current, and is very cpu cache dependent for performance (but barely stresses the cache substructure).


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> sounds like it could be a power limit thing. R15 pulls a lot of current, and is very cpu cache dependent for performance (but barely stresses the cache substructure).


That makes sense to me. Just not sure what the limiting factor is. I can actually get it to boot at 4.8 ( like right now) and the PC seems fine. Will lowering the cache frequency back to 2400 help?


----------



## GXTCHA

RichKnecht said:


> So, I have been reading through this thread and lots of interesting stuff going on here with 7900x chips. Seems to be a lot of variation from chip to chip when it comes to votage and overclocking ability. I have mine at 4.7 on all cores at 1.23V. This nets me ~81C under full load without delidding. I am only running an EK L240kit, but just ordered a second 240mm PE radiator and the D5 RGB PWM pump/res combo. Hoping the additional radiator and flow will help temps a little. I did manage to get it to 4.8 at 1.32V, but it only improved my CB score by ~35 points ([email protected] vs. 2301 @ 4.8) and a lot more heat. Performance is very respectable with what I do (photo editing). Still trying to tweak voltages to get it stable at 1.2V. Anything in particular (other than delidding) that I may be overlooking? Other settings include:
> 
> Board: Strix 299e gaming
> LLC= Level 3
> AVX offset= 1
> AVX512 offset= 1
> Cache+ 3000MHz
> CPU input V= 1.9
> Speed step C-states= disabled


As others have stated, its really going to be dependent on the chip. For reference, my 7900x runs a stable 4.8 @ 1.220v adaptive with vccin @ 1.84 and LLC 6 on Rampage 6 Apex.

Your LLC @ 3 seems low but I dont know what board you have.

Also, what are your power limit settings?


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> That makes sense to me. Just not sure what the limiting factor is. I can actually get it to boot at 4.8 ( like right now) and the PC seems fine. Will lowering the cache frequency back to 2400 help?


need more info.. what MB? what ram kit? (add your rig to your signature block). cache and core pull from separate voltage rails on this architecture- but combine for heat and power on the SIO. Cache can be beneficial, especially with a tuned ram kit.. but at some point, the power and heat contribution of increasing cache OC outweighs the benefits for a 24/7 OC. 
Best thing to do is post bios screenshots (hit F12 with a USB stick in any port). or if you have an ASUS rog board, ctrl-F2 to drop a txt file of all settings to the USB stick (you have to select the USB stick in the "save slot= menu).


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> That makes sense to me. Just not sure what the limiting factor is. I can actually get it to boot at 4.8 ( like right now) and the PC seems fine. Will lowering the cache frequency back to 2400 help?


Hi,
Auto is most likely 2700 cache I'd be more inclined to leave it on auto than at 2400 or min/ max cache at 24 :/
Use min cache 27 and max cache 30 is what I use.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I've never disabled c-steps 
I do however disable 
cpu svid support
Enhanced speed step tech.


----------



## RichKnecht

kingofblog said:


> Assuming you have already done everything correctly, the only way you can improve the voltage/frequency curve is to reduce the operating temperature. Are you monitoring your liquid temperature? You can continue improving it by adding radiators until it becomes the same as your intake temperature. I know my own 280 mm AIO reaches a delta-T of 20 degrees at 200 W, which by projection would be 30 degrees at 300 W. Doubling the radiator area can bring the liquid temperature down by up to half, so I could gain another 10-15 degrees with dual radiators. Reducing the temperature by 10 degrees may or may not allow a marginal voltage reduction.
> 
> FYI: 4.7 GHz at 1.237 V is the Silicon Lottery 50% probable OC for the i9-7900X.


I do not monitor water temp yet. I have a temp probe coming with the D5 RGB PWM pump/res combo and second 240mm radiator. Once I get those installed, I am going to do more testing. However, I think I will have to "deal with" a 4.7OC and get temps as low as I can without delidding.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> I do not monitor water temp yet. I have a temp probe coming with the D5 RGB PWM pump/res combo and second 240mm radiator. Once I get those installed, I am going to do more testing. However, I think I will have to "deal with" a 4.7OC and get temps as low as I can without delidding.


Hi,
Delid will drop 20c off your temps or at least did for me 
See silicon lottery no binning best 80.us I've ever spent plus shipping costs of course not included :thumb:


----------



## RichKnecht

On a separate note, what kind of CB scores are you guys getting with the 7900x OC'ed to 4.8 and above? Just curious.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> On a separate note, what kind of CB scores are you guys getting with the 7900x OC'ed to 4.8 and above? Just curious.


just look thru this: http://hwbot.org/benchmark/cinebenc...d=processor_5453&cores=10#start=0#interval=20

#40 and higher are ambient cooling.


----------



## Martin778

What do you guys think about those temps for a stock, delidded XE w. 360mm aio on max rpm?


Spoiler


----------



## Jpmboy

Martin778 said:


> What do you guys think about those temps for a stock, delidded XE w. 360mm aio on max rpm?


I think they are about right for the x264 stress test after that many loops. I am impressed with the package temp. However - when you say stock.. are you allowing the MB to deliver what it thinks the CPU needs? - vcore not shown in your screenshot. ((it will be a bit high for many cpu samples)
try using SIV64 to monitor things


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi, @JmPboy
What do you think about disabling c states ?


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi, @*JmP* boy
> What do you think about disabling c states ?


only when using manual override. When using adaptive, the cpu rests at idle vcore, so not much power to save. And returning to a full-wake state (from the higher c-states) can induce lag. Then... there's core parking which is fine if the rig sits for hours, but not fine if your game or work doesn't pull sufficient demand to wake all cores. (personally, I hate core parking  ). But, if you do use ITB and Speedshift - you need the c6 state for them to work properly.
http://www.dungeoner.com/en/overclo...anagement-settings-eist-c-states-turbo-boost/
a good intro read... but before speedshift was introduced.


----------



## wingman99

Difference Between Deep and Deeper Sleep States for Processors: https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...0006619/processors/intel-core-processors.html
C-states are only active when there is no processing at idle.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> just look thru this: http://hwbot.org/benchmark/cinebenc...d=processor_5453&cores=10#start=0#interval=20
> 
> #40 and higher are ambient cooling.


Thank you for that link. I'm at 2585 at 4.7GHz so it looks like I am on par with what I'm seeing there. Kind of strange that some chips running at 4700 are faster than some running at 4800.


----------



## truehighroller1

RichKnecht said:


> Thank you for that link. I'm at 2585 at 4.7GHz so it looks like I am on par with what I'm seeing there. Kind of strange that some chips running at 4700 are faster than some running at 4800.


I said hell with it and submitted my score and now I'm in 40th place with 2782 and then apparently now I'm number one in the enthusiast league!! 

The ones that are running faster could have faster memory and or it could just be that they have more stable overclocks.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi, @*JmP* boy
> What do you think about disabling c states ?


since I'm here, let me add the following. I run this 7980XE as a per specific core OC using adaptive. the 2 * cores are at 4.6 w/ 1.26V, the remaining 16 are at 4.5 with 1.18V. C6 is enabled, speedstep disabled, speed shift enabled. When the load calls for only 1 or 2 cores (eg, folding with 2 GPUs) only the * cores get work (as seen by SIV64). The system idles at really low power(like 8-12watts). using manual override and all c-states, idle is 20+ W, straight adaptive is 18W. Not that this matters from a power use perspective, but from the CPUs POV, it's a happy camper. Wake from resting states is very fast. no performance loss in a 24/7 use scenario. yeah, there's state imaging and L3 cache flushing going on at C6, but that's not an issue. the C6 com is neeed for shift to work as designed afaik, so the pass-thru states are required also.
That said, Benchmarking is different... and not what one runs for 24/7.


RichKnecht said:


> Thank you for that link. I'm at 2585 at 4.7GHz so it looks like I am on par with what I'm seeing there. Kind of strange that some chips running at 4700 are faster than some running at 4800.


check the cache clocks and ram freq/timings. tuned ram can be worth 100MHx on the core in that benchmark. 


truehighroller1 said:


> I said hell with it and submitted my score and now I'm in 40th place with 2782 and then apparently now I'm number one in the enthusiast league!!
> 
> The ones that are running faster could have faster memory and or it could just be that they have more stable overclocks.


lol - I didn't check that #40 was your score! 
damn good score! right up there with the cold crowd!! :sonic:


----------



## truehighroller1

Jpmboy said:


> lol - I didn't check that #40 was your score!
> damn good score! right up there with the cold crowd!! :sonic:



Thanks man! That means a lot actually.


----------



## RichKnecht

OK, so I changed to adaptive mode (1.31V) and I can actually run Cinebench now and scores are ~2610. Not that great considering at 4.7 I am at 2585. Maybe I should clear the CMOS and start all over again, working my back up.


----------



## Jpmboy

two "Better" cores working, others just chillin'


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> OK, so I changed to adaptive mode (1.31V) and I can actually run Cinebench now and scores are ~2610. Not that great considering at 4.7 I am at 2585. Maybe I should clear the CMOS and start all over again, working my back up.


settle on a core OC, leave cache on auto, once you have that down, we can work on a ram OC... but you gotta list your gear!! No idea what you are working with.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> settle on a core OC, leave cache on auto, once you have that down, we can work on a ram OC... but you gotta list your gear!! No idea what you are working with.


OK, sounds like a plan. Here is my setup:

ASUS Strix 299e gaming
7900X
32GB Corsair vengence 3466 DDR4 @3600
1050ti
Samsung 850Pro SSD boot drive
EK cooling loop


----------



## wingman99

Manual Vcore disables C-states.


----------



## cekim

wingman99 said:


> Manual Vcore disables C-states.


Got a reference for that?


----------



## wingman99

cekim said:


> Got a reference for that?


I saw it posted by programmer, I just can't find it. You can test it your self by setting the C states to enabled with manual Vcore and the core voltage will not lower at idle to ~0.036v like it will with adaptive.


----------



## cekim

wingman99 said:


> I saw it posted by programmer, I just can't find it. You can test it your self by setting the C states to enabled with manual Vcore and the core voltage will not lower at idle to ~0.036v like it will with adaptive.


Well, the voltage definitely is fixed (though, it will still go to sleep if your power plan allows it), but I see linux reporting movement among the C-states with a fixed v-core.


----------



## Jpmboy

there's no reference for that because it's wrong and has nothing to do with adaptive, manual or offset voltage report to the OS. But does say something about one's (not your's  ) understanding of C, P and T states. C-state voltage bins are not reported to the OS and operate on a per core basis. C7 and higher can put an individual core voltage to zero volts. Early on, like over a decade ago, when 75% of cores would hit C7 some desktop PSUs would shut down "thinking" that the 12V rail has fouled, especially when the +3 and +5V lines were still active (USB power, power over cat5 etc, etc). This was never a problem when first implemented in laptops since the power section was designed to deal with this specifically. Just a fun fact.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> only when using manual override. When using adaptive, the cpu rests at idle vcore, so not much power to save. And returning to a full-wake state (from the higher c-states) can induce lag. Then... there's core parking which is fine if the rig sits for hours, but not fine if your game or work doesn't pull sufficient demand to wake all cores. (personally, I hate core parking  ). But, if you do use ITB and Speedshift - you need the c6 state for them to work properly.
> http://www.dungeoner.com/en/overclo...anagement-settings-eist-c-states-turbo-boost/
> a good intro read... but before speedshift was introduced.


Hi,
Thank you good read :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Thank you good read :thumb:


the guys at anadtech wrote something up more recently...


----------



## wingman99

cekim said:


> Well, the voltage definitely is fixed (though, it will still go to sleep if your power plan allows it), but I see linux reporting movement among the C-states with a fixed v-core.


There is two processes going on with C-states Clock halt and Voltage lowering. Fixed Vcore bypasses the C-states voltage lowering, however not the clock halt.

BACKGROUND: A QUICK REFRESHER ON IDLE STATES

Here is a quick summary of what C-states are. C-states are idle power saving states, in contrast to P-states, which are execution power saving states. During a P-state, the processor is still executing instructions, whereas during a C-state (other than C0), the processor is idle, meaning that nothing is executing. To make a quick analogy, a processor lying idle is like a house with all the lights on when no one is at home. Consuming all that power is doing nothing other than providing your electric company a little extra income. What is the best option? If no one is at home, meaning the house is idle, why leave the lights on? The same applies to a processor. If no one is using it, why keep the unused circuits powered up and consuming energy? Shut them down and save.

POWER MANAGEMENT: Core C0 and C1

So what does all this have to do with power management? Though it is sometimes assumed by the lower paid liberal arts students that engineers are unimaginative and boring, you and I know that, though boring we may be, we are not unimaginative. With this in mind, I ask you to visualize that on every one of those desks is a computer and a desk light.

The Core in C0: When at least one of the high tech workers is diligently working at their task. (I.e. At least one of the core’s CPUs/HW threads is executing instructions.)

CPU Executing a HALT: When one of those diligent workers finishes his task, he turns out his desk lamp, shuts down his computer, and leaves. (I.e. one of the HW threads executes a HALT instruction.)

Entering Core-C1: When all four diligent workers finish their tasks, they all execute HALT instructions. The last one finishing turns off the lights. (I.e. The core is clock gated.)



POWER MANAGEMENT: Core-C6

Entering Core-C6: Yes, I know it’s blatantly obvious, but I like talking to myself. As time proceeds, everyone leaves for lunch. Since no one is in the office, we can shut things down even further in the rooms (i.e. power gating). Remember, though, that they are coming back after lunch so anything shut down must be able to be powered back up quickly.


LINK: https://software.intel.com/en-us/ar...states-p-states-c-states-and-package-c-states


----------



## Jpmboy

oh man... besides the fact that Taylor's blog is discussing the Intel Phi coprocessor and power management for that AIC, no where does he mention vcore (Vcc or any relevant voltage rail) NOT dropping in any frequency/voltage pair (which is a p-state function anyway). How this works is when an individual core is halted, it (that specific core) receives low or, in c6 and higher no voltage from the "vcore" rail. That is how it is HALTED, as opposed to simply sitting at ldle. Moreover... as soon as you use a discrete GPU, you are limited to C3 at the package level. USB3.1 connected devices that are on/active will also limit the system to C3 as a state... but in order for speedshift to remain active in controlling "P" state, the c6 com remains active as long as speedshift is enabled.

Dude - I blocked you many months ago because you kept posting similar google-search stuff. Blocked again.


----------



## wingman99

Jpmboy said:


> oh man... besides the fact that Taylor's blog is discussing the Intel Phi coprocessor and power management for that AIC, no where does he mention vcore (Vcc or any relevant voltage rail) NOT dropping in any frequency/voltage pair (which is a p-state function anyway). How this works is when an individual core is halted, it (that specific core) receives low or, in c6 and higher no voltage from the "vcore" rail. That is how it is HALTED, as opposed to simply sitting at ldle. Moreover... as soon as you use a discrete GPU, you are limited to C3 at the package level. USB3.1 connected devices that are on/active will also limit the system to C3 as a state... but in order for speedshift to remain active in controlling "P" state, the c6 com remains active as long as speedshift is enabled.
> 
> Dude - I blocked you many months ago because you kept posting similar google-search stuff. Blocked again.


I was just pointing out with Taylor's blog what c states does that is all. And my observation is that with C-states enabled the core Voltage drops to 0.036v when the core or cores is halted at idle, then with fixed Vcore the voltage does not drop with C-states enabled.


----------



## tistou77

I was wondering, with an OC 4600 AVX -1 / -1, With Realbench, it test more 4500 than 4600 (test AVX), but if it's ok at 4500 AVX, it's also ok at 4600 ?

The AVX2 frequency, is useful for benchmarks in general ?
Or is it better to increase the "standard" frequency and use the Offest for the AVX ?

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> I was wondering, with an OC 4600 AVX -1 / -1, With Realbench, it test more 4500 than 4600 (test AVX), but if it's ok at 4500 AVX, it's also ok at 4600 ?
> 
> The AVX2 frequency, is useful for benchmarks in general ?
> Or is it better to increase the "standard" frequency and use the Offest for the AVX ?
> 
> Thanks


yeah that's where the offset can be tricky - to test 4600, the AID64 cpu (only) module should run the non-AVX clocks. Of course, the other method is to use p95v26.x or disable AVX in any later version of p95.


----------



## DeathAngel74

> I'm just wondering if my 7820x's oc'ing potential is average or below average. It can do 4.5GHz @ 1.1v/mesh 3200MHz @ 1.1v. Yesterday I tried 4.7 GHz, after apply bios 1102 w/microcode update. I was able to push to 4.7 @1.2v AVX-3/AVX512-5. Max temps were 84C, Cinebench-2055 for mc, 206 for sc.
> I wasn't really comfortable with that because gaming temps were 75-80C. I dropped back down to 4.6GHz @ 1.160v, AVX-4.3GHz, AVX512-4.0GHZ. Max temps were 75-81C during 1hr prime95 26.6, gaming temps were 67C; stable after 6 hours gaming, 1 hr RB2.56 and Cinebench scores were 2018 for mc, 201 for sc.
> My cooling is a Thermaltake Riing 360mm AIO with 6 fans push/pull, max 1500RPM. Any input or advice is appreciated. TIA
> PS no delid yet.


I posted this about 20 pages back. Just in case it got missed in the shuffle or maybe no one cares, lol.


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> yeah that's where the offset can be tricky - to test 4600, the AID64 cpu (only) module should run the non-AVX clocks. Of course, the other method is to use p95v26.x or disable AVX in any later version of p95.


Ok thanks
I test my OC at 4600 (AVX -1 / -1) and it's good with Realbench
I have to test with Aida64 too to be sure ?


----------



## Martin778

I've tested a predator 360 kit on my 7980XE and it performs worse than a BQ SL 360. No idea why...I think the CPU sensors are cheating in on me. 
On stock settings the BQ is 3-4*C cooler after 10+ loops of X264.


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> Ok thanks
> I test my OC at 4600 (AVX -1 / -1) and it's good with Realbench
> I have to test with Aida64 too to be sure ?


I'm sure the non-avx clocks are fine at -1. Many use much higher AVX offsets, that's when an non-AVX test is really necessary. :thumb:


Martin778 said:


> I've tested a predator 360 kit on my 7980XE and it performs worse than a BQ SL 360. No idea why...I think the CPU sensors are cheating in on me.
> On stock settings the BQ is 3-4*C cooler after 10+ loops of X264.


lol - I get the same feeling about the temp sensors on mine too! They think higher is better. :blinksmil


----------



## rt123

So anyone ever find a good clocking retail 7740X??


----------



## Jpmboy

DeathAngel74 said:


> I posted this about 20 pages back. Just in case it got missed in the shuffle or maybe no one cares, lol.


NOt sure there's a question in there (besides if anyone thinks it a good chip). Bottom line is this whole gen is thermally limited for overclocking and really can't be uncorked much beyond what you have done without a delid. We can tank Intel for the pigeon poop at thermal bond line


----------



## DeathAngel74

Thank you. That's the answer I was looking for. I was just concerned that the chip was below average. I feel better now knowing the thermal limitations are Intel's fault.


----------



## RichKnecht

OK, so I spent a little time trying to improve the OC on my 7900x/ Strix 299E system running 32GB Corsair vengence 3466 DDR4. No matter what I try, 4.8 on all cores won't happen without throwing a ton (1.32V) at it. I can set the 2 * cores at [email protected], but all that does is add heat. CB scores remain the same. Cooling is provided by 2 EK PE240 radiators, EK waterblock, and a D5 RGB PWM. For those interested, here are some screenshots of my settings.


----------



## truehighroller1

RichKnecht said:


> OK, so I spent a little time trying to improve the OC on my 7900x/ Strix 299E system running 32GB Corsair vengence 3466 DDR4. No matter what I try, 4.8 on all cores won't happen without throwing a ton (1.32V) at it. I can set the 2 * cores at [email protected], but all that does is add heat. CB scores remain the same. Cooling is provided by 2 EK PE240 radiators, EK waterblock, and a D5 RGB PWM. For those interested, here are some screenshots of my settings.



You need more heat dissipation. I have two 360's and a 480 and two d5 pumps. I have them setup externally outside of my case. 

The only thing in my case from my loop is the block. I also just ordered the dual d5 pump setup from ekwb yesterday along with some connectors and the reservoir that goes on top of the dual pump setup so I can shorten my hoses and get even better pressure / cooling. I've had this setup for about five years now with a few adjustments here and there.

I'm running my 7900x all cores, at 5GHz 1.325v cache at 3.3 1.2v.


----------



## RichKnecht

truehighroller1 said:


> You need more heat dissipation. I have two 360's and a 480 and two d5 pumps. I have them setup externally outside of my case.
> 
> The only thing in my case from my loop is the block. I also just ordered the dual d5 pump setup from ekwb yesterday along with some connectors and the reservoir that goes on top of the dual pump setup so I can shorten my hoses and get even better pressure / cooling. I've had this setup for about five years now with a few adjustments here and there.
> 
> I'm running my 7900x all cores, at 5GHz 1.325v cache at 3.3 1.2v.


I honestly think I have plenty of cooling. Room temp is ~20C and water temps are 27C. I doubt I can get the water temps to ambient with more radiators. Processor idles at ~30C, which is only 10C over room temp. Under full load, the max core temp is 83, still very good IMO when you consider the chip is not delidded. I think it all has to do with how "lucky" you are when it comes to your chip. Some just OC better than others with less volts. Temperature aside, I can't get all cores to run at 4.8 at 1.32V whereas you are getting 5GHz with the same voltage. Unless I am missing something here, I have hit the limits of this chip. Mind you, I am not complaining, as performance is pretty darn good.


----------



## truehighroller1

RichKnecht said:


> I honestly think I have plenty of cooling. Room temp is ~20C and water temps are 27C. I doubt I can get the water temps to ambient with more radiators. Processor idles at ~30C, which is only 10C over room temp. Under full load, the max core temp is 83, still very good IMO when you consider the chip is not delidded. I think it all has to do with how "lucky" you are when it comes to your chip. Some just OC better than others with less volts. Temperature aside, I can't get all cores to run at 4.8 at 1.32V whereas you are getting 5GHz with the same voltage. Unless I am missing something here, I have hit the limits of this chip. Mind you, I am not complaining, as performance is pretty darn good.



Mine is delidded. Delidding should net you more room with less voltage.


----------



## RichKnecht

truehighroller1 said:


> Mine is delidded. Delidding should net you more room with less voltage.


I thought about sending it in to Silcon Lottery, but it still doesn't guarantee a higher overclock, just lower temps. I figured yours was delidded since you were at 5GHz.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> OK, so I spent a little time trying to improve the OC on my 7900x/ Strix 299E system running 32GB Corsair vengence 3466 DDR4. No matter what I try, 4.8 on all cores won't happen without throwing a ton (1.32V) at it. I can set the 2 * cores at [email protected], but all that does is add heat. CB scores remain the same. Cooling is provided by 2 EK PE240 radiators, EK waterblock, and a D5 RGB PWM. For those interested, here are some screenshots of my settings.


So - CB scores will remain unchanged like you say because the AVX ofset is applied to the lowest core multiplier. If the other cores are at 47 with 2 at 48, the offset for all cores is based on 47. Secondly, try using min cache at auto, and in general, lowering cache frequency will lower heat quite a bit. System Agent and IO - have you tried to lower these? 


RichKnecht said:


> I thought about sending it in to Silcon Lottery, but it still doesn't guarantee a higher overclock, just lower temps. I figured yours was delidded since you were at 5GHz.


SL is not going to say you will get a higher OC by delidding, but in general, lowering temps by 10-20C will net 100MHz on this generation chip.


----------



## tistou77

The Offset for Cache voltage works ?
When I tried, in idle I had the "same" tension as the manual setting


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> So - CB scores will remain unchanged like you say because the AVX ofset is applied to the lowest core multiplier. If the other cores are at 47 with 2 at 48, the offset for all cores is based on 47. Secondly, try using min cache at auto, and in general, lowering cache frequency will lower heat quite a bit. System Agent and IO - have you tried to lower these?


OK, that makes sense. I switched the min cache to auto, and CB results were the same but ~2 degrees lower ( tried it 6 times with the same result) so I'll leave that on auto. Never tried lowering the system agent or IO.


----------



## STErcan

I have the same problem as you guys. I have delidded my 7980xe en have a direct die mount. When I run 4.9Ghz (allcores) with 30 cache 1.35v. I get 81c, with 2x240 rads with cinebench. When I lower the voltage to 1.34v, it crashes. So far so good. But when I increase the voltage to 1.382v and 5Ghz. When I start cinebench, the pc shutdowns instantly. When I put al my fans 100%, then it crashes after few seconds.

The weird part is, the cores don't throttle, I saw 90c. I'm thinking that the package sensor is getting 105c, bios is set to shutdown at 105c, before the cores ar reaching throttle level.

My question is is this a known issue? Can adding more rads fix this?


----------



## CptSpig

STErcan said:


> I have the same problem as you guys. I have delidded my 7980xe en have a direct die mount. When I run 4.9Ghz (allcores) with 30 cache 1.35v. I get 81c, with 2x240 rads with cinebench. When I lower the voltage to 1.34v, it crashes. So far so good. But when I increase the voltage to 1.382v and 5Ghz. When I start cinebench, the pc shutdowns instantly. When I put al my fans 100%, then it crashes after few seconds.
> 
> The weird part is, the cores don't throttle, I saw 90c. I'm thinking that the package sensor is getting 105c, bios is set to shutdown at 105c, before the cores ar reaching throttle level.
> 
> My question is is this a known issue? Can adding more rads fix this?


Not really a issue sounds like you are reaching thermal limits and it's keeping you from cooking your chip. You need a chiller or some way of cooling below ambient temperatures.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> I honestly think I have plenty of cooling. Room temp is ~20C and water temps are 27C. I doubt I can get the water temps to ambient with more radiators. Processor idles at ~30C, which is only 10C over room temp. Under full load, the max core temp is 83, still very good IMO when you consider the chip is not delidded. I think it all has to do with how "lucky" you are when it comes to your chip. Some just OC better than others with less volts. Temperature aside, I can't get all cores to run at 4.8 at 1.32V whereas you are getting 5GHz with the same voltage. Unless I am missing something here, I have hit the limits of this chip. Mind you, I am not complaining, as performance is pretty darn good.


Hi,
Personally I would use 
3 for avx 512
Cache min 27 would probably be auto as well 
Max cache 30
Cache on Adaptive with the same +0.150 or even +0.175 with additional +0.50 turbo
VCCIO 1.1
System agent 1.05
Enable Enhanced speed step..
LLC 4
CPU power phase Extreme


----------



## RichKnecht

On a side note, when I ordered the D5 pump, I also ordered some Gelid GC Extreme as I have read that it can improve heat transfer over other TIMs out there. So I popped off the water block, removed the Arctic Silver 5, and applied the Gelid paste. Fired the PC back up and temps were actually 7C HIGHER when under load than with the Arctic silver! Idle temps were the same. Tried it 3 times with the exact same results and went back to Artic silver 5. What are you guys using and do you really think it makes a difference? Was thinking of trying Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut or the Noctua stuff as I have read they offer improved temps over my present paste.


----------



## tistou77

For Cache at 3000 or 3100mhz, how much voltage do you have (to get an idea) ?
Reading Vcache is really weird with monitoring software (Aida64, SIV, etc...)

Thanks


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> What are you guys using and do you really think it makes a difference? Was thinking of trying Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut or the Noctua stuff as I have read they offer improved temps over my present paste.


Hi,
I wouldn't expect any miracles with thermal paste NT-H1 is fine only miracle is going to be delid 
Thermal grizzly kryonaut is not any better NT-H1 every local tech store usually has in-stock.

I would add vCore override I would use 1.25v with the other settings.
3 for avx 512
Cache min 27 would probably be auto as well 
Max cache 30
Cache on Adaptive with the same +0.150 or even +0.175 with additional +0.50 turbo
VCCIO 1.1
System agent 1.05
Enable Enhanced speed step..
LLC 4
CPU power phase Extreme


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I wouldn't expect any miracles with thermal paste NT-H1 is fine only miracle is going to be delid
> Thermal grizzly kryonaut is not any better NT-H1 every local tech store usually has in-stock.
> 
> I would add vCore override I would use 1.25v with the other settings.
> 3 for avx 512
> Cache min 27 would probably be auto as well
> Max cache 30
> Cache on Adaptive with the same +0.150 or even +0.175 with additional +0.50 turbo
> VCCIO 1.1
> System agent 1.05
> Enable Enhanced speed step..
> LLC 4
> CPU power phase Extreme


I have vcore set at 1.23V. It says Auto on those screens because I am overclocking by specific core ( for now). As for the TIM, I'm not expecting miracles, but a couple degrees here and there would be OK. I was just surprised that the AS 5 outperformed the Gelid GC Extreme. I'll stick with AS 5 for now as it is maxing out at 81 with my OC. I have pretty much given up on 4.8, which is just fine.


----------



## DeathAngel74

I stopped using AS5 with Devil's Canyon chips. Switched to Kryonaut for a while, but had to replace it within a year's time after temps started to skyrocket on my 6700k. I've had success with MX-4 with Skylake/Skylake-X, no complaints so far.


----------



## Radox-0

tistou77 said:


> For Cache at 3000 or 3100mhz, how much voltage do you have (to get an idea) ?
> Reading Vcache is really weird with monitoring software (Aida64, SIV, etc...)
> 
> Thanks


I have just gone with 1v for my cache at 3 GHz on my 7980xe for daily use. Can use slightly less voltage, but not bothered finding out when it falls over and 1v or can do more then 3GHz with a slight notch up in voltage. As it is, easy to recall for my day to day settings.


----------



## tistou77

Radox-0 said:


> I have just gone with 1v for my cache at 3 GHz on my 7980xe for daily use. Can use slightly less voltage, but not bothered finding out when it falls over and 1v or can do more then 3GHz with a slight notch up in voltage. As it is, easy to recall for my day to day settings.


OK, thanks
I test the stability with Aida64 currently (ok with Realbench) and I was not stable (error after 15, 20mn), and lowering the Vcache, error after 1h
I was wondering if too much Vcache could play on stability
Or it's a coincidence and the problem is somewhere else


----------



## bmgjet

Is some one able to answer my question, Done some googling but gotten conflicting answers.

Is X299 socket compatible with x99 waterblocks?
Looking at upgrading my 6900K to a 7960X next week but want to use my EK waterblock for a few weeks while waiting on a delid tool and monoblock to get shipped.


----------



## SuperMumrik

bmgjet said:


> Is X299 socket compatible with x99 waterblocks?


Yes


----------



## ThrashZone

bmgjet said:


> Is some one able to answer my question, Done some googling but gotten conflicting answers.
> 
> Is X299 socket compatible with x99 waterblocks?
> Looking at upgrading my 6900K to a 7960X next week but want to use my EK waterblock for a few weeks while waiting on a delid tool and monoblock to get shipped.


Hi,
Yes but I wouldn't waste the money on a mono block they only look cool or at least a EK mono block are a waste
A regular block will cool better by at least 5c and mono blocks are a pain to deal with and oddly enough to get all the air out of from poor flow design.


----------



## hrmgamer

truehighroller1 said:


> You need more heat dissipation. I have two 360's and a 480 and two d5 pumps. I have them setup externally outside of my case.
> 
> The only thing in my case from my loop is the block. I also just ordered the dual d5 pump setup from ekwb yesterday along with some connectors and the reservoir that goes on top of the dual pump setup so I can shorten my hoses and get even better pressure / cooling. I've had this setup for about five years now with a few adjustments here and there.
> 
> I'm running my 7900x all cores, at 5GHz 1.325v cache at 3.3 1.2v.


Out of curiosity what's your flowrate like? I've got an EK Dual D5 and I'm only getting about 100L/h with 2x 480XE/Supremacy Evo WB/2x1080Ti blocks. If I stick a second Dual D5 (for a total of 4 D5s) it goes up to about 150L/h and drops the temps another 10+ degrees. Is it just me or is that flow rate awful and really needing to be around 250L/h?

Thanks
HRMGamer


----------



## cekim

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yes but I wouldn't waste the money on a mono block they only look cool or at least a EK mono block are a waste
> A regular block will cool better by at least 5c and mono blocks are a pain to deal with and oddly enough to get all the air out of from poor flow design.


1. had no issue getting the air out... between good loop/res design and bleeding, I've no problems at all from either my x99Pro, RVE or R6E mono-blocks which are all of similar design.

2. VRM cooling is a thing with these systems (like never before) and mono-blocks do it very well.

3. 5C is overstating the difference and ignoring the VRM benefit needed for #2. 

4. Valid concern/complaint: once you delid, you may have seating geometry issues depending on whether you re-glue the spreader and change the geometry. I would presume that having someone like Silicon Lottery do it for you would provide some assurance that it would be re-glued to the right height. 

I chose NOT to re-glue for the additional thermal performance and deal with altering the geometry of my mono-block via thinner thermal pads on the VRM chokes/ICs. Had no issues since. Picked up some 0.5mm fuji thermal pads and added thermal compound to them. Works fine, solves the delta in height from the "missing" silicon glue.

Used LM on both sides of spreader.

If you DON'T use a mono-block, then you need to look hard at your VRM cooling scheme. You need good airflow to your VRMs and a fan dedicated to providing it.

FWIW, I have a 5960 with an EVO and had a dual 2696v3 setup with 2 of them, so I have no concerns with them either, but VRM temps are a much bigger issue with this platform as it easily moves 2x the wattage as the prior generations.


----------



## truehighroller1

hrmgamer said:


> Out of curiosity what's your flowrate like? I've got an EK Dual D5 and I'm only getting about 100L/h with 2x 480XE/Supremacy Evo WB/2x1080Ti blocks. If I stick a second Dual D5 (for a total of 4 D5s) it goes up to about 150L/h and drops the temps another 10+ degrees. Is it just me or is that flow rate awful and really needing to be around 250L/h?
> 
> Thanks
> HRMGamer



I don't know. Maybe I'll look at getting a flow meter. I've never had one. I've just always eye balled what my flow rate looks like in the reservoir.


----------



## Jpmboy

cekim said:


> 1. had no issue getting the air out... between good loop/res design and bleeding, I've no problems at all from either my x99Pro, RVE or R6E mono-blocks which are all of similar design.
> 
> 2. VRM cooling is a thing with these systems (like never before) and mono-blocks do it very well.
> 
> 3. 5C is overstating the difference and ignoring the VRM benefit needed for #2.
> 
> 4. Valid concern/complaint: once you delid, you may have seating geometry issues depending on whether you re-glue the spreader and change the geometry. I would presume that having someone like Silicon Lottery do it for you would provide some assurance that it would be re-glued to the right height.
> 
> *I chose NOT to re-glue for the additional thermal performance and deal with altering the geometry of my mono-block via thinner thermal pads on the VRM chokes/ICs. Had no issues since. Picked up some 0.5mm fuji thermal pads and added thermal compound to them. Works fine, solves the delta in height from the "missing" silicon glue.*
> 
> Used LM on both sides of spreader.
> 
> If you DON'T use a mono-block, then you need to look hard at your VRM cooling scheme. You need good airflow to your VRMs and a fan dedicated to providing it.
> 
> FWIW, I have a 5960 with an EVO and had a dual 2696v3 setup with 2 of them, so I have no concerns with them either, but VRM temps are a much bigger issue with this platform as it easily moves 2x the wattage as the prior generations.


that's interesting! .. and where's is the +rep button????


----------



## ThrashZone

cekim said:


> 1. had no issue getting the air out... between good loop/res design and bleeding, I've no problems at all from either my x99Pro, RVE or R6E mono-blocks which are all of similar design.
> 
> 2. VRM cooling is a thing with these systems (like never before) and mono-blocks do it very well.
> 
> 3. 5C is overstating the difference and ignoring the VRM benefit needed for #2.
> 
> 4. Valid concern/complaint: once you delid, you may have seating geometry issues depending on whether you re-glue the spreader and change the geometry. I would presume that having someone like Silicon Lottery do it for you would provide some assurance that it would be re-glued to the right height.
> 
> I chose NOT to re-glue for the additional thermal performance and deal with altering the geometry of my mono-block via thinner thermal pads on the VRM chokes/ICs. Had no issues since. Picked up some 0.5mm fuji thermal pads and added thermal compound to them. Works fine, solves the delta in height from the "missing" silicon glue.
> 
> Used LM on both sides of spreader.
> 
> If you DON'T use a mono-block, then you need to look hard at your VRM cooling scheme. You need good airflow to your VRMs and a fan dedicated to providing it.
> 
> FWIW, I have a 5960 with an EVO and had a dual 2696v3 setup with 2 of them, so I have no concerns with them either, but VRM temps are a much bigger issue with this platform as it easily moves 2x the wattage as the prior generations.


Hi,
SL did the delid for me they are local 
But being I had EK D5 pump it was pretty weak with a mono block 
I have switched to a 5 speed D5 vario and an ocool res difference is day and night in water flow :thumb:
http://www.performance-pcs.com/watercool-wcp-d5-vario-12v-pump.html
Also changed piping arrangement a tad pump res combo/ 280 rad/ cpu/ 240se rad/ gpu and it seems better all around temp than rad/ rad/ cpu/ gpu... was going to add another pump between cpu and gpu but doesn't seem to need it now :/

I did not notice any problems with contact with mono block and vrm's all impressions were clearly seen they were all getting contact so no thermal paste was needed to act as filler.
What are vrm's listed as in hwmonitor or hwinfo free ?

Prime x299 has an okay aluminum heat sink on it x99 sabertooth not sure what it has plastic cover blocks what ever is there :/


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> SL did the delid for me they are local
> But being I had EK D5 pump it was pretty weak with a mono block
> I have switched to a 5 speed D5 vario and an ocool res difference is day and night in water flow :thumb:
> http://www.performance-pcs.com/watercool-wcp-d5-vario-12v-pump.html
> Also changed piping arrangement a tad pump res combo/ 280 rad/ cpu/ 240se rad/ gpu and it seems better all around temp than rad/ rad/ cpu/ gpu... was going to add another pump between cpu and gpu but doesn't seem to need it now :/
> 
> I did not notice any problems with contact with mono block and vrm's all impressions were clearly seen they were all getting contact so no thermal paste was needed to act as filler.
> What are vrm's listed as in hwmonitor or hwinfo free ?
> 
> Prime x299 has an okay aluminum heat sink on it x99 sabertooth not sure what it has plastic cover blocks what ever is there :/


Curious to what your temps are. Water, ambient, idle, & load? I have a D5 PWM and it's running at 65% through 2 240mm EK PE radiators. Water temp is ~26C with 20C ambient temp.


----------



## eatthermalpaste

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yes but I wouldn't waste the money on a mono block they only look cool or at least a EK mono block are a waste
> A regular block will cool better by at least 5c and mono blocks are a pain to deal with and oddly enough to get all the air out of from poor flow design.


Well yeah, you wouldn't waste your money on a monoblock since he is askign if x99 is compatible with x299...

the monoblocks will not be.

Someone before said monoblocks are compatible with the x299s... maybe for some boards but it is not a one size fits all. Depends on the monoblock and depends on the board.

The part of the VRMs that we cool on X299 boards are generally about 10-20mm longer than on X99 boards (for ASUS, possibly same for others). Also, if the portion of the monoblock you have is meant to screw in to the VRMs as well and not just the CPU to make decent contact iwht VRMs... the screws for VRMs on ASUS boards are diagonal from each other rather than straight across on some boards and can possibly be further away from eachother than on X99 board but not always the case.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Curious to what your temps are. Water, ambient, idle, & load? I have a D5 PWM and it's running at 65% through 2 240mm EK PE radiators. Water temp is ~26C with 20C ambient temp.


Hi,
Texas so that will give you an idea of ambient which is usually 25c 
Load is always full tilt benchmarking and gpu suffered the most with the ek pump getting upwards to 60+c
New pump is now 43c with the ek supremacy back in with cpu at about 68c at 4.8

With the mono block cpu was getting up to 85c on ek pump and gpu was crapping out at about 68c

Water temp I wouldn't believe any one can break the ambient wall unless a chiller is being used.

Might try the mono block again someday now better flow is going on and the fact I have one.

For the record I never said anything about mono blocks being compatible between x99 and x299 only cpu sockets are the same


----------



## GXTCHA

I’m considering moving from my 7900x at 4.8 back down to a 6950x and attempting to keep it daily at 4.4 at something under 1.35v. 

The 7900x is so damn hard to cool and I’m not sure of any benefits over x99. Does anyone have any good experience with their 6950x where they could give me an idea of temps while gaming/encoding/streaming? I typically see a 10c delta on my water to ambient air (21c air to 31c water). Package typically hits 60c while cores range from high 40s to high 50s when gaming.


----------



## truehighroller1

GXTCHA said:


> I’m considering moving from my 7900x at 4.8 back down to a 6950x and attempting to keep it daily at 4.4 at something under 1.35v.
> 
> The 7900x is so damn hard to cool and I’m not sure of any benefits over x99. Does anyone have any good experience with their 6950x where they could give me an idea of temps while gaming/encoding/streaming? I typically see a 10c delta on my water to ambient air (21c air to 31c water). Package typically hits 60c while cores range from high 40s to high 50s when gaming.



I'm running my 7900x at 5Ghz all cores by the way not just the two best cores @ 1.325v, cache at 3.3Ghz 1.2v, memory at 3800 mhz 15-16-16-32-300 1.5v and it's delidded which I did my self not through silicone lottery.. It runs fine with two d5 pumps and 3 radiators. I have two 360 radiators and a 480 radiator all three in pull and setup externally not inside my case. What are you going on about not being able to cool it for?

I see that your ambient temperature is not what your water temp is. That's your issue. You need to reach ambient temperature with your water. You don't have beefy enough water cooling.


----------



## GXTCHA

truehighroller1 said:


> I'm running my 7900x at 5Ghz all cores by the way not just the two best cores 1.325v, cache at 3.3Ghz 1.2v, memory at 3800 mhz 15-16-16-32-300 1.5v and it's delidded which I did my self not through silicone lottery.. It runs fine with two d5 pumps and a 3 radiators, What are you going on about not being able to cool it for?
> 
> I see that your ambient temperature is not what your water temp is. That's your issue. You need to reach ambient temperature with your water. You don't have beefy enough water cooling.


This is a quick 15 minute run (attached)

I feel like something is up with my loop. I had to drop my AVX offset to -8/-8 instead of -3/-5 to keep the temps down. Chip is delidded. I was originally thinking i didnt have good contact with the cpu but my idle temps seem fine. running 2x 360 rads (thick and slim) along with a 1080ti. I just thought 4.8 @ 1.220v would be cooler on a custom loop but my temps are the same as an AIO. 

I guess I can pull it apart and see if I screwed up the seating somehow...

Edit: Ok, so my 10c delta over ambient is the issue i guess. The loop is in a case so the top slim rad is being choked by the air from the front (thick) rad. i guess ill have to either move it all to a bench or just live with it. Thanks for the help


----------



## truehighroller1

GXTCHA said:


> This is a quick 15 minute run (attached)
> 
> I feel like something is up with my loop. I had to drop my AVX offset to -8/-8 instead of -3/-5 to keep the temps down. Chip is delidded. I was originally thinking i didnt have good contact with the cpu but my idle temps seem fine. running 2x 360 rads (thick and slim) along with a 1080ti. I just thought 4.8 @ 1.220v would be cooler on a custom loop but my temps are the same as an AIO.
> 
> I guess I can pull it apart and see if I screwed up the seating somehow...
> 
> Edit: Ok, so my 10c delta over ambient is the issue i guess. The loop is in a case so the top slim rad is being choked by the air from the front (thick) rad. i guess ill have to either move it all to a bench or just live with it. Thanks for the help


If you have a gpu in the loop yeah that's not enough beefyness to handle it. I have my offsets at about the same as you on avx. Avx doesn't matter for gaming and normal task though which it sounds like your doing which I'm doing as well. A thicker radiator needs more powerfull fans to push and or to pull air through them. It could be a combo of things going on here.

Yeah I have everything outside my case except the CPU block. That heat will build up in there furthering the heat build up issue. I took an old table and made it my radiator bench if you will and mounted my pumps, reservoir and radiators on it and just ran the block into the case from there. I've had the same setup externally for about five years and just changed a few little things here and there with it. It's easier to work on too.


----------



## GXTCHA

truehighroller1 said:


> If you have a gpu in the loop yeah that's not enough beefyness to handle it. I have my offsets at about the same as you on avx. Avx doesn't matter for gaming and normal task though which it sounds like your doing which I'm doing as well. A thicker radiator needs more power full fans to push and or the pull air through them. It could be a combo of things going on here.
> 
> Yeah I have everything outside my case except the CPU block. That heat will build up in there furthering the heat build up issue. I took and old table and made it my radiator bench if you will and mounted my pumps, reservoir and radiators on it and just ran the block into the case from there. I've had the same setup externally for about five years and just changed a few little things here and there a with it. It's easier to work on too.


Got it. Thanks for the insight. I'll have to come up with a solution somehow... Thought I'd be safe but nope!! Back to the drawing board.


----------



## clarifiante

hi guys, i´ve been searching for a holy grail consensus on manual vs adaptive voltage and have found nothing conclusive.

i have a i9-7980xe which currently is stable at [email protected] Vcore manual. i am on an ASUS Rampage Extreme VI with LLC5

i used to have a i5-6500k which i remember having on adaptive voltage OC. 

so i have been trying to move back to adaptive on my 7980xe, i like the lower temps and voltages. i am a sucker for lower temps. however on the 7980xe, if i move to adaptive, on boot up i get VID readings that jump up to 1.18V. 

i have tried all types of voltage settings, i am reading voltages using HWinfo:
inputting 1.14V into additional voltage with a negative Auto offset = 1.18V
i have gone all the way down to 0.9V on additional voltage with positive Auto offset = 1.181V
1.14V with 0.001 negative or positive 0.001 offset = 1.183V
interestingly when i tried to push 4.8ghz, when i input 1.19V into additional voltage, i still got 1.18V VID reading

i have also tried LL5 to 6 on all settings above and only gotten +/- 0.02V.

it seems that with adaptive, it never goes below 1.18V, and i am truly at a loss. do i keep manual? or do i go adaptive, if i do what can i do because i am at a loss now

the 2 schools of thought i have come across so far:
1. keep it on manual + enable C-states
2. go adaptive but live with the offshoot

appreciate any help!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yes adaptive try with a -0.035 and additional turbo of +1.185
Manual mode for cache override at 1.165 and Uncore at 0.300


----------



## cekim

clarifiante said:


> hi guys, i´ve been searching for a holy grail consensus on manual vs adaptive voltage and have found nothing conclusive.
> 
> i have a i9-7980xe which currently is stable at [email protected] Vcore manual. i am on an ASUS Rampage Extreme VI with LLC5
> 
> i used to have a i5-6500k which i remember having on adaptive voltage OC.
> 
> so i have been trying to move back to adaptive on my 7980xe, i like the lower temps and voltages. i am a sucker for lower temps. however on the 7980xe, if i move to adaptive, on boot up i get VID readings that jump up to 1.18V.
> 
> i have tried all types of voltage settings, i am reading voltages using HWinfo:
> inputting 1.14V into additional voltage with a negative Auto offset = 1.18V
> i have gone all the way down to 0.9V on additional voltage with positive Auto offset = 1.181V
> 1.14V with 0.001 negative or positive 0.001 offset = 1.183V
> interestingly when i tried to push 4.8ghz, when i input 1.19V into additional voltage, i still got 1.18V VID reading
> 
> i have also tried LL5 to 6 on all settings above and only gotten +/- 0.02V.
> 
> it seems that with adaptive, it never goes below 1.18V, and i am truly at a loss. do i keep manual? or do i go adaptive, if i do what can i do because i am at a loss now
> 
> the 2 schools of thought i have come across so far:
> 1. keep it on manual + enable C-states
> 2. go adaptive but live with the offshoot
> 
> appreciate any help!


4.7 @ 1.14v is a unicorn... or you haven't tried hard enough to crash it. ;-)

As Thrash says, if you must go adaptive, then you need a larger negative offset to the burned in VID.

That said, if it really is stable at such a low voltage, call it a win and go home.


----------



## CptSpig

clarifiante said:


> hi guys, i´ve been searching for a holy grail consensus on manual vs adaptive voltage and have found nothing conclusive.
> 
> i have a i9-7980xe which currently is stable at [email protected] Vcore manual. i am on an ASUS Rampage Extreme VI with LLC5
> 
> i used to have a i5-6500k which i remember having on adaptive voltage OC.
> 
> so i have been trying to move back to adaptive on my 7980xe, i like the lower temps and voltages. i am a sucker for lower temps. however on the 7980xe, if i move to adaptive, on boot up i get VID readings that jump up to 1.18V.
> 
> i have tried all types of voltage settings, i am reading voltages using HWinfo:
> inputting 1.14V into additional voltage with a negative Auto offset = 1.18V
> i have gone all the way down to 0.9V on additional voltage with positive Auto offset = 1.181V
> 1.14V with 0.001 negative or positive 0.001 offset = 1.183V
> interestingly when i tried to push 4.8ghz, when i input 1.19V into additional voltage, i still got 1.18V VID reading
> 
> i have also tried LL5 to 6 on all settings above and only gotten +/- 0.02V.
> 
> it seems that with adaptive, it never goes below 1.18V, and i am truly at a loss. do i keep manual? or do i go adaptive, if i do what can i do because i am at a loss now
> 
> the 2 schools of thought i have come across so far:
> 1. keep it on manual + enable C-states
> 2. go adaptive but live with the offshoot
> 
> appreciate any help!


These are the settings I use for Adaptive 4.4 sync all cores. You have a very good chip if you are stable at 4.7 with 1.14v or exceptional cooling. What are you stress testing with for stability?

[2017/11/23 09:26:10]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
CPU Strap [100]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
ASUS MultiCore Enhancement [Auto]
AVX Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [3]
AVX-512 Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [5]
CPU Core Ratio [Sync All Cores]
ALL-Core Ratio Limit [44]
Min. CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
Max. CPU Cache Ratio [30]
BCLK Frequency : DRAM Frequency Ratio [Auto]
DRAM Frequency [DDR4-4000MHz]
Xtreme Tweaking [Disabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
CPU SVID Support [Auto]
BCLK Aware Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
- Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage [1.120]
CPU Cache Voltage [Manual Mode]
CPU Cache Voltage Override [1.100]
Uncore Voltage Offset [Auto]
Uncore Voltage Offset Prefix [+]
CPU Input Voltage [1.800]
DRAM Voltage(CHA, CHB) [1.4100]
DRAM Voltage(CHC, CHD) [1.4100]
CPU VCCIO Voltage [1.01000]
CPU System Agent Voltage [0.80000]
PCH Core Voltage [1.02500]
PLL Reference Offset Mode Sign [+]
PLL Reference Offset Value [Auto]


----------



## Jpmboy

CptSpig said:


> These are the settings I use for Adaptive 4.4 sync all cores. You have a very good chip if you are stable at 4.7 with 1.14v or exceptional cooling. *What are you stress testing with for stability?*
> 
> snip


the claim is not really possible without drastic throttling.


----------



## tistou77

cekim said:


> 4.7 @ 1.14v is a unicorn... or you haven't tried hard enough to crash it. ;-)


For the moment mine goes to 4.6ghz -2/-2 to 1.125v
Aida64, Realbench and RamTest for 1h
Not tested any longer for the moment


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> the claim is not really possible without drastic throttling.


That's what I was thinking just curious to see his response....


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> These are the settings I use for Adaptive 4.4 sync all cores. You have a very good chip if you are stable at 4.7 with 1.14v or exceptional cooling. What are you stress testing with for stability?
> 
> [2017/11/23 09:26:10]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
> CPU Strap [100]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> ASUS MultiCore Enhancement [Auto]
> AVX Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [3]
> AVX-512 Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [5]
> CPU Core Ratio [Sync All Cores]
> ALL-Core Ratio Limit [44]
> Min. CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
> Max. CPU Cache Ratio [30]
> BCLK Frequency : DRAM Frequency Ratio [Auto]
> DRAM Frequency [DDR4-4000MHz]
> Xtreme Tweaking [Disabled]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> CPU SVID Support [Auto]
> BCLK Aware Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
> CPU Core Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> - Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage [1.120]
> CPU Cache Voltage [Manual Mode]
> CPU Cache Voltage Override [1.100]
> Uncore Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Uncore Voltage Offset Prefix [+]
> CPU Input Voltage [1.800]
> DRAM Voltage(CHA, CHB) [1.4100]
> DRAM Voltage(CHC, CHD) [1.4100]
> CPU VCCIO Voltage [1.01000]
> CPU System Agent Voltage [0.80000]
> PCH Core Voltage [1.02500]
> PLL Reference Offset Mode Sign [+]
> PLL Reference Offset Value [Auto]


Hi,
Nice would you change anything for 4.9 and a 7900x with 3200C16 and what timings would that be shooting for 16-18-18-38 T1 ?
Not really looking for 4K memory 

Also need help on my x99 and 5930k for 4.7 with 3200c14 "yes I pulled the trigger" what timings would you use seeing it would be AI tuner at manual 14-14-14-34 T1 ?
Not really looking for 4k memory 
But cache settings/ voltages especially at min 24 and max 38 
4.6 is good with most items at auto and using digi... goodies llc 4/ extreme/ cpu 140%
Post x99 on the x99 mother board thread if you wish too most appreciated


----------



## vmanuelgm

I would like to see a LinX, and the hashes of a Realbench, for example, xDDD

If we go this route, soon there will be 7980xe's needing 1v for 5GHz,


----------



## RichKnecht

cekim said:


> 4.7 @ 1.14v is a unicorn... or you haven't tried hard enough to crash it. ;-)
> 
> As Thrash says, if you must go adaptive, then you need a larger negative offset to the burned in VID.
> 
> That said, if it really is stable at such a low voltage, call it a win and go home.


A unicorn is right. My 7900x is set to "by specific core" @ 4.7GHZ at 1.23V and 1.22V on the asterisk cores. Won't go any lower.


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Nice would you change anything for 4.9 and a 7900x with 3200C16 and what timings would that be shooting for 16-18-18-38 T1 ?
> Not really looking for 4K memory
> 
> Also need help on my x99 and 5930k for 4.7 with 3200c14 "yes I pulled the trigger" what timings would you use seeing it would be AI tuner at manual 14-14-14-34 T1 ?
> Not really looking for 4k memory
> But cache settings/ voltages especially at min 24 and max 38
> 4.6 is good with most items at auto and using digi... goodies llc 4/ extreme/ cpu 140%
> Post x99 on the x99 mother board thread if you wish too most appreciated


I don't just throw settings at any machine and expect it to be stable. All hardware differs in performance and needs to be OC'd on a per case bases. You need to overclock your machine systematically. Clear c'mos, OC your CPU first and get it stable. Now OC your memory and get that stable then you are ready to OC Cashe/Ring/Mesh. See Jpmboy's OC guides they are very good. See these links also: http://edgeup.asus.com/2016/broadwell-e-overclocking-guide/ ..... http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-in...el-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread-659.html When you get it close to stable post back and we will help with tweaking for best performance.









Edit are both the kits you posted G.Skill Trident Z?


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> I don't just throw settings at any machine and expect it to be stable. All hardware differs in performance and needs to be OC'd on a per case bases. You need to overclock your machine systematically. Clear c'mos, OC your CPU first and get it stable. Now OC your memory and get that stable then you are ready to OC Cashe/Ring/Mesh. See Jpmboy's OC guides they are very good. See these links also: http://edgeup.asus.com/2016/broadwell-e-overclocking-guide/ ..... http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-in...el-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread-659.html When you get it close to stable post back and we will help with tweaking for best performance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit are both the kits you posted G.Skill Trident Z?


Hi,
Yes trident z 
I've never been able to use adaptive on x99 5930k 
Always offset at +0.175 4.5 with xmp 
4.6 like I said I've been mostly on auto everything except some of the digi stuff changes.

Just did the links sample 4.3 on adaptive and it works without xmp using manual default 2133 ? :/
Newest x99 bios 3801 I believe


----------



## wingman99

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yes trident z
> I've never been able to use adaptive on x99 5930k
> Always offset at +0.175 4.5 with xmp
> 4.6 like I said I've been mostly on auto everything except some of the digi stuff changes.
> 
> Just did the links sample 4.3 on adaptive and it works :/
> Newest x99 bios 3801 I believe


What is the difference with adaptive versus offset?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I believe adaptive is better just never gotten it to actually work on 5930k 
You can refer to the link Cap posted 
http://edgeup.asus.com/2016/broadwell-e-overclocking-guide/


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yes trident z
> I've never been able to use adaptive on x99 5930k
> Always offset at +0.175 4.5 with xmp
> 4.6 like I said I've been mostly on auto everything except some of the digi stuff changes.
> 
> Just did the links sample 4.3 on adaptive and it works without xmp using manual default 2133 ? :/
> Newest x99 bios 3801 I believe


They are very nice memory kits.







Here is a bios sample for X99 6950X with 3200 Memory. This should help get you started.



Spoiler


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Looks like you have 2 clocks in there @CptSpig 4.3 and 4.6 Oops


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Looks like you have 2 clocks in there @CptSpig 4.3 and 4.6 Oops


Sorry one is 4.3 24/7 and one is 4.6 benchmarking.


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> Sorry one is 4.3 24/7 and one is 4.6 benchmarking.


Hi,
Think you could separate them not sure where one starts and the other starts 

I might add you have a wild cache max on 4.6 too sure that is not too high for 5930k a lot of fried 5930k's were going on not to long ago on newer bios :/


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Think you could separate them not sure where one starts and the other starts
> 
> I might add you have a wild cache max on 4.6 too sure that is not too high for 5930k a lot of fried 5930k's were going on not to long ago on newer bios :/


This OC is for 4.6 I can't find the 4.3. The voltages are ok for 6950X the big core processors are harder to OC. Best thing is to set on manual and get the 5930K stable. Than you can switch to adaptive using the manual as a guide. Now work on the memory once stable you can then work on Cashe / Ring OC. You want to keep your Cashe voltage no higher than 1.2v for 24/7. Try to keep your CPU input voltage below 1.92v. Good luck.


----------



## RichKnecht

OK, after coming to the realization that I am "stuck" at my 4.7OC on my 7900x, I am starting to tweak it as much as I can. I switched to "by specific core" and I am able to drop the voltages on the asterisk cores a bit while maintaining stability. The part I am a little confused about is LLC. I understand what it does, but I am not sure what an acceptable voltage drop under load actually is. Previously, I had it set to level 3, but when running CB, I noticed that in CPU-Z, my voltage was dropping .04V-.08V under load. I raised the LLC level to 5 and reduced the drop to .02. At level 6, there is no voltage drop at all. However, there is a tiny bump in voltage at idle occasionally (.006V) that I don't think is an issue. I was able to reduce my Vcore from 1.225 per core to 1.215 per core and 1.2 on the asterisk cores. Am I going about this the right way? Will a higher LLC value damage my chip?


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> OK, after coming to the realization that I am "stuck" at my 4.7OC on my 7900x, I am starting to tweak it as much as I can. I switched to "by specific core" and I am able to drop the voltages on the asterisk cores a bit while maintaining stability. The part I am a little confused about is LLC. I understand what it does, but I am not sure what an acceptable voltage drop under load actually is. Previously, I had it set to level 3, but when running CB, I noticed that in CPU-Z, my voltage was dropping .04V-.08V under load. I raised the LLC level to 5 and reduced the drop to .02. At level 6, there is no voltage drop at all. However, there is a tiny bump in voltage at idle occasionally (.006V) that I don't think is an issue. I was able to reduce my Vcore from 1.225 per core to 1.215 per core and 1.2 on the asterisk cores. Am I going about this the right way? Will a higher LLC value damage my chip?


0.006V, unless measured many times directly off the MB with a (good) multimeter is noise. There are different opinions regrading LLC and droop. For a 24/7 configuration, IMO it is best to allow for some vdroop - "compensating" for load line overshoot during load change.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> 0.006V, unless measured many times directly off the MB with a (good) multimeter is noise. There are different opinions regrading LLC and droop. For a 24/7 configuration, IMO it is best to allow for some vdroop - "compensating" for load line overshoot during load change.


OK, That makes sense. I'll drop it to 5 and see what happens. Temps are not bad at all (~76C full load) considering I have not delidded this chip. I also tweaked the flow in my loop and managed to drop idle temps by 3C.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> OK, That makes sense. I'll drop it to 5 and see what happens. Temps are not bad at all (~76C full load) considering I have not delidded this chip. I *also tweaked the flow in my loop and managed to drop idle temps by 3C*.


lol - how was the flow configured before?


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> lol - how was the flow configured before?


When I installed the D5 and second radiator, I had the pump at max flow. Mainly to get rid of any extra air, but also with the mindset of "more flow is better". I have it at 65% now and it seems like the sweet spot between noise and temps. Still thinking of switching from my MasterCase Maker 5T to a Define R6 just so I an add a 360mm radiator on top. Just not sure it will make a difference as water temps are at 25C, idle temps are 28C, and room temp is 20C.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> When I installed the D5 and second radiator, I had the pump at max flow. Mainly to get rid of any extra air, but also with the mindset of "more flow is better". I have it at 65% now and it seems like the sweet spot between noise and temps. Still thinking of switching from my MasterCase Maker 5T to a Define R6 just so I an add a 360mm radiator on top. Just not sure it will make a difference as water temps are at 25C, idle temps are 28C, and room temp is 20C.


Cool. THat's another example where more is not always better. Aquacomputer did a pretty thorough study of flow rates and rad residence time effect on cooling some years ago.

(snowy day in the Forge  )


----------



## clarifiante

thanks to everyone for the response. yes, as most have observed the speed and voltage is indeed unbelievable. at the time of writing, i had not done extensive testing, i wanted to dial in soft ceiling. after spending the past day testing, i have had to drop it to 4.6ghz at 1.14, the previous setting was too much for my cooling which is just your average run of the mill 360 AIO. 

i still cannot get the adaptive to stick, i tried 1.18 with negative offset of 0.035 to 0.04 and it would still read 1.18, and VID reading would never drop at all. i might just keep manual and set min processing speed in power options. 

i didn't realise we should also change VCCIO and System Agent Voltage. will definitely look into it. thanks!

edit: will definitely do alot more tweaking and testing in the coming week. takes alot of time this OC stability stuff!



CptSpig said:


> These are the settings I use for Adaptive 4.4 sync all cores. You have a very good chip if you are stable at 4.7 with 1.14v or exceptional cooling. What are you stress testing with for stability?
> 
> [2017/11/23 09:26:10]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
> CPU Strap [100]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> ASUS MultiCore Enhancement [Auto]
> AVX Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [3]
> AVX-512 Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [5]
> CPU Core Ratio [Sync All Cores]
> ALL-Core Ratio Limit [44]
> Min. CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
> Max. CPU Cache Ratio [30]
> BCLK Frequency : DRAM Frequency Ratio [Auto]
> DRAM Frequency [DDR4-4000MHz]
> Xtreme Tweaking [Disabled]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> CPU SVID Support [Auto]
> BCLK Aware Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
> CPU Core Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> - Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage [1.120]
> CPU Cache Voltage [Manual Mode]
> CPU Cache Voltage Override [1.100]
> Uncore Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Uncore Voltage Offset Prefix [+]
> CPU Input Voltage [1.800]
> DRAM Voltage(CHA, CHB) [1.4100]
> DRAM Voltage(CHC, CHD) [1.4100]
> CPU VCCIO Voltage [1.01000]
> CPU System Agent Voltage [0.80000]
> PCH Core Voltage [1.02500]
> PLL Reference Offset Mode Sign [+]
> PLL Reference Offset Value [Auto]


----------



## tistou77

The VSA is like the Vcore, Vcache, etc ... It depends on the CPU or it is more related to something else (RAM, etc ...) ?

Thanks


----------



## CptSpig

tistou77 said:


> The VSA is like the Vcore, Vcache, etc ... It depends on the CPU or it is more related to something else (RAM, etc ...) ?
> 
> Thanks


VCCSA and VCCIO are voltage rails for memory. VCCIN (CPU input voltage) is for the CPU socket.


----------



## tistou77

CptSpig said:


> VCCSA and VCCIO are voltage rails for memory.


Ok thanks, it is among others for the memory controller
I was wondering because with the same RAM frequency, one needs 0.80v VSA (4000 C16) and another needs 0.90v (4000 C17), eg


----------



## bmgjet

Got my 7900X rig together and a quick overclock on it, Limited by heat/voltage, Will optimise voltages before going onto ram overclocking in next few days.

Chip does behave quite strange. My old CPU I used adaptive voltage and had to add on a positive offset. Where this one I have to use offset voltage and minus voltage. Gave me a shock on first oc boot when it was at 1.3v using + 0.040v

Ended up with 4.7ghz all cores, 4.6ghz AVX, (AVX512 4.4ghz not tested) and 4.965ghz 1-2 core boost on 1.239v. Iv got not idea how to change the 1-2 core boost rates, Doesnt seem to be a settings anywhere for it with all cores synced, But it hasnt crashed in cinebench single thread bench so ill just leave it.
Cinebench gets up to 70s, AIDA gets up to low 90s, Intelburntest AVX hit 99C before I stopped it after 15 passes.
Waiting on de-lidding tool so I maybe able to get 4.8ghz stable but the step up from 4.6 to 4.7 was 39mv so im expecting about the same if not more for 4.8ghz all cores.

Settings are,
Ai Overclock Tuner [XMP]
CPU Strap [100]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
ASUS MultiCore Enhancement [Enabled]
AVX Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [1]
AVX-512 Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [3]
CPU Core Ratio [Sync All Cores]
ALL-Core Ratio Limit [47]
Min. CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
Max. CPU Cache Ratio [32]
BCLK Frequency : DRAM Frequency Ratio [Auto]
DRAM Frequency [DDR4-3200MHz]
Xtreme Tweaking [Disabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
CPU SVID Support [Auto]
BCLK Aware Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Voltage [Offset Mode]
- Offset Mode Sign [-]
CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.020]
CPU Cache Voltage [Manual Mode]
CPU Cache Voltage Override [1.068]
Uncore Voltage Offset [Auto]
Uncore Voltage Offset Prefix [+]
CPU Input Voltage [1.900]
DRAM Voltage(CHA, CHB) [1.35]
DRAM Voltage(CHC, CHD) [1.35]
CPU VCCIO Voltage [Auto]
CPU System Agent Voltage [Auto]
PCH Core Voltage [Auto]
PLL Reference Offset Mode Sign [+]
PLL Reference Offset Value [Auto]


----------



## Jpmboy

bmgjet said:


> Got my 7900X rig together and a quick overclock on it, Limited by heat/voltage, Will optimise voltages before going onto ram overclocking in next few days.
> 
> Chip does behave quite strange. My old CPU I used adaptive voltage and had to add on a positive offset. Where this one I have to use offset voltage and minus voltage. Gave me a shock on first oc boot when it was at 1.3v using + 0.040v
> 
> Ended up with 4.7ghz all cores, 4.6ghz AVX, (AVX512 4.4ghz not tested) and 4.965ghz 1-2 core boost on 1.239v. *Iv got not idea how to change the 1-2 core boost rates,* Doesnt seem to be a settings anywhere for it with all cores synced, But it hasnt crashed in cinebench single thread bench so ill just leave it.
> Cinebench gets up to 70s, AIDA gets up to low 90s, Intelburntest AVX hit 99C before I stopped it after 15 passes.
> Waiting on de-lidding tool so I maybe able to get 4.8ghz stable but the step up from 4.6 to 4.7 was 39mv so im expecting about the same if not more for 4.8ghz all cores.
> 
> Settings are,
> Ai Overclock Tuner [XMP]
> CPU Strap [100]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> ASUS MultiCore Enhancement [Enabled]
> AVX Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [1]
> AVX-512 Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [3]
> CPU Core Ratio [Sync All Cores]
> ALL-Core Ratio Limit [47]
> Min. CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
> Max. CPU Cache Ratio [32]
> BCLK Frequency : DRAM Frequency Ratio [Auto]
> DRAM Frequency [DDR4-3200MHz]
> Xtreme Tweaking [Disabled]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> CPU SVID Support [Auto]
> BCLK Aware Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
> CPU Core Voltage [Offset Mode]
> - Offset Mode Sign [-]
> CPU Core Voltage Offset [0.020]
> CPU Cache Voltage [Manual Mode]
> CPU Cache Voltage Override [1.068]
> Uncore Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Uncore Voltage Offset Prefix [+]
> CPU Input Voltage [1.900]
> DRAM Voltage(CHA, CHB) [1.35]
> DRAM Voltage(CHC, CHD) [1.35]
> CPU VCCIO Voltage [Auto]
> CPU System Agent Voltage [Auto]
> PCH Core Voltage [Auto]
> PLL Reference Offset Mode Sign [+]
> PLL Reference Offset Value [Auto]


instead of Synch All COres, you need to use "By Specific Core" or Per Core. here's an example with a 7980XE, 2 * cores x4.6, 16x4.5 with adaptive on each. What LLC are you using that it needs a -20mV offset?


----------



## ThrashZone

bmgjet said:


> Got my 7900X rig together and a quick overclock on it, Limited by heat/voltage, Will optimise voltages before going onto ram overclocking in next few days.
> 
> Chip does behave quite strange. My old CPU I used adaptive voltage and had to add on a positive offset. Where this one I have to use offset voltage and minus voltage. Gave me a shock on first oc boot when it was at 1.3v using + 0.040v
> 
> Ended up with 4.7ghz all cores, 4.6ghz AVX, (AVX512 4.4ghz not tested) and 4.965ghz 1-2 core boost on 1.239v. Iv got not idea how to change the 1-2 core boost rates, Doesnt seem to be a settings anywhere for it with all cores synced, But it hasnt crashed in cinebench single thread bench so ill just leave it.
> Cinebench gets up to 70s, AIDA gets up to low 90s, Intelburntest AVX hit 99C before I stopped it after 15 passes.
> Waiting on de-lidding tool so I maybe able to get 4.8ghz stable but the step up from 4.6 to 4.7 was 39mv so im expecting about the same if not more for 4.8ghz all cores.
> 
> ]


Hi,
I'd use By core usage 
Set half the cores to your highest core and the rest to the lowest core 
With all core selected as say 4.8 it will already use that for the two missing core counts on the By core usage page so just count down and change the rest to 4.5 or what ever.

All cores will hit the highest core multiplier just not all at once 
Saves a lot of heat problems and you'd still get the speed of the highest multiplier too :thumb:


----------



## tistou77

With R6E, those options _MRC Fast Boot_ and _DRAM SPD Write_ are not present ?

Thanks


----------



## RichKnecht

Just when everything seems to be going great, AI Suite3 is broken again. Booted up the PC today and Fan Expert 4 no longer functions. ***.


----------



## Pepillo

RichKnecht said:


> Just when everything seems to be going great, AI Suite3 is broken again. Booted up the PC today and Fan Expert 4 no longer functions. ***.


Welcome to the club. Asus Rog forums are plenty of people with the same problems with AI Suite ..........


----------



## bmgjet

Jpmboy said:


> instead of Synch All COres, you need to use "By Specific Core" or Per Core. here's an example with a 7980XE, 2 * cores x4.6, 16x4.5 with adaptive on each. What LLC are you using that it needs a -20mV offset?


Ill give that a go later on today when I get home from work. But I might just settle on what I have until I delid since iv come from 6900k on 4.4-4.5ghz so 4.7ghz is a good step up.

LLC = 1
Using higher settings makes it over shoot and have to use bigger offsets.
Tried a few different bios as well (STRIX mobo) Anything newer then 1102 gives a big decrease on benchmarks. 300 points cinebench, 1500 points 3dmark physics.


Also is there a spreadsheet with what every ones managed to overclock to, so I can work out a sort of average and see where about my chip sits in the silicon lottery.


----------



## Jpmboy

bmgjet said:


> Ill give that a go later on today when I get home from work. But I might just settle on what I have until I delid since iv come from 6900k on 4.4-4.5ghz so 4.7ghz is a good step up.
> 
> LLC = 1
> Using higher settings makes it over shoot and have to use bigger offsets.
> Tried a few different bios as well (STRIX mobo) Anything newer then 1102 gives a big decrease on benchmarks. 300 points cinebench, 1500 points 3dmark physics.
> 
> 
> *Also is there a spreadsheet with what every ones managed to overclock *to, so I can work out a sort of average and see where about my chip sits in the silicon lottery.


none I know of.


----------



## Barefooter

RichKnecht said:


> Just when everything seems to be going great, AI Suite3 is broken again. Booted up the PC today and Fan Expert 4 no longer functions. ***.


Yeah the AI Suite software has had problems off and on for years. I just never install it... I never have a problem with it that way


----------



## bmgjet

I guess ill start one if the OP wants to add it to first page.

Results
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pjXp4syz3mWfM45yLU8V0w6fx5wAV29RxaejBp5epH8/


Application form.
https://goo.gl/forms/2sWcDS50voR33V703


----------



## CptSpig

bmgjet said:


> I guess ill start one if the OP wants to add it to first page.
> 
> Results
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pjXp4syz3mWfM45yLU8V0w6fx5wAV29RxaejBp5epH8/
> 
> 
> Application form.
> https://goo.gl/forms/2sWcDS50voR33V703


You need to add column for type of CPU ie: i9-7980Xe.


----------



## Jpmboy

bmgjet said:


> I guess ill start one if the OP wants to add it to first page.
> 
> Results
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pjXp4syz3mWfM45yLU8V0w6fx5wAV29RxaejBp5epH8/
> 
> 
> Application form.
> https://goo.gl/forms/2sWcDS50voR33V703


Nice! but as KW noted, need the CPU column. 

I think SOmonkey would be open to adding the live G-sheet. @*schoolofmonkey* - I can help with the active window once you have the g-sheet link and shared access).


----------



## bmgjet

Updated to include cpu model

Form
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1...WF8VVN60JeNIcBSNk3SOQsAA/viewform?usp=sf_link

Sheet
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...azGUDMWgRY3/pubhtml?gid=950925908&single=true


----------



## Jpmboy

bmgjet said:


> Updated to include cpu model
> 
> Form
> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1...WF8VVN60JeNIcBSNk3SOQsAA/viewform?usp=sf_link
> 
> Sheet
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...azGUDMWgRY3/pubhtml?gid=950925908&single=true


just subbed my folding clocks.


----------



## Mysticial

bmgjet said:


> Updated to include cpu model
> 
> Form
> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1...WF8VVN60JeNIcBSNk3SOQsAA/viewform?usp=sf_link
> 
> Sheet
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...azGUDMWgRY3/pubhtml?gid=950925908&single=true


Things that should probably be included:


Method of stress-testing. (including duration of test)
AVX and AVX512 speeds.
Because every single one of those 4.5+ GHz 7980XE setups will crumble under AVX512 without LN2.


----------



## Jpmboy

Mysticial said:


> Things that should probably be included:
> 
> 
> Method of stress-testing. (including duration of test)
> AVX and AVX512 speeds.
> Because every single one of those 4.5+ GHz 7980XE setups will crumble under AVX512 without LN2.


NOt crumble - melt. lol - that's why there is an AVX512 offset!

This uses AVX, but like everything except y-prime, 512 is not a concern.


----------



## Mysticial

Jpmboy said:


> NOt crumble - melt. lol - that's why there is an AVX512 offset!
> 
> This uses AVX, but like everything except y-prime, 512 is not a concern.


Your benchmark at 4.7 GHz looked suspiciously good for AVX. So out of curiosity, I ran GPUPI for CPU through a profiler.

Yes, it does use AVX. But only negligibly so. In other words, it's not really stressing AVX at much at all.

The only thing GPUPI seems to stress is the scalar integer divider.


----------



## toncij

Not sure what for (was under impression it doesn't), but Cinebench R15 also uses AVX and periodically causes short drops in freq. if you have AVX offset set. Wasn't able to notice without active monitoring of the multiplier, but had odd results so had to check.


----------



## done12many2

Jpmboy said:


> NOt crumble - melt. lol - that's why there is an AVX512 offset!
> 
> This uses AVX, but like everything except y-prime, 512 is not a concern.


https://youtu.be/-gAD17EQS3E?t=6m35s

Thought you might enjoy some fame. 

Hope all is well bud.

**Not sure why the timestamp isn't working but skip to 6:35 in the video.


----------



## czin125

He says Core0 and Core1 are 4900mhz and the other 16 cores are running at 4800mhz. How's he not throttling on a 360mm AIO even if delidded?


----------



## RichKnecht

Been starting to hash around the thought of delidding my 7900x. More so for temps, and not a higher overclock. Been giving serious thought to DerBauer's Direct Die frame. Looks like an ingenious solution to eliminating a layer of thermal paste and having the cooler in direct contact with the chip instead of having the IHS in between. Has anyone tried one of these yet? Can't seem to find any available in the US. I watched his video a few times and he is getting great temps using a NZXT Kraken cooler. I suspect a custom loop may perform even better. Thoughts? Opinions?


----------



## Mysticial

toncij said:


> Not sure what for (was under impression it doesn't), but Cinebench R15 also uses AVX and periodically causes short drops in freq. if you have AVX offset set. Wasn't able to notice without active monitoring of the multiplier, but had odd results so had to check.


If I get the time I'll run Cinebench through the profiler to see what it's really doing.

But generally speaking, all it takes is a single AVX instruction of the right kind to force the entire core down to the AVX speed. And it can come from anywhere - the application or even the OS itself. A lot of applications which utilize AVX barely use it at all. So they suffer the clock-down penalty with no noticeable performance gain for it.

If this is the case for Cinebench, I probably won't be able to see it since the profiler only picks up things that are used "enough" to get tracked.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I've seen some conflict opinions about avx and which ones to actually use 
I usually apply the same value to both entries is that not correct ?


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I've seen some conflict opinions about avx and which ones to actually use
> I usually apply the same value to both entries is that not correct ?


I've been using 3 and 5 for my offsets. Hasn't really affected performance for what I do from what I can tell. What I did do was to turn on Speed step and re-enabled C-states and that has dropped my idle temps by 7C (31C-24C) and my water temp is now 24C which is only 4C over ambient. Pretty happy about that.


----------



## ThrashZone

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I've seen some conflict opinions about avx and which ones to actually use
> I usually apply the same value to both entries is that not correct ?





RichKnecht said:


> I've been using 3 and 5 for my offsets. Hasn't really affected performance for what I do from what I can tell. What I did do was to turn on Speed step and re-enabled C-states and that has dropped my idle temps by 7C (31C-24C) and my water temp is now 24C which is only 4C over ambient. Pretty happy about that.


Hi,
Thanks yeah c states that's another one which I've read only if using manual voltage should both those be disabled :/
Using adaptive or offset both enabled 
Are you saying 5 would be the 512 avx = probably 
For 4.6 I usually only use 2 for both maybe 3 if a benchmark borks.


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Thanks yeah c states that's another one which I've read only if using manual voltage should both those be disabled :/
> Using adaptive or offset both enabled
> Are you saying 5 would be the 512 avx = probably
> For 4.6 I usually only use 2 for both maybe 3 if a benchmark borks.


For Adaptive CPU C-States [AUTO] and Enhanced C-States [Enabled]. I use 3 for AVX and 5 for AVX-512 never had a issue.


----------



## RichKnecht

CptSpig said:


> For Adaptive CPU C-States [AUTO] and Enhanced C-States [Enabled]. I use 3 for AVX and 5 for AVX-512 never had a issue.


What he said  I'm using "by specific core" and setting CPU voltages there. All cores are at 1.2V except the 2 "*" cores, which are set at 1.15V. LLC set on 5 and my 4.7OC is nice and stable. It's when I tried to move up to 4.8 that everything "fell apart", so I'll "settle" with my 4.7.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I had 4.7 going pretty good and flash bios and lost it lol 
So now back to 0802 and resetting it up a little differently 
Got 4.6 by core usage going now it's an everyday clock pretty much 44 on half and 46 on the other half with avx 2 & 512 at 2
No digi stuff just manual on 3200 memory 16-18-18-38 T2 
Adaptive -0.090 and turbo -1.195
That gets me hovering around +-1.2v

Now for 4.7 all core


----------



## bmgjet

Spent all last night on my OC using some cold air ducted from out the window. 4.8ghz is so close to being stable on 1.270v. Lasts 40-45mins on real bench before core 2 hits 100c and throws a hash error. 

100% validated my 4.6ghz and 4.7ghz OC tho with dropped voltage and tightened ram timings. Ended up with 1.180v for 4.6ghz and 1.219v for 4.7ghz Doesnt break over 80C with those voltages. Just that core 2 is a let down running 20c hotter then the rest. Guess there is nothing more I can do until I delid.

Ram ended up with 3200 14,15,15,cl1 on 1.4V (stock 3200,16,18,18,cl2 on 1.35v)
8 hours memtest86 no errors.

Cache OC stuck with 3200mhz on 1.160v, Can get to 3300mhz on 1.185v but it bumps temps up 10c for near no difference in benchmarks.


----------



## Vlada011

AMD Second generation of Ryzen 200$+ worth processors arrive with soldered IHS for better coling and heat dissipation from CPU on waterblock... 
I would never bought Intel expensive processors to remove him IHS and clean Intels faeces arround Die.
I will keep X99, increase number of cores as much is possible and wait successor of 2066 and if Intel again install thermal paste I will use successor of Threadripper.

Can you imagine i7-8700K soldered...
10C better under full load than after ideal delidding operation with at least 40$ saved for tools, liquid metal, paste, don't even to talk about warranty. That mean 5.0GHz on 80C would be 5.0GHz on 67-68C.
Processors with soldered IHS completely different react on Prime95 and that's visible instantly out of box on even stock value it's 20C less temperature.


----------



## Mysticial

toncij said:


> Not sure what for (was under impression it doesn't), but Cinebench R15 also uses AVX and periodically causes short drops in freq. if you have AVX offset set. Wasn't able to notice without active monitoring of the multiplier, but had odd results so had to check.


Ran Cinebench R15 through the profiler. I don't see any AVX at all. And based on the nature* of the code, it's unlikely it would have any AVX in the first place.

So if you're seeing drops to the AVX offset, it's most likely something else that's causing it. (maybe the OS?)

From what I can see, Cinebench is all scalar SSE floating-point. Furthermore it doesn't really use much in the way of memory bandwidth.

Both of these characteristics are extremely favorable to Ryzen which explains why it does so well in this benchmark.

*Cinebench isn't even compiled for AVX since I don't even see any VEX-encoded instructions at all.



CptSpig said:


> For Adaptive CPU C-States [AUTO] and Enhanced C-States [Enabled]. I use 3 for AVX and 5 for AVX-512 never had a issue.


From my experience on 2 different systems, I need to set the AVX512 offset at least 3 or 4 multipliers beyond the AVX offset. Most people I've seen so far set it no more than 2 bins away. But they don't have any issues since they probably haven't tried to run any AVX512 on it - let alone the intensive kind.

The author Prime95 is working on AVX512 support. And my guess is that when that gets released, a lot of people are gonna be caught off guard.

On my 7940X, I currently run all-core 4.7 GHz with AVX/AVX512 offsets of 7 and 10. (4.0 GHz AVX, 3.7 GHz AVX512)

Any higher than 3.8 GHz on the AVX512 and it goes unstable under the relevant workloads. It also pushes the temps into 90s.


----------



## eatthermalpaste

To the people that have been keeping tabs on this thread and testing on some 7900Xs... what would you say is a decent OC/above average on the 7900X with water cooling / general voltage area? from what I've went through in here it seems like people hit 47 or 48 with somewhere between 1.23V and 1.34V, sound about right? Would I be right to assume those are speeds on AVX like mprime?


----------



## bmgjet

You got me testing my AVX stability. Something Ill never use but might aswell make sure its stable.
Using linpack benchmark 2gb per thread 10 min loops. 
Orignal settings AVX-1 and -2.
AVX passed fine, 
AVX512 instant hardlock.
Tried -3, Hardlock after 15sec.
Tried -4, whea bluescreen after 3mins.
tried -5, lasted 6mins before temp was high 90s so stopped test. (stable enough for my usage)

Iv found my settings to be.
Core 4.7ghz @ 1.22v (58-69C)
AVX  -1 (60-86c)
AVX512 - 5 (80-98C)


Updated the OC spreadsheet.


bmgjet said:


> Updated to include cpu model
> 
> Fill in Form
> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1...WF8VVN60JeNIcBSNk3SOQsAA/viewform?usp=sf_link
> 
> Results Sheet
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...azGUDMWgRY3/pubhtml?gid=950925908&single=true


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi, @*Mysticial* 
Think you could evaluate what Blender render uses 
Namely BMW short test and Classroom longer test 

https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/


----------



## Lucius5nm

Mysticial said:


> Your benchmark at 4.7 GHz looked suspiciously good for AVX. So out of curiosity, I ran GPUPI for CPU through a profiler.
> 
> Yes, it does use AVX. But only negligibly so. In other words, it's not really stressing AVX at much at all.
> 
> The only thing GPUPI seems to stress is the scalar integer divider.


What if you analyze y-cruncher and Prime95?
How much FPU utilization?


----------



## Jpmboy

Mysticial said:


> Ran Cinebench R15 through the profiler. I don't see any AVX at all. And based on the nature* of the code, it's unlikely it would have any AVX in the first place.
> 
> So if you're seeing drops to the AVX offset, it's most likely something else that's causing it. (maybe the OS?)
> 
> From what I can see, Cinebench is all scalar SSE floating-point. Furthermore it doesn't really use much in the way of memory bandwidth.
> 
> Both of these characteristics are extremely favorable to Ryzen which explains why it does so well in this benchmark.
> 
> *Cinebench isn't even compiled for AVX since I don't even see any VEX-encoded instructions at all.
> 
> 
> 
> From my experience on 2 different systems, I need to set the AVX512 offset at least 3 or 4 multipliers beyond the AVX offset. Most people I've seen so far set it no more than 2 bins away. But they don't have any issues since they probably haven't tried to run any AVX512 on it - let alone the intensive kind.
> 
> The author Prime95 is working on AVX512 support. And my guess is that when that gets released, a lot of people are gonna be caught off guard.
> 
> On* my 7940X, I currently run all-core 4.7 GHz with AVX/AVX512 offsets of 7 and 10. (4.0 GHz AVX, 3.7 GHz AVX512)*
> 
> Any higher than 3.8 GHz on the AVX512 and it goes unstable under the relevant workloads. It also pushes the temps into 90s.


For perspective, on my 7980XE with 2x4.6 and 16x4.5, I run a -5/-10 offset for AVX and AVX512 for 24/7 use. The later solely to deal with your y-cruncher app, which, with the exception of a custom TimeSpy config (using 512) is the only time this rigs sees that suicidal instruction set.


----------



## CptSpig

Updated my bios to 1301 last night. I used RealBench for 30 minutes and my temps dropped 12c from bios 0802 and 1004. Never went over 70c with 1301 on my Predator 360 push/pull. Very happy with this update. Now it's time to put it on the chiller for Cinebench and see if there is improvement.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## cgpyos

Hello, looking for someone to make advice considering G.Skill kits.

My current Kingston HX432C16PB3K4/32 can't go past 64ns latency, no matter how i try.
Goal is to reach 50-54ns result. I live in Ukraine, hence i restricted to local shops which don't have 4x8 GB kits at all. 

Is it okay, to mix two 2x8 GB kits? 

If so, which particular G.Skill kits would you recommend?

Thanks in advance!


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Mysticial

ThrashZone said:


> Hi, @*Mysticial*
> Think you could evaluate what Blender render uses
> Namely BMW short test and Classroom longer test
> 
> https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/


If I get the time, I'll take a look at it.



Lucius5nm said:


> What if you analyze y-cruncher and Prime95?
> How much FPU utilization?


In order of attachment:


Prime95 29.2 Small FFTs (AVX)
Prime95 29.2 Large FFTs (AVX)
y-cruncher v0.7.5.9481 (17-SKX ~ Kotori) 2.5b
 
Things to notice:


Prime95 only uses AVX(2). So 256-bit vectors at most. The author is still working on the AVX512 version.
Prime95 Small FFTs stays in cache. So it doesn't use much memory bandwidth.
Prime95 Large FFTs and y-cruncher use a ton of memory bandwidth. Prime95 completely saturates it whereas y-cruncher has more of a distribution.

A note about the "low" FPU utilization:

There's a bug in the profiler that makes it impossible to achieve more than 50% when HT is enabled. So you should double up the #'s that you see. Furthermore, the only way to achieve more than 25% (before accounting for the HT bug) is to spam the processor with FMA instructions. Neither Prime95 nor y-cruncher has the type of workload that does that.

In reality, anything above 10% is probably considered "stressful". But this isn't a perfect metric since it only measures floating-point. There's also integer AVX(512) stuff which you can't see in this profiler view.


----------



## Jpmboy

Mysticial said:


> If I get the time, I'll take a look at it.
> 
> 
> 
> In order of attachment:
> 
> 
> Prime95 29.2 Small FFTs (AVX)
> Prime95 29.2 Large FFTs (AVX)
> y-cruncher v0.7.5.9481 (17-SKX ~ Kotori) 2.5b
> 
> Things to notice:
> 
> 
> Prime95 only uses AVX(2). So 256-bit vectors at most. The author is still working on the AVX512 version.
> Prime95 Small FFTs stays in cache. So it doesn't use much memory bandwidth.
> Prime95 Large FFTs and y-cruncher use a ton of memory bandwidth. Prime95 completely saturates it whereas y-cruncher has more of a distribution.
> 
> A note about the "low" FPU utilization:
> 
> There's a bug in the profiler that makes it impossible to achieve more than 50% when HT is enabled. So you should double up the #'s that you see. Furthermore, the only way to achieve more than 25% (before accounting for the HT bug) is to spam the processor with FMA instructions. Neither Prime95 nor y-cruncher has the type of workload that does that.
> 
> In reality, anything above 10% is probably considered "stressful". But this isn't a perfect metric since it only measures floating-point. There's also integer AVX(512) stuff which you can't see in this profiler view.


Nice! ^^ this post deserves reps!


----------



## RichKnecht

eatthermalpaste said:


> To the people that have been keeping tabs on this thread and testing on some 7900Xs... what would you say is a decent OC/above average on the 7900X with water cooling / general voltage area? from what I've went through in here it seems like people hit 47 or 48 with somewhere between 1.23V and 1.34V, sound about right? Would I be right to assume those are speeds on AVX like mprime?


I'd say most chips should do 4.6. Voltages between chips vary a lot. My 7900x is clocked at 4.7GHz with 1.215V across the 8 "regular" cores, and 4.7GHz on the 2 "*" cores at 1.15V. However, when I tried for 4.8, I hit a wall. Even at 1.32V Cinebench just locked up. Another thing to consider when using such high voltages is heat. These chips can run HOT.


----------



## ThrashZone

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I had 4.7 going pretty good and flash bios and lost it lol
> So now back to 0802 and resetting it up a little differently
> Got 4.6 by core usage going now it's an everyday clock pretty much 44 on half and 46 on the other half with avx 2 & 512 at 2
> No digi stuff just manual on 3200 memory 16-18-18-38 T2
> Adaptive -0.090 and turbo -1.195
> That gets me hovering around +-1.2v
> 
> Now for 4.7 all core





eatthermalpaste said:


> To the people that have been keeping tabs on this thread and testing on some 7900Xs... what would you say is a decent OC/above average on the 7900X with water cooling / general voltage area? from what I've went through in here it seems like people hit 47 or 48 with somewhere between 1.23V and 1.34V, sound about right? Would I be right to assume those are speeds on AVX like mprime?


Hi,
As I stated above which is not All Core so it might need a little more for that I'd guess +0.010
4.7 I expect to have to add 0.025 for each additional multiplier from 1.2v
4.7 = 1.145v
4.8 = 1.170v
Start a little higher and dial it down till it crashes 

Don't use prime95 mostly realbench/ cinebench and blender rendering for final test.

1301 bios I had no luck with.


----------



## bmgjet

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> As I stated above which is not All Core so it might need a little more for that I'd guess +0.010
> 4.7 I expect to have to add 0.25 for each additional multiplier from 1.2v
> 4.7 = 1.45v
> 4.8 = 1.70v
> Start a little higher and dial it down till it crashes
> 
> Don't use prime95 mostly realbench/ cinebench and blender rendering for final test.
> 
> 1301 bios I had no luck with.


You missed a number there.

Here is what iv found based off my chip.
1.175v for 4.6ghz, 
1.220v for 4.7ghz, (+0.040v)
1.271v for 4.8ghz (+0.051v)
Next clock speed id be expecting to see +0.060V atleast before even trying to see if its stable.( So around 1.33v)

And for the CPU Cache.
1.140v for 3.1ghz
1.160v for 3.2ghz (+0.020v)
1.185v for 3.3ghz (+0.025v)
I did try for 1.215v for 3.4ghz (+0.030v) but it wasnt stable and I wasnt willing to go any higher. 
The temp gain from 3.3ghz wasnt worth the performance so I stuck to 3.2ghz.


----------



## vmanuelgm

bmgjet said:


> You missed a number there.
> 
> Here is what iv found based off my chip.
> 1.175v for 4.6ghz,
> 1.220v for 4.7ghz, (+0.040v)
> 1.271v for 4.8ghz (+0.051v)
> Next clock speed id be expecting to see +0.060V atleast before even trying to see if its stable.( So around 1.33v)
> 
> And for the CPU Cache.
> 1.140v for 3.1ghz
> 1.160v for 3.2ghz (+0.020v)
> 1.185v for 3.3ghz (+0.025v)
> I did try for 1.215v for 3.4ghz (+0.030v) but it wasnt stable and I wasnt willing to go any higher.
> The temp gain from 3.3ghz wasnt worth the performance so I stuck to 3.2ghz.



4.9-4.9avx-3.2Mesh-4000CL17










1.32v vcore, 1.134v mesh.


----------



## ThrashZone

bmgjet said:


> You missed a number there.
> 
> Here is what iv found based off my chip.
> 1.175v for 4.6ghz,
> 1.220v for 4.7ghz, (+0.040v)
> 1.271v for 4.8ghz (+0.051v)
> Next clock speed id be expecting to see +0.060V atleast before even trying to see if its stable.( So around 1.33v)
> 
> And for the CPU Cache.
> 1.140v for 3.1ghz
> 1.160v for 3.2ghz (+0.020v)
> 1.185v for 3.3ghz (+0.025v)
> I did try for 1.215v for 3.4ghz (+0.030v) but it wasnt stable and I wasnt willing to go any higher.
> The temp gain from 3.3ghz wasnt worth the performance so I stuck to 3.2ghz.


Hi,
Oops yep sure did miss some numbers edited 
I found a little lower temp at 1.20v then 1.80v believe it or not and at 4.6 a little more v doesn't really matter 
But I found an max cache at 30 is just fine and dandy with most the time just adaptive with a + and auto works fine too otherwise I might use +0.150 and additional cache turbo of +0.050.

Probably try out everything tomorrow morning and see how it goes 
But your 0.050 for each multiplier is whack


----------



## Lucius5nm

Mysticial said:


> If I get the time, I'll take a look at it.
> 
> 
> 
> In order of attachment:
> 
> 
> Prime95 29.2 Small FFTs (AVX)
> Prime95 29.2 Large FFTs (AVX)
> y-cruncher v0.7.5.9481 (17-SKX ~ Kotori) 2.5b
> 
> Things to notice:
> 
> 
> Prime95 only uses AVX(2). So 256-bit vectors at most. The author is still working on the AVX512 version.
> Prime95 Small FFTs stays in cache. So it doesn't use much memory bandwidth.
> Prime95 Large FFTs and y-cruncher use a ton of memory bandwidth. Prime95 completely saturates it whereas y-cruncher has more of a distribution.
> 
> A note about the "low" FPU utilization:
> 
> There's a bug in the profiler that makes it impossible to achieve more than 50% when HT is enabled. So you should double up the #'s that you see. Furthermore, the only way to achieve more than 25% (before accounting for the HT bug) is to spam the processor with FMA instructions. Neither Prime95 nor y-cruncher has the type of workload that does that.
> 
> In reality, anything above 10% is probably considered "stressful". But this isn't a perfect metric since it only measures floating-point. There's also integer AVX(512) stuff which you can't see in this profiler view.


Thanks for the detailed information.


----------



## Lucius5nm

Thanks for the detailed [email protected]


----------



## Nihaan

Whats the best TIM application method for Skylake X ?

I was using dot method for years but today when I was watching gamersnexus video I realized that their modmat shows thermal paste application method for different generations.

https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...12969387130/gn-modmat-full-1.jpg?format=1500w

https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...7179914/gn-modmat-gallery-05.jpg?format=2500w

Did anyone try this ?


----------



## truehighroller1

Nihaan said:


> Whats the best TIM application method for Skylake X ?
> 
> I was using dot method for years but today when I was watching gamersnexus video I realized that their modmat shows thermal paste application method for different generations.
> 
> https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...12969387130/gn-modmat-full-1.jpg?format=1500w
> 
> https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...7179914/gn-modmat-gallery-05.jpg?format=2500w
> 
> Did anyone try this ?


I used two rice size dabs for my 7900x and its seems to have worked good.. I would think a line down the middle with four dots would be way to much.


----------



## RichKnecht

Nihaan said:


> Whats the best TIM application method for Skylake X ?
> 
> I was using dot method for years but today when I was watching gamersnexus video I realized that their modmat shows thermal paste application method for different generations.
> 
> https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...12969387130/gn-modmat-full-1.jpg?format=1500w
> 
> https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...7179914/gn-modmat-gallery-05.jpg?format=2500w
> 
> Did anyone try this ?


I use Kryonaut and spread it over the entire IHS with a spatula. When I used to use AS 5, I used a credit card to spread it evenly over the entire IHS. Never had an issue doing it this way and I know I had 100% coverage.


----------



## CptSpig

RichKnecht said:


> I use Kryonaut and spread it over the entire IHS with a spatula. When I used to use AS 5, I used a credit card to spread it evenly over the entire IHS. Never had an issue doing it this way and I know I had 100% coverage.


I 2nd ^^^^


----------



## trn

I've used the old big dot in the middle only and each time I've removed the block the TIM is spread out and covers the full IHS. The pressure the cooler puts on the IHS is quite a bit so it seems to do a good job at spreading around the TIM.


----------



## bmgjet

Spread out with cotton swab thinnly to ihs and waterblock. Do block up 3/4 tension and start pc to warm up. Then tighten down fully.


----------



## Jpmboy

bmgjet said:


> Spread out with cotton swab thinnly to ihs and waterblock. Do block up 3/4 tension and start pc to warm up. Then tighten down fully.


there's really no need to spread out a modern (less viscous) TIM. A dollop in the middle, line or X are all good. The issue with a thin spread is that it can trap air that may or may not squeeze out...

And any lint from that cotton swab if not gonna help thermal conductivity.


----------



## bmgjet

Jpmboy said:


> there's really no need to spread out a modern (less viscous) TIM. A dollop in the middle, line or X are all good. The issue with a thin spread is that it can trap air that may or may not squeeze out...
> 
> And any lint from that cotton swab if not gonna help thermal conductivity.


Should of mentioned, Liquid metal.


----------



## vmanuelgm

I tried several methods, and for me the best one is putting a line in the center without spreading, and then screwing the block on it in x mode, both for x299 and x99. I found the dot in the center is not enough for large IHS's.












If we talk about liquid metal, spreading is needed of course.


----------



## truehighroller1

vmanuelgm said:


> I tried several methods, and for me the best one is putting a line in the center without spreading, and then screwing the block on it in x mode, both for x299 and x99. I found the dot in the center is not enough for large IHS's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If we talk about liquid metal, spreading is needed of course.




I followed ek' s method which is two rice sized applications in the center right next to eachother which covers perfect.


----------



## vmanuelgm

truehighroller1 said:


> I followed ek' s method which is two rice sized applications in the center right next to eachother which covers perfect.



Two centered rice together may work since you are applying more quantity...


----------



## truehighroller1

vmanuelgm said:


> Two centered rice together may work since you are applying more quantity...


Yeah they have a nice little how to apply it for different CPUs on their site.


----------



## vmanuelgm

truehighroller1 said:


> Yeah they have a nice little how to apply it for different CPUs on their site.



EK Also advised to use cross method for gpus, when a dot in the center was enough, xDDD

Most of times the best thing is to try for yourself and find what works ok in your case!!!


----------



## Jpmboy

bmgjet said:


> Should of mentioned, Liquid metal.


Ah - that's a different beast! Must be spread... painted on both surfaces for the best thermal bond line to be formed. It really does not "spread" in the classic sense. 
Cotton fibers have the same effect tho. There are foam-tipped swabs available in most drug stores/pharmacies. These work really well for LM.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Dumb question 
Is vccsa cpu system agent voltage and if so why does everyone call it vccsa instead of cpusa


----------



## tistou77

Nihaan said:


> Whats the best TIM application method for Skylake X ?
> 
> I was using dot method for years but today when I was watching gamersnexus video I realized that their modmat shows thermal paste application method for different generations.
> 
> https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...12969387130/gn-modmat-full-1.jpg?format=1500w
> 
> https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...7179914/gn-modmat-gallery-05.jpg?format=2500w
> 
> Did anyone try this ?


I also put a line in the middle (a longer grain of rice) and it suits me


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I always need to add small drops on the corners along with a pea size drop in the middle
Thermal grizzly does not spread well


----------



## xarot

I bought a nearly unused i9-7920X from a local forum, but ended up taking it back to the seller.

It was pulled from a HP Omen X PC. I noticed that memory booted up only at up to 2666 MHz and only 4 sticks out of my 8 sticks were detected at BIOS defaults. Tried another kit but it didn't work properly either.

I saw the motherboard from that PC has 4 DIMM slots set for dual channel with 4 sticks and all memory slots are on the same side of the CPU socket, like used on Kaby Lake X. Is it possible that while this CPU looked just like a retail one, there was a different microcode or some features were just locked out? I guess only the "right side" of my 8 DIMMs were detected? It sounds crazy but I guess my idea works unless the CPU was actually broken. There was the SR3NG marking on the chip. 

I guess this is the mobo: https://content.hwigroup.net/images/products_xl/419325/4/hp-omen-x-900-200nd.jpg


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Sounds like the board was broken to me if the dims were only working on one side.

Would be pretty rare to get 2 bad kits of ram


----------



## xarot

I tried it on R6E. I put the 7900X back and all 8 sticks were detected.


----------



## Piospi

I bite my nails because my delided 7900x r is probably hopeless. I can't stabilize at 4.8 GHZ with offset +0.115....
My settings are in attached images. When I test it in the RealBench, temperatures come to 105C....and my processor is unstable in the game World Of Tanks.

With 4.5 GHZ my CPU is fine, temperatures are below 60C and CoreTemp shows the voltage ~1.2 with -0.080 offset. 

What am I doing wrong?

P.S. I have LC with custom loop.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Might try by core usage with 4.8 on 4 cores and 4.5 on the others :/
Upload .png files and they might show up in your post instead of links.


----------



## bmgjet

Piospi said:


> I bite my nails because my delided 7900x r is probably hopeless. I can't stabilize at 4.8 GHZ with offset +0.115....
> My settings are in attached images. When I test it in the RealBench, temperatures come to 105C....and my processor is unstable in the game World Of Tanks.
> 
> With 4.5 GHZ my CPU is fine, temperatures are below 60C and CoreTemp shows the voltage ~1.2 with -0.080 offset.
> 
> What am I doing wrong?
> 
> P.S. I have LC with custom loop.


Its getting too hot.
Mine will fail realbench as soon as 1 core goes over 100C.
I can get 4.8ghz stable on mine by ducting in cold air from outside. Take the ducting off and it gets too hot so I have had to settle for 4.7ghz until I delid mine.
Maybe you got a bad tim install under the IHS if you have done the delid and its still that hot.


----------



## DeathAngel74

Cold-air intake for CPU's 


Spoiler


----------



## ottoore

Did someone try Avx-512 bench in Aida64 Extreme 5.97 ?


----------



## eatthermalpaste

using prime95 v27.9 (avx), I'm running blend test but at 17minute marker is when everything ramps up and is the true stability checker... anyone know how I can force that instruction set rather than wait for that time to come up - do you know what that set is at that specific time?


----------



## Jpmboy

eatthermalpaste said:


> using prime95 v27.9 (avx), I'm running blend test but at 17minute marker is when everything ramps up and is the true stability checker... anyone know how I can force that instruction set rather than wait for that time to come up - do you know what that set is at that specific time?


Just look for which FFT is running at that time.



ottoore said:


> Did someone try Avx-512 bench in Aida64 Extreme 5.97 ?


what about it?


----------



## ottoore

Jpmboy said:


> what about it?


Temps? Is that load as high as Linx 0.9.0 ( with latest linpack) or Y-cruncher? Can you share a screenshot?
Thank you.


----------



## DeathAngel74

MX4 has been working fine here on my 7820X for almost 8 months.


----------



## Jpmboy

ottoore said:


> Temps? Is that load as high as Linx 0.9.0 ( with latest linpack) or Y-cruncher? Can you share a screenshot?
> Thank you.


sure it is hot... that's why these (and E-class) CPUs have an AVX-512 offset. But I don't think it is 100% 512. y-cruncher is just too brutal. TimeSpy physics has a 512 option in the custom run menu.


----------



## tistou77

With the latest stable release of Aida64, the Stress test uses AVX512 (FPU I guess)
Someone tried ?

For me, hardly I press Start for stress, the PC freezes or BSOD even without the FPU test or just the test Memory and Cache
No problem with the last beta
I wonder if it's a stability problem (without AVX tested, it's the same thing)


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> With the latest stable release of Aida64, the Stress test uses AVX512 (FPU I guess)
> Someone tried ?
> 
> For me, hardly I press Start for stress, the PC freezes or BSOD even without the FPU test or just the test Memory and Cache
> No problem with the last beta
> I wonder if it's a stability problem (without AVX tested, it's the same thing)


I'm using this version... the one claimed to use 512 according to their website.


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> I'm using this version... the one claimed to use 512 according to their website.


And you have no problem when you launch the Stress Test ?


----------



## Mysticial

ThrashZone said:


> Hi, @*Mysticial*
> Think you could evaluate what Blender render uses
> Namely BMW short test and Classroom longer test
> 
> https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/


Is there a simple binary I can just download and run? I didn't find anything after glancing through the page.



Jpmboy said:


> I'm using this version... the one claimed to use 512 according to their website.


Was going to try running this through the profiler. But two problems:


It's not free and the trial locks you out after 30 days. So I'd need to do it in my sandbox if I want to be able to use it again in the future.
There's some fine print in the license that's a bit murky with respect to what I'd need to do to run the profiler.
They explicitly ban any attempts to reverse engineer the program. While that isn't my intention, the _profiler_ itself will do things that are explicitly forbidden in the license. Furthermore, the profiler is a tool that can be used to reverse engineer applications.

I'm not sure what laws can be used to legally enforce these things (since it's literally impossible to prevent anyone from just doing it and not admitting it). But I'm not sure I want to get into that territory. lol


----------



## ThrashZone

Mysticial said:


> Is there a simple binary I can just download and run? I didn't find anything after glancing through the page.


Hi,
Don't know 
Download Blender = harmless 
https://www.blender.org/

And BMW demo file 
On the top left go to File and Open
Search for the demo file 
Then Render and Render image about 2-3 minutes.
Render video with make it repeat till canceled.

Classroom demo file is longer about 10-15 minute.


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> And you have no problem when you launch the Stress Test ?


yeah - I can run the new AID64 stress test, I'm thinking you have power limits set too low?


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> yeah - I can run the new AID64 stress test, I'm thinking you have power limits set too low?


For Power Limit, I left everything on AUTO
It's not good ?

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> For Power Limit, I left everything on AUTO
> It's not good ?
> 
> Thanks


for AID I would think it should be. realy need to see bios screenshots, and equip list.


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> for AID I would think it should be. realy need to see bios screenshots, and equip list.


Bios screens for Power Limit option

Thanks for your help


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> Bios screens for Power Limit option
> 
> Thanks for your help


here's a bios SS pack which uses speedshift, not speedstep.


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> here's a bios SS pack which uses speedshift, not speedstep.


Here are the screens of bios
With these settings, it's good with Realbench and the last beta of Aida64
I tested with an Offset of -8 for the AVX512, but it's the same with the latest Aida64

Power Limit to put like you ?

Thanks


----------



## bmgjet

Delid tool finally showed up.
Now just have to wait for the weekend to go ahead and pop that IHS.


So are people reglueing there lids on or just using the cpu bracket to hold it in place.


----------



## vmanuelgm




----------



## truehighroller1

bmgjet said:


> Delid tool finally showed up.
> Now just have to wait for the weekend to go ahead and pop that IHS.
> 
> 
> So are people reglueing there lids on or just using the cpu bracket to hold it in place.



I used four dabs of super glue, one in each corner. There are how to's out there on you tube. Just make sure you apply the paste correctly the first time both sides, the cpu and the ihs and the right amount.


----------



## cekim

bmgjet said:


> Delid tool finally showed up.
> Now just have to wait for the weekend to go ahead and pop that IHS.
> 
> 
> So are people reglueing there lids on or just using the cpu bracket to hold it in place.


If you don't have a mono-block, there's really much up-side to re-gluing (if you do its not the end of the world, but will require some adjustment of thermal pads). I guess if you move your CPU around to other motherboards or live on a spice harvester. 

Short of that sort of bouncing around, the socket clamping force should be adequate.

The upside of NOT gluing is that the glue can increase the distance between your IHS and die which means higher temps, more chance for bubbles, etc... 

The thickness of the glue becomes pretty critical, too much and you will reduce the efficacy of your LM/delid. 

So, if you re-glue, do so sparingly.


----------



## vmanuelgm

I wouldn't reglue even in the case of using a monoblock, unless I had to rma or sell the cpu.


----------



## truehighroller1

Spoiler






vmanuelgm said:


>






Here's my results.



vmanuelgm said:


> I wouldn't reglue even in the case of using a monoblock, unless I had to rma or sell the cpu.


I used the rockit cool tool to re-seat my ihs and did four tiny dabs one in each corner as you're supposed to and mine is fine. But I am not using a mono block either which I don't see why any one would use a mono block considering they run hotter then a single cpu block..


----------



## cekim

truehighroller1 said:


> don't see why any one would use a mono block considering they run hotter then a single cpu block..


VRM cooling without fan... That's why. Works well.


----------



## truehighroller1

cekim said:


> VRM cooling without fan... That's why. Works well.


Sure, if you want higher CPU temps.. I use a fan and I get highest temp VRM 67C under prime95.

My AIDA64 results, my other one messed up..


----------



## vmanuelgm

truehighroller1 said:


> Here's my results.
> 
> 
> 
> I used the rockit cool tool to re-seat my ihs and did four tiny dabs one in each corner as you're supposed to and mine is fine. But I am not using a mono block either which I don't see why any one would use a mono block considering they run hotter then a single cpu block..


As cekim said, a monoblock is needed to cool VRM when u push these toys...










In case it is possible, I would go for a monoblock, unless u want to have a fan over the VRM area or the monoblock is not compatible (Direct Die Frame for example)...


----------



## Jpmboy

cekim said:


> If you don't have a mono-block, there's really much up-side to re-gluing (if you do its not the end of the world, but will require some adjustment of thermal pads). I guess if you move your CPU around to other motherboards or live on a spice harvester.
> 
> Short of that sort of bouncing around, the socket clamping force should be adequate.
> 
> The upside of NOT gluing is that the glue can increase the distance between your IHS and die which means higher temps, more chance for bubbles, etc...
> 
> The thickness of the glue becomes pretty critical, too much and you will reduce the efficacy of your LM/delid.
> 
> So, if you re-glue, do so sparingly.


This is one of the reasons some folks like to use a tiny dot of crazy glue at the corners. Very little effect on the thermal bondline, much "thinner" than silicone gasket material. And you can pop it open again without difficulty... just dab each corner with a q-tip wet with acetone. Quickly loosens the glue.


----------



## vmanuelgm

truehighroller1 said:


> Sure, if you want higher CPU temps.. I use a fan and I get highest temp VRM 67C under prime95.
> 
> My AIDA64 results, my other one messed up..




FYI, I just passed the RealBench 2.56 at 4.8avx, (which pulls around 1100w from my wall meter), take a look at max temp of the VRM (1.35v vcore):


----------



## RichKnecht

bmgjet said:


> Delid tool finally showed up.
> Now just have to wait for the weekend to go ahead and pop that IHS.
> 
> 
> So are people reglueing there lids on or just using the cpu bracket to hold it in place.


I'm thinking of delidding my 7900x to shave off some heat, but I want to use a Direct Die Frame instead of reinstalling the IHS.


----------



## tistou77

tistou77 said:


> Here are the screens of bios
> With these settings, it's good with Realbench and the last beta of Aida64
> I tested with an Offset of -8 for the AVX512, but it's the same with the latest Aida64
> 
> Power Limit to put like you ?
> 
> Thanks


 @Jpmboy, settings to modify? Power Limit probably ?

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> I'm thinking of delidding my 7900x to shave off some heat, but I want to use a Direct Die Frame instead of reinstalling the IHS.


Unfortunately, AFAIK we can't get de8aure's die shim here in the US. 



tistou77 said:


> @*Jpmboy* , settings to modify? Power Limit probably ?
> 
> Thanks


set the power limits as shown in the bios pack I posted for you.


----------



## Haans249

truehighroller1 said:


> I used four dabs of super glue, one in each corner. There are how to's out there on you tube. Just make sure you apply the paste correctly the first time both sides, the cpu and the ihs and the right amount.


This is exactly right. I did not use super glue, but Black RTV sealant. I carefully scrapped all of the old sealant off the PCB and IHS, applied conductonaut and partially sealed with only a tiny (less than rice sized) dab of Black RTV on each corner of the IHS. I used the Rocket kit with the IHS bracket, but used a clamp to apply more pressure to ensure I got as close as a bond between IHS and core as possible. I let it set overnight.

Once I fired back up, I experienced 32C DROP in temps at 4.4Ghz @ 1.25V testing in Prime95. Went from a high of 105C after stopping the test due to overheating after 5 minutes to a high of 73C after running for several hours. No other changes were done - thermal paste spread was perfect before delidding as well. I never thought I would experience a drop in temps that dramatic, but delidding is real! I will be shooting for a higher overclock now that temps are well under control, just haven't got to that yet as I have been working on memory overclocking which has not been going so well.


----------



## trn

Jpmboy said:


> Unfortunately, AFAIK we can't get de8aure's die shim here in the US.



Same, I keep checking Amazon every few days with no luck.


----------



## iamjanco

trn said:


> Same, I keep checking Amazon every few days with no luck.


See: *Der8auer Skylake-X Direct Die Frame*.


----------



## Jpmboy

iamjanco said:


> See: *Der8auer Skylake-X Direct Die Frame*.


thanks! Just ordered one. :thumb:

Roman kept mentioning to check Amazon... which I did too. :blinksmil


----------



## iamjanco

Jpmboy said:


> thanks! Just ordered one. :thumb:
> 
> Roman kept mentioning to check Amazon... which I did too. :blinksmil


Looks like they only had five of them (now four, ), so you got in under the gun.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> thanks! Just ordered one. :thumb:
> 
> Roman kept mentioning to check Amazon... which I did too. :blinksmil


Let me know how it works out for you. I'm going to see if I can borrow a delidding tool locally to save a little money since I'll use it only once. BTW, wanna delid my 7900x for me ?


----------



## trn

iamjanco said:


> Looks like they only had five of them (now four, ), so you got in under the gun.


Make that 3, thanks for the link!


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> set the power limits as shown in the bios pack I posted for you.


Thanks, I'll test with this "settings" and 3600, 3800 for AVX512 ?



Jpmboy said:


> thanks! Just ordered one. :thumb:
> 
> Roman kept mentioning to check Amazon... which I did too. :blinksmil


You will mount it with the Koolance waterblock ?
If so, it interests me to know the results, and if the base of your WB is not perfectly flat, know if it's good for the "mounting"

Thanks


----------



## bmgjet

Was going to wait for the weekend but though hell might as well do it now so if I do kill it I can buy another one before the weekend.
It was super easy using the rockit 99. All the videos I watched had people with there hands shaking struggling to turn the allen key with it in longwards.
Didnt even need to turn the allen key longwards to pop the lid off mine. Just kept turning it and heard a ripping sound as I turned it. The ammount of pressure I needed I could of almost pulled the lid off just using my finger nails.
Was some super flaky silicon once I removed the IHS. Just rubbed off with my fingers didnt even have to use the scraper that came with the kit.

Gave it a dose of liquid electircal tape over the caps/resistors. And a thin application of TG LM to the core and IHS.
Fitting the CPU in the backet was the hardest bit of it all. Have a virtical case and didnt want to drain the loop to fit the cpu. But I got there.
Then another application on the top of the IHS and waterblock with TG LM.

Im just running a bit of a burn in with stress tests at the moment since Iv found LM gets better over a few hours of hot temps then letting it cool off and set.
So far on my OC that I was running before delid my hottest core is 76C, Where it was 92C.
My coolest core is now 63C where it was 75c before.
So thats a temp drop of 12-16C on load.
1.277v use to be my max. Should now make maybe 1.3V

Looking forward to get some high overclocking in.


----------



## vmanuelgm

bmgjet said:


> Was going to wait for the weekend but though hell might as well do it now so if I do kill it I can buy another one before the weekend.
> It was super easy using the rockit 99. All the videos I watched had people with there hands shaking struggling to turn the allen key with it in longwards.
> Didnt even need to turn the allen key longwards to pop the lid off mine. Just kept turning it and heard a ripping sound as I turned it. The ammount of pressure I needed I could of almost pulled the lid off just using my finger nails.
> Was some super flaky silicon once I removed the IHS. Just rubbed off with my fingers didnt even have to use the scraper that came with the kit.
> 
> Gave it a dose of liquid electircal tape over the caps/resistors. And a thin application of TG LM to the core and IHS.
> Fitting the CPU in the backet was the hardest bit of it all. Have a virtical case and didnt want to drain the loop to fit the cpu. But I got there.
> Then another application on the top of the IHS and waterblock with TG LM.
> 
> Im just running a bit of a burn in with stress tests at the moment since Iv found LM gets better over a few hours of hot temps then letting it cool off and set.
> So far on my OC that I was running before delid my hottest core is 76C, Where it was 92C.
> My coolest core is now 63C where it was 75c before.
> So thats a temp drop of 12-16C on load.
> 1.277v use to be my max. Should now make maybe 1.3V
> 
> Looking forward to get some high overclocking in.



Nice job, but why did u cover with electrical tape the pins on the external pcb???


----------



## bmgjet

vmanuelgm said:


> Nice job, but why did u cover with electrical tape the pins on the external pcb???


Incase the IHS slipped as I was fitting it in the socket. Thought you cant really protect too much.


----------



## vmanuelgm

bmgjet said:


> Incase the IHS slipped as I was fitting it in the socket. Thought you cant really protect too much.



You didn't need that, the liquid metal won't spread to that pcb, unless u throw it all around!!!


----------



## bmgjet

vmanuelgm said:


> You didn't need that, the liquid metal won't spread to that pcb, unless u throw it all around!!!


I wasnt worried about that. I was worried about the IHS since its got no silicon on it anymore so its got a sharp edge to it and if it slipped while fitting it in the socket since its not glued and scraped off the pads.


----------



## vmanuelgm

bmgjet said:


> I wasnt worried about that. I was worried about the IHS since its got no silicon on it anymore so its got a sharp edge to it and if it slipped while fitting it in the socket since its not glued and scraped off the pads.



Well, better going the safer way, but doing things carefully it shouldn't slip and scrape anything.


----------



## clarifiante

is anyone here using the EKWB MLC phoenix to cool their i9s? what´s the performance like?


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> thanks! Just ordered one. :thumb:
> 
> Roman kept mentioning to check Amazon... which I did too. :blinksmil


Another question for you. Do you plan on using LM for the TIM or just a "regular" TIM between the cooler and the chip? My thoughts are that a regular TIM such as Gelid extreme, Kryonaut, or the Noctua TIM would be perfectly fine when used with the die frame. One of the reasons I have not delidded my 7900x is that I do not like the fact that LM is highly conductive.


----------



## RichKnecht

clarifiante said:


> is anyone here using the EKWB MLC phoenix to cool their i9s? what´s the performance like?



Why not just buy a copper EK kit like the P360? You can upgrade them easily and performance is quite amazing for a "kit".


----------



## trn

RichKnecht said:


> Another question for you. Do you plan on using LM for the TIM or just a "regular" TIM between the cooler and the chip? My thoughts are that a regular TIM such as Gelid extreme, Kryonaut, or the Noctua TIM would be perfectly fine when used with the die frame. One of the reasons I have not delidded my 7900x is that I do not like the fact that LM is highly conductive.


LM for me, I've masked off the SMD's with nail polish and the LM stays in place once applied correctly.


----------



## RichKnecht

trn said:


> LM for me, I've masked off the SMD's with nail polish and the LM stays in place once applied correctly.


I know that is practice when reinstalling the OEM IHS, but I am referring to using the Direct Die Frame which eliminates the OEM IHS. There should be no need for LM in that situation.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> thanks! Just ordered one. :thumb:
> 
> Roman kept mentioning to check Amazon... which I did too. :blinksmil


Hi,
Yeah 5c for the 7900x really isn't much for 100.us
Subscribed if I get a notification might flip a coin 

If I do then how to delid a already delided cpu from SL :h34r-smi


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> I know that is practice when reinstalling the OEM IHS, but I am referring to using the Direct Die Frame which eliminates the OEM IHS. There should be no need for LM in that situation.


if you use a really good non-LM tim, the gains will be less, but still substantial compared to the stock pigeon poop. And, it is always best to protect the exposed SMDs and contacts. Use the stuff the OEMs do: MG conformal coating. (amazon). :specool:

You do know that you need to *remove the socket clamp * to use de8auer's gizmo - right?



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah 5c for the 7900x really isn't much for 100.us
> Subscribed if I get a notification might flip a coin
> If I do then how to delid a already delided cpu from SL :h34r-smi


not really needed... but then again, how much of any of this is really "needed".


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah one always wants a little more granted


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> here's a bios SS pack which uses speedshift, not speedstep.


Hi,
Wish you could do a 7900x you have some interesting setting there 
@Jpmboy
Those settings are from 2.6 or 4.2 for the 7980xe

Interesting the 7900x base/ turbo is 3.3 and 4.3 
If you went by your turbo we aren't too far apart but if went from base we are a ways different :/
I was working on 4.9 though not 4.6


----------



## frankieskiller

vmanuelgm said:


> As cekim said, a monoblock is needed to cool VRM when u push these toys...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In case it is possible, I would go for a monoblock, unless u want to have a fan over the VRM area or the monoblock is not compatible (Direct Die Frame for example)...


Was just reading some of these replies and thought I'd chime in. Sorry if I'm way off track.

I was having the same heat issues with my 7980xe. Had it delidded and when overclocking the mosfets were exceeding 120C. I tried the EK MSI monoblock but, it didn't work out because the delidding "thinned" out the cpu ever so slightly and I wasn't able to get the monoblock to seat properly on the cpu without machining the block. I dug a little deeper and found the Koolance MVR-100 universal mosfet water block which I added to the cooling loop. You also need to purchase a heat transfer plate which I had to cut, grind, sand and polish down to size. In the end, I went from 120C+ on the mosfets down to @ 75C under cpu load (4.4GHZ - all cores - 1.115V).


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Too bad one of those vrm cools weren't manufactured well enough to not have to mess with altering parts :/
Or is that just because you wanted a copper heat plate ?


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Too bad one of those vrm cools weren't manufactured well enough to not have to mess with altering parts :/
> Or is that just because you wanted a copper heat plate ?


the koolance coldplates require the copper transfer plate. It is designed that way so it can be fitted to any vrm array.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> the koolance coldplates require the copper transfer plate. It is designed that way so it can be fitted to any vrm array.


Hi,
Why wouldn't they include one or show it's needed ?
http://www.performance-pcs.com/koolance-mvr-100-mb-vreg-no-nozzles.html#Specifications

Nickle plated copper 
http://www.performance-pcs.com/koolance-mvr-heat-transfer-plate-140mm.html#Additional-Information


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> if you use a really good non-LM tim, the gains will be less, but still substantial compared to the stock pigeon poop. And, it is always best to protect the exposed SMDs and contacts. Use the stuff the OEMs do: MG conformal coating. (amazon). :specool:
> 
> You do know that you need to *remove the socket clamp * to use de8auer's gizmo - right?
> 
> 
> not really needed... but then again, how much of any of this is really "needed".


Yes, I know that the OEM clamp needs to go too. I have no problem with any of this and I think the Die Frame is genius. IMO, it is how all extreme chips should be sold. The fact that these chips overclock so well and that Intel uses TIM for the IHS is sad. It really limits your OC if you do not delid, which in turn voids any warranty. My next thing is going to be delidding my 7900x and installing a Direct Die Frame. Then, I swear I am done (except switching to a Define R6 from my present MasterCase Maker 5T)


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah us all delidding.... we really should of sent back these cpu's as defective with major thermal issues 
Intel will not learn anything now the pigeon poop will continue


----------



## frankieskiller

The cooler is meant to be universal so you can use it with different transfer plates. They mention you need this on their website but, I missed the fine print and had to order it separately. The transfer plate is 140mm long so, I had to cut it down to 105mm. The polished copper was just a nice side effect of altering the plate  I'm temped to polish the block down to copper too. I guess I just have a thing for raw materials.

They also mention on their site that if you need a custom transfer plate they would be willing to create one to suit your needs. MB mosfet configurations vary greatly so, due to lack of demand is why the don't make proper fitting plates for every MB. At least that's my theory


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I'm guessing they thing everyone lives near salt water or something nickle plating everything is just weird :/


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I'm guessing they thing everyone lives near salt water or something nickle plating everything is just weird :/


you would be amazed at how many folks never check the pH of the coolant in a rig... hence nickel plating.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah us all delidding.... we really should of sent back these cpu's as defective with major thermal issues
> Intel will not learn anything now the pigeon poop will continue


Seriously, did you ever stop and think what would happen if all of the people who have had to delid their "X" chips to properly overclock got together and formed a class action suit against Intel? I have seen many class action suits for dumber crap. After all, the reason we spend more to buy "X" or "unlocked" chips is to overclock them.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> Seriously, did you ever stop and think what would happen if all of the people who have had to delid their "X" chips to properly overclock got together and formed a class action suit against Intel? I have seen many class action suits for dumber crap. After all, the reason we spend more to buy "X" or "unlocked" chips is to overclock them.


wouldn't stand for a moment. Nothing is spec'ed to run outside the AORs (even for k and x class chips), never was. From intel's perspective, delid at your own risk and lowers their warranty returns for electrocuted chips.

That said, they still could use a better TIM if they want to save money vs soldering.


----------



## vmanuelgm

frankieskiller said:


> Was just reading some of these replies and thought I'd chime in. Sorry if I'm way off track.
> 
> I was having the same heat issues with my 7980xe. Had it delidded and when overclocking the mosfets were exceeding 120C. I tried the EK MSI monoblock but, it didn't work out because the delidding "thinned" out the cpu ever so slightly and I wasn't able to get the monoblock to seat properly on the cpu without machining the block. I dug a little deeper and found the Koolance MVR-100 universal mosfet water block which I added to the cooling loop. You also need to purchase a heat transfer plate which I had to cut, grind, sand and polish down to size. In the end, I went from 120C+ on the mosfets down to @ 75C under cpu load (4.4GHZ - all cores - 1.115V).



Nice, gonna take a look at those pieces!!!

Thanks!!!


----------



## frankieskiller

vmanuelgm said:


> Nice, gonna take a look at those pieces!!!
> 
> Thanks!!!


Yeah man, get 'er done. It well worth the investment and a fun little project.


----------



## frankieskiller

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I'm guessing they thing everyone lives near salt water or something nickle plating everything is just weird :/


hahah, well said!


----------



## frankieskiller

Jpmboy said:


> you would be amazed at how many folks never check the pH of the coolant in a rig... hence nickel plating.


Yeah seriously, idiots...

...off to check the pH of my coolant cause I had no idea it was good practice to do so!


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> Yes, I know that the OEM clamp needs to go too. I have no problem with any of this and I think the Die Frame is genius. IMO, it is how all extreme chips should be sold. The fact that these chips overclock so well and that Intel uses TIM for the IHS is sad. It really limits your OC if you do not delid, which in turn voids any warranty. My next thing is going to be delidding my 7900x and installing a Direct Die Frame. Then, I swear I am done (except switching to a Define R6 from my present MasterCase Maker 5T)


well.. I spent a couple of hours installing the X-die frame on my Rampage VI Apex... at least 3 times. 
Pulled the MB, cleaned the CPU PCB (no residual glue)
Test fitted the bare die and block using pressure sensing paper (for flange fitting. I used 28-65psi paper) to examine the contact. The picture below shows the initial fit. The smudge in the middle is the CPU die. So - okay, I apply LM to the die and block, hook her up, and loading windows is hitting 80C on the OC Panel. Uh oh!
Second attempt - pull the frame, double check frame for anything that may be causing the uneven frame contact which you can see in the test paper. All looks good - nothing obvious. Remount frame, block and new LM... windows only hits 77C - wut?
Repeat and... same result. :sad-smile

Pull the cpu out, redo a standard delid (LM on the die and underside of the IHS, and TGK on top of the IHS) Reinstall everything and viola - the system is running (cooler actually) like before.

So - there must be some irregularity in my MB that is causing a poor fit of the frame and back plate. I also have a Gigabyte Gaming 9 (and monoblock) I might try the X-frame on. Otherwise there will be a good buy for one on the OCN market place soon. Don't get me wrong. The X-frame is very well engineered - I believe the fitment issue is more specific to my board (which is the equivalent of an ES cpu) and not the Frame.

Looking forward to other's experience...



frankieskiller said:


> Yeah seriously, idiots...
> 
> ...off to check the pH of my coolant cause I had no idea it was good practice to do so!


a pool strip or kit works fine. Acid = bad.


----------



## bmgjet

Doesn't it say it doesn't work with monoblock and only some ek blocks using different mounting studs.


----------



## Jpmboy

bmgjet said:


> Doesn't it say it doesn't work with monoblock and only some ek blocks using different mounting studs.


I used the 2066 studs. I can use a koolance block which does not have screw-down stops.
(my box did not have written instructions.)
I'll test fit the monoblock the same way to examine contact with th ecore and vrms (7740X build).

I used the studs shown in this video: 




8 min in.


----------



## cekim

Jpmboy said:


> well.. I spent a couple of hours installing the X-die frame on my Rampage VI Apex... at least 3 times.
> So - there must be some irregularity in my MB that is causing a poor fit of the frame and back plate. I also have a Gigabyte Gaming 9 (and monoblock) I might try the X-frame on. Otherwise there will be a good buy for one on the OCN market place soon. Don't get me wrong. The X-frame is very well engineered - I believe the fitment issue is more specific to my board (which is the equivalent of an ES cpu) and not the Frame.


Hmm, the provided back-plate and die-frame should sandwich the CPU so that "irregularities" would be pressed flat.

From what you describe, I think the plastic socket itself has to be the factor here.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> well.. I spent a couple of hours installing the X-die frame on my Rampage VI Apex... at least 3 times.
> Pulled the MB, cleaned the CPU PCB (no residual glue)
> Test fitted the bare die and block using pressure sensing paper (for flange fitting. I used 28-65psi paper) to examine the contact. The picture below shows the initial fit. The smudge in the middle is the CPU die. So - okay, I apply LM to the die and block, hook her up, and loading windows is hitting 80C on the OC Panel. Uh oh!
> Second attempt - pull the frame, double check frame for anything that may be causing the uneven frame contact which you can see in the test paper. All looks good - nothing obvious. Remount frame, block and new LM... windows only hits 77C - wut?
> Repeat and... same result. :sad-smile
> 
> Pull the cpu out, redo a standard delid (LM on the die and underside of the IHS, and TGK on top of the IHS) Reinstall everything and viola - the system is running (cooler actually) like before.
> 
> So - there must be some irregularity in my MB that is causing a poor fit of the frame and back plate. I also have a Gigabyte Gaming 9 (and monoblock) I might try the X-frame on. Otherwise there will be a good buy for one on the OCN market place soon. Don't get me wrong. The X-frame is very well engineered - I believe the fitment issue is more specific to my board (which is the equivalent of an ES cpu) and not the Frame.
> 
> Looking forward to other's experience...
> 
> 
> 
> a pool strip or kit works fine. Acid = bad.


Well that is disappointing to hear. I will also be looking to see how others experience pans out.


----------



## axiumone

Yeah, no issues on this end with the direct die frame and an extreme VI, both retail, as well as the cpu. Though I'm using a corsair 360 aio and I took pretty much all of the adhesive off the cpu. As far as I remember these frames aren't compatible with monoblocks. I'm curious if you'll be able to manage it, as I'm thinking about a monoblock in the near future as well. 

A question for you, is the ek block from your pictures nickel plated or bare copper? Any staining visible on the block from liquid metal? Both corsair AIO's I've had stained in a matter of days, which are supposedly pure copper and not an alloy. The only way to get rid of the discoloration was sanding. I'm curious if it's the same issue for ek blocks.


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> well.. I spent a couple of hours installing the X-die frame on my Rampage VI Apex... at least 3 times.
> Pulled the MB, cleaned the CPU PCB (no residual glue)
> Test fitted the bare die and block using pressure sensing paper (for flange fitting. I used 28-65psi paper) to examine the contact. The picture below shows the initial fit. The smudge in the middle is the CPU die. So - okay, I apply LM to the die and block, hook her up, and loading windows is hitting 80C on the OC Panel. Uh oh!
> Second attempt - pull the frame, double check frame for anything that may be causing the uneven frame contact which you can see in the test paper. All looks good - nothing obvious. Remount frame, block and new LM... windows only hits 77C - wut?
> Repeat and... same result. :sad-smile
> 
> Pull the cpu out, redo a standard delid (LM on the die and underside of the IHS, and TGK on top of the IHS) Reinstall everything and viola - the system is running (cooler actually) like before.


Did you test with the Koolance and the Ek block ?
I have not tested mine yet, but your experience a little me unmotivated 
Especially that my block Koolance is not perfectly flat (for a good contact this is not ideal, I think)

Your block (koolance and Ek) are perfectly flat or not ?


----------



## frankieskiller

Jpmboy said:


> well.. I spent a couple of hours installing the X-die frame on my Rampage VI Apex... at least 3 times.
> Pulled the MB, cleaned the CPU PCB (no residual glue)
> Test fitted the bare die and block using pressure sensing paper (for flange fitting. I used 28-65psi paper) to examine the contact. The picture below shows the initial fit. The smudge in the middle is the CPU die. So - okay, I apply LM to the die and block, hook her up, and loading windows is hitting 80C on the OC Panel. Uh oh!
> Second attempt - pull the frame, double check frame for anything that may be causing the uneven frame contact which you can see in the test paper. All looks good - nothing obvious. Remount frame, block and new LM... windows only hits 77C - wut?
> Repeat and... same result. :sad-smile
> 
> Pull the cpu out, redo a standard delid (LM on the die and underside of the IHS, and TGK on top of the IHS) Reinstall everything and viola - the system is running (cooler actually) like before.
> 
> So - there must be some irregularity in my MB that is causing a poor fit of the frame and back plate. I also have a Gigabyte Gaming 9 (and monoblock) I might try the X-frame on. Otherwise there will be a good buy for one on the OCN market place soon. Don't get me wrong. The X-frame is very well engineered - I believe the fitment issue is more specific to my board (which is the equivalent of an ES cpu) and not the Frame.
> 
> Looking forward to other's experience...
> 
> 
> 
> a pool strip or kit works fine. Acid = bad.


Ugh, that is brutal. Sounds like my experience with trying to install a monoblock on a delidded cpu. I don't know enough about the direct die process aside from what you shared but, it looks like it should work. You're absolutely sure you're not missing anything? 

The little paper test is cool! Where did you get that? I was about to call my orthodontist to see if I could buy a similar paper from them that they use to test top/bottom tooth alignments. Pretty genius.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> you would be amazed at how many folks never check the pH of the coolant in a rig... hence nickel plating.


Hi,
I believe premix fluid does not apply or need checking ph level it is good to go 
Acid green or navy blue... would be pretty tough to tell


----------



## vmanuelgm

Direct Die Frame needs an even and proper mounting.

Bad setup=big fail!!!

Clumsy hands=big big fail!!!

xDDDD





tistou77 said:


> Did you test with the Koolance and the Ek block ?
> I have not tested mine yet, but your experience a little me unmotivated
> Especially that my block Koolance is not perfectly flat (for a good contact this is not ideal, I think)
> 
> Your block (koolance and Ek) are perfectly flat or not ?




I told it here a while ago, the setup must be perfect in all senses. Correct mounting=great result!!!

Maybe in France u don't understand spanish guys speaking (writing) english, xDDD

Or maybe Asus guys don't understand Gigabyte ones, xDDD

PS: my block isn't perfectly flat. Doesn't have to do with the mainboard either.


----------



## iamjanco

Jpmboy said:


> well.. I spent a couple of hours installing the X-die frame on my Rampage VI Apex... at least 3 times.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Pulled the MB, cleaned the CPU PCB (no residual glue)
> Test fitted the bare die and block using pressure sensing paper (for flange fitting. I used 28-65psi paper) to examine the contact. The picture below shows the initial fit. The smudge in the middle is the CPU die. So - okay, I apply LM to the die and block, hook her up, and loading windows is hitting 80C on the OC Panel. Uh oh!
> Second attempt - pull the frame, double check frame for anything that may be causing the uneven frame contact which you can see in the test paper. All looks good - nothing obvious. Remount frame, block and new LM... windows only hits 77C - wut?
> Repeat and... same result. :sad-smile
> 
> Pull the cpu out, redo a standard delid (LM on the die and underside of the IHS, and TGK on top of the IHS) Reinstall everything and viola - the system is running (cooler actually) like before.
> 
> 
> So - there must be some irregularity in my MB that is causing a poor fit of the frame and back plate. I also have a Gigabyte Gaming 9 (and monoblock) I might try the X-frame on. Otherwise there will be a good buy for one on the OCN market place soon. Don't get me wrong. The X-frame is very well engineered - I believe the fitment issue is more specific to my board (which is the equivalent of an ES cpu) and not the Frame.


Shame. APEX/7980XE combo? 

De8auer states in his video that ≥500 newtons (or *112.40447 lbf/psi*) is typically needed to seat the pins properly in the socket, but you're probably already there.

Just an fyi; you're obviously a lot braver than I am


----------



## bmgjet

Had a search around but cant really find a answer, any one know whats considered the safe daily limit for voltage?

So far im at 1.3V which has tested stable with 4 cores now on 5ghz and 6 cores on 4.9ghz.
Hottest core 84C
VRM 92C (fan blowing directly on max speed)
Air temp 21C

Get worker errors in prime95 when turning on the 5th rated core.
6 and 7th rated cores cause hard freeze.
So want to turn voltage up since seems iv still got some cooling over head and im guessing the lower rated cores are going to need more then 1.3v for 5ghz.

Oc method iv been using.

Settings are core specific OC,
And all offsets so max core voltage is 1.3V

Already knew that I could get 4.7 all cores stable so started at 4.8ghz all cores.
Then went though turning on each core in rated order and stress tested.
10mins prime95 NON-AVX.
5min prime95 AVX (-2 offset)
-8 AVX-512 (not testing)
and 15min Realbench.

If thats max safe 24/7 voltage then ill work on getting those voltages for each core lower by doing same test dropping 10mv per test then up 5mv again and test onces it has a error.
Got a few more hours before ill go to bed and leave it running over night stress.


Done better from the delid then I expected.

------
Found the VRM is my limit,
1 hour of realbench and VRMs starting to hit 110c and im not comftable having any part that hot.
Dropped back to 9 cores 4.9ghz and 1 core 5ghz. Since then I can run voltage 1.29v on the 2 turd cores and 1.285v on the better cores and 1.277v on the 3 good cores.

Left it running over night VRM max temp was 88C with hottest core 79c.
Need to look into better VRM cooling.
And it looks like some people are happy to run up to 1.35v provided its cooled well enough. With that id expect to hit 5ghz on 8 core. And leave the 2 turd cores at 4.9ghz.


----------



## Jpmboy

axiumone said:


> Yeah, no issues on this end with the direct die frame and an extreme VI, both retail, as well as the cpu. Though I'm using a corsair 360 aio and I took pretty much all of the adhesive off the cpu. As far as I remember these frames aren't compatible with monoblocks. I'm curious if you'll be able to manage it, as I'm thinking about a monoblock in the near future as well.
> 
> A question for you, is the ek block from your pictures nickel plated or bare copper? Any staining visible on the block from liquid metal? Both corsair AIO's I've had stained in a matter of days, which are supposedly pure copper and not an alloy. The only way to get rid of the discoloration was sanding. I'm curious if it's the same issue for ek blocks.


Both blocks are nickel plate, so no staining from the LM. Yeah, bare copper will "stain" from the gallium/indium alloy, It does look bad, but would not affect thermal performance.



cekim said:


> Hmm, the provided back-plate and die-frame should sandwich the CPU so that "irregularities" would be pressed flat.
> 
> From what you describe, I think the *plastic socket* itself has to be the factor here.


this is where I'm at. I may take another whack at it early next week. The die frame mount is very simple - the frame applies pressure to the cpu-socket for contact. With the straight delid, when pulling ~400W at the CPU (SIV64, and corsair-link) max core is mid 60s, package is 60s, VRMs are low 50s with this "re-delid".



tistou77 said:


> Did you test with the Koolance and the Ek block ?
> I have not tested mine yet, but your experience a little me unmotivated
> Especially that my block Koolance is not perfectly flat (for a good contact this is not ideal, I think)
> Your block (koolance and Ek) are perfectly flat or not ?


I only tried the EK block at this point. Don't be unmotivated. It's likely my board or block (tho the block works perfectly on the IHS/delid).



frankieskiller said:


> Ugh, that is brutal. Sounds like my experience with trying to install a monoblock on a delidded cpu. I don't know enough about the direct die process aside from what you shared but, it looks like it should work. You're absolutely sure you're not missing anything?
> 
> *The little paper test is cool*! Where did you get that? I was about to call my orthodontist to see if I could buy a similar paper from them that they use to test top/bottom tooth alignments. Pretty genius.


"Sensor Products Inc". Sht is expensive tho in larger sheets .
I do not think I missed anything - three times. But ya never know. I tend to be a bit OCD on assembly. I also build bikes as a hobby, and there it's like building an airplane... mechanical failure, unlike with 4 wheels, can be tragic. :skull:


ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I believe premix fluid does not apply or need checking ph level it is good to go
> Acid green or navy blue... would be pretty tough to tell


Premix contains mainly water, pH is either buffered or will change over time due to contact surfaces in a loop.



iamjanco said:


> Shame. APEX/7980XE combo?
> 
> De8auer states in his video that ≥500 newtons (or *112.40447 lbf/psi*) is typically needed to seat the pins properly in the socket, but you're probably already there.
> 
> Just an fyi; you're obviously a lot braver than I am


Yeah - the intel socket spec datasheet is the same. The die frame "clamps" the cpu down well. The install ran okay - just hot. IDK, cold be the block studs are not squaring things up.

last "OCD" build (now, 20K+ miles on a roll) :


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> I only tried the EK block at this point. Don't be unmotivated. It's likely my board or block (tho the block works perfectly on the IHS/delid).


Ok thanks 

For me it's mostly the base of the block that scares me (Koolance 390i), it is slightly bulging and I'm afraid to crush the DIE by "squeezing" the block on the socket
And it will make me ***** to "break" this CPU, especially that it is very good for me

you applied the LM as for the DIE and IHS ?


----------



## xarot

With the direct die frame you need to use LM on the base of the block too or it will not work. I tried direct die on my 7900X and had to mount it 3-4 times too, tried with a TIM first with catastrophic results.  In the end I was running a tad cooler with the direct die frame on a 360mm custom loop in my test bench. I used Alphacool XP3 light copper-base waterblock. You'll need to try it yourself to see if it's worthwile. Also after all that mess with installing it and then tooking it apart later I saw a tiny drop of the LM had squeezed off the die on the PCB. I don't want to try it with my 7980XE because I'd need to remove all the adhesive, which I don't want to do...instead I am using custom copper IHS with my 7980XE. Maybe direct die at some point with my i7-7800X that can do 5.1 GHz. 

Also if you have been around before the Athlons with direct die you'll know how easy it can be to crack the core. However, installing this is NOTHING like installing those Titan coolers on direct dies back in the day...


----------



## tistou77

xarot said:


> instead I am using custom copper IHS with my 7980XE. Maybe direct die at some point with my i7-7800X that can do 5.1 GHz.


Did you see a difference with copper IHS ?
Some tried and no temperature difference (or so 1°C so nothing significant)


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> Ok thanks
> 
> For me it's mostly the base of the block that scares me (Koolance 390i), it is slightly bulging and I'm afraid to crush the DIE by "squeezing" the block on the socket
> And it will make me ***** to "break" this CPU, especially that it is very good for me
> 
> *you applied the LM as for the DIE and IHS* ?


yes - 3 times! The problem I had is not the X-frame, it is well made. Something else is causing the poor block contact.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
If @DooRules hasn't already got one he'd probably be interested in it if you decide to ditch it


----------



## iamjanco

OT: 



Jpmboy said:


> last "OCD" build (now, 20K+ miles on a roll) :


If you built that, it's great work. Either way, it's a beautiful bike. :thumb:

Rode a softail myself when I was in Europe back in the latter half of the 80s. Nowhere near as customized though, but great memories to this day.


----------



## xarot

tistou77 said:


> Did you see a difference with copper IHS ?
> Some tried and no temperature difference (or so 1°C so nothing significant)



Nothing significant really. Thought using it in case I put some LM between the block and IHS.


----------



## Jpmboy

iamjanco said:


> OT:
> 
> 
> 
> If you built that, it's great work. Either way, it's a beautiful bike. :thumb:
> 
> Rode a softail myself when I was in Europe back in the latter half of the 80s. Nowhere near as customized though, but great memories to this day.


Thanks, yeah - many hours in the garage/shop. Started with a bare metal custom frame and went from there. The 250 rear was the challenge 16 years ago.
A softtail anywhere in europe back then was a rare thing.

okay - I'll stop the OT


----------



## iamjanco

More OT:



Jpmboy said:


> Thanks, yeah - many hours in the garage/shop. Started with a bare metal custom frame and went from there. The 250 rear was the challenge 16 years ago.
> A softtail anywhere in europe back then was a rare thing.


Beautiful work!

As for the softail in Europe thing, as a GI, you could purchase them through AAFES and pick them up at a German dealer which worked with Harley and AAFES. I paid somewhat over 10 grand for mine at the time. 

Sourcing extras, now that was an exercise in those days, through APO mail; though there was a local German custom bike shop where I picked up the odd bit here and there. Being fluent in German helped.

OT Off.


----------



## trn

I installed my Der8auer Direct Die Frame today:

- Overall results seem to match up with what Roman stated in his video; I didn't do a great before-after comparison but it does seem that my 7900x is now 5c-10c cooler and the cores are much closer in temps. The hottest cores seem around 10c cooler and the cooler cores are around 5c cooler. 

- Previously my CPU was de-lidded and then re-lidded with liquid metal and I was using thermal grizzley normal TIM (cryonaught maybe?) CPU was relidded with 4 dabs of super glue on the IHS.

- I did have to remount to get the CPU to post, the first attempt I think I over tightened so it didn't post. Or maybe the CPU needed to be re-seated a little better, not to sure. 

- One odd thing is that the top of the smaller CPU PCBA isn't held down by the die-frame. The second mounting it seems to be that I have a smaller gap so maybe this helped?

- my advise for seating & mounting is to seat the CPU and die frame and turn on your mobo quickly to see if your getting post codes. And do this before you mount on the cooler (and fill your loop etc.) I found it was easy to over tighten and make my CPU not post so this quick trial-error method worked well without having to take apart my full loop to fix it.

- Previously my IHS was re-lidded with liquid metal and glued down with super glue. I used a qtip and dabbed on acetone for around 2 minutes then de-lidded again with a rocket99. the super glue came undone with little force required and acetone


----------



## Jpmboy

trn said:


> I installed my Der8auer Direct Die Frame today:
> 
> - Overall results seem to match up with what Roman stated in his video; I didn't do a great before-after comparison but it does seem that my 7900x is now 5c-10c cooler and the cores are much closer in temps. The hottest cores seem around 10c cooler and the cooler cores are around 5c cooler.
> 
> - Previously my CPU was de-lidded and then re-lidded with liquid metal and I was using thermal grizzley normal TIM (cryonaught maybe?) CPU was relidded with 4 dabs of super glue on the IHS.
> 
> - I did have to remount to get the CPU to post, the first attempt I think I over tightened so it didn't post. Or maybe the CPU needed to be re-seated a little better, not to sure.
> 
> - One odd thing is that the top of the smaller CPU PCBA isn't held down by the die-frame. The second mounting it seems to be that I have a smaller gap so maybe this helped?
> 
> - my advise for seating & mounting is to seat the CPU and die frame and turn on your mobo quickly to see if your getting post codes. And do this before you mount on the cooler (and fill your loop etc.) I found it was easy to over tighten and make my CPU not post so this quick trial-error method worked well without having to take apart my full loop to fix it.
> 
> - Previously my IHS was re-lidded with liquid metal and glued down with super glue. I used a qtip and dabbed on acetone for around 2 minutes then de-lidded again with a rocket99. the super glue came undone with little force required and acetone


Nice work! I'm hearing good things about that evga dark MB. :thumb:


----------



## vmanuelgm

trn said:


> I installed my Der8auer Direct Die Frame today:
> 
> - Overall results seem to match up with what Roman stated in his video; I didn't do a great before-after comparison but it does seem that my 7900x is now 5c-10c cooler and the cores are much closer in temps. The hottest cores seem around 10c cooler and the cooler cores are around 5c cooler.
> 
> - Previously my CPU was de-lidded and then re-lidded with liquid metal and I was using thermal grizzley normal TIM (cryonaught maybe?) CPU was relidded with 4 dabs of super glue on the IHS.
> 
> - I did have to remount to get the CPU to post, the first attempt I think I over tightened so it didn't post. Or maybe the CPU needed to be re-seated a little better, not to sure.
> 
> - One odd thing is that the top of the smaller CPU PCBA isn't held down by the die-frame. The second mounting it seems to be that I have a smaller gap so maybe this helped?
> 
> - my advise for seating & mounting is to seat the CPU and die frame and turn on your mobo quickly to see if your getting post codes. And do this before you mount on the cooler (and fill your loop etc.) I found it was easy to over tighten and make my CPU not post so this quick trial-error method worked well without having to take apart my full loop to fix it.
> 
> - Previously my IHS was re-lidded with liquid metal and glued down with super glue. I used a qtip and dabbed on acetone for around 2 minutes then de-lidded again with a rocket99. the super glue came undone with little force required and acetone



Nice, mate!!!

Possibly in your first attempt you applied excessive or uneven pressure, causing problems to memory detection.

5 degrees is similar to my first mounting. Now I have improved it further, but I did have issues when reseating the cpu and tightening too much (I like tightened screws, xDDD).

Still think that people who don't get nice temperatures are not mounting it properly.


----------



## tistou77

And so when you tighten the waterblock on the socket, you tighten until the WB does not "move more"
But not as "tight" as with an IHS ?


----------



## trn

Jpmboy said:


> Nice work! I'm hearing good things about that evga dark MB. :thumb:


I'm a recent X299 convert so I don't have experience with any other x299 boards but i'm happy with the Dark. The bios is nice, it's organized well putting all the OC settings into a few page views. VRM's stay cool, i'm only using a 7900x and nothing to extreme so it only supplys around 375-400w or so of max power to the CPU; the VRM finned heat sink and fans work great. and I dig the no-RGB design and the matte black w/ gold accents.




vmanuelgm said:


> Nice, mate!!!
> 
> Possibly in your first attempt you applied excessive or uneven pressure, causing problems to memory detection.
> 
> 5 degrees is similar to my first mounting. Now I have improved it further, but I did have issues when reseating the cpu and tightening too much (I like tightened screws, xDDD).
> 
> Still think that people who don't get nice temperatures are not mounting it properly.


My first mount, i cranked down on the direct-die mounting plate so I think it probably caused a lot of the pins to have no contact. I was getting no post codes at all; if it was memory only I think i would have had post codes and memory detection issues?

The mounting takes some skill, luck, trial and error it seems top get the best results. Even now with what I consider a good mount I have one hotter core. Core 5 is hot for me now with my current mount. I don't remember this being a hot core before, previously with the de-lidded IHS core 1 and core 8 were hot cores. Maybe I have slightly poor LM coverage with core 5 but overall this is good enough for my taste now. Maybe next time i'm working on my loop/system maybe i'll try re-mounting again. having a soft-tube water cooled test bench would be very nice for mount-testing vs. disassembling my hardline tube loop.

my core averages now are around low 60's; before direct die with delided (LM under IHS and Cryonaught ontop of the IHS) I was mid 60's on most cores with a few cores in the low 70's. So roughly 5c less on most cores and 10c on my prior hot cores (and 





tistou77 said:


> And so when you tighten the waterblock on the socket, you tighten until the WB does not "move more"
> But not as "tight" as with an IHS ?


I tightened down my EK supremacy waterblock until the thumb-nuts hit the end of the threads and stop turning. 

The Der8auer die-lid bracket (that replaces the ILM) is the part that I think is very sensitive to over, or uneven tightening.


----------



## tistou77

trn said:


> I tightened down my EK supremacy waterblock until the thumb-nuts hit the end of the threads and stop turning.
> 
> The Der8auer die-lid bracket (that replaces the ILM) is the part that I think is very sensitive to over, or uneven tightening.


Ok thanks

On the screen, you had too "tight" ?
I thought I read that the temperature was "closer" with the Direct Die


----------



## trn

tistou77 said:


> I thought I read that the temperature was "closer" with the Direct Die


I'm finding this to be correct; I used to have higher core temp delta's (minus my one hot core now.) I used to have a few hot cores and now they are much closer together.


----------



## vmanuelgm

trn said:


> I'm a recent X299 convert so I don't have experience with any other x299 boards but i'm happy with the Dark. The bios is nice, it's organized well putting all the OC settings into a few page views. VRM's stay cool, i'm only using a 7900x and nothing to extreme so it only supplys around 375-400w or so of max power to the CPU; the VRM finned heat sink and fans work great. and I dig the no-RGB design and the matte black w/ gold accents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My first mount, i cranked down on the direct-die mounting plate so I think it probably caused a lot of the pins to have no contact. I was getting no post codes at all; if it was memory only I think i would have had post codes and memory detection issues?
> 
> The mounting takes some skill, luck, trial and error it seems top get the best results. Even now with what I consider a good mount I have one hotter core. Core 5 is hot for me now with my current mount. I don't remember this being a hot core before, previously with the de-lidded IHS core 1 and core 8 were hot cores. Maybe I have slightly poor LM coverage with core 5 but overall this is good enough for my taste now. Maybe next time i'm working on my loop/system maybe i'll try re-mounting again. having a soft-tube water cooled test bench would be very nice for mount-testing vs. disassembling my hardline tube loop.
> 
> my core averages now are around low 60's; before direct die with delided (LM under IHS and Cryonaught ontop of the IHS) I was mid 60's on most cores with a few cores in the low 70's. So roughly 5c less on most cores and 10c on my prior hot cores (and
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I tightened down my EK supremacy waterblock until the thumb-nuts hit the end of the threads and stop turning.
> 
> The Der8auer die-lid bracket (that replaces the ILM) is the part that I think is very sensitive to over, or uneven tightening.



The proper setup of DDF needs 3 steps. One, same pressure in four screws without overtightening. Two, correct liquid metal spreading. And three, proper waterblock placing, being the tightening of this one less important (u can tighten the block with your fingers as much as you want).

In my first setup I also had a hotter core. Now they all get similar temperatures at load.



Far Cry 5 Gameplay in my Skylake-X:


----------



## RichKnecht

So I have decided to delid my 7900x. For those who have delidded, which tool did you use. Not sure if I want to buy the DeBauer or Rocket.


----------



## vmanuelgm

RichKnecht said:


> So I have decided to delid my 7900x. For those who have delidded, which tool did you use. Not sure if I want to buy the DeBauer or Rocket.



Rockit here. I recommend you this one, cheaper and effective.


----------



## trn

RichKnecht said:


> So I have decided to delid my 7900x. For those who have delidded, which tool did you use. Not sure if I want to buy the DeBauer or Rocket.


Rockit worked well for me also. No experience with the Der8auer but i'd expect it also works well.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> So I have decided to delid my 7900x. For those who have delidded, which tool did you use. Not sure if I want to buy the DeBauer or Rocket.


Hi,
Just sent mine to silicon lottery 
Couldn't give myself a 1 year warranty 
Only about 80.us +shipping
https://siliconlottery.com/collections/sl/products/delid?variant=45398763980


----------



## cletus-cassidy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Just sent mine to silicon lottery
> Couldn't give myself a 1 year warranty
> Only about 80.us +shipping
> https://siliconlottery.com/collections/sl/products/delid?variant=45398763980


Out of curiousity, did you test out your CPU before sending out for delidding? I'm trying to decide if I should OC it first and see what it looks like vs sending out to SL for delidding immediately.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yes I used mine for 29 days 
I flipped a coin to either return it as defective from thermal issues or send it to get delidded
You can guess which way the coin toss went 2 out of 3 
Yeah no binning just delidded mine
They want a lot for binning for just a meager 4.5 which mine does 4.8 quite easily.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Just sent mine to silicon lottery
> Couldn't give myself a 1 year warranty
> Only about 80.us +shipping
> https://siliconlottery.com/collections/sl/products/delid?variant=45398763980


I understand about the warranty, but I can't have the downtime. I fI delid myself, it will be up and running again in a couple hours (I'd hope). My temps are really not all that bad at my 4.7 OC. I have voltage at 1.225 and max temps for what I do hit 80 only once in a while. I'd just like to slow my fans down a little for a bit more peace and quiet while I work.


----------



## cletus-cassidy

RichKnecht said:


> I understand about the warranty, but I can't have the downtime. I fI delid myself, it will be up and running again in a couple hours (I'd hope). My temps are really not all that bad at my 4.7 OC. I have voltage at 1.225 and max temps for what I do hit 80 only once in a while. I'd just like to slow my fans down a little for a bit more peace and quiet while I work.


I got a replacement 7900X from Intel and trying to decide whether I should run it first and test to see if it's a good overclocker or just send in for delidding right now, as I'm still waiting on a few last parts for my build. Seems like most of these will hit 4.7ghz so maybe just roll the dice and get it delidded right now and that way I can build when everything comes in at once?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Most these guys cheat and use by core with only 2 high the rest lower oc'ing is that how you're doing it ?
I use by core usage with half the cores at high multiplier and the other half at 3-4 lower 
All core does being the heat


----------



## wingman99

cletus-cassidy said:


> I got a replacement 7900X from Intel and trying to decide whether I should run it first and test to see if it's a good overclocker or just send in for delidding right now, as I'm still waiting on a few last parts for my build. Seems like most of these will hit 4.7ghz so maybe just roll the dice and get it delidded right now and that way I can build when everything comes in at once?


Why did you need a replacement?


----------



## cletus-cassidy

wingman99 said:


> Why did you need a replacement?


I bought it open box from Micro Center and it didn't post. Micro Center wouldn't give me a new one (even though they obviously didn't test), but it was still under warranty from Intel so I had to get a replacement from them. It's unclear to me whether what I got from Intel is new or a refurb, but I'm assuming it will at least work.


----------



## wingman99

cletus-cassidy said:


> I bought it open box from Micro Center and it didn't post. Micro Center wouldn't give me a new one (even though they obviously didn't test), but it was still under warranty from Intel so I had to get a replacement from them. It's unclear to me whether what I got from Intel is new or a refurb, but I'm assuming it will at least work.


That is weird that it did not post.:sadsmiley Intel always sends new boxed processors.


----------



## cletus-cassidy

wingman99 said:


> That is weird that it did not post.:sadsmiley Intel always sends new boxed processors.


I'm guessing that is why the person returned it and it was open box. At a minimum, I feel like MC should have replaced but they didn't have any more open box in stock. Either way, two weeks later, I have a new (thanks for confirming) CPU so that's good. Now I need to decide whether and when to delid. Any thoughts?


----------



## RichKnecht

cletus-cassidy said:


> I got a replacement 7900X from Intel and trying to decide whether I should run it first and test to see if it's a good overclocker or just send in for delidding right now, as I'm still waiting on a few last parts for my build. Seems like most of these will hit 4.7ghz so maybe just roll the dice and get it delidded right now and that way I can build when everything comes in at once?


Mine is doing fine at 4.7. The only reason I would want to delid is to cool it down a touch and slow down my fans. I am using an EK custom loop with 2 240mm PE radiators and a D5 RGB pump.



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Most these guys cheat and use by core with only 2 high the rest lower oc'ing is that how you're doing it ?
> I use by core usage with half the cores at high multiplier and the other half at 3-4 lower
> All core does being the heat


Mine is running 4.7 on all cores 24/7.


----------



## Mysticial

cletus-cassidy said:


> I bought it open box from Micro Center and it didn't post. Micro Center wouldn't give me a new one (even though they obviously didn't test), but it was still under warranty from Intel so I had to get a replacement from them. It's unclear to me whether what I got from Intel is new or a refurb, but I'm assuming it will at least work.





wingman99 said:


> That is weird that it did not post.:sadsmiley Intel always sends new boxed processors.


It's likely that the previous owner killed the chip then returned it. Micro Center didn't bother testing it and put it back on the shelf.

Micro Center's return policy is lax enough that it can be abused. But they don't try to catch it at all. So it ends up getting passed to the next person who dares to buy open box.

My local Micro Center has an open box 7980XE for $1600. Even if I was willing to spend that much, I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole without them verifying in front of me that it works.


----------



## cletus-cassidy

Mysticial said:


> It's likely that the previous owner killed the chip then returned it. Micro Center didn't bother testing it and put it back on the shelf.
> 
> Micro Center's return policy is so lax that it can be abused.
> 
> My local Micro Center has an open box 7980XE for $1600. Even if I had was willing to spend that much, I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole without them verifying in front of me that it works.


Lesson learned. That said, I ended up with a new CPU eventually, so I'm basically in the same place, just two weeks later.


----------



## wingman99

cletus-cassidy said:


> I'm guessing that is why the person returned it and it was open box. At a minimum, I feel like MC should have replaced but they didn't have any more open box in stock. Either way, two weeks later, I have a new (thanks for confirming) CPU so that's good. Now I need to decide whether and when to delid. Any thoughts?


I would test the new processor from Intel first and see if you like it, also if it runs good free from manufacturing defect. I know it's rare. however, it could happen.


----------



## Mysticial

cletus-cassidy said:


> Lesson learned. That said, I ended up with a new CPU eventually, so I'm basically in the same place, just two weeks later.


The other thing is that when you return something, they only verify that the serial number matches and they inspect for physical damage.

In other words, there's an easy avenue for a delid+relid scam by swapping the IHS with a 7800X or one of the KBL-X chips.


----------



## xarot

cletus-cassidy said:


> I got a replacement 7900X from Intel and trying to decide whether I should run it first and test to see if it's a good overclocker or just send in for delidding right now, as I'm still waiting on a few last parts for my build. Seems like most of these will hit 4.7ghz so maybe just roll the dice and get it delidded right now and that way I can build when everything comes in at once?


There are some very good and very bad 7900Xs out there. I was one of the first to get the 7900X and wow, it needed 1.21 V for 4.5 GHz, 1.26 V for 4.6 GHz, around 1.3 V to run CB at 4.7...I then used the tuning plan with it. The new chip is great compared to that, 1.16 V for 4.5 GHz, 1.175 V for 4.6 GHz, 1.225~1.235 V for 4.7 GHz. Ran CB at 5050 MHz with cold water. 

I wouldn't even want to delid a chip like my first one so I would definitely check what kind of chip it is before delidding. The 7900X is a very hot chip anyway, least heat dissipation area for so many cores, even after delidding it will be very difficult to run it cool when overclocked. The 7920X is already a very different case and can be cooled a tad easier...


----------



## ThrashZone

cletus-cassidy said:


> Lesson learned. That said, I ended up with a new CPU eventually, so I'm basically in the same place, just two weeks later.


Hi,
Micro center has a 30 day return policy on everything supposed to be no questions asked auto in store credit open box or not
So what happened to that ?

I was there one day and a guy was returning an item he had no receipt and past 30 days 
The clerk did say after this guy returned a lot of stuff and he was flagged for that and they didn't accept the return 
If he had a receipt probably no problem besides a restocking fee/ open box...


----------



## Nikos4Life

Hello everyone, 

I have just received my 7980XE from CaseKing @ 4.6GHz / 1.22V 
I would like to know max safe voltages (stepping aside from cooling solution which is going to be watercooling) for this thing and normally I could find this information without asking but I could not this time, so any information will be much appreciated. 
Thanks in advance. 

Regards,
Nikos


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,


----------



## Nikos4Life

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeITi8DrlTI


Thanks but It does not stated anything about safe voltages (only a screenshot for a very specific case). 

My cooling solution is the following:

Just for CPU & VRM:

3 x D5 pumps 
2 x 560 rads
16 x Ek vardar 2500 rpm
1 x heatkiller block (vrm)
1 x AquaComputer Kryos Vario vision (cpu) 
1 x DirectDieFrame der8auer
With CLU

Which values is not safe to exceed over SkyLake-X? Under water / LN2?

Thanks sorry if there is any information missing. 

Kind regards,
Nikos


----------



## Jpmboy

Nikos4Life said:


> Thanks but It does not stated anything about safe voltages (only a screenshot for a very specific case).
> 
> My cooling solution is the following:
> 
> Just for CPU & VRM:
> 
> 3 x D5 pumps
> 2 x 560 rads
> 16 x Ek vardar 2500 rpm
> 1 x heatkiller block (vrm)
> 1 x AquaComputer Kryos Vario vision (cpu)
> 1 x DirectDieFrame der8auer
> With CLU
> 
> Which values is not safe to exceed over SkyLake-X? Under water / LN2?
> 
> Thanks sorry if there is any information missing.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Nikos


keep VCCIN in the 1.9V range. vcore... you will be limited by temperature, 1.3-ish volts.


----------



## Haans249

Nikos4Life said:


> Thanks but It does not stated anything about safe voltages (only a screenshot for a very specific case).
> 
> My cooling solution is the following:
> 
> Just for CPU & VRM:
> 
> 3 x D5 pumps
> 2 x 560 rads
> 16 x Ek vardar 2500 rpm
> 1 x heatkiller block (vrm)
> 1 x AquaComputer Kryos Vario vision (cpu)
> 1 x DirectDieFrame der8auer
> With CLU
> 
> Which values is not safe to exceed over SkyLake-X? Under water / LN2?
> 
> Thanks sorry if there is any information missing.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Nikos


What motherboard are you using and which Heatkiller VRM Block are you using for it? I'm curious on VRM watercooling solutions for my RVIE because my overclock on my 7940X at 4.6Ghz @ 1.22V-ish results in 92C+ VRM temps after 15mins stressing on Prime95. Tossing two 50mm fans on the VRM bracket drops temps by only 3-5C. The VRM is my current bottleneck for higher overclock.


----------



## ThrashZone

Nikos4Life said:


> Thanks but It does not stated anything about safe voltages (only a screenshot for a very specific case).
> 
> My cooling solution is the following:
> 
> Just for CPU & VRM:
> 
> 3 x D5 pumps
> 2 x 560 rads
> 16 x Ek vardar 2500 rpm
> 1 x heatkiller block (vrm)
> 1 x AquaComputer Kryos Vario vision (cpu)
> 1 x DirectDieFrame der8auer
> With CLU
> 
> Which values is not safe to exceed over SkyLake-X? Under water / LN2?
> 
> Thanks sorry if there is any information missing.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Nikos


Hi,
It pretty much is a run through of things to try 
As said thermal is your limitation especially if you haven't delidded.


----------



## Nikos4Life

Jpmboy said:


> keep VCCIN in the 1.9V range. vcore... you will be limited by temperature, 1.3-ish volts.


Thanks so stay below 1.35 if temps allow it?



Haans249 said:


> What motherboard are you using and which Heatkiller VRM Block are you using for it? I'm curious on VRM watercooling solutions for my RVIE because my overclock on my 7940X at 4.6Ghz @ 1.22V-ish results in 92C+ VRM temps after 15mins stressing on Prime95. Tossing two 50mm fans on the VRM bracket drops temps by only 3-5C. The VRM is my current bottleneck for higher overclock.


I am going to use Asus Apex, I will upload as many benchmarks and pics as possible. So if by any chance could be helpful to anyone.

A pic I took from the board recently:

https://www.instagram.com/p/BhWIph4ne0k



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> It pretty much is a run through of things to try
> As said thermal is your limitation especially if you haven't delidded.


It is delidded and resealed it but I will use it with direct frame so no IHS. 

Regards


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah thought about direct die frame mount but for 5c it's just not worth it to me 
10c for you might be


----------



## Haans249

Nikos4Life said:


> Thanks so stay below 1.35 if temps allow it?
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to use Asus Apex, I will upload as many benchmarks and pics as possible. So if by any chance could be helpful to anyone.
> 
> A pic I took from the board recently:
> 
> https://www.instagram.com/p/BhWIph4ne0k
> 
> 
> 
> It is delidded and resealed it but I will use it with direct frame so no IHS.
> 
> Regards


Which Heatkiller VRM waterblock are you going to use on your Apex? I can't see where they make a specific waterblock for the VRMs of the RVIE or Apex

NVM!!! Finally found it: http://shop.watercool.de/epages/WatercooleK.sf/en_GB/?ObjectPath=/Shops/WatercooleK/Products/11562

Definitely going to add this to the loop. Will be a simple addition. I'll be using Fujipoly 1.0MM Ultra Extreme thermal pads as well. ThermalBench.com did a review of the RVE version and found that it only dropped VRM temps by 4-6C, but I suspect temps will drop quite a bit more on a X299 VRM. I may also look into getting micro channels CNC milled into the waterblock channel to increase surface cooling area. I don't understand why they just left it flat.


----------



## vmanuelgm

http://shop.watercool.de/epages/Wat...ühler/MB_Kuehler/Mainboard_Sets/"Sockel 2066"


----------



## Jpmboy

Nikos4Life said:


> Thanks so stay below 1.35 if temps allow it?
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to use Asus Apex, I will upload as many benchmarks and pics as possible. So if by any chance could be helpful to anyone.
> 
> A pic I took from the board recently:
> 
> https://www.instagram.com/p/BhWIph4ne0k
> 
> 
> 
> *It is delidded and resealed it but I will use it with direct frame so no IHS. *
> 
> Regards


I suggest you first get the system up and running with the delid as is, then go direct die. Just to set a baseline for the rig. Is it a silicon lottery delid?


----------



## cletus-cassidy

wingman99 said:


> I would test the new processor from Intel first and see if you like it, also if it runs good free from manufacturing defect. I know it's rare. however, it could happen.


Good call. I'll do that and report back. Leaning toward de-lidding either way as I'd like to push this hard if I can.


----------



## Nikos4Life

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah thought about direct die frame mount but for 5c it's just not worth it to me
> 10c for you might be


Hope it worth the risk :$. 



Haans249 said:


> Which Heatkiller VRM waterblock are you going to use on your Apex? I can't see where they make a specific waterblock for the VRMs of the RVIE or Apex
> 
> NVM!!! Finally found it: http://shop.watercool.de/epages/WatercooleK.sf/en_GB/?ObjectPath=/Shops/WatercooleK/Products/11562
> 
> Definitely going to add this to the loop. Will be a simple addition. I'll be using Fujipoly 1.0MM Ultra Extreme thermal pads as well. ThermalBench.com did a review of the RVE version and found that it only dropped VRM temps by 4-6C, but I suspect temps will drop quite a bit more on a X299 VRM. I may also look into getting micro channels CNC milled into the waterblock channel to increase surface cooling area. I don't understand why they just left it flat.


I am going to test fujipoly as well for the TXp and for the VRM's block.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BhPcQyqnABM/

Sorry I said heatkiller but it is from watercool (you found it anyway hehe) 



vmanuelgm said:


> http://shop.watercool.de/epages/Wat...ühler/MB_Kuehler/Mainboard_Sets/"Sockel 2066"


Thanks!



Jpmboy said:


> I suggest you first get the system up and running with the delid as is, then go direct die. Just to set a baseline for the rig. Is it a silicon lottery delid?


CaseKing I wanted 4.7GHz certified but it was not possible to find one after more than a month so 4.6GHz should do the trick as well.
I will post pics ASAP. 
I will follow your advice, first system up and running then direct dire frame. 

Regards


----------



## cletus-cassidy

xarot said:


> There are some very good and very bad 7900Xs out there. I was one of the first to get the 7900X and wow, it needed 1.21 V for 4.5 GHz, 1.26 V for 4.6 GHz, around 1.3 V to run CB at 4.7...I then used the tuning plan with it. The new chip is great compared to that, 1.16 V for 4.5 GHz, 1.175 V for 4.6 GHz, 1.225~1.235 V for 4.7 GHz. Ran CB at 5050 MHz with cold water.
> 
> I wouldn't even want to delid a chip like my first one so I would definitely check what kind of chip it is before delidding. The 7900X is a very hot chip anyway, least heat dissipation area for so many cores, even after delidding it will be very difficult to run it cool when overclocked. The 7920X is already a very different case and can be cooled a tad easier...


Good advice, thank you. Hoping my chip is a decent one too.


----------



## cletus-cassidy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Micro center has a 30 day return policy on everything supposed to be no questions asked auto in store credit open box or not
> So what happened to that ?
> 
> I was there one day and a guy was returning an item he had no receipt and past 30 days
> The clerk did say after this guy returned a lot of stuff and he was flagged for that and they didn't accept the return
> If he had a receipt probably no problem besides a restocking fee/ open box...


With open box it's 14 days no questions. I definitely had the option to get my money back, but I couldn't get a replacement open-box CPU. In other words, I would have had to pay full price (less my return) for a new CPU instead of the discounted open box 7900X. They suggested I work through Intel to get a replacement CPU, which is what I did.


----------



## ThrashZone

cletus-cassidy said:


> With open box it's 14 days no questions. I definitely had the option to get my money back, but I couldn't get a replacement open-box CPU. In other words, I would have had to pay full price (less my return) for a new CPU instead of the discounted open box 7900X. They suggested I work through Intel to get a replacement CPU, which is what I did.


Hi,
Okay yeah I know they have good support but availability is another quirk :thumb:


----------



## vmanuelgm

Nikos4Life said:


> Hope it worth the risk :$.
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to test fujipoly as well for the TXp and for the VRM's block.
> https://www.instagram.com/p/BhPcQyqnABM/
> 
> Sorry I said heatkiller but it is from watercool (you found it anyway hehe)
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> CaseKing I wanted 4.7GHz certified but it was not possible to find one after more than a month so 4.6GHz should do the trick as well.
> I will post pics ASAP.
> I will follow your advice, first system up and running then direct dire frame.
> 
> Regards


I write first in english, mandatory in this forum.

Now u have the DDF, if I were u, I would install it immediately, since setting it up properly can be a bit hard and u'll save time filling, emptying and refilling again, plus u'll get used to it. With your custom lc with 2x560, if u unlock power limits, u should be around 70-80 degrees in charge using 4.5-4.6avx.

Now in spanish, u are from Spain, aren't u???

Montaría el Direct Die primero para ahorrarte el llenado y vaciado. Te vas a encontrar con que el DDF puede ser fastidiado para montar (a lo mejor a tí te es muy fácil), en el sentido de ver temperaturas peores o fallos de detección de memorias por ejemplo. Y es frustrante estar llenando y vaciando si no se tienen enchufes rápidos, como en mi caso .

Permíteme una licencia, por qué te vienes aquí directo a hablar en inglés si hay foros españoles, como el chapuzas en el que yo estoy (y además yo uso el DDF), sin preguntar antes allí???


----------



## Jpmboy

Nikos4Life said:


> Hope it worth the risk :$.
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to test fujipoly as well for the TXp and for the VRM's block.
> https://www.instagram.com/p/BhPcQyqnABM/
> 
> Sorry I said heatkiller but it is from watercool (you found it anyway hehe)
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> CaseKing I wanted 4.7GHz certified but it was not possible to find one after more than a month so 4.6GHz should do the trick as well.
> I will post pics ASAP.
> *I will follow your advice, first system up and running then direct dire frame. *
> 
> Regards


even if just on a table and especially if you hard tube the rig. with soft tubing, I never have to drain a loop to change CPUs or gpus. just quick disconnects..

not as pretty, but functional.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I like soft lines 
Quick disconnects I need to get into


----------



## xarot

Using QDCs I have swapped the mobo, RAMs, CPU and GPUs in the case without draining anything...


----------



## vmanuelgm

You don't speak spanish so you didn't realize I told him about quick disconnects, xDDD


----------



## RichKnecht

A question for those who have delidded. I have my Rockit 99, LM, and silicone ready to go. Before I do this,I have what may seem to be a few dumb questions, but need to ask anyway  After the delid, should I be able to drop vcore on my current OC? Does the fact that the processor will be running cooler allow for lower voltages? Just trying to figure out f I really want to go through with this.


----------



## Pepillo

RichKnecht said:


> A question for those who have delidded. I have my Rockit 99, LM, and silicone ready to go. Before I do this,I have what may seem to be a few dumb questions, but need to ask anyway  After the delid, should I be able to drop vcore on my current OC? Does the fact that the processor will be running cooler allow for lower voltages? Just trying to figure out f I really want to go through with this.


At Overclock there is nothing guaranteed, but if it would not be rare to be able to lower something voltage when operating in stress at a lower temperature. In my case, it was.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> A question for those who have delidded. I have my Rockit 99, LM, and silicone ready to go. Before I do this,I have what may seem to be a few dumb questions, but need to ask anyway  After the delid, *should I be able to drop vcore on my current OC? Does the fact that the processor will be running cooler allow for lower voltages?* Just trying to figure out f I really want to go through with this.


For the majority of CPUs - yes to both (or a higher clock - take your pick ). There is a good study (with data) in the Kaby lake guide from [email protected]


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> For the majority of CPUs - yes to both (or a higher clock - take your pick ). There is a good study (with data) in the Kaby lake guide from [email protected]


Excellent thanks! Now I am both excited and nervous about this project.


----------



## Nikos4Life

vmanuelgm said:


> I write first in english, mandatory in this forum.
> 
> Now u have the DDF, if I were u, I would install it immediately, since setting it up properly can be a bit hard and u'll save time filling, emptying and refilling again, plus u'll get used to it. With your custom lc with 2x560, if u unlock power limits, u should be around 70-80 degrees in charge using 4.5-4.6avx.
> 
> Now in spanish, u are from Spain, aren't u???
> 
> Montaría el Direct Die primero para ahorrarte el llenado y vaciado. Te vas a encontrar con que el DDF puede ser fastidiado para montar (a lo mejor a tí te es muy fácil), en el sentido de ver temperaturas peores o fallos de detección de memorias por ejemplo. Y es frustrante estar llenando y vaciando si no se tienen enchufes rápidos, como en mi caso .
> 
> Permíteme una licencia, por qué te vienes aquí directo a hablar en inglés si hay foros españoles, como el chapuzas en el que yo estoy (y además yo uso el DDF), sin preguntar antes allí???



Hi there 

Yes I am from Madrid, thanks for your information. I am going to write in English so everyone can follow up the post (btw thanks for your spanish message :$). 

I will not start the build till next week so I will think about DDF first at that time but I see your point though.

Actually the loop has 4 x 560 rads + 1 x 360 rad (all powered by 6 D5's pumps and push/pull vardar) but I have planned to split the loop in two. Or instead of using 3 x rads for GPU's use 3 for CPU as the CPU will generate more watts to be cooled.

I do apologize in advance for this little message in Spanish but after his message with valuable information I owe him an answer 

Siempre he estado en el mundo del OC y como sabrás la mejor información siempre esta en foros ingleses o al menos no locales. Es muy complicado encontrar españoles que tengan este tipo de equipos por lo que si necesitas info o simplemente charlar del asunto se te complica aún así como te digo tengo cuenta en todas las comunidades solo que siempre he escrito en otro tipo de comunidades. Aquí llevo poquito escribiendo pero muchos años leyendo. Si quieres pasarme un enlace al hilo de ECI donde habláis del tema estaré encantado de pasarme a compartir información  Gracias por la info por cierto, lo de los QDCs lo tengo pensado pero no son bonitos xD. Lo dicho si quieres MP y seguimos también por ECI o privado.  




Jpmboy said:


> even if just on a table and especially if you hard tube the rig. with soft tubing, I never have to drain a loop to change CPUs or gpus. just quick disconnects..
> 
> not as pretty, but functional.


Which QDC's models do you recommend? (Thank you)




xarot said:


> Using QDCs I have swapped the mobo, RAMs, CPU and GPUs in the case without draining anything...


I am going to think about them very seriously thank you.


----------



## djgar

Nikos4Life said:


> Hi there
> 
> Yes I am from Madrid, thanks for your information. I am going to write in English so everyone can follow up the post (btw thanks for your spanish message :$).
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I will not start the build till next week so I will think about DDF first at that time but I see your point though.
> 
> Actually the loop has 4 x 560 rads + 1 x 360 rad (all powered by 6 D5's pumps and push/pull vardar) but I have planned to split the loop in two. Or instead of using 3 x rads for GPU's use 3 for CPU as the CPU will generate more watts to be cooled.
> 
> I do apologize in advance for this little message in Spanish but after his message with valuable information I owe him an answer
> 
> Siempre he estado en el mundo del OC y como sabrás la mejor información siempre esta en foros ingleses o al menos no locales. Es muy complicado encontrar españoles que tengan este tipo de equipos por lo que si necesitas info o simplemente charlar del asunto se te complica aún así como te digo tengo cuenta en todas las comunidades solo que siempre he escrito en otro tipo de comunidades. Aquí llevo poquito escribiendo pero muchos años leyendo. Si quieres pasarme un enlace al hilo de ECI donde habláis del tema estaré encantado de pasarme a compartir información  Gracias por la info por cierto, lo de los QDCs lo tengo pensado pero no son bonitos xD. Lo dicho si quieres MP y seguimos también por ECI o privado.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which QDC's models do you recommend? (Thank you)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am going to think about them very seriously thank you.


So, the Laughing Man is from Madrid??!! Dang, I thought he was in Japan! I better warn my sister ...


----------



## vmanuelgm

Nikos4Life said:


> Hi there
> 
> 
> Siempre he estado en el mundo del OC y como sabrás la mejor información siempre esta en foros ingleses o al menos no locales. Es muy complicado encontrar españoles que tengan este tipo de equipos por lo que si necesitas info o simplemente charlar del asunto se te complica aún así como te digo tengo cuenta en todas las comunidades solo que siempre he escrito en otro tipo de comunidades. Aquí llevo poquito escribiendo pero muchos años leyendo. Si quieres pasarme un enlace al hilo de ECI donde habláis del tema estaré encantado de pasarme a compartir información  Gracias por la info por cierto, lo de los QDCs lo tengo pensado pero no son bonitos xD. Lo dicho si quieres MP y seguimos también por ECI o privado.



Can't agree with you, but it's your opinion and you can also enhance your english level!!! xDDD

Which is your nick in spanish forums???

PS: It's a pity Scone is not here right now. He is not only a hardware expert, but an english teacher too!!!

By the way, anyone knows what happened to Silent Scone??? I asked him in ROG Forum (pm) but he didn't answer to my question about a ban...


----------



## Nikos4Life

djgar said:


> So, the Laughing Man is from Madrid??!! Dang, I thought he was in Japan! I better warn my sister ...


Yep, I had to move because there was a cyborg obsessed with me so that is life **** happens haha... 



vmanuelgm said:


> Can't agree with you, but it's your opinion and you can also enhance your english level!!! xDDD
> 
> Just an example:
> 
> https://foro.elchapuzasinformatico....3-hilo-oficial-asus-rampage-extreme-rv10.html
> 
> Which is your nick in spanish forums???


Yes, I always have been more confident writing technical stuff on English forums. I will stop by there, thanks for the information  

My nick is always Nikos or Nikos4Life (if it is not available at the moment)

Going back on topic, 

what do you think about my 7980XE sample? 
4.6GHz @ 1.22v is it a good one (or does it seem to be?) ? 
Should I expect to reach higher numbers with the cooling solution which I described on my previous post?


Regards


----------



## vmanuelgm

Nikos4Life said:


> Yep, I had to move because there was a cyborg obsessed with me so that is life **** happens haha...
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, I always have been more confident writing technical stuff on English forums. I will stop by there, thanks for the information
> 
> My nick is always Nikos or Nikos4Life (if it is not available at the moment)
> 
> Going back on topic,
> 
> what do you think about my 7980XE sample?
> 4.6GHz @ 1.22v is it a good one (or does it seem to be?) ?
> Should I expect to reach higher numbers with the cooling solution which I described on my previous post?
> 
> 
> Regards


You have to mount it first and pass several benchs/stress tests to see how much voltage does it need really and its performance.

I am not a fortune teller, xDDD

Is it a desk or a big case???


----------



## Jpmboy

Nikos4Life said:


> Hi there
> 
> Yes I am from Madrid, thanks for your information. I am going to write in English so everyone can follow up the post (btw thanks for your spanish message :$).
> 
> I will not start the build till next week so I will think about DDF first at that time but I see your point though.
> 
> Actually the loop has 4 x 560 rads + 1 x 360 rad (all powered by 6 D5's pumps and push/pull vardar) but I have planned to split the loop in two. Or instead of using 3 x rads for GPU's use 3 for CPU as the CPU will generate more watts to be cooled.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I do apologize in advance for this little message in Spanish but after his message with valuable information I owe him an answer
> 
> Siempre he estado en el mundo del OC y como sabrás la mejor información siempre esta en foros ingleses o al menos no locales. Es muy complicado encontrar españoles que tengan este tipo de equipos por lo que si necesitas info o simplemente charlar del asunto se te complica aún así como te digo tengo cuenta en todas las comunidades solo que siempre he escrito en otro tipo de comunidades. Aquí llevo poquito escribiendo pero muchos años leyendo. Si quieres pasarme un enlace al hilo de ECI donde habláis del tema estaré encantado de pasarme a compartir información  Gracias por la info por cierto, lo de los QDCs lo tengo pensado pero no son bonitos xD. Lo dicho si quieres MP y seguimos también por ECI o privado.
> 
> 
> 
> *Which QDC's models do you recommend? (Thank you)
> *
> I am going to think about them very seriously thank you.


Koolance zero drip (https://koolance.com/products?path=62_60_179_144). But any quality QDC is better than none! 



xarot said:


> Using QDCs I have swapped the mobo, RAMs, CPU and GPUs in the case without draining anything...


The only way to plumb a rig!


----------



## bmgjet

So here is where I am so far on my OC, Still havnt been able to find whats considered safe max 24/7 voltage but there is a lot of mention to keep it at 1.35v or less so thats where iv stopped.

Cores 1 and 7 needed 1.362v to make 5ghz so just running them at 4.9ghz to stay under that 1.35v
been avoiding pushing cores 0 and 5 any further since they are the 2 worst cores so would end up around 1.38v before I even try stress test them at 5ghz.


----------



## RichKnecht

bmgjet said:


> So here is where I am so far on my OC, Still havnt been able to find whats considered safe max 24/7 voltage but there is a lot of mention to keep it at 1.35v or less so thats where iv stopped.
> 
> Cores 1 and 7 needed 1.362v to make 5ghz so just running them at 4.9ghz to stay under that 1.35v
> been avoiding pushing cores 0 and 5 any further since they are the 2 worst cores so would end up around 1.38v before I even try stress test them at 5ghz.


I find your numbers and scores very interesting. My 7900X is OC'ed at 4.7 on all cores at 1.225V and actually scores higher than yours in CPU-Z in multi thread, but lower in single thread, and is at 2603 in Cinebench. I would think that 5GHz would score much higher than that, but what do I know. I suspect it has something to do with actual processes each computer is running. I am on a fresh install of W10 Pro with 32GB of 3466 RAM. Next for me is to delid mine to see where that takes me. Don't think I'll get to 5GHz though. My goal is a stable 4.8 24/7 OC.


----------



## bmgjet

RichKnecht said:


> I find your numbers and scores very interesting. My 7900X is OC'ed at 4.7 on all cores at 1.225V and actually scores higher than yours in CPU-Z in multi thread, but lower in single thread, and is at 2603 in Cinebench. I would think that 5GHz would score much higher than that, but what do I know. I suspect it has something to do with actual processes each computer is running. I am on a fresh install of W10 Pro with 32GB of 3466 RAM. Next for me is to delid mine to see where that takes me. Don't think I'll get to 5GHz though. My goal is a stable 4.8 24/7 OC.


CPUZ loves ram speed, multi-thread score goes up 900 points putting my ram overclock on. But im stilling trying to find limit of cpu so have XMP profile set to factory.
Cinebench is sort of the same, goes up 1 point single thread and 30 points multi.

Im way past my goal lol, I only expected 4.8-4.9ghz mixtures with 1 good core on 5ghz.

Before delid, I could run on mixture of 4.7 and 4.8ghz on same voltage as you have and was hitting 90c in stress tests.
Now I can run a extra 130mv and its still runs cooler then before delid. Just my VRM temps gone from hitting 50c with no fan, to hitting 90c with full speed fan on it and 25C room temp.


----------



## RichKnecht

bmgjet said:


> CPUZ loves ram speed, multi-thread score goes up 900 points putting my ram overclock on. But im stilling trying to find limit of cpu so have XMP profile set to factory.
> Cinebench is sort of the same, goes up 1 point single thread and 30 points multi.
> 
> Im way past my goal lol, I only expected 4.8-4.9ghz mixtures with 1 good core on 5ghz.
> 
> Before delid, I could run on mixture of 4.7 and 4.8ghz on same voltage as you have and was hitting 90c in stress tests.
> Now I can run a extra 130mv and its still runs cooler then before delid. Just my VRM temps gone from hitting 50c with no fan, to hitting 90c with full speed fan on it and 25C room temp.


Ahh, it makes sense now  My max temps now at 4.7 are ~ 77-80C. Hoping the delid will bring them down a bit.


----------



## Nikos4Life

iamjanco said:


> Shame. APEX/7980XE combo?
> 
> De8auer states in his video that ≥500 newtons (or *112.40447 lbf/psi*) is typically needed to seat the pins properly in the socket, but you're probably already there.
> 
> Just an fyi; you're obviously a lot braver than I am


I am doing some research about DDF and its pressure needed to make it work perfectly. I am thinking about getting a dynamometric tool or something like this but I need to know the exact pressure needed to find a tool that can provide the correct numbers. 

Any ideas? 

Hand tighten the DDF is something I would like to avoid if possible.

Regards,
Nikos


----------



## Nikos4Life

iamjanco said:


> Shame. APEX/7980XE combo?
> 
> De8auer states in his video that ≥500 newtons (or *112.40447 lbf/psi*) is typically needed to seat the pins properly in the socket, but you're probably already there.
> 
> Just an fyi; you're obviously a lot braver than I am



I am doing some research about DDF and its pressure needed to make it work perfectly. I am thinking about getting a dynamometric tool or something like this but I need to know the exact pressure needed to find a tool that can provide the correct numbers. 

Any ideas? 

Hand tighten the DDF is something I would like to avoid if possible.

Regards,
Nikos


----------



## bmgjet

Just past 330am here and found the limit of my chip using ducted air from out side (9c).

1 core 5111mhz
2 core 5010mhz
7 core 4910mnz

1.309v - 1.360v
-3 AVX
-5 AVX512

1 hour real bench, 15min prime non-avx, 10min prime avx. 5min linpack avx512.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Nikos4Life said:


> I am doing some research about DDF and its pressure needed to make it work perfectly. I am thinking about getting a dynamometric tool or something like this but I need to know the exact pressure needed to find a tool that can provide the correct numbers.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> Hand tighten the DDF is something I would like to avoid if possible.
> 
> Regards,
> Nikos



Hand tightening works ok, u like to complicate things, don't u??? xDDD





bmgjet said:


> Just past 330am here and found the limit of my chip using ducted air from out side (9c).
> 
> 1 core 5111mhz
> 2 core 5010mhz
> 7 core 4910mnz
> 
> 1.309v - 1.360v
> -3 AVX
> -5 AVX512
> 
> 1 hour real bench, 15min prime non-avx, 10min prime avx. 5min linpack avx512.



U should get more than 2800...


----------



## serjserj

Hi guys, is it dangerous to make such a difference in the bios?
Adaptive + offset
Offset -0.080 

what to choose? override ore adaptive + offset mode


----------



## wingman99

serjserj said:


> Hi guys, is it dangerous to make such a difference in the bios?
> Offset -0.080


It is not dangerous. Might have stability problems at idle with power saving options enabled since it reduces the stock non turbo clock voltage.


----------



## serjserj

wingman99 said:


> It is not dangerous. Might have stability problems at idle with power saving options enabled since it reduces the stock non turbo clock voltage.


Thanks for the answer
I just picked up the voltage taking into account the overestimation of the motherboard at + 0.090)
+ stress test.


----------



## wingman99

serjserj said:


> Thanks for the answer
> I just picked up the voltage taking into account the overestimation of the motherboard at 0.090)
> + stress test.


Just wondering are you + or - for offset?


----------



## serjserj

*wingman99*
-0.080


----------



## Siigari

Hey everyone.

Are there any batch number guides for binning?


----------



## Jpmboy

Siigari said:


> Hey everyone.
> 
> Are there any batch number guides for binning?


binning of what CPU?


----------



## wingman99

serjserj said:


> *wingman99*
> -0.080


Thanks, I did not know if you changed it to +0.090v in this post http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-in...e-x-combined-discussion-726.html#post27158705


----------



## hrmgamer

Hello everyone.

Those following the Asus x299 support thread will know I'm at my wits end with my R6E/7980/RAM, I keep failing RAM and CPU Cache tests on stock settings. RAM appears to be testing fine in other machines. I'm having trouble figuring out if it's the mobo or CPU so I've given up. I'm going to buy another (different) motherboard and retest. Hopefully it will all work and I can RMA the R6E and get a working one. This new board will end up being the basis for either an overkill LAN box or another business workstation.

So I'm looking for suggestions as to what to purchase. Part of me says grab another Asus because frankly I love Asus boards, but if Asus which one? Another part says grab an Asrock or MSI in case it's some weird combination of ASUS + my particular CPU + my particular RAM. It's a pity the R6E is the only board with a built-in 10GbE NIC. The only requirements I have are that it has 8+4 CPU power, 8 DIMMs (I'll be testing with 4x64GB to start with but hopefully getting all 8x64GB to work), and not be Giga-Byte (I don't get on with their products but that's a long story). 

All that said it seems only Asus has my RAM (CMD64GX4M4B3466C16) on the QVL, so maybe I should just get another Asus?

This has also been posted in the Asus x299 support thread for continuity. 

And thanks in advance for the advice 
HRMGamer


----------



## Siigari

Jpmboy said:


> Siigari said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey everyone.
> 
> Are there any batch number guides for binning?
> 
> 
> 
> binning of what CPU? /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif
Click to expand...

7900X. I got mine today.


----------



## vmanuelgm

hrmgamer said:


> Hello everyone.
> 
> Those following the Asus x299 support thread will know I'm at my wits end with my R6E/7980/RAM, I keep failing RAM and CPU Cache tests on stock settings. RAM appears to be testing fine in other machines. I'm having trouble figuring out if it's the mobo or CPU so I've given up. I'm going to buy another (different) motherboard and retest. Hopefully it will all work and I can RMA the R6E and get a working one. This new board will end up being the basis for either an overkill LAN box or another business workstation.
> 
> So I'm looking for suggestions as to what to purchase. Part of me says grab another Asus because frankly I love Asus boards, but if Asus which one? Another part says grab an Asrock or MSI in case it's some weird combination of ASUS + my particular CPU + my particular RAM. It's a pity the R6E is the only board with a built-in 10GbE NIC. The only requirements I have are that it has 8+4 CPU power, 8 DIMMs (I'll be testing with 4x64GB to start with but hopefully getting all 8x64GB to work), and not be Giga-Byte (I don't get on with their products but that's a long story).
> 
> All that said it seems only Asus has my RAM (CMD64GX4M4B3466C16) on the QVL, so maybe I should just get another Asus?
> 
> This has also been posted in the Asus x299 support thread for continuity.
> 
> And thanks in advance for the advice
> HRMGamer


You can grab the Asrock x299 Professional XE, which comes with the Aquantia 10G and is a very solid board.


----------



## xarot

https://overclock3d.net/news/cpu_ma...efresh_-_no_kaby_lake-x_replacement_planned/1

If true, then I feel a bit cheated. To get the thermals to an acceptable level I've tried delid, custom IHS and even naked die on these. It would've been so much simpler with solder to begin with.


----------



## vmanuelgm

xarot said:


> https://overclock3d.net/news/cpu_ma...efresh_-_no_kaby_lake-x_replacement_planned/1
> 
> If true, then I feel a bit cheated. To get the thermals to an acceptable level I've tried delid, custom IHS and even naked die on these. It would've been so much simpler with solder to begin with.



U will not get better temperatures with soldered cpus if u compare to delidded ones.


----------



## xarot

vmanuelgm said:


> U will not get better temperatures with soldered cpus if u compare to delidded ones.


True, but the hassle vs. soldered... and warranty.


----------



## vmanuelgm

xarot said:


> True, but the hassle vs. soldered... and warranty.


If u delid (avoiding visible damage) and relid with black silicon, Intel will exchange your cpu in rma in case of failure.

So the only downsides are the need of purchasing a tool and doing the job.


----------



## hrmgamer

vmanuelgm said:


> You can grab the Asrock x299 Professional XE, which comes with the Aquantia 10G and is a very solid board.


Looks promising, thanks


----------



## tistou77

Hello

If we have an error message with iexplore.exe (the memory can not be written or something like that) and in Event Viewer there is this error message related to Dwminit



> The Desktop Window Manager process has exited. (Process exit code: 0xc000005, Restart count: 1, Primary display device ID: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080)


it is due to a problem of the graphics card or something else (Memory, etc...) ?

Thanks


----------



## vmanuelgm

tistou77 said:


> Hello
> 
> If we have an error message with iexplore.exe (the memory can not be written or something like that) and in Event Viewer there is this error message related to Dwminit
> 
> 
> 
> it is due to a problem of the graphics card or something else (Memory, etc...) ?
> 
> Thanks



Does it happen all the time???


----------



## tistou77

vmanuelgm said:


> Does it happen all the time???


Appeared 3 or 4 times today (in 1h) and last time while browsing with IE, there was a BSOD (Memory Management I believe)
So to have a BSOD using IE....


----------



## vmanuelgm

tistou77 said:


> Appeared 3 or 4 times today (in 1h) and last time while browsing with IE, there was a BSOD (Memory Management I believe)
> So to have a BSOD using IE....



Seems like memory unstability... Have u checked your oc???


----------



## tistou77

I had a problem with the memory, the R6E doing a bit of anything with the VDRAM, I will see to increase it and put an increment more than the ones that are needed


----------



## vmanuelgm

tistou77 said:


> I had a problem with the memory, the R6E doing a bit of anything with the VDRAM, I will see to increase it and put an increment more than the ones that are needed



Can u show your timings with Memtweakit???


----------



## tistou77

vmanuelgm said:


> Can u show your timings with Memtweakit???


I was 17-18-18, but I had relaxed the timing to test a few days ago


----------



## vmanuelgm

tistou77 said:


> I was 17-18-18, but I had relaxed the timing to test a few days ago


The tCWL is very low for CL18. I would try CL17-17-17-40 and tCWL at 16 instead.

For 4000 CL17 u shouldn't need more than 1.39v dram voltage.

Clear cmos before changing timings.


----------



## tistou77

vmanuelgm said:


> The tCWL is very low for CL18. I would try CL17-17-17-40 and tCWL at 16 instead.
> 
> For 4000 CL17 u shouldn't need more than 1.39v dram voltage.


i will put the tCWL at 16 and see
Thanks :thumb:

I tested 4000 17-18-18-38 at 1.376v and it was good with RamTest (1h), Aida64 and Realbench
But since bios 1201 and 1301, the VDIMM CD does just about anything

DIMM AB: 1.37v bios, under Windows => idle and load 1.376v
DIMM CD: 1.37v bios, under Windows => idle 1.376v and load varies between 1.35x and 1.376v

DIMM AB: 1.38v bios, under Windows => idle and load 1.392v
DIMM CD: 1.38v bios, under Windows => idle 1.392v and load varies between 1.392 and 1.376v

DIMM AB: 1.39v bios, under Windows => idle and load varies between 1.392 and 1.408v
DIMM CD: 1.39v bios, under Windows => idle and load varies between 1.392 and 1.408v

For now, I test with 1.39v in bios


EDIT : CMOS with the load setting default in bios or CMOS button ?


----------



## vmanuelgm

tistou77 said:


> i will put the tCWL at 16 and see
> Thanks :thumb:
> 
> I tested 4000 17-18-18-38 at 1.376v and it was good with RamTest (1h), Aida64 and Realbench
> But since bios 1201 and 1301, the VDIMM CD does just about anything
> 
> DIMM AB: 1.37v bios, under Windows => idle and load 1.376v
> DIMM CD: 1.37v bios, under Windows => idle 1.376v and load varies between 1.35x and 1.376v
> 
> DIMM AB: 1.38v bios, under Windows => idle and load 1.392v
> DIMM CD: 1.38v bios, under Windows => idle 1.392v and load varies between 1.392 and 1.376v
> 
> DIMM AB: 1.39v bios, under Windows => idle and load 1.392v
> DIMM CD: 1.39v bios, under Windows => idle 1.392v and load varies between 1.392 and 1.408v
> 
> For now, I test with 1.39v in bios
> 
> 
> EDIT : CMOS with the load setting default in bios or CMOS button ?


Clear cmos with the button!!!


----------



## tistou77

vmanuelgm said:


> Clear cmos with the button!!!


I'll test :thumb:


----------



## RichKnecht

So this morning I took the plunge and delidded my 7900x. It wasn't as hard as I thought and everything seemed to go well. Insulated all of the SMDs with MG conformal coating, LM between IHS and die, and applied a fresh layer of Gelid extreme, and booted it up. No issues..yay. I kept the same overclock so that I can see just how much better temps really are. Idle temps dropped about a degree, which is just fine. Load temps however, went from 83 to 67  Not too bad I think. If it stays like this, I would say that delidding was definitely worth the money ($45) and time (2 hours) I spent doing the job. I may fiddle around a little with the overclock, but I have work to do so I will run the machine through its paces. Thanks to all here who "pushed me over the edge" and gave great advice.


----------



## vmanuelgm

RichKnecht said:


> So this morning I took the plunge and delidded my 7900x. It wasn't as hard as I thought and every seemed to go well. Insulated all of the SMDs with MG conformal coating, applied a fresh layed of Gelid extreme, and booted it up. No issues..yay. I kept the same overclock so that I can see just how much better temps really are. Idle temps dropped about a degree, which is just fine. Load temps however, went from 83 to 67  Not too bad I think. If it stays like this, I would say that delidding was definitely worth the money ($45) and time (2 hours) I spent doing the job. I may fiddle around a little with th overclock, but I have work to do so I will run the maching through its paces. Thanks to all here who "pushed me over the edge" and gave great advice.



Glad u are happy!!!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah delid is well worth it 
Intel now saying their going to do a skylake x refresh lol too little too late 
A real thing to do is not void warranties for delidded first release


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah delid is well worth it
> Intel now saying their going to do a skylake x refresh lol too little too late
> A real thing to do is not void warranties for delidded first release


Yeah, I read that. IMO, every "X" chip should be soldered. They are meant to be overclocked, that's why we spend the extra money. The fact that they overheat when overclocked is a shame. Intel makes great chips.


----------



## wingman99

RichKnecht said:


> Yeah, I read that. IMO, every "X" chip should be soldered. They are meant to be overclocked, that's why we spend the extra money. The fact that they overheat when overclocked is a shame. Intel makes great chips.


With the few folks I see overclocking in the forums over the years, I don't think overclocking is a concern with Intel.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I also read the delid's will probably work better than the intel refresh series lol 

And no refresh for kabylake x :/


----------



## RichKnecht

So, as a follow up to my recent 7900x delidding, temps were creeping up pretty steadily yesterday while working. I was very confident about the LM application between the IHS and die so I unmounted the water block today and removed the TIM (Gelid extreme) I used for the first time. I have always used AS5, but after looking at the specs and reviews, I decided to give the Gelid a try. IMO, waste of money. After a little thought at Microcenter, I came home with AS5 and a tube of CoolerMaster Mastergel Maker. Application was via the spread method and temps are back down to ~66C under load. Going to give it a bit and see what happens. I have a fresh tube of AS5 just in case now. By the way, I can now get the 7900x to run all cores at 4.8 ~1.275V at lower temps than I had at 4.7 before the delid. Sticking with 4.7 as the jump to 4.8 really didn't make a huge improvement in benchmarks, which still puzzles me.


----------



## wingman99

RichKnecht said:


> So, as a follow up to my recent 7900x delidding, temps were creeping up pretty steadily yesterday while working. I was very confident about the LM application between the IHS and die so I unmounted the water block today and removed the TIM (Gelid extreme) I used for the first time. I have always used AS5, but after looking at the specs and reviews, I decided to give the Gelid a try. IMO, waste of money. After a little thought at Microcenter, I came home with AS5 and a tube of CoolerMaster Mastergel Maker. Application was via the spread method and temps are back down to ~66C under load. Going to give it a bit and see what happens. I have a fresh tube of AS5 just in case now. By the way, I can now get the 7900x to run all cores at 4.8 ~1.275V at lower temps than I had at 4.7 before the delid. Sticking with 4.7 as the jump to 4.8 really didn't make a huge improvement in benchmarks, which still puzzles me.


Is it phantom throttling at 4.8GHz? LINK: http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1634045-skylake-x-phantom-throttling.html


----------



## cekim

wingman99 said:


> Is it phantom throttling at 4.8GHz? LINK: http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1634045-skylake-x-phantom-throttling.html


Yeah, I've seen quite a few reviews and OC reports that show 4.7/.8/.9 5.0 7940/60/80 with benchmarks the same or lower than what this chip does @ 4.5/4.6. 

It's gotten surprisingly smart about dialing back so that you CPUz strato-numbers, but don't gain much if anything at all.


----------



## RichKnecht

wingman99 said:


> Is it phantom throttling at 4.8GHz? LINK: http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1634045-skylake-x-phantom-throttling.html


Good question. I know the clock speeds stay constant and temperature is no longer an issue, so I suspect there must be some type of under voltage issue. Just not sure where to look. I have LLC set on 4 and Vccin at 1.9. All of the power limit settings are at max.


----------



## vmanuelgm

RichKnecht said:


> Good question. I know the clock speeds stay constant and temperature is no longer an issue, so I suspect there must be some type of under voltage issue. Just not sure where to look. I have LLC set on 4 and Vccin at 1.9. All of the power limit settings are at max.


Raise vccin to 2.1v.


----------



## RichKnecht

vmanuelgm said:


> Raise vccin to 2.1v.


I did that last night, as well as raising the LLC to 5. Still going from 4.7 to 4.8 really doesn't make all that much difference in benchmarks. For example, at 4.7 my CB score is ~2595. After I change the voltages to get it to 4.8, the score goes to 2631. Nothing like when I go from 4.6 ( CB 2450) to 4.7 (CB 2595). Maybe my processor just "tops out" at 4.7.


----------



## GXTCHA

RichKnecht said:


> I did that last night, as well as raising the LLC to 5. Still going from 4.7 to 4.8 really doesn't make all that much difference in benchmarks. For example, at 4.7 my CB score is ~2595. After I change the voltages to get it to 4.8, the score goes to 2631. Nothing like when I go from 4.6 ( CB 2450) to 4.7 (CB 2595). Maybe my processor just "tops out" at 4.7.


I see around the same scores at 4.8 @ 1.220v with my 7900x. Usually it's around 2650 however, after all of the spectre/meltdown patches and BIOS release, its around 2630. I can't see your settings but I doubt you're throttling with the settings you've described.

I need to pop the top and redo the LM as my temps have steadily crept upwards and are no longer as cool as they used to be.


----------



## RichKnecht

GXTCHA said:


> I need to pop the top and redo the LM as my temps have steadily crept upwards and are no longer as cool as they used to be.


What TIM are you using between the block and IHS? I would check that first. I have tried basically every brand and for me, the CoolerMaster Maker Gel Nano outperforms every other paste I used. Actually cooler than Gelid and Kryonaut by ~5C. My 7900x idles at ~21C with an ambient of 20C. Water temps are at 22C according to my inline sensor.


----------



## GXTCHA

RichKnecht said:


> What TIM are you using between the block and IHS? I would check that first. I have tried basically every brand and for me, the CoolerMaster Maker Gel Nano outperforms every other paste I used. Actually cooler than Gelid and Kryonaut by ~5C. My 7900x idles at ~21C with an ambient of 20C. Water temps are at 22C according to my inline sensor.


I'm using Kryonaut. Never had an issue with it before. Am running it on my x99 test bench and no problems so far but who knows. Maybe they have changed the formula....

I'm at the point now where I'm either going to pop the top off the CPU to check the LM or rip apart my loop and try and find an issue. My CPU temps are low 20's with ambient at 20 to 22c. Water is about the same but under load, I'm getting worse temps than I had with an AIO.


----------



## cletus-cassidy

GXTCHA said:


> I'm using Kryonaut. Never had an issue with it before. Am running it on my x99 test bench and no problems so far but who knows. Maybe they have changed the formula....
> 
> I'm at the point now where I'm either going to pop the top off the CPU to check the LM or rip apart my loop and try and find an issue. My CPU temps are low 20's with ambient at 20 to 22c. Water is about the same but under load, I'm getting worse temps than I had with an AIO.


I'm in a similar position, although I have not yet delidded my 7900X. My goal is to get a 4.8 ghz 24/7 overlock on the cpu.

I purposefully built what I thought was an "over the top" custom loop to tame the 7900X. I've got a EK D5 pump running through two 420 Black Ice SR2 rads and an EK 480 XE rad. There is one 1080 ti with EK block in the loop and the CPU is cooled by an EK Supremacy EVO nickel block. My 4.7 ghz overclock is still not stable, as Handbrake bombs out at 1.27 Vcore and temps get very high. The rads aren't blowing hot air at any time and even the CPU block doesn't really warm up.

Two primary questions

-Curious why my large rad capacity isn't cooling better. Is it a limit of the CPU block pulling heat off the CPU with the stock TIM? Or does it sound more like my block isn't working right / isn't mounted properly?

-Should I bother delidding this CPU given I'm not stable at 4.7 ghz and 1.28 Vcore? I know I'll get lower temps but maybe I have a bum CPU?


----------



## GXTCHA

cletus-cassidy said:


> I'm in a similar position, although I have not yet delidded my 7900X. My goal is to get a 4.8 ghz 24/7 overlock on the cpu.
> 
> I purposefully built what I thought was an "over the top" custom loop to tame the 7900X. I've got a EK D5 pump running through two 420 Black Ice SR2 rads and an EK 480 XE rad. There is one 1080 ti with EK block in the loop and the CPU is cooled by an EK Supremacy EVO nickel block. My 4.7 ghz overclock is still not stable, as Handbrake bombs out at 1.27 Vcore and temps get very high. The rads aren't blowing hot air at any time and even the CPU block doesn't really warm up.
> 
> Two primary questions
> 
> -Curious why my large rad capacity isn't cooling better. Is it a limit of the CPU block pulling heat off the CPU with the stock TIM? Or does it sound more like my block isn't working right / isn't mounted properly?
> 
> -Should I bother delidding this CPU given I'm not stable at 4.7 ghz and 1.28 Vcore? I know I'll get lower temps but maybe I have a bum CPU?


Very similar circumstances for me and I'm running 1.22v for 4.8. Im stable but have higher temps. My block is a EK supremacy evo nickel as well (went straight with the X99 version) and I feel like its the block... lilke its not making correct contact/pressure. I've got 2x 360 rads (GTS360 and GTX360) and they never become hot to the touch.


----------



## cletus-cassidy

GXTCHA said:


> Very similar circumstances for me and I'm running 1.22v for 4.8. Im stable but have higher temps. My block is a EK supremacy evo nickel as well (went straight with the X99 version) and I feel like its the block... lilke its not making correct contact/pressure. I've got 2x 360 rads (GTS360 and GTX360) and they never become hot to the touch.


Do people using Heatkiller IV or XSPC have better results?


----------



## RichKnecht

cletus-cassidy said:


> Do people using Heatkiller IV or XSPC have better results?


I'm using an EK D5 pump running at 70%, Supremacy EVO nickel, and 2 240mm PE rads with 2 EK Vardar 120mm fans on each radiator pushing air through them. One on top and one in front of a MasterCase Maker 5T. I'm not a gamer, so I do not have my GPU in the loop. My ambient temp is 21C, water temp is 22C and idle temps are ~21C. All pretty close, so I think I have my loop tuned fairly well. My load temp is 67-69C on the hottest core. As far as water blocks go, I think the EVO nickel is the best out there. If I OC to 4.8, that requires 1.275V and my temps go to ~79-81C.


----------



## cletus-cassidy

RichKnecht said:


> I'm using an EK D5 pump running at 70%, Supremacy EVO nickel, and 2 240mm PE rads with 2 EK Vardar 120mm fans on each radiator pushing air through them. One on top and one in front of a MasterCase Maker 5T. I'm not a gamer, so I do not have my GPU in the loop. My ambient temp is 21C, water temp is 22C and idle temps are ~21C. All pretty close, so I think I have my loop tuned fairly well. My load temp is 67-69C on the hottest core. As far as water blocks go, I think the EVO nickel is the best out there. If I OC to 4.8, that requires 1.275V and my temps go to ~79-81C.


Good data point here, thanks. What are you using to load your cores with the temps you listed so I can compare apples to apples?


----------



## toncij

Does anyone know what is an acceptable and what is a shut-down temperature of the VRM on Asus R6E boards? My 7980XE started shutting down lately (it got warmer tho) and I see that VRM caught 74°C today during Blender rendering.


----------



## wingman99

toncij said:


> Does anyone know what is an acceptable and what is a shut-down temperature of the VRM on Asus R6E boards? My 7980XE started shutting down lately (it got warmer tho) and I see that VRM caught 74°C today during Blender rendering.


Shut-down should be over 120c, the VRM throttles at 115c. I would swap your PSU for your shut down problems.


----------



## toncij

wingman99 said:


> Shut-down should be over 120c, the VRM throttles at 115c. I would swap your PSU for shut down problems.


I did. Brand new AX1600i tried, same problem. Under load, it simply shuts down. Suspected CPU but 7940X has the same problem.


----------



## RichKnecht

cletus-cassidy said:


> Good data point here, thanks. What are you using to load your cores with the temps you listed so I can compare apples to apples?


I used Aida64, Realbench, and x264. Before the delid I was in the high 80s.


----------



## wingman99

toncij said:


> I did. Brand new AX1600i tried, same problem. Under load, it simply shuts down. Suspected CPU but 7940X has the same problem.


Well your 74c VRM temperature is low when running Blender rendering. After all the things you tried sounds like a faulty motherboard short circuit or wires or PC components short circuit.


----------



## ThrashZone

toncij said:


> I did. Brand new AX1600i tried, same problem. Under load, it simply shuts down. Suspected CPU but 7940X has the same problem.



Hi,
Do you have the system on a backup battery system ?


----------



## Jpmboy

toncij said:


> Does anyone know what is an acceptable and what is a shut-down temperature of the VRM on Asus R6E boards? My 7980XE started shutting down lately (it got warmer tho) and I see that VRM caught 74°C today during Blender rendering.


Shut down and immediate reboot, or shut down and stays off? What bios power limits are you running? Does the 1600i also have per-rail (or single rail) settings like the 1500i?


----------



## vmanuelgm

RichKnecht said:


> I did that last night, as well as raising the LLC to 5. Still going from 4.7 to 4.8 really doesn't make all that much difference in benchmarks. For example, at 4.7 my CB score is ~2595. After I change the voltages to get it to 4.8, the score goes to 2631. Nothing like when I go from 4.6 ( CB 2450) to 4.7 (CB 2595). Maybe my processor just "tops out" at 4.7.


If the chip is not delidded, that is a normal result. Mine before delidding scored like yours:
















toncij said:


> Does anyone know what is an acceptable and what is a shut-down temperature of the VRM on Asus R6E boards? My 7980XE started shutting down lately (it got warmer tho) and I see that VRM caught 74°C today during Blender rendering.


Raise the vccin to 2.1 (this is the second time I advise it, xDDD).


----------



## RichKnecht

vmanuelgm said:


> If the chip is not delidded, that is a normal result. Mine before delidding scored like yours:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Raise the vccin to 2.1 (this is the second time I advise it, xDDD).


Is that a screenshot after delidding? Mine at 4.8 is basically the same. Yes, it is delidded as of 2 days ago. My issue is that it scores 2595 at 4.7 and ~2638 at 4.8 with extra heat since I have to raise the vcore from 1.225 (4.7 OC) to 1.275 (4.8 OC). I was expecting a bigger jump in performance at 4.8 like I did going from 4.6 to 4.7.


----------



## toncij

wingman99 said:


> Well your 74c VRM temperature is low when running Blender rendering. After all the things you tried sounds like a faulty motherboard short circuit or wires or PC components short circuit.


Yeah, my fear too (I hate dismantling the mbo.).



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Do you have the system on a backup battery system ?


None atm. But checked the outlet power, it's very stable.



Jpmboy said:


> Shut down and immediate reboot, or shut down and stays off? What bios power limits are you running? Does the 1600i also have per-rail (or single rail) settings like the 1500i?


Shut down to a halt then if I try to start it back, it goes into endless loop of powering on and immediately shutting down until i cut the power, self-test the PSU (to force discharge) and start again when it works again, until load and a shut down (in games or rendering, but randomly). My first fear was in fact PSU, but replacement did not help. Then I tried the memory but it was rock solid in the other PC. Memtest shows some 1-bit errors, but it happens on the 7940X too, although 7940X showed significantly less memtest errors (during hammer only). Since it's delidded, I hope it's not the CPU or the memory controller. 

Oh, the best thing is that this did not happen after any kind of change, just... all out of sudden. It was mildly clocked to 4.2 all cores, 3.2 mesh.


----------



## wingman99

toncij said:


> Yeah, my fear too (I hate dismantling the mbo.).
> 
> 
> None atm. But checked the outlet power, it's very stable.
> 
> 
> 
> Shut down to a halt then if I try to start it back, it goes into endless loop of powering on and immediately shutting down until i cut the power, self-test the PSU (to force discharge) and start again when it works again, until load and a shut down (in games or rendering, but randomly). My first fear was in fact PSU, but replacement did not help. Then I tried the memory but it was rock solid in the other PC. Memtest shows some 1-bit errors, but it happens on the 7940X too, although 7940X showed significantly less memtest errors (during hammer only). Since it's delidded, I hope it's not the CPU or the memory controller.
> 
> Oh, the best thing is that this did not happen after any kind of change, just... all out of sudden. It was mildly clocked to 4.2 all cores, 3.2 mesh.


Try a BIOS reflash then don't run the memory system out of stock specifications, so it does not have any memory errors and see how it works for a while.


----------



## vmanuelgm

RichKnecht said:


> Is that a screenshot after delidding? Mine at 4.8 is basically the same. Yes, it is delidded as of 2 days ago. My issue is that it scores 2595 at 4.7 and ~2638 at 4.8 with extra heat since I have to raise the vcore from 1.225 (4.7 OC) to 1.275 (4.8 OC). I was expecting a bigger jump in performance at 4.8 like I did going from 4.6 to 4.7.


As I said, that score is before delidding. After delidding the scores were better and my best result with the 7900x and the Gigabyte Gaming 9 (Infineon 3556) was this:


----------



## Jpmboy

toncij said:


> Yeah, my fear too (I hate dismantling the mbo.).
> 
> 
> None atm. But checked the outlet power, it's very stable.
> 
> 
> 
> *Shut down to a halt then if I try to start it back*, it goes into endless loop of powering on and immediately shutting down until i cut the power, self-test the PSU (to force discharge) and start again when it works again, until load and a shut down (in games or rendering, but randomly). My first fear was in fact PSU, but replacement did not help. Then I tried the memory but it was rock solid in the other PC. Memtest shows some 1-bit errors, but it happens on the 7940X too, although 7940X showed significantly less memtest errors (during hammer only). Since it's delidded, I hope it's not the CPU or the memory controller.
> 
> Oh, the best thing is that this did not happen after any kind of change, just... all out of sudden. It was mildly clocked to 4.2 all cores, 3.2 mesh.


if/when it happens again, do a clrcmos after it self-shuts down (no post/boot looping plz ). When it restarts after clrcmos, only set any raid/boot order if needed. Boot to windows and use it in a way which had caused the shutdown (sounds like an OCP or something). A board short would not likely be as sporadic, but would be very consistent. Only other thing.. do you have the vrms on the stock cooler, or have you installed a monoblock or something?


----------



## toncij

Jpmboy said:


> if/when it happens again, do a clrcmos after it self-shuts down (no post/boot looping plz ). When it restarts after clrcmos, only set any raid/boot order if needed. Boot to windows and use it in a way which had caused the shutdown (sounds like an OCP or something). A board short would not likely be as sporadic, but would be very consistent. Only other thing.. do you have the vrms on the stock cooler, or have you installed a monoblock or something?


Already tried:
clearing CMOS, removing battery, reflashing UEFI, running on stock, memory in other PC, other CPU, other undelided CPU (7900X) other PSU, other cooling (using H150Pro for testing so I don't have to assemble the loop every time), other memory... the only thing I did not replace is the board, but it beats me why would a board cause memtest errors and such a shut down behaviour. 

Can you at all run overclocked CPU and have no hammer 1-bit errors on non-ECC RAM?

Will now try undelidded CPU, everything on stock and run a memtest. If that fails I guess I'll have to test everything out of the case in a new board. This is the weirdest sh I ever witnessed.


----------



## wingman99

toncij said:


> Can you at all run overclocked CPU and have no hammer 1-bit errors on non-ECC RAM?


I don't have them.


----------



## toncij

wingman99 said:


> I don't have them.


Tried it?


----------



## wingman99

toncij said:


> Tried it?


Are you talking about memtest86 hammer test? My rig passes memtest86.


----------



## RichKnecht

vmanuelgm said:


> As I said, that score is before delidding. After delidding the scores were better and my best result with the 7900x and the Gigabyte Gaming 9 (Infineon 3556) was this:


That's impressive. I never really pushed mine past 1.3V as I am looking more for a 24/7 OC You must have pretty impressive cooling to keep those temps at that voltage.


----------



## toncij

wingman99 said:


> Are you talking about memtest86 hammer test? My rig passes memtest86.


Yes. Mine just spams errors... from few hundreds to thousands. With a verified, fully stable replacement memory, CPU, PSU... the board is the only thing I have not yet tried to replace. Will have to obviously.


----------



## Jpmboy

toncij said:


> Already tried:
> clearing CMOS, removing battery, reflashing UEFI, running on stock, memory in other PC, other CPU, other undelided CPU (7900X) other PSU, other cooling (using H150Pro for testing so I don't have to assemble the loop every time), other memory... the only thing I did not replace is the board, but it beats me why would a board cause memtest errors and such a shut down behaviour.
> 
> Can you at all run overclocked CPU and have no hammer 1-bit errors on non-ECC RAM?
> 
> Will now try undelidded CPU, everything on stock and run a memtest. If that fails I guess I'll have to test everything out of the case in a new board. This is the weirdest sh I ever witnessed.


lol - I have not run memtest86+ in years. Boards _can _fail or bork. I know it's a PIA, but it's best to test it out of the case (on cardboard is fine), with nothing but a keyboard/mouse and gpu attached. Did you try Bios 2 instead of a flash? A bios chip can fail. worth a shot...


----------



## toncij

Jpmboy said:


> lol - I have not run memtest86+ in years. Boards _can _fail or bork. I know it's a PIA, but it's best to test it out of the case (on cardboard is fine), with nothing but a keyboard/mouse and gpu attached. Did you try Bios 2 instead of a flash? A bios chip can fail. worth a shot...


What I wonder is what fails on the board? Can a VRM fail while being only up to 70 deg hot? Hmm.. 

Yes, BIOS2 the same (a bit older BIOS on it 1201 vs. 1301 on BIOS1). Planing to do that test today, barebone test, brand new CPU and then add my own components until it fails again. Will take full day probably. It's PIA AF. 


No luck lately with hw - 8700K gaming machine also acting up (one CPU (delided) can clock higher, but is hungry, the other (not delidded) needs significantly less voltage when clocked at 5GHz, but can't touch higher) or I lack knowledge on how CL OC works).

Anyway, thx a bunch everyone. Will post up what was wrong if I find out and not mace the machine in anger.


----------



## Jpmboy

toncij said:


> *What I wonder is what fails on the board*? Can a VRM fail while being only up to 70 deg hot? Hmm..
> 
> Yes, BIOS2 the same (a bit older BIOS on it 1201 vs. 1301 on BIOS1). Planing to do that test today, barebone test, brand new CPU and then add my own components until it fails again. Will take full day probably. It's PIA AF.
> 
> 
> No luck lately with hw - 8700K gaming machine also acting up (one CPU (delided) can clock higher, but is hungry, the other (not delidded) needs significantly less voltage when clocked at 5GHz, but can't touch higher) or I lack knowledge on how CL OC works).
> 
> Anyway, thx a bunch everyone. Will post up what was wrong if I find out and not mace the machine in anger.


Anything can fail, down to traces within the PCB. It's unlikely/rare out of the bazillion made, but boards can fail.
I assume you got the magnifying glass out and checked the socket for bent/misaligned pins?


----------



## bmgjet

Here what Iv been running for two weeks now no crashes.
Just went though stress tests again to re-validate.

https://valid.x86.fr/rrmabs


----------



## wingman99

toncij said:


> Yes. Mine just spams errors... from few hundreds to thousands. With a verified, fully stable replacement memory, CPU, PSU... the board is the only thing I have not yet tried to replace. Will have to obviously.


Wow that is very weird, after all the swapping of parts and testing you have done then failing memtest86 and it is not the memory or processor.
The onlytime I fail memtest86 is with defective memory or overclocking. So something is not correct. I would also try a different motherboard if it was me.

Have you tried flashing to a older BIOS then flash back to the most recent. Sometimes when just reflashing the procedure only does check sum and there is still a error in BIOS.


----------



## wingman99

Jpmboy said:


> lol - I have not run memtest86+ in years. Boards _can _fail or bork. I know it's a PIA, but it's best to test it out of the case (on cardboard is fine), with nothing but a keyboard/mouse and gpu attached. Did you try Bios 2 instead of a flash? A bios chip can fail. worth a shot...


Memtest86 has a new USB UEFI version 21 Feb 2018 out, it does a good job.
Main Features
The latest version of MemTest86 supports all the current technologies, including

13 different RAM testing algorithms
DDR4 RAM (and DDR2 & DDR3) support
XMP - high performance memory profiles
UEFI - The new graphical standard for BIOS
64bit - From version 5, MemTest86 is native 64bit code
ECC RAM - support for error-correcting code RAM
Secure boot - With MemTest86 being code signed by Microsoft
Graphical interface, mouse support and logging of results to disk
Foreign language support (Chinese, German & more)
Self booting off USB or CD, without needing DOS, Linux nor Windows
Network (PXE) boot - Scalable, disk-less provisioning from a single PXE server
Dual booting - Will boot to V4 in BIOS and V7 in UEFI from a single flash drive


----------



## vmanuelgm

RichKnecht said:


> That's impressive. I never really pushed mine past 1.3V as I am looking more for a 24/7 OC You must have pretty impressive cooling to keep those temps at that voltage.



Nope, just 3 UT60's and simple water.



I like best this one:


----------



## toncij

vmanuelgm said:


> Nope, just 3 UT60's and simple water.
> 
> 
> 
> I like best this one:


1.48V? Is that a 1kW at load?


----------



## vmanuelgm

toncij said:


> 1.48V? Is that a 1kW at load?



Used Blender at 5GHz and my wall meter showed 1200w. Have to deduct 100w for SAI and monitor more or less, 1100 were pulled from my rig.

Its nuts!!!


----------



## czin125

vmanuelgm said:


> Used Blender at 5GHz and my wall meter showed 1200w. Have to deduct 100w for SAI and monitor more or less, 1100 were pulled from my rig.
> 
> Its nuts!!!


 1100 from only the cpu or is there one gpu?

5ghz at 1.48v? What temperatures do you get on the VRM and the cpu? How many pumps? Fan speed? Water/Air temp?


----------



## xarot

Crazy results, my 7980XE is sitting at 4.4 [email protected] V and I cannot run Prime95 AVX disabled at [email protected] V because temps will creep up to 97c on some cores and some are way colder. Using 480mm XT45 and 360mm Monsta rads, D5 pump, also GPU and VRM block in the loop.

Going to try that direct die soon if I can even those temps a little better.


----------



## vmanuelgm

czin125 said:


> 1100 from only the cpu or is there one gpu?
> 
> 5ghz at 1.48v? What temperatures do you get on the VRM and the cpu? How many pumps? Fan speed? Water/Air temp?




Right now my rig looks like this:










DDF, 3 UT60's (quad, dual and simple), 9 nb eloops, one 8cm fan on the vrm, 90 degree mobo invertion with a pair of Silverstone's AP181.

I just raised to 5GHz to pass cinebench, but my stable oc is 4.8-3-4000CL17, 4.8avx and 4avx512, at 1.35v.












As u can see, the vrm gets hotty at 4.8avx, 110 celsius degrees. I am thinking about using a vrm block to reduce those temps. The wall meter also has peaks of 1200w at 4.8avx. The whole rig is pulling around 1000-1100w. If I use one of the latest versions of Prime95 the charge of the cpu is higher, it's nuts!!! xDDD

Intel should care about these consumptions. The Skylake-X chips overclock nice (delidded) and have a good performance per clock, but they are like small nuclear factories, xDDD























This is HWBotx265Bench peak at wall meter:


----------



## xarot

Probably you are throttling if the VRM is around 110 degrees C.


----------



## vmanuelgm

xarot said:


> Probably you are throttling if the VRM is around 110 degrees C.



I don't know exactly which is the throttling point of this VRM. Most of them can reach 115-125 before throttling.

Performance is not bad at 4.8avx, I don't see worse scores. That is the case of some mates here.

Wall meter also maintains the same peaks of wattage.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
At least you have a fan right over the vrm's and still hit 110c


----------



## czin125

Is that 560+280+140 or 480+240+120?

There's like 2400/2000/1900/1500/1300/800 rpm for the 120mm variants and 1400/1200/900/600 rpm for the 140mm

Two unused ram slots or do you use all 4?
3 quick disconnects + Titan Xp. Is the Titan Xp OC'd too?


----------



## pantsaregood

Anyone know how to read the uncore/mesh voltage? I'm running a 0.15V offset at 3.2 GHz mesh, but I have no idea where that actually places the voltage.


----------



## Martin778

xarot said:


> Crazy results, my 7980XE is sitting at 4.4 [email protected] V and I cannot run Prime95 AVX disabled at [email protected] V because temps will creep up to 97c on some cores and some are way colder. Using 480mm XT45 and 360mm Monsta rads, D5 pump, also GPU and VRM block in the loop.
> 
> Going to try that direct die soon if I can even those temps a little better.


Heh, the XE is just a garbage chip that should never see the enthousiast world  Intel didn't think it through at all when releasing it, they just 'brute force' threw it on the market to beat the Threadripper on paper.

Here, delidded chip, EK monoblock and 560mm + D5 custom loop just for the CPU alone:









Also - 79c on the VRM's - WATER COOLED, LOL!


----------



## vmanuelgm

xarot said:


> Crazy results, my 7980XE is sitting at 4.4 [email protected] V and I cannot run Prime95 AVX disabled at [email protected] V because temps will creep up to 97c on some cores and some are way colder. Using 480mm XT45 and 360mm Monsta rads, D5 pump, also GPU and VRM block in the loop.
> 
> Going to try that direct die soon if I can even those temps a little better.



If u purchase it, pay special attention to mounting, since there are several mates here who find it problematic.





czin125 said:


> Is that 560+280+140 or 480+240+120?
> 
> There's like 2400/2000/1900/1500/1300/800 rpm for the 120mm variants and 1400/1200/900/600 rpm for the 140mm
> 
> Two unused ram slots or do you use all 4?
> 3 quick disconnects + Titan Xp. Is the Titan Xp OC'd too?



4 unused ram slots since I have the 32GB 3600CL15 kit (x2). I have 480+240+120, Two D5 PWM pumps (they raise rpm's according to cpu temp) so do the pwm nb-eloops. And yes, TitanXp overclocked. U can see some gaming videos in my youtube, for example this one recorded under Windows Server 2016 and DX12 (Battlefield 1 64 players):









Finally I have a total of 4 pairs of quick disconnects.


----------



## xarot

Martin778 said:


> Heh, the XE is just a garbage chip that should never see the enthousiast world  Intel didn't think it through at all when releasing it, they just 'brute force' threw it on the market to beat the Threadripper on paper.
> 
> Here, delidded chip, EK monoblock and 560mm + D5 custom loop just for the CPU alone:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also - 79c on the VRM's - WATER COOLED, LOL!


Your temps seem very similar as mine, but was this in Prime95? My VRM stays under 60c with the Heatkiller block.

I think the 7980XE is a beast chip though. Even at 4 GHz. 



vmanuelgm said:


> If u purchase it, pay special attention to mounting, since there are several mates here who find it problematic.


I know, I've tried it on 7900X already and saw an improvement in temps (the only way to cool down that garbage chip) . But I failed several mounts...


----------



## toncij

70ish deg for 4.4? On 560mm? Wasn't someone here running it on a 360 at more?
I have dual 360 XE (EK) and push-pull, keeping it at 4.5GHz under 65 deg. but I don't run Prime small ffts.


----------



## vmanuelgm




----------



## Martin778

xarot said:


> Your temps seem very similar as mine, but was this in Prime95? My VRM stays under 60c with the Heatkiller block.
> 
> I think the 7980XE is a beast chip though. Even at 4 GHz.
> 
> 
> I know, I've tried it on 7900X already and saw an improvement in temps (the only way to cool down that garbage chip) . But I failed several mounts...



This was AIDA64 stresstest AFAIK. Look at the peak core temp - 92*C which later raised to 97, this is the problem of those chips ~20% of all of the cores running way hotter than the rest. In the end they are server grade Xeons for purpose applications, probably never intented to be running high clocks.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Martin778 said:


> This was AIDA64 stresstest AFAIK. Look at the peak core temp - 92*C which later raised to 97, this is the problem of those chips ~20% of all of the cores running way hotter than the rest. In the end they are server grade Xeons for purpose applications, probably never intented to be running high clocks.



My cores get similar temperatures right now, xDDD


----------



## RichKnecht

So I decided to fiddle around with my 7900x OC yet again last night and it has made me rethink my cooling effectiveness. I managed to get it stable with all 10 cores running at 4.8 with a vcore of 1.28. Temps are ~81 on the hottest core, which is the same temps I was hitting at 4.7 before the delid. No doubt the delid got me an extra 100MHz with the same temps as the lower OC. Cooling is with 2 240mm EK PE radiators with 2 EK Vardar Evo fans on each one. Right now, my limiting factor is my case (MasterCase Maker 5T) as I can't fit any more radiators inside. I'm thinking of moving to a Define R6 and adding a 360mm radiator but I am wondering if that will really do anything. Thoughts?


----------



## vmanuelgm

RichKnecht said:


> So I decided to fiddle around with my 7900x OC yet again last night and it has made me rethink my cooling effectiveness. I managed to get it stable with all 10 cores running at 4.8 with a vcore of 1.28. Temps are ~81 on the hottest core, which is the same temps I was hitting at 4.7 before the delid. No doubt the delid got me an extra 100MHz with the same temps as the lower OC. Cooling is with 2 240mm EK PE radiators with 2 EK Vardar Evo fans on each one. Right now, my limiting factor is my case (MasterCase Maker 5T) as I can't fit any more radiators inside. I'm thinking of moving to a Define R6 and adding a 360mm radiator but I am wondering if that will really do anything. Thoughts?



I like cases with top and/or bottom free space for radiators to avoid pushing hot air to the components, such as Caselabs SMA8 or STH10.


----------



## RichKnecht

Also, right now I have my 2 radiator/fans setup as follows. Top radiator/fan setup on PWM getting temp from CPU header and the front radiator/fan setup set to PWM with temp sensor set to water temp. Does that make sense, or should both be set to CPU temp?


----------



## xarot

Alright that direct die is a PITA to install for sure. It took me three tries. 

At first there were 4 cores instanly hopping to 105c where the coldest cores were only around 55c. :S I tried spreading the Conductonaut again but didn't help, then I remembered that the die is not actually making contact directly in the center of the waterblock, but a little bit upwards and painted LM on the block base actually a little more than might be required. 

Also noticed marginal spills on the PCB from tightening down the waterblock, but those are more of the type you could do with a silver marker, nothing to really make a flow there. And then evening the pressure when tightening down the waterblock...

Currently I am seeing over 10c drop in temperature on the hottest core with 7980XE, but that's also because the water temp has not maxed out yet. Anyway, lower than before.

Can we have soldered CPUs again Intel pls?


----------



## ThrashZone

xarot said:


> Can we have soldered CPUs again Intel pls?


Hi,
Intel is planning on a skylake-x refresh not sure it's going to help us suckers that delided ours though


----------



## vmanuelgm

If the new chip is not more efficient, soldering will not make miracles.




RichKnecht said:


> Also, right now I have my 2 radiator/fans setup as follows. Top radiator/fan setup on PWM getting temp from CPU header and the front radiator/fan setup set to PWM with temp sensor set to water temp. Does that make sense, or should both be set to CPU temp?



I have all of my fans and pumps working according to CPU temp, except for the mini and 8cm fans to VRM.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I was going to do a transplant into another case 450D to a 750D so I can get another 280 or 360mm rad on top instead of the tinny 240se 
Might pick it up today at micro center :/


----------



## xarot

vmanuelgm said:


> If the new chip is not more efficient, soldering will not make miracles.


At least it would prevent us (me) from doing something crazy like direct die. 

But seriously, I've spent quite a bit of money trying to get temps in control: Few syringes of Conductonaut, Rockit99, custom IHS, direct die frame...with my 6950X, it was always plug and play.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I was going to do a transplant into another case 450D to a 750D so I can get another 280 or 360mm rad on top instead of the tinny 240se
> Might pick it up today at micro center :/


Anymore, I am afraid to go to Microcenter. I always wind up coming home with something new


----------



## RichKnecht

xarot said:


> At least it would prevent us (me) from doing something crazy like direct die.
> 
> But seriously, I've spent quite a bit of money trying to get temps in control: Few syringes of Conductonaut, Rockit99, custom IHS, direct die frame...with my 6950X, it was always plug and play.


I don't even want to add up what I spent to lower temps. I often wonder if I should have just bought an 8700K instead.


----------



## Jpmboy

xarot said:


> At least it would prevent us (me) from doing something crazy like direct die.
> 
> But seriously, I've spent quite a bit of money trying to get temps in control: Few syringes of Conductonaut, Rockit99, custom IHS, direct die frame...*with my 6950X, it was always plug and play*.


^^ This. the flagship cpu really should NOT require modification for proper function as an X-class cpu. For $2000 solder the damn thing.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Anymore, I am afraid to go to Microcenter. I always wind up coming home with something new


Hi,
On occasion I have run into a good open box deal too 
But indeed this platform to get better temps is a money pit lol but skylake x was the last win-7 easy install platform 
8700 was a pain to keep 7 updated seeing MS would keep with the hardware unsupported crap
Either way I have extra pumps too I was also going to add to x299's loop instead of separating into two different loops.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> On occasion I have run into a good open box deal too
> But indeed this platform to get better temps is a money pit lol but skylake x was the last win-7 easy install platform
> 8700 was a pain to keep 7 updated seeing MS would keep with the hardware unsupported crap
> Either way I have extra pumps too I was also going to add to x299's loop instead of separating into two different loops.


Right, now I think I am done. 4.8 on all cores at 1.28V. Max temps ~71 so I am still glad I did the delid. MAYBE a new case down the road for more radiators, but not sure that would help. Did get it stable at 4.9 on all cores, but that was at 1.34V and that's just too much for me to be happy with.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Right, now I think I am done. 4.8 on all cores at 1.28V. Max temps ~71 so I am still glad I did the delid. MAYBE a new case down the road for more radiators, but not sure that would help. Did get it stable at 4.9 on all cores, but that was at 1.34V and that's just too much for me to be happy with.


Hi,
Yeah I dumped all core and preferred by core usage splitting half the cores 5 higher... but it was weird because it only shows 8 instead of all 10 cores :/

I might try out by core like the rest of these guys and gals too doing about the same with half the cores seeing there are only 10 to split and they all show up in the by core interface 
I don't see much advantage in all core anymore it just produces more heat and needs more juice.


----------



## RichKnecht

For those with 7900X's and above, what size power supply are you using? I'm starting to think some of my issues are actually power supply rated as I am only running an 850W EVGA Supernova power supply. Am I wrong to think this? Should I move to a 1000W or 1200W?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Using all core yeah probably psu related


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I was going to do a transplant into another case 450D to a 750D so I can get another 280 or 360mm rad on top instead of the tinny 240se
> Might pick it up today at micro center :/


I picked up one of these with a QDC and it's easy to move from one machine to another. Waiting on the other three fans should be here tomorrow. Phobya G-Changer Xtreme NOVA 1080 radiator 60mm - Full Copper 



Spoiler


----------



## cletus-cassidy

RichKnecht said:


> For those with 7900X's and above, what size power supply are you using? I'm starting to think some of my issues are actually power supply rated as I am only running an 850W EVGA Supernova power supply. Am I wrong to think this? Should I move to a 1000W or 1200W?


I'm on a Supernova G3 1000W, but I also have an OC'ed 1080 ti in my loop.


----------



## toncij

Jpmboy said:


> ^^ This. the flagship cpu really should NOT require modification for proper function as an X-class cpu. For $2000 solder the damn thing.


There is a rumor Intel will go back to soldering with the refresh this year.


----------



## Mysticial

RichKnecht said:


> For those with 7900X's and above, what size power supply are you using? I'm starting to think some of my issues are actually power supply rated as I am only running an 850W EVGA Supernova power supply. Am I wrong to think this? Should I move to a 1000W or 1200W?


What issues are you running into? If it's just having issues getting above 4.8 GHz, that's kinda expected since that's where these chips seem to top out at.

Unless there's something wrong with your PSU specifically, 850W should be fine for the 7900X - unless you have some ridiculous GPU setup that's pushing it over the limit.

I've got a 7940X @ 4.7 GHz (vid's ranging from 1.20 - 1.37) on an 850W TT.

The thing never pulls more than 700W at the wall - even with running both CPU and 1050Ti simultaneously. (It's usually only around 500 - 550W when I'm doing the usual CPU-only stuff.)

That's not to say it's ideal to pull 700W on an 850W PSU, but I've had no stability issues that seem power-related.


----------



## toncij

RichKnecht said:


> I don't even want to add up what I spent to lower temps. I often wonder if I should have just bought an 8700K instead.


Wouldn't help. That bastard is also warm AF. Idle is so-so, but as soon as you oc non-delidded to 5.0 it goes up to 85°C. Delid and it's down below 65°C. All that with ambient of 24°C atm.



xarot said:


> At least it would prevent us (me) from doing something crazy like direct die.


GPUs are always direct-die, so ain't that scary tbh. )



vmanuelgm said:


> If the new chip is not more efficient, soldering will not make miracles.
> 
> 20-25°C diff is significant. LM might be a tiny more efficient than solder, but it's very close.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have all of my fans and pumps working according to CPU temp, except for the mini and 8cm fans to VRM.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
That's big @CptSpig 
I was also thinking of a 3-120mm fan shroud extension for the top seeing I can fit a thicker rad but no room for fans probably the cheaper route but my 450D case is pretty small 
May sleep on it and decide tomorrow


----------



## ThrashZone

Mysticial said:


> What issues are you running into? If it's just having issues getting above 4.8 GHz, that's kinda expected since that's where these chips seem to top out at.
> 
> Unless there's something wrong with your PSU specifically, 850W should be fine for the 7900X - unless you have some ridiculous GPU setup that's pushing it over the limit.
> 
> I've got a 7940X @ 4.7 GHz (vid's ranging from 1.20 - 1.37) on an 850W TT.
> 
> The thing never pulls more than 700W at the wall - even with running both CPU and 1050Ti simultaneously. (It's usually only around 500 - 550W when I'm doing the usual CPU-only stuff.)
> 
> That's not to say it's ideal to pull 700W on an 850W PSU, but I've had no stability issues that seem power-related.


Hi,
1080ti ftw3 will pull I read nearly 300w :/


----------



## RichKnecht

Mysticial said:


> What issues are you running into? If it's just having issues getting above 4.8 GHz, that's kinda expected since that's where these chips seem to top out at.
> 
> Unless there's something wrong with your PSU specifically, 850W should be fine for the 7900X - unless you have some ridiculous GPU setup that's pushing it over the limit.
> 
> I've got a 7940X @ 4.7 GHz (vid's ranging from 1.20 - 1.37) on an 850W TT.
> 
> The thing never pulls more than 700W at the wall - even with running both CPU and 1050Ti simultaneously. (It's usually only around 500 - 550W when I'm doing the usual CPU-only stuff.)
> 
> That's not to say it's ideal to pull 700W on an 850W PSU, but I've had no stability issues that seem power-related.


It's running fine at 4.8. I was just wondering if my 850W supply was enough. From what you have said here, it should be plenty as I don't game or have a killer graphics card. This is my photo editing rig. Thanks for your input.


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> That's big @CptSpig
> I was also thinking of a 3-120mm fan shroud extension for the top seeing I can fit a thicker rad but no room for fans probably the cheaper route but my 450D case is pretty small
> May sleep on it and decide tomorrow


I have a 750D case in my closet. I did remove the drive bays for a 360 top and front mount.


----------



## cletus-cassidy

CptSpig said:


> I have a 750D case in my closet. I did remove the drive bays for a 360 top and front mount.


I also have a 750D -- I put a 360 rad in the top, a 240 rad in the bottom and a 140 rad in the back. Note that I also have a Core x71 which I prefer and that gave me room for a 360 on top, a 280 in the front (intake) and a 480 in the bottom.


----------



## SaLaDiN666

Hello, would like to ask something the guys who been overclocking mesh..

So, been tinkering with it for a while, running at fixed 1.0v Voltage @3200MHz, my mobo is AsRock Taichi XE, cpu 7820x.

I overclocked it in Bios by setting the max Mesh ratio to x32.

The thing is when I was running benchmarks or stress tests, Intel Extreme Testing Utility or HWINFO64 always showed the mesh running @2700mhz, never any higher or the desired value.

I fixed it by setting the min Mesh ratio to x32 as well, so Intel Extreme Testing Utility and HWINFO finally show it running @3200MHz.


Anyone here with this mobo? Or experienced the same thing? I guess it is a bios bug.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Default mesh/ cache is 2700
Max cache/ mesh 30 is what most of us use shows as Uncore 3k.


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> I have a 750D case in my closet. I did remove the drive bays for a 360 top and front mount.


Hi,
Yep the top 360mm is the goal although I was going to start with an extra 280p I have already on the top and I already have the 280p on the front 
Add another top ek d5 pump between the rads to fuel liquid through mono block and titan Xp block 

Need at least 2 expansion slots for cd/ dvd player and my ez swap evo so yeah drive bays I have no use for 
Top slot unused for additional rad space 750D seems perfect :/


----------



## Martin778

toncij said:


> There is a rumor Intel will go back to soldering with the refresh this year.



Indeed, I'm following any news about it closely. I bet when Intel officialy anounces that the refreshed SKU's will be soldered, the prices of the previous SKL-X will crash massively and if they get around in fixing those temp differences between cores, then the old chips will be worth nothing (for OC'ers) 

Anyways, when I want to know if my radiator has sufficient cooling capacity, I just run a very mild stress test like Intel's XTU (it's about 20c cooler than X264 or Prime) and look at the graph how the avg. temp is rising. 
With a 560mm HWLabs GTX it barely moves


----------



## toncij

Martin778 said:


> Indeed, I'm following any news about it closely. I bet when Intel officialy anounces that the refreshed SKU's will be soldered, the prices of the previous SKL-X will crash massively and if they get around in fixing those temp differences between cores, then the old chips will be worth nothing (for OC'ers)
> 
> Anyways, when I want to know if my radiator has sufficient cooling capacity, I just run a very mild stress test like Intel's XTU (it's about 20c cooler than X264 or Prime) and look at the graph how the avg. temp is rising.
> With a 560mm HWLabs GTX it barely moves


Well, getting a 7980XE cheap and delidding should be worth the difference and profit. I'm sure the refresh won't be faster by any meaningful amount.


----------



## Martin778

Depends what Intel does to it, whether they will just solder it or also change the arrangement of the core and tweak the mesh.


----------



## Jpmboy

the 7980XE is not Intel's _fastest _chip, it is their most powerful non-server sku. And should have a better thermal solution.


----------



## czin125

vmanuelgm said:


> 4 unused ram slots since I have the 32GB 3600CL15 kit (x2). I have 480+240+120, Two D5 PWM pumps (they raise rpm's according to cpu temp) so do the pwm nb-eloops. And yes, TitanXp overclocked. U can see some gaming videos in my youtube, for example this one recorded under Windows Server 2016 and DX12 (Battlefield 1 64 players):
> 
> Finally I have a total of 4 pairs of quick disconnects.


Didn't see. Even with 4 QDCs and OC'd GPU you could still get 4.8. Nice.


----------



## vmanuelgm

czin125 said:


> Didn't see. Even with 4 QDCs and OC'd GPU you could still get 4.8. Nice.


And even further if we talk about games, 5GHz easily.


----------



## pantsaregood

What kind of voltage is everyone running for mesh? I have a 0.15V offset on mesh for 3.2 GHz, but I have no idea how to check what the actual voltage is. I suppose I could set a static voltage and figure out where it is stable.


----------



## tistou77

Does the Offset for Cache work for you ?
I tested and the voltage does not drop in idle


----------



## vmanuelgm

tistou77 said:


> Does the Offset for Cache work for you ?
> I tested and the voltage does not drop in idle


Hey mate, what about your memory stability??? Did my advise help???


----------



## tistou77

vmanuelgm said:


> Hey mate, what about your memory stability??? Did my advise help???


Yes that's right, I did not answer 
It helped but with the timings at 12 it was good too

I think my problem comes from the problem of VDIMM, once it varies, reboot after it does not vary
RamTest is ok for 1h example (Aida64 for memory / Cache) and reboot after I have an error from the first seconds


----------



## vmanuelgm

tistou77 said:


> Yes that's right, I did not answer
> It helped but with the timings at 12 it was good too
> 
> I think my problem comes from the problem of VDIMM, once it varies, reboot after it does not vary
> RamTest is ok for 1h example (Aida64 for memory / Cache) and reboot after I have an error from the first seconds



So u left 12 for CL17??? I guess that is a problem (among others eventually).

And u use Aida for memory testing???

U need to use HCI or GSAT under Linux, these are the ones that really stress your memory and let you know if the system is stable or not.


----------



## tistou77

vmanuelgm said:


> So u left 12 for CL17??? I guess that is a problem (among others eventually).
> 
> And u use Aida for memory testing???
> 
> U need to use HCI or GSAT under Linux, these are the ones that really stress your memory and let you know if the system is stable or not.


Some are at 12 with memory at 4000 16-17-17 and 1.40v, so ... 

I'm also using Aida64 for memory and cache (and AVX512 instructions)
I prefer to use RamTest for 1h, I do not have time to use HCI for 2 or 3h (and I never leave home leaving the Stress Test on the PC)
And for GSAT, not possible, I deleted the Linux sub system of Windows 10 and I do not want to bother to find a Linux Live to use GSAT


----------



## Testier

Few cores on my 7980XE got runned to 1.59v for 1-2mins due to a bug with Intel XTU. The temperatures were under 100c but how bad could this be for my CPU lifetime?


----------



## pantsaregood

Testier said:


> Few cores on my 7980XE got runned to 1.59v for 1-2mins due to a bug with Intel XTU. The temperatures were under 100c but how bad could this be for my CPU lifetime?


I doubt they were actually hitting 1.59V if your temperatures didn't break 100°C immediately.


----------



## vmanuelgm

tistou77 said:


> Some are at 12 with memory at 4000 16-17-17 and 1.40v, so ...
> 
> I'm also using Aida64 for memory and cache (and AVX512 instructions)
> I prefer to use RamTest for 1h, I do not have time to use HCI for 2 or 3h (and I never leave home leaving the Stress Test on the PC)
> And for GSAT, not possible, I deleted the Linux sub system of Windows 10 and I do not want to bother to find a Linux Live to use GSAT


Ramtest is easier to pass than HCI. I don't trust Ramtest. If u want to emulate HCI with Ramtest, you should run it for 6 hours at least.

In regards to timings, some of them can be run at 12 when using CL17 as u say, but Write Latency can't unless u want unstability.

Please pass HCI and show a 1000% to see if u have errors or not.


----------



## RichKnecht

pantsaregood said:


> What kind of voltage is everyone running for mesh? I have a 0.15V offset on mesh for 3.2 GHz, but I have no idea how to check what the actual voltage is. I suppose I could set a static voltage and figure out where it is stable.


That's what I am using on my 7900x with a 10 core OC at 4.8. No issues so far.


----------



## Martin778

Ouch, don't do the "no idea what the actual voltage is" thing...it might mean RIP CPU very soon.


----------



## Testier

pantsaregood said:


> I doubt they were actually hitting 1.59V if your temperatures didn't break 100°C immediately.


Just one or two cores. Those core temp did hit close to 100c on prime95.(90ish)


----------



## RichKnecht

Is there any harm in changing from static voltage to adaptive? I am OC'ing by specific core and want the CPU to cut voltage at idle. I have the "*" cores set to a slightly lower voltage.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> Is there any harm in changing from static voltage to adaptive? I am OC'ing by specific core and want the CPU to cut voltage at idle. I have the "*" cores set to a slightly lower voltage.


no harm at all. you can set a per core OC with an adaptive voltage for each individual core.


----------



## bmgjet

RichKnecht said:


> Is there any harm in changing from static voltage to adaptive? I am OC'ing by specific core and want the CPU to cut voltage at idle. I have the "*" cores set to a slightly lower voltage.


You should be pushing your * cores the furthest since they are the best ones on the die and will overclock the most.
Your better to run the worst cores at a lower speed if your wanting to save on some heat and power usage.

I use offset for specific cores.
For mine my worst cores do +.050 for 4.8ghz (needed +.102 to get to 4.9ghz)
.130 on the best cores "*" 5ghz and 5.1ghz
.090 on the rest for 4.9ghz


----------



## Ezric

So I noticed something when I got a new 7820x in. The PCB is now dual layered as opposed to the single layer of the same processor I bought last year. I took a side by side pic to show what I’m talking about.
New 7820x on left batch L728C775. The old processor on right, batch L716B567.


----------



## truehighroller1

Ezric said:


> So I noticed something when I got a new 7820x in. The PCB is now dual layered as opposed to the single layer of the same processor I bought last year. I took a side by side pic to show what I’m talking about.
> New 7820x on left batch L728C775. The old processor on right, batch L716B567.


Shoot, that makes me want to turn in my 7900x to see if I get a nice dual layered one too perhaps..


----------



## vmanuelgm

Ezric said:


> So I noticed something when I got a new 7820x in. The PCB is now dual layered as opposed to the single layer of the same processor I bought last year. I took a side by side pic to show what I’m talking about.
> New 7820x on left batch L728C775. The old processor on right, batch L716B567.



Does the new one overclock to higher frequencies???



In regards to soldering the cpus, delidding vs soldering shows a bit better temps in the delidded cpu:

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/amd-ryzen-5-2600-cpu-gets-delidded-and-tested.html


----------



## Martin778

Using LM TIM may yield better temps at first but soldering is a much more stable and permanent solution.


----------



## tistou77

tistou77 said:


> Does the Offset for Cache work for you ?
> I tested and the voltage does not drop in idle


Someone ?


----------



## vmanuelgm

tistou77 said:


> Someone ?


My Gigabyte doesn't reduce this voltage via offset either.


----------



## toncij

So, just a follow-up: replaced the Asus board... Running for 3 days normal. Today, on stock setting, the machine just shut down in the middle of a game of HotS (not particularly high load). After that a reboot loop.

If it was anything to do with the CPU it would not happen only after a while in load. The only thing left to replace is the PSU. I'll replace it and see what happens. It might be the PSU that starts to be unreliable after it heats up a bit.


----------



## ThrashZone

toncij said:


> So, just a follow-up: replaced the Asus board... Running for 3 days normal. Today, on stock setting, the machine just shut down in the middle of a game of HotS (not particularly high load). After that a reboot loop.
> 
> If it was anything to do with the CPU it would not happen only after a while in load. The only thing left to replace is the PSU. I'll replace it and see what happens. It might be the PSU that starts to be unreliable after it heats up a bit.


Hi,
You should also invest in a backup battery system too
Good way to tell if your power outlet is weak too if it is the battery backup will activate 
Plus the obvious other features


----------



## toncij

Shouldn't be the power. On regular days I can run 4-5 other machines at the same time. There is an APC in-front with 3000VA, fully stable. It's just this machine. It might meet its end by a mace if it keeps annoying me...


----------



## Jpmboy

toncij said:


> Shouldn't be the power. On regular days I can run 4-5 other machines at the same time. There is an APC in-front with 3000VA, fully stable. It's just this machine. It might meet its end by a mace if it keeps annoying me...


This occured at all Default settings (no XMP)? Is the CPU delidded? If yes, did you cover the SMDs on the pcb under the IHS with a sealant (conformal coating or some nail polish or something)?
If it is shutting down while under load (gaming?) and then boot looping... can you see the last Q-code displayed right when the post-loop cycles?
sorry for all the questions, but remote diagnosis is not good health care.


----------



## toncij

Jpmboy said:


> This occured at all Default settings (no XMP)? Is the CPU delidded? If yes, did you cover the SMDs on the pcb under the IHS with a sealant (conformal coating or some nail polish or something)?
> If it is shutting down while under load (gaming?) and then boot looping... can you see the last Q-code displayed right when the post-loop cycles?
> sorry for all the questions, but remote diagnosis is not good health care.


It reboots fast, prior to memory detection or something like that. Code 10ish to 20ish. It must be something power and heat related, otherwise it wouldn't shut off only on load.
As an engineer myself, even with some hw experience, I can't figure this out reliably.
It's a brand new 7940X. Delided 7980XE showed same issues; yes, all the components have been isolated using non-conductive dielectric insulation gel. It can't be the CPU.

But, since the PSU was warm-to-hot on touch I left it to cool off and it started now. I'd bet it's something overheating here. Just set HWINFO64 to log everything. I'll track VRM, CPU etc. to see what's going on.


----------



## Testier

Testier said:


> Just one or two cores. Those core temp did hit close to 100c on prime95.(90ish)


Now that I think about it,it must be a misreading. 1.59v would have went way pass 100c easily.


----------



## Jpmboy

toncij said:


> It reboots fast, prior to memory detection or something like that. Code 10ish to 20ish. It must be something power and heat related, otherwise it wouldn't shut off only on load.
> As an engineer myself, even with some hw experience, I can't figure this out reliably.
> It's a brand new 7940X. Delided 7980XE showed same issues; yes, all the components have been isolated using non-conductive dielectric insulation gel. It can't be the CPU.
> 
> But, since the PSU was warm-to-hot on touch I left it to cool off and it started now. I'd bet it's something overheating here. Just set HWINFO64 to log everything. I'll track VRM, CPU etc. to see what's going on.


just an FYI, the corsair "i" series will report PSU internal temps (and loads) to the OS. can be reaD BY siv64, aid64 ETC.


----------



## ABeta

toncij said:


> It reboots fast, prior to memory detection or something like that. Code 10ish to 20ish. It must be something power and heat related, otherwise it wouldn't shut off only on load.
> As an engineer myself, even with some hw experience, I can't figure this out reliably.
> It's a brand new 7940X. Delided 7980XE showed same issues; yes, all the components have been isolated using non-conductive dielectric insulation gel. It can't be the CPU.
> 
> But, since the PSU was warm-to-hot on touch I left it to cool off and it started now. I'd bet it's something overheating here. Just set HWINFO64 to log everything. I'll track VRM, CPU etc. to see what's going on.


Try setting the CPU current capability to something like 200%


----------



## mikecli

I had a similar experience with my x58 system and it carried over once on my x299 system. I'm convinced it's the PSU as that's the only component that carried over (aside from the watercooling) and it only ever happens in the summer.


----------



## RichKnecht

After messing with Adaptive voltage on my Specific core OC, I switched back to static with SpeedShift on. Even with the Turbo voltage set to where I wanted it, the VCore would spike to 1.31V on a few cores. I am not sure why it was doing that as I had max voltage set at 1.28 on 8 cores and 1.275 on the 2 * cores. 

With that, I messed around with the OC a bit more. I was able to get the 4 best cores to 4.9 at at 1.33V and the rest are at 4.8 at 1.28V. Temps really didn't go up that much. Max temps are now ~81-84 under load. I also went out today and bought a watt meter. I wanted to see if my PSU was holding me back voltage wise. With Cinebench, the system is pulling 579-600 watts. It draws about 500W with CPU-Z bench test and Intel's XTU. This is only the computer, no monitor, etc. So I guess my EVGA Supernova 850 is just fine for my system.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> After messing with Adaptive voltage on my Specific core OC, I switched back to static with SpeedShift on. Even with the Turbo voltage set to where I wanted it, the VCore would spike to 1.31V on a few cores. I am not sure why it was doing that as I had max voltage set at 1.28 on 8 cores and 1.275 on the 2 * cores.
> 
> With that, I messed around with the OC a bit more. I was able to get the 4 best cores to 4.9 at at 1.33V and the rest are at 4.8 at 1.28V. Temps really didn't go up that much. Max temps are now ~81-84 under load. I also went out today and bought a watt meter. I wanted to see if my PSU was holding me back voltage wise. With Cinebench, the system is pulling 579-600 watts. It draws about 500W with CPU-Z bench test and Intel's XTU. This is only the computer, no monitor, etc. So I guess my EVGA Supernova 850 is just fine for my system.


remember, adaptive (Additional Turbo Voltage) will deliver voltage based on the VID. If the VID is low for a given core, "Additional" is the operative term. You can account for this with a small negative offset with adaptive turbo voltage on the cores that are seeing the VID-based voltage boost.


----------



## toncij

Jpmboy said:


> just an FYI, the corsair "i" series will report PSU internal temps (and loads) to the OS. can be reaD BY siv64, aid64 ETC.


Thanks, yes, suspected that, but never tried, since it needs to be connected to do that, and the cable need a port... which I did not have spare.  Will have to find a way obviously.



ABeta said:


> Try setting the CPU current capability to something like 200%


I'll try that, although I didn't expect that as req. on stock.



mikecli said:


> I had a similar experience with my x58 system and it carried over once on my x299 system. I'm convinced it's the PSU as that's the only component that carried over (aside from the watercooling) and it only ever happens in the summer.


This is a new PSU, but yes - what Jpmboy and ABeta say - it is obviously either power or heat related. Since it happens long into gaming or other heavy use, I'd say heat, but it can be PSU heating (it's facing desk with its vent and is enclosed into case cover.) VRM shouldn't be the problem, but I remember someone mentioning X299 VRMs get seriously hot.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> remember, adaptive (Additional Turbo Voltage) will deliver voltage based on the VID. If the VID is low for a given core, "Additional" is the operative term. You can account for this with a small negative offset with adaptive turbo voltage on the cores that are seeing the VID-based voltage boost.


Thanks for the settings. Makes sense now. I have noticed that a couple of cores run about 7-8 C warmer than the rest. One is at 4.9, which makes sense given it is running at a higher voltage, but the other is at 48 with 1.28V which is the same voltage as other cores that running much cooler. Do you think it has anything to do with my LM application, or is that just how it is?


----------



## cekim

toncij said:


> Shouldn't be the power. On regular days I can run 4-5 other machines at the same time. There is an APC in-front with 3000VA, fully stable. It's just this machine. It might meet its end by a mace if it keeps annoying me...


3000VA doesn't tell the whole story.

Is there a wattage rating? I have some 1500VA APC boxes that state 865W capacity and will howl and eventually clamp when you exceed that for any amount of time.

Your "4-5" and 3KVA math has me wondering if perhaps you are in a "zone of danger?" ;-) 

All 5-6 machines fully loaded at any point when you get these crashes?


----------



## ABeta

toncij said:


> Thanks, yes, suspected that, but never tried, since it needs to be connected to do that, and the cable need a port... which I did not have spare.  Will have to find a way obviously.
> 
> 
> 
> I'll try that, although I didn't expect that as req. on stock.
> 
> 
> 
> This is a new PSU, but yes - what Jpmboy and ABeta say - it is obviously either power or heat related. Since it happens long into gaming or other heavy use, I'd say heat, but it can be PSU heating (it's facing desk with its vent and is enclosed into case cover.) VRM shouldn't be the problem, but I remember someone mentioning X299 VRMs get seriously hot.


Also double check your ram voltage. I helped a friend recently who would get BSOD like 30 minutes into video editing and he had his DRAM volts on stock, but on stock the voltage on one of the slots would droop by .2v and manually adding the proper voltage to account for the droop solved that issue.


----------



## toncij

cekim said:


> 3000VA doesn't tell the whole story.
> 
> Is there a wattage rating? I have some 1500VA APC boxes that state 865W capacity and will howl and eventually clamp when you exceed that for any amount of time.
> 
> Your "4-5" and 3KVA math has me wondering if perhaps you are in a "zone of danger?" ;-)
> 
> All 5-6 machines fully loaded at any point when you get these crashes?


Sorry, wasn't very clear. Crashes happen when a single machine is running, for example playing HotS (one core load). I run only one machine at the UPS (2,7kW, 3kVA, ~230V) with a PSU of 1,5kW max, a 7980XE stock stripped of all but a single GPU (GTX 970) for test. 
So far max temps with no crash: M2 SSD: 73°C, RAM: 45°C, CPU: 63°C, VRM: 71°C


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
73c on an ssd m.2 is getting up there :/
Do you have a heat sink on it ?


----------



## toncij

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 73c on an ssd m.2 is getting up there :/
> Do you have a heat sink on it ?


Yep.  - will have to watercool it obviously... maybe the M2 crashes the machine. (960Pro).


----------



## Martin778

Nah, they never crash but just throttle.

Also, seems like SKL-X and X299 will be one of the shortest lived chipsets Intel has released: http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/z390-and-x399-chipset-confirmed-through-intel.html


----------



## cletus-cassidy

Martin778 said:


> Nah, they never crash but just throttle.
> 
> Also, seems like SKL-X and X299 will be one of the shortest lived chipsets Intel has released: http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/z390-and-x399-chipset-confirmed-through-intel.html


Hoping it's a situation like Z170 / Z270 where X299 owners can update BIOS and run the new chips on the older chipset. Otherwise, it's a bit of a kick in the teeth.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> Thanks for the settings. Makes sense now. I have noticed that a couple of cores run about 7-8 C warmer than the rest. One is at 4.9, which makes sense given it is running at a higher voltage, but the other is at 48 with 1.28V which is the same voltage as other cores that running much cooler. Do you think it has anything to do with my LM application, or is that just how it is?


the cores have different leakage, hence the * cores and those that are not. a 5C spread among cores is normal/expected at stock. IF the spread is in the 10c range it can be the TIM, LM, or even the block mount.


Martin778 said:


> Nah, they never crash but just throttle.
> 
> Also, seems like SKL-X and X299 will be one of the shortest lived chipsets Intel has released: http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/z390-and-x399-chipset-confirmed-through-intel.html


the 300 series chipsets are not to replace x299. It's a mid stream SKU. Probably see at most an 8 core and that will need a MUCH better power section vs z370


----------



## cletus-cassidy

Jpmboy said:


> the cores have different leakage, hence the * cores and those that are not. a 5C spread among cores is normal/expected at stock. IF the spread is in the 10c range it can be the TIM, LM, or even the block mount.
> 
> 
> the 300 series chipsets are not to replace x299. It's a mid stream SKU. Probably see at most an 8 core and that will need a MUCH better power section vs z370


The articles mentions both Z390 (mid stream SKU) and an X399 (HEDT -- despite same model number as Threadripper boards).


----------



## Jpmboy

cletus-cassidy said:


> The articles mentions both Z390 (mid stream SKU) and an X399 (HEDT -- despite same model number as Threadripper boards).


nothing said about x399 except in the title and one sentence (it's an AMD architecture and is actually pretty poor in performance). Anyway, I hope a new HEDT-intel chipset comes out.


----------



## Martin778

Jpmboy said:


> the cores have different leakage, hence the * cores and those that are not. a 5C spread among cores is normal/expected at stock. IF the spread is in the 10c range it can be the TIM, LM, or even the block mount.
> 
> 
> the 300 series chipsets are not to replace x299. It's a mid stream SKU. Probably see at most an 8 core and that will need a MUCH better power section vs z370


*Tried 3 different coolers, delidded my 7920X 3 times (once with Kryonout just to be sure about the application) and nope, still 20*C+ differences.
7980XE is even worse in that regard but I don't even bother with opening it again or trying different coolers anymore, it's the CPU itself.
Stress tests like XTU or IntelBurnTest (Standard) are very weak in terms of heat output, to fully see what's happening with the temps you should run Cinebench R15, X264 stresstest or REalBench but the last one is too fussy for me.

Where dit you get that info about X399 by the way? The chart itself only states "HEDT".


----------



## cletus-cassidy

Martin778 said:


> *Tried 3 different coolers, delidded my 7920X 3 times (once with Kryonout just to be sure about the application) and nope, still 20*C+ differences.
> 7980XE is even worse in that regard but I don't even bother with opening it again or trying different coolers anymore, it's the CPU itself.
> Stress tests like XTU or IntelBurnTest (Standard) are very weak in terms of heat output, to fully see what's happening with the temps you should run Cinebench R15, X264 stresstest or REalBench but the last one is too fussy for me.
> 
> Where dit you get that info about X399 by the way? The chart itself only states "HEDT".


Pretty sure X399 is a new Intel HEDT chipset: https://hothardware.com/news/intel-confirms-x399-chipset-for-coffee-lake-cannon-lake-hedt-cpus

I'm hopeful X299 will be able to run Coffee Lake / Cannon Lake HEDT but Intel could just be moving on from Z370 and X299 entirely.


----------



## Jpmboy

Martin778 said:


> *Tried 3 different coolers, delidded my 7920X 3 times (once with Kryonout just to be sure about the application) and nope, still 20*C+ differences.
> 7980XE is even worse in that regard but I don't even bother with opening it again or trying different coolers anymore, it's the CPU itself.
> Stress tests like XTU or IntelBurnTest (Standard) are very weak in terms of heat output, to fully see what's happening with the temps you should run Cinebench R15, X264 stresstest or REalBench but the last one is too fussy for me.
> 
> Where dit you get that info about X399 by the way? The chart itself only states "HEDT".


Sorry bud, I don't see a 20C spread on the 3 2066 cpus I have here right now (all delidded). You are asking me if i use x264 stresstestv2, realbench and R15? x264v2 has been a shared link from my G acct for several years :tiredsmil I do not agree that XTU or IBT are weak in power consumption, but they may cause (unreported, or what ever the common name is) clock throttling. I do think XTU and IBT are weak at determining stability tho.
Double check that something like Hwi64 does not have thermal calibration offsets in it's config for each core.

Threadripper is HEDT right? (x399)... z300 series are not, but then again, was not long ago when a 6 or 8 core cpu was. 
Anyway, why would anyone complain about a new platform launch? Would be disappointing if there was not. I'm looking forward to i9 x399.


----------



## wingman99

toncij said:


> Yep.  - will have to watercool it obviously... maybe the M2 crashes the machine. (960Pro).





Martin778 said:


> Nah, they never crash but just throttle.
> 
> Also, seems like SKL-X and X299 will be one of the shortest lived chipsets Intel has released: http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/z390-and-x399-chipset-confirmed-through-intel.html


I second that all the reviews I have see when fully utilizing the 960Pro they just throttle down. I would substitute the 960pro for testing to see if there is a problem with it.


----------



## wingman99

Jpmboy said:


> Sorry bud, I don't see a 20C spread on the 3 2066 cpus I have here right now (all delidded). You are asking me if i use x264 stresstestv2, realbench and R15? x264v2 has been a shared link from my G acct for several years :tiredsmil I do not agree that XTU or IBT are weak in power consumption, but they may cause (unreported, or what ever the common name is) clock throttling. I do think XTU and IBT are weak at determining stability tho.
> Double check that something like Hwi64 does not have thermal calibration offsets in it's config for each core.
> 
> Threadripper is HEDT right? (x399)... z300 series are not, but then again, was not long ago when a 6 or 8 core cpu was.
> Anyway, why would anyone complain about a new platform launch? Would be disappointing if there was not. I'm looking forward to i9 x399.


The Intel internal specification shows x399.







http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/z390-and-x399-chipset-confirmed-through-intel.html


----------



## Martin778

Yup, it will be damn confusing as there is already X399 Threadripper on the market. 
@Jpmboy, that would mean my Apex MB is broken...both of my CPU's had 20*C+ differences which only show when you push the CPU.


----------



## toncij

New HEDT is fine, but what is Intel going to get with a Z390? If it's going to get 10nm chips, that's a worthy upgrade, but if it's going to get only 2 more cores on the same chip CL is... meh.

Now, X399 is a cool thing: soldered? Give! 10nm? Woah! - 14nm CoffeeLake-X? Meh.


----------



## Martin778

Hades himself resides in this CPU:
1.22V 4.6GHz
https://i.imgur.com/jlCu0Cz.png
I think I might give the der8auer's direct-die frame a go and otherwise just sell this trash chip, however Roman said himself that it probably won't work with the monoblock, sigh.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Martin778 said:


> Hades himself resides in this CPU:
> 1.22V 4.6GHz
> https://i.imgur.com/jlCu0Cz.png
> I think I might give the der8auer's direct-die frame a go and otherwise just sell this trash chip, however Roman said himself that it probably won't work with the monoblock, sigh.



Can't work with the monoblock since DDF lowers the height of the socket around 3mm.


----------



## Martin778

Bummer, another reason to sell it or make another keychain (6950X was the previous  )
I've found a Dutch review where they tested the XE @ 4.6 1.2V on an AIO and non delidded and their temps were better, which simpply put, does not compute.


----------



## Jpmboy

Martin778 said:


> Yup, it will be damn confusing as there is already X399 Threadripper on the market.
> 
> @*Jpmboy* , that would mean my Apex MB is broken...both of my CPU's had 20*C+ differences which only show when you push the CPU.


lol - must be the board.  (sure were'nt using the apex with your 6950x).  were you using the same cooling equip with both CPUs??
Again - the on board DTS reports what it sees The MB has very little to do with (if anything at all) with on-die temperature spreads. Are the VIDs very different between the cores? And if you test one core at a time, does the temp match when all are tested together?



Martin778 said:


> Hades himself resides in this CPU:
> 1.22V 4.6GHz
> https://i.imgur.com/jlCu0Cz.png
> I think I might give the der8auer's direct-die frame a go and otherwise just sell this trash chip, *however Roman said himself that it probably won't work with the monoblock*, sigh.


it does not work with the gaming 9 and a monoblock... but, you see these temp variations with a monoblock? have you tried a good cpu-only block?


Martin778 said:


> Bummer, another reason to sell it or make another keychain (6950X was the previous  )
> I've found a Dutch review where they tested the XE @ 4.6 1.2V on an AIO and non delidded and their temps were better, which simpply put, does not compute.


depending on the load, the dutch guys may have seen artificially low temps (and therefore low spread) due to vrm throttling ("phantom throttling"). IDKk I have not (ever) seen a 7980XE in with stock tim run 4.6 with a decent load at 1.2V and not either drop a bin due to low voltage or run hot, like in the 80s. 

I think you need to find a better source for CPUs if both the 6950X and 7980XE were potatoes... and very expensive ones at that! 
I feel your pain.


----------



## Martin778

I mean, I've never had those issues when I was running the previous 7920X on the Taichi, in fact I did pretty crazy stuff on it like 1.30Vcore and the temps were amazing, like 80*C peak in Cine R15 @ 4.8GHz.
That melted 8-pin panic from der8auer got to me and so I sold the Taichi and got the Apex...and then this menace started  7920X started to get 20C diff between the cores and I went bananas by delidding it a few more times, even tried a D15, custom loop with a normal EK block, EK Predator 360, BeQuiet SL360 - nope.
Finally I RMA'ed the CPU, got my money back and got the XE - which is even worse in that regard.

I serously hope it's not another ASUS VRM nightmare as with my X99 Deluxe, which I'm certain of, killed the 6950X. *Not this s...t again* LOL

Tough call, this one:
- I can't buy the R6E or I'd have to make a new custom EPS cable as my current ones are solid 8 pin and ASUS has, very conventiently, put a capacitor next to the 4 pin connector.
- I can buy the X299 OC Formula but I'd have to get a new monoblock and redo the loop...
- Go "YOLO" and order EVGA X299 dark but that one doesn't have a monoblock and would look butt-ugly in my TT900 with 90deg acryl tubes, which I'd have to redo again.
- Sell the XE and risk it again with a 7900 or 7920.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Martin778 said:


> Hades himself resides in this CPU:
> 1.22V 4.6GHz
> https://i.imgur.com/jlCu0Cz.png
> I think I might give the der8auer's direct-die frame a go and otherwise just sell this trash chip, however Roman said himself that it probably won't work with the monoblock, sigh.



By the way, those IBT Gflops are low:


----------



## Martin778

There is something not right...I've tried what you did and got ~190GFlops. At some point the screen went blank and I got "EE" on the Qcode display. 
My setting was manual Vcore ~1.210V, cache [email protected], RAM @ XMP + 0.02V to be sure. LLC=4, CPU current and limits set to max. FIVR fault reporting turned off, phases set to Optimized.

It wouldn't reboot by pushing the button and I had to force it shutdown with the power button.

I've looked through my previous uploads and it turns out that my 7920X had much higher CPU score than the 7980XE in Time Spy, weird stuff going on.
Take a look:


----------



## Jpmboy

Martin778 said:


> There is something not right...I've tried what you did and got ~190GFlops. At some point the screen went blank and I got "EE" on the Qcode display.
> My setting was manual Vcore ~1.210V, cache [email protected], RAM @ XMP + 0.02V to be sure. LLC=4, CPU current and limits set to max. FIVR fault reporting turned off, phases set to Optimized.
> 
> It wouldn't reboot by pushing the button and I had to force it shutdown with the power button.
> 
> I've looked through my previous uploads and it turns out that my 7920X had much higher CPU score than the 7980XE in Time Spy, weird stuff going on.
> Take a look:


something is def not right. This rig is getting 280 gflops at bone stock (except the ram OC) and 295-300 at 4.5 (pulling very close to 500W at the CPU!) Cores range from 57C to 66C (2 cores are at 4.6, 16 at 4.5 but the avx offset runs all cores at the same multiplier, based off 45 - the lowest multiplier in the stack with per specific core OCs).

You should post a bios text dump (ctrl-F2) to a USB stick and lets have a look at what's going on there.


----------



## ocvn

Martin778 said:


> There is something not right...I've tried what you did and got ~190GFlops. At some point the screen went blank and I got "EE" on the Qcode display.
> My setting was manual Vcore ~1.210V, cache [email protected], RAM @ XMP + 0.02V to be sure. LLC=4, CPU current and limits set to max. FIVR fault reporting turned off, phases set to Optimized.
> 
> It wouldn't reboot by pushing the button and I had to force it shutdown with the power button.
> 
> I've looked through my previous uploads and it turns out that my 7920X had much higher CPU score than the 7980XE in Time Spy, weird stuff going on.
> Take a look:


too much cache voltage. cache 2.7GHz need around 0.9 to 0.95V. 

It wouldn't reboot by pushing the button and I had to force it shutdown with the power button. ->> too low vcore or vccin. I think you get phantom throttle also due to cpu packet reach 104. I got 250 gflops @4.6GHz but my ram was 3200c15. You can raise the gflops with higher ram speed.


----------



## xarot

Martin778 said:


> Hades himself resides in this CPU:
> 1.22V 4.6GHz
> https://i.imgur.com/jlCu0Cz.png
> I think I might give the der8auer's direct-die frame a go and otherwise just sell this trash chip, however Roman said himself that it probably won't work with the monoblock, sigh.


How is your chip trash? I am nearing my cooling capacity on a simple 480mm+360mm rads setup with the 7980XE 4.5 [email protected] V. It already pulls around 600W (or more) in P95. Two or three cores are around 93c max but the rest are way lower. 4.6 needs around 1.23 V so it's putting out too much heat. I run Prime95 SmallFFTs with AVX disabled. Using direct die so I could still even those temps if I had time to test multiple remounts of the water block. I think after going over 1.1 V on the core voltage on my chip, heat problems start to arise. Of course with gaming and browsing there is never an issue. The loop is also old and probably full of gunk (radiators going without flush since 2015, only regular water change).

It's just not possible to cool down that amount of heat with AIOs used in the reviews, unless they did some "limited" testing but that's how the reviews seem to be these days.  After all, a single thick 360mm radiator can dissipate around 200-500 W heat with delta T 10c, depending largely on fan speed and setup.

I am quite happy with the 7980XE, even at 4~4.2 GHz.  Also I've seen that if you can get the temps down on these chips (80c or below on the cores), you can drop the Vcore too.


----------



## vmanuelgm

10nm issues.


https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-cpu-10nm-earnings-amd,36967.html


Intel needed Jim Keller.







7980xe makes a good job sustaining gpu load at 720p in Origins:


----------



## L3G3NDIXIV

I have a 7920X on an asrock gaming i9 and that thing is a beast. Makes me wonder if I should've gotten the 7960x. Yh, I'm not tempted to get the 7980XE


----------



## Martin778

Welp, there is certainly something wrong. At bone stock speeds(no xmp or MCE, just full defaults) I still have 20c temp discrepancy and 60C+ under load. Imo this cannot be with such a big loop.



Spoiler














And when you push it a tiny bit harder with Aida64 FPU, the hotter cores start to 'run away':


----------



## Jpmboy

It's really 2 cores driving this issue. Was LM applied to both the die and underside of the IHS?
Drop HWi and aid64 for a bit. DL siv64 and after running any stress test (but let's stick with one like IBT so we can compare heat and efficiency), post up a snip of the "Status" panel. Lets see the individual core voltages and temps.


----------



## Martin778

It was done by someone who did hundreds of delids already and offers himself for delidding service so it would've been very uncommon if he didn't get it right. 
Going to try SIV64 now.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Martin778 said:


> It was done by someone who did hundreds of delids already and offers himself for delidding service so it would've been very uncommon if he didn't get it right.
> Going to try SIV64 now.



Everybody has a bad day!!!


----------



## Martin778

Can be, but my previous 7920X I've delidded 3 times and got the same bad temp. result, every time. I even tried plain Kryonaut between the die, just for the sake of testing.
Can't really explain what's going on but this started with swapping the Taichi for the Apex. On the Taichi the same chip ran within a couple of deg. between the cores, even at crazy 1.3V OC.

@Jpmboy, 
Does this tell you something? I'm completely unfamiliar with SVI (it's a bit too 'crowded' for me):

IBT Standard:


Spoiler














Aida64 pure FPU, much harder hitting than IBT:


Spoiler


----------



## Jpmboy

Martin778 said:


> Can be, but my previous 7920X I've delidded 3 times and got the same bad temp. result, every time. I even tried plain Kryonaut between the die, just for the sake of testing.
> Can't really explain what's going on but this started with swapping the Taichi for the Apex. On the Taichi the same chip ran within a couple of deg. between the cores, even at crazy 1.3V OC.
> 
> @*Jpmboy* ,
> Does this tell you something? I'm completely unfamiliar with SVI (it's a bit too 'crowded' for me):


click the "Status" button and post that snip. It will show min /max data. :thumb:


----------



## Martin778

There you go:
IBT Standard:


Spoiler















Aida64 FPU (heavy load)


Spoiler














, 
Also, the Apex has 2 BIOS'es - right? I found out that second one only allows 140% current cap while the other one goes up to 240% and looks very slightly different. I'm looking at the manual atm but I don't see it saying that they're different, hmm!
I've made a small video on how the temp. is rising in Cinebench R15 when using a crude 4.3GHz @ 1.15V OC w. XMP, unlocked power limits and using the 2nd BIOS:


----------



## Jpmboy

Martin778 said:


> There you go:
> IBT Standard:
> 
> Aida64 FPU (heavy load)
> ,
> Also, the Apex has 2 BIOS'es - right? I found out that second one only allows 140% current cap while the other one goes up to 240% and looks very slightly different. I'm looking at the manual atm but I don't see it saying that they're different, hmm!
> I've made a small video on how the temp. is rising in Cinebench R15 when using a crude 4.3GHz @ 1.15V OC w. XMP, unlocked power limits and using the 2nd BIOS: https://youtu.be/9vrw_0NKJJo


the second bios is a backup and should only really be used when bios 1 gets corrupted. It may copy to bios 1 if used. Best to flash bios 1 with bios flash back (use bios 1301). All that said, DO NOT enable XMP for this testing. XMP programming will adjust voltages which are set to Auto in bios.
With the settings loaded exactly as you had them when you ran IBT at "default"in the quoted post, put a usb stick in any port, enter bios, nav to the Asus overclocking profiles page, scroll down to the USB and hit enter. Read the instructions at the bottom and drop a bios TXT file to the USB stick. Post that file back here.
The temps in the quoted post are okay at defaults with cores 4 and one other running hot (tho more importantly the g-flops are really poor). Need to see the exact bios settings that produced that IBT result.
Bro, focus on a single test at this point, use IBT to ferret out the problem, then you can play with AID64, R15. Otherwise it is helter skelter. We've seen the observed temp problem you've posted about. Let's try to see if it just a cpu-silicon lottery thing or a configuration thing.
And please add your rig to your sig


----------



## Martin778

1. Sig added
2. BIOS set to "1" and updated to 1301
3. All setttings set to defaults (F5 key), no XMP.

4. Ran 10x IBT Standard:


Spoiler















5. Ran Cine R15, got 3337 points.


----------



## Jpmboy

we're running nearly identical rigs, only difference is ram and gpus. 

first - that looks like a low vid cpu, which is a good thing in the Extreme world, but can be a hot one in the real world (low voltage cpus tend to run hot cause they are "tight"). 
From every thing you posted (and thank you for more complete info), my first inclination is that the LM has either squeezed out (vertical mount of cpu) or trapped an air pocket. But since you say the same issue happens with a different cpu (?? right?, or is it only that this was not observed on the asrock board with this CPu?), pull the chip check the socket for any mis-aligned pins (i'd flash the bios at this point without the cpu in the socket, you just need the atx power to the board and follow the flashback procedure), check the contact pads of the cpu for any "darkened" areas/pads and clean these, blow the socket clear with an air can, set the cpu in with the cpu insertion tool included with the APEX, mount the cooler with only moderate pressure, fire it up and check temps again.
...or, you could try an RMA ticket, but they will believe it is the cpu as it is very hard to explain core temp variance by the board... unless the pins/pads are making poor or off contact leading to voltage delivery issues.


----------



## Martin778

The story went pretty much like this:

1. In September I've bought a 7920X and X299 Taichi. Also a custom loop w. EK Supremacy EVO X99, 420mm GTS rad and D5
2. Delidded the CPU myself w. Rockit tool, ran like an absolute dream up to 1.3V.
3. I panicked about the single 8Pin drama, sold the Taichi and bought the Apex
4. Temp problems arise
5. I delid the CPU 3 more times and try different coolers - didn't help
6. CPU finally goes RMA, after a long fight with the store I get my money back. Meanwhile the custom loop was sold as I wanted full LC and a monoblock, went back to BQ SL 360mm AIO in the meantime.
7. Bought the 7980XE, it's having similar temp problems as w. the 7920X. Right after my XE came back from delidding, I installed it, put a BQ SL360 on it and get 27*C difference between cores: CLICK That 'd pretty much exclude dripped LM.
8. Built a custom loop w. monoblock, hoping it would bring the temp. difference down - it didn't.


Regarding the low FPS, Spectre/Meltdown patch maybe? My Cinebench R15 score looks to be perfectly on par with other reviews.


----------



## Jpmboy

Martin778 said:


> The story went pretty much like this:
> 
> 1. In September I've bought a 7920X and X299 Taichi. Also a custom loop w. EK Supremacy EVO X99, 420mm GTS rad and D5
> 2. Delidded the CPU myself w. Rockit tool, ran like an absolute dream up to 1.3V.
> 3. I panicked about the single 8Pin drama, sold the Taichi and bought the Apex
> 4. Temp problems arise
> 5. I delid the CPU 3 more times and try different coolers - didn't help
> 6. CPU finally goes RMA, after a long fight with the store I get my money back. Meanwhile the custom loop was sold as I wanted full LC and a monoblock, went back to BQ SL 360mm AIO in the meantime.
> 7. Bought the 7980XE, it's having similar temp problems as w. the 7920X. Right after my XE came back from delidding, I installed it, put a BQ SL360 on it and get 27*C difference between cores: CLICK That 'd pretty much exclude dripped LM.
> 8. Built a custom loop w. monoblock, hoping it would bring the temp. difference down - it didn't.
> 
> 
> Regarding the* low FPS*, Spectre/Meltdown patch maybe? My Cinebench R15 score looks to be perfectly on par with other reviews.


Nasty story. Considering that you seem to have the wherewithal, why not grab a different board and see if the APEX is the root cause? If the monoblock (for the APEX??) required cutting/removing vrm cooling, I can say that I have a gigabyte gaming 9 with the vrm HS cut off. It can;t OC ram for sht! 
I think you mean G-flops not FPS. The IBT posts I made yesterday are with a fully patched rig... can;t point to that for he gflops difference.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> Nasty story. Considering that you seem to have the wherewithal, why not grab a different board and see if the APEX is the root cause? If the monoblock (for the APEX??) required cutting/removing vrm cooling, I can say that I have a gigabyte gaming 9 with the vrm HS cut off. It can;t OC ram for sht!
> I think you mean G-flops not FPS. The IBT posts I made yesterday are with a *fully patched rig*... can;t point to that for he gflops difference.


Hi,
Guess we know now what you were looking for in new bios now


----------



## Martin778

Got to this so far:


Spoiler














Haven't tweaked the memory yet.


----------



## wingman99

Jpmboy said:


> Nasty story. Considering that you seem to have the wherewithal, why not grab a different board and see if the APEX is the root cause? If the monoblock (for the APEX??) required cutting/removing vrm cooling, I can say that I have a gigabyte gaming 9 with the vrm HS cut off. It can;t OC ram for sht!
> I think you mean G-flops not FPS. The IBT posts I made yesterday are with a fully patched rig... can;t point to that for he gflops difference.


How does the Gigabyte gaming 9 behave when overclocking ram?


----------



## Jpmboy

Martin778 said:


> Got to this so far:
> Haven't tweaked the memory yet.


by doing what to fix the problem you posted earlier??


----------



## vmanuelgm

wingman99 said:


> How does the Gigabyte gaming 9 behave when overclocking ram?



4000 CL17 stable is possible.


----------



## wingman99

vmanuelgm said:


> 4000 CL17 stable is possible.




Thanks.:thumb:I find with my Gigabyte motherboard I can have a stable memory overclock 400% HCI MemTest. However when I reboot 1-20 times the test will fail HCI MemTest at 1-30% and if I don't change the setting and reboot the PC again it will pas the HCI MemTest 400%. Do you think there is a problem with Gigabyte motherboard?


----------



## vmanuelgm

wingman99 said:


> Thanks.:thumb:I find with my Gigabyte motherboard I can have a stable memory overclock 400% HCI MemTest. However when I reboot 1-20 times the test will fail HCI MemTest at 1-30% and if I don't change the setting and reboot the PC again it will pas the HCI MemTest 400%. Do you think there is a problem with Gigabyte motherboard?



Gigabyte Bios is not the best UEFI in the world as we all know. But that behaviour has to do with memory training rtl and iol's. At 3800 CL16 u shouldn't have that problem.

I am now with a Gaming 7 Pro and my motherboard is completely stable reboot after reboot at 4000 CL17. I didn't have that issue with the gaming 9, manually tuning the timings.


----------



## wingman99

vmanuelgm said:


> Gigabyte Bios is not the best UEFI in the world as we all know. But that behaviour has to do with memory training rtl and iol's. At 3800 CL16 u shouldn't have that problem.
> 
> I am now with a Gaming 7 Pro and my motherboard is completely stable reboot after reboot at 4000 CL17. I didn't have that issue with the gaming 9, manually tuning the timings.


Is there something I can use to see the changed memory training rtl and iol's when it boots up so I can set them manually so they won't change?


----------



## Martin778

Jpmboy said:


> Martin778 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Got to this so far:
> Haven't tweaked the memory yet.
> 
> 
> 
> by doing what to fix the problem you posted earlier??
Click to expand...

Lowered the stress load, medium data set....the problem is still there but is pretty much not fixable. I got suggested this is due to IHS being slightly bent.


----------



## vmanuelgm

wingman99 said:


> Is there something I can use to see the changed memory training rtl and iol's when it boots up so I can set them manually so they won't change?



U can use Memtweakit under Win10. Please install it and upload a shot of all your timings.


----------



## eatthermalpaste

Anyone know if theres information anywhere about batch/lot performance for skylake-x?


----------



## bmgjet

What sort of underclocking results are people getting.
Working out my UPS run time and on full load overclocked I get 27mins vs stock clock 40mins. Would really like to extend that a little bit more.
(Profiles are switched via throttlestop software)


----------



## ThrashZone

eatthermalpaste said:


> Anyone know if theres information anywhere about batch/lot performance for skylake-x?


Hi,
I would imagine @Silicon Lottery would be best to ask that seeing they go through a lot of chips


----------



## Martin778

Is 1.2V mesh @ 3GHz normal for a 7980XE? I've tried 1.10 - freeze/bsod, 1.15V, same, 1.2V it passed 1h of RealBench.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Martin778 said:


> Is 1.2V mesh @ 3GHz normal for a 7980XE? I've tried 1.10 - freeze/bsod, 1.15V, same, 1.2V it passed 1h of RealBench.



A bit high, it normally needs around 1.08-1.12v.

Try HCI to see if it is completely stable.


----------



## Martin778

Realbench is fiddly, looks like it's more core/AVX related than cache, sometimes it would crash, sometimes it wouldn't.
4300 -3 AVX and 1.14V Mesh:


Spoiler














4.4GHz won't work at thos settings (DPC Watchdog), probably needs -4 offset. Glad I replaced the fans with ML120 Pro's, some more RPM certainly helps under full load.
My VRM temps peaked @ 78*C. Mighty fine result from EVGA.
And yes that's a GT230, sold the LC 1080ti's and currently waiting for a temporary card (GTX1060 6GB) while Titan Xp hunting


----------



## vmanuelgm

Martin778 said:


> Realbench is fiddly, looks like it's more core/AVX related than cache, sometimes it would crash, sometimes it wouldn't.
> 4300 -3 AVX and 1.14V Mesh:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.4GHz won't work at thos settings (DPC Watchdog), probably needs -4 offset. Glad I replaced the fans with ML120 Pro's, some more RPM certainly helps under full load.
> My VRM temps peaked @ 78*C. Mighty fine result from EVGA.
> And yes that's a GT230, sold the LC 1080ti's and currently waiting for a temporary card (GTX1060 6GB) while Titan Xp hunting



In that shot u have the most of the cores at -4 offset. And package 89 celsius degrees at 4-4.1 avx, very very high!!!

A bad unit for sure!!!

Guess Intel will fix some way this behaviour with cascade lake x cpus, including the nuts power consumption.


----------



## Martin778

Oh well, don't expect lower power consumption for 18 cores, unless they bring back the ring interconnect.
The results are on an 360mm AIO w. 3x ML120. Core voltage is set to fixed so offset doesn't do all that much besides giving more stability.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Martin778 said:


> Oh well, don't expect lower power consumption for 18 cores, unless they bring back the ring interconnect.
> The results are on an 360mm AIO w. 3x ML120. Core voltage is set to fixed so offset doesn't do all that much besides giving more stability.



With your setup, u should get 90 degrees when pushing 4.4 avx more or less, depending on the used vcore.


----------



## Martin778

No way, this thing is pushing like 450-500W through the CPU at that load  

4.4 AVX needs like 1.17V = 96*C peak core / 99*C package. I've also noticed that the hotter cores have a much higher VID = crappy SKU.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Martin778 said:


> No way, this thing is pushing like 450-500W through the CPU at that load
> 
> 4.4 AVX needs like 1.17V = 96*C peak core / 99*C package. I've also noticed that the hotter cores have a much higher VID = crappy SKU.



Crap unit.


----------



## Martin778

Yup, selling it and going back to ~7900X (need the PCI-E lanes).


----------



## vmanuelgm

Martin778 said:


> Yup, selling it and going back to ~7900X (need the PCI-E lanes).



Good decision. Wait for Cascade, maybe things get better.


----------



## Martin778

Depends what the ETA is for Cascade, knowing Intel's policy I'd have to change the MB too.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Martin778 said:


> Depends what the ETA is for Cascade, knowing Intel's policy I'd have to change the MB too.



Happy with the EVGA???


----------



## pantsaregood

Any ideas what kind of cache voltages are safe? I'm running 1.05V right now, but I'm wondering if I can push further.


----------



## Martin778

> Happy with the EVGA???


Very 'meh' for that price, to he honest. Useless if not used for LN2.

- Only 2 usable (curve controlled) fan headers
- Very crude BIOS compared to Apex or Taichi, missing power limit settings etc.
- Every failed OC needs a CMOS reset, lots of important features simply missing
- According to BIOS voltage readouts, heavy VCCIN overshoot, set to 1.875 gives 1.900. LLC can only be set to auto/enabled/disabled (LOL)
- No WiFi card, only a blank slot
- BIOS update by running .bat file (LOL*2)


----------



## vmanuelgm

Martin778 said:


> Very 'meh' for that price, to he honest. Useless if not used for LN2.
> 
> - Only 2 usable (curve controlled) fan headers
> - Very crude BIOS compared to Apex or Taichi, missing power limit settings etc.
> - Every failed OC needs a CMOS reset, lots of important features simply missing
> - According to BIOS voltage readouts, heavy VCCIN overshoot, set to 1.875 gives 1.900. LLC can only be set to auto/enabled/disabled (LOL)
> - No WiFi card, only a blank slot
> - BIOS update by running .bat file (LOL*2)



Its like a retro bios then, xDDD

Stable at least???





pantsaregood said:


> Any ideas what kind of cache voltages are safe? I'm running 1.05V right now, but I'm wondering if I can push further.


I wouldn't go over 1.16v.


----------



## Martin778

Rock stable, can't complain about that but it really does have a bit of a primitive/retro feel to it.


----------



## nycgtr

Fairly new to skylake x ocing, was too busy on threadripper. I have a 7940x that's been delided with a lapped copper ihs. It seems I have the chip running with a +.01 offset voltage @ 4.6ghz. Temps in aida64 stress is under a hair under 70 across all cores, for prime 95 small I am hiting like high 80 to low 90s across all cores. I have the avx offets at 5/6. I got this chip second hand from a guy who's relatively savy. However, his bin numbers are significant better than mine with this chip lol. No real reason for him to butter up the numbers so I should try a different board? Using a strix x299 for this chip atm with a monoblock.


----------



## cletus-cassidy

Could use some help with my 7900X OC that is driving me crazy. I'm running a delidded 7900X on a Taichi XE under custom water. I'm OC'ed to 4.7ghz at 1.230 vcore and AVX2 -5 offset and AVX3 -7 offset that is stable in every test I throw at it (P95, RealBench, etc.). Except for Handbrake. Handbrake randomly crashes ("Handbrake is not responding") at the same point about 50% of the time. Right after it's encoded the subtitles and switches to full encoding, it sometimes crashes. But other times with the exact same file and OC settings it will run. I've tried a variety of voltage changes and it seems to continue exhibiting the same behavior regardless of what I switch. Everything else seems stable, so I'm at a loss at what to do next. 

Any thoughts on whether it's Handbrake or if this is a classic unstable OC? I suppose I could try it at stock a number of times in a row to see if it exhibits the same symptoms, but I would think my AVX offset is so low that it's not a pure vcore issue.


----------



## vmanuelgm

cletus-cassidy said:


> Could use some help with my 7900X OC that is driving me crazy. I'm running a delidded 7900X on a Taichi XE under custom water. I'm OC'ed to 4.7ghz at 1.230 vcore and AVX2 -5 offset and AVX3 -7 offset that is stable in every test I throw at it (P95, RealBench, etc.). Except for Handbrake. Handbrake randomly crashes ("Handbrake is not responding") at the same point about 50% of the time. Right after it's encoded the subtitles and switches to full encoding, it sometimes crashes. But other times with the exact same file and OC settings it will run. I've tried a variety of voltage changes and it seems to continue exhibiting the same behavior regardless of what I switch. Everything else seems stable, so I'm at a loss at what to do next.
> 
> Any thoughts on whether it's Handbrake or if this is a classic unstable OC? I suppose I could try it at stock a number of times in a row to see if it exhibits the same symptoms, but I would think my AVX offset is so low that it's not a pure vcore issue.



Try 1.25v vcore and raise to 1.95v vccin.


----------



## cletus-cassidy

vmanuelgm said:


> Try 1.25v vcore and raise to 1.95v vccin.


I've done both of these and no change. I'll think it's worked because Handbrake works for one encode but the next day with the same settings it will crash again. Any other ideas?


----------



## trn

cletus-cassidy said:


> I've done both of these and no change. I'll think it's worked because Handbrake works for one encode but the next day with the same settings it will crash again. Any other ideas?


What are your mesh settings? multiplier and Vmesh? maybe try backing down the mesh multiplier to see if maybe that's the issue? If that solves the crashes you need more voltage for the uncore.


----------



## cletus-cassidy

trn said:


> What are your mesh settings? multiplier and Vmesh? maybe try backing down the mesh multiplier to see if maybe that's the issue? If that solves the crashes you need more voltage for the uncore.


I set everything back to UEFI defaults and replicated the crash on stock voltages. I guess that means there is an issue with Handbrake. Not sure how to go about fixing that?


----------



## cletus-cassidy

cletus-cassidy said:


> I set everything back to UEFI defaults and replicated the crash on stock voltages. I guess that means there is an issue with Handbrake. Not sure how to go about fixing that?


Seems to be a broader issue of Handbroke v1.1 on Skylake-X: https://github.com/HandBrake/HandBrake/issues/1280

I moved to version 1.07 and it seems to be working fine. Hoping the link above helps other avoid wasting as much time as I spent trying to "fix" their overclock as I did (and also believing I had a bad unit). Now I need to go back to the drawing board on my OC.


----------



## Jpmboy

cletus-cassidy said:


> Seems to be a broader issue of *Handbroke* v1.1 on Skylake-X: https://github.com/HandBrake/HandBrake/issues/1280
> 
> I moved to version 1.07 and it seems to be working fine. Hoping the link above helps other avoid wasting as much time as I spent trying to "fix" their overclock as I did (and also believing I had a bad unit). Now I need to go back to the drawing board on my OC.


ain't that the truth!


----------



## superV

so in the end i bought the asus apex x299 over the evga,from amazon used, because of the mentions posted by other user before,simply i don't want to do a cmos reset after every oc failure.
tho is worth delidding the 7980xe and direct die cooling it?i'm aiming for 5ghz without HT because of some personal usage where latency is important h.264,that way i noticed a big decrease in power consumption at 4.8ghz with 1.25v around 400/500w used on the gigabyte gaming 9 x299,that mobo has throttle issues so i expect a higher power consumption on the apex.
thanks


----------



## Martin778

ASUS is a wayyy more user friendly board, yes. Also forget 5GHz on the XE, be happy if it hits 4.4GHz without throttling @ H.264. (tip - watch the package temperature!!)
5GHz on all cores just isn't gonna happen, period...maybe 4.5 if you go direct die and get a very good chip.

If you guys are OC'ing, I'd suggest to stay away from the latest 1803 update for Windows 10. It still has major issues that may lead you to think your overclock is unstable but it's the OS itself. 
My work laptop started to BSOD every 5 minutes by itself, reverted to 1709 en poof, all problems gone.

Don't forget to cool the VRM's on the APEX or they will throttle/burn out. The stock heatsink is weak, especially compared to the EVGA which, when you smack the CPU with synthetic load, already heat up to 80c on the VRM. 1.90Vccin and 1.17Vcore.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Martin778 said:


> ASUS is a wayyy more user friendly board, yes. Also forget 5GHz on the XE, be happy if it hits 4.4GHz without throttling @ H.264. (tip - watch the package temperature!!)
> 5GHz on all cores just isn't gonna happen, period...maybe 4.5 if you go direct die and get a very good chip.
> 
> If you guys are OC'ing, I'd suggest to stay away from the latest 1803 update for Windows 10. It still has major issues that may lead you to think your overclock is unstable but it's the OS itself.
> My work laptop started to BSOD every 5 minutes by itself, reverted to 1709 en poof, all problems gone.
> 
> Don't forget to cool the VRM's on the APEX or they will throttle/burn out. The stock heatsink is weak, especially compared to the EVGA which, when you smack the CPU with synthetic load, already heat up to 80c on the VRM. 1.90Vccin and 1.17Vcore.



Today MS released a new update for 1803 which solves a lot of weird issues causing bsod even browsing with Chrome.


----------



## cx-ray

Martin778 said:


> Very 'meh' for that price, to he honest. Useless if not used for LN2.
> 
> 
> - According to BIOS voltage readouts, heavy VCCIN overshoot, set to 1.875 gives 1.900. LLC can only be set to auto/enabled/disabled (LOL)


Doesn't appear to be out of the ordinary. With my Apex for instance set to 1.9V in BIOS the software readout will state 1.920V and with a DMM I see it going over 1.95V depending on load.



cletus-cassidy said:


> Seems to be a broader issue of Handbroke v1.1 on Skylake-X: https://github.com/HandBrake/HandBrake/issues/1280


Ran into that prob as well. I tried the Nightly build on 4/29, which seems to have fixed it.


----------



## nycgtr

Need some help understanding my temps here lol. I have a 7940x ocing. I am trying to make this chip stable @ 4.6 i have a +.01 offset set in the bios. This is my first time dealing with a delided i9. I got this chip as part of a swap for some other stuff. I noticed that when I am running realbench highest pull off some cores will be 1.26-1.27. I have avx offsets at 5/6. I noticed that some cores are hitting 98-100c. As per cooling the chip is hooked up to a monoblock with 2 480s. From what I've read anything above 1.2 is gonna make some heat, yet at the same time I see all these posts in the 1.25 category and I seem to be the only one hitting near 100 or am I Just misreading things. I am thinking maybe I should delid this myself and check or maybe it's a board issue? The guy I got it from had it rock stable at 4.6 with less voltage, and I really have no reason to doubt what he told me. Kinda all over the place as to how I should address this issue.


----------



## vmanuelgm

nycgtr said:


> Need some help understanding my temps here lol. I have a 7940x ocing. I am trying to make this chip stable @ 4.6 i have a +.01 offset set in the bios. This is my first time dealing with a delided i9. I got this chip as part of a swap for some other stuff. I noticed that when I am running realbench highest pull off some cores will be 1.26-1.27. I have avx offsets at 5/6. I noticed that some cores are hitting 98-100c. As per cooling the chip is hooked up to a monoblock with 2 480s. From what I've read anything above 1.2 is gonna make some heat, yet at the same time I see all these posts in the 1.25 category and I seem to be the only one hitting near 100 or am I Just misreading things. I am thinking maybe I should delid this myself and check or maybe it's a board issue? The guy I got it from had it rock stable at 4.6 with less voltage, and I really have no reason to doubt what he told me. Kinda all over the place as to how I should address this issue.



Check that delidding/relidding is ok and reseat the monoblock using liquid metal instead of non conductive thermal compound. U can also grab a Direct Die to improve cooling, but some mates report mounting issues.


----------



## ObiWanShinob1

schoolofmonkey said:


> Instead of chatting in other threads like Broadwell-E, I thought I'd start a thread where everything can be put.
> 
> Myself I'm looking at getting the 7820x, still undecided on motherboard though.
> I was looking at the Strix, but the current reviews aren't promising, same with the Prime Deluxe.
> 
> And yet MSI are leading the pack with the Carbon Pro's benchmark performances.
> 
> A few reviews:
> 7900x
> http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/intel-core-i9-7900x-processor-review,1.html
> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-7900x-skylake-x,5092.html
> https://youtu.be/Ff1wWs_pREo
> https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_mainboard/intel_i9_7900x_skylake-x_review/1
> 
> Motherboards:
> http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/asus-x299-prime-deluxe-review,1.html
> http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/msi-x299-gaming-pro-carbon-ac-review,1.html
> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/asus-prime-x299-deluxe-motherboard,5095.html
> 
> The one thing I love seeing is how the 7800x, 7820x and 7900x are killing the current top tier Ryzen 7 CPU's.
> 
> But it seems everyone agrees that Intel did rush this launch a little..


Honestly for gaming I'd rather have a core i3 unlocked with only two physical cores and a 6ghz stable overclock than any i5 or i7. I think intel has a huge opportunity to make these chips go faster if they put better quality silicon in a more simpl design specifically designed to overclock at a cheap price. Could be the best cpu period for gaming until they take full advantage of four cores, and maybe piss off enough developers with core i9's being slower at gaming than a $150 core i3 processor lolol. encoding and other uses are a whole nother story.

basically faster super pi time = better for gaming is the way I see it because of lazy ass developers yet an xbox one has an 8 core cpu only clocked to like 2.2ghz. potential floating point operations means NOTHING if the software doesn't take advantage. a pentium D is probably way better for gaming than that, but if software allowed I guess the xbox would lbe better for encoding possibly than a 2 core pentium D @ 3ghz. blows my mind how people never do aomething that actually makes sense for an industry.


----------



## Jpmboy

nycgtr said:


> Need some help understanding my temps here lol. I have a 7940x ocing. I am trying to make this chip stable @ 4.6 i have a +.01 offset set in the bios. This is my first time dealing with a delided i9. I got this chip as part of a swap for some other stuff. I noticed that when I am running realbench highest pull off some cores will be 1.26-1.27. I have avx offsets at 5/6. I noticed that some cores are hitting 98-100c. As per cooling the chip is hooked up to a monoblock with 2 480s. From what I've read anything above 1.2 is gonna make some heat, yet at the same time I see all these posts in the 1.25 category and I seem to be the only one hitting near 100 or am I Just misreading things. I am thinking maybe I should delid this myself and check or maybe it's a board issue? The guy I got it from had it rock stable at 4.6 with less voltage, and I really have no reason to doubt what he told me. Kinda all over the place as to how I should address this issue.


which board, PSU? (rigbuilder is now working  )
I'm not surprised that you are seeing 90C at 1.27V with realbench encode. I'd definitely pop the top and redo the delid - no mater where it was originally done. And monoblock fitment is critical - some come with VRM pads that are a bit to thick compromising the IHS contact.
what OS tool for temps? Post up a screenshot...


----------



## nycgtr

vmanuelgm said:


> Check that delidding/relidding is ok and reseat the monoblock using liquid metal instead of non conductive thermal compound. U can also grab a Direct Die to improve cooling, but some mates report mounting issues.


Yeah I have a delidder and I guess i will have to check the lid. The previous owner who delided and lmed, sealed it. Could be too much silicone sealent. He replaced the IHS with a copper one. I have contacted the maker of the copper ihs and confirmed it's dimensions, height is the same as stock.


Jpmboy said:


> which board, PSU? (rigbuilder is now working  )
> I'm not surprised that you are seeing 90C at 1.27V with realbench encode. I'd definitely pop the top and redo the delid - no mater where it was originally done. And monoblock fitment is critical - some come with VRM pads that are a bit to thick compromising the IHS contact.
> what OS tool for temps? Post up a screenshot...


This is on a strix board, psu is a evga 1600 p2, on the bench when I was just basic test boot and quick cb run I was using a hx1000. The monoblock is an EK one. The loop is not an issue as I had a zenith 1950x in this case I that replaced that was being cooled more than fine. As for tools to see temps, I was using core temp, hwinfo, hardware monitor and they all line up the same numbers. Which screenshot would more useful I can grab them tonight. 

I bought a x299 desginaire and a xpower on amazon which should be coming tmr or sat and I'll be testing it with a skylakex summit block.


----------



## Jpmboy

nycgtr said:


> Yeah I have a delidder and I guess i will have to check the lid. The previous owner who delided and lmed, sealed it. Could be too much silicone sealent. He replaced the IHS with a copper one. I have contacted the maker of the copper ihs and confirmed it's dimensions, height is the same as stock.
> 
> 
> This is on a strix board, psu is a evga 1600 p2, on the bench when I was just basic test boot and quick cb run I was using a hx1000. The monoblock is an EK one. The loop is not an issue as I had a zenith 1950x in this case I that replaced that was being cooled more than fine. As for tools to see temps, I was using core temp, hwinfo, hardware monitor and they all line up the same numbers. Which screenshot would more useful I can grab them tonight.
> 
> I bought a x299 desginaire and a xpower on amazon which should be coming tmr or sat and I'll be testing it with a skylakex summit block.


I find that SIV64 has been thorough in reporting voltages and temperatures on x299. They all report the basic stuff the same.
Yeah, before doing much more I would redo the delid, and remove any OEM or added sealant from the PCB and IHS. Just "tack" down the 4 corners of the IHS with a spot of silicon sealant... or use none at all. We're talking microns, but that can make or break the thermal bondline with LMs.
I'm not real keen on monoblocks (tho I have 2: one on the R5E10 and one on a G9) - they really require test fitting to ensure there is good contact with the cpu IHS, and thermal pad tweaking is likely needed.


----------



## nycgtr

Jpmboy said:


> I find that SIV64 has been thorough in reporting voltages and temperatures on x299. They all report the basic stuff the same.
> Yeah, before doing much more I would redo the delid, and remove any OEM or added sealant from the PCB and IHS. Just "tack" down the 4 corners of the IHS with a spot of silicon sealant... or use none at all. We're talking microns, but that can make or break the thermal bondline with LMs.
> I'm not real keen on monoblocks (tho I have 2: one on the R5E10 and one on a G9) - they really require test fitting to ensure there is good contact with the cpu IHS, and thermal pad tweaking is likely needed.


Yeah I asked the guy who did it prior and it resealed it himself, thinking back to when I first was inspecting the chip that seal did look a tad heavy from the outside edge at least. I really should of unseated that monoblock and double checked before I put the loop back together. However, my cb run temps are identical on the h100v2 I was using on the bench as the monoblock lol, but that's not enough of a length of load to determine a difference.


----------



## superV

Martin778 said:


> ASUS is a wayyy more user friendly board, yes. Also forget 5GHz on the XE, be happy if it hits 4.4GHz without throttling @ H.264. (tip - watch the package temperature!!)
> 5GHz on all cores just isn't gonna happen, period...maybe 4.5 if you go direct die and get a very good chip.
> 
> If you guys are OC'ing, I'd suggest to stay away from the latest 1803 update for Windows 10. It still has major issues that may lead you to think your overclock is unstable but it's the OS itself.
> My work laptop started to BSOD every 5 minutes by itself, reverted to 1709 en poof, all problems gone.
> 
> Don't forget to cool the VRM's on the APEX or they will throttle/burn out. The stock heatsink is weak, especially compared to the EVGA which, when you smack the CPU with synthetic load, already heat up to 80c on the VRM. 1.90Vccin and 1.17Vcore.


what i'm saying is that i'm aiming for 5ghz without hyper threading,on the gigabyte gaming 9 couldn't try more than that because the mobo has some limits,no matter what voltage or even trying 4.9 at 1.25v will simply shut down, with all bios power options raised etc etc.for the vrm i bought 1 fan Noctua Nf-A6 x 25 Flx 3k rpm,i think it should do.at 4.8ghz 1.25v without hyper threading saw a power consumption around 400/500w,i don't remember.
once i get the board,i will see if i'm thermal limited,if so will delid.


----------



## Haxman

Hello wise OC'ers,

I have a delidded 7940x paired with a 360mm AIO which is running a bit too hot (getting max temps between 79-89C across the cores after 30 minutes of XTU; repeated cinebench runs can get hotter than this). Clocks are set to 4.4GHz (avx: -3 avx2: -5), manual voltage at v1.155. Everything else is stock/auto.

I can think of two reasons for this heat - either the cooler is no good, or the delid job is no good.

Before I go out and spend $$$$ on a custom loop, are there any tests I can run to check whether it is a bad delid? (short of delidding it again myself)

Thanks in advance!


----------



## nycgtr

Anyone else get this diff high pitch like coil whine noise by the vrms doing intel extreme tunning utility benchmark, I cannot get it to happen in any other stress.

vid
https://photos.app.goo.gl/6TWvIMqfpPBFqHEE2


Funny thing is this benchmark pulls less wattage than others where it doesn't whine at all.


----------



## wingman99

vmanuelgm said:


> Gigabyte Bios is not the best UEFI in the world as we all know. But that behaviour has to do with memory training rtl and iol's. At 3800 CL16 u shouldn't have that problem.
> 
> I am now with a Gaming 7 Pro and my motherboard is completely stable reboot after reboot at 4000 CL17. I didn't have that issue with the gaming 9, manually tuning the timings.


What are your settings for stable memory at 4000 CL17?


----------



## Haxman

Haxman said:


> Hello wise OC'ers,
> 
> I have a delidded 7940x paired with a 360mm AIO which is running a bit too hot (getting max temps between 79-89C across the cores after 30 minutes of XTU; repeated cinebench runs can get hotter than this). Clocks are set to 4.4GHz (avx: -3 avx2: -5), manual voltage at v1.155. Everything else is stock/auto.
> 
> I can think of two reasons for this heat - either the cooler is no good, or the delid job is no good.
> 
> Before I go out and spend $$$$ on a custom loop, are there any tests I can run to check whether it is a bad delid? (short of delidding it again myself)
> 
> Thanks in advance!


I've just taken everything back to stock (apart from XMP) and done a 10 min RealBench (too hot to run for any longer).

These are the results:


----------



## nycgtr

You need to delid and redo


----------



## ThrashZone

Haxman said:


> Hello wise OC'ers,
> I can think of two reasons for this heat - either the cooler is no good, or the delid job is no good.
> 
> Before I go out and spend $$$$ on a custom loop, are there any tests I can run to check whether it is a bad delid? (short of delidding it again myself)
> 
> Thanks in advance!


Hi,
Does sound like delid wasn't good 
How to check well you might remove the cpu and see if you bent a cpu socket pin on the board 
Not sure what region you are in but silicon lottery is very good at delid in the u.s.


----------



## cletus-cassidy

wingman99 said:


> What are your settings for stable memory at 4000 CL17?


Agree this looks like a botched delid. When you open it up, check to see that there is a sufficient amount of LM on the backside of the IHS. That would show you if they either didn't use proper technique or the sealant has raised the IHS too far from the PCB.


----------



## Haxman

thanks guys - thought as much, will check it out!


----------



## Abaidor

Haxman said:


> thanks guys - thought as much, will check it out!


I just did a quick Realbench stress test with my i9-7940X + EK Monoblock and max temp at stock settings + MEM XMP 3600 CL17 was 61C in 15mins. My motherboard is the Rampage VI Extreme.

It's on a custom loop with Dual D5s + a MO-RA 420 RAD with 9X ML140 Pros spinning at 40%.


----------



## nycgtr

Got the desginaire in today. This has to be the most premium gigabyte board i've seen. Coming from someone that's bought multiple gigabyte flagships lol. Xpower comes tmr.


----------



## mitcHELLspawn

Hey there. So I am totally new to this thread, just bored tonight searching through the internet and found this thread and thought I would share my skylake-X journey Lol and also find out if there has been any testing/definitive proof as to whether really tweaking the cache frequency and memory speed/timings can drastically improve specifically gaming performance in skylake-x, but moreso in really any application. I specifically mention gaming because I know at launch these chips really seemed to lag behind their mainstream counterparts a bit. From my personal experience, when these chips are pushed to their limit, they absolute crush in really all applications, but I have definitely noticed an increase in average FPS and definitely 0.1% lows and 1% lows coming from my 6850K at 4.5Ghz.

So yeah, I am running a 7820X at 5Ghz locked on all 8 cores at a voltage of 1.27, with a cache(NB) of 3.2Ghz but have not actually done a lot of tweaking in this department and am curious if I might be able to push it further. I am also running my ram at 3400Mhz CL15 currently, but I also very much want to push that up in the 3600 range. 

I personally delidded my CPU when I bought it, and replaced the (absolute terrible) TIM with thermal-grizzly conductonaut, which was a fun experience, and have done quite a few since for some friends. Anyway I run a custom loop with 1x 360MM ek rad and 1x 240MM ek rad, and the only other thing in the loop is a 1080Ti. 

My temps are actually pretty damn great. Under normal use, whether it be gaming, or the multitasking (VM's) workloads that I put it through, it never goes above around 70C on any core. That does change however when I run something like Cinebench. I will see spikes up in the high 80's when testing.

Speaking of cinebench, my scores are around 2189 for multithreaded, and 221 for single core. 

Oh, for my motherboard I am using the Asus rampage Apex and it is an absolute monster for overclocking CPU/RAM. I am in love with it haha..

If anyone has any questions, or would like to maybe give me advice on where I could go from here if I wanted to tweak a little more Id love to hear it. Especially about the Cache. 

thanks!


----------



## czin125

Very nice cpu. It looks like you could even get 5.1 out of it if you only needed 1.27v @5GHZ.


----------



## mitcHELLspawn

Hey thanks ! So yeah I am definitely able to hit 5.1 and even stable, but it requires way too much of a voltage jump and heat dump into my system for me to be okay with it for something I run 24/7 , whereas I have absolutely no issue running my 5Ghz OC 24/7 which is just so badass  

Haha I actually took a peek on siliconlottery and they don't even offer a 5.0Ghz version of the 7820X, and they charge over 800USD for a 4.9Ghz guarantee.... Apparently less than 10% of chips they have recieved are able to hit 4.9, so I must have hit the jackpot.


----------



## Jpmboy

mitcHELLspawn said:


> Hey thanks ! So yeah I am definitely able to hit 5.1 and even stable, but it requires way too much of a voltage jump and heat dump into my system for me to be okay with it for something I run 24/7 , whereas I have absolutely no issue running my 5Ghz OC 24/7 which is just so badass
> 
> Haha I actually took a peek on siliconlottery and they don't even offer a 5.0Ghz version of the 7820X, and they charge over 800USD for a 4.9Ghz guarantee.... Apparently less than 10% of chips they have recieved are able to hit 4.9, so I must have hit the jackpot.


 all depends on whether the 5.0 can hold up to SL's stability protocol. If it does, then yes you hit the jackpot.


if yoyu want help with ram OC, please fill out rigbuilder so folks know what (exact) ram kity you are using... and visit the* Intel DDR4 Ram Stability* thread. :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

mitcHELLspawn said:


> Hey thanks ! So yeah I am definitely able to hit 5.1 and even stable, but it requires way too much of a voltage jump and heat dump into my system for me to be okay with it for something I run 24/7 , whereas I have absolutely no issue running my 5Ghz OC 24/7 which is just so badass
> 
> Haha I actually took a peek on siliconlottery and they don't even offer a 5.0Ghz version of the 7820X, and they charge over 800USD for a 4.9Ghz guarantee.... Apparently less than 10% of chips they have recieved are able to hit 4.9, so I must have hit the jackpot.


Hi,
Nice :thumb:
Post a cpu-z validate link here make sure to uncheck the private boxes first 

Also feel free to post hwinfo64 voltage screen shots too 
https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php


----------



## mitcHELLspawn

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Nice :thumb:
> Post a cpu-z validate link here make sure to uncheck the private boxes first
> 
> Also feel free to post hwinfo64 voltage screen shots too
> https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php



Hey! No problem man Just threw up a validation here https://valid.x86.fr/q0auxd Im just heading out the door but when I get home I will snap some voltage pics for you!

Also to the other guy who mentioned something about "SL stability protocol" Im not familiar but would like to do whatever tests hes talking about. I already know the system is 100% rock solid as ive been running it for a bit now and have put it through some very toturous situations to say the least lol.. but would gladly run it through any other paces any of you would like to see !

just let me know! 

I can also do some benching and screenshots at 5.1 as well if you are interested.

Edit: just actually looked at my link and realized I bumped up my voltage up to 1.285 a few weeks ago while when trying to break my record on firestrike. I was getting these weird momentary stutters in graphics test one at 2 specific spots and wanted to make sure the cpu wasn't the cause. Forgot to change it back.


----------



## mitcHELLspawn

Oh also I ordered a titan Xp last week when they came in stock for the heck of it  so if anyone is interested in seeing what kind of gaming numbers I can put up with a Watercooled tXp/5Ghz 7820x/3400cl15 ram just let me know any specifics you're interested in and I will bang em off. 

Shipping manifest says it will be here Wednesday.


----------



## Mysticial

nycgtr said:


> Got the desginaire in today. This has to be the most premium gigabyte board i've seen. Coming from someone that's bought multiple gigabyte flagships lol. Xpower comes tmr.


I was also quite amazed when I got mine. The thing looks really rugged. Though if the Gaming 7 Pro was available in NA, I'd probably have gotten that instead for the RGB shininess.

Either way, both of these Gigabyte boards seem underrated if not for the BIOS.


----------



## Haxman

nycgtr said:


> You need to delid and redo





cletus-cassidy said:


> Agree this looks like a botched delid. When you open it up, check to see that there is a sufficient amount of LM on the backside of the IHS. That would show you if they either didn't use proper technique or the sealant has raised the IHS too far from the PCB.


so i did a relid - the LM looked fine both on the die and the IHS but i spread it again.

i then made sure to remove all traces of sealant/glue (both the original intel one and the one used in the delid) and put the IHS on without any glue (to try and get a closer fit).

initially i ran 1 hour of realbench and the temps were not great but OKish (maxing out around 80-85C), however this was from a cold boot. now that the box has been running for a while the results are the same as before - this is 10min RealBench at stock:










i'm starting to think it's the cooler or something else that slowly heats up and stays warm. one thing i've noticed is that Realbench has a second reading for CPU Package (under a different set of sensors) and this is way hot - over 100C, seems to sit about 10C higher than core temp (even at idle)


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi, @*Haxman* 
Yep not good for mostly 4.0 might show all voltages instead of all the the tj max stuff


----------



## Martin778

Haxman said:


> nycgtr said:
> 
> 
> 
> You need to delid and redo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cletus-cassidy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Agree this looks like a botched delid. When you open it up, check to see that there is a sufficient amount of LM on the backside of the IHS. That would show you if they either didn't use proper technique or the sealant has raised the IHS too far from the PCB.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> so i did a relid - the LM looked fine both on the die and the IHS but i spread it again.
> 
> i then made sure to remove all traces of sealant/glue (both the original intel one and the one used in the delid) and put the IHS on without any glue (to try and get a closer fit).
> 
> initially i ran 1 hour of realbench and the temps were not great but OKish (maxing out around 80-85C), however this was from a cold boot. now that the box has been running for a while the results are the same as before - this is 10min RealBench at stock:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i'm starting to think it's the cooler or something else that slowly heats up and stays warm. one thing i've noticed is that Realbench has a second reading for CPU Package (under a different set of sensors) and this is way hot - over 100C, seems to sit about 10C higher than core temp (even at idle)
Click to expand...

Same garbage chip as mine, already had 2 like yours with certain cores spiking. Sell it or break it and send RMA because it's a bad chip.
You could try a custom copper IHS or direct die cooling but then you end up with a cpu that you'd never be able to sell and without warranty.


----------



## hotrod717

Martin778 said:


> Very 'meh' for that price, to he honest. Useless if not used for LN2.
> 
> - Only 2 usable (curve controlled) fan headers
> - Very crude BIOS compared to Apex or Taichi, missing power limit settings etc.
> - Every failed OC needs a CMOS reset, lots of important features simply missing
> - According to BIOS voltage readouts, heavy VCCIN overshoot, set to 1.875 gives 1.900. LLC can only be set to auto/enabled/disabled (LOL)
> - No WiFi card, only a blank slot
> - BIOS update by running .bat file (LOL*2)


Thats one way to look at it. Only just received mine and still "kicking the tires", but am liking it so far. I would say the Dark is not for the average enthusiast. No upside or exclusive features you do like? 
Overshoot? You must not be familiar with Asrock boards and the MOCF in particular. 
There are plenty of things that can be liked or disliked about any board, given an individual or its use. It sounds like you picked the wrong board to meet your needs and use, or haven't gotten appropriately familiar with the board yet. Every motherboard has its caveats.


----------



## nycgtr

Mysticial said:


> nycgtr said:
> 
> 
> 
> Got the desginaire in today. This has to be the most premium gigabyte board i've seen. Coming from someone that's bought multiple gigabyte flagships lol. Xpower comes tmr.
> 
> 
> 
> I was also quite amazed when I got mine. The thing looks really rugged. Though if the Gaming 7 Pro was available in NA, I'd probably have gotten that instead for the RGB shininess.
> 
> Either way, both of these Gigabyte boards seem underrated if not for the BIOS.
Click to expand...


So I had gotten the msi xpower and the designaire. The msi bench numbers are better for sure. At the same time, the gigabyte bios was driving me nuts. Also while doing realbench I saw my vrm temps on the designaire go to 100c. Some reason the little fan never kicked in either. I really like the designaire lookwise but it seems to perform worse than the strix,taichi, and msi xpower. I tried all 3 bios versions no dice. I will be going with the xpower.

On the delid note I mentioned earlier. I redid the delid the previous owner did and I dropped temps by 12-15c across cores in real bench.


----------



## Jpmboy

mitcHELLspawn said:


> Oh also I ordered a titan Xp last week when they came in stock for the heck of it  so if anyone is interested in seeing what kind of gaming numbers I can put up with a Watercooled tXp/5Ghz 7820x/3400cl15 ram just let me know any specifics you're interested in and I will bang em off.
> 
> Shipping manifest says it will be here Wednesday.



plenty of places to post your benchmark scores 



http://www.overclock.net/t/1518806/firestrike-ultra-top-30/0_20
http://www.overclock.net/t/1443196/firestrike-extreme-top-30
http://www.overclock.net/t/1464813/3d-mark-11-extreme-top-30
http://www.overclock.net/t/872945/top-30-3d-mark-13-fire-strike-scores-in-crossfire-sli
http://www.overclock.net/t/1235557/official-top-30-heaven-benchmark-4-0-scores
http://www.overclock.net/t/1360884/official-top-30-unigine-valley-benchmark-1-0
http://www.overclock.net/t/1361939/top-30-3dmark11-scores-for-single-dual-tri-quad
http://www.overclock.net/t/1406832/single-gpu-firestrike-top-30
http://www.overclock.net/t/1606006/3dmark-time-spy-benchmark-top-30/0_20


----------



## Mysticial

nycgtr said:


> So I had gotten the msi xpower and the designaire. The msi bench numbers are better for sure. At the same time, the gigabyte bios was driving me nuts. Also while doing realbench I saw my vrm temps on the designaire go to 100c. Some reason the little fan never kicked in either. I really like the designaire lookwise but it seems to perform worse than the strix,taichi, and msi xpower. I tried all 3 bios versions no dice. I will be going with the xpower.
> 
> On the delid note I mentioned earlier. I redid the delid the previous owner did and I dropped temps by 12-15c across cores in real bench.


That doesn't sound right. How much are you pulling on VCCIN/VRIN? I was never able to get the VRMs above 80C-ish even with 380W. Is the airflow on yours completely stagnant?

If you go into the fan settings you can find the fan speed curve for each of the headers including the VRM - which should be set to 90C.

Likewise, if your performance numbers are bad, are you by any chance hitting the phantom throttling? Though it would be hard to pull a high enough wattage to warm up the VRMs if you were.

I've played with both the Apex and the Designare + Gaming 7. The Apex is a lot easier to get working out-of-the-box. The Gigabyte BIOS takes a lot more tweaking - hence my gripe about it.


----------



## Martin778

hotrod717 said:


> Thats one way to look at it. Only just received mine and still "kicking the tires", but am liking it so far. I would say the Dark is not for the average enthusiast. No upside or exclusive features you do like?
> Overshoot? You must not be familiar with Asrock boards and the MOCF in particular.
> There are plenty of things that can be liked or disliked about any board, given an individual or its use. It sounds like you picked the wrong board to meet your needs and use, or haven't gotten appropriately familiar with the board yet. Every motherboard has its caveats.


I had the Taichi, it overshot other voltages when left on auto like crazy (1.3 VCCSA was not uncommon).

I don't think I picked the wrong board, I just dislike getting scammed. I still think EVGA used the "extreme overclockers board" slogan to strip it off many of the usable features while keeping the price high, given it has less features than an entry lever ~250,- X299 board, I'm mainly referring here to the fan headers and BIOS update options.
Depending how the memory support now is, I might be going Ryzen 2700X as I just don't have luck with Intel's HEDT, 6950X died, now 2nd X299 chip with temp. spiking and a 550eu board that makes me use triple fan splitters...


----------



## nycgtr

Mysticial said:


> That doesn't sound right. How much are you pulling on VCCIN/VRIN? I was never able to get the VRMs above 80C-ish even with 380W. Is the airflow on yours completely stagnant?
> 
> If you go into the fan settings you can find the fan speed curve for each of the headers including the VRM - which should be set to 90C.
> 
> Likewise, if your performance numbers are bad, are you by any chance hitting the phantom throttling? Though it would be hard to pull a high enough wattage to warm up the VRMs if you were.
> 
> I've played with both the Apex and the Designare + Gaming 7. The Apex is a lot easier to get working out-of-the-box. The Gigabyte BIOS takes a lot more tweaking - hence my gripe about it.



I had set vccin manually @ 1.92. If i were to estimate I was pulling at aprox 400 watts at the socket. I also had weird lag in windows. I've got the system up in my loop now with the xpower. So far so good. Pulling 435 watts at the socket with a monoblock I am sitting at 68c on the vrm. I like the designaire but that bios is beyond a turn off. I have a gaming 7 x399 and z370 gaming 7 so I am not a stranger to gigabytes outdated horrific bios, however I have never ran into one where options were hidden and I have to guessing at what to enter to prompt the other choices. So I will be returning the designaire. Even bone stock auto my bench scores were lower than the strix and msi. if the bios wasn't such in a pain in the rear, and it kept up with the other boards. I would of bought the monoblock for it and used it instead as I really like the aesthetic and overall feel of the board. 


Also really liking the msi, as all the info shows up properly in hwinfo. Granted the board has some really stupid placements for like the front panel connectors, 1 of the usb 3s. A little dissapointed in that it does not feel as premium as prior msi flagships.


----------



## pantsaregood

I've been playing around with RAM timings recently. DDR4-4000 runs in quad-channel on my i7-7820X at 16-18-15-30-1T with tight secondary and tertiary timings fairly easily. I've managed read/write/copy of 114 GB/s-120GB/s-102GB/s, respectively, as well as 49.5ns latency. Above this, it seems attempting to gain bandwidth efficiency through tuning RAM is ineffective and limited by mesh frequency.

Out of curiosity, I loaded UEFI defaults - 58 GB/s read/write and 54 GB/s copy with 87ns latency on RAM. Loaded my tight timings and bumped mesh up to 3.4 GHz from 3.2 GHz and promptly landed at 116 GB/s read and 104 GB/s copy with 48.6ns response time. Unfortunately, 3.4 GHz cache appears unstable at any reasonable voltage. Seems like RAM performance is heavily dependent on mesh frequency.


----------



## Jpmboy

nycgtr said:


> I had set vccin manually @ 1.92. If i were to estimate I was pulling at aprox 400 watts at the socket. *I also had weird lag in windows. *I've got the system up in my loop now with the xpower. So far so good. Pulling 435 watts at the socket with a monoblock I am sitting at 68c on the vrm. I like the designaire but that bios is beyond a turn off. I have a gaming 7 x399 and z370 gaming 7 so I am not a stranger to gigabytes outdated horrific bios, however I have never ran into one where options were hidden and I have to guessing at what to enter to prompt the other choices. So I will be returning the designaire. Even bone stock auto my bench scores were lower than the strix and msi. if the bios wasn't such in a pain in the rear, and it kept up with the other boards. I would of bought the monoblock for it and used it instead as I really like the aesthetic and overall feel of the board.
> 
> 
> Also really liking the msi, as all the info shows up properly in hwinfo. Granted the board has some really stupid placements for like the front panel connectors, 1 of the usb 3s. A little dissapointed in that it does not feel as premium as prior msi flagships.


check that you have HPET disabled ("bcdedit /set useplatformclock false") in admin command or powershell. reboot and the lag should disappear. 


pantsaregood said:


> I've been playing around with RAM timings recently. DDR4-4000 runs in quad-channel on my i7-7820X at 16-18-15-30-1T with tight secondary and tertiary timings fairly easily. I've managed read/write/copy of 114 GB/s-120GB/s-102GB/s, respectively, as well as 49.5ns latency. Above this, it seems attempting to gain bandwidth efficiency through tuning RAM is ineffective and limited by mesh frequency.
> 
> Out of curiosity, I loaded UEFI defaults - 58 GB/s read/write and 54 GB/s copy with 87ns latency on RAM. Loaded my tight timings and bumped mesh up to 3.4 GHz from 3.2 GHz and promptly landed at 116 GB/s read and 104 GB/s copy with 48.6ns response time. Unfortunately, 3.4 GHz cache appears unstable at any reasonable voltage.* Seems like RAM performance is heavily dependent on mesh frequency*.


Actually, AID64 memtest is heavily dependent on cache freq. Other measures of ram performance are less so. But sure, faster cache means faster IO. try increasing vccio voltage a couple of notches. :thumb:


----------



## wingman99

nycgtr said:


> I had set vccin manually @ 1.92. If i were to estimate I was pulling at aprox 400 watts at the socket. I also had weird lag in windows. I've got the system up in my loop now with the xpower. So far so good. Pulling 435 watts at the socket with a monoblock I am sitting at 68c on the vrm. I like the designaire but that bios is beyond a turn off. I have a gaming 7 x399 and z370 gaming 7 so I am not a stranger to gigabytes outdated horrific bios, however I have never ran into one where options were hidden and I have to guessing at what to enter to prompt the other choices. So I will be returning the designaire. Even bone stock auto my bench scores were lower than the strix and msi. if the bios wasn't such in a pain in the rear, and it kept up with the other boards. I would of bought the monoblock for it and used it instead as I really like the aesthetic and overall feel of the board.
> 
> 
> Also really liking the msi, as all the info shows up properly in hwinfo. Granted the board has some really stupid placements for like the front panel connectors, 1 of the usb 3s. A little dissapointed in that it does not feel as premium as prior msi flagships.


How much further behind is Gigabyte in Bench scores compared with ASUS?


----------



## pantsaregood

Jpmboy said:


> check that you have HPET disabled ("bcdedit /set useplatformclock false") in admin command or powershell. reboot and the lag should disappear.
> 
> Actually, AID64 memtest is heavily dependent on cache freq. Other measures of ram performance are less so. But sure, faster cache means faster IO. try increasing vccio voltage a couple of notches. :thumb:


What am I going to get out of increasing VCCIO? Mesh and RAM are currently stable. Increasing mesh voltage doesn't help with overclocking since there's a huge wall at >3.2 GHz.


----------



## Kana Chan

What's the temp difference with 3.4ghz vs 3.2ghz?


----------



## pantsaregood

Temperatures aren't the issue. 3.2 GHz requires mesh voltage at 1.05V. 3.4 GHz requires somewhere north of 1.2V, which I'm not entirely sure is safe.


----------



## ESRCJ

Did Silicon Lottery sell binned and delidded 7960X's as one point? They don't seem to have any now, although I could have sworn I saw some months ago. I'm asking because I'm curious what the binning is like on these. I just upgraded from a 7920X. My goal is a 4.7GHz on all cores after a delid, although I'm not sure how reasonable this is considering I'm already hitting over 90C with 4.5GHz 1.175V all cores (not delidded yet). Any suggestions on max voltages for this CPU? For my 7920X, I always stayed under 1.25V for my everyday OC and a max of 1.3V for benchmarking.


----------



## Jpmboy

pantsaregood said:


> What am I going to get out of increasing VCCIO? Mesh and RAM are currently stable. Increasing mesh voltage doesn't help with overclocking since there's a huge wall at >3.2 GHz.


you may be able to help cache along with vccio... but it sounds like you want to stand pat. Again, AID64 is good/helpful, but not a complete picture of ram performance.


----------



## CptSpig

gridironcpj said:


> Did Silicon Lottery sell binned and delidded 7960X's as one point? They don't seem to have any now, although I could have sworn I saw some months ago. I'm asking because I'm curious what the binning is like on these. I just upgraded from a 7920X. My goal is a 4.7GHz on all cores after a delid, although I'm not sure how reasonable this is considering I'm already hitting over 90C with 4.5GHz 1.175V all cores (not delidded yet). Any suggestions on max voltages for this CPU? For my 7920X, I always stayed under 1.25V for my everyday OC and a max of 1.3V for benchmarking.


They did not include the 7960x.


----------



## nycgtr

wingman99 said:


> How much further behind is Gigabyte in Bench scores compared with ASUS?


In cb it was about 300 points.


Per thread. What's the max reasonable voltage for hcc, I can keep 1.28-1.29v well under control thermally, using an offset.


----------



## pantsaregood

Jpmboy said:


> you may be able to help cache along with vccio... but it sounds like you want to stand pat. Again, AID64 is good/helpful, but not a complete picture of ram performance.


I'll give it a try. I didn't know mesh stability was affected by VCCIO - I thought it only related to mesh voltage.


----------



## nycgtr

gridironcpj said:


> Did Silicon Lottery sell binned and delidded 7960X's as one point? They don't seem to have any now, although I could have sworn I saw some months ago. I'm asking because I'm curious what the binning is like on these. I just upgraded from a 7920X. My goal is a 4.7GHz on all cores after a delid, although I'm not sure how reasonable this is considering I'm already hitting over 90C with 4.5GHz 1.175V all cores (not delidded yet). Any suggestions on max voltages for this CPU? For my 7920X, I always stayed under 1.25V for my everyday OC and a max of 1.3V for benchmarking.


you wont know till you delid.


----------



## ThrashZone

pantsaregood said:


> I'll give it a try. I didn't know mesh stability was affected by VCCIO - I thought it only related to mesh voltage.


Hi,
I don't believe I've seen anyone going past max cache of 30 
Minimum cache 27 or auto
Voltage wise I've used mostly adaptive and +0.050 and turbo +0.175 not sure where that actually put it just over 1v maybe :/


----------



## superV

so i got the apex.
i tried a quick dirty oc to 5ghz of my 7980xe,but as soon goes under load it freezes or shutdowns.
i did raise to the max all the power limits and amps limits. avx -12 avx512 to -15.
vcore 1.35v
input v 1.85v
xmp enabled 3600
llc to level 5
did raise other voltages 1.2v vccio/sa etc and is a no go.
i'm i doing something wrong or the cpu simply wont keep 5g under load?
at this point will try to oc without ht to 5ghz,that's my goal.
beast of a mobo,first try it booted 5g


----------



## Jpmboy

superV said:


> so i got the apex.
> i tried a quick dirty oc to 5ghz of my 7980xe,but as soon goes under load it freezes or shutdowns.
> i did raise to the max all the power limits and amps limits. avx -12 avx512 to -15.
> vcore 1.35v
> input v 1.85v
> xmp enabled 3600
> llc to level 5
> did raise other voltages 1.2v vccio/sa etc and is a no go.
> i'm i doing something wrong or the cpu simply wont keep 5g under load?
> at this point will try to oc without ht to 5ghz,that's my goal.
> beast of a mobo,first try it booted 5g


 Yeah, it is a very good MB, but vcore is too low, vccin is too low. you probably can;t cool 700+ watts. More reasonable would be to get 4.5 or 4.6 solid then try higher. 
you are not gonna get 5.0 on that chip as a 24/7 (and it will run hotter with HT off - that's the nature of scheduling to 36 or 18 operating threads). Benching - sure.
lol - just don;t disable any bios safety.


----------



## Mysticial

superV said:


> so i got the apex.
> i tried a quick dirty oc to 5ghz of my 7980xe,but as soon goes under load it freezes or shutdowns.
> i did raise to the max all the power limits and amps limits. avx -12 avx512 to -15.
> vcore 1.35v
> input v 1.85v
> xmp enabled 3600
> llc to level 5
> did raise other voltages 1.2v vccio/sa etc and is a no go.
> i'm i doing something wrong or the cpu simply wont keep 5g under load?
> at this point will try to oc without ht to 5ghz,that's my goal.
> beast of a mobo,first try it booted 5g


If you want stability at 5 GHz for these HCC chips, you're gonna need upwards of 1.4v - probably closer to 1.5v. I've tested several of these chips at 5 GHz on the Apex. Of a total of 46 cores across 3 chips, very few of them were prime-stable (non-AVX) at 5 GHz with under 1.4v (HT disabled). I only found 5 of such cores and they were all on an engineering sample which was probably pre-binned.

The Intel overclocking guide has a 6 GHz section that can be summarized as:

Cool the processor to -150C or lower.
Raise VCCIO. But it doesn't say by how much. 
Set the VCore to 1.7 - 1.8V.
Raise PLL_SFR_OC from 1.2 -> 1.5v.
Raise PLL SFR output voltage by 75 - 225mV. Higher isn't always better.

I'll let you decide how useful this is. It comes with the usual disclaimer about overclocking. And I assume they really mean it this time.

So you'll probably need to be realistic with your expectations if you aren't willing to go subzero.


----------



## superV

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah, it is a very good MB, but vcore is too low, vccin is too low. you probably can;t cool 700+ watts. More reasonable would be to get 4.5 or 4.6 solid then try higher.
> you are not gonna get 5.0 on that chip as a 24/7 (and it will run hotter with HT off - that's the nature of scheduling to 36 or 18 operating threads). Benching - sure.
> lol - just don;t disable any bios safety.


ty for reply.
my bad anyway,bad thermal paste spread,i knew it will go wrong,i bought the gelid extreme,it's very hard to spread,i do the method with a card,and it was very hard to spread it,temps simply jump to 90/100 instantly.
i'm gonna delidd and mount it naked.
what voltages for a 5ghz without ht do u recommend?
obviously it's an approximation,then i will try and see.
and what about the the avx/avx 512?what do you think?
ty


----------



## nycgtr

Mysticial said:


> If you want stability at 5 GHz for these HCC chips, you're gonna need upwards of 1.4v - probably closer to 1.5v. I've tested several of these chips at 5 GHz on the Apex. Of a total of 46 cores across 3 chips, very few of them were prime-stable (non-AVX) at 5 GHz with under 1.4v (HT disabled). I only found 5 of such cores and they were all on an engineering sample which was probably pre-binned.
> 
> The Intel overclocking guide has a 6 GHz section that can be summarized as:
> 
> Cool the processor to -150C or lower.
> Raise VCCIO. But it doesn't say by how much.
> Set the VCore to 1.7 - 1.8V.
> Raise PLL_SFR_OC from 1.2 -> 1.5v.
> Raise PLL SFR output voltage by 75 - 225mV. Higher isn't always better.
> 
> I'll let you decide how useful this is. It comes with the usual disclaimer about overclocking. And I assume they really mean it this time.
> 
> So you'll probably need to be realistic with your expectations if you aren't willing to go subzero.


1.4-1.5 sounds really high lol. What is the consensus here for delids and on custom looped for daily voltage? I was thinking more along 1.25-1.3?


----------



## Mysticial

nycgtr said:


> 1.4-1.5 sounds really high lol. What is the consensus here for delids and on custom looped for daily voltage? I was thinking more along 1.25-1.3?


I don't think there's a simple answer to that. There seems to be a very high variation in both vcore and per-core leakage. Just because a core happens to need more vcore doesn't mean it will necessarily run hotter.

From my experience, cores that require more voltage to hit a certain speed tend to have less leakage. (I believe there is a physics explanation for this, but I'm not an expert on the topic.) The result is that some (good) cores can do 5 GHz at 1.38, but will hit 100C+. While other (bad) cores will need 1.45 to 5 GHz, but may stay under 100C despite the higher voltage.

My retail 7900X doesn't much of a vcore range across the cores. The VID table for the top speed are all within 0.050v of each other.

But my 7940X is the exact opposite. The top speed VID ranges from 1.21 - 1.34 across the different cores. Since the Gigabyte boards don't have per-core voltage, I need to run a global offset of +0.030 to get stability at 4.7 GHz non-AVX and 3.7 GHz AVX512. So the "bad" cores run as high as 1.37.

Yet these "bad" cores @ 1.37v for 4.7 GHz aren't the hottest cores on the chip. The hottest core is actually one of the two good" TB3 cores running only at 1.24 for 4.7 GHz.


This is also under a 360 AIO with no delid. So to answer your question, I'm running 1.37 on a couple of cores for daily usage (not sustained though).


----------



## nycgtr

Mysticial said:


> I don't think there's a simple answer to that. There seems to be a very high variation in both vcore and per-core leakage. Just because a core happens to need more vcore doesn't mean it will necessarily run hotter.
> 
> From my experience, cores that require more voltage to hit a certain speed tend to have less leakage. (I believe there is a physics explanation for this, but I'm not an expert on the topic.) The result is that some (good) cores can do 5 GHz at 1.38, but will hit 100C+. While other (bad) cores will need 1.45 to 5 GHz, but may stay under 100C despite the higher voltage.
> 
> My retail 7900X doesn't much of a vcore range across the cores. The VID table for the top speed are all within 0.050v of each other.
> 
> But my 7940X is the exact opposite. The top speed VID ranges from 1.21 - 1.34 across the different cores. Since the Gigabyte boards don't have per-core voltage, I need to run a global offset of +0.030 to get stability at 4.7 GHz non-AVX and 3.7 GHz AVX512. So the "bad" cores run as high as 1.37.
> 
> Yet these "bad" cores @ 1.37v for 4.7 GHz aren't the hottest cores on the chip. The hottest core is actually one of the two good" TB3 cores running only at 1.24 for 4.7 GHz.
> 
> 
> This is also under a 360 AIO with no delid. So to answer your question, I'm running 1.37 on a couple of cores for daily usage (not sustained though).


Currently testing my 7940x with a +0.045 offset with 5 cores set to 48. it's pulling max 1.295 on most of the cores with 3 being over 1.311-1.318.


----------



## Jpmboy

superV said:


> ty for reply.
> my bad anyway,bad thermal paste spread,i knew it will go wrong,i bought the gelid extreme,it's very hard to spread,i do the method with a card,and it was very hard to spread it,temps simply jump to 90/100 instantly.
> i'm gonna delidd and mount it naked.
> what voltages for a 5ghz without ht do u recommend?
> obviously it's an approximation,then i will try and see.
> and what about the the avx/avx 512?what do you think?
> ty


 there's really no reason to spread out the tim with a card. The best and easiest method is a small pea-size blob in the middle on the IHS, then place the block on the mounts... do not allow the block to separate from the tim until you complete the radial spread by using the mounting system to spread the blob evenly... uses much less tim (too much is bad) and will not trap/form air-gaps in the spread (common with a manual spreading). The tim is there to fill microscopic gaps and imperfections in the mating surfaces... use as little as possible.
No way to tell where 5.0 will be stable on your chip without knowing what you consider to be stable. If p95 is your thing... forget about 5.0 (without AVX2 offsets in the teens, AVX in the high single digits). Real bench - maybe if you have a chiller. It's not a voltage question, it is a thermal question. They all will do 5.0 assuming you have a capable PSU (700+ watts on the 2 EPS lines), excellent cooling (direct die or not), and patience in getting there.


I don't want to burst your bubble or anything, but with the exception of a few benchmarks (HWBOT stuff) and specialty compute problems (which would be better run on a Phi equivalent anyway) _nothing _will use 36 threads at 5.0. post up a stable 4.5 realbench with voltages and we can (generally) gauge a bit of ambient scaling.


----------



## ESRCJ

I just ordered the X299 delid kit from Rockit. Any advice from your delidding experiences? This is my first delid ever, so hopefully I destroy this 7960X lol.


----------



## bmgjet

My 7900 needs 1.32-1.36v depending on core for 5ghz and pulls 600w with cinebench.

7980 is going to need more then that and would be close on 1000w.

Safe voltages not really a problem since ull hit cooling limit first. Up to 1.4v ment to be fine for daily use when I was looking for Max voltage I could run.


----------



## Jpmboy

gridironcpj said:


> I just ordered the X299 delid kit from Rockit. Any advice from your delidding experiences? This is my first delid ever, so hopefully I destroy this 7960X lol.


The delid is easy. Main thing(s) are to remove all the OEM sealant... carefully, you can knock off the nearby SMDs - killing the processor. Coat the exposed components with MG Conformal coating, or nail polish, and PAINT the LM both on the die and the underside of the IHS. Then just tack down the four corners with a dab of black RTV. I would not use crazy glue like Rockit recommends. If you do, you'll want to have some acetone handy to soften the crazy glue if you should need to pop the top again.


----------



## superV

i started thinking about and got really really really curious.
so i did re paste the cpu with the good old mx4,it didn't change that much in terms of temps,but i did just to make sure the paste got spread ed well.
so i tried again for the 5ghz without hyper threading on CB and same results,too much heat and crash.
then i tried 4.9 and same issues.
then i tried 4.8 ghz 1.28v,the same voltages used on the gigabyte gaming 9,to see if i get temp issues again.
and guess what,same temp issues,when on gigabyte i had mid/high 70's for 4.8ghz,but what got my attention was the CB score,3684,when with the gigabyte i was getting around 3200/3300.
i knew that the gigabyte was throttling,but not to this level.on the asus at the same speeds and voltages i get +20c,which is insane.
and that's why i didn't think to delidd,because i was thinking that the low temps are because the 7980xe has a large chip,large surface area LUL,and not because the gigabyte mobo was throttling.
anyway,i ordered Der8auer delid tool and the direct die frame,can't wait to see the true potential of this chip for x.264 and oc the ram to 4000mhz which was impossible on the gigabyte with the timings suggested by users here.
by the way,can you guys tell me what timings i need to change?i have the g.skill rgb 3600c16 F4-3600c16Q-32GTZR,so i can tweak the ram till delid.
ty


----------



## nycgtr

superV said:


> i started thinking about and got really really really curious.
> so i did re paste the cpu with the good old mx4,it didn't change that much in terms of temps,but i did just to make sure the paste got spread ed well.
> so i tried again for the 5ghz without hyper threading on CB and same results,too much heat and crash.
> then i tried 4.9 and same issues.
> then i tried 4.8 ghz 1.28v,the same voltages used on the gigabyte gaming 9,to see if i get temp issues again.
> and guess what,same temp issues,when on gigabyte i had mid/high 70's for 4.8ghz,but what got my attention was the CB score,3684,when with the gigabyte i was getting around 3200/3300.
> i knew that the gigabyte was throttling,but not to this level.on the asus at the same speeds and voltages i get +20c,which is insane.
> and that's why i didn't think to delidd,because i was thinking that the low temps are because the 7980xe has a large chip,large surface area LUL,and not because the gigabyte mobo was throttling.
> anyway,i ordered Der8auer delid tool and the direct die frame,can't wait to see the true potential of this chip for x.264 and oc the ram to 4000mhz which was impossible on the gigabyte with the timings suggested by users here.
> by the way,can you guys tell me what timings i need to change?i have the g.skill rgb 3600c16 F4-3600c16Q-32GTZR,so i can tweak the ram till delid.
> ty


Why is your cb score so weak.


----------



## superV

nycgtr said:


> Why is your cb score so weak.


no hyper threading and obvious bad temps,but still higher than the gigabyte gaming 9.


----------



## ESRCJ

Jpmboy said:


> The delid is easy. Main thing(s) are to remove all the OEM sealant... carefully, you can knock off the nearby SMDs - killing the processor. Coat the exposed components with MG Conformal coating, or nail polish, and PAINT the LM both on the die and the underside of the IHS. Then just tack down the four corners with a dab of black RTV. I would not use crazy glue like Rockit recommends. If you do, you'll want to have some acetone handy to soften the crazy glue if you should need to pop the top again.


Thanks for the detailed response! Some people don't bother resealing it and just rely on the compression of the water block. I'm on the fence as to which route I should go in this regard. I will likely be switching back to a Supremacy Evo waterblock, so installation won't require any movement like the monoblock installation.


----------



## nycgtr

gridironcpj said:


> Thanks for the detailed response! Some people don't bother resealing it and just rely on the compression of the water block. I'm on the fence as to which route I should go in this regard. I will likely be switching back to a Supremacy Evo waterblock, so installation won't require any movement like the monoblock installation.


I just used the clamping force. I have the rocket it's fairly simple. I delided 2 now with it. There's quite a pop when its come loose.


----------



## bmgjet

gridironcpj said:


> Thanks for the detailed response! Some people don't bother resealing it and just rely on the compression of the water block. I'm on the fence as to which route I should go in this regard. I will likely be switching back to a Supremacy Evo waterblock, so installation won't require any movement like the monoblock installation.


Mines not glued, Just used the CPU socket clamp to hold it in place. Have had it out again and the liquid metals gone hard enough that the IHS doesnt move.



nycgtr said:


> I just used the clamping force. I have the rocket it's fairly simple. I delided 2 now with it. There's quite a pop when its come loose.


Mine made no noise at all. Didnt even need to spin the allen key for more leaverage. Just screwed in easily then stopped on the stopper. Unscrewed it and the lid fell off basically.


----------



## Kana Chan

superV said:


> i started thinking about and got really really really curious.
> so i did re paste the cpu with the good old mx4,it didn't change that much in terms of temps,but i did just to make sure the paste got spread ed well.
> so i tried again for the 5ghz without hyper threading on CB and same results,too much heat and crash.
> then i tried 4.9 and same issues.
> then i tried 4.8 ghz 1.28v,the same voltages used on the gigabyte gaming 9,to see if i get temp issues again.
> and guess what,same temp issues,when on gigabyte i had mid/high 70's for 4.8ghz,but what got my attention was the CB score,3684,when with the gigabyte i was getting around 3200/3300.
> i knew that the gigabyte was throttling,but not to this level.on the asus at the same speeds and voltages i get +20c,which is insane.
> and that's why i didn't think to delidd,because i was thinking that the low temps are because the 7980xe has a large chip,large surface area LUL,and not because the gigabyte mobo was throttling.
> anyway,i ordered Der8auer delid tool and the direct die frame,can't wait to see the true potential of this chip for x.264 and oc the ram to 4000mhz which was impossible on the gigabyte with the timings suggested by users here.
> by the way,can you guys tell me what timings i need to change?i have the g.skill rgb 3600c16 F4-3600c16Q-32GTZR,so i can tweak the ram till delid.
> ty


That's without delidding right? The 105C and 102C from that pic?


----------



## disintegratorx

The 7900x is the best processor ever... Have my C1E disabled, mesh clocked at 2.9, and check out this memory!


----------



## superV

Kana Chan said:


> That's without delidding right? The 105C and 102C from that pic?


yes,with hyper threading off.


----------



## Nizzen

disintegratorx said:


> The 7900x is the best processor ever... Have my C1E disabled, mesh clocked at 2.9, and check out this memory!


What about it? Can't see any benchmarks, and trfc is stock for 4266 memory. Not very fast 😛 try trfc @ 400 an run Aida 64 memory benchmark. Post results 😉

I can benchmark with my 7900x 4.8ghz/ 32 mesh mem @ 4000 cl15-15-15-35. Fully stable it isn't 😛


----------



## superV

Nizzen said:


> What about it? Can't see any benchmarks, and trfc is stock for 4266 memory. Not very fast 😛 try trfc @ 400 an run Aida 64 memory benchmark. Post results 😉
> 
> I can benchmark with my 7900x 4.8ghz/ 32 mesh mem @ 4000 cl15-15-15-35. Fully stable it isn't 😛


i want to overclock my ram too,i have the g.skill rgb 3600c16 F4-3600c16Q-32GTZR.what timings should i change and what voltages?i'm still on ddr3 on my gaming rig,i have no knowledge with ddr4.
edit:
so far so good,i managed to boot with ram at 4000mhz with stock timings by only changing the the voltage to 1.45v and switching frequency and dram current capability to 140% and increasing the tRFC to 700.
i did the aida benchmark and i get 60ns,which is not that good,i need to get at least under 60ns,hoping for a 55ns.
tried tRFC at 600 and cr1 and latency went to 57.5ns
what other changes can i do ?


----------



## Jpmboy

superV said:


> i want to overclock my ram too,i have the g.skill rgb 3600c16 F4-3600c16Q-32GTZR.what timings should i change and what voltages?i'm still on ddr3 on my gaming rig,i have no knowledge with ddr4.
> edit:
> so far so good,i managed to boot with ram at 4000mhz with stock timings by only changing the the voltage to 1.45v and switching frequency and dram current capability to 140% and increasing the tRFC to 700.
> i did the aida benchmark and i get 60ns,which is not that good,i need to get at least under 60ns,hoping for a 55ns.
> tried tRFC at 600 and cr1 and latency went to 57.5ns
> what other changes can i do ?


 read thru this thread: http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-in...memory-stability-thread-137.html#post27401081


----------



## ThrashZone

gridironcpj said:


> Thanks for the detailed response! Some people don't bother resealing it and just rely on the compression of the water block. I'm on the fence as to which route I should go in this regard. *I will likely be switching back to a Supremacy Evo waterblock, so installation won't require any movement like the monoblock installation*.


Hi,
Too bad just got my mono block working better than the evo finally 
But i can relate to switching did it myself for quite a while before I added another pump before the mono block to get some pressure going through it 

Delid will make the most difference I just used silicon lottery personally no binning.


----------



## nycgtr

I am using the bitspower monoblock and vrm/cpu temps are great. I know bitspower redesigned the coldplate for skylake x. I have the new summit skylake x cpu block but I've yet to use that but the monos use the same plate.


----------



## superV

Jpmboy said:


> read thru this thread: http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-in...memory-stability-thread-137.html#post27401081


so i did a copy/pasterino of the primary/secondary as on the screen,and bingo, latency went to 53ns and was stable 45 mins on the aida memory test before giving hardware fail.
i think it shloud do for my needs.
ty


----------



## Jpmboy

superV said:


> so i did a copy/pasterino of the primary/secondary as on the screen,and bingo, latency went to 53ns and was stable 45 mins on the aida memory test before giving hardware fail.
> i think it shloud do for my needs.
> ty


 what voltage? AID64 ram test is fairly slow to find errors. I suspect that GSAT would error out much quicker. I suggest setting up windows BASH (google it - easy, download from the windows store - unbuntu)) which gives you a windows linux VM. go from there.
Remember - a bad core OC will basically BSOD but a bad ram OC can silently corrupt an OS install beyond recovery (and data files) without any premonitory signs. I know we all focus on the CPU overclock 'cause the efect of a bad one is immediately noticed. Locking down a stable ram configuration is more critical IMO.


----------



## superV

Jpmboy said:


> what voltage? AID64 ram test is fairly slow to find errors. I suspect that GSAT would error out much quicker. I suggest setting up windows BASH (google it - easy, download from the windows store - unbuntu)) which gives you a windows linux VM. go from there.
> Remember - a bad core OC will basically BSOD but a bad ram OC can silently corrupt an OS install beyond recovery (and data files) without any premonitory signs. I know we all focus on the CPU overclock 'cause the efect of a bad one is immediately noticed. Locking down a stable ram configuration is more critical IMO.


i missed one timing, cas write latency i did set it to 12 like in the screen and did another test for 1 hour on aida, and was stable.i think it will do since i don't think will reach 92% of memory usage with x.264 encoding on obs.i'm more than happy,thanks
so overall oc:
48 core with hyper threading disabled @1.28v(will test again once i delid to see what i can achieve)
avx 10 avx-512 15
cache 30
dram 4000mhz (dram current at 140% and switching frequency 1000KHz)
vcore 1.28v
cache 1.10v (i think it could do 1.08v)
cpu input voltage 1.85 (to re test once i delid)
dram voltage 1.45v(i think i'll leave like this since it's stable)
vccio 1.2v
system agent 1.2v
pch default 1v


----------



## Jpmboy

superV said:


> i missed one timing, cas write latency i did set it to 12 like in the screen and did another test for 1 hour on aida, and was stable.i think it will do since i don't think will reach 92% of memory usage with x.264 encoding on obs.i'm more than happy,thanks
> so overall oc:
> 48 core with hyper threading disabled @1.28v(will test again once i delid to see what i can achieve)
> avx 10 avx-512 15
> cache 30
> dram 4000mhz (dram current at 140% and switching frequency 1000KHz)
> vcore 1.28v
> cache 1.10v (i think it could do 1.08v)
> cpu input voltage 1.85 (to re test once i delid)
> dram voltage 1.45v(i think i'll leave like this since it's stable)
> vccio 1.2v
> system agent 1.2v
> pch default 1v


 good job. Just FYI - in Bios, nav to the ASUS profiles page, put a USB stick in any port, hit crtl-F2 to drop a txt file of asll bios settings to the stick. :thumb:
You can take advantage of the preferred cores by using a per-core OC, disabling EIST (speedstep) and enabling Speedshift. Low core count loads will be scheduled to the higher clocked cores.


----------



## superV

Jpmboy said:


> good job. Just FYI - in Bios, nav to the ASUS profiles page, put a USB stick in any port, hit crtl-F2 to drop a txt file of asll bios settings to the stick. :thumb:
> You can take advantage of the preferred cores by using a per-core OC, disabling EIST (speedstep) and enabling Speedshift. Low core count loads will be scheduled to the higher clocked cores.


ok thanks.
so far better than expected,i just need to delid to drop some temps and see what's possible on 280mm+240mm rads with not so good xspc pump.


----------



## ESRCJ

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Too bad just got my mono block working better than the evo finally
> But i can relate to switching did it myself for quite a while before I added another pump before the mono block to get some pressure going through it
> 
> Delid will make the most difference I just used silicon lottery personally no binning.


I removed my 120mm rad that was after my graphics card, but before the monoblock for the sake of flow, but that didn't seem to help. It's sad, because I love the aesthetics of the monoblock. The issue with a second pump in my system is the location: the only spot I found that seems feasible is on the side opposite of the monoblock, so I'd have a lot more tubing going through my build and somewhat killing the aesthetic. I do love the Supremacy Evo though. It's very efficient and does the job very well.

Does anyone have any suggestions for separate VRM blocks for the RVIE?


----------



## nycgtr

gridironcpj said:


> I removed my 120mm rad that was after my graphics card, but before the monoblock for the sake of flow, but that didn't seem to help. It's sad, because I love the aesthetics of the monoblock. The issue with a second pump in my system is the location: the only spot I found that seems feasible is on the side opposite of the monoblock, so I'd have a lot more tubing going through my build and somewhat killing the aesthetic. I do love the Supremacy Evo though. It's very efficient and does the job very well.
> 
> Does anyone have any suggestions for separate VRM blocks for the RVIE?


Heatkiller. What's wrong with the monoblock.


----------



## ESRCJ

nycgtr said:


> Heatkiller. What's wrong with the monoblock.


Thanks for the suggestion! That looks like the perfect product for me.

I have found that my CPUs (7920X and 7960X) have run 10-15C hotter with the monoblock versus a Supremacy Evo. Thrashzone found that his monoblock cooling improved after adding a second pump, so it seems like the EK monoblock is highly dependent on flow, whereas the Supremacy Evo is not. I think having separate blocks for the CPU and VRM would be best for me since the only spot I can fit another pump optimally in my case would require significantly more tubing to the point where aesthetics are hurt dramatically unless I pull off some Singularity Computer magic. I'm not nearly the custom water cool guy he is. I'm still very much a novice.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I just added the pump the only place i could looks wasn't really considered 
I was looking into a vrm block too but yes why I have a mono block already that wasn't all that darn cheap so I used it any way possible 

Either way yeah heatkiller has some vrm blocks koolance too piping is a lot more complicated if you ever want to change thermal paste.
http://www.performance-pcs.com/water-blocks-mosfets-volt-regs?limit=90


----------



## nycgtr

gridironcpj said:


> Thanks for the suggestion! That looks like the perfect product for me.
> 
> I have found that my CPUs (7920X and 7960X) have run 10-15C hotter with the monoblock versus a Supremacy Evo. Thrashzone found that his monoblock cooling improved after adding a second pump, so it seems like the EK monoblock is highly dependent on flow, whereas the Supremacy Evo is not. I think having separate blocks for the CPU and VRM would be best for me since the only spot I can fit another pump optimally in my case would require significantly more cooling to the point where aesthetics are hurt dramatically unless I pull off some Singularity Computer magic. I'm not nearly the custom water cool guy he is. I'm still very much a novice.


I have a EK strix monoblock for x299 that I found fairly good for cpu temps. I also have a bitspower x299 x power monoblock that works very well. Bitspower makes 2 different monos for the rampage, one even uses the onboard MB block header. You can try those.


----------



## superV

what difference in terms of temps does make water cooling the vrm? specify your clocks and voltages.
also look at this blocks:
https://sage-shop.com/epages/WatercooleK.sf/en_GB/?ObjectPath=/Shops/WatercooleK/Products/11562
Compatible with:
ASUS ROG RAMPAGE VI APEX
ASUS ROG RAMPAGE VI EXTREME

then look at this:
http://shop.watercool.de/HEATKILLER-MB-X-VRM-ASUS-RAMPAGE-V-EXTREME-NI/en

both blocks have same dimensions and look the same.means that the x99 blocks are compatible with x299?


----------



## toncij

A little follow-up on that 7980XE problem: first, it was the PSU that was actually dying. Two units. Then the motherboard VRM. Very rare, but it happens. Dead.
Replaced both. Now, MemTest shows errors on hammer tests even with brand new RAM and CPU... but CBA any more. Seems that it simply throws errors on any RAM or CPU overclock in any situation. Stock doesn't seemingly.


----------



## ThrashZone

superV said:


> what difference in terms of temps does make water cooling the vrm? specify your clocks and voltages.
> also look at this blocks:
> https://sage-shop.com/epages/WatercooleK.sf/en_GB/?ObjectPath=/Shops/WatercooleK/Products/11562
> Compatible with:
> ASUS ROG RAMPAGE VI APEX
> ASUS ROG RAMPAGE VI EXTREME
> 
> then look at this:
> http://shop.watercool.de/HEATKILLER-MB-X-VRM-ASUS-RAMPAGE-V-EXTREME-NI/en
> 
> both blocks have same dimensions and look the same.means that the x99 blocks are compatible with x299?


Hi,
I posted hwinfo64 readings at 4.5 with the mono block poor flow and all here which max was showing at 50c for vrm's didn't do it with the ek evo and stock vrm cooler 
http://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1643516-oc-advice-settings-i9-7900x.html


----------



## nycgtr

superV said:


> what difference in terms of temps does make water cooling the vrm? specify your clocks and voltages.
> also look at this blocks:
> https://sage-shop.com/epages/WatercooleK.sf/en_GB/?ObjectPath=/Shops/WatercooleK/Products/11562
> Compatible with:
> ASUS ROG RAMPAGE VI APEX
> ASUS ROG RAMPAGE VI EXTREME
> 
> then look at this:
> http://shop.watercool.de/HEATKILLER-MB-X-VRM-ASUS-RAMPAGE-V-EXTREME-NI/en
> 
> both blocks have same dimensions and look the same.means that the x99 blocks are compatible with x299?


Not the same. Not compatible. In terms of difference its throttle at the vrms over extended loads or not throttling that's probably the most important part.


----------



## ESRCJ

I've been testing this 7960X and it managed 4.5GHz at 1.15V vcore (no memory OC). I used Realbench for a couple of hours to test stability. Not bad, but it seems like it struggles with 3GHz mesh. I needed 1.1V vmesh just to get it to boot... it isn't stable either, but I can run benchmarks.

I decided to try 4.6GHz and it was stable for 15min of RB at 1.175V, although the VRM temp started to induce throttling. I then tried 3GHz mesh at 1.1V vmesh again. My PC shut down a second into Cinebench then restarted. This has never happened before to me, even with unstable OCs with previous CPUs. I cranked the vmesh up to 1.15V, but it shut down again after a second of Cinebench. Finally, I increased vcore to 1.2V just in case, but the same issue occurred. 

Any ideas what could be causing the shutdown? I'm using a 1200W PSU, although I have a 10amp cable plugged in. The cable that came with the PSU is in another room... don't tell me that's the issue lol. I'm not home so I can't test it.

I'm also worried my CPU might just be a lottery loser with regards to the cache.


----------



## nycgtr

gridironcpj said:


> I've been testing this 7960X and it managed 4.5GHz at 1.15V vcore (no memory OC). I used Realbench for a couple of hours to test stability. Not bad, but it seems like it struggles with 3GHz mesh. I needed 1.1V vmesh just to get it to boot... it isn't stable either, but I can run benchmarks.
> 
> I decided to try 4.6GHz and it was stable for 15min of RB at 1.175V, although the VRM temp started to induce throttling. I then tried 3GHz mesh at 1.1V vmesh again. My PC shut down a second into Cinebench then restarted. This has never happened before to me, even with unstable OCs with previous CPUs. I cranked the vmesh up to 1.15V, but it shut down again after a second of Cinebench. Finally, I increased vcore to 1.2V just in case, but the same issue occurred.
> 
> Any ideas what could be causing the shutdown? I'm using a 1200W PSU, although I have a 10amp cable plugged in. The cable that came with the PSU is in another room... don't tell me that's the issue lol. I'm not home so I can't test it.
> 
> I'm also worried my CPU might just be a lottery loser with regards to the cache.


I had the same issue with the shutdown moment I ran like prime95 or aida stressing cache on the strix 299. All overcurrent protection was disabled. So I pinned it to the board that I could not draw more than about 380 watts before it just shuts down and reboots. With the xpower and desginaire I don't have this problem.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I would use adaptive for cache +0.050 and another +0.150 for turbo (Min cache 27 pretty much default) and Max cache 30 seems fine.


----------



## ESRCJ

That can't be right though for the RVIE, can it? I'd be shocked if Asus's flagship couldn't handle my lukewarm OC. I had no issues with my 7920X in this regard, although it draws a bit less power.


----------



## superV

nycgtr said:


> Not the same. Not compatible. In terms of difference its throttle at the vrms over extended loads or not throttling that's probably the most important part.


https://sage-shop.com/epages/WatercooleK.sf/en_GB/?ObjectPath=/Shops/WatercooleK/Products/11562
Material: Nickel plated electrolytic Copper, PLEXIGLAS GS
Measurements (LxBxH): 107 x 19 x 22,5mm (VRM)
Weight: approx. 150g
pressure tested: 5 bar
Seals: NBR70

http://shop.watercool.de/HEATKILLER-MB-X-VRM-ASUS-RAMPAGE-V-EXTREME-NI/en
Material: nickel-plated electrolytic copper, POM, stainless steel
Dimensions: (L x W x H): 107 x 19 x 22,5 mm (VRM)
Weight: approx. 430 g
Pressure tested: 5 bar
Sealing: NBR70
Threads: G ¼ inch (DIN ISO 228-1)

same dimension,how they can't be compatible.
ye sorry i'm cheaping out,50 euro + 10 shipping,at that price i could buy a 360 rad.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah ek just released or is about to release a mono block for x99 and it does have a diagram
I believe the x299 also has a diagram for it on ek's site too
http://www.overclock.net/forum/1806...asus-x99-mono-block-little-late-game-not.html

Some of those vrm coolers don't come with heat plates adding more to costs.


----------



## nycgtr

superV said:


> https://sage-shop.com/epages/WatercooleK.sf/en_GB/?ObjectPath=/Shops/WatercooleK/Products/11562
> Material: Nickel plated electrolytic Copper, PLEXIGLAS GS
> Measurements (LxBxH): 107 x 19 x 22,5mm (VRM)
> Weight: approx. 150g
> pressure tested: 5 bar
> Seals: NBR70
> 
> http://shop.watercool.de/HEATKILLER-MB-X-VRM-ASUS-RAMPAGE-V-EXTREME-NI/en
> Material: nickel-plated electrolytic copper, POM, stainless steel
> Dimensions: (L x W x H): 107 x 19 x 22,5 mm (VRM)
> Weight: approx. 430 g
> Pressure tested: 5 bar
> Sealing: NBR70
> Threads: G ¼ inch (DIN ISO 228-1)
> 
> same dimension,how they can't be compatible.
> ye sorry i'm cheaping out,50 euro + 10 shipping,at that price i could buy a 360 rad.


Check the watercool thread this has been discussed before. You need to look at the back of block not the dimensions of the block. IF you think about it every EK mono has the same dimensions for intel just about doesn't mean you can put it on any board.


----------



## nycgtr

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah ek just released or is about to release a mono block for x99 and it does have a diagram
> I believe the x299 also has a diagram for it on ek's site too
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/1806...asus-x99-mono-block-little-late-game-not.html
> 
> Some of those vrm coolers don't come with heat plates adding more to costs.


That's been around since 2015 that block. I had it on my deluxe.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
The only other ek asus mono block for x99 I saw was is one for gigabyte compatible
I thought it was weird that there wasn't one out yet or listed anywhere like performance pc/.... for x99


----------



## tistou77

I compared the block VRM of X99 and X299, on X299 "the distance" between the 2 screws is slightly larger (~1mm)
With an X99 block, on an MB X299, one of the screws does not fall in front of the hole


----------



## superV

tistou77 said:


> I compared the block VRM of X99 and X299, on X299 "the distance" between the 2 screws is slightly larger (~1mm)
> With an X99 block, on an MB X299, one of the screws does not fall in front of the hole


thanks.
i'll delid first and test what frequency i can get,then if vrm will be a problem will buy the **** thing,and probably will add a rad.


----------



## Jpmboy

gridironcpj said:


> I removed my 120mm rad that was after my graphics card, but before the monoblock for the sake of flow, but that didn't seem to help. It's sad, because I love the aesthetics of the monoblock. The issue with a second pump in my system is the location: the only spot I found that seems feasible is on the side opposite of the monoblock, so I'd have a lot more tubing going through my build and somewhat killing the aesthetic. I do love the Supremacy Evo though. It's very efficient and does the job very well.
> 
> Does anyone have any suggestions for separate VRM blocks for the RVIE?


Koolance has coldplates that will fit any vrm array. http://koolance.com/mvr-100-motherboard-vreg-water-block


----------



## ESRCJ

Jpmboy said:


> gridironcpj said:
> 
> 
> 
> I removed my 120mm rad that was after my graphics card, but before the monoblock for the sake of flow, but that didn't seem to help. It's sad, because I love the aesthetics of the monoblock. The issue with a second pump in my system is the location: the only spot I found that seems feasible is on the side opposite of the monoblock, so I'd have a lot more tubing going through my build and somewhat killing the aesthetic. I do love the Supremacy Evo though. It's very efficient and does the job very well.
> 
> Does anyone have any suggestions for separate VRM blocks for the RVIE?
> 
> 
> 
> Koolance has coldplates that will fit any vrm array. http://koolance.com/mvr-100-motherboard-vreg-water-block
Click to expand...

Another good suggestion, thanks.

The issue of my PC shutting down during CB with the OC I described has been fixed. I used my power cable that came with my PSU and that fixed it. I'm glad it was something very simple.


----------



## Barefooter

gridironcpj said:


> Thanks for the suggestion! That looks like the perfect product for me.
> 
> I have found that my CPUs (7920X and 7960X) have run 10-15C hotter with the monoblock versus a Supremacy Evo. Thrashzone found that his monoblock cooling improved after adding a second pump, so it seems like the EK monoblock is highly dependent on flow, whereas the Supremacy Evo is not. I think having separate blocks for the CPU and VRM would be best for me since the only spot I can fit another pump optimally in my case would require significantly more cooling to the point where aesthetics are hurt dramatically unless I pull off some Singularity Computer magic. I'm not nearly the custom water cool guy he is. I'm still very much a novice.


Here's a shot of my Heatkiller VRM block.


----------



## superV

Barefooter said:


> Here's a shot of my Heatkiller VRM block.
> 
> View attachment 192153


i'm i blind or there are no micro channels?


----------



## Jpmboy

superV said:


> i'm i blind or there are no micro channels?


 even the EK monoblock I have for the G9 is a "smoothbore".


----------



## Barefooter

superV said:


> i'm i blind or there are no micro channels?


Correct no micro channels needed.


----------



## superV

Jpmboy said:


> even the EK monoblock I have for the G9 is a "smoothbore".





Barefooter said:


> Correct no micro channels needed.


dunno why but these blocks look more promising:



REAN1MAT0R said:


> Quote: Originally Posted by *czin125*
> 
> Nice 7980XE and 2 1080Tis. These OC'd as well? Did you ever change the thermal pads for better ones?
> 
> Is that 5x 480mm radiators + a Mora3 420 or 360? Which radiators are those? Nidec fans in push/pull? Do you happen to use that Revo DualTop for the cpu? Is that only one pump for the cooling side?
> 
> cards ocd only to 2100 core at 1.2 volts( very poor scaling, cant push them higher with 100% stability
> thermal pads for cards from EK, thats more then enough
> *thermal pads for rampage apex vrm are phobya extreme 7wk 0.5mm* (Click to show)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> radiators are
> 5x ek XTX 480 with typhoons push-pull with 25mm shrouds for both sides
> mora 3 9x140 with 9 XSPC fans one side pull
> pumps are one D5 to pull water from the tank
> and 6 DDC+ with 3 dual top EK
> single loop system





REAN1MAT0R said:


> ow ow ow)
> asus lickers club founder arrived
> and yes. if my waterblocks with 17w/mk thermal pads and best backplate cant help to mb vrm, than any vrm waterblock cant help. and of course, including typical no-structure waterblocks.
> i suggest you will obey me.


----------



## Barefooter

superV said:


> dunno why but these blocks look more promising:


Well they may look more promising to you... but to me they look but ugly


----------



## RichKnecht

Barefooter said:


> Here's a shot of my Heatkiller VRM block.
> 
> View attachment 192153


Pretty slick. Wish they made one for the Strix Gaming E.


----------



## nycgtr

RichKnecht said:


> Pretty slick. Wish they made one for the Strix Gaming E.


I have the mono for the strix. Works fine. Seems vrms do get up to 80c though at max draw with a block but that's more than fine.


----------



## Jpmboy

superV said:


> dunno why but these blocks look more promising:


lol - that bone colored plastic must be an acquired taste. :blinksmil
I wouldn't consider those nubbins/teats microchannels and the finned block is too restrictive for a little vrm block. Again, the VRMs get hot but do not put out a lot of BTUs. Smooth bore works fine. I suggest that before you start voiding the warranty on your board and attaching "objects" like those , delid the cpu and see if you even need a vrm cooler.
A simple Gelid fan on the vrm fan mount is all that's needed for this Apex. The second gelid fan is cooling a pair of 960s on the DIMM.2 card. I've since moved that to the PCH DIMM.2 slot and run the OS off an Intel 900p.


----------



## xarot

The Heatkiller block for the VRM works wonders on the Rampage VI Extreme, I've never seen over 60c temps and I am stressing heavily with Prime95. That's close to 50c difference when compared to air, my VRM went up to 109c.


----------



## superV

Jpmboy said:


> lol - that bone colored plastic must be an acquired taste. :blinksmil
> I wouldn't consider those nubbins/teats microchannels and the finned block is too restrictive for a little vrm block. Again, the VRMs get hot but do not put out a lot of BTUs. Smooth bore works fine. I suggest that before you start voiding the warranty on your board and attaching "objects" like those , delid the cpu and see if you even need a vrm cooler.
> A simple Gelid fan on the vrm fan mount is all that's needed for this Apex. The second gelid fan is cooling a pair of 960s on the DIMM.2 card. I've since moved that to the PCH DIMM.2 slot and run the OS off an Intel 900p.


For me cosmetics doesn't matter at all,performance is n1 priority.
I do have a Noctua Nf-A6 x 25 Flx 3k rpm mounted straight on the heat spreader,because i couldn't figure out how to use the brackets,gigabyte really killed my patience.I did some tests and saw 75c on the vrm.
Need to delid first and see.But a little of research just in case,doesn't harm.But still 50 euros for a piece of copper like that,it's too much money.


----------



## Jpmboy

EK block on the gigabyte G9


----------



## superV

Jpmboy said:


> EK block on the gigabyte G9


try a cb with the cpu at 4.8ghz 1.28v with no HT and ram at stock xmp 3600mhz cache at 3ghz.
really curious.


----------



## Jpmboy

superV said:


> try a cb with the cpu at 4.8ghz 1.28v with no HT and ram at stock xmp 3600mhz cache at 3ghz.
> really curious.


There's a 7740X at 5.2 in that rig.


----------



## superV

Jpmboy said:


> There's a 7740X at 5.2 in that rig.


ah ok.now things match up.
the user @nycgtr said in the gigabyte x299 thread,that he's getting 300 points less in cb on gigabyte x299 designaire than the msi xpower at the same settings.
at this point it's clearly visible that gigabyte started do coke.
i think the issues is with the vrm's,that don't work as should.
They do coke, since he made a video and had to show the time and stuff,sort of he's not rigging,since he's way too asus,i put it that way.
That means something is going behind the scenes,some beef or something,and the review it self says that,but i'd like the reviewer to be more direct in situations like this.
I lost a lot of time with the gigabyte,because i had to get rid of it and wasn't easy,and lost 120 euros,i knew that was throttling but not to this point,where i need to delid to handle the temps.


----------



## ocvn

superV said:


> ah ok.now things match up.
> the user @nycgtr said in the gigabyte x299 thread,that he's getting 300 points less in cb on gigabyte x299 designaire than the msi xpower at the same settings.
> at this point it's clearly visible that gigabyte started do coke.
> i think the issues is with the vrm's,that don't work as should.
> They do coke, since he made a video and had to show the time and stuff,sort of he's not rigging,since he's way too asus,i put it that way.
> That means something is going behind the scenes,some beef or something,and the review it self says that,but i'd like the reviewer to be more direct in situations like this.
> I lost a lot of time with the gigabyte,because i had to get rid of it and wasn't easy,and lost 120 euros,i knew that was throttling but not to this point,where i need to delid to handle the temps.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wuT7cCgOCg


i am running x299 designare ex now. my r6e is rma. designare ex with active fan much cooler than r6e with active fan ([email protected]@ 1.17V Mesh 24 DDR4 3600 xmp) 10-15C. CB15 score same = 4450. So I dont know how MSI can be 300 pts better in CB15?
The big problem with gigabyte is there bios... no adaptive voltage, no adaptive offset voltage, ram tweak not good at all etc...


----------



## nycgtr

I have the designaire ex which has the beefed up vrms. I am not sure why it benches lower. I try tackle it sometime this weekend. When i get a chance. I do have 2 xpowers on hand so I don't need to disassemble anything.


----------



## ocvn

nycgtr said:


> I have the designaire ex which has the beefed up vrms. I am not sure why it benches lower. I try tackle it sometime this weekend. When i get a chance. I do have 2 xpowers on hand so I don't need to disassemble anything.


i run x264 v2 stability test [email protected]@1.17V AVX 0 VCCIN 2V, LLC Turbo. run 20 rounds with 100 threads, normal and VRM never get above 70. Power consumption around 550-600W. you can try to check ur VRM temp. Ambient is 27C


----------



## ocvn

nycgtr said:


> I have the designaire ex which has the beefed up vrms. I am not sure why it benches lower. I try tackle it sometime this weekend. When i get a chance. I do have 2 xpowers on hand so I don't need to disassemble anything.


i run x264 v2 stability test [email protected]@1.17V AVX 0 VCCIN 2V, LLC Turbo. run 20 rounds with 100 threads, normal and VRM never get above 70. Power consumption around 550-600W. you can try to check ur VRM temp. Ambient is 27C


----------



## nycgtr

ocvn said:


> i run x264 v2 stability test [email protected]@1.17V AVX 0 VCCIN 2V, LLC Turbo. run 20 rounds with 100 threads, normal and VRM never get above 70. Power consumption around 550-600W. you can try to check ur VRM temp. Ambient is 27C


I need to recheck the seating of the VRM heatsink on mine. I was hitting 100c running real bench on the desginaire. However, on a fresh boot just doing 1-2 runs of cb was giving me the 300ish points lower at which the point the vrms didn't even heat up.


----------



## ocvn

nycgtr said:


> I need to recheck the seating of the VRM heatsink on mine. I was hitting 100c running real bench on the desginaire. However, on a fresh boot just doing 1-2 runs of cb was giving me the 300ish points lower at which the point the vrms didn't even heat up.


Active fan? Without active fan, the vrm was hot too when OC the cpu (100C with realbench) . I use the 80mm fan above the heatsink and the vrm temp is good now.


----------



## Jpmboy

nycgtr said:


> I have the designaire ex which has the beefed up vrms. I am not sure why it benches lower. I try tackle it sometime this weekend. When i get a chance. I do have 2 xpowers on hand so I don't need to disassemble anything.


some of this 300pt difference can depend on whether the bios(es) address certain intel ME issues differently, whether the OS's are in the same state (this is why win 7 diagnostic mode is very handy - be careful with win 10 diagnostic mode, be sure to enable the OS splash screen with bcdedit if you do), and the Auto rules for ram timings (3rd, 4th etc).
But I think you know all this. 
CB15 is too short of a test to level some of these variables. Blender "classroom" may be better.


----------



## nycgtr

Jpmboy said:


> some of this 300pt difference can depend on whether the bios(es) address certain intel ME issues differently, whether the OS's are in the same state (this is why win 7 diagnostic mode is very handy - be careful with win 10 diagnostic mode, be sure to enable the OS splash screen with bcdedit if you do), and the Auto rules for ram timings (3rd, 4th etc).
> But I think you know all this.
> CB15 is too short of a test to level some of these variables. Blender "classroom" may be better.


Yea the bios addressing the ME is an impact. I was running the latest bios revisions for both boards when I did the test. Actually all 3. I pretty much used a clean win 10 install updated to the latest update when I did both ( I actually reinstalled it clean both times). I have a 7900x that I will delid this weekend and put thru to both boards. 960 evo clean for both so we will see.


----------



## Jpmboy

nycgtr said:


> Yea the bios addressing the ME is an impact. I was running the latest bios revisions for both boards when I did the test. Actually all 3. I pretty much used a clean win 10 install updated to the latest update when I did both ( *I actually reinstalled it clean both times*). I have a 7900x that I will delid this weekend and put thru to both boards. 960 evo clean for both so we will see.


you are a more patient man than I. :sonic:


----------



## nycgtr

Jpmboy said:


> you are a more patient man than I. :sonic:


Better than then, finding out the board has issues after I put it into my loop. So I was literally testing every sata port for function etc haha.


----------



## superV

Look at my patience,just screwed the fan into the vrm's heat spreader


----------



## ocvn

superV said:


> Look at my patience,just screwed the fan into the vrm's heat spreader











Same.... ugly but good


----------



## nycgtr

If i Keep the designaire I will buy the bitspower monoblock for it.


----------



## Jpmboy

nycgtr said:


> Better than then, finding out the board has issues after I put it into my loop. So I was literally testing every sata port for function etc haha.


Lol - this is why I have a few bench tables!


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> some of this 300pt difference can depend on whether the bios(es) address certain intel ME issues differently, whether the OS's are in the same state (this is why win 7 diagnostic mode is very handy - be careful with win 10 diagnostic mode, be sure to enable the OS splash screen with bcdedit if you do), and the Auto rules for ram timings (3rd, 4th etc).
> But I think you know all this.
> CB15 is too short of a test to level some of these variables. * Blender "classroom" may be better*.


Hi,
Great bench test :thumb:
https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/


----------



## Martin778

If someone's interested, I'm getting rid of my XE and Dark MB, located in Western EU.


----------



## pantsaregood

What is everyone doing to test mesh stability? I've been running RAM test with cache testing on for five hours, but I want to know if there's something else to try as well.


----------



## Jpmboy

pantsaregood said:


> What is everyone doing to test mesh stability? I've been running RAM test with cache testing on for five hours, but I want to know if there's something else to try as well.


only other thing is AID64 cache test for several hours.


----------



## bmgjet

AIDA64 cache stress test, it wont throw a error, It will usually just bluescreen or youll get cache L0 errors in HWINFO64 sensor tab.


----------



## ESRCJ

For those of you with a 7960X or 7980XE and an RVI board, what are your current capabilities set to? I have mine at 140%. I'm currently trying to stabilize 4.6GHz, but I'm getting shutdowns (no BSODs, just shutdowns and reboots) during Realbench after 15-30 min. The VRM seems to approach 110C before each shutdown as well, although I'm pretty sure this would just induce throttling, not a shutdown. 

On a different note, I was considering returning the 7960X and just getting the 7980XE since it's only another $300. For those of you who own a 7980XE, how are you liking it? What kind of clocks are you running 24-7?


----------



## Martin778

Nah, don't do it. You will gain nothing but even more heat output and the market for used X299 parts is tiny.
That said, Intel's X399 is somewhere around the corner with new CPU's. ~4.3-4.4GHz is about the maximum what a delidded XE can do for encoding, even Sillon Lottery doesn't bin them above 4.4.

If it shuts down right after starting the test, it's probably CPU power limit or FIVR giving a shutdown (fault) signal.
The VRM heatsink on the RVI is a bit sub-par for stress testing overclocked 12+ cores and should have additional airflow (or a monboblock). You really don't want to run it at 110*C...


----------



## ESRCJ

Martin778 said:


> Nah, don't do it. You will gain nothing but even more heat output and the market for used X299 parts is tiny.
> That said, Intel's X399 is somewhere around the corner with new CPU's. ~4.3-4.4GHz is about the maximum what a delidded XE can do for encoding, even Sillon Lottery doesn't bin them above 4.4.
> 
> If it shuts down right after starting the test, it's probably CPU power limit or FIVR giving a shutdown (fault) signal.
> The VRM heatsink on the RVI is a bit sub-par for stress testing overclocked 12+ cores and should have additional airflow (or a monboblock). You really don't want to run it at 110*C...


Thanks for your input. I noticed GamersNexus had the same issue as me in their 7960X and 7980XE review, which they used the RVIE with. That's actually very unfortunate, since it means these CPUs are simply too power-hungry for Asus's "flagship" board (the Apex seems to be the real flagship honestly). 

I heard X399 might not be coming until 2019, although the early rumors were Q4 2018. Have you heard sooner?


----------



## ocvn

gridironcpj said:


> For those of you with a 7960X or 7980XE and an RVI board, what are your current capabilities set to? I have mine at 140%. I'm currently trying to stabilize 4.6GHz, but I'm getting shutdowns (no BSODs, just shutdowns and reboots) during Realbench after 15-30 min. The VRM seems to approach 110C before each shutdown as well, although I'm pretty sure this would just induce throttling, not a shutdown.
> 
> On a different note, I was considering returning the 7960X and just getting the 7980XE since it's only another $300. For those of you who own a 7980XE, how are you liking it? What kind of clocks are you running 24-7?


use 200% or 240%. However you will need a high flow fan for VRM. run multi times x264 v2 as jmpboy suggested with [email protected]@1.19V without shut down.


----------



## ESRCJ

ocvn said:


> use 200% or 240%. However you will need a high flow fan for VRM. run multi times x264 v2 as jmpboy suggested with [email protected]@1.19V without shut down.


I have a monoblock, although I went back to the Supremacy Evo since my CPU temps are 15C lower with the Evo. I'll give a fan a try. Is tripping OCP a big issue with these CPUs and boards? I haven't delidded my CPU yet, as I'm not even sure I want to keep it at this point, but my thermals are not really all that problematic. I could see 4.7GHz being feasible after a delid, but if that trips OCP due to the higher voltage required, then I guess I'm stuck at 4.6GHz regardless of a delid. That would be quite disappointing. 4.7GHz all cores after a delid has been my target for this CPU.


----------



## Martin778

4.6 might be doable in x264v2 but you'll need a helluva cooling and a good chip and maybe 20-23*C ambient max. 

The problem with the R6 is that it doesn't really have a heatsink, it's just 2 slabs of of aluminium connected with a heatpipe and with a few cuts in it, it actually accomodates heat...
AFAIK the only board I know of that will sustain such beating on the VRM's is the DARK as it has active cooling built in and if you have top exhaust fans it works amazing because the fans will pull the hot air from between the fins of the heatsink.


----------



## ocvn

gridironcpj said:


> I have a monoblock, although I went back to the Supremacy Evo since my CPU temps are 15C lower with the Evo. I'll give a fan a try. Is tripping OCP a big issue with these CPUs and boards? I haven't delidded my CPU yet, as I'm not even sure I want to keep it at this point, but my thermals are not really all that problematic. I could see 4.7GHz being feasible after a delid, but if that trips OCP due to the higher voltage required, then I guess I'm stuck at 4.6GHz regardless of a delid. That would be quite disappointing. 4.7GHz all cores after a delid has been my target for this CPU.


rma my R6E now so i can not test for you however with 7980xe, you have to delid it before OC pass to 45 (non avx). i am testing designare now, 46, avx 0, 1.17V, max temp core 82, avg 75 with x264 v2, hwbot x265 or realbench 4hours. the bios is suck, no adaptive offset voltage. adaptive or offset not working with f4c bios.


----------



## ESRCJ

Martin778 said:


> 4.6 might be doable in x264v2 but you'll need a helluva cooling and a good chip and maybe 20-23*C ambient max.
> 
> The problem with the R6 is that it doesn't really have a heatsink, it's just 2 slabs of of aluminium connected with a heatpipe and with a few cuts in it, it actually accomodates heat...
> AFAIK the only board I know of that will sustain such beating on the VRM's is the DARK as it has active cooling built in and if you have top exhaust fans it works amazing because the fans will pull the hot air from between the fins of the heatsink.


Cooling has not been an issue yet. With RealBench, my 7960X at 4.6GHz and 1.205V, I was hitting 89C max. The VRM is a different story of course. I have a monoblock, but I actually went back to the EK Supremacy Evo block since I get 15C lower temps with it. To my understanding, the monoblock requires better flow and it was rather deep in my loop.

Do you know if anyone here has been able to manage 4.7GHz for 24-7 use on either the 7960X or 7980XE? I would imagine some of these CPUs could do it under 1.25V and after a delid, temps would still be a bit high, but manageable with a nice cooling setup. The thing that keeps popping in my mind is the board not being able to sustain the power draw...



ocvn said:


> rma my R6E now so i can not test for you however with 7980xe, you have to delid it before OC pass to 45 (non avx). i am testing designare now, 46, avx 0, 1.17V, max temp core 82, avg 75 with x264 v2, hwbot x265 or realbench 4hours. the bios is suck, no adaptive offset voltage. adaptive or offset not working with f4c bios.


Ah well hopefully you get your board back soon from the RMA.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Dealing with non delidded chips is like watching a dog chasing it's tail expecting a different result no offense 
@*DooRules* uses some crazy clocks :thumb:

If one doesn't want to delid contact Intel directly and ask when skylake-x refresh will be released it's supposed to be a soldered skylake-x


----------



## ESRCJ

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Dealing with non delidded chips is like watching a dog chasing it's tail expecting a different result no offense
> @DooRules uses some crazy clocks :thumb:


Ha. I have the delid kit sitting on my desk. I have just been too lazy to drain the system, remove the CPU, and delid it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I edited you should return and wait for skylake-x refresh it will be a soldered chip.
Contact Intel for release date.


----------



## ESRCJ

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I edited you should return and wait for skylake-x refresh it will be a soldered chip.
> Contact Intel for release date.


I doubt Intel would tell me something like that. I heard it was either launching Q4 of this year or maybe even in 2019.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Well last Saturday I finally broke 5700 on heaven


----------



## ESRCJ

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Well last Saturday I finally broke 5700 on heaven


Well done! On the note of Cascade Lake-X, I've heard of a 4GHz mesh being a possibility along with the solder you mentioned as well. It'll also be on 14nm++, as opposed Skylake-X's 14nm+.


----------



## superV

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I edited you should return and wait for skylake-x refresh it will be a soldered chip.
> Contact Intel for release date.


Me personally,i'm against soldering.I'm mounting the chips naked since 2014,and it's simply great,you can push a lot of voltages and get higher clocks.
This time simply i got deceived by the gigabyte mobo that the temps will not be a problem and it's expensive chip,but after testing on the x299 apex,i saw the real performance of the 7980xe so it changed my mind quick.
But of course need to think about people that don't like to play with the chip that way or don't have much knowledge,majority want simply to put some thermal paste and the cooler and that's it.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Well last Saturday I finally broke 5700 on heaven


that's a *Top 30*! 


superV said:


> Me personally,i'm against soldering.I'm mounting the chips naked since 2014,and it's simply great,you can push a lot of voltages and get higher clocks.
> This time simply i got deceived by the gigabyte mobo that the temps will not be a problem and it's expensive chip,but after testing on the x299 apex,i saw the real performance of the 7980xe so it changed my mind quick.
> But of course need to think about people that don't like to play with the chip that way or don't have much knowledge,majority want simply to put some thermal paste and the cooler and that's it.


so, you are now using the Apex?


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> that's a *Top 30*!
> 
> so, you are now using the Apex?


Hi,
Looks more like a top 10


----------



## superV

Jpmboy said:


> that's a *Top 30*!
> 
> so, you are now using the Apex?


yes,it's almost 1 week i'm testing on the apex,got it used form amazon for 316 euros shipped 
and can't be happier,cuz for a preset i tested on the G9 i was getting encoder overload, i just needed a bit more performance not to fall in the encoder overload.Achieved that at the same settings/frequency as the gigabyte, but of course i have the temp issue,but once naked and vrm water cooled,i could go higher.And let's not forget the ram ovc which is very important to reduce latency to improve h.264 efficiency (huge thanks btw for the copy/pasterino),which on G9 wasn't possible 4000mhz with your settings,probably too tight secondary/tertiary,on the apex worked at first try.


----------



## ThrashZone

HI,
5c just was not worth chasing for me for an additional 100.us for this item 
http://www.performance-pcs.com/der8auer-skylake-x-direct-die-frame.html

I just added another pump and got better flow though my mono block and gpu blocks 
So now I have a pump before and after both rads seems like the ticket vrm's are 42c ice-ice baby


----------



## pantsaregood

Well, never thought I'd see that happen.

RAM/cache passed 47000% in RAM Test. AIDA64 reported a failure (no WHEA or crash) after only 30 minutes when testing just cache and RAM. Individually testing cache now to see if I lowered the voltage too far.


----------



## superV

ThrashZone said:


> HI,
> 5c just was not worth chasing for me for an additional 100.us for this item
> http://www.performance-pcs.com/der8auer-skylake-x-direct-die-frame.html
> 
> I just added another pump and got better flow though my mono block and gpu blocks
> So now I have a pump before and after both rads seems like the ticket vrm's are 42c ice-ice baby
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rog8ou-ZepE


what pumps are you using? d5?


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## DMac84

Need some help and guidance.

Im looking to replace my 6950X @ 4.2 with a Skylake-X rig, unsure if I want to go 7900X OC or 7980CE OC. Im trying to find benchmarks comparing the OC's of all 3 chips so I can see what im dealing with in terms of performance. All the reviews that I have found are just base clocks vs base clocks, or sometimes the reviewed chip OC vs base clocks of all the other chips in the field. Does me no good. There are like 3 videos on youtube for this, all which are not really in depth. Basically what im trying to compare is 6950X @ 4.2-4.4 vs 7900X @ 4.6-4.8 vs 7980XE @ 4.0-4.2 in all categories such as Rendering, Encoding, Gaming, etc.

System will be my workstation for Cyber Security pen testing w/ virtual machines, productivity & content creation, and Gaming + Streaming single box. I know I could wait to build X399 or whatever, but I need to build now as I am going to purpose this 6950X system for another project. Any help would be appreciated.


----------



## ocvn

DMac84 said:


> Need some help and guidance.
> 
> Im looking to replace my 6950X @ 4.2 with a Skylake-X rig, unsure if I want to go 7900X OC or 7980CE OC. Im trying to find benchmarks comparing the OC's of all 3 chips so I can see what im dealing with in terms of performance. All the reviews that I have found are just base clocks vs base clocks, or sometimes the reviewed chip OC vs base clocks of all the other chips in the field. Does me no good. There are like 3 videos on youtube for this, all which are not really in depth. Basically what im trying to compare is 6950X @ 4.2-4.4 vs 7900X @ 4.6-4.8 vs 7980XE @ 4.0-4.2 in all categories such as Rendering, Encoding, Gaming, etc.
> 
> System will be my workstation for Cyber Security pen testing w/ virtual machines, productivity & content creation, and Gaming + Streaming single box. I know I could wait to build X399 or whatever, but I need to build now as I am going to purpose this 6950X system for another project. Any help would be appreciated.


i didn't jump to 7900x so i dont know. however i did some quick review with [email protected] and [email protected]:
6950x: https://vozforums.com/showpost.php?p=95099889&postcount=1
7980xe: https://vozforums.com/showpost.php?p=129151893&postcount=1

it writed in Vietnamese however you can see the screenshot to compare. hope this help


----------



## Martin778

Ha, thanks for the links! Now I am 100% sure there is nothing wrong with my chip, it's how they are....he has 23*C diff. between cores on that XE.


----------



## wingman99

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I edited you should return and wait for skylake-x refresh it will be a soldered chip.
> Contact Intel for release date.


Where did you get the information that the chip will be soldered?


----------



## hotrod717

ThrashZone said:


> HI,
> 5c just was not worth chasing for me for an additional 100.us for this item
> http://www.performance-pcs.com/der8auer-skylake-x-direct-die-frame.html
> 
> I just added another pump and got better flow though my mono block and gpu blocks
> So now I have a pump before and after both rads seems like the ticket vrm's are 42c ice-ice baby
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rog8ou-ZepE


 Better yet, add a /c unit ducted into your rad fans and case. A legit window unit, not a mobile or "indoor" unit. My secret sauce for water cooling for several years now. Active cooling. Cheaper than a aquarium chiller, if you can live with the look and have a strategy for dealing with the condensate from air conditioner.


----------



## ESRCJ

Do any of you hear coil whine when running AIDA64's cache and memory benchmark? I never noticed any with my 7920X, but it's very loud with my 7960X.

Update: After playing around with this CPU, I'm just going to return it and delid my 7920X. I'll just wait for Cascade Lake-X and buy the flagship if it launches sooner rather than later.


----------



## nycgtr

gridironcpj said:


> Do any of you hear coil whine when running AIDA64's cache and memory benchmark? I never noticed any with my 7920X, but it's very loud with my 7960X.
> 
> Update: After playing around with this CPU, I'm just going to return it and delid my 7920X. I'll just wait for Cascade Lake-X and buy the flagship if it launches sooner rather than later.


It's probably your VRMS. I have this whine with a 7940x but not a 7900x.


----------



## ThrashZone

superV said:


> what pumps are you using? d5?


Hi,
Yep one ek d5 res combo and one ek d5 top 
Top radiator is the reservoir for the d5 top. 
About all I could do with a 450D corsair case


----------



## ThrashZone

wingman99 said:


> Where did you get the information that the chip will be soldered?


Hi,
I can't remember here in the hardware news or on tenforums.com in it's hardware thread or news section a while back should of saved the article link 


hotrod717 said:


> Better yet, add a /c unit ducted into your rad fans and case. A legit window unit, not a mobile or "indoor" unit. My secret sauce for water cooling for several years now. Active cooling. Cheaper than a aquarium chiller, if you can live with the look and have a strategy for dealing with the condensate from air conditioner.


Hi,
Yeah I was thinking more like a mini fridg so I could at least get the beer a lot closer too :cowboy:


----------



## RichKnecht

Thinking of taking the IHS back off my 7900X and getting a Direct Die Frame. Wondering how it's been working out for those who have done this.


----------



## ESRCJ

I noticed that both Rampage VI boards are not in stock sold directly by most main vendors (Newegg, Amazon, etc) and it has been this way for at least a week. Skylake-X availability seems to have disappeared for some CPUs shipped and sold by Amazon and Newegg. Perhaps X399 and Cascade Lake-X are coming at Computex?


----------



## nycgtr

gridironcpj said:


> I noticed that both Rampage VI boards are not in stock sold directly by most main vendors (Newegg, Amazon, etc) and it has been this way for at least a week. Skylake-X availability seems to have disappeared for some CPUs shipped and sold by Amazon and Newegg. Perhaps X399 and Cascade Lake-X are coming at Computex?


the rampage was available last week on amazon, I know as I tired to talk someone out of it lol.


----------



## hotrod717

gridironcpj said:


> I noticed that both Rampage VI boards are not in stock sold directly by most main vendors (Newegg, Amazon, etc) and it has been this way for at least a week. Skylake-X availability seems to have disappeared for some CPUs shipped and sold by Amazon and Newegg. Perhaps X399 and Cascade Lake-X are coming at Computex?


Boards and CPU's are always available even after new gen comes out. Also keep in mind the new cpu's, Skylake -X refresh with solder, will still be compatible with x299 chipset, from what i understand.


----------



## superV

edit


----------



## pantsaregood

Well, this is peculiar.

Replaced my NH-D15S with an AIO. Temperatures dropped by a few degrees. Fell asleep.

Woke up, PC had crashed and rebooted.

Tried Realbench - crashed within minutes.
Lowered RAM speed - crashed within minutes.
Lowered cache speed - crashed within minutes.
Lowered CPU speed - crashed within minutes.

Reloaded BIOS defaults - crashed within minutes at stock.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Wouldn't be the first time an aio pump died or is defective :/
Which aio did you buy ?


----------



## pantsaregood

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Wouldn't be the first time an aio pump died or is defective :/
> Which aio did you buy ?



Fractal Design Celsius S36. It's just an Asetek Gen 5 unit. It isn't dead - temperatures are in check, pump is working. Going to start pulling out RAM sticks later and see if I may have knocked one loose.


----------



## DMac84

Thanks all for the info. I picked up a EVGA X299 Dark and a 7980XE from micro center. Sent the chip to SL for delid and binning. I don’t have the knowledge or time to build a custom loop, so I went with an NZXT Kraken x72, 320mm AIO.

I’m seeing an overclocking guide. I googled for a while and found a few things here or there, what what I’m really looking for is maximum recommended voltages for things like vccin, vccio, vccsa, are L3 cache/uncore/Mesh all the same volatges? etc. I have some significant overclocking experience on x99/Broadwell-E, but with the crazy high temps that this 7980XE will generate, I’d be more comfortable with some guides. If possible, I’m seeking at least 4.2 all core and 3000 - 3200 mesh for a 24x7. If anyone has good ones to share, it would be appreciated. Thanks


----------



## Martin778

3000MHz Mesh is just about what an XE can do. The bigger the mesh network, the worse it overclocks. I had my VCCIN at around ~1.92V.
I'd try 1.10V mesh, if it crashes go 1.15V.


----------



## ThrashZone

DMac84 said:


> Thanks all for the info. I picked up a EVGA X299 Dark and a 7980XE from micro center. Sent the chip to SL for delid and binning. I don’t have the knowledge or time to build a custom loop, so I went with an NZXT Kraken x72, 320mm AIO.
> 
> I’m seeing an overclocking guide. I googled for a while and found a few things here or there, what what I’m really looking for is maximum recommended voltages for things like vccin, vccio, vccsa, are L3 cache/uncore/Mesh all the same volatges? etc. I have some significant overclocking experience on x99/Broadwell-E, but with the crazy high temps that this 7980XE will generate, I’d be more comfortable with some guides. If possible, I’m seeking at least 4.2 all core and 3000 - 3200 mesh for a 24x7. If anyone has good ones to share, it would be appreciated. Thanks


Hi,
All core on a 7980xe is that really necessary even at 4.2 for what 19 cores ?
I'd use By Core Usage and split the cores, half of them at 4.2-4.3 and the rest at the default turbo speed or 3.8-3.9 all of the cores will eventually hit 4.2-4.3 just not at the same time thus lowering temps 

A delidded 7980xe is great but all core on an aio cooler I doubt will cool very well.

Min cache 27 and max cache 30 is enough I believe 
I use adaptive and +0.050 and turbo +0.150 on cache.
Uncore is cache/ mesh.


----------



## Martin778

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> *All core on a 7980xe is that really necessary even at 4.2 for what 19 cores*?
> I'd use By Core Usage and split the cores, half of them at 4.2-4.3 and the rest at the default turbo speed or 3.8-3.9 all of the cores will eventually hit 4.2-4.3 just not at the same time thus lowering temps
> 
> A delidded 7980xe is great but all core on an aio cooler I doubt will cool very well.
> 
> Min cache 27 and max cache 30 is enough I believe
> I use adaptive and +0.050 and turbo +0.150 on cache.
> Uncore is cache/ mesh.


Like this 

By core usage on the Dark has no point because you can't use per core voltage (adaptive doesn't work for !#$% imo) and the temp difference at 4.0 vs 4.3 at the same voltage will be neglible.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Mesh/ cache even using offset mode with +0.125 would be pretty close a tad lower than 1.1v which would be plenty for min 27 and max 30 cache.


----------



## Shadowarez

Just picked up a i9 7980Xe with a gigabyte AORUS Ultimate would this board be able to handle a delided 7980Xe with a corsair 150i Pro with 6 noctua Sterrox fans in push pull config in corsair 1000D. Aiming for a 4.2ghz oc the CPU has liquid metal under IHS.


----------



## ThrashZone

Shadowarez said:


> Just picked up a i9 7980Xe with a gigabyte AORUS Ultimate would this board be able to handle a delided 7980Xe with a corsair 150i Pro with 6 noctua Sterrox fans in push pull config in corsair 1000D. Aiming for a 4.2ghz oc the CPU has liquid metal under IHS.


Hi,
I've read nothing good about gigabyte boards.
Asrock taichi has the best thermal cooling and price I suppose.


----------



## ocvn

Martin778 said:


> Ha, thanks for the links! Now I am 100% sure there is nothing wrong with my chip, it's how they are....he has 23*C diff. between cores on that XE.


undelided 7980xe. currently realbench [email protected] 0 AVX offset, 3000 cache, ddr4 3800c16 and highest core 78, lowest 63. could run 47-48 during winter time. summer time in my country, the ambient with air condition is around 27-28c.


----------



## Shadowarez

Damn should I even try setting up that 18 Core Monster on this board or just buy the new Xe taichi board.?


----------



## Jpmboy

Shadowarez said:


> Damn should I even try setting up that 18 Core Monster on this board or just buy the new Xe taichi board.?


or an ASUS Apex.


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> or an ASUS Apex.


I second that but they are hard to find these days.


----------



## ThrashZone

Shadowarez said:


> Damn should I even try setting up that 18 Core Monster on this board or just buy the new Xe taichi board.?


Hi,
For the money and performance yes asrock kills gigabyte 
Apex will set you back a little price wise but is an awesome board


----------



## wingman99

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I've read nothing good about gigabyte boards.
> Asrock taichi has the best thermal cooling and price I suppose.


What particular things did you read that are not good on the Gigabyte motherboards?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Just a little on the gigabyte thread plus a friend has one and a 8700 and it's just mediocre board a lot of better ones but asrock is a lot better and not all that much more money
x299 in general isn't a very popular platform pretty much why Intel was going to do a skylake-x refresh 
Most all went with 8700's because of thermal issues of course coffee lake has it's own thermal issues too but didn't hurt sells all that much


----------



## wingman99

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Just a little on the gigabyte thread plus a friend has one and a 8700 and it's just mediocre board a lot of better ones but asrock is a lot better and not all that much more money
> x299 in general isn't a very popular platform pretty much why Intel was going to do a skylake-x refresh
> Most all went with 8700's because of thermal issues of course coffee lake has it's own thermal issues too but didn't hurt sells all that much


Is Intel going to use solder with the skylake-x refresh? I can't find any information.


----------



## Shadowarez

Would you consider the Apex like the River 4 Black Edition in Quality?


----------



## Nizzen

CptSpig said:


> Jpmboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> or an ASUS Apex. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> 
> 
> I second that but they are hard to find these days.
Click to expand...

In stock here in Norway 😉


----------



## Shadowarez

There $1200+1990 from what I'm seeing ????


----------



## ThrashZone

wingman99 said:


> Is Intel going to use solder with the skylake-x refresh? I can't find any information.


Hi,
I believe this is the rumor thread 
https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cp...efresh_-_no_kaby_lake-x_replacement_planned/1


----------



## pantsaregood

Has anyone managed <45ns RAM latency with Skylake-X? The best I've managed is 48.7ns. Higher latency than Coffee Lake, but a lot lower than "stock" Skylake-X.


----------



## Jpmboy

pantsaregood said:


> Has anyone managed <45ns RAM latency with Skylake-X? The best I've managed is 48.7ns. Higher latency than Coffee Lake, but a lot lower than "stock" Skylake-X.


quad channel is always gonna suffer latency somewhat, it is more a bandwidth thing. I get 52-ish latency in AID64 with the 32GB 4000c16 posted above. Bench settings in quad can get low 40s and better on x299 (400c12 with 1.9V and tricking windows into thinking it is a 32bit OS  )


----------



## pantsaregood

Jpmboy said:


> quad channel is always gonna suffer latency somewhat, it is more a bandwidth thing. I get 52-ish latency in AID64 with the 32GB 4000c16 posted above. Bench settings in quad can get low 40s and better on x299 (400c12 with 1.9V and tricking windows into thinking it is a 32bit OS  )


My daily settings (1.45V VDIMM) are 32 GB DDR4-4000 16-18-15-38-1T at 285 tRFC. They average 49.2ns in AIDA64.

Throwing more voltage at my RAM doesn't seem to help much. Nothing seems to let me run tCL at 15 or tRCD at 17, short of dropping clocks all the way to DDR4-3600.

I'd say it isn't bad, though - the kits I ordered were mismatched due to an Amazon seller sending the wrong kit. One of my kits (the ones I intended to get) was a G.Skill DDR4-3600 CL15 kit. The other kit (that was supposed to be CL15) was a DDR4-3600 CL16 kit. I'm guessing the CL16 kit is holding me back. I can't get them to post at DDR4-4266 regardless of what VDIMM or VCCSA I use. There doesn't seem to be a DDR4-4133 multiplier available on my X299 OC Formula, either - so DDR4-4000 it is.


----------



## ESRCJ

I delidded my 7920X a few days ago and I'm pleased with the results. I'm now running 4.7GHz on 8 cores and 4.8GHz on 4 cores for my 24-7 OC. All cores are at 1.26V with an offset. I might try to bump a few more cores up. My average RealBench core and package temps after 2 hours are 76C. This is with the monoblock, which tends to cool my CPU worse than a Supremacy Evo by 10-15C based on my testing (due to poor flow).

Unfortunately, this 7920X is somewhat of a lottery loser. I can't get 4.9GHz on all cores to finish a Cinebench run no matter what voltages I throw at it. I even tried 1.36V on all cores.


----------



## crpcookie

kingofblog said:


> Neither soldered packages nor 4 GHz caches are going to happen. If anything, I would expect the uncore ("mesh") to lose frequency headroom on Cascade Lake, as that has been the trend.
> 
> Haswell-E: 4.6 GHz (source)
> Broadwell-E: 3.8 GHz (source)
> Skylake-X: 3.2 GHz (this thread)
> 
> Intel has been steadily reducing the design tolerances on the uncore system to allow scaling to higher core counts. The only thing that should be expected from a 14 nm++ refresh with any degree of certainty is an increase in the single-core turbo ("Turbo Boost Max"). The refresh might ship with 4.7 GHz boost frequency on selected cores. Those cores might reach 5.0 GHz when overclocked.


He’s probably referring to the HWINFO leak which shows an 18 core with 4200mhz uncore/mesh speed.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-ice-lake-10nm-whiskey-lake-400-series,36180.html


----------



## crpcookie

kingofblog said:


> Neither soldered packages nor 4 GHz caches are going to happen. If anything, I would expect the uncore ("mesh") to lose frequency headroom on Cascade Lake, as that has been the trend.
> 
> Haswell-E: 4.6 GHz (source)
> Broadwell-E: 3.8 GHz (source)
> Skylake-X: 3.2 GHz (this thread)
> 
> Intel has been steadily reducing the design tolerances on the uncore system to allow scaling to higher core counts. The only thing that should be expected from a 14 nm++ refresh with any degree of certainty is an increase in the single-core turbo ("Turbo Boost Max"). The refresh might ship with 4.7 GHz boost frequency on selected cores. Those cores might reach 5.0 GHz when overclocked.


He’s probably referring to the HWINFO leak which shows an 18 core with 4200mhz uncore/mesh clock speed. 

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-ice-lake-10nm-whiskey-lake-400-series,36180.html


----------



## wingman99

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I believe this is the rumor thread
> https://www.overclock3d.net/news/cp...efresh_-_no_kaby_lake-x_replacement_planned/1


Thanks, I hope it is true.:specool:


----------



## mafia97160

Hi, my first experience on the x299 with a 7900x delid Live Die Frame.


----------



## glnn_23

Back on x299 after getting an EVGA Dark and the somewhat unpopular 7740x.

It has a delid/relid and is quite a bit of fun to play with.
Still need to sort out the memory yet though

Here's a CB15 run 5.5Ghz @ 1.43v
I'm having a little trouble posting a pic.

https://imgur.com/a/bGO1lMy


----------



## mafia97160

my return with the dark and 7900x.
https://imgur.com/a/v50QKZL


----------



## RichKnecht

Anyone using LM between the IHS and waterblock? Thinking of going that route before I buy a direct die frame to shave off a few more degrees.


----------



## bmgjet

RichKnecht said:


> Anyone using LM between the IHS and waterblock? Thinking of going that route before I buy a direct die frame to shave off a few more degrees.


I run LM on everything, GPU to waterblock, Under IHS, IHS to waterblock.




Any one else running there Skylake-X on UPS?


----------



## mafia97160

me..


----------



## hdtvnut

Mafia, I have a Dark and 1080ti sitting here waiting for the rest of the junk Tuesday for a 4K-capable video editor, but still have to decide whether to get a 7940x or 80xe.

I've been reading that the 40x does faster rendering and playback of 4K at stock speed in Adobe Premier. I assume the numbers may be best for the 40x because it has a higher base clock than the 20x, 60x or 80xe, and the optimum minimum number of cores for AP. If this is right, would equally good OC treatment change the comparison? The listings on Silicon Lottery's site seem to infer not. I'd like to have the extra cores, but not at more expense and less performance. So I'm thinking save a few bucks. I gather that memory is more important for editing, so ordered 64GB 3733.


----------



## ThrashZone

gridironcpj said:


> I delidded my 7920X a few days ago and I'm pleased with the results. I'm now running 4.7GHz on 8 cores and 4.8GHz on 4 cores for my 24-7 OC. All cores are at 1.26V with an offset. I might try to bump a few more cores up. My average RealBench core and package temps after 2 hours are 76C. This is with the monoblock, which tends to cool my CPU worse than a Supremacy Evo by 10-15C based on my testing (due to poor flow).
> 
> Unfortunately, this 7920X is somewhat of a lottery loser. I can't get 4.9GHz on all cores to finish a Cinebench run no matter what voltages I throw at it. I even tried 1.36V on all cores.


Hi,
Yeah a wall can be hit but even silicon lottery has low achievers listed for the most part with high prices on them 
An update on the second pump I added 
I had to add also a pressure release system also to the cap on the pump res combo 
Lots of head and back pressure turning on and off the system was making it leak a little 
Basically I just ran another hose from the top of the reservoir to the top of the case and added a little foam insert to act as a filter and air can be sucked in or out on demand 

Took my ek evo cpu blocks apart they both had crap in them
Both were used way before the mono or gpu blocks so hopefully they collected the crap in the loop 
Need to add a inline filter to catch crap instead of the cpu and gpu blocks ordered a couple yesterday :thumb:


----------



## superV

hdtvnut said:


> Mafia, I have a Dark and 1080ti sitting here waiting for the rest of the junk Tuesday for a 4K-capable video editor, but still have to decide whether to get a 7940x or 80xe.
> 
> I've been reading that the 40x does faster rendering and playback of 4K at stock speed in Adobe Premier. I assume the numbers may be best for the 40x because it has a higher base clock than the 60x or 80xe, and the optimum minimum number of cores for AP. If this is right, would equally good OC treatment change the comparison? The listings on Silicon Lottery's site seem to infer not. I'd like to have the extra cores, but not at more expense and less performance. So I'm thinking save a few bucks. I gather that memory is more important, so ordered 64GB 3733.


if you're doing video editing,this video will surprise you.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Jpmboy

kingofblog said:


> That just shows that the CPU will accept a 42x uncore multiplier. It says nothing about whether such frequencies can be achieved. You might notice that the same screenshot shows the "current frequency" as 2.4 GHz.


 looks like it shows 36x100.
anyway, if it's unlocked those stock min/max limits are meaningless. What is curious is the per-core usage stack for AVX2 and AVX512


----------



## The-Real-Link

So, getting much closer to purchase time now that my SMA8 shipped out. Would you still say the EVGA Dark and a 7940X are worth it in the sense of being a good combo? I know people really love their ASUS boards here but since I'm figuring to get a Silicon Lottery based chip, I know people have spoken good things about the Dark's heatsinked VRMs and other features. 

I have a Kryos in my cart for the CPU cooler but it's also seeming to be out of stock so thought to maybe switch to one of the EK ones instead. But then I hear just as many people saying their junk. Anyway I hope by upgrading this machine I'll see a huge boost to batch photo editing / retouching, 4K video work, and gaming. Will be keeping my same GPU though.


----------



## ThrashZone

The-Real-Link said:


> So, getting much closer to purchase time now that my SMA8 shipped out. Would you still say the EVGA Dark and a 7940X are worth it in the sense of being a good combo? I know people really love their ASUS boards here but since I'm figuring to get a Silicon Lottery based chip, I know people have spoken good things about the Dark's heatsinked VRMs and other features.
> 
> *I have a Kryos in my cart for the CPU cooler* but it's also seeming to be out of stock so thought to maybe *switch to one of the EK ones instead.* But then I hear just as many people saying their junk. Anyway I hope by upgrading this machine I'll see a huge boost to batch photo editing / retouching, 4K video work, and gaming. Will be keeping my same GPU though.


Hi,
Be aware anything from ek is going to be shipping involved and rma wise as well which isn't cheap 
Not links exact produces isn't very helpful for anyone so it's all just a big ????
A clc/ aio on a x series chip I doubt will go very well but good luck all the same


----------



## RichKnecht

My DeBauer Direct Die Frame is now sitting on my desk. Any tips or pointers as far as installing it the right way on the first try? My board is a ASUS Strix 299E eGaming if that matters.


----------



## superV

RichKnecht said:


> My DeBauer Direct Die Frame is now sitting on my desk. Any tips or pointers as far as installing it the right way on the first try? My board is a ASUS Strix 299E eGaming if that matters.


here you go


----------



## RichKnecht

superV said:


> here you go
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_2YzZAOOLU


I've actually watched that several times. I know a few people here have them installed and was wondering if they ran into any "issues" while installing the frame on their board.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Scrimstar

Where can I find the average OC for 7960 and 7980 ? I am deciding which CPU to buy, as I want to game at ~4.5GHz

Also looking for a proper mobo, as I heard most X299 mobos do not have proper VRM cooling for these two CPU. I'm looking for ~$450 or less and ATX size
Was looking at this mobo, but I would like to see other good mobos
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...ignorebbr=1&cm_re=x299-_-13-157-798-_-Product


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Martin778

Scrimstar said:


> Where can I find the average OC for 7960 and 7980 ? I am deciding which CPU to buy, as I want to game at ~4.5GHz
> 
> Also looking for a proper mobo, as I heard most X299 mobos do not have proper VRM cooling for these two CPU. I'm looking for ~$450 or less and ATX size
> Was looking at this mobo, but I would like to see other good mobos
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...ignorebbr=1&cm_re=x299-_-13-157-798-_-Product


XE will go ~4.3 on all cores after delid and under sustained a synthetic load. 4.5GHz when gaming is perfectly doable, just don't try X264 or any AVX loads 
Rampage VI's and Asrock's VRM cooling will struggle in the summer, the EVGA DARK is a much better bet for the XE.
It might work if you have your top exhaust fans close to the heatsinks.


----------



## CptSpig

Martin778 said:


> XE will go ~4.3 on all cores after delid and under sustained a synthetic load. 4.5GHz when gaming is perfectly doable, just don't try X264 or any AVX loads
> Rampage VI's and Asrock's VRM cooling will struggle in the summer, the EVGA DARK is a much better bet for the XE.
> It might work if you have your top exhaust fans close to the heatsinks.


Don't know where you get your information my R6A has no problems with VRM cooling during the summer. It's over a 100 degree's here and my VRM is under 45 even while gaming. I would take the R6A over the Dark simply for the UEFI it's light years ahead of EVGA. I have been running my 7980xe at 4.4 / 3.0 or per core 4.5 / (2) at 4.6 on a AIO 360 for months. Memory CL16 at 4000 1.41 Vdimm. I also have a overclocked Titan Xp running as well. :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ yeah ditto.


I have my R6 Apex at 2x4.7, 16x4.5 with 1.34V, 1.2V respectively, AVX 5 avx512 at 10. VRMs stay below 60C (single gelid 50mm fan mounted on the included vrm fan bracket). Besides, anyone quoting running "1KW" 24/7 is delirious. The chip will not handle that (hair dryer) power level for any period of time (beyond moments/minutes) without suffering serious degradation, and only a few PSUs can push 1000W thru the EPS. Silly stuff.


----------



## cekim

Jpmboy said:


> ^^ yeah ditto.
> 
> 
> I have my R6 Apex at 2x4.7, 16x4.5 with 1.34V, 1.2V respectively, AVX 5 avx512 at 10. VRMs stay below 60C (single gelid 50mm fan mounted on the included vrm fan bracket). Besides, anyone quoting running "1KW" 24/7 is delirious. The chip will not handle that (hair dryer) power level for any period of time (beyond moments/minutes) without suffering serious degradation, and only a few PSUs can push 1000W thru the EPS. Silly stuff.


ditto ditto (close anyway)
4.5x18 1.175 AVX 5 AVX512 7

Ran boinc pentathlon that way... Could definitely do more with these cores (4.7), but for 24/7 compute, its just too hot even with a waterblock and dedicated rad. 

So, full CPU load and 2 1080ti's OC'd as well is bouncing between 800-1000W at the wall (full system) - mostly 850 for non-AVX loads. CPU hovers around 290-300W but can spike to 350-400W particularly with all-core AVX. The rest is those 2 1080ti's, ram, fans, pumps, etc... 

The reality of gaming is much more mundane for this system... Even games that use "a lot" of cores are yawn levels of heat compared to computes. So, you can get away with higher clock rates, until those compute loads hit unexpectedly and then you have a an enormous amount of heat in that socket and on those EPS pins.


----------



## Jpmboy

oh daaum... i missed the 9th pentathlon! Caught sleeping...


----------



## cekim

Jpmboy said:


> oh daaum... i missed the 9th pentathlon! Caught sleeping...


Fail... we lost because of you... ;-)


----------



## ESRCJ

Scrimstar said:


> Where can I find the average OC for 7960 and 7980 ? I am deciding which CPU to buy, as I want to game at ~4.5GHz
> 
> Also looking for a proper mobo, as I heard most X299 mobos do not have proper VRM cooling for these two CPU. I'm looking for ~$450 or less and ATX size
> Was looking at this mobo, but I would like to see other good mobos
> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...ignorebbr=1&cm_re=x299-_-13-157-798-_-Product


I have not seen binning results for the 7960X, but you can guess it's somewhere between what you see for the 7940X and 7980XE. As for my own personal experience, I temporarily had a 7960X at I had it running at 4.6GHz stable without a delid. Granted, I have two 480mm rads and a 120mm. With a delid, 4.7GHz may have been possible for 24-7 use. I should note that the VRM temps are problematic if you're going to be running those clocks long-term in something that really draws a lot of power. Passive cooling is just not feasible at 4.6GHz or higher. You will want a monoblock or a VRM block. Fans will work as well. Personally, I would only recommend the monoblocks from EK if you have a pump running straight to it since they are highly flow dependent. In the same place in my loop, my CPU temps with the RVI monoblock are 15C higher than with an EK Supremacy Evo. A user here reported much better results when he added a second pump to his loop. Just beware of this.

As for the board, go with the RVI Apex unless you absolutely need 8 dimm slots. The Extreme is not as good for overclocking, but it looks nicer if you're into RGB. The Apex is cheaper as well, so it's a no-brainer if you care about overclocking, which clearly we all do given the forum we're on.


----------



## wingman99

gridironcpj said:


> I have not seen binning results for the 7960X, but you can guess it's somewhere between what you see for the 7940X and 7980XE. As for my own personal experience, I temporarily had a 7960X at I had it running at 4.6GHz stable without a delid. Granted, I have two 480mm rads and a 120mm. With a delid, 4.7GHz may have been possible for 24-7 use. I should note that the VRM temps are problematic if you're going to be running those clocks long-term in something that really draws a lot of power. Passive cooling is just not feasible at 4.6GHz or higher. You will want a monoblock or a VRM block. Fans will work as well. Personally, I would only recommend the monoblocks from EK if you have a pump running straight to it since they are highly flow dependent. In the same place in my loop, my CPU temps with the RVI monoblock are 15C higher than with an EK Supremacy Evo. A user here reported much better results when he added a second pump to his loop. Just beware of this.
> 
> As for the board, go with the RVI Apex unless you absolutely need 8 dimm slots. The Extreme is not as good for overclocking, but it looks nicer if you're into RGB. The Apex is cheaper as well, so it's a no-brainer if you care about overclocking, which clearly we all do given the forum we're on.


Why is the Extreme not as good for overclocking?


----------



## Scrimstar

I can't fit an EATX in my case, and both the EVGA Dark and ASUS Rampage(s) look like they have smaller VRM heatsinks. Right now, the ASROCK mobo is looking like a good choice for me. Maybe I can put in a makeshift fan over the VRM... Also planning to use an AIO with delidding. Currently own a Swiftech 320X2 Prestige, but I am not sure if it mounts but I seen someone mount a 7900, will look into if there exists a better AIO.

I realize you can OC a few of the cores to achieve a higher clock, is it possible to reach 5GHz or near for 6 cores on the 7980xe or 7960

https://proclockers.com/reviews/cpus/intel-core-i9-7900x-cpu-review/page/0/3

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/HH86D2

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157798


----------



## Pyounpy-2

*7980XE 5GHz Occt 4.5.1 LINPACK*

7980XE 5GHz Occt 4.5.1 LINPACK 1H
AVX OFFSET:0
Memory:4000MHz 17-18-18-36-2T
Chilled Water:-17 C @Start, -11C @ENd (stable after 30min)


----------



## PWn3R

What was your voltage @ 5.0? Also, assuming that is delid with LM or DD cooling?

Just got my 7980xe and a Taichi XE. I got 4.6GHz all cores @ 1.183vcore with temps in 67-72 range with no delid. Think this chip is a pretty good one and I got it for 1200 new in box on eBay.


----------



## Pyounpy-2

PWn3R said:


> What was your voltage @ 5.0? Also, assuming that is delid with LM or DD cooling?
> 
> Just got my 7980xe and a Taichi XE. I got 4.6GHz all cores @ 1.183vcore with temps in 67-72 range with no delid. Think this chip is a pretty good one and I got it for 1200 new in box on eBay.


The voltage was set by core, lowest one was 1.3V and highest one was 1.37, avg. was about 1.35V in adaptive mode.
My CPU was delided and LM and a normal HS was used.
I did not checK Vcore for no delid. And my delied one needs less than 1.03V @4.5GHz and 1.15V @4.8GHz.
IF you want check it(good or poor chip), without delid. 
In my idea, first, only one core is enable(other cores disable), then you check the core voltage. 
By using this way you will get the core voltage when you delid it and use nice cooling system due to avoiding thermal plobrem.
Of cource, it cost a long time. Because, you should check it for every 18 cores.
In my case every core was stable less than 1.28V @5GHZ for the water temp : 15 or 20 degrees C (room tem in winter).

thank you


----------



## ocvn

Pyounpy-2 said:


> 7980XE 5GHz Occt 4.5.1 LINPACK 1H
> AVX OFFSET:0
> Memory:4000MHz 17-18-18-36-2T
> Chilled Water:-17 C @Start, -11C @ENd (stable after 30min)


Can you test again without "Use all Logical Cores" ?


----------



## Pyounpy-2

ocvn said:


> Can you test again without "Use all Logical Cores" ?


Yes, I'll try, but next week end. because now my chiller system cools another system (8700K) and I use it.


----------



## HURRICAN3

Whats up everybody, how good is the R6 Extreme for overclocking compare to R6 Apex? Apex is hard to find.


----------



## Scrimstar

Pyounpy-2 said:


> 7980XE 5GHz Occt 4.5.1 LINPACK 1H
> AVX OFFSET:0
> Memory:4000MHz 17-18-18-36-2T
> Chilled Water:-17 C @Start, -11C @ENd (stable after 30min)


Nice, you got a godtier chip



PWn3R said:


> What was your voltage @ 5.0? Also, assuming that is delid with LM or DD cooling?
> 
> Just got my 7980xe and a Taichi XE. I got 4.6GHz all cores @ 1.183vcore with temps in 67-72 range with no delid. Think this chip is a pretty good one and I got it for 1200 new in box on eBay.


Did you check VRM temps, the taichi XE has the same VRM heatsink as the mobo I'm looking at


----------



## PWn3R

I haven't found a way to check the temperature on the vrm modules from Windows. So I can't check them under load because of that. I did most of my testing at 4.6 gigahertz with the case side off and I confirm under load that the vrm modules were less than 140 degrees Fahrenheit. They were warm to the touch but not hot at least on the heat sinks. I can't seem to get 4.7 gigahertz to go on this CPU. The computer is simply shutting off when I put the voltage to 1.23 vcore. I have the overcurrent protection disabled as best I can tell on this ASRock bored. However, the computer just continuously shuts off when I start cinebench at that voltage. It was freezing with the voltage and 1.225 and 1.227. I don't know if it's pulling too much current for my old power supply. I have a 2008 model year Corsair modular 1000 watt power supply. I've been using it this whole time and I probably should upgrade. That might be why the computer is shutting off if this power supply can supply that much wattage anymore. I also had to install a 4 pin to 8 Pin adapter so both 8 pins are coming off the same feed from the PSU. Certainly not optimal but when I dropped all this money on the computer I didn't want to spend another 500 on the power supply right away. Does anyone have any ideas about what else I should try?


----------



## SirWaWa

^ try aida 64?


What is your guys is NB clock in cpu-z? Mine says 2700mhz. 7820x with 32gb ram @ 3200mhz xmp, only the ram is overclocked.
What's a normal NB clock supposed to be?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
No idea what "NB" is 
But 2700 is default cache/ mesh/ uncore clock or max cache in bios at 27 instead of what most people use which is 30 or 3000.


----------



## ocvn

SirWaWa said:


> ^ try aida 64?
> 
> 
> What is your guys is NB clock in cpu-z? Mine says 2700mhz. 7820x with 32gb ram @ 3200mhz xmp, only the ram is overclocked.
> What's a normal NB clock supposed to be?


Mesh clock. Normal: 2400.


----------



## PWn3R

My mesh is at 2400. I tested with it at 2900 and it only added 20 points to Cinebench score and it added about 150 points to CPU score on 3Dmark.


----------



## xarot

2400 is the default with optimized defaults on 7980XE and R6E. When XMP is set, the mobo overclocks it to 2.7 GHz.


----------



## hrmgamer

Hi all

I've finally gotten around to overclocking my rig. I know there was discussion about this earlier in this thread but I can't for the life of me find it, so apologies for the repeated question.

With my 7980 (not delidded) I have my normal ratio (42) then the negative offsets for AVX (4) and AVX-512 (8), and what I am finding is I can get the voltage right using either manual or adaptive* for AVX+normal or AVX-512 but not both. My current settings are based on Jpmboy's 47per_setting.txt, though I might have missed something. 

Apative would be fine except that for some reason the additional turbo voltage (1.1V) seems to be getting ignored (probably because of the way it's hitting 4200MHz isn't a turbo frequency for some reason). So instead the cores are all around 1.2V causing the temperatures to start to run away. 

Which brings me to another question, my package temperature seems to consistently be 5-15 degrees hotter than my hottest core depending on the type of stress test. What's really worrying is that this is before I've even started to push my RAM (right now I'm at 2133MHz) or Cache (2400MHz) speeds. Anything obvious I should be doing to reduce the CPU package temp, or is it likely the pigeon poop causing this, which in turn will hold back the whole overclock?

I should probably note that settings such as VCCIN, VCCSA, VCCIO, Cache V, Uncore, are mostly on Auto during testing because I haven't reached the point of trying to dial them in. I have mostly been preoccupied getting a feel for my stable Core voltage range instead. That said for the most part they are actually lower than what I have typically seen here. Again this is probably due to me not getting stuck into the RAM and Cache overclocks yet.

My testing has been with a mix of P95 (both AVX and non-AVX), y-cruncher, and AIDA64. Sing out if you need me to post a settings dump or screen shot. Though to be honest that might not be so informative because I'm changing settings around trying to figure this out. So if people are really interested I can publish my overclock spreadsheet which logs all my variable changes and the results from it...yeah, almost every variable in the UEFI has a cell and I am tracking all the changes 

Thanks in advance for the advice.
HRMGamer


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## hrmgamer

kingofblog said:


> 1. Voltage targets aren't applied when the frequency exists in the VID table, which is what you are encountering with adaptive mode.


That's what I figured, but not what I hoped :/ 



kingofblog said:


> Instead, you can apply an additional negative voltage offset to "undervolt" the CPU when it is running within VID range. Apply the opposite offset to the target voltage.


I'm sorry I wasn't clearer in my original post, the problem I'm having the separation in voltages between normal and the AVX-512 load is too high. If I apply the necessary offset to get a stable normal+AVX load (-0.100V), it brings the voltage to ~1.1V for normal and ~1.0V for AVX but it's then too low for AVX-512 at ~0.9V... SFT on y-cruncher is a near instant crash.

Unfortunately I can't bump the voltage higher because on normal operations with a -0.100V offset I'm around 80 degrees under some heavy loads with cold ambient temperatures (16-17C).



kingofblog said:


> For power-intensive chips like Skylake-X HCC, this can allow you to run some workloads at a frequency you otherwise could not cool. Another approach is to reduce Tjunction from the factory value (94 C) and let thermal throttling do its work.


SVID is enabled, but I'm not familiar with PL1 and PL2 so I'll have a look into them 



kingofblog said:


> For power-intensive chips like Skylake-X HCC, this can allow you to run some workloads at a frequency you otherwise could not cool. Another approach is to reduce Tjunction from the factory value (94 C) and let thermal throttling do its work.


I'm not reducing the Tjunction margin, in fact it's really too high for me seeing as how this will be a 24/7 use rig---sustained high temperatures are just asking for trouble long term. Not to mention I don't trust thermal throttling, as I've already had one case where I screwed my settings and the temperature got well above 94 C before I managed to kill the stress test. 



kingofblog said:


> 3. Package temperature is the highest temperature on the CPU die. Depending on your workload, it could be the uncore (cache, mesh, etc.) temperature, which does not have its own sensor. In cache and memory-intensive workloads like AIDA64, the uncore can be the most power-intensive component.


Thanks for the info! 

Thanks again for all the feedback. The fact that I can see stable settings for normal/avx/avx-512 but not get them similtaneously is driving me nuts!

Cheers
HRMGamer


----------



## Mysticial

hrmgamer said:


> That's what I figured, but not what I hoped :/
> 
> I'm sorry I wasn't clearer in my original post, the problem I'm having the separation in voltages between normal and the AVX-512 load is too high. If I apply the necessary offset to get a stable normal+AVX load (-0.100V), it brings the voltage to ~1.1V for normal and ~1.0V for AVX but it's then too low for AVX-512 at ~0.9V... SFT on y-cruncher is a near instant crash.
> 
> Thanks again for all the feedback. The fact that I can see stable settings for normal/avx/avx-512 but not get them similtaneously is driving me nuts!
> 
> Cheers
> HRMGamer



At the same frequency, AVX/AVX512 will require more voltage for stability than normal loads. The larger loads will need more voltage to compensate for the larger internal vdroop of the heavier loads.

The real problem is that either Skylake X and/or the x299 platform do not support workload-dependent voltage selection.

So as much as it would sense to do the following, you can't:


1.00v for non-AVX @ 4.0 GHz
1.05v for AVX @ 4.0 GHz
1.10v for AVX512 @ 4.0 GHz.
 
What is possible (from the chip's perspective) is to increase the voltage for the lower speeds where AVX/AVX512 will be running (due to the offset). This means overvolting non-AVX code, but that doesn't matter at the lower clock speeds.

But I'm not aware of any motherboard/BIOS that will let you do that. You either need a "reverse adaptive" mode, or an option that gives you full control of the VID table.


------


In any case, you are correct that you don't be able to optimize for all of normal, AVX, AVX512 all at once. You'll have to pick one or some balance between them.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Haxman

Are there any other voltages to increase for cache OC apart from cache voltage? I just can't get anything over stock stable on a 7940x/Rampage VI Apex - tried as much as 1.2V for 3 GHz but still fails AIDA within minutes. Temps don't seem to be an issue (under 70C)


----------



## Jpmboy

Yeah, due to the current demands, it would be pure luck to have 1 voltage that covers all three. I think you need to look at the AVX power issue from the other side. Instead of searching for a single voltage that covers non-AVX, AVX and AVX512, (where 512 will need higher voltage to carry the higher current... which leads to more droop. I do not recommend using LLC to "fix" this), Adjust the offsets so that the 512 frequency is stable at the AVX or non-AVX voltage setting. this is why the offsets are there, and your cpu will thank you. Oh, and I'd be worried if the package temp was not higher than the reported core temps. 


Regarding OCCT at 5GHz... if "CPU" in occt equals package temperature, at 125, the system is power throttling (not frequency, so called "phantom throttling"). 125 is above Tcase. So yeah, that's stable, but likely not performing as well as a 7980XE that is not PT'ing at a lower frequency. Looks good in screenshots, but not in performance measurements.




Haxman said:


> Are there any other voltages to increase for cache OC apart from cache voltage? I just can't get anything over stock stable on a 7940x/Rampage VI Apex - tried as much as 1.2V for 3 GHz but still fails AIDA within minutes. Temps don't seem to be an issue (under 70C)


cache is a large substructure... you may need more VCCIN. If your board has cpu AUX voltages, cpu aux 1 may help.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Indeed package temps can be as high as 10c higher than any highest reported single core temp shows in say coretemp....


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Anyone else seeing no results for bios... on asus site ?
https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/SABERTOOTH_X99/HelpDesk_BIOS/

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/PRIME-X299-DELUXE/HelpDesk_BIOS/


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Anyone else seeing no results for bios... on asus site ?
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/SABERTOOTH_X99/HelpDesk_BIOS/
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/PRIME-X299-DELUXE/HelpDesk_BIOS/


Shows up fine for my X299E.


----------



## Mysticial

kingofblog said:


> As Mysticial noted, you can not optimize voltage and frequency for all three operating conditions (non-AVX, AVX, AVX-512) simultaneously. Either you will have to set the voltage offset to the lowest common denominator (smallest offset), or you will have to sacrifice frequency. If you are in the VID range, reducing frequency via AVX offset will not help, since it would just result in stepping down to a lower, still unstable voltage.
> 
> The best case would be if you manage to push the non-AVX ratio outside of the VID range, but leave the AVX-512 frequency within VID. That way, you can effectively set two voltages instead of only one. On i9-7980XE, you need at least 4.5 GHz to accomplish this.



Having a VID table entry isn't enough. The speed also has to be at or below the stock speeds with AVX/AVX512.

IOW, the VID table entries for > 4.0 GHz may not be sufficient for AVX512. Since none of the SKUs allow AVX512 at those speeds regardless of load.

At stock volts running AVX512:


My 7900X crashes on core 9 @ 4.5 GHz (one of the two TB3 cores). A VID table entry exists since it's the top TB3 speed.
My 7940X crashes on several cores @ 3.8 GHz. VID table entries exist for all cores up to 4.2 GHz.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## crpcookie

Damn Intel 28 cores @ 5GHz for HEDT. Pretty crazy stuff! It’s expected some time this year.


----------



## RichKnecht

Installed my Die Frame today on my Strix 299E with 7900X. Immediate overtemp error on boot. Seems that there is a pretty decent gap between the top of the die and the block (EK Evo). Has anyone experienced this? Did you find a solution or did you return the frame?


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Installed my Die Frame today on my Strix 299E with 7900X. Immediate overtemp error on boot. Seems that there is a pretty decent gap between the top of the die and the block (EK Evo). Has anyone experienced this? Did you find a solution or did you return the frame?


Hi, Jmpboy 
Had fun with his no telling if he got his sorted out or not :/
Odd though the evo was on the videos list he tested with.
5c was all the supposed cooling for 7900x opposed to delid not nearly enough for me personally to try.

I did read it took someone a few tries to get it right some where back 5-10 pages.


----------



## ESRCJ

So... who here is getting that 28-core Cascade Lake-X behemoth?


----------



## hrmgamer

Thank you all for your responses, I'll address your comments then add in some new findings from my end.



Mysticial said:


> At the same frequency, AVX/AVX512 will require more voltage for stability than normal loads. The larger loads will need more voltage to compensate for the larger internal vdroop of the heavier loads.
> 
> The real problem is that either Skylake X and/or the x299 platform do not support workload-dependent voltage selection.


Yeah, I remember this being a problem, for some reason I thought you wonderful people had come up with a simple solution to it (probably just wishful thinking on my part!). 



Mysticial said:


> What is possible (from the chip's perspective) is to increase the voltage for the lower speeds where AVX/AVX512 will be running (due to the offset). This means overvolting non-AVX code, but that doesn't matter at the lower clock speeds.


I believe I'm still pretty low with my voltages so over-volting wouldn't concern me greatly as (theoretically) the two cores that are running hot can be backed off separately from the others and then all will be fine in core land...it's just the package temps aren't giving me any room to over-volt :/ 



kingofblog said:


> As Mysticial noted, you can not optimize voltage and frequency for all three operating conditions (non-AVX, AVX, AVX-512) simultaneously. Either you will have to set the voltage offset to the lowest common denominator (smallest offset), or you will have to sacrifice frequency. If you are in the VID range, reducing frequency via AVX offset will not help, since it would just result in stepping down to a lower, still unstable voltage.


I'm starting to come to the conclusion it will have to be a frequency sacrifice. That being said I could always try disabling the worst offending cores, push to 4.5GHz and get a feel for where the voltages and temperatures will be if I run a mix of say 4.5GHz and 4.0GHz across the cores.



kingofblog said:


> The best case would be if you manage to push the non-AVX ratio outside of the VID range, but leave the AVX-512 frequency within VID. That way, you can effectively set two voltages instead of only one. On i9-7980XE, you need at least 4.5 GHz to accomplish this.


Please correct me if I'm wrong but are you saying if I run the cores at 4.5GHz I'll be in the adaptive voltage's boost zone and thus can set a cap on the voltages?



Jpmboy said:


> Yeah, due to the current demands, it would be pure luck to have 1 voltage that covers all three. I think you need to look at the AVX power issue from the other side. Instead of searching for a single voltage that covers non-AVX, AVX and AVX512, (where 512 will need higher voltage to carry the higher current... which leads to more droop. I do not recommend using LLC to "fix" this)


LLC is at 5 and I'm seriously considering that I should wind it in further given the sustained loads this will be handling from time to time. 



Jpmboy said:


> Adjust the offsets so that the 512 frequency is stable at the AVX or non-AVX voltage setting. this is why the offsets are there, and your cpu will thank you.


I assume you mean the ratio offsets? Yeah, this is what I've been having trouble with, up until my last post it's been either:
1. low avx ratios (high offsets) with not enough voltage but good temps
2. sensible avx ratios with not quite enough voltage and high temps
3. high avx ratios with what appears to be enough voltage but way to high temps
This analysis has kind of been invalidated however, see below.



Jpmboy said:


> Oh, and I'd be worried if the package temp was not higher than the reported core temps.


Ok good, not doing something stupid then...or at least this bit isn't a result of me doing something stupid 



kingofblog said:


> His main issue is going to be pushing the non-AVX to 45x. Silicon Lottery statistics show that the odds are against him.


Particularly without the delid!

Ok onto the new findings...normal ratio of 42, avx-512 offset of 7 (giving me 3.5GHz), a -0.050V core offset and I appear stable at 70ish degrees in y-cruncher SFT (90min in, up from near instantaneous hard lock-ups)...with one big caveat: processor current at 240% up from 200%. This sounds like a good way to kill the chip long term, right? :/ 

This was almost a desperation test that came about because I've noticed that all my AVX-512 tests at ratio 42 with various offsets (IIRC 4-10) cpu power reported in SIV was well exceeding 330W, with it typically being around 360-370W with -4 pushing 400W. I didn't know how accurate that actually was so I figured maybe an over-current protection was stepping in somewhere. Bump to 240% and suddenly I'm stable on the AVX-512 front. 

It was a rookie error on my part not to check the power draw on the CPU earlier, it's just not something I'm used to paying attention to. So does this mean I'll need to drop my AVX-512 frequency down to something ridiculously low to preserve the chip long term?

I should also note that with a core voltage offset of -0.100V SFT in y-cruncher I lose 3 cores (6 threads) and then the program terminates due to bad calcs, but the rest seemed *ok*. So there might even be some room to drop the voltage further if I keep the 3 weaker cores at -0.050V.

Thanks again for all the feedback, it is very appreciated.
HRMGamer


----------



## hrmgamer

gridironcpj said:


> So... who here is getting that 28-core Cascade Lake-X behemoth?


Gaaahhhhh and here I was assuming my ludicrous *investment* in an 18 core would keep me near the top of the pack for a while. I suppose I should be thanking AMD for making CPUs interesting again.


----------



## ESRCJ

hrmgamer said:


> gridironcpj said:
> 
> 
> 
> So... who here is getting that 28-core Cascade Lake-X behemoth?
> 
> 
> 
> Gaaahhhhh and here I was assuming my ludicrous *investment* in an 18 core would keep me near the top of the pack for a while. I suppose I should be thanking AMD for making CPUs interesting again.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing it's LGA3647. Maybe that's what X399 is all about. We could see $1000 HEDT mobos. Ha!


----------



## ThrashZone

gridironcpj said:


> So... who here is getting that 28-core Cascade Lake-X behemoth?


Hi,
lol not I


----------



## Mysticial

gridironcpj said:


> I'm guessing it's LGA3647. Maybe that's what X399 is all about. We could see $1000 HEDT mobos. Ha!


I'm thinking the same. Not only is the XCC die a very tight fit for the X299 socket, but it'll be severely bandwidth starved with only 4 memory channels.

Also, the extra surface area of LGA3647 will certainly help with the thermals.

Anyone wanna start guessing at the price?



Mysticial said:


> I'm also amazed by that. And looking over at the Skylake X thread, there seems to be no shortage of people waiting specifically for the 7980XE. And those waiting for it seem to have absolutely no qualms about spending that much.
> 
> Intel should bring down the XCC line* and sell overclockable versions for something stupid like 5k - 10k or even higher. I'm very curious to see exactly how price-insensitive the extreme high-end is. They could probably sell soldiered versions of the same chips for another absurd price premium on top of that to see how much demand those get.
> 
> At some point, it basically falls into the same category as jewelry and luxury cars. Virtually no upper-bound on price and people will buy them anyway as a status symbol.
> 
> *The XCC die won't fit in the X299 socket, but looking into the future they can definitely make it happen in one way or another if there was money to be made...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Why would Intel solder when people will delid and wash Intel's warranty 
Intel loves people washing warranties easy money :thumb:


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi, Jmpboy
> Had fun with his no telling if he got his sorted out or not :/
> Odd though the evo was on the videos list he tested with.
> 5c was all the supposed cooling for 7900x opposed to delid not nearly enough for me personally to try.
> 
> I did read it took someone a few tries to get it right some where back 5-10 pages.


I tried it 3 times. No luck with any of my attempts. I am back to the OEM ILM with the IHS in place without any glue to minimize any gap that may be present between the die and IHS. I think I am just going to return the part and deal with "higher temps".


----------



## crpcookie

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Why would Intel solder when people will delid and wash Intel's warranty
> Intel loves people washing warranties easy money :thumb:


I would laugh if Intel delided their own CPU on Computex


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
CPU VID support auto or disabled ?
Friend on 8700k said he gets voltage spike with it on auto :/


----------



## Jpmboy

hrmgamer said:


> Thank you all for your responses, I'll address your comments then add in some new findings from my end.
> 
> 
> Yeah, I remember this being a problem, for some reason I thought you wonderful people had come up with a simple solution to it (probably just wishful thinking on my part!).
> 
> 
> I believe I'm still pretty low with my voltages so over-volting wouldn't concern me greatly as (theoretically) the two cores that are running hot can be backed off separately from the others and then all will be fine in core land...it's just the package temps aren't giving me any room to over-volt :/
> 
> 
> I'm starting to come to the conclusion it will have to be a frequency sacrifice. That being said I could always try disabling the worst offending cores, push to 4.5GHz and get a feel for where the voltages and temperatures will be if I run a mix of say 4.5GHz and 4.0GHz across the cores.
> 
> 
> Please correct me if I'm wrong but are you saying if I run the cores at 4.5GHz I'll be in the adaptive voltage's boost zone and thus can set a cap on the voltages?
> 
> 
> LLC is at 5 and I'm seriously considering that I should wind it in further given the sustained loads this will be handling from time to time.
> 
> 
> I assume you mean the ratio offsets? Yeah, this is what I've been having trouble with, up until my last post it's been either:
> 1. low avx ratios (high offsets) with not enough voltage but good temps
> 2. sensible avx ratios with not quite enough voltage and high temps
> 3. high avx ratios with what appears to be enough voltage but way to high temps
> This analysis has kind of been invalidated however, see below.
> 
> 
> Ok good, not doing something stupid then...or at least this bit isn't a result of me doing something stupid
> 
> 
> Particularly without the delid!
> 
> Ok onto the new findings...normal ratio of 42, avx-512 offset of 7 (giving me 3.5GHz), a -0.050V core offset and I appear stable at 70ish degrees in y-cruncher SFT (90min in, up from near instantaneous hard lock-ups)...with one big caveat: processor current at 240% up from 200%. This sounds like a good way to kill the chip long term, right? :/
> 
> This was almost a desperation test that came about because I've noticed that all my AVX-512 tests at ratio 42 with various offsets (IIRC 4-10) cpu power reported in SIV was well exceeding 330W, with it typically being around 360-370W with -4 pushing 400W. I didn't know how accurate that actually was so I figured maybe an over-current protection was stepping in somewhere. Bump to 240% and suddenly I'm stable on the AVX-512 front.
> 
> It was a rookie error on my part not to check the power draw on the CPU earlier, it's just not something I'm used to paying attention to. So does this mean I'll need to drop my AVX-512 frequency down to something ridiculously low to preserve the chip long term?
> 
> I should also note that with a core voltage offset of -0.100V SFT in y-cruncher I lose 3 cores (6 threads) and then the program terminates due to bad calcs, but the rest seemed *ok*. So there might even be some room to drop the voltage further if I keep the 3 weaker cores at -0.050V.
> 
> Thanks again for all the feedback, it is very appreciated.
> HRMGamer



LLC - this alows you to hold a higher voltage under load aty the expense of load transient overshoot and undershoot. Vdroop is there for a reason. Probably the worst thing one can do for a 24/7 configuration is use the MB LLC to reach a load voltage, rather than just set a higher vcore and allow vdroop.
Simply said, AVX offset allows for the selection of an AVX (and 512) frequency that can perform in your configuration of voltage and temperature tolerances. Server class chips have had this function for a few generations (tho the user had no control of the offset, at least with x99 and x299 we do) E-class chips ran/run a single load voltage (a single VID stack) and drop multipliers based on the instruction set(s) in the execution stack. We just need to tune a manual overclock to the same balance of voltage and thermal solution. A large 512 offset is fine to use since virtually nothing uses it yet (except a few stressors/benchmarks). 





gridironcpj said:


> So... who here is getting that 28-core Cascade Lake-X behemoth?


right now it's... priceless.


----------



## superV

RichKnecht said:


> I tried it 3 times. No luck with any of my attempts. I am back to the OEM ILM with the IHS in place without any glue to minimize any gap that may be present between the die and IHS. I think I am just going to return the part and deal with "higher temps".


y'all start to worry me.
ordered at the casking the delid tool and the frame,but the frame is not available yet,passed almost 3 weeks.
at this point will delid and mount it naked og style without the socket bracket and frame.
got tired to wait,then will arrive and will be an epic fail.
i don't think that the pcb will bend to the point to loose contact with pins if installed carefully.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
An expensive test 
http://www.performance-pcs.com/der8auer-skylake-x-direct-die-frame.html


----------



## superV

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> An expensive test
> http://www.performance-pcs.com/der8auer-skylake-x-direct-die-frame.html


yep.
i told them to send me only the delid tool,will mount without the frame.
Also ordered the vrm waterblock,65 euros shipped,costs almost like a cpu waterblock


----------



## RichKnecht

superV said:


> y'all start to worry me.
> ordered at the casking the delid tool and the frame,but the frame is not available yet,passed almost 3 weeks.
> at this point will delid and mount it naked og style without the socket bracket and frame.
> got tired to wait,then will arrive and will be an epic fail.
> i don't think that the pcb will bend to the point to loose contact with pins if installed carefully.


For X299, the CPU sits lower than the top of the mounting frame. So if you try and mount it without the lid, the plastic frame on the MOBO will prevent the waterblock from touching the naked die. I guess you can grind down the mounting frame to "fix" this, but that is an irreversible mod. I really wish I could have gotten the frame to work. The first time I tried, it booted fine, then went into thermal shutdown. Took off the block, removed/remounted the frame and tried again. This time it wouldn't post at all. Redid it once again, and again wouldn't post. So, I removed the frame, reinstalled the IHS (no glue) and reinstalled the LM/block. Posted fine with slightly (1-2 degrees) lower than the original delid which I just suspect was due to cool water in the loop. I think my real answer to lower temps is a different case which will support larger radiators than the dual 240s I am using now.


----------



## wingman99

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Why would Intel solder when people will delid and wash Intel's warranty
> Intel loves people washing warranties easy money :thumb:


Has the rumors changed to no solder for the refresh?


----------



## superV

RichKnecht said:


> For X299, the CPU sits lower than the top of the mounting frame. So if you try and mount it without the lid, the plastic frame on the MOBO will prevent the waterblock from touching the naked die. I guess you can grind down the mounting frame to "fix" this, but that is an irreversible mod. I really wish I could have gotten the frame to work. The first time I tried, it booted fine, then went into thermal shutdown. Took off the block, removed/remounted the frame and tried again. This time it wouldn't post at all. Redid it once again, and again wouldn't post. So, I removed the frame, reinstalled the IHS (no glue) and reinstalled the LM/block. Posted fine with slightly (1-2 degrees) lower than the original delid which I just suspect was due to cool water in the loop. I think my real answer to lower temps is a different case which will support larger radiators than the dual 240s I am using now.


from what i heard,height issues are present on the new 1151 socket because of the socket plastic.
the 7980xe has good height,it has sort of pcb on a bigger pcb then there's the die.
i'm only worried a bit not to bend the pcb,but if mounted well and managing the screws proportionally it work. 
on z97 works perfect with a smaller die without issues.


----------



## ThrashZone

superV said:


> yep.
> i told them to send me only the delid tool,will mount without the frame.
> Also ordered the vrm waterblock,65 euros shipped,costs almost like a cpu waterblock


Hi,
Yeah they do cost a little bit lol and a lot more piping too 
Pretty straight forward though just had to dismantle my 3 week old x99 mono block already clogged 
Not sure how that happened ek sending used mono blocks 
I had a evo installed for a while since December 2017 and it was clean  



wingman99 said:


> Has the rumors changed to no solder for the refresh?


Hi,
I haven't read anything other than the other rumor 
But Intel not having to maintain a warranty is a win-win for them why would they start soldering again 
People seem to buy them regardless


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> For X299, the CPU sits lower than the top of the mounting frame. So if you try and mount it without the lid, the plastic frame on the MOBO will prevent the waterblock from touching the naked die. I guess you can grind down the mounting frame to "fix" this, but that is an irreversible mod. I really wish I could have gotten the frame to work. The first time I tried, it booted fine, then went into thermal shutdown. Took off the block, removed/remounted the frame and tried again. This time it wouldn't post at all. Redid it once again, and again wouldn't post. So, I removed the frame, reinstalled the IHS (no glue) and reinstalled the LM/block. Posted fine with slightly (1-2 degrees) lower than the original delid which I just suspect was due to cool water in the loop. I think my real answer to lower temps is a different case which will support larger radiators than the dual 240s I am using now.


What waterblock were you using? EK??


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> What waterblock were you using? EK??


Yes. EK Supremacy full nickel. Actually been sitting here drinking a couple cold beers wondering what I could have done wrong. All the glue has been removed from the die and the frame seemed to fit nice and flat on my board ( Strix 299 gaming e) it just seems that the block isn't touching the die at all. After I coated both the die and block, I installed the block and then took it back off. Judging from the appearance of the LM, there was no evidence that the 2 sides made any contact.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> Yes. EK Supremacy full nickel. Actually been sitting here drinking a couple cold beers wondering what I could have done wrong. All the glue has been removed from the die and the frame seemed to fit nice and flat on my board ( Strix 299 gaming e) it just seems that the block isn't touching the die at all. After I coated both the die and block, I installed the block and then took it back off. Judging from the appearance of the LM, there was no evidence that the 2 sides made any contact.


 the mount studs have "stops" or what ever you want to call them (you can't screw down any further) that are set close to the height of the IHS. When you remove the IHS, the block makes only nominal contact ( I measured this a month or so ago with pressure sensing film and posted the results of what I thought was sufficient contact.) quick test with a koolance block (no stops) and it works fine. Since then I put the Ek block back on with the IHS... and put the x-frame in the drawer thinking I'd get back to it eventually. 


superV said:


> y'all start to worry me.
> ordered at the casking the delid tool and the frame,but the frame is not available yet,passed almost 3 weeks.
> at this point will delid and mount it naked og style without the socket bracket and frame.
> got tired to wait,then will arrive and will be an epic fail.
> i don't think that the pcb will bend to the point to loose contact with pins if installed carefully.


ohhh... that sphincter-relaxing crack sound.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> the mount studs have "stops" or what ever you want to call them (you can't screw down any further) that are set close to the height of the IHS. When you remove the IHS, the block makes only nominal contact ( I measured this a month or so ago with pressure sensing film and posted the results of what I thought was sufficient contact.) quick test with a koolance block (no stops) and it works fine. Since then I put the Ek block back on with the IHS... and put the x-frame in the drawer thinking I'd get back to it eventually.


Hmmm...that makes me wonder why he says that the frame works fine with EK blocks when in fact, it doesn't. I emailed the place I bought it from and asked to return it as it is useless to me,


----------



## Jpmboy

i'll keep it and probably use it in a final build... after x399 or what ever the next gen that comes out is.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> i'll keep it and probably use it in a final build... after x399 or what ever the next gen that comes out is.


Was just looking at EK blocks and it seems that the EK Evos now come with attached mounting screws, not studs (like mine) that you then install the springs and top thumb screws onto. Do you think this would work? Here is a link to the photos:

http://www.performance-pcs.com/ek-supremacy-evo-x99-nickel-29404.html


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> i'll keep it and probably use it in a final build... after x399 or what ever the next gen that comes out is.


Hi,
Yeah sort of like my wall of shame parts


----------



## hdtvnut

Newbie in general, and am in the middle of assembling my first x299, as a video editor. Ended up getting a new 80xe for $70 more than I could find a 40x for, and it just arrived. Quick and dirty tabletop test with Asrock Formula, H115i Pro and XTU settings of x44 all core, 1.110v, avx/avx512 3/5, default mem, 5-min stress test pulled about 70-71 C at 260-280w. Does this sound good?


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> i'll keep it and probably use it in a final build... after x399 or what ever the next gen that comes out is.


Not sure if you have been watching YouTube videos from Computex, but EK is introducing a block with a cold plate developed for naked die cooling. The center of the cold plate is extended to meet the die while using the OEM locking mechanism. This looks VERY promising.


----------



## hrmgamer

kingofblog said:


> If you push the non-AVX to 4.5, it should run at the adaptive voltage target. Then, when the AVX offset is in effect, the frequency goes into the VID range and it will run at VID +/- the offset. This effectively allows you to set two voltage targets simultaneously.


Ok after some extensive testing changing one variable at a time (I was going mad thinking it was something stupid like a speedstep setting I was overlooking) I think I fundomentally misunderstood how adapative can be used. 

I've found the following: 
1. sync cores ratio 46/Adaptive/-0.100 offset/1.2 for additional turbo (1.15V) cores run at approx 1.22V
2. sync cores ratio 46/Adaptive/-0.100 offset/1.1 for additional turbo (1.05V) cores run at approx 1.22V
3. sync cores ratio 46/Adaptive/-0.100 offset/1.3 for additional turbo (1.25V) cores run at *exactly 1.25V* while under full load

So does this mean that the additional turbo voltage can't be used to reign in the the upper end of ratios, only (as the name suggests) provide additional voltage? If so, ugh! I think I'm going to have to go for plan B of mixed core ratios.

I've attached my settings if someone feels like having a look and laughing  And yes there are a few things I still need to reign in, e.g. LLC, and other ones I should probably give meaningful values to, e.g. VCCIO, but feel free to point them out in case I've missed something! 

Cheers
HRMGamer


----------



## ThrashZone

hrmgamer said:


> Ok after some extensive testing changing one variable at a time (I was going mad thinking it was something stupid like a speedstep setting I was overlooking) I think I fundomentally misunderstood how adapative can be used.
> 
> I've found the following:
> 1. sync cores ratio 46/Adaptive/-0.100 offset/1.2 for additional turbo (1.15V) cores run at approx 1.22V
> 2. sync cores ratio 46/Adaptive/-0.100 offset/1.1 for additional turbo (1.05V) cores run at approx 1.22V
> 3. sync cores ratio 46/Adaptive/-0.100 offset/1.3 for additional turbo (1.25V) cores run at *exactly 1.25V* while under full load
> 
> So does this mean that the additional turbo voltage can't be used to reign in the the upper end of ratios, only (as the name suggests) provide additional voltage? If so, ugh! I think I'm going to have to go for plan B of mixed core ratios.
> 
> I've attached my settings if someone feels like having a look and laughing  And yes there are a few things I still need to reign in, e.g. LLC, and other ones I should probably give meaningful values to, e.g. VCCIO, but feel free to point them out in case I've missed something!
> 
> Cheers
> HRMGamer


Hi,
I was looking at Jpmboy's settings and can't believe he is using 4.5 by core with adaptive + auto for voltage offset and turbo +1.180 :/

Doorules on the other hand uses for 4.5 adaptive mode -0.035 and turbo at -1.185 
I see the this as more logical since skylake-x over shoots voltage every time 
Only their uncore voltage offset is similar at 0.300 and jpmboy's is at 0.400
cpu vccio at 1.02500 for jpmboy


----------



## nycgtr

Just wanna add that I've been using the x299 Bitspower summit v2. This block is a doing better than the bitspower mono, ek mono, and ek evo. I have the heatkiller vrm coming tmr so I will add that. While I had no contact issues with the EK monobock ( I have 2 of these for x299) I found vrm temps hitting 80 running realbench oced, which was like 60s on the bitspower mono. I also found my peak core temps 8-10c higher almost with the ek mono. I also see closest core temps with the summit 2. It's out performing the supremacy evo I tried on there by a few deg.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> Was just looking at EK blocks and it seems that the EK Evos now come with attached mounting screws, not studs (like mine) that you then install the springs and top thumb screws onto. Do you think this would work? Here is a link to the photos:
> 
> http://www.performance-pcs.com/ek-supremacy-evo-x99-nickel-29404.html


That's the nickel block I have 'cept with Plexitop (for 4mm leds). 


(for some reason i can't attach pics or files to posts any more)




ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I was looking at Jpmboy's settings and can't believe he is using 4.5 by core with adaptive + auto for voltage offset and turbo +1.180 :/
> 
> Doorules on the other hand uses for 4.5 adaptive mode -0.035 and turbo at -1.185
> *I see the this as more logical since skylake-x over shoots voltage every time*
> Only their uncore voltage offset is similar at 0.300 and jpmboy's is at 0.400
> cpu vccio at 1.02500 for jpmboy



45per? Must be an old configuration file. I'm using 2x47, 16x45 adaptive. 1.34 for 4.7, 1.18 for 4.5 both adaptive "By Specific Core". no offset, no over voltage (over shoot is different, and related to load transients), whether monitoring with SIV/AID etc, or directly off the APEX with a Fluke (zero-point calibrated) DMM. I'm not sure what the issue is. Some CPUs can run at a voltage below the VID (nice - right?). If this is the case, then Adaptive (which is additional turbo voltage) cannot be set to add less than the VID, so you might need a neg offset. Alternatively, spin the cpu up so that it actually needs "Additional Turbo Voltage". There's no mystery or bug here, it's all related to the CPU grade. So... mine is not he best 7980xe out there, yours may be better, but you have to run it at a freq just above the VID table voltage request entry, or use manual override. Same issue with Coffee lake


----------



## ThrashZone

nycgtr said:


> Just wanna add that I've been using the x299 Bitspower summit v2. This block is a doing better than the bitspower mono, ek mono, and ek evo. I have the heatkiller vrm coming tmr so I will add that. While I had no contact issues with the EK monobock ( I have 2 of these for x299) I found vrm temps hitting 80 running realbench oced, which was like 60s on the bitspower mono. I also found my peak core temps 8-10c higher almost with the ek mono. I also see closest core temps with the summit 2. It's out performing the supremacy evo I tried on there by a few deg.


Hi,
Nice looking inexpensive block 
http://www.performance-pcs.com/bits...acrylic-designed-for-intel-x299-platform.html

The settings file I was referring to was named new 46 per


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Nice looking inexpensive block
> http://www.performance-pcs.com/bits...acrylic-designed-for-intel-x299-platform.html
> 
> The settings file I was referring to was named new 46 per


Unable to attach... so:





Spoiler



[2018/04/25 14:15:26]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
CPU Strap [100]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
ASUS MultiCore Enhancement [Auto]
AVX Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [7]
AVX-512 Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [12]
CPU Core Ratio [By Specific Core]
Min. CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
Max. CPU Cache Ratio [30]
BCLK Frequency : DRAM Frequency Ratio [Auto]
DRAM Frequency [DDR4-4000MHz]
Xtreme Tweaking [Enabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
CPU SVID Support [Auto]
BCLK Aware Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
CPU Cache Voltage [Manual Mode]
CPU Cache Voltage Override [1.175]
Uncore Voltage Offset [0.400]
Uncore Voltage Offset Prefix [+]
CPU Input Voltage [1.920]
DRAM Voltage(CHA, CHB) [1.4000]
DRAM Voltage(CHC, CHD) [1.4000]
CPU VCCIO Voltage [1.02500]
CPU System Agent Voltage [0.80000]
PCH Core Voltage [1.01250]
PLL Reference Offset Mode Sign [+]
PLL Reference Offset Value [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 0 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 0 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 1 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 1 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 2 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 2 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 3 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 3 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 4 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 4 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 5 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 5 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 6 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 6 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 7 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 7 [Auto]
Core-1 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-1 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-1 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-1 Voltage [1.185]
Core-2 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-2 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-2 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-2 Voltage [1.185]
Core-3 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-3 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-3 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-3 Voltage [1.185]
Core-4 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-4 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-4 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-4 Voltage [1.185]
Core-5 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-5 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-5 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-5 Voltage [1.185]
Core-6 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-6 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-6 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-6 Voltage [1.185]
Core-7 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-7 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-7 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-7 Voltage [1.185]
Core-8 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-8 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-8 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-8 Voltage [1.185]
Core-9 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-9 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-9 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-9 Voltage [1.185]
Core-10 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-10 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-10 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-10 Voltage [1.185]
Core-11 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-11 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-11 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-11 Voltage [1.185]
*Core-12 Max Ratio [47]
CPU Core-12 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-12 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-12 Voltage [1.340]
Core-13 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-13 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-13 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-13 Voltage [1.185]
Core-14 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-14 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-14 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-14 Voltage [1.185]
*Core-15 Max Ratio [47]
CPU Core-15 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-15 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-15 Voltage [1.340]
Core-16 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-16 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-16 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-16 Voltage [1.185]
Core-17 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-17 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-17 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-17 Voltage [1.185]
Core-18 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-18 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-18 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-18 Voltage [1.185]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHC [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHD [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL7 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL7 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL7 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL7 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL7 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL7 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL7 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL7 [Auto]
VIN Tracker [Auto]
Self-tracked Clocking [Auto]
PCIe Gen3 PLL Clock Control [Enabled]
PLL Post Divider Adjust [Auto]
Change PLLTRIM Prefix [+]
Change PllTrim Value [Auto]
Change MC-PLLTRIM Prefix [+]
Change MC-PllTrim Value [Auto]
Turbo Residence Tweak 0 [8]
Turbo Residence Tweak 1 [6]
Turbo Residence Tweak 2 [4]
Turbo Residence Tweak 3 [2]
Initial BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU BCLK Amplitude [Auto]
CPU BCLK Spread Spectrum [Auto]
CPU BCLK Frequency Slew Rate [Auto]
CPU BCLK Slew Rate [Auto]
PCIE/DMI Slew Rate [Auto]
CPU AUX1 Voltage [0.00000]
CPU AUX2 Voltage [0.00000]
CPU Input Reset Voltage [Auto]
VTTDDR Voltage(CHA, CHB) [Auto]
VTTDDR Voltage(CHC, CHD) [Auto]
VPPDDR Voltage (CHA, CHB) [Auto]
VPPDDR Voltage (CHC, CHD) [Auto]
DMI Voltage [Auto]
DRAM Eventual Voltage(CHA, CHB) [Auto]
DRAM Eventual Voltage(CHC, CHD) [Auto]
Eventual CPU Standby Voltage [Auto]
Eventual PLL Termination Voltage [Auto]
Eventual DMI Voltage [Auto]
Maximus Tweak [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [Auto]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Delay [Auto]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [Auto]
DRAM Command Rate [Auto]
DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay L [Auto]
DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay S [Auto]
DRAM REF Cycle Time [Auto]
DRAM Refresh Interval [Auto]
DRAM WRITE Recovery Time [Auto]
DRAM READ to PRE Time [Auto]
DRAM FOUR ACT WIN Time [Auto]
DRAM WRITE to READ Delay [Auto]
DRAM WRITE to READ Delay L [Auto]
DRAM WRITE to READ Delay S [Auto]
DRAM CKE Minimum Pulse Width [Auto]
DRAM Write Latency [Auto]
tRDRD_sg [Auto]
tRDRD_dg [Auto]
tRDWR_sg [Auto]
tRDWR_dg [Auto]
tWRWR_sg [Auto]
tWRWR_dg [Auto]
tWRRD_sg [Auto]
tWRRD_dg [Auto]
tRDRD_dr [Auto]
tRDRD_dd [Auto]
tRDWR_dr [Auto]
tRDWR_dd [Auto]
tWRWR_dr [Auto]
tWRWR_dd [Auto]
tWRRD_dr [Auto]
tWRRD_dd [Auto]
TWRPRE [Auto]
TRDPRE [Auto]
tREFIX9 [Auto]
OREF_RI [Auto]
MRC Fast Boot [Auto]
DRAM CLK Period [Auto]
Memory Scrambler [Enabled]
Channel C DIMM Control [Enable both DIMMs]
Channel D DIMM Control [Enable both DIMMs]
MCH Full Check [Auto]
DLLBwEn [Auto]
DRAM SPD Write [Disabled]
XTU Setting [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Delay [17]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [17]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [36]
DRAM Command Rate [Timing 1T]
DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay [4]
DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay L [6]
DRAM REF Cycle Time [374]
DRAM Refresh Interval [32767]
DRAM WRITE Recovery Time [12]
DRAM READ to PRE Time [4]
DRAM FOUR ACT WIN Time [16]
DRAM WRITE to READ Delay [6]
DRAM WRITE to READ Delay L [10]
DRAM CKE Minimum Pulse Width [6]
DRAM Write Latency [12]
tRRDR [0]
tRRDD [0]
tRWDR [7]
tRWDD [0]
tWRDR [0]
tWRDD [0]
tWWDR [2]
tWWDD [2]
tRWSR [14]
tCCD [0]
tCCD_L [Auto]
tCCDWR [0]
tCCDWR_L [Auto]
tRRDS [0]
tRWDS [8]
tWRDS [2]
tWWDS [3]
DRAM CLK Period [10]
Attempt Fast Boot [Auto]
Attempt Fast Cold Boot [Auto]
DRAM Training [Auto]
WR CRC feature Control [Auto]
Duty Cycle Training [Auto]
Read Vref Centering [Auto]
Eye Diagrams [Auto]
Turnaround Time Optimization [Auto]
PDA [Auto]
Write Vref Centering [Auto]
Enhanced Training(CHA) [Auto]
Enhanced Training(CHB) [Auto]
Enhanced Training(CHC) [Auto]
Enhanced Training(CHD) [Auto]
DRAM RTL INIT value [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC DIMM0 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC DIMM0 Rank1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC DIMM1 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC DIMM1 Rank1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD DIMM0 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD DIMM0 Rank1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD DIMM1 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD DIMM1 Rank1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC DIMM0 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC DIMM0 Rank1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC DIMM1 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC DIMM1 Rank1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD DIMM0 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD DIMM0 Rank1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD DIMM1 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD DIMM1 Rank1) [Auto]
CHC IO_Latency_offset [Auto]
CHD IO_Latency_offset [Auto]
CHC RFR delay [Auto]
CHD RFR delay [Auto]
DRAM RTL INIT value [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHA D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHA D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHA D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHA D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHB D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHB D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHB D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHB D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHA D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHA D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHA D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHA D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHB D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHB D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHB D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHB D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IO Comp (CHA) [Auto]
DRAM IO Comp (CHB) [Auto]
DRAM IO Comp (CHC) [Auto]
DRAM IO Comp (CHD) [Auto]
MC Vref(CHA) [Auto]
MC Vref(CHB) [Auto]
MC Vref(CHC) [Auto]
MC Vref(CHD) [Auto]
DRAM Vref(CHA) [Auto]
DRAM Vref(CHA) [Auto]
DRAM Vref(CHC) [Auto]
DRAM Vref(CHC) [Auto]
CTL Vref (CHA) [Auto]
CTL Verf (CHB) [Auto]
CTL Vref (CHC) [Auto]
CTL Verf (CHD) [Auto]
Receiver DQ Pre-emphasis [Auto]
Receiver DQ De-emphasis [Auto]
Transmitter DQ Pre-emphasis [Auto]
Transmitter DQ De-emphasis [Auto]
Receiver DQS Pre-emphasis [Auto]
Receiver DQS De-emphasis [Auto]
Transmitter DQS Pre-emphasis [Auto]
Transmitter DQS De-emphasis [Auto]
Receiver CMD Pre-emphasis [Auto]
Receiver CMD De-emphasis [Auto]
Transmitter CMD Pre-emphasis [Auto]
Transmitter CMD De-emphasis [Auto]
ODT RTT WR (CHC) [Auto]
ODT RTT PARK (CHC) [Auto]
ODT RTT NOM (CHC) [Auto]
ODT RTT WR (CHD) [Auto]
ODT RTT PARK (CHD) [Auto]
ODT RTT NOM (CHD) [Auto]
ODT_READ_DURATION [Auto]
ODT_READ_DELAY [Auto]
ODT_WRITE_DURATION [Auto]
ODT_WRITE_DELAY [Auto]
Data Rising Slope [Auto]
Data Rising Slope Offset [Auto]
Cmd Rising Slope [Auto]
Cmd Rising Slope Offset [Auto]
Ctl Rising Slope [Auto]
Ctl Rising Slope Offset [Auto]
Clk Rising Slope [Auto]
Clk Rising Slope Offset [Auto]
Data Falling Slope [Auto]
Data Falling Slope Offset [Auto]
Cmd Falling Slope [Auto]
Cmd Falling Slope Offset [Auto]
Ctl Falling Slope [Auto]
Ctl Falling Slope Offset [Auto]
Clk Falling Slope [Auto]
Clk Falling Slope Offset [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHA D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHA D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHB D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHB D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHC D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHC D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHD D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHD D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHA D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHA D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHB D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHB D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHC D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHC D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHD D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHD D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHA D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHA D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHB D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHB D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHC D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHC D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHD D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHD D1) [Auto]
Data Rising Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
Data Rising Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
Data Rising Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
Data Rising Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
Cmd Rising Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
Cmd Rising Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
Cmd Rising Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
Cmd Rising Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
Ctl Rising Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
Ctl Rising Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
Ctl Rising Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
Ctl Rising Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
Data Falling Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
Data Falling Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
Data Falling Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
Data Falling Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
Cmd Falling Slope Falling Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
Cmd Falling Slope Falling Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
Cmd Falling Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
Cmd Falling Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
Ctl Falling Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
Ctl Falling Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
Ctl Falling Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
Ctl Falling Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
IMC Interleaving [Auto]
Channel Interleaving [Auto]
Rank Interleaving [Auto]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 5]
CPU Current Capability [200%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
VRM Spread Spectrum [Disabled]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Optimized]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
DRAM Current Capability [140%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Optimized]
DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
CPU Input Boot Voltage [Auto]
CPU System Agent Boot Voltage [Auto]
CPU VCCIO Boot Voltage [Auto]
Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology [Disabled]
Turbo Mode [Enabled]
Long Duration Package Power Limit [500]
Package Power Time Window [127]
Short Duration Package Power Limit [Auto]
CPU Integrated VR Current Limit [Auto]
CPU Integrated VR Fault Management [Disabled]
CPU Integrated VR Efficiency Management [Balanced]
Thermal Monitor [Enabled]
Active Processor Cores [All]
Intel Virtualization Technology [Disabled]
Hardware Prefetcher [Enabled]
Adjacent Cache Line Prefetch [Enabled]
Boot performance mode [Auto]
Tcc Offset Time Window [Auto]
SMM Code Access Check [Disabled]
SMM Use Delay Indication [Disabled]
SMM Use Block Indication [Disabled]
Intel(R) SpeedStep(tm) [Auto]
Turbo Mode [Enabled]
CPU C-states [Auto]
CFG Lock [Disabled]
Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology [Enabled]
Number of P states [0]
Acoustic Noise Mitigation [Disabled]
Disable Fast PKG C State Ramp for IA Domain [FALSE]
Slow Slew Rate for IA Domain [Fast/2]
Disable Fast PKG C State Ramp for GT Domain [FALSE]
Slow Slew Rate for GT Domain [Fast/2]
Disable Fast PKG C State Ramp for SA Domain [FALSE]
Slow Slew Rate for SA Domain [Fast/2]
Configurable TDP Boot Mode [Nominal]
Configurable TDP Lock [Disabled]
CTDP BIOS control [Disabled]
Power Limit 1 [0]
Power Limit 2 [0]
Power Limit 1 Time Window [0]
ConfigTDP Turbo Activation Ratio [0]
Power Limit 1 [0]
Power Limit 2 [0]
Power Limit 1 Time Window [0]
ConfigTDP Turbo Activation Ratio [0]
Power Limit 1 [0]
Power Limit 2 [0]
Power Limit 1 Time Window [0]
ConfigTDP Turbo Activation Ratio [0]
Overclocking Lock [Disabled]
Hyper-Threading [ALL] [Enabled]
Max CPUID Value Limit [Disabled]
Execute Disable Bit [Enabled]
Hardware Prefetcher [Enabled]
Adjacent Cache Prefetch [Enabled]
VMX [Enabled]
Boot performance mode [Max Performance]
Maximum CPU Core Temperature [Auto]
MSR Lock Control [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 0 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 1 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 2 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 3 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 4 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 5 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 6 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 7 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 8 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 9 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 10 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 11 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 12 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 13 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 14 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 15 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 16 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 17 [Enabled]
Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology [Disabled]
Turbo Mode [Enabled]
Autonomous Core C-State [Enabled]
Enhanced Halt State (C1E) [Enabled]
CPU C6 report [Enabled]
Package C State [C0/C1 state]
Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology [Enabled]
MFC Mode Override [OS Native Support]
PCI Express Native Power Management [Disabled]
PCH DMI ASPM [Disabled]
ASPM [Disabled]
DMI Link ASPM Control [Disabled]
PEG - ASPM [Disabled]
PTID Support [Enabled]
PECI Access Method [Direct I/O]
PCI Express Native Power Management [Disabled]
BDAT ACPI Table Support [Disabled]
Low Power S0 Idle Capability [Disabled]
Lpit Recidency Counter [SLP S0]
PCI Delay Optimization [Disabled]
ZpODD Support [Disabled]
PEP CPU [Enabled]
PEP Graphics [Enabled]
PEP SATA [Storage Controller]
PEP UART [Enabled]
PEP I2C0 [Enabled]
PEP I2C1 [Enabled]
PEP I2C2 [Enabled]
PEP I2C3 [Enabled]
PEP I2C4 [Enabled]
PEP I2C5 [Enabled]
PEP SPI [Enabled]
PEP XHCI [Enabled]
PEP Audio [Enabled]
PEP EMMC [Enabled]
PEP SDXC [Enabled]
Intel® VT for Directed I/O (VT-d) [Enabled]
MCTP [Disabled]
ACS Control [Disabled]
Link Speed [Auto]
Link Speed [Auto]
Link Speed [Auto]
Link Speed [Auto]
Link Speed [Auto]
VDOC Profile requested [VDOC Profile 0]
Frequency divider ratio (Step size) [Step size - 100 KHz]
Number of steps [1000]
Number of steps [1000]
Number of steps [1000]
Number of steps [1000]
Frequency divider ratio (Step size) [Step size - 100 KHz]
Number of steps [1000]
Number of steps [1000]
Number of steps [1000]
Number of steps [1000]
VT-d [Disabled]
Primary Display [Auto]
RC6(Render Standby) [Enabled]
DVMT Pre-Allocated [32M]
DMI Max Link Speed [Auto]
PCIEX16_1 Link Speed [Auto]
PCIEX16_2 Link Speed [Auto]
PCIe Speed [Auto]
SATA Controller(s) [Enabled]
SATA Mode Selection [AHCI]
S.M.A.R.T. Status Check [Enabled]
Aggressive LPM Support [Disabled]
SATA6G_1 [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
SATA6G_2 [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
SATA6G_3 [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
SATA6G_4 [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
PCI Express Root Port 21 [Enabled]
Topology [Unknown]
ASPM [Auto]
L1 Substates [L1.1 & L1.2]
Gen3 Eq Phase3 Method [Software Search]
UPTP [5]
DPTP [7]
ACS [Enabled]
URR [Disabled]
FER [Disabled]
NFER [Disabled]
CER [Disabled]
CTO [Disabled]
SEFE [Disabled]
SENFE [Disabled]
SECE [Disabled]
PME SCI [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Advanced Error Reporting [Enabled]
PCIe Speed [Auto]
Transmitter Half Swing [Disabled]
Detect Timeout [0]
Extra Bus Reserved [0]
Reserved Memory [10]
Reserved I/O [4]
PCH PCIE21 LTR [Enabled]
Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Non Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Force LTR Override [Disabled]
PCIE21 LTR Lock [Disabled]
PCIE20 CLKREQ Mapping Override [Default]
PCI Express Root Port 22 [Enabled]
Topology [Unknown]
ASPM [Auto]
L1 Substates [L1.1 & L1.2]
Gen3 Eq Phase3 Method [Software Search]
UPTP [5]
DPTP [7]
ACS [Enabled]
URR [Disabled]
FER [Disabled]
NFER [Disabled]
CER [Disabled]
CTO [Disabled]
SEFE [Disabled]
SENFE [Disabled]
SECE [Disabled]
PME SCI [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Advanced Error Reporting [Enabled]
PCIe Speed [Auto]
Transmitter Half Swing [Disabled]
Detect Timeout [0]
Extra Bus Reserved [0]
Reserved Memory [10]
Reserved I/O [4]
PCH PCIE22 LTR [Enabled]
Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Non Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Force LTR Override [Disabled]
PCIE22 LTR Lock [Disabled]
PCIE20 CLKREQ Mapping Override [Default]
PCI Express Root Port 23 [Enabled]
Topology [Unknown]
ASPM [Auto]
L1 Substates [L1.1 & L1.2]
Gen3 Eq Phase3 Method [Software Search]
UPTP [5]
DPTP [7]
ACS [Enabled]
URR [Disabled]
FER [Disabled]
NFER [Disabled]
CER [Disabled]
CTO [Disabled]
SEFE [Disabled]
SENFE [Disabled]
SECE [Disabled]
PME SCI [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Advanced Error Reporting [Enabled]
PCIe Speed [Auto]
Transmitter Half Swing [Disabled]
Detect Timeout [0]
Extra Bus Reserved [0]
Reserved Memory [10]
Reserved I/O [4]
PCH PCIE23 LTR [Enabled]
Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Non Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Force LTR Override [Disabled]
PCIE23 LTR Lock [Disabled]
PCIE20 CLKREQ Mapping Override [Default]
PCI Express Root Port 24 [Enabled]
Topology [Unknown]
ASPM [Auto]
L1 Substates [L1.1 & L1.2]
Gen3 Eq Phase3 Method [Software Search]
UPTP [5]
DPTP [7]
ACS [Enabled]
URR [Disabled]
FER [Disabled]
NFER [Disabled]
CER [Disabled]
CTO [Disabled]
SEFE [Disabled]
SENFE [Disabled]
SECE [Disabled]
PME SCI [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Advanced Error Reporting [Enabled]
PCIe Speed [Auto]
Transmitter Half Swing [Disabled]
Detect Timeout [0]
Extra Bus Reserved [0]
Reserved Memory [10]
Reserved I/O [4]
PCH PCIE24 LTR [Enabled]
Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Non Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Force LTR Override [Disabled]
PCIE24 LTR Lock [Disabled]
PCIE20 CLKREQ Mapping Override [Default]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
HDA-Link Codec Select [Platform Onboard]
iDisplay Audio Disconnect [Disabled]
PME Enable [Disabled]
SPI0 Controller [Disabled]
SPI1 Controller [Disabled]
UART0 Controller [Disabled]
UART1 Controller [Disabled]
UART2 Controller [for debug only]
GPIO Controller [Disabled]
Additional Serial IO devices [Disabled]
SerialIO timing parameters [Disabled]
I2C IO Voltage Select [3.3V]
Connected device [Disabled]
I2C IO Voltage Select [3.3V]
Connected device [Disabled]
I2C IO Voltage Select [1.8V]
I2C IO Voltage Select [1.8V]
I2C IO Voltage Select [3.3V]
I2C IO Voltage Select [3.3V]
ChipSelect polarity [Active High]
Finger Print Sensor [Disabled]
Bluetooth Device [Disabled]
Wireless Charging Mode [WC Disabled]
Hardware Flow Control [Enabled]
Hardware Flow Control [Enabled]
Hardware Flow Control [Enabled]
GPIO IRQ Route [IRQ14]
Select Camera [Ivcam]
Delay needed for Ivcam power on [0]
Delay needed for Ivcam power off [0]
Rotation [0]
DFU support [Disabled]
Wake support [Disabled]
Vcc Core voltage override enable [Disabled]
Vcc Core voltage [1300]
Vcc SA voltage override enable [Disabled]
Vcc SA voltage [1050]
Vcc SFR OC voltage override enable [Disabled]
Vcc SFR OC voltage [1200]
Vcc IO voltage override enable [Disabled]
Vcc IO voltage [950]
Vcc SFR voltage override enable [Disabled]
Vcc SFR voltage [1000]
Vcc ST SFR Vout voltage override enable [Disabled]
Vcc ST SFR Vout voltage [1000]
ASF support [Enabled]
USB Provisioning of AMT [Disabled]
Activate Remote Assistance Process [Disabled]
CIRA Timeout [0]
PET Progress [Enabled]
WatchDog [Disabled]
OS Timer [0]
BIOS Timer [0]
Secure Erase mode [Simulated]
Force Secure Erase [Disabled]
MEBx hotkey Pressed [Disabled]
MEBx Selection Screen [Disabled]
Hide Unconfigure ME Confirmation Prompt [Disabled]
MEBx OEM Debug Menu Enable [Disabled]
Unconfigure ME [Disabled]
Non-UI Mode Resolution [Auto]
UI Mode Resolution [Auto]
Graphics Mode Resolution [Auto]
Security Device Support [Enable]
Security Device Support [Enable]
Pending operation [None]
Platform Hierarchy [Enabled]
Storage Hierarchy [Enabled]
Endorsement Hierarchy [Enabled]
TPM2.0 UEFI Spec Version [TCG_2]
Physical Presence Spec Version [1.3]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]
Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
Q-Code LED Function [POST Code Only]
PCIEX16/X8_1 [Disabled]
PCIEX8_2 [Disabled]
PCIEX16/X8_3 [Disabled]
PCIEX8_4 and CPU_DIMM.2 [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
Q-Code Display [Enabled]
PCIEX8_4 bandwidth configuration [X4 Mode]
Asmedia Back 1A/1C USB 3.1 Gen2 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
Asmedia Front 1C USB 3.1 Gen2 Controller [Enabled]
ASMedia Storage Controller [Enabled]
ASPM Support [Disabled]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
Wi-Fi 802.11ac Controller [Enabled]
Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN PXE Option ROM [Disabled]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Primary PEG [Auto]
Primary PCIE [Auto]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
USB Keyboard and Mouse Simulator [Disabled]
Generic Flash Disk 8.07 [Auto]
U31G2_EC1 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_E2 [Enabled]
U31G1_E3 [Enabled]
U31G1_E4 [Enabled]
USB_10 [Enabled]
USB_11 [Enabled]
USB_12 [Enabled]
USB_13 [Enabled]
USB_14 [Enabled]
Hide Asus Logo [Disabled]
TPM Device Selection [dTPM]
PTP aware OS [PTP Aware]
Me FW Image Re-Flash [Disabled]
Local FW Update [Enabled]
HECI Timeouts [Enabled]
Force ME DID Init Status [Disabled]
Disable CPU Replaced Polling [Disabled]
ME DID Message [Enabled]
HECI Retry Disable [Disabled]
HECI Message check Disable [Disabled]
MBP HOB Skip [Disabled]
HECI2 Interface Communication [Disabled]
KT Device [Enabled]
IDER Device [Enabled]
End Of Post Message [Send in DXE]
D0I3 Setting for HECI Disable [Disabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
CPU_DIMM.2 Sensor 1 [Monitor]
CPU_DIMM.2 Sensor 2 [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
VRM Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
Water In T Sensor [Monitor]
Water Out T Sensor [Monitor]
PCH_DIMM.2 Sensor 1 [Monitor]
PCH_DIMM.2 Sensor 2 [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
Water Pump+ Speed [Monitor]
AIO Pump Speed [Monitor]
Flow Rate [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Temperature LED Switch [Enabled]
CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
CPU Fan Step Up [2.1 sec]
CPU Fan Step Down [2.1 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
CPU Upper Temperature [70]
CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
CPU Middle Temperature [40]
CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
CPU Lower Temperature [20]
CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [40]
Water Pump+ Control [PWM Mode]
Water Pump+ Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Water Pump+ Upper Temperature [70]
Water Pump+ Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Water Pump+ Middle Temperature [25]
Water Pump+ Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [50]
Water Pump+ Lower Temperature [10]
Water Pump+ Min. Duty Cycle (%) [50]
AIO Pump Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [VRM]
Chassis Fan 1 Step Up [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Step Down [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 1 Upper Temperature [40]
Chassis Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 1 Middle Temperature [30]
Chassis Fan 1 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [85]
Chassis Fan 1 Lower Temperature [20]
Chassis Fan 1 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Chassis Fan 1 Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
Above 4G Decoding [Disabled]
Boot Logo Display [Disabled]
POST Report [5 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Enabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E/PCI Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
PCH SATA Boot Only [Disabled]
USB Boot [Enabled]
Watchdog Support [Disabled]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
Load from Profile [4]
Profile Name [47per]
Save to Profile [4]
CPU Input Voltage [Auto]
CPU System Agent Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah the one I was looking at was screen shots not the text file.


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> Unable to attach... so:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> [2018/04/25 14:15:26]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
> CPU Strap [100]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> ASUS MultiCore Enhancement [Auto]
> AVX Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [7]
> AVX-512 Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [12]
> CPU Core Ratio [By Specific Core]
> Min. CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
> Max. CPU Cache Ratio [30]
> BCLK Frequency : DRAM Frequency Ratio [Auto]
> DRAM Frequency [DDR4-4000MHz]
> Xtreme Tweaking [Enabled]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> CPU SVID Support [Auto]
> BCLK Aware Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> CPU Cache Voltage [Manual Mode]
> CPU Cache Voltage Override [1.175]
> Uncore Voltage Offset [0.400]
> Uncore Voltage Offset Prefix [+]
> CPU Input Voltage [1.920]
> DRAM Voltage(CHA, CHB) [1.4000]
> DRAM Voltage(CHC, CHD) [1.4000]
> CPU VCCIO Voltage [1.02500]
> CPU System Agent Voltage [0.80000]
> PCH Core Voltage [1.01250]
> PLL Reference Offset Mode Sign [+]
> PLL Reference Offset Value [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Limit 0 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Cores 0 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Limit 1 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Cores 1 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Limit 2 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Cores 2 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Limit 3 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Cores 3 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Limit 4 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Cores 4 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Limit 5 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Cores 5 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Limit 6 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Cores 6 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Limit 7 [Auto]
> Turbo Ratio Cores 7 [Auto]
> Core-1 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-1 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-1 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-1 Voltage [1.185]
> Core-2 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-2 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-2 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-2 Voltage [1.185]
> Core-3 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-3 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-3 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-3 Voltage [1.185]
> Core-4 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-4 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-4 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-4 Voltage [1.185]
> Core-5 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-5 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-5 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-5 Voltage [1.185]
> Core-6 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-6 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-6 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-6 Voltage [1.185]
> Core-7 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-7 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-7 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-7 Voltage [1.185]
> Core-8 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-8 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-8 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-8 Voltage [1.185]
> Core-9 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-9 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-9 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-9 Voltage [1.185]
> Core-10 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-10 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-10 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-10 Voltage [1.185]
> Core-11 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-11 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-11 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-11 Voltage [1.185]
> *Core-12 Max Ratio [47]
> CPU Core-12 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-12 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-12 Voltage [1.340]
> Core-13 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-13 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-13 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-13 Voltage [1.185]
> Core-14 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-14 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-14 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-14 Voltage [1.185]
> *Core-15 Max Ratio [47]
> CPU Core-15 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-15 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-15 Voltage [1.340]
> Core-16 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-16 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-16 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-16 Voltage [1.185]
> Core-17 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-17 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-17 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-17 Voltage [1.185]
> Core-18 Max Ratio [45]
> CPU Core-18 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core-18 Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-18 Voltage [1.185]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHC [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHD [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL0 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL1 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL2 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL3 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL4 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL5 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL6 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL7 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL0 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL1 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL2 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL3 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL4 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL5 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL6 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL7 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL0 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL1 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL2 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL3 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL4 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL5 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL6 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL7 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL0 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL1 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL2 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL3 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL4 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL5 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL6 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL7 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL0 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL1 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL2 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL3 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL4 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL5 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL6 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL7 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL0 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL1 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL2 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL3 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL4 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL5 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL6 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL7 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL0 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL1 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL2 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL3 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL4 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL5 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL6 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL7 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL0 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL1 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL2 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL3 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL4 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL5 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL6 [Auto]
> DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL7 [Auto]
> VIN Tracker [Auto]
> Self-tracked Clocking [Auto]
> PCIe Gen3 PLL Clock Control [Enabled]
> PLL Post Divider Adjust [Auto]
> Change PLLTRIM Prefix [+]
> Change PllTrim Value [Auto]
> Change MC-PLLTRIM Prefix [+]
> Change MC-PllTrim Value [Auto]
> Turbo Residence Tweak 0 [8]
> Turbo Residence Tweak 1 [6]
> Turbo Residence Tweak 2 [4]
> Turbo Residence Tweak 3 [2]
> Initial BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU BCLK Amplitude [Auto]
> CPU BCLK Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> CPU BCLK Frequency Slew Rate [Auto]
> CPU BCLK Slew Rate [Auto]
> PCIE/DMI Slew Rate [Auto]
> CPU AUX1 Voltage [0.00000]
> CPU AUX2 Voltage [0.00000]
> CPU Input Reset Voltage [Auto]
> VTTDDR Voltage(CHA, CHB) [Auto]
> VTTDDR Voltage(CHC, CHD) [Auto]
> VPPDDR Voltage (CHA, CHB) [Auto]
> VPPDDR Voltage (CHC, CHD) [Auto]
> DMI Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM Eventual Voltage(CHA, CHB) [Auto]
> DRAM Eventual Voltage(CHC, CHD) [Auto]
> Eventual CPU Standby Voltage [Auto]
> Eventual PLL Termination Voltage [Auto]
> Eventual DMI Voltage [Auto]
> Maximus Tweak [Auto]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [Auto]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Delay [Auto]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [Auto]
> DRAM Command Rate [Auto]
> DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay L [Auto]
> DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay S [Auto]
> DRAM REF Cycle Time [Auto]
> DRAM Refresh Interval [Auto]
> DRAM WRITE Recovery Time [Auto]
> DRAM READ to PRE Time [Auto]
> DRAM FOUR ACT WIN Time [Auto]
> DRAM WRITE to READ Delay [Auto]
> DRAM WRITE to READ Delay L [Auto]
> DRAM WRITE to READ Delay S [Auto]
> DRAM CKE Minimum Pulse Width [Auto]
> DRAM Write Latency [Auto]
> tRDRD_sg [Auto]
> tRDRD_dg [Auto]
> tRDWR_sg [Auto]
> tRDWR_dg [Auto]
> tWRWR_sg [Auto]
> tWRWR_dg [Auto]
> tWRRD_sg [Auto]
> tWRRD_dg [Auto]
> tRDRD_dr [Auto]
> tRDRD_dd [Auto]
> tRDWR_dr [Auto]
> tRDWR_dd [Auto]
> tWRWR_dr [Auto]
> tWRWR_dd [Auto]
> tWRRD_dr [Auto]
> tWRRD_dd [Auto]
> TWRPRE [Auto]
> TRDPRE [Auto]
> tREFIX9 [Auto]
> OREF_RI [Auto]
> MRC Fast Boot [Auto]
> DRAM CLK Period [Auto]
> Memory Scrambler [Enabled]
> Channel C DIMM Control [Enable both DIMMs]
> Channel D DIMM Control [Enable both DIMMs]
> MCH Full Check [Auto]
> DLLBwEn [Auto]
> DRAM SPD Write [Disabled]
> XTU Setting [Auto]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Delay [17]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [17]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [36]
> DRAM Command Rate [Timing 1T]
> DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay [4]
> DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay L [6]
> DRAM REF Cycle Time [374]
> DRAM Refresh Interval [32767]
> DRAM WRITE Recovery Time [12]
> DRAM READ to PRE Time [4]
> DRAM FOUR ACT WIN Time [16]
> DRAM WRITE to READ Delay [6]
> DRAM WRITE to READ Delay L [10]
> DRAM CKE Minimum Pulse Width [6]
> DRAM Write Latency [12]
> tRRDR [0]
> tRRDD [0]
> tRWDR [7]
> tRWDD [0]
> tWRDR [0]
> tWRDD [0]
> tWWDR [2]
> tWWDD [2]
> tRWSR [14]
> tCCD [0]
> tCCD_L [Auto]
> tCCDWR [0]
> tCCDWR_L [Auto]
> tRRDS [0]
> tRWDS [8]
> tWRDS [2]
> tWWDS [3]
> DRAM CLK Period [10]
> Attempt Fast Boot [Auto]
> Attempt Fast Cold Boot [Auto]
> DRAM Training [Auto]
> WR CRC feature Control [Auto]
> Duty Cycle Training [Auto]
> Read Vref Centering [Auto]
> Eye Diagrams [Auto]
> Turnaround Time Optimization [Auto]
> PDA [Auto]
> Write Vref Centering [Auto]
> Enhanced Training(CHA) [Auto]
> Enhanced Training(CHB) [Auto]
> Enhanced Training(CHC) [Auto]
> Enhanced Training(CHD) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL INIT value [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHC DIMM0 Rank0) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHC DIMM0 Rank1) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHC DIMM1 Rank0) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHC DIMM1 Rank1) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHD DIMM0 Rank0) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHD DIMM0 Rank1) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHD DIMM1 Rank0) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHD DIMM1 Rank1) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHC DIMM0 Rank0) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHC DIMM0 Rank1) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHC DIMM1 Rank0) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHC DIMM1 Rank1) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHD DIMM0 Rank0) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHD DIMM0 Rank1) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHD DIMM1 Rank0) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHD DIMM1 Rank1) [Auto]
> CHC IO_Latency_offset [Auto]
> CHD IO_Latency_offset [Auto]
> CHC RFR delay [Auto]
> CHD RFR delay [Auto]
> DRAM RTL INIT value [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHA D0 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHA D0 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHA D1 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHA D1 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHB D0 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHB D0 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHB D1 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHB D1 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHC D0 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHC D0 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHC D1 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHC D1 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHD D0 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHD D0 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHD D1 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM RTL (CHD D1 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHA D0 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHA D0 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHA D1 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHA D1 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHB D0 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHB D0 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHB D1 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHB D1 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHC D0 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHC D0 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHC D1 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHC D1 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHD D0 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHD D0 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHD D1 R0) [Auto]
> DRAM IOL (CHD D1 R1) [Auto]
> DRAM IO Comp (CHA) [Auto]
> DRAM IO Comp (CHB) [Auto]
> DRAM IO Comp (CHC) [Auto]
> DRAM IO Comp (CHD) [Auto]
> MC Vref(CHA) [Auto]
> MC Vref(CHB) [Auto]
> MC Vref(CHC) [Auto]
> MC Vref(CHD) [Auto]
> DRAM Vref(CHA) [Auto]
> DRAM Vref(CHA) [Auto]
> DRAM Vref(CHC) [Auto]
> DRAM Vref(CHC) [Auto]
> CTL Vref (CHA) [Auto]
> CTL Verf (CHB) [Auto]
> CTL Vref (CHC) [Auto]
> CTL Verf (CHD) [Auto]
> Receiver DQ Pre-emphasis [Auto]
> Receiver DQ De-emphasis [Auto]
> Transmitter DQ Pre-emphasis [Auto]
> Transmitter DQ De-emphasis [Auto]
> Receiver DQS Pre-emphasis [Auto]
> Receiver DQS De-emphasis [Auto]
> Transmitter DQS Pre-emphasis [Auto]
> Transmitter DQS De-emphasis [Auto]
> Receiver CMD Pre-emphasis [Auto]
> Receiver CMD De-emphasis [Auto]
> Transmitter CMD Pre-emphasis [Auto]
> Transmitter CMD De-emphasis [Auto]
> ODT RTT WR (CHC) [Auto]
> ODT RTT PARK (CHC) [Auto]
> ODT RTT NOM (CHC) [Auto]
> ODT RTT WR (CHD) [Auto]
> ODT RTT PARK (CHD) [Auto]
> ODT RTT NOM (CHD) [Auto]
> ODT_READ_DURATION [Auto]
> ODT_READ_DELAY [Auto]
> ODT_WRITE_DURATION [Auto]
> ODT_WRITE_DELAY [Auto]
> Data Rising Slope [Auto]
> Data Rising Slope Offset [Auto]
> Cmd Rising Slope [Auto]
> Cmd Rising Slope Offset [Auto]
> Ctl Rising Slope [Auto]
> Ctl Rising Slope Offset [Auto]
> Clk Rising Slope [Auto]
> Clk Rising Slope Offset [Auto]
> Data Falling Slope [Auto]
> Data Falling Slope Offset [Auto]
> Cmd Falling Slope [Auto]
> Cmd Falling Slope Offset [Auto]
> Ctl Falling Slope [Auto]
> Ctl Falling Slope Offset [Auto]
> Clk Falling Slope [Auto]
> Clk Falling Slope Offset [Auto]
> ODT RTTWR(CHA D0) [Auto]
> ODT RTTWR(CHA D1) [Auto]
> ODT RTTWR(CHB D0) [Auto]
> ODT RTTWR(CHB D1) [Auto]
> ODT RTTWR(CHC D0) [Auto]
> ODT RTTWR(CHC D1) [Auto]
> ODT RTTWR(CHD D0) [Auto]
> ODT RTTWR(CHD D1) [Auto]
> ODT RTTNOM(CHA D0) [Auto]
> ODT RTTNOM(CHA D1) [Auto]
> ODT RTTNOM(CHB D0) [Auto]
> ODT RTTNOM(CHB D1) [Auto]
> ODT RTTNOM(CHC D0) [Auto]
> ODT RTTNOM(CHC D1) [Auto]
> ODT RTTNOM(CHD D0) [Auto]
> ODT RTTNOM(CHD D1) [Auto]
> ODT RTTPARK(CHA D0) [Auto]
> ODT RTTPARK(CHA D1) [Auto]
> ODT RTTPARK(CHB D0) [Auto]
> ODT RTTPARK(CHB D1) [Auto]
> ODT RTTPARK(CHC D0) [Auto]
> ODT RTTPARK(CHC D1) [Auto]
> ODT RTTPARK(CHD D0) [Auto]
> ODT RTTPARK(CHD D1) [Auto]
> Data Rising Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
> Data Rising Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
> Data Rising Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
> Data Rising Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
> Cmd Rising Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
> Cmd Rising Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
> Cmd Rising Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
> Cmd Rising Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
> Ctl Rising Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
> Ctl Rising Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
> Ctl Rising Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
> Ctl Rising Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
> Data Falling Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
> Data Falling Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
> Data Falling Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
> Data Falling Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
> Cmd Falling Slope Falling Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
> Cmd Falling Slope Falling Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
> Cmd Falling Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
> Cmd Falling Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
> Ctl Falling Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
> Ctl Falling Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
> Ctl Falling Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
> Ctl Falling Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
> IMC Interleaving [Auto]
> Channel Interleaving [Auto]
> Rank Interleaving [Auto]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 5]
> CPU Current Capability [200%]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VRM Spread Spectrum [Disabled]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Optimized]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> DRAM Current Capability [140%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control [Optimized]
> DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Input Boot Voltage [Auto]
> CPU System Agent Boot Voltage [Auto]
> CPU VCCIO Boot Voltage [Auto]
> Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology [Disabled]
> Turbo Mode [Enabled]
> Long Duration Package Power Limit [500]
> Package Power Time Window [127]
> Short Duration Package Power Limit [Auto]
> CPU Integrated VR Current Limit [Auto]
> CPU Integrated VR Fault Management [Disabled]
> CPU Integrated VR Efficiency Management [Balanced]
> Thermal Monitor [Enabled]
> Active Processor Cores [All]
> Intel Virtualization Technology [Disabled]
> Hardware Prefetcher [Enabled]
> Adjacent Cache Line Prefetch [Enabled]
> Boot performance mode [Auto]
> Tcc Offset Time Window [Auto]
> SMM Code Access Check [Disabled]
> SMM Use Delay Indication [Disabled]
> SMM Use Block Indication [Disabled]
> Intel(R) SpeedStep(tm) [Auto]
> Turbo Mode [Enabled]
> CPU C-states [Auto]
> CFG Lock [Disabled]
> Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology [Enabled]
> Number of P states [0]
> Acoustic Noise Mitigation [Disabled]
> Disable Fast PKG C State Ramp for IA Domain [FALSE]
> Slow Slew Rate for IA Domain [Fast/2]
> Disable Fast PKG C State Ramp for GT Domain [FALSE]
> Slow Slew Rate for GT Domain [Fast/2]
> Disable Fast PKG C State Ramp for SA Domain [FALSE]
> Slow Slew Rate for SA Domain [Fast/2]
> Configurable TDP Boot Mode [Nominal]
> Configurable TDP Lock [Disabled]
> CTDP BIOS control [Disabled]
> Power Limit 1 [0]
> Power Limit 2 [0]
> Power Limit 1 Time Window [0]
> ConfigTDP Turbo Activation Ratio [0]
> Power Limit 1 [0]
> Power Limit 2 [0]
> Power Limit 1 Time Window [0]
> ConfigTDP Turbo Activation Ratio [0]
> Power Limit 1 [0]
> Power Limit 2 [0]
> Power Limit 1 Time Window [0]
> ConfigTDP Turbo Activation Ratio [0]
> Overclocking Lock [Disabled]
> Hyper-Threading [ALL] [Enabled]
> Max CPUID Value Limit [Disabled]
> Execute Disable Bit [Enabled]
> Hardware Prefetcher [Enabled]
> Adjacent Cache Prefetch [Enabled]
> VMX [Enabled]
> Boot performance mode [Max Performance]
> Maximum CPU Core Temperature [Auto]
> MSR Lock Control [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 0 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 1 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 2 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 3 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 4 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 5 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 6 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 7 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 8 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 9 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 10 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 11 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 12 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 13 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 14 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 15 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 16 [Enabled]
> Active Processor Core 17 [Enabled]
> Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology [Disabled]
> Turbo Mode [Enabled]
> Autonomous Core C-State [Enabled]
> Enhanced Halt State (C1E) [Enabled]
> CPU C6 report [Enabled]
> Package C State [C0/C1 state]
> Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology [Enabled]
> MFC Mode Override [OS Native Support]
> PCI Express Native Power Management [Disabled]
> PCH DMI ASPM [Disabled]
> ASPM [Disabled]
> DMI Link ASPM Control [Disabled]
> PEG - ASPM [Disabled]
> PTID Support [Enabled]
> PECI Access Method [Direct I/O]
> PCI Express Native Power Management [Disabled]
> BDAT ACPI Table Support [Disabled]
> Low Power S0 Idle Capability [Disabled]
> Lpit Recidency Counter [SLP S0]
> PCI Delay Optimization [Disabled]
> ZpODD Support [Disabled]
> PEP CPU [Enabled]
> PEP Graphics [Enabled]
> PEP SATA [Storage Controller]
> PEP UART [Enabled]
> PEP I2C0 [Enabled]
> PEP I2C1 [Enabled]
> PEP I2C2 [Enabled]
> PEP I2C3 [Enabled]
> PEP I2C4 [Enabled]
> PEP I2C5 [Enabled]
> PEP SPI [Enabled]
> PEP XHCI [Enabled]
> PEP Audio [Enabled]
> PEP EMMC [Enabled]
> PEP SDXC [Enabled]
> Intel® VT for Directed I/O (VT-d) [Enabled]
> MCTP [Disabled]
> ACS Control [Disabled]
> Link Speed [Auto]
> Link Speed [Auto]
> Link Speed [Auto]
> Link Speed [Auto]
> Link Speed [Auto]
> VDOC Profile requested [VDOC Profile 0]
> Frequency divider ratio (Step size) [Step size - 100 KHz]
> Number of steps [1000]
> Number of steps [1000]
> Number of steps [1000]
> Number of steps [1000]
> Frequency divider ratio (Step size) [Step size - 100 KHz]
> Number of steps [1000]
> Number of steps [1000]
> Number of steps [1000]
> Number of steps [1000]
> VT-d [Disabled]
> Primary Display [Auto]
> RC6(Render Standby) [Enabled]
> DVMT Pre-Allocated [32M]
> DMI Max Link Speed [Auto]
> PCIEX16_1 Link Speed [Auto]
> PCIEX16_2 Link Speed [Auto]
> PCIe Speed [Auto]
> SATA Controller(s) [Enabled]
> SATA Mode Selection [AHCI]
> S.M.A.R.T. Status Check [Enabled]
> Aggressive LPM Support [Disabled]
> SATA6G_1 [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> SATA6G_2 [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> SATA6G_3 [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> SATA6G_4 [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Spin Up Device [Disabled]
> SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
> Topology [Unknown]
> DITO Configuration [Disabled]
> DITO Value [625]
> DM Value [15]
> Spin Up Device [Disabled]
> SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
> Topology [Unknown]
> DITO Configuration [Disabled]
> DITO Value [625]
> DM Value [15]
> Spin Up Device [Disabled]
> SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
> Topology [Unknown]
> DITO Configuration [Disabled]
> DITO Value [625]
> DM Value [15]
> Spin Up Device [Disabled]
> SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
> Topology [Unknown]
> DITO Configuration [Disabled]
> DITO Value [625]
> DM Value [15]
> Spin Up Device [Disabled]
> SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
> Topology [Unknown]
> DITO Configuration [Disabled]
> DITO Value [625]
> DM Value [15]
> Spin Up Device [Disabled]
> SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
> Topology [Unknown]
> DITO Configuration [Disabled]
> DITO Value [625]
> DM Value [15]
> Spin Up Device [Disabled]
> SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
> Topology [Unknown]
> DITO Configuration [Disabled]
> DITO Value [625]
> DM Value [15]
> Spin Up Device [Disabled]
> SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
> Topology [Unknown]
> DITO Configuration [Disabled]
> DITO Value [625]
> DM Value [15]
> PCI Express Root Port 21 [Enabled]
> Topology [Unknown]
> ASPM [Auto]
> L1 Substates [L1.1 & L1.2]
> Gen3 Eq Phase3 Method [Software Search]
> UPTP [5]
> DPTP [7]
> ACS [Enabled]
> URR [Disabled]
> FER [Disabled]
> NFER [Disabled]
> CER [Disabled]
> CTO [Disabled]
> SEFE [Disabled]
> SENFE [Disabled]
> SECE [Disabled]
> PME SCI [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Advanced Error Reporting [Enabled]
> PCIe Speed [Auto]
> Transmitter Half Swing [Disabled]
> Detect Timeout [0]
> Extra Bus Reserved [0]
> Reserved Memory [10]
> Reserved I/O [4]
> PCH PCIE21 LTR [Enabled]
> Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
> Non Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
> Force LTR Override [Disabled]
> PCIE21 LTR Lock [Disabled]
> PCIE20 CLKREQ Mapping Override [Default]
> PCI Express Root Port 22 [Enabled]
> Topology [Unknown]
> ASPM [Auto]
> L1 Substates [L1.1 & L1.2]
> Gen3 Eq Phase3 Method [Software Search]
> UPTP [5]
> DPTP [7]
> ACS [Enabled]
> URR [Disabled]
> FER [Disabled]
> NFER [Disabled]
> CER [Disabled]
> CTO [Disabled]
> SEFE [Disabled]
> SENFE [Disabled]
> SECE [Disabled]
> PME SCI [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Advanced Error Reporting [Enabled]
> PCIe Speed [Auto]
> Transmitter Half Swing [Disabled]
> Detect Timeout [0]
> Extra Bus Reserved [0]
> Reserved Memory [10]
> Reserved I/O [4]
> PCH PCIE22 LTR [Enabled]
> Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
> Non Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
> Force LTR Override [Disabled]
> PCIE22 LTR Lock [Disabled]
> PCIE20 CLKREQ Mapping Override [Default]
> PCI Express Root Port 23 [Enabled]
> Topology [Unknown]
> ASPM [Auto]
> L1 Substates [L1.1 & L1.2]
> Gen3 Eq Phase3 Method [Software Search]
> UPTP [5]
> DPTP [7]
> ACS [Enabled]
> URR [Disabled]
> FER [Disabled]
> NFER [Disabled]
> CER [Disabled]
> CTO [Disabled]
> SEFE [Disabled]
> SENFE [Disabled]
> SECE [Disabled]
> PME SCI [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Advanced Error Reporting [Enabled]
> PCIe Speed [Auto]
> Transmitter Half Swing [Disabled]
> Detect Timeout [0]
> Extra Bus Reserved [0]
> Reserved Memory [10]
> Reserved I/O [4]
> PCH PCIE23 LTR [Enabled]
> Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
> Non Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
> Force LTR Override [Disabled]
> PCIE23 LTR Lock [Disabled]
> PCIE20 CLKREQ Mapping Override [Default]
> PCI Express Root Port 24 [Enabled]
> Topology [Unknown]
> ASPM [Auto]
> L1 Substates [L1.1 & L1.2]
> Gen3 Eq Phase3 Method [Software Search]
> UPTP [5]
> DPTP [7]
> ACS [Enabled]
> URR [Disabled]
> FER [Disabled]
> NFER [Disabled]
> CER [Disabled]
> CTO [Disabled]
> SEFE [Disabled]
> SENFE [Disabled]
> SECE [Disabled]
> PME SCI [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Advanced Error Reporting [Enabled]
> PCIe Speed [Auto]
> Transmitter Half Swing [Disabled]
> Detect Timeout [0]
> Extra Bus Reserved [0]
> Reserved Memory [10]
> Reserved I/O [4]
> PCH PCIE24 LTR [Enabled]
> Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
> Non Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
> Force LTR Override [Disabled]
> PCIE24 LTR Lock [Disabled]
> PCIE20 CLKREQ Mapping Override [Default]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> HDA-Link Codec Select [Platform Onboard]
> iDisplay Audio Disconnect [Disabled]
> PME Enable [Disabled]
> SPI0 Controller [Disabled]
> SPI1 Controller [Disabled]
> UART0 Controller [Disabled]
> UART1 Controller [Disabled]
> UART2 Controller [for debug only]
> GPIO Controller [Disabled]
> Additional Serial IO devices [Disabled]
> SerialIO timing parameters [Disabled]
> I2C IO Voltage Select [3.3V]
> Connected device [Disabled]
> I2C IO Voltage Select [3.3V]
> Connected device [Disabled]
> I2C IO Voltage Select [1.8V]
> I2C IO Voltage Select [1.8V]
> I2C IO Voltage Select [3.3V]
> I2C IO Voltage Select [3.3V]
> ChipSelect polarity [Active High]
> Finger Print Sensor [Disabled]
> Bluetooth Device [Disabled]
> Wireless Charging Mode [WC Disabled]
> Hardware Flow Control [Enabled]
> Hardware Flow Control [Enabled]
> Hardware Flow Control [Enabled]
> GPIO IRQ Route [IRQ14]
> Select Camera [Ivcam]
> Delay needed for Ivcam power on [0]
> Delay needed for Ivcam power off [0]
> Rotation [0]
> DFU support [Disabled]
> Wake support [Disabled]
> Vcc Core voltage override enable [Disabled]
> Vcc Core voltage [1300]
> Vcc SA voltage override enable [Disabled]
> Vcc SA voltage [1050]
> Vcc SFR OC voltage override enable [Disabled]
> Vcc SFR OC voltage [1200]
> Vcc IO voltage override enable [Disabled]
> Vcc IO voltage [950]
> Vcc SFR voltage override enable [Disabled]
> Vcc SFR voltage [1000]
> Vcc ST SFR Vout voltage override enable [Disabled]
> Vcc ST SFR Vout voltage [1000]
> ASF support [Enabled]
> USB Provisioning of AMT [Disabled]
> Activate Remote Assistance Process [Disabled]
> CIRA Timeout [0]
> PET Progress [Enabled]
> WatchDog [Disabled]
> OS Timer [0]
> BIOS Timer [0]
> Secure Erase mode [Simulated]
> Force Secure Erase [Disabled]
> MEBx hotkey Pressed [Disabled]
> MEBx Selection Screen [Disabled]
> Hide Unconfigure ME Confirmation Prompt [Disabled]
> MEBx OEM Debug Menu Enable [Disabled]
> Unconfigure ME [Disabled]
> Non-UI Mode Resolution [Auto]
> UI Mode Resolution [Auto]
> Graphics Mode Resolution [Auto]
> Security Device Support [Enable]
> Security Device Support [Enable]
> Pending operation [None]
> Platform Hierarchy [Enabled]
> Storage Hierarchy [Enabled]
> Endorsement Hierarchy [Enabled]
> TPM2.0 UEFI Spec Version [TCG_2]
> Physical Presence Spec Version [1.3]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Prefetchable Memory [10]
> Reserved Memory Alignment [1]
> Prefetchable Memory Alignment [1]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> Q-Code LED Function [POST Code Only]
> PCIEX16/X8_1 [Disabled]
> PCIEX8_2 [Disabled]
> PCIEX16/X8_3 [Disabled]
> PCIEX8_4 and CPU_DIMM.2 [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> Q-Code Display [Enabled]
> PCIEX8_4 bandwidth configuration [X4 Mode]
> Asmedia Back 1A/1C USB 3.1 Gen2 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
> Asmedia Front 1C USB 3.1 Gen2 Controller [Enabled]
> ASMedia Storage Controller [Enabled]
> ASPM Support [Disabled]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
> Wi-Fi 802.11ac Controller [Enabled]
> Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN PXE Option ROM [Disabled]
> Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
> Primary PEG [Auto]
> Primary PCIE [Auto]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
> USB Keyboard and Mouse Simulator [Disabled]
> Generic Flash Disk 8.07 [Auto]
> U31G2_EC1 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_E1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_E2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_E3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_E4 [Enabled]
> USB_10 [Enabled]
> USB_11 [Enabled]
> USB_12 [Enabled]
> USB_13 [Enabled]
> USB_14 [Enabled]
> Hide Asus Logo [Disabled]
> TPM Device Selection [dTPM]
> PTP aware OS [PTP Aware]
> Me FW Image Re-Flash [Disabled]
> Local FW Update [Enabled]
> HECI Timeouts [Enabled]
> Force ME DID Init Status [Disabled]
> Disable CPU Replaced Polling [Disabled]
> ME DID Message [Enabled]
> HECI Retry Disable [Disabled]
> HECI Message check Disable [Disabled]
> MBP HOB Skip [Disabled]
> HECI2 Interface Communication [Disabled]
> KT Device [Enabled]
> IDER Device [Enabled]
> End Of Post Message [Send in DXE]
> D0I3 Setting for HECI Disable [Disabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU_DIMM.2 Sensor 1 [Monitor]
> CPU_DIMM.2 Sensor 2 [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> VRM Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
> Water In T Sensor [Monitor]
> Water Out T Sensor [Monitor]
> PCH_DIMM.2 Sensor 1 [Monitor]
> PCH_DIMM.2 Sensor 2 [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> Water Pump+ Speed [Monitor]
> AIO Pump Speed [Monitor]
> Flow Rate [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Temperature LED Switch [Enabled]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> CPU Fan Step Up [2.1 sec]
> CPU Fan Step Down [2.1 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
> CPU Upper Temperature [70]
> CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> CPU Middle Temperature [40]
> CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> CPU Lower Temperature [20]
> CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [40]
> Water Pump+ Control [PWM Mode]
> Water Pump+ Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Water Pump+ Upper Temperature [70]
> Water Pump+ Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Water Pump+ Middle Temperature [25]
> Water Pump+ Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [50]
> Water Pump+ Lower Temperature [10]
> Water Pump+ Min. Duty Cycle (%) [50]
> AIO Pump Control [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [VRM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Step Up [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Step Down [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
> Chassis Fan 1 Upper Temperature [40]
> Chassis Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Chassis Fan 1 Middle Temperature [30]
> Chassis Fan 1 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [85]
> Chassis Fan 1 Lower Temperature [20]
> Chassis Fan 1 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> Chassis Fan 1 Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> Fast Boot [Enabled]
> Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
> Above 4G Decoding [Disabled]
> Boot Logo Display [Disabled]
> POST Report [5 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Enabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E/PCI Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> PCH SATA Boot Only [Disabled]
> USB Boot [Enabled]
> Watchdog Support [Disabled]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [4]
> Profile Name [47per]
> Save to Profile [4]
> CPU Input Voltage [Auto]
> CPU System Agent Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]


How do you do to have this (bios setting in list) ?

Thanks


----------



## nycgtr

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Nice looking inexpensive block
> http://www.performance-pcs.com/bits...acrylic-designed-for-intel-x299-platform.html
> 
> The settings file I was referring to was named new 46 per


The pic is actually outdated. That is revision 1 for people who are interested and discontinued.










This is how the block is now.


----------



## ThrashZone

nycgtr said:


> The pic is actually outdated. That is revision 1 for people who are interested and discontinued.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is how the block is now.


Hi,
Malwarebytes sure doesn't like from where that image is coming from or posted from 
I can't see it they blocked it


----------



## nycgtr

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Malwarebytes sure doesn't like from where that image is coming from or posted from
> I can't see it they blocked it


I uploaded to postimage


----------



## cx-ray

hrmgamer said:


> So does this mean that the additional turbo voltage can't be used to reign in the the upper end of ratios, only (as the name suggests) provide additional voltage? If so, ugh! I think I'm going to have to go for plan B of mixed core ratios.


Correct. With Adaptive the additional supplied voltage has to be higher than VID, or it will get ignored. For less than VID a negative Offset is required.


----------



## ThrashZone

nycgtr said:


> I uploaded to postimage


Hi,
Well malwarebytes sure doesn't like that site Avast either I don't use Avast though 
https://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=184629.0

https://forums.malwarebytes.com/topic/209070-blocked-website/


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> How do you do to have this (bios setting in list) ?
> 
> Thanks



with a usb stick in , enter bios and on the ASus Profile bios page scroll down to the USB stick. hit crtl-F2.


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> with a usb stick in , enter bios and on the ASus Profile bios page scroll down to the USB stick. hit crtl-F2.


That's what I do to save the profile on a USB key (but just F2)
And that creates a .CMO file, but I can not read it


----------



## hrmgamer

tistou77 said:


> That's what I do to save the profile on a USB key (but just F2)
> And that creates a .CMO file, but I can not read it


CMO is a profile to load the settings into UEFI and comes from pressing F2. You're after CTRL+F2, that creates a .txt (but it won't show up in the browser, you'll see it back in Windows).


----------



## tistou77

Yes I tested with ctrl+F2 and it's good, thanks


----------



## LazyAfternoons

Hello guys, I have a 7800X on a Mark 1. I'd like to overclock the CPU a bit but I have absolutely no clue where to start. Any tip? Thank you!


----------



## RichKnecht

LazyAfternoons said:


> Hello guys, I have a 7800X on a Mark 1. I'd like to overclock the CPU a bit but I have absolutely no clue where to start. Any tip? Thank you!


Do a search on YouTube. Linus Tech Tips did a decent video explaining the basics. Before you start though, run a few Benchmarks on stock settings to see what kind of scores you are getting and what your temps are. That will give you a baseline. Once you overclock, you can run the same tests and see how much performance was gained. Be careful though, Slylake runs HOT.


----------



## hrmgamer

Hi all

I'm currently able to pass P95 non-AVX (though runs quite hot at normal room temps, so been leaving the windows open...sigh) and y-cruncher SFT for extended periods (24hrs).

What is the max VCCIN you'd recommend for sustained use? I'm finding that if I dial it back from where it sits on auto (between 1.98-2.05V) I get errors in y-cruncher VST and HNT tests almost instantly. If I leave it on auto it's erroring after a few hours but only on VST and HNT. I suspect I'm going to have to push VCCIN up, go back to an LLC of 5 (currently trying 3 and 4), or drop my clocks. 

Before I do anything I'm running an AIDA64 cache test for 12+hrs, and GSAT for 24hrs, just to make sure it's not something on that side of the fence. 

Also while I've got you what do you recommend for a max vcore? Most seem reasonable in the 1.13-1.17 range for a 42x, but the 4 cores I have sitting at 44x are up around 1.2-1.24V. I could actually lower the voltage offsets further for normal operations, but it would result in failing AVX-512 stress tests in short order. 

And finally I've found there are a few more cores I could push to 43-44x except that they don't seem stable at any temperature or voltage for AVX-512 with an offset of 8 (i.e. can't get them stable above 3400MHz), which seems a little odd. 

Cheers
HRMGamer.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
From what I've read 1.1 and 1.15 is about the max 24/7.
Oops that vccio 
CPU input 1.95 I thought was the max and should be well under that.


----------



## wheatpaste1999

Has anyone used a different IHS than the stock Intel piece after delidding? It looks like Rockit Cool is working on a bare copper IHS:

https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/copper-ihs-for-lga-2066?variant=13012078002234

I've emailed about availability, waiting to hear back. I used one of their copper IHS' on my 7700k and it worked well.

Are there any other options out there? I did some preliminary searching but didn't find much.


----------



## hrmgamer

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> From what I've read 1.1 and 1.15 is about the max 24/7.
> Oops that vccio
> CPU input 1.95 I thought was the max and should be well under that.



Hmmm I've just found the 6th-gen-x-series-datasheet-vol-1.pdf and page 46 states the max is 2.15V. So I guess the questions are does that figure have the usual Intel margin And is that a burst max voltage (likely) or a sustained voltage (unlikely)?

If I have to drop the VCCIN that is just going to be so much freaking fun :/

Any more thoughts or tips on other things I can try? 

Cheers
HRMGamer


----------



## hrmgamer

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> From what I've read 1.1 and 1.15 is about the max 24/7.
> Oops that vccio
> CPU input 1.95 I thought was the max and should be well under that.


_Apologies if this double posts_. 

EDIT: Yes it did!!!! Ugh!


----------



## nycgtr

wheatpaste1999 said:


> Has anyone used a different IHS than the stock Intel piece after delidding? It looks like Rockit Cool is working on a bare copper IHS:
> 
> https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/copper-ihs-for-lga-2066?variant=13012078002234
> 
> I've emailed about availability, waiting to hear back. I used one of their copper IHS' on my 7700k and it worked well.
> 
> Are there any other options out there? I did some preliminary searching but didn't find much.


I got a copper one. Not really worth it.


----------



## tistou77

wheatpaste1999 said:


> Has anyone used a different IHS than the stock Intel piece after delidding? It looks like Rockit Cool is working on a bare copper IHS:
> 
> https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/copper-ihs-for-lga-2066?variant=13012078002234
> 
> I've emailed about availability, waiting to hear back. I used one of their copper IHS' on my 7700k and it worked well.
> 
> Are there any other options out there? I did some preliminary searching but didn't find much.


It has already been tested with Skylake-X and no temperature difference with normal IHS, it would seem


----------



## ThrashZone

hrmgamer said:


> Hmmm I've just found the 6th-gen-x-series-datasheet-vol-1.pdf and page 46 states the max is 2.15V. So I guess the questions are does that figure have the usual Intel margin And is that a burst max voltage (likely) or a sustained voltage (unlikely)?
> 
> If I have to drop the VCCIN that is just going to be so much freaking fun :/
> 
> Any more thoughts or tips on other things I can try?
> 
> Cheers
> HRMGamer


Hi,
Personally I haven't seen much reason to go much over 1.8v for 4.8 and it seems fine probably could use 1.9 but that's the max I've gone and it made little difference.
Someone said to use 1.95v for 4.8 but never needed that much but I wasn't using the same stress tests either


----------



## wheatpaste1999

nycgtr said:


> I got a copper one. Not really worth it.





tistou77 said:


> It has already been tested with Skylake-X and no temperature difference with normal IHS, it would seem


Thanks for the replies... Any links to testing results/reviews? 

I'm still probably going to pick one up as I haven't delidded my 7900x yet and this seems like one of those items that you might as well do while you're in there.

It sounds like Rockit Cool has only tested this IHS on the 7800x and 7900x at this point, FYI.


----------



## nycgtr

wheatpaste1999 said:


> Thanks for the replies... Any links to testing results/reviews?
> 
> I'm still probably going to pick one up as I haven't delidded my 7900x yet and this seems like one of those items that you might as well do while you're in there.
> 
> It sounds like Rockit Cool has only tested this IHS on the 7800x and 7900x at this point, FYI.












This is mine on a 7940x. Honestly I don't see anything that isn't outta margin of error, maybe the cores are closer in temp but I can't even recall tbh.


----------



## wheatpaste1999

nycgtr said:


> This is mine on a 7940x. Honestly I don't see anything that isn't outta margin of error, maybe the cores are closer in temp but I can't even recall tbh.


Thanks, really appreciate the input.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Personally I haven't seen much reason to go much over 1.8v for 4.8 and it seems fine probably could use 1.9 but that's the max I've gone and it made little difference.
> Someone said to use 1.95v for 4.8 but never needed that much but I wasn't using the same stress tests either


I'm at 1.8 on my 7900X OC'ed to 4.7 on all cores at 1.232V. From what I have read, most say that 450mv above VCore should be plenty. So if you are at 1.3V VCore, then 1.75 is fine. You could always round up to 1.8 I guess, but why do it if it doesn't need it?


----------



## Jpmboy

Just an FYI guys... if you are gonna delid a SKL-X cpu, a copper IHS is pretty meaningless. especially with liquid metal between the die and IHS. I say this for 2 reasons... 1) the stock IHS, unless concave or convex is net neutral in heat flux and spread (the the spread is important). It's the stock TIM that is the flux limit. 2) the liquid metal you will use (else why delid) will form an amalgam with the copper (gallium, indium) and it is really unknown what long term effect that will have on the die-IHS thermal bondline.


----------



## superV

just received my delid tool and vrm waterblock.
thinking to do a swap with my gaming rig water loop.
going from 280 rad + 240 rad with decent fans but terrible xspc pump around 1000 l/h with bad pressure to a single 360mm 60mm thick rad full copper with very good alphacool pump VPP655 1500 l/h with very good pressure.
what do you think?
also do you know how much tdp will have 4x4gb ddr3 @2400mhz cl9 with 1.7/1.75v?i guess around 10w per stick for a total 40/50w.


----------



## hrmgamer

RichKnecht said:


> I'm at 1.8 on my 7900X OC'ed to 4.7 on all cores at 1.232V. From what I have read, most say that 450mv above VCore should be plenty. So if you are at 1.3V VCore, then 1.75 is fine. You could always round up to 1.8 I guess, but why do it if it doesn't need it?


I wonder if my high VCCIN is combating VCore V-droop which is happening so quick I don't see it/show up in logs? In which case I should just push my V-Cores just a little higher.


----------



## RichKnecht

hrmgamer said:


> I wonder if my high VCCIN is combating VCore V-droop which is happening so quick I don't see it/show up in logs? In which case I should just push my V-Cores just a little higher.


I think it all depends on what your goal is. If you are just trying to push your OC for benchmarking scores, then I guess you can try increasing Vcore. However, I have found that even adding a tiny bit of Vcore seems to add a lot more heat. With my 7900X, I originally had VCore at 1.25V across all cores for my 4.7 OC and even with delidding, my chip ran quite warm (80C) while testing the OC. That was with 2 240mm rads and 4 fans. I have since swapped out one of the 240mm rads for a 360mm with 6 ML120 fans in push/pull. That pushed temps down quite a bit. Yesterday I was able to drop my voltages on 8 cores to 1.232 and 1.227 on the other 2 cores. This is due to overall lower temps. It's apparent, at least in my case, that the cooler you can get these chips to run, the less vcore you will need to achieve a given OC. There will be a point however, where your chip will need quite a substantial bump in vcore to gain that additional 100MHz with your OC. For my 7900X, to get 4.8 stable on all 10 cores, it requires close to 1.3V vcore. That's a lot more heat for what comes down to a 2-3% gain in performance. Simply not worth it for a 24/7 OC like I am running.


----------



## ThrashZone

superV said:


> just received my delid tool and vrm waterblock.
> thinking to do a swap with my gaming rig water loop.
> going from 280 rad + 240 rad with decent fans but terrible xspc pump around 1000 l/h with bad pressure to a single 360mm 60mm thick rad full copper with very good alphacool pump VPP655 1500 l/h with very good pressure.
> what do you think?
> also do you know how much tdp will have 4x4gb ddr3 @2400mhz cl9 with *1.7/1.75v*?i guess around 10w per stick for a total 40/50w.


Hi,
Hope that voltage is a typo 

Only advantage of a variable speed pump is to slow it down otherwise it's setting #5 is 4800rpm same as any D5 pump is.


----------



## superV

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Hope that voltage is a typo
> 
> Only advantage of a variable speed pump is to slow it down otherwise it's setting #5 is 4800rpm same as any D5 pump is.


no it's not a typo,i want to run the ram on my gaming rig at subzero temps around -30/-60ºC,and i will overclock it,for that you need voltages around 1.7/1.8v,typical for temps like those,but i need to know the tdp of the 4 sticks.
regarding the pump you are wrong,the format is d5,kinda,but d5 pumps vary from manufacturer, perfomance included,for example the xspc d5 wont fit in a d5 res from alphacool.
xspc pump x4 has max 600 l/h while the alphacool d5 vpp655 at max has 1500 l/h. i did the same mistake thinking that all the d5 have the same flow rate and size.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Okay meant to say as all my D5 ek xres combo and top pumps go too 1500 l/h 
Thought my watercool vario went above 1500 but it's the same at #5 setting.

I switched back to all ek D5's now 
I use the other to flush out rads... 

Good luck with the rest of that


----------



## Jpmboy

superV said:


> no it's not a typo,i want to run the ram on my gaming rig at subzero temps around -30/-60ºC,and i will overclock it,for that you need voltages around 1.7/1.8v,typical for temps like those,but i need to know the tdp of the 4 sticks.
> regarding the pump you are wrong,the format is d5,kinda,but d5 pumps vary from manufacturer, perfomance included,for example the xspc d5 wont fit in a d5 res from alphacool.
> xspc pump x4 has max 600 l/h while the alphacool d5* vpp655 at max has 1500 l/h*. i did the same mistake thinking that all the d5 have the same flow rate and size.


that's too funny. 

just realize that higher flow does not result in lower coolant temperatures. 1500 l/h is frankly ridiculous (and probably represents max for for that D5 with zero head pressure - which does not exist in a loop). This flow rate effect has been clearly shown by the Aquacomputer guys. If you want to do it right, put temp sensors on the in and out sides AIR of the radiator and hot and cold side in-line coolant temp sensors, then you can optimize flow and fans. lol - I have 3 D5s here... and bunch of DCC pumps (all are made by the same primary manufacturer: Laing, then alphacool ek .. etc every body adds their name to the pump).


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
No hasn't anything to do with cooling water only the fans/ rads will do that.

But flowing through block cooling fins will help sustain cpu or gpu block temp spikes 
Also allow for lower fan speeds too 
The pumps I do have I can't hear any of them running full blast but fans heck yeah


----------



## tistou77

The l/h given for the pumps, are without any restriction, in conventional use, a pump 600l/h or 1500l/h will have the "same flow" (+/- 50l/h) in the same loop
Otherwise need a loop LDPC (low pressure loss) to see a difference in the flow (no longer available nowadays)
The most important being the water column


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> that's too funny.
> 
> just realize that higher flow does not result in lower coolant temperatures. 1500 l/h is frankly ridiculous (and probably represents max for for that D5 with zero head pressure - which does not exist in a loop). This flow rate effect has been clearly shown by the Aquacomputer guys. If you want to do it right, put temp sensors on the in and out sides AIR of the radiator and hot and cold side in-line coolant temp sensors, then you can optimize flow and fans. lol - I have 3 D5s here... and bunch of DCC pumps (all are made by the same primary manufacturer: Laing, then alphacool ek .. etc every body adds their name to the pump).


^^^^ What he said. I went with two DDC 3.2 PWM pumps because they have more head pressure of 5.2 vs 3.2 for the D5. Idel temps remain the same with two pumps but load temps went down from 40c to 35c during gaming. I went with two pumps for redundancy so I can leave the machine running and not have to worry. DDC run a little hotter but I use mounting brackets with fans cooling the pumps. So I am very happy.


----------



## Scrimstar

Is there a way to tell if chips are binned well from the serial or factory origin on the box? Costa Rica chips used to be better than most

For 7980XE


----------



## dslatin

*Right spot to post?*

Hi, super new because I just built my sky lake x rig and overclocked it. I and was wondering where a good place would be to discuss whether or not I did it properly. This is the first spot I found, but I'm not sure if I should post here (rules) or I should start a thread elsewhere. Thanks


----------



## CptSpig

dslatin said:


> Hi, super new because I just built my sky lake x rig and overclocked it. I and was wondering where a good place would be to discuss whether or not I did it properly. This is the first spot I found, but I'm not sure if I should post here (rules) or I should start a thread elsewhere. Thanks



This is where you want to be ask away.


----------



## dslatin

Thanks,

So to start. I haven't built a computer in like...20 years, So the past month has been non-stop research putting the specs together for what I need, checking compatibility, etc. Everything arrived Tuesday and over the course of a few hours and tutorial breaks, actually managed to get everything in the first pass with a successful boot. (minus AiO physical fan configuration, messed that up by following a dumb picture. this messed up my numbers for the first two days). Once I got everything installed and running the next day I spent all wed/thu trying to learn how to over clock. After many attempts at 4.3-4.7 I eventually got where I wanted to be. As of this morning it passed it's Prime 6 hour torture test (as well as shorter intel burn/aida64), and has been running like a champ with amazing temperatures, I thought I would have had to get a minimum x62 to get to this operation with the skylake x heat reports (peoples opinions). Anyways what I'm trying to figure out is that everywhere I look people who are overclocking above 4.3ghz need minimum 1.2v but I'm getting away fine with 1.1. There are a few settings in the gigabyte bios that I can't seem to match 100% online anywhere, but they are called Intel Speed Shift and Energy Efficient Turbo. As soon as I turned those off after stabilizing my system, it started failing the intelburn test within 2-3 cycles. I was hoping someone would be able to explain to me what these functions do? Oh and any advice or recommendations on my system would be great, I'm a photo/cinematographer and needed to build a 4k editing rig. 
*Note during intel burn text cpu-z reports core VID switchig from 1.142 to 1.242

Specs below:
Intel i7 7820x 3.6ghz ([email protected] 1.1v, Vcoreloadcalib:Extreme, disabled: turbo per core limit, CPU enhanced halt(c1e), c6/c7 state support, cpuflex ratio override. Enabled: speed shift, enhanced multicore performance, energy efficient turbo, turbo boost technology. also note intel turbo boost max tech 3.0 is set to legacy)
NZXT Kraken x52
Gigabyte X299 Aorus Ultra Gaming
Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 DRAM 3000MHz 
EVGA GTX 1060 SC 6GB
EVGA SuperNOVA 650 G3 80+ Gold
Samsung 960 EVO M.2 250GB (windows10)
WD Blue 4TB
NZXT s340Elite

Bench/Stress:
Cinebench - 138.49fps / 2007cb (started at 90fps/1610cb)
Prime95 - Torture Test completed 17 tests in 6 hours, 57 minutes, 0 errors, 0 warnings
Aida64 - 10 mins on CPU passes with temps of 85 max, 10 mins on FPU with temps of 93 max
Intelburntest - 10 times on Standard passed 
*that CAM temp/status is just after a burn test finished
Thanks in advance.


----------



## ThrashZone

dslatin said:


> Hi, super new because I just built my sky lake x rig and overclocked it. I and was wondering where a good place would be to discuss whether or not I did it properly. This is the first spot I found, but I'm not sure if I should post here (rules) or I should start a thread elsewhere. Thanks


Hi,
Here and also the gigabyte x299 oc thread you might get better details on the giga thread 
http://www.overclock.net/forum/6-intel-motherboards/1633978-gigabyte-x299-overclocking-thread.html


----------



## dslatin

cross-posted, thank's for the tip.


----------



## tistou77

No one has re tested the Direct Die Frame (der8auer) ?
I will be on vacation and I will be able to test it, but I saw that some had removed it and handed over the IHS (Jpmboy I believe, among others)


----------



## RichKnecht

tistou77 said:


> No one has re tested the Direct Die Frame (der8auer) ?
> I will be on vacation and I will be able to test it, but I saw that some had removed it and handed over the IHS (Jpmboy I believe, among others)


I tried mine3 times at first and each time it did not work as expected. PC would post and instantly go to thermal shut down. After a lot of searching online, I found an article on Tom's Hardware where they had the same problem while trying to overclock a 7900X. They found that the screws holding the cold plate to the block ( EK Supemacy) were not flush with the plate. This caused the block to "float" slightly above the die thus not making contact causing thermal shutdown. This was apparently an issue with EK blocks made over a year ago. Newer blocks have flush screws. After checking mine, the screws were indeed not flush. Instead of buying a countersink bit and fixing the issue on my full nickel block, I decided to get a new RGB Supremacy. Tried the frame again and this time it worked like a champ. I have my 7900X OC'ed on all cores at 1.232V and my max temps after an hour of Realbench went from 74 (delidded with LM on IHS) to 68. Idle temps are at 25C with ambient at 23C. Cooling is via an EK PE240 rad on top with 2 EK EVO fans and an EK PE 360 on the front with 6 ML120 fans in push/pull. I may try for 4.8 again, but this is rock stable at 4.7 and I'm not really sure it would be worth the time to push it further. Igt scores 2606 with Cinebench.


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> No one has re tested the Direct Die Frame (der8auer) ?
> I will be on vacation and I will be able to test it, but I saw that some had removed it and handed over the IHS (Jpmboy I believe, among others)


I haven;t gotten around to trying any of the koolance blocks here (my EK did not work) - sorry. Give a a try if you have time.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> I haven;t gotten around to trying any of the koolance blocks here (my EK did not work) - sorry. Give a a try if you have time.


Check your PMs


----------



## tistou77

Thanks for your feedback 

I hesitated to do it because the base of my waterblock is not completely flat (slightly domed) and I was afraid of "kill" the DIE of the cpu


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> Check your PMs


i saw your pm from a couple of weeks ago... and?


----------



## Hachimitsu

Not sure where to post this - if its a CPU OC issue or MB issue, or XTU reporting incorrect things. But after a cold boot, Intel XTU reports wrong multipliers and voltages, different cores seemingly at random. The multiplier is always 12x when its incorrect. looks like this: https://imgur.com/H9ZmwFa

However, after a warm reboot, every time, XTU shows the correct values, looks like this: https://imgur.com/CIJSQj3

Any idea whats going on? Temps are solid, benching is stable. Are these values reported by XTU just cosmetic and in error or is there something else going on here?

Specs: 7980XE @ 4.3 All Cores 1.105v / 3.1 Mesh 1.105v on NZXT Kraken X72 360mm
C States disabled
EVGA x299 DARK
64GB GSkill Trident Z 3800 16-17-17-2T
Corsair 1600 PSU


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> i saw your pm from a couple of weeks ago... and?


Just wanted to know if you tried it before I got a chance to do it and to see if you had any luck before I took my computer apart again. That's all.


----------



## Jpmboy

nah, sorry. I have not had a chance to. Stupid of me tho, the x-frame is sitting in the drawer for a long time now. Summer is tough - too many other things going on. Need to put some miles on a few things...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah that cover needs to be removed and blown off naturally


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah that cover needs to be removed and blown off naturally



Home built...




Spoiler


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> Home built...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Awesome stuff! Yeah, don't think I would be taking my computer apart with a garage full of toys like that. Much better things to do!


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> nah, sorry. I have not had a chance to. Stupid of me tho, the x-frame is sitting in the drawer for a long time now. Summer is tough - too many other things going on. Need to put some miles on a few things...


I second that to many other things needing attention like a corsa ehxaust on the C5 this weekend!



Spoiler


----------



## Jpmboy

lol - it's summer in Cali all year.


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> lol - it's summer in Cali all year.



LOL Good point, I guess I am waiting for the next big computer tech to hit the market.


----------



## Jpmboy

i'm just jelly...


----------



## chibi

Have you guys heard anything about the 2066 refresh CPU's being soldered? I have a delidded 8700K now and it's just not sitting well with me. I prefer Intel and Asus Maximus/Rampage series bios' so switching over to AMD is not happening. 

I can live with the 8700K, but just don't like the feeling of _settling_.


----------



## cookiesowns

soooo ~ I've been awol for a bit. Glad to see @Jpmboy is still around!

I'm currently stuck between the 7900X+ cpu's. I'd really like to be at 4.5Ghz or higher this time around with my exisiting water loop. So I'm not sure which CPU to go for. I'd probably be content with a 7980XE or 7960X if we can still do per core turbo boost with core pinning..

What are the average OC's we're seeing with the 10+core CPUs?

Edit: Did some reading. Need.. we can "offset" AVX2/AVX-512 boost bins now for VID.. that's very neat. I guess maybe I'll go with a 7980XE and just do a mild 4.2 OC which should be obtainable on most chips right? And then use the per core voltage offsets to pick a couple cores at 4.4+


----------



## hrmgamer

cookiesowns said:


> soooo ~ I've been awol for a bit. Glad to see @Jpmboy is still around!
> 
> I'm currently stuck between the 7900X+ cpu's. I'd really like to be at 4.5Ghz or higher this time around with my exisiting water loop. So I'm not sure which CPU to go for. I'd probably be content with a 7980XE or 7960X if we can still do per core turbo boost with core pinning..
> 
> What are the average OC's we're seeing with the 10+core CPUs?
> 
> Edit: Did some reading. Need.. we can "offset" AVX2/AVX-512 boost bins now for VID.. that's very neat. I guess maybe I'll go with a 7980XE and just do a mild 4.2 OC which should be obtainable on most chips right? And then use the per core voltage offsets to pick a couple cores at 4.4+


Without a delid but with a 2x EK 480XE loop it's looking like I am going to end up with my 7980XE cores at:
- 4x 4.4
- 6x 4.2
- 5x 4.1
- 3x 4.0

AVX offset @ 4, AVX-512 @ 8.

If I could set my AVX voltages independently from the 'normal' voltages I'd be able to get it higher, but as it stands my voltages needed to be pushed higher to keep things stable in y-cruncher. I should note that the above ratios on P95 put my cache temp uncomfortably hot, but every other stress test is between 60-70 degrees with an ambient of 18.

I'm actually curious to know how good that is :/


----------



## RichKnecht

My 7900X runs 24/7 @ 4.7 on all cores. 8 cores at 1.232V and 2 cores at 1.227V. -3 AVX and -5 AVX512 offsets. It was delidded, but now I am using a Direct Die Frame. It will do 4.8, but the performance gains are minimal so I leave it at 4.7 to tame the heat a little. Running an EK 240PE with 2 EK EVO fans and a EK PE360 with 6 ML120 in push/pull. Temps never hit 70C under real world situations. It may hit 70 after an hour or so of Realbench though.


----------



## Jpmboy

cookiesowns said:


> soooo ~ I've been awol for a bit. Glad to see @*Jpmboy* is still around!
> 
> I'm currently stuck between the 7900X+ cpu's. I'd really like to be at 4.5Ghz or higher this time around with my exisiting water loop. So I'm not sure which CPU to go for. I'd probably be content with a 7980XE or 7960X if we can still do per core turbo boost with core pinning..
> 
> What are the average OC's we're seeing with the 10+core CPUs?
> 
> Edit: Did some reading. Need.. we can "offset" AVX2/AVX-512 boost bins now for VID.. that's very neat. I guess maybe I'll go with a 7980XE and just do a mild 4.2 OC which should be obtainable on most chips right? And then use the per core voltage offsets to pick a couple cores at 4.4+



hey cookie. 4.5 should not be a problem on a 7980XE. "Per specific core" works very well. I run mine at 2x4.7 (1.325V) and 16x4.5 (1.18V). RB, x264, x265, GSAT stable on the RVIA. 5 and 10 AVX offsets to keep the wattage down. BTW, the AVX ofsets are applied to the lowest multiplier in the OC, so in my case the offsets are from 45 on all cores.


----------



## tistou77

Bizarre, I tested the microcode 4D, and the TJMax of my 7980XE, went from 105 to 110°C

And temperatures have gone up 5°C (idle / load)


----------



## Pepillo

tistou77 said:


> Bizarre, I tested the microcode 4D, and the TJMax of my 7980XE, went from 105 to 110°C
> 
> And temperatures have gone up 5°C (idle / load)


Where I can find this microcode update to test it?


Thanks


----------



## tistou77

Pepillo said:


> Where I can find this microcode update to test it?
> 
> Thanks


With UBU


----------



## SirWaWa

what generation is skylake-x considered?


----------



## bmgjet

SirWaWa said:


> what generation is skylake-x considered?


6.5


----------



## Artah

Jpmboy said:


> nah, sorry. I have not had a chance to. Stupid of me tho, the x-frame is sitting in the drawer for a long time now. Summer is tough - too many other things going on. Need to put some miles on a few things...


The must be the drool garage!


----------



## cookiesowns

Jpmboy said:


> hey cookie. 4.5 should not be a problem on a 7980XE. "Per specific core" works very well. I run mine at 2x4.7 (1.325V) and 16x4.5 (1.18V). RB, x264, x265, GSAT stable on the RVIA. 5 and 10 AVX offsets to keep the wattage down. BTW, the AVX ofsets are applied to the lowest multiplier in the OC, so in my case the offsets are from 45 on all cores.


sweet, 7980XE it is. I'd be content with 4.2-4.5 16 core.


----------



## Jpmboy

cookiesowns said:


> sweet, 7980XE it is. I'd be content with 4.2-4.5 16 core.



18 cores...


----------



## Mysticial

Speaking of cores...

Is anyone gonna jump ship to the 32-core TR2? Or is everyone gonna go for the 6-channel 28-core chip instead?


----------



## Jpmboy

Mysticial said:


> Speaking of cores...
> 
> Is anyone gonna jump ship to the 32-core TR2? Or is everyone gonna go for the 6-channel 28-core chip instead?



TR2 does look "interesting".


----------



## bmgjet

Mysticial said:


> Speaking of cores...
> 
> Is anyone gonna jump ship to the 32-core TR2? Or is everyone gonna go for the 6-channel 28-core chip instead?


TR2 does look really intresting. Will be the go to chip if you need threads.
Intels 28 core is a joke. Id be supprised if it was ever offically released and capiable of doing even 1/2 of what there demo showed.


----------



## ESRCJ

Mysticial said:


> Speaking of cores...
> 
> Is anyone gonna jump ship to the 32-core TR2? Or is everyone gonna go for the 6-channel 28-core chip instead?


From what I have heard, the 28-core is likely not releasing until 2019. There will instead be a 22-core in September or October that is compatible with X299. So that would mean Intel is adding another row of cores to their HCC dies (so a 4x6 this time). We will get some motherboard refreshes and probably a price-per-core drop, with the 22-core taking the $1999 spot (maybe even lower since the 2990X is rumored to be $1499). 

With that said, I will definitely wait for reviews to see how 14nm++ with even larger HCC dies fare. That rumored 22-core part will be a major pain to cool and I would likely need a new motherboard with a better VRM versus my RVIE. I will most likely be getting the 8-core Coffee Lake part on Z390 if I don't bother getting that 22-core.

As for TR2, I worry about two of the CCX dies not having their own memory channels. Not to mention, Ryzen leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to clock speeds. It's a boring platform to overclock on. With Skylake-X, you can have fun in both the multi-threaded and single-threaded realms of overclocking. Not to mention, they're fantastic if your workloads mix single-threaded and multi-threaded algorithms. I will hold off on AMD CPUs at least until Zen 2 parts arrive. I am very thankful AMD is competitive again though.


----------



## cookiesowns

Just got the system put together... man the edition 10 was such a great board. Went with the Rampage VI Extreme, and the 7980XE...

that stock max turbo clock though... lol. Time to break her in and turn it up!

Is it necessary to delid these chips? So far I'm at 1.075V @ 3.8 all 18 cores 62C package temp. Cache stock.

Update: After the initial struggle with cache voltage ( for a second I thought i had a dud chip ) and cache at 3.0.

I decided to go with a mild bump in cache vccio, and keep cache at 28, and now chip is running awesome.

1.050 VTT. 1.91 VCCIN @ level 5. Voltage setpoint is adaptive at 1.055 Turbo and +0.005 offset VID reporting by HWINFO seems to be around 1.155-1.18V, not sure if these are relevant? EDIT2: Turns out they are relevant  can't set voltage lower than VID without using offset....

GRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

Is there really no way of setting voltages below VID that the CPU wants for a certain frequency? This ruins everything...

EDIT3: oooh... adaptive vcore + offset on individual core.. now this is fun!

EDIT4: Got a pretty good basic OC dialed in... 4.4 with -0.060 offset which nets about 1.175V max and about 1.15V average on all 18 cores under load. And AVX2 brings it down to 4.1 with -3 offset at roughly 1.050 - 1.086V


----------



## ESRCJ

cookiesowns said:


> Just got the system put together... man the edition 10 was such a great board. Went with the Rampage VI Extreme, and the 7980XE...
> 
> that stock max turbo clock though... lol. Time to break her in and turn it up!
> 
> Is it necessary to delid these chips? So far I'm at 1.075V @ 3.8 all 18 cores 62C package temp. Cache stock.
> 
> Update: After the initial struggle with cache voltage ( for a second I thought i had a dud chip ) and cache at 3.0.
> 
> I decided to go with a mild bump in cache vccio, and keep cache at 28, and now chip is running awesome.
> 
> 1.050 VTT. 1.91 VCCIN @ level 5. Voltage setpoint is adaptive at 1.055 Turbo and +0.005 offset VID reporting by HWINFO seems to be around 1.155-1.18V, not sure if these are relevant? EDIT2: Turns out they are relevant /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif can't set voltage lower than VID without using offset....
> 
> GRRRRRRRRRRRRR.
> 
> Is there really no way of setting voltages below VID that the CPU wants for a certain frequency? This ruins everything...
> 
> EDIT3: oooh... adaptive vcore + offset on individual core.. now this is fun!
> 
> EDIT4: Got a pretty good basic OC dialed in... 4.4 with -0.060 offset which nets about 1.175V max and about 1.15V average on all 18 cores under load. And AVX2 brings it down to 4.1 with -3 offset at roughly 1.050 - 1.086V


It will be hard to push the XE very far without a delid. I was able to get away with 4.6GHz at 1.2V with a 7960X without a delid, although that was some good silicon and I have quite the cooling solution. 4.7GHz was also fine, although I was hitting over 90C in Cinebench at 1.25V. The XE is obviously even harder to cool. 4.6GHz all cores would be a good target with a delid and maybe a few cores at 4.7-4.8GHz. If you have direct-to-die cooling, then you could go a little further. 

As for setting voltages, I personally test with manual voltages per core and then dial in the offsets accordingly per core after I've found my lowest stable voltages per core at the desired frequencies. There's usually some decent variation between cores in this regard. My worst core is usually at least 0.04V greater than my best core for the same frequency.


----------



## cookiesowns

gridironcpj said:


> It will be hard to push the XE very far without a delid. I was able to get away with 4.6GHz at 1.2V with a 7960X without a delid, although that was some good silicon and I have quite the cooling solution. 4.7GHz was also fine, although I was hitting over 90C in Cinebench at 1.25V. The XE is obviously even harder to cool. 4.6GHz all cores would be a good target with a delid and maybe a few cores at 4.7-4.8GHz. If you have direct-to-die cooling, then you could go a little further.
> 
> As for setting voltages, I personally test with manual voltages per core and then dial in the offsets accordingly per core after I've found my lowest stable voltages per core at the desired frequencies. There's usually some decent variation between cores in this regard. My worst core is usually at least 0.04V greater than my best core for the same frequency.


What do you think of this?

My worst core doesn't seem to be more than 0.035V off on VID. and I can run cinebench run after run at these settings right now. Chip is unmolested, hasn't be delidded yet. Temps are great..

Cooling is nothing fancy. Just a EK Supremacy EVO, Single quad XE480, D5 100% and a EK Supremacy GPU block on a TitanX(p) single card for now.

on my chip it seems like the VID doesn't change from 4.4 to 4.5.. which I found interesting.

*Ignore the turbo watt limit, that was raised after a few runs and all was the same*










1.2V max core VID... was Cinebench 4.6 stable. Max temps was in the 83C package temps... I have no reference so I have no idea if this is any good or not.

https://valid.x86.fr/d4242i

Got some more stuff....










Cinebench scored at 4400+ if i leave bg tasks off.


----------



## Jpmboy

cookiesowns said:


> What do you think of this?
> 
> My worst core doesn't seem to be more than 0.035V off on VID. and I can run cinebench run after run at these settings right now. Chip is unmolested, hasn't be delidded yet. Temps are great..
> 
> Cooling is nothing fancy. Just a EK Supremacy EVO, Single quad XE480, D5 100% and a EK Supremacy GPU block on a TitanX(p) single card for now.
> 
> on my chip it seems like the VID doesn't change from 4.4 to 4.5.. which I found interesting.
> 
> *Ignore the turbo watt limit, that was raised after a few runs and all was the same*
> 
> 
> 
> 1.2V max core VID... was Cinebench 4.6 stable. Max temps was in the 83C package temps... I have no reference so I have no idea if this is any good or not.
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/d4242i
> 
> Got some more stuff....
> 
> 
> 
> Cinebench scored at 4400+ if i leave bg tasks off.



looks good cookie. that's right (around) where r15 should be at that frequency. Ram settings?
Anyway - v good for a non-delid. But as you know, R15 is not really an indicator of stability. x265 (avx2) is good, as is plain old realbench. R15 is basically zero load on the cache and IO. And... cache (mesh) on this architecture is critical for effeciency.


----------



## cookiesowns

Jpmboy said:


> looks good cookie. that's right (around) where r15 should be at that frequency. Ram settings?
> Anyway - v good for a non-delid. But as you know, R15 is not really an indicator of stability. x265 (avx2) is good, as is plain old realbench. R15 is basically zero load on the cache and IO. And... cache (mesh) on this architecture is critical for effeciency. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


Thanks JPM,

Ram is just XMP GSkill 3200 C14-14-14-34 64GB Bdie for now. Might actually try overclocking ram this time. 

Yup. I’ve been doing some more testing over the last few hours. And I can do 4.6 stable at 1.185V across all cores. Lower on some. So far a -0.035 offset is perfect including AVX voltages. At -5 and -8

I’m really close to passing CB15 at 4.7. But my temps sky rocket at 1.225V which is hindering me. Wattage pull at this levels is insane so I’ve stopped it

In RB, X265x, x264 and y cruncher


----------



## Jpmboy

cookiesowns said:


> Thanks JPM,
> 
> Ram is just XMP GSkill 3200 C14-14-14-34 64GB Bdie for now. Might actually try overclocking ram this time.
> 
> Yup. I’ve been doing some more testing over the last few hours. And I can do 4.6 stable at 1.185V across all cores. Lower on some. So far a -0.035 offset is perfect including AVX voltages. At -5 and -8
> 
> I’m really close to passing CB15 at 4.7. But my temps sky rocket at 1.225V which is hindering me. Wattage pull at this levels is insane so I’ve stopped it
> 
> In RB, X265x, x264 and y cruncher



lol - best not look at the wattage/amperage too often, it's bad for one's sanity.


----------



## cookiesowns

Jpmboy said:


> lol - best not look at the wattage/amperage too often, it's bad for one's sanity.


Haha.. yeah.. Has anyone found the limits of the amount of current before these chips will start degrading? ( assuming temps are kept in check )

And wow... the IMC's on these things are amazing. Have my old set of 3200 C14 running at 3466 C15 with barely any effort. At 3Ghz mesh too!


----------



## chibi

cookiesowns said:


> And wow... the IMC's on these things are amazing. Have my old set of 3200 C14 running at 3466 C15 with barely any effort. At 3Ghz mesh too!



You gotta pump those numbers up, those are rookie numbers in this _IMC_ :lachen:


----------



## cookiesowns

chibi said:


> You gotta pump those numbers up, those are rookie numbers in this _IMC_ :lachen:


lol. I tried to go for 3600.. C15 was complete no go at 1.375V, and 3600 C16 was borderline unstable..

3466 C15 flat with tightened seconds is a happy middle ground. I don't like pumping voltage as I'm running 8x8GB.. so the dimms get quite hot especially once they are fully in my system ( i like to keep my fans quiet so airflow isn't so great over RAM )

Just gota get my delid kit.. finish delidding with CLU, put it back together with my full loop ( along with the bits power X299 block ) and then I think i'll be golden!

Dialed down the OC just so i keep temps in check until delid.. while I do memory stress testing..

RAM test with FPU enabled & cache enabled


----------



## Jpmboy

cookiesowns said:


> Haha.. yeah.. Has anyone found the limits of the amount of current before these chips will start degrading? ( assuming temps are kept in check )
> 
> And wow... the IMC's on these things are amazing. Have my old set of 3200 C14 running at 3466 C15 with barely any effort. At 3Ghz mesh too!


 yeah - you'll find the sweetspot at 4000. I have two 3600c15 kits running 4000c16 with 1.4V - fully stable (gsat, hci, ramtest). (2x4.7, 16x4.5, cache at 3.0). Been at that ram speed since launch. My board has a really good first channel - check the RTL in A1. The other 3 cannot run that round trip speed. IDK, each unit is different. 
post up a ATC snip of the 3600 you tried. my 3200c14 (x99, 8x8 for 64GB so I used 4 of the sticks on this Apex) kit really did the same as the 3600c15 (z370) kit


Like x99, as for voltage... vccin is the one to pay attention to.. Vcore is important, but there are multiple step-downs on the die.


----------



## cookiesowns

Jpmboy said:


> yeah - you'll find the sweetspot at 4000. I have two 3600c15 kits running 4000c16 with 1.4V - fully stable (gsat, hci, ramtest). (2x4.7, 16x4.5, cache at 3.0). Been at that ram speed since launch. My board has a really good first channel - check the RTL in A1. The other 3 cannot run that round trip speed. IDK, each unit is different.
> post up a ATC snip of the 3600 you tried. my 3200c14 (x99, 8x8 for 64GB so I used 4 of the sticks on this Apex) kit really did the same as the 3600c15 (z370) kit
> 
> 
> Like x99, as for voltage... vccin is the one to pay attention to.. Vcore is important, but there are multiple step-downs on the die.


Gotcha. Yeah I'm running 1.88 VCCIN with L5 LLC. seems perfect for what I'm doing right now.

What do you feel the sweet spots are for VCCSA, VCCIO, uncore offset, cache etc. As with BW/HW-E cache will probably slowly settle down. but so far I'm at 3Ghz cache with 1.095V via offset 

I've heard SA doesn't do much anymore but uncore and cache/mesh is the critical one for cache/IMC performance/scaling?

Here's my current RTL on my day to day setup.. back to my daily OS.. Once I re put the loop together after delid I might try to push for memory again at 3600 C15. All 8 sticks definitely won't do 3600 C15 at 1.37V or so. However I was not 100% sure if it was cache or memory.


----------



## Jpmboy

cookiesow
ns;27534596 said:


> Gotcha. Yeah I'm running 1.88 VCCIN with L5 LLC. seems perfect for what I'm doing right now.
> 
> What do you feel the sweet spots are for VCCSA, VCCIO, uncore offset, cache etc. As with BW/HW-E cache will probably slowly settle down. but so far I'm at 3Ghz cache with 1.095V via offset
> 
> I've heard SA doesn't do much anymore but uncore and cache/mesh is the critical one for cache/IMC performance/scaling?
> 
> Here's my current RTL on my day to day setup.. back to my daily OS.. Once I re put the loop together after delid I might try to push for memory again at 3600 C15. All 8 sticks definitely won't do 3600 C15 at 1.37V or so. However I was not 100% sure if it was cache or memory.


 yeah - channels A and C are a bit "askew". But no big deal IF that is stable. If not, try manually setting both (all four) in bios to the higher value for that daily. For sure, a fully loaded 8-slot board is gonna require tuning - certainly did for the R5E-10 I still have running 8x8GB. 

The sweet spot will be different for these boards, but here's voltages for this APEX running (folding) 16x4.5 and 2x4.6 (1.18V and 1.26V, resp)... for folding I use a 10/15 avx/avx512 offset. Cache and Uncore offset are different settings. default for Uncore offset would be 450mV. 350 works but I had some glitches montrhs ago, which I blamed on Uncore at 350, so I increased it to 400 and it's been good since. Tho, no proof that it was really the problem. My cpu needs 1.18V or so on cache to be truly stable at 3000. 







\


----------



## Kyozon

Hello friends! New to this Intel thread, looking for an advice as to which motherboard to get for an i9 7980XE.

Most recently i found a sweet deal on an EVGA X299 Dark Motherboard. I have been reading around and it seems to be an adequate motherboard for this specific chip. In comparison to this deal, the next top-end Motherboard is the RVIE as the Apex is nowhere to be found here locally. The RVIE is going for $250+ than this EVGA X299 Dark that i was able to find. 

Everything seems very good with the Dark, with the exception that i am limited to current 64GB of System RAM with the Dark. Which could be something that i am afraid about missing with the current Projects that i am working on. I have heard rumors about 32GB Modules by the end of this year, but so far can't actually count on it.

Knowing this current situation, what would you friends suggest? 

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Jpmboy

Kyozon said:


> Hello friends! New to this Intel thread, looking for an advice as to which motherboard to get for an i9 7980XE.
> 
> Most recently i found a sweet deal on an EVGA X299 Dark Motherboard. I have been reading around and it seems to be an adequate motherboard for this specific chip. In comparison to this deal, the next top-end Motherboard is the RVIE as the Apex is nowhere to be found here locally. The RVIE is going for $250+ than this EVGA X299 Dark that i was able to find.
> 
> Everything seems very good with the Dark, with the exception that i am limited to current 64GB of System RAM with the Dark. Which could be something that i am afraid about missing with the current Projects that i am working on. I have heard rumors about 32GB Modules by the end of this year, but so far can't actually count on it.
> 
> Knowing this current situation, what would you friends suggest?
> 
> Thanks in advance.



32Gb sticks are gonna be ridiculously expensive at launch (for any decent freq). If >64GB of ram is critical, - the decision is easy. The Dark is a good board tho, but not the best 4 slot board IMO (which is the APEX, hands down).


----------



## ESRCJ

Kyozon said:


> Hello friends! New to this Intel thread, looking for an advice as to which motherboard to get for an i9 7980XE.
> 
> Most recently i found a sweet deal on an EVGA X299 Dark Motherboard. I have been reading around and it seems to be an adequate motherboard for this specific chip. In comparison to this deal, the next top-end Motherboard is the RVIE as the Apex is nowhere to be found here locally. The RVIE is going for $250+ than this EVGA X299 Dark that i was able to find.
> 
> Everything seems very good with the Dark, with the exception that i am limited to current 64GB of System RAM with the Dark. Which could be something that i am afraid about missing with the current Projects that i am working on. I have heard rumors about 32GB Modules by the end of this year, but so far can't actually count on it.
> 
> Knowing this current situation, what would you friends suggest?
> 
> Thanks in advance.


The Apex is available at some Fry's locations for about $390. The X299 Dark is a solid board. I honestly wish I got the Apex instead of the Extreme. Note that we are likely getting a 14nm++ refresh of Skylake-X along with a few higher core count parts before the end of the year, so we should see some new motherboards as well. The Dark is especially nice because of its stock VRM cooling solution. You could always throw a fan in for the VRM on the Apex or Extreme. A monoblock or dedicated VRM block are also options, although results with the monoblock have been mixed (worse CPU temps compared to a CPU-only block depending on your flow rate into the monoblock).


----------



## masterwishx

I have somehow power 330watt on cinebench15 and stress tests, 4.3ghz on vccin 1.85v vid 1.12v-1.18v so I have 100c very quickly,all power limits unlimited
7820x 4.3ghz 1.16v vccin 1.85v 
Asus mark1 cmr16gx4m2c3200c16 
2x8GB Asus gtx1080ti oc
H115i pro 
Will be glad for any help...


----------



## bmgjet

My 7900X does 580-600W on cinebench so 330W doesnt seem too bad.
1.32-1.36V 4.9-5.1ghz


----------



## masterwishx

So do you use custom wcs? And what Temps do you have on stress tests or cinebench15 with 600watts let's say??


----------



## bmgjet

masterwishx said:


> So do you use custom wcs? And what Temps do you have on stress tests or cinebench15 with 600watts let's say??


Full loop. 1X 360 and 1X 480 radiator.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=206576&thumb=1


----------



## cookiesowns

Just finished delidding the CPU.... Did conductonaut with the rockit 99. scraped off silicon on both IHS and the substrate and main chip. Conformal coated all around the caps/resistors Used a bit of the gel superglue on the 8 corners and all is good. Swapped to a bitspower EL-X X299 block from the Supremacy EVO. Seems to have dropped load temps about 10-15C depending on the workload.

Was able to Cinebench 4.7 @ 1.230V on all 18 cores running 3467Mhz 64GB. Forgot to take a SS since it was on my bench OS.

Decided to just leave offset at a -0.015 and running 4.6 at stock VID.. seems fine. AVX at -4 and avx512 at -8

68C Max at 350W or so running AVX2 X265 overkillx4 4K VID ranging from 1.135V to 1.22V 4.6 max clock 4.2 AVX2


----------



## Kana Chan

Are you saying the delid gave you 10-15C drop or are you saying the waterblock change gave it that? Or combination of both?


----------



## cookiesowns

Kana Chan said:


> Are you saying the delid gave you 10-15C drop or are you saying the waterblock change gave it that? Or combination of both?


Combination of both. Possibly more. I doubt the bitspower is significantly better than the EK. 

I noticed my chip seemed to have a decent layer of TIM and the silicon layer was quite minimal to some other processors I’ve seen. Maybe intel refined later batches.


----------



## ThrashZone

Kana Chan said:


> Are you saying the delid gave you 10-15C drop or are you saying the waterblock change gave it that? Or combination of both?


Hi,
Just delid alone should usually give a 20c or lower depending on the chips silicon lottery on skylake-x temps.
Water blocks... will help maintain a temp
Flip of a coin how temp spikes go on any water block or cooling system though


----------



## fireedo

hi, 
long time not visit this thread
I have a question, there's a sale in my country but I have to choose between an i9 7900x or a motherboard Asus Maximus VI Apex, I already have x299 system as on my system information below. (7820x and Asus x299 Strix-E Gaming)
thankyou in advance


----------



## Jpmboy

fireedo said:


> hi,
> long time not visit this thread
> I have a question, there's a sale in my country but I have to choose between an i9 7900x or a motherboard Asus Maximus VI Apex, I already have x299 system as on my system information below. (7820x and Asus x299 Strix-E Gaming)
> thankyou in advance


what is your question? ... get the 7900x unless you think the Strix is holding your 7820x back. if this is a straight gaming rig, look for a sale on video cards.


----------



## nycgtr

cookiesowns said:


> Combination of both. Possibly more. I doubt the bitspower is significantly better than the EK.
> 
> I noticed my chip seemed to have a decent layer of TIM and the silicon layer was quite minimal to some other processors I’ve seen. Maybe intel refined later batches.


It is much better at holding core temps closer than the EK and its couple deg drop. I had the evo, and the ek and bitspower monoblock before I swapped to the bitspower elx

On crappy aio and a crappy old version of the ultra gaming with a 7900x I recently copped for giggles. Never kept an eye on 7900x bins. This worthy of delidding and going for more? Or is this just avg. AVX 3/5. Passes XTU for about an hr at 1.24 just fine but I find for prime and cb i need 1.25


----------



## fireedo

Jpmboy said:


> what is your question? ... get the 7900x unless you think the Strix is holding your 7820x back. if this is a straight gaming rig, look for a sale on video cards.


I'm sorry for my incomplete post but you are right I was asking about which one to choose between processor or motherboard 
Thankyou

So, do you think 7900x will better performance then 7820x in gaming? or are you suggesting that I should do SLI with my 1080Ti ?


----------



## nycgtr

fireedo said:


> I'm sorry for my incomplete post but you are right I was asking about which one to choose between processor or motherboard
> Thankyou
> 
> So, do you think 7900x will better performance then 7820x in gaming? or are you suggesting that I should do SLI with my 1080Ti ?


I don't get the market for the 7820x tbh with you. For sli I don't see why anyone would want 8x/8x either with current gpus. A 7820x is worse than a 8700k for gaming. So i am confused why you would buy x299 for gaming. I could see the justification if it was a higher pcie lane count cpu so you could pull double duty with 1 machine work/play.


----------



## fireedo

nycgtr said:


> I don't get the market for the 7820x tbh with you. For sli I don't see why anyone would want 8x/8x either with current gpus. A 7820x is worse than a 8700k for gaming. So i am confused why you would buy x299 for gaming. I could see the justification if it was a higher pcie lane count cpu so you could pull double duty with 1 machine work/play.


Well, I do know x299 not great for gaming, but this is the system I want to use since my other system which is a z370 based with a 8086K cpu occupied by my daughter and my son. Lol ...
So I'm back using x299 which primary for my work but now I need this x299 based system to able and perform good at gaming too.
So should I OC whatever 7820x can max or get 7900x to compete with my 8086K (running at 5.3Ghz)? 
Right now my 7820x running at 4.9Ghz, very close to 8086K when run at 5.2Ghz 
Will I can get better performance with 7900x lets say OC'ed to 4.7Ghz vs my 7820x at 4.9Ghz ?

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk


----------



## Nikos4Life

Hi there, 

I've trying to find some info about X299's CPU refresh around the forum but I did not find anything regarding Intel Bay Trail. 

Is there any rumors about it? 

Regards,
Nikos


----------



## Jpmboy

fireedo said:


> I'm sorry for my incomplete post but you are right I was asking about which one to choose between processor or motherboard
> Thankyou
> 
> So, do you think 7900x will better performance then 7820x in gaming? or are you suggesting that I should do SLI with my 1080Ti ?



if your 7820 has a decent OC, of course a second 1080Ti would give a much better improvement in games (well... sli opt games) than a 7900x upgrade. No question. x8/x8 on the PCIE slots will not get close to saturation at 4K or below, and even then, a 7900x with a single card will be easily outperformed by a 7820x with SLI 1080Tis. Hands down.
However, if you do more than game on the rig, and will actually use the extra cores (tho, going from 8 to 10 cores is nominal), look for bargains on the higher core count CPUs.
Depending on the OC a good 7820 will not game any weaker than a 7900... neither are all that good at it.


----------



## fireedo

Jpmboy said:


> if your 7820 has a decent OC, of course a second 1080Ti would give a much better improvement in games (well... sli opt games) than a 7900x upgrade. No question. x8/x8 on the PCIE slots will not get close to saturation at 4K or below, and even then, a 7900x with a single card will be easily outperformed by a 7820x with SLI 1080Tis. Hands down.
> However, if you do more than game on the rig, and will actually use the extra cores (tho, going from 8 to 10 cores is nominal), look for bargains on the higher core count CPUs.
> Depending on the OC a good 7820 will not game any weaker than a 7900... neither are all that good at it.


really appreciate your complete reply, thankyou
my 7820x can OC at 4.9Ghz without any AVX offset using 1.335v, temps are nice, but for 5.0Ghz I have to use AVX -3 AVX512 -5 using 1.370v so 4.9Ghz is my sweetspot.
about SLI, just now I have read that next month Nvidia GTX 1180 will be released so I will wait for that.


----------



## bmgjet

Stay away from SLI, Its just gotten worse and worse each generation.
Your best to wait for the next cards to come out. But since you already have a 1080ti dont bother with the 1180 since its a milking product and will drop 40% in price once the 1180ti comes out a few months later.
Just enjoy what you have now since there will be less then 1fps difference changing CPU since thats a decent overclock.


----------



## fireedo

bmgjet said:


> Stay away from SLI, Its just gotten worse and worse each generation.
> Your best to wait for the next cards to come out. But since you already have a 1080ti dont bother with the 1180 since its a milking product and will drop 40% in price once the 1180ti comes out a few months later.
> Just enjoy what you have now since there will be less then 1fps difference changing CPU since thats a decent overclock.


I think for now my 7820x will be obsolete fast then I expected since rumour about i9 9900K is getting more real...dunno what intel strategy about their x299 line up


----------



## Nizzen

fireedo said:


> I think for now my 7820x will be obsolete fast then I expected since rumour about i9 9900K is getting more real...dunno what intel strategy about their x299 line up


There is coming an refresh to x299, like x99 haswell-e ->broadwell-e. We just have to wait and see


----------



## PWn3R

Hi - I have a 7980XE @ 4.6Ghz on all cores @ 1.185v. I have NOT delidded this chip, and I have no plans to do so currently. However, this chip is not displaying which cores are the "Turbo Max" cores in BIOS or in Windows using the Intel utility. How can I figure out which cores are the Turbo Max ones? Do I need to remove the OC and then turn on turbo in BIOS and boot to Windows? 

What I would like to do is set all the cores to 4.6 except the turbo max ones and try to go for ~5Ghz on those, but I don't know which ones are which.

I am on an ASRock Taichi XE on the 1.40 BIOS.


----------



## bmgjet

Intel Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0 app will have them listed in order in the core list from best to worse.
Or if you watch the voltages if your using offset voltage the best cores will have the least ammount of voltage.


----------



## PWn3R

bmgjet said:


> Intel Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0 app will have them listed in order in the core list from best to worse.
> Or if you watch the voltages if your using offset voltage the best cores will have the least ammount of voltage.


Ah, OK, the screenshot that I had seen of the Intel App had * next to the TBM cores. I wasn't seeing that, so I wasn't sure what cores were the TBM ones. I'll try boosting those up to see what I can do. Thanks again!


----------



## bmgjet

Mine doesnt have * next to them.
With 1.36V set in bios.

Core 4 does 5.1ghz
Core 3,9,2 does 5ghz
Core 6,8,1,7 does 4.9ghz
Core 0 and 5 does 4.85ghz


----------



## Radox-0

PWn3R said:


> Hi - I have a 7980XE @ 4.6Ghz on all cores @ 1.185v. I have NOT delidded this chip, and I have no plans to do so currently. However, this chip is not displaying which cores are the "Turbo Max" cores in BIOS or in Windows using the Intel utility. How can I figure out which cores are the Turbo Max ones? Do I need to remove the OC and then turn on turbo in BIOS and boot to Windows?
> 
> What I would like to do is set all the cores to 4.6 except the turbo max ones and try to go for ~5Ghz on those, but I don't know which ones are which.
> 
> I am on an ASRock Taichi XE on the 1.40 BIOS.



Sounds like what I have done, but delidded. As mentioned the list of cores shows best to worst, but similarly I left voltages on auto initially and monitored how each core behaved under load to see what they pulled. Made slightly easier with the Rampage board as it has the 2 best cores highlighted. For my daily load in turn have tuned in 1.22v for 4.9 GHz on 6 cores and 1.18v for remaining 12 cores at 4.6 GHz (will fall over in heavy stress tests though, but fine for me atm)


----------



## PWn3R

bmgjet said:


> Mine doesnt have * next to them.
> With 1.36V set in bios.
> 
> Core 4 does 5.1ghz
> Core 3,9,2 does 5ghz
> Core 6,8,1,7 does 4.9ghz
> Core 0 and 5 does 4.85ghz


Do you mind sharing what voltages you are getting those at? I can do 1.185 for ALL cores 4.6Ghz and 1.225 wasn't enough for 4.7 on all cores. I saw temps getting high before the lockup in CB while testing (mid 80s). I am running a 1st gen XPSC Raystorm with the upgraded mounting kit from the v3. I'm going to mess with the TBM cores for sure and see if I can get those close to 5 without overheating. I use this machine for gaming alot, streaming and I run a VM for Android ROM development as well. My main game is WoW, so IPC > All even with the new DX12 in the BFA prepatch, I didn't see much impact as far as multi-threading from the game, and the nvidia drivers are not optimized for it either yet.


----------



## Radox-0

PWn3R said:


> Do you mind sharing what voltages you are getting those at? I can do 1.185 for ALL cores 4.6Ghz and 1.225 wasn't enough for 4.7 on all cores. I saw temps getting high before the lockup in CB while testing (mid 80s). I am running a 1st gen XPSC Raystorm with the upgraded mounting kit from the v3. I'm going to mess with the TBM cores for sure and see if I can get those close to 5 without overheating. I use this machine for gaming alot, streaming and I run a VM for Android ROM development as well. My main game is WoW, so IPC > All even with the new DX12 in the BFA prepatch, I didn't see much impact as far as multi-threading from the game, and the nvidia drivers are not optimized for it either yet.


Pretty sure he wrote it in the first line, 1.36v  Assume at those voltages those are what said cores can achieve.


----------



## Jpmboy

PWn3R said:


> Do you mind sharing what voltages you are getting those at? *I can do 1.185 for ALL cores 4.6Ghz and 1.225 wasn't enough for 4.7 on all cores*. I saw temps getting high before the lockup in CB while testing (mid 80s). I am running a 1st gen XPSC Raystorm with the upgraded mounting kit from the v3. I'm going to mess with the TBM cores for sure and see if I can get those close to 5 without overheating. I use this machine for gaming alot, streaming and I run a VM for Android ROM development as well. My main game is WoW, so IPC > All even with the new DX12 in the BFA prepatch, I didn't see much impact as far as multi-threading from the game, and the nvidia drivers are not optimized for it either yet.


 Assuming you have a capable power supply and MB, I think this is an unreasonable expectation... tho the 7980XE (and all HCC cpus for that matter) seems to have an inflection point in the mV/Hz curve in this range, the general rule of thumb is that "at the sweetspot" or linear portion of the curve, most CPUs look for 10mV per 100MHz per core... which on a 7980XE is ~ 180mV per multiplier increase for the same stability seen at the lower multiplier. That said the 7980XE appears to require less than 10mV up to a point. Most times this is the result of thermal management in the microenvironment - which delidding can help. Use the 2 favored cores for the first jump, then see if the other cores can run at the same voltage. Assuming the 4.6 at 1.18V is _actually _stable, 4.7 could be as low as 1.225V.
Do a per-core OC and spin up the favored cores (should be ID'd in bios with an asterisk in the per specific core listing).


----------



## bmgjet

My method of overclocking was 1 core at a time and 30mins prime. Kept everything nice and cool for stress testing but would take a really long time on the 18 core. Wasnt so bad with my 10 core managed to find my stable overclock over 2 nights.

Then once I found the max for each core seperatly I put them all on to there max overclock. Prime got to hot after 5mins. Real bench managed to do a 15min pass with cores in the mid 90s and VRM touching 100C with a 7c air temp. I just slapped AVX offsets to -4 and -9 for 512 since I dont use AVX for anything.


Normal every day use, encoding, cinebench, gaming ect. Never gets over 80c on the cores. VRM still gets up to 90s with a fan on it directly.
Iv delidded with LM on both sides of IHS.


----------



## PWn3R

I am running a 480MM radiator setup with d5 pump. The only thing in the loop is the CPU. The GPU is running on air cooling. I am using this power supply: Seasonic Flagship PRIME SERIES SSR-1200PD 1200W PLATINUM. I upgraded to that less than a month ago from an almost 11 year old Corsair semi modular 1KW PSU.

I think 1.225 is CLOSE to stable 4.7Ghz on all cores, and 4.6 has been rock solid for almost 2 months, including hours of 100% load compression, video encoding, and many many many cinebench tests. The temps on 1.185v stay around high 50s to low 60s after stabilizing. I suspect that it would be low 80s after stabilizing around 2.230 volts or so. I don't think I want it going that high though 24/7.

I had been running my 4770k and 4790k without an IHS with the Raystorm, but I haven't delidded the 7980xe yet. If I do that I'm going to need to get a tool as I'm not willing to risk had razorblading this 7980xe.


----------



## ocvn

PWn3R said:


> I am running a 480MM radiator setup with d5 pump. The only thing in the loop is the CPU. The GPU is running on air cooling. I am using this power supply: Seasonic Flagship PRIME SERIES SSR-1200PD 1200W PLATINUM. I upgraded to that less than a month ago from an almost 11 year old Corsair semi modular 1KW PSU.
> 
> I think 1.225 is CLOSE to stable 4.7Ghz on all cores, and 4.6 has been rock solid for almost 2 months, including hours of 100% load compression, video encoding, and many many many cinebench tests. The temps on 1.185v stay around high 50s to low 60s after stabilizing. I suspect that it would be low 80s after stabilizing around 2.230 volts or so. I don't think I want it going that high though 24/7.
> 
> I had been running my 4770k and 4790k without an IHS with the Raystorm, but I haven't delidded the 7980xe yet. If I do that I'm going to need to get a tool as I'm not willing to risk had razorblading this 7980xe.


try realbench 2.43 (non AVX realbench) 30 mins maximum your ram to see your core temp/ vrm temp and stability (30 mins) in 4.6 1st and test 4.7. hwinfo is good tool to check all temps.


----------



## PWn3R

ocvn said:


> try realbench 2.43 (non AVX realbench) 30 mins maximum your ram to see your core temp/ vrm temp and stability (30 mins) in 4.6 1st and test 4.7. hwinfo is good tool to check all temps.


None of the software I have tried shows VRM temps on the Taichi XE. The heatsinks never got above about 110 or so running Aida64 for 30 minute spans during original testing.


----------



## Jpmboy

PWn3R said:


> I am running a 480MM radiator setup with d5 pump. The only thing in the loop is the CPU. The GPU is running on air cooling. I am using this power supply: Seasonic Flagship PRIME SERIES SSR-1200PD 1200W PLATINUM. I upgraded to that less than a month ago from an almost 11 year old Corsair semi modular 1KW PSU.
> 
> I think 1.225 is CLOSE to stable 4.7Ghz on all cores, and 4.6 has been rock solid for almost 2 months, including hours of 100% load compression, video encoding, and many many many cinebench tests. The temps on 1.185v stay around high 50s to low 60s after stabilizing. I suspect that it would be low 80s after stabilizing around 2.230 volts or so. I don't think I want it going that high though 24/7.
> 
> I had been running my 4770k and 4790k without an IHS with the Raystorm, but I haven't delidded the 7980xe yet. If I do that I'm going to need to get a tool as I'm not willing to risk had razorblading this 7980xe.



a 7980xe running 4.6 as a daily OC is very good. Just keep it there. What you can do is set a per core oc so that (best with win 10) low core demand loads run at 4.7 with only those cores getting the higher vcore (set in bios). Here's some guidance (based on the ASUS Apex)


----------



## ocvn

PWn3R said:


> None of the software I have tried shows VRM temps on the Taichi XE. The heatsinks never got above about 110 or so running Aida64 for 30 minute spans during original testing.


as my exp with 7980xe, if you get stable 4.6 1.185V, 1.22 or 1.23V is stable voltage for 47. try realbench i mentioned in previous post to see you get instability detected or not? if this pass raise to 47 with 1.23V and retest again. you can disable luxmark to test cpu alone.


----------



## PWn3R

I tried 1.25v for the two TBM cores and can't get them to do 47. Disappointing, but hey, 4.6 on all of them is pretty damned good.

Edit: I tried to get adaptive working earlier. Never saw any of the voltages hit even 1.24 with HWinfo running the whole time, but now I can't get 4.6 stable using cinebench..... *** And that's at 1.210

What happened!!!???????!!!

Edit2: I was able to get it to be stable at 1.212v in Cinebench. Obviously something degraded my CPU at voltages that should NOT have hurt it. I really don't understand. This makes ZERO sense.


----------



## ocvn

PWn3R said:


> I tried 1.25v for the two TBM cores and can't get them to do 47. Disappointing, but hey, 4.6 on all of them is pretty damned good.
> 
> Edit: I tried to get adaptive working earlier. Never saw any of the voltages hit even 1.24 with HWinfo running the whole time, but now I can't get 4.6 stable using cinebench..... *** And that's at 1.210
> 
> What happened!!!???????!!!
> 
> Edit2: I was able to get it to be stable at 1.212v in Cinebench. Obviously something degraded my CPU at voltages that should NOT have hurt it. I really don't understand. This makes ZERO sense.


your 1.185V before is not stable voltage. try 4.5GHz 1st. again cb15 is NOT indicate stable voltage (from cb15 to realbench 8 hours i measure the voltage need to increase voltage 30-50mv)


----------



## PWn3R

ocvn said:


> your 1.185V before is not stable voltage. try 4.5GHz 1st. again cb15 is NOT indicate stable voltage (from cb15 to realbench 8 hours i measure the voltage need to increase voltage 30-50mv)


The machine ran Aida64 for 8 hours at that voltage previously and has encoded several TB of video in premier. I also used 7zip to compress hundreds of GB of files as well. All of those loaded the CPU to 100% for as much as 7 hours at a time. I suppose I could've just got lucky for that long but I also had probably completed more than 50 CB runs as well at that voltage.

Could the fact that it was bumping most of the cores to about 1.22 - 1.235v on adaptive really caused degredation in a couple of hours?

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## ocvn

PWn3R said:


> The machine ran Aida64 for 8 hours at that voltage previously and has encoded several TB of video in premier. I also used 7zip to compress hundreds of GB of files as well. All of those loaded the CPU to 100% for as much as 7 hours at a time. I suppose I could've just got lucky for that long but I also had probably completed more than 50 CB runs as well at that voltage.
> 
> Could the fact that it was bumping most of the cores to about 1.22 - 1.235v on adaptive really caused degredation in a couple of hours?
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


no, check this thread, a lot of people run more than 1.2V per core and they still work good


----------



## PWn3R

ocvn said:


> no, check this thread, a lot of people run more than 1.2V per core and they still work good


That was what I saw when I was doing research, that's why I'm thoroughly confused as to what happened necessitating the need to raise the voltage by about .030. I can still cool that, even with the stock TIM, but temps bump low 90s before the drop into the 80s under full load.

Edit: Should I just put it back on adaptive and lower the base voltage a bit and let it do it's thing? I cut power usage when not juiced to the max on load significantly. I'm just concerned about not killing this thing.


----------



## Jpmboy

PWn3R said:


> The machine ran Aida64 for 8 hours at that voltage previously and has encoded several TB of video in premier. I also used 7zip to compress hundreds of GB of files as well. All of those loaded the CPU to 100% for as much as 7 hours at a time. I suppose I could've just got lucky for that long but I also had probably completed more than 50 CB runs as well at that voltage.
> 
> *Could the fact that it was bumping most of the cores to about 1.22 - 1.235v on adaptive really caused degredation in a couple of hours?*
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk



No. (period). 
you are tuning and 18 core cpu (with cache/ring/mesh... and ram) in play. This ain't a 4 core desktop. There are several voltage rails to adjust: vcore, vccin, vcache, vsa, vccio... LLC, and multiplier offsets.
Forget about R15, and daily workoads (encodes and the like, including AID64) as a measure of stability. Stick with realbench to get a decent OC foundation. As mentioned, lock down a solid 4.5 first.


----------



## PWn3R

Jpmboy said:


> No. (period).
> you are tuning and 18 core cpu (with cache/ring/mesh... and ram) in play. This ain't a 4 core desktop. There are several voltage rails to adjust: vcore, vccin, vcache, vsa, vccio... LLC, and multiplier offsets.
> Forget about R15, and daily workoads (encodes and the like, including AID64) as a measure of stability. Stick with realbench to get a decent OC foundation. As mentioned, lock down a solid 4.5 first.


I made some more changes last night. I left realbench for about 9 hours over night with the following: Specific per Core settings:

Most cores set to 1.195v @ 46
The cores that used the same voltage under adaptive as the TurboMax cores set to 1.200v @ 47.

The system is still running normally this morning. I am going to do some more testing. Based on synthetic benchmarks, I saw almost no performance gain from 2.4Ghz mesh to 2.9Ghz. I was able to get 2.9Ghz mesh running at 1.15v the last time I tried it but I put it back to Auto because there was almost no performance gain. I didn't test gaming with that in place, but in CB it made a difference of about 40 points, and about 110 points on Timespy in the CPU test.

I saw other people reporting wildly higher gains from that, which is interesting to me. I'm going to keep tuning from here. Maybe I can get closer to 5Ghz on the TBM cores. I think for a non-delided chip, I'm not going to get 4.7 on all cores because I hit 90 on two cores over night as a max, averages were between 76 and 87 per core.


----------



## Jpmboy

PWn3R said:


> I made some more changes last night. I left realbench for about 9 hours over night with the following: Specific per Core settings:
> 
> Most cores set to 1.195v @ 46
> The cores that used the same voltage under adaptive as the TurboMax cores set to 1.200v @ 47.
> 
> The system is still running normally this morning. I am going to do some more testing. Based on synthetic benchmarks, I saw almost no performance gain from 2.4Ghz mesh to 2.9Ghz. I was able to get 2.9Ghz mesh running at 1.15v the last time I tried it but I put it back to Auto because there was almost no performance gain. I didn't test gaming with that in place, but in CB it made a difference of about 40 points, and about 110 points on Timespy in the CPU test.
> 
> I saw other people reporting wildly higher gains from that, which is interesting to me. I'm going to keep tuning from here. Maybe I can get closer to 5Ghz on the TBM cores. I think for a non-delided chip, I'm not going to get 4.7 on all cores because I hit 90 on two cores over night as a max, averages were between 76 and 87 per core.


 gains in cache/mesh clock scale best with high ram frequencies. here's some settings for 4000c16 ram which I've been running since the 7980XE launched (4x8GB, sticks are rated for 3600c15 - yeah, I combined 2 kits which is a no-no).


----------



## PWn3R

Jpmboy said:


> gains in cache/mesh clock scale best with high ram frequencies. here's some settings for 4000c16 ram which I've been running since the 7980XE launched (4x8GB, sticks are rated for 3600c15 - yeah, I combined 2 kits which is a no-no).


I've never messed that much with overclocking Ram. I have a 3000 megahertz kit that's running at 3000 megahertz. I believe it's C 16. Should I try pushing it up closer to 4000 megahertz? The last time I did anything with it was on my 4790k and it made almost no difference.

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## Jpmboy

whether or not the ram OC matters really depends on what you do with the rig. Above 2800 really is not going to be "felt" in games much, tho some games benefit quite a bit.
Rendering large images, 4K and 8K primary encodes (x265 and x264) will measure a benefit, but not great differences - tho 8K stuff can take hours and tuned ram will help... heck, the micron guys even wrote an article about the effect of one timing... FAW. 


You'll first want to know if the kit is samsung or hynix.. or micron (gd forbid). Open AID64 to the page shown below... if it shows no company, they are likely not Samsung (currently the best ram ICs)


----------



## wingman99

PWn3R said:


> I've never messed that much with overclocking Ram. I have a 3000 megahertz kit that's running at 3000 megahertz. I believe it's C 16. Should I try pushing it up closer to 4000 megahertz? The last time I did anything with it was on my 4790k and it made almost no difference.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


This is the only recent test I could find for Intel DDR4 memory scaling 2133 to 36000 ~5% nothing after 3600 speed Link: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews...Memory_Performance_Benchmark_Analysis/10.html


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> whether or not the ram OC matters really depends on what you do with the rig. Above 2800 really is not going to be "felt" in games much, tho some games benefit quite a bit.
> Rendering large images, 4K and 8K primary encodes (x265 and x264) will measure a benefit, but not great differences - tho 8K stuff can take hours and tuned ram will help... heck, the micron guys even wrote an article about the effect of one timing... FAW.
> 
> 
> You'll first want to know if the kit is samsung or hynix.. or micron (gd forbid). *Open AID64 to the page shown below*... if it shows no company, they are likely not Samsung (currently the best ram ICs)


Hi,
Yep confirmed my suspicions on my trident z C16's are indeed sk hynix :/
C14 set are samsung.


----------



## fireedo

well, sold my 7820x and asus strix-e gaming now waiting for my 7940x, Asus Ramapge VI Apex already in hand 
with "only" 32Gb of RAM will this setup enough for 1-2 VM machine running (linux guest) for compiling and encoding on windows?

Q : Do I need to delid this 7940x to get around 4.7 Ghz with custom loop using 2 D5 pump and 1x560 + 2x360 Radiator ?


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep confirmed my suspicions on my trident z C16's are indeed sk hynix :/
> C14 set are samsung.


yeah, the 3200c16s are hynix - still reasonably good sticks for a gaming rig. I recently put a 2x8GB 2400c14 "economy" Team kit - Sk Hynix - in a build ([email protected]) and was able to get them stable at 3066c16-18-18 with 1.45V. They have been running at that speed for months now... can't say it seems slow


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, the 3200c16s are hynix - still reasonably good sticks for a gaming rig. I recently put a 2x8GB 2400c14 "economy" Team kit - Sk Hynix - in a build ([email protected]) and was able to get them stable at 3066c16-18-18 with 1.45V. They have been running at that speed for months now... can't say it seems slow


Hi,
Yeah my first clue they were not samsung was because the C16's would not even allow my x99 to even post which isn't conclusive but very odd seeing the C14's did post on the x99 lol 
Keeping in mind x99 sabertooth 3200 isn't even in the neighborhood of being compatible if you read the qvl but none the less C14 samsung's works on it


----------



## idahosurge

Started a separate thread on this question 3 days ago and never got a response so I am going to ask in this thread hoping I get a response.

I can see on the main tab of SIV64X my ram timings, but I can not see on any of the tabs in SIV64X the memory frequency that my ram is running at.

I know this must be someplace so can anyone tell me where it is in SIV64X?


----------



## nycgtr

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, the 3200c16s are hynix - still reasonably good sticks for a gaming rig. I recently put a 2x8GB 2400c14 "economy" Team kit - Sk Hynix - in a build ([email protected]) and was able to get them stable at 3066c16-18-18 with 1.45V. They have been running at that speed for months now... can't say it seems slow


I got 3 sets of 3200 cl16s that are b die. They do exist but rare.


----------



## ThrashZone

nycgtr said:


> I got 3 sets of 3200 cl16s that are b die. They do exist but rare.


Hi,
Yeah I read there was a 50-50% chance of being samsung = I lost those odds


----------



## ThrashZone

idahosurge said:


> Started a separate thread on this question 3 days ago and never got a response so I am going to ask in this thread hoping I get a response.
> 
> I can see on the main tab of SIV64X my ram timings, but I can not see on any of the tabs in SIV64X the memory frequency that my ram is running at.
> 
> I know this must be someplace so can anyone tell me where it is in SIV64X?


Hi,
You can see the info using cpu-z memory tab or using hwinfo64 free along with a bunch of other goodies 

http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html


https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php


----------



## nycgtr

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I read there was a 50-50% chance of being samsung = I lost those odds


Well only time I've gotten them was on 16gb sticks. All 3 sets of mine were either 4x16 or 128 8x16. I know for corsair v4.31 is samsung but since gskill changed their naming convention it just luck with them at that point.


----------



## PWn3R

Jpmboy said:


> whether or not the ram OC matters really depends on what you do with the rig. Above 2800 really is not going to be "felt" in games much, tho some games benefit quite a bit.
> Rendering large images, 4K and 8K primary encodes (x265 and x264) will measure a benefit, but not great differences - tho 8K stuff can take hours and tuned ram will help... heck, the micron guys even wrote an article about the effect of one timing... FAW.
> 
> 
> You'll first want to know if the kit is samsung or hynix.. or micron (gd forbid). Open AID64 to the page shown below... if it shows no company, they are likely not Samsung (currently the best ram ICs)


RIP Me:


----------



## nycgtr

PWn3R said:


> RIP Me:


Corsairs are the easiest to tell. Just look at the version number on the heat spreader.


----------



## idahosurge

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> You can see the info using cpu-z memory tab or using hwinfo64 free along with a bunch of other goodies
> 
> http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html
> 
> 
> https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php


Thanks for the reply and I know about these, I just want to know if it is in SIV64X and if it is then where is it.


----------



## Jpmboy

idahosurge said:


> Started a separate thread on this question 3 days ago and never got a response so I am going to ask in this thread hoping I get a response.
> 
> I can see on the main tab of SIV64X my ram timings, but I can not see on any of the tabs in SIV64X the memory frequency that my ram is running at.
> 
> I know this must be someplace so can anyone tell me where it is in SIV64X?


it should be right on the main window right above the CPU Brand (red in mine below):


nycgtr said:


> I got 3 sets of 3200 cl16s that are b die. They do exist but rare.


I haven't seen any, just not lucky


nycgtr said:


> Well only time I've gotten them was on 16gb sticks. All 3 sets of mine were either 4x16 or 128 8x16. I know for corsair v4.31 is samsung but since gskill changed their naming convention it just luck with them at that point.


ahh, I have not bought (and kept) a 16BG sticks yet.


----------



## fireedo

finally I received my i9 cpu
this is an i9 7940x with Rampage VI Apex
so far this chip is a monster 14 cores / 28 Threads, this is the most cpu cores I have since I use computer (1992 with intel 386)...so I'm sorry for my excitement, lol

for now using cinebench couple of times and HWBot X265 benchmark using overkill mode I get 4.7 Ghz All core with offset voltage (+) 0.025v and Offset AVX -3 ; Offset AVX512 -5
AND because of this is the most expensive CPU I ever bought so for now I'm not try to delid this 
here my result with room ambient temp around 28-29c


----------



## idahosurge

Jpmboy said:


> it should be right on the main window right above the CPU Brand (red in mine below):


Found it, thanks!


----------



## Jpmboy

fireedo said:


> finally I received my i9 cpu
> this is an i9 7940x with Rampage VI Apex
> so far this chip is a monster 14 cores / 28 Threads, this is the most cpu cores I have since I use computer (1992 with intel 386)...so I'm sorry for my excitement, lol
> 
> for now using cinebench couple of times and HWBot X265 benchmark using overkill mode I get 4.7 Ghz All core with offset voltage (+) 0.025v and Offset AVX -3 ; Offset AVX512 -5
> AND because of this is the most expensive CPU I ever bought so for now I'm not try to delid this
> here my result with room ambient temp around 28-29c


Nice! Enjoy - it's good to be excited. these i9s are the most expensive desktop CPUs - ever. Fire it up


----------



## fireedo

Jpmboy said:


> Nice! Enjoy - it's good to be excited. these i9s are the most expensive desktop CPUs - ever. Fire it up


thankyou Jpmboy 

after lack of sleep last night, this morning I try to use manual voltage and 1.208v for 4.7 Ghz undelidded (with max temp recorded around 82-83c) passed 1 hour of realbench, 30 minutes of Prime95 (lol...in-place Large FFT is too hot for VRM's), HWBot x265 with overkill mode 4x (both 1080p and 4K), encoding using handbrake for 45 minutes, AIDA64 couple of benchmark test, intel XTU test and benchmark, so I guess I can say my OC is stable  

after delid I will targeting at least 4.8 Ghz below 1.25v or maybe if I'm lucky I can get 4.9 Ghz around 1.275v


----------



## Jpmboy

looks to me like you got a good one.


----------



## PWn3R

So I did some more playing and seem to be sitting stable (no voltage tuning done yet) at 4.9Ghz on 3 cores the other 15 at 4.6Ghz. The 4.9Ghz cores are running 1.25v right now. I tried 5Ghz at up to 1.275, but didn't think it wise to go higher. It wasn't stable enough to boot all the way to Windows at 5Ghz on the three cores, so I just backed it down. I know from what was recommended by Asus according to JayzTwoCents was 1.28max. Anyone else got any thoughts?


----------



## hdtvnut

I found a new 7980xe at a good price and have installed it on an Asrock OC Formula board. Got stable operation to 4.4/1.110v using a Corsair H115i, and decided to opt for better cooling. This last weekend, installed an HK4/EK d5+res/Nemesis 360gtx. Now appears stable at 4.6/1.160v at temp < 87 deg/avx -3/avx512 -5 for full load. Would like a de-lid, but never done one; since this cpu has both a high price and a more complex glue scheme, I'm thinking best to send it to SL. What say you?


----------



## Mysticial

PWn3R said:


> So I did some more playing and seem to be sitting stable (no voltage tuning done yet) at 4.9Ghz on 3 cores the other 15 at 4.6Ghz. The 4.9Ghz cores are running 1.25v right now. I tried 5Ghz at up to 1.275, but didn't think it wise to go higher. It wasn't stable enough to boot all the way to Windows at 5Ghz on the three cores, so I just backed it down. I know from what was recommended by Asus according to JayzTwoCents was 1.28max. Anyone else got any thoughts?


We're past the 1 year mark for Skylake X now. Here's my updated degradation report:

Unless otherwise stated, all core speeds refer to non-AVX.

7900X Retail: No signs of degradation.

*July 2017 - Now:* All cores 4.3 - 4.5 GHz with stock voltages, or below stock voltages. (1.29 is as high as it ever goes)

7940X ES: Possible AVX512 degradation

*November - December:* 4 cores @ 5.0 GHz with 1.4v. *Stability:* 5.050 GHz non-AVX prime-stable for 10 min. Remaining cores at 3.0 GHz with auto-voltage.
*January - May:* All cores @ 4.7 GHz with +0.030v offsets. 2 of the cores reach 1.365v. (*Stability:* 4.75 GHz non-AVX prime-stable for 10 min.)
*May - Now:* Dropped down to 4.6. Crashed about 3 or 4 times since January. No crashes since dropping to 4.6. 4.75 GHz remains non-AVX prime-stable for 10 min.
*January - July:* All cores AVX512 @ 3.7 GHz. (3.8 GHz y-cruncher AVX512 stable for 24 hours, 3.9 GHz -> soft error)
*July - Now:* All cores AVX512 @ 3.6 GHz due to soft error encountered during AVX512 workload.

7940X Retail: Likely degradation

*December - July:* 4 cores @ 4.9 GHz with 1.40 - 1.42v. *Stability:* 4.950 GHz non-AVX prime-stable for 1 hour. Remaining cores at 3.0 GHz with auto-voltage.
*July - Now:* Dropped to 4.8 GHz after crash under a non-stressful load that was formerly stable.

7980XE Retail: No signs of degradation

*December - Now:* 4 cores @ 4.8 GHz with 1.35 - 1.38v. *Stability:* 4.850 GHz non-AVX prime-stable for 1 hour. Remaining cores at 2.0 GHz with auto-voltage.


Vendor-built 6950X Retail: Likely degradation

*circa 2016? - June:* 8 cores @ 4.5 GHz with 1.440v. *Stability:* No crashes ever reported.
*June - Now:* Dropped down to 4.1 GHz. Sysadmin discovered that box wouldn't make it past boot anymore.


------


Based on this, I want to say that 1.4v is not healthy for 14nm(++). But given that both my 7900X and 7940X reach 1.29 - 1.33v on stock volts, those are probably safe.


----------



## bmgjet

Keep it under 1.35v and 90c and it should live out its full life.

In my digging for info when I was first doing my overclock, what I found was high leakage chips can use 1.35v on turbo so if you can keep it cool enough then you should be able to atleast get the full warranty period out of it if intel was willing to push that voltage.


----------



## Void-Ray

Hi everyone i have a question here, recently i bought a new set of mainboard+cpu+memory, and here is the specs:
Intel I7 7820X
Asus Rampage VI Extreme
G.skill TridentZ RGB 3200MHz 64GB
GTX 980 SLI
EVGA 1000W P2
also graphics and CPU are watercooled by custom cooling, 2 radiators one XSPC RX 360 and one XSPC AX 240, so i think they should be enough right?
now the biggest question for me is which program do i use to get the correct voltage and temp readings? i am overclocking the cpu to 4.4GHz for now.
CPU-Z is showing me some low core voltage like 1.016 under test, at the same time intel extreme utility is showing me around 1.160, also on mainboard the OLED livedash shows around 60c on cpu temp but again intel extreme utility is showing around 75, so is this normal and common? which one should i use actually?

Second question, as soon as i run FPU test in aida system crashes, complete black screen ASAP, here is what i did for OC.

XMP profile activated
44 multiplier sync all core
cpu core voltage offset mode
- 55
cpu load line in set to 7
cpu current capability set to 140%
also AVX amd AVX 512 set to -3

other settings are auto except the ram voltage which was set by XMP profile and their timings, so anyone has any guess here? like is it a bad chip? just a crappy chip that can't handle a bit of OC or do i need to change something?


also with this setup at this voltages, only cpu burn in test can hit around 80 and if i let some cpu intense rendering apps work, cpu can hit up to 93-95c for a second sometimes according to intel extreme utility, is that ok? or something is wrong? my cpu block is EK supremacy EVO btw with a D5 pump.


----------



## nycgtr

Void-Ray said:


> Hi everyone i have a question here, recently i bought a new set of mainboard+cpu+memory, and here is the specs:
> Intel I7 7820X
> Asus Rampage VI Extreme
> G.skill TridentZ RGB 3200MHz 64GB
> GTX 980 SLI
> EVGA 1000W P2
> also graphics and CPU are watercooled by custom cooling, 2 radiators one XSPC RX 360 and one XSPC AX 240, so i think they should be enough right?
> now the biggest question for me is which program do i use to get the correct voltage and temp readings? i am overclocking the cpu to 4.4GHz for now.
> CPU-Z is showing me some low core voltage like 1.016 under test, at the same time intel extreme utility is showing me around 1.160, also on mainboard the OLED livedash shows around 60c on cpu temp but again intel extreme utility is showing around 75, so is this normal and common? which one should i use actually?
> 
> Second question, as soon as i run FPU test in aida system crashes, complete black screen ASAP, here is what i did for OC.
> 
> XMP profile activated
> 44 multiplier sync all core
> cpu core voltage offset mode
> - 55
> cpu load line in set to 7
> cpu current capability set to 140%
> also AVX amd AVX 512 set to -3
> 
> other settings are auto except the ram voltage which was set by XMP profile and their timings, so anyone has any guess here? like is it a bad chip? just a crappy chip that can't handle a bit of OC or do i need to change something?
> 
> 
> also with this setup at this voltages, only cpu burn in test can hit around 80 and if i let some cpu intense rendering apps work, cpu can hit up to 93-95c for a second sometimes according to intel extreme utility, is that ok? or something is wrong? my cpu block is EK supremacy EVO btw with a D5 pump.



You should mention if your delided and .55 would instant shutdown if its +. off topic I think a 7900x would be a much better investment then that 7820x. 7820x is already quite unappealing when the 9900k drops its going to even look more outta place then it does now. You can get a 7900x new easily for 700 if you shop around. Not only that if your into sli 16x 16x on next gen or even current higher tier cards make quite a difference.


----------



## SirWaWa

does nb frequency matter? cpu-z reports 2700mhz
I have XMP enabled if that matters
is there a way to get this higher and how?


----------



## fireedo

Well, after delid accident with my 7940X, today my wife give me a surprise present 
She gives me an i9 7980XE !! 
(eventhough Threadripper 2 is soon to be released but for now this CPU is really a beast)

So...testing....overclocking begin
right now, I found all core 4.5 Ghz without any offset AVX with 1.225v is stable but too hot for me, it can reach 100c when benchmarking HWBot x265
so with 4.4Ghz with 1.135v I think is more "safe" for daily usage 

here pictures of my damaged 7940X (full of surprise it still working great but lost Quad channel suppport, I can only use triple channel, A1, B1 and D1 DIMMs) and my new 7980XE


----------



## tistou77

A friend to mount the "Direct Die Frame" and or it blocks the boot on CPU B1 or BSOD
Can it come from what?
He disassembled / reassembled several times

Thanks for him


----------



## nycgtr

fireedo said:


> Well, after delid accident with my 7940X, today my wife give me a surprise present
> She gives me an i9 7980XE !!
> (eventhough Threadripper 2 is soon to be released but for now this CPU is really a beast)
> 
> So...testing....overclocking begin
> right now, I found all core 4.5 Ghz without any offset AVX with 1.225v is stable but too hot for me, it can reach 100c when benchmarking HWBot x265
> so with 4.4Ghz with 1.135v I think is more "safe" for daily usage
> 
> here pictures of my damaged 7940X (full of surprise it still working great but lost Quad channel suppport, I can only use triple channel, A1, B1 and D1 DIMMs) and my new 7980XE


I believe every part of this post aside from wife giving you a 7980xe.


----------



## fireedo

nycgtr said:


> I believe every part of this post aside from wife giving you a 7980xe.


LoL, cant blame you, She know me, if I have trouble(s) with my PC than all at home will be at trouble too, I mean, my mood will be messed up  
so maybe she decide to give me this as a "cure" or as a prevention, maybe I'm too selfish, wierd but this is us


----------



## nycgtr

fireedo said:


> LoL, cant blame you, She know me, if I have trouble(s) with my PC than all at home will be at trouble too, I mean, my mood will be messed up
> so maybe she decide to give me this as a "cure" or as a prevention, maybe I'm too selfish, wierd but this is us


My wife knows that about me too. But I will have to buy it then have her complain about it. We should trade.

Btw I showed that post to my wife and her response was I qoute "if your mood is bad it will make mine worse and you will pay for it"


----------



## Void-Ray

nycgtr said:


> You should mention if your delided and .55 would instant shutdown if its +. off topic I think a 7900x would be a much better investment then that 7820x. 7820x is already quite unappealing when the 9900k drops its going to even look more outta place then it does now. You can get a 7900x new easily for 700 if you shop around. Not only that if your into sli 16x 16x on next gen or even current higher tier cards make quite a difference.


Hi, and no not delidded, and it's minus 55, -55, under pressure i get 1.159v for Vcore, and i already bought the chip and it's here, so not gonna change it to 7900x, as i already heard 7900x having more heat problem than 7820x, and the cheapest price available for me on 7900x was on amazon for 1000$, plus shipping, only two more cores weren't worth it for me, but my concern right now is about this 7820x, why am i getting instant restart with it? in other programs and tests it's rock solid stable but FPU? instant restart...


----------



## Barefooter

Mysticial said:


> We're past the 1 year mark for Skylake X now. Here's my updated degradation report:
> 
> Unless otherwise stated, all core speeds refer to non-AVX.
> 
> 7900X Retail: No signs of degradation.
> 
> *July 2017 - Now:* All cores 4.3 - 4.5 GHz with stock voltages, or below stock voltages. (1.29 is as high as it ever goes)
> 
> 7940X ES: Possible AVX512 degradation
> 
> *November - December:* 4 cores @ 5.0 GHz with 1.4v. *Stability:* 5.050 GHz non-AVX prime-stable for 10 min. Remaining cores at 3.0 GHz with auto-voltage.
> *January - May:* All cores @ 4.7 GHz with +0.030v offsets. 2 of the cores reach 1.365v. (*Stability:* 4.75 GHz non-AVX prime-stable for 10 min.)
> *May - Now:* Dropped down to 4.6. Crashed about 3 or 4 times since January. No crashes since dropping to 4.6. 4.75 GHz remains non-AVX prime-stable for 10 min.
> *January - July:* All cores AVX512 @ 3.7 GHz. (3.8 GHz y-cruncher AVX512 stable for 24 hours, 3.9 GHz -> soft error)
> *July - Now:* All cores AVX512 @ 3.6 GHz due to soft error encountered during AVX512 workload.
> 
> 7940X Retail: Likely degradation
> 
> *December - July:* 4 cores @ 4.9 GHz with 1.40 - 1.42v. *Stability:* 4.950 GHz non-AVX prime-stable for 1 hour. Remaining cores at 3.0 GHz with auto-voltage.
> *July - Now:* Dropped to 4.8 GHz after crash under a non-stressful load that was formerly stable.
> 
> 7980XE Retail: No signs of degradation
> 
> *December - Now:* 4 cores @ 4.8 GHz with 1.35 - 1.38v. *Stability:* 4.850 GHz non-AVX prime-stable for 1 hour. Remaining cores at 2.0 GHz with auto-voltage.
> 
> 
> Vendor-built 6950X Retail: Likely degradation
> 
> *circa 2016? - June:* 8 cores @ 4.5 GHz with 1.440v. *Stability:* No crashes ever reported.
> *June - Now:* Dropped down to 4.1 GHz. Sysadmin discovered that box wouldn't make it past boot anymore.
> 
> 
> ------
> 
> 
> Based on this, I want to say that 1.4v is not healthy for 14nm(++). But given that both my 7900X and 7940X reach 1.29 - 1.33v on stock volts, those are probably safe.


Great info! Thanks for sharing... now if only that Rep button worked


----------



## nycgtr

Void-Ray said:


> Hi, and no not delidded, and it's minus 55, -55, under pressure i get 1.159v for Vcore, and i already bought the chip and it's here, so not gonna change it to 7900x, as i already heard 7900x having more heat problem than 7820x, and the cheapest price available for me on 7900x was on amazon for 1000$, plus shipping, only two more cores weren't worth it for me, but my concern right now is about this 7820x, why am i getting instant restart with it? in other programs and tests it's rock solid stable but FPU? instant restart...


I have the 7820x and 7900x and no the 7900x does not have heat issues in comparison. In terms of it shutting down on fpu loads, is usually tripping power restrictions.


----------



## Void-Ray

nycgtr said:


> I have the 7820x and 7900x and no the 7900x does not have heat issues in comparison. In terms of it shutting down on fpu loads, is usually tripping power restrictions.


so does it mean it needs more Vcore? are my temps normal you think? it's in my previous post on previous page, and what app you guys use to see temps and voltages? my cpu-z and intel extreme are giving me two different voltages on Vcore, and mainboard OLED livedash and intel extreme also are giving me different temp readings, cpu-z and mainboard OLED livedash are giving me much lower readings, but i'm not sure which one is correct.


----------



## ThrashZone

nycgtr said:


> Corsairs are the easiest to tell. Just look at the version number on the heat spreader.


Hi, @nycgtr
Ver. 3.21 what would that say ?


----------



## superV

so i reached my goal finally,better than expected.(i know it's with HT off,but that's because of my needs)
tho i lost 1 ram slot,won't work no matter what,re seated the cpu 4/5 times and still nothing,so i'm on dual channel.what performance loss i have going from quad to dual with this cpu?
it was very hard to make the die stick out from the frame to make contact with the water block,i had to sand internally the frame and it worked.
temps look very good at 5.1ghz 1.39v 1.95v input with 360 60 thick rad.
later private bonus story for @Jpmboy


----------



## fireedo

superV said:


> so i reached my goal finally,better than expected.(i know it's with HT off,but that's because of my needs)
> tho i lost 1 ram slot,won't work no matter what,re seated the cpu 4/5 times and still nothing,so i'm on dual channel.what performance loss i have going from quad to dual with this cpu?
> it was very hard to make the die stick out from the frame to make contact with the water block,i had to sand internally the frame and it worked.
> temps look very good at 5.1ghz 1.39v 1.95v input with 360 60 thick rad.
> later private bonus story for @Jpmboy


hi,
I'm sorry but your MT score in the CB15 is too low if you say that your 7980XE running at 5.1 Ghz
mine, at 4.4Ghz CB15 around 4300ish


----------



## Jpmboy

Void-Ray said:


> so does it mean it needs more Vcore? are my temps normal you think? it's in my previous post on previous page, and what app you guys use to see temps and voltages? my cpu-z and intel extreme are giving me two different voltages on Vcore, and mainboard OLED livedash and intel extreme also are giving me different temp readings, cpu-z and mainboard OLED livedash are giving me much lower readings, but i'm not sure which one is correct.


 the mainboa4rd OLED displays what's called "T2 CPUTIN". It is not the cpu core temperatures. It is a on-board, not on-die T-sensor. Use this for fan control or something. It reads 10+ C cooler than cores and 20+C cooler than package). Download AID64 and buy a legit version or SIV64 (free). SIV64 works fine and shows all temps and voltages reported to the OS (including the board's T-sensor headers. (see below). It's a bit complex, but worth learning.


If the rig is shuitting down under AVX loads, it is either tripping the bios power limits (easy to do if left on auto), or is triggering an OCP in your PSU. Ttry setting the bios powerlimits higher - if you do not know what these are, post back, cause you need to know these when overclocking (for results and safety). No increasing vcore may not be the issue and increasing vcore could make it OCP sooner.



superV said:


> so i reached my goal finally,better than expected.(i know it's with HT off,but that's because of my needs)
> tho i lost 1 ram slot,won't work no matter what,re seated the cpu 4/5 times and still nothing,so i'm on dual channel.what performance loss i have going from quad to dual with this cpu?
> it was very hard to make the die stick out from the frame to make contact with the water block,i had to sand internally the frame and it worked.
> temps look very good at 5.1ghz 1.39v 1.95v input with 360 60 thick rad.
> later private bonus story for @*Jpmboy*


... waiting. :cheers:




fireedo said:


> hi,
> I'm sorry but your MT score in the CB15 is too low if you say that your 7980XE running at 5.1 Ghz
> mine, at 4.4Ghz CB15 around 4300ish


he has HT (hyperthreading) disabled, that's why it appears lower.


----------



## Jpmboy

Mysticial said:


> We're past the 1 year mark for Skylake X now. Here's my updated degradation report:
> 
> Unless otherwise stated, all core speeds refer to non-AVX.
> 
> 7900X Retail: No signs of degradation.
> 
> *July 2017 - Now:* All cores 4.3 - 4.5 GHz with stock voltages, or below stock voltages. (1.29 is as high as it ever goes
> 
> 7940X ES: Possible AVX512 degradation
> 
> *November - December:* 4 cores @ 5.0 GHz with 1.4v. *Stability:* 5.050 GHz non-AVX prime-stable for 10 min. Remaining cores at 3.0 GHz with auto-voltage.
> *January - May:* All cores @ 4.7 GHz with +0.030v offsets. 2 of the cores reach 1.365v. (*Stability:* 4.75 GHz non-AVX prime-stable for 10 min.)
> *May - Now:* Dropped down to 4.6. Crashed about 3 or 4 times since January. No crashes since dropping to 4.6. 4.75 GHz remains non-AVX prime-stable for 10 min.
> *January - July:* All cores AVX512 @ 3.7 GHz. (3.8 GHz y-cruncher AVX512 stable for 24 hours, 3.9 GHz -> soft error)
> *July - Now:* All cores AVX512 @ 3.6 GHz due to soft error encountered during AVX512 workload.
> 
> 7940X Retail: Likely degradation
> 
> *December - July:* 4 cores @ 4.9 GHz with 1.40 - 1.42v. *Stability:* 4.950 GHz non-AVX prime-stable for 1 hour. Remaining cores at 3.0 GHz with auto-voltage.
> *July - Now:* Dropped to 4.8 GHz after crash under a non-stressful load that was formerly stable.
> 
> 7980XE Retail: No signs of degradation
> 
> *December - Now:* 4 cores @ 4.8 GHz with 1.35 - 1.38v. *Stability:* 4.850 GHz non-AVX prime-stable for 1 hour. Remaining cores at 2.0 GHz with auto-voltage.
> 
> 
> Vendor-built 6950X Retail: Likely degradation
> 
> *circa 2016? - June:* 8 cores @ 4.5 GHz with 1.440v. *Stability:* No crashes ever reported.
> *June - Now:* Dropped down to 4.1 GHz. Sysadmin discovered that box wouldn't make it past boot anymore.
> 
> 
> ------
> 
> 
> Based on this, I want to say that 1.4v is not healthy for 14nm(++). But given that both my 7900X and 7940X reach 1.29 - 1.33v on stock volts, those are probably safe.



Hey bud, we'd love to have a followup on the 7980XE @ 1.35-1.38V. I've been keeping mine (delid) at or below 1.3V for it's day job... but with "occasional excursions" to the 1.5V range.


----------



## Kana Chan

Mysticial said:


> Based on this, I want to say that 1.4v is not healthy for 14nm(++). But given that both my 7900X and 7940X reach 1.29 - 1.33v on stock volts, those are probably safe.


Do you have the average ambient temperature in each month + core temp somewhere?


----------



## fireedo

Jpmboy said:


> he has HT (hyperthreading) disabled, that's why it appears lower.



oops didnt know that

jpmboy, do you use offset or adaptive voltage? for now I using manual voltage, would you mind to share your BIOS setup for 7980XE. Thankyou


----------



## Mysticial

Kana Chan said:


> Do you have the average ambient temperature in each month + core temp somewhere?



I don't know since most of these boxes ran in a server farm which I don't have physical access to. And it wouldn't be relevant since most of these were not all-core overclocks. They had 4 cores overclocked and the remaining cores underclocked to keep the chip from melting. All under CLCs - no fancy cooling. Custom water is disallowed anyway.


----------



## Jpmboy

fireedo said:


> oops didnt know that
> 
> jpmboy, do you use offset or adaptive voltage? for now I using manual voltage, would you mind to share your BIOS setup for 7980XE. Thankyou



Adaptive, but "per core". Attached txt file of all settings, just to get an idea on "how to". Voltages will vary. :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

Mysticial said:


> I don't know since most of these boxes ran in a server farm which I don't have physical access to. And it wouldn't be relevant since most of these were not all-core overclocks. They had 4 cores overclocked and the remaining cores underclocked to keep the chip from melting. All under CLCs - no fancy cooling. *Custom water is disallowed anyway*.



wut? (click the pic  )


----------



## aerotracks

Metal prep day for 7940X and then I started fooling around with EVGA Dark and Corsair B-Die 

     

I never managed anything above 3800 memtest stable on Xpower, Apex and OCF. So even though 7940X IMC can't do DDR4-4200 Winboot which has been possible for me on these other boards with different CPUs, stable clocks on the Dark look pretty nice. 2nds and some 3rds are already tight, will try C16-17-17 tomorrow. :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

aerotracks said:


> Metal prep day for 7940X and then I started fooling around with EVGA Dark and Corsair B-Die
> 
> 
> 
> I never managed anything above 3800 memtest stable on Xpower, Apex and OCF. So even though 7940X IMC can't do DDR4-4200 Winboot which has been possible for me on these other boards with different CPUs, stable clocks on the Dark look pretty nice. 2nds and some 3rds are already tight, will try C16-17-17 tomorrow. :thumb:



looks real good Buddy, can you post up an ATC or memtweaKIT showing the timings? Voltage?


----------



## PWn3R

Under full Aida/realbench load my 7980xe is getting up to 95c on one core with the OC of 4 cores to 4.7. I've got a new monoblock coming instead of my raystorm v1.

I still don't know what happened to cause it to now need more voltage to be stable. And it's significantly more. I'm wondering if the new PSU needs more LLC? I upgraded from a 10 year old Corsair 1kw to a 1200w Seasonic Prime 80+ platinum. 

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

PWn3R said:


> Under full Aida/realbench load my 7980xe is getting up to 95c on one core with the OC of 4 cores to 4.7. *I've got a new monoblock coming* instead of my raystorm v1.
> 
> I still don't know what happened to cause it to now need more voltage to be stable. And it's significantly more. I'm wondering if the new PSU needs more LLC? I upgraded from a 10 year old Corsair 1kw to a 1200w Seasonic Prime 80+ platinum.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


Hi,
I'd advise against a mono block for skylake-x unless you have some seriously strong water flow


----------



## Mysticial

Jpmboy said:


> wut? (click the pic  )



Some "data centers" do not allow custom water because they tend to leak - which causes problems for other customers in the same rack.


----------



## PWn3R

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I'd advise against a mono block for skylake-x unless you have some seriously strong water flow


I have a d5 and a 480rad, I don't think it should be a problem. With the raystorm I had to dial it back to 2 from suggested 4/5.

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

PWn3R said:


> I have a d5 and a 480rad, I don't think it should be a problem. With the raystorm I had to dial it back to 2 from suggested 4/5.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


Hi,
I have 2 D5's and one directly feeding the mono block and it barely keeps it cool at full blast 
Rad means little 
A chiller would mean the world though :thumb:


----------



## PWn3R

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I have 2 D5's and one directly feeding the mono block and it barely keeps it cool at full blast
> Rad means little
> A chiller would mean the world though :thumb:


Well **** lol

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## Kana Chan

Mysticial said:


> I don't know since most of these boxes ran in a server farm which I don't have physical access to. And it wouldn't be relevant since most of these were not all-core overclocks. They had 4 cores overclocked and the remaining cores underclocked to keep the chip from melting. All under CLCs - no fancy cooling. Custom water is disallowed anyway.


There's that ebullientdirectjet company that makes use of the novec 7000 fluid in their loops/manifolds for servers.


----------



## PWn3R

What input voltage are you guys using? My ASRock defaulted to 2.1, but I dropped it to 1.9. thoughts?

Edit:

What input voltage are you guys using? I found two sources last night saying that over 4.5Ghz on 7980xe you need 2.1 for stability.

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## hdtvnut

Decided after more extensive testing with video conversion batch files that my 80xe was stable for maybe 10-20 minutes with 18-core 100% 45x/1.150 v, reaching 85-87 deg, and am guessing that long-term would need to drop at least to 44x/1.110v or so (10min=82 deg). I sent it to SL yesterday and will undertake longer tests after it's back.


----------



## aerotracks

Jpmboy said:


> looks real good Buddy, can you post up an ATC or memtweaKIT showing the timings? Voltage?


Sure thing :thumb:


1.44V for this, didn't check lower 

Now to find out which stick fails TRCD 17...


----------



## PWn3R

hdtvnut said:


> Decided after more extensive testing with video conversion batch files that my 80xe was stable for maybe 10-20 minutes with 18-core 100% 45x/1.150 v, reaching 85-87 deg, and am guessing that long-term would need to drop at least to 44x/1.110v or so (10min=82 deg). I sent it to SL yesterday and will undertake longer tests after it's back.


Let me know how that goes for you. I am debating whether i want to keep my 7980xe and delid or if i'm going to sell it (I paid 1/2 retail for a new in box 7980xe) and look at the new i9 stuff that's going to be coming. I don't necessarily have to have 18 cores, it was a case of if i'm doing it, i'm going big dick.


----------



## Jpmboy

aerotracks said:


> Sure thing :thumb:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.44V for this, didn't check lower
> 
> Now to find out which stick fails TRCD 17...



nice - that's quite a good ram kit.


----------



## aerotracks

Jpmboy said:


> nice - that's quite a good ram kit.


Thank you, I ended up trying all 3 sets 2x8GB 4400C19 LPX, and they each need tRCD 18 at these clocks. Almost seems like this platform is harder on primaries compared to socket 1151 stuff.


----------



## Jpmboy

aerotracks said:


> Thank you, I ended up trying all 3 sets 2x8GB 4400C19 LPX, and they each need tRCD 18 at these clocks. Almost seems like this platform is harder on primaries compared to socket 1151 stuff.


 I can get this stable at 1.41V (two 3600c15 kits), but couldn't get even close to that on a Gaming 9 with these kits, or any other kits I tried (7740X which runs 4000 easy on the apex). That Gigabyte board is either borked (it was a freebe tho) or it simply has me beat. Can't figure it out so settled with a 2400c15 Team kit oC'd to 3066c16 at 1.45V. Been that way for months now. 
And this Apex has a very tight channel A1, no other chanels can run RTL the same as A1... GSAT 2h stable btw.


----------



## anticommon

Forgive my ignorance. Wrong thread


----------



## aerotracks

Jpmboy said:


> I can get this stable at 1.41V (two 3600c15 kits), but couldn't get even close to that on a Gaming 9 with these kits, or any other kits I tried (7740X which runs 4000 easy on the apex). That Gigabyte board is either borked (it was a freebe tho) or it simply has me beat. Can't figure it out so settled with a 2400c15 Team kit oC'd to 3066c16 at 1.45V. Been that way for months now.
> And this Apex has a very tight channel A1, no other chanels can run RTL the same as A1... GSAT 2h stable btw.


Gigabyte making all these nice SOC Force / Champion boards but not making them available to buy sort of turned me away from the brand.
Only one result with Gaming 9 on the 2066 luxe result thread, and that was 1600MHz memspeed. That's telling maybe?

Some 3rd timing tweaking, feels like changing all these numbers is entirely cosmetic.


----------



## superV

had the gaming 9 and it was pure trash,it throttles with not temp issues,and other mobos from gigabyte have the same issue, i think it was the designare (check the gigabyte x299 thread,will give like 200 points less in cinebench,which i think is a vrm problem no matter the temps)
and let's not talk about ram overclocking.


----------



## PWn3R

What input voltages are you guys using on your chips? 1.8 1.9 2.1?

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## Jpmboy

aerotracks said:


> Gigabyte making all these nice SOC Force / Champion boards but not making them available to buy sort of turned me away from the brand.
> Only one result with Gaming 9 on the 2066 luxe result thread, and that was 1600MHz memspeed. That's telling maybe?
> 
> Some 3rd timing tweaking, *feels like changing all these numbers is entirely cosmetic*.



It may be, but some/many benchmarks just can't show this or that timing effect. A good example is when Micron really ferreted out the effect of FAW on server work flow/ traffic some time ago (published). No one looked before. With the exception of some benches (which you know) most operations are pretty insensitive to ram tweaks in the short run. 





superV said:


> had the gaming 9 and it was pure trash,it throttles with not temp issues,and other mobos from gigabyte have the same issue, i think it was the designare (check the gigabyte x299 thread,will give like 200 points less in cinebench,which i think is a vrm problem no matter the temps)
> and* let's not talk about ram overclocking*.



Epic failure on gigabyte's part with the Gaming 9. 





PWn3R said:


> What input voltages are you guys using on your chips? 1.8 1.9 2.1?
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


That would depend on the OC and work load (current flow to the Die). VCCIN basically feeds all major voltage rails your OC relies upon. For daily use, 1.9-ish should be plenty. And vdroop on vccin is a healthy thing over time. :thumb:


----------



## aerotracks

Jpmboy said:


> It may be, but some/many benchmarks just can't show this or that timing effect. A good example is when Micron really ferreted out the effect of FAW on server work flow/ traffic some time ago (published). No one looked before. With the exception of some benches (which you know) most operations are pretty insensitive to ram tweaks in the short run.


Speaking of FAW and RRD - HCI memtest showed tRRD 6/4 and tFAW 24 at 300% stable and going.
Running LinX (at 3.1GHz as to not burn down the house) tRRD needs at least 6/6 (or bluescreen) and tFAW >36 (or error).


----------



## Performer81

I swapped my Mugen 5 to a Noctua U14S and my temps dropped about 10 degrees on my 7820. Temps went out of control at just about over 1,1V. 
And from the tim on my cooler i think I know why, that does not look right.


----------



## PWn3R

I swapped my v1 raystorm for an EKWB Monoblock, my temps have gone up by 10+ degrees. Not really happy about that, and I also swapped to liquid metal instead of thermal paste during the process, which I figured would bring them down. The EK Monoblock doesn't appear to provide full IHS coverage either, which could be why temps are up some.

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## Jpmboy

PWn3R said:


> I swapped my v1 raystorm for an EKWB Monoblock, my temps have gone up by 10+ degrees. Not really happy about that, and I also swapped to liquid metal instead of thermal paste during the process, which I figured would bring them down. The EK Monoblock doesn't appear to provide full IHS coverage either, which could be why temps are up some.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk



you need to check the fitment of the monoblock. it may be hitting a SMD or solder nodule and blocking full seating. Also, LM is not really good for these monoblocks... until you ensure the cold plate is making full contact with the IHS. Just use a good TIM like TGK or PK-3, Gelid extreme. I suspect the monoblock mount is poor leading to the +10C temps.


----------



## PWn3R

Good to know. First time on LM and first Monoblock. Unfortunately, it's gonna have to stay the way it is for a while. I'll remove and remount with thermal paste, but doing so is gonna have to wait until I'm done with the new xpac grind on WoW. I didn't see anything that looked like it would stop good mounting of the Monoblock, but I'll check for sure.

I did make sure to LM both sides and not used too much.

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

PWn3R said:


> Good to know. First time on LM and first Monoblock. Unfortunately, it's gonna have to stay the way it is for a while. I'll remove and remount with thermal paste, but doing so is gonna have to wait until I'm done with the new xpac grind on WoW. I didn't see anything that looked like it would stop good mounting of the Monoblock, but I'll check for sure.
> 
> I did make sure to LM both sides and not used too much.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


Hi,
Yeah mono blocks are a pita 
Noctua nt-h1 works pretty good too on them.

Might check if you didn't think too is to check just how flat the cpu cap is 
Mine is not all that flat.


----------



## superV

i have bouncy bclk on my 7980xe, 99.69 99.94 to 100.05
what can be done about it?
maybe because it's at 5ghz with no ht,issue related to high frequency.
llc it's at auto,the bclk is at 100 and didn't increase the vrm freq.


----------



## PWn3R

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah mono blocks are a pita
> Noctua nt-h1 works pretty good too on them.
> 
> Might check if you didn't think too is to check just how flat the cpu cap is
> Mine is not all that flat.


I thought the fit was good. The VRM screws went in normally, and everything else appeared to fasten right. I gave the thumbscrews on the back of the board a good tightning with the fingers. I had to turn my pump down to 4 from 5 because it was making a constant stream of stirred bubbles in the line, but on 4 it's fine. I can try to the thermal paste instead of LM at some point as well.


----------



## PWn3R

superV said:


> i have bouncy bclk on my 7980xe, 99.69 99.94 to 100.05
> what can be done about it?
> maybe because it's at 5ghz with no ht,issue related to high frequency.
> llc it's at auto,the bclk is at 100 and didn't increase the vrm freq.


What voltages are you running for that and how the hell are you cooling it?


----------



## superV

i'm running 5ghz HT off with 1.35v core and 1.95v uncore,the rest is auto with c-states disabled,no llc,ram overclocked to 4000mhz 1.4v with @Jpmboy timings.
it's a dirty oc,since i didn't try to find the right voltages,but i doubt it's the problem.
regarding cooling it's direct die, and vrm's on water too, on a 360 60mm thick rad with typhoons 3000 rpm around 2.5k,still having issues to control them with the mobo software.


----------



## Jpmboy

superV said:


> i have bouncy bclk on my 7980xe, 99.69 99.94 to 100.05
> what can be done about it?
> maybe because it's at 5ghz with no ht,issue related to high frequency.
> llc it's at auto,the bclk is at 100 and didn't increase the vrm freq.



it's normal. BCLK spreadspectrum is disabled? (tho even with this the bclk read from the OS will float.)


lol - you're making me want to put my x-frame on the R6A here....


----------



## superV

Jpmboy said:


> it's normal. BCLK spreadspectrum is disabled? (tho even with this the bclk read from the OS will float.)
> 
> 
> lol - you're making me want to put my x-frame on the R6A here....


u got all the info 
plus i want you involved in that testing,maybe you can be more accurate.
u got the info


----------



## PWn3R

superV said:


> u got all the info
> plus i want you involved in that testing,maybe you can be more accurate.
> u got the info


You're making me want to delid my 7980xe, which I haven't been brave enough to do. I did my 4790k and 4770k with a razer blade by hand. I can't use my monoblock if I delid though. I was using my Raystom completely naked with the 4770 and 4790, so I know i have hardware that will work.


----------



## superV

PWn3R said:


> You're making me want to delid my 7980xe, which I haven't been brave enough to do. I did my 4790k and 4770k with a razer blade by hand. I can't use my monoblock if I delid though. I was using my Raystom completely naked with the 4770 and 4790, so I know i have hardware that will work.


with delid tool ye,with razor don't risk it, plus u need to direct die frame+some work on it,or u will have a nightmare with the ram slots,some will work some won't.
it's a big socket with a lot of pins,you need to be careful,but worth it.
still couldn't fix the bouncy bclk by disabling the spreadspectrum cpu/vrm,only way is to set 100.1,but still will bounce 100.15/100.16,it's ok.


----------



## PWn3R

superV said:


> with delid tool ye,with razor don't risk it, plus u need to direct die frame+some work on it,or u will have a nightmare with the ram slots,some will work some won't.
> it's a big socket with a lot of pins,you need to be careful,but worth it.
> still couldn't fix the bouncy bclk by disabling the spreadspectrum cpu/vrm,only way is to set 100.1,but still will bounce 100.15/100.16,it's ok.


What delid tool did you use? Debating sending to silicon lottery very buying delid die mate x

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

PWn3R said:


> You're making me want to delid my 7980xe, which I haven't been brave enough to do. I did my 4790k and 4770k with a razer blade by hand. I can't use my monoblock if I delid though. I was using my Raystom completely naked with the 4770 and 4790, so I know i have hardware that will work.


https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/rockit-99-delid-and-relid-kit-for-skylakex-kabylakex


----------



## Chargeit

Hey guys. I'm planning on pulling my H115i off my 7820x to give the rad a good cleaning. I'm thinking if I go through the trouble of pulling the rad I might as well delid the cpu. I'm looking the rockit99 kit for $40. What suggestions do you guys have for thermal paste to use under the heat spreader? Thanks.


----------



## superV

Chargeit said:


> Hey guys. I'm planning on pulling my H115i off my 7820x to give the rad a good cleaning. I'm thinking if I go through the trouble of pulling the rad I might as well delid the cpu. I'm looking the rockit99 kit for $40. What suggestions do you guys have for thermal paste to use under the heat spreader? Thanks.


liquid metal,otherwise it doesn't make sense to delid and use other tim,at least for me.


----------



## Chargeit

superV said:


> liquid metal,otherwise it doesn't make sense to delid and use other tim,at least for me.


What's good liquid metal to use? I've never messed with the stuff.

I see Coollaboratory Liquid Pro on the rockit site. Should that do the job or is there something better I should look at?

Thanks.


----------



## superV

Chargeit said:


> What's good liquid metal to use? I've never messed with the stuff.
> 
> I see Coollaboratory Liquid Pro on the rockit site. Should that do the job or is there something better I should look at?
> 
> Thanks.


same here using liquid ultra for years with no issues,but there are options from other companies such as der8aurer's Conductonaut and others.


----------



## Chargeit

superV said:


> same here using liquid ultra for years with no issues,but there are options from other companies such as der8aurer's Conductonaut and others.


Thanks. I'll check it out.

One last question. How often do you have to replace the LM under the heat spreader? Is it a apply and forget or does it require maintenance?


----------



## Jpmboy

Chargeit said:


> Hey guys. I'm planning on pulling my H115i off my 7820x to give the rad a good cleaning. I'm thinking if I go through the trouble of pulling the rad I might as well delid the cpu. I'm looking the rockit99 kit for $40. What suggestions do you guys have for thermal paste to use under the heat spreader? Thanks.


any LM is better than the intel pigeon poop. I tend to favor CL Pro (seems to remain flow-able longer). Main thing is to PAINT the Lm on both the die and the underside of the IHS, and remove the black sealant... LM will work better the thinner the thermal bond line.


----------



## PWn3R

Could the bad temps on my monoblock be because I used the stock thermal pads instead of switching to the ek provided pad? It seemed the same thickness.

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## Jpmboy

PWn3R said:


> Could the bad temps on my monoblock be because I used the stock thermal pads instead of switching to the ek provided pad? It seemed the same thickness.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk



always best to use the ones that come with the block - compressibility may be different. If you can find them. get the same thickness FujiPoly 17mK pads (as described in the EK instructions). The Fp extreme pads are fragile... like putty almost.


----------



## Chargeit

Jpmboy said:


> any LM is better than the intel pigeon poop. I tend to favor CL Pro (seems to remain flow-able longer). Main thing is to PAINT the Lm on both the die and the underside of the IHS, and remove the black sealant... LM will work better the thinner the thermal bond line.


Thanks.

I watched this video,








I'm still debating if I'm going to do the delidding myself or just ship it to Silicon lottery. Money wise there's not enough of a difference for it to matter. Time my system is down vs chance of me screwing it up is my main consideration.


----------



## ThrashZone

Chargeit said:


> Thanks.
> 
> I watched this video,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm still debating if I'm going to do the delidding myself or* just ship it to Silicon lottery.* Money wise there's not enough of a difference for it to matter. Time my system is down vs chance of me screwing it up is my main consideration.


Hi,
Yeah I just sent mine in


----------



## Chargeit

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I just sent mine in


Yeah that seems like the smart way to go. Just hate having my computer down for a week +. I have a few other systems, one of which has a ryzen 2700 in it so it's not like I'd be without a 
competent computer but still.


----------



## PWn3R

Jpmboy said:


> you need to check the fitment of the monoblock. it may be hitting a SMD or solder nodule and blocking full seating. Also, LM is not really good for these monoblocks... until you ensure the cold plate is making full contact with the IHS. Just use a good TIM like TGK or PK-3, Gelid extreme. I suspect the monoblock mount is poor leading to the +10C temps.


Where would you suspect that there is solder nodule or something hitting? Near the VRMs?

Edit: I'm wondering of the membrane that I had to push the legs of the Monoblock through is stopping me from being able to tighten it down over the CPU with the thumb screws all the way.

Either way, I'll be cheating and just moving the Monoblock to the side without draining the loop most likely.


----------



## ThrashZone

Chargeit said:


> Yeah that seems like the smart way to go. Just hate having my computer down for a week +. I have a few other systems, one of which has a ryzen 2700 in it so it's not like I'd be without a
> competent computer but still.


Hi,
Yeah I was lucky with SL being a local company so I just dropped it off at the fedex or ups store.
So return shipping is as fast as you can see to spend
They do have fast turn around 1day.

I couldn't give myself a 1 year warranty like they do


----------



## Chargeit

Decided to go ahead with doing the delidding myself.

Ordered,

ROCKIT 99 - LGA 2066 Delid & Relid kit @ $45.77 shipped (Paid for 3 day shipping)

Coollaboratory Liquid pro from amazon - $0.00 (had some amazon prime reward points. So got this free)

Super glue - Already have some

Nail polish - Need to find a clear coat that's nitrocellulose based. Ol'lady said she'll check hers when she gets home. If not, I'll pick up whatever's the cheapest from Walmart or something.

So right now I'm looking at delidding my cpu for less then $50 in house. Not too bad. I'll also likely record the process.


----------



## superV

Chargeit said:


> Decided to go ahead with doing the delidding myself.
> 
> Ordered,
> 
> ROCKIT 99 - LGA 2066 Delid & Relid kit @ $45.77 shipped (Paid for 3 day shipping)
> 
> Coollaboratory Liquid pro from amazon - $0.00 (had some amazon prime reward points. So got this free)
> 
> Super glue - Already have some
> 
> Nail polish - Need to find a clear coat that's nitrocellulose based. Ol'lady said she'll check hers when she gets home. If not, I'll pick up whatever's the cheapest from Walmart or something.
> 
> So right now I'm looking at delidding my cpu for less then $50 in house. Not too bad. I'll also likely record the process.


:thumb:
buying such tech then let others play with it...nope


----------



## Chargeit

superV said:


> :thumb:
> buying such tech then let others play with it...nope


Yeah should make for an interesting experience.

The rockit kit already shipped out. Nice.


----------



## Mat_UK

Chargeit said:


> Decided to go ahead with doing the delidding myself.
> 
> Ordered,
> 
> ROCKIT 99 - LGA 2066 Delid & Relid kit @ $45.77 shipped (Paid for 3 day shipping)
> 
> Coollaboratory Liquid pro from amazon - $0.00 (had some amazon prime reward points. So got this free)
> 
> Super glue - Already have some
> 
> Nail polish - Need to find a clear coat that's nitrocellulose based. Ol'lady said she'll check hers when she gets home. If not, I'll pick up whatever's the cheapest from Walmart or something.
> 
> So right now I'm looking at delidding my cpu for less then $50 in house. Not too bad. I'll also likely record the process.



Good luck with the de-lid. I just delidded my 7900x with the RockItCool tool yesterday and it went without a hitch - bit scary though! My average all core temps running P95 dropped by 18c and I'm now stability testing an all core 4.8 OC on it - so far looks good and temps are not a problem at all.


----------



## superV

what i think is that, if you have a delid tool (good one) from rockit or der8aurer,the risk of killing the cpu is very small,i mean it must happen some really unbelievable stuff to kill one.
the big risk comes with the razor or other methods,never heard somebody deliding this kind of cpu's with razor.


----------



## Jpmboy

Chargeit said:


> Decided to go ahead with doing the delidding myself.
> 
> Ordered,
> 
> ROCKIT 99 - LGA 2066 Delid & Relid kit @ $45.77 shipped (Paid for 3 day shipping)
> 
> Coollaboratory Liquid pro from amazon - $0.00 (had some amazon prime reward points. So got this free)
> 
> *Super glue - Already have some*
> 
> *Nail polish* - Need to find a clear coat that's nitrocellulose based. Ol'lady said she'll check hers when she gets home. If not, I'll pick up whatever's the cheapest from Walmart or something.
> 
> So right now I'm looking at delidding my cpu for less then $50 in house. Not too bad. I'll also likely record the process.


Good move. Some hints:

erm - skip the superglue, or use very very little. If you have to (or should want to) delid again, SG can be a problem - you need 100% acetone to soften it. Just pick up any RTV sealant from the local hardware store, or use a dab of even silicone window caulking at each corner. Ideally it's best to use a black silicon RTV sealant.
Nail polish... is okay, but you can get a small jar of MG industries "Conformal Coating" for a few bucks off amazon. It's made for waterproofing PCBs and SMDs.
Oh, and knocking off an SMD when cleaning off the OEM sealant is the most frequent cause of damage during a delid on these CPUs. Just clean it off with patience.
Then, let that HCC chip loose!


----------



## Chargeit

I'm going to stick with super glue and nail polish. I'll use a toothpick to transfer a small amount of super glue to 4 corners of the heat spreader. 

From what I've read there seems to be a lot of debate about what's best. Though looking at it superglue and nail polish looks easy to apply. 


Yeah I'm still concerned about cleaning the old sealant off the cpu. More worried about that then the rest of the process.


----------



## Jpmboy

Chargeit said:


> I'm going to stick with super glue and nail polish. I'll use a toothpick to transfer a small amount of super glue to 4 corners of the heat spreader.
> 
> From what I've read there seems to be a lot of debate about what's best. Though looking at it superglue and nail polish looks easy to apply.
> 
> 
> Yeah I'm still concerned about cleaning the old sealant off the cpu. More worried about that then the rest of the process.


cool. it'll go fine, just be patient with the cleaning. :thumb:


----------



## Mat_UK

Chargeit said:


> Yeah I'm still concerned about cleaning the old sealant off the cpu. More worried about that then the rest of the process.


Yep that takes patience and a lot of care... oh and good eyesight too! Just scraping slowly with a thumbnail seemed to be the best option, it takes a while but don't rush it and you'll be fine. Keeping the chip in the bottom half of the delid tool while you do it helps as it holds it still and gives you something to grip on to without putting your fingers all over the backside of the CPU package.

For re-lidding, I didn't bother myself. I just socketed the chip, put the IHS on top and locked it down in the socket. It's got a monoblock clamped over the top of that too so it's not going to move about. I guess the main thing is for me to remember it's not glued in next time I strip it down.

Like you I was also planning to superglue the corners of the IHS. My main concern was not using anything that might cause the IHS not to sit as tight as possible on the die. Superglue seemed a good option but in then end I gave it a miss

I went with nitrocellulose nail polish for sealing the PCB before applying the LM. Works fine but I guess only time will tell how well it stands up.

If you have not used LM before you will find that you only need the tiniest amount. You can always add a bit more but it's better to use a bit less and add some than put too much and have to get it off again. Gamers Nexus have a great video on doing this, worth watching.

EDIT: There's more pictures of the process I went through on my build log below.

Good luck!


----------



## hdtvnut

Chargit, I sent my 80xe to SL a week ago, and due back today. By the way, they do not give a warranty on re-lids, only on new purchases, or to replace if damaged.


----------



## Chargeit

Hey thanks for all the info guys.

I watched gamersnexus Skylake x delidding videos and have a pretty good feel for the process. 

My ol'lady checked her nail polish for me and found a bottle of, "Sally Hansen - Diamond Strength - Diamond Shine - Base & Top Coat" nail polish that has Nitrocellulose. 

This stuff, (She said she paid $4 or $5 for it, amazon prices are jacked for nail polish) 
https://www.amazon.com/Sally-Hansen...ncoding=UTF8&refRID=PE8AVXZ3TSYECQQVCMR3&th=1


**If anything does happen to the chip I'll move to my Ryzen 7 system and sell the x299 mobo. I'll pick up an 8 core Coffee Lake when they hit. Though I plan on using this Skylake x for a few more years assuming everything works out.


----------



## wheatpaste1999

I know it's not exactly Skylake-X/Kabylake-X CPU related, but anyone have experience with the EVGA X299 Micro motherboard? They just released a v2 with some updates, but the v1 is going for $149 on EVGA's website which doesn't seem like a bad deal. (EDIT: $199, not $149). I'd just be using this as a side build for a spare 7800x that I have (as well as my current 7900x if I ever upgrade to something higher core count).

Specifically wondering if the v1 VRMs have heat issues given that they added active cooling for the v2 boards. Guessing if I stick with the 6-10 core count CPUs I won't have any problems, but curious if anyone has any direct experience.


----------



## superV

Jpmboy said:


> Good move. Some hints:
> 
> erm - skip the superglue, or use very very little. If you have to (or should want to) delid again, SG can be a problem - you need 100% acetone to soften it. Just pick up any RTV sealant from the local hardware store, or use a dab of even silicone window caulking at each corner. Ideally it's best to use a black silicon RTV sealant.
> Nail polish... is okay, but you can get a small jar of MG industries "Conformal Coating" for a few bucks off amazon. It's made for waterproofing PCBs and SMDs.
> Oh, and knocking off an SMD when cleaning off the OEM sealant is the most frequent cause of damage during a delid on these CPUs. Just clean it off with patience.
> Then, let that HCC chip loose!



definitely pay attention at the SMD's not to knock them off when cleaning.
that's the biggest risk,not the delid tool.
:thumb:


----------



## wheatpaste1999

I've used an old "club card" / basically a thin credit card for removing the old silicone sealant on the couple of delids I've done. 

Works pretty well, just go slow and be careful.


----------



## Chargeit

wheatpaste1999 said:


> I've used an old "club card" / basically a thin credit card for removing the old silicone sealant on the couple of delids I've done.
> 
> Works pretty well, just go slow and be careful.


Is there anything that will help break the sealant down making it easier to remove? 

-----

On another note. I watched this video,






Now I'm wishing I had ordered the copper heat spreader. Looked like enough of a difference that it would be worth the cost. Rockit offers a kit with the copper IHS included for an extra $15. Though now I'd have to buy the heat spreader for $30 and pay for shipping so I'm not going to bother. Would of been able to use the Intel heat spreader as a key chain. Opportunities lost.


----------



## Jpmboy

Chargeit said:


> Is there anything that will help break the sealant down making it easier to remove?
> 
> -----
> 
> On another note. I watched this video,
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbTi5Ed89Yk
> 
> Now I'm wishing I had ordered the copper heat spreader. Looked like enough of a difference that it would be worth the cost. Rockit offers a kit with the copper IHS included for an extra $15. Though now I'd have to buy the heat spreader for $30 and pay for shipping so I'm not going to bother. Would of been able to use the Intel heat spreader as a key chain. Opportunities lost.



not a good idea to use LM in direct contact with bare copper.... no matter what the gamersnexus tube vid says.


----------



## superV

Jpmboy said:


> not a good idea to use LM in direct contact with bare copper.... no matter what the gamersnexus tube vid says.


why?in my case with direct die, it does with the waterblock plate.
it's hard to remove it completely because it ends up look grey,but with liquid metal,in the pack there is something to sand the waterblock and clean it completely.


----------



## Chargeit

Jpmboy said:


> not a good idea to use LM in direct contact with bare copper.... no matter what the gamersnexus tube vid says.


Yeah probably better safe then sorry.


----------



## bmgjet

Iv been using LM on copper for years, No issues just stains it.


----------



## Jpmboy

bmgjet said:


> Iv been using LM on copper for years, No issues just stains it.


yep.. but it's not exactly a "stain".


----------



## Chargeit

Ok guys I've got everything except the Liquid Metal. The LM comes in tomorrow. 


.


----------



## bmgjet

Jpmboy said:


> yep.. but it's not exactly a "stain".


3mins with a 3M scotch brite pad and some iso and it comes off after being on the same application of LM for 2 years.
Was harder getting the IHS and Block apart lol, Was very solid at room temp and needed to put some warm water into cpu block lol.


----------



## PWn3R

Anyone that has worked with Monoblocks before have any sage advice on what I should check for when I pull mine off tomorrow. Symptoms are temperatures on the CPU package that are almost 30C higher and 15C+ higher core temps after putting it on. It does NOT have thermal paste, I tried LM this previous try. I am going to make sure that the holes I had to shove the mounting legs through (they have a membrane in them) are completely free from obstruction and switch to the provided thermal pads instead of the stock ones (that appeared to be the same thickness). I am planning on checking around the VRMs for any type of solder obstruction, but I didn't see anything when I put it on. I did note that the nuts on the back of the motherboard didn't appear to be screwed all the way down, but they were finger tight.


----------



## xarot

I didn't see any difference with a copper IHS, on 7900X or 7980XE. Better to just use original IHS or go straight to direct-die with preferably a nickel block.


----------



## PWn3R

I just finished replacing the thermal pad and switching to thermal paste. It made about a 5C improvement on all the temps. However, the temps overall are still significantly higher than using my Raystorm V1. Really disappointed with this, it does appear that the LM was not making good contact.


----------



## ThrashZone

PWn3R said:


> I just finished replacing the thermal pad and switching to thermal paste. It made about a 5C improvement on all the temps. However, the temps overall are still significantly higher than using my Raystorm V1. Really disappointed with this, it does appear that the LM was not making good contact.


Hi,
You need pretty good flow to cool a mono block
I use NT-H1 and it seems fine as a bottle of wine but of course I have two d5 pumps one pumping directly into my mono blocks.


----------



## PWn3R

I have 1 d5 and I can't run it on 5 without bubbles in the lines. The loop is pretty small. 5 had no impact on temps, was running 3 on the raystorm. I am now on 4 with the monoblock

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## Jpmboy

bmgjet said:


> 3mins with a 3M scotch brite pad and some iso and it comes off after being on the same application of LM for 2 years.
> Was harder getting the IHS and Block apart lol, Was very solid at room temp and needed to put some warm water into cpu block lol.



the "stain" is an amalgam of copper and gallium. LM is a eutectic of indium and gallium - same stuff (now) used in non-alcohol thermometers to replace mercury (I buy it by the 25g vial at 25% the cost of CLP or CLU). 

As you describe, you have to remove the layer to get to fresh copper. Not a problem with nickel plated components.
that's the chemistry.


----------



## Chargeit

I still haven't delidded my 7820x. Plan on recording the process so I want to delid while I'm alone in the house for minimal distractions. 

I've been thinking about the resealing process. I planned on resealing the cpu with gel super glue but now I'm thinking I might just put the cpu back in the system without sealing it. The only down side to not sealing the cpu I've been able to come across is not being able to take the cpu out with the system standing upright. This isn't a problem for me since I always lay my case on its side when working on it. 

Are there any other issues I should be aware of with putting the cpu back in the system without sealing the IHS? 

Thanks.


----------



## Jpmboy

Chargeit said:


> I still haven't delidded my 7820x. Plan on recording the process so I want to delid while I'm alone in the house for minimal distractions.
> 
> I've been thinking about the resealing process. I planned on resealing the cpu with gel super glue but now I'm thinking I might just put the cpu back in the system without sealing it. The only down side to not sealing the cpu I've been able to come across is not being able to take the cpu out with the system standing upright. This isn't a problem for me since I always lay my case on its side when working on it.
> 
> *Are there any other issues I should be aware of with putting the cpu back in the system without sealing the IHS*?
> 
> Thanks.



Hold the IHS in place with a finger - the locking mech has a forward slide when latching. that's about all regarding additional "issues". :thumb:


----------



## Chargeit

Jpmboy said:


> Hold the IHS in place with a finger - the locking mech has a forward slide when latching. that's about all regarding additional "issues". :thumb:


Ok thanks.

Yeah think I'm going to skip on the sealant. Seems like an extra step that only causes a gap and lessens the cooling performance.


----------



## PWn3R

I ended up opening a ticket with EK about my monoblock issues. No solder nodules I can find that would stop it from mating well. I confirmed that the thermal paste spread well before reassembling. They asked for a list of components in my loop and system alont with pictures of the whole thing. The only bad part for me is they want me to tear the block down again for photos of the spread of thermal paste. They can't believe the temps went up that much which makes two of us. I don't want the heat from the VRMs inside my case if I can avoid it. It makes my video card fan spool up alot higher. My case has a separate section at the bottom where my radiator is, so the heat ends up there with the monoblock and my video card fan speed went from 75% under load to 35%. However, if I can't get the temps back under control I'm going to have to put the stock heatsink back and go back to my raystorm or another block that doesn't give me temperature problems.

I did ask about needing a second pump, and they said a loop my size with CPU only shouldn't even need to the D5 @ speed 5. I did turn it up to that and the water is moving so fast it made a constant vortex stream of small bubbles in the loop. They eventually went away after about 4 hours. Turning it up to 5 did not help temps at all.

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## Jpmboy

Chargeit said:


> Ok thanks.
> 
> Yeah think I'm going to skip on the sealant. Seems like an extra step *that only causes a gap and lessens the cooling performance*.


^^ this. The rockit kit resealer will apply sufficient pressure to squeeze out any excess sealant - too much and it is possible to crack the die. 




PWn3R said:


> I ended up opening a ticket with EK about my monoblock issues. No solder nodules I can find that would stop it from mating well. I confirmed that the thermal paste spread well before reassembling. They asked for a list of components in my loop and system alont with pictures of the whole thing. The only bad part for me is they want me to tear the block down again for photos of the spread of thermal paste. They can't believe the temps went up that much which makes two of us. I don't want the heat from the VRMs inside my case if I can avoid it. It makes my video card fan spool up alot higher. My case has a separate section at the bottom where my radiator is, so the heat ends up there with the monoblock and my video card fan speed went from 75% under load to 35%. However, if I can't get the temps back under control I'm going to have to put the stock heatsink back and go back to my raystorm or another block that doesn't give me temperature problems.
> 
> I did ask about needing a second pump, and they said a loop my size with CPU only shouldn't even need to the D5 @ speed 5. I did turn it up to that and the water is moving so fast it made a constant vortex stream of small bubbles in the loop. They eventually went away after about 4 hours. *Turning it up to 5 did not help temps at all*.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


yeah, this is a myth. the loop needs some residence time in the heat exchanger except at the steady-state thermal point. At all other times, a more moderate flow will result in a larger delta-T on the in and out port of the rad (heat exchanger). With an Aquaero 6 controller you can see this real time.


----------



## ThrashZone

PWn3R said:


> I have 1 d5 and I can't run it on 5 without bubbles in the lines. The loop is pretty small. 5 had no impact on temps, was running 3 on the raystorm. I am now on 4 with the monoblock
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


Hi,
Getting all the bubbles out is good you might actually have air lock in the rad somewhere 

First thing that happen to me is my mono was nearly blocked with ek fluid sludge making all the flow go through the escape routes on the lower part of the mono block thus not even going through the cooling fins and upper part of the mono blocks water channels.

I added a inline filter too so the second D5 helps there and hopefully picks up any other sludge..
Either way 2 pumps might not be necessary it was just the easiest for me to do and pipe it in my tiny corsair D450 case
I just added a ek d5 top on the top rear of the case, top rad is it's reservoir.

Prioritizing the mono block is really the trick that I've noticed with d5 flow before other components 

But ultimately mono blocks are over rated.
I also made sure I could get the mono block out without pulling the board !
Drilled or cut appropriate holes where vrm screws are located so they can be removed easily was really a lot of fun on my x99 sabertooth with it metal back plate my prime x299 was just a couple of notches in the back of the case


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 
> 
> *I also made sure I could get the mono block out without pulling the board !
> Drilled or cut appropriate holes where vrm screws are located so they can be removed easily* was really a lot of fun on my x99 sabertooth with it metal back plate my prime x299 was just a couple of notches in the back of the case


that is a good idea!


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> that is a good idea!


Hi,
Yeah just having to pull it out once was all it took to make sure the second.... pull out was going to be a lot easier lol 
Pulling a board just to fit a block or change the thermal paste is a silly process.


----------



## Chargeit

Not sure what you used to drill out the holes but I'd suggest checking out Step Drill bits. 

You can get them cheap,

https://www.amazon.com/Neiko-10194A-Titanium-Drill-Speed/dp/B000FZ2UOY

https://www.amazon.com/Neiko-10193A-Titanium-Drill-3-Piece/dp/B001OEPYWK

Or not so cheap,

https://www.homedepot.com/b/Tools-Power-Tool-Accessories-Drill-Bits-Step-Drill-Bits/N-5yc1vZc90q


Would be great for doing things like drilling out holes to size on the inside of your mobo trays for easy access to the rear of the mobo.

*Works well on Plexiglas too.


----------



## Jpmboy

Chargeit said:


> Not sure what you used to drill out the holes but I'd suggest checking out Step Drill bits.
> 
> You can get them cheap,
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Neiko-10194A-Titanium-Drill-Speed/dp/B000FZ2UOY
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Neiko-10193A-Titanium-Drill-3-Piece/dp/B001OEPYWK
> 
> Or not so cheap,
> 
> https://www.homedepot.com/b/Tools-Power-Tool-Accessories-Drill-Bits-Step-Drill-Bits/N-5yc1vZc90q
> 
> 
> Would be great for doing things like drilling out holes to size on the inside of your mobo trays for easy access to the rear of the mobo.
> 
> *Works well on Plexiglas too.



it the only drill type you should use on sheet metal.


----------



## Chargeit

Have the cpu delidded. Waiting on glue to dry. Did end up sealing it.

I manged to shoot LM across my computer room right at my x34. Luckily it didn't hit it.


----------



## Chargeit

Crap. The delidding went well. Though I fried one of my 140mm rad fans. I got water in the connection and must not of dried it out well enough. Was just the stock H115i fans. Guess I'll order some new 140mm rad fans. 

Wow. Even with one fan going the cpu is idling at 25c. I didn't take idle temps but usually I'm in the 30's or so.

*I had the system at stock settings. Why the cpu was idling so low. I ordered two, "Corsair ML140 Pro". I was going to get some black Noctua but the ones I wanted only had one in stock. I want to get these fans in asap. Though switching fans around are going to throw my numbers off. 

***Hey, the fan just started working. Guess I'll cancel the order for now.


----------



## superV

@Jpmboy
help him please,gigabyte doing victims.
it's his 1st post,become his father.
ty
https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...x299-overclocking-thread-60.html#post27587376


----------



## Jpmboy

superV said:


> @*Jpmboy*
> help him please,gigabyte doing victims.
> it's his 1st post,become his father.
> ty
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...x299-overclocking-thread-60.html#post27587376


oh man... giga bite.


----------



## Kana Chan

Chargeit said:


> Have the cpu delidded. Waiting on glue to dry. Did end up sealing it.
> 
> I manged to shoot LM across my computer room right at my x34. Luckily it didn't hit it.


You could squirt a bit out onto some other surface before moving it to the IHS


----------



## czin125

https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/08/19/intel-unveils-2019-and-2020-data-center-processor.aspx



> Cascade Lake, Intel tells me, incorporates "[manufacturing] process enhancements beyond 14nm++."


Cascadelake-X from Skylake-X is 2 optimizations up ( 14+++ from 14+ ? )


----------



## Mat_UK

Chargeit said:


> Have the cpu delidded. Waiting on glue to dry. Did end up sealing it.
> 
> I manged to shoot LM across my computer room right at my x34. Luckily it didn't hit it.


Hehe, it's tricky stuff for sure 

Congrats on the de-lid man, bet you're glad it POSTed after the surgery. Interested to see what temps under load you are seeing before and after the delidding?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah 15-20c lower is usually the normal temp drop for delid.


----------



## Chargeit

Hey. 

This is what my temps look like. Not so sure about how the program gets its avg temps since when running with stock tim the cpu ran 89c - 91c most times and after delidding the cpu ran 78c - 81c. 

Notice the cpu fan not ramping up as much during normal use and when gaming I'm seeing lower temps. Wish I had taken some measurements of gaming and general use temps. 


I recorded the process and will make a video though I'm not overly happy with my recordings. See what I can do with it in editing. If anything I'll make a graph. 

44 all cores @ 1.2v (I used to run 46 though the temps made me pull it back. Might look into 46 again)

H115i stock fans with a custom fan curve that maxes at 70% fan speed.

Stock tim - max 97c

After delidding - max 85c


----------



## Nosnibor

Hey everyone.

I have been messing with an OC with a i9-7980xe.

I'm still tweaking voltage but not really sure what temp I should be looking for as safe.

Any help?

Thanks.


----------



## ThrashZone

Nosnibor said:


> Hey everyone.
> 
> I have been messing with an OC with a i9-7980xe.
> 
> I'm still tweaking voltage but not really sure what temp I should be looking for as safe.
> 
> Any help?
> 
> Thanks.


Hi,
TJ Max is I believe 105c so well below that 
90c'ish should be an okay highest cpu package temp which core temps will be lower than than by about 5-8c.


----------



## CptSpig

Nosnibor said:


> Hey everyone.
> 
> I have been messing with an OC with a i9-7980xe.
> 
> I'm still tweaking voltage but not really sure what temp I should be looking for as safe.
> 
> Any help?
> 
> Thanks.



When stress testing with real bench (or any time you stress the CPU) I try to keep temperatures as close to 80c as possible. This will help with long term degradation of the CPU. :thumb:


----------



## Nosnibor

CptSpig said:


> When stress testing with real bench (or any time you stress the CPU) I try to keep temperatures as close to 80c as possible. This will help with long term degradation of the CPU. :thumb:





ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> TJ Max is I believe 105c so well below that
> 90c'ish should be an okay highest cpu package temp which core temps will be lower than than by about 5-8c.


Ok perfect!

I am seeing ~70c right now when stressing at 4.5 however my voltage isn't good yet. I was about 2 minutes into prime95 when it shut of at 1.200v.

Going to try a 1.210v unless y'all think that voltage is too high?


----------



## PWn3R

I got high and then dial it back til it crashes. I usually jump .005 at a time then dial it back .001 til not stable then go back up and test. 

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

Nosnibor said:


> Ok perfect!
> 
> I am seeing ~70c right now when stressing at 4.5 however my voltage isn't good yet. I was about 2 minutes into prime95 when it shut of at 1.200v.
> 
> Going to try a 1.210v unless y'all think that voltage is too high?


Hi,
Yeah I wouldn't be using prime or all core at 4.5 without serious water cooling or if the 9880xe wasn't delidded 
But indeed mid 85c max would be good.

Try realbench instead of prime 95 or what ever it is I personally don't use it it's really unnecessary to use it.


----------



## Nosnibor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I wouldn't be using prime or all core at 4.5 without serious water cooling or if the 9880xe wasn't delidded
> But indeed mid 85c max would be good.
> 
> Try realbench instead of prime 95 or what ever it is I personally don't use it it's really unnecessary to use it.


Hey thanks,

I do have a water cooler but not anything custom. It's just the Corsair H150i.

I will need to check out that real bench. I'm still pretty new to this but prime95 was something I saw on almost every guide.

Also if I am not hitting that ~85c pegged out should I keep raising my clock until I do? Like does that mean I could keep going up? Or is there also a voltage concern for going too high?


----------



## PWn3R

I would say keep it 1.28 or lower based on everything I've seen and read, but cooling will almost certainly be a problem before voltage is.

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## CptSpig

Nosnibor said:


> Hey thanks,
> 
> I do have a water cooler but not anything custom. It's just the Corsair H150i.
> 
> I will need to check out that real bench. I'm still pretty new to this but prime95 was something I saw on almost every guide.
> 
> Also if I am not hitting that ~85c pegged out should I keep raising my clock until I do? Like does that mean I could keep going up? Or is there also a voltage concern for going too high?



Your temperasure is going to tell you if you are using to much voltage. I have a 4.4 OC with 1.120v and a 4.6 per core (2 cores @ 4.6 / 1.35v and 16 cores @ 4.5 / 1.210v) OC. When bench marking I have used 1.535v on my chiller so it's all about keeping your chip cool. Please add your system to RIGBUILDER or your siginature. The comunity will be able to help you better with this information. Use Realbench and don't forget to use offsets for AVX instruction. :thumb:


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I wouldn't be using prime or all core at 4.5 without serious water cooling or if the 9880xe wasn't delidded
> But indeed mid 85c max would be good.
> 
> Try realbench instead of prime 95 or what ever it is I personally don't use it it's really unnecessary to use it.



^^^^^^ use Realbench and don't forget to use offsets for AVX instruction. :thumb:


----------



## Nosnibor

CptSpig said:


> Your temperasure is going to tell you if you are using to much voltage. I have a 4.4 OC with 1.120v and a 4.6 per core (2 cores @ 4.6 / 1.35v and 16 cores @ 4.5 / 1.210v) OC. When bench marking I have used 1.535v on my chiller so it's all about keeping your chip cool. Please add your system to RIGBUILDER or your siginature. The comunity will be able to help you better with this information. Use Realbench and don't forget to use offsets for AVX instruction. :thumb:


It's interesting to me that your 4.4 OC is only using 1.120 when I'm at 1.240 currently trying to hit 4.5 (unstable). I wonder if I am doing something wrong or it just takes that much more to go a .1 GHz?



CptSpig said:


> ^^^^^^ use Realbench and don't forget to use offsets for AVX instruction. :thumb:


I had read that I should try not to use AVX offset because that just "covers the problem" but honestly trying to find a real answer online is impossible because everyone has different ways of doing it.

I'm wondering if I should just try setting my Vcore to "auto" and my LLC to extreme to get the right voltage but I guess I'm afraid it may pump too much into it. Is that how it works anyway?

Thanks for all the help so far.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
On another note to make life easier at first since your cooling is considered meager 
Instead of using all core use By Core usage instead your temps will be probably cut in half probably not that much by using say 45 on 8 cores instead of all 18 at one time will obviously allow you to get lower temps and have just as good of benchmark numbers too.

Otherwise use By core and 45 on just 2 of the assigned *best cores
The rest use a lower multiplier 40...

Here's a screen shot of the avx offsets mentioned 
512 @5 and avx at 10 and @Jpmboy settings which he has a text file available too some where


----------



## CptSpig

Nosnibor said:


> It's interesting to me that your 4.4 OC is only using 1.120 when I'm at 1.240 currently trying to hit 4.5 (unstable). I wonder if I am doing something wrong or it just takes that much more to go a .1 GHz?
> 
> 
> 
> I had read that I should try not to use AVX offset because that just "covers the problem" but honestly trying to find a real answer online is impossible because everyone has different ways of doing it.
> 
> I'm wondering if I should just try setting my Vcore to "auto" and my LLC to extreme to get the right voltage but I guess I'm afraid it may pump too much into it. Is that how it works anyway?
> 
> Thanks for all the help so far.


Jpmboy has a great OC guide for Coffee lake processors but the method is very similar: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I_1Zhs3rT8K8bEtoY-9pS1P4Bvin9nZZ/view

Please put your rig in your sig. The voltage diference could be your MB.


----------



## Nosnibor

CptSpig said:


> Jpmboy has a great OC guide for Coffee lake processors but the method is very similar: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I_1Zhs3rT8K8bEtoY-9pS1P4Bvin9nZZ/view
> 
> Please put your rig in your sig. The voltage diference could be your MB.


Ok I updated my Rig. Nothing super specific yet because I can't remember off the top of my head but I will fill in as I go.

EDIT: I didn't have it as sig yet.


----------



## CptSpig

Nosnibor said:


> Ok I updated my Rig. Nothing super specific yet because I can't remember off the top of my head but I will fill in as I go.
> 
> EDIT: I didn't have it as sig yet.



Take a gander at this thread as well it will be more specific to your board: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-intel-motherboards/1633978-gigabyte-x299-overclocking-thread.html


----------



## Nosnibor

CptSpig said:


> Take a gander at this thread as well it will be more specific to your board: https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-intel-motherboards/1633978-gigabyte-x299-overclocking-thread.html


Thanks, I have already been there. I've been melding the knowledge from the MB and CPU forums to get a better understanding.

I just tried a 4.5 OC all cores at 1.280v and it still shut down as soon as I started realbench.

I think I may give up on the 4.5 and drop down to maybe a 4.2.

I know people were getting 4.6 with air/wc and I'm afraid to go up in voltage past the 1.280 unless someone says it's ok.

I know yours had 1.350v for the 4.6 but even your 4.5 cores were way lower than I was for 4.5 across all unless because it is all I need more?

I hate being a burden to y'all.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
No problem 
I would try by core usage though lol it does make life easier


----------



## Nosnibor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> No problem
> I would try by core usage though lol it does make life easier


So the by core is a new idea to me. Can you help me understand the benefit of only having maybe the 2 you suggested higher and the rest lower?

Is it because certain applications don't take advantage of all cores?

Also I would have to research how to do that in my BIOS. I am finding out there is a lot of disgruntled people with the gigabyte board I have


----------



## PWn3R

I have an ASRock Taichi XE and I'm regretting not getting an Asus.

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## CptSpig

Nosnibor said:


> Thanks, I have already been there. I've been melding the knowledge from the MB and CPU forums to get a better understanding.
> 
> I just tried a 4.5 OC all cores at 1.280v and it still shut down as soon as I started realbench.
> 
> I think I may give up on the 4.5 and drop down to maybe a 4.2.
> 
> I know people were getting 4.6 with air/wc and I'm afraid to go up in voltage past the 1.280 unless someone says it's ok.
> 
> I know yours had 1.350v for the 4.6 but even your 4.5 cores were way lower than I was for 4.5 across all unless because it is all I need more?
> 
> I hate being a burden to y'all.



No Worries, It's best to get it stable at some oc and then work your way up all CPU's have different capabilities. You need to have a system try clearing your C'Mos and starting over and just oc the cpu on manual to see what voltage it can handle keeping temperature at around 80c. Once you have that change your settings to adaptive mode. Once you are happy with the CPU oc try your memory next and then you can oc cashe. It just takes patience. Don't try just using someone elses settings it ussaully will not work. Rember oc the cpu only first (stable OC) with no other hardware being overclocked. Try 1.25v @ 4.2 if that's stable kick it up to 4.3 until it crashes. Now once it will boot try lowering the voltage 10mv at a time until it won't boot and than add 10 mv. Now stress test adding 10 mv until stable with temperatures around 80c. You get the picture.


----------



## Nosnibor

CptSpig said:


> Nosnibor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, I have already been there. I've been melding the knowledge from the MB and CPU forums to get a better understanding.
> 
> I just tried a 4.5 OC all cores at 1.280v and it still shut down as soon as I started realbench.
> 
> I think I may give up on the 4.5 and drop down to maybe a 4.2.
> 
> I know people were getting 4.6 with air/wc and I'm afraid to go up in voltage past the 1.280 unless someone says it's ok.
> 
> I know yours had 1.350v for the 4.6 but even your 4.5 cores were way lower than I was for 4.5 across all unless because it is all I need more?
> 
> I hate being a burden to y'all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No Worries, It's best to get it stable at some oc and then work your way up all CPU's have different capabilities. You need to have a system try clearing your C'Mos and starting over and just oc the cpu on manual to see what voltage it can handle keeping temperature at around 80c. Once you have that change your settings to adaptive mode. Once you are happy with the CPU oc try your memory next and then you can oc cashe. It just takes patience. Don't try just using someone elses settings it ussaully will not work. Rember oc the cpu only first (stable OC) with no other hardware being overclocked. Try 1.25v @ 4.2 if that's stable kick it up to 4.3 until it crashes. Now once it will boot try lowering the voltage 10mv at a time until it won't boot and than add 10 mv. Now stress test adding 10 mv until stable with temperatures around 80c. You get the picture.
Click to expand...

This is what confuses me.

I'm not trying to OC anything else I don't think. I had to disable a bunch of settings because this mobo has a ton of stuff on auto and clocks were going up and down all over the place.

The only thing I have done extra is the xmp profile to 1 which set my ram to 2400.

Maybe I have changed other things but I wouldn't know because gigabyte has its own language compared to what everyone else calls things.

In your manual testing when would it be appropriate to go above a 4.3 and so on? I mean if I get stable 4.3 do I then do 4.4 and when it crashes which it should right away just keep inching up until I get stable there too? And what volt is too high because on the stable 4.2 I had I was still in the 60-70c range. Some people say temp will come first but just in case it doesn't I don't want to be trying to hit 4.5 at 1.6v and explode the CPU...lol.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I have all of @Jpmboy bios screen shots you're welcome to them they are .bmp images very clear like the two others I changed the format on but in a zip folder 

I actually prefer By core usage not all core or even by core like the settings in the zip folder
Reason being you can use the same voltages and it's applied to all of the cores same as you are now and just go to the by core usage page and change the top 8 cores to 45 "for some reason it will only show 16 of 18 of the cores" and the other cores to 40 and that's about it.

Point is only 8-9 cores will be used at the same time but all will eventually hit the max multiplier 45.. just not at the same time which will lower the temperatures a lot.
And yes not a lot of anything uses that many cores most applications only use 2-4 cores 

Oops this is all for asus bios not gigabite


----------



## Nosnibor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I have all of @Jpmboy bios screen shots you're welcome to them they are .bmp images very clear like the two others I changed the format on but in a zip folder
> 
> I actually prefer By core usage not all core or even by core like the settings in the zip folder
> Reason being you can use the same voltages and it's applied to all of the cores same as you are now and just go to the by core usage page and change the top 8 cores to 45 "for some reason it will only show 16 of 18 of the cores" and the other cores to 40 and that's about it.
> 
> Point is only 8-9 cores will be used at the same time but all will eventually hit the max multiplier 45.. just not at the same time which will lower the temperatures a lot.
> And yes not a lot of anything uses that many cores most applications only use 2-4 cores
> 
> Oops this is all for asus bios not gigabite


Thank you anyway. I am going to attempt the multi-core today I guess.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah all core is for exotic water cooling and even it has issues with cooling 10-18 cores without a chiller connected to it 
By core or if it has by core usage either of these would be advised to use instead of all core.


----------



## Nosnibor

So I think I have found my problem.

My Vcore protection and Vcore current protection were on auto. I'm assuming that is why as soon as it wanted more power it was shutting the PSU down (assuming it was the PSU that shut down? lol).

Any idea on safe levels for these two settings?

The Vcore Protection can go up to 400.0mV.

The Vcore Current Protection goes: Normal, Standard, Low, Medium, High, Turbo, Extreme (am I right in assuming the higher these are the more "protection" it adds?")


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Sounds like llc = load line calibration 
I'd leave it on normal

You didn't add what power supply you have installed 
1200w would probably be a bare minimum for your system.


----------



## CptSpig

Nosnibor said:


> This is what confuses me.
> 
> I'm not trying to OC anything else I don't think. I had to disable a bunch of settings because this mobo has a ton of stuff on auto and clocks were going up and down all over the place.
> 
> The only thing I have done extra is the xmp profile to 1 which set my ram to 2400.
> 
> Maybe I have changed other things but I wouldn't know because gigabyte has its own language compared to what everyone else calls things.
> 
> In your manual testing when would it be appropriate to go above a 4.3 and so on? I mean if I get stable 4.3 do I then do 4.4 and when it crashes which it should right away just keep inching up until I get stable there too? And what volt is too high because on the stable 4.2 I had I was still in the 60-70c range. Some people say temp will come first but just in case it doesn't I don't want to be trying to hit 4.5 at 1.6v and explode the CPU...lol.


Do not use XMP it overclocks other hardware not just memory. Start with clearing your c'mos and setting your bclk to 100.


----------



## Jpmboy

I'm not sure this user/member should be overclocking a 7980XE until he does some reading and better understands the bios on that board. There's no need to adjust the board's powerlimits with the shutdown he described. On this platform, it will power-throttle. It's more likely the PSU is doing an OCP.
:blinksmil


----------



## Nosnibor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Sounds like llc = load line calibration
> I'd leave it on normal
> 
> You didn't add what power supply you have installed
> 1200w would probably be a bare minimum for your system.


My PSU is 1000W Platinum.

My LLC has always been at Turbo (second to last)

My most recent test which all I did was set the Vcore Current Protection to "Medium" and I was able actually run Real Bench (I also LOWERED Vcore to 1.210V).

Here is the weird thing though: Windows is reporting my CPU at 1.3Ghz but CPU-ID and Core Temp is reporting the 4.5Ghz and when I ran Real Bench it seems like it was only testing 1 core? Is that accurate?


----------



## Nosnibor

Jpmboy said:


> I'm not sure this user/member should be overclocking a 7980XE until he does some reading and better understands the bios on that board. There's no need to adjust the board's powerlimits with the shutdown he described. On this platform, it will power-throttle. It's more likely the PSU is doing an OCP.
> :blinksmil


I have literally spent every google search possible. Now individual tweaking is all I am left to. Gigabyte has the most lax "guide" of any board I have read. I am making progress finally but it's really difficult to get the info I need from forum post where a real conversation would actually help a ton.


----------



## Jpmboy

The realbench x264 module will load all cores with AVX2-level loads. if you have any AVX offset in bios (and you should) the freq will drop when under AVX load. If you do not have an AVX offset set... you will.


----------



## Jpmboy

the best way to approach this is to CLRCMOS, then simply set synch all cores to 43, manual vcore to 1.18V, and VCCIN to 1.9V. Everything else on auto (NO XMP). verify that this is stable. if it is, then begin slowly lowering vcore until it is not stable. Increase vcore back to stability. Save this to a bios save slot (Profiles in Gbyte). and work from there. Also, be sure you have a good image of your OS/system, in case it corrupts during this process - assuming you'd rather not reinstall the OS.
Once you have a stable base to work from, then we'll move to ram and cache.
Please fill out rigbuilder and add it to your signature block. Helps us help you.


BTW - ALWAYS use a mid level LLC!


----------



## Nosnibor

Jpmboy said:


> the best way to approach this is to CLRCMOS, then simply set synch all cores to 43, manual vcore to 1.18V, and VCCIN to 1.9V. Everything else on auto (NO XMP). verify that this is stable. if it is, then begin slowly lowering vcore until it is not stable. Increase vcore back to stability. Save this to a bios save slot (Profiles in Gbyte). and work from there. Also, be sure you have a good image of your OS/system, in case it corrupts during this process - assuming you'd rather not reinstall the OS.
> Once you have a stable base to work from, then we'll move to ram and cache.
> Please fill out rigbuilder and add it to your signature block. Helps us help you.
> 
> 
> BTW - ALWAYS use a mid level LLC!


Thank you. It's crazy that Gigabyte's guide says to use Turbo which is just under Extreme for LLC.

The one thing I have noticed is that no matter what clock I set and if I had any manual vcore if "CPU Vcore Current Protection" was set to auto anytime I ran a test the machine would shut off and restart.

Right now I have it on "Normal" and LLC to "Normal" and I am running prime95 blend test with no AVX at 1.200v Vcore with Core Temp reporting 64-76c temp all cores 4.5GHz and pulling ~250w.

Is this seemingly ok? Should I try backing the Vcore off now and see the lowest I can go?

EDIT: As the test goes on some cores are briefly hitting 82c. I will keep an eye on it.


----------



## CptSpig

Nosnibor said:


> Thank you. It's crazy that Gigabyte's guide says to use Turbo which is just under Extreme for LLC.
> 
> The one thing I have noticed is that no matter what clock I set and if I had any manual vcore if "CPU Vcore Current Protection" was set to auto anytime I ran a test the machine would shut off and restart.
> 
> Right now I have it on "Normal" and LLC to "Normal" and I am running prime95 blend test with no AVX at 1.200v Vcore with Core Temp reporting 64-76c temp all cores 4.5GHz and pulling ~250w.
> 
> Is this seemingly ok? Should I try backing the Vcore off now and see the lowest I can go?



Yes you should voltage = heat the lower the better. Make sure it's stable don't go so low you have issue with any programs you may run. One thing I noticed is you did not list your power supply in you rigbuilder. EDIT: I saw you listed a 1000w in a prior post with this CPU. I had power issue with my 1000w PS when benching and stress testing something to think about..... 82c on a couple or three cores no problem keep an eye on the package temps.


----------



## Nosnibor

CptSpig said:


> Yes you should voltage = heat the lower the better. Make sure it's stable don't go so low you have issue with any programs you may run. One thing I noticed is you did not list your power supply in you rigbuilder. EDIT: I saw you listed a 1000w in a prior post with this CPU. I had power issue with my 1000w PS when benching and stress testing something to think about.....


Yeah I thought I had added it in rig builder but apparently it didn't stick but I have done it again and hopefully it will this time.

That's interesting about 1000w not being enough. I'm ok with lowering my clock to be honest for the cooler temps since I share an office the size of a closet with 3 other people with computers.

My prime test just failed around the 10 minute mark and I wonder if it still has to do with this "CPU Vcore Current Protection" As the test went on the total wattage pulled was going up and I can't find any real information on what this setting is. It seems like it is the equivalent to "Current Capability" on other boards but with the options available I'm not sure if "low" means less protection and "extreme" would be more or if they fall inline with the LLC and should be paired with that.

I see people post about levels 1-5 but I technically have 8 options in this bios, lol.


----------



## CptSpig

Nosnibor said:


> Yeah I thought I had added it in rig builder but apparently it didn't stick but I have done it again and hopefully it will this time.
> 
> That's interesting about 1000w not being enough. I'm ok with lowering my clock to be honest for the cooler temps since I share an office the size of a closet with 3 other people with computers.
> 
> My prime test just failed around the 10 minute mark and I wonder if it still has to do with this "CPU Vcore Current Protection" As the test went on the total wattage pulled was going up and I can't find any real information on what this setting is. It seems like it is the equivalent to "Current Capability" on other boards but with the options available I'm not sure if "low" means less protection and "extreme" would be more or if they fall inline with the LLC and should be paired with that.
> 
> I see people post about levels 1-5 but I technically have 8 options in this bios, lol.



I also used different brand boards until Jpm set me on the right path with Asus. The Asus bios is by far the best in the business. I would think low means less protection and extreme means more protection. Did you see his post # 8088 (There's no need to adjust the board's powerlimits with the shutdown he described. On this platform, it will power-throttle. It's more likely the PSU is doing an OCP). Something to consider.


----------



## Nosnibor

CptSpig said:


> I also used different brand boards until Jpm set me on the right path with Asus. The Asus bios is by far the best in the business. I would think low means less protection and extreme means more protection. Did you see his post # 8088 (There's no need to adjust the board's powerlimits with the shutdown he described. On this platform, it will power-throttle. It's more likely the PSU is doing an OCP). Something to consider.


So just going from what I have seen is with adjusting that setting I can at least start the test and run several minutes when before it was on auto the second I clicked start it shut down.

But maybe that means nothing?


----------



## CptSpig

Nosnibor said:


> So just going from what I have seen is with adjusting that setting I can at least start the test and run several minutes when before it was on auto the second I clicked start it shut down.
> 
> But maybe that means nothing?



Adjust one notch down and see what happens. What are you using for monitoring? If you are not using SIVx64 get it and keep an eye on voltage and package temperasures. I would not set limit protections to low you could cook the CPU. Be cautious. :thumb:


----------



## Nosnibor

CptSpig said:


> Adjust one notch down and see what happens. What are you using for monitoring? If you are not using SIVx64 get it and keep an eye on voltage and package temperasures. I would not set limit protections to low you could cook the CPU. Be cautious. :thumb:


Again with the brilliant Gigabyte board my options are in this order "Auto, Normal, Standard, Low, Medium, High, Turbo and Extreme", lol. To me Normal, Standard and Medium should be the same thing? I don't know. I don't get who would make this board with those options. So it gets confusing when I read other post for boards where "one down" makes since.


----------



## CptSpig

Nosnibor said:


> Again with the brilliant Gigabyte board my options are in this order "Auto, Normal, Standard, Low, Medium, High, Turbo and Extreme", lol. To me Normal, Standard and Medium should be the same thing? I don't know. I don't get who would make this board with those options. So it gets confusing when I read other post for boards where "one down" makes since.



What is the recommend setting in the manual? I would try auto and watch sivx64's voltage and temperature when the machine shuts down. It sounds like you are reaching power or temperature limits.


----------



## Nosnibor

CptSpig said:


> What is the recommend setting in the manual? I would try auto and watch sivx64's voltage and temperature when the machine shuts down. It sounds like you are reaching power or temperature limits.


Any auto on the setting during tests instantly shuts down the PC even at a 3GHz which it really should be able to do. I'm watching all the temps but I've barely touched 80c and thats on the more aggressive 4.5 I was attempting.

Would power limit be the PSU?

When people say "Current Capability" to 130-140% what is that setting because I feel like that is what this setting I am messing with does....but with words instead of percentages.


----------



## Nosnibor

Here is my SIV64x a couple minutes into my 4.2Ghz test. It failed about 10 minutes in.

Currently testing 1.100v Vcore.

Temps sitting ~70c.

Says the max system pull is 282w. How is the PSU running out when I have 1000w?

Cpu is pulling ~220w.

Could maybe my shutoff be from the auto Tjmax setting in the bios? Who knows what gigabyte is setting that to. Even though Core Temp states Tjmax is 105c?

https://imgur.com/a/HPBe0i4


----------



## ThrashZone

Nosnibor said:


> My PSU is 1000W Platinum.
> 
> My LLC has always been at Turbo (second to last)
> 
> My most recent test which all I did was set the Vcore Current Protection to "Medium" and I was able actually run Real Bench (I also LOWERED Vcore to 1.210V).
> 
> Here is the weird thing though: Windows is reporting my CPU at 1.3Ghz but CPU-ID and Core Temp is reporting the 4.5Ghz and when I ran Real Bench it seems like it was only testing 1 core? Is that accurate?


Hi,
To get or change information on your rig on signature you have to make edits,
Uncheck the box to show your rig in sig save.
Then go back and recheck the show rig in sig/ yes a pain 

Do you have a battery backup connected to the machine in case you loose power ?
I like them for the obvious reason plus it will activate if the wall plug is not putting out as much as is being used by equipment.

Some people also use a kill a watt meter too to see what is being pulled from the wall plug
https://www.homedepot.com/p/P3-International-Kill-A-Watt-EZ-Meter-P4460/202196388


----------



## ThrashZone

Nosnibor said:


> Any auto on the setting during tests instantly shuts down the PC even at a 3GHz which it really should be able to do. I'm watching all the temps but I've barely touched 80c and thats on the more aggressive 4.5 I was attempting.
> 
> Would power limit be the PSU?
> 
> *When people say "Current Capability" to 130-140% what is that setting because I feel like that is what this setting I am messing with does....but with words instead of percentages*.


Hi,
I'd leave that alone till you get past some basic temp testing just leave it at auto or 100% it overshoots voltage so the cpu runs faster.


----------



## Nosnibor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> To get or change information on your rig on signature you have to make edits,
> Uncheck the box to show your rig in sig save.
> Then go back and recheck the show rig in sig/ yes a pain
> 
> Do you have a battery backup connected to the machine in case you loose power ?
> I like them for the obvious reason plus it will activate if the wall plug is not putting out as much as is being used by equipment.
> 
> Some people also use a kill a watt meter too to see what is being pulled from the wall plug
> https://www.homedepot.com/p/P3-International-Kill-A-Watt-EZ-Meter-P4460/202196388


Hey man,

My rig has been in my sig for a few days now.

I am starting to wonder now based on other things I have found online if my PSU is bad.

I actually just called EVGA and they think it is a bad PSU but at the same time my OC may not be 100% stable.

But tell me if I am wrong...I shouldn't be having PSU issues if SIV64x is telling me max load at ~280w and the machine just shuts off with no error and boots up fine. I'm definitely thinking the PSU is having some trouble but please help me understand if I am wrong in thinking that.

I know I'm being annoying and trying to learn everything and I also know this is an intense build to learn from but I believe I have learned a lot so far...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
For one get one of those kill a watt ez devices asap !
Could be the wall plug.

evga has good psu's I've got 3 of them 1200/ 1000/ 850 all P2 series.

Make sure the ECO switch is not activated !


----------



## Nosnibor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> For one get one of those kill a watt ez devices asap !
> Could be the wall plug.
> 
> evga has good psu's I've got 3 of them 1200/ 1000/ 850 all P2 series.
> 
> Make sure the ECO switch is not activated !


Good call. ECO was off but I didn't even notice that. I'm checking the wall next.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep one step at a time 
The wall meter will help say what is being pulled when the computer shuts down.
Good evidence for evga too


----------



## CptSpig

Nosnibor said:


> Here is my SIV64x a couple minutes into my 4.2Ghz test. It failed about 10 minutes in.
> 
> Currently testing 1.100v Vcore.
> 
> Temps sitting ~70c.
> 
> Says the max system pull is 282w. How is the PSU running out when I have 1000w?
> 
> Cpu is pulling ~220w.
> 
> Could maybe my shutoff be from the auto Tjmax setting in the bios? Who knows what gigabyte is setting that to. Even though Core Temp states Tjmax is 105c?
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/HPBe0i4





Nosnibor said:


> Hey man,
> 
> My rig has been in my sig for a few days now.
> 
> I am starting to wonder now based on other things I have found online if my PSU is bad.
> 
> I actually just called EVGA and they think it is a bad PSU but at the same time my OC may not be 100% stable.
> 
> But tell me if I am wrong...I shouldn't be having PSU issues if SIV64x is telling me max load at ~280w and the machine just shuts off with no error and boots up fine. I'm definitely thinking the PSU is having some trouble but please help me understand if I am wrong in thinking that.
> 
> I know I'm being annoying and trying to learn everything and I also know this is an intense build to learn from but I believe I have learned a lot so far...





Nosnibor said:


> Good call. ECO was off but I didn't even notice that. I'm checking the wall next.



Do you have another PSU you can use to test? Only then will you know for sure. My 1000 watt that failed was EVGA so it's possible.


----------



## PWn3R

Some of the EVGA models are good, some are weaksauce. There are articles on HardOCP and that power supply review guys page detailing the differences.

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## Jpmboy

PWn3R said:


> Some of the EVGA models are good, some are weaksauce. There are articles on HardOCP and that* power supply review guys p*age detailing the differences.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk



johnnyguru


----------



## Jpmboy

Nosnibor said:


> Thank you. It's crazy that Gigabyte's guide says to use Turbo which is just under Extreme for LLC.
> 
> The one thing I have noticed is that no matter what clock I set and if I had any manual vcore if "CPU Vcore Current Protection" was set to auto anytime I ran a test the machine would shut off and restart.
> 
> Right now I have it on "Normal" and LLC to "Normal" *and I am running prime95 blend test w*ith no AVX at 1.200v Vcore with Core Temp reporting 64-76c temp all cores 4.5GHz and pulling ~250w.
> 
> Is this seemingly ok? Should I try backing the Vcore off now and see the lowest I can go?
> 
> EDIT: As the test goes on some cores are briefly hitting 82c. I will keep an eye on it.



forget about p95 on this platform. Just use realbench or x264 *stressor 
*
Honestly, something is very wrong if your 18 core cpu is only pulling 250W at 4.5GHZ and 1.2V (tho is likely not stable as you noticed). For comparison, my 7980XE pulls over 400W at 4.5 with 1.22V just running GSAT (a memory test). p95 would be over 700W.


Like I said, get a stable foundation overclock at a lower frequency first, then work your way up.


----------



## PWn3R

Jpmboy said:


> johnnyguru


Yes, thank you. Also, confirming what you said. My 7980xe consumes over 700 Watts with P95 with approximately 1. 2 volts on all the cores running at 4. 6 gigahertz. Cinebench hits nearly 600 watts with the same setup. Would yours running higher than that, I would expect power draw north of 750w based on your voltage. Note: with a 480 mm radiator I am at the limit of what I can cool with waterblock I am using and a non delided CPU at 1. 2 volts.

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## Jpmboy

PWn3R said:


> Yes, thank you. Also, confirming what you said. My *7980xe consumes over 700 Watts with P95 *with approximately 1. 2 volts on all the cores running at 4. 6 gigahertz. Cinebench hits nearly 600 watts with the same setup. Would yours running higher than that, I would expect power draw north of 750w based on your voltage. Note: with a 480 mm radiator I am at the limit of what I can cool with waterblock I am using and a non delided CPU at 1. 2 volts.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk



yeah, these HCC chips are not your old 4 core pentium. p95 really needs to be put back in the tar pit with the rest of the dinosaurs.


----------



## Chargeit

Well, wasn't easy but I salvaged a video out of my footage. 

My cpu temps maxed out at 80c while rendering the video. Before the delidding my temps would hit 95c + when rendering video.


----------



## Mat_UK

Chargeit said:


> Well, wasn't easy but I salvaged a video out of my footage.
> 
> My cpu temps maxed out at 80c while rendering the video. Before the delidding my temps would hit 95c + when rendering video.
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/b_mImN-mD8I


Nice, thanks for posting the video


----------



## Chargeit

Mat_UK said:


> Nice, thanks for posting the video


Thanks!


----------



## PWn3R

Well, the team at EK has stopped responding to my support request. I sent all the requested pictures of the loop, the block, the thermal paste installation, etc. I'm starting to suspect that something with the block legs isn't fitting through the holes in the CPU retention clip assembly on the motherboard. I don't have any other explanation for the horrible temperature increase after switching to this monoblock.

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## wingman99

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, these HCC chips are not your old 4 core pentium. p95 really needs to be put back in the tar pit with the rest of the dinosaurs.


4 core pentium did not have AVX2/FMA3 for prime95. Prime95 is updated and still relevant.


----------



## Chargeit

wingman99 said:


> 4 core pentium did not have AVX2/FMA3 for prime95. Prime95 is updated and still relevant.


P95 seems too aggressive compared to other stress testing tools. 

I oc'ed my current clocks on my 7820x using Realbench and Aida64. I've used the system since release without stability issues. My usage is everything from gaming to rendering/encoding videos. Hell, I even used the cpu for crypto mining for as much as weeks at a time without break. If you can get that kind of stability without using P95 then why bother unless there's a very specific usage case where P95 does simulate your workload.


----------



## ThrashZone

PWn3R said:


> Well, the team at EK has stopped responding to my support request. I sent all the requested pictures of the loop, the block, the thermal paste installation, etc. I'm starting to suspect that something with the block legs isn't fitting through the holes in the CPU retention clip assembly on the motherboard. I don't have any other explanation for the horrible temperature increase after switching to this monoblock.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


Hi,
Really not surprising 
EK dropped ocn reps too a long time ago.
Just a overly complicated design with too may channels that don't go through the cooling fins thus all fluid does not pass through the fins and we see higher temps.
More flow will help a little getting to say a ek evo block but that's about all.

I might delid mine again or sand the cap it's not very flat which you might look at closer.


----------



## PWn3R

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Really not surprising
> EK dropped ocn reps too a long time ago.
> Just a overly complicated design with too may channels that don't go through the cooling fins thus all fluid does not pass through the fins and we see higher temps.
> More flow will help a little getting to say a ek evo block but that's about all.
> 
> I might delid mine again or sand the cap it's not very flat which you might look at closer.


Pretty disappointed honestly. Debating asking if I can ask Performance PCs to let me swap it out for a bitspower. I may try sanding the legs on the block to see if that helps. I'm guessing the only real possibility is that it's not squeezing down tight on the CPU. The vrms are indenting into the thermal pad so I know that's tightened all the way. The thermal paste looks even but too thick across the CPU, after looking closely at the pictures I sent EK again.

I may buy a deliding kit and do mine or I might send it to SL. For me turn around time would be the biggest issue with SL.

Sent from my Mi MIX 2S using Tapatalk


----------



## Jpmboy

Nosnibor said:


> Good call. ECO was off but I didn't even notice that. I'm checking the wall next.



just for comparison purposes... here's my 7980XE running 16 cores at 4.5 and 2 cores at 4.6, with 1.2-1.22V for 4.5 and 1.3V for 4.6 resp. Any p95 or Y-prime runs (which is better for this purpose - higher current draw) and it will hit 700W and turn on the AX1500i fan (only happens when power is above 50% of the PSU capacity). :blinksmil
So, point being... use something other than p95 until you range the CPU's power and thermal performance, preferrably on a per core basis.


Use the AVX offsets, HCC chips normally have these hard coded and not changable in bios (server HCC).


----------



## wingman99

Chargeit said:


> P95 seems too aggressive compared to other stress testing tools.
> 
> I oc'ed my current clocks on my 7820x using Realbench and Aida64. I've used the system since release without stability issues. My usage is everything from gaming to rendering/encoding videos. Hell, I even used the cpu for crypto mining for as much as weeks at a time without break. If you can get that kind of stability without using P95 then why bother unless there's a very specific usage case where P95 does simulate your workload.


There must be some reasons because Intel's linpack benchmark and test uses the same utilization and watts. https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-linpack-benchmark-download-license-agreement


----------



## Mat_UK

I actually found Realbench uncovered an instability in my overclock that P95 didn't find. Also, with the stock IHS & TIM my 7900x at 4.7 all core OC could not run the default blend test in P95 (both AVX and non AVX) without temps going through the roof and thermal throttling. Since delidding I can now get through the blend test without throttling. 

I'm now at 4.8 all core OC and I consider this stable. I use a range of tests, starting with Cinebench to see if the OC is basically unstable as it's quick. If that works, running 10 times in a row, I then run Realbench looping 10 times over for several runs through and if that passes switch to P95 for a couple of hours or more. Finally if I use the PC for a week as I normally would and if it gets through that and several 3-4 hours straight gaming sessions without a crash then I consider it stable.

I suppose it's possible that P95 finds an instability that is caused (or at least revealed) by the extremely high temps it creates. In normal use, many of us probably get nowhere near the temps generated by P95 - I know I don't - so there is a case for saying P95 is somewhat pointless if it is testing for a scenario that you never actually use. This is why I really like Realbench as it does seem more geared towards what people might actually use their rig for.

All that said, I reckon a range of different stress tests that put load on all parts of the system in different ways is the best way to satisfy (at least to yourself) that your rig is stable.


----------



## Jpmboy

Mat_UK said:


> I actually found Realbench uncovered an instability in my overclock that P95 didn't find. Also, with the stock IHS & TIM my 7900x at 4.7 all core OC could not run the default blend test in P95 (both AVX and non AVX) without temps going through the roof and thermal throttling. Since delidding I can now get through the blend test without throttling.
> 
> I'm now at 4.8 all core OC and I consider this stable. I use a range of tests, starting with Cinebench to see if the OC is basically unstable as it's quick. If that works, running 10 times in a row, I then run Realbench looping 10 times over for several runs through and if that passes switch to P95 for a couple of hours or more. Finally if I use the PC for a week as I normally would and if it gets through that and several 3-4 hours straight gaming sessions without a crash then I consider it stable.
> 
> *I suppose it's possible that P95 finds an instability that is caused (or at least revealed) by the extremely high temps it creates.* In normal use, many of us probably get nowhere near the temps generated by P95 - I know I don't - so there is a case for saying P95 is somewhat pointless if it is testing for a scenario that you never actually use. This is why I really like Realbench as it does seem more geared towards what people might actually use their rig for.
> 
> All that said, I reckon a range of different stress tests that put load on all parts of the system in different ways is the best way to satisfy (at least to yourself) that your rig is stable.



^^ this. p95 just basically stresses the cooling configuration. It's pretty useless IMO, and I've been saying that since x99 launched. Last platform I found it useful for was my 2700K (which is still running all day, every day unattended storing and compressing security cam videos from 5 cameras around my property.)


----------



## crpcookie

So how are the loads distributed if I use Specific Core overclock? Let’s say I have an 8 core CPU with this setup:
Core 0: 4.6GHz
Core 1: 4.5GHz
Core 2: 4.5GHz
Core 3: 4.4GHz
Core 4; 4.2GHz
Core 5: 4.0GHz
Core 6: 3.8GHz
Core 7: 3.6GHz

If I run an application that only uses 4 threads, will the first 4 cores be used?


----------



## ThrashZone

crpcookie said:


> So how are the loads distributed if I use Specific Core overclock? Let’s say I have an 8 core CPU with this setup:
> Core 0: 4.6GHz
> Core 1: 4.5GHz
> Core 2: 4.5GHz
> Core 3: 4.4GHz
> Core 4; 4.2GHz
> Core 5: 4.0GHz
> Core 6: 3.8GHz
> Core 7: 3.6GHz
> 
> If I run an application that only uses 4 threads, will the first 4 cores be used?


Hi,
You'd have to refer to intel turbo boost 3.0 to see which arrangement of cores are first..... or best to worst.
Wish it was 0....... but it could show 3-4-6-8..... as first or best which minus 1 would in bios be 2-3-5-7... there is no 0 core, 0 is 1.


----------



## crpcookie

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> You'd have to refer to intel turbo boost 3.0 to see which arrangement of cores are first..... or best to worst.
> Wish it was 0....... but it could show 3-4-6-8..... as first or best which minus 1 would in bios be 2-3-5-7... there is no 0 core, 0 is 1.


I’ll take a look thanks


----------



## ThrashZone

crpcookie said:


> I’ll take a look thanks


Hi,
Here's mine top is best but remember minus 1 on all of them.


----------



## Nosnibor

Jpmboy said:


> just for comparison purposes... here's my 7980XE running 16 cores at 4.5 and 2 cores at 4.6, with 1.2-1.22V for 4.5 and 1.3V for 4.6 resp. Any p95 or Y-prime runs (which is better for this purpose - higher current draw) and it will hit 700W and turn on the AX1500i fan (only happens when power is above 50% of the PSU capacity). :blinksmil
> So, point being... use something other than p95 until you range the CPU's power and thermal performance, preferrably on a per core basis.
> 
> 
> Use the AVX offsets, HCC chips normally have these hard coded and not changable in bios (server HCC).


Wow, So why am I only seeing ~250 in siv? Something must be wrong right? Whether bios setting or something....ugh


----------



## Nosnibor

Something else odd that I notice is SIV64x is reporting that my Vcore is 1.9v.....? I have it set as 1.1v and all the CPU's show 1.1v

Any thoughts?


----------



## Jpmboy

Nosnibor said:


> Something else odd that I notice is SIV64x is reporting that my Vcore is 1.9v.....? I have it set as 1.1v and all the CPU's show 1.1v
> 
> Any thoughts?



show a screenshot of what you have there. (hit prtsc then paste it into Paint, or use the Snipping Tool).


----------



## Nosnibor

Jpmboy said:


> show a screenshot of what you have there. (hit prtsc then paste it into Paint, or use the Snipping Tool).


I will get you that first thing in the morning.

Side note. I am wondering about the settings that set like how much consistent watts pulled before dropping down. In my bios it has set values but would something like LLC override that? Or is supposed to?

All the values are low like 165 for 3 seconds or something but it just added to my pot of questions...


----------



## Jpmboy

Nosnibor said:


> I will get you that first thing in the morning.
> 
> Side note. I am wondering about the settings that set like how much consistent watts pulled before dropping down. In my bios it has set values but would something like LLC override that? Or is supposed to?
> 
> All the values are low like 165 for 3 seconds or something but it just added to my pot of questions...



yeah, set Power limit 1 to 500, PL1 time limit to 127. CPU Current limit to 255. Be aware that raising these limits can roast your CPU. Always proceed with caution UNTIL YOU UNDERSTAND THE POWER AND TEMPERATURE CHARACT5ERISTICS OF YOUR CPU. Stay away from p95 during these initial stages of OC with your HCC chip.


----------



## Nosnibor

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, set Power limit 1 to 500, PL1 time limit to 127. CPU Current limit to 255. Be aware that raising these limits can roast your CPU. Always proceed with caution UNTIL YOU UNDERSTAND THE POWER AND TEMPERATURE CHARACT5ERISTICS OF YOUR CPU. Stay away from p95 during these initial stages of OC with your HCC chip.


When you say "understand the power and temperature characteristics of your cpu" what does that even mean and what can I do to learn that? I'm really trying here and just keep getting smacked with warnings.

Is there a lesser than maxed out setting that may work?

Is setting the power limit necessary and do my symptoms represent that of a power limit issue?


----------



## Nosnibor

As far as power limit I see a lot of guides stating they need to be set to "130-140%" however my board has specific values to be set in.

So if my CPU is 165w do I need to do the math for the 130-140% and input that there instead?


----------



## Mysticial

Nosnibor said:


> When you say "understand the power and temperature characteristics of your cpu" what does that even mean and what can I do to learn that? I'm really trying here and just keep getting smacked with warnings.
> 
> Is there a lesser than maxed out setting that may work?
> 
> Is setting the power limit necessary and do my symptoms represent that of a power limit issue?


Imagine you're driving a really nice sports car. The car is really powerful, but it has limiters in place to cap its power so that you don't do anything stupid.

What we're trying to tell you here is to understand your car before you remove those limiters and hit the gas. Otherwise you're just gonna crash it right away like this:







IOW, don't just blindly remove power protections just because they're getting in the way of the overclock. They are there for a reason. And they are not to be removed until you know what you're doing.


-------


Start with the default power limits. And carefully watch all the hardware monitors for temperature, power draw, etc... Then slowly work up from there.

What you don't want to do is to completely remove the limits, then the load you put on the system completely overruns the thermals and blows the system up. (IOW, don't try to AVX512 at 4.5 GHz on all cores. At least not without LN2.)


----------



## Void-Ray

Jpmboy said:


> the mainboa4rd OLED displays what's called "T2 CPUTIN". It is not the cpu core temperatures. It is a on-board, not on-die T-sensor. Use this for fan control or something. It reads 10+ C cooler than cores and 20+C cooler than package). Download AID64 and buy a legit version or SIV64 (free). SIV64 works fine and shows all temps and voltages reported to the OS (including the board's T-sensor headers. (see below). It's a bit complex, but worth learning.


Hi, sorry for late answer and thanks for the info, i tried AIDA64 and temps without FPU are around 70 at most on my highest core in a cool room, is that normal for these chips? just in case to remind you of my hardware here it is:
I7 7820X
Asus Rampage VI Extreme
G.Skill 3200 RGB 64GB
and about my power supply it's EVGA 1000W P2, and i changed the cpu current capability to 200% and yet still the system would crash and reboot itself as soon as i run FPU, do you think it's a problem with my PSU? i plugged in additional CPU power cable too, and i have my CPU overclocked at 4.4GHZ, AVX and AVX-512 are set to 3 and 4, CPU voltage is set to offset minus 40 now, and under load i'm getting 1.174V on core voltage.
any ideas on how i can determine the fault in here maybe?


----------



## Mysticial

Void-Ray said:


> Hi, sorry for late answer and thanks for the info, i tried AIDA64 and temps without FPU are around 70 at most on my highest core in a cool room, is that normal for these chips? just in case to remind you of my hardware here it is:
> I7 7820X
> Asus Rampage VI Extreme
> G.Skill 3200 RGB 64GB
> and about my power supply it's EVGA 1000W P2, and i changed the cpu current capability to 200% and yet still the system would crash and reboot itself as soon as i run FPU, do you think it's a problem with my PSU? i plugged in additional CPU power cable too, and i have my CPU overclocked at 4.4GHZ, AVX and AVX-512 are set to 3 and 4, CPU voltage is set to offset minus 40 now, and under load i'm getting 1.174V on core voltage.
> any ideas on how i can determine the fault in here maybe?


Try AVX -4 and AVX512 -8. If that is stable, then work back up from there.


----------



## Nosnibor

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, set Power limit 1 to 500, PL1 time limit to 127. CPU Current limit to 255. Be aware that raising these limits can roast your CPU. Always proceed with caution UNTIL YOU UNDERSTAND THE POWER AND TEMPERATURE CHARACT5ERISTICS OF YOUR CPU. Stay away from p95 during these initial stages of OC with your HCC chip.


I am going over what you put here. Here is what my bios has has options.

Would I leave 2 blank or on auto IF I did this.

Also it looks like for some reason on auto the core was hitting way higher than the 255 you recommend or is there a different setting I need to find?

https://imgur.com/a/bNj6my2


----------



## Jpmboy

Nosnibor said:


> I am going over what you put here. Here is what my bios has has options.
> 
> *Would I leave 2 blank or on auto IF I did this.*
> 
> Also it looks like for some reason on auto the core was hitting way higher than the 255 you recommend or is there a different setting I need to find?
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/bNj6my2



wut? simply enter only the settings as I posted. The power limit 2 value is calc'd from PL1. so yes, leave that on Auto. 255 is the board limit for current. 500 is a reasonable value for someone just learning "how to" do this... it is a safety feature you can always raise later.
Avoid changing too many settings. stick with VCCIN, VCORE, LLC and the power limits at this point in the process. Be sure that Speedshift is enabled, Speedstep (EIST) can be disabled if you are using windows 10 builds higher than 16xx


----------



## PWn3R

Does anyone have an ASRock board? I'm trying other figure out how to get per core settings to run auto with turbo on all the cores except the four that I can get to do 4.9ghz. However when I leave the other cores on full auto, the other cores just sit at 1200mhz and don't turbo, even with turbo on.i suppose I could drop the other cores to just like 44 or 45 to lower voltage a bit on those.

I did finally get another response from EK saying that the block is not tightening down all the way but I can't tighten them more. I'm going to sand the legs down a bit to see if that helps. I think they are stuck in the holes through the course retention clip and not allowing the block to tighten down all the way. It's the only remaining idea I have on the bad temperatures.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## aDyerSituation

Has anyone else had to slowly increase their vcore for their overclock? My chip is from SL binned at 4.6ghz and 1.2vcore. I now need 1.23 to be stable.

Also, I asked this over year ago, but I can't seem to find my mesh voltage in any sensor monitoring program. It doesn't show it in my bios(strix e)


----------



## ThrashZone

aDyerSituation said:


> Has anyone else had to slowly increase their vcore for their overclock? My chip is from SL binned at 4.6ghz and 1.2vcore. I now need 1.23 to be stable.
> 
> Also, I asked this over year ago, but I can't seem to find my mesh voltage in any sensor monitoring program. It doesn't show it in my bios(strix e)


Hi,
Two very good questions 
I haven't been oc'ing the x299 too much but the micro code in the newer bios has been said to need more juice 
I'm on older bios and don't use 10 all that much and 7 hasn't been updated since December 2017 so I wouldn't know of any issues updates might have altered stuff with or without newer bios.

I've been messing with x99 system more trying to mess with some of the 8700k boys and girls lol but yeah updates and Ms insisting on new bios is a issue on it for sure depending on which build one is using and of course Updates OFF 

Mesh voltage that one is true nothing shows it 
I have noticed people use intel extreme tuning utility possibly it shows something besides what +-... stuff :/
I don't use oc utilities personally only in bios which I can't even remember what I use for 3000 at the moment 
Hwmonitor shows a llc/ mesh volage that might be pretty close I saw at 1.1v


----------



## cekim

aDyerSituation said:


> Has anyone else had to slowly increase their vcore for their overclock? My chip is from SL binned at 4.6ghz and 1.2vcore. I now need 1.23 to be stable.
> 
> Also, I asked this over year ago, but I can't seem to find my mesh voltage in any sensor monitoring program. It doesn't show it in my bios(strix e)


I had to go from 1.175 to 1.185 for 4.5GHz all-core after moving to a warmer climate this summer - I had one random crash under intense load (very big threaded compile using all threads in linux) - so I raised it a little. It may have always been "unstable" and this peculiar load was "enough" to break it, but I ran that job quite a few more times (out of necessity) after that without issue. 

I've not seen another integer based load that got the chip as warm as that job...


----------



## PWn3R

I had to raise my voltage as well, while seemingly being completely in the safe zone with an OC that was tested with Aida and ran for months with no issues. And I had to bump mine more than .010 now we have three people that have reported similar. I wonder if we somehow got a microcode update that I didn't see. Maybe through windows update? There haven't been any BIOS updates for my board since March.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ocvn

PWn3R said:


> I had to raise my voltage as well, while seemingly being completely in the safe zone with an OC that was tested with Aida and ran for months with no issues. And I had to bump mine more than .010 now we have three people that have reported similar. I wonder if we somehow got a microcode update that I didn't see. Maybe through windows update? There haven't been any BIOS updates for my board since March.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


i think the cpu quite sensitive with high temperature. When you pass 80+ in core temp/ hwinfo, you will have some kind of crash/bsod. However, if you can keep your temp below 80 with stress test (in my case: non avx realbench 2.43 8h, avx realbench 2.56 8h, hwbot x265 4k 12 thread, 2 x264v2 run in parallel with 50 threads/ 50 rounds and intel avx 512 test) it good to go. [email protected] , avx -3, avx512 - 13 x299 Dark.


----------



## PWn3R

I need to bust out sand paper and fix the legs on my monoblock this weekend if I get a chance. That will lower mine for sure. I want to see if I can get stock turbo working on other cores and set my 4 good ones to 4.9 which I know works, but it thermal throttles right now with [email protected] 12 @4.6 and 4 @ 4.9

Also, I hate this ASRock bios. Regretting not going x299 dark or an MSI or Asus.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## cekim

ocvn said:


> i think the cpu quite sensitive with high temperature. When you pass 80+ in core temp/ hwinfo, you will have some kind of crash/bsod. However, if you can keep your temp below 80 with stress test (in my case: non avx realbench 2.43 8h, avx realbench 2.56 8h, hwbot x265 4k 12 thread, 2 x264v2 run in parallel with 50 threads/ 50 rounds and intel avx 512 test) it good to go. [email protected] , avx -3, avx512 - 13 x299 Dark.


Yeah, I am attributing mine entirely to seasonal/locational increase in ambient. I tuned in cooler weather.


----------



## aDyerSituation

It could be attributed to heat I guess. But .03 increase is a little odd. I've been on the same 0802 bios for a while


----------



## Jpmboy

with the very common occurrence of this, the added voltage on these HCC chips may simply be an ageing effect. Not a lot of history with such high core count (18) CPUs running voltage this high. Remember stock vcore on a 7980XE is less than 1 volt.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Jpmboy said:


> with the very common occurrence of this, the added voltage on these HCC chips may simply be an ageing effect. Not a lot of history with such high core count (18) CPUs running voltage this high. Remember stock vcore on a 7980XE is less than 1 volt.


Really? I didn't know that. Mine is only an 8 core though.

Lowkey thinking about switching to the 9900k when it comes out. I haven't had a good time with this platform to be honest.


----------



## Jpmboy

aDyerSituation said:


> Really? I didn't know that. Mine is only an 8 core though.
> 
> Lowkey thinking about switching to the 9900k when it comes out. I haven't had a good time with this platform to be honest.



I think every gen chip has an initial ageing effect (break or burn in). What has been the bad time with this platform?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Jpmboy said:


> I think every gen chip has an initial ageing effect (break or burn in). What has been the bad time with this platform?


That's true. Not denying that part. 

The ram I had originally which was a 2x8 4000mhz kit, I couldn't get stable at anything other than default. This could have just been the ram, not sure as I returned it anyway
The second kit I bought was a 4 x 8 3600mhz trident kit, qvl certified

It took me forever to get this ram stable at 3600. The XMP profiles didn't work. 
Once I did get it stable, the best overclock I could get on my ram was 3800. No matter what I set the timings/voltage to I couldn't get it to go past that.
When the platform first came out and I updated the BIOS as they came out, I would have to change something in my ram or voltage to get my old settings that were stable, stable again. That's why I'm still on 0802

I am also dipping to lower FPS than I think I should be while playing Fortnite compared to someone with an 8700k at lower clocks. 

The system isn't the worst thing I've had to deal with but I am a little dissapointed that I bought it instead of waiting for the 8700k.


----------



## Jpmboy

aDyerSituation said:


> That's true. Not denying that part.
> 
> The ram I had originally which was a 2x8 4000mhz kit, I couldn't get stable at anything other than default. This could have just been the ram, not sure as I returned it anyway
> The second kit I bought was a 4 x 8 3600mhz trident kit, qvl certified
> 
> It took me forever to get this ram stable at 3600. The XMP profiles didn't work.
> Once I did get it stable, the best overclock I could get on my ram was 3800. No matter what I set the timings/voltage to I couldn't get it to go past that.
> When the platform first came out and I updated the BIOS as they came out, I would have to change something in my ram or voltage to get my old settings that were stable, stable again. That's why I'm still on 0802
> 
> *I am also dipping to lower FPS than I think I should be while playing Fortnite compared to someone with an 8700k at lower clocks. *
> 
> The system isn't the worst thing I've had to deal with but I am a little dissapointed that I bought it instead of waiting for the 8700k.



yeah, the IPC on the 8700K is tough to beat. I'm not surprised by that (for gaming).


----------



## aDyerSituation

Yeah so it's very minor things that irk me. But even if I only dip to 110 fps on the 9900k vs the 90fps I sometimes dip to now it would be worth the switch for me. I play a lot of Fortnite


----------



## Jpmboy

aDyerSituation said:


> Yeah so it's very minor things that irk me. But even if I only dip to 110 fps on the 9900k vs the 90fps I sometimes dip to now it would be worth the switch for me. I play a lot of Fortnite


What's the refresh on your monitor? 120 or 144?


----------



## aDyerSituation

Jpmboy said:


> What's the refresh on your monitor? 120 or 144?


144hz


----------



## Jpmboy

aDyerSituation said:


> 144hz



yeah, then those min framerates are a PIA. Can you set it to 120 and see if the min FPS increases?


----------



## Chargeit

aDyerSituation said:


> 144hz


The 9900k should be a mean 8 core for gaming at high refresh rate. 

I've been happy with the gaming performance of my 7820x. There were early issues that seemed to get ironed out. Though I game at 3440x1440 and mainly play co-op/sp open world type games. Could see where playing lower res/high refresh could fall short. 

If I were in your shoes I think I'd pick up a new 9900k or used 8700k and sell the 7820x.


----------



## tistou77

Hello

I will probably replace my Koolance 390i with ekwb supremacy EVO (to test the direct die, not good with the Koolance I think after testing the installation)
I do not remember which jetplate is best for Skylake-X

Thanks


----------



## aDyerSituation

Chargeit said:


> The 9900k should be a mean 8 core for gaming at high refresh rate.
> 
> I've been happy with the gaming performance of my 7820x. There were early issues that seemed to get ironed out. Though I game at 3440x1440 and mainly play co-op/sp open world type games. Could see where playing lower res/high refresh could fall short.
> 
> If I were in your shoes I think I'd pick up a new 9900k or used 8700k and sell the 7820x.


I feel that. At the time I really wanted something new and couldn't wait for the 8700k. It's a great cpu overall though. And it holds it's own in gaming but the .1% lows can be a little rough


----------



## Chargeit

aDyerSituation said:


> I feel that. At the time I really wanted something new and couldn't wait for the 8700k. It's a great cpu overall though. And it holds it's own in gaming but the .1% lows can be a little rough


I've seen tests where the tester compared the latency of ring bus vs mesh in games and there was a measurable difference. Would imagine that would be a spot where you'd see the most improvements as a competitive gamer. Using a platform that uses ring bus should make for an overall more responsive gaming experience.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Chargeit said:


> I've seen tests where the tester compared the latency of ring bus vs mesh in games and there was a measurable difference. Would imagine that would be a spot where you'd see the most improvements as a competitive gamer. Using a platform that uses ring bus should make for an overall more responsive gaming experience.




No doubt.


----------



## cristiancl

Hi,

I've recently built the rig that is on my signature, and i've been trying to OC my i9 7980xe. I've been reading a lot about the CPU and i see lots of different opinions on each config. It seems there isn't a step by step overclocking guide, but more like trial and error.

It's important to note that my CPU is not delidded (yet), i want to find the best OC for this chip with Intel TIM before i even consider deliding it

So i've been tweaking by specific core on the last few days and i'm currently at this config:

43 per core
Manual 1.070v
VCCIN 1.900v
LLC 5
XMP OFF
AVX Offset 3 5

I've been stress testing this config on RealBench, default 15 mins and my temps are:
VRM MAX 68C
CPU Package MAX 92C
CPU Package AVG 75C
NO CPU Thermal Throttle
Coolant 40C
Ambient 27C

The test has completed a few times, but it just BSOD'ed, throwing a DPC Watchdog Violation

I know that i could keep increasing the voltage until it's totally stable, but i'm afraid of facing high thermals, since i've tried 43 per core with 1.100v and i've reached 105C MAX @ 90~95C AVG

What problem am i facing here? is it voltage? is it any other config that i should change on BIOS?


----------



## bmgjet

id try bumping the cpu input voltage (vccin) a bit more.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I'm pretty sure you'll need closer to 1.13v for 4.3 but i'd be using adaptive not manual :/
Are you only using 4.3 on the 2 cores with * next to them ?
If so what are the other cores set too 3.5... ???

I've not seen many reasons to go past llc4 personally 5 at most with cpu current capability of 120% and Optimized on voltage.

I would try this 
Adaptive on the 2 cores with * on them 
Adaptive cpu core voltage offset -0.060
Additional Turbo mode cpu voltage -1.20v 
All other core put at the same but lower the multiplier to 3.5.

See where you voltage is at if averaging higher than 1.13v increase the turbo - offset.


----------



## Jpmboy

cristiancl said:


> Hi,
> 
> I've recently built the rig that is on my signature, and i've been trying to OC my i9 7980xe. I've been reading a lot about the CPU and i see lots of different opinions on each config. It seems there isn't a step by step overclocking guide, but more like trial and error.
> 
> It's important to note that my CPU is not delidded (yet), i want to find the best OC for this chip with Intel TIM before i even consider deliding it
> 
> So i've been tweaking by specific core on the last few days and i'm currently at this config:
> 
> 43 per core
> Manual 1.070v
> VCCIN 1.900v
> LLC 5
> XMP OFF
> AVX Offset 3 5
> 
> I've been stress testing this config on RealBench, default 15 mins and my temps are:
> VRM MAX 68C
> CPU Package MAX 92C
> CPU Package AVG 75C
> NO CPU Thermal Throttle
> Coolant 40C
> Ambient 27C
> 
> The test has completed a few times, but it just BSOD'ed, throwing a DPC Watchdog Violation
> 
> I know that i could keep increasing the voltage until it's totally stable, but i'm afraid of facing high thermals, since i've tried 43 per core with 1.100v and i've reached 105C MAX @ 90~95C AVG
> 
> *What problem am i facing here*? is it voltage? is it any other config that i should change on BIOS?


Really - it's the stock TIM and high thermals holding the chip back.

I know you have started with a per specific core OC, but when initially ranging the freqencies and thermals, I would synch all cores; find the lowest vcore ALL cores can run say, 4.2 at, tune that to stable, thenyou can use that value for tuning each specific caore. A synch all cores OC is not limited by the two * cores - so no loss there. Once you have that you can either look to increase the multiplier on the * cores, or lower the vcore for these two. Vccin of 1.9V for 4.3 is probably a bit low.
Again, shoot for 4.2 on a Stock CPU. delids seem to all be able to run at least 4.5 on all 18 cores, and some run 4.6 with very good cooling. Most 7980XEs are running in the 1.18-1.22V range for stable 4.5. :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi, @DooRules uses for all core 4.5 input voltage at 1.8v so more than 1.9v well I'd test that one :/


----------



## PWn3R

I have all cores at 4.6Ghz with VCCIN @ 1.8. I tried raising and it made no difference except more heat. Same benchmark scores and lowering the vcore made the OC unstable, even with higher VCCIN. I tried 1.85, 1.9, 1.95, 2.0.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah one would have to have a pretty bad chip to need 1.9+ input on such a low vcore voltage


----------



## Jpmboy

the chips are all different. I run 1.92V set in bios with 50mV droop for 2x4.6, 16x4.5. It not what the vccin is at idle that matters, it's the VCCIN needed at load. So, depending on LLC, the bios setting is only a static, no load voltage and not very meaningful.
That said, my cpu will loose "efficiency" or "power" (measured by time to complete the job) in long extended calculations when I lower VCCIN much below 1.9V. Not all Cpus will behave like this, but many do. Outliers really can't be used to set general rules... each CPU needs to be _ranged _for it's intended use.


----------



## PWn3R

Sure, my only comment would be I think his VCORE is more likely to be the culprit given what he posted rather than the VCCIN, but that could easily be confirmed. I can't speak to others experience but when tuning OC so far on this board I've found that .001 on vcore triggers unstable to rock solid. I haven't run into a grey range yet where I could finish a cinebench at a certain voltage, but then not have stability on realbench.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## cristiancl

bmgjet said:


> id try bumping the cpu input voltage (vccin) a bit more.


Wouldn't that increase the thermals?



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I'm pretty sure you'll need closer to 1.13v for 4.3 but i'd be using adaptive not manual :/
> Are you only using 4.3 on the 2 cores with * next to them ?
> If so what are the other cores set too 3.5... ???
> 
> I've not seen many reasons to go past llc4 personally 5 at most with cpu current capability of 120% and Optimized on voltage.
> 
> I would try this
> Adaptive on the 2 cores with * on them
> Adaptive cpu core voltage offset -0.060
> Additional Turbo mode cpu voltage -1.20v
> All other core put at the same but lower the multiplier to 3.5.
> 
> See where you voltage is at if averaging higher than 1.13v increase the turbo - offset.


1.1v at 4.3 already thermal throttles, no point on going 1.13v
4.3 on all cores, but i do plan on settting the two best cores .2 more than the other cores.



Jpmboy said:


> Really - it's the stock TIM and high thermals holding the chip back.
> 
> I know you have started with a per specific core OC, but when initially ranging the freqencies and thermals, I would synch all cores; find the lowest vcore ALL cores can run say, 4.2 at, tune that to stable, thenyou can use that value for tuning each specific caore. A synch all cores OC is not limited by the two * cores - so no loss there. Once you have that you can either look to increase the multiplier on the * cores, or lower the vcore for these two. Vccin of 1.9V for 4.3 is probably a bit low.
> Again, shoot for 4.2 on a Stock CPU. delids seem to all be able to run at least 4.5 on all 18 cores, and some run 4.6 with very good cooling. Most 7980XEs are running in the 1.18-1.22V range for stable 4.5. :thumb:


Yeah, i'm choosing per specific core but all cores have the exact same config. I don't know where i read it (or if it is true) but i've heard that if you set to sync all cores the thermals go up.

I saw on this topic, some pages back, your config on a .txt and you had a bunch of config changed from auto, but since it's from your final overclock with memory and cache config i don't know if it could be applied to my case. 
Besides VCCIN, LLC and AVX, is there anything else that i could change that will impact my overclock performance? being it stability, frequency or thermals?


----------



## PWn3R

I hate to say this, but you need to pimp your cooling if you are thermal throttling at ~1.1. You're not going to do much without some more thermal headroom. I spent 6 hours this weekend d trying to find a way on the taichi xe to do most core auto turbo with best cores set to 4.9. I could not find a way. However there is one mode where the translation is horrible that I can't figure out how it works that might let me do what I want.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## cristiancl

PWn3R said:


> I hate to say this, but you need to pimp your cooling if you are thermal throttling at ~1.1. You're not going to do much without some more thermal headroom. I spent 6 hours this weekend d trying to find a way on the taichi xe to do most core auto turbo with best cores set to 4.9. I could not find a way. However there is one mode where the translation is horrible that I can't figure out how it works that might let me do what I want.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


I have a custom loop with a D5 and two 420 rads, my cooling isn't the issue, since my coolant temperature won't go over 40C. The only issue i could think of is if there is any issue with the monoblock. But i'm using Kryonaut, spread method, and the screws on the back of the motherboard are tight without room left to be twisted.


----------



## PWn3R

I hate to ask, but what monoblock? I was running an OG raystorm block that I think is 9 or 10 years old. I switched to an EKWB monoblock for my taichi xe and my temps went up almost 30c on some cores. I am 99% sure that ASRock changed the height of the mounting bracket holes on the CPU retention bracket. It's the only thing I can think of at this point. I'm going to grind the spots I think are a problem down an mm or so and see if it helps. I would agree, your radiators should be plenty. I have 1x480 and it was working fine with my 7980xe with all 18 @ 4.6. voltages between 1.185 and 1.220

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## cristiancl

PWn3R said:


> I hate to ask, but what monoblock? I was running an OG raystorm block that I think is 9 or 10 years old. I switched to an EKWB monoblock for my taichi xe and my temps went up almost 30c on some cores. I am 99% sure that ASRock changed the height of the mounting bracket holes on the CPU retention bracket. It's the only thing I can think of at this point. I'm going to grind the spots I think are a problem down an mm or so and see if it helps. I would agree, your radiators should be plenty. I have 1x480 and it was working fine with my 7980xe with all 18 @ 4.6. voltages between 1.185 and 1.220
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


EK Monoblock for the Rampage VI. The mounting mechanism is to pierce the monoblock pins into the mounting holes (it has some kind of membrane?) and then you have a screw that need to be hand tightned.


----------



## PWn3R

cristiancl said:


> EK Monoblock for the Rampage VI. The mounting mechanism is to pierce the monoblock pins into the mounting holes (it has some kind of membrane?) and then you have a screw that need to be hand tightned.


Same as mine. Legs go through the holes on the socket retention bracket, right? I think mine won't squeeze tight enough over the cpu. The screws are as tight as I can go with fingers and I even tested with pliers, they won't turn anymore.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## cristiancl

Ok, so i cleared CMOS, and set this config:

Ai Overclock Tuner: Manual
AVX offset: 3
AVX-512 offset: 5
CPU Core Ratio: Sync All Cores
CPU Core Ratio: 42
CPU Input Voltage: 1.9
CPU Load-Line Calibration: Auto

This is the result after a 15 min realbench stress test.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
lol you're hitting 1.18v there so 1.13v would be an improvement 
What voltage combination got you to 1.18v vid ???


----------



## cristiancl

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> lol you're hitting 1.18v there so 1.13v would be an improvement
> What voltage combination got you to 1.18v vid ???


Ai Overclock Tuner: Manual
AVX offset: 3
AVX-512 offset: 5
CPU Core Ratio: Sync All Cores
CPU Core Ratio: 42
CPU Input Voltage: 1.9
CPU Load-Line Calibration: Auto

Any other config is from default

Also, that is at 42 multiplier, i was trying 43 at 1.100v and thermal throttling before when you suggested 1.13v


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Like I said you hit 1.18 on thew screen shot and probably almost thermal shut down with cpu package at 107c

I already suggested using adaptive on the "-" offset with numbers to try and see where the voltage put you 
-60 and -1.2
You could also try this with all core too if you want too.


ThrashZone said:


> I would try this
> Adaptive on the 2 cores with * on them
> Adaptive cpu core voltage offset -0.060
> Additional Turbo mode cpu voltage -1.20v
> All other core put at the same but lower the multiplier to 3.5.
> 
> See where you voltage is at if averaging higher than 1.13v increase the turbo - offset.


----------



## Formula383

Hey guys just wondering if anyone had been playing around with pci-e clock speeds? my 7980xe could for sure use some extra speed while streaming. thing is afterburner will show around 50% usage while windows task manager will show 100% why well because the sub system is busy. overclocking the mesh helps to a point but after 3.2ghz it just stopped helping. i can run 104.5bclk and that helped my task manager cpu usaged by around 10% so now it shows 90% while afterburner shows 50%. idea's on how to get more pci-e speed? I am really not even sure why this helps tbh it must be affecting the internal cpu pcie speeds? or what they used to call Quick path interconnect? because i thought that was somehow tied to pcie aswell? hell idk. all i know it really sucks to have this puppy happly chugging along at 4.9ghz and only be able to use approximately half the cores...


----------



## ThrashZone

Formula383 said:


> Hey guys just wondering if anyone had been playing around with pci-e clock speeds? my 7980xe could for sure use some extra speed while streaming. thing is afterburner will show around 50% usage while windows task manager will show 100% why well because the sub system is busy. overclocking the mesh helps to a point but after 3.2ghz it just stopped helping. i can run 104.5bclk and that helped my task manager cpu usaged by around 10% so now it shows 90% while afterburner shows 50%. idea's on how to get more pci-e speed? I am really not even sure why this helps tbh it must be affecting the internal cpu pcie speeds? or what they used to call Quick path interconnect? because i thought that was somehow tied to pcie aswell? hell idk. all i know it really sucks to have this puppy happly chugging along at 4.9ghz and only be able to use approximately half the cores...


Hi,
Use hwinfo free and scroll all the way down the list for gpu and it will show the pci-e link speed 
I haven't noticed it on x299 but on x99 my pci-e link speed is reduced to 5 instead of 8 with a lot less bclk than you're using lol 
Mine drops with as little as 100.3 bclk.
https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php


----------



## Formula383

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Use hwinfo free and scroll all the way down the list for gpu and it will show the pci-e link speed
> I haven't noticed it on x299 but on x99 my pci-e link speed is reduced to 5 instead of 8 with a lot less bclk than you're using lol
> Mine drops with as little as 100.3 bclk.
> https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php


Ok? I care not for pci-e link speed to my gpu. pci-e clock speed is prob better than link speed anyway? at least from what i have seen, that said gpuz reports its full speed 3.0 x16. HWinfo shows 2.5gt/s meh. matters not to me games still play the same. My issue is with cpu load while streaming or recording. put it to you this way my ryzen 1700 8core cpu is almost as fast for streaming as my 7980xe LOL. increasing the base clock is the only way i know how to increase the "QPI" if thats a thing for this cpu. And it seems to help reduce the bottleneck for my cpu. clearly its data limited at some point because the usage in HW or afterburner is reading far less than the task manager does. Also when task manager hits 100% i start dropping frames bad. I also have a 7820x 8core and it does not do this near as bad likely because it has the same internal qpi what have you speed for 10 less cores to feed. I do recall reading about this and apparently its a well known thing about intel cpu's i forgot what they called it or who was talking about it. it seems something not very many know of or want to talk about apparently.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Okay thought i would mention something I noticed


----------



## Formula383

cristiancl said:


> I have a custom loop with a D5 and two 420 rads, my cooling isn't the issue, since my coolant temperature won't go over 40C. The only issue i could think of is if there is any issue with the monoblock. But i'm using Kryonaut, spread method, and the screws on the back of the motherboard are tight without room left to be twisted.


40c is a issue for this cpu. you want that water temp as close to ambient that you can get. before i delided my 7980xe i ran it on a corsair 110i all the way up to 4.7ghz (i dont recall what kind of stress testing i was doing at that point prob prime95 blend test, i dont see the need in stressing a cpu harder than what its going to be used at i mean sure a little bit but no need to run avx 512 for hours to make sure its stable imo. unless thats what you will be using the system to do but at that point i'm not sure why you would be overclocking if your going to be working it like a dog all day and night  ) all i did was add 2 120mm x 38mm fans (3000rpm) to the rad and had them ramp up with cpu temps, noisy but got the job done. So imho i think i would start with your water temps. And i would not use a monoblock either. its very possible the vrms are holding up one side of the cold plate and its not getting solid contact, These cpus produce a LOT of heat you want a good snug pressure fit to the water block. As for thermal paste anything high end will be fine, just use a nice sized dot in the middle and its good enough.


----------



## Abaidor

Formula383 said:


> 40c is a issue for this cpu. you want that water temp as close to ambient that you can get. before i delided my 7980xe i ran it on a corsair 110i all the way up to 4.7ghz (i dont recall what kind of stress testing i was doing at that point prob prime95 blend test, i dont see the need in stressing a cpu harder than what its going to be used at i mean sure a little bit but no need to run avx 512 for hours to make sure its stable imo. unless thats what you will be using the system to do but at that point i'm not sure why you would be overclocking if your going to be working it like a dog all day and night  ) all i did was add 2 120mm x 38mm fans (3000rpm) to the rad and had them ramp up with cpu temps, noisy but got the job done. So imho i think i would start with your water temps. And i would not use a monoblock either. its very possible the vrms are holding up one side of the cold plate and its not getting solid contact, These cpus produce a LOT of heat you want a good snug pressure fit to the water block. As for thermal paste anything high end will be fine, just use a nice sized dot in the middle and its good enough.


That is the reason I have not delidded my i9-7940X although I was planning to. I am using a Monoblock and to be 100% sure that I will get perfect contact with the IHS I need to move to a dedicated CPU block + VRM block along with Delid tool + materials. I am just not sure if it is worth it or whether I should wait for the refresh CPUs. I have it at 6 Cores 4.7Ghz, 2 Cores at 4.6GHz and the rest at 4.2 GHz...without delid to keep temps in control. I am using a big MO-RA 420 Pro with 9 ML 140 Pros + Dual D5s.


----------



## Formula383

Abaidor said:


> That is the reason I have not delidded my i9-7940X although I was planning to. I am using a Monoblock and to be 100% sure that I will get perfect contact with the IHS I need to move to a dedicated CPU block + VRM block along with Delid tool + materials. I am just not sure if it is worth it or whether I should wait for the refresh CPUs. I have it at 6 Cores 4.6Ghz, 2 Cores at 4.5GHz and the rest at 4.2 GHz...without delid to keep temps in control. I am using a big MO-RA 420 Pro with 9 ML 140 Pros + Dual D5s.


Ya its been a ride thats for sure. I had issues with my Liquid metal "drying up" and then even my AC5 when using a bare die. i thought maybe i needed a new socket retention that was 100% waste of 110$.. the stock retention bracket is perfectly designed to work without a cpu lid. I did however need to replace my pure copper waterblock with a nickel plated one so the LM wont soak into the copper. That said 5.0 is doable now, with a very loud and large radiator setup. i have seen 1100w from the wall under just cpu load, and the vrm at that point will cook if left to run prime too long. I guess i a vrm waterblock would possibly solve that but really its just not needed to run this cpu at that speed. For most work loads 4.5 is all you need as there are other limitations to the speed of the chip. 7nm Thread ripper will be the next cpu i buy. i have friends with them and they are just as good if not better for my type of work.


----------



## Abaidor

Abaidor said:


> I have it at 6 Cores 4.6Ghz, 2 Cores at 4.5GHz and the rest at 4.2 GHz...without delid to keep temps in control. I am using a big MO-RA 420 Pro with 9 ML 140 Pros + Dual D5s.


LoL I must have been tired last night.. the correct clocks are 6 Cores 4.7Ghz, 2 Cores at 4.6GHz and the rest at 4.2 GHz - MESH 3.2Ghz.



Formula383 said:


> Ya its been a ride thats for sure. I had issues with my Liquid metal "drying up" and then even my AC5 when using a bare die. i thought maybe i needed a new socket retention that was 100% waste of 110$.. the stock retention bracket is perfectly designed to work without a cpu lid. I did however need to replace my pure copper waterblock with a nickel plated one so the LM wont soak into the copper. That said 5.0 is doable now, with a very loud and large radiator setup. i have seen 1100w from the wall under just cpu load, and the vrm at that point will cook if left to run prime too long. I guess i a vrm waterblock would possibly solve that but really its just not needed to run this cpu at that speed. For most work loads 4.5 is all you need as there are other limitations to the speed of the chip. 7nm Thread ripper will be the next cpu i buy. i have friends with them and they are just as good if not better for my type of work.


Ridiculous amount of power draw no matter how you put it....The more you push clocks and voltages in these HCC chips the power skyrockets. The reason I chose the i9-7940X out of the 7960 or 7980 was because it was clocked higher out of the box compared to the other 3 and supposedly I would be able to clock it higher for better single core performance. Well it looks like boosting all cores turns this into a power hog even with 14 cores. So given that I am not using the CPU for AVX workloads or heavy daily compute tasks I decided that delidding and going through the hassle is not going to give me any worthy performance advantage. 

The fact is though that these CPUs are not as fast as 5GHz 8700K or 9900K for apps like Adobe Creative Cloud (that I use heavily) but do shine in HEAVY multitasking (i.e. VM + Some rendering) compared to i7s. I am really interested in the 7nm Threadripper as well but will certainly build an 8700K or 9900K machine for my son (gaming and school use) in the next months that will also serve as a backup PC should I ever need it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah over voltage is pretty much why adaptive on the negative symbol probably should be used.
Just have to fiddle with it to find the happy spot for higher clocks.


----------



## Abaidor

Oh I will but I am so stuffed with work right now that I need the PC stable and can't risk downtime. It's been rock solid save for the trash Asus Software that I have uninstalled (AI Suite).


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
There is a ai suite uninstaller 
I linked to it before but the link breaks for some reason on the rog forum by [email protected]


----------



## PWn3R

I can't get adaptive - voltage to work on my Taichi XE. If adaptive is on, it always gives the max voltage configured for the cores, at least at 4.6.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah hit and miss I'd imagine manufacture to manufacture
Useless on x99 too won't even post I don't think no matter how low the numbers are only works on the +


----------



## kithylin

Sorry if this has been pasted already but I'm trying to find a system that does everything I want out of a computer to upgrade to.. need something with minimum 40 PCIE Lanes, @ PCIE 3.0, and at least 8 cpu cores with hyper-threading. I was sort of avoiding the X299 platform because it was so expensive, considering 6950X/X99 or threadripper, but not sure anymore.. So just a couple quick questions.

I7-7900X is what I would be going for. So.. under custom water loop, what are the typical overclocks to be expected commonly for 7900X? For a reasonable 24-7 OC. Is 4.7 - 4.8 ghz common, or is that rare and is 4.5 ghz more the norm? What about ram speed.. what's the typical max ram clocks of 7900X? Is 4000 - 4500 mhz DDR4 common for 7900X? Or does it cap out more around 3300-3500? Is 7900X soldered IHS, or TIM IHS? Is delidding 7900X a thing? I mean, do the chips run stupid hot even under water and actually need delidding for best thermals?


----------



## bmgjet

kithylin said:


> Sorry if this has been pasted already but I'm trying to find a system that does everything I want out of a computer to upgrade to.. need something with minimum 40 PCIE Lanes, @ PCIE 3.0, and at least 8 cpu cores with hyper-threading. I was sort of avoiding the X299 platform because it was so expensive, considering 6950X/X99 or threadripper, but not sure anymore.. So just a couple quick questions.
> 
> I7-7900X is what I would be going for. So.. under custom water loop, what are the typical overclocks to be expected commonly for 7900X? For a reasonable 24-7 OC. Is 4.7 - 4.8 ghz common, or is that rare and is 4.5 ghz more the norm? What about ram speed.. what's the typical max ram clocks of 7900X? Is 4000 - 4500 mhz DDR4 common for 7900X? Or does it cap out more around 3300-3500? Is 7900X soldered IHS, or TIM IHS? Is delidding 7900X a thing? I mean, do the chips run stupid hot even under water and actually need delidding for best thermals?



My 7900X.
Cant get ram over 3600mhz. Settled on 3200mhz with tight timings. (4000mhz ram kit)
With my custom loop before delid 4.5ghz on 2 worst cores, 4.6 on average cores and 4.7ghz on 2 best. (that had me hitting 96-100C in stress tests)
After delid, 5.1ghz on 2 best cores, 5ghz on rest. (hit 85-95C in same stress tests)
Overclocking the Mesh makes a good gain in games 3.2ghz is the sweet spot since the voltage jump for 3.3ghz isnt worth the temp and voltages gains.

Overall im happy with mine coming from a 6900k.


----------



## kithylin

bmgjet said:


> My 7900X.
> Cant get ram over 3600mhz. Settled on 3200mhz with tight timings. (4000mhz ram kit)
> With my custom loop before delid 4.5ghz on 2 worst cores, 4.6 on average cores and 4.7ghz on 2 best. (that had me hitting 96-100C in stress tests)
> After delid, 5.1ghz on 2 best cores, 5ghz on rest. (hit 85-95C in same stress tests)
> Overclocking the Mesh makes a good gain in games 3.2ghz is the sweet spot since the voltage jump for 3.3ghz isnt worth the temp and voltages gains.
> 
> Overall im happy with mine coming from a 6900k.


Hrmm. I'm seeing your signature there, are you using a 1080 Ti on this system? Did you see a gain in FPS in general from 6900K?

There's not a lot of options out there for 40+ PCIE lanes and 8+ cores today. Either X99, X299, or X399.


----------



## bmgjet

kithylin said:


> Hrmm. I'm seeing your signature there, are you using a 1080 Ti on this system? Did you see a gain in FPS in general from 6900K?
> 
> There's not a lot of options out there for 40+ PCIE lanes and 8+ cores today. Either X99, X299, or X399.


Have 2X 1080ti at the moment.
Some games saw a good boost in min frame rates like pubg went from have lows of 40s to lows of 60s. Average and max no difference really but I do play on 4K.
My 6900K was a real turd and only did 4.4ghz and felt like a down grade from the 5820K I had before it on 4.5ghz for gaming.


----------



## PWn3R

Has anyone ever seen a clock to clock comparison between an 8700 k and a core I-9 when they are at the same frequency? I'm wondering how much of a difference there is in IPC and in gaming if they're at the same frequency. I've been considering selling my 7980xe, since I bought it for half retail price, and picking up the new 9900k when it comes out. I've made a number of changes to my system configuration and could get away with less pcie Lanes now. I've moved away from dedicated raid cards yes plural, so I only have my graphics card and some NVMe SSDs.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## kithylin

bmgjet said:


> Have 2X 1080ti at the moment.
> Some games saw a good boost in min frame rates like pubg went from have lows of 40s to lows of 60s. Average and max no difference really but I do play on 4K.
> My 6900K was a real turd and only did 4.4ghz and felt like a down grade from the 5820K I had before it on 4.5ghz for gaming.


Yeah I'm on 5820K right now, and just have a single 1080 Ti.. I have some obscure / uncommon gaming situations most people don't encounter and I'm maxing out my gpu @ 1080p in some games with only a 80 hz panel. Thought I might consider newer hardware.. I have some other odd considerations, like needing to run a raid card for big redundant local storage (24 TB Raid-5, RAW 4K videos are massive) for some video editing work I do from time to time when not gaming and pretty much need M.2 NVME drive (scratch disk for video editing) + Raid card + 1080 Ti, and thought it might be nice to have a platform with the possibility to do all of this with a second 1080 Ti too some day, 2 1080 Ti's + raid card + NVME drive. Means 44 PCIE lanes minimum. Not a lot of options out there.. X99, X299, or X399. I might just go for a 5960X and just clock it stupid high and go with that, they're only $300 used today and I already have the platform for it. And they average 3300 - 3400 ram speed like your 7900X gets and from some of the reviews I've found it's not too difficult to push em commonly to 4.6 - 4.7 ghz with water. I dunno.. I'm looking at near $1500 to move up to 7900X + board.

Thanks for your input though, you gave me some insight in to the x299 platform.


----------



## bmgjet

PWn3R said:


> Has anyone ever seen a clock to clock comparison between an 8700 k and a core I-9 when they are at the same frequency? I'm wondering how much of a difference there is in IPC and in gaming if they're at the same frequency. I've been considering selling my 7980xe, since I bought it for half retail price, and picking up the new 9900k when it comes out. I've made a number of changes to my system configuration and could get away with less pcie Lanes now. I've moved away from dedicated raid cards yes plural, so I only have my graphics card and some NVMe SSDs.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk



8700k is 6% better clock for clock both locked at 4.5ghz on single and quad thread, With a mesh overclock on the I9 that drops down closer to 4%.
Personally I wouldnt touch a 9900K. Its not even worthy of being called a I9 and is a obvous last attempt at milking from intel before the real battle at 7nm starts.
Even the 8700K are a bit trash at the moment since all the good ones went into 8087k.

If I was you id sell the 7980xe and pick up another I9 with less cores that can overclock more. Keep that money you saved set aside for around mid next year.



kithylin said:


> Yeah I'm on 5820K right now, and just have a single 1080 Ti.. I have some obscure / uncommon gaming situations most people don't encounter and I'm maxing out my gpu @ 1080p in some games with only a 80 hz panel. Thought I might consider newer hardware.. I have some other odd considerations, like needing to run a raid card for big redundant local storage (24 TB Raid-5, RAW 4K videos are massive) for some video editing work I do from time to time when not gaming and pretty much need M.2 NVME drive (scratch disk for video editing) + Raid card + 1080 Ti, and thought it might be nice to have a platform with the possibility to do all of this with a second 1080 Ti too some day, 2 1080 Ti's + raid card + NVME drive. Means 44 PCIE lanes minimum. Not a lot of options out there.. X99, X299, or X399. I might just go for a 5960X and just clock it stupid high and go with that, they're only $300 used today and I already have the platform for it. And they average 3300 - 3400 ram speed like your 7900X gets and from some of the reviews I've found it's not too difficult to push em commonly to 4.6 - 4.7 ghz with water. I dunno.. I'm looking at near $1500 to move up to 7900X + board.
> 
> Thanks for your input though, you gave me some insight in to the x299 platform.


Id take that 4.6-4.7 with a grain of salt, Only the golden ones hit that and the binned silicon sent out to reviewers.
Iv been lucky enough to play with each of the haswell-e CPUs with overclocking.
The 5960x I played with only managed 4.2ghz but it was on a H100 AIO cooler so couldnt push more then 1.3v
Both the 5930k and 5820K got to 4.5ghz on custom loops but needed over 1.35v to do it.


----------



## PWn3R

bmgjet said:


> 8700k is 6% better clock for clock both locked at 4.5ghz on single and quad thread, With a mesh overclock on the I9 that drops down closer to 4%.
> Personally I wouldnt touch a 9900K. Its not even worthy of being called a I9 and is a obvous last attempt at milking from intel before the real battle at 7nm starts.
> Even the 8700K are a bit trash at the moment since all the good ones went into 8087k.
> 
> If I was you id sell the 7980xe and pick up another I9 with less cores that can overclock more. Keep that money you saved set aside for around mid next year.
> 
> 
> 
> Id take that 4.6-4.7 with a grain of salt, Only the golden ones hit that and the binned silicon sent out to reviewers.
> Iv been lucky enough to play with each of the haswell-e CPUs with overclocking.
> The 5960x I played with only managed 4.2ghz but it was on a H100 AIO cooler so couldnt push more then 1.3v
> Both the 5930k and 5820K got to 4.5ghz on custom loops but needed over 1.35v to do it.


So basically you would agree that if I can get my heat problem sorted out a bit, and I can run 4 cores at 4.9ghz on this 7980xe, with the rest at 4.4-4.6, I should probably just keep it and chill? This CPU will run 3 of the cores at [email protected] and another core at [email protected] I can probably tune each of the 3 @1.265 down a few .001 as they weren't stable at 1.26 but we're at 1.265.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## kithylin

bmgjet said:


> Id take that 4.6-4.7 with a grain of salt, Only the golden ones hit that and the binned silicon sent out to reviewers.
> Iv been lucky enough to play with each of the haswell-e CPUs with overclocking.
> The 5960x I played with only managed 4.2ghz but it was on a H100 AIO cooler so couldnt push more then 1.3v
> Both the 5930k and 5820K got to 4.5ghz on custom loops but needed over 1.35v to do it.


My 5820K chip did 4.5 ghz originally when I first got it, and wanted 1.35v to do that.. it degraded a little over time and 4 months ago it's down to 4.4 ghz now. And I've looked at threadripper and most of the chips on the X299 line, 7900K might work but supposedly the power usage is insane when overclocked.. some reviews showed 580 watts for a 7900K @ 4.6 ghz @ 1.35v For just CPU alone that's more than my entire computer uses right now, even with the 1080 Ti overclocked to the max and all the fans (360mm rad double fans in push-pull) and hard drives and the 2 water pumps and the 5820K @ 4.4 ghz and everything: I only run around 230 watts idle, 450-475 load. Any rough idea what your system pulls power wise @ 5.0 ghz ?

So.. I dunno what to do with anything. Supposedly at least 5960X is decent on power, somewhere around 385 watts @ 4.6 ghz. I've considered 6900K or 6950X, maybe.


----------



## ThrashZone

kithylin said:


> My 5820K chip did 4.5 ghz originally when I first got it, and wanted 1.35v to do that.. it degraded a little over time and 4 months ago it's down to 4.4 ghz now. And I've looked at threadripper and most of the chips on the X299 line, 7900K might work but supposedly the power usage is insane when overclocked.. some reviews showed 580 watts for a 7900K @ 4.6 ghz @ 1.35v For just CPU alone that's more than my entire computer uses right now, even with the 1080 Ti overclocked to the max and all the fans (360mm rad double fans in push-pull) and hard drives and the 2 water pumps and the 5820K @ 4.4 ghz and everything: I only run around 230 watts idle, 450-475 load. Any rough idea what your system pulls power wise @ 5.0 ghz ?
> 
> So.. I dunno what to do with anything. Supposedly at least 5960X is decent on power, somewhere around 385 watts @ 4.6 ghz. I've considered 6900K or 6950X, maybe.


Hi,
Personally I'd go for the 6950.
Keeps up with the 7900x and probably cheaper and no delid needed I don't believe.
But it's top is 4.5 on a aio 
https://valid.x86.fr/tz6z6c
Custom loop maybe a little more.

You'd be lucky to get 4.5 thermals under control on 7900x even on a custom loop.
I wouldn't count on be lucky lol


----------



## kithylin

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Personally I'd go for the 6950.
> Keeps up with the 7900x and probably cheaper and no delid needed I don't believe.
> But it's top is 4.5 on a aio
> https://valid.x86.fr/tz6z6c
> Custom loop maybe a little more.
> 
> You'd be lucky to get 4.5 thermals under control on 7900x even on a custom loop.
> I wouldn't count on be lucky lol


This is the information I was looking for.. even at 4.4 ghz my 5820K is around 65c - 70c fully loaded in render crunching outputting a video for video editing. I so don't want a chip that slams at 100c when I load it up.

So thanks everyone for the information. For my needs, guess 7900X and x299 in general is out of the question.


----------



## bmgjet

kithylin said:


> My 5820K chip did 4.5 ghz originally when I first got it, and wanted 1.35v to do that.. it degraded a little over time and 4 months ago it's down to 4.4 ghz now. And I've looked at threadripper and most of the chips on the X299 line, 7900K might work but supposedly the power usage is insane when overclocked.. some reviews showed 580 watts for a 7900K @ 4.6 ghz @ 1.35v For just CPU alone that's more than my entire computer uses right now, even with the 1080 Ti overclocked to the max and all the fans (360mm rad double fans in push-pull) and hard drives and the 2 water pumps and the 5820K @ 4.4 ghz and everything: I only run around 230 watts idle, 450-475 load. Any rough idea what your system pulls power wise @ 5.0 ghz ?
> 
> So.. I dunno what to do with anything. Supposedly at least 5960X is decent on power, somewhere around 385 watts @ 4.6 ghz. I've considered 6900K or 6950X, maybe.



You can see what sort of power mine pulls. 618W, Thats just my normal use over a week and a bit (gaming, rendering, encoding.)


----------



## kithylin

bmgjet said:


> You can see what sort of power mine pulls. 618W, Thats just my normal use over a week and a bit (gaming, rendering, encoding.)


Yeah that's way way way too high, I have to think about power usage here and that's extremely excessive.


----------



## bmgjet

1080ti is quite hungry on power as well.
My first one sits around 350W and spikes up to 390W
Second one sits around 250W and spikes 320W (only sees 80% usage)
Thats with both of them on 1.081v @ 2062mhz.

When I bought this PSU I never thought id need it 1500W. Back then I just had the 5820K and 980ti sli which pull a total of 900W lol.


----------



## kithylin

bmgjet said:


> 1080ti is quite hungry on power as well.
> My first one sits around 350W and spikes up to 390W
> Second one sits around 250W and spikes 320W (only sees 80% usage)
> Thats with both of them on 1.081v @ 2062mhz.
> 
> When I bought this PSU I never thought id need it 1500W. Back then I just had the 5820K and 980ti sli which pull a total of 900W lol.


My 1080 Ti here will peak out @ 322W (according to nvidia-smi) but that's at 2136 mhz @ 1.200v & 6120 mhz ram. That's in a game (ark evolved) that can load it up to 100% usage @ max boost. Most games it averages around 112-130 watts.


----------



## ThrashZone

kithylin said:


> This is the information I was looking for.. even at 4.4 ghz my 5820K is around 65c - 70c fully loaded in render crunching outputting a video for video editing. I so don't want a chip that slams at 100c when I load it up.
> 
> So thanks everyone for the information. For my needs, guess 7900X and x299 in general is out of the question.


Hi,
Yeah he's a buddy of mine over on tenforums.com solarstarshines 
You can take a look see at some of our benchmarks there 
https://www.tenforums.com/pc-custom-builds-overclocking/?
He does have a few builds though but we are pretty close I get him because I'm delidded and can go 4.8 

Don't know what board you have if an asus I'd watch your vccio cpu 1.05 voltages closely 
Newer bios shoots it up to 1.25v+ where hasswell-e stays around 1.05+- 
Just by changing ram speed past 2133 
But you may have already noticed it


----------



## bmgjet

Thats a lot of voltage. I tried all the way up to 1.15V on mine and only gained a extra 10mhz over where I have it set now on card 1.
Card 2 is a bit better and does 2100mhz on 1.1v but have to keep them clocked same for sli. What res you play on? 1440P drops around 60W off usage and 1080p drops 150W off.


----------



## kithylin

bmgjet said:


> Thats a lot of voltage. I tried all the way up to 1.15V on mine and only gained a extra 10mhz over where I have it set now on card 1.
> Card 2 is a bit better and does 2100mhz on 1.1v but have to keep them clocked same for sli. What res you play on? 1440P drops around 60W off usage and 1080p drops 150W off.


Mainly 1080p/80 right now, Which.. 90% of games this card is great for, and averages like 60% - 80% utilization. I've just (apparently) come up with 2-3 use-cases in games where this card's not enough alone, and looking for more CPU for it perhaps, not sure if that would even help. Supposedly the newer platforms would give me more out of my 1080 Ti. But I'm not sure if I would gain much say, going from 5820K @ 4.4 ghz to like 7900X @ 4.6 ghz or 6950X @ 4.6 ghz. I could go for a 8086K from siliconlottery.com guaranteed for 5.3 ghz and X370, but I'd have to drop my M.2 NVME SSD from my configuration, due to PCIE lanes, and not sure I want to after having it.

Why can't Intel or AMD just release a 8 (or more) core CPU that will do 5.0 Ghz normally, provide 44 (or more) PCIE lanes and both not run stupid hot, and use < 400 watts of power while doing it. You'd think they would of figured that out by now.. I think the dream CPU I'm waiting for probably won't exist for another 3-5 years yet.


----------



## Formula383

PWn3R said:


> I can't get adaptive - voltage to work on my Taichi XE. If adaptive is on, it always gives the max voltage configured for the cores, at least at 4.6.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


I have a x299 tachi with 7820x @ 4.8ghz and voltage scale with load. make sure your power plan is balanced in windows for voltage scaling to work.


----------



## Formula383

kithylin said:


> This is the information I was looking for.. even at 4.4 ghz my 5820K is around 65c - 70c fully loaded in render crunching outputting a video for video editing. I so don't want a chip that slams at 100c when I load it up.
> 
> So thanks everyone for the information. For my needs, guess 7900X and x299 in general is out of the question.


i run my 7980xe @ 4.9 atm with just standard old paste on naked die, temps while streaming and gaming are in the 80's depending how hard of encoding i run (pushing hard). normal gaming around 45c average with 60c spikes. 5.0 is really where the cpu just feels Great (requires LM to keep temps under 90c). The really great thing is you can run 4000mhz at cl 16 16 16 all day on this chip. If you push you can run cl 15 15 15 or better with t1. So is the 7980xe faster yes but the cost to delid is not cheap and it is messing around a bit. Also the power draw is insane. Performance scales well up to 4.5 under all work loads but for gaming more core clock is always better. 3.2ghz on the mesh is good. Wish i could clock the base clock up a bit more than 4.5% at least for the 18core it seems to help at higher clocks. I think the 12~16core is where its at depending how far you want to clock it. the more cores you have the less clock is needed to saturate the bus. Also if you want to delid and run the IHS 4.7 should be easy target to hit even on a big air cooler, 4.8with aio and 4.9 would be the max with out going bare die and tbh the temps might start getting a bit warm there depending on the work load. Also do note these are clocks with sub 25c ambient temps if your house is 30c you will prob want to back it down 100mhz.

Also i think it was you talking about raid cards? I have been thinking about getting a NAS with a 10gb network for my storage. But truth is i think i will just wait for ssd prices to fall and then pick up a few 4+TB drives on possibly a m.2 pci-e card. I really hate the power draw of the drives spinning when not being used, not to mention raid card eating 100 ish watts too. That combined with the price per gb not really going anywhere fast and the drive quality control is more questionable than ever. meh i guess i'll just wait a couple more years.


----------



## Formula383

kithylin said:


> Mainly 1080p/80 right now, Which.. 90% of games this card is great for, and averages like 60% - 80% utilization. I've just (apparently) come up with 2-3 use-cases in games where this card's not enough alone, and looking for more CPU for it perhaps, not sure if that would even help. Supposedly the newer platforms would give me more out of my 1080 Ti. But I'm not sure if I would gain much say, going from 5820K @ 4.4 ghz to like 7900X @ 4.6 ghz or 6950X @ 4.6 ghz. I could go for a 8086K from siliconlottery.com guaranteed for 5.3 ghz and X370, but I'd have to drop my M.2 NVME SSD from my configuration, due to PCIE lanes, and not sure I want to after having it.
> 
> Why can't Intel or AMD just release a 8 (or more) core CPU that will do 5.0 Ghz normally, provide 44 (or more) PCIE lanes and both not run stupid hot, and use < 400 watts of power while doing it. You'd think they would of figured that out by now.. I think the dream CPU I'm waiting for probably won't exist for another 3-5 years yet.


Silicon lottery is a complete joke imho. Maybe if you were going for world records it might be possibly worth it? But in no way is it worth more than 100$ premium over the base price of the chip. Consumers are just idiots when it comes to spending money and wanting the best. (no offence to anyone its your money do what you enjoy with it) The i7 is already the top of line binned chip off the line. So get your cooling under control. Use a adequate motherboard and a good quality psu. I have never had a cpu that just clocked significantly worse than any other cpu. You could see about 100mhz difference and possibly 200?? if you compare that with a best of the best one in a 10 million chip MAYBE? Fact is unless your doing severely single threaded gaming your fps bottlenecking is not going to be from cpu clocks anyhow its the ram speed and latency that will get you the bad feeling in games. So the difference from 5.0 to 5.2 is essentially nill. Since almost all games will run really great at 4.0ghz. 

And if i did get a cpu that was really that bad i would just send it back for a new one. I mean why not? IF its that bad do it. I have never seen one that just would not clock yet and i have seen a fair bit of cpu's. Again not saying its never going to happen because it can i'm sure, i just dont think its very likely. its more likely that people just have something setup wrong or it has REALY bad toothpaste on it LUL.


----------



## PWn3R

What voltage did you have to jump up to in order to get 4.9 and is it all cores?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

Formula383 said:


> *Silicon lottery is a complete joke imho.* .


Hi,
I wouldn't say that they do a lot of testing and give settings to use that is time served 

It is sort of a joke why they charge twice as much to delid skylake-x verses coffeelake though.


----------



## ocvn

Formula383 said:


> kithylin said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is the information I was looking for.. even at 4.4 ghz my 5820K is around 65c - 70c fully loaded in render crunching outputting a video for video editing. I so don't want a chip that slams at 100c when I load it up.
> 
> So thanks everyone for the information. For my needs, guess 7900X and x299 in general is out of the question.
> 
> 
> 
> i run my 7980xe @ 4.9 atm with just standard old paste on naked die, temps while streaming and gaming are in the 80's depending how hard of encoding i run (pushing hard). normal gaming around 45c average with 60c spikes. 5.0 is really where the cpu just feels Great (requires LM to keep temps under 90c). The really great thing is you can run 4000mhz at cl 16 16 16 all day on this chip. If you push you can run cl 15 15 15 or better with t1. So is the 7980xe faster yes but the cost to delid is not cheap and it is messing around a bit. Also the power draw is insane. Performance scales well up to 4.5 under all work loads but for gaming more core clock is always better. 3.2ghz on the mesh is good. Wish i could clock the base clock up a bit more than 4.5% at least for the 18core it seems to help at higher clocks.
Click to expand...

possible can you provide the info for [email protected] with normal paste? voltage, avx? i run 4.8 with realbench and reach 80+ highest core temp already


----------



## tistou77

With my 7980XE @4.6ghz (AVX -2 / -6) and Adaptive mode
This is an old bench, I will retest with the new bios


----------



## Formula383

PWn3R said:


> What voltage did you have to jump up to in order to get 4.9 and is it all cores?
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


1.325 @ 4.9Ghz 

1.375 @ 5.0Ghz make no mistake here things get very toasty and would not be doing long stress tests here and would definitely keep a close eye on things even with LM, The amount of power that it can draw depending on workload makes it very critical you pay attention things. That said it works and works really well even under heavy load. just shy of 5000 points in R15.


----------



## Formula383

ocvn said:


> possible can you provide the info for [email protected] with normal paste? voltage, avx? i run 4.8 with realbench and reach 80+ highest core temp already


No avx offset and this works depending on the type of workload. If i was to run a prime avx or something more taxing 4.7 would be more realistic. But for streaming and gaming at the same time it can handle 90~100% load just fine. The problem with offset on the x299 Apex at least is you cant adjust voltage for the AVX workloads. meaning if you leave it with no offset the voltage is the same. if you run a offset your voltage drops to the stock voltage of 1.1xx. So the max speed i can run with that voltage is around 4.3 for avx offset speed. Because it drops voltage as well as clock speeds. And there is not way to change this. its either all or nothing.


----------



## PWn3R

Just ordered the rockit delid kit for this biatch. Time to go hard.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Formula383

PWn3R said:


> Just ordered the rockit delid kit for this biatch. Time to go hard.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


Nice! About time 

Keep in mind its by far safer to use LM and replace the lid. And i have the computer in the basement so ambient temps are cool.... at least to start LOL the cpu does warm it up a bit after all day  that said the max air temp is prob around 22c. i would say 20c is typical. I also have a fairly noisy high pressure water pump, two 360mm double thick, high FPI rads with 6 120mm x 38mm 3000rpm panaflo fans. So water temps stay in check. If you have less cooling i would recommend 4.5 all core and just pick your coldest cores to push a bit higher for games, if you do play games that is  I will say i do enjoy having a naked die but it is not without its drawbacks. If you have questions or want help feel free to PM me.


----------



## Mysticial

Formula383 said:


> No avx offset and this works depending on the type of workload. If i was to run a prime avx or something more taxing 4.7 would be more realistic. But for streaming and gaming at the same time it can handle 90~100% load just fine. The problem with offset on the x299 Apex at least is you cant adjust voltage for the AVX workloads. meaning if you leave it with no offset the voltage is the same. if you run a offset your voltage drops to the stock voltage of 1.1xx. So the max speed i can run with that voltage is around 4.3 for avx offset speed. Because it drops voltage as well as clock speeds. And there is not way to change this. its either all or nothing.


The behavior that you're observing on the Apex is not consistent with what I saw on our boards. 

On both the Apex boards that I dealt with, enabling the AVX(512) offsets does not force the vcore down to stock. It will drop to the vcore to the value that will be used at the lower frequency - because, it is well... running at that lower frequency.

If you don't run any AVX(512), the offsets don't matter.


----------



## Formula383

Mysticial said:


> The behavior that you're observing on the Apex is not consistent with what I saw on our boards.
> 
> On both the Apex boards that I dealt with, enabling the AVX(512) offsets does not force the vcore down to stock. It will drop to the vcore to the value that will be used at the lower frequency - because, it is well... running at that lower frequency.
> 
> If you don't run any AVX(512), the offsets don't matter.


I would be interested to know what settings you used. I was getting stock voltage for avx at -1 offset when the cpu was @ 5.0ghz 

Edit: it has been awhile since i done this. It might have been only using adaptive voltage? Also i do not know if i have tested with disabling the cpu's vrms and relying solely on the board to do power delivery. I think that can be done? But its over 100w of power at idle extra from the wall if you leave clocks and voltage at full speed. So imo not really practical for daily usage at least not to me.


----------



## Mysticial

Formula383 said:


> I would be interested to know what settings you used. I was getting stock voltage for avx at -1 offset when the cpu was @ 5.0ghz
> 
> Edit: it has been awhile since i done this. It might have been only using adaptive voltage? Also i do not know if i have tested with disabling the cpu's vrms and relying solely on the board to do power delivery. I think that can be done? But its over 100w of power at idle extra from the wall if you leave clocks and voltage at full speed. So imo not really practical for daily usage at least not to me.


It was per-core overclock with per-core voltage. If you enter an explicit voltage, it stays at that voltage. If you use an offset, it keeps the scaling behavior. I haven't tried adaptive.

Admittedly, I haven't tried the all-core overclocks on the Apex since that wasn't what we were targeting.


----------



## Formula383

Mysticial said:


> It was per-core overclock with per-core voltage. If you enter an explicit voltage, it stays at that voltage. If you use an offset, it keeps the scaling behavior. I haven't tried adaptive.
> 
> Admittedly, I haven't tried the all-core overclocks on the Apex since that wasn't what we were targeting.


Ok, cool. Maybe i should try to play around with some per-core stuffs. I wonder how well the per-core overclocking works in windows, is it clock speed aware? or must you manually set apps to use specific cores?


----------



## bmgjet

Formula383 said:


> Ok, cool. Maybe i should try to play around with some per-core stuffs. I wonder how well the per-core overclocking works in windows, is it clock speed aware? or must you manually set apps to use specific cores?


Intel turbo boost 3.0 automatically sets apps to use the order of your best to worst core.
Which can sort of be a good or a bad thing.

Good because it will always put your games running on the fastest cores.
Bad because those best cores are overclocked more so use more power when your in idle state your background tasks are going to keep hitting those cores instead of using the lower clocked lower voltage ones.


----------



## PWn3R

I had to disable TBM due to unplayable lag with it on in some games. Did anyone else run into that? As soon as it was off, everything was buttery smooth again.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
What's tbm 
Turbo boost monitor lol ?


----------



## Formula383

Turbo boost max. i think. what mobo is he on is the question? i dont think i have touched it on the apex.


----------



## Formula383

bmgjet said:


> Intel turbo boost 3.0 automatically sets apps to use the order of your best to worst core.
> Which can sort of be a good or a bad thing.
> 
> Good because it will always put your games running on the fastest cores.
> Bad because those best cores are overclocked more so use more power when your in idle state your background tasks are going to keep hitting those cores instead of using the lower clocked lower voltage ones.


So does this require the intel software to be installed and running in windows to function? I dont normally install that sorta thing and is why i shyed away from the percore overclocking in the first place altho i can see the benefit and if the software does work then might be worth using it. Now the question i do have is what seems to be better? the on package vrm or using the bypass it and use the mobo vrm only? Also what is the max voltage you would use for a single core? and what cores are best to boost high. i would assume you just use the cooler of the cores? I mean testing 18core individually would really start to take some time  i wonder if i could get 5.1ghz stable on a few cores hmmm 1.5vcore anyone? LOL


----------



## kithylin

Formula383 said:


> i run my 7980xe @ 4.9 atm with just standard old paste on naked die, temps while streaming and gaming are in the 80's depending how hard of encoding i run (pushing hard). normal gaming around 45c average with 60c spikes. 5.0 is really where the cpu just feels Great (requires LM to keep temps under 90c). The really great thing is you can run 4000mhz at cl 16 16 16 all day on this chip. If you push you can run cl 15 15 15 or better with t1. So is the 7980xe faster yes but the cost to delid is not cheap and it is messing around a bit. Also the power draw is insane. Performance scales well up to 4.5 under all work loads but for gaming more core clock is always better. 3.2ghz on the mesh is good. Wish i could clock the base clock up a bit more than 4.5% at least for the 18core it seems to help at higher clocks. I think the 12~16core is where its at depending how far you want to clock it. the more cores you have the less clock is needed to saturate the bus. Also if you want to delid and run the IHS 4.7 should be easy target to hit even on a big air cooler, 4.8with aio and 4.9 would be the max with out going bare die and tbh the temps might start getting a bit warm there depending on the work load. Also do note these are clocks with sub 25c ambient temps if your house is 30c you will prob want to back it down 100mhz.
> 
> Also i think it was you talking about raid cards? I have been thinking about getting a NAS with a 10gb network for my storage. But truth is i think i will just wait for ssd prices to fall and then pick up a few 4+TB drives on possibly a m.2 pci-e card. I really hate the power draw of the drives spinning when not being used, not to mention raid card eating 100 ish watts too. That combined with the price per gb not really going anywhere fast and the drive quality control is more questionable than ever. meh i guess i'll just wait a couple more years.


Just so you know, the folks at siliconlottery.com are -NOT- a joke what so ever. I was chatting with a friend of mine in steam that has two chips from them he's bought in the past, a 3770K that was spec'd by them to run at 5.4 ghz, and a 7700K spec'd by them to run at 5.3 ghz. Both chips (according to my friend) are still in use in his computers today, since the day he bought them, at the overclock settings originally provided by the siliconlottery.com people. And both systems have never once blue-screened, crashed, or had any degradation or any other issues what so ever in all these years. They're the only people that sell pre-binned chips with a 1 year warranty, that come pre-delidded with liquid metal inside and re-sealed again.

Yes they charge a lot for that service but that's mainly because there's no competition. Usually the chips they sell last well beyond the 1 year warranty they offer.

But anyway, I came here for 7900X overclock information.. and I got what I wanted so I'm probably going to unsubscribe from this thread now. Thanks everyone for sharing information that I asked for.:thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

Mysticial said:


> The behavior that you're observing on the Apex is not consistent with what I saw on our boards.
> 
> On both the Apex boards that I dealt with, enabling the AVX(512) offsets does not force the vcore down to stock. It will drop to the vcore to the value that will be used at the lower frequency - because, it is well... running at that lower frequency.
> 
> If you don't run any AVX(512), the offsets don't matter.


 I, for one, think much of what has been posted regarding 4.9 at 1.37V (or what ever) or 5.0 is better than every 7980XE I've had or heard of. Guys running direct die under LN2 at 5.0 (many with binned chips) can barely control the thermals and power plane heat.

absent any real benchmarks, hard to believe any of the posts. :2cents:


----------



## bmgjet

PWn3R said:


> I had to disable TBM due to unplayable lag with it on in some games. Did anyone else run into that? As soon as it was off, everything was buttery smooth again.
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


How did you disable it, I tried to when I first got this chip but failed to find a permant disable for it so just left it in the end.
You uninstall it. Next boot windows forces it back on your computer.
You block the service. Windows fails to boot and does a repair which re-enables it.
You block it with anti-virus. Get spammed every 20 secs that windows tried to reinstall it.




Formula383 said:


> So does this require the intel software to be installed and running in windows to function? I dont normally install that sorta thing and is why i shyed away from the percore overclocking in the first place altho i can see the benefit and if the software does work then might be worth using it. Now the question i do have is what seems to be better? the on package vrm or using the bypass it and use the mobo vrm only? Also what is the max voltage you would use for a single core? and what cores are best to boost high. i would assume you just use the cooler of the cores? I mean testing 18core individually would really start to take some time  i wonder if i could get 5.1ghz stable on a few cores hmmm 1.5vcore anyone? LOL


Windows auto install it as soon as it see you have a I9.
It lists in it which cores are the best in order. Some bios list them with a * next to the 2 best cores and a # next to the next 2 best after those and a ! next to the 2 worst.

1.4V ment to be the max safe voltage for bursts and 1.35V for prolong useage since real turd chips can use that voltage stock to boost on single core.
I limited my self to staying under 1.35V even tho I have another 10-15C thermals head room. For the 3 best cores need about 1.34V for 5.1ghz, I could probably get another 2 cores up to 5.1ghz if I was willing to push 1.38v but I want this PC to last me atleast 4 years.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> I, for one, think much of what has been posted regarding 4.9 at 1.37V (or what ever) or 5.0 is better than every 7980XE I've had or heard of. Guys running direct die under LN2 at 5.0 (many with binned chips) can barely control the thermals and power plane heat.
> 
> absent any real benchmarks, hard to believe any of the posts. :2cents:


Hi,
Here's a 5.1 
No telling if anything was able to run it was pretty warm 
https://valid.x86.fr/0he0u8


----------



## bmgjet

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Here's a 5.1
> No telling if anything was able to run it was pretty warm
> https://valid.x86.fr/0he0u8


Temperature
98 °C 

Lol on the CPU-Z scan so yeah nar you wont be able to run anything at that speed it will just instant throttle.


----------



## PWn3R

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> What's tbm
> Turbo boost monitor lol ?





Formula383 said:


> Turbo boost max. i think. what mobo is he on is the question? i dont think i have touched it on the apex.





bmgjet said:


> How did you disable it, I tried to when I first got this chip but failed to find a permant disable for it so just left it in the end.
> You uninstall it. Next boot windows forces it back on your computer.
> You block the service. Windows fails to boot and does a repair which re-enables it.
> You block it with anti-virus. Get spammed every 20 secs that windows tried to reinstall it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Windows auto install it as soon as it see you have a I9.
> It lists in it which cores are the best in order. Some bios list them with a * next to the 2 best cores and a # next to the next 2 best after those and a ! next to the 2 worst.
> 
> 1.4V ment to be the max safe voltage for bursts and 1.35V for prolong useage since real turd chips can use that voltage stock to boost on single core.
> I limited my self to staying under 1.35V even tho I have another 10-15C thermals head room. For the 3 best cores need about 1.34V for 5.1ghz, I could probably get another 2 cores up to 5.1ghz if I was willing to push 1.38v but I want this PC to last me atleast 4 years.


On the ASRock Taichi XE, you can disable Turbo Boost Max (that's what I was abbreviating) from the BIOS. If you do this, it doesn't present the device that causes the driver to be auto-installed. You can also disable from software by right clicking on the icon and selecting disable from the task tray. My goal for this weekend is to get this monoblock fitting better (it's not tightening down enough I think) and get temps back down where they should be. Then the push for 4.6x14 and 4.9x4 will be on.

Edit: looking at the screenshot from CPUz you posted, I'd bet that person is over 1.45v VCORE. I'm pretty sure I could probably get my best cores to boot at 5Ghz somewhere around 1.3v, but I'm not willing to push this CPU that high and I certainly can't cool the whole thing at that temperature. This thing gets slammed for hours at a time, so I need it to atleast stay away from thermal throttling range when it's full tilt.


----------



## bmgjet

PWn3R said:


> On the ASRock Taichi XE, you can disable Turbo Boost Max (that's what I was abbreviating) from the BIOS. If you do this, it doesn't present the device that causes the driver to be auto-installed. You can also disable from software by right clicking on the icon and selecting disable from the task tray. My goal for this weekend is to get this monoblock fitting better (it's not tightening down enough I think) and get temps back down where they should be. Then the push for 4.6x14 and 4.9x4 will be on.


Yeah my bios doesnt have that option, and you click disable or untick enable. 5sec later it auto ticks enabled again.


----------



## ocvn

Jpmboy said:


> I, for one, think much of what has been posted regarding 4.9 at 1.37V (or what ever) or 5.0 is better than every 7980XE I've had or heard of. Guys running direct die under LN2 at 5.0 (many with binned chips) can barely control the thermals and power plane heat.
> 
> absent any real benchmarks, hard to believe any of the posts. :2cents:


me too. somehow with 4.9 or 5G it quite hard to control the cpu. direct die with LM , koolance block and 1080 rad for CPU alone.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Here's a 5.1
> No telling if anything was able to run it was pretty warm
> https://valid.x86.fr/0he0u8


i have some subs at HWbot at 5.2 (superPi 32M), but that's all and was using 10C chilled (not direct die but delidded). System will post at higher but can;t do anything beyond post and low current desktop stuff.


bmgjet said:


> Temperature
> 98 °C
> 
> Lol on the CPU-Z scan so yeah nar you wont be able to run anything at that speed it will just instant throttle.


I'm with ya man. Everytime I've seen claims of a 5.0 (or higher) 7980XE it is either under extreme cooling, or unaccompanied by proof under load.


ocvn said:


> me too. somehow with 4.9 or 5G it quite hard to control the cpu. direct die with LM , koolance block and 1080 rad for CPU alone.


 Nice stuff. yeah, it's not just the CPU cores that can cause thermal clock bin drops, Package temps can easily get crazy... and the VRMs are a separate problem (but at least that safety can be released in bios on the Apex).
Mystical is correct (as usual), there is no voltage offset o with AVX offset. And if one sees a voltage drop to stock under AVX load, the CPU has entered a failsafe.



BTW guys, if you want to disable ITB there is a specific procedure to disable the service then uninstall it./ Otherwise it will reinstall. Also, ITB is meaningless if you synch cores or manually override voltage. With a per specific core OC the "*" cores will receive the first proc_calls until 4 threads or 2 cores are scheduled, then the others receive in Intel's stack order. this stack order is shown in SIV64 - it buried but in there. 


Here's a proper way to disable the application (with device driver intact).
1. RIght-click on the tray icon, and disable it.
2. Open Task Scheduler and disable Intel Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0
3. Open Command Prompt and type “sc config ITBMService start= disabled”
4. Reboot.


----------



## Formula383

Jpmboy said:


> i have some subs at HWbot at 5.2 (superPi 32M), but that's all and was using 10C chilled (not direct die but delidded). System will post at higher but can;t do anything beyond post and low current desktop stuff.
> 
> I'm with ya man. Everytime I've seen claims of a 5.0 (or higher) 7980XE it is either under extreme cooling, or unaccompanied by proof under load.
> 
> Nice stuff. yeah, it's not just the CPU cores that can cause thermal clock bin drops, Package temps can easily get crazy... and the VRMs are a separate problem (but at least that safety can be released in bios on the Apex).
> Mystical is correct (as usual), there is no voltage offset o with AVX offset. And if one sees a voltage drop to stock under AVX load, the CPU has entered a failsafe.


Cpu should not be seeing fail safe with a 4.5 oc on 1.2vcore right? So i am not sure but i really dont think this is why but i thank you for the information. What is the max avx 512 clocks you have been able to run or have seen run? Also what can i run for a specific avx512 load only? 

So you are saying i should disable the cpu vrm and use the mother boards vrm? Tbh i dont even know how to do this. And power settings for the cpu make little sense to me as do most bios labels in general. These things should have labels in a manual with real information of what they are imo. or better yet in the bios but yea...

Edit: ok so i did some looking and i can not find any place that says to disable the integrated vrm on the cpu. lots of places i can change stuff with the ivrm but nothing that even remotely looks like it would disable it.


----------



## Jpmboy

Formula383 said:


> Cpu should not be seeing fail safe with a 4.5 oc on 1.2vcore right? So i am not sure but i really dont think this is why but i thank you for the information. What is the max avx 512 clocks you have been able to run or have seen run? Also what can i run for a specific avx512 load only?
> 
> So you are saying i should disable the cpu vrm and use the mother boards vrm? Tbh i dont even know how to do this. And power settings for the cpu make little sense to me as do most bios labels in general. These things should have labels in a manual with real information of what they are imo. or better yet in the bios but yea...
> 
> Edit: ok so i did some looking and i can not find any place that says to disable the integrated vrm on the cpu. lots of places i can change stuff with the ivrm but nothing that even remotely looks like it would disable it.



What MB are you using? 

You cannot disable the VRM array, and would not want to, but you can set it (in most bioses) to high perf mode and disable VRM temperature throttling ("Ignore") depending on the motherboard. Disable speedstep ("EIST") and enable SpeedShift if you are using windows 10.

You can run AVX512 using *this*
Do be cautious, y-cruncher 1B and higher is fully capable of pulling more amps than most boards and PSUs can handle.
Try using this with the system returned to fully stock settings first - then see what overclock it can manage under y-cruncher. This is VERY BRUTAL. 

here's a simple txt file of bios settings on the ASus Apex for a fully stable 2x4.6 and 16x4.5 adaptive overclock with AVX offsets that "survive" AVX512 use... but with a loop temperature of 15C or lower.


----------



## cx-ray

bmgjet said:


> You uninstall it. Next boot windows forces it back on your computer.
> You block the service. Windows fails to boot and does a repair which re-enables it.
> You block it with anti-virus. Get spammed every 20 secs that windows tried to reinstall it.


I removed it with Geek Uninstaller (right click TBM - select Force Removal). To prevent installation after a reboot it gets rid of the appropriate registry keys.


----------



## PWn3R

I just got done grinding down the mounting posts on my monoblock with a Dremel. J removed about 1mm from the base of each post and got rid of the taper on the posts too at the bottom. Off to Home Depot to get a funnel. I've been filling my rad and system with a 10ml syringe. Which is also why I avoided draining it like the plague.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ocvn

Formula383 said:


> Cpu should not be seeing fail safe with a 4.5 oc on 1.2vcore right? So i am not sure but i really dont think this is why but i thank you for the information. What is the max avx 512 clocks you have been able to run or have seen run? Also what can i run for a specific avx512 load only?
> 
> So you are saying i should disable the cpu vrm and use the mother boards vrm? Tbh i dont even know how to do this. And power settings for the cpu make little sense to me as do most bios labels in general. These things should have labels in a manual with real information of what they are imo. or better yet in the bios but yea...
> 
> Edit: ok so i did some looking and i can not find any place that says to disable the integrated vrm on the cpu. lots of places i can change stuff with the ivrm but nothing that even remotely looks like it would disable it.


https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/new-linpack-stress-test-released.247335/
AVX512 load. with my cpu non avx 4.8 (realbench 24.3), avx 4.5 (relabench 2.56 or x264 v2) and 3.5 for avx512 by linpack stress test above. almost 1k gFlops


----------



## Formula383

Jpmboy said:


> What MB are you using?
> 
> You cannot disable the VRM array, and would not want to, but you can set it (in most bioses) to high perf mode and disable VRM temperature throttling ("Ignore") depending on the motherboard. Disable speedstep ("EIST") and enable SpeedShift if you are using windows 10.
> 
> You can run AVX512 using *this*
> Do be cautious, y-cruncher 1B and higher is fully capable of pulling more amps than most boards and PSUs can handle.
> Try using this with the system returned to fully stock settings first - then see what overclock it can manage under y-cruncher. This is VERY BRUTAL.
> 
> here's a simple txt file of bios settings on the ASus Apex for a fully stable 2x4.6 and 16x4.5 adaptive overclock with AVX offsets that "survive" AVX512 use... but with a loop temperature of 15C or lower.


Nice and really nice of you to include the text file! I have the apex as well. pretty good board. VRM is perhaps a bit small for 7980xe but nothing that wont do fine for most. And i see you can disable the power limits and that's cool but i'm probably better off leaving them on. If its power limiting from vrm then the cpu is prob pulling a bit much more juice to begin with  One thing i do not understand tho is why it would throttle the voltage from avx only in offset mode and not in full speed? Mind you i am only doing avx work and not 512. Maybe the bios disabled the vrm throttling feature? untill you use offset?? idk weird.


----------



## Formula383

PWn3R said:


> I just got done grinding down the mounting posts on my monoblock with a Dremel. J removed about 1mm from the base of each post and got rid of the taper on the posts too at the bottom. Off to Home Depot to get a funnel. I've been filling my rad and system with a 10ml syringe. Which is also why I avoided draining it like the plague.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


I just used a bottle that came with my buddies pre mixed liquid for his system, has a nice long tube and a nice sized squeezy bottle works really great. i think it was only like 10 bucks with the fluid.


----------



## PWn3R

The Dremel work appears to have pushed temps down between 5 and 10c per core under load. Going to probably remove some more when I pull the block again for delid in a week or so.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## arrow0309

*7900X @4.8ghz /3.1 /ram 4000cl17 Gaming vs 8086k @5.2*

Guys I really need an advice here, I'm close (near to the final step) to change my system (I have in sig, full tower & custom loop with internal 360 and external 420 monsta) with a "smaller" one, a cpu (8086k @5.2, delidded) only small loop with a 360 only and an air cooled gpu, 2080 FE, all inside a LianLi PC-O11_Dynamic.
All for gaming purposes mostly (well, the gpu side is yet to be decided, I may change my mind and either keep the 2080 looking for a nvlink setup later or even cancel the preorder, wait for the prices to calm down and get myself a 2080ti).
But since many (most) of my folks / friends / other forums users keep telling me not to do it I wonder if it's still wise to do it.
I wanted to shrink my rig, get a new look (and some new toys like a Raystorm Pro for the cpu) and play the same way on my X34P but now, with all the new RT stuff, tensors, nvlink and (maybe) better multicore support soon do you think they will require more cpu power (with or without a multi - gpu rtx), if not immediately soon enough? 
I'm counting on your support to either remain or leave this thread. 

PS:
I already have all the new parts already in my possession, motherboard is a Z370 Gaming 7.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Not sure why anyone would ponder if replacing a titan Xp for a 2080 would be a good thing to do 
I'd personally say no way Jose possibly for a 2080ti but even that is unknown but at 750.us for a 2080 whatever 

Everything else is already in hand so no sense in debating it just have fun with it.


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Not sure why anyone would ponder if replacing a titan Xp for a 2080 would be a good thing to do
> I'd personally say no way Jose possibly for a 2080ti but even that is unknown but at 750.us for a 2080 whatever
> 
> Everything else is already in hand so no sense in debating it just have fun with it.


I was talking about the cpu 
However:
1: Did some cleaning and some drivers / DIP5 / Xtu updates and suddenly my cpu is now back in action, with even higher Xtu (bench) score than ever.
gonna keep it! 
2: I've just cancelled the preorder for the 2080 FE (I'm not shrinking my pc anymore) and I'll keep an eye open for the 2080 ti reviews and maybe (like 77%) will get myself one under water.


----------



## Formula383

arrow0309 said:


> I was talking about the cpu
> However:
> 1: Did some cleaning and some drivers / DIP5 / Xtu updates and suddenly my cpu is now back in action, with even higher Xtu (bench) score than ever.
> gonna keep it!
> 2: I've just cancelled the preorder for the 2080 FE (I'm not shrinking my pc anymore) and I'll keep an eye open for the 2080 ti reviews and maybe (like 77%) will get myself one under water.


Why not put the 2080 into the mainstream pc. I dont see that a 115x cpu would be a upgrade from the x299 but it can do very well and even give better fps in some games. i think i would just have 2 systems and enjoy both. prob use the little cpu for gaming because it uses less power from the wall. But nothing wrong with enjoying both


----------



## zGunBLADEz

got me a asrock extreme 4 matx nice to see a good vrm heatsink on a board shame i cant find the thermal sensor reading even if it do have one.. 


got a 7820x from the old good bay it is delidded by sillicon lottery
dude runs hot lol but cant expect much from a ut60 240 so i give it that for now


so far avg 70s package core

1.25v

49x 26.6 P95
-2 Avx rog bench stress test stable


Planning to get rid off my 8700k rig i just dont seem to like it..


----------



## Pedropc

Sorry for my bad English.

I have recently mounted an i9 7940x, and with the rest of the signature team, I have achieved this.

Edit; AXV and AVX512 set to 0


----------



## Pepillo

Good job Fmt


----------



## Pedropc

Jijijijijijiji, gracias Pepillo.


----------



## Formula383

Welp, i'm so sick of my 7980xe right now. and its not even the 7980xe fault. but from the der8auer direct die retention bracket not being the correct z height to the new ekblock having too much curve to the bottom. i'm just done. The 1700 amd cpu feels faster for daily tasks anyways. Could be the vega gpu over the old titanX? prob just the software patches for disk writes but w/e. I guess i need a new flat waterblock... with nickel plating, or just use my old block and use normal tim.


----------



## PWn3R

Can anyone recommend a brand of nail polish and silicone sealant for delid? Going to assault my 7980xe on Saturday morning.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## tistou77

Formula383 said:


> Welp, i'm so sick of my 7980xe right now. and its not even the 7980xe fault. but from the der8auer direct die retention bracket not being the correct z height to the new ekblock having too much curve to the bottom. i'm just done. The 1700 amd cpu feels faster for daily tasks anyways. Could be the vega gpu over the old titanX? prob just the software patches for disk writes but w/e. I guess i need a new flat waterblock... with nickel plating, or just use my old block and use normal tim.


Did you have a problem with the Direct Die (Der8auer) and your 7980XE ?
Because of the base of the new ekwb that is convex ?


----------



## bmgjet

PWn3R said:


> Can anyone recommend a brand of nail polish and silicone sealant for delid? Going to assault my 7980xe on Saturday morning.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


Liquid Electrical tape is what I used to seal the caps.
Then no silicon, I just used the bracket to hold my IHS in place.


----------



## superV

Formula383 said:


> Welp, i'm so sick of my 7980xe right now. and its not even the 7980xe fault. but from the der8auer direct die retention bracket not being the correct z height to the new ekblock having too much curve to the bottom. i'm just done. The 1700 amd cpu feels faster for daily tasks anyways. Could be the vega gpu over the old titanX? prob just the software patches for disk writes but w/e. I guess i need a new flat waterblock... with nickel plating, or just use my old block and use normal tim.


if u want to fix the height issue,sanding is da way,it worked for me


----------



## Jpmboy

Formula383 said:


> Welp, i'm so sick of my 7980xe right now. and its not even the 7980xe fault. but from the der8auer direct die retention bracket not being the correct z height to the new ekblock having too much curve to the bottom. i'm just done. The 1700 amd cpu feels faster for daily tasks anyways. Could be the vega gpu over the old titanX? prob just the software patches for disk writes but w/e. I guess i need a new flat waterblock... with nickel plating, or just use my old block and use normal tim.


remove the x-frame, put the IHS back on with LM under the hood, and use the EK block. A properly tuned 7980XE in that configuration is very quick (responsiveness near a 5.2 8700K). The AMD vs Nvidia thing may be related to the different way these do scheduling: 





 


PWn3R said:


> Can anyone recommend a brand of nail polish and silicone sealant for delid? Going to assault my 7980xe on Saturday morning.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


MG INdustries conformal coating and any RTV black silicon sealant (local hardware store)


----------



## mikegold10

*Tolerable mounting force on raw silicon?*

I have an i9-7980XE sitting in a De8auer Direct Die Frame, naked silicon except for the thermal paste (see attached image).

It has a monstrous and heavy Noctua NH-D15S heatsink (with two fans mounted, see second attached image) sitting on top and bearing down on the raw 7980XE silicon. The heatsink is screwed in tight (into the direct die frame) and makes good/hard contact with the CPU silicon.

I have no idea how much force I am putting on the raw 7980 XE naked silicon top as a result, since the monstrous heat-sink is sitting on top of it (not to mention under tension).

Is this safe for the long term, or will the chip silicon get damaged?


----------



## Formula383

tistou77 said:


> Did you have a problem with the Direct Die (Der8auer) and your 7980XE ?
> Because of the base of the new ekwb that is convex ?


Both. put the stock cpu hold down back in works fine. i just need a proper cold plate for the water block or get my old one nickel plated. not going to do that just going to look for a better block that is not ridiculously curved... Its so much that even with the heat spreader it would still be terrible contact point. Honestly its just far far too much prob around .100 thats and the center point is small very small like 1/4 the size of the 6700k die. And sure that may work ok for the 6700k cpu. but definitely not a good thing for a larger die cpu. hell not even a good thing for a smaller cpu tbh.


----------



## Jpmboy

mikegold10 said:


> I have an i9-7980XE sitting in a De8auer Direct Die Frame, naked silicon except for the thermal paste (see attached image).
> 
> It has a monstrous and heavy Noctua NH-D15S heatsink (with two fans mounted, see second attached image) sitting on top and bearing down on the raw 7980XE silicon. The heatsink is screwed in tight (into the direct die frame) and makes good/hard contact with the CPU silicon.
> 
> I have no idea how much force I am putting on the raw 7980 XE naked silicon top as a result, since the monstrous heat-sink is sitting on top of it (not to mention under tension).
> 
> Is this safe for the long term, or will the chip silicon get damaged?


The NHD15 mount has a screw-down stop which is meant to work with an IHS to apply the appropriate mount pressure via the springs... so without the IHS, the springs will be compressed less and probably okay. Honestly, very few direct-die mounts with air coolers that I've known or heard of, so I'd be looking to you for the result of this.
As far as the weight of the cooler "levering" a crack in the die, pretty unlikely. That 1Kg cooler is more of a pull on the socket (and away from the die). 

Cracked dies can happen tho. :blinksmil
I do have one of *these* on an x299/7740X (at 5.0/4.8 with 1.35V) and it keeps it under control. It is smaller than my NH-D15, but seems to cool nearly as well.




Formula383 said:


> Both. put the stock cpu hold down back in works fine. i just need a proper cold plate for the water block or get my old one nickel plated. not going to do that just going to look for a better block that is not ridiculously curved... Its so much that even with the heat spreader it would still be terrible contact point. Honestly its just far far too much prob around .100 thats and the center point is small very small like 1/4 the size of the 6700k die. And sure that may work ok for the 6700k cpu. but definitely not a good thing for a larger die cpu. hell not even a good thing for a smaller cpu tbh.


https://www.ekwb.com/shop/ek-supremacy-evo-copper-ni-base


----------



## Formula383

Jpmboy said:


> The NHD15 mount has a screw-down stop which is meant to work with an IHS to apply the appropriate mount pressure via the springs... so without the IHS, the springs will be compressed less and probably okay. Honestly, very few direct-die mounts with air coolers that I've known or heard of, so I'd be looking to you for the result of this.
> As far as the weight of the cooler "levering" a crack in the die, pretty unlikely. That 1Kg cooler is more of a pull on the socket (and away from the die).
> 
> Cracked dies can happen tho. :blinksmil
> I do have one of *these* on an x299/7740X (at 5.0/4.8 with 1.35V) and it keeps it under control. It is smaller than my NH-D15, but seems to cool nearly as well.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.ekwb.com/shop/ek-supremacy-evo-copper-ni-base



The direct die mounting bracket is to hold the cpu in the socket, and is just too thick to apply proper mounting tension to the die. hence it wont work out of the box with out modification to it. Also i added washers to take up the Z hight of the missing IHS even tho it is not needed.

I just want a flat based water block, i contacted EK and they do not make one. I just wish they had put in what sort of a convex they used on their parts. had i known it was going to be that much or that agressive i would have never bought it not even for a stock 115x cpu its just far too tight of a point to be effective imo. and yes it could crack a die if too much pressure was used. 

I may have to look at my amd water block from koolance and see how much of a curve if any is in it. I do believe it might have had a very slight curve but tbh i would not want more than a few thousands of a inch away from being truly flat. and in fact for this cpu i think a true flat die would be best. With a IHS it would be fine to have a very slight curve to it. I still dont think its needed. And is probably only put there to help with spreading the paste if you use far too much. Any how if anyone has a known water block that is 100% true and flat with nickel plating let me know please 

edit: i messed up and thought you quoted me on more than you did


----------



## Formula383

Jpmboy said:


> remove the x-frame, put the IHS back on with LM under the hood, and use the EK block. A properly tuned 7980XE in that configuration is very quick (responsiveness near a 5.2 8700K). The AMD vs Nvidia thing may be related to the different way these do scheduling:
> 
> https://youtu.be/nIoZB-cnjc0
> 
> 
> MG INdustries conformal coating and any RTV black silicon sealant (local hardware store)


I did this on my 7820x and it runs 4.8 happy on a quiet aio. altho i left out the sealant as i may want to remove the lid again and will be fine so long as i dont remove the cpu from the mobo.


----------



## Formula383

tistou77 said:


> Did you have a problem with the Direct Die (Der8auer) and your 7980XE ?
> Because of the base of the new ekwb that is convex ?


Sorry if i was not clear the EK EVO block is pointed so that would be convex. I think that is correct! The frame could possibly work with the proper waterblock maybe? but this water block is just far to fine of a point. and the frame can be sanded down a bit to make it work. and so could the EK block but then it would not have the nickel plating for the LM.


----------



## Formula383

mikegold10 said:


> I have an i9-7980XE sitting in a De8auer Direct Die Frame, naked silicon except for the thermal paste (see attached image).
> 
> It has a monstrous and heavy Noctua NH-D15S heatsink (with two fans mounted, see second attached image) sitting on top and bearing down on the raw 7980XE silicon. The heatsink is screwed in tight (into the direct die frame) and makes good/hard contact with the CPU silicon.
> 
> I have no idea how much force I am putting on the raw 7980 XE naked silicon top as a result, since the monstrous heat-sink is sitting on top of it (not to mention under tension).
> 
> Is this safe for the long term, or will the chip silicon get damaged?


Just make sure you are not mailing the pc like that and you will be fine. it would take a pretty good drop to crack the die unless you had it really cranked down with a tone of pressure. Dies are not super fragile provided you are flat on them. If you had it sitting on the corner of the die then yes you could crack it very easy. 

TLR you will be just fine


----------



## Jpmboy

Formula383 said:


> The direct die mounting bracket is to hold the cpu in the socket, and is just too thick to apply proper mounting tension to the die. hence it wont work out of the box with out modification to it. Also i added washers to take up the Z hight of the missing IHS even tho it is not needed.
> 
> I just want a flat based water block, i contacted EK and they do not make one. I just wish they had put in what sort of a convex they used on their parts. had i known it was going to be that much or that agressive i would have never bought it not even for a stock 115x cpu its just far too tight of a point to be effective imo. and yes it could crack a die if too much pressure was used.
> 
> I may have to look at my amd water block from koolance and see how much of a curve if any is in it. I do believe it might have had a very slight curve but tbh i would not want more than a few thousands of a inch away from being truly flat. and in fact for this cpu i think a true flat die would be best. With a IHS it would be fine to have a very slight curve to it. I still dont think its needed. And is probably only put there to help with spreading the paste if you use far too much. Any how if anyone has a known water block that is 100% true and flat with nickel plating let me know please
> 
> edit: i messed up and thought you quoted me on more than you did


 Yeah, in all the excitement you musta missed the link to the nickel plated EK base plate.


----------



## tistou77

Formula383 said:


> Both. put the stock cpu hold down back in works fine. i just need a proper cold plate for the water block or get my old one nickel plated. not going to do that just going to look for a better block that is not ridiculously curved... Its so much that even with the heat spreader it would still be terrible contact point. Honestly its just far far too much prob around .100 thats and the center point is small very small like 1/4 the size of the 6700k die. And sure that may work ok for the 6700k cpu. but definitely not a good thing for a larger die cpu. hell not even a good thing for a smaller cpu tbh.


Ok, I also wanted to mount the Direct Die with a Koolance 390i, but the base of the waterblock is too convex so I have not tried
I'm waiting for the next ekwb Velocity to test

The watercool heatkiller is good
A friend put it up and no worries
Initially he had problems but it was more in the tightening of the DDF I think and he was testing with thermal paste and since he put the LM is all good

I thought the waterblock base of the ekwb was flat, I see many mounting Supremacy EVO with Direct Die, weird
Supremacy EVO is perhaps less convex than the Koolance, when I put the 390i on the direct die, I had the impression that the waterblock base touched the DIE but did not touch the DDF


----------



## PWn3R

Hi all - for a while I had considered selling my 7980xe. After this morning (stressful as it was) I am glad I did not. Below is a screenshot of my temps at 4.6Ghz all cores after running AIDA64 for 10 minutes. Keep in mind, this is AFTER delid, LM on IHS and Monoblock and some more ghetto modding on the legs on my monoblock, all done this morning.


----------



## SirWaWa

hmmmm


----------



## superV

tistou77 said:


> Ok, I also wanted to mount the Direct Die with a Koolance 390i, but the base of the waterblock is too convex so I have not tried
> I'm waiting for the next ekwb Velocity to test
> 
> The watercool heatkiller is good
> A friend put it up and no worries
> Initially he had problems but it was more in the tightening of the DDF I think and he was testing with thermal paste and since he put the LM is all good
> 
> I thought the waterblock base of the ekwb was flat, I see many mounting Supremacy EVO with Direct Die, weird
> Supremacy EVO is perhaps less convex than the Koolance, when I put the 390i on the direct die, I had the impression that the waterblock base touched the DIE but did not touch the DDF


i sanded the frame bought from China N.1 and using waterblock from Alphacool NexXxoS XP³ Light - Acetal - Intel/AMD https://www.alphacool.com/shop/cpu-...ol-nexxxos-xp3-light-acetal-intel/amd?c=20571
works perfectly on my 7980xe,direct die baby


----------



## Jpmboy

PWn3R said:


> Hi all - for a while I had considered selling my 7980xe. After this morning (stressful as it was) I am glad I did not. Below is a screenshot of my temps at 4.6Ghz all cores after running AIDA64 for 10 minutes. Keep in mind, this is AFTER delid, LM on IHS and Monoblock and some more ghetto modding on the legs on my monoblock, all done this morning.


probably best to show the entire HWinfo screen so we can see the power/wattage during AID64. was this with cpu/fpu/cache and ram checked?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I didn't notice any "legs" on the mono block 
The surface on it has a round spot that go further than the rest of the body of it is all I noticed which was the main stopping point I assumed :/


----------



## Robostyle

So, I have a laptop, 1060 + 6700HQ, 1080p screen, 16GB ddr4. As the matter of fact, it randomly hits it's max 3500 mhz, obviously (however, for surprise, it does - at least what I see in HWi). But it is bad. I mean, really BAD. 

ARMA 3 (autodetect) - totally unplayable, fps are around 25. I know it's was a failure, not a game, terrific optimization - but, I think 1060 isn't the issue here. 
BF1, all ultra, 1920x1080, *no AA or SSAA*(DSR/Supersampling, as you wish) - since the last spring patch, it was barely playable because of microstutters. I can tell, they're everywhere now. I know 4c/4t CPU have issues there, but not 4c/8t. And aswell, gpu isn't an issue here too.

Also, I've tried Crysis 3, for an instance - it is CPU demanding game - opposite to other modern games, Crysis 3 reacts positively for additional CPU muscles - so you get what you pay for. As a CPU demanding game, I've chose locations and scenarios with vast of grass, NPC and other cpu-fed stuff. Sooo, I've got drops from steady 60 FPS to ~45, and ofc with some frametime drop, comletely destroying smoothness.

So, here what I thought - it IS CPU or RAM bottleneck, no doubt. But at first, what can I do with 6700HQ? I've read alot threads + judjing from my experience, it is hard to OC things Intel don't want you to OC. 

But anyway - isn't there ANY thing I can do to this mobile ... "abomination"?


----------



## Jpmboy

sure, you can bclk OC and/or tune up the ram. (note: this is a SkyLake-X thread...)


----------



## Robostyle

Jpmboy said:


> sure, you can bclk OC and/or tune up the ram. (note: this is a SkyLake-X thread...)


Ugh, I misread “skylake-s”...

But is it possible to tune bclk on skylake-h? At least, BIOS in my case is purely useless...


----------



## Jpmboy

Folding on 30 [email protected] w/ 1.165V, Titan V folding at 1.54GHz (+104 on the slider). VRM holds at 63C wityh a 40MM Gelid fan on the Apex included bracket.


----------



## TahoeDust

Do you think we will ever see anything x299 ringbus? I use my machine mostly for gaming, and am thinking about hopping over to the 9900k when it comes out.


----------



## Mysticial

TahoeDust said:


> Do you think we will ever see anything x299 ringbus? I use my machine mostly for gaming, and am thinking about hopping over to the 9900k when it comes out.


Kaby Lake X 

In all seriousness, it's unlikely the server/HEDT will go back to the ring bus. Ring bus may have lower latencies and such, but it's not scalable to the extreme multi-core in bandwidth and throughput. Also, ring bus is a very mature design, the mesh not so much. So there's likely room for improvement in the mesh design in future processors.

From what I heard, Cascade Lake will share the same crappy mesh as Skylake X. So we're looking at Ice Lake at the earliest for mesh improvements.


----------



## ThrashZone

Mysticial said:


> Kaby Lake X
> 
> In all seriousness, it's unlikely the server/HEDT will go back to the ring bus. Ring bus may have lower latencies and such, but it's not scalable to the extreme multi-core in bandwidth and throughput. Also, ring bus is a very mature design, the mesh not so much. So there's likely room for improvement in the mesh design in future processors.
> 
> *From what I heard, Cascade Lake will share the same crappy mesh as Skylake X. So we're looking at Ice Lake at the earliest for mesh improvements*.


Hi,
I believe by then we'll be on threadripper 3 by then


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Mysticial

kingofblog said:


> As the server line grows to larger and larger core counts, the interconnect is only going to get slower, not faster. This was already true in the old ring bus, where Broadwell-EP was clocked at 2.8 GHz versus Haswell-EP at 3.0 GHz. I fully expect the mesh to go below 2 GHz in the next iteration, whenever it comes*.
> 
> *Newest leaks show 10 nm delayed to H2 2020 for clients, which implies 2021 for server.



Indeed the trend is to make it slower. And the reason they told us is to save power. But it has reached the point where it's starting to have a negative effect on some of their high-volume customers (such as the company that I work in). And as such we're starting to look at alternatives. And you bet that we let them know that.

In the end, performance does matter. They won't be able to keep slowing down the interconnect forever - especially when it starts to cut into their profits.

It's one thing to not improve from generation to generation. It's another to actively regress. And that's what Intel is doing right now. Let's see how long they can keep it up before market forces start having an effect. Let's see what AMD can do in the next couple of years.


----------



## TahoeDust

Mysticial said:


> Kaby Lake X
> 
> In all seriousness, it's unlikely the server/HEDT will go back to the ring bus. Ring bus may have lower latencies and such, but it's not scalable to the extreme multi-core in bandwidth and throughput. Also, ring bus is a very mature design, the mesh not so much. So there's likely room for improvement in the mesh design in future processors.
> 
> From what I heard, Cascade Lake will share the same crappy mesh as Skylake X. So we're looking at Ice Lake at the earliest for mesh improvements.


Haha....So if you were a gamer would you leave 7820x/x299 for 9900k/z390?


----------



## PWn3R

Not since I delidded, got my monoblock working. Not a chance in hell.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Mysticial

TahoeDust said:


> Haha....So if you were a gamer would you leave 7820x/x299 for 9900k/z390?



If I was strictly a gamer on a budget with no other use for the machine, then yes.


----------



## 0-8-15 User

Some questions arose when overclocking an i9-7960X on an ASUS WS X299 SAGE board with 64 GB of DDR4-2400, CL15-15-15-35 RAM:

1. What does the CPU Integrated VRM Fault Management actually do? And is it safe to turn it off?
2. What does the Cache Offset actually do? And should I even care about it?
3. Would delidding the CPU (significantly) reduce power consumption?
4. What should I aim for when tweaking Core Voltage vs. LCC vs. Input Voltage
5. What would be a realistic RAM OC target for two F4-2400C15Q-32GNT kits?

Current settings:

CPU Multiplier: 45x
Cache Multiplier: 30x

Vcore: 1.16V (fixed)
Uncore: 1.05V (fixed)
VCCIO 1.0V (fixed)
VCSA: 0.9V (fixed)
Input Voltage: 1.85V
LLC: Level 4

Prime95 (1344k in-place without AVX): Core temps between 67 °C and 83 °C; VRM: 86 °C

Power consumption (Idle): 90 Watt
Power consumption (Prime95): 500 Watt
Cinebench R15: 3909

-> I basically reached my personal temperature and power draw limit, so what would you do if you were me in order to squeeze out some more speed?

Delid?
Better RAM?
Per-Core fine-tuning?


----------



## ThrashZone

0-8-15 User said:


> Some questions arose when overclocking an i9-7960X on an ASUS WS X299 SAGE board with 64 GB of DDR4-2400, CL15-15-15-35 RAM:
> 
> 1. What does the CPU Integrated VRM Fault Management actually do? And is it safe to turn it off?
> 2. What does the Cache Offset actually do? And should I even care about it?
> 3. Would delidding the CPU (significantly) reduce power consumption?
> 4. What should I aim for when tweaking Core Voltage vs. LCC vs. Input Voltage
> 5. What would be a realistic RAM OC target for two F4-2400C15Q-32GNT kits?
> 
> Current settings:
> 
> CPU Multiplier: 45x
> Cache Multiplier: 30x
> 
> Vcore: 1.16V (fixed)
> Uncore: 1.05V (fixed)
> VCCIO 1.0V (fixed)
> VCSA: 0.9V (fixed)
> Input Voltage: 1.85V
> LLC: Level 4
> 
> Prime95 (1344k in-place without AVX): Core temps between 67 °C and 83 °C; VRM: 86 °C
> 
> Power consumption (Idle): 90 Watt
> Power consumption (Prime95): 500 Watt
> Cinebench R15: 3909
> 
> -> I basically reached my personal temperature and power draw limit, so what would you do if you were me in order to squeeze out some more speed?
> 
> *Delid?
> Better RAM?*
> Per-Core fine-tuning?


Hi,
Yes delid and you can keep doing what you've been doing with 15-20c lower temps as a reward :thumb:
The default frequency on x299 is 2666 so yeah you shot very low on memory 3200C14 4x8gb is good stuff.


----------



## 0-8-15 User

ThrashZone said:


> 3200C14 4x8gb is good stuff.


Yes, but also very expensive at the moment, since I need 64 GB in total.

My current memory sticks seem to be capable of doing 2800 MHz CL15-15-15-35 @ 1.3V. I wonder how much of a difference those 3200 MHz CL14 sticks would make in real world applications ...

I would have to pay at least 300 bucks to upgrade to them.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## tistou77

There has already been info on the next gen X299 CPU (Cascade Lake-X) ?
It will be thermal paste or soldered ?


----------



## magnusavr

Question regarding VCCIO and VCCSA. Just set up my new system with Taichi XE and 7940x and did some overclocking.

Running it 4.4GHz all vcore 1.125v and VCCIN 1.8v. AVX Offset 6 (3.8GHz). Mesh 3GHz 1v. My tridentz using it's xmp profile.


I noticed that the VCCIO Auto was 1.3v and VCCSA Auto 1.35v. Isn't this a bit high? What is the default for the CPU?

I set it manually to VCCIO 1.05 and VCCSA 1.0v (I have not tested any lower).

Also LLC2 (I belive 1 is the highest on asrock). I guess LLC2 is ok?

Thanks for any anyswer you can give


----------



## wingman99

magnusavr said:


> Question regarding VCCIO and VCCSA. Just set up my new system with Taichi XE and 7940x and did some overclocking.
> 
> Running it 4.4GHz all vcore 1.125v and VCCIN 1.8v. AVX Offset 6 (3.8GHz). Mesh 3GHz 1v. My tridentz using it's xmp profile.
> 
> 
> I noticed that the VCCIO Auto was 1.3v and VCCSA Auto 1.35v. Isn't this a bit high? What is the default for the CPU?
> 
> I set it manually to VCCIO 1.05 and VCCSA 1.0v (I have not tested any lower).
> 
> Also LLC2 (I belive 1 is the highest on asrock). I guess LLC2 is ok?
> 
> Thanks for any anyswer you can give


Vccio Stock Intel 0.950v

Vccsa (System Agent) stock Intel 1.050v


----------



## idahosurge

tistou77 said:


> There has already been info on the next gen X299 CPU (Cascade Lake-X) ?
> It will be thermal paste or soldered ?


There is no information out yet. Intel has not even officially announced this.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah just some laptop company but it was the 9900 series stuff they said were soldered 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/225...onfirms-intel-i9-9900k-i7-9700k-soldered.html


----------



## mikegold10

*Liquid metal is not all its cracked out to be!*

I am heavily overclocking an Intel i9-7980XE CPU and decided to use liquid metal. I delidded the CPU and am using Der8auer's Direct Die Frame allowing me to put the cold plate of my custom water cooling loop directly on the chip silicon.

The problem is that the silicon die itself is slightly convex at its top. This apparently is a common issue for Skylake-X CPUs (especially the many core ones, as pointed out by no other than Der8auer himself in a video he made on the issue) - the CPU chip itself not being perfectly flat. It is less of an issue with conventional thermal paste, which is much thicker than liquid metal and can be applied as a thick coat to make up for any die/heat-sink/cold-plate warping or imperfections.

With liquid metal though, and I am using Thermal Grizzly Conductanaut, the general recommendation is to apply a thin coat to the silicon and a thin coat to the heat-sink. This accepted approach does not work for me. Only an oval portion of the chip, representing approx. the central 33% of the total area of the top of the die is coming into contact with the perfectly flat top-notch mirror finished cold plate I am using, an Aqua Computer Cuplex Kryos Next Vario with Vision. The periphery of the silicon around this oval center, due to the convexity of the chip (i.e., the ever so slight central bulge), is not coming into contact with the cold plate under tension (regardless of how much tension I place, within reason). I figured this out by leveling the cold plate on the CPU with LM applied, putting a lot of downward force on it, and seeing that only the central 33% of the die had touched the cold plate. This was easily noticeable due to the disturbance of the LM on both the die and the cold plate, forming an oval like fingerprint at the area of actual contact.

The result of applying two thin layers of LM to the CPU die and cold plate, respectively, is that some cores, probably the ones along the periphery of the die, are either not making contact or are making poor contact with the cold plate and jump to the Tj MAX temperature (or close to it) at load. Other cores near by are also extremely hot. There is an almost 60 degree C disparity between properly cooled cores (near the center of the die) and the overheating ones at the farthest point in the periphery.

I have been able to (temporarily?) resolve this issue on my motherboard which is sitting horizontally on a test-bed by applying a much thicker Conductanaut coat to both the die and cold plate. At this point, I see quite a bit of Conductanaut LM pooling on both surfaces, which goes completely against all recommendations for how to apply LM, but the temps are uniform across cores and very very good when mounted. So good in fact, that I am now motherboard VRM temperature limited in my ability to overclock (MB: ASRock Fatal1ty X299 Professional Gaming i9 XE) as I hit over 800 W at the wall, while the CPU cores remain at a temperature of about 65-70 C.

My concern is what will happen when I actually mount the motherboard vertically in a case, after I am done testing, and that the liquid metal will pool over time to the bottom facing edge of the CPU die due to the effects of gravity. This is despite the great surface tension and capillary action between the cold plate and the die keeping the Conductanaut mostly in place. I have protected the CPU PCB with many layers of nail polish so that any spilled over LM will not short out the tiny resistors and caps on the CPU PCB, but as soon as the LM pools and shifts off of the top facing part of the CPU die when the motherboard is mounted vertically, the cores situated at the top of the die will again lose contact with the cold plate and/or make poor contact, and begin to overheat at load. This effect may be very gradual, assuming it happens at all.

How can LM pooling with a thick coat be prevented and/or avoided, short of sanding down the silicon to make it perfectly flat and risking damage to a $2000 CPU (especially over time, as the protective layer at the top of the silicon will be sanded off)? Milling the cold plate (or laser etching it) to make it concave to match the CPU die is pretty much out of the question since this will be a very complicated expensive process and way beyond what I am willing to do to go forward.

I think for as long as I keep the motherboard horizontal, none of this will be an issue, but as soon as I mount it vertically into a case which is the goal, then the problems may start (after some unknown period of time, depending on how slowly the LM flows/transitions to the bottom).

I am left with just an LM solution of some sort, I think. Will the pooling of Conductanaut be an actual issue or will capillary action and the surface tension of the LM be enough to prevent pooling due to gravity over time despite the two thick coats of it applied to the chip die and cold plate, respectively.

Switching to a non-liquid-metal TM results in much worse temperatures - worse on the order of around 20-30 degrees C under load.


----------



## Jpmboy

erm - do not sand down the bare die (or if you do, you gotta post back with the "experience"  ). LM will run-out if you vertically mount the board before it can form a surface oxide which may lower the chances of it flowing out. You can try packing "eraser" abound the gap between the cold plate and be sure to cover all SMDs on the cpu's pcb with MG conformal coating...
question - does the problem exist when you use the stock IHS (and LM under the hood?) and no direct-die x-frame?


----------



## mikegold10

Formula383 said:


> The direct die mounting bracket is to hold the cpu in the socket, and is just too thick to apply proper mounting tension to the die. hence it wont work out of the box with out modification to it. Also i added washers to take up the Z hight of the missing IHS even tho it is not needed.
> 
> I just want a flat based water block, i contacted EK and they do not make one. I just wish they had put in what sort of a convex they used on their parts. had i known it was going to be that much or that agressive i would have never bought it not even for a stock 115x cpu its just far too tight of a point to be effective imo. and yes it could crack a die if too much pressure was used.
> 
> I may have to look at my amd water block from koolance and see how much of a curve if any is in it. I do believe it might have had a very slight curve but tbh i would not want more than a few thousands of a inch away from being truly flat. and in fact for this cpu i think a true flat die would be best. With a IHS it would be fine to have a very slight curve to it. I still dont think its needed. And is probably only put there to help with spreading the paste if you use far too much. Any how if anyone has a known water block that is 100% true and flat with nickel plating let me know please
> 
> edit: i messed up and thought you quoted me on more than you did


These are perfectly flat, and you can get them without the VARIO and VISION to save money:

https://shop.aquacomputer.de/product_info.php?language=en&products_id=3562

Just make sure your CPU die is perfectly flat, many are convex, and assymetrically so.


----------



## Beagle Box

PWn3R said:


> Can anyone recommend a brand of nail polish and silicone sealant for delid? Going to assault my 7980xe on Saturday morning.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


Sally Hansen Clear No Chip Top Coat
Permatex Ultra Black Advanced Formula Gasket Maker

They've worked well for me.


----------



## PWn3R

Thanks, I ended up using a toothpick to apply liquid electrical tape. In the small amount needed to cover the SMDs it was setup before I had the LM applied to the die and inside of the IHS. The polish my wife had all had sparkly stuff in it, except one but that didn't have an ingredients list and I saw something saying the ingredients in some of them can mess up the substrate surface.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ZeroC00L

Hello,

I delidded my i9-7900X and am using the Fractial Design Celsius S36 to cool the beast. However, I have my AIO in the top portion of my case, with the cover on. My case is the be quiet! Dark Base Pro 900. 

When idle, I'm at about 39C. I feel this is too high and when I go to overclock, with AIDA64 on a stress test for 15 minutes, I'm already hitting 95C. 

I'm not sure what to try next, or if this CPU is just a bad one to overclock.


----------



## bmgjet

Is the pump running at full speed?
How did you re-seal the IHS, Using silicon will give worse temps since it will hold the IHS away from the die.
Thats a pritty weak AIO anyway and most 280 rad AIO beat it but id still expect idle temps to be a good 10C cooler then that which shows somethings not right. Well unless your room temps like 35C.


----------



## PWn3R

That idle temperature seems quite High unless your ambient temperature is high as well. My ambient temperature is around 24 C. I have a bigger radiator and a custom Loop but I'm also cooling a 7980xe. My idle temperature is 26 to 28 C. I'm running between 1.2 and 1.24v on my cores right now. Under full load the highest temperature is 69 C which is 12 degrees higher than the coldest core.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

ZeroC00L said:


> Hello,
> 
> I delidded my i9-7900X and am using the Fractial Design Celsius S36 to cool the beast. However, I have my AIO in the top portion of my case, with the cover on. My case is the be quiet! Dark Base Pro 900.
> 
> When idle, I'm at about 39C. I feel this is too high and when I go to overclock, with AIDA64 on a stress test for 15 minutes, I'm already hitting 95C.
> 
> I'm not sure what to try next, or if this CPU is just a bad one to overclock.


Hi,
What are your clocks might be perfectly normal for all core 45 with no delid yet.


----------



## ZeroC00L

bmgjet said:


> Is the pump running at full speed?
> How did you re-seal the IHS, Using silicon will give worse temps since it will hold the IHS away from the die.
> Thats a pritty weak AIO anyway and most 280 rad AIO beat it but id still expect idle temps to be a good 10C cooler then that which shows somethings not right. Well unless your room temps like 35C.


I had the delid done by Silicon Lottery. So, I'm exactly sure what they use to reseal it. They said they use a adhesive that is similar to Intel's. 

So, my Fractial Design S36 is weak? I have a PWM fan curve set in the BIOS to hit 50% at 50C. So, at 39C it's at 39%. I wonder if with the Dark Base Pro 900 case, if there is not enough ventilation through the top cover/shroud to expel the heat well enough?

What are your thoughts on the case and other thoughts you might have? Should I look at a different AIO?


----------



## ZeroC00L

PWn3R said:


> That idle temperature seems quite High unless your ambient temperature is high as well. My ambient temperature is around 24 C. I have a bigger radiator and a custom Loop but I'm also cooling a 7980xe. My idle temperature is 26 to 28 C. I'm running between 1.2 and 1.24v on my cores right now. Under full load the highest temperature is 69 C which is 12 degrees higher than the coldest core.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


Silicon Lottery did the delid and bin for me. They sent a note stating the following... "7900X @4.6GHz DELIDDED - Your CPU should be stable when using the settings below and matching components from our online QVL. We go through a rigorous stress test routine to ensure stability for the vast majority of use cases."

Settings provided below in the letter are...

1.225V Vcore
-3 AVX Offset
-5 AVX512 Offset


----------



## ZeroC00L

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> What are your clocks might be perfectly normal for all core 45 with no delid yet.


Stock clocks right now. It has been delidded and binned by Silicon Lottery. Please refer to the two previous posts above this one for more information. 

Thank you


----------



## bmgjet

Switch the radiator to inlet so it gets the coolest air.
Then use rear fan as exhaust.

Your just wasting your time with AIO. Go proper water cooling. Even just a basic EK kit 280 or 360 will be way better.


----------



## ThrashZone

ZeroC00L said:


> Silicon Lottery did the delid and bin for me. They sent a note stating the following... "7900X @4.6GHz DELIDDED - Your CPU should be stable when using the settings below and matching components from our online QVL. We go through a rigorous stress test routine to ensure stability for the vast majority of use cases."
> 
> Settings provided below in the letter are...
> 
> 1.225V Vcore
> -3 AVX Offset
> -5 AVX512 Offset


Hi,
That's all they gave you ?

46 all core,
I did those settings and just ran time spy my cpu package temp was 80c 
Having cpu input voltage "vccin" on auto pushes it to 2.0v

All you might need is 1.9v-1.8v which I switched it too and got a cpu package temp of 80c as well on 1.9v :/
Ran real bench and got cpu package of 89c

Real bench still at all core 46
Input voltage 1.8v
cpu core voltage adaptive -0.080 & turbo -1.195 = 1.217v max vid/ cpu package temp 78c good drop there 
So you can drop a little heat by setting the vccin to 1.8v instead of leaving it on auto.

I believe i've used this same adaptive voltage for 4.7 and 4.8 but using By Core Usage instead with them being entred on the top 4 or 5 core listings and 42 on the rest by core usage only show 8 of my 10 cores 
All of the core will hit the highest multiplier eventually just not at the same time thus lowering temps even a little more :thumb:


----------



## ZeroC00L

..


----------



## ZeroC00L

bmgjet said:


> Switch the radiator to inlet so it gets the coolest air.
> Then use rear fan as exhaust.
> 
> Your just wasting your time with AIO. Go proper water cooling. Even just a basic EK kit 280 or 360 will be way better.


I just went with the AIO since it was convenient. I probably will go with an EKWB custom loop. For right now, you want me to put the radiator on the front of the case? 

Lastly, do you think just a CPU block will suffice or should I invest in a monoblock?

I've added below a picture of my current setup. The radiator is pulling to the top. So, the fans are not visible, unless I remove the top of the case. Which has two cut-outs for letting the heat out.


----------



## iamjanco

ZeroC00L said:


> I just went with the AIO since it was convenient. I probably will go with an EKWB custom loop. For right now, you want me to put the radiator on the front of the case?
> 
> Lastly, do you think just a CPU block will suffice or should I invest in a monoblock?
> 
> I've added below a picture of my current setup. The radiator is pulling to the top. So, the fans are not visible, unless I remove the top of the case. Which has two cut-outs for letting the heat out.



If you decide to go with a monoblock for the RVIE (or Apex), you might want to avoid the EK version. Others here haven't been overly happy with the results it provides. That said, if you opt for a separate cpu block, you can get a *vrm block that will work for the Apex* from Watercool (PPCS lists them as well, but not sure if they have any stock).

Nice case, btw. As soon as I saw the top vents I knew what it was. I've got one (the first edition) that I might use in a future build.


----------



## bmgjet

Switch to intake as in, Air is sucked though the case and radiator into the case.
Then you have the front fans providing cool air to the gpu
And the rear fan on the case as exhaust.

That top will really be limiting your air flow. So try with it removed.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Just a tad on the ocd side to quibble about an aio's air streaming 
Yes as intake would be best.

Real problem as I attempted to say is AUTO voltages are bad lol :doh:
Limiting input voltage and system agent voltage will drop temps no matter which way the rad gets air


----------



## PWn3R

There's no performance hit on my 7980xe from running input voltage of 1.8 vs 1.9, 2.0, 2.1.

Temps go up a lot with each notch I'd say about 5c for each .1 I'd try 1.8 and go from there 

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## tistou77

I tried to mount the Direct Die Frame (der8auer) with the new waterblock ekwb Velocity
After 3 tries, I had 5 cores much hotter than the other @stock (with my OC, Cinebench closed from the beginning)   
So I do not know if it's editing, or if 3 times in a row I put the Liquid metal wrong, but it did not work ....

I handed the IHS for now (I have 3, 4 cores hotter than before with Cinebench)
Maybe today, I could not spread out the LM...
Or it's the new WB (full of little bubbles inside)

I will look later for relid properly, I'm fed up


----------



## Kimir

Why did you change your previous waterblock?


----------



## tistou77

Kimir said:


> Why did you change your previous waterblock?


The Koolance 390i I had was very convex and I was afraid for the DIE 
I took pictures of the base of Koolance, I will post them


----------



## superV

@tistou77 you need to sand the frame to make the die pop out a bit more to make contact with the waterblock.
it's a height issue not the waterblock.
i did and it works perfectly with old alphacool waterblock


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
If anyone has ever delid with jb weld I imagine we would of heard about it


----------



## tistou77

superV said:


> @tistou77 you need to sand the frame to make the die pop out a bit more to make contact with the waterblock.
> it's a height issue not the waterblock.
> i did and it works perfectly with old alphacool waterblock


Thanks but it looks like the future "Skylake-X" 9xxx are (maybe) soldered, if so, I'll stay with the IHS and do not bother with the Direct Die for a few months


----------



## aerotracks

I was bored and bought another used 7820X (untested) from local forums - tested it undelidded on AIO and imagine my surprise it outclasses every Sky-X CPU I have had 





On this one Input 1.9V, Mesh 1.2V, IO 1.05V, SA 0.825V, VDIMM 1.36V


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ lol - it is a lottery! :thumb"


----------



## arrow0309

arrow0309 said:


> Hi guys I've had bsod and crashes at windows logon this morning (been stable for more than 6 months) and I'm still using the 1004 bios.
> I'll have to solve the bsod (for now just set to the bios defaults quickly) but maybe it's time to finally update this bios.
> Any of you can share anything about this last 1503?
> Would you advise me to flash it?
> Or better the older 1401 (or just remain with my old 1004)?





arrow0309 said:


> Hi, I've decided to go for this (1401) bios and flashed it a few days ago, also clean reinstalled Windows (the last 1809 build).
> Put for testing the same OC settings (4.8 core, 3.1 cache, no AVX1/2 offsets) but with the default XMP (manually) of 3200 cl14 for now.
> I use 1.27v adaptive and -0.020 offset.
> 
> Tried a run of Realbench 2.56 earlier, it stopped for instability (Handbrake).
> Any clue, before I try to increase vcore?


Hi, sorry for the cross quoting (from the Asus X299 thread), any clues for the lost stability and / or how to solve it?


----------



## Jpmboy

arrow0309 said:


> Hi, sorry for the cross quoting (from the Asus X299 thread), any clues for the lost stability and / or how to solve it?


it's likely vcore at load causing x264 to crash, add 10-20mV. Also check LLC and allow for some droop of input voltage at load (on this platform, VCCIN is affected by LLC), what VCCIN is set in bios?.


----------



## ThrashZone

arrow0309 said:


> Hi, sorry for the cross quoting (from the Asus X299 thread), any clues for the lost stability and / or how to solve it?


Hi,
What was the bsod whea/ watchdog.... ?


----------



## arrow0309

Jpmboy said:


> it's likely vcore at load causing x264 to crash, add 10-20mV. Also check LLC and allow for some droop of input voltage at load (on this platform, VCCIN is affected by LLC), what VCCIN is set in bios?.


Hi, vccin 1.840 and LLC level 5.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1O2rALSifhFL7kUiX6PpuISqqZo0X7tcw/view?usp=drivesdk

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1049Tu4KWuMjS56iXeAwgj0_O-HzGSfGU/view?usp=drivesdk

I was initially thinking of a - 1 avx offset but yeah, +10 / 20mv won't be a big deal considering that I've even ordered a delid die frame (not der8auer, the other one). 



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> What was the bsod whea/ watchdog.... ?


I didn't look, it happened some weeks ago at Windows logon.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Dang hit you at login :/
Probably memory issues or ssd 
Have you used hwinfo to see the life state it's in ?


----------



## arrow0309

Drives are OK, ram at it's XMP seems OK as well.
Testing right now, seems stable after 30'
I did:
- 1 avx offset
- 0.0010v vcore offset, same 1.270v adaptive (it was -0.0020v / 1.270v).
Let's see what's gonna happen (but maybe I won't be able to finish the 4h this evening however).


----------



## arrow0309

Nope, didn't handle, it found another (7Zip) instability after 32 min. 
I'll try again tomorrow morning adding another +0.010v to the vcore.


----------



## ThrashZone

arrow0309 said:


> Nope, didn't handle, it found another (7Zip) instability after 32 min.
> I'll try again tomorrow morning adding another +0.010v to the vcore.


Hi,
I'd raise your system agent to match you vccio voltage see if it makes a difference.


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I'd raise your system agent to match you vccio voltage see if it makes a difference.


OK, already set the sa to 1.000 (1.040 looks like on hwinfo64) and running the realbench right now.


----------



## Jpmboy

arrow0309 said:


> OK, already set the sa to 1.000 (1.040 looks like on hwinfo64) and running the realbench right now.


As in another thread you posted in... the VCCIN seems low at 1.84, Raise it to 1.9 to 1.95V


----------



## arrow0309

arrow0309 said:


> OK, already set the sa to 1.000 (1.040 looks like on hwinfo64) and running the realbench right now.


Small update, 170 min passed, up and running. 
Core max 74C 
Liquid 28.6C



Jpmboy said:


> As in another thread you posted in... the VCCIN seems low at 1.84, Raise it to 1.9 to 1.95V


Are you sure? 
Used to try even lower and it didn't make any difference apparently. 
Wouldn't it raise my temps even further?


----------



## Jpmboy

arrow0309 said:


> Small update, 170 min passed, up and running.
> Core max 74C
> Liquid 28.6C
> 
> 
> 
> Are you sure?
> Used to try even lower and it didn't make any difference apparently.
> Wouldn't it raise my temps even further?


 you are looking to get those clocks stable. if it resolves that you then know that it needs more VCCIN. Whether the cooling allows you to run those clocks stable at the necessary voltage is a matter you can decide once you have stability. Either lower the multiplier or improve cooling once there. But since you seem to have it fixed, enjoy. :thumb:


tho this is on a 7980XE, here's an example of the effect of VCCIN. Both are stable to x264 and x265.. etc. 1.92V vs 1.94V as shown in the sensor panel under CPU Voltage (= VCCIN in SIV64). All other settings are thbe same in bios.


----------



## arrow0309

Jpmboy said:


> you are looking to get those clocks stable. if it resolves that you then know that it needs more VCCIN. Whether the cooling allows you to run those clocks stable at the necessary voltage is a matter you can decide once you have stability. Either lower the multiplier or improve cooling once there. But since you seem to have it fixed, enjoy. :thumb:
> 
> 
> tho this is on a 7980XE, here's an example of the effect of VCCIN. Both are stable to x264 and x265.. etc. 1.92V vs 1.94V as shown in the sensor panel under CPU Voltage (= VCCIN in SIV64). All other settings are thbe same in bios.


Yeah, finished, 4h run, no errors. 
But Holy Crap, I'm gonna test with Cinebench at 1.840 and at 1.900 myself as well to see if there's any difference. 
Also with XTu benchmark.


----------



## SsXxX

hello

question about DRAM voltage and overclocking


how much effect does increasing dram voltage (say from stock 1.2 to 1.35) have on your core tempreture .... in my case (haswell-e 5930k) increasing dram volts from 1.2 to 1.35 add s abt 10c degrees on core temp which is crazy! is it the same with skylake-x?


how much effect does faster ram have on skylake-x gaming performance? say going from 2666mhz to 3600mhz? i know it doesnt directly increase fps, but searching here and there many seem to think faster rams improves frametimes, provides more consistant frames and less lag, and even helps with min fps in some scenarios; so how true is that and to what extent? 



im asking here as im planing to build a new system around skylake-x refresh soon, so i wanna see how does skylake-x play with dram speeds, latency and volts, educated advise is much appreciated


----------



## aerotracks

Well this is interesting, hoarding all these B-Die finally comes to a productive outcome 

(All 3rds still auto)

I seriously doubt memtest is going to work though on my setup. 
Has anyone attempted this madness before? G.Skill has a 4200 memtest screen with this board floating around somewhere...


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> you are looking to get those clocks stable. if it resolves that you then know that it needs more VCCIN. Whether the cooling allows you to run those clocks stable at the necessary voltage is a matter you can decide once you have stability. Either lower the multiplier or improve cooling once there. But since you seem to have it fixed, enjoy. :thumb:
> 
> 
> tho this is on a 7980XE, here's an example of the effect of VCCIN. Both are stable to x264 and x265.. etc. 1.92V vs 1.94V as shown in the sensor panel under CPU Voltage (= VCCIN in SIV64). All other settings are thbe same in bios.


Theres a particular drop where it start phantom throttling..? or thats mobo dependant??

I notice on my asrock x299M it does it when it goes below 1.76v with the vdrop in both 7820x and 7940x so i have to add an input where it dont go below that voltage so i dont experience phantom throttling.

Tip: Its nice for benchs as it dont heat the cpu so much and requires less voltage for a higher multi eventually it will Phantom throttling.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

aerotracks said:


> I was bored and bought another used 7820X (untested) from local forums - tested it undelidded on AIO and imagine my surprise it outclasses every Sky-X CPU I have had /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On this one Input 1.9V, Mesh 1.2V, IO 1.05V, SA 0.825V, VDIMM 1.36V


I got this one at ebay for $400 before they went up


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> Theres a particular drop where it start phantom throttling..? or thats mobo dependant??
> 
> I notice on my asrock x299M it does it when it goes below 1.76v with the vdrop in both 7820x and 7940x so i have to add an input where it dont go below that voltage so i dont experience phantom throttling.
> 
> Tip: Its nice for benchs as it dont heat the cpu so much and requires less voltage for a higher multi eventually it will Phantom throttling.


 as far as I know it's not a step (-like) effect. But yeah, some benchmarks require tuning of VCCIN (and some need it very high for best efficiency  )
and you nay want to try one of the attached SS gadgets rather than a phone pic for screenshots...


----------



## aerotracks

Jpmboy said:


> and you nay want to try one of the attached SS gadgets rather than a phone pic for screenshots...


This or push Windows + Print Keys if you don't want to use external tools.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

yeah i know i was stress testing my ram on the 7940x was almost out of ram sorry XD


----------



## MunneY

Okay..

So say a guy could pick up a 7980xe for like... 1250 bucks... Should I sell my 7900x and pick one up. I'm worried about my Asrock Tiachi motherboard but don't wanna drop the $ to upgrade it too


----------



## Jpmboy

MunneY said:


> Okay..
> 
> So say a guy could pick up a 7980xe for like... 1250 bucks... Should I sell my 7900x and pick one up. I'm worried about my Asrock Tiachi motherboard but don't wanna drop the $ to upgrade it too


hey bud.
the taichi will handle it no problem. It's a sane upgrade if you need the cores, not so much if low core count frequency is better for your use. For gaming, the 7900X it's not worth it IMO.


----------



## MunneY

Jpmboy said:


> hey bud.
> the taichi will handle it no problem. It's a sane upgrade if you need the cores, not so much if low core count frequency is better for your use. For gaming, the 7900X it's not worth it IMO.


I do game some, but its mostly for video rendering and to try and keep these 2080 ti's under control. Just got that itch and need to scratch it really.


----------



## ThrashZone

MunneY said:


> I do game some, but its mostly for video rendering and to try and keep these 2080 ti's under control. Just got that itch and need to scratch it really.


Hi,
Yeah gaming wise not much if any difference same mesh deal
Rendering yeah you'd see a healthy bump there though 
But you could very well wait for the soldered skylake-x too what ever Intel naming calls it


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> MunneY said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do game some, but its mostly for video rendering and to try and keep these 2080 ti's under control. Just got that itch and need to scratch it really.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> Yeah gaming wise not much if any difference same mesh deal
> Rendering yeah you'd see a healthy bump there though
> But you could very well wait for the soldered skylake-x too what ever Intel naming calls it /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

After seen how hot the 9900k gets with soldered idk about that if you are not afraid of delidding i stick with the pigeon poop ones and delid those instead lm its better than soldered and if you bare die cool even better.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> MunneY said:
> 
> 
> 
> Okay..
> 
> So say a guy could pick up a 7980xe for like... 1250 bucks... Should I sell my 7900x and pick one up. I'm worried about my Asrock Tiachi motherboard but don't wanna drop the $ to upgrade it too
> 
> 
> 
> hey bud.
> the taichi will handle it no problem. It's a sane upgrade if you need the cores, not so much if low core count frequency is better for your use. For gaming, the 7900X it's not worth it IMO. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

Idk, my 7820x its pretty close on 1080p @48x when i tested it vs my [email protected]/50x cache with 3200/cl12 40ns on rotr benchie like 2-3% difference.

I doubt the difference over that res its even noticeable like 1440P and up.i dont play at 1080P so i dont see this issues on x299.


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> After seen how hot the 9900k gets with soldered idk about that if you are not afraid of delidding i stick with the pigeon poop ones and delid those instead lm its better than soldered and if you bare die cool even better.


Hi,
Well if say 9900 does 5.0 out of the box might be an okay exchange for heat which is already tough thing to get by with delid and not many hitting 5.0 at that 

Although I did read somewhere Intel is only saying single core boost to 5.0 not all core so could be the trick to say they do higher clocks lol single core okay what's the other 9.... cores doing :doh:


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> After seen how hot the 9900k gets with soldered idk about that if you are not afraid of delidding i stick with the pigeon poop ones and delid those instead lm its better than soldered and if you bare die cool even better.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> Well if say 9900 does 5.0 out of the box might be an okay exchange for heat which is already tough thing to get by with delid and not many hitting 5.0 at that /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> Although I did read somewhere Intel is only saying single core boost to 5.0 not all core so could be the trick to say they do higher clocks lol single core okay what's the other 9.... cores doing /forum/images/smilies/doh.gif
Click to expand...

The problem with this is, this is not a quad core mainstream cpu. Even the hecta core ones were pulling 220w+ under avx load they were kind manageable. 

Now add 2/4t more in the package and they already showed the 9900k cpu shooting 300w+ under a cine bench run thats a quick run not even stress testing. 
People going to try avx the crap out of this cpus under crappy mobos they are up for a surprise lol.

If you never did custom loop like a regular user and stuff like that and rely on AiOs you are up to a serious surprise even soldered.

Pushing 50x on this 9900k and trying latest avx p95 on it lol.
I cant imagine this users trying the same methodology shoot 1.4v+ to achieve 50x like they did on quad or 8700k bcuz on the 8700k were already pushing it and borderline.

So im sticking with my 8700k instead of buying a 9900k dont see no reason for it my 7820x can do that job just fine. I just changed my asus z370-g for an asus z390-i cannot be worst than the 4vrm phase that z370-g have at least the itx look it can manage my 8700k without a monoblock so im not worry about that. Plus i want a small build i dont like big boards too much waste.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Indeed just cooling skylake-x has been a fun task for me anyway even with delid 

Anyone find a caveman diagram of core line up/ positions for 7900x 
I have some pretty weird hot cores no idea of where on the chip they are located at 
Coldest are 1-5*-6-10 maybe in the center of the chip ?
Hottest 2-3-4*-7-8-9


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Indeed just cooling skylake-x has been a fun task for me anyway even with delid
> 
> Anyone find a caveman diagram of core line up/ positions for 7900x
> I have some pretty weird hot cores no idea of where on the chip they are located at
> Coldest are 1-5*-6-10 maybe in the center of the chip ?
> Hottest 2-3-4*-7-8-9


The die its not 100% flat derbauer did a video where he sanded down the silicon to make it more flat and even which he dont recommend.

Only thing you can do use a moderate aplication of tim to small the gap.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I had silicon lottery do the delid 
Are you referring to between the cpu cooler or under the cap where the delid is ?


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I had silicon lottery do the delid
> Are you referring to between the cpu cooler or under the cap where the delid is ?


Yes the die


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Might have to contact SL and see if they have altered their delid process from first launch than later :/


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> The problem with this is, this is not a quad core mainstream cpu. Even the hecta core ones were pulling 220w+ under avx load they were kind manageable.
> 
> Now add 2/4t more in the package and they already showed the 9900k cpu shooting 300w+ under a cine bench run thats a quick run not even stress testing.
> People going to try avx the crap out of this cpus under crappy mobos they are up for a surprise lol.
> 
> If you never did custom loop like a regular user and stuff like that and rely on AiOs you are up to a serious surprise even soldered.
> 
> *Pushing 50x on this 9900k and trying latest avx p95 on it* lol.
> I cant imagine this users trying the same methodology shoot 1.4v+ to achieve 50x like they did on quad or 8700k bcuz on the 8700k were already pushing it and borderline.
> 
> So im sticking with my 8700k instead of buying a 9900k dont see no reason for it my 7820x can do that job just fine. I just changed my asus z370-g for an asus z390-i cannot be worst than the 4vrm phase that z370-g have at least the itx look it can manage my 8700k without a monoblock so im not worry about that. Plus i want a small build i dont like big boards too much waste.


as any doctor would say "... then don't do that". 
p95 is useless for anything but hammering the FPU or heat stressing (even for that, it is silly). Unless you plan on hunting primes, put it in the circular file.


----------



## arrow0309

Jpmboy said:


> as any doctor would say "... then don't do that".
> p95 is useless for anything but hammering the FPU or heat stressing (even for that, it is silly). Unless you plan on hunting primes, put it in the circular file.


I cannot but agree mate, imho realbench at max ram for 4h and you're good to go gaming :specool:

Do ya guys plan to swap your old Skylake X for a new 9 gen refresh one?


----------



## Abaidor

I have a 7940X that does 3X Cores @ 4.7Ghz, 3 X Cores @ 4.6Ghz and the rest @ 4.2Ghz without a delid if I am to never exceed 90C in Realbench. It can do more per core if I increase the voltages but the heat is too high. 

After the announcement I was thinking of whether an upgrade to the new 18 Core is worth it but honestly I do not need that many threads and besides heavy multitasking (good to have many cores) I am using Adobe Creative Suite that benefits a lot from single core performance too. That was the reason I did not go for the 7980XE in the first place (in hope of higher clocks with the 7940X). 

I will wait and see how far the new SKUs overclock and take it from there. Then the other issue is whether I can sell my 7940X without a huge loss since spending a lot for 4X more cores might not be worth it for me.


----------



## Jpmboy

arrow0309 said:


> I cannot but agree mate, imho realbench at max ram for 4h and you're good to go gaming :specool:
> 
> Do ya guys plan to swap your old Skylake X for a new 9 gen refresh one?


unfortunately, I usually don;t swap... just keep adding to the collection.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> unfortunately, I usually don;t swap... just keep adding to the collection.


Hi,
Come on now I've seen you sell an item or two on ocn


----------



## MunneY

Jpmboy said:


> unfortunately, I usually don;t swap... just keep adding to the collection.


I see somethings change... other things keep staying the same.

How you been man. It's been a hot minute!


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Come on now I've seen you sell an item or two on ocn


yeah- that's the thing... one or two. I gotta make a list and post the lot! 


MunneY said:


> I see somethings change... other things keep staying the same.
> 
> How you been man. It's been a hot minute!


been good. too busy lately to keep subs going at the bot, but I'l pick up again someday.


----------



## cookiesowns

Does anyone know what the average core temperature deviance on a 80XE is?

Had my system delidded for over 2-3 months now.... I can't remember what my core temperature deviance was, but right now it's looks like on the low point its about 4C, and high point is about 15C ( lowest reading temp core and highest reading temp core )

Note this is on adaptive vcore running VID, so lowest core vcore is about 1.18V and highest vcore is about 1.23V @ 4.6.

I really would hate to get hotspots on the DIE and kill the CPU... as it's a decent performing chip.


----------



## Vlada011

This new i9-9820X look me so interesting.
4.1GHz, Easy OC to 4.8GHz I believe.


----------



## arrow0309

Jpmboy said:


> unfortunately, I usually don;t swap... just keep adding to the collection.


C'mon, and make me a deal on your 7980XE. 



Vlada011 said:


> This new i9-9820X look me so interesting.
> 4.1GHz, Easy OC to 4.8GHz I believe.


Don't forget the 44 pcie lanes.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> The problem with this is, this is not a quad core mainstream cpu. Even the hecta core ones were pulling 220w+ under avx load they were kind manageable.
> 
> Now add 2/4t more in the package and they already showed the 9900k cpu shooting 300w+ under a cine bench run thats a quick run not even stress testing.
> People going to try avx the crap out of this cpus under crappy mobos they are up for a surprise lol.
> 
> If you never did custom loop like a regular user and stuff like that and rely on AiOs you are up to a serious surprise even soldered.
> 
> *Pushing 50x on this 9900k and trying latest avx p95 on it* lol.
> I cant imagine this users trying the same methodology shoot 1.4v+ to achieve 50x like they did on quad or 8700k bcuz on the 8700k were already pushing it and borderline.
> 
> So im sticking with my 8700k instead of buying a 9900k dont see no reason for it my 7820x can do that job just fine. I just changed my asus z370-g for an asus z390-i cannot be worst than the 4vrm phase that z370-g have at least the itx look it can manage my 8700k without a monoblock so im not worry about that. Plus i want a small build i dont like big boards too much waste.
> 
> 
> 
> as any doctor would say "... then don't do that". /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif
> p95 is useless for anything but hammering the FPU or heat stressing (even for that, it is silly). Unless you plan on hunting primes, put it in the circular file.
Click to expand...

 yeah i know but you know how ppl are. Strongest test i would take serious would be x264 bcuz of encoding other than that as much i like stress testing we should know the limits of the hardware and whats real and whats not. Specially when you pushing more watts than a gpu lol.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Abaidor said:


> I have a 7940X that does 3X Cores @ 4.7Ghz, 3 X Cores @ 4.6Ghz and the rest @ 4.2Ghz without a delid if I am to never exceed 90C in Realbench. It can do more per core if I increase the voltages but the heat is too high.
> 
> After the announcement I was thinking of whether an upgrade to the new 18 Core is worth it but honestly I do not need that many threads and besides heavy multitasking (good to have many cores) I am using Adobe Creative Suite that benefits a lot from single core performance too. That was the reason I did not go for the 7980XE in the first place (in hope of higher clocks with the 7940X).
> 
> I will wait and see how far the new SKUs overclock and take it from there. Then the other issue is whether I can sell my 7940X without a huge loss since spending a lot for 4X more cores might not be worth it for me.


To be honest i dont see no reason for it you may loose couple mhz for cores and in the end you be shaving couple seconds on real usage?

I was hunting for a 7900 in the beginning before they went up. So the 7900/7920&7940 are rounding at the same price 50bucks more or less so i manage to catch the 7820x for $400 bucks this one is a nice one overclock nice on low voltages and i grabbed the 7940x for 1060. Which was a nice catch. Seen it a bit lower used but this one was brand new.

Knowing the new ones are just a refresh and soldered i would not trade them for the old skus. It just makes no sense. Seen how hot this cpus get i prefer mine with liquid metal or bare die cooling which i have the retention bracket for it. Soldered is worst than liquid metal to begin with and bare die cooling if done right can give you a nice drop on temps.

This cpus overclock nice with low volts anyway a refresh would not do no better. This cpus are very power hungry thats their downfall and most of us would never know their true potential of them because of what is required to remove the heat as fast as you can.. My 7940x do 3x48 3x47 rest 46 with vcore at 1.23v for example.

Only one to look for out of the new ones would be the 9800x bcuz of the 44pci lanes and maybe more l3 cache vs the 28 the 7820x has other than that if u need that many pci lanes or not well idk.


----------



## MunneY

Jpmboy said:


> unfortunately, I usually don;t swap... just keep adding to the collection.





Jpmboy said:


> yeah- that's the thing... one or two. I gotta make a list and post the lot!
> 
> been good. too busy lately to keep subs going at the bot, but I'l pick up again someday.


Heard that man. The farm and kid have basically completely cut my tweaking time down to nothing. When I'm not doing one of those in the winter I'm hunting so thats even less time LOL. Are you gonna go 9980xe? I'd looked into it but I think for the 600$ difference I'll just pick up a 7980 and rock on.


----------



## Jpmboy

MunneY said:


> Heard that man. The farm and kid have basically completely cut my tweaking time down to nothing. When I'm not doing one of those in the winter I'm hunting so thats even less time LOL. Are you gonna go 9980xe? I'd looked into it but I think for the 600$ difference I'll just pick up a 7980 and rock on.


Eh, the 9980XE is just a higher _stock _clocked 7980XE. Who cares about stock clocks anyway...
Solder is nice for sure, but a delid 7980XE is basically the same if done well. Use CLP, not CLU (or TGC). CLP "ages" better IME.
Farm? you too? Lol - I've got all sorts of rides in the garage(s), but spend way more time on tractors and mowers.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> Eh, the 9980XE is just a higher _stock _clocked 7980XE. Who cares about stock clocks anyway...
> Solder is nice for sure, but a delid 7980XE is basically the same if done well. *Use CLP*, not CLU (or TGC). CLP "ages" better IME.
> Farm? you too? Lol - I've got all sorts of rides in the garage(s), but spend way more time on tractors and mowers.


Hi,
What is this CLP ?


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> What is this CLP ?


Coollaboratory Liquid Pro (where U stands for Ultra).


----------



## MunneY

Jpmboy said:


> MunneY said:
> 
> 
> 
> Heard that man. The farm and kid have basically completely cut my tweaking time down to nothing. When I'm not doing one of those in the winter I'm hunting so thats even less time LOL. Are you gonna go 9980xe? I'd looked into it but I think for the 600$ difference I'll just pick up a 7980 and rock on.
> 
> 
> 
> Eh, the 9980XE is just a higher _stock _clocked 7980XE. Who cares about stock clocks anyway...
> Solder is nice for sure, but a delid 7980XE is basically the same if done well. Use CLP, not CLU (or TGC). CLP "ages" better IME.
> Farm? you too? Lol - I've got all sorts of rides in the garage(s), but spend way more time on tractors and mowers. /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

Yea man. I farm soybeans! I have lots of big "toys", but this year isn't gonna be pretty. 

Your thoughts on the chips are the same as mine. I have some conductonaut I plan on using. Its gonna be under standard water with mild 24/7 clocks tbh.


----------



## Abaidor

zGunBLADEz said:


> To be honest i dont see no reason for it you may loose couple mhz for cores and in the end you be shaving couple seconds on real usage?
> 
> I was hunting for a 7900 in the beginning before they went up. So the 7900/7920&7940 are rounding at the same price 50bucks more or less so i manage to catch the 7820x for $400 bucks this one is a nice one overclock nice on low voltages and i grabbed the 7940x for 1060. Which was a nice catch. Seen it a bit lower used but this one was brand new.
> 
> Knowing the new ones are just a refresh and soldered i would not trade them for the old skus. It just makes no sense. Seen how hot this cpus get i prefer mine with liquid metal or bare die cooling which i have the retention bracket for it. Soldered is worst than liquid metal to begin with and bare die cooling if done right can give you a nice drop on temps.
> 
> This cpus overclock nice with low volts anyway a refresh would not do no better. This cpus are very power hungry thats their downfall and most of us would never know their true potential of them because of what is required to remove the heat as fast as you can.. My 7940x do 3x48 3x47 rest 46 with vcore at 1.23v for example.
> 
> Only one to look for out of the new ones would be the 9800x bcuz of the 44pci lanes and maybe more l3 cache vs the 28 the 7820x has other than that if u need that many pci lanes or not well idk.



Yeah...really value is not what is hidden behind those new CPUs for existing Skylake-X owners....I will delid sometime in the future and be done with it till Ice-Lake, DDR5 & PCI-E 4/5....Same with my 1080Ti that overclocks nicely with a wateblock. 

Meanwhile I will pursue other upgrades and build a nice gaming PC for my kid on Z390.


----------



## Jpmboy

cookiesowns said:


> Does anyone know what the average core temperature deviance on a 80XE is?
> 
> Had my system delidded for over 2-3 months now.... I can't remember what my core temperature deviance was, but right now it's looks like on the low point its about 4C, and high point is about 15C ( lowest reading temp core and highest reading temp core )
> 
> Note this is on adaptive vcore running VID, so lowest core vcore is about 1.18V and highest vcore is about 1.23V @ 4.6.
> 
> I really would hate to get hotspots on the DIE and kill the CPU... as it's a decent performing chip.


yeah - that is a good chip. I don;t have data for straight 4.6, but at 4.5 manual overide (1.165V) the cores range a max of 7C under x264 (or the cpuZ stress test for that matter). Rig is busy right now but I would not worry about a 10C spread on an 18 core at 4.6. The VIDs have that much range which can translate to temps. 





zGunBLADEz said:


> yeah i know but you know how ppl are. Strongest test i would take serious would be x264 bcuz of encoding other than that as much i like stress testing we should know the limits of the hardware and whats real and whats not. Specially when you pushing more watts than a gpu lol.


abs. when/if you start to see >2x the stock TDP, you can be sure the stresstest is not doing nice things to the silicon. So when we're pulling 500W on the 7980XE... calling it in danger close.


----------



## Maximization

stupid question will the new intel HEDT platform be HDCP 2.2 compliant?


----------



## Jpmboy

Maximization said:


> stupid question will the new intel HEDT platform be HDCP 2.2 compliant?


the video card is the HDCP compliant component. Intel's HEDT platforms (x299, x99, x79 for example) do not have on-board video. So, yes the platform "is" HDCP. The mainstream platforms have on-board video (CPU graphics) and are 2.2. :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

Maximization said:


> stupid question will the new intel HEDT platform be HDCP 2.2 compliant?


the video card is the HDCP compliant component. Intel's HEDT platforms (x299, x99, x79 for example) do not have on-board video. So, yes the platform "is" HDCP. The mainstream platforms have on-board video (CPU graphics) and are HDCP. :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

SsXxX said:


> hello
> 
> question about DRAM voltage and overclocking
> 
> 
> how much effect does increasing dram voltage (say from stock 1.2 to 1.35) have on your core tempreture .... in my case (haswell-e 5930k)* increasing dram volts from 1.2 to 1.35 add s abt 10c degrees on core temp which is crazy! is it the same with skylake-x?
> *
> 
> how much effect does faster ram have on skylake-x gaming performance? say going from 2666mhz to 3600mhz? i know it doesnt directly increase fps, but searching here and there many seem to think faster rams improves frametimes, provides more consistant frames and less lag, and even helps with min fps in some scenarios; so how true is that and to what extent?
> 
> 
> 
> im asking here as im planing to build a new system around skylake-x refresh soon, so i wanna see how does skylake-x play with dram speeds, latency and volts, educated advise is much appreciated


Hi,
Can't say I've ever noticed any temp increase like that on x99 that is crazy might be board issues or voltage from somewhere else making it shoot up 

I did notice on any bios past 2101 the newer broadwell-e bios compatibility just increasing the memory frequency does shoot vccio cpu 1.05 voltage to 1.250v where as many state never go above 1.150v and should probably stay well under that.

Skylake-x is so freaking hot cpu wise who would notice if it came from ram frequency voltage :/


----------



## ThrashZone

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Might have to contact SL and see if they have altered their delid process from first launch than later :/


Hi,
Just a little update SL didn't really advise delid again seems they use a lot tougher adhesive to stick it together maybe they should just use solder if they want it permanent :/


----------



## Vlada011

Jpmboy said:


> the video card is the HDCP compliant component. Intel's HEDT platforms (x299, x99, x79 for example) do not have on-board video. So, yes the platform "is" HDCP. The mainstream platforms have on-board video (CPU graphics) and are HDCP. :thumb:


That's one of things I like. Ha ha... I joke.
No I always thought Processor is processor, Graphic card is for Graphic.
Intel Graphic is very good for people who save money for something better and budget at the moment of build can't cover graphic they planned.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Just a little update SL didn't really advise delid again seems they use a lot tougher adhesive to stick it together maybe they should just use solder if they want it permanent :/


So how they want you to re apply the application afterwards? I know they use lm on it but how about in the long run if needed?

If they used some type of glue that is hard to remove or you cant remove they should cover it as that wasnt the idea...
the application of lm its not made to last forever.


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> So how they want you to re apply the application afterwards? I know they use lm on it but how about in the long run if needed?
> 
> If they used some type of glue that is hard to remove or you cant remove they should cover it as that wasnt the idea...
> the application of lm its not made to last forever.


Hi,
They just said there's a different process to redo a delid since they use tougher adhesive than Intel.

Tight lipped I imagine on what exact products they use for anything LM or otherwise I didn't ask though.
They just finally said add a note in the box that they have already delid the cpu.


----------



## ESRCJ

I have yet to see any confirmation that the Skylake-X refresh is either 14nm+ or 14nm++. Many people seem to be convinced that it's just 14nm+. If that's the case and given that the 9900K is a thermal nightmare with Intel's STIM (the Skylake-X refresh will probably feature STIM as well), should I just pull the trigger and get a 7980XE? I was originally interested in a 9980XE. I simply want the best performer.


----------



## Abaidor

Wait to see some reviews at least before you buy. You might even find a better deal on 7980XE once the new SKUs are out.


----------



## ThrashZone

gridironcpj said:


> I have yet to see any confirmation that the Skylake-X refresh is either 14nm+ or 14nm++. Many people seem to be convinced that it's just 14nm+. If that's the case and given that the 9900K is a thermal nightmare with Intel's STIM (the Skylake-X refresh will probably feature STIM as well), should I just pull the trigger and get a 7980XE? I was originally interested in a 9980XE. I simply want the best performer.


Hi,
As far as I'm aware Intel only used solder instead of pigeon poop Inside.
Might help weary people that didn't see a need to strap a 3 year Intel warranty seconds after buying the pigeon poop series.


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> As far as I'm aware Intel only used solder instead of pigeon poop Inside.
> Might help weary people that didn't see a need to strap a 3 year Intel warranty seconds after buying the pigeon poop series.



Well that's the reason I have not delided my 7940X yet - warranty and I need this thing for work so I am taking it easy. I will delid but only when I am ready to buy a replacement (funds on the side) without shedding a tear... It's not the end of the world if I wait a bit longer before I drive the chip to its limits - it is still performing great with the cache at 3.0Ghz, 2 Cores @ 4.7Ghz, 4 Cores @ 4.6Ghz and the rest at 4.2 Ghz with RAM @ 3600. I can push it further even now but I don't want 95C temps....

I will order the delid tool soon and I might also get the Skylake-X Direct Die Frame to have them for when I decide to go forward....I am just waiting to see how the new SKUs perform with the solder and whether it is worth it to sell the 7940X and get one of the new ones (maybe more cores too). Otherwise my next major upgrade will be when 10mm CPUs, PCI-E 4/5 and DDR5 arrive.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> So how they want you to re apply the application afterwards? I know they use lm on it but how about in the long run if needed?
> 
> If they used some type of glue that is hard to remove or you cant remove they should cover it as that wasnt the idea...
> the application of lm its not made to last forever.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> They just said there's a different process to redo a delid since they use tougher adhesive than Intel.
> 
> Tight lipped I imagine on what exact products they use for anything LM or otherwise I didn't ask though.
> They just finally said add a note in the box that they have already delid the cpu.
Click to expand...


I would let you know, the 7820x i bought second handed from ebay supposedly was serviced by sillicon lottery i havent opened yet.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

@Jpmboy

Question

The 400w is a hard limit for power throttle on all boards? Even if you raise limit to unlimited?

Without turning off svid of course? Read theres some board capping at 300w .


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> I would let you know, the 7820x i bought second handed from ebay supposedly was serviced by sillicon lottery i havent opened yet.


Hi,
If you ever do open it up let me know 
If it's just a case of heating it up a little it shouldn't be a big deal.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would let you know, the 7820x i bought second handed from ebay supposedly was serviced by sillicon lottery i havent opened yet.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> If you ever do open it up let me know /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> If it's just a case of heating it up a little it shouldn't be a big deal.
Click to expand...

Have one of this to put to use, bought it for the 7820x but i need to cut some metal on the middle for the 7940x as the die is bigger.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah looks like a nice weekend project


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Opened the 7940x with the chinese tool for deliding it was a breeze. Easier than rockit or derbauer tool it didnt took that much torque. Its 100% fool proof and cheap.

Now the chinese direct die kit....
That was a project lol. 
That needs to get sand down so it properly shows the die so the block can touch it 4 of the cores were instant thermal throttling at stock.. I had to cut all around make a square then sanddown the sides till the block make proper contact.


----------



## Abaidor

What Delid tool did you get? I am asking since I am about to get a Derbauer kit and you said yours was more than fine (this does not mean that another unit would be too when it comes to chinese)....Care to share a link?


----------



## PWn3R

Abaidor said:


> What Delid tool did you get? I am asking since I am about to get a Derbauer kit and you said yours was more than fine (this does not mean that another unit would be too when it comes to chinese)....Care to share a link?


I bought the Rockit 88 kit. It was great and $40.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## arrow0309

zGunBLADEz said:


> Opened the 7940x with the chinese tool for deliding it was a breeze. Easier than rockit or derbauer tool it didnt took that much torque. Its 100% fool proof and cheap.
> 
> Now the chinese direct die kit....
> That was a project lol.
> That needs to get sand down so it properly shows the die so the block can touch it 4 of the cores were instant thermal throttling at stock.. I had to cut all around make a square then sanddown the sides till the block make proper contact.


Hi, what do you mean? 
I've just bought this Chinese direct die guard from IceMan:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gfRlkp7O2SkYI9wzqMvugxwjiJkDYAAI/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NGuTYDJGKxH05IEqkuS5sq8e-ygQepQf/view?usp=sharing

You had to do what?
It was the same kit?

I bought this one:

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Del...525.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.26c04c4dpBOVK2



PWn3R said:


> I bought the Rockit 88 kit. It was great and $40.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


Exactly, great delid kit, perfect!


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah - nothing wrong with the rockit kit (1151 or x299). My rocket x299 tool has delidded 3 cpus with no issues.


----------



## Chargeit

I was happy with my rockit 99. Had no problems popping the ihs off my 7820x.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Abaidor said:


> What Delid tool did you get? I am asking since I am about to get a Derbauer kit and you said yours was more than fine (this does not mean that another unit would be too when it comes to chinese)....Care to share a link?


This one, maybe you can see it cheaper. Just make sure is for 2066 cpus.

https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https://www.ebay.com/ulk/itm/272997210269

Very safe to use. Its all metal too.
Pcb gets underneath the push jig so it wont raise when applying force. The jig that push the ihs also goes into a canal/rails on the frame so it wont go up with force applied either.
It looks simple than the other tools but its very safe to use. Specially for the price.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

arrow0309 said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Opened the 7940x with the chinese tool for deliding it was a breeze. Easier than rockit or derbauer tool it didnt took that much torque. Its 100% fool proof and cheap.
> 
> Now the chinese direct die kit....
> That was a project lol.
> That needs to get sand down so it properly shows the die so the block can touch it, 4 of the cores were instant thermal throttling at stock.. I had to cut all around make a square then sand down the sides till the block make proper contact.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi, what do you mean?
> I've just bought this Chinese direct die guard from IceMan:
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gfRlkp7O2SkYI9wzqMvugxwjiJkDYAAI/view?usp=sharing
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NGuTYDJGKxH05IEqkuS5sq8e-ygQepQf/view?usp=sharing
> 
> You had to do what?
> It was the same kit?
> 
> I bought this one:
> 
> https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Del...525.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.26c04c4dpBOVK2
> 
> 
> 
> PWn3R said:
> 
> 
> 
> I bought the Rockit 88 kit. It was great and $40.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Exactly, great delid kit, perfect! /forum/images/smilies/cool.gif
Click to expand...

Yeah thats the one lol
I bought the one for up to 7920x as i have a 7820x before the 7940x never tried on the 7820x but i think i would be the same issue. So i had to make the square bigger. But i needed to cut and sand down more than what i thought. The block wasn't making good contact in my sample. Had to cut until the small pcb of the cpu was totally showing up then shave/sand around the square till it make proper contact with the block.
That was the best way to do it as theres 2 squares one for each pcb of the cpu.

Not an issue for me, the frame still useful just needs some work which i dont mind. But i paid $32 for it as you expect to work out of the box.

The small pcb and the die its not above the frame still underneath the frame its showing up like in the pictures but its not above. I sanded to the point the die itself its above metal frame barely so i can touch it with the block.

Now if you dont have the tools then theres a problem. I used a rotary tool "dremel variants" for the job.


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> Opened the 7940x with the chinese tool for deliding it was a breeze. Easier than rockit or derbauer tool it didnt took that much torque. Its 100% fool proof and cheap.
> 
> Now the chinese direct die kit....
> That was a project lol.
> That needs to get sand down so it properly shows the die so the block can touch it 4 of the cores were instant thermal throttling at stock.. I had to cut all around make a square then sanddown the sides till the block make proper contact.


Hi,
I'm more interested in how easy the 7820 already messed with by silicon lottery goes


----------



## superV

@zGunBLADEz :thumb:
did the same with the same frame and working perfectly with 7980xe
at the beginning it was hard, i did sand manually then used a rotary tool and the die finally did pop up.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Opened the 7940x with the chinese tool for deliding it was a breeze. Easier than rockit or derbauer tool it didnt took that much torque. Its 100% fool proof and cheap.
> 
> Now the chinese direct die kit....
> That was a project lol.
> That needs to get sand down so it properly shows the die so the block can touch it 4 of the cores were instant thermal throttling at stock.. I had to cut all around make a square then sanddown the sides till the block make proper contact.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> I'm more interested in how easy the 7820 already messed with by silicon lottery goes /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...


I would let you know. But i dont think it would be an issue.



superV said:


> @zGunBLADEz /forum/images/smilies/thumb.gif
> did the same with the same frame and working perfectly with 7980xe
> at the beginning it was hard, i did sand manually then used a rotary tool and the die finally did pop up.


Yeah i bet, you sanded down both squares evenly. That requires more work and time. I went for the easy way xD.

Mine worked till some extent out of the box but 4 cores were shooting up instant thermal throttling on a cb run so went and modified it. 

Now im having some issue with one of the probes in hwinfo, which idk where is getting the read out.

In hwinfo i have something called cpu package shooting close to 100cs when im observing my cores with cpu temp they are not even close to that temp.
Theres another 2 x CPU packags in hwinfo that matches the core temp highest core

Its in a tab called "cpu id 7940x "enhanced where svid shows cpu wattage and p0 temp is the other sensor in that tree.

It goes up and down with load. I think its the vrm temp not 100% sure yet. It shows on aida too as package temp but in core temp hottest core its not that temp so im assuming its the vrm temp.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
You could save me 100.us plus shipping to say how bad SL stuck the cpu back together and just how tough to clean it all up is going to be lol 
Yeah rockit 99 
Performance pc I've tried twice to get the darn thing and it just hangs in cart checkout 
Might just get it from rockit website not sure where it would ship from though.


----------



## PWn3R

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> You could save me 100.us plus shipping to say how bad SL stuck the cpu back together and just how tough to clean it all up is going to be lol
> Yeah rockit 99
> Performance pc I've tried twice to get the darn thing and it just hangs in cart checkout
> Might just get it from rockit website not sure where it would ship from though.


That's where mine is from. Their site worked great.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

PWn3R said:


> That's where mine is from. Their site worked great.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


Hi,
Where from here ?
https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/rockit-99-delid-and-relid-kit-for-skylakex-kabylakex


----------



## PWn3R

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Where from here ?
> https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/rockit-99-delid-and-relid-kit-for-skylakex-kabylakex


Yep, that's it. It was here in two days.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

PWn3R said:


> Yep, that's it. It was here in two days.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


Hi,
Thank you it looked different that others I've seen thought it was a copycat or something 
Doubt I'll get it that fast with 5.us usps but I'm in no rush still want to see what all SL did with that 7820 
Got my heating gun ready though just have to make sure not to get it too hot I suppose 105c shouldn't be too tough to stay under lol


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Thank you it looked different that others I've seen thought it was a copycat or something
> Doubt I'll get it that fast with 5.us usps but I'm in no rush still want to see what all SL did with that 7820
> Got my heating gun ready though just have to make sure not to get it too hot I suppose 105c shouldn't be too tough to stay under lol


what's the hot gun for?


----------



## PWn3R

Jpmboy said:


> what's the hot gun for?


Valid question I could see heating the IHS on a 9900K if you were using a Rockit kit as it is made from plastic, so it may not be able to break the seal on a 9900k without breaking the delid kit.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> what's the hot gun for?


Hi,
From what silicon lottery said 
They use stronger adhesive so it might need to be heated up before using rockit 99 tool.


----------



## PWn3R

Ah, gotcha, I just used a very thin film of silicon to reseal mine when I did it. It doesn't have to be super glued down.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

PWn3R said:


> Ah, gotcha, I just used a very thin film of silicon to reseal mine when I did it. It doesn't have to be super glued down.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


Hi,
Apparently it's not the way SL's practice is lol 
All they say at first is they don't recommend redoing their work high temps are normal lol 

I've had this chip for over a year and in fact temps have gotten worse not the same as after delid so the LM has obviously changed a lot imho.


----------



## Abaidor

PWn3R said:


> I bought the Rockit 88 kit. It was great and $40.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk





arrow0309 said:


> Hi, what do you mean?
> I've just bought this Chinese direct die guard from IceMan:
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gfRlkp7O2SkYI9wzqMvugxwjiJkDYAAI/view?usp=sharing
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NGuTYDJGKxH05IEqkuS5sq8e-ygQepQf/view?usp=sharing
> 
> You had to do what?
> It was the same kit?
> 
> I bought this one:
> 
> https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Del...525.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.26c04c4dpBOVK2
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly, great delid kit, perfect!





zGunBLADEz said:


> This one, maybe you can see it cheaper. Just make sure is for 2066 cpus.
> 
> https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https://www.ebay.com/ulk/itm/272997210269
> 
> Very safe to use. Its all metal too.
> Pcb gets underneath the push jig so it wont raise when applying force. The jig that push the ihs also goes into a canal/rails on the frame so it wont go up with force applied either.
> It looks simple than the other tools but its very safe to use. Specially for the price.



Well the problem with Rockit 99 is that it works out more expensive than the Derbauer Delid-Die-Mate X for me because of shipping + VAT (24%) + import taxes that I don't know what it might be. It starts at $66 at Rockit web site for the item + shipping and the if you add the rest it will cost more). 

The Derbauer kit will cost me 75 Euros (buying sans VAT as business) so going with Rockit does not make sense. The only cost saving option is to get one of those chinese "vices" @ about $10.

However, for the Direct die frame I think I will go straight for the Derbauer one since I am not in the mood for any modding in order to save maybe 20 Euros. I am sure precision will be bang on with the Derbauer kit. 

So to delid my i9-7940X I need:

- Liquid metal : 14 Eur
- Delid Kit : 75 Eur
- Liquid Tape : 20 Eur
- Silicon gasket : I have

Then I also need to get 
-Waterblock for the Rampage VI VRMs : 50 Euros
- Dedicated CPU waterblock : 80 Euros
- Some extra Bitspower Fittings 

And waste my EK Monoblock if it does not make proper contact....

Hmmmm. Not exactly a cheap little upgrade......

*EDIT* I forgot the 55 Euros (excl. VAT) for the Direct die frame.....


----------



## arrow0309

zGunBLADEz said:


> Yeah thats the one lol
> I bought the one for *up to 7920x* as i have a 7820x before the 7940x never tried on the 7820x but i think i would be the same issue. So i had to make the square bigger. But i needed to cut and sand down more than what i thought. The block wasn't making good contact in my sample. Had to cut until the small pcb of the cpu was totally showing up then shave/sand around the square till it make proper contact with the block.
> That was the best way to do it as theres 2 squares one for each pcb of the cpu.
> 
> Not an issue for me, the frame still useful just needs some work which i dont mind. But i paid $32 for it as you expect to work out of the box.
> 
> The small pcb and the die its not above the frame still underneath the frame its showing up like in the pictures but its not above. I sanded to the point the die itself its above metal frame barely so i can touch it with the block.
> 
> Now if you dont have the tools then theres a problem. I used a rotary tool "dremel variants" for the job.


For "up to 7900X" (LCC) maybe you wanna mean



superV said:


> @zGunBLADEz :thumb:
> did the same with the same frame and working perfectly with 7980xe
> at the beginning it was hard, i did sand manually then used a rotary tool and the die finally did pop up.


OK guys but I have a 7900X, LCC, small die so I took the proper one (7800X - 7820X - 7900X).
Will I still have to do all this modifications?

And one more thing, will the four springs and bolts of my Heatkiller IV be still enough (pressure) now that the ihs will be missing?
Or will I have to add 4 washers?


----------



## Abaidor

Well this looks like a good option 

https://www.ebay.ie/itm/Strong-CPU-...=item3d69865085:g:TFMAAOSwwBha93Cs:rk:12:pf:0


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> From what silicon lottery said
> They use stronger adhesive so it might need to be heated up before using rockit 99 tool.


ah - a relid redo.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> ah - a relid redo.


Hi,
Yep,
Updated my bios to 1401 too 
Even intel turbo boost changed core assortment 
Used to be 
3-4-6-8-2-7-0-1-9-5
Now using a by core usage at 40 on four and 38 on four
3-4-8-6-7-2-9-1-0-5

Reality with 0801 bios best to worst cores not sure yet how well each of these are on 1401 but 0 or 1 really is the best core
Funny how ITB shows 5 or really I guess core 6 as the worst core but it's actually third best lol
1-*5-6-10-3-*4-8-9-2-7

Just looked on win-10 1709 and this is now what ITB shows as best to worst on my 4.8 clock using above as how cores are clocked high to lowest by specific core 
0-4-9-5-3-8-2-7-6-1

Posted a siv64 screen shot here 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...memory-stability-thread-748.html#post27685560


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep,
> Updated my bios to 1401 too
> Even intel turbo boost changed core assortment
> Used to be
> 3-4-6-8-2-7-0-1-9-5
> Now using a by core usage at 40 on four and 38 on four
> 3-4-8-6-7-2-9-1-0-5
> 
> Reality with 0801 bios best to worst cores not sure yet how well each of these are on 1401 but 0 or 1 really is the best core
> Funny how ITB shows 5 or really I guess core 6 as the worst core but it's actually third best lol
> 1-*5-6-10-3-*4-8-9-2-7
> 
> Just looked on win-10 1709 and this is now what ITB shows as best to worst on my 4.8 clock using above as how cores are clocked high to lowest by specific core
> 0-4-9-5-3-8-2-7-6-1
> 
> Posted a siv64 screen shot here
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...memory-stability-thread-748.html#post27685560



Funny thing is, 1709 seems to be the most "stable" of 1709, 1803, and 1809 here. 1803 ain't bad, but it seems to "age" poorly. 1709 runs same as day 1 install (measured by benches and the like).


Are you doing a direct die or gonna replace the IHS? I have the De8auer direct die frame in the closet. Putzed with it for a day and said F it. Poorly machine product IMO.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> Funny thing is, 1709 seems to be the most "stable" of 1709, 1803, and 1809 here. 1803 ain't bad, but it seems to "age" poorly. 1709 runs same as day 1 install (measured by benches and the like).
> 
> 
> Are you doing a direct die or gonna replace the IHS? I have the De8auer direct die frame in the closet. Putzed with it for a day and said F it. Poorly machine product IMO.


Hi,
Yes 1709 is the best build !
Doubt I'll go the direct die thing that is a tad too extreme for me 
Just ran this siv64 is a little weird to me so I guess it takes a little getting used too :/
What do you think about the voltages :/

LOL just noticed hovering shows the goodies 
After running some benchmarks 
I can see cache voltage too that's a new one hwinfo doesn't show it for me anyway


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Guys, you are making this more difficult than what it is the Chinese tool i put for less than $10 will do the job fine. I will put some pics when i get home so you can see how secure the cpu is on it.


The chinese die kit in my sample needed some work. But i bought the one aim for the smaller die and i wasnt buying a second one. If it dont work you know why and how to solve the problem.

You will have no problems tighting a block and been afraid you will crack the die. Thats what the die kit is for other than hold cpu on place. If you over tight, the die guard will prevent going to far the only thing you will be "crushing" its the die guard.
The die is barely above the die guard anyway. So when you find force securing your block you are already flat on the die guard.


Im using this block and its very tight screwed in. The surface its the flattest of all my blocks.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Abaidor said:


> Well this looks like a good option
> 
> https://www.ebay.ie/itm/Strong-CPU-...img]/forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif[/IMG]f:0


 that one looks like plastic the one i put is all metal.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I have no doubts about the tool you posted 
I have a 3 year in store warranty on my board so I don't want to scrap it by removing anything else.
As long as I ignore cpu package temps they don't seem all that bad lol


----------



## superV

@Jpmboy

i am the warranty


----------



## Jpmboy

superV said:


> @*Jpmboy*
> 
> i am the warranty


 guaaaaarrrrranteeeeed!


----------



## PWn3R

I recently switched to adaptive voltage from override, but now I get a when uncorrectable when launching CSGO. I found some guidance from Puget systems for Gigabyte boards having the same issue with a stable over clock telling people to set voltage to 1.2 override. I'm happy to go back to override voltage, but wanted to ask if anyone else has had this problem. I have an ASRock x299 Taichi XE with 1.50 bios.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

PWn3R said:


> I recently switched to adaptive voltage from override, but now I get a when uncorrectable when launching CSGO. I found some guidance from Puget systems for Gigabyte boards having the same issue with a stable over clock telling people to set voltage to 1.2 override. I'm happy to go back to override voltage, but wanted to ask if anyone else has had this problem. I have an ASRock x299 Taichi XE with 1.50 bios.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


Hi,
Yep I switched to manual using by specific core seems more straight forward 
You just have to add a hair more than any vid ever read.


----------



## Abaidor

zGunBLADEz said:


> that one looks like plastic the one i put is all metal.


OK got it! I trust you more than an image on ebay from an unknown seller.....I realize that all of them are just vices and nothing more. As long as the PCB is held securely into place then I have no worries. I will inspect it when I get it anyway to make sure everything fits together accurately.


----------



## toncij

It seems, judging by 9900K, that going 7980XE + delid and LM is better than 9980XE... for overclockers at least, the new gen seems useless.


----------



## ThrashZone

toncij said:


> It seems, judging by 9900K, that going 7980XE + delid and LM is better than 9980XE... for overclockers at least, the new gen seems useless.


Hi,
Not sure I would say useless 
99..x or xe or even 99..k series will still have a 3 year warranty where as a delid won't.


----------



## tistou77

Before, with an LLC at 6, I had a drop in the VCCIN in load (idle : 1.87xV / load : 1.82xV)
And I just noticed that I no longer had this voltage drop with the VCCIN (idle : 1.88xV / load : 1.88xV)

I do not know if it's since the last bios (I have not looked before)

Is it better that I test with an LLC at 5 (for example) ?
I can not leave with a VCCIN that does not drop in load ?

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> Before, with an LLC at 6, I had a drop in the VCCIN in load (idle : 1.87xV / load : 1.82xV)
> And I just noticed that I no longer had this voltage drop with the VCCIN (idle : 1.88xV / load : 1.88xV)
> 
> I do not know if it's since the last bios (I have not looked before)
> 
> Is it better that I test with an LLC at 5 (for example) ?
> I can not leave with a VCCIN that does not drop in load ?
> 
> Thanks


i think it is a good idea to allow for some vdroop in your 24/7 settings.


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> i think it is a good idea to allow for some vdroop in your 24/7 settings.


Ok thanks :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> From what silicon lottery said
> They use stronger adhesive so it might need to be heated up before using rockit 99 tool.


Just FYI - you can use a q-tip soaked in 100% acetone (not nail polish remover) to soften the adhesive. I'd try that first before taking a hot gun/paint stripper to the PCB. I've used 100% acetone on several CPUs, not an issue for the PCB or SMDs under the IHS of a 7980XE for example. just my :2cents:


----------



## ESRCJ

toncij said:


> It seems, judging by 9900K, that going 7980XE + delid and LM is better than 9980XE... for overclockers at least, the new gen seems useless.


Yeah I'm a bit disappointed. I figured Intel would at least refresh X299 with 14nm++ so we could achieve slightly higher clocks. The 7980XE is also more expensive than it was this summer, so someone like me waited months to upgrade and is paying more.


----------



## PWn3R

gridironcpj said:


> Yeah I'm a bit disappointed. I figured Intel would at least refresh X299 with 14nm++ so we could achieve slightly higher clocks. The 7980XE is also more expensive than it was this summer, so someone like me waited months to upgrade and is paying more.


I got mine on Ebay, new in box for $980 (no typo and yes 7980xe).

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ESRCJ

PWn3R said:


> I got mine on Ebay, new in box for $980 (no typo and yes 7980xe).
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


That's much lower than I've seen on ebay even for used.


----------



## toncij

Very low price, ideal for 7980XE since LM seems more performant than solder.


----------



## PWn3R

Yeah the guy who sold it to me has a store full of workstations. He told me it was purchased for a custom order of workstations, but someone gumped the CPU count so they were just offloading it.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Tried the tool on the sillicon lottery 7820x it didn't require much effort to move it but it needs more than that.

I took pictures so you can see how secure the cpu is on the tool. 

But, their sillicon adhesive its working as a type of "spring" it moves back and forth and comes back to place. You can see in the side of the cpu what im talking about.

So i need to use a heat gun so i can ply it upwards as the tool its not doing too much for this cpu from sillicon lottery delid services. The glue its different than intels. It serves as a "spring" heat gun with take care of the problem. The ihs have a moving play from back and forth and to side to side but it springs back to center.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Heat gun and a razor did the trick. They just glued the middle of the ihs

Wth @Silicon Lottery is that mess?

Thats alot of glue, unacceptable to me


----------



## tistou77

Asrock and MSI having updated their X299 bios with 4D microcode for Skylake-X, I wanted to test with the Rampage VI Extreme X299 (tested 4D and 50 Intel Microcode and same thing)
Already the TJMax goes to 110° by default and even with the TJMax at 105°, the cores warm up more under the same conditions (noticed in idle)






























Those who have MSI or Asrock with the latest bios, you noticed the same thing ?

Thanks


----------



## PWn3R

tistou77 said:


> Asrock and MSI having updated their X299 bios with 4D microcode for Skylake-X, I wanted to test with the Rampage VI Extreme X299 (tested 4D and 50 Intel Microcode and same thing)
> Already the TJMax goes to 110° by default and even with the TJMax at 105°, the cores warm up more under the same conditions (noticed in idle)
> 
> View attachment 227874
> View attachment 227878
> 
> 
> View attachment 227876
> View attachment 227880
> 
> 
> 
> Those who have MSI or Asrock with the latest bios, you noticed the same thing ?
> 
> Thanks


I didn't notice a TJMax change on my ASRock. My temps are within 1C as well. I have the latest bios for my X299 Taichi XE

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## zGunBLADEz

somebody have a topography of the die and core placements?


----------



## tistou77

PWn3R said:


> I didn't notice a TJMax change on my ASRock. My temps are within 1C as well. I have the latest bios for my X299 Taichi XE
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


Thanks for your feedback

You have version bios 2.20 ?
you would have a screen of Aida64 (Motherboard / CPUID) that I look if there are differences

And what version of Windows 10 do you have (1803, 1809) ?
The Windows kernel will be able to play it will seem

Thanks


----------



## PWn3R

Does anyone care to hazard some feedback on voltages on the HCC chips? I'm pretty sure I can get 3 or 4 core to 5ghz at about 1.3-1.32v on my 7980xe. I don't want to degrade the chip and I've seen people reporting degraded chips at as low as 1.25-1.26v in this thread. Is anyone running that much on override for their day to day OC?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## PWn3R

I have 1.50 which was latest as of a week or two ago. I can post a SS when I get home from work.

I am on 1809.



tistou77 said:


> Thanks for your feedback
> 
> You have version bios 2.20 ?
> you would have a screen of Aida64 (Motherboard / CPUID) that I look if there are differences
> 
> And what version of Windows 10 do you have (1803, 1809) ?
> The Windows kernel will be able to play it will seem
> 
> Thanks


Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## tistou77

PWn3R said:


> I have 1.50 which was latest as of a week or two ago. I can post a SS when I get home from work.
> I am on 1809.


Thanks, the last bios for X299 Taichi is 2.20 with microcode updated (but not X299 Taichi XE)


----------



## PWn3R

Yeah, I know microcode was in the changelog for 1.50 for the XE and I think they released 1.50 in September


tistou77 said:


> Thanks, the last bios for X299 Taichi is 2.20 with microcode updated (but not X299 Taichi XE)


Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## tistou77

PWn3R said:


> Yeah, I know microcode was in the changelog for 1.50 for the XE and I think they released 1.50 in September


Not microcode updated for Taichi XE



Code:


1.Support Runtime CPU temperature display in Dr.Debug LED
2.Improve Specific Per Core function

Thanks anyway for your feedback :thumb:

If some have Taichi (not XE) with the latest bios


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
@zGunBLADEz

How much alcohol did it take to remove all that crap ?
Wonder what type of LM they used ?

Call me crazy but isn't the chip supposed to have a clear space like the original so heat might escape on top I suppose red circled 
I've seen delid and the Intel gasket does not completely seal the cap all the way around.

Yeah quite a mess might be worth it to get SL to clean it up for 100.us

Heck can one soak in alcohol before attempting to delid ???


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> @*zGunBLADEz*
> 
> How much alcohol did it take to remove all that crap ?
> Wonder what type of LM they used ?
> 
> Call me crazy but isn't the chip supposed to have a clear space like the original so heat might escape on top I suppose red circled
> I've seen delid and the Intel gasket does not completely seal the cap all the way around.
> 
> Yeah quite a mess might be worth it to get SL to clean it up for 100.us
> 
> Heck can one soak in alcohol before attempting to delid ???


yes. that is a "breathing" gap. :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> yes. that is a "breathing" gap. :thumb:


Hi,
SOB how the heck can SL be covering it up completely not to mention putting their aggressive glue on stuff that is only supposed to be protected with nail polish or liquid electrical tape... 
I find all this very disturbing frankly :/


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> SOB how the heck can SL be covering it up completely not to mention putting their aggressive glue on stuff that is only supposed to be protected with nail polish or liquid electrical tape...
> I find all this very disturbing frankly :/


 i'm gonna guess that Intel has more (initial) VOCs in the tim than LM does. It is more likely an overkill engineering issue at intel. I really do not think there's any worry either way. IBE and SBE had a small hole in the top of the IHS for this purpose. Nail polish and LET are mot ideal. Use MG industries conformal coating, which is designed specifically for this purpose.
At least SL did not go the crazy glue route. :no-smile


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> i'm gonna guess that Intel has more (initial) VOCs in the tim than LM does. It is more likely an overkill engineering issue at intel. I really do not think there's any worry either way. IBE and SBE had a small hole in the top of the IHS for this purpose. Nail polish and LET are mot ideal. Use MG industries conformal coating, which is designed specifically for this purpose.
> At least SL did not go the crazy glue route. :no-smile


Hi,
Not even removing the Intel stuff off the chip is pretty lazy though and adding their glue where it was so it's not on sensitive areas is just baffling to me


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ really? the LM thermal bond line is very thin... IMO it is best to remove all the OEM sealant.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> ^^ really? the LM thermal bond line is very thin... IMO it is best to remove all the OEM sealant.


Hi,
Nope SL gives a mono block compatibility blah.... they must stick with 
I made a thread in SL section 
They give other excuses such as delivery hazards... 

It's just quick cash best to make 85.us in 15 minutes than 30 minutes it seems more likely to me.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

to me thats pretty lazy specially they are charging for a service...
i read the post you put on their section their response is pretty lame at best

clean the freaking thing add ur "barrier" on the smds glue the four corner like the picture i highlighted in blue how much is needed

call it a day.

Been delidding for ages and to find out crap like that from a "reputable source" that charge for this type of service is unacceptable...


----------



## Silicon Lottery

zGunBLADEz said:


> to me thats pretty lazy specially they are charging for a service...
> i read the post you put on their section their response is pretty lame at best
> 
> clean the freaking thing add ur "barrier" on the smds glue the four corner like the picture i highlighted in blue how much is needed
> 
> call it a day.
> 
> Been delidding for ages and to find out crap like that from a "reputable source" that charge for this type of service is unacceptable...


We have tried everything you can think of over the years. It's not that simple when you need to successfully ship thousands of these. Without a complete seal, liquid metal would seep out in some orders during shipping no matter how thin the liquid metal layer is applied. That wasn't acceptable for us.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Silicon Lottery said:


> We have tried everything you can think of over the years. It's not that simple when you need to successfully ship thousands of these. Without a complete seal, liquid metal would seep out in some orders during shipping no matter how thin the liquid metal layer is applied. That wasn't acceptable for us.


I understand this, to some extent!!!! i know what you are trying to say... makes sense but...

if it will zip out like you said it will make no difference whatsoever the smds are covered...

Just the let the user know they might see some lm spillage like a type of warning instead of trying to containing all of it inside its the same concept at my point of view it just the user would not be aware of it..The lm still would spillage regardless of containment XD


"What the eye doesn't see, the heart doesn't grieve over" 

The lm still spilled/run inside between the ihs and the die regardless is sealed or not right? 

So whats the biggie? if the end user can clean some thermal grease they can clean some lm XD


----------



## Silicon Lottery

zGunBLADEz said:


> I understand this, to some extent!!!! i know what you are trying to say... makes sense but...
> 
> if it will zip out like you said it will make no difference whatsoever the smds are covered...
> 
> Just the let the user know they might see some lm spillage like a type of warning instead of trying to containing all of it inside its the same concept at my point of view it just the user would not be aware of it..The lm still would spillage regardless of containment XD
> 
> 
> "What the eye doesn't see, the heart doesn't grieve over"
> 
> The lm still spilled/run inside between the ihs and the die regardless is sealed or not right?
> 
> So whats the biggie? if the end user can clean some thermal grease they can clean some lm XD


You're right on a technical level, it doesn't matter if a little bit spills out if it all gets cleaned up. The problem is that liquid metal is very messy, and the customer experience when they actually see it- it scares a lot of people and they worry. The goal is for the processor to come back looking exactly the same as when it was sent in, with no worries in sight.

There are compromises to everything, but this has been the most successful solution for us in regards to customer support and satisfaction.


----------



## Jpmboy

Silicon Lottery said:


> We have tried everything you can think of over the years. It's not that simple when you need to successfully ship thousands of these. Without a complete seal, liquid metal would seep out in some orders during shipping no matter how thin the liquid metal layer is applied. That wasn't acceptable for us.





Silicon Lottery said:


> You're right on a technical level, it doesn't matter if a little bit spills out if it all gets cleaned up. The problem is that liquid metal is very messy, and the customer experience when they actually see it- it scares a lot of people and they worry. The goal is for the processor to come back looking exactly the same as when it was sent in, with no worries in sight.
> 
> There are compromises to everything, but this has been the most successful solution for us in regards to customer support and satisfaction.



No doubt the considerations of a business shipping hundreds of delidded cpus will be different than what a hobbyist does at home. That said, you guys came up with a product and service that was sorely needed by the community during these intel pigeon poop days. Great idea and well done. :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> No doubt the considerations of a business shipping hundreds of delidded cpus will be different than what a hobbyist does at home. That said, you guys came up with a product and service that was sorely needed by the community during these intel pigeon poop days. Great idea and well done. :thumb:


Hi,
Better we should of returned to retail as thermally defective frankly I'm still kicking myself for that blunder choice.


----------



## CptSpig

Silicon Lottery said:


> We have tried everything you can think of over the years. It's not that simple when you need to successfully ship thousands of these. Without a complete seal, liquid metal would seep out in some orders during shipping no matter how thin the liquid metal layer is applied. That wasn't acceptable for us.





Silicon Lottery said:


> You're right on a technical level, it doesn't matter if a little bit spills out if it all gets cleaned up. The problem is that liquid metal is very messy, and the customer experience when they actually see it- it scares a lot of people and they worry. The goal is for the processor to come back looking exactly the same as when it was sent in, with no worries in sight.
> 
> There are compromises to everything, but this has been the most successful solution for us in regards to customer support and satisfaction.



I own a 7980Xe processors and could not be happier! The processor is as fast today as it was when I received it more than a year ago. I will definitely buy my next processor from SL again. :thumb:


----------



## Kana Chan

It's not impossible to offer a checkbox ( separate vrm / monoblock capability ) when buying?


----------



## ocvn

tistou77 said:


> Asrock and MSI having updated their X299 bios with 4D microcode for Skylake-X, I wanted to test with the Rampage VI Extreme X299 (tested 4D and 50 Intel Microcode and same thing)
> Already the TJMax goes to 110° by default and even with the TJMax at 105°, the cores warm up more under the same conditions (noticed in idle)
> 
> View attachment 227874
> View attachment 227878
> 
> 
> View attachment 227876
> View attachment 227880
> 
> 
> 
> Those who have MSI or Asrock with the latest bios, you noticed the same thing ?
> 
> Thanks


I also notice the core temp change with newest bios for x299 Dark. Temp increase 5c.


----------



## tistou77

ocvn said:


> I also notice the core temp change with newest bios for x299 Dark. Temp increase 5c.


Thanks for your feedback
You can tell me the microcode version (with Aida64 for example in Motherboard - CPUID)


----------



## RichKnecht

I thought I was seeing things when I recently flashed the 1503 Bios to my 299E Strix MB with [email protected] all core 4.7GHz @1.23V, as temps went up ~5 degrees at idle. Nothing else changed. Temps are still fine, ~70C, under load and 24/7 use. Processor is lid-less with a Direct Die Frame, BTW.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I tried 1401 didn't take long to dump that
Trying 1301 now seems better 48 on 4 cores 0,4,9,5 as ITB-3 shows as the best with so-so stability and temps too if win-10 wasn't so-so it might be better 

I didn't have any problems with 0802 I'm just trying newer bios to see what's up so far besides the 4 cores on 48 doing okay 0802 is best.


----------



## PWn3R

I can cool at least 1.3v on all cores. Does anyone have an HCC at more than 1.28 override? I'm just nervous about degredation. I saw someone who posted that they had degredation at 1.25v on a 7980xe. I was able to get 5ghz on my 3 best cores stable at 1.33v.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## zGunBLADEz

I dont think degradation and that type of voltage is a thing. I think is more related to the new bioses with the fixes for spectre and meltdown which are asking for more voltage than before same scenario on the 8700s for example

??

Btw, whats the hottest core difference between the coldest one in your guys chips....?


----------



## bmgjet

10c difference in my best and worst core on same voltage.


----------



## PWn3R

7980xe 10-12 degrees and it varies which is annoying. Mine is delidded too, I did it myself and I'm on a modified EK Monoblock.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## PWn3R

Yeah, I agree. There were two similar posts claiming deg with 1.25-1.28. my CPU puts 1.258 on my two ****tiest cores on auto voltage. I seem to remember posted Intel documentation saying safe voltage for OC was 20% over stock. I guess my question is, since I CAN cool it, should I worry about running [email protected] or just go 1.265 for 4.9 on my good cores. This is really just a few more mhz for a currently single threaded mmo. That is about to become multithreaded next patch anyway.


zGunBLADEz said:


> I dont think degradation and that type of voltage is a thing. I think is more related to the new bioses with the fixes for spectre and meltdown which are asking for more voltage than before same scenario on the 8700s for example
> 
> ??
> 
> Btw, whats the hottest core difference between the coldest one in your guys chips....?


Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Abaidor

PWn3R said:


> 7980xe 10-12 degrees and it varies which is annoying. Mine is delidded too, I did it myself and I'm on a modified EK Monoblock.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk



Could you please share some info about what kind of modifications have you applied to your monoblock? Do you have a Rampage VIE with the EK monoblock? I have it and I am gathering parts for delidding my 7940X and go for direct die cooling but I keep wondering how it is going to work with the EK monoblock I have since there are going to be height differences and the block might be at an angle. 

I fear that going direct frame means that I have to scrap the monoblock and go for separate VRM + CPU block cooling or the angle between the "higher" VRM part and the CPU core won't allow for proper surface contact of the cpu with the monoblock.


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> I dont think degradation and that type of voltage is a thing. I think is more related to the new bioses with the fixes for spectre and meltdown which are asking for more voltage than before same scenario on the 8700s for example
> 
> ??
> 
> *Btw, whats the hottest core difference between the coldest one in your guys chips*....?


Hi,
By the way what all did it take to get all the crap off the chip ??

Good question and one that lead me to believe something is wrong with the SL delid's LM 
Which is extremely different and yes noticed in the last couple months
Not sure if changing any setting below would make any difference
Input any lower seems ignored and throws 1.840v at it anyway.

All core 45 
Manual voltage 1.240v
cpu vccio voltage 1.01000
cpu system agent voltage auto 0.98000
PCH Core voltage 1.00625
cpu input voltage 1.840

llc-4
cpu capability 140%
cpu power phase adaptive
Dram +130%

Read them and weep like I do 
CPU package reads 94c and 91c this is just running time spy/ fire strike/ cinebench and realbench


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Back to by specific core seems 40 won't stick on the turd cores zapped to 43 for an odd reason :/
But some at 47 same settings and tests...
Might push a couple more to to 47 and see what happens and I suppose the turds up to 43-44 I guess seeing Intel or asus wants them that high lol :h34r-smi


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think degradation and that type of voltage is a thing. I think is more related to the new bioses with the fixes for spectre and meltdown which are asking for more voltage than before same scenario on the 8700s for example
> 
> ??
> 
> *Btw, whats the hottest core difference between the coldest one in your guys chips*....?
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> By the way what all did it take to get all the crap off the chip ??
> 
> Good question and one that lead me to believe something is wrong with the SL delid's LM
> Which is extremely different and yes noticed in the last couple months
> Not sure if changing any setting below would make any difference
> Input any lower seems ignored and throws 1.840v at it anyway.
> 
> All core 45
> Manual voltage 1.240v
> cpu vccio voltage 1.01000
> cpu system agent voltage auto 0.98000
> PCH Core voltage 1.00625
> cpu input voltage 1.840
> 
> llc-4
> cpu capability 140%
> cpu power phase adaptive
> Dram +130%
> 
> Read them and weep like I do /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif
> CPU package reads 94c and 91c this is just running time spy/ fire strike/ cinebench and realbench
Click to expand...

Havent removed yet just delidded quick for you so you can see, but i dont think its that hard to remove the problem is to remove around the smds that are plastered with it without knocking them out.

Im kind of busy with the 7940x I'm putting back with the ihs to see if i get better temps as i notice my package temp read was high but core temps were on check when I removed the block after some stress test the die frame was very hot to the touch somehow. I have like 15-20c difference between cores have cores at 65-70c others like 4 of them to 85-90c @ 1.205v. so the die frame its not doing the job in my case. 

Maybe i shaved too much metal, didnt try the lm and ihs first.


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> Havent removed yet just delidded quick for you so you can see, but i dont think its that hard to remove the problem is to remove around the smds that are plastered with it without knocking them out.
> 
> Im kind of busy with the 7940x I'm putting back with the ihs to see if i get better temps as i notice my package temp read was high but core temps were on check when I removed the block after some stress test the die frame was very hot to the touch somehow. I have like 15-20c difference between cores have cores at 65-70c others like 4 of them to 85-90c @ 1.205v. so the die frame its not doing the job in my case.
> 
> Maybe i shaved too much metal, didnt try the lm and ihs first.


Hi,
Okay thanks for decapitating that SL 7820 for me :thumb:

I'm starting to think the worst cores are only worst because of higher voltage than they actually need to go the same clocks as other that need more but are tagged as the best :/


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
On another note seems on 1301 bios I've had to change my avx offsets a bit 
avx-4 and 512-5 to be stable opposed to 3 & 5 for 47 so might be why 48 was wonkey as heck might need 5 & 6 for it :/


----------



## PWn3R

Direct die you will have to use separate blocks. I had to grind the standoffs on the legs down on my monoblock to get decent temps. Then further once I delidded. I only put a super thin layer of silicone about the size of a pinhead under each corner of the ihs. I am running 3 cores @ [email protected] 1.27v and the rest at [email protected] 1.207-1.258. my temps are between 57 and 69c.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I ditched the mono block for a separate vrm block and back on the ek evo now.
I got the *2 cores going at 48 and 1.270v now couple at 47 1.250v and a few at 45 at 1.230v and a few at 40 at 1.100v to get them out of the way.
Package at 90c still hottest *core at 84 it runs everything so far.
Probably could put core 0 or 1 back on 48 it's at 76c at 47.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

PWn3R said:


> Direct die you will have to use separate blocks. I had to grind the standoffs on the legs down on my monoblock to get decent temps. Then further once I delidded. I only put a super thin layer of silicone about the size of a pinhead under each corner of the ihs. I am running 3 cores @ [email protected] 1.27v and the rest at [email protected] 1.207-1.258. my temps are between 57 and 69c.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


I remember i had to play on my 4790k mounting to get the mounting just right when i bare die cooled him . didnt help the die frame i bought needed some work to begin with.. 

im getting better temps now with the ihs and lm.. might as well just leave it like that for now..

way way better temps, still have the core difference depending of the voltage at 1.15v or so 1.175v its very narrow like 8c between coldest and hottest more likely and acceptable now than the close to 20c i was getting before.


Trying to stay away from occt and "ANY version" of p95 is resulting very difficult for me lol...
Hard to let a bad habit like that go..

Im using realbench "looping unlimited" everything except open cl. I use heaven for the gpu instead more easy XD....


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> I remember i had to play on my 4790k mounting to get the mounting just right when i bare die cooled him . didnt help the die frame i bought needed some work to begin with..
> 
> im getting better temps now with the ihs and lm.. might as well just leave it like that for now..
> 
> way way better temps, still have the core difference depending of the voltage at 1.15v or so 1.175v its very narrow like 8c between coldest and hottest more likely and acceptable now than the close to 20c i was getting before.
> 
> 
> Trying to stay away from occt and "ANY version" of p95 is resulting very difficult for me lol...
> Hard to let a bad habit like that go..
> 
> Im using realbench "looping unlimited" everything except open cl. I use heaven for the gpu instead more easy XD....


Hi,
If you get tiered of realbench and or heaven you can use blender rendering files and render video instead of render photo and it will loop 
Classroom is a tough one about 10 minutes and bmw is a fairly quick one like cinebench is
You can switch it to use cpu or gpu
https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/


----------



## Abaidor

PWn3R said:


> Direct die you will have to use separate blocks. I had to grind the standoffs on the legs down on my monoblock to get decent temps. Then further once I delidded. I only put a super thin layer of silicone about the size of a pinhead under each corner of the ihs. I am running 3 cores @ [email protected] 1.27v and the rest at [email protected] 1.207-1.258. my temps are between 57 and 69c.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk





ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I ditched the mono block for a separate vrm block and back on the ek evo now.
> I got the *2 cores going at 48 and 1.270v now couple at 47 1.250v and a few at 45 at 1.230v and a few at 40 at 1.100v to get them out of the way.
> Package at 90c still hottest *core at 84 it runs everything so far.
> Probably could put core 0 or 1 back on 48 it's at 76c at 47.


Well as I feared, it looks like the EK Monoblock will make a nice decorative item "on the wall"....I might even make a loop for defunct waterblocks on the wall one day...

When I delid I will go direct die to make it worth it so next step will be to order a VRM block as part of my "Upgrade Pack" that includes hard tubes and some other case mods....When I drain the loop I will do several upgrades in one go...

Now what about the new EK Velocity? Should I go for it or get a Heatikiller or Raystorm or something from Aquacomputer.....I might get the velocity first anyway and if I don't like the temps, I'll "dump" it to my kid's PC..


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> Well as I feared, it looks like the EK Monoblock will make a nice decorative item "on the wall"....I might even make a loop for defunct waterblocks on the wall one day...
> 
> When I delid I will go direct die to make it worth it so next step will be to order a VRM block as part of my "Upgrade Pack" that includes hard tubes and some other case mods....When I drain the loop I will do several upgrades in one go...
> 
> Now what about the new EK Velocity? Should I go for it or get a Heatikiller or Raystorm or something from Aquacomputer.....I might get the velocity first anyway and if I don't like the temps, I'll "dump" it to my kid's PC..


take a look at koolance blocks also, the 400i is real good. :thumb:


----------



## Abaidor

Jpmboy said:


> take a look at koolance blocks also, the 400i is real good. :thumb:


Oh yes, I forgot about it but I like the plexi ones better so I can see inside how clean they are...the Velocity I will get anyway for my kids PC (Gaming RGB etc) so I might as well test it. Koolance is a great performer too though...


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> Oh yes, I forgot about it but I like the plexi ones better so I can see inside how clean they are...the Velocity I will get anyway for my kids PC (Gaming RGB etc) so I might as well test it. Koolance is a great performer too though...


yeah - the 390i is see thu. it;s a good one also. I've never had a bad/warped koolance block... but then, I've never had a bad EK either.


----------



## ThrashZone

Abaidor said:


> Well as I feared, it looks like the EK Monoblock will make a nice decorative item "on the wall"....I might even make a loop for defunct waterblocks on the wall one day...
> 
> When I delid I will go direct die to make it worth it so next step will be to order a VRM block as part of my "Upgrade Pack" that includes hard tubes and some other case mods....When I drain the loop I will do several upgrades in one go...
> 
> Now what about the new EK Velocity? Should I go for it or get a Heatikiller or Raystorm or something from Aquacomputer.....I might get the velocity first anyway and if I don't like the temps, I'll "dump" it to my kid's PC..


Hi,
I ended up getting two koolance vrm blocks one for x99 and x299 
Kind of vanilla but mono block on x99 couldn't monitor the vrm's on it no sensor 
So I got two and added the other to get an idea of what it does on x299 and it does good so I left it on both.

CPU blocks I did get a couple of barrows to use they do work good too 
I switched to the ek evo just for comparison lately and I believe the barrows is a tad better 
Barrows sure does have a straight forward flow input through top or bottom and outlet same deal 
Fluid stream straight cross the cooling fins all across the entire chip instead of shooting in the middle and both directions like the ek evo if that makes any sense at all 

But yeah both mono blocks now on my wall of shame lol :doh:


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I ended up getting two koolance vrm blocks one for x99 and x299
> Kind of vanilla but mono block on x99 couldn't monitor the vrm's on it no sensor
> So I got two and added the other to get an idea of what it does on x299 and it does good so I left it on both.
> 
> CPU blocks I did get a couple of barrows to use they do work good too
> I switched to the ek evo just for comparison lately and I believe the barrows is a tad better
> Barrows sure does have a straight forward flow input through top or bottom and outlet same deal
> Fluid stream straight cross the cooling fins all across the entire chip instead of shooting in the middle and both directions like the ek evo if that makes any sense at all
> 
> But yeah both mono blocks now on my wall of shame lol :doh:


Barrows? have a link? .. nvm, found them. :thumb:


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I ended up getting two koolance vrm blocks one for x99 and x299
> Kind of vanilla but mono block on x99 couldn't monitor the vrm's on it no sensor
> So I got two and added the other to get an idea of what it does on x299 and it does good so I left it on both.
> 
> CPU blocks I did get a couple of barrows to use they do work good too
> I switched to the ek evo just for comparison lately and I believe the barrows is a tad better
> Barrows sure does have a straight forward flow input through top or bottom and outlet same deal
> Fluid stream straight cross the cooling fins all across the entire chip instead of shooting in the middle and both directions like the ek evo if that makes any sense at all
> 
> But yeah both mono blocks now on my wall of shame lol :doh:



For the VRM I am certainly getting this from Watercool but with the CPU blocks honestly all the top performers do not show any major differences between them so I might get the one that looks prettier.....

BTW this one tops the charts.....

https://shop.aquacomputer.de/index.php?cPath=7_11_12_3373

But it can get quite expensive for top-end configurations and in the end once you add up the costs for your build maybe it is not worth it and you are better off saving and get a faster CPU to begin with...

I can explore how far I can go with reducing the thickness of the VRM thermalpads on the monoblock thus lowering its height but I am not sure if it is enough for direct die cooling.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> Barrows? have a link? .. nvm, found them. :thumb:





Abaidor said:


> For the VRM I am certainly getting this from Watercool but with the CPU blocks honestly all the top performers do not show any major differences between them so I might get the one that looks prettier.....
> 
> BTW this one tops the charts.....
> 
> https://shop.aquacomputer.de/index.php?cPath=7_11_12_3373
> 
> But it can get quite expensive for top-end configurations and in the end once you add up the costs for your build maybe it is not worth it and you are better off saving and get a faster CPU to begin with...
> 
> I can explore how far I can go with reducing the thickness of the VRM thermalpads on the monoblock thus lowering its height but I am not sure if it is enough for direct die cooling.


Hi,
Oops my bad looked at so many 
It was a bitspower summit rgb's that I got a couple of 
https://shop.bitspower.com/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=4818


----------



## Abaidor

The bitspower block looks nice too so ON my list...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah it does look nice also nickle so LM shouldn't mess with it for direct die mount but it is larger than an ek evo so might have clearance issues with die frame no telling.
That's the deal really test nickle bitspower verses ek evo copper plus flow designs differences to see what's best 
Even though nickle bitspower it's looking better temp wise by a little

Mount wise it lacks designed stopping points and also has weak springs so it's easy to over tighten 
Might try to use the ek evo mounting studs on it see if that helps because ek's do have stopping point on the nut caps 
Might need to add a washer or two because the cooling plate on the bitspower is 1/16" thinner than the ek evo.


----------



## Abaidor

Hmm thanks for the info I will certainly research it before deciding..If only the monoblock could work I still prefer how it looks and my VRM temps are really low with it while honestly it still looks the best for me...

Well no matter what I will still wait to see what the new SKUs do before proceeding just for the sake of it...maybe, I say maybe the don't need delidding or at least not direct die cooling..Reviews should not be far away.

Meanwhile, since I will be draining the loop I am building my "upgrade pack" with hardline fittings/tubes, a cablemod Vertical GPU mount, some lighting strips and some lazer cut acrylic pieces that I want to get into the case (luminus bottom plate, covers, shrouds, etc) along with some custom PSU cables. So I have my hands busy...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah performance pc has it image looks different but the part number is the same ppc is where I purchased
Price is pretty cheap too frankly 56.us and looks 100% better than an ek evo 
http://www.performance-pcs.com/bits...acrylic-designed-for-intel-x299-platform.html

I believe we all wish mono blocks did better but cool vrm's is nothing if cpu is hitting 90-100c


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah performance pc has it image looks different but the part number is the same ppc is where I purchased
> Price is pretty cheap too frankly 56.us and looks 100% better than an ek evo
> http://www.performance-pcs.com/bits...acrylic-designed-for-intel-x299-platform.html


Thanks for the heads up, it's cheap but not so much for me sine I am in Europe and it would end up costing me the same as the EK Velocity RGB since I am buying without VAT (company purchase)..

Performance wise the Aquacomputer Cuplex Kryos Next Vario is the best (well not by big margins) but honestly I don't really like the look of it and the plexi models don't have the "Vario" adjustments. That is why I am leaning on the Velocity that I need for another build as well so if it is not great it won't go to waste. Eventually I will buy 2X CPU builds (2 PCs) so the second one, after I dig up some info about performance on HCC i9s will be one of the following:

Heatkiller IV
Raystorm Pro
Cuplex Kryo Next Vario (or plexi)
Koolance
Bitspower

If am going through the hassle of direct die cooling I only want the best possible outcome so I will spent some time researching this. I am doing it for fun too to be honest.

Some reviews 

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/EKWB/EK-Velocity_CPU_Block/6.html
https://www.xtremerigs.net/2018/04/10/koolance-cpu-400i-intel-cpu-water-block-review/

I still need to see how most of these perform on X299 HCC CPUs (i9-7940 and up) before I decide but I said I have a chance to test the Velocity since its going on another build if I don't like it. That other build is for my kid and he wants RGB so it won't go to waste. 




ThrashZone said:


> I believe we all wish mono blocks did better but cool vrm's is nothing if cpu is hitting 90-100c


Haha that certainly is the issue - I just wonder how they tested it before release...not that there is much they can do with the height differences to be honest..


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I doubt ek did any testing 
They just went by spec drawings for select sucker owner mother boards and boom.
EK is pretty well stuck with their flow design.


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I doubt ek did any testing
> They just went by spec drawings for select sucker owner mother boards and boom.
> EK is pretty well stuck with their flow design.


Well for the intended target audience and the fact that the i9s on x299 require delidding for expensive watercooling loops to make any sense, they should have done better than that or at least warn that there will be issues. I would have not bought it had I known this.

Anyway, as an small bonus (lol) the Aquantia chip heatsink is nice and will stay there when I switch....


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I have a strong feeling this weekend the bitspower is going back on lol 
Sideways/ horizontal too so the flow crosses the narrow part of the chip instead long ways or vertical 
It pipes better too.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
My probably next project will be to use of of these draw bays as my new computer case


----------



## Scrimstar

Non-Delid 7980XE, But I have Swiftech 360mm AIO w/ GC Gelid Xtreme, GSKill 64GB 3200MHz -14, ASRock XE

Want to overclock to 4.5GHz All cores, possibly 5GHz on 6-8 cores for gaming. I don't know any of the specific settings to adjust. I am used to only overclocking BLCK, multipliers, and voltage... 
I am not sure to have constant 4.5GHz or not... I want to be stable, but I am willing to push voltage to 1.3/1.4ish, I am not sure what voltage or high temps are safe for 24/7 use. 

If someone can look carefully at my settings, and tell me which exactly to adjust and change, that would be great help!

Also looking to OC my ram to 4GHz after finding a stable cpu oc.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Think it would be an act of all mighty to get 45 on all cores without a delid and even more so 5.0 lol
But all core 45 try these settings leave everything else on auto Jpmboy screen shot


----------



## Abaidor

With an AIO pushing the 7980XE @ 4.5Ghz all cores and without a delid - you can save your self the trouble....Unless you have a golden chip it ain't happening and even if you did it would still need better cooling.

As for pushing 6-8 cores to 5Ghz on top of 4.5Ghz.....dreaming is nice but this ain't happening either with your setup. 

If you wanted high clocks you got the wrong CPU...

What exactly are you using the 7980XE for? Multithreaded productivity applications? 3D Rendering? Extremely heavy desktop multitasking? Content Creation? Gaming?


----------



## zGunBLADEz

The problem with that even if is possible is the avx offset. Theres Some games already using avx. So when that offset kicks in you are about to expect crashes or problems.

So its better sticking to resolutions from 1440P and up to avoid those problems and stick to all core same multi.

I always look silly benchs trying to make a cpu bottleneck to show some difference between cpus in games. Where even a tweak in the ram would give you a boost on fps. You dont do that on multimedia benches.

Neither buying a high end gpu and putting everything on low for fast hz and resolution sub 1080P like "wuakala". As i remember since back in the days everything was cranking up the res everything on max settings in game for eye candy and decent frame rates.


----------



## Abaidor

What does make games different than other software where AVX offset works fine?

I have offsets on my 7940X and never had an issue with games..Do you have anything specific in mind?


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Abaidor said:


> What does make games different than other software where AVX offset works fine?
> 
> I have offsets on my 7940X and never had an issue with games..Do you have anything specific in mind?


In my asrock board it will drop the multi to the next step.

So let's say i have 45x in 8 cores on my 7940x and lets say i have 3 48x and 3 47x with -1 avx offset

I will get

8x44x
3x46x
3x47x 

On an avx load. The problem is how stable would be in the avx offset in such high multi.

Game load are light loads so far but they are already using avx code if you have osd on you can see in some games avx code been used your system is using the offset. FFXV to name one


----------



## Abaidor

zGunBLADEz said:


> In my asrock board it will drop the multi to the next step.
> 
> So let's say i have 45x in 8 cores on my 7940x and lets say i have 3 48x and 3 47x with -1 avx offset
> 
> I will get
> 
> 8x44x
> 3x46x
> 3x47x
> 
> On an avx load.
> 
> Game load are light loads so far but they are already using avx code if you have osd on you can see in some games avx code been used your system is using the offset. FFXV to name one


Of course it will use the offset no disagreement about it....you mentioned "problems & crashes" that's why I asked..I also have offset on my 7940X - can't overclock that high otherwise...

If you want high clocks AND AVX (not 512) with an HCC Skylake-X then you might have to disable cores and turn it to an 8 Core or 10 Core version...

Of course using AVX and using AVX like Prime95 does are two different things so I guess you can get away with lesser or no offset on some games. 

Even the new 9900K when highly overclocked and on AVX loads won't be great thermally and not that stable @5GHZ all cores.

When I have time I might be tempted to try a High Clock 8 Core ONLY profile in BIOS with HT disabled for games only to see how far I can get.


----------



## Scrimstar

If I set to 4.5GHz at all times, then would that fix AVX issues? 
Here is FF14... not sure if it is too different from FF15





I am trying to game, stream and multitask, was hoping having some cores at a high clock would help FPS. 


Can you guys help fix my settings, I am pretty sure some are not optimal... but I am not sure which to change to what... I changed the specific core to 45 Max ratio, 1.18V Extra Turbo Voltage
I think turning off C State might crash some games, I am not sure if that was the problem when I tested before


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Abaidor said:


> Of course it will use the offset no disagreement about it....you mentioned "problems & crashes" that's why I asked..I also have offset on my 7940X - can't overclock that high otherwise...
> 
> If you want high clocks AND AVX (not 512) with an HCC Skylake-X then you might have to disable cores and turn it to an 8 Core or 10 Core version...
> 
> Of course using AVX and using AVX like Prime95 does are two different things so I guess you can get away with lesser or no offset on some games.
> 
> Even the new 9900K when highly overclocked and on AVX loads won't be great thermally and not that stable @5GHZ all cores.
> 
> When I have time I might be tempted to try a High Clock 8 Core ONLY profile in BIOS with HT disabled for games only to see how far I can get.


Thats what i did if i need avx code i have cores to spare i dont need 8 of them at 50 when i can have 14 at 45x to make an example, your 7940x will perform better on lower multi on some applications than the 9900k because of the quad channel.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Scrimstar said:


> If I set to 4.5GHz at all times, then would that fix AVX issues?
> Here is FF14... not sure if it is too different from FF15
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc7WkLraNc4
> 
> I am trying to game, stream and multitask, was hoping having some cores at a high clock would help FPS.
> 
> 
> Can you guys help fix my settings, I am pretty sure some are not optimal... but I am not sure which to change to what... I changed the specific core to 45 Max ratio, 1.18V Extra Turbo Voltage
> I think turning off C State might crash some games, I am not sure if that was the problem when I tested before


i would not take that video too seriously lol


----------



## Abaidor

zGunBLADEz said:


> i would not take that video too seriously lol


I can't be of any help with the Asrock BIOS but if you want some cores high you need to identify the cooler/best ones and try boosting them while lowering other. Its a matter of thermal budget and unless you delid and go custom water simply forget it with 18 cores to tame. 

I went for the 7940X in hope of clocking it higher than a 7980XE and did not need even 14 cores to be honest but wanted a HCC chip.


----------



## TahoeDust

I have my eye on the 9900x to replace my 7820x. Has there been any leaks about release date?


----------



## ESRCJ

TahoeDust said:


> I have my eye on the 9900x to replace my 7820x. Has there been any leaks about release date?


Likely using STIM instead of TIM and using the "same silicon." I guess that means it's still 14nm+.


----------



## Scrimstar

Abaidor said:


> I can't be of any help with the Asrock BIOS but if you want some cores high you need to identify the cooler/best ones and try boosting them while lowering other. Its a matter of thermal budget and unless you delid and go custom water simply forget it with 18 cores to tame.
> 
> I went for the 7940X in hope of clocking it higher than a 7980XE and did not need even 14 cores to be honest but wanted a HCC chip.


I ran Cinenebench and CPUz benchmark both at once. set all cores to 50max multiplier 1.2 extra turbo voltage, most settings on default/auto


----------



## Abaidor

That looks like you 50X multiplier is not doing the trick.....

I am getting 3330 on cinebench with my 7940X (non-delided) so your 7980XE is obviously throttling at 50X Multi...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
What ever you set sure didn't stick 
Only 3 hit 44 and was the highest core


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Abaidor said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> i would not take that video too seriously lol
> 
> 
> 
> I can't be of any help with the Asrock BIOS but if you want some cores high you need to identify the cooler/best ones and try boosting them while lowering other. Its a matter of thermal budget and unless you delid and go custom water simply forget it with 18 cores to tame.
> 
> I went for the 7940X in hope of clocking it higher than a 7980XE and did not need even 14 cores to be honest but wanted a HCC chip.
Click to expand...

I have no problems wirh my 7940x is well with my expectations.

I was talking about the video the guy put of the 7980xe with ff14 hitting 50x+ probably under dry ice or some exotic cooling. Thats no where near to call stable or take into consideration.


----------



## toncij

zGunBLADEz said:


> I have no problems wirh my 7940x is well with my expectations.
> 
> I was talking about the video the guy put of the 7980xe with ff14 hitting 50x+ probably under dry ice or some exotic cooling. Thats no where near to call stable or take into consideration.


People did run 50x on a chiller, so no need for exotic stuff.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

toncij said:


> People did run 50x on a chiller, so no need for exotic stuff.



to me anything under watercooling is exotic or non 24/7 or require to much effort and $$$.

Not normal XD



ex·ot·ic
/iɡˈzädik/Submit
adjective
adjective: exotic
1.
originating in or characteristic of a distant foreign country.
"exotic birds"
synonyms:	foreign, nonnative, tropical; More
antonyms:	native, familiar, nearby
attractive or striking because colorful or out of the ordinary.
"an exotic outfit"
synonyms:	striking, colorful, eye-catching, flamboyant; More
antonyms:	conventional
of a kind *not used for ordinary purposes or not ordinarily encountered.*
"exotic elementary particles as yet unknown to science"


----------



## toncij

zGunBLADEz said:


> to me anything under watercooling is exotic or non 24/7 or require to much effort and $$$.
> 
> Not normal XD
> 
> 
> 
> ex·ot·ic
> /iɡˈzädik/Submit
> adjective
> adjective: exotic
> 1.
> originating in or characteristic of a distant foreign country.
> "exotic birds"
> synonyms:	foreign, nonnative, tropical; More
> antonyms:	native, familiar, nearby
> attractive or striking because colorful or out of the ordinary.
> "an exotic outfit"
> synonyms:	striking, colorful, eye-catching, flamboyant; More
> antonyms:	conventional
> of a kind *not used for ordinary purposes or not ordinarily encountered.*
> "exotic elementary particles as yet unknown to science"


Ahh, well, ok, but context is important. For office users after-market fans are exotic. Overclock.net is kinda.... water is pretty normal, chillers are advanced, exotic is ice/LN2/helium/peltiers...?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
The cheapest chiller I've seen was about 1200.us


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> The cheapest chiller I've seen was about 1200.us


nah - you can get an aquarium chiller for $3-400 and just plumb it in. I have and use an AquaEuroUSA aquarium chiller. works great and has been for years.


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> The cheapest chiller I've seen was about 1200.us


The are chillers (good brands) from 450 Euros incl VAT and with 1000 you can get a strong one. I have spent at least 500 Euros for RAD/FANs and might double that for excess capacity. That is not the point though since a chiller has many disadvantages for daily usage such as energy consumption and noise..you can use a chiller without going too low in temps though instead of a normal radiator but I don't see the point then.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

toncij said:


> Ahh, well, ok, but context is important. For office users after-market fans are exotic. Overclock.net is kinda.... water is pretty normal, chillers are advanced, exotic is ice/LN2/helium/peltiers...?


Thats why i told the guy to not take that video too seriously. If you see the video thats "obviously" not conventional overclock neither are the temps and voltages for 24/7.. Thats not even close to be stable neither is stable...
Even that the power usage wasnt even braking 200w so wasnt fully utilize... wonder how well it will do on a blender RUN XD 

If i was him i would stay away any voltage above 1.2v on that cpu and stay anything above 45x... 

50x+ aint happening for 24/7 on his case


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Abaidor said:


> The are chillers (good brands) from 450 Euros incl VAT and with 1000 you can get a strong one. I have spent at least 500 Euros for RAD/FANs and might double that for excess capacity. That is not the point though since a chiller has many disadvantages for daily usage such as energy consumption and noise..you can use a chiller without going too low in temps though instead of a normal radiator but I don't see the point then.


humidity too


----------



## Jpmboy

you just set the temperature so that you do not run below the dew point. Fact is, chillers work great... loud but great. I do find it funny when folks are concerned about power consumption as they type on a HEDT PC running a 7980XE off a 1500W PSU. It's all relative, ain't it.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

how those aquachiller fare?


----------



## Scrimstar

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> What ever you set sure didn't stick
> Only 3 hit 44 and was the highest core


Yes, I know that is why I am asking for bios settings lol. sometimes HWMonitor will go haywire. Sometimes if I play BlackOps4, itll rev 5-6 cores to 4.5GHz
idr ever going above 55*C





zGunBLADEz said:


> Thats why i told the guy to not take that video too seriously. If you see the video thats "obviously" not conventional overclock neither are the temps and voltages for 24/7.. Thats not even close to be stable neither is stable...
> Even that the power usage wasnt even braking 200w so wasnt fully utilize... wonder how well it will do on a blender RUN XD
> 
> If i was him i would stay away any voltage above 1.2v on that cpu and stay anything above 45x...
> 
> 50x+ aint happening for 24/7 on his case


Well for that 5.4Ghz vid, I wasn't expecting to get the same clocks, but high clocks are usable for gaming... I can easily make two extra bios profile for AVX 3 and 512
If I knew how to overclock lol


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Scrimstar said:


> Yes, I know that is why I am asking for bios settings lol. sometimes HWMonitor will go haywire. Sometimes if I play BlackOps4, itll rev 5-6 cores to 4.5GHz
> idr ever going above 55*C
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well for that 5.4Ghz vid, I wasn't expecting to get the same clocks, but high clocks are usable for gaming... I can easily make two extra bios profile for AVX 3 and 512
> If I knew how to overclock lol




go to bios raise the limit, they put some pictures a few pages back check those.

Stay under 1.2v for the time been start with 45x and -2 avx offset and throw like 15x offset on the 512 avx for now ...

as hard it is for me to not recommend p95 in this type of cpus, you will have alot of headaches using any power virus like p95/linpack/occt XD

i would recommend realbench loop/unlimited for 1-2hr everything except open cl you main goal is to test the cpu..

You can start at 1.15v and move up or down ... Watch for temps, watch for power usage this will tell you if is throttling or not, expect 400w+ of usage in that cpu not 200w.


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> how those aquachiller fare?


 I've been using the same one for years now. @*Menthol* got me started with the aquarium chiller thing. Blame him. 
(there is is sitting on the floor in a pic from 2015. Hook it in with QDCs.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

thats a rad tower plus chiller in the same loop?
i thought you are not supposed to mix them together bcuz the rad will add temps on to the loop..

clarify this for me


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> I've been using the same one for years now. @*Menthol* got me started with the aquarium chiller thing. Blame him.
> (there is is sitting on the floor in a pic from 2015. Hook it in with QDCs.


Hi,
Nice how far did that one set you back $$


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Nice how far did that one set you back $$


 something like $300




zGunBLADEz said:


> thats a rad tower plus chiller in the same loop?
> i thought you are not supposed to mix them together bcuz the rad will add temps on to the loop..
> 
> clarify this for me


just turn the fan(s) off. ideally have the chiller as the last thing before the first waterblock.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> something like $300
> 
> 
> 
> just turn the fan(s) off. ideally have the chiller as the last thing before the first waterblock.


ohh i see, you add that for the extra punch lol cool
not a bad idea not too shabby either that with a mora or something like that XD
have the extra cooling ...
those are cheap on amazon/ebay even local shops may give a second look later.
Thanks.

So ur config would be chiller>blocks>rad to cool some of those watts before it goes back to chiller so you dont underwhelm too much the chiller with too much wattage/heat as well..

nice


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> ohh i see, you add that for the extra punch lol cool
> not a bad idea not too shabby either that with a mora or something like that XD
> have the extra cooling ...
> those are cheap on amazon/ebay even local shops may give a second look later.
> Thanks.
> 
> *So ur config would be chiller>blocks>rad* to cool some of those watts before it goes back to chiller so you dont underwhelm too much the chiller with too much wattage/heat as well..
> 
> nice


 yes. And I only use the chiller when needed, otherwise it just sits there acting as a reservoir. 
I hook in this one sometimes. they are portable, and with QDCs they get moved around as needed to different rigs.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
There you go 1600.us lol :thumb:


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> yes. And I only use the chiller when needed, otherwise it just sits there acting as a reservoir.
> I hook in this one sometimes. they are portable, and with QDCs they get moved around as needed to different rigs.



I took JP's lead on this one and they are amazing at cooling for bench marks or gaming when it's 105 during the summer!


----------



## Scrimstar

I reset bios settings, and these are the settings I have changed... cpu speed/voltage spikes to 4.4GHz/1.2V but I haven't seen it during benching... and I just noticed I set my core 1 wrong... but I don't think thats the problem lol

Also I am not sure about voltage settings, there are like over 5 different voltages to set... I mostly set them on auto... also still think somethings wrong with my settings, took thermal throttling off too

Tried the benchmark 5x, didnt use the image editing, used encoding and multitask, because they stressed more and conveniently lasted ~60sec total

https://imgur.com/a/i5kgcsW changed settings in here


----------



## Jpmboy

nice setup captain! I do like the way the white gelid fans look.


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> nice setup captain! I do like the way the white gelid fans look.



Your recommendation! They work amazingly well for such a small fan. That's a old picture I have dual pumps now.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep sweet Cpt


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep sweet Cpt



Thanks!


----------



## Jpmboy

just an fyi with hte OC panel... if you are not using its on-board fan headers, ya don't need the sata power cable if you are using one.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep you guys are giving me wild ideas 
Unfortunately my reality is only in the 3-400.00 range 
There are a couple on PPc for that but with all the other stuff they say is needed it's still 1k at the least 
Not sure i need the pump they say though I do already have 2 D5's or the triple rad... fans.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep you guys are giving me wild ideas
> Unfortunately my reality is only in the 3-400.00 range
> There are a couple on PPc for that but with all the other stuff they say is needed it's still 1k at the least
> Not sure i need the pump they say though I do already have 2 D5's or the triple rad... fans.


what other stuff? 2 d5s in plenty. just need tubing and that's it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> what other stuff? 2 d5s in plenty. just need tubing and that's it.


Hi,
Well now it's under personalized options 
http://www.performance-pcs.com/hot-...hp-395watt-cooling-capacity-waterchiller.html


----------



## Jpmboy

that's a strong cooler. 1/4 horse. still don;t see these "other stuff"


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> just an fyi with hte OC panel... if you are not using its on-board fan headers, ya don't need the sata power cable if you are using one.



Got-it Thanks!


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> that's a strong cooler. 1/4 horse. still don;t see these "other stuff"


Hi,
Way at the bottom of the page 
Here's another think it's okay about 50.00 cheaper 1/16hp?
http://www.performance-pcs.com/hot-...hp-295watt-cooling-capacity-waterchiller.html


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Way at the bottom of the page
> Here's another think it's okay about 50.00 cheaper 1/16hp?
> http://www.performance-pcs.com/hot-...hp-295watt-cooling-capacity-waterchiller.html


1/6th, not 1/16th. My aquaeuro (from amazon I think) is only 1/10th HP. Cools the loop to 12C. These are aquarium chillers... to go colder you have to mod the controls.
*this one*
but yeah, they have gone up in price since I bought one.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

How the koolance one fare against that one? And
Which one is louder


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
The last one I posted is 20dba 1/6hp the 1/4hp it shows the same


Code:


Noise emissions:

    The small chillers (like HC150) have a noise emission of  20dB(A) only and can be used near the computer / aquarium without disturbing.

The one Jpmboy posted doesn't say just


Code:


They are powerful, compact, quiet


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Scrimstar said:


> I reset bios settings, and these are the settings I have changed... cpu speed/voltage spikes to 4.4GHz/1.2V but I haven't seen it during benching... and I just noticed I set my core 1 wrong... but I don't think thats the problem lol
> 
> Also I am not sure about voltage settings, there are like over 5 different voltages to set... I mostly set them on auto... also still think somethings wrong with my settings, took thermal throttling off too
> 
> Tried the benchmark 5x, didnt use the image editing, used encoding and multitask, because they stressed more and conveniently lasted ~60sec total
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/i5kgcsW changed settings in here


Try doing a general multi first then at last by core if you want. You going to fast. You need to check first all core same multi stability first.

Untick the gpu from realbench so it dont stress the gpu.


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> How the koolance one fare against that one? And
> Which one is louder





ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> The last one I posted is 20dba 1/6hp the 1/4hp it shows the same
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> Noise emissions:
> 
> The small chillers (like HC150) have a noise emission of  20dB(A) only and can be used near the computer / aquarium without disturbing.
> 
> The one Jpmboy posted doesn't say just
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> They are powerful, compact, quiet


these are refrigeration units... they are not "silent" by any measure. I'd say about the same as an old school window AC unit.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
20dba is a Corsair SP series fan that maxes out at 1500rpm I believe = not bad they do turn off and on it's not like they stay running all the time depending on setting and temp to maintain 

Who said oc'ing was a quiet sport


----------



## Dwofzz

Is any of the 2066 xeons unlocked/ overclockable?


----------



## ThrashZone

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> By the way what all did it take to get all the crap off the chip ??
> 
> Good question and one that lead me to believe something is wrong with the SL delid's LM
> Which is extremely different and yes noticed in the last couple months
> Not sure if changing any setting below would make any difference
> Input any lower seems ignored and throws 1.840v at it anyway.
> 
> All core 45
> Manual voltage 1.240v
> cpu vccio voltage 1.01000
> cpu system agent voltage auto 0.98000
> PCH Core voltage 1.00625
> cpu input voltage 1.840
> 
> llc-4
> cpu capability 140%
> cpu power phase adaptive
> Dram +130%
> 
> Read them and weep like I do
> CPU package reads 94c and 91c this is just running time spy/ fire strike/ cinebench and realbench


Hi,
Well bit the bullet and redid SL's delid 
Looking good so far 
Same 4.5 voltages as here 10c lower package temp no core hit 80c :thumb:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...e-x-combined-discussion-849.html#post27697238


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi, @zGunBLADEz

Well here's mine


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
My used to be normal 4.7 clock using by core usage I couldn't use anymore because it was hitting 95c+
Looking good again cpu package temp 82c after running all 3 fire strikes and time spy :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> My used to be normal 4.7 clock using by core usage I couldn't use anymore because it was hitting 95c+
> Looking good again cpu package temp 82c after running all 3 fire strikes and time spy :thumb:


what changed? or, what did you do to the delid?


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> what changed? or, what did you do to the delid?


Hi,
Just cleaned the sl delid up and redid it 
Just like you've said remove all the Intel sticky stuff too to remove the height so the cap is on the chip and thin LM applied.

Luckily SL didn't use as much silicone on mine as the 7820 shown.

Now I can do 4.7 on all "the were bad cores" now not too bad before as shown 4.4 and 4.3 had to be used on them. 
4.8 was a little too much temp wise but 4.7 is bearable

Core *4 is still being a pita though hottest core but Intel say is one of the best


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Just cleaned the sl delid up and redid it
> Just like you've said remove all the Intel sticky stuff too to remove the height so the cap is on the chip and thin LM applied.
> 
> Luckily SL didn't use as much silicone on mine as the 7820 shown.
> 
> Now I can do 4.7 on all "the were bad cores" now not too bad before as shown 4.4 and 4.3 had to be used on them.
> 4.8 was a little too much temp wise but 4.7 is bearable
> 
> *Core *4 is still being a pita though hottest core but Intel say is one of the best*


 ah - nice work bud!
Regarding the hotter core, it is not unusual (actually, it's normal) for low voltage/leakage cores to run hotter. :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
By the way the bad core were as bios shows 3-7-8-9 and 2 being the very worst


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> ah - nice work bud!
> Regarding the hotter core, it is not unusual (actually, it's normal) for low voltage/leakage cores to run hotter. :thumb:


Hi,
Here's where I'm at now


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Got to run some errands so I'll save this and continue on later


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
4.8 on 5 cores took 1.9v on vccin though :h34r-smi


----------



## Babel

Does this look alright for a 8700k delidded with a Kraken x62?
Overclocked to 5hgz. AVX offset is set to 0 in bios.

Maximus XI Hero


Prime95 for 35 minutes and Cinebench run:


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> @zGunBLADEz
> 
> Well here's mine


Nice gains bro. At least i push you to delid that sucker again lol.

Very nice happy for you.

Im using mine with the ihs and lm for now.
I apply a lil bit of black sillicon under the 4 corners on the ihs not too much.
Put the sucker on the socket so it apply force to it left it there since then.


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> Nice gains bro. At least i push you to delid that sucker again lol.
> 
> Very nice happy for you.
> 
> Im using mine with the ihs and lm for now.
> I apply a lil bit of black sillicon under the 4 corners on the ihs not too much.
> Put the sucker on the socket so it apply force to it left it there since then.


Hi,
Indeed can't thank you enough as well as many other with excellent advice for a newbie delider and oc'er for that matter :thumb:

After looking at my ek evo blocks I see why it was good but not great 
The one I was using on my x299 was terribly not flat the other was so-so
So I lapped them to flatten them both out and I have the evo back in x299

Now I'm looking at my nickle plated bitspower and it's not flat either :doh:
Not sure what can be done with it except lap/ bench belt sander it a lot to get the nickle plating off and flatten the copper hopefully under it.


----------



## PWn3R

I had to hand Dremel the base of the standoffs part on the legs on my EK monoblock. Temps dropped almost 20 degrees from doing that. I think I removed at least 2mm from each leg. I was not precise and free-handed it.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah looking at the mono block and evo for that matter water jet design 
It's vertical not horizontal like the chip 
That can't be good for maximum cooling potential

EVO is easy to flip sideways to get the jet the same direction as the chip is 
Which is the way I have it now so I'm soon to find out if that theory holds any water 

Oops my bad mono block jet is horizontal


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Not too bad got 5x48 and 5x47 vccin 1.91v
2039 is my best cinebench way back in November 2017 cripes a year ago almost no telling what the temps were much worse I'm sure lol

After the usual cinebench/ time spy all three fire strikes and even sky diver this time still looking okay even with 5x47 
Might give all core 4.8 a swing later on we got some good cool stuff coming into Texas


----------



## Abaidor

Hey ThrashZone great results man! I can't wait for Christmas (I will have time then) to drain the loop and do all the deliding, direct die frame, change blocks and switch to hardlines eventually! I am gathering the parts till then so I will be ready. 

I hope that I can get 5 Cores @ 4.8GHz + [email protected] 4.7GHz too and the rest 4 can stay at 4.2 even..I don't care....10 fast cores are more than enough for me! Heck even 8!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Thanks yeah direct die well I believe I'd try a chiller first 
LM leaking on the mobo... is not all that attractive to me 

Paste might be curing a little plus I'm lowering system agent finding a sweet spot 0.95v atm and testing.
Almost got doorules 6950x and titan on time spy 
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/30132230


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Thanks yeah direct die well I believe I'd try a chiller first
> LM leaking on the mobo... is not all that attractive to me
> 
> Paste might be curing a little plus I'm lowering system agent finding a sweet spot 0.95v atm and testing.
> Almost got doorules 6950x and titan on time spy
> https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/30132230


So you are not using Liquid Metal?


----------



## ESRCJ

I'm ready to play with a 9980XE/7980XE. I've pushed this 7920X with mediocre silicon just about as far as it can go with H2O. Max temp I saw with the first few runs of this OC was 91C.


----------



## ThrashZone

Abaidor said:


> So you are not using Liquid Metal?


Hi,
I redelid with LM but using nt-h1 between the cpu cooler.


----------



## Babel

ThrashZone said:


> Abaidor said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you are not using Liquid Metal?
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> I redelid with LM but using nt-h1 between the cpu cooler.
Click to expand...

I did the same.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah besides I'm on an ek evo I sanded flat so copper don't go well with LM anyway


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Well this isn't as bad as I thought it would be 
Cinebench was only 2 points lower at 2599 instead of 2601 but with time spy/ all 3 fire strikes plus sky diver
Settings wise are drasticly different mostly on auto vccio.... 
Only core voltage is the same adaptive -0.010 & -1.160 on llc 4/ 140% cpu left dram on 100% seeing I also switched to xmp profile 3600

Beside input voltage really high everything else is surprisingly low especially system agent


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Well this isn't as bad as I thought it would be
> Cinebench was only 2 points lower at 2599 instead of 2601 but with time spy/ all 3 fire strikes plus sky diver
> Settings wise are drasticly different mostly on auto vccio....
> Only core voltage is the same adaptive -0.010 & -1.160 on llc 4/ 140% cpu left dram on 100% seeing I also switched to xmp profile 3600
> 
> Beside input voltage really high everything else is surprisingly low especially system agent


CB R15 needs a lot of vccin... I posted some results somewhere regarding this. sometimes simply increasing vccin will get 1000+ pts with a 7980xe.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> CB R15 needs a lot of vccin... I posted some results somewhere regarding this. sometimes simply increasing vccin will get 1000+ pts with a 7980xe.


Hi,
I lowered to I believe your vccin settings of 1.95v and CB got 2624 
But yeah auto is whack it still showed a max vccin as 1.97v min 1.92v though llc 4


----------



## Dwofzz

Do you guys think it's worth waiting for the 9xxx x? I'm actually considering a 7920x mostly because of the price 1276$ since the 9920x will be like 1519$ here in sweden..


----------



## Abaidor

Wait and see some reviews then decide.

Regarding the LM I was thinking of whether using it on direct die cooling is safe but would try Cryonaut first anyway.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Really wait for reviews to appear about the 99..x stuff 

Last I read LM on the direct die was finicky to get it on all the cores evenly 
From my short use if it I can imagine 
Not supposed to have puddles but that is what LM does just took apart my titan Xp to look at it's shunt mod guess I put too much on it seems it was crashing quite a bit on known good gpu settings 2050 wasn't happening anymore so had to try dabbing some of the LM off
LM didn't move around which is good


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Really wait for reviews to appear about the 99..x stuff
> 
> Last I read LM on the direct die was finicky to get it on all the cores evenly
> From my short use if it I can imagine
> Not supposed to have puddles but that is what LM does just took apart my titan Xp to look at it's shunt mod guess I put too much on it seems it was crashing quite a bit on known good gpu settings 2050 wasn't happening anymore so had to try dabbing some of the LM off
> LM didn't move around which is good


I am also curious to see how the new SKUs perform but I doubt selling my 7940X isn't going to be at a good loss so I don't know if they are worth it and I don't really need 18 cores @ 1000 Euros extra after the swap. I just want higher clocks. 

I guess since the IHS won't be there even Kryonaut will be fine so I will start with this and take it from there. 

Hahah....."building" a new batch of shopping carts before Christmas is fun...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah a buddy fellow 7900xer hasn't even delid yet lol and was asking me about him getting a 9900x 
Said man, you don't even know what you have now but he's really tinkering about delid with kronaut instead of LM :/ okay 

Originally I told him to contact Intel and say skylake-x is thermally defective and you want a free 9900x or at least let you pay the difference on one since it's never been delidded yet


----------



## Abaidor

Hahah---you wish this could happen...maybe I tell them what I want for Christmas...LOL


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
All Intel can do is say no and laugh 
They know full well skylake-x is thermally defective plus kabylake too really just not as bad.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Well cpu is doing fine 
Titan Xp on the other hand is a piece of garbage


----------



## Dwofzz

What do you guys think about a refurbish 7900x at 889$? Is that something to consider?


----------



## ThrashZone

Dwofzz said:


> What do you guys think about a refurbish 7900x at 889$? Is that something to consider?


Hi,
I paid about that over a year ago retail at micro center so no that is not a good deal anymore.
Someone had one for like 700. on ocn market place a couple days ago that's a good deal a year later.


----------



## Dwofzz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I paid about that over a year ago retail at micro center so no that is not a good deal anymore.
> Someone had one for like 700. on ocn market place a couple days ago that's a good deal a year later.


You have to remember that I pay 25% VAT on all pc parts so in the us that 889$ is more like 737$ :/


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Might be a good deal then 
Freaking tariffs yeah only good thing for us in the U.S. is used parts might get a good bump 
I have some extra ram I need to get rid of without taking too big of a hit


----------



## cx-ray

Dwofzz said:


> You have to remember that I pay 25% VAT on all pc parts so in the us that 889$ is more like 737$ :/


Perhaps it's better to get a new i7-9800X, if you're not looking for a binned chip or need 10 cores.


----------



## Dwofzz

cx-ray said:


> Perhaps it's better to get a new i7-9800X, if you're not looking for a binned chip or need 10 cores.


Actually I think that the 7920x is what I need, I'm just waiting for the skylake refresh cuz I want to see how much of and improvement it is or isn't. The 7920x is 11588 sek (954$) or 1272$ vat included... the 9800x is a 8 core chip and the new 10 core 9820x will be the same and the 9900x will be even more soo... nah 
I've made up my minde and going with a 7920x, I just want to see how fast the "new" chip is.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah 2 more cores for another 100. isn't bad usually it's 100. per core.


----------



## Vlada011

cx-ray said:


> Perhaps it's better to get a new i7-9800X, if you're not looking for a binned chip or need 10 cores.


i9-9800X is definitely more interesting than i9-9900K.
But i9-9820X is BEST. Can you feel moment when AMD launch Zen 2 with 10 cores and his cheaper processor beat i9-9800X and i9-9900K.
But i9-9820X will still be best from both worlds. 
He is strong in multi core with 10C/20T but single threaded performance are not weak and slow at all.

I don't need to think, he is everything we need, people who don't like to see slower but more expensive processor than AMD.


----------



## mikegold10

This is a question for anyone who has been able to get either 4.9 GHz or 5.0 GHz stable on an i9-7980XE with a custom water loop (preferably delidded) (with obviously no phantom throttling/tested with Cinebench):

What core voltage did you settle on and what is your temp range under the hottest possible non-AVX load (e.g., Prime95 Small FFT with no-AVX).

I have 4.9 GHz stable at 1.32 Vcore on all cores (1.82 Vin) with temps in the 65-75 C range. If you have a 7900X-7960X, your results as well would be of interest as well.

Update: Changed Vcore voltage to the correct voltage of 1.32 V .


----------



## vmanuelgm

mikegold10 said:


> This is a question for anyone who has been able to get either 4.9 GHz or 5.0 GHz stable on an i9-7980XE with a custom water loop (preferably delidded) (with obviously no phantom throttling/tested with Cinebench):
> 
> What core voltage did you settle on and what is your temp range under the hottest possible non-AVX load (e.g., Prime95 Small FFT with no-AVX).
> 
> I have 4.9 GHz stable at 3.20 Vcore (1.82 Vin) with temps in the 65-75 C range. If you have a 7900X-7960X, your results as well would be of interest as well.



3.20v and 65-75 degrees is superb. So superb that must be an alien cpu!!!


----------



## mikegold10

vmanuelgm said:


> 3.20v and 65-75 degrees is superb. So superb that must be an alien cpu!!!


It's an average chip (i.e., not a golden sample). It is delidded and Direct Die Framed, though, with Conductanaut LM between it and the water block (custom water cooling with 540 mm radiator). I also have a fan blowing on the motherboard VRM heatsink which helps with stability.


----------



## PWn3R

3.20v would instantly fry the chip....

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## mikegold10

PWn3R said:


> 3.20v would instantly fry the chip....
> 
> Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


You're right, it was a numerical typo/brainfart. 1.32 Vcore is what all the cores are set to in reality.


----------



## Dwofzz

With 3.2v you should be able to get 10 to 12 GHz on all cores and damn does temps are amazing with that voltage 😄


----------



## CptSpig

mikegold10 said:


> This is a question for anyone who has been able to get either 4.9 GHz or 5.0 GHz stable on an i9-7980XE with a custom water loop (preferably delidded) (with obviously no phantom throttling/tested with Cinebench):
> 
> What core voltage did you settle on and what is your temp range under the hottest possible non-AVX load (e.g., Prime95 Small FFT with no-AVX).
> 
> I have 4.9 GHz stable at 3.20 Vcore on all cores (1.82 Vin) with temps in the 65-75 C range. If you have a 7900X-7960X, your results as well would be of interest as well.



I have run my 7980Xe at 4.9 GHz with my chiller set to 7c voltage on all cores 1.345v in Cinebench. Running Cinebench at 4.9 GHz @ 1.32v is hard to believe on a loop must be real cold where you live. Even with a chiller I have not been able to run 5.0 GHz on all cores. Thermal protection shuts down the bench mark. I think JP did it with a modified bios but it is not easy. Need Proof?


----------



## CptSpig

Dwofzz said:


> With 3.2v you should be able to get 10 to 12 GHz on all cores and damn does temps are amazing with that voltage 😄



:laughings


----------



## Dwofzz

CptSpig said:


> :laughings


It's all just good fun when someone makes a typo


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Not fun if someone actually used it


----------



## ESRCJ

According to the few written reviews of the 9980XE, it is indeed on 14nm++. The main issue is, it's using Intel's nasty STIM. Gamersnexus showed massive temperature deltas between a 7980XE delidded and 9980XE both at the same voltages and frequencies, although he was using a tiny 280mm AIO.

So which would you get at this point? A 7980XE (14nm+ and really easy to delid) or a 9980XE (14nm++ and much more work to delid)?


----------



## Abaidor

An 7980XE at discount, although I doubt there would be any (discount)...

The STIM is only good for the stock clock bump that could be there in the first place....I see this release as pointless or only for benchmarks and those who use these CPUs at stock without any overclocking. If you overclock and delid you get a big bump in speed so you might as well make your life easier and get a "mature" 7980XE at this point....my guess is that you will get better clocks.


----------



## mikegold10

CptSpig said:


> I have run my 7980Xe at 4.9 GHz with my chiller set to 7c voltage on all cores 1.345v in Cinebench. Running Cinebench at 4.9 GHz @ 1.32v is hard to believe on a loop must be real cold where you live. Even with a chiller I have not been able to run 5.0 GHz on all cores. Thermal protection shuts down the bench mark. I think JP did it with a modified bios but it is not easy. Need Proof?


I will post a screenshot of my Cinebench tonight as well, in kind return. It is 69-70F in my room and I am not using any sort of chiller, just a custom water loop and a run of the mill water block. Of course I disabled all of the motherboard current/power protection, but some things cannot be disabled like the VRMs overheating and either causing a hard freeze or reboot. Having said that, I am truly stable at 1.32 Vcore/1.82 Vccin and 65-75C worst case temps (non-AVX). My AVX offsets are -12 at the moment, btw, but that’s a set of settings I will tweak last.

The key for me isn’t just some Cinebench score attempt, I want perfect stability at these settings in non-AVX workloads (and once I figure out my best AVX offsets, with AVX workloads as well).


----------



## CptSpig

mikegold10 said:


> I will post a screenshot of my Cinebench tonight as well, in kind return. It is 69-70F in my room and I am not using any sort of chiller, just a custom water loop and a run of the mill water block. Of course I disabled all of the motherboard current/power protection, but some things cannot be disabled like the VRMs overheating and either causing a hard freeze or reboot. Having said that, I am truly stable at 1.32 Vcore/1.82 Vccin and 65-75C worst case temps (non-AVX). My AVX offsets are -12 at the moment, btw, but that’s a set of settings I will tweak last.
> 
> The key for me isn’t just some Cinebench score attempt, I want perfect stability at these settings in non-AVX workloads (and once I figure out my best AVX offsets, with AVX workloads as well).



When you say you are stable what stress test are you using? Please run 30 min. of Real Bench to confirm stablity and post screen shot. The numbers you are posting seem to good to be true on a water loop. I have a very good water loop with two pumps and I don't think I could be stable at 4.9 on all cores. See spoiler below. Thanks for taking the time to post your screen shots.



Spoiler


----------



## mikegold10

CptSpig said:


> When you say you are stable what stress test are you using? Please run 30 min. of Real Bench to confirm stablity and post screen shot. The numbers you are posting seem to good to be true on a water loop. I have a very good water loop with two pumps and I don't think I could be stable at 4.9 on all cores. See spoiler below. Thanks for taking the time to post your screen shots.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


No, I won't run RealBench. Why do people keep insisting on RealBench? It uses AVX and AFAIK there is no way to run it in a no-AVX configuration. These specs are all *non-AVX* as I've indicated numerous times. AVX offsets are the last items on my list to tweak and are very dependant on how the system will be used. 

I run Prime95 SmallFFT *non-AVX* for 24 hours+ to get the max core temp readings and to ensure CPU (and cache) stability. I also run Prime95 with large FFTs and lots of memory usage to test the stability of the 128 GB of RAM in this machine with its overclock.

I will post a CineBench screenshot (_Preview:_ 4,924 points max of five runs which comes friggin' close to the Threadripper 2990WX [in Creator Mode] with its 32 physical cores (64 virtual via SMT) that scores 4,990 CB points, ambient temp is 70.9 F and core temp maxs after five CB runs are in the range of 60-70 C ) and HWInfo64 stats tonight or tomorrow night.

At the moment, I am watching the i9-9980XE reviews that came out today and laughing my ass off at how big of a turd it turned out to be (as I predicted it would be, based on the i9-9900k temps/freqs and OC headroom). And, what the hell is up with the huge 30-40C core to core discrepancies in temps at (OC) load on a chip with a _soldered_ IHS?? How is that even possible?


----------



## Kana Chan

How soon till the 9800X reviews vs the 7820X?


----------



## mikegold10

As promised my Cinebench results with full HWInfo64 stats (for the CB runs) for my system:

CPU: i9-7980XE at 4.9 GHz on all cores/3.3 GHz mesh at 1.32 Vcore/1.825 Vccin/1.15 Mesh (CPU is delided and sitting ina der8auer Direct Die Frame with Conductanaut being used for TIM)
Memory: 128 GB @ 3,400 MHz 15/15/17/T2/280 (Trfc) at 1.375 V (Cost almost as much as an i9-7980XE and overclocking 128GB of RAM is a bit*h !)
MB: Asrock Fatal1ty X299 Professional Gaming i9 XE
PS: EVGA SuperNOVA 1600 T2 80+ TITANIUM
Cinebench power draw at the wall: 710-715 watts
Cooling: Water Block - Coolance CPU-400i with custom water cooling including 2 Hardwarelabs Black Ice Nemesis 560GTX 560mm radiators, 8 140mm Noctua NF-A14 industrialPPC-3000 PWM fans (only 4 of the 8 are plugged in at the moment, the other 4 are off).

Cinebench results (best score of five consecutive runs) overlaid with full HWInfo64 stats (ambient temperature 70.9 F):



Spoiler


----------



## Jpmboy

mikegold10 said:


> As promised my Cinebench results with full HWInfo64 stats (for the CB runs) for my system:
> 
> CPU: i9-7980XE at 4.9 GHz on all cores/3.3 GHz mesh at 1.32 Vcore/1.825 Vccin/1.15 Mesh (CPU is delided and sitting ina der8auer Direct Die Frame with Conductanaut being used for TIM)
> Memory: 128 GB @ 3,400 MHz 15/15/17/T2/280 (Trfc) at 1.375 V (Cost almost as much as an i9-7980XE and overclocking 128GB of RAM is a bit*h !)
> MB: Asrock Fatal1ty X299 Professional Gaming i9 XE
> PS: EVGA SuperNOVA 1600 T2 80+ TITANIUM
> Cinebench power draw at the wall: 710-715 watts
> Cooling: Water Block - Coolance CPU-400i with custom water cooling including 2 Hardwarelabs Black Ice Nemesis 560GTX 560mm radiators, 8 140mm Noctua NF-A14 industrialPPC-3000 PWM fans (only 4 of the 8 are plugged in at the moment, the other 4 are off).
> 
> Cinebench results (best score of five consecutive runs) overlaid with full HWInfo64 stats (ambient temperature 70.9 F):



it's likely that if you increased VCCIN you'd break 5000. :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Wow you're really pumping some voltages on that


----------



## mikegold10

Jpmboy said:


> it's likely that if you increased VCCIN you'd break 5000. :thumb:


Actually, no. There is no improvement in performance above a Vccin of 1.770 V. As I already mentioned, I am not phantom throttling at all at Vccin above around 1.76-1.77 V. Such is the result of proper motherboard Load Line Calibration (LLC) at its highest (or in my MB's settings' case, lowest) level. In order to phantom throttle, your Vccin has to dip (however momentarily) below 1.700 V. This is a known fact and I have verified it experimentally. When phantom throttling occurs, it will be clearly visible via Cinebench scores decreasing. Cinebench may not be the best test for stability, but it is an excellent test to detect phantom throttling of Skylake-X CPUs, since it is draining enough to dip Vccin if ample and proper LLC is not in effect.

The reason I am using 1.825 Vccin instead of 1.770 Vccin is solely for stability and not to avoid (phantom) throttling, since there is no improvement in performance at this ~0.050 V higher Vccin level.

So, speaking of breaking 5000 CB points, I tried raising Vccin to 1.850 V (again just for stability) and increased Vcore to 1.380 V for *****s and giggles, allowing me to set all core frequencies to 5.0 GHz with some semblance of stability (across 10 cinebench runs in rapid succession - not sure how stable this set of settings is for Prime). I also increased the mesh to 3.2 GHz (forgot to do so before, but I can get 3.2 and not 3.3 quite easily with my CPU at 1.150 Vmesh).

The Cinebench results are in (!!) - with a full "open book" HWInfo64 screenshot of everything, as before:



Spoiler















Bear in mind that I have no desire to run my CPU 24/7 at 1.380Vcore, because I am fairly certain that with temps now in the 70s and this high of (a) core voltage(s), the $2,000+ CPU's lifetime will surely be significantly reduced (below 5 years - my target lifetime for this chip).

I should also mention that I am not using this system for gaming, if I haven't already. Who puts 128 GB and a 7980XE into a gaming machine, anyways? The system will be used for 3D rendering (CPU and GPU) and will run multiple Linux VMs, concurrently each with a big slice of RAM. The I/O in the system, which I have not specified yet, will be provided by 2 2TB Intel 960 pros and a 1TB 960 pro used for swap.


----------



## mikegold10

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Wow you're really pumping some voltages on that


Wait, what? The Intel specified VCCSA and VCCIO max voltages are 1.350 V. My motherboard by default sets VCCSA to 1.350 V, so I am actually "undervolting" it. I don't know what the hell VTT is for Skylake-X (it should now be VCCSA and not VTT), nor did I manually set it (i.e., this voltage level is coming from an Auto setting on my motherboard that I will look into), but my mesh voltage was set to 1.125 V for a 3.1 GHz mesh/uncore freq, that I know for sure and it is staying in that ballpark based on the motherboard's own monitoring utility. 

I am not overly concerned about this (i.e., the VTT voltage level), but to be certain I will look in the BIOS and try to figure out if there is a VTT setting that can be tuned and what it's impact is (and lower it if possible without impacting stability), so thank you for pointing that out.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Highest I've ever seen 
How are you getting to those voltages ?
Couple only do +-...


----------



## mikegold10

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> ...
> How are you getting to those voltages ?
> Couple only do +-...


I don't understand your question, please rephrase it, especially the "Couple only do +-..." part. I will be more than happy to answer any questions/concerns and perform other benchmarks, as long as there is no AVX involved, since I have not reached a stable point on the AVX side and will not bother with it until I am done with the rest (from CPU to mesh to RAM).


----------



## Dwofzz

gridironcpj said:


> According to the few written reviews of the 9980XE, it is indeed on 14nm++. The main issue is, it's using Intel's nasty STIM. Gamersnexus showed massive temperature deltas between a 7980XE delidded and 9980XE both at the same voltages and frequencies, although he was using a tiny 280mm AIO.
> 
> So which would you get at this point? A 7980XE (14nm+ and really easy to delid) or a 9980XE (14nm++ and much more work to delid)?


Der8auer did delid a 9980xe and talked alot about it. I wouldn't even think about getting any of the 9xxx series except the 9800x.


----------



## mikegold10

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Highest I've ever seen


Probably because it's the second highest score ever presented with water cooling. See result #80 at: User: ADSL OC: 5000 MHz Intel Core i9 7980XE Cooling: H2O with a CB score of 5,049 - the current world record holder for an H2O setup. He probably got there, with better RAM freq/timings and he's probably using two modules vs my 8 (and a motherboard that only supports 4 sticks, vs my 8). To do this with 128 GB of RAM installed and an average run of the mill CPU (and not some golden sample) is friggin' hard and required a sh-tload of time, effort and playing with the BIOS settings.


----------



## mikegold10

Dwofzz said:


> Der8auer did delid a 9980xe and talked alot about it. I wouldn't even think about getting any of the 9xxx series except the 9800x.


Why in the world would you get a 9* anything? Unless of course you are planning not to delid or need the PCIe lanes.


----------



## Dwofzz

mikegold10 said:


> Actually, no. There is no improvement in performance above a Vccin of 1.770 V. As I already mentioned, I am not phantom throttling at all at Vccin above around 1.76-1.77 V. Such is the result of proper motherboard Load Line Calibration (LLC) at its highest (or in my MB's settings' case, lowest) level. In order to phantom throttle, your Vccin has to dip (however momentarily) below 1.700 V. This is a known fact and I have verified it experimentally. When phantom throttling occurs, it will be clearly visible via Cinebench scores decreasing. Cinebench may not be the best test for stability, but it is an excellent test to detect phantom throttling of Skylake-X CPUs, since it is draining enough to dip Vccin if ample and proper LLC is not in effect.
> 
> The reason I am using 1.825 Vccin instead of 1.770 Vccin is solely for stability and not to avoid (phantom) throttling, since there is no improvement in performance at this ~0.050 V higher Vccin level.
> 
> So, speaking of breaking 5000 CB points, I tried raising Vccin to 1.850 V (again just for stability) and increased Vcore to 1.380 V for *****s and giggles, allowing me to set all core frequencies to 5.0 GHz with some semblance of stability (across 10 cinebench runs in rapid succession - not sure how stable this set of settings is for Prime). I also increased the mesh to 3.2 GHz (forgot to do so before, but I can get 3.2 and not 3.3 quite easily with my CPU at 1.150 Vmesh).
> 
> The Cinebench results are in (!!) - with a full screenshot of everything, as before:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bear in mind that I have no desire to run my CPU 24/7 at 1.380V, because I am fairly certain that with temps now in the 70s and this high of a voltage, its lifetime will surely be significantly reduced (below 5 years - my target lifetime).


I would say that 1.4v is fine if the cpu is held under 80 degrees. just my 2 cent


----------



## Dwofzz

mikegold10 said:


> Why in the world would you get a 9* anything? Unless of course you are planning not to delid or need the PCIe lanes.


Because you might want a overclockable 8 core with a lot of pcie lanes? thats the only reason


----------



## mikegold10

Dwofzz said:


> I would say that 1.4v is fine if the cpu is held under 80 degrees. just my 2 cent


Sure it's fine for the short term, but what about 5 years down the road after running it 24/7 with that voltage and temps? Electromigration is real, I've experienced it with several CPUs now, either (significant) downclocking (required for continued stability, on a Core 2 DUO) or outright failing after several years (Northwood Death Syndrome).


----------



## Dwofzz

mikegold10 said:


> Sure it's fine for the short term, but what about 5 years down the road after running it 24/7 with that voltage and temps? Electromigration is real, I've experienced it with several CPUs now, either (significant) downclocking (required for continued stability, on a Core 2 DUO) or outright failing after several years (Northwood Death Syndrome).


My 4930k and 4960x is still fine, no degradation what so ever


----------



## Mysticial

Jpmboy said:


> it's likely that if you increased VCCIN you'd break 5000. :thumb:


I see a lot of conflicting information about this. Some people say increasing it beyond 1.8-1.9 helps, others don't. My own testing shows no difference between 1.700 and 1.900. It only matters once you drop below like 1.67-ish which is when the phantom throttling starts to kick in for my setup.

Is there a physical/scientific explanation for why it helps those that do? Is it motherboard dependent?


----------



## ESRCJ

mikegold10 said:


> ThrashZone said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> Highest I've ever seen
> 
> 
> 
> Probably because it's the second highest ever record with water cooling. See result #80 at: User: ADSL	5000 MHz OC Intel Core i9 7980XE	H2O with a score of 5049 which is the current world record holder for an H2O setup.
Click to expand...

Well done. How recently did you buy your CPU? 4.9GHz all cores at 1.32V is very impressive. I'm hoping to order a 7980XE myself. Direct-to-die sounds like the way to go, although I might just delid and call it a day.


----------



## mikegold10

Mysticial said:


> I see a lot of conflicting information about this. Some people say increasing it beyond 1.8-1.9 helps, others don't. My own testing shows no difference between 1.700 and 1.900. It only matters once you drop below like 1.67-ish which is when the phantom throttling starts to kick in for my setup.
> 
> Is there a physical/scientific explanation for why it helps those that do? Is it motherboard dependent?


This is misinformation (i.e., the like 1.67-ish part). Phantom throttling kicks in the moment you dip below exactly 1.700 Vccin (or as exactly as the CPU can measure it and within its measurement frequency, which is unspecified). This has been measured experimentally many times by many people, including myself. Note that you may not see these dips in hardware monitors, because of their measurement frequency granularity (e.g., 1 second), but the CPU samples far more frequently.

The easily measurable end result of phantom throttling occurring is a decrease in Cinebench (or other similar benchmark) score.


----------



## CptSpig

mikegold10 said:


> As promised my Cinebench results with full HWInfo64 stats (for the CB runs) for my system:
> 
> CPU: i9-7980XE at 4.9 GHz on all cores/3.3 GHz mesh at 1.32 Vcore/1.825 Vccin/1.15 Mesh (CPU is delided and sitting ina der8auer Direct Die Frame with Conductanaut being used for TIM)
> Memory: 128 GB @ 3,400 MHz 15/15/17/T2/280 (Trfc) at 1.375 V (Cost almost as much as an i9-7980XE and overclocking 128GB of RAM is a bit*h !)
> MB: Asrock Fatal1ty X299 Professional Gaming i9 XE
> PS: EVGA SuperNOVA 1600 T2 80+ TITANIUM
> Cinebench power draw at the wall: 710-715 watts
> Cooling: Water Block - Coolance CPU-400i with custom water cooling including 2 Hardwarelabs Black Ice Nemesis 560GTX 560mm radiators, 8 140mm Noctua NF-A14 industrialPPC-3000 PWM fans (only 4 of the 8 are plugged in at the moment, the other 4 are off).
> 
> Cinebench results (best score of five consecutive runs) overlaid with full HWInfo64 stats (ambient temperature 70.9 F):
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler



That's impresive my friend! You should try SIV64 as HWInfo64 tends to give the wrong stats on X299. I will continue to use my chiller as I have not lost any performance since I pruchased my CPU.


----------



## mikegold10

CptSpig said:


> That's impresive my friend! You should try SIV64 as HWInfo64 tends to give the wrong stats on X299. I will continue to use my chiller as I have not lost any performance since I pruchased my CPU.


Thanks for the tip, I haven't heard of SIV and will give it a shot and see if it is more informative. HWInfo64 is missing a very important temperature reading - the VRM temp, which is present in a few other hardware monitors (OpenHardwareMonitor and OCCP's temp monitors).

As a side note, be sure to check out my 5 GHz core freq CB results screenshot as well, if you haven't seen them already:



Spoiler


----------



## Mysticial

mikegold10 said:


> This is misinformation (i.e., the like 1.67-ish part). Phantom throttling kicks in the moment you dip below exactly 1.700 Vccin (or as exactly as the CPU can measure it and within its measurement frequency, which is unspecified). This has been measured experimentally many times by many people, including myself. Note that you may not see these dips in hardware monitors, because of their measurement frequency granularity (e.g., 1 second), but the CPU samples far more frequently.
> 
> The easily measurable end result of phantom throttling occurring is a decrease in Cinebench (or other similar benchmark) score.


I don't think we're in disagreement here. 1.67-ish and 1.700 are within measurement error.


----------



## CptSpig

mikegold10 said:


> Thanks for the tip, I haven't heard of SIV and will give it a shot and see if it is more informative. HWInfo64 is missing a very important temperature reading - the VRM temp, which is present in a few other hardware monitors (OpenHardwareMonitor and OCCP's temp monitors).
> 
> As a side note, be sure to check out my 5 GHz core freq CB results screenshot as well, if you haven't seen them already:
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler



Looks great! I will have to sac-up and disable my saftey features.


----------



## ThrashZone

mikegold10 said:


> I don't understand your question, please rephrase it, especially the "Couple only do +-..." part. I will be more than happy to answer any questions/concerns and perform other benchmarks, as long as there is no AVX involved, since I have not reached a stable point on the AVX side and will not bother with it until I am done with the rest (from CPU to mesh to RAM).


 Hi,
Well settings wise some one can only add or subtract an amount there isn't a manual way to enter some like system agent and off hand might be the only one 
Cache one can do manual and of course core can too 
But I was wondering if you were in fact using manual mode or adaptive... for some if not all settings basically ?




mikegold10 said:


> Probably because it's the second highest score ever presented with water cooling. See result #80 at: User: ADSL OC: 5000 MHz Intel Core i9 7980XE Cooling: H2O with a CB score of 5,049 - the current world record holder for an H2O setup. He probably got there, with better RAM freq/timings and he's probably using two modules vs my 8 (and a motherboard that only supports 4 sticks, vs my 8). To do this with 128 GB of RAM installed and an average run of the mill CPU (and not some golden sample) is friggin' hard and required a sh-tload of time, effort and playing with the BIOS settings.


Hi,
Thanks but I was referring to the voltages were the most I've seen 
CB I don't keep up with but I'll trust they are the highest :thumb:

I also ran across an ugly delid video 9980xe 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/225...core-i9-9980xe-cpu-review-3.html#post27715054


----------



## RichKnecht

mikegold10 said:


> Why in the world would you get a 9* anything? Unless of course you are planning not to delid or need the PCIe lanes.


That's my thought. I was thinking of moving from my 7900X to a new chip but I don't think I will gain anything if I stay with 10 cores. My temps are fine with my present 4.7 all core OC using a Direct Die Frame and a decent water cooling loop.


----------



## Jpmboy

mikegold10 said:


> Probably because it's the second highest score ever presented with water cooling. See result #80 at: User: ADSL OC: 5000 MHz Intel Core i9 7980XE Cooling: H2O with a CB score of 5,049 - the current world record holder for an H2O setup. He probably got there, with better RAM freq/timings and he's probably using two modules vs my 8 (and a motherboard that only supports 4 sticks, vs my 8). To do this with 128 GB of RAM installed and an average run of the mill CPU (and not some golden sample) is friggin' hard and required a sh-tload of time, effort and playing with the BIOS settings.


lol a record seeker? Have you actually measured the VCCIN on that board, or just going by what is set in bios and read with OS-tools? 


mikegold10 said:


> Sure it's fine for the short term, but what about 5 years down the road after running it 24/7 with that voltage and temps? Electromigration is real, I've experienced it with several CPUs now, either (significant) downclocking (required for continued stability, on a Core 2 DUO) or outright failing after several years (Northwood Death Syndrome).


VCCIN is the V_ovs limit rail and therefore has a load line compensation component. I'm sure you know this, but when you defeat vdroop with LLC, all that has been done is an increase in operating voltage, it does not dampen the over and undershoot that occurs with load change (neither of which you can see unless you are using an oscilloscope since these damaging overshoots occur on the microsecond scale). So... long story short best to allow for some droop. A bench session is one thing, not related to performance/durability for 24/7 settings.


----------



## mikegold10

Jpmboy said:


> lol a record seeker? Have you actually measured the VCCIN on that board, or just going by what is set in bios and read with OS-tools?
> 
> VCCIN is the V_ovs limit rail and therefore has a load line compensation component. I'm sure you know this, but when you defeat vdroop with LLC, all that has been done is an increase in operating voltage, it does not dampen the over and undershoot that occurs with load change (neither of which you can see unless you are using an oscilloscope since these damaging overshoots occur on the microsecond scale). So... long story short best to allow for some droop. A bench session is one thing, not related to performance/durability for 24/7 settings.


I am not a record seeker, or I would not be using 128 GB of RAM for this and avoiding high voltages.

I have not physically measured and I do own (300 MHz) and know how to operate a scope, but I am not risking shorting something trying to get at Vccin with the dexterity of a fifty year old. I do understand what you are saying, and if anything LLC will cause larger overshoots as it tries to compensate for significant Vdroop. However, small overvoltages for brief periods will not damage the CPU, especially if they are infrequent and very brief. Likewise, extremely brief undervoltages will not induce throtling behavior - the CPU is not a 300 MHz scope!

I don’t think anyone even attempts to set their Vccin at exactly 1.700 V and expects the LLC of the VRM to do a perfect job, because there is always some (nearly instantaneous) droop, because LLC takes time to react to a downward spike in Vccin as the CPU pulls in more current, no matter how good it is. However, experimentally, I have found that for my MB, 1.770 Vccin is enough to offset this droop to the point of it not mattering (i.e., not dropping below 1.7V for an amount of time where it causes the CPU to initiate throttling in a measurable way). This is best tested experimentally via one or more benchmarks, which will score lower when throttling occurs, however briefly (and as far as I know, it is lasts long enough to be detectable, or otherwise it really doesn’t matter). Especially, multiple benchmark runs, to increase the probability of detecting throttling (and also to record the min voltage(s) during droop and see how close they get to 1.7V). If the min voltage stays >=1.725V or 1.738V, the probability of even instantaneous throttling is very low, especially after many attempts to trigger it.

Having said all of that, a system using >1.3V Vcore will not be very stable at 1.7Vccin. So, one is force to increase Vccin not because of throttling concerns, but to reinforce stability of the CPU at larger Vcores.


----------



## Jpmboy

mikegold10 said:


> I am not a record seeker, or I would not be using 128 GB of RAM for this and avoiding high voltages.
> 
> I have not physically measured and I do own (300 MHz) and know how to operate a scope, but I am not risking shorting something trying to get at Vccin with the dexterity of a fifty year old. I do understand what you are saying, *and if anything LLC will cause larger overshoots as it tries to compensate for significant Vdroop*. However, small overvoltages for brief periods will not damage the CPU, especially if they are infrequent and very brief. Likewise, extremely brief undervoltages will not induce throtling behavior - the CPU is not a 300 MHz scope!
> 
> I don’t think anyone even attempts to set their Vccin at exactly 1.700 V and expects the LLC of the VRM to do a perfect job, because there is always some (nearly instantaneous) droop, because LLC takes time to react to a downward spike in Vccin as the CPU pulls in more current, no matter how good it is. However, experimentally, I have found that for my MB, 1.770 Vccin is enough to offset this droop to the point of it not mattering (i.e., not dropping below 1.7V for an amount of time where it causes the CPU to initiate throttling in a measurable way). This is best tested experimentally via one or more benchmarks, which will score lower when throttling occurs, however briefly (and as far as I know, it is lasts long enough to be detectable, or otherwise it really doesn’t matter). Especially, multiple benchmark runs, to increase the probability of detecting throttling (and also to record the min voltage(s) during droop and see how close they get to 1.7V). If the min voltage stays >=1.725V or 1.738V, the probability of even instantaneous throttling is very low, especially after many attempts to trigger it.
> 
> Having said all of that, a system using >1.3V Vcore will not be very stable at 1.7Vccin. So, one is force to increase Vccin not because of throttling concerns, but to reinforce stability of the CPU at larger Vcores.


sorry bro - this is where you are missing how LLC works, eg, the transition overshoot occurs regardless of the voltage the load change occurs at. It does not react to droop. But having explained this a dozen times here, x99 and x79 I'll not go there again. Anywho... enjoy the rig! :thumb:


----------



## tistou77

Will there be a new topic for Skylake-X Refresh or it's still here ?
I have gone through some reviews and the 9980XE seems disappointing in terms of temperature (and soldered in more) and the OC will be worse...


----------



## bmgjet

tistou77 said:


> Will there be a new topic for Skylake-X Refresh or it's still here ?
> I have gone through some reviews and the 9980XE seems disappointing in terms of temperature (and soldered in more) and the OC will be worse...


Just in here.
Yeah refresh is what skylake-x should of been to start off so really disappointing.
200mhz better for same temps un delided.

Then LM with delid much better then the STIM.
STIM harder to delid.
Refresh gets same clocks with 12-20mv less going on the reviews where they have delidded and overclocked.
But then thats not comparing to recent 7980XE samples, its comparing to older release day chips.

So really just comes down to. If you dont want to lose warranty and do some light overclocking refresh is best choice.
If you want to do heavy overclocking best to get 7 series and delid it.


----------



## tistou77

bmgjet said:


> Just in here.
> Yeah refresh is what skylake-x should of been to start off so really disappointing.
> 200mhz better for same temps un delided.
> 
> Then LM with delid much better then the STIM.
> STIM harder to delid.
> Refresh gets same clocks with 12-20mv less going on the reviews where they have delidded and overclocked.
> But then thats not comparing to recent 7980XE samples, its comparing to older release day chips.
> 
> So really just comes down to. If you dont want to lose warranty and do some light overclocking refresh is best choice.
> If you want to do heavy overclocking best to get 7 series and delid it.


Yes, tests that I saw, it heats more at stock and 200mhz less (but a little better in some benchs) compared with 7980XE delided

I already have a 7980XE delided @4.6ghz (AVX 3/6) and 1.135v (~ 65° with RealBench, Aida64, etc ...)
So if I can not have as well with a 9980XE (STIM), so stay with the 7980XE  

Strange, the old CPUs with STIM (6950X, eg) did not heat up


----------



## bmgjet

tistou77 said:


> Yes, tests that I saw, it heats more at stock and 200mhz less (but a little better in some benchs) compared with 7980XE delided
> 
> I already have a 7980XE delided @4.6ghz (AVX 3/6) and 1.135v (~ 65° with RealBench, Aida64, etc ...)
> So if I can not have as well with a 9980XE (STIM), so stay with the 7980XE
> 
> Strange, the old CPUs with STIM (6950X, eg) did not heat up


My old 5820K and 6900K ran really hot with STIM.
Didnt have the guts to delid the 6900K. But the 5820K I did and made 14C difference with LM.


----------



## ESRCJ

Finally pulled the trigger on a 7980XE. Wish me luck with the silicon lottery!


----------



## tistou77

bmgjet said:


> My old 5820K and 6900K ran really hot with STIM.
> Didnt have the guts to delid the 6900K. But the 5820K I did and made 14C difference with LM.


To see if it's as easy to delid a 9980XE (STIM) as a 7980XE
If der8auer and other "makes" a tool


----------



## mikegold10

gridironcpj said:


> Finally pulled the trigger on a 7980XE. Wish me luck with the silicon lottery!


If you're going to delid and Direct Die Frame it, you don't need to win the lottery (assuming sufficient H2O cooling) to get great speeds approaching 4.8-5 GHz on all cores (non-AVX). My average run-of-the-mill 7980XE is doing 4.9 GHz stable right now (after much tuning, granted).


----------



## mikegold10

tistou77 said:


> Yes, tests that I saw, it heats more at stock and 200mhz less (but a little better in some benchs) compared with 7980XE delided
> 
> I already have a 7980XE delided @4.6ghz (AVX 3/6) and 1.135v (~ 65° with RealBench, Aida64, etc ...)
> So if I can not have as well with a 9980XE (STIM), so stay with the 7980XE
> 
> Strange, the old CPUs with STIM (6950X, eg) did not heat up


Newsflash: 9980XE STIM is horrible, watch the reviews from Gamer's Nexus and der8auer.


----------



## mikegold10

Hey guys and gals, I just wanted to gauge how much interest there would be in auto-looping Cinebench to run continuously. This is great for stability testing, testing for phantom throttling, and/or tweaking settings via your motherboard's in-Windows voltage/frequency tweaking utility while Cinebench is running to see if it freezes. If there is enough interest, I will create a top-level post in this section on how to do it.


----------



## ocvn

mikegold10 said:


> Hey guys and gals, I just wanted to gauge how much interest there would be in auto-looping Cinebench to run continuously. This is great for stability testing, testing for phantom throttling, and/or tweaking settings via your motherboard's in-Windows voltage/frequency tweaking utility while Cinebench is running to see if it freezes. If there is enough interest, I will create a top-level post in this section on how to do it.


CB15 lopp:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...-line-syntax-bat-loop-detailed-output.815101/


----------



## Jpmboy

unfortunately is is not a very telling test of stability, since it uses very little of the installed ram (can run with win 10 limited to 4GB, which leaves less than 2GB free). And CB15 is notorious for running "stable" with cache clocks that fail very simple tests. But, if you want to to see a med high amp pull, it's fine. Tests like LinX or IBT (or even the jurassic p95) wil lpull many more amps.


----------



## mikegold10

ocvn said:


> CB15 lopp:
> http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...-line-syntax-bat-loop-detailed-output.815101/


Well, that's one option, but it restarts Cinebench each run (i.e., good for hot/cold testing, but not good for a continuous run with as little time in between tests as possible).


----------



## mikegold10

Jpmboy said:


> unfortunately is is not a very telling test of stability, since it uses very little of the installed ram (can run with win 10 limited to 4GB, which leaves less than 2GB free). And CB15 is notorious for running "stable" with cache clocks that fail very simple tests. But, if you want to to see a med high amp pull, it's fine. Tests like LinX or IBT (or even the jurassic p95) wil lpull many more amps.


It's a pretty good test of CPU/Mesh stability and it's non-AVX, unlike all of the tests you mentioned with the exception of P95 which can be configured to not use AVX2/AVX512 CPU instructions.

In fact, I've even had Prime95 SmallFFT (no-AVX) stability for 12+ hours only to have my system fail Cinebench loop after less than five minutes. It's also great to run in conjunction with Prime95 to test for VRM stability for difficult non-AVX loads.


----------



## Jpmboy

sure?.. but for the last 8 or gen of CPUs, R15 (or 11.5) allow for cache/mesh/ring (what ever you want to call the interconnect) to run much higher freqs than any actual use scenario. Certainly from Haswell on up. All it tests is the render machine., If you want to use something more stressful of the same architecture try Blender and one of the large renders you can download for it. Another really good (and useful, real world) cpu "test" is Boinc. :thumb


----------



## PWn3R

mikegold10 said:


> It's a pretty good test of CPU/Mesh stability and it's non-AVX, unlike all of the tests you mentioned with the exception of P95 which can be configured to not use AVX2/AVX512 CPU instructions.
> 
> In fact, I've even had Prime95 SmallFFT (no-AVX) stability for 12+ hours only to have my system fail Cinebench loop after less than five minutes. It's also great to run in conjunction with Prime95 to test for VRM stability for difficult non-AVX loads.


I have found more instability with CB than Realbench as well. I think it's the slam start/stop that exposes it more than a hard sustained workload.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## ocvn

mikegold10 said:


> Well, that's one option, but it restarts Cinebench each run (i.e., good for hot/cold testing, but not good for a continuous run with as little time in between tests as possible).


i run this few times already and it take like 1s to another run. cb15 for checking any phantom throttling. i tried p95 non-avx smallftt yesterday 4hours and did not fail work load or system but BSOD with Realbench 2.43 (Non AVX version) after 2 hours. So I agree that smallFTT is good stress for temp but for non avx stability i still prefer Realbench 2.43. With AVX stress: realbench 2.56 or x264 v2 50 loops and for avx512: Linpack Xtreme stress.


----------



## ESRCJ

Is anyone here using a 1200W PSU for a 7980XE build? I was considering upgrading from my Corsair AX1200i to either an AX1600i or an EVGA 1600 T2 for this new build, which was also going to include two 2080 Tis. Although I decided to just stick with a single 2080 Ti.


----------



## Scrimstar

You will need 1600 for bench marking 2 2080ti


Is 1.275 VCore too much for daily use? Not gonna be running on load for more than 2-3hrs
Also, what is normal AVX limit? I set 4GHz for both.


Might want to try to overclock my RAM to 4GHz. It is samsung b die GSKill tridentz 3200 14cl
I think there is an Asrock RAM app but I am not sure if that's best, would also like settings to copy.


----------



## Mysticial

Thought I'd drop this interesting experience here.

I've been running 4.6/4.0/3.6 GHz (non-AVX, AVX, AVX512) on my 7940X for a long time now. And it's been rock stable. All speeds have at least 100 MHz headroom from being stress-stable at their respective voltages.

Recently (last weekend), I wrote a new test framework for y-cruncher to QA the upcoming v0.7.7 release. When I ran it on my 7940X setup above, it started erroring - about once every 4 - 8 hours. And it would only happen on the AVX512 binaries.

After spending a few days tracking it down, I was able to rule out:


A bug in the program.
A bug in the new test framework.
The memory overclock at 3466 MHz.
The AVX512 at 3.6 GHz.

As of tonight, it's looking like the culprit is actually, "light-AVX512 @ the AVX speed". If the current test survives to the end, then that should come pretty close to confirming it.

For those who aren't familiar with the Skylake X workload/clock ranges:


*Non-AVX* runs at the full speed. (no offset)
*"Light" AVX* run at the full speed. (no offset)
*"Heavy" AVX* runs at the AVX speed. (AVX offset)
*"Light" AVX512* runs at the AVX speed. (AVX offset)
*"Heavy" AVX512* runs at the AVX512 speed. (AVX512 offset)
In order to be truly stable, all 5 of these workloads need to be stable.

Most applications and stress-tests are #1 only.
Prime95 AVX is #3 only.
The majority of the current AVX512 stress-tests (i.e. Firestarter, Linpack, y-cruncher) are #5 only.

AFAIK, there are no dedicated stress-tests out there that hit #2 and #4 or the transition states.


Apparently, the new test framework that I wrote is a heterogeneous workload that hits #4 just enough to break my overclock. IOW, my chip at the current voltages cannot run "light-AVX512" at 4.0 GHz.

------

Moral of the story: Skylake X is even more difficult to stably overclock than it already seems.

Tangentially, that new test framework also revealed an instability in the memory overclock on my Ryzen.

I'm starting to think that heterogeneous workloads (even if they are less stressful and draw less power) are better stress-tests than the classic dedicated ones which try to maximize stress with a homogeneous workload.


----------



## Dwofzz

It finally arrived, hopefully it's a somewhat decent chip.. Currently waiting on my G.skill Trident Z Black 3600 MHz to be delivered but unfortunately it's out of stock so I'll have to wait 2-3 weeks to see what this cpu is capable of...
My first Malaysian chip :O 
Batch#L717B710


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Fairly well known what an undelidded skylake-x is capable of at 4.5 and it's about 105c


----------



## Jpmboy

Mysticial said:


> Thought I'd drop this interesting experience here.
> 
> I've been running 4.6/4.0/3.6 GHz (non-AVX, AVX, AVX512) on my 7940X for a long time now. And it's been rock stable. All speeds have at least 100 MHz headroom from being stress-stable at their respective voltages.
> Recently (last weekend), I wrote a new test framework for y-cruncher to QA the upcoming v0.7.7 release. When I ran it on my 7940X setup above, it started erroring - about once every 4 - 8 hours. And it would only happen on the AVX512 binaries.
> After spending a few days tracking it down, I was able to rule out:
> 
> 
> A bug in the program.
> A bug in the new test framework.
> The memory overclock at 3466 MHz.
> The AVX512 at 3.6 GHz.
> As of tonight, it's looking like the culprit is actually, "light-AVX512 @ the AVX speed". If the current test survives to the end, then that should come pretty close to confirming it.
> For those who aren't familiar with the Skylake X workload/clock ranges:
> 
> 
> *Non-AVX* runs at the full speed. (no offset)
> *"Light" AVX* run at the full speed. (no offset)
> *"Heavy" AVX* runs at the AVX speed. (AVX offset)
> *"Light" AVX512* runs at the AVX speed. (AVX offset)
> *"Heavy" AVX512* runs at the AVX512 speed. (AVX512 offset)
> In order to be truly stable, all 5 of these workloads need to be stable.
> 
> Most applications and stress-tests are #1 only.
> Prime95 AVX is #3 only.
> The majority of the current AVX512 stress-tests (i.e. Firestarter, Linpack, y-cruncher) are #5 only.
> 
> AFAIK, there are no dedicated stress-tests out there that hit #2 and #4 or the transition states.
> 
> 
> Apparently, the new test framework that I wrote is a heterogeneous workload that hits #4 just enough to break my overclock. IOW, my chip at the current voltages cannot run "light-AVX512" at 4.0 GHz.
> 
> ------
> 
> Moral of the story: Skylake X is even more difficult to stably overclock than it already seems.
> 
> Tangentially, that new test framework also revealed an instability in the memory overclock on my Ryzen.
> 
> *I'm starting to think that heterogeneous workloads (even if they are less stressful and draw less power) are better stress-tests than the classic dedicated ones which try to maximize stress with a homogeneous workload.*


 Something I've been saying for years. I'm really looking forward to your next release. I'll be using it on all my rigs for bullet-proof clock settings! (especially my 2700X/AsRock rig)




gridironcpj said:


> Is anyone here using a 1200W PSU for a 7980XE build? I was considering upgrading from my Corsair AX1200i to either an AX1600i or an EVGA 1600 T2 for this new build, which was also going to include two 2080 Tis. Although I decided to just stick with a single 2080 Ti.


a water cooled 2080Ti with the galax bios will pull 350W at the extreme (very temperature dependent). The 7980XE can pull 700W at the limit - something you will never do in a 24/7 OC setting with ambient cooling. Add in 200W for pump(s) fans sata etc. It tallays up pretty high. But "could a 1200i in single rail mode run the rig in a gaming setting? Yes, no problem. (2 cards ~ 500W peak, cpu ~ 300W peak, +200W = ~ 1000W)
you will need single rail. the 1500i or 1600i will do fine, as would any 1500W+ PSU. I can say from experience, that both the 1500 or 1600i in multi rail mode will OCP on the EPS lines with a 7980XE.


----------



## mikegold10

Mysticial said:


> Thought I'd drop this interesting experience here.
> 
> I've been running 4.6/4.0/3.6 GHz (non-AVX, AVX, AVX512) on my 7940X for a long time now. And it's been rock stable. All speeds have at least 100 MHz headroom from being stress-stable at their respective voltages.
> 
> Recently (last weekend), I wrote a new test framework for y-cruncher to QA the upcoming v0.7.7 release. When I ran it on my 7940X setup above, it started erroring - about once every 4 - 8 hours. And it would only happen on the AVX512 binaries.


How can I get y-cruncher v0.7.7 source or a windows executable of it. I would like to test my 7980XE - 4.9 GHz/3.2 GHz mesh overclock with it.

I am particularly interested in running it with all AVX functionality disabled (i.e., non-AVX test case) and utilizing all 36 logical cores similar to how Prime95 does it. Of course being able to tune the amount of memory used would be great as well.


----------



## Jpmboy

mikegold10 said:


> How can I get y-cruncher v0.7.7 source or a windows executable of it. I would like to test my 7980XE - 4.9 GHz/3.2 GHz mesh overclock with it.
> 
> I am particularly interested in running it with all AVX functionality disabled (i.e., non-AVX test case) and utilizing all 36 logical cores similar to how Prime95 does it. Of course being able to tune the amount of memory used would be great as well.


have you tried the current version?


----------



## djgar

Jpmboy said:


> Something I've been saying for years. I'm really looking forward to your next release. I'll be using it on all my rigs for bullet-proof clock settings! (especially my 2700X/AsRock rig)


Jpmboy, how long should one run y-crunch for a good stability test period? I take it it would be a good alternative to RealBench?

Cheers!


----------



## Jpmboy

djgar said:


> Jpmboy, how long should one run y-crunch for a good stability test period? I take it it would be a good alternative to RealBench?
> 
> Cheers!



first - recognize that this will really punish a CPU (and if run haphazardly, damage the chip). Try running it in a down clocked setting first, then have at it increasing the OC incrementally. Time wise, lol - first find settings that survive it and you are comfortable with the multiple of TDP it WILL pull.


----------



## Mysticial

Jpmboy said:


> Something I've been saying for years. I'm really looking forward to your next release. I'll be using it on all my rigs for bullet-proof clock settings! (especially my 2700X/AsRock rig)


Thanks! Though as I'll explain further down, the v0.7.7 stuff isn't exactly aimed at OCers.



mikegold10 said:


> How can I get y-cruncher v0.7.7 source or a windows executable of it. I would like to test my 7980XE - 4.9 GHz/3.2 GHz mesh overclock with it.


Don't wait for v0.7.7. It's not gonna be ready until mid-December or early-mid January at the earliest (the latter being more likely). It also won't have anything new that the OC community would be interested in.

The main hold up is a very large new feature aimed at the math community which - let's just say is still a long way from being acceptably stable for release.



> I am particularly interested in running it with all AVX functionality disabled (i.e., non-AVX test case) and utilizing all 36 logical cores similar to how Prime95 does it. Of course being able to tune the amount of memory used would be great as well.


Go into the "Binaries" folder and you'll see all the binaries for all the different architectures it's tuned for. The number and 3-letter abbreviation is the year and architecture that the binary is meant for.

The highest non-AVX binary is "08-NHM" for 2008 Nehalem.

It's not going to be as stressful as Prime95 non-AVX. But the workload is a bit more heterogeneous if you run the computations instead of the built-in stress-tester.

Admittedly, I no longer use my own stress-tester for stress-testing beyond initial sanity checks. I use either a really long running computation or the program's own unit/integration test framework which unfortunately are developer-only and aren't easy to use.

If you want a heavy heterogeneous stress-test, run multiple different binaries simultaneously. This will toss the CPU in and out of all the different AVX states and clock speeds. The case that I've been dealing with this week involved doing this on a ram drive with swap-mode computations. A lot of the disk I/O falls under #2 and #4 described in my earlier post.




djgar said:


> Jpmboy, how long should one run y-crunch for a good stability test period? I take it it would be a good alternative to RealBench?
> 
> Cheers!



The full answer to this gets more and more complicated as time goes on as it's becoming increasingly apparent that y-cruncher's built-in stress-tester has pretty poor coverage in terms of stability. So you can easily pass it for hours and fail instantly on something else.

If you want to do better than the usual X hours of stress-test, but you don't want to get overly fancy, I recommend this:

I would recommend maybe 1 hour of the built-in stress test for each of the following binaries:

08-NHM
14-BDW
17-SKX

This covers the steady-state non-AVX, heavy-AVX, and heavy-AVX512. For transitional stability and *some* degree of light-AVX and light-AVX512, I recommend performing some very large and long-running computations using the same 3 binaries above. Ideally, do them all simultaneously if you have the memory for it.

Of course, combine this with other stress-tests. As always, never rely on a single program.


------


At some point in the future, I'll need to think of a way to revamp y-cruncher's stress-tester to cover these heterogeneous cases.


----------



## djgar

Jpmboy said:


> first - recognize that this will really punish a CPU (and if run haphazardly, damage the chip). Try running it in a down clocked setting first, then have at it increasing the OC incrementally. Time wise, lol - first find settings that survive it and you are comfortable with the multiple of TDP it WILL pull.





Mysticial said:


> Thanks! Though as I'll explain further down, the v0.7.7 stuff isn't exactly aimed at OCers.
> 
> Don't wait for v0.7.7. It's not gonna be ready until mid-December or early-mid January at the earliest (the latter being more likely). It also won't have anything new that the OC community would be interested in.
> 
> The main hold up is a very large new feature aimed at the math community which - let's just say is still a long way from being acceptably stable for release.
> 
> Go into the "Binaries" folder and you'll see all the binaries for all the different architectures it's tuned for. The number and 3-letter abbreviation is the year and architecture that the binary is meant for.
> 
> The highest non-AVX binary is "08-NHM" for 2008 Nehalem.
> 
> It's not going to be as stressful as Prime95 non-AVX. But the workload is a bit more heterogeneous if you run the computations instead of the built-in stress-tester.
> 
> Admittedly, I no longer use my own stress-tester for stress-testing beyond initial sanity checks. I use either a really long running computation or the program's own unit/integration test framework which unfortunately are developer-only and aren't easy to use.
> 
> If you want a heavy heterogeneous stress-test, run multiple different binaries simultaneously. This will toss the CPU in and out of all the different AVX states and clock speeds. The case that I've been dealing with this week involved doing this on a ram drive with swap-mode computations. A lot of the disk I/O falls under #2 and #4 described in my earlier post.
> .........
> 
> The full answer to this gets more and more complicated as time goes on as it's becoming increasingly apparent that y-cruncher's built-in stress-tester has pretty poor coverage in terms of stability. So you can easily pass it for hours and fail instantly on something else.
> 
> If you want to do better than the usual X hours of stress-test, but you don't want to get overly fancy, I recommend this:
> 
> I would recommend maybe 1 hour of the built-in stress test for each of the following binaries:
> 
> 08-NHM
> 14-BDW
> 17-SKX
> 
> This covers the steady-state non-AVX, heavy-AVX, and heavy-AVX512. For transitional stability and *some* degree of light-AVX and light-AVX512, I recommend performing some very large and long-running computations using the same 3 binaries above. Ideally, do them all simultaneously if you have the memory for it.
> 
> Of course, combine this with other stress-tests. As always, never rely on a single program.
> 
> ------
> 
> At some point in the future, I'll need to think of a way to revamp y-cruncher's stress-tester to cover these heterogeneous cases.


Cool (or hot?) - thanks, guys!


----------



## Jawnathin

Been wanting to tweak the computer a little and I'd appreciate any suggestions on getting my 7820x to 5ghz. Possible it may not get there but thought I'd check with people better at this than I am for advice first.

It is currently at 49x with auto vcore at 1.35v. I haven't done manual vcore testing on 49x but at 48x my CPU needs about 1.25v. Both are 24/7 stress test stable. Quick test of 50x on auto vcore puts it at 1.4v and it can boot into Windows but it is not stable and temps get way too high. I don't want to go higher than 1.375v-ish vcore if I don't have to. Chip is delidded with LM on a 280mm AIO. Motherboard is a Asus Rampage VI Apex on BIOS 1102.

I am not interested in changing the cooling system for now so I understand options are limited. I am hoping there are some BIOS tweaks that improve stability or will lower temps to a point where it could be stable at 1.35-1.375v max vcore.

Below and attached is a link to my OC profile in Google Docs. Thanks.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/...5ILTuaM4Rdm6JnQLuSP2KfL-fOw6mSv0wtTHymCEO/pub


----------



## ThrashZone

Jawnathin said:


> Been wanting to tweak the computer a little and I'd appreciate any suggestions on getting my 7820x to 5ghz. Possible it may not get there but thought I'd check with people better at this than I am for advice first.
> 
> It is currently at 49x with auto vcore at 1.35v. I haven't done manual vcore testing on 49x but at 48x my CPU needs about 1.25v. Both are 24/7 stress test stable. Quick test of 50x on auto vcore puts it at 1.4v and it can boot into Windows but it is not stable and temps get way too high. I don't want to go higher than 1.375v-ish vcore if I don't have to. Chip is delidded with LM on a 280mm AIO. Motherboard is a Asus Rampage VI Apex on BIOS 1102.
> 
> I am not interested in changing the cooling system for now so I understand options are limited. I am hoping there are some BIOS tweaks that improve stability or will lower temps to a point where it could be stable at 1.35-1.375v max vcore.
> 
> Below and attached is a link to my OC profile in Google Docs. Thanks.
> 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/...5ILTuaM4Rdm6JnQLuSP2KfL-fOw6mSv0wtTHymCEO/pub


Hi,
Once past a point you might try toning down current cpu capability to 100% and switch power phase to optimized.


----------



## Jawnathin

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Once past a point you might try toning down current cpu capability to 100% and switch power phase to optimized.


Thanks, gonna give that a try. I also saw some other profiles from jpmboy and cptspig and used some of their settings. These are the changes I've made. 

CPU System Agent Voltage [0.80000]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
VRM Spread Spectrum [Disabled]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Optimized]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]

Currently testing 50x @ 1.375v. Was not stable with 1.365v. I feel like I am really close as I can crank out some Cinebench runs but I still need to do other stability testing. I doubt it is 100% stable but if I can keep the temps down I'll have a much better chance. Package temp in high 80s. Highest core in low 90s.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah you may also have to add 1 to both avx as well might help


----------



## Jpmboy

Jawnathin said:


> Thanks, gonna give that a try. I also saw some other profiles from jpmboy and cptspig and used some of their settings. These are the changes I've made.
> 
> CPU System Agent Voltage [0.80000]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VRM Spread Spectrum [Disabled]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Optimized]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> 
> Currently testing 50x @ 1.375v. Was not stable with 1.365v. I feel like I am really close as I can crank out some Cinebench runs but I still need to do other stability testing. I doubt it is 100% stable but if I can keep the temps down I'll have a much better chance. Package temp in high 80s. Highest core in low 90s.


 REgarding temperature... lower vccin on the apex as far as you can without noticing a performance drop (as an initial "look-see" the simple bench in cpuZ is quick and quantitative). In the tweaker menu, scroll down to the two CPU AUX voltage rails and manually set these to 0. Make sure all c-states are enabled and speed shift is enabled (step is disabled) if you are using windows 10 1709 or higher.
Lastly, if you getr serious, you can try lowering the switching frequencies on all rails it is available on.


----------



## Jawnathin

Thanks for the help ThrashZone and Jpmboy. I did bump up the AVX offset to match up with the new multiplier but I am still unstable at non-AVX anyway .

I did try the settings you recommended Jpmboy but they caused some stability issues. I did some testing and the C-State updates seem to be OK but I think the CPU AUX voltage makes it unstable. Not sure if it ran any cooler but it seemed more crash prone than before. Now that I think I've isolated it to the CPU AUX I'll try lowering VCCIN but it is already pretty low and I'm not sure that is enough to keep it cool enough to be stable. At this point I am having my doubts unless I upgrade to a custom loop, direct die or something else to cool it down. Bummer because it feels really close to 5ghz stable. 

On the bright side, according to what has been submitted to HWBot, I have the 2nd highest 8-core AIO Cinebench score, only 21 points away from the top score that was run at 5.1ghz. On the H20 list it would have been good for 8th. The run was also good enough to to have the highest scoring 5.0ghz chip for either of those. Not too shabby.


----------



## ESRCJ

Jpmboy said:


> Something I've been saying for years. I'm really looking forward to your next release. I'll be using it on all my rigs for bullet-proof clock settings! (especially my 2700X/AsRock rig)
> 
> 
> 
> a water cooled 2080Ti with the galax bios will pull 350W at the extreme (very temperature dependent). The 7980XE can pull 700W at the limit - something you will never do in a 24/7 OC setting with ambient cooling. Add in 200W for pump(s) fans sata etc. It tallays up pretty high. But "could a 1200i in single rail mode run the rig in a gaming setting? Yes, no problem. (2 cards ~ 500W peak, cpu ~ 300W peak, +200W = ~ 1000W)
> you will need single rail. the 1500i or 1600i will do fine, as would any 1500W+ PSU. I can say from experience, that both the 1500 or 1600i in multi rail mode will OCP on the EPS lines with a 7980XE.


Thanks for the suggestion. When I had a 7960X to play around with, running Realbench with the CPU past 1.2V definitely tripped OCP on my AX1200i. I will need to change it to single rail mode for the XE. Either that, or I might just pick up a 1600W PSU with Black Friday coming up.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jawnathin said:


> Thanks for the help ThrashZone and Jpmboy. I did bump up the AVX offset to match up with the new multiplier but I am still unstable at non-AVX anyway .
> 
> I did try the settings you recommended Jpmboy but they caused some stability issues. I did some testing and the C-State updates seem to be OK but I think the CPU AUX voltage makes it unstable. Not sure if it ran any cooler but it seemed more crash prone than before. Now that I think I've isolated it to the CPU AUX I'll try lowering VCCIN but it is already pretty low and I'm not sure that is enough to keep it cool enough to be stable. At this point I am having my doubts unless I upgrade to a custom loop, direct die or something else to cool it down. Bummer because it feels really close to 5ghz stable.
> 
> On the bright side, according to what has been submitted to HWBot, I have the 2nd highest 8-core AIO Cinebench score, only 21 points away from the top score that was run at 5.1ghz. On the H20 list it would have been good for 8th. The run was also good enough to to have the highest scoring 5.0ghz chip for either of those. Not too shabby.


Hi,
Not sure if you saw these voltages posted earlier a couple pages back so check them out I thought them pretty wild but here's the summery 
But might give you something to bump a little VTT I believe is Mesh/ cache..


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Not sure if you saw these voltages posted earlier a couple pages back so check them out I thought them pretty wild but here's the summery
> But might give you something to bump a little VTT I believe is Mesh/ cache..


that's the problem with HWI sometimes. VTT is not cache/mesh (hopefully, cause that is very high voltage for cache). See below My cache/mesh V is 0.9V in bios in this snip.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I matched it off of siv readings :/


----------



## RichKnecht

I have a question. Everytime I look at someone's numbers in HWInfo, their trfc is in the 300s. I looked at mine and it is 608. Is this something I should change, or let it be?


----------



## mikegold10

The system just made another turn for the better: https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1713588-i-just-broke-world-cinebench-r15-record-room-temp-water-cooled-i9-7980-xe-overclock.html


----------



## Dwofzz

The cpu is now seated in it's final home, still waiting on my g.skill's to arrive


----------



## RichKnecht

I've noticed according to HWInfo, that when running Cinebench or Realbench my vccin drops from 1.92 to 1.856. I don't get any errors, but is this normal? If not, will a higher LLC setting correct it? I currently have it set to 4.


----------



## ESRCJ

Question about batch numbers: Does the second character (first number) still represent the fourth digit of the year? The 9980XE I just received came in a torn up box from B&H and the batch number is L733D256. It's as if they grabbed the one with the ugliest box and shipped it to me.


----------



## mikegold10

gridironcpj said:


> Question about batch numbers: Does the second character (first number) still represent the fourth digit of the year? The 9980XE I just received came in a torn up box from B&H and the batch number is L733D256. It's as if they grabbed the one with the ugliest box and shipped it to me.


Best I can tell going of that number is that they have not manufactured any 7980’s in 2018. It’s all 2017 stock, even new ones. So I am not sure if that is any longer an indicator of the year for new chips (like the 9980).


----------



## ESRCJ

mikegold10 said:


> Best I can tell going of that number is that they have not manufactured any 7980’s in 2018. It’s all 2017 stock, even new ones. So I am not sure if that is any longer an indicator of the year for new chips (like the 9980).


It could just be an old one that has been sitting in inventory a while, although B&H is probably a popular retailer for Skylake-X CPUs given that they don't collect sales tax for many states. They also usually have the better prices. I have not seen a single Skylake-X CPU with a batch number with a 2018 manufacturing though and I searched for a good 20 minutes.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> I've noticed according to HWInfo, that when running Cinebench or Realbench my vccin drops from 1.92 to 1.856. I don't get any errors, but is this normal? If not, will a higher LLC setting correct it? I currently have it set to 4.


That's vdroop. controlled by LLC. On x299, vccin is the off die voltage supply.


----------



## Amurtigress

hrmgamer said:


> Hmmm I've just found the 6th-gen-x-series-datasheet-vol-1.pdf and page 46 states the max is 2.15V. So I guess the questions are does that figure have the usual Intel margin And is that a burst max voltage (likely) or a sustained voltage (unlikely)?
> 
> Cheers
> HRMGamer


I know my reply is coming WAY late, but here's an interesting fact for you.

ASRock X299 boards default to 2.1V on CPU in on AUTO, probably for high core count CPUs that are known to need more voltage on the FIVR. Yes that's quite a lot but I don't think ASRock uses seriously damaging settings, so I tend to believe it may be sustained voltage.

Just my two scents <sniffs armpit>


----------



## RichKnecht

Amurtigress said:


> I know my reply is coming WAY late, but here's an interesting fact for you.
> 
> ASRock X299 boards default to 2.1V on CPU in on AUTO, probably for high core count CPUs that are known to need more voltage on the FIVR. Yes that's quite a lot but I don't think ASRock uses seriously damaging settings, so I tend to believe it may be sustained voltage.
> 
> Just my two scents <sniffs armpit>


So, then what should we be setting vccin to? Mine is at 1.9 and many say to set it to 2.1 and "forget it". I can see their point, but I don't see any performance gains when I set it to 2.1 as some others have proclaimed. Many say that their CB scores increase dramatically when vccin is set at 2.1. I do know that if I set it to 1.85, I run into stability issues so that is definitely too low.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> So, then what should we be setting vccin to? Mine is at 1.9 and many say to set it to 2.1 and "forget it". I can see their point, but I don't see any performance gains when I set it to 2.1 as some others have proclaimed. Many say that their CB scores increase dramatically when vccin is set at 2.1. I do know that if I set it to 1.85, I run into stability issues so that is definitely too low.


lol - yeah I agree. If you set it to 2.1V, you can forget it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> lol - yeah I agree. If you set it to 2.1V, you can forget it.


Hi,
Yeah I'm going to take that comment with a lot more than a grain of salt


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I'm going to take that comment with a lot more than a grain of salt


emphasis on the "can".


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> emphasis on the "can".


Hi,
Is that like spam in a can


----------



## PWn3R

RichKnecht said:


> So, then what should we be setting vccin to? Mine is at 1.9 and many say to set it to 2.1 and "forget it". I can see their point, but I don't see any performance gains when I set it to 2.1 as some others have proclaimed. Many say that their CB scores increase dramatically when vccin is set at 2.1. I do know that if I set it to 1.85, I run into stability issues so that is definitely too low.


While I can't comment on your stability issues with your VCCIN, I can tell you that my 7980xe is running stable with 1.80 VCCIN. And I have a mix of 4.9ghz cores and the rest at 4.6ghz. VCORE is locked to between 1.2 and 1.265. Cache voltage is 1.15 with 30x cache.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk


----------



## RichKnecht

Thinking of moving from my 7900X to a 7980XE for various reasons too numerous to get into here. I do wonder about a couple things. Will my Strix 299E gaming VRMs handle an overclocked 7980 without melting and what kind of 24/7 OC can I expect? I know the second question is hard to answer, but I was just curious. If the Strix can't handle it, I'll probably go for a EVGA Dark.


----------



## Jpmboy

the strix will handle a decent 24/7 overclock on a 7980XE. Of course any 7980XE is limited based on the cooling.


----------



## ESRCJ

I recently installed my 7980XE and I noticed that the bus clock will randomly drop below 100MHz, with the minimum being just below 99MHz. Note that this is at idle. I had a 7920X in this build previously and the bus clock always stayed at 100MHz. I had a 7960X in temporarily in the summer and it also kept a stable 100MHz bus clock. Any idea why this could be happening? I have spread spectrum disabled. I also have a very mild overclock currently of 1.1vcore for 4.2GHz.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> that's the problem with HWI sometimes. VTT is not cache/mesh (hopefully, cause that is very high voltage for cache). See below My cache/mesh V is 0.9V in bios in this snip.


Hi,
Looks like you were correct 
Asked hwinfo VTT is just a random reading on my board and probably a fluke it showed the same min max as siv64 showed as cache voltage dang it :/

siv64 is miss labling the VTT so called random reading as vcache 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/21-...ial-hwinfo-32-64-thread-190.html#post27727318


----------



## Amurtigress

@hrmgamer:

As far as I understand it, VCCIN/CPU in should get higher voltages as the number of cores rises. AFAIK there are two types of CPU dies. High core count and low core count. The LCC dice should be up to 10 cores, HCC dice are 12 and higher. If it doesn't benefit you, keep it at 1.9. I am using 1.9V myself on my 7800X...however I see definitively throttling and kinda more sluggish behavior at the default of 1.8V.

To my knowledge the HCC dice all have 18 cores, with some disabled as they don't meet the specs. Those may benefit from higher CPU IN voltages.


----------



## Jpmboy

gridironcpj said:


> I recently installed my 7980XE and I noticed that the bus clock will randomly drop below 100MHz, with the minimum being just below 99MHz. Note that this is at idle. I had a 7920X in this build previously and the bus clock always stayed at 100MHz. I had a 7960X in temporarily in the summer and it also kept a stable 100MHz bus clock. Any idea why this could be happening? I have spread spectrum disabled. I also have a very mild overclock currently of 1.1vcore for 4.2GHz.


that's normal. if you want to avoid this disable BCLK spreadspectrum, VRM spreadspectrum, and all C-states. Manual OC (you need to override all dynamic clocks)


----------



## RichKnecht

OK, I am hoping someone can help me out. Been using a direct die frame on my 7900X for a little bit, and all was fine until a week ago. Temps started creeping up and I would occasionally "lose" some functions like mouse/keyboard, undetected memory stick, no video on boot, and a couple other weird things. So, I took off the block (EVO Supremacy)and everything looked fine. Remounted and same things were happening. I figured that, for some reason, the frame wasn't putting enough pressure on the CPU so I reinstalled the IHS ( it's lapped) with liquid metal and everything fired right up and no problems since. Now, when benching, I have a crazy temperature spread between the cores. Redid the LM and same thing. Thinking thermal paste issue, I use the spread method. I am using Cooler Master Maker Nano which has always worked great for me in the past but now I have my doubts. Any ideas? Thoughts? I attached a screenshot of HWInfo after a few Cinebench runs so you can see whare things are set at. Hope I can get to the bottom of this as it is pretty annoying.


----------



## cx-ray

To see if it's a contact issue, you could run a test with regular thermal paste between IHS and die.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
VCCIO VCCST looks pretty high 1.168v
VTT also is pretty high probably because of the first vccio

But yeah sure didn't spread well 62-83c at 4.7 difference :/


----------



## tistou77

The 9980XE must not be delided, otherwise it will "break" resistances






The 9980XE warm enormously from the first review, it's a shame...


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> VCCIO VCCST looks pretty high 1.168v
> VTT also is pretty high probably because of the first vccio
> 
> But yeah sure didn't spread well 62-83c at 4.7 difference :/


I've looked around and really can't find much on what range those voltages should be in. Yeah, the temp spread is really driving me nuts. 20C is just plain crazy. Going to take it apart again today to check everything, but I am starting to doubt my skills when it comes to applying thermal paste/LM.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> I've looked around and really can't find much on what range those voltages should be in. Yeah, the temp spread is really driving me nuts. 20C is just plain crazy. Going to take it apart again today to check everything, but I am starting to doubt my skills when it comes to applying thermal paste/LM.


Hi,
Yeah I did notice you were using 32 cache max 
I have no way to monitor cache voltage so prior I was using +0.050 and turbo of 0.150 for +0.200 for min 24 and max 30 cache
Someone else was just using +0.200 and leaving turbo on auto for 32 cache might have been you ?

VCCIO last I used was 1.01500v


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I did notice you were using 32 cache max
> I have no way to monitor cache voltage so prior I was using +0.050 and turbo of 0.150 for +0.200 for min 24 and max 30 cache
> Someone else was just using +0.200 and leaving turbo on auto for 32 cache might have been you ?
> 
> VCCIO last I used was 1.01500v


No, that wasn't me. I lowered the two voltages you mentioned and it's still stable, so that's fine. I also took it apart and looked at my LM application and it looked a little "heavy" so I removed some and temps did drop a couple degrees. I am now wondering if I still have too much LM on the die/IHS. I am waiting on a new tube of Kryonaut, so it's going to stay the way it is until I get that. Using Noctua NT-H1 at the moment, but I know from past experience that it doesn't perform as well as some others. My "go to" paste was CM Maker Nano and I never had issues with it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I use nt-h1 on cpu and gpu seems fine 
I don't bother with thermal grizzly any more 
a) it's expensive with little gain over nt-h1 1 gram tube verses 5 gram tube and TGK still costs more lol 
b) it's only an online item I can get nt-h1 at local micro center usually.

Haven't heard of the other stuff you say but yeah cooler master I did use some that came with a air cooler I had a while back it was okay wasn't this stuff though
This looks similar to arctic silver 5 
https://www.amazon.com/MasterGel-Maker-Nano-High-performance-MGZ-NDSG-N15M-R1/dp/B019BZENY8


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I use nt-h1 on cpu and gpu seems fine
> I don't bother with thermal grizzly any more
> a) it's expensive with little gain over nt-h1 1 gram tube verses 5 gram tube and TGK still costs more lol
> b) it's only an online item I can get nt-h1 at local micro center usually.
> 
> Haven't heard of the other stuff you say but yeah cooler master I did use some that came with a air cooler I had a while back it was okay wasn't this stuff though
> This looks similar to arctic silver 5
> https://www.amazon.com/MasterGel-Maker-Nano-High-performance-MGZ-NDSG-N15M-R1/dp/B019BZENY8


I'll let you know if the Kryonaut makes any marked improvement in temps. I know the Cooler Master stuff has a higher rating than NT-H1 and Kryonaut even higher yet. Right now, my water temp is at 24C and idle temps are at 25-26C. If I can get the cores closer in temp under load, I may be able to get into the top 10 high score in Cinebench R15 on HWBOT (sitting at #11 now). Not that it really matters, but it's a challenge.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> I'll let you know if the Kryonaut makes any marked improvement in temps. I know the Cooler Master stuff has a higher rating than NT-H1 and Kryonaut even higher yet. Right now, my water temp is at 24C and idle temps are at 25-26C. If I can get the cores closer in temp under load, *I may be able to get into the top 10 high score in Cinebench R15 on HWBOT* (sitting at #11 now). Not that it really matters, but it's a challenge.


Hi,
Yeah that would be nice :thumb:
You'll have to save a text file from your bios settings one day of your #11 prior profile I'd love see how you got there or where your best profile was at


----------



## Jpmboy

just an FYI - repeated HOT benchmarking runs can skew DTS (temperature) reporting. There is no "software" fix for this. :thumb


----------



## ESRCJ

I just installed the Heatkiller VRM block for my RVIE and VRM temps are now in the 50s with Prime95 small FFTs. However, I noticed my CPU temps have gone up about 5 degrees. Water temps are identical as before, which should be no surprise since the VRM block barely adds any heat to my loop. I found my 4.3GHz at 1.1V overclock of my 7980XE to actually survive Prime95 blend without any BSODs now, so this is a win for the VRM block. 

Obviously the VRM are operating more efficiently, but would this result in slightly increased CPU temps? I'm definitely not an expert in this particular topic, so feel free to shed some light. I didn't remove my CPU block, so it's the same paste job as before the VRM block was added to the loop.


----------



## RichKnecht

gridironcpj said:


> I just installed the Heatkiller VRM block for my RVIE and VRM temps are now in the 50s with Prime95 small FFTs. However, I noticed my CPU temps have gone up about 5 degrees. Water temps are identical as before, which should be no surprise since the VRM block barely adds any heat to my loop. I found my 4.3GHz at 1.1V overclock of my 7980XE to actually survive Prime95 blend without any BSODs now, so this is a win for the VRM block.
> 
> Obviously the VRM are operating more efficiently, but would this result in slightly increased CPU temps? I'm definitely not an expert in this particular topic, so feel free to shed some light. I didn't remove my CPU block, so it's the same paste job as before the VRM block was added to the loop.


If you are using the same loop for VRM and CPU cooling, it makes sense that the CPU temps have gone up. The heat transfer from the VRM block to the fluid is the cause of the increased CPU temp. What components are in your loop? Can you increase pump speed? Not sure if you have the room, but you can always add a second loop for the VRMs, but that seems like a bit of overkill for 5C.


----------



## ESRCJ

RichKnecht said:


> If you are using the same loop for VRM and CPU cooling, it makes sense that the CPU temps have gone up. The heat transfer from the VRM block to the fluid is the cause of the increased CPU temp. What components are in your loop? Can you increase pump speed? Not sure if you have the room, but you can always add a second loop for the VRMs, but that seems like a bit of overkill for 5C.


The fluid temps are the same as they were without the VRM block though. The VRM is probably adding less than 50W of heat to the loop, which is nothing.

Loop: Res -> D5 -> D5 -> 420mm rad -> 2080 Ti block -> CPU block -> VRM block -> 480mm rad -> 480mm rad


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I haven't noticed any difference since going with isolated vrm water block 
Although my arrangement is different but yours cooling the gpu first could point to it being blocked/ clogged maybe ?
Pump 1/ rad 1/ vrm/ rad 2/ pump 2/ cpu/ gpu/ back to pump 1.
x99 and x299 same arrangement.


----------



## Jpmboy

gridironcpj said:


> I just installed the Heatkiller VRM block for my RVIE and VRM temps are now in the 50s with Prime95 small FFTs. However, I noticed my CPU temps have gone up about 5 degrees. Water temps are identical as before, which should be no surprise since the VRM block barely adds any heat to my loop. I found my 4.3GHz at 1.1V overclock of my 7980XE to actually survive Prime95 blend without any BSODs now, so this is a win for the VRM block.
> 
> Obviously the VRM are operating more efficiently, but would this result in slightly increased CPU temps? I'm definitely not an expert in this particular topic, so feel free to shed some light. I didn't remove my CPU block, so it's the same paste job as before the VRM block was added to the loop.


yeah, it is not uncommon for the cpu cold plate in a mono to not make as good a mount quality as a separate cpu block will. Sometimes they do, most times not. It may take a bit more TIM to fill the irregularities.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Still notching my 7940x I find very helpful having all cores at the same temp range . Meaning setting voltages to all of them lowering the high temp ofenders even if they are in the top list on favorite cores. Was struggling trying to stabilize 45x+ and up 

He do [email protected] 1.185V on all cores but i have cores that are way hotter than others i notice this was throwing my power/thermal envelope to the ground and messing with stability. I guess the hottest ones are the ones closest to the imc/comtrollers.. 

So i started tweaking the offenders with one multi less and less vcore. Now my coldest core vs my hottes one is only 5c difference and the avg is only about 3c difference between colder and hottest. Require less voltage too to achieve higher clocks.

So i ended using less vcore for the desire multis.

So now i have a split between 47/46x 7&7 with less vcore.


----------



## ESRCJ

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I haven't noticed any difference since going with isolated vrm water block
> Although my arrangement is different but yours cooling the gpu first could point to it being blocked/ clogged maybe ?
> Pump 1/ rad 1/ vrm/ rad 2/ pump 2/ cpu/ gpu/ back to pump 1.
> x99 and x299 same arrangement.





Jpmboy said:


> yeah, it is not uncommon for the cpu cold plate in a mono to not make as good a mount quality as a separate cpu block will. Sometimes they do, most times not. It may take a bit more TIM to fill the irregularities.


I'm using a separate block though: EK Velocity for the CPU, Heatkiller for the VRM.

On a different note, I've been using Prime95 for stability testing (all AVX disabled) and things get very toasty with the XE. I still need to delid this thing, but I'm also looking to try some different stress tests. I've never liked Realbench since it uses AVX and I'm more concerned with finding my non-AVX stable voltage-frequency combos first. I've tried OCCT, but it also uses AVX. Does anyone have any other recommendations? Or is Prime95 without AVX my best bet?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
As far as I've read prime is a cooling system stress test 

Blender/ real bench/... are pretty close to real usage that and basic benchmarks like time spy/ fire strike/....
That's where i keep testing.


----------



## Jpmboy

gridironcpj said:


> I'm using a separate block though: EK Velocity for the CPU, Heatkiller for the VRM.
> 
> On a different note, I've been using Prime95 for stability testing (all AVX disabled) and things get very toasty with the XE. I still need to delid this thing, but I'm also looking to try some different stress tests. I've never liked Realbench since it uses AVX and I'm more concerned with finding my non-AVX stable voltage-frequency combos first. I've tried OCCT, but it also uses AVX. Does anyone have any other recommendations? Or is Prime95 without AVX my best bet?


 ah - not a mono block. :thumb:
As far as a non-AVX stress, I think you are chasing windmills. There are several power states in these HCC class cpus. See Mystical's post in this thread. Bottom line is, you should not look for stability by isolating (or excluding) specific instruction sets from the regime. What trips up the logic in these processors is rapidly changing proc calls using different IS's. That said, what you are doing with p95 is fine (non-avx) as is cycling the photoediting module in realbench Bench 50 times. But neither of these address the state transition stability issue very well. Cycling realbench Bench 50 times is quite good at overall stability. y-prime... stay tuned for he new release.


----------



## ThrashZone

HI,
lol yeah I believe we all dumped mono blocks and now hanging on our walls of shame


----------



## zGunBLADEz

I find occt linkpack "without avx ticked" works wonders for the highest multi non avx and x264v2 for avx offset. Realbench loop also no opencl. I use heaven for gpus xD

Blender also works for avx testing and large cpu occt for ram/cpu testing with avx. Small occt data set will hammer your cpu like almost P95.

Little by little im getting rid of P95 as a stress test. Its just useless.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> HI,
> lol yeah I believe we all dumped mono blocks and now hanging on our walls of shame



lol- I still have one on my Rampage V -10 (EK block, the one that has the PCH block too. It was on sale. Working fine. I did do a contact test with pressure film before final install in this rig. It's all li up but can't see it in the caselabs box. 

(also have one on a Gigabyte x299 G9, but that only has a 7740X to deal with.)


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I believe the mono blocks just have too many other less restrictive routes water can go which is not along the top across the vrm's but the vrm's don't seem to care but the top of the 79..x chips sure do mind not having the flow 

I have my ek evo jet sideways now like the mono block design it seems okay instead of vertical like ek designed it for x99 chips.
EK evo as far as I can tell has the same water escape routes but isn't as bad without the long trip around like the mono has.


----------



## ocvn

gridironcpj said:


> I'm using a separate block though: EK Velocity for the CPU, Heatkiller for the VRM.
> 
> On a different note, I've been using Prime95 for stability testing (all AVX disabled) and things get very toasty with the XE. I still need to delid this thing, but I'm also looking to try some different stress tests. I've never liked Realbench since it uses AVX and I'm more concerned with finding my non-AVX stable voltage-frequency combos first. I've tried OCCT, but it also uses AVX. Does anyone have any other recommendations? Or is Prime95 without AVX my best bet?


realbench 2.43, non avx stress. realbench 2.56 or x264 v2 for avx/avx2 and linpack extreme for avx512


----------



## ESRCJ

Alright, so there's definitely something wrong. Ever since I added the Heatkiller VRM block to my system, my CPU temps have gone up across the board. I reset the BIOS to stock settings and I'm just about hitting 60C in a run of Cinebench, whereas when I first purchased the CPU, it never passed 45C at stock settings in Cinebench.


----------



## Abaidor

gridironcpj said:


> Alright, so there's definitely something wrong. Ever since I added the Heatkiller VRM block to my system, my CPU temps have gone up across the board. I reset the BIOS to stock settings and I'm just about hitting 60C in a run of Cinebench, whereas when I first purchased the CPU, it never passed 45C at stock settings in Cinebench.


This is weird and I can only assume that there is an issue with the CPU block. Besides this bear in mind that if you updated your BIOS/CPU Microcode newer ones have increased idle temperatures by 5C see this thread on ROG forum.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?106775-Bios-1603-is-out/page2

The new microcode and windows 10 1809 can be the issue since the AVX512/FMA3 unit is now being utilized from the OS but I am not an expert on this by any means. I suppose you have checked CPU block contact/delidd status etc.


----------



## ESRCJ

Abaidor said:


> This is weird and I can only assume that there is an issue with the CPU block. Besides this bear in mind that if you updated your BIOS/CPU Microcode newer ones have increased idle temperatures by 5C see this thread on ROG forum.
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?106775-Bios-1603-is-out/page2
> 
> The new microcode and windows 10 1809 can be the issue since the AVX512/FMA3 unit is now being utilized from the OS but I am not an expert on this by any means. I suppose you have checked CPU block contact/delidd status etc.


I reapplied the paste and that solved the issue. My Prime95 small FFT temps dropped about 15C... something was definitely wrong with the paste job. Oddly enough, I kept the CPU block on the mobo while I was installing the VRM block. So perhaps all of that movement and holding of the mobo in different angles to remove the stock VRM heatsink and install the new one somehow moved some of the paste? Although that seems a bit odd still. Either way, temps are back to normal. Still on 1503 as well.


----------



## Jpmboy

gridironcpj said:


> I reapplied the paste and that solved the issue. My Prime95 small FFT temps dropped about 15C... something was definitely wrong with the paste job. Oddly enough, I kept the CPU block on the mobo while I was installing the VRM block. So perhaps all of that movement and holding of the mobo in different angles to remove the stock VRM heatsink and install the new one somehow moved some of the paste? Although that seems a bit odd still. Either way, temps are back to normal. Still on 1503 as well.


paste will dry and/or thicken after use. It may have simply cracked during the mugging.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> paste will dry and/or thicken after use. It may have simply cracked during the mugging.


Hi,
Talk about mugging 
Since I can't monitor my cache/ mesh voltage I wonder if you or someone would try a couple settings for it and show what they do after some benchmarks...?

Min and max cache voltage used.

I've been using adaptive and +0.050 and turbo +0.150 to get to +0.200 of course set at max cache 30

Another poster not sure who showed a similar setting but was adaptive at +0.200 and turbo on auto but set max cache 32.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Talk about mugging
> Since I can't monitor my cache/ mesh voltage I wonder if you or someone would try a couple settings for it and show what they do after some benchmarks...?
> 
> Min and max cache voltage used.
> 
> I've been using adaptive and +0.050 and turbo +0.150 to get to +0.200 of course set at max cache 30
> 
> Another poster not sure who showed a similar setting but was adaptive at +0.200 and turbo on auto but set max cache 32.


adaptive cache voltage?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep.
I believe you use manual mode 1.175 and uncore offset 0.400 no idea of what min max cache voltages are on that either


----------



## Jpmboy

adaptive cache does not work well on x299 or x99. make sure your min cache freq is set to at least one half ram speed. So with 4000 ram, min cache freq should be >= 2000
post a bios screen shot of that bios page


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I haven't had any issues using adaptive for cache min 24 and max 30 with +0.050 and turbo +0.150 uncore offset auto.
I'm just running blind is all 

I've tried your settings and doorules which is slightly different he uses manual 1.165 ans uncore offset 0.300 prefix +

Both seem wonky :/


----------



## Jpmboy

do you mean offset cache?
bios pic please.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> do you mean offset cache?
> bios pic please.


Hi,
Not sure why you need a screen shot 
All it will show is the 3 options cache can be used as 
Manual mode
Adaptive
Offset

Once you select adaptive it will show pretty much the same as core voltage will show 
off set mode sign +-
core voltage offset
Additional turbo mode 

All my usb's are tied up and none are fat32


----------



## Jpmboy

so then... what's the original question with adaptive cache? Are you asking me to try it? if yes, then no. I know it has control issues since 30 is not a turbo multiplier last time I looked.


----------



## cx-ray

When I was dialing in my 7900X I tested the Adaptive Cache voltage behavior with a DMM. It doesn't do much of anything. Yours is probably doing something AUTO without specific user control. Use either Offset or Fixed voltage. 

On my RVIA board I also measured about .02 higher in Offset mode with DMM compared to what HWiNFO reports.


----------



## ThrashZone

bmgjet said:


> AIDA64 cache stress test, it wont throw a error, It will usually just bluescreen or youll get cache L0 errors in HWINFO64 sensor tab.


Hi,
@bmgjet 
Can you please use siv64 and show me what your vcache shows you at min max voltage against mine here where I have my hwinfo and siv screen shots at
https://www.overclock.net/forum/21-...ial-hwinfo-32-64-thread-190.html#post27727318

I believe at one time you were the person that posted a screen shot using min cache auto and max cache 32 
Cache voltage adaptive @ +0.200 additional turbo @ auto.


----------



## ThrashZone

cx-ray said:


> When I was dialing in my 7900X I tested the Adaptive Cache voltage behavior with a DMM. It doesn't do much of anything. Yours is probably doing something AUTO without specific user control. Use either Offset or Fixed voltage.
> 
> On my RVIA board I also measured about .02 higher in Offset mode with DMM compared to what HWiNFO reports.


Hi,
Since nobody so far will test my settings I'll assume you're correct 
I've been using the settings for about 1 year nothing has blown up or a source instability either all it would do is limit auto voltage it's not set in stone one good thing about adaptive same goes for vcore adaptive which everyone uses


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Since nobody so far will test my settings I'll assume you're correct
> I've been using the settings for about 1 year nothing has blown up or a source instability either all it would do is limit auto voltage it's not set in stone one good thing about adaptive same goes for vcore adaptive which everyone uses


 I think I see the issue. "VIN9 VCache" in SIV64 is not the cache voltage. click the status button and look for CPU Cache voltage. It is not shown in the I/O popup window as in your post.
I have it set in bios to 1.2V for cache- manual, vcore to 1.25 adaptive with no offset.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Oops I'm on your old settings I stated earlier manual mode 1.175 and 0.400
I'll have to restart and see what it shows at 1.2v


----------



## Jpmboy

If I leave cache voltage in bios on Auto and increase max cache to 30 (leave min on auto) it delivers 1.10V. the picture below is data from a short HCi memtest I ran with Auto cache voltage and max cache multi at 30. Works fine it seems... but basically Auto holds a constant cache voltage.


----------



## Jpmboy

I do not see CPU Cache Voltage in your SIV64 panel. IDK what's going on there, but it's apparently not reported by the MB via the SIO?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah manual 1.2v I don't see anything that changed min cache 18 max 30


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah - cpu cache is not available to the OS on that board.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
What would the cache latency show about all this lol


----------



## ESRCJ

I swear I'm a PC hardware hypochondriac, as I always seem to find something wrong lol. So I was playing Forza earlier and the game froze, then closed on its own. I ran the Time Spy stress test to make sure it wasn't my 2080 Ti and it passed with 99.3% stability. I've had issues with my system memory in the past, so I ran RAM Test and the screen went black all of a sudden. I switched DisplayPorts and that brought the picture back. However, I then opened the NVCP while RAM Test was running just to see if it would tweak out anymore and turning off gsync produced lines everywhere and the screen was frozen again. I then forced a shut down, booted back up, and only 24GB of memory was detected. I have had this happen in the past and it always seems to happen to the same memory module (I tested this by moving it to a different slot). With all that said, these issues started when I received my XE. It's possible a memory module was going bad beforehand, but it seems to run fine in dual channel. This leads me to believe it's either the CPU's memory controller or that memory module. It could even be the mobo I suppose. Does anyone have any ideas? I was going to start an RMA with the memory to start with.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah dual channel support really hurt quad channel I believe
Sort of a waste to bother with quad it seems especially using micron or hynix.


----------



## ESRCJ

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah dual channel support really hurt quad channel I believe
> Sort of a waste to bother with quad it seems especially using micron or hynix.


This is a Samsung B-die kit. The fact that one memory module sometimes fails to be recognized and is the case no matter where I put it makes me think it's the module which is the problem. I'm worried about the CPU memory controller being the issue. The black screens are an odd symptom of memory issues.


----------



## Jpmboy

gridironcpj said:


> I swear I'm a PC hardware hypochondriac, as I always seem to find something wrong lol. So I was playing Forza earlier and the game froze, then closed on its own. I ran the Time Spy stress test to make sure it wasn't my 2080 Ti and it passed with 99.3% stability. I've had issues with my system memory in the past, so I ran RAM Test and the screen went black all of a sudden. I switched DisplayPorts and that brought the picture back. However, I then opened the NVCP while RAM Test was running just to see if it would tweak out anymore and turning off gsync produced lines everywhere and the screen was frozen again. I then forced a shut down, booted back up, and only 24GB of memory was detected. I have had this happen in the past and it always seems to happen to the same memory module (I tested this by moving it to a different slot). With all that said, these issues started when I received my XE. It's possible a memory module was going bad beforehand, but it seems to run fine in dual channel. This leads me to believe it's either the CPU's memory controller or that memory module. It could even be the mobo I suppose. Does anyone have any ideas? I was going to start an RMA with the memory to start with.



a dropped stick may be a voltage/training issue (if it is indeeed not a bad stick). first try booting with 25mV more vdimm. If that don't do it, you need to range the VSA and VCCIO voltages.


----------



## ESRCJ

Jpmboy said:


> a dropped stick may be a voltage/training issue (if it is indeeed not a bad stick). first try booting with 25mV more vdimm. If that don't do it, you need to range the VSA and VCCIO voltages.


For what it's worth, I was running the same kit with my 7920X for almost a year. I have the timings at conservative settings for now. I would often get "check memory" error, which I figured was just an issue with the mobo. Perhaps this dimm was a bad apple to begin with and is now showing more serious signs of failing? Either way, I've contact G.Skill to begin an RMA. Hopefully a replacement resolves the issue.

On a different note, has anyone documented their temperature reduction from delidding? I'd also like to know if anyone was able to drop their voltages a bit after delidding. I still haven't delidded my XE, as I want to make sure it runs fine for a bit before voiding the warranty. With my 7920X, I was sitting at the same voltages for 4.8GHz before and after the delid. Temps dropped 10C in Prime95 or so from what I recall.


----------



## Jpmboy

you can expect a temp drop... which may result in +100-200MHz in OC. Any voltage change really depends on the chips leakage characteristics. I would not expect a decrease in vcore from delidding, but it does happen for this reason.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
After delid almost 20c cooler after removing the pigeon poop inside for me I could barely do 45 all core without hitting 100c

Of course SL delid I had to redo because I eventually lost 5-6 cores temps it was like they weren't delidded again and couldn't even go over 42 on them they were as hot as 4 cores at 47-48.

Now i can can at least go 48 on 5 and 47 on 5 and all stay out of the 90c range.

Voltage wise I doubt it ever changed what the chip actually needed to do the clocks.


----------



## ESRCJ

Alright so my 7920X delid results were pretty normal then. I'm currently sitting at 4.6GHz at 1.2V "stable" with the XE (not a comprehensive suite of stress tests), so maybe I'll be able to push 1.25V in Prime95 or so after the delid and get to 4.7GHz all cores, although the VF curve is starting to level a little. Per core overclocking should get a few cores up to 4.7GHz just at 1.20V. It's crazy how there are some XEs out there that can manage 4.6GHz at 1.136V (2 percent from Silicon Lottery's binning).


----------



## RichKnecht

In my constant effort to reduce heat, I have been trying to find the ideal setting for my vccin with my OC'ed 7900x. At 1.91, it is stable after an hour of Realbench and every day "operations". Now for what I think us the strange part. At 1.91 vccin, my CB score is ~2635 +/- 5pts. If I DROP the vccin to 1.88, the score goes to 2665 but it is no longer stable in Realbench. What does this mean? Is my LLC setting too low (4)? Watching HFInfo, if the vccin is set to 1.91, it never drops below 1.887. But, at 1.88 it will drop to 1.845.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> In my constant effort to reduce heat, I have been trying to find the ideal setting for my vccin with my OC'ed 7900x. At 1.91, it is stable after an hour of Realbench and every day "operations". Now for what I think us the strange part. At 1.91 vccin, my CB score is ~2635 +/- 5pts. If I DROP the vccin to 1.88, the score goes to 2665 but it is no longer stable in Realbench. What does this mean? Is my LLC setting too low (4)? Watching HFInfo, if the vccin is set to 1.91, it never drops below 1.887. But, at 1.88 it will drop to 1.845.


Hi,
What multiplier ?
Yes llc 5-6 might give better stability at 1.9v or even lower


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> What multiplier ?
> Yes llc 5-6 might give better stability at 1.9v or even lower


I was at 4.8 on all cores, but it was a little warm for 24/7work loads. So I dropped it to 4.7 (1.27 vcore) on 8 cores and 4.8 (1.3 vcore) on the * cores. I am switching cases soon to add cooling as I do not think my present radiator surface area is enough for the voltages I was using. I'll try bumping up the LLC to see what that does.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Your voltage seems pretty high for those clocks on 7900x 
Add you rig to your signature please just plain text would be better than nothing 

Are you using manual mode ?
Have you tried adaptive on the - offset ?
4.8 I use -0.010 and additional turbo -1.180
4.7 I use -0.030 and additional turbo -1.185

I posted my temperatures... a few pages back


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Your voltage seems pretty high for those clocks on 7900x
> Add you rig to your signature please just plain text would be better than nothing
> 
> Are you using manual mode ?
> Have you tried adaptive on the - offset ?
> 4.8 I use -0.010 and additional turbo -1.180
> 4.7 I use -0.030 and additional turbo -1.185
> 
> I posted my temperatures... a few pages back


I'm using manual mode as I really can't grasp on how to use adaptive no matter how many times I read on how to do it. My voltages are a touch higher than yours, but my temps are actually a little lower. My chip idles at ~27 and peak temps are almost identical to yours at the given clock speeds. What LLC setting/vccin do you use? I'll try posting a shot of my info just like you did so we can directly compare the 2. BTW, I tried to add my rig to my signature but have no idea on how to do it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
VCCIN was 1.9v/ llc5/ capability 140%/ standard power phase/ dram 130%
VCCIO 1.01500v
System agent 1.00500v
Pch core voltage 1.00625

Idle doesn't really matter it changes with the ambient.
I was just happy with the cpu package temps which for sanity reasons should probably be ignored lol 


Rig in sig well that is a weird one but it is signature options user cp
Uncheck show rig in sig save and exit.
Check show sig in rig save and exit.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> VCCIN was 1.9v/ llc5/ capability 140%/ standard power phase/ dram 130%
> VCCIO 1.01500v
> System agent 1.00500v
> Pch core voltage 1.00625
> 
> Idle doesn't really matter it changes with the ambient.
> I was just happy with the cpu package temps which for sanity reasons should probably be ignored lol
> 
> 
> Rig in sig well that is a weird one but it is signature options user cp
> Uncheck show rig in sig save and exit.
> Check show sig in rig save and exit.


Tried the adaptive again, but I just don't get it. Guess I'll leave it on manual and deal with it.


----------



## cx-ray

RichKnecht said:


> Tried the adaptive again, but I just don't get it. Guess I'll leave it on manual and deal with it.


Adaptive only applies when it's higher than the CPU core VID. 

Example: 
4.8 GHz VID 1.2V at Turbo - Set adaptive higher than 1.2 or it will not take effect.

Set Offset to negative when you want less voltage than VID.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
For me even if my settings are ignored the vid steps up or down with my settings 
I use adaptive knowing it is not a stone set voltage and keep it on the negative 
Only issue happens above 4.8 I believe I haven't tried 4.9 ... because temp wise was no way good enough 
Now I have 20c play room maybe more on the newer bios seeing tj max was changed to 110c instead of 105c 
But i'm still on an older bios so that is not a factor.

If unstable maybe avx and avx 512 isn't enough which for the last screen shot was 5 & 5

Rig in sig is showing up now if you ever edit it you must repeat show off and show on.. :thumb:


----------



## mikegold10

Does anybody have an i9-7980XE manufactured in 2018? (i.e., the FPO should start with L8xx, where xx is the week of manufacture)


----------



## JustinThyme

RichKnecht said:


> I was at 4.8 on all cores, but it was a little warm for 24/7work loads. So I dropped it to 4.7 (1.27 vcore) on 8 cores and 4.8 (1.3 vcore) on the * cores. I am switching cases soon to add cooling as I do not think my present radiator surface area is enough for the voltages I was using. I'll try bumping up the LLC to see what that does.


Yes they do seem a bit high. While not everyone can get there I made 5GHz all cores on with less and run 4.8 24x7 on adaptive of 1.225

Havent been on in awhile.

Anyone actually tried one of the refresh chips yet? Not a reference to a reviewer, looking for actual retail samples.
Was considering a 9960X or 9980XE. Yeah Ive heard the arguements and heard them before with the TIM. When they went to other than soldered everyone cried foul, now that they went back everyone is crying foul. 

FWIW I was reading in the last few pages about some having issues with a monoblock on a delid. Im not experiencing any issues at all on a delidded 7900X from SL.


----------



## ESRCJ

Earlier this week, my AX1200i cut off power to the dual molex connectors going to my two D5 pumps while I was in the bathroom away from my PC for 20 minutes (bad dinner). When I returned, the CPU was running over 100C on multiple cores, with the rest in the high 90s and the clock speed below 1GHz and the PC running very slowly. This obviously happened because there wasn't any water flowing in my loop. After replacing the PSU, I've run some stability tests on the CPU and ran into issues. Before, I was running the system as follows:

4.5GHz all cores at 1.16V
3.0GHz mesh at 1.05V
16GB 3600MHz CL16-16-16-36 T1, 1.35V

Everything was stable using Prime95 (all FFTs), Realbench, and 10,000% coverage in RAM Test. Notice that I was only using 16GB of memory, as one stick was not working anymore. The kit has now been sent to G.Skill for replacement. I am using a backup kit I have from an old build. It's a pretty low-end kit: Corsair Vengeance 16GB 3200MHz CL16-16-16-36. I was running it with very conservative timings (tested with my 7920X a year ago) and I'm hitting errors in RAM Test rather early. I instantly thought my CPU may have degraded from the pump accident previously described. I lowered the multiplier to core multiplier to 44, same voltage to test this and it made it further, but still crashed. I can't get through Prime95 1344 without errors, which is where I first noticed this. 

So is it possible my CPU degraded from reaching insane temps while the pumps stopped running for up to 20 minutes?


----------



## RichKnecht

JustinThyme said:


> Yes they do seem a bit high. While not everyone can get there I made 5GHz all cores on with less and run 4.8 24x7 on adaptive of 1.225


I would like to try adaptive, but I just can't grasp on how to set it up. Looked at videos and searched online, but nothing I have found explains how to do it.


----------



## JustinThyme

RichKnecht said:


> I would like to try adaptive, but I just can't grasp on how to set it up. Looked at videos and searched online, but nothing I have found explains how to do it.


Heres how mine is set up


----------



## ThrashZone

JustinThyme said:


> Heres how mine is set up


Hi,
A little toasty at your 5.0 verify 
I'd love to see a bios text file of 5.0 though ctrl+F2


----------



## ThrashZone

JustinThyme said:


> Yes they do seem a bit high. While not everyone can get there I made 5GHz all cores on with less and run 4.8 24x7 on adaptive of 1.225
> 
> Havent been on in awhile.
> 
> *Anyone actually tried one of the refresh chips yet?* Not a reference to a reviewer, looking for actual retail samples.
> Was considering a 9960X or 9980XE. Yeah Ive heard the arguements and heard them before with the TIM. When they went to other than soldered everyone cried foul, now that they went back everyone is crying foul.
> 
> FWIW I was reading in the last few pages about some having issues with a monoblock on a delid. *Im not experiencing any issues at all on a delidded 7900X from SL.*


Hi,
Nope buddy was looking into it waiting for reviews obviously 
Higher cache is about all the improvements I've noticed in spec's 
I'll pass personally 

I was and SL just said it was normal and that was that 
Obvious it wasn't normal and after redoing their delid things are back to normal and actually a little better removing the Intel crap too


----------



## RichKnecht

JustinThyme said:


> Heres how mine is set up


Are you using Sync all cores or another mode? I am OC'ed by specific core.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Are you using Sync all cores or another mode? I am OC'ed by specific core.


Hi,
Probably all core seeing the setting he's showing would be on auto... if by specific core was used. 
Although by core usage could use the setting he's set too as well.


----------



## JustinThyme

RichKnecht said:


> Are you using Sync all cores or another mode? I am OC'ed by specific core.


Im using sync all cores. 
The temp on the Verify page is not accurate. Dont know what it was polling but 85C is what HW monitor logged as max. These chips are toasty and its all good so long as you dont step off the ledge!

Doing by the core you have to set the adaptive value for each core and it gets a bit more complex. I dont have any screen shots as I tried that route and found myself in the same boat weeks later with the sync all cores. I could drop back two weak cores and get even more out of it but my view has always been all or none. Could probably get it to the same values as my 7700K on 4 cores at 5.2GHz but whats the point in under clocking or downright shutting down weak cores when the 4 core CPU is much cheaper. Some have a different view. With a 7980XE it takes by the core to squeeze out every little bit which I would do for fun but rather leave it on all ores synced for daily use.


----------



## ThrashZone

JustinThyme said:


> Im using sync all cores.
> The temp on the Verify page is not accurate. Dont know what it was polling but 85C is what HW monitor logged as max. These chips are toasty and its all good so long as you dont step off the ledge!
> 
> Doing by the core you have to set the adaptive value for each core and it gets a bit more complex. I dont have any screen shots as I tried that route and found myself in the same boat weeks later with the sync all cores. I could drop back two weak cores and get even more out of it but my view has always been all or none. Could probably get it to the same values as my 7700K on 4 cores at 5.2GHz but whats the point in under clocking or downright shutting down weak cores when the 4 core CPU is much cheaper. Some have a different view. With a 7980XE it takes by the core to squeeze out every little bit which I would do for fun but rather leave it on all ores synced for daily use.


Hi,
Yeah if cpuid pulled 95c on the little validate file it uses your cpu package probably hit that too which can be different by as much as 10c more than any single core max temp 
Not terrible for 5.0 
I'd still like to see a bios text file for it though if it's not too much to ask


----------



## JustinThyme

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah if cpuid pulled 95c on the little validate file it uses your cpu package probably hit that too which can be different by as much as 10c more than any single core max temp
> Not terrible for 5.0
> I'd still like to see a bios text file for it though if it's not too much to ask


Tell me how on an ASUS R6E and the next time I clock it up Ill try and provide what it is you seek. If I look hard enough Im sure I have most if not all of the BIOS screen shots saved somewhere, its been awhile. 
That clock still holds a front page position after a year on the ROG Realbench leader board. I'm happy with it for a 7900X.

The thermals on this chip have always shot right up as soon as full load all cores is applied. Problem is and always has been getting the heat off the die. This is what keeps me at 1.225V adaptive. light use it hovers around 30-35C depending on ambient.


----------



## ThrashZone

JustinThyme said:


> Tell me how on an ASUS R6E and the next time I clock it up Ill try and provide what it is you seek. If I look hard enough Im sure I have most if not all of the BIOS screen shots saved somewhere, its been awhile.
> That clock still holds a front page position after a year on the ROG Realbench leader board. I'm happy with it for a 7900X.
> 
> The thermals on this chip have always shot right up as soon as full load all cores is applied. Problem is and always has been getting the heat off the die. This is what keeps me at 1.225V adaptive. light use it hovers around 30-35C depending on ambient.


Hi,
I don't need screen shots 
Just use a fat32 flash drive same for screen shots and use CTRL+F2
That will or should place a .txt file on the flash drive of all your bios settings 
Just send to zip folder and upload it here in a reply


----------



## ESRCJ

Happy to report that there is no degradation in my 7980XE from the accident. It turns out the issue was I was running that crappy Corsair memory kit beyond its rated primary timings (CL16-18-18-36). What a terrible kit! I can't believe I used this thing for X99. 

I also realized I had VCCIN set to 1.85V, which was what I had it set to for my 7920X. I bumped it up to 1.90V and everything is running much smoother. I also tested 4.7GHz all cores at 1.24Vcore and it passed a couple of hours of Prime95 1344K, which is hard on core and core voltage. Small FFTs are a no go until I delid though.


----------



## RichKnecht

So, I have been playing around with adaptive voltage and I think I understand it for the most part, but is it really the best option for overclocking? First, I lowered my OC just so that I don't get any crazy vcore action going on  Working with "Sync all cores" if I set adaptive to say 1.15, and then a "+" in the offset and .05. It "says" that the total voltage will be 1.2, OK. I open HWInfo and run Cinebench a couple times. To my surprise, voltage is going to 1.24. Can someone explain what is going on? Is the margin of error really that bad?


----------



## Jpmboy

yes, the margin is... especially if you put 1.5V in adaptive as you say. ;P


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> yes, the margin is... especially if you put 1.5V in adaptive as you say. ;P


Ugh...what a typo. I meant to say 1.15. OK, so if I want 1.2V, what do I need to set the offset voltage to? Leave it on "+" and auto? Or, do I lower the .05 to .02? Alternatively, can I set it to 1.2 and use a "-" offset value?


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> Ugh...what a typo. I meant to say 1.15. OK, so if I want 1.2V, what do I need to set the offset voltage to? Leave it on "+" and auto? Or, do I lower the .05 to .02? Alternatively, can I set it to 1.2 and use a "-" offset value?


you do not need to set the offset to anything. Simply enter the necessary voltage in the Additional Turbo Voltage field. So if you want 1.2V, just enter 1.2V. If that runs a high vcore (because the vid is higher than the chip needs - common) you can then try to fudge it with a negative offset on the vcore. It is ADDITIONAL turbo voltage, and is based off the VID.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Ugh...what a typo. I meant to say 1.15. OK, so if I want 1.2V, what do I need to set the offset voltage to? Leave it on "+" and auto? Or, do I lower the .05 to .02? Alternatively, can I set it to 1.2 and use a "-" offset value?


Hi,
Use the negative or at least I do skylake-x over volts always 
1.24 
I use adaptive and both fields with -0.050 & turbo -1.185 if you need more take away from the 0.050 setting by 0.010 at a time.
Keep the lowest at -0.001 then play with the turbo.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Use the negative or at least I do skylake-x over volts always
> 1.24
> I use adaptive and both fields with -0.050 *& turbo -1.185* if you need more take away from the 0.050 setting by 0.010 at a time.
> Keep the lowest at -0.001 then play with the turbo.


another typo?


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> another typo?


Hi,
Nope 
That setting is good for 4.6 for my board
4.7 I use -0.030 & -1.185
4.8 I use -0.010 & -1.180 
VIDS produced are on my [email protected] and [email protected] screen shot with temps.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I think at one time I used for 4.8
Adaptive -auto & turbo -1.130 and vid was 1.266v
I just didn't like using auto


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Nope
> That setting is good for 4.6 for my board
> 4.7 I use -0.030* & -1.185*
> 4.8 I use -0.010 & -1.180
> VIDS produced are on my [email protected] and [email protected] screen shot with temps.


negative voltage in turbo? ...be more specific. there is no such thing as negative turbo voltage on any board I have afaik. and either your 4.7 is overvolted or 4.8 is undervolted. unless that is a 2 core CPU... or the mV/Hz line is at a serious inflection point for those frequencies (not likely)


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> negative voltage in turbo? really?


Hi,
Absolutely 
If it's being ignored it's being ignored in an acceptable voltage way instead of completely over shooting voltage which skylake-x always does on auto anything really doorules informed me of that fact long ago been using negative since


----------



## JustinThyme

Confusing me, not that this is a difficult task!
My OC is not far off from optimized defaults
VCCIN 1.9
LLC 5
140%
Vcore adative 1.225 (1.25 sometimes for stability on 5GHz)
XMP on
Sync all cores 
AVX 3
AVX 512 5
Multi 48-50
Cache 32
Power limit maxed

Maybe I could squeeze more out if I dived in deeper. I generally stay at 4.8 all cores for 24/7 use with a balanced power profile and go to high performance when benchmarking, otherwise when actually having a workload (mostly photos and videos) I leave the power profile at balanced and it does its job. I do have an excellent chip too.

Heat is always the issue. You know it’s hot when you are compiling, its cold outside and the usually cold blooded wifey asks me if it’s hot. Office is in 10x12 area off the 16x20 bedroom and I often have to crack the window to cool the room. Add window AC for the summer. 

Now with all that being said I’ve got an itch. I’m still pondering on a 9980XE or 7980XE. Lots of complaints on the OC headroom of the 9980 by reviewers. When they stopped using solder everyone cried and now that they went back......everyone is crying. The biggest thing that disturbs me about the refresh is tJ was dropped to 84 in the refresh from 94 in the 7980. 

Whichever I’d be ecstatic with 4.5 on all cores but happy with 4.4. 
Anyone care to weigh in with their results on a 7980xe delidded of course as there is no comparison without liquid metal TIM under the IHS.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Absolutely
> If it's being ignored it's being ignored in an acceptable voltage way instead of completely over shooting voltage which skylake-x always does on auto anything really doorules informed me of that fact long ago been using negative since


th4e "negative" modifier applies to offset. Additional Turbo is only positive. POst a bios screenshot of what you are calling "-turbo" volts.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> th4e "negative" modifier applies to offset. Additional Turbo is only positive. POst a bios screenshot of what you are calling "-turbo" volts.


Hi,
Only difference between my settings which came from doorules and your adaptive settings is you use a positive symbol and we use the negative symbol so not sure why you need a screen shot but okay here's the screen shot doorules shared with me


----------



## Kimir

From your screenshot, the way I read it is, at idle you have -0.035v applied to the vid and when turbo kicks in and you are at 4.7 (or 4.8 w/e) you have 1.185v (target voltage).
That's what it was with haswell-e (or so I recall, I could check with a DMM), not sure if the behavior changed since then.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I believe it adds 1.185v to the default voltage actually 
I call it -1.185 because it's still under the negative although the wording does say Additional turbo voltage so it's just the placement that I still say - instead of just calling it what it is additional... 1.185v. my bad


----------



## RichKnecht

Kimir said:


> From your screenshot, the way I read it is, at idle you have -0.035v applied to the vid and when turbo kicks in and you are at 4.7 (or 4.8 w/e) you have 1.185v (target voltage).
> That's what it was with haswell-e (or so I recall, I could check with a DMM), not sure if the behavior changed since then.


That's how I see it as well. Negative VID doesn't make sense, but a negative offset does. What ever the case may be, if it's working, then let it be


----------



## tistou77

Normally, the 1.185v is the desired voltage in load
The 0.035v is the difference between the VID found at the frequency in load and the Vcore that we want in load

Example, OC @4.6ghz stable at 1.20v
VID (with Vcore AUTO) applied at 1.25v in load (@4.6ghz)
Have to set a negative offset and a 0.05 / 1.20 setting


----------



## cx-ray

tistou77 said:


> Example, OC @4.6ghz stable at 1.20v
> VID (with Vcore AUTO) applied at 1.25v in load (@4.6ghz)
> Have to set a negative offset and a 0.05 / 1.20 setting


Since it's below VID the 1.2V in the above example for Additional Turbo Mode voltage does nothing.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah most the time I show vid using 4.8 into 1.28v+- land with the prior posted adaptive voltages 
I say it's okay even if ignored as being too low.... because temps might be in an acceptable range.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I believe it adds 1.185v to the default voltage actually
> I call it -1.185 because it's still under the negative although the wording does say Additional turbo voltage so it's just the placement that I still say - instead of just calling it what it is additional... 1.185v. my bad


 yeah - that's the difference. The +/- modifier ONLY applies to the offset voltage. Turbo voltage is only applied to turbo multipliers. Offset is applied across the entire VID stack. So for clarity, so folks don't start asking why their bios is broken and can't set a negative turbo voltage... there is no such thing.
Your settings lower the vcore by 35mV across the vid stack, then run the turbo voltage on that adjusted VID stack (supposedly - I'd measure it to know for sure. This solution to the "high VID" issue does not always work and onlyu manual override can set the necessary voltage for turbo multis with high-VID samples).
Problem with that setting is there really is not a good way to test the stability of the non-turbo settings - unless you disable the turbo multipliers in bios and run something.


----------



## RichKnecht

From what I am gathering, adaptive mode isn't the mode to use when overclocking. To minimize heat, wouldn't it be better to overclock one core at a time, finding it's ideal voltage and using that? Or, will the heat from surrounding cores affect the "stable" cores when you overclock them?


----------



## cx-ray

Provided higher than VID Turbo voltage is required, Adaptive is an evolution to Offset overclocking. For 24/7 non-fixed frequency settings it's pretty much ideal. At lower clocks you let the chip do what Intel has intended for it and at Turbo overclocking frequencies you set the voltage for improved stability.


----------



## RichKnecht

cx-ray said:


> Provided higher than VID Turbo voltage is required, Adaptive is an evolution to Offset overclocking. For 24/7 non-fixed frequency settings it's pretty much ideal. At lower clocks you let the chip do what Intel has intended for it and at Turbo overclocking frequencies you set the voltage for improved stability.


Ok, I think I got it. If I allow the CPU to down clock at idle or during periods of low usage, adaptive is ideal. However, if I have Speed shift, Speed step, and C states disabled keeping the chip at full frequency all the time, it makes more sense to keep a static vcore. Sorry for the questions, I am pretty dense when it comes to adaptive voltage


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> Ok, I think I got it. If I allow the CPU to down clock at idle or during periods of low usage, adaptive is ideal. However, if I have Speed shift, Speed step, and C states disabled keeping the chip at full frequency all the time, it makes more sense to keep a static vcore. Sorry for the questions, I am pretty dense when it comes to adaptive voltage


 correct. there is zero reason to use adaptive (dynamic) voltage control if you are not allowing dynamic frequency. So locked freq = manual override. c-states enable low power states without dynamic (that we see) voltage or frequency.


(the below also applies to CFL and SL-X)


----------



## Kimir

I'd give a rep to that, but I can't. :'


----------



## ESRCJ

JustinThyme said:


> Confusing me, not that this is a difficult task!
> My OC is not far off from optimized defaults
> VCCIN 1.9
> LLC 5
> 140%
> Vcore adative 1.225 (1.25 sometimes for stability on 5GHz)
> XMP on
> Sync all cores
> AVX 3
> AVX 512 5
> Multi 48-50
> Cache 32
> Power limit maxed
> 
> Maybe I could squeeze more out if I dived in deeper. I generally stay at 4.8 all cores for 24/7 use with a balanced power profile and go to high performance when benchmarking, otherwise when actually having a workload (mostly photos and videos) I leave the power profile at balanced and it does its job. I do have an excellent chip too.
> 
> Heat is always the issue. You know it’s hot when you are compiling, its cold outside and the usually cold blooded wifey asks me if it’s hot. Office is in 10x12 area off the 16x20 bedroom and I often have to crack the window to cool the room. Add window AC for the summer.
> 
> Now with all that being said I’ve got an itch. I’m still pondering on a 9980XE or 7980XE. Lots of complaints on the OC headroom of the 9980 by reviewers. When they stopped using solder everyone cried and now that they went back......everyone is crying. The biggest thing that disturbs me about the refresh is tJ was dropped to 84 in the refresh from 94 in the 7980.
> 
> Whichever I’d be ecstatic with 4.5 on all cores but happy with 4.4.
> Anyone care to weigh in with their results on a 7980xe delidded of course as there is no comparison without liquid metal TIM under the IHS.


My build is currently in pieces, but I have the 7980XE non-delidded for now with a single Black Ice Nemesis 480 GTX with a Heatkiller VRM block in the loop as well. I'm currently sitting at 4.5GHz at 1.16V for daily use, although I did test 4.6GHz at 1.20V and 4.7GHz at 1.24V in Prime95 1344K for a couple of hours each, which does a good job at testing the core frequency and vcore. With small FFTs, things get too hot without the delid beyond 4.5GHz and 1.16V. With a delid and with my full radiator setup (another 480 GTX and a 420 GTX), I will definitely aim for 4.7GHz all cores for daily use, and possibly 4.8GHz. 

Here are my voltage-frequency results with my non-comprehensive testing (lowest voltage per frequency, stable):
4.3GHz: 1.10V
4.4GHz: 1.13V
4.5GHz: 1.16V
4.6GHz: 1.20V
4.7GHz: 1.24V
I have not bothered with memory overclocking yet, so I may need to add a little to the vcore if I aim for 4000MHz and tight timings. Note that my CPU is average at best. The best 7980XEs from Silicon Lottery were able to do 4.6GHz at 1.137V. As for delidded versus non-delidded, the main difference will be lower temps and lower power consumption, all else constant. When I delidded my 7920X, my lowest stable voltages remained the same. When I asked about possibly lower voltages per clock with the 7980XE, a few users mentioned there likely won't be anything to gain. So expect the same voltages per frequency after a delid. Although who knows, you might be able to shave off 0.01V 

So don't be discouraged about the clock speeds unless you get the world's worst Skylake-X silicon. As long as you have a beefy cooling setup, VRM cooling, good mobo, and beefy PSU, you should be able to push the 7980XE to nice clock speeds. Oh, and avoid monoblocks if possible. Many of us with the RVIE have ditched the monoblock in favor of a CPU block + VRM block.


----------



## Nikos4Life

Hi guys, 

quick question, which CPU would you pick? 

7900X 4.9GHz pre-binned
9900X (Would it be any pre-binned ones?)
7960X Which I can easily find around the same price as the pre-binned 7900X? 

It is going to be delidded but it is too much sillicon lotery to me, I rather prefer to buy the pre-binned but I have doubts.


Regards


----------



## RichKnecht

Nikos4Life said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> quick question, which CPU would you pick?
> 
> 7900X 4.9GHz pre-binned
> 9900X (Would it be any pre-binned ones?)
> 7960X Which I can easily find around the same price as the pre-binned 7900X?
> 
> It is going to be delidded but it is too much sillicon lotery to me, I rather prefer to buy the pre-binned but I have doubts.
> 
> 
> Regards


7900X at 4.9 is going to be a bit warm, even delidded. Mine runs in the 70s under a DirectDie frame and it's at 4.8 @ 1.28V.
9900X needs some testing as far as temps go. The 9980XE reviews show that it gets quite toasty. Delidding the new chips may be a challenge due to the soldered IHS.
7960X would be my choice unless you want to play games and then I wouldn't choose any of them.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Retail lottery wise yeah no way I'd ever buy a binned chip they want way too much for them and delidding is way too easy.

4.8-4.9 binned/ delid chips were stupid expensive adding 400.us+ to the price tag lol 
4.8 on a properly delidded 7900x it's tough 
4.9 is all cooling if it will do that and above 

Same goes for 99..x series biggest difference is 3 year warranty is intact where as a delid warranty is gone with the wind.
If I hadn't already gotten a 7900x I might of gotten a 99..x 
But seeing I did no way I'm wasting another 1k.us for another space heater 

But with the higher cache of the 99..x it might actually game a lot better not that 7900x is bad just a little wonky but 4.5 with 30 cache works pretty good.

I'm sure there will be binned 99..x there's too much money not to offer them.


----------



## Jpmboy

Nikos4Life said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> quick question, which CPU would you pick?
> 
> 7900X 4.9GHz pre-binned
> 9900X (Would it be any pre-binned ones?)
> 7960X Which I can easily find around the same price as the pre-binned 7900X?
> It is going to be delidded but it is too much sillicon lotery to me, I rather prefer to buy the pre-binned but I have doubts.
> Regards


2 different board platforms. x299 and Z390. MOst 9900Ks run 5.0+ on all cores and 4000c16 ram (with a decent 16 or 32GB kit). For gaming, get the 9900K. For production work... get as many cores as you can afford.


----------



## Nikos4Life

RichKnecht said:


> 7900X at 4.9 is going to be a bit warm, even delidded. Mine runs in the 70s under a DirectDie frame and it's at 4.8 @ 1.28V.
> 9900X needs some testing as far as temps go. The 9980XE reviews show that it gets quite toasty. Delidding the new chips may be a challenge due to the soldered IHS.
> 7960X would be my choice unless you want to play games and then I wouldn't choose any of them.





ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Retail lottery wise yeah no way I'd ever buy a binned chip they want way too much for them and delidding is way too easy.
> 
> 4.8-4.9 binned/ delid chips were stupid expensive adding 400.us+ to the price tag lol
> 4.8 on a properly delidded 7900x it's tough
> 4.9 is all cooling if it will do that and above
> 
> Same goes for 99..x series biggest difference is 3 year warranty is intact where as a delid warranty is gone with the wind.
> If I hadn't already gotten a 7900x I might of gotten a 99..x
> But seeing I did no way I'm wasting another 1k.us for another space heater
> 
> But with the higher cache of the 99..x it might actually game a lot better not that 7900x is bad just a little wonky but 4.5 with 30 cache works pretty good.
> 
> I'm sure there will be binned 99..x there's too much money not to offer them.





Jpmboy said:


> 2 different board platforms. x299 and Z390. MOst 9900Ks run 5.0+ on all cores and 4000c16 ram (with a decent 16 or 32GB kit). For gaming, get the 9900K. For production work... get as many cores as you can afford.


First of all thanks for your thoughts and opinions.

It will have mixed use between production and gaming. Also I need the PCIe-lanes because of expansion cards (almost twenty USB connected at the same time + 4 m2 nvme). 

I have bought last month a EVGA Dark motherboard for 300$ brand new on Amazon so I could not resist to buy it. 

Now I know it is not the best time to upgrade the CPU as Ryzen 3000 are close enough and that is why I do not want to buy another 7980XE (I have had one pre-binned @ 4.6 GHz). 

The whole system it is under a custom watercooling (two differents loops for GPU & CPU) and heat it is not going to be an issue for me (4 x 560 rads + 1 x 480 with 2500 rpm push/pull fans all powered with 6 d5 pumps to keep it up). 

So my thoughts are about getting the 4.9 7900X because I am mostly sure I will be able to push it harder as the sample is pretested with an AIO. Or investing the same money on a 7960X and play silicon lottery while crossing my fingers. 

Right now I am doing all my stuff with a 6900K @ 4.5 so I guess it is going to be a noticiable jump talking about single core performance right? (7900X between 4.9 & 5.1)


Regards


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah evga is just dumping those boards 
evga on ebay they were cheaper than that


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah evga is just dumping those boards
> evga on ebay they were cheaper than that


I almost bought one at $219 but my case won't fit an e-ATX board. Once I decide on a new case, I'm springing for a Rampage Extreme VI and keeping the 7900X.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
What's different e-atx from a regular atx case ?


----------



## Nikos4Life

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah evga is just dumping those boards
> evga on ebay they were cheaper than that


Even if they are doing so, Do you find this motherboard a wrong choice right now?

Thanks


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> What's different e-atx from a regular atx case ?


E-ATX is the extended version and it's bigger. Usually won't fit a ATX case that is why I love the bench!


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> E-ATX is the extended version and it's bigger. Usually won't fit a ATX case that is why I love the bench!


Hi,
Yeah I did notice atx board almost sit's on top of my psu in my corsair 450D lol 

Test bench okay yeah gotcha :thumb:
Thought briefly about one but they have a large foot print


----------



## RichKnecht

Nikos4Life said:


> Even if they are doing so, Do you find this motherboard a wrong choice right now?
> 
> Thanks


Not at all. If it would have fit in my case, I would have bought it. $219 is a steal. The board is highly regarded and all reviewers have nothing but good things to say about it. The only drawback would be if you wanted RGB everywhere, this board doesn't have it, hence the name "Dark".


----------



## RichKnecht

CptSpig said:


> E-ATX is the extended version and it's bigger. Usually won't fit a ATX case that is why I love the bench!


I'd love to do a bench, but it would look out of place where my PC is. Looking hard at the Lian Li V3000WX now.


----------



## ThrashZone

Nikos4Life said:


> Even if they are doing so, Do you find this motherboard a wrong choice right now?
> 
> Thanks


Hi,
If your case will fit it no 
EVGA was way too late in the x299 game to release this board frankly pretty much why they are dumping them now I suspect


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I did notice atx board almost sit's on top of my psu in my corsair 450D lol
> 
> Test bench okay yeah gotcha :thumb:
> Thought briefly about one but they have a large foot print


Big foot print....mine is sitting on a TV tray.


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> Big foot print....mine is sitting on a TV tray.


Hi,
Yeah but I could fit two 450D cases there too, case and point


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah but I could fit two 450D cases there too, case and point


Yeah, but no room for the chiller! :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> Yeah, but no room for the chiller! :thumb:


Hi,
I still don't have a chiller dang performance pc holiday discount was too low this year only 12% for 3-400.us come on


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Nikos4Life

kingofblog said:


> RichKnecht said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not at all. If it would have fit in my case, I would have bought it. $219 is a steal. The board is highly regarded and all reviewers have nothing but good things to say about it. The only drawback would be if you wanted RGB everywhere, this board doesn't have it, hence the name "Dark".
> 
> 
> 
> It may not matter to the crowd here, but the BIOS is terrible on the Dark. I bought one because it was cheap ($300, Amazon), and because ASUS boards kept burning out on me, only to find that EVGA removed half the settings from the BIOS. This includes the power management settings (power limit, current limit, etc.), making it impossible to run at stock.
Click to expand...

What do you mean you can not make it run stock?
I am not going to run it stock all the time but I am going to need some starting point which have to be reliable.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Nikos4Life

kingofblog said:


> Intel HEDT/server chips come pre-programmed with turbo curves for different instruction sets. As an example, the i9-7900X has:
> 
> Non-AVX: 4.5 Ghz 1-core / 4.0 GHz all-core
> AVX2: 4.0 GHz 1-core / 3.6 GHz all-core
> AVX-512: 4.0 GHz 1-core / 3.3 GHz all-core
> Power limit: 140 W
> 
> The EVGA DARK BIOS has removed all the power management settings you see on other boards, which means that its "stock" runs like this:
> 
> Non-AVX: 4.0 GHz all-core
> AVX2: 4.0 GHz all-core
> AVX-512: 4.0 GHz all-core (>300 W!)
> Power limit: Disabled*
> 
> * SVID is also permanently disabled on the board. You can not read the processor power, and the processor can not use it for thermal/power control.
> 
> 300 W is just barely sustainable on the i9-7900X, but if you had an i9-7980XE, the all-core AVX-512 boost would be 3.5 GHz (instead of 2.8 GHz)**, leading to a thermal disaster. You can lower the AVX frequencies by switching to OC mode and enabling AVX offset, but then the single-core AVX frequency would get hit, because you probably can not sustain that on all cores.
> 
> ** As seen here in the screenshot here: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-ice-lake-10nm-whiskey-lake-400-series,36180.html


Thanks for the info: 

Does this "* SVID is also permanently disabled on the board. You can not read the processor power, and the processor can not use it for thermal/power control." means CPU can not throttle in case needs it?

I was not aware of that.


----------



## RichKnecht

It's been a week since I FINALLY was able to get my Die Frame to work with my board and chip. Everything was running great at my 4.7/4.8 @ 1.285V (4 & 4) with no hiccups along the way with my normal workload. It passes an hour of Realbench with a max temp of 86C. 

Now for the part that has me a bit puzzled. I decided to redo my OC from scratch. First I let the chip run at stock configuration with everything set to auto except I enabled XMP. I had HWInfo opened up so that I can see what the voltages and temps were. I noticed that during turbo, the chip was only pulling 1.14-1.17V MAX. So, I started overclocking as I normally do keeping Vcore at 1.18. To my surprise, it was passing stress tests with very good temps. For the moment, I am leaving it at 4.6 @ 1.18V to see how it does while doing what I normally do for my day to day activities. 

Now for my stupid question, and please I am prone to sudden moments of denseness . Is what I am seeing the result of the Die Frame dissipating heat in a more efficient manner which is allowing a much lower stable Vcore? I mean from 1.285 to 1.18 seems insane. Not to mention the fact that my chip mow runs around 10C cooler during normal workloads. I attached a screen shot of HWInfo after the last stress test. VRMs are a touch warm, but everything else looks pretty good IMO. Thoughts?

EDIT: Just found the settings for my over clock when I first delidded the chip. It was 4.6 all cores at 1.235. Still much higher than where it is at now.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## RichKnecht

!#^&*. Well shortly after I posted about my "success", temps shot into the high 80s and low 90s WITH the Die Frame  So I took it apart and finally saw why I always had so many issues with the Die Frame long term. Seems my die is pretty convex. This meant htat the edge of the die would eventually lose good contact with the block. Sigh. No way to fix that and I am not lapping my die. So....when I bought the 7900X I bought something I forgot I had, the Rockit Cool copper IHS. Never opened it up until now. What a beautiful piece of gear. So I figured, what the heck, it's all apart and I'm putting an IHS back on, why not use it? Well, I am kinda surprised at the result. After an hour of Realbench with the chip still at 4.6 and 1.18V, max temp went DOWN compared to the Die Frame. At this point, it's staying just like it is and I will continue tweaking my OC upwards. I have attached both HWInfo screen shots so you can see for yourself. The top screenshot (screenshot9) is the Die Frame, the bottom screenshot is with the Rockit Cool IHS. I used Conductonaut between the die and IHS and Kryonaut between the IHS and block.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Package stayed about the same 84-86c
Maybe you're starving cores and they are punishing you lol 

You have a lot of blk going first screen shot showed 4650GHz 
Last was 4600GHz.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Package stayed about the same 84-86c
> Maybe you're starving cores and they are punishing you lol
> 
> You have a lot of blk going first screen shot showed 4650GHz
> Last was 4600GHz.


Yeah, I have no idea why that first screenshot showed 4650 as the multiplier was at 46 and bclk at 100. Nevertheless, it's working and its about 6C lower than Intel's IHS that I had on before the frame. I also just noticed that water temp is 24C and idle temp is 25C. I have never had both temps so close even at stock speed. I'm going to see how far I can get and I'll keep you posted. The IHS was definitely worth 20 bucks. Should have just gotten that instead of the frame. Oh well, live and learn.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah a vrm water block and you should be fine 

I just picked up a couple 280 gtx rads largest I can fit in 450D case 
Might have them and installed this weekend
Might be slightly better than 1 240 gtx and 1 ek 280p rad who knows


----------



## Dwofzz

Finaly up and running, haven't done much yet since I'm only using a open air bench (on the mobo box)  

Cpu is running 4GHz fine on a H60 from corsair in push config at 1v and the ram is set at xmp 3600MHz CL 16-16-16-36 1.35v IO/SA 1v/0.92v.

Will poste some pics and do some more testing, I couldn't decide which mobo to get so I got the EVGA x299 Dark and Asus Rampage 6 Apex hehe..

Ran firestrike, everything at stock speed (asus multicore enhancement off) : https://www.3dmark.com/fs/17411201 

Cinebench r15 : 2535

Max cpu temp : 54c

Tested with HT off at stock speed against my 6850k

Ps. I've tested the 3 newest bios versions for the Apex 1602, 1503 and 1401. Stay away from 1602 and 1503 if you have a 7xxx x cpu.. I've lost 100 - 250p in cinebench R15 and firstrike is down almost 2000p.. Went back to 1401 and the scores came back! 1602 also rose the the max cpu temp with 10c...


----------



## RichKnecht

Been tweaking and messing around with vccin. The OEM profile sets the vccin to 1.95 and a LLC setting of 7, which I thought was kind of high. With my OC, I lowered the vccin to 1.9 and the vcore was at 1.235 which gets me to a stable 4.7 all core OC. Tonight I was reading on line about on some of the older chips, you could raise vccin and lower vcore...hmmm. So I raised vccin to 1.95 and so far, I was able to drop vcore to 1.23 and perhaps even lower. That.small drop in vcore really helps temps (~4C) and doesn't affect Cinebench scores. So, has anyone else tried this? If so, what was your result?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I believe we were talking about vccin a few pages back 
CB likes a lot 
Auto will crank it up nearly 2.0 

Since I mainly use adaptive it uses more usually manual setting is hit and miss seeing CB is just one benchmark lower vcore might work where it might get watchdog... on time spy or blender rendering files which are much longer.

I have no intention of getting one but 9900x instock locally at micro center 999.99


----------



## xarot

I got my 9900X yesterday. But it's a lemon like my first 7900X. Needs ~1.2 V for 4.5 GHz  and after this the voltage starts to ramp up significantly. Oh well, I wasn't actually going to OC it much higher anyway.


----------



## 6950X

I’m building a new desktop, I’ve got a X99 godlike motherboard already, that I’ve never used it is new in the box I’ve had it nearly a year.

Should I pickup a used 6950X? Or sell the board and get a 7900X? Maybe even a 7920X? 

I’m thinking it would be easier, and cheaper just to buy a 6950X. 

I’ve been out of the PC hobby a while. And I really want to play some video games, and run some benchmarks. 

Any opinions would be helpful thank you!


----------



## bmgjet

6950X said:


> I’m building a new desktop, I’ve got a X99 godlike motherboard already, that I’ve never used it is new in the box I’ve had it nearly a year.
> 
> Should I pickup a used 6950X? Or sell the board and get a 7900X? Maybe even a 7920X?
> 
> I’m thinking it would be easier, and cheaper just to buy a 6950X.
> 
> I’ve been out of the PC hobby a while. And I really want to play some video games, and run some benchmarks.
> 
> Any opinions would be helpful thank you!


I came from a 6900K to a 7900X, 7900X blows the 6900K out of water with gaming since I does 5ghz vs the 4.4ghz on the 6900K.


----------



## 6950X

bmgjet said:


> 6950X said:
> 
> 
> 
> I’m building a new desktop, I’ve got a X99 godlike motherboard already, that I’ve never used it is new in the box I’ve had it nearly a year.
> 
> Should I pickup a used 6950X? Or sell the board and get a 7900X? Maybe even a 7920X?
> 
> I’m thinking it would be easier, and cheaper just to buy a 6950X.
> 
> I’ve been out of the PC hobby a while. And I really want to play some video games, and run some benchmarks.
> 
> Any opinions would be helpful thank you!
> 
> 
> 
> I came from a 6900K to a 7900X, 7900X blows the 6900K out of water with gaming since I does 5ghz vs the 4.4ghz on the 6900K.
Click to expand...

Your thinking slower clocked 8 cores vs faster clocked 10 cores. 

I don’t think there is much difference, if any at all in a 6950X vs. a 7900X.


----------



## Jpmboy

for a new gaming rig.. sell the "godlike" (cause it is not), buy a z390 board and a 9900K - save money. Enjoy 5+GHz on 8 cores. What video card? Since that matters more than the cpu/board for games.


----------



## 6950X

Jpmboy said:


> for a new gaming rig.. sell the "godlike" (cause it is not), buy a z390 board and a 9900K - save money. Enjoy 5+GHz on 8 cores. What video card? Since that matters more than the cpu/board for games.


I missed a deal of a lifetime on a 7980XE on eBay yesterday. It was delided with a rocket cool IHS, it sold for $1,076 dollars with about 50 bids. I was gonna buy it and grab a X299 board on the cheap..

I still need a GPU, whatever CPU, and a PSU.. I’m gonna run a custom loop as I’ve got all the components for that. pump, reservoir, radiators, etc. etc.

This new build, it’s not primarily for gaming. That’s just as a pass time really. If I don’t find a cheap 6950X. I might just get a Threadripper. 

At this rate with intel and AMD seeing who’s is bigger the 9900K and socket will be obsolete fairly quickly. 

I’ve beem a longtime reader I know your a enthusiast type of CPU guy your self haha. I’ve learned an extreme amount with my old J series 5960X that I ran a couple years back. It did finally fail after running 4.7ghz so long.


----------



## xarot

bmgjet said:


> I came from a 6900K to a 7900X, 7900X blows the 6900K out of water with gaming since I does 5ghz vs the 4.4ghz on the 6900K.


If my memory serves me right BW-E at 4.2 GHz in gaming equals SK-X at ~4.7 GHz, so if you get a lemon 79xx (or even 99xx) processor like I did, you might not gain anything.


----------



## ESRCJ

6950X said:


> I’m building a new desktop, I’ve got a X99 godlike motherboard already, that I’ve never used it is new in the box I’ve had it nearly a year.
> 
> Should I pickup a used 6950X? Or sell the board and get a 7900X? Maybe even a 7920X?
> 
> I’m thinking it would be easier, and cheaper just to buy a 6950X.
> 
> I’ve been out of the PC hobby a while. And I really want to play some video games, and run some benchmarks.
> 
> Any opinions would be helpful thank you!


For gaming and "some benchmarks," I would recommend a 9900K. Skylake-X is great if you have a use for the high core count or AVX-512. It can also hold its own in gaming if you overclock the CPU, memory, and mesh high enough. My 7920X was often competing with overclocked 8700Ks in those low-res CPU-bottlenecked gaming/benchmark scenarios. Below is my best 720p low Superposition score with my previous build. 3rd place on the Superposition leaderboard, but I should note that this is a pretty insane OC and I didn't run with this for daily use. Again though, this isn't the platform to jump on if the additional cores don't do anything for you.


----------



## ThrashZone

6950X said:


> Your thinking slower clocked 8 cores vs faster clocked 10 cores.
> 
> I don’t think there is much difference, if any at all in a 6950X vs. a 7900X.


Hi,
Yes clock for clock being the same 4.4-4.5 they score about the same 
A delid 7900x can go higher 

But there are some 6950's on pretty wild cooling or delidded... that are pretty good look at all the benchmark boards here you'll see what I mean.
Windows update pretty much messed up brordwell-e so some tlc is required to get oc'ing back up and running on it.

EVGA/ asrock and possible a few other board manufactures haven't dumped bios support like asus has so I would not buy a asus x99 board for that main reason eol x99.


----------



## ThrashZone

xarot said:


> If my memory serves me right BW-E at 4.2 GHz in gaming equals SK-X at ~4.7 GHz, so if you get a lemon 79xx (or even 99xx) processor like I did, you might not gain anything.


Hi,
Nope clocks being equal so are scores usually 
7900x can just clock higher if delid is done and pass broadwell-e.

I believe that is true for all Intel chips same multiplier usually very close in scoring across different platforms.
Rendering on higher core counts will do those tasks better.


----------



## xarot

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Nope clocks being equal so are scores usually
> 7900x can just clock higher if delid is done and pass broadwell-e.
> 
> I believe that is true for all Intel chips same multiplier usually very close in scoring across different platforms.
> Rendering on higher core counts will do those tasks better.


No, I mean in gaming only Broadwell-E is often faster clock-to-clock than Skylake-X. But the requestor was not so keen on gaming so.


----------



## 6950X

I’ve gotta get a system put together within a week or two. I have found a brand new, unopened, sealed up 6950X for $600, it was bought on Amazon a few months ago; possibly newest silicon available? He’s got a receipt too. I’m reading through some reviews and articles on 9900K to see if I’m having any last 2nd thoughts on this choice. 

The price of the 9900K makes me [email protected] $570. I almost feel better buying the old timer 6950X with (2) more cores, quad channel, and 25MB in L2 cache 

I’m either really dumb, or I just don’t care about the latest and greatest as I’ve gotten nearly in my 30’s and I’m gonna ride this system out a few years anyways.

Do you guys think with a really good custom loop, and a monoblock, I could get 4.5 on Broadwell-E? Or is that asking to much.


----------



## ThrashZone

6950X said:


> I’ve gotta get a system put together within a week or two. I have found a brand new, unopened, sealed up 6950X for $600, it was bought on Amazon a few months ago; possibly newest silicon available? He’s got a receipt too. I’m reading through some reviews and articles on 9900K to see if I’m having any last 2nd thoughts on this choice.
> 
> The price of the 9900K makes me [email protected] $570. I almost feel better buying the old timer 6950X with (2) more cores, quad channel, and 25MB in L2 cache
> 
> I’m either really dumb, or I just don’t care about the latest and greatest as I’ve gotten nearly in my 30’s and I’m gonna ride this system out a few years anyways.
> 
> Do you guys think with a really good custom loop, and a monoblock, I could get 4.5 on Broadwell-E? Or is that asking to much.


Hi,
Firstly mono blocks only look cool 
Get a dedicated vrm cooler and cpu block is better just more piping

600.us is a good price for a 6950 beside what I already said windows updates has messes up asus boards for oc'ing broadwell-e so you will have to fix that manually every time MS releases another updated micro code....
Haswell-e hasn't been effected yet.


----------



## Jpmboy

6950X said:


> I missed a deal of a lifetime on a 7980XE on eBay yesterday. It was delided with a rocket cool IHS, it sold for $1,076 dollars with about 50 bids. I was gonna buy it and grab a X299 board on the cheap..
> 
> I still need a GPU, whatever CPU, and a PSU.. I’m gonna run a custom loop as I’ve got all the components for that. pump, reservoir, radiators, etc. etc.
> 
> This new build, it’s not primarily for gaming. That’s just as a pass time really. If I don’t find a cheap 6950X. I might just get a Threadripper.
> 
> At this rate with intel and AMD seeing who’s is bigger the 9900K and socket will be obsolete fairly quickly.
> 
> I’ve beem a longtime reader I know your a enthusiast type of CPU guy your self haha. I’ve learned an extreme amount with my old J series 5960X that I ran a couple years back. It did finally fail after running 4.7ghz so long.



I'm surprised the 5960X failed - if anything has been going on that cpu it has been the IMC. Honestly, I can tell you from hands-on today. (I have 6950x, 7980XE, 9700K, 2700X (AMD), 8086K and a 4960X rig running right now. IMO: Go big on the GPU and PCIE lanes for SLI are not an issue; get the best clocking 6+core CPU you can find (assuming you really do not need an HCC chip, here the 8086K is the best bet. they all do at least 5.2 on 6 cores); a fast NVME drive, and a good samsung b-die ram kit on a 4-slot board. That configuration simply cannot be beat in how it games. The 9700K and 8086K rigs are the "snappiest". \




xarot said:


> No, I mean in gaming only Broadwell-E is often faster clock-to-clock than Skylake-X. But the requestor was not so keen on gaming so.


this is true... it's an IPC/IPT thing. However, coffee lake has a better IPC than either.


----------



## Dwofzz

So I've done some more testing on the Apex. The cpu is still not delided and I'm still running the H60 with 1 fan on the modo carton 

Tested all core AVX and AVX512, 41 GHz 1.129v and 4.4 GHz 1.16 ~ going to tinker a bit more with the 4.4 setup!

Update 4.4 GHz all cores and when running AVX/AVX512 at 1.139v
4.4GHz at 1.1v 
4.4GHz at 1.064v


----------



## 6950X

Jpmboy said:


> 6950X said:
> 
> 
> 
> I missed a deal of a lifetime on a 7980XE on eBay yesterday. It was delided with a rocket cool IHS, it sold for $1,076 dollars with about 50 bids. I was gonna buy it and grab a X299 board on the cheap..
> 
> I still need a GPU, whatever CPU, and a PSU.. I’m gonna run a custom loop as I’ve got all the components for that. pump, reservoir, radiators, etc. etc.
> 
> This new build, it’s not primarily for gaming. That’s just as a pass time really. If I don’t find a cheap 6950X. I might just get a Threadripper.
> 
> At this rate with intel and AMD seeing who’s is bigger the 9900K and socket will be obsolete fairly quickly.
> 
> I’ve beem a longtime reader I know your a enthusiast type of CPU guy your self haha. I’ve learned an extreme amount with my old J series 5960X that I ran a couple years back. It did finally fail after running 4.7ghz so long.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm surprised the 5960X failed - if anything has been going on that cpu it has been the IMC. Honestly, I can tell you from hands-on today. (I have 6950x, 7980XE, 9700K, 2700X (AMD), 8086K and a 4960X rig running right now. IMO: Go big on the GPU and PCIE lanes for SLI are not an issue; get the best clocking 6+core CPU you can find (assuming you really do not need an HCC chip, here the 8086K is the best bet. they all do at least 5.2 on 6 cores); a fast NVME drive, and a good samsung b-die ram kit on a 4-slot board. That configuration simply cannot be beat in how it games. The 9700K and 8086K rigs are the "snappiest". /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif\
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xarot said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, I mean in gaming only Broadwell-E is often faster clock-to-clock than Skylake-X. But the requestor was not so keen on gaming so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> this is true... it's an IPC/IPT thing. However, coffee lake has a better IPC than either.
Click to expand...

I’m assuming the IMC did go bad. I could only get the cpu to work properly with only 1 memory stick. If my memory serves me right, I think it was only running in single channel. That’s why I bought another motherboard, I experience the same thing after testing with the Godlike carbon.

Do you know what you can push your 6950X to? What DDR4 speeds can you overclock to with everyday use?


----------



## Dwofzz

So I tried 4.6 GHz but I didn't get it to work at 1.15v and 70c is my max so I backed of to 4.5GHz and 1.135v. 
Going to leave it like this until I get the dark and then I do all the tests again


----------



## 6950X

Dwofzz said:


> So I tried 4.6 GHz but I didn't get it to work at 1.15v and 70c is my max so I backed of to 4.5GHz and 1.135v.
> Going to leave it like this until I get the dark and then I do all the tests again


That 7920X is quick man. I may get one of these. Very impressive, at even only 4.5ghz and 4.6Ghz. I see a lot more room in these with proper cooling.


----------



## 6950X

It seems almost like the 7920X and 7940X are in a similar price range on the used market. These chips are so much drastically cheaper than 7960X, and 7980XE. There’s a lot of pricing hype with the latter two top tier options.


----------



## toncij

Jpmboy said:


> I'm surprised the 5960X failed - if anything has been going on that cpu it has been the IMC. Honestly, I can tell you from hands-on today. (I have 6950x, 7980XE, 9700K, 2700X (AMD), 8086K and a 4960X rig running right now. IMO: Go big on the GPU and PCIE lanes for SLI are not an issue; get the best clocking 6+core CPU you can find (assuming you really do not need an HCC chip, here the 8086K is the best bet. they all do at least 5.2 on 6 cores); a fast NVME drive, and a good samsung b-die ram kit on a 4-slot board. That configuration simply cannot be beat in how it games. The 9700K and 8086K rigs are the "snappiest". \
> 
> 
> 
> this is true... it's an IPC/IPT thing. However, coffee lake has a better IPC than either.


It seems that it's a terrible time to build a HEDT, since we don't know how Sunny Cove vs. Ryzen 2, especially in HEDT will play out. But any machine I build today is 3-4k euro. Building for 4-5k to get more PCIE lanes and loose single-core performance is the most troublesome.


----------



## Dwofzz

toncij said:


> Jpmboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm surprised the 5960X failed - if anything has been going on that cpu it has been the IMC. Honestly, I can tell you from hands-on today. (I have 6950x, 7980XE, 9700K, 2700X (AMD), 8086K and a 4960X rig running right now. IMO: Go big on the GPU and PCIE lanes for SLI are not an issue; get the best clocking 6+core CPU you can find (assuming you really do not need an HCC chip, here the 8086K is the best bet. they all do at least 5.2 on 6 cores); a fast NVME drive, and a good samsung b-die ram kit on a 4-slot board. That configuration simply cannot be beat in how it games. The 9700K and 8086K rigs are the "snappiest". /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif\
> 
> 
> 
> this is true... it's an IPC/IPT thing. However, coffee lake has a better IPC than either.
> 
> 
> 
> It seems that it's a terrible time to build a HEDT, since we don't know how Sunny Cove vs. Ryzen 2, especially in HEDT will play out. But any machine I build today is 3-4k euro. Building for 4-5k to get more PCIE lanes and loose single-core performance is the most troublesome.
Click to expand...

It depends.. I payed 1100$ for the 7920x 508$ for the Trident Z and 360$ for the Apex... And the Dark was 216$ Soo.. well I mean you could get some cheaper RAM and a dark with say a used cpu and be within the 1200$ price range. If and only if you must/ want a Intel HEDT right now.


----------



## 6950X

I keep hearing about the dark X299 board more than usual when it comes to overclocking. This board looks just average to me. What’s the deal with everyone running the dark?


----------



## Dwofzz

6950X said:


> I keep hearing about the dark X299 board more than usual when it comes to overclocking. This board looks just average to me. What’s the deal with everyone running the dark?


 I'll let you now at the end of the week how it compares to the Apex 🙂


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
EVGA is just dumping them
It has two probably screaming little fans on the vrm's so it would have better stock vrm cooling is about all 
Just my one little fan has a high pitch on it thankfully it doesn't come on all that much only on shutdown it runs for about 30 seconds.
e-atx make sure your case will fit it


----------



## 6950X

I’m being tempted by the so many amazing CPU’s available to us! 

Tough choices.

Intel 7940X used $700

TR 2950X new $749 OEM 

TR 2920X new $619 OEM

TR 1950X used $425 retail box

6950X new $600 retail boxed

I’ve got about $825 burning a hole in my pocket, that I can use towards a CPU now. I’d have to buy the motherboard the following week, unless it is a 6950X as I’ve got a X99 motherboard already.

I know this is an Intel thread, but was anyone here tempted by the Threadripper 2? I’m thinking either 2950X, 2920X or a used 7940X that is just as powerful as any AMD (16) core only really fast IPC at 4.5Ghz OC.


----------



## Hydroplane

6950X said:


> I’m being tempted by the so many amazing CPU’s available to us!
> 
> Tough choices.
> 
> Intel 7940X used $700
> 
> TR 2950X new $749 OEM
> 
> TR 2920X new $619 OEM
> 
> TR 1950X used $425 retail box
> 
> 6950X new $600 retail boxed
> 
> I’ve got about $825 burning a hole in my pocket, that I can use towards a CPU now. I’d have to buy the motherboard the following week, unless it is a 6950X as I’ve got a X99 motherboard already.
> 
> I know this is an Intel thread, but was anyone here tempted by the Threadripper 2? I’m thinking either 2950X, 2920X or a used 7940X that is just as powerful as any AMD (16) core only really fast IPC at 4.5Ghz OC.


Of those the 1950X sounds like by far the best bang for the buck, the 7940X and 2950X may be a touch faster but cost 70% more lol


----------



## Dreamliner

I just built a rig with a bone stock 7820X in an Asus TUF Mark 1. I set all cores to 4.8Ghz and changed zero other BIOS settings. Cinebench R15 gave me a 2040 score and RealBench ran for over 2 hours with a max temp of 101c. I bought a delid kit and Conductonaut is on it's way, but I'm not sure its necessary...thoughts?


----------



## 6950X

Dreamliner said:


> I just built a rig with a bone stock 7820X in an Asus TUF Mark 1. I set all cores to 4.8Ghz and changed zero other BIOS settings. Cinebench R15 gave me a 2040 score and RealBench ran for over 2 hours with a max temp of 101c. I bought a delid kit and Conductonaut is on it's way, but I'm not sure its necessary...thoughts?


101C is really really seriously hot. But honestly, an average load or just gaming will not get it anywhere near those temps. So unless you want to run 100% load stress test all the time then delid it. If it is stable, and it stays under 90C under everyday usage I’d ride it out! 

I wouldn’t advise running chips over 100C lol.


----------



## Dreamliner

6950X said:


> 101C is really really seriously hot. But honestly, an average load or just gaming will not get it anywhere near those temps. So unless you want to run 100% load stress test all the time then delid it. If it is stable, and it stays under 90C under everyday usage I’d ride it out!
> 
> I wouldn’t advise running chips over 100C lol.


I agree that 101C is pretty toasty, but it’s a pretty strong OC and still stable. How often are chips actually subjected to constant 100% loads like a stress test anyhow?


----------



## 6950X

Dreamliner said:


> 6950X said:
> 
> 
> 
> 101C is really really seriously hot. But honestly, an average load or just gaming will not get it anywhere near those temps. So unless you want to run 100% load stress test all the time then delid it. If it is stable, and it stays under 90C under everyday usage I’d ride it out!
> 
> I wouldn’t advise running chips over 100C lol.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree that 101C is pretty toasty, but it’s a pretty strong OC and still stable. How often are chips actually subjected to constant 100% loads like a stress test anyhow?
Click to expand...

Not very often. Unless your running a program that is pushing all 8 cores to 100% but even then, the temps don’t get anywhere near as hot as a stress test will push a processor to.

I ran my 5960X at about 4.75Ghz daily. It would get around 90C in intel burn test 100% load. 

But, I had also used Adobe premier pro CC daily. And while encoding a 4K video, the CPU was at 100% and temps were like 68C.

So, I’d say if it stays around or under 90C during gaming, and doing anything else besides a stress test. 

The temperature a stress test provides is just unrealistic.

But I wouldn’t run at 100C for the extended time period ever again. You could cause degradation or worse.

You could go for a custom loop. It’s an investment! There could always be a 7980XE in your near future when prices come down as a upgrade.


----------



## Dreamliner

6950X said:


> Not very often. Unless your running a program that is pushing all 8 cores to 100% but even then, the temps don’t get anywhere near as hot as a stress test will push a processor to.
> 
> I ran my 5960X at about 4.75Ghz daily. It would get around 90C in intel burn test 100% load.
> 
> But, I had also used Adobe premier pro CC daily. And while encoding a 4K video, the CPU was at 100% and temps were like 68C.
> 
> So, I’d say if it stays around or under 90C during gaming, and doing anything else besides a stress test.
> 
> The temperature a stress test provides is just unrealistic.
> 
> But I wouldn’t run at 100C for the extended time period ever again. You could cause degradation or worse.
> 
> You could go for a custom loop. It’s an investment! There could always be a 7980XE in your near future when prices come down as a upgrade.


I could always delid but I’m second guessing it. I guess I’m wondering if it’s necessary. With how loud I hear everyone screaming about Intel TIM, I was expecting thermal throttling.


----------



## 6950X

Dreamliner said:


> 6950X said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not very often. Unless your running a program that is pushing all 8 cores to 100% but even then, the temps don’t get anywhere near as hot as a stress test will push a processor to.
> 
> I ran my 5960X at about 4.75Ghz daily. It would get around 90C in intel burn test 100% load.
> 
> But, I had also used Adobe premier pro CC daily. And while encoding a 4K video, the CPU was at 100% and temps were like 68C.
> 
> So, I’d say if it stays around or under 90C during gaming, and doing anything else besides a stress test.
> 
> The temperature a stress test provides is just unrealistic.
> 
> But I wouldn’t run at 100C for the extended time period ever again. You could cause degradation or worse.
> 
> You could go for a custom loop. It’s an investment! There could always be a 7980XE in your near future when prices come down as a upgrade.
> 
> 
> 
> I could always delid but I’m second guessing it. I guess I’m wondering if it’s necessary. With how loud I hear everyone screaming about Intel TIM, I was expecting thermal throttling.
Click to expand...

Deliding the chip will reduce temps by probably 10-14 degrees Celsius. You may gain another couple hundred MHz too. But, I don’t think it’s worth it on a 7820X. Your doing pretty good at 4.7Ghz. Another thing about delidding, is it literally kills any kind of resale value a processor has. 

I missed a deal on a 7980XE that was delided. It sold for $1,000 bucks, compared to about $1,580 average.

But, if your trying to hit 5Ghz like some of these 7900X (10) cores can do. Hey go for it! 

I have delided about (4) processors. I did kill a 6600K out of those (4) be careful.


----------



## Dreamliner

6950X said:


> Deliding the chip will reduce temps by probably 10-14 degrees Celsius. You may gain another couple hundred MHz too. But, I don’t think it’s worth it on a 7820X. Your doing pretty good at 4.7Ghz. Another thing about delidding, is it literally kills any kind of resale value a processor has.
> 
> I missed a deal on a 7980XE that was delided. It sold for $1,000 bucks, compared to about $1,580 average.
> 
> But, if your trying to hit 5Ghz like some of these 7900X (10) cores can do. Hey go for it!
> 
> I have delided about (4) processors. I did kill a 6600K out of those (4) be careful.


Yeah, I think I'm talking myself out of delidding. I'm actually pretty pleased with the 4.8Ghz OC, I was only expecting 4.5Ghz (that's what my 5820K does). Just out of curiosity, I want my chip to still SpeedStep and such to save power, I just want it to boost all the way to 4.8Ghz when something demanding hits. The only thing I set in my Asus TUF Mark 1 BIOS was the OC "per core" and set them all to 48. I didn't change anything else for OC, will this still SpeedStep?

Idle, a OC and non OC chip should be identical, OC only affect max capable speeds, right?

I don't plan to mess with voltages at all, I usually leave all that alone.


----------



## 6950X

Dreamliner said:


> 6950X said:
> 
> 
> 
> Deliding the chip will reduce temps by probably 10-14 degrees Celsius. You may gain another couple hundred MHz too. But, I don’t think it’s worth it on a 7820X. Your doing pretty good at 4.7Ghz. Another thing about delidding, is it literally kills any kind of resale value a processor has.
> 
> I missed a deal on a 7980XE that was delided. It sold for $1,000 bucks, compared to about $1,580 average.
> 
> But, if your trying to hit 5Ghz like some of these 7900X (10) cores can do. Hey go for it!
> 
> I have delided about (4) processors. I did kill a 6600K out of those (4) be careful.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, I think I'm talking myself out of delidding. I'm actually pretty pleased with the 4.8Ghz OC, I was only expecting 4.5Ghz (that's what my 5820K does). Just out of curiosity, I want my chip to still SpeedStep and such to save power, I just want it to boost all the way to 4.8Ghz when something demanding hits. The only thing I set in my Asus TUF Mark 1 BIOS was the OC "per core" and set them all to 48. I didn't change anything else for OC, will this still SpeedStep?
> 
> Idle, a OC and non OC chip should be identical, OC only affect max capable speeds, right?
> 
> I don't plan to mess with voltages at all, I usually leave all that alone.
Click to expand...

You can set it in windows power saving properties and it will speed step. 

If it’s set to high performance default in windows I don’t think it will speed step. You need to set the minimum cpu percentage in high performance windows power profile to 5% minimum and 100% maximum.


----------



## Dwofzz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> EVGA is just dumping them
> It has two probably screaming little fans on the vrm's so it would have better stock vrm cooling is about all
> Just my one little fan has a high pitch on it thankfully it doesn't come on all that much only on shutdown it runs for about 30 seconds.
> e-atx make sure your case will fit it /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif


They are not that loud.. and you can lower the rpm or even remove them if you have fans above the vrm heat spreader. But I'll test it for you guys, So I'll be back with my honest opinion about it!


----------



## RichKnecht

6950X said:


> You can set it in windows power saving properties and it will speed step.
> 
> If it’s set to high performance default in windows I don’t think it will speed step. You need to set the minimum cpu percentage in high performance windows power profile to 5% minimum and 100% maximum.


I have Windows set to high performance and speed step works fine. It will down clock the processor and reduce voltages as long as you are using adaptive. If vcore is set to manual, Windows will not decrease the voltage, just the clocks.


----------



## ThrashZone

Dwofzz said:


> They are not that loud.. and you can lower the rpm or even remove them if you have fans above the vrm heat spreader. But I'll test it for you guys, So I'll be back with my honest opinion about it!


Hi,
So I'm being dishonest with my opinion of asus's tiny vrm fan noise lol okay

Either way evga was it's own worst enemy 
Late launch of a x299 500.us board now they are dumping them through ebay account at 200.us 

Funny evga is still listing it for 500.us on their website is that just for the suckers add to cart :thumb:
https://www.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=151-SX-E299-KR


----------



## Dwofzz

ThrashZone said:


> Dwofzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are not that loud.. and you can lower the rpm or even remove them if you have fans above the vrm heat spreader. But I'll test it for you guys, So I'll be back with my honest opinion about it!
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> So I'm being dishonest with my opinion of asus's tiny vrm fan noise lol okay
> 
> Either way evga was it's own worst enemy
> Late launch of a x299 500.us board now they are dumping them through ebay account at 200.us
> 
> Funny evga is still listing it for 500.us on their website is that just for the suckers add to cart /forum/images/smilies/thumb.gif
> https://www.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=151-SX-E299-KR
Click to expand...

 Sorry wasn't supposed to sound like you where dishonest! I meant the fans on the dark, I don't use any cooling on the Apex atm so that one is dead silent 🙂 "I'll give you my honest opinion" about whether the dark is a board to consider or not over the Apex or any other x299.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Only difference I see in the evga and asus little fans is the fins on the evga are smaller so maybe they won't give off a high pitch scream as my x99 sabertooth does.


----------



## Dwofzz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Only difference I see in the evga and asus little fans is the fins on the evga are smaller so maybe they won't give off a high pitch scream as my x99 sabertooth does.


The Vrm's a significantly cooler on the dark (40~c) the Apex is around 70c which isn't bad so, I'm not done with the Apex yet so I can't tell you more right now but the Apex is.. just a dream to work with


----------



## Dwofzz

7920x 4.5Ghz 1.135v lvl 5 LLC 140% VCCIN 1.9v
Trident Z 3800MHz CL15 1.4v IO/SA 1v/0.9v 
Cache 3GHz 1.115v (the cache is dull on my chip..)

62c as max temp on a H60 with one fan.. I call that pretty good (ambient is 19c)  

Now I'm just going to use it as is for a couple of days then I'll be switching over to the dark.


----------



## Dreamliner

Dwofzz said:


> 7920x 4.5Ghz 1.135v lvl 5 LLC 140% VCCIN 1.9v
> Trident Z 3800MHz CL15 1.4v IO/SA 1v/0.9v
> Cache 3GHz 1.115v (the cache is dull on my chip..)
> 
> 62c as max temp on a H60 with one fan.. I call that pretty good (ambient is 19c)
> 
> Now I'm just going to use it as is for a couple of days then I'll be switching over to the dark.


How are your temps that low?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I'm sure the ambient isn't hurting.


----------



## Dwofzz

Dreamliner said:


> Dwofzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 7920x 4.5Ghz 1.135v lvl 5 LLC 140% VCCIN 1.9v
> Trident Z 3800MHz CL15 1.4v IO/SA 1v/0.9v
> Cache 3GHz 1.115v (the cache is dull on my chip..)
> 
> 62c as max temp on a H60 with one fan.. I call that pretty good (ambient is 19c) /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> Now I'm just going to use it as is for a couple of days then I'll be switching over to the dark.
> 
> 
> 
> How are your temps that low?
Click to expand...

 Ambient and a chip with good TIM application I guess.


----------



## 6950X

Dreamliner said:


> Dwofzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 7920x 4.5Ghz 1.135v lvl 5 LLC 140% VCCIN 1.9v
> Trident Z 3800MHz CL15 1.4v IO/SA 1v/0.9v
> Cache 3GHz 1.115v (the cache is dull on my chip..)
> 
> 62c as max temp on a H60 with one fan.. I call that pretty good (ambient is 19c) /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> Now I'm just going to use it as is for a couple of days then I'll be switching over to the dark.
> 
> 
> 
> How are your temps that low?
Click to expand...

That’s probably his max temp with normal usage, or gaming.


----------



## Dwofzz

6950X said:


> Dreamliner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dwofzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 7920x 4.5Ghz 1.135v lvl 5 LLC 140% VCCIN 1.9v
> Trident Z 3800MHz CL15 1.4v IO/SA 1v/0.9v
> Cache 3GHz 1.115v (the cache is dull on my chip..)
> 
> 62c as max temp on a H60 with one fan.. I call that pretty good (ambient is 19c) /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> Now I'm just going to use it as is for a couple of days then I'll be switching over to the dark.
> 
> 
> 
> How are your temps that low?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s probably his max temp with normal usage, or gaming.
Click to expand...

Nope, it's after a lot of tests. I use HW info and max temperatur ever seen was 62c, only thing that pushes the temps higher is prime95 smal fft but that is a unrealistic scenario. Here is the system, I did add one 120mm and a 140mm just to get some airflow over the RAM and mobo.


----------



## 6950X

Dwofzz said:


> 6950X said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dreamliner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dwofzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 7920x 4.5Ghz 1.135v lvl 5 LLC 140% VCCIN 1.9v
> Trident Z 3800MHz CL15 1.4v IO/SA 1v/0.9v
> Cache 3GHz 1.115v (the cache is dull on my chip..)
> 
> 62c as max temp on a H60 with one fan.. I call that pretty good (ambient is 19c) /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> Now I'm just going to use it as is for a couple of days then I'll be switching over to the dark.
> 
> 
> 
> How are your temps that low?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s probably his max temp with normal usage, or gaming.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, it's after a lot of tests. I use HW info and max temperatur ever seen was 62c, only thing that pushes the temps higher is prime95 smal fft but that is a unrealistic scenario. Here is the system, I did add one 120mm and a 140mm just to get some airflow over the RAM and mobo.
Click to expand...

The other users temps being much higher than yours, are based on those unrealistic scenarios lol.

So there you have it. 

What kind of gpu is that?


----------



## Dwofzz

6950X said:


> Dwofzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6950X said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dreamliner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dwofzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 7920x 4.5Ghz 1.135v lvl 5 LLC 140% VCCIN 1.9v
> Trident Z 3800MHz CL15 1.4v IO/SA 1v/0.9v
> Cache 3GHz 1.115v (the cache is dull on my chip..)
> 
> 62c as max temp on a H60 with one fan.. I call that pretty good (ambient is 19c) /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> Now I'm just going to use it as is for a couple of days then I'll be switching over to the dark.
> 
> 
> 
> How are your temps that low?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s probably his max temp with normal usage, or gaming.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, it's after a lot of tests. I use HW info and max temperatur ever seen was 62c, only thing that pushes the temps higher is prime95 smal fft but that is a unrealistic scenario. Here is the system, I did add one 120mm and a 140mm just to get some airflow over the RAM and mobo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The other users temps being much higher than yours, are based on those unrealistic scenarios lol.
> 
> So there you have it.
> 
> What kind of gpu is that?
Click to expand...

Also worth noting is that I'm on bios 1401, if I would have been on 1503 or 1602 does temps would be +10c.. 
It's a GTX 980Ti classified 🙂


----------



## RichKnecht

Dwofzz said:


> Also worth noting is that I'm on bios 1401, if I would have been on 1503 or 1602 does temps would be +10c..
> It's a GTX 980Ti classified 🙂


1401 makes that much of a difference? I know when I went to 1602 my temps went up ~5C at idle and load, so I rolled it back to 1503 and temps returned to "normal". Wonder if I can go back to 1401 and see what happens to temps.


----------



## 6950X

Dwofzz said:


> 6950X said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dwofzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 6950X said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dreamliner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dwofzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 7920x 4.5Ghz 1.135v lvl 5 LLC 140% VCCIN 1.9v
> Trident Z 3800MHz CL15 1.4v IO/SA 1v/0.9v
> Cache 3GHz 1.115v (the cache is dull on my chip..)
> 
> 62c as max temp on a H60 with one fan.. I call that pretty good (ambient is 19c) /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> Now I'm just going to use it as is for a couple of days then I'll be switching over to the dark.
> 
> 
> 
> How are your temps that low?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That’s probably his max temp with normal usage, or gaming.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Nope, it's after a lot of tests. I use HW info and max temperatur ever seen was 62c, only thing that pushes the temps higher is prime95 smal fft but that is a unrealistic scenario. Here is the system, I did add one 120mm and a 140mm just to get some airflow over the RAM and mobo.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The other users temps being much higher than yours, are based on those unrealistic scenarios lol.
> 
> So there you have it.
> 
> What kind of gpu is that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Also worth noting is that I'm on bios 1401, if I would have been on 1503 or 1602 does temps would be +10c..
> It's a GTX 980Ti classified 🙂
Click to expand...

Ok I thought so. It’s amazing how the tables turn. We can just about keep our gpu’s longer than our cpu’s Lol.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I know my friend will probably put his 7900x not delided up on ebay I suppose 
Might wait a little longer and see how many will side grade to 99..x just for a higher cache and solder lol


----------



## Dreamliner

Dwofzz said:


> Nope, it's after a lot of tests. I use HW info and max temperatur ever seen was 62c, only thing that pushes the temps higher is prime95 smal fft but that is a unrealistic scenario. Here is the system, I did add one 120mm and a 140mm just to get some airflow over the RAM and mobo.


Did you delid? What kind of “tests”? Most people when talking about temps are using programs like AIDA64, RealBench or Prime95, specifically to cause worst case heat scenario. 

While I agree some of those test are unrealistic for daily usage, you can’t run something like 3DMark or Cinebench and compare it to other people’s temps. Your 62c temp is not really stressing that chip. You’ll thermal throttle on Prime95 with that cooler.


----------



## Dwofzz

Dreamliner said:


> Did you delid? What kind of “tests”? Most people when talking about temps are using programs like AIDA64, RealBench or Prime95, specifically to cause worst case heat scenario.
> 
> While I agree some of those test are unrealistic for daily usage, you can’t run something like 3DMark or Cinebench and compare it to other people’s temps. Your 62c temp is not really stressing that chip. You’ll thermal throttle on Prime95 with that cooler.


First of all are you guys talking about core temp or package? Second no it is not deleted but the IHS is plane on this chip and I use lower voltage to achieve this oc then the chip uses by default.
Did you guys even bother reading my last posts? 
I've tested the system in this order : Does it post? Does it Boot? Does it run cinebech? Does it run Firestrike/ Time Spy? Does it run Realbench? If yes on all then I'll render a couple of videos, move some files, reboot windos a couple of times. If it hasn't crashed yet I just use it as normal, Running Prime95 or aida64 for an extended period of time is useless and a waste of time. I've been overclocking for a bout 13 yesrs or so and when I was new to it I used to check for stability that way, But.. I've had to many systems failing on me under normal use even after a successful run of OCCT or Prime95.
But aida64 cpu, cache and mem test puts it right at 75c on the hottest core (10 min test just for you) Same goes for handbrake when encoding a 10 min video.


----------



## RichKnecht

I have been running my OC on adaptive voltage for the past week to see if there was any advantage to using it. For me, the answer is no. The only difference I saw was lower idle temps due to the chip's voltage drop at idle which resulted in a 2C idle temp drop from 25 to 23. However, I did notice that my load and everyday usage temps went up by about 4-5C thanks to afaptive's tendency to increase vcore to over 1.29V on a few cores and 1.26-1.28 on the others when I have it set to 1.23. So, I switched back to manual mode with my voltage once again set to 1.23. Unless I am doing something wrong or you want to try and save electricity, adaptive is pointless to me and I find it no different than using "aiuto".


----------



## Dreamliner

Dwofzz said:


> First of all are you guys talking about core temp or package? Second no it is not deleted but the IHS is plane on this chip and I use lower voltage to achieve this oc then the chip uses by default.
> Did you guys even bother reading my last posts?
> I've tested the system in this order : Does it post? Does it Boot? Does it run cinebech? Does it run Firestrike/ Time Spy? Does it run Realbench? If yes on all then I'll render a couple of videos, move some files, reboot windos a couple of times. If it hasn't crashed yet I just use it as normal, Running Prime95 or aida64 for an extended period of time is useless and a waste of time. I've been overclocking for a bout 13 yesrs or so and when I was new to it I used to check for stability that way, But.. I've had to many systems failing on me under normal use even after a successful run of OCCT or Prime95.
> But aida64 cpu, cache and mem test puts it right at 75c on the hottest core (10 min test just for you) Same goes for handbrake when encoding a 10 min video.


If you run RealBench for 30 minutes your hottest core will not be 62C or 75C, I can promise you that. Everyone in here with a water cooler is running stress tests for long periods of time to normalize temps. Since you've been overclocking for 13 years, you know running a 10 minute benchmark doesn't have enough time to warm up the fluid in your AIO so you don't actually know the thermal capacity and limits of your system. Since I've been overclocking for 13 years, I know these tests can be a bit unrealistic to real world usage, but I'm also not going to pretend my chip magically runs cooler than anyone else because I'm not testing the same. Even running for a measly 10 minutes you already bumped up your "max temp" from 62C to 75C.

If everyone else is posting their 1/4 mile time, posting your 1/8 mile time is disingenuous. It doesn't matter that you didn't actually stress test your chip, you just have to acknowledge you didn't when posting about it.


----------



## Jpmboy

Dreamliner said:


> If you run RealBench for 30 minutes your hottest core will not be 62C or 75C, I can promise you that. Everyone in here with a water cooler is running stress tests for long periods of time to normalize temps. Since you've been overclocking for 13 years, you know running a 10 minute benchmark doesn't have enough time to warm up the fluid in your AIO *so you don't actually know the thermal capacity and limits of your system*. Since I've been overclocking for 13 years, I know these tests can be a bit unrealistic to real world usage, but I'm also not going to pretend my chip magically runs cooler than anyone else because I'm not testing the same. Even running for a measly 10 minutes you already bumped up your "max temp" from 62C to 75C.
> 
> If everyone else is posting their 1/4 mile time, posting your 1/8 mile time is disingenuous. It doesn't matter that you didn't actually stress test your chip, you just have to acknowledge you didn't when posting about it.



You guys are talking about two different things... checking the OC for _fault_ and finding the _capability of the cooling_ configuration. don't confuse the two.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Blender rendering demo files push the cores to 100% just like prime would 
I see no difference than doing blender rendering is a more realistic usage test than prime is
Plus a lot prettier images appear and blender is more useful than prime is.

If you want it to run longer or until you want to cancel just use render animation instead of render image and it repeats.
Demo file downloads include a gpu and cpu render file so one can test both 
https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/


----------



## Dreamliner

Jpmboy said:


> You guys are talking about two different things... checking the OC for _fault_ and finding the _capability of the cooling_ configuration. don't confuse the two.


Agreed. All I'm saying is stating "max temp" when all your doing is checking for fault is a bit disingenuous. If it isn't then my chip's "max temp" is 25C...I mean, that's what it says in the BIOS after it posts. 

I fully acknowledge some of the stress tests are not real world realistic, but we have to compare apples-to-apples to avoid confusing people.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yes it does 
To make matters worse hwinfo shows two cpu package temps 
A happy and a sad listing both should be posted lol


----------



## Dwofzz

Dreamliner said:


> Dwofzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> First of all are you guys talking about core temp or package? Second no it is not deleted but the IHS is plane on this chip and I use lower voltage to achieve this oc then the chip uses by default.
> Did you guys even bother reading my last posts?
> I've tested the system in this order : Does it post? Does it Boot? Does it run cinebech? Does it run Firestrike/ Time Spy? Does it run Realbench? If yes on all then I'll render a couple of videos, move some files, reboot windos a couple of times. If it hasn't crashed yet I just use it as normal, Running Prime95 or aida64 for an extended period of time is useless and a waste of time. I've been overclocking for a bout 13 yesrs or so and when I was new to it I used to check for stability that way, But.. I've had to many systems failing on me under normal use even after a successful run of OCCT or Prime95.
> But aida64 cpu, cache and mem test puts it right at 75c on the hottest core (10 min test just for you) Same goes for handbrake when encoding a 10 min video.
> 
> 
> 
> If you run RealBench for 30 minutes your hottest core will not be 62C or 75C, I can promise you that. Everyone in here with a water cooler is running stress tests for long periods of time to normalize temps. Since you've been overclocking for 13 years, you know running a 10 minute benchmark doesn't have enough time to warm up the fluid in your AIO so you don't actually know the thermal capacity and limits of your system. Since I've been overclocking for 13 years, I know these tests can be a bit unrealistic to real world usage, but I'm also not going to pretend my chip magically runs cooler than anyone else because I'm not testing the same. Even running for a measly 10 minutes you already bumped up your "max temp" from 62C to 75C.
> 
> If everyone else is posting their 1/4 mile time, posting your 1/8 mile time is disingenuous. It doesn't matter that you didn't actually stress test your chip, you just have to acknowledge you didn't when posting about it.
Click to expand...

Well then you know as well as I do that I don't care what temp I'd get with prime95 or even real bench. Because this is a temporary setup with temporary cooling, it's just for testing and it's way easier to change motherboard when the setup is like that. You will never see me running stress tests like prime95 for hours and hours and neither will you see Der8auer, Kingpin, Buildzoid or any other hardcore overclocker who doesn't use their system as a 24/7 machine.. This is a test between the Apex and the Dark so temp doesn't matter the score does however. Cus I'm hunting scores and if I'm being limited by cooling I get some dice or ln2 and the problem is gone but I'm not there yet.


----------



## Jpmboy

Dreamliner said:


> Agreed. All I'm saying is stating "max temp" when all your doing is checking for fault is a bit disingenuous. If it isn't then my chip's "max temp" is 25C...I mean, that's what it says in the BIOS after it posts.
> 
> I fully acknowledge some of the stress tests are not real world realistic, but we have to compare apples-to-apples to avoid confusing people.


 huh? unless booting to bios is what one considers "stable", then sure, your 25C chip is a golden one. 
Stability is subjective. what you do to establish stability for a millisecond trader and a gaming rig are very different. Stability is only defined by the intended use. Running p95 on a rig that will never hunt primes with AVX make no sense. what trips up these rigs is rapidly changing load and instruction sets, not hammering the FPU with the same IS for 5 mins. Mix it up. :thumb:


----------



## Dreamliner

^My goal was simply to point out apples-to-apples comparison is what is fair. Most people point to long term stress tests when talking about max temps, not a quick Cinebench run or similar. I just got annoyed when I saw someone with an AIO proven to be less effective than air coolers acting like his max temp was 63C.


----------



## Dwofzz

Dreamliner said:


> ^My goal was simply to point out apples-to-apples comparison is what is fair. Most people point to long term stress tests when talking about max temps, not a quick Cinebench run or similar. I just got annoyed when I saw someone with an AIO proven to be less effective than air coolers acting like his max temp was 63C.


But it is.. when doing valid stuff. Checking temps with a program that heat soak your system like crazy (like no other program ever will) is not comparing apples to apples anyways. So I don't know what you're on about.


----------



## ESRCJ

So I finally delidded my XE and I think I may need to redo it. I ran P95 small FFTs just to see the temps and the hottest core hit 94C, whereas the coolest core never passed 64C. This is a rather massive variance, which makes me think my application of the LM must not have been adequate. Before I take it apart again, I'm curious to know if anyone else is getting such a variance across cores with an XE after delidding. For reference, this was tested at 4.6GHz at 1.2V and a 480mm rad.


----------



## RXWX

Are Kaby Lake-X's still available? Is there still use cases for those chips, seen as there are motherboards specifically designed for them. https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/X299M-A-PRO.html https://www.gigabyte.com/us/Motherboard/X299-AORUS-Gaming-rev-10#kf


----------



## PWn3R

gridironcpj said:


> So I finally delidded my XE and I think I may need to redo it. I ran P95 small FFTs just to see the temps and the hottest core hit 94C, whereas the coolest core never passed 64C. This is a rather massive variance, which makes me think my application of the LM must not have been adequate. Before I take it apart again, I'm curious to know if anyone else is getting such a variance across cores with an XE after delidding. For reference, this was tested at 4.6GHz at 1.2V and a 480mm rad.


480 rad here. Did my delid myself as well. Spread on mine is 10c which I don't like. Something wrong with your LM application or your die is very not flat.

Sent from my MIX 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## ESRCJ

PWn3R said:


> gridironcpj said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I finally delidded my XE and I think I may need to redo it. I ran P95 small FFTs just to see the temps and the hottest core hit 94C, whereas the coolest core never passed 64C. This is a rather massive variance, which makes me think my application of the LM must not have been adequate. Before I take it apart again, I'm curious to know if anyone else is getting such a variance across cores with an XE after delidding. For reference, this was tested at 4.6GHz at 1.2V and a 480mm rad.
> 
> 
> 
> 480 rad here. Did my delid myself as well. Spread on mine is 10c which I don't like. Something wrong with your LM application or your die is very not flat.
> 
> Sent from my MIX 3 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I reapplied the LM and now the cores that ran hot are running cool, but two cores (13 and 14) are now running hot. This is a major pain lol. Are you resealing yours? I shed some LM off the second time and swear it was even as could be.


----------



## RichKnecht

gridironcpj said:


> I reapplied the LM and now the cores that ran hot are running cool, but two cores (13 and 14) are now running hot. This is a major pain lol. Are you resealing yours? I shed some LM off the second time and swear it was even as could be.


It IS a pain. I am having the same issues with my 7900X. Most cores barely hit 65 under load where as a couple hit 80. I haven't taken it apart yet to try and redo the LM as I am pretty tired of doing it. I try and spread it as evenly as possible and it doesn't seem to help.


----------



## ESRCJ

RichKnecht said:


> It IS a pain. I am having the same issues with my 7900X. Most cores barely hit 65 under load where as a couple hit 80. I haven't taken it apart yet to try and redo the LM as I am pretty tired of doing it. I try and spread it as evenly as possible and it doesn't seem to help.


I took my system apart 4 times to finally get it right. The 30C delta is now reduced to 15C, which is much more in-line with what I've seen elsewhere and the 7920X I used to have. I completely removed the LM from both the die and IHS, then reapplied it (more this time on both). I apparently wasn't using enough before. 

On a different note, now that I'm running at lower temps, I was able to run CB with my XE at 4.7GHz at 1.24V. However, it took many runs for me to get similar scaling I was seeing previously each 100MHz (usually another 100 points in CB). I wonder if I'm starting to hit the limits of the RVIE's VRM?


----------



## PWn3R

gridironcpj said:


> I reapplied the LM and now the cores that ran hot are running cool, but two cores (13 and 14) are now running hot. This is a major pain lol. Are you resealing yours? I shed some LM off the second time and swear it was even as could be.


Hi, I did a very minimal reseal. I put nail polish thin dots of silicone on each corner of the IHS. My IHS is squeaky clean underneath. I removed all the glue using a spudger from my iFixit toolkit. Then cleaned it a bit more for residue with a bit of Xylene. I feel better about my 10c spread now though. On mine with the stock TIM it was about 18c spread. I also have mine on override voltage with each core tuned separately.

Sent from my MIX 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

gridironcpj said:


> I reapplied the LM and now the cores that ran hot are running cool, but two cores (13 and 14) are now running hot. This is a major pain lol. Are you resealing yours? I shed some LM off the second time and swear it was even as could be.


Hi,
Still on a mono block ?

I Just installed 2-280 GTX rads to mine and so far it's looking okay 74-84c nothing mind blowing but still about the same as before on 4.8 I posted earlier way back in this thread after redid of silicon lottery's work which was off the chart bad temps.

Guess I got lucky or just the small chip was easier 
You removed all the stock Intel sealant... ?


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Still on a mono block ?
> 
> I Just installed 2-280 GTX rads to mine and so far it's looking okay 74-84c nothing mind blowing but still about the same as before on 4.8 I posted earlier way back in this thread after redid of silicon lottery's work which was off the chart bad temps.
> 
> Guess I got lucky or just the small chip was easier
> You removed all the stock Intel sealant... ?


Yeah, I can't see the 2 280s making a huge difference in your setup. I bought a new case, Lian Li V3000WX, 2 EK XE480s, and a Rampage VI Extreme (when they arrive) and am moving my gear from its cramped home. Also going to add the Heatkiller VRM block to the Extreme with it's own pump and PE360 radiator. I think that will do the trick and allow me to run this machine a lot quieter than it's running now. It's incredible how warm these chips can get.


----------



## PWn3R

I have a monoblock with a 480, but I had to modify my monoblock a bit. I also put LM between the monoblock and the IHS.

Temps while using all 18 cores for realbench we're in the mid 70s. Gaming sits in the low 40s or high 30s. Cinebench was getting cores between 58 and 60 after 15-20 runs.

Sent from my MIX 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Yeah, I can't see the 2 280s making a huge difference in your setup. I bought a new case, Lian Li V3000WX, 2 EK XE480s, and a Rampage VI Extreme (when they arrive) and am moving my gear from its cramped home. Also going to add the Heatkiller VRM block to the Extreme with it's own pump and PE360 radiator. I think that will do the trick and allow me to run this machine a lot quieter than it's running now. It's incredible how warm these chips can get.


Hi,
Well before all I had was 1 ek 280 CE which came with my 280 performance ek kit and 1-240 gtx 

So yeah I'm not expecting any extra ordinary but should be a little better


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Well before all I had was 1 ek 280 CE which came with my 280 performance ek kit and 1-240 gtx
> 
> So yeah I'm not expecting any extra ordinary but should be a little better


LOL...I don't even want to think about how much money I spent on cooling solutions for this chip.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> LOL...I don't even want to think about how much money I spent on cooling solutions for this chip.


Hi,
Yep me either but all I can say is 200.us more :wheee:


----------



## Dwofzz

4.5Ghz 1.152v 3200Mhz Mesh 1.15v Dram 3600Mhz Cl16 1.35v 
Rampage VI Apex


----------



## Abaidor

Is anyone using *Process Lasso* to optimize affinities on a Skylake-X? Is it of any real use since I tend to run a lot of applications at the same time and some of them (Extensis Suitcase Fusion - Font Management) sometimes lock the system briefly when they do certain tasks. Suitcase Fusion for example is a Pro font management application with Adobe plugins that automatically activates fonts used in your documents (adobe) and deactivates them upon closing this file. It "locks" the system sometimes when adding fonts to its main library making everything unresponsive. Unfortunately, I need it and there is no alternative in Windows. It works great but besides this quirk that only occurs when adding new fonts.

I am using the Balanced Power plan in Windows with my i9-7940X.


----------



## Hydroplane

What's the maximum short term voltage you can put through these things before they pop? I got my chip to 5 GHz at 1.38V but seem to hit a wall there. 5050 took 1.5V. I couldn't get 5100 to run benchmarks even at 1.55 so I stopped there. Not too worried about long term degradation, only running for a few hours at these settings.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
No telling lol 1.5v wow that can't be good even short term


----------



## RichKnecht

Why do Bios updates raise temps? I just rolled my Strix back to 1401 and temps dropped 4C under load with the same voltage and ambient/fluid temps. Idle temps went down ~2-3C as well. Right now, room temp is ~19C, loop temps is 22C and idle is at 22-23C.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
New bios = newer micro code update that has been said to cause the higher temps 
I thought it might of been because of the newer bios 99..x compatibility stuff that also adds 25w more power spike and raises tj max to 110c instead of 105c but who knows for sure I'm in no hurry to get the new bios I'm sure not buying a 99... series chip.

Asus has been releasing bios like a madman and is just flat out counter productive to keep rebuilding oc profiles over and over :kookoo:


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> New bios = newer micro code update that has been said to cause the higher temps
> I thought it might of been because of the newer bios 99..x compatibility stuff that also adds 25w more power spike and raises tj max to 110c instead of 105c but who knows for sure I'm in no hurry to get the new bios I'm sure not buying a 99... series chip.
> 
> Asus has been releasing bios like a madman and is just flat out counter productive to keep rebuilding oc profiles over and over :kookoo:


Well, I was on 1503, then "upgraded" to 1602. The only thing I saw different with 1602 was higher temps. So I went back to 1503 and temps went back to where they used to be. This morning, I decided to roll back to 1401 to see what that would get me. Now the chip is running cooler than with 1503 and performance is unchanged other than temps being lower under load.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Eight bios releases for 2018 I find crazy lol 
I'm on 1301 and that's higher than I'd prefer I'd rather be on 1004 I believe released 12/2017 before all this spectre... bs started


----------



## ESRCJ

Is anyone else on Windows 10 version 1809? WinTimerTester now shows a QueryPerformanceFrequency of 10MHz. This isn't HPET. It's something new that came with the recent update. If anyone finds a way to bring it back down to 3MHz (like disabling HPET before), let me know. This has slightly lowered my benchmark scores across the board by about 1-2%. It's not much, but it's a little annoying when chasing the highest possible scores for my system.


----------



## KCDC

Hello there! Just got myX299 TUF Mark 1 and 9900x 

Coming from a X99 Build with a 6900K

That one had issues with voltages left at auto, so I am woindering if I need to take the same steps with all voltages with this new combo.

Currently all voltages are set to auto, cores are at 4500 and both preferred at 4700. Haven't done any stressing or benching aside from cinebench where I get a score of almost 2400 


I would like to set everything manually, but I'm having issues finding any guides for these new CPUs, is it safe to use guides for the 79**x CPUs?

Also, the BW-E cpu hated any decent cache overclocking, is it the same with this one? How high could I go? everythings watercooled aside from the VRMs 

The settings in the TUF BIOS are a bit different than my x99 strix and I'm worried that I should have gone with a ROG board instead. No? Yes? I have a window to return it. 

Everything in my sig rig is the same aside from mobo/cpu. cooling, ram, psu etc. are all same. I haven't combed through this thread yet, which is why I'm posting to make sure I'm in the right place. 



Thanks all!!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Voltages really depend on cooling mostly but yeah skylake-x does over shoot voltages 
How bad is cooling dependent.

Lets see where you're at 
Open cpuid/ cpu-z and use the Validate button and uncheck the privacy boxes and use Submit.
Post a link to that page it opens.


----------



## tistou77

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> New bios = newer micro code update that has been said to cause the higher temps
> I thought it might of been because of the newer bios 99..x compatibility stuff that also adds 25w more power spike and raises tj max to 110c instead of 105c but who knows for sure I'm in no hurry to get the new bios I'm sure not buying a 99... series chip.
> 
> Asus has been releasing bios like a madman and is just flat out counter productive to keep rebuilding oc profiles over and over :kookoo:


According to Intel, the microcode must not modify the TJMax, They keep me informed of the reason for this modification (bug or other)


----------



## ThrashZone

tistou77 said:


> According to Intel, the microcode must not modify the TJMax, They keep me informed of the reason for this modification (bug or other)


Hi,
Might be an asus bug or by design let us know


----------



## RichKnecht

tistou77 said:


> According to Intel, the microcode must not modify the TJMax, They keep me informed of the reason for this modification (bug or other)


Whatever the case may be, the newer Asus bios releases (1503 and 1602) definitely elevate temps by at least 7-10C and change TJ Max. Not sure what the Rampage board will be loaded with, but if I can, I'm going to roll that back too when it's up and running.


----------



## tistou77

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Might be an asus bug or by design let us know


Of course 
I do not think it's a bios bug, because if I replace the 4D microcode with the 49 microcode, it's good


----------



## RichKnecht

tistou77 said:


> Of course
> I do not think it's a bios bug, because if I replace the 4D microcode with the 49 microcode, it's good


So the newer bios with the 49 microcode doesn't raise temps? How does one check to see what microcode is installed? Just asking as I never saw any of the "increased system performance and stability" benefits when updating my bios.


----------



## tistou77

RichKnecht said:


> So the newer bios with the 49 microcode doesn't raise temps? How does one check to see what microcode is installed? Just asking as I never saw any of the "increased system performance and stability" benefits when updating my bios.


In Bios, Advanced and CPU (if I remember correctly)


----------



## KCDC

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Voltages really depend on cooling mostly but yeah skylake-x does over shoot voltages
> How bad is cooling dependent.
> 
> Lets see where you're at
> Open cpuid/ cpu-z and use the Validate button and uncheck the privacy boxes and use Submit.
> Post a link to that page it opens.


Thanks for responding, I'll get to this after work tonight.

I messed around with trying to find stock voltages manually, but the mobo wouldn't post, so clearly I'm missing some new things I'm not yet familiar with and I put everything back to auto for now.


----------



## PWn3R

I used auto voltages as starting points for manual. Just got them from HWINFO. GLHF

Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## RichKnecht

tistou77 said:


> In Bios, Advanced and CPU (if I remember correctly)


OK, it says 43. Should I update it? If so, how do I do that without upgrading the bios as well?


----------



## tistou77

RichKnecht said:


> OK, it says 43. Should I update it? If so, how do I do that without upgrading the bios as well?


43 with the bios 150x I guess
No need to update
I put the 49 to replace the 4D of bios 1603


----------



## RichKnecht

tistou77 said:


> 43 with the bios 150x I guess
> No need to update
> I put the 49 to replace the 4D of bios 1603


Actually it's 43 with bios 1401. Temps are 20C at idle right now. Water temp is also at 20C. I'm not touching it  I may roll back the bios in the Rampage when I install it if it's running anything later than 1503.


----------



## GXTCHA

7900x @ 4.9 w/ 1.225v adaptive
1.90v - VCCIN
LLC - 6
1.04v - IO
0.98v - SA
32GB RAM @ 4000 w/ 1.35v, 17-17-17-37
Mesh @ 3.0 w/ 1.0v

Run was done on an open bench with a single EK Phoenix 360 loop for the CPU. I'm toying with the idea of moving over to a 9900k since lately all I've done is game on my home machine however, I'm not sure it's even worth the churn in hardware at this point...


----------



## bmgjet

GXTCHA said:


> 7900x @ 4.9 w/ 1.225v adaptive
> 1.90v - VCCIN
> LLC - 6
> 1.04v - IO
> 0.98v - SA
> 32GB RAM @ 4000 w/ 1.35v, 17-17-17-37
> Mesh @ 3.0 w/ 1.0v
> 
> Run was done on an open bench with a single EK Phoenix 360 loop for the CPU.


Nice, Mine needs 1.31 - 1.345v for 4.9ghz
And 1.87v VCCIN
1.05v for 3.2ghz mesh. 
-2 AVX
-5 AVX512
100% stable (AVX,AVX512,Prime,realbench) 24 hours. Max temp 70C

Currently im pushing 5ghz tho with 1.35-1.38v, 1.95 VCCIN and same mesh.
99.9% stable. -3/-6 AVX/AVX512 (not tested) Prime/realbench 6 hours. Shut down mid day when temp started touching in high 90s.


----------



## GXTCHA

That's awesome. Yeah I really need to drop this back into my loop. With 2x 360's I get about an 8 to 9c delta on my water vs ambient which would bring this down a bit.

With the single "AIO" I had to run it with a -9/-9 AVX/512 to keep temps cool. Day to day, temps dont break over 40c.


----------



## KCDC

*9900X results on auto volts*



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Voltages really depend on cooling mostly but yeah skylake-x does over shoot voltages
> How bad is cooling dependent.
> 
> Lets see where you're at
> Open cpuid/ cpu-z and use the Validate button and uncheck the privacy boxes and use Submit.
> Post a link to that page it opens.



Here we are with voltages on Auto:

https://valid.x86.fr/ubrp0a

This was at 70c

It reports the preferred cores only, which both are at 4.7, all other cores are at 4.5


I'd like to start dialing the voltages in (vccio, sa, pch etc), after my fiasco with a 6900k dying from x99 strix auto voltage (code 00), I am very wary of it happening again, even if that's not supposed to happen anymore. Besides where's the fun in auto? 

I'd like to get as close to 5.0 as I can. I'm on dual 420 rads, so I am hoping this is safely possible, no longer WCing the VRMS, but two 1080tis are also in the loop. I will do some more searching, but what's the max safe voltages for cache and cores? Is 4.8 on all cores possible at 1.30ish or do I need to go higher? I know every chip is different, but has anyone achieved something that high on voltage under 1.30? I know 1.40 was max for BW-E if I wanted to try 4.5, which was highly unstable and very hot. Based on my reading, I'm noticing I don't have to jack the voltage up as I did for my BW-E chip, but still want to know if the 9900x is about the same as a 7900x in these terms. Also it seems VCCIN can go much higher. max on 6900k was 1.90ish. Do I need to take this off of auto and force a higher voltage closer to 2.00v or more for my goals? I am wary of the new settings of course. Any guidance would be most appreciated, I know these chips are still quite new.



Asus Edgeup had a great OC guide for BW-E that helped me a ton, can't seem to find one for this round of chips, unless I can use one for just x299 in general which I think exists there. Trying not to bother yall with questions I'm sure have been asked many times already.


Many thanks! Still reading through this thread.


----------



## KCDC

so far on the 9900x I've been able to get a cinebench score of 2511 with 4.8 on two preferred @ 1.32v and the others at 4.6 on auto, vccin is at 2.1 



io, sa and pch I set to 1.15 

rams ar 3200, 1.35



I can't seem to find the latest Realbench. What's the latest version/link? I'd like to see if this will stress at this level. Doesn't look like I have a super unicorn.


----------



## RichKnecht

KCDC said:


> Here we are with voltages on Auto:
> 
> https://valid.x86.fr/ubrp0a
> 
> This was at 70c
> 
> It reports the preferred cores only, which both are at 4.7, all other cores are at 4.5
> 
> 
> I'd like to start dialing the voltages in (vccio, sa, pch etc), after my fiasco with a 6900k dying from x99 strix auto voltage (code 00), I am very wary of it happening again, even if that's not supposed to happen anymore. Besides where's the fun in auto?
> 
> I'd like to get as close to 5.0 as I can. I'm on dual 420 rads, so I am hoping this is safely possible, no longer WCing the VRMS, but two 1080tis are also in the loop. I will do some more searching, but what's the max safe voltages for cache and cores? Is 4.8 on all cores possible at 1.30ish or do I need to go higher? I know every chip is different, but has anyone achieved something that high on voltage under 1.30? I know 1.40 was max for BW-E if I wanted to try 4.5, which was highly unstable and very hot. Based on my reading, I'm noticing I don't have to jack the voltage up as I did for my BW-E chip, but still want to know if the 9900x is about the same as a 7900x in these terms. Also it seems VCCIN can go much higher. max on 6900k was 1.90ish. Do I need to take this off of auto and force a higher voltage closer to 2.00v or more for my goals? I am wary of the new settings of course. Any guidance would be most appreciated, I know these chips are still quite new.
> 
> 
> 
> Asus Edgeup had a great OC guide for BW-E that helped me a ton, can't seem to find one for this round of chips, unless I can use one for just x299 in general which I think exists there. Trying not to bother yall with questions I'm sure have been asked many times already.
> 
> 
> Many thanks! Still reading through this thread.


I'd try to OC using "Sync all cores". Try 4.7GHZ with 1.225vcore, MESH @ 30 with 1.05V, vccin @ 1.90-1.95, and AVS offsets at 3 & 5 respectively. If that's stable, bump the multiplier up to 4.8 with the same voltages. If that doesn't work, raise vcore in .02V steps. Once you have your OC stable, you can switch to "By specific core" and lower vcore by .01V core by core until you find what each core needs to be stable. It's takes a while, but in the end, it makes for a cooler chip. As far as 4.9-5GHZ is concerned, that depends on the chip and how lucky you are


----------



## ThrashZone

KCDC said:


> so far on the 9900x I've been able to get a cinebench score of 2511 with 4.8 on two preferred @ 1.32v and the others at 4.6 on auto, vccin is at 2.1
> 
> 
> 
> io, sa and pch I set to 1.15
> 
> rams ar 3200, 1.35
> 
> 
> 
> I can't seem to find the latest Realbench. What's the latest version/link? I'd like to see if this will stress at this level. Doesn't look like I have a super unicorn.


Hi,
RealBench you can get here 
https://rog.asus.com/rog-pro/realbench-v2-leaderboard/

Use hwinfo and post some voltages it's using just the voltages list not all the other stuff.
If cache was on auto looks like 9900x uses 30 as default/ Uncore which is good 27 is 7900x's defaults too.
https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php

VCCIN shouldn't need more than 1.9v 1.94 max auto will do crazy high vccin as you see 2.1v 
Some peg it at 1.8v


----------



## KCDC

RichKnecht said:


> I'd try to OC using "Sync all cores". Try 4.7GHZ with 1.225vcore, MESH @ 30 with 1.05V, vccin @ 1.90-1.95, and AVS offsets at 3 & 5 respectively. If that's stable, bump the multiplier up to 4.8 with the same voltages. If that doesn't work, raise vcore in .02V steps. Once you have your OC stable, you can switch to "By specific core" and lower vcore by .01V core by core until you find what each core needs to be stable. It's takes a while, but in the end, it makes for a cooler chip. As far as 4.9-5GHZ is concerned, that depends on the chip and how lucky you are





ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> RealBench you can get here
> https://rog.asus.com/rog-pro/realbench-v2-leaderboard/
> 
> Use hwinfo and post some voltages it's using just the voltages list not all the other stuff.
> If cache was on auto looks like 9900x uses 30 as default/ Uncore which is good 27 is 7900x's defaults too.
> https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php
> 
> VCCIN shouldn't need more than 1.9v 1.94 max auto will do crazy high vccin as you see 2.1v
> Some peg it at 1.8v





Thank you both. I'll mess around with settings some more tonight.


----------



## KCDC

Last question for now: Can the cache voltage handle adaptive mode or is that still really unstable like on x99?


----------



## ThrashZone

KCDC said:


> Last question for now: Can the cache voltage handle adaptive mode or is that still really unstable like on x99?


Hi,
My board doesn't even have a sensor to monitor the cache voltage 
You haven't posted any voltages yet so not sure you can monitor cache voltages either ?

Last I was informed manual at 1.2v should be okay for 30 max cache.
I'v seen others use adaptive and +200 for 32 max cache

I myself use +0.050 and additional at 0.150 to equal 0.200 for 30 max cache without issues.


----------



## jsarver

I’m having a hard time getting a good 9900x . I have had two chips. One took 1.23 with 1.95 input just to pass cinebench at 4.6. No voltage up to 1.26 would get me 4.7 posted. Second chip couldn’t hit 4.6 all the way up to 1.25 volts. These are awful numbers compared to what I’ve been seeing from 7900x stats.


----------



## KCDC

@ThrashZone you are correct in that I also can't find any sensor for cache voltage. 



I was able to get 4.7 stable at 1.320 volts on my 9900x, but temps would get into the high 80s and sometimes hit 90 during stressing and rendering. anything under 1.30 just doesn't work. avxoffsets are at 5


cache settings anything above 32 and the mobo wont even post regardless of voltage, I didn't go above 1.30v


I'm keeping cache at 32 for now at 1.25v


preferred cores are currently at 48 @1.31v


dialed down the other cores to 46 @1.28v, but will probably go to 4.5 for temps



still pretty hot when rendering on my waterloop, so I may go lower since cores will still hit 80c. The render times aren't much of a difference, so I won't be saving that much time with my work, just wanted to see how far I could take this chip. Really appreciate the help from everyone. If I get antsy, I may return the chip since I just got it. Or use the tuning plan. Not unhappy with the numbers, but if there is one out there that's gone further on a decent waterloop, I'd be down to try the lottery again.


----------



## bmgjet

The 7900X cores are rated for 98c with the recommended operating range of 0-92c.
I would imagin the 9900X would be the same. I let mine push mid 90s during stress testing.
Then for daily use I just lowered the throttle point down to 90C from 105C default.


----------



## ThrashZone

KCDC said:


> @ThrashZone you are correct in that I also can't find any sensor for cache voltage.
> 
> I was able to get 4.7 stable at 1.320 volts on my 9900x, but temps would get into the high 80s and sometimes hit 90 during stressing and rendering. anything under 1.30 just doesn't work. avxoffsets are at 5
> 
> cache settings anything above 32 and the mobo wont even post regardless of voltage, I didn't go above 1.30v
> 
> I'm keeping cache at 32 for now at 1.25v
> 
> preferred cores are currently at 48 @1.31v
> 
> dialed down the other cores to 46 @1.28v, but will probably go to 4.5 for temps
> 
> still pretty hot when rendering on my waterloop, so I may go lower since cores will still hit 80c. The render times aren't much of a difference, so I won't be saving that much time with my work, just wanted to see how far I could take this chip. Really appreciate the help from everyone. If I get antsy, I may return the chip since I just got it. Or use the tuning plan. Not unhappy with the numbers, but if there is one out there that's gone further on a decent waterloop, I'd be down to try the lottery again.





jsarver said:


> I’m having a hard time getting a good 9900x . I have had two chips. One took 1.23 with 1.95 input just to pass cinebench at 4.6. No voltage up to 1.26 would get me 4.7 posted. Second chip couldn’t hit 4.6 all the way up to 1.25 volts. These are awful numbers compared to what I’ve been seeing from 7900x stats.


Hi,
My last venture vid's produced using adaptive 4.8 -0.010 additional turbo 1.180
4.7 -0.030 additional turbo 1.185

For 4.6 adaptive -0.050 additional turbo 1.185

Input 1.9v
vccio 1.01500
system agent 1.00500
pch core voltage 1.00625

LLC 5
cpu current capability 140%
cpu power phase Standard
Dram current capability 130%

Both avx's are 5


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Just did some runs on the new 280 rads time spy all three fire strikes and a couple bmw renders with blender 
Not too bad avx offset indeed kicked in lol 4.3 probably why temps are slightly better


----------



## Timmaigh!

I have a question about Cinebench R15 - after running stable OC of 4,1GHz on all cores on my 7940x for almost a year, i tried today to increase my OC to 4,4GHz. Interestingly, the score in CB did not rise as expected (from cca 3120-3170 range per random run to only about 3250, when i expected above 3300). Checking the CPU properties and clocks via HWInfo the cores do not seem to be running at 4,4GHz throughout the test - some of them were just 4,3 or 4,2...simply clocks were all of the place (which would explain lower then expected result). At my previous OC, if i ran the test, HWinfo would report stable 4,1GHz for all the cores.... any idea, what is going on?


----------



## PWn3R

Did it show thermal or power throttling in HWInfo?

Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
After a year I'd expect a lot of dust buildup 
Do you blow your system out/ clean radiators if any....

Rebuild the clock from optimize defaults.


----------



## Timmaigh!

PWn3R said:


> Did it show thermal or power throttling in HWInfo?
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


Where is it supposed to be showing? 

No core runs hotter than 88C during these Cinebench runs, actually most of them are around 80C, its only single core getting that hot. I thought the thermal throttling happens only when closing Tj max, thus close to 100C. So i dont think its down to high temps.
Regarding power throttling, i set the power limit for CPU package in BIOS to 350W. Coretemp reports 284W as highest CPU package power draw...so i guess that is not that either?

Funnily, i tried Blender Benchmark CPU Quick Test - this is one where core clocks jump around a lot, its not max clocks on all the cores all the time, even under my original OC. The result was actually inline with the bump in clocks - the rendering time decreased from 11:01 to 10:14 (1,07x), while the clocks increased from 41x to 44x (1,07x)...so it seems to be fine there? Since its indirect proportion in this case, i hope my "math" is sound here, lol.


----------



## Timmaigh!

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> After a year I'd expect a lot of dust buildup
> Do you blow your system out/ clean radiators if any....
> 
> Rebuild the clock from optimize defaults.


Hi,

its definitely not dust, i have the case well filtered (Define R5) and had it recently opened, as i installed new GPUs, it was fine in this regard.

The other thing, about OC being weird cause being done off previous OC setting, seems like more likely culprit. I might redo the OC from the scratch. For now i returned to my previous setting, even though the new one managed to pass 10 min of blender test, so it might have been fairly stable for daily use (i am not the kind to do 48h Prime95 torture tests to be sure), but i did not like increased temps.


----------



## PWn3R

The HWINFO should show some of the information on the other screens of data. You can also open Intel Extreme Tuning Utility to check those things and EDP clipping.

Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

Timmaigh! said:


> Where is it supposed to be showing?
> 
> No core runs hotter than 88C during these Cinebench runs, actually most of them are around 80C, its only single core getting that hot. I thought the thermal throttling happens only when closing Tj max, thus close to 100C. So i dont think its down to high temps.
> Regarding power throttling, i set the power limit for CPU package in BIOS to 350W. Coretemp reports 284W as highest CPU package power draw...so i guess that is not that either?
> 
> Funnily, i tried Blender Benchmark CPU Quick Test - this is one where core clocks jump around a lot, its not max clocks on all the cores all the time, even under my original OC. The result was actually inline with the bump in clocks - the rendering time decreased from 11:01 to 10:14 (1,07x), while the clocks increased from 41x to 44x (1,07x)...so it seems to be fine there? Since its indirect proportion in this case, i hope my "math" is sound here, lol.


Hi,
Were you on auto core voltage or using the same setting you had on your 4.1 clock ?
If either what was the core voltage set at ?
I'm pretty sure 1.2v would be needed for 4.4

I have pretty good filters too now they do hurt temps a bit but a dust clogged radiator does the same thing so it's a wash without cleaning anything but the filters a couple times a month


----------



## Timmaigh!

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Were you on auto core voltage or using the same setting you had on your 4.1 clock ?
> If either what was the core voltage set at ?
> I'm pretty sure 1.2v would be needed for 4.4
> 
> I have pretty good filters too now they do hurt temps a bit but a dust clogged radiator does the same thing so it's a wash without cleaning anything but the filters a couple times a month


Hi,

i had it set as negative offset -0,055V (on the 4,1GHz OC profile) - not sure offset from what (exact) value though, LOL - seems to be changing. I have been trying to change this value for the new OC (went as far as -0,1V), but did not do much for the scores, except reported lower VIDs for the cores under load. Maybe, just maybe, -0,1V was better (got up to 3300), but i am not sure, but i have been playing around with Process Lasso thread priority at the same time, so that might have been the reason for higher score there.

BTW would not the computer freeze/lock up/crash, if my vCore was not high enough, rather than throttling the core multipliers under load?


----------



## ThrashZone

Timmaigh! said:


> Hi,
> 
> i had it set as negative offset -0,055V (on the 4,1GHz OC profile) - not sure offset from what (exact) value though, LOL - seems to be changing. I have been trying to change this value for the new OC (went as far as -0,1V), but did not do much for the scores, except reported lower VIDs for the cores under load. Maybe, just maybe, -0,1V was better (got up to 3300), but i am not sure, but i have been playing around with Process Lasso thread priority at the same time, so that might have been the reason for higher score there.
> 
> BTW would not the computer freeze/lock up/crash, if my vCore was not high enough, rather than throttling the core multipliers under load?


Hi,
Yeah you'd be on the edge of a bsod watchdog timeout.... usually 
You just throttled for some reason 

Adaptive Offset -0.050 shouldn't be bad use it for a lot of clocks up to 4.5 I believe
Additional turbo voltage might need a bump 
Try 1.180 for additional turbo auto might not be keeping up or 1.150 plus your already -0.050 will put you at 1.20v


----------



## jsarver

so here is what im doing to quickly bin the chips i have had. pls let me know if you recommend something different

xmp off
all cores 4.6 @ manual voltage of 1.23
input voltage 1.95
cache and cache voltage auto
140% cpu power
svid disabled
llc auto

i have chosen these clocks and voltages as this is the best results i have had with the last two chips. i figure i should start there then check if the new one i get is better or worse then my "baseline."
again im only using this a rough estimate if the chip is worth more time invested. if i can pass cinebench then id fine tune a 4.7 clock or a lower voltage 4.6 and include flipping the switch on xmp.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Manual mode core voltage usually needs 0.010-0.020 more than adaptive.. would use and 1.23v for 4.6 is less than I would need anyway 
1.25v possibly 1.24v depending on stability tests used.


----------



## ThrashZone

Timmaigh! said:


> Hi,
> 
> i had it set as negative offset -0,055V (on the 4,1GHz OC profile) - not sure offset from what (exact) value though, LOL - seems to be changing. I have been trying to change this value for the new OC (went as far as -0,1V), but did not do much for the scores, except reported lower VIDs for the cores under load. Maybe, just maybe, -0,1V was better (got up to 3300), but i am not sure, but i have been playing around with Process Lasso thread priority at the same time, so that might have been the reason for higher score there.
> 
> BTW would not the computer freeze/lock up/crash, if my vCore was not high enough, rather than throttling the core multipliers under load?


Hi,
Yep adaptive offset -0.050 and additional turbo 1.185v 
Blender rendering file bmw and classroom plus time spy and all three fire strikes/ sky diver 
Produced these temps and voltages 
No llc was used and no avx offsets either 
Input voltage was set at 1.85v obviously without llc applied it was ignored


----------



## D-EJ915

My delidded 7820x in my OCF package temp is always about the same as the core temps but on my new 9900x in my Dark board it sits at like 50 C when the core temps are like 35-36, anybody else ever ran into this? When at load the difference is only 2-3 C though. Should I be worried about this and try to get a different CPU?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
What is OCF ?
How are you reading the temps hwinfo ?
https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php


----------



## D-EJ915

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> What is OCF ?
> How are you reading the temps hwinfo ?
> https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php


old chip is in the asrock x299 oc formula, new chip is in the evga x299 dark. I'm using the evga e-leet utility but that hwinfo shows same package temperature. It has the same behaviour with the old bios and new one so I'm pretty sure it is just the chip itself.

Whether it makes the chip not as good is one thing, but it makes setting fan profiles in any meaningful way impossible since the cpu temp for the fan sensor is based off of it.

Perhaps I should RMA to Intel for another one?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah codes only work when everyone knows the code lol 

Why not add your systems to your signature and name them what ever code name you want too so we might know or at least might get a hint out of the info 

15c difference from hottest core reading and package temp is pretty large usually 5-10c is the norm.
Seems like more a board sensor issue
HWinfo has 2 package temp reading a happy go lucky one and an evil one


----------



## D-EJ915

I used to have them there before but I guess they deleted them for inactive users lol. I might get more thermal paste and swap CPUs from board to board see if it is a sensor issue.


----------



## xarot

jsarver said:


> I’m having a hard time getting a good 9900x . I have had two chips. One took 1.23 with 1.95 input just to pass cinebench at 4.6. No voltage up to 1.26 would get me 4.7 posted. Second chip couldn’t hit 4.6 all the way up to 1.25 volts. These are awful numbers compared to what I’ve been seeing from 7900x stats.


I haven't seen a good 9900X yet anywhere. Mine is also junk, 4.5 GHz is already 1.2 V and 4.7 max in CB. Makes me think the 9900Xs are the trash bin of the HCC die chips where 7900X was the top bin in the LCC chips? Too bad I sold my good 7900X - although I think that CPU should never have existed on the LCC die and paste to begin with...



bmgjet said:


> Nice, Mine needs 1.31 - 1.345v for 4.9ghz
> And 1.87v VCCIN
> 1.05v for 3.2ghz mesh.
> -2 AVX
> -5 AVX512
> 100% stable (AVX,AVX512,Prime,realbench) 24 hours. Max temp 70C
> 
> Currently im pushing 5ghz tho with 1.35-1.38v, 1.95 VCCIN and same mesh.
> 99.9% stable. -3/-6 AVX/AVX512 (not tested) Prime/realbench 6 hours. Shut down mid day when temp started touching in high 90s.


Holy smokes how can you run voltage that high? What kind of a loop? From my experience the 7900Xs start to be nuclear reactors when the voltage exceeds 1.2 V if you use Prime95 (AVX/AVX2/FMA3 disabled) for stressing.


----------



## ThrashZone

xarot said:


> I haven't seen a good 9900X yet anywhere. Mine is also junk, 4.5 GHz is already 1.2 V and 4.7 max in CB. Makes me think the 9900Xs are the trash bin of the HCC die chips where 7900X was the top bin in the LCC chips? Too bad I sold my good 7900X - although I think that CPU should never have existed on the LCC die and paste to begin with...
> 
> 
> 
> Holy smokes how can you run voltage that high? What kind of a loop? From my experience the 7900Xs start to be nuclear reactors when the voltage exceeds 1.2 V if you use Prime95 (AVX/AVX2/FMA3 disabled) for stressing.


Hi,
All core 47 that I'm testing now needs 1.24v at 84c hottest core with package at 89c


----------



## Jspinks020

I think some of those six cores can get up higher than me though like 4.5ghz....What I said Team Blue ran the Gauntlet with clocks with everything and Series of stuff.

But next year looks Promising a chip with possible boost top to 4.8-5ghz. Would be awesome.


----------



## jsarver

xarot said:


> jsarver said:
> 
> 
> 
> I’m having a hard time getting a good 9900x . I have had two chips. One took 1.23 with 1.95 input just to pass cinebench at 4.6. No voltage up to 1.26 would get me 4.7 posted. Second chip couldn’t hit 4.6 all the way up to 1.25 volts. These are awful numbers compared to what I’ve been seeing from 7900x stats.
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't seen a good 9900X yet anywhere. Mine is also junk, 4.5 GHz is already 1.2 V and 4.7 max in CB. Makes me think the 9900Xs are the trash bin of the HCC die chips where 7900X was the top bin in the LCC chips? Too bad I sold my good 7900X - although I think that CPU should never have existed on the LCC die and paste to begin with...
> 
> I’d be happy if I could get a 4.7 chip. 3rd one comes this week.
Click to expand...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Slowly but surely I'm starting to see how much a higher system agent does to stability lol 
Down to 0.896v max and looking okay with input down to 1.904v max interesting


----------



## bmgjet

xarot said:


> Holy smokes how can you run voltage that high? What kind of a loop? From my experience the 7900Xs start to be nuclear reactors when the voltage exceeds 1.2 V if you use Prime95 (AVX/AVX2/FMA3 disabled) for stressing.


2X 480 radiator,
1X 280 radiator,
De lid with LM
EK water block and D5 pump.

Id say I still have a little bit of thermal head room as well, But didnt want to push the voltage any more. I did for a little bit to run 1 core up to 5.1ghz.
The VRMs are more of a tempture concern for me since they have new thermal pads, And high speed fan blowing straight on them and still its the hottest part of the PC.


----------



## Jspinks020

There's stuff in the Background the 7700k doesn't like...if you tried running and high CPU Usage. And would have to Delid everyone of these Intel CPU's and LM. 

Why I said I don't game a whole lot anymore...and something Like Ryzen makes sense and still has some frames. Thoroughput and just runner build, I guess if you need something and or want to do something occasionally.


----------



## xarot

jsarver said:


> xarot said:
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't seen a good 9900X yet anywhere. Mine is also junk, 4.5 GHz is already 1.2 V and 4.7 max in CB. Makes me think the 9900Xs are the trash bin of the HCC die chips where 7900X was the top bin in the LCC chips? Too bad I sold my good 7900X - although I think that CPU should never have existed on the LCC die and paste to begin with...
> 
> I’d be happy if I could get a 4.7 chip. 3rd one comes this week.
> 
> 
> 
> My 9900X needs 1.28 V for running CB at 4.7 GHz. 4.6 is around 1.26 V I think, but already too hot.  Well, it's in my secondary PC with a tiny case so I am going to keep it stock but OC the cache and RAM only.
Click to expand...


----------



## toncij

Terrible time for HEDT...


----------



## ThrashZone

xarot said:


> Holy smokes how can you run voltage that high? What kind of a loop? From my experience the 7900Xs start to be nuclear reactors when the voltage exceeds 1.2 V if you use Prime95 (AVX/AVX2/FMA3 disabled) for stressing.


Hi,
Frankly the only way I see those clocks happing is
1) A very cold climate somewhere near Alaska 
2) A Chiller
3) Turn off hyper threading


----------



## bmgjet

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Frankly the only way I see those clocks happing is
> 1) A very cold climate somewhere near Alaska
> 2) A Chiller
> 3) Turn off hyper threading


1) Live in NZ ambient is usually low to mid 20s.
2) I have a chiller but its for the GPU only, Flow is res, pump, 480 rad, CPU, 480 rad, Chiller, GPU, 280 rad back to res.(with no GPU load the 280 rad is normally blowing cold air into the rest of the computer.)
3) HT is on. 

Before delid I could only get 4.7ghz and it was hitting 100C on 1.23v
I wouldnt even call this a good chip since my brother got nearly the same setup and after a delid his does 5ghz as well on 1.33-1.35v and runs under 90C in intelburn test and real bench.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I'm 2 for 3 :thumb:


----------



## KCDC

Been finishing a move to a new case and my temps dropped by 7-10c across the components at load, about -5c at idle. Also switched my tubing from glass to zmt. I was clearly having some water temp issues. Now the 9900x doesnt see 80c at all. Water now sits at 28c at idle when before it was sitting at 35c. That said, I'm now ready to redo my settings and post what I get.


Happy New Year to yall!


----------



## Hydroplane

KCDC said:


> Been finishing a move to a new case and my temps dropped by 7-10c across the components at load, about -5c at idle. Also switched my tubing from glass to zmt. I was clearly having some water temp issues. Now the 9900x doesnt see 80c at all. Water now sits at 28c at idle when before it was sitting at 35c. That said, I'm now ready to redo my settings and post what I get.
> 
> 
> Happy New Year to yall!


I have the GTR rads as well, 280+420, 8 more cores, same GPUs, and can keep the water at 26-27C with the fans at 1500 rpm. Granted I have the industrial fans rather than the A14, but I think the design is similar. It depends on ambient a bit as well, I keep the house around 21C in the winter. So I would say there was something up with your old case, lol. Good to see you were able to drop the temps.


----------



## KCDC

Hydroplane said:


> I have the GTR rads as well, 280+420, 8 more cores, same GPUs, and can keep the water at 26-27C with the fans at 1500 rpm. Granted I have the industrial fans rather than the A14, but I think the design is similar. It depends on ambient a bit as well, I keep the house around 21C in the winter. So I would say there was something up with your old case, lol. Good to see you were able to drop the temps.



Yes, it was the case, EVGA DG87. While unique, it had it's limitations in rad locations and proper cooling. My Christmas present to myself this year was supposed to just be the CPU and mobo, but after getting a lot of high pitched ringing from the mobo in the old case due to one of the non-removable standoff "pins" (hard to explain), I decided to get another Christmas gift to myself and got the Phanteks Enthoo Elite. Amazing difference in everything from build quality to cooling to ease of building within. I can finally have one rad in a true push-pull config which these GTR rads love. Fans at idle/normal load sit around 900rpm and the curve is pretty linear to 100% once temps get to 60c. Very silent. I wanted a CaseLabs, but sadly they're gone and now their cases are expensive collectors items. Now I just gotta find some freelance side-work to pay it all off!


----------



## tistou77

Have some had the 4D microcode updated with the bios of their motherboards ?
Have you noticed that the TJMax goes from 105 to 110 ° and an increase in the temperature of the cores ?

Intel studies this problem that some meet (on Asus motherboard among others) and more there are people who meet the problem and faster Intel will solve it


----------



## Pepillo

Yes, I see this on my Asus X299 Deluxe with 1603 bios …..


----------



## RichKnecht

tistou77 said:


> Have some had the 4D microcode updated with the bios of their motherboards ?
> Have you noticed that the TJMax goes from 105 to 110 ° and an increase in the temperature of the cores ?
> 
> Intel studies this problem that some meet (on Asus motherboard among others) and more there are people who meet the problem and faster Intel will solve it


Not sure what the microcodes were in the latest bios' I installed, but temps definitely rose at idle and load. I rolled back to 1401 (2 bios updated since then) and temps are what they used to be. I'd say the latest Ausu bios, 1603, raised my temps 8-11C at idle and load.


----------



## ThrashZone

Pepillo said:


> Yes, I see this on my Asus X299 Deluxe with 1603 bios …..


Hi,
Guess he was wanting some proof and or show some snips of the temps and tj max showing 110c ?

I'll stick with 1402 or what ever it is lol asus fixes nothing
They release bios every 2-3 months if they don't notice it they are idiots


----------



## Pepillo

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Guess he was wanting some proof and or show some snips of the temps and tj max showing 110c ?












110º


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
TDP looks like it stayed at 140w instead 165w like 99..x is supposed to use.


----------



## Dwofzz

I went with the dark and I'll update on why I decided to use it over the Apex..

Here Is some nice Idle temps anyways now when everything is back together!


----------



## ocvn

Dwofzz said:


> I went with the dark and I'll update on why I decided to use it over the Apex..
> 
> Here Is some nice Idle temps anyways now when everything is back together!


Dark bios with normal temp: 1.03, 1.07, 1.08, 1.09. 1.08 and 1.09 has auto overclocking and stress-test build in option.
Dark bios with increase temp 5C: 1.12, 1.14.


----------



## tistou77

ocvn said:


> Dark bios with normal temp: 1.03, 1.07, 1.08, 1.09. 1.08 and 1.09 has auto overclocking and stress-test build in option.
> Dark bios with increase temp 5C: 1.12, 1.14.


Microcode 4D with bios 1.12, 1.14 I guess ?


----------



## Hydroplane

Dwofzz said:


> I went with the dark and I'll update on why I decided to use it over the Apex..
> 
> Here Is some nice Idle temps anyways now when everything is back together!


It's definitely a lot easier to find the Dark these days. It was on sale for $250 a few days back, can't beat that.

Nice temps btw, are you on a chiller or just really cold there?


----------



## Dwofzz

ocvn said:


> Dark bios with normal temp: 1.03, 1.07, 1.08, 1.09. 1.08 and 1.09 has auto overclocking and stress-test build in option.
> Dark bios with increase temp 5C: 1.12, 1.14.


Yes I know, I use 1.09 and I do have bios 2 -3 flashed with XOC and 1.04!


----------



## Dwofzz

Hydroplane said:


> It's definitely a lot easier to find the Dark these days. It was on sale for $250 a few days back, can't beat that.
> 
> Nice temps btw, are you on a chiller or just really cold there?


Actually I do have both of them 

No chilled water or anything just 18.5 - 19c ambient and a 480 in pull, D5 at lvl 2 and 1200RPM fans. The cpu isn't even delidded yet but keep in mind that this is at factory settings


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Stock not sure anything temp wise is bad 
45+ brings the heat


----------



## Dwofzz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Stock not sure anything temp wise is bad
> 45+ brings the heat


That is true! 
I'm working on a 24/7 oc and I'm in the mid 60's at 1.176v 4.6Ghz.


----------



## ThrashZone

Dwofzz said:


> That is true!
> I'm working on a 24/7 oc and I'm in the mid 60's at 1.176v 4.6Ghz.


Hi,
All core that's not possible for me voltage way too low 
4.5 heck I need like 1.24v 4.8 needs like 1.28v I image 4.6-4.7 is somewhere between 
I'm tring 1401 bios again it sucks frankly 

1301 is buggy as heck but voltage wise was way better than 1401 or newest were doing
Might try 1201 next never did since 1301 hit like 4 days later lol thought it was really bad


----------



## Dwofzz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> All core that's not possible for me voltage way too low
> 4.5 heck I need like 1.24v 4.8 needs like 1.28v I image 4.6-4.7 is somewhere between
> I'm tring 1401 bios again it sucks frankly
> 
> 1301 is buggy as heck but voltage wise was way better than 1401 or newest were doing
> Might try 1201 next never did since 1301 hit like 4 days later lol thought it was really bad


4.5GHz isn't bad tho, what cpu is that? is it delidded?


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> All core that's not possible for me voltage way too low
> 4.5 heck I need like 1.24v 4.8 needs like 1.28v I image 4.6-4.7 is somewhere between
> I'm tring 1401 bios again it sucks frankly
> 
> 1301 is buggy as heck but voltage wise was way better than 1401 or newest were doing
> Might try 1201 next never did since 1301 hit like 4 days later lol thought it was really bad


I can get all cores at 4.6 easily with 1.18V, temps are great too...~60C. For my present all core 4.7, I am using 1.23V and 1.95V vccin. Temps are mainly in the mid 70's. Running 1401 bios now and it's working like a champ. 1503 and 1602 raised temps too much. Hope things will change when I switch cases and move to 3 360mm rads and a Rampage Extreme or Deluxe II.


----------



## Dwofzz

Btw guys what SA/IO voltage is considered "safe" on x299? I've been running X79 for so long in my daily and all I've ever done on X99 and X299 is benching with chilled or Ln2 and I'm lazy so I just set whatever works and call it a day since I don't have to worry about degradation and what not.. 
I know that I don't need much but since the motherboard pulled 1.26v SA out of it's a** at 3800Mhz It made me wonder.


----------



## KCDC

Looks like I need to try this 1401 bios on my TUF Mk1 and see how my temps do with higher clocks. It should still support 9***x CPUs i think? Looks like it's pre-meltdown/spectre fix which is what causes higher temps? Will this also require deleting/renaming that intel.msc file in win/sys32? I forget the filename off the top of my head. Had to do it with BW-E.


----------



## bmgjet

Dwofzz said:


> Btw guys what SA/IO voltage is considered "safe" on x299? I've been running X79 for so long in my daily and all I've ever done on X99 and X299 is benching with chilled or Ln2 and I'm lazy so I just set whatever works and call it a day since I don't have to worry about degradation and what not..
> I know that I don't need much but since the motherboard pulled 1.26v SA out of it's a** at 3800Mhz It made me wonder.


Im running 7900X 5ghz cores, 3.2ghz mesh, 3.2ghz ram.

SA = 1.0V
IO = 1.05V (Ram voltage 1.405V)
Havnt tried to lower it since thats what it had to use in the overclock guide when I got mine over a year ago. And those voltages just worked with out issue so might be able to go lower.

Default for mine was
SA 0.78V
IO 0.98v

If left on auto with XMP loaded it tries to run.
SA 1.25V
IO 1.15V


----------



## Dwofzz

bmgjet said:


> Dwofzz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw guys what SA/IO voltage is considered "safe" on x299? I've been running X79 for so long in my daily and all I've ever done on X99 and X299 is benching with chilled or Ln2 and I'm lazy so I just set whatever works and call it a day since I don't have to worry about degradation and what not..
> I know that I don't need much but since the motherboard pulled 1.26v SA out of it's a** at 3800Mhz It made me wonder.
> 
> 
> 
> Im running 7900X 5ghz cores, 3.2ghz mesh, 3.2ghz ram.
> 
> SA = 1.0V
> IO = 1.05V (Ram voltage 1.405V)
> Havnt tried to lower it since thats what it had to use in the overclock guide when I got mine over a year ago. And those voltages just worked with out issue so might be able to go lower.
> 
> Default for mine was
> SA 0.78V
> IO 0.98v
> 
> If left on auto with XMP loaded it tries to run.
> SA 1.25V
> IO 1.15V
Click to expand...

The system is parts from my ln2 test bench and my "old" main rig :
7920x 4.6GHz 1.176v new
EVGA X299 Dark new
G.skill Trident Z 3600MHz CL16 new
EVGA 1000w T2 old main rig
GTX 1080Ti Kingpin Ln2 bench
And so on..

Settings right now is :
x46 core 1.176v
x30 mesh 1.116v
3600MHz RAM 1.35v
SA 1v
IO 1v
Uncore offset +300 (1.26v)
VIN 1.95v

The LN2 setup I had was 
7980XE 
Team group xtreem 4133MHz
Asus x299 Apex 
GTX 1080Ti Kingpin

x56 1.42v -100c
x34 mesh 1.36v
3800MHz cl12 2v
SA 1.3v
IO 1.38v
Uncore offset +500 (1.4v)
VIN 2.1v

So.. obviously I can't copy paste any settings, So I really have no idea what voltage I need for 24/7 :')


----------



## ocvn

Dwofzz said:


> The system is parts from my ln2 test bench and my "old" main rig :
> 7920x 4.6GHz 1.176v new
> EVGA X299 Dark new
> G.skill Trident Z 3600MHz CL16 new
> EVGA 1000w T2 old main rig
> GTX 1080Ti Kingpin Ln2 bench
> And so on..
> 
> Settings right now is :
> x46 core 1.176v
> x30 mesh 1.116v
> 3600MHz RAM 1.35v
> SA 1v
> IO 1v
> Uncore offset +300 (1.26v)
> VIN 1.95v


above setting, with 3600 RAM i think your uncore a little bit high, i use +150 and pass Wangdang test, aida64 cache and memtest. I run daily voltage as below (after 8h rb 2.43 with avg temp below 70C):
x49 core adaptive 1.285V
x30 mesh adaptive 0.98V
3600Mhzc16 1.35V with uncore 150
io 1V
SA 0.85V
VIN 1.8 to 1.9V


----------



## jsarver

Fourth and final 9900x reporting in. Finally found one that can boot 4.7 all core. Voltage 1.248 manual and input 1.92. Cache 30 with auto voltage. Monitored this and it doesn’t pass 1.11 volts. 

Daily overclock of 4.6 @ 1.195 volts and 1.9 input. Same cache. This adjustment dropped me 20c on gaming load. Staying in the mid 50’s now with a 360 aio.

A custom loop would really let this chip cruise but I’m happy to know it has the potential even if I can’t use it all right now. 

O and ram is 32GB 3200cl14. Xmp stable no adjustments further were needed.


----------



## ThrashZone

jsarver said:


> Fourth and final 9900x reporting in. Finally found one that can boot 4.7 all core. Voltage 1.248 manual and input 1.92. Cache 30 with auto voltage. Monitored this and it doesn’t pass 1.11 volts.
> 
> Daily overclock of 4.6 @ 1.195 volts and 1.9 input. Same cache. This adjustment dropped me 20c on gaming load. Staying in the mid 50’s now with a 360 aio.
> 
> A custom loop would really let this chip cruise but I’m happy to know it has the potential even if I can’t use it all right now.
> 
> O and ram is 32GB 3200cl14. Xmp stable no adjustments further were needed.


Hi,
Sounds about right voltage wise

Your cache should be higher just on auto 

Switch to auto max and min cache same clocks as you like and post what it turbos too doing some of your benchmarks or a cpuid validate and post a link what uncore shows as default.

One of the perks of 99..x release was a higher default cache.


----------



## Dwofzz

Settings after some more testing :
x45 core 1.165v
x32 mesh 1.16v
3600MHz CL15 1.44v (1.47v with mm) all timings are manually set
SA 1v
IO 1.05v
Uncore offset +150 (1.116v)
VIN 1.95v

And these settings seems to be fine for 24/7 use.


----------



## jsarver

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Sounds about right voltage wise
> 
> Your cache should be higher just on auto
> 
> Switch to auto max and min cache same clocks as you like and post what it turbos too doing some of your benchmarks or a cpuid validate and post a link what uncore shows as default.
> 
> One of the perks of 99..x release was a higher default cache.


i might be using the wrong term i meant mesh. coming from broadwell e it was always cache. auto mesh is 27 with the 9900x. so i have bumped mine to 30.


----------



## Hydroplane

Nice thing about owning Skylake-X: when I hit the "run" button in Cinebench, the lights dim. Threadripper owners can't say that


----------



## CptSpig

jsarver said:


> i might be using the wrong term i meant mesh. coming from broadwell e it was always cache. auto mesh is 27 with the 9900x. so i have bumped mine to 30.


Cashe, Ring or Mesh same thing depending on your board. :thumb:


----------



## wingman99

CptSpig said:


> Cashe, Ring or Mesh same thing depending on your board. :thumb:


Ring communicates L3 to the cores in a Ring. Mesh communicates L3 to the cores like a network. They are totally different.


----------



## ThrashZone

jsarver said:


> i might be using the wrong term i meant mesh. coming from broadwell e it was always cache. auto mesh is 27 with the 9900x. so i have bumped mine to 30.


Hi,
Bios names nothing that I've noticed as "Mesh" there is only min/ max cache and it's voltage named again as cache.
2700 is the same as 79..x runs on.

I was just wondering seems weird it's turbo is only 2700 since it was increased on 99..x :/
Thanks for the report though :thumb:


----------



## Middleman

*7820X OC Stats*

Ya so came here to poke and see who's running the Basin-Falls Refresh - Was debating picking up a 9920X or maybe a 9960X and wondering what speeds / temps people get. Probably going to hold off once price comes down but X399 might be out by then!




So here goes - my specs


7820X @ 4.5Ghz (I can get it up to 5Ghz but i'm not a fan of the temps past 4.5ghz)
Mesh = 3.3Ghz

userbenchmark single thread score of 145


280 AIO EnnerMax 



Asus Rampage Apex VI (fantastic motherboard - probably the best I've owned besides a dual socket Tyan)


32GB G.SKILL TridentZ F4-3600C16Q-32GTZSW @ 3733mhz 15-15-15-34 401 2T


Details
CPU Temp 46C Idle -75C Load
Lowest 45C - 64C
Highest 47 - 77C
VRM = 42C (pretty stable temp)



CPU Core = 1.171 V
VCCIN = 1.8 V

VCCIO = 1.168 V

VCCSA = 1.2 V
DIMM = 1.4 ( ran it at 1.38 but noticed an app crashing so i bumped it up)


Load Line is 6


----------



## CptSpig

wingman99 said:


> Ring communicates L3 to the cores in a Ring. Mesh communicates L3 to the cores like a network. They are totally different.


I should have said that members refer to cashe using cashe, ring or mesh. Thanks for the info. But I already know the definition of mesh.


----------



## wingman99

CptSpig said:


> I should have said that members refer to cashe using cashe, ring or mesh. Thanks for the info. But I already know the definition of mesh.


I don't know what your trying to explain? All 3 are different things.


----------



## CptSpig

wingman99 said:


> I don't know what your trying to explain? All 3 are different things.


Members use different terms for the same thing even though it's not correct when coming from older platforms. That's it nothing for you to explain the post was not literal. Hope this helps you to understand.


----------



## wingman99

CptSpig said:


> Members use different terms for the same thing even though it's not correct when coming from older platforms. That's it nothing for you to explain the post was not literal. Hope this helps you to understand.


You need to correct members that think cache, ring or mesh are the same things. Cache is processor memory. Ring is not from a old platform it is processor Cache bus like i9 9900k and Mesh is processor Cache bus on Skylake -X. Folks need to know what there talking about to communicate correctly.


----------



## JustinThyme

Havent been venturing here much. Ill just drop this here.
9940X @4.8 all cores Vcore 1.225 although Ive dialed it back to 1.195 after figuring out Im not getting to 4.9GHz


----------



## cx-ray

wingman99 said:


> You need to correct members that think cache, ring or mesh are the same things. Cache is processor memory. Ring is not from a old platform it is processor Cache bus like i9 9900k and Mesh is processor Cache bus on Skylake -X. Folks need to know what there talking about to communicate correctly.


They are just making sure we're referring to the same thing regardless of actual naming convention. The confusion comes from how it's called in the BIOS from various manufacturers. Asus for instance labels it as mesh cache voltage, MSI as Ring, and Gigabyte (correctly) as mesh for Skylake-X.

EDIT:mesh cache


----------



## ThrashZone

cx-ray said:


> They are just making sure we're referring to the same thing regardless of actual naming convention. The confusion comes from how it's called in the BIOS from various manufacturers. *Asus for instance labels it as mesh voltage*, MSI as Ring, and Gigabyte (correctly) as mesh for Skylake-X.


Hi,
My asus bios has nothing that names anything Mesh
Cache voltage and Uncore that's it.


----------



## cx-ray

Yeah typo. I'll fix it


----------



## ThrashZone

JustinThyme said:


> Havent been venturing here much. Ill just drop this here.
> 9940X @4.8 all cores Vcore 1.225 although Ive dialed it back to 1.195 after figuring out Im not getting to 4.9GHz


Hi,
Looks nice every color of the rainbow going on 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/161...ase-club-lovers-owners-2017.html#post27792040

So what's the hold up from 4.9 temperatures or stability ?

Can't tell which way the water is flowing on it cpu first before gpu's or opposite ?


----------



## CptSpig

wingman99 said:


> You need to correct members that think cache, ring or mesh are the same things. Cache is processor memory. Ring is not from a old platform it is processor Cache bus like i9 9900k and Mesh is processor Cache bus on Skylake -X. Folks need to know what there talking about to communicate correctly.


I think I just got told! Thanks for the lesson....I got it....


----------



## akromatic

Hey guys, I seemed to have an issue with my CPU and mobo where the moment i touch any CPU or ram related setting on my mobo it would lock up on reboot or BSOD when stressed. even simple settings while leaving CPU and ram at stock and enable watercooling mode or multi threaded enhancement would throw it off.

So i have my suspicion that it is the mobo but unfortunately there is no warranty on it so my next cause of action is perhaps to warranty the CPU. mobo and CPU in question is the Asrock X299-E/AC ITX and the intel 7900x.

My PC has limited cooling capabilities(kinda struggling as is) so lets assume that the maximum cooling capacity that I can afford is a 240mm rad for the CPU and given that I dont want to overclock beyond just playing around for benches before putting it back to stock so would it be worth it to push for a 9900X just for the soldered paste at the expense of higher TDP or should i stick with the 7900X with pigeon poop and lower TDP? I have no intention of delidding.


----------



## RichKnecht

If it is indeed your lack of or inadequate cooling, I'd leave the 7900X at stock speeds. Even at those speeds, it's no slouch in the performance department. As for swapping it out for a 9900X, it would be much cheaper to upgrade your cooling on the 7900X. Temps on the 99XX series are better, but still not great if you don't have the means to cool it down. I know you said you don't want to, but delidding would help a lot in your situation. I delidded my 7900X and it wasn't bad at all. There are so many great how-to videos on YouTube that explain the process step by step. My 7900X dropped 24C at load after delidding and allowed for a higher OC.


----------



## ThrashZone

akromatic said:


> Hey guys, I seemed to have an issue with my CPU and mobo where the moment i touch any CPU or ram related setting on my mobo it would lock up on reboot or BSOD when stressed. even simple settings while leaving CPU and ram at stock and enable watercooling mode or multi threaded enhancement would throw it off.
> 
> So i have my suspicion that it is the mobo but unfortunately there is no warranty on it so my next cause of action is perhaps to warranty the CPU. mobo and CPU in question is the Asrock X299-E/AC ITX and the intel 7900x.
> 
> My PC has limited cooling capabilities(kinda struggling as is) so lets assume that the *maximum cooling capacity that I can afford is a 240mm rad for the CPU *and given that I dont want to overclock beyond just playing around for benches before putting it back to stock so *would it be worth it to push for a 9900X just for the soldered paste at the expense of higher TDP* or should i stick with the 7900X with pigeon poop and lower TDP? I have no intention of delidding.


Hi,
Yes 9900x
You could use a simple AIO cooler or air cooler for that matter for probably 4.5 easily in the 70c range

240mm cooler isn't going to do much of anything on 79..x except being a deep disappointment without a delid


----------



## Hydroplane

akromatic said:


> Hey guys, I seemed to have an issue with my CPU and mobo where the moment i touch any CPU or ram related setting on my mobo it would lock up on reboot or BSOD when stressed. even simple settings while leaving CPU and ram at stock and enable watercooling mode or multi threaded enhancement would throw it off.
> 
> So i have my suspicion that it is the mobo but unfortunately there is no warranty on it so my next cause of action is perhaps to warranty the CPU. mobo and CPU in question is the Asrock X299-E/AC ITX and the intel 7900x.
> 
> My PC has limited cooling capabilities(kinda struggling as is) so lets assume that the maximum cooling capacity that I can afford is a 240mm rad for the CPU and given that I dont want to overclock beyond just playing around for benches before putting it back to stock so would it be worth it to push for a 9900X just for the soldered paste at the expense of higher TDP or should i stick with the 7900X with pigeon poop and lower TDP? I have no intention of delidding.


What kind of PSU are you running? What does HWMonitor tell you for the voltage on the 5V, 3.3V, and 12V rails? I had a similar issue once that was caused by weak voltage from the PSU.

If you are buying new, I would get the 9900X. If you already have a 7900X, stick with it, you might gain 100-200 MHz at the same temps.


----------



## Jpmboy

akromatic said:


> Hey guys, I seemed to have an issue with my CPU and mobo where the moment i touch any CPU or ram related setting on my mobo it would lock up on reboot or BSOD when stressed. even simple settings while leaving CPU and ram at stock and enable watercooling mode or multi threaded enhancement would throw it off.
> 
> So i have my suspicion that it is the mobo but unfortunately there is no warranty on it so my next cause of action is perhaps to warranty the CPU. mobo and CPU in question is the Asrock X299-E/AC ITX and the intel 7900x.
> 
> My PC has limited cooling capabilities(kinda struggling as is) so lets assume that the maximum cooling capacity that I can afford is a 240mm rad for the CPU and given that I dont want to overclock beyond just playing around for benches before putting it back to stock so would it be worth it to push for a 9900X just for the soldered paste at the expense of higher TDP or should i stick with the 7900X with pigeon poop and lower TDP? I have no intention of delidding.



what MB? what PSU? And what bios settings have you "touched" that are causing the failures?


----------



## fgh

Hey, I wonder how safe is using Direct Die on MB vertically positioned. Is a leakage could go to the MB/socket if I apply more (never touched liquid metal before)?


----------



## Nexosu

I upgraded from a 7800x to a 9800x. I'm having problems overclocking the mesh. On my 7800x I ran at 4.8/3.2 with low voltages (I think about 1v for the mesh). With the 9800x, it reaches 4.8 all core at 1.27, so not too bad there but running the mesh at anything above 2.6 will crash me to blue screen. I've tried upping the voltage up to 1.2 @ 3.0 mesh which helped but wasn't stable in the end. Has anyone else ever experienced anything like this? Am I missing some setting that didn't apply to the 7800x that applies to 9800x? I've just never heard of anyone not being able to get mesh up to at least 3.0 with a reasonable voltage bump.

Specs:
X299 MSI Pro Carbon Gaming
i7-9800x 4.8(1.27) 2.6(1.05)
970 Evo 1 TB
32 G TridentZ DDR4 3600 CL16-16-16-36

Edit: Was able to stabilize the mesh at 3.0 by upping the SA and IO voltages about 0.1v each, while also using a MSI "Memory Try it!" recommendation of 3600 CL16-18-18-38 instead of the XMP profile. I may see how much I can lower the core voltage now that I've discovered the source of my instability.


----------



## akromatic

RichKnecht said:


> If it is indeed your lack of or inadequate cooling, I'd leave the 7900X at stock speeds. Even at those speeds, it's no slouch in the performance department. As for swapping it out for a 9900X, it would be much cheaper to upgrade your cooling on the 7900X. Temps on the 99XX series are better, but still not great if you don't have the means to cool it down. I know you said you don't want to, but delidding would help a lot in your situation. I delidded my 7900X and it wasn't bad at all. There are so many great how-to videos on YouTube that explain the process step by step. My 7900X dropped 24C at load after delidding and allowed for a higher OC.


Cooling is a work in progress at this stage, I have a total of 2x 240mm rads in my system but one of the rads are just for show and is not functional which is why I said I would just have 240mm for just the CPU. I’d expect that 240mm would be enough at stock clocks but unfortunately that isn’t the case ether. 
I’ll eventually get the other 240mm working but at best it would work at half capacity with slim fans and with the gpu in the loop.

It doesn’t sky rocket to 90c and throttle immediately but it would heat soak over a few hours and eventually throttle. Mind you all this is stock clocks as I’m unable to tweak anything without freezing or BSOD.

As for why I’m considering the 9900x is because the opportunity came for me to warranty this CPU and I’ve maxed out my cooling potential. I’m not delidding for warranty and longevity reasons.



Hydroplane said:


> What kind of PSU are you running? What does HWMonitor tell you for the voltage on the 5V, 3.3V, and 12V rails? I had a similar issue once that was caused by weak voltage from the PSU.
> 
> If you are buying new, I would get the 9900X. If you already have a 7900X, stick with it, you might gain 100-200 MHz at the same temps.


I’m running a Silverstone 700w SFX, I know it is not the best but it is what is available. Mind you I have used other PSU and got the same result.
I don’t know exactly what HWmonitor says on the voltage rails but IIRC it is within spec.

Also I’m not buying new, I’ll warranty my current 7900x and ask for a refund that would be placed towards another CPU. Which is why I want to know if I should go for a 9900x or just stick with a 7900x for improved thermals.



Jpmboy said:


> what MB? what PSU? And what bios settings have you "touched" that are causing the failures?


I’ve mentioned what is my mobo I the original post, it is the asrock x299-e itx/ac and the PSU is a Silverstone sx700-lpt

As for bios settings I haven’t really explored too far. But touch any memory clocks would result in a lock up.
Mobo also has a specific watercooling mode which is meant to unlock the VRM potential and throw more voltage at things but just enabling that feature while leaving CPU at stock would just result in BSOD

At this stage I’ll just warranty the CPU and see how things go. As there is no warranty for the mobo I’ll have to live with it if a replacement CPU does not resolve anything. Mind you it is stable at stock but it just runs hot.


----------



## Burke888

Would any of you consider upgrading from my current i7 5930k (X99), running at a stable daily clock of 4.3Ghz? I have it paired with 16Gb of DDR4 at 3000Mhz. 
My primary use is internet surfing and gaming. 

Thanks!


----------



## ESRCJ

Not for those use cases. With gaming being your most intensive task, the only upgrade I would consider is a 9900K.


----------



## Burke888

gridironcpj said:


> Not for those use cases. With gaming being your most intensive task, the only upgrade I would consider is a 9900K.


The 9900k only has 16 PCIe lanes on the CPU. My GPU alone would use up all of the lanes.
I usually use at least one M.2 NVMe drive, and would like to RAID 0 a pair when I upgrade. Would the limited number of PCIe lanes cause any issues?

Also, I really dislike the mainstream CPUs as they include an integrated GPU which is a waste and I hate paying extra for. 

Would a 9900k even be much a jump from a 5930k that I am using now for games?

Thanks for your help!


----------



## wingman99

Burke888 said:


> The 9900k only has 16 PCIe lanes on the CPU. My GPU alone would use up all of the lanes.
> I usually use at least one M.2 NVMe drive, and would like to RAID 0 a pair when I upgrade. Would the limited number of PCIe lanes cause any issues?
> 
> Also, I really dislike the mainstream CPUs as they include an integrated GPU which is a waste and I hate paying extra for.
> 
> Would a 9900k even be much a jump from a 5930k that I am using now for games?
> 
> Thanks for your help!


There is enough PCIe lanes for one Video card M.2NVMe drive and Raid 0 pair.

The new i9-9900kf does not have IGPU.


----------



## bmgjet

Burke888 said:


> Would any of you consider upgrading from my current i7 5930k (X99), running at a stable daily clock of 4.3Ghz? I have it paired with 16Gb of DDR4 at 3000Mhz.
> My primary use is internet surfing and gaming.
> 
> Thanks!


I went from 5820K 4.5ghz to 6900K 4.4ghz to 7900X 5ghz.

7900X is way better in gaming is that clock speed massively boosts single thread performance over the HW-E and BW-E chips I had.
But then im also the type of person that enjoys upgrading. I would of gotten a 9***X chip if they had been a upgrade of any sort.


----------



## ThrashZone

Burke888 said:


> Would a 9900k even be much a jump from a 5930k that I am using now for games?
> 
> Thanks for your help!


Hi,
Of course it would be a nice upgrade and an intact 3 year intel warranty :thumb:

Look at the time spy benchmark boards 99..k cpu scores are pretty nice and nearly twice as high as haswell-e.


----------



## akromatic

So what do you guys reckon for the 7900x vs 9900x given my situation as outlined above?


----------



## RichKnecht

akromatic said:


> So what do you guys reckon for the 7900x vs 9900x given my situation as outlined above?


Simply put, if you don't want to delid and can warranty exchange your 7900X, go for the 9900X. However, I wouldn't expect great thermals as your cooling is still going to play a major role in any overclocking you may or mat not want to do. I know I won't be making the move to the 99XX series as my current delidded 7900X runs nice and cool with an all core OC of 4.7. I'll be swapping boards/cases soon with improved cooling and I'll post my results when that's done.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Seems like deja vu inquiry to me frankly lol :lachen:


----------



## JustinThyme

Burke888 said:


> The 9900k only has 16 PCIe lanes on the CPU. My GPU alone would use up all of the lanes.
> I usually use at least one M.2 NVMe drive, and would like to RAID 0 a pair when I upgrade. Would the limited number of PCIe lanes cause any issues?
> 
> Also, I really dislike the mainstream CPUs as they include an integrated GPU which is a waste and I hate paying extra for.
> 
> Would a 9900k even be much a jump from a 5930k that I am using now for games?
> 
> Thanks for your help!


IGPU is a waste of die space unless that is your primary source in something like a MS surface.

The 16 lanes covers only the PCIE slots, all the M2 drives are downstream of the PCH controller and raiding them up is a waste of time as the DMI bottleneck is the limiting factor. 2 M2s at 4X doesnt matter if the connection to the CPU is 4X for everything....all drives, USB, BT etc. Raiding them up also causes latency which will give you a performance hit where it counts in the low que depth 4K arena.

Right now the 9900K is the fastest gaming chip on the market. so its a very nice jump over a haswell. They clock like crazy. well most of them. You are almost guaranteed to hit 5 GHz all cores with a great deal being able to hit 5.3GHz with adequate cooling.

Ive run 2 GPUs on 16 lanes with very good results. Thing is the GPUs are not saturating the bandwidth of X8. Just do a search on it, plenty of results with bench data to back it up showing everything up to 2080Ti cards that have identical results in X8 and X16.


----------



## Dwofzz

Starting to get second thoughts on this 7920x.. I might get another 7980XE or maybe going with a 7960x since that would be a more "practical" cpu to run 24/7 and It'll preform equal to a 7980XE in many cases.
Anyhow, I did some boot tests with the 7920x. NOTE JUST BOOTING ON THESE SPEEDS!!

50x HT
51x HT
52x HT OFF

It is not delidded yet, didn't want to do that before I knew what It'll do but yeah.

All credit to Vince "Kingpin" Lucido and Illya "Tin" Tsemenko and EVGA when it comes to the wallpaper... Just to be safe


----------



## tistou77

i9 9990XE and TDP 255W :devil: :devil: :devil:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13804/intel-core-i9-9990xe-up-to-5-ghz-auction-only


----------



## Dwofzz

I got myself a 7940x instead and man.. This cpu is so much better than my 7920x!
Batch: L738C354

It does up to 4.1GHz at 1v and 4.3GHz at 1.08v

The 7920x needs 1.13v at 4.1GHz (comparation pict). 

Haven't pushed it much further yet but I don't need any extra voltage when running the Dram at 3600Mhz (the 7920x needs 1 vSA, 1.1vIO and +250 uncore)

And as I've seen on the Asus forum and Evga to I belive? There is something with the cach on the 7920x cus man it scores low when compared to the 7940x ( I've seen 7900x's beat me in write/read/copy with much worse Dram settings and lower cache speed so ***..)


----------



## Dwofzz

tistou77 said:


> i9 9990XE and TDP 255W :devil: :devil: :devil:
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/13804/intel-core-i9-9990xe-up-to-5-ghz-auction-only


Probably a 2000 USD chip..

And remember "Intel! You promised us *all-core* turbo of 5.0 GHz on *28* cores!"


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> i9 9990XE and TDP 255W :devil: :devil: :devil:
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/13804/intel-core-i9-9990xe-up-to-5-ghz-auction-only



yeah - it's an auction for select OEMs... thing is, do the OEMs think they can recoup the added cpu cost in a built system @ 14 cores.


----------



## toncij

JustinThyme said:


> IGPU is a waste of die space unless that is your primary source in something like a MS surface.
> 
> The 16 lanes covers only the PCIE slots, all the M2 drives are downstream of the PCH controller and raiding them up is a waste of time as the DMI bottleneck is the limiting factor. 2 M2s at 4X doesnt matter if the connection to the CPU is 4X for everything....all drives, USB, BT etc. Raiding them up also causes latency which will give you a performance hit where it counts in the low que depth 4K arena.
> 
> Right now the 9900K is the fastest gaming chip on the market. so its a very nice jump over a haswell. They clock like crazy. well most of them. You are almost guaranteed to hit 5 GHz all cores with a great deal being able to hit 5.3GHz with adequate cooling.
> 
> Ive run 2 GPUs on 16 lanes with very good results. Thing is the GPUs are not saturating the bandwidth of X8. Just do a search on it, plenty of results with bench data to back it up showing everything up to 2080Ti cards that have identical results in X8 and X16.





Jpmboy said:


> yeah - it's an auction for select OEMs... thing is, do the OEMs think they can recoup the added cpu cost in a built system @ 14 cores.


It's an interesting choice. Given bad performance (in oc) for 9900X I've tried...
This also could mean all the good i9-9940Xs are now gone for this bin. :_D


----------



## Abaidor

toncij said:


> It's an interesting choice. Given bad performance (in oc) for 9900X I've tried...
> This also could mean all the good i9-9940Xs are now gone for this bin. :_D



This means also that the best balance between single core speed & number of cores was found on these chips and now they "are gone"....way to go Intel.....they don't leave a "Hertz" go to waste without charging dollars for it.....No silicon lottery on the 14 core parts then....I am glad I got the 7940X.


----------



## l470594464

duplicate post


----------



## l470594464

Nexosu said:


> I upgraded from a 7800x to a 9800x. I'm having problems overclocking the mesh. On my 7800x I ran at 4.8/3.2 with low voltages (I think about 1v for the mesh). With the 9800x, it reaches 4.8 all core at 1.27, so not too bad there but running the mesh at anything above 2.6 will crash me to blue screen. I've tried upping the voltage up to 1.2 @ 3.0 mesh which helped but wasn't stable in the end. Has anyone else ever experienced anything like this? Am I missing some setting that didn't apply to the 7800x that applies to 9800x? I've just never heard of anyone not being able to get mesh up to at least 3.0 with a reasonable voltage bump.
> 
> Specs:
> X299 MSI Pro Carbon Gaming
> i7-9800x 4.8(1.27) 2.6(1.05)
> 970 Evo 1 TB
> 32 G TridentZ DDR4 3600 CL16-16-16-36


Hi, could you do a memory test in AIDA64 with your 9800x? I am planning to buy it but see it has terrible writing speed ~75% of the reading speed. 
Thank you very much.


----------



## D-EJ915

Update to my post from earlier about the CPU/package temp being whack on my 9900X, I received my new one from newegg which is from a later batch and it works normally.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Only normal thing I've noticed with package temps there is two 
One normal that reads 1-2c from the max core temp 
And one that varies 5-10c higher than the other which I refer to as the evil package temp 

So which one do you call "normal package temp" lol


----------



## D-EJ915

Normal meaning not stuck at 50C when my core temps are 29-30 C LOL. If anyone else runs into that I suggest RMA with the seller, Intel support was trying to give me runaround...

I also downgraded my Dark board to the 1.09 bios suggested here and it does run cooler though I have not tried to OC this chip yet. https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...e-x-combined-discussion-225.html#post27787056


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Did you try the other bios before returning the chip ?
Without oc'ing doubt it matters until you do basic oc all core 45 or something to see where both were running at.


----------



## tistou77

Someone used the ICE frame for direct die ?









Point of view finish, machining, etc ... it is a good product (well no risk to use it)
It concerns me (unlike that of der8auer) where we keep the backplate of the original socket
And I may have more luck than the der8auer frame 

Otherwise, I do not see almost feedback on the new Skylake-X (the 9980XE especially)
Compared to 7980XE, it's better, less well, the same ?


----------



## D-EJ915

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Did you try the other bios before returning the chip ?
> Without oc'ing doubt it matters until you do basic oc all core 45 or something to see where both were running at.


Yes it was a faulty temperature gauge, the issue wasn't the high end it would never go below 50 C so I could not make fan profiles that worked for anything. I appreciate you trying to help but it's like you don't actually read the posts. You probably forgot so sorry for sounding like an ******* lol.



tistou77 said:


> Otherwise, I do not see almost feedback on the new Skylake-X (the 9980XE especially)
> Compared to 7980XE, it's better, less well, the same ?


The chips are mostly the same. They're better if you are scared of delid otherwise 7000 series is better.


----------



## ocvn

tistou77 said:


> Someone used the ICE frame for direct die ?
> 
> View attachment 247906
> 
> 
> Point of view finish, machining, etc ... it is a good product (well no risk to use it)
> It concerns me (unlike that of der8auer) where we keep the backplate of the original socket
> And I may have more luck than the der8auer frame
> 
> Otherwise, I do not see almost feedback on the new Skylake-X (the 9980XE especially)
> Compared to 7980XE, it's better, less well, the same ?


I used it...few months already.


----------



## Abaidor

ocvn said:


> I used it...few months already.



I am stuck in a backorder of the der8auer Direct Frame since end of November from Caseking and they still have no ETA which is ridiculous of course for such a simple item. The problem is that I am in Europe and the ICE Man model still needs up to 35 days for delivery from China. 

Anyway what waterblock are you using if you don't mind? Did you get the HCC model of the ICEMAN frame (7920X and up?) because I remember someone mentioning that he had to mod it...


----------



## ocvn

Abaidor said:


> I am stuck in a backorder of the der8auer Direct Frame since end of November from Caseking and they still have no ETA which is ridiculous of course for such a simple item. The problem is that I am in Europe and the ICE Man model still needs up to 35 days for delivery from China.
> 
> Anyway what waterblock are you using if you don't mind? Did you get the HCC model of the ICEMAN frame (7920X and up?) because I remember someone mentioning that he had to mod it...


my WB is Koolance 360. I tried EK Evo but it seem the block was not good. Yeah, i ordered the HCC model (7920x and up).


----------



## Abaidor

ocvn said:


> my WB is Koolance 360. I tried EK Evo but it seem the block was not good. Yeah, i ordered the HCC model (7920x and up).


So I guess no modding then and it fits just out of the box. I might give them one more week then before I cancel my order if they are unable to provide an ETA and proceed buying this instead. Or get this too to be on the safe side....lol....what is $35 more wasted in this build.....


----------



## RichKnecht

Abaidor said:


> I am stuck in a backorder of the der8auer Direct Frame since end of November from Caseking and they still have no ETA which is ridiculous of course for such a simple item. The problem is that I am in Europe and the ICE Man model still needs up to 35 days for delivery from China.
> 
> Anyway what waterblock are you using if you don't mind? Did you get the HCC model of the ICEMAN frame (7920X and up?) because I remember someone mentioning that he had to mod it...


My Die frame is sitting in my drawer once again. Either my die or block isn't perfectly flat (convex) for the frame to work long term. When I first put it on, I get amazing temps. But after a week or so temps creep back up because the LM loses contact with the ends of the die.


----------



## Abaidor

RichKnecht said:


> My Die frame is sitting in my drawer once again. Either my die or block isn't perfectly flat (convex) for the frame to work long term. When I first put it on, I get amazing temps. But after a week or so temps creep back up because the LM loses contact with the ends of the die.


Contact with the "bare die" is something that I am worried about regardless of which frame is in use. 

I posted the following on the ROG forum but I'll put it here as well. 

Here is what I think for the EK Velocity but it should apply to any block with similar mounting mechanism:

---------------------------------------------------------------
The Velocity comes with springs for the 2066 socket based on their manual and the ones I have here. I am not dismantling my build to test it before the direct die frame is here so I rely on literature and the parts in the box right now. 

Since I am personally interested in this and I was suspecting contact issues I was "studying" it a bit and if there is an issue here is what I suspect. Look at the draft diagram I modified below from the manual.

(see the diagram from the EK Velocity manual)

With that said I am not sure how safe it is to let the block "descend" freely on the bare die but that's why we have the direct frame which is there to prevent the block from crashing it.

My guess is that EK calculated the tolerance of the mechanism with the IHS in place and maybe left a bit of headroom to account for the convexity/concavity of the IHS. With the IHS removed that tolerance might not be enough thus preventing 100% contact. This might or might not be the case and I am soon about to find out. The solution will be to either use other struts / thumb nuts and be REALLY careful about the force applied while tightening which would be best found through trial and error. I mean going really slow and measuring temps instead of brute forcing it.


Now look at the other image where where ICEMAN states it clearly on their product description that not all blocks might be able to provide good contact due to their mounting mechanisms. 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


And something else. Wouldn't it be better to even use Thermal Paste such as Kryonaut on the bare die vs putting back the IHS? I mean you are still using it so removing the extra thermal layer (IHS + LM) would still be better given you have proper contact. This depends on you block though but still thermal paste is more stable than LM..


----------



## RichKnecht

Abaidor said:


> Contact with the "bare die" is something that I am worried about regardless of which frame is in use.
> 
> I posted the following on the ROG forum but I'll put it here as well.
> 
> Here is what I think for the EK Velocity but it should apply to any block with similar mounting mechanism:
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> The Velocity comes with springs for the 2066 socket based on their manual and the ones I have here. I am not dismantling my build to test it before the direct die frame is here so I rely on literature and the parts in the box right now.
> 
> Since I am personally interested in this and I was suspecting contact issues I was "studying" it a bit and if there is an issue here is what I suspect. Look at the draft diagram I modified below from the manual.
> 
> (see the diagram from the EK Velocity manual)
> 
> With that said I am not sure how safe it is to let the block "descend" freely on the bare die but that's why we have the direct frame which is there to prevent the block from crashing it.
> 
> My guess is that EK calculated the tolerance of the mechanism with the IHS in place and maybe left a bit of headroom to account for the convexity/concavity of the IHS. With the IHS removed that tolerance might not be enough thus preventing 100% contact. This might or might not be the case and I am soon about to find out. The solution will be to either use other struts / thumb nuts and be REALLY careful about the force applied while tightening which would be best found through trial and error. I mean going really slow and measuring temps instead of brute forcing it.
> 
> 
> Now look at the other image where where ICEMAN states it clearly on their product description that not all blocks might be able to provide good contact due to their mounting mechanisms.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> And something else. Wouldn't it be better to even use Thermal Paste such as Kryonaut on the bare die vs putting back the IHS? I mean you are still using it so removing the extra thermal layer (IHS + LM) would still be better given you have proper contact. This depends on you block though but still thermal paste is more stable than LM..


I have no doubt that this is what is happening with my 7900X. The die is a lot smaller than the HCC dies, thus amplifying the problem. I tried using thermal paste, but the temps were so bad I had to remove it. I'm using the Rockit copper IHS now and temps are within 4C of what I got using the Die frame when it was working.


----------



## tistou77

I do not know if it's a good idea to test the ICE frame 
I tried the one of der8auer with EK Velocity many time (I had a Koolance 390i, but much too convex for tested), but after several attempts, impossible to have correct temperatures on 3 or 4 cores
Bad contact I think

Stock with Cinebench









I know that the PCB of CPU needs to be cleaned very well and I think it's good

What I like about the ICE model is that we can keep the backplate of the original socket


----------



## Abaidor

You guys make me think that I should cancel the frame and get an thicker IHS instead....

I can't think that the CPU die is convex/concave but the Velocity could be. However, it comes with 2 jet plates on thicker than the other and I think I read somewhere they can control the convexity of the base (can this happen?). What about switching between the two?


----------



## tistou77

The jet plate can not change the base of the waterblock (less convex)
Velocity is a bit convex, but slightly


----------



## RichKnecht

Abaidor said:


> You guys make me think that I should cancel the frame and get an thicker IHS instead....
> 
> I can't think that the CPU die is convex/concave but the Velocity could be. However, it comes with 2 jet plates on thicker than the other and I think I read somewhere they can control the convexity of the base (can this happen?). What about switching between the two?


I'd give the Rockit IHS a try. It's not all that expensive and does shave a few degrees off temps. The only way I am going to try the Die Frame again is if I buy a new base for my Evo and sand it down flat to see if that works. Right now, it's all good.


----------



## tistou77

I have seen some feedback from users who have used an IHS "copper" (bought on ebay) with no change in temperature
I do not know if it's so good

I saw that the original IHS is already copper coated with nickel (or some other material)


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> I have seen some feedback from users who have used an IHS "copper" (bought on ebay) with no change in temperature
> I do not know if it's so good
> 
> *I saw that the original IHS is already copper coated with nickel *(or some other material)


^^ this. Unless the OEM IHS has a manufacturing flaw, aftermarket IHS's really can't do any better. Frankly, the quality of the block mount (even torque, TIM, too much or too little pressure and contact etc.) will affect cooling performance much more.


Lol - if anyone wants a de8auer direct die frame, you can have mine.


----------



## RichKnecht

tistou77 said:


> I have seen some feedback from users who have used an IHS "copper" (bought on ebay) with no change in temperature
> I do not know if it's so good
> 
> I saw that the original IHS is already copper coated with nickel (or some other material)


I understand. However, when I took off my dieframe, I reinstalled the OEM IHS and temps were ~27 at idle and 79-80 with load. A couple days later, I found the Rockit IHS in my drawer that I forgot I bought when I bought the delidding tool. I was bored, so I installed it and my temps went to 23 at tidle and 74 with load. Now granted, this could be from a bad TIM job, but I am got pretty good at installing TIM between the block and IHS, so who knows. It could be that the Rockit IHS is perfectly flat and the OEM one is not thus creating better contact. Whatever the case, it's staying on there


----------



## tistou77

Or the IHS Rockit is perhaps less thick and therefore a faster "heat transfer" ?

I hesitate tested the Direct Die of ICE or so this IHS if really there is a temperature gain


----------



## ThrashZone

Abaidor said:


> You guys make me think that I should cancel the frame and get an thicker IHS instead....
> 
> I can't think that the CPU die is convex/concave but the Velocity could be. However, it comes with 2 jet plates on thicker than the other and I think I read somewhere they can control the convexity of the base (can this happen?). What about switching between the two?


Hi,
Neither of my ek evo's were perfectly flat 
Good thing is ek at least used 1/4" copper base so flatting it out was not a problem 

It you got a nickle plated velocity might be more fun to flatten than just copper.

Mounting studs could be an issue haven't really looked into the direct die mounts to closely on it 
Message Jpmboy he has one as he stated ready to go


----------



## ThrashZone

D-EJ915 said:


> Yes it was a faulty temperature gauge, the issue wasn't the high end it would never go below 50 C so I could not make fan profiles that worked for anything. * I appreciate you trying to help but it's like you don't actually read the posts. You probably forgot so sorry for sounding like an ******* lol.
> *
> .


Hi,
I didn't read the link you posted is all 
You haven't really until now or my prior inquiries really given any real details just generic terms hard to extract anything from them here.
OverClock.net not StockClocks.net


----------



## Abaidor

Hey Jpmboy you have a pm.

At this point though I am not that excited about the direct die frame after reading all those posts...all this waiting and in the end something tells me that I will end up with the IHS but delided and with separate blocks. It's got to be better than stock that I am now otherwise I will have wasted time and money for no reason + a wasted monoblock that looks better.


----------



## ThrashZone

Abaidor said:


> Hey Jpmboy you have a pm.
> 
> At this point though I am not that excited about the direct die frame after reading all those posts...all this waiting and in the end something tells me that I will end up with the IHS but delided and with separate blocks. It's got to be better than stock that I am now otherwise I will have wasted time and money for no reason + a wasted monoblock that looks better.


Hi,
I'd be more worried about LM dripping off the die... onto something else and shorting out something than the wasted time...

They are fiddly as far as I've read getting LM just right and it applies to all core temps equally which might end up with excessive application of LM and dripping... 

Test bench might be best seeing they are nearly horizontal instead of a regular vertical case deal.


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> Hey Jpmboy you have a pm.
> 
> At this point though I am not that excited about the direct die frame after reading all those posts...all this waiting and in the end something tells me that I will end up with the IHS but delided and with separate blocks. It's got to be better than stock that I am now otherwise I will have wasted time and money for no reason + a wasted monoblock that looks better.


 I'm 100% sure that you can't use the monoblock with the die frame... or it may take a "more than usual" level of massaging than with fitting any monoblock properly.
Those folks who did spend the time to get the die frame to fit, swear by it. The rest of us swear at it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> I'm 100% sure that you can't use the monoblock with the die frame... or it may take a "more than usual" level of massaging than with fitting any monoblock properly.
> *Those folks who did spend the time to get the die frame to fit, swear by it. The rest of us swear at it.*


Hi,
That's funny :lachen:


----------



## Abaidor

Jpmboy said:


> I'm 100% sure that you can't use the monoblock with the die frame... or it may take a "more than usual" level of massaging than with fitting any monoblock properly.
> Those folks who did spend the time to get the die frame to fit, swear by it. The rest of us swear at it.


Haha ha....I am willing to dedicate a weekend to it after having planned it properly. By this I mean that I will go find a way to make the EK Velocity sit properly on through trying different struts. I have a large collection of mounting screws & thumb nuts & springs from the past so I will test some to see how they do. 

In addition to delidding & installing the VRM Block + Velocity I was planning to change my soft tubing to hard tubes (have everything), add some Addresable strips & Halos along with some custom cables from Pexon that I will be receiving soon. However, I might leave the soft tubing in place for a bit longer until I conclude on the direct frame installation.


***The monoblock is out of question and I am aware that it will serve as a coaster soon....I will salvage its RGB strips though and leave the Aquantia 10Gbit heatsink installed though since its good.


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I'd be more worried about LM dripping off the die... onto something else and shorting out something than the wasted time...
> 
> They are fiddly as far as I've read getting LM just right and it applies to all core temps equally which might end up with excessive application of LM and dripping...
> 
> Test bench might be best seeing they are nearly horizontal instead of a regular vertical case deal.


I am aware of the danger of LM that is why I have bought Liquid tape and Klampton tape to make a seal around the die that will prevent LM from escaping...at least I will try.


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> I am aware of the danger of LM that is why I have bought Liquid tape and Klampton tape to make a seal around the die that will prevent LM from escaping...at least I will try.


best thing to do is get a bottle of Conformal Coating (MG industries) and cover all the top-side exposed SMDs on your cpu. It's clear... you can also paint it on the MB PCB quite liberally. It is what is used to waterproof/seal PCB intended for wet environments. It's waaay better than nail polish. Apply (paint) the LM on the die and underside of the cooler. Paint. No blobs. LM would not leak out since the amount used is very little (and that's the proper way to form a LM thermal bond-line).


----------



## Abaidor

Jpmboy said:


> best thing to do is get a bottle of Conformal Coating (MG industries) and cover all the top-side exposed SMDs on your cpu. It's clear... you can also paint it on the MB PCB quite liberally. It is what is used to waterproof/seal PCB intended for wet environments. It's waaay better than nail polish. Apply (paint) the LM on the die and underside of the cooler. Paint. No blobs. LM would not leak out since the amount used is very little (and that's the proper way to form a LM thermal bond-line).


I already bought liquid electrical tape but if I can find this I will give it a shot.....


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
That conformal coating is some tough stuff to get off


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> That conformal coating is some tough stuff to get off


So if using it, one needs to be careful where he puts it on..

Initially I go some kampton tape and have 4-5 rolls of it (various widths) but then I also bought the liquid tape...All these consumables add to the total cost though...I wonder what the end result will be..If I get 4.8GHz All Cores I will be happy.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
There's some other stuff electricians use too 
3M ScotchKote don't use it lol not sure the conformal coating Jp suggested is much different or not ?


----------



## Abaidor

Permatex Liquid Electrical Tape is what I got....

"Weatherproof protectant for wiring and electrical connections. Goes on as a liquid and dries to a vinyl polymer that resists dirt, dust, chemicals, moisture, ensuring that connections stay intact. Brush-top applicator allows coverage without gaps and enables access to tight spaces that roll tape and shrink tubing cant get to."


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Should be fine.


----------



## Abaidor

My main worry now is how to achieve perfect contact with the waterblock given that it is a bit convex and whether the mounting screws allow it to go lower than when it is installed with the IHS.

The hell with it....I am peeling that sticker now and giving it the spin test...coming back...


Well, the result is...........


https://youtu.be/PGNiXGX2nLU?t=59


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Originall posted to jpmboy in the RAM OC thread:



GnarlyCharlie said:


> You better watch out, I just snagged a pre-owned 7980XE, gonna stuff the ram slots thusly:
> 
> https://gskill.com/en/product/f4-3600c16q2-64gtzsw
> 
> It's in a Gig X299 Gaming 7 Pro board, I see you had a 9. As usual, I'm late to the party and all the 8 ram slot Asus boards are history (they got a RVIE Omega? coming - haven't seen one and it'll no doubt be the better part of a grand) so I'll see if I can get by with the Gigabyte. I've only ever had one other Gig board, a Z79 in my HTPC and nothing in it is overclocked.
> 
> Fun and games ahead!


Got it booted up on air, all the ram shows up and the board seems functional so tore it all back down to put it in a loop. This would have been a top rig a gen or so ago - if I can get it OC'd. Titan X Pascal, 970 Pro NVME, Supernova G2 1300 ($150 at Da Egg!). Not too worried about trying to break records, just cruising like a big ol' '59 El Dorado or something. Case is a 900D, The 59 El Dorado of cases, I'd forgotten how dang big that thing is. Bought it to move the 5960X rig into a little more rad area case, yeah, there's a little more room alright.


----------



## CptSpig

GnarlyCharlie said:


> Originall posted to jpmboy in the RAM OC thread:
> 
> 
> 
> Got it booted up on air, all the ram shows up and the board seems functional so tore it all back down to put it in a loop. This would have been a top rig a gen or so ago - if I can get it OC'd. Titan X Pascal, 970 Pro NVME, Supernova G2 1300 ($150 at Da Egg!). Not too worried about trying to break records, just cruising like a big ol' '59 El Dorado or something. Case is a 900D, The 59 El Dorado of cases, I'd forgotten how dang big that thing is. Bought it to move the 5960X rig into a little more rad area case, yeah, there's a little more room alright.


"Not too worried about trying to break records, just cruising like a big ol' '59 El Dorado or something".....Yeah Right.....:laughings


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> That conformal coating is some tough stuff to get off


it's easier than LET and has zero chance of pulling an SMB off the board/PCB when you do. But why bother - it's completely transparent and only UV visible. (it's used on drone control PCBs for wet flying.  ) It washes right off with 100% EtOH. MG also sells a spray can of cleaner for that purpose. You can also spray the PCB/MB - the entire thing - with 3M electrical contact cleaner, even clean the socket, dimm slots with ECC. During assembly, the entire MB is dipped to remove flux and other crap. Hang to dry. Some guys use a hot box to dry boards after (cardboard box with a hair dryer duct-taped to it). Done.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I wouldn't think liquid electrical tape would be any harder than removing hot glue which is very easy with 91% alcohol :/


----------



## bmgjet

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I wouldn't think liquid electrical tape would be any harder than removing hot glue which is very easy with 91% alcohol :/


I used LET on my GPUs and CPU.
Have removed it as well, its as easy as use a tooth pick and pull up one corner. Then it pulls off like a bit cling wrap. Like there is no way it could cause any damage since its has nearly no stick at all to it, Its just a blob of rubber basically.


----------



## Abaidor

I will experiment on something else with LET before applying it to the CPU smds just to make sure it is applied properly. 

Now what to do about the convex block is what puzzles me....I wonder if it can be made flat depending the amount of force exerted through the screws on it's mounting frame. 

Well I was sure I read something about it but I have also found it on the Techpowerup review now:

"The cooling engine has been simplified as compared to the older EK-Supremacy EVO. Gone is the implementation of the insert, and instead, we only have two *jetplates* to choose from (1.0 and 0.8 mm thick), *which influence the overall bow of the cold plate itself.*"

So I then guess that the jetplate "presses" the base in the middle when the plexi lid is screwed in place and since it does so in the middle the two different thicknesses increase or decrease the bow...BINGO

I was also just looking at the manual and the Velocity comes with the 1mm jetplate installed by default (for 1150 socket) meaning it has the larger bow. I will of course disassemble, install the 08mm jet plate (socket 2066) and take the spin test again hoping that it will be even flatter if not 100% flat. 

Worst case scenario, I am prepared to even make my own jetplate that is going to be even slimmer (maybe 0.6 or 0.5mm) to reduce the bow even further. It's just a piece of stainless steel so it won't be hard to have on lazer cut. Alternatively, I could attempt to lap it down to the best thickness that works....


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Frankly I don't see a razor blade jet plate pushing a 1/4" piece of copper any amount as stated there 
Plexi is more likely to bend than the copper base plate.
But the different thicknesses only judges how much that jet plate will flex once the liquid goes through it 

As fluid goes through it will want to raise up
Thicker jet plate won't raise as much as a thinner one would
But it has nothing to do with pushing against the base plate and bowing it at all that I can imagine.

Only bad thing about the velocity or any bowed water block, if it is nickle pretty much zaps any attempt to flatten it out
Copper is easy just sand/ lap it flat boom done.

LM and copper is another story 



bmgjet said:


> I used LET on my GPUs and CPU.
> Have removed it as well, its as easy as use a tooth pick and pull up one corner. Then it pulls off like a bit cling wrap. Like there is no way it could cause any damage since its has nearly no stick at all to it, Its just a blob of rubber basically.


Hi,
Yep have you ever tried 91% alcohol I image it would make it ever easier to remove it would have to stick a little.


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Frankly I don't see a razor blade jet plate pushing a 1/4" piece of copper any amount as stated there
> Plexi is more likely to bend than the copper base plate.
> But the different thicknesses only judges how much that jet plate will flex once the liquid goes through it
> 
> As fluid goes through it will want to raise up
> Thicker jet plate won't raise as much as a thinner one would
> But it has nothing to do with pushing against the base plate and bowing it at all that I can imagine.
> 
> Only bad thing about the velocity or any bowed water block, if it is nickle pretty much zaps any attempt to flatten it out
> Copper is easy just sand/ lap it flat boom done.
> 
> LM and copper is another story



I found another reference of this happening (reducing the bow on a discussion on Redit) - I am sending EK an email now to clear it up. 
The plate does not push anything -- the edges and the screws on the mounting frame do so and I also have a old swiftech block that works similarly by changing the o-ring with a thicker one. 

The copper base might not be that rigid as one may think it is too. It has a certain degree of flexibility that also changes and "hugs" or forms to the shape of the IHS supposedly.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I just don't see that copper and or copper with nickle plating moving even a little bit 
Even if there is only 1/8" left on the copper base plate that is still pretty ridged.

The razor blade jet is more likely to float than anything else moving 
Can't say much about the plastic insert that the jet plate fit in it might move no telling but that is where I'd expect the jet plate to be moving within.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
An easy test if you have this block out 
Take it apart 
Remove the o-ring place the base plate on the body and see if there is a gap between the two.
No gap no bowing.


----------



## RichKnecht

If I ever feel inclined to mess with my Die frame again, I will buy a new copper base for my EVO and sand it so I know it's flat. A also can't see how the jet plate is going to flex the base. I don't think the mounting mechanism can flex it either. What I do know is that if I use the die frame, the edges of the die do not contact my block, just the very middle. So, it has to be the base of the block or the die itself.


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I just don't see that copper and or copper with nickle plating moving even a little bit
> Even if there is only 1/8" left on the copper base plate that is still pretty ridged.
> 
> The razor blade jet is more likely to float than anything else moving
> Can't say much about the plastic insert that the jet plate fit in it might move no telling but that is where I'd expect the jet plate to be moving within.


I am with you but the base can be bowed (I suppose) as it happened with the Swiftech Apogee block some 10 years ago (I have it and it does)

Look at it here - replacing the o-ring does cause a bow of the base

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Swiftech/Apogee_GT/2.html
http://martinsliquidlab.petrastech.com/Swiftech_Apogee_GT_Review.html

Obviously, and if we take both of the references I found seriously (needs to be confirmed) the jet plate, irrelevantly of tis thickness, can not be compressed and the same holds true for the plexi. The question is why does the base warps instead of the plexi top then? Well if it is actually happening (will find out soon) the only explanation is that the copper base is indeed softer copper than what we think it is. I will see what EK support has to say about this and will also change the jet plate (the 0.8mm is the suggested for socket 2066 anyway) and see what happens.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
My ek evo's are both installed so I can't do this yet but trust me I will 


ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> An easy test if you have this block out
> Take it apart
> Remove the o-ring place the base plate on the body and see if there is a gap between the two.
> No gap no bowing.


----------



## Jpmboy

:thumb:
for citing Martin's lab.


----------



## Abaidor

RichKnecht said:


> If I ever feel inclined to mess with my Die frame again, I will buy a new copper base for my EVO and sand it so I know it's flat. A also can't see how the jet plate is going to flex the base. I don't think the mounting mechanism can flex it either. What I do know is that if I use the die frame, the edges of the die do not contact my block, just the very middle. So, it has to be the base of the block or the die itself.


For the die we can't do much but the base....I really have a hard time to think that they machine it convex. The bow must be an effect of warping after tightening the screws (one time the top plexi screws and again on the opposite direction through the screws of the mounting frame so that it takes the form of the IHS.) 

It did happen with my old Swiftech apoggee - the copper base warped more or less depending on which o-ring you used.

Anyway, I am just making thoughts here to explain their reasoning of designing it with a bow...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yes tightening too much will bow copper for sure.


----------



## tistou77

Normally, the jet plate is for the flow / restriction of the loop
It does not play on the base of the waterblock (the jet plate must not be able to bend the base)


----------



## Abaidor

tistou77 said:


> Normally, the jet plate is for the flow / restriction of the loop
> It does not play on the base of the waterblock (the jet plate must not be able to bend the base)


Well for me, if it does it makes perfect sense so that it can assist the base take the form of the IHS....as I said look at the Apogee from 15 years ago (have it) - the fatter o-ring was intentionally included so that it bows the base more- by design...And indeed it does bow the base while it has a derlin top (softer than plexi)....

I am really curious what EK support has to say if they give a clear answer of course...I will also test my self anyway....

It all comes down to how "soft" the copper used in the base is vs the plexi top. I assume that if the plexi top has been designed with rigidity in mind then certain cuts/ridges on its body may prevent it from bowing vs the base which is flat (it is a structural engineering matter).....then whatever movement takes place in the center of the supposedly "softer" copper base would certainly create a small gap (0.2mm) between the edge of the plexi top and the base which is accounted for of course and covered by the 0-ring flexibility....

LOL - Conspiracy theory 101.....

I want to be able to adjust the bow of the base so much that I will produce many theories until I find out if it is actually possible...


----------



## tistou77

Abaidor said:


> Well for me, if it does it makes perfect sense so that it can assist the base take the form of the IHS....as I said look at the Apogee from 15 years ago (have it) - the fatter o-ring was intentionally included so that it bows the base more- by design...And indeed it does bow the base while it has a derlin top (softer than plexi)....
> 
> I am really curious what EK support has to say if they give a clear answer of course...I will also test my self anyway....
> 
> It all comes down to how "soft" the copper used in the base is vs the plexi top. I assume that if the plexi top has been designed with rigidity in mind then certain cuts/ridges on its body may prevent it from bowing vs the base which is flat (it is a structural engineering matter).....then whatever movement takes place in the center of the supposedly "softer" copper base would certainly create a small gap (0.2mm) between the edge of the plexi top and the base which is accounted for of course and covered by the 0-ring flexibility....
> 
> LOL - Conspiracy theory 101.....
> 
> I want to be able to adjust the bow of the base so much that I will produce many theories until I find out if it is actually possible...


The answer I got from Koolance about the convex base (the same thing for EKWB I guess)



> They're convex because it creates better contact with the CPU IHS that a purely flat waterblock (due to minor flexing after mounting).


And so, a minor flexing with tightening screws

I had an answer from EKWB for the jet plate at the time, I try to find it


----------



## Abaidor

So some flexing does take place at least due to the mounting frame tightening. I.e. it is convex and then after tightening the screws at the edges of the frame it does flex making it flatter.

What I can't confirm is whether the jet plate is capable of pushing the middle section of the base down or not instead of flexing the plexi top...It could and the channels (cuttings) could assist something like that but then again if it did flex the channel gaps might get affected and there is not much space between them in the first place. 

I wonder why Techpowerup mentions this in their review. It's not like they have no experience..


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yes pressure just from mounting the actual water block would also create a bow on the copper 
Doing this on a direct die is the tricky could be die crushing part of direct die mounting delid to I suppose since we removed the intel spacing for a thinner LM contact.
Either way seems just the mount would counter act any flex from the o-ring..
OCD is definitely sinking in


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> So some flexing does take place at least due to the mounting frame tightening. I.e. it is convex and then after tightening the screws at the edges of the frame it does flex making it flatter.
> 
> *What I can't confirm is whether the jet plate is capable of pushing the middle section of the base down or not instead of flexing the plexi top.*..It could and the channels (cuttings) could assist something like that but then again if it did flex the channel gaps might get affected and there is not much space between them in the first place.
> 
> I wonder why Techpowerup mentions this in their review. It's not like they have no experience..


 the thin jet plate and plastic insert do not add any rigidity to the contact (cold) plate. If anything flexes first in the socket-coldplate assembly, it's the PCB itself. Many examples of bent (or bending) CPU PCBs. 
On the direct die frame, the purpose of the frame is to mount the cpu in the socket with enough pressure to ensure complete electrical contact - since you really do not want to apply the contact pressure thru the die directly (this is why they crack). So, when doing direct-to-die cooling, the block mount pressure has to be much less than when the IHS is in place.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Jp might know since he has one and went through hello dealing with it
Is the top of the direct die frame the same height as the top of the naked cpu ?
And does the cpu water block touch the die frame if so.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> the thin jet plate and plastic insert do not add any rigidity to the contact (cold) plate. If anything flexes first in the socket-coldplate assembly, it's the PCB itself. Many examples of bent (or bending) CPU PCBs.
> On the direct die frame, the purpose of the frame is to mount the cpu in the socket with enough pressure to ensure complete electrical contact - since you really do not want to apply the contact pressure thru the die directly (this is why they crack). So, when doing direct-to-die cooling, the block mount pressure has to be much less than when the IHS is in place.


So you think, perhaps in my case, that I am over tightening the block? I do crank it down until the screws stop (as it is now with the Rockit IHS). When I removed my block when using the die frame, it was pretty obvious that the main contact was in the center. So perhaps I was over tightening the die frame as well, thus bowing the chip? Other than the temps, I had a bugger of a time getting the right pressure on the chip when using the die frame. Too loose and it would not post. Tightening it a bit let it post, but often with missing memory DIMMs, no video, and funky USB behavior. Once I got it "right", that's when temps crept up over a weeks's time and I removed the frame and went to the Rockit IHS. Perhaps I may give it another go when I swap boards (Extreme or Omega, whichever I can get).


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Jp might know since he has one and went through hello dealing with it
> *Is the top of the direct die frame the same height as the top of the naked cpu *?
> *And does the cpu water block touch the die frame* if so.


 no... and no it should not touch the frame (tho maybe if done properly, you might be able to cool the socket also?:thinking:
(wouldn;t say I had a hellofa time with it, was more of a lack of patience with it)




RichKnecht said:


> So you think, perhaps in my case, that I am over tightening the block? I do crank it down until the screws stop (as it is now with the Rockit IHS). When I removed my block when using the die frame, it was pretty obvious that the main contact was in the center. So perhaps I was over tightening the die frame as well, thus bowing the chip? Other than the temps, I had a bugger of a time getting the right pressure on the chip when using the die frame. Too loose and it would not post. Tightening it a bit let it post, but often with missing memory DIMMs, no video, and funky USB behavior. Once I got it "right", *that's when temps crept up over a weeks's time *and I removed the frame and went to the Rockit IHS. Perhaps I may give it another go when I swap boards (Extreme or Omega, whichever I can get).


that's odd. and sounds like more of a tim issue?


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> no... and no it should not touch the frame (tho maybe if done properly, you might be able to cool the socket also?:thinking:
> (wouldn;t say I had a hellofa time with it, was more of a lack of patience with it)
> 
> 
> 
> that's odd. and sounds like more of a tim issue?


I tried that die frame MANY times. Maybe they work better on the HCC chips. The die on my 7900x is pretty small and narrow compared to the 7940s and up. At this point, I'll accept that I can't use the frame. I just want to ditch this Strix board for a Rampage.


----------



## tistou77

Indeed, the die does not touch the base of the waterblock, 0.1mm (of memory) between the die and the "top" of the frame (to "protect" the die)


----------



## Abaidor

tistou77 said:


> Indeed, the die does not touch the base of the waterblock, 0.1mm (of memory) between the die and the "top" of the frame (to "protect" the die)


If the naked die does not touch the waterblock then how does it get cooled? Through a thermal layer of TIM filling the 0.1mm gap that does touch both (die & bottom of block)? 

I was under the impression that the direct die frame is at the same height with the top of the naked die.....but now that I am thinking of it this would also spread the cooling capacity of the block to the frame....
Now I am really curious to investigate it in person but it seems like I need to dedicate a weekend to this that I won't be needing my PC...


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> If the naked die does not touch the waterblock then how does it get cooled? Through a thermal layer of TIM filling the 0.1mm gap that does touch both (die & bottom of block)?
> 
> I was under the impression that the direct die frame is at the same height with the top of the naked die.....but now that I am thinking of it this would also spread the cooling capacity of the block to the frame....
> Now I am really curious to investigate it in person but it seems like I need to dedicate a weekend to this that I won't be needing my PC...


Pretty sure he means "frame" not "die" in that post... or more accurately, the die sits higher than the x-frame (has to as you note).


----------



## RichKnecht

Abaidor said:


> If the naked die does not touch the waterblock then how does it get cooled? Through a thermal layer of TIM filling the 0.1mm gap that does touch both (die & bottom of block)?
> 
> I was under the impression that the direct die frame is at the same height with the top of the naked die.....but now that I am thinking of it this would also spread the cooling capacity of the block to the frame....
> Now I am really curious to investigate it in person but it seems like I need to dedicate a weekend to this that I won't be needing my PC...


In my scientific experiment  with my 7900X, the die sat above the frame ever so slightly. I checked it by laying a razor blade ( on edge) across the frame and sliding it over the die. The blade indeed bumped the die. Granted it isn't much, but the die is not flush with the top of the frame.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep straight edge across to the frame and see where the die is
Die higher get a feeler gauge and find the happy size and get 4 one for each corner where the mounts go and there's your stopping points for tightening.

I broke my system down and cleaned both blocks.. and yes the ek evo once the gasket is off the razor blade jet does hold it up a hair 
But the gasket is a little more height so tightening would remove any difference 
Thinner razor blade jet would be less. 

Lapped/ flattened the cpu and evo block after reassembly carpenters dream flat as a pancake 
CPU before I checked it seemed fairly flat nope high middle and outsides small concave all around weird looking actually all copper top now though 

Looks like the gpu block was about to leak had some liquid outside the gasket


----------



## Abaidor

Well thanks to the amazing Jpmboy the direct die frame is on its way to me and will finally have the chance to see what I can do with it..
The wait (over 2 months) for it has delayed a series of upgrades to my rig and a pile of new water cooling & other parts collecting dust on a bench....

Hey Thrashzone I might do the trick with the feeler gauges while tightening that might also help in keeping it level...

This "upgrade" is going to be fun because there will be a lot of things I am doing for the first time such as:

1) Deliding a CPU - check
2) Using Liquid Metal - check
3) Cooling a bare die - check
4) Going to bend hard tubes - check ( I will leave the soft tubes until I am done with the delid & final overclock in case I need to re-mount something)
5) Install custom sleeved cables - check (lol ok I have these coming ready to install from Pexon)

I also plan on doing several case mods (some decorative plexi or metal pieces, lighting, custom paint jobs).

All these have been put on hold because of the damn frame. So Jpmboy, thanks again!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Don't forget to lap/ flatten that velocity too if it's not flat


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> Well thanks to the amazing Jpmboy the direct die frame is on its way to me and will finally have the chance to see what I can do with it..
> The wait (over 2 months) for it has delayed a series of upgrades to my rig and a pile of new water cooling & other parts collecting dust on a bench....
> 
> Hey Thrashzone I might do the trick with the feeler gauges while tightening that might also help in keeping it level...
> 
> This "upgrade" is going to be fun because there will be a lot of things I am doing for the first time such as:
> 
> 1) Deliding a CPU - check
> 2) Using Liquid Metal - check
> 3) Cooling a bare die - check
> 4) Going to bend hard tubes - check ( I will leave the soft tubes until I am done with the delid & final overclock in case I need to re-mount something)
> 5) Install custom sleeved cables - check (lol ok I have these coming ready to install from Pexon)
> 
> I also plan on doing several case mods (some decorative plexi or metal pieces, lighting, custom paint jobs).
> 
> All these have been put on hold because of the damn frame. So Jpmboy, thanks again!



you're welcome. Keep us informed as it all comes together. :thumb:


----------



## ESRCJ

I sense that some bigger gains can be had from lapping the die on these HCC parts. The large differences in core temps seem like a byproduct of an uneven die surface. MikeGold seemed to have a lot of success with this combined with direct-to-die.


----------



## Mysticial

gridironcpj said:


> I sense that some bigger gains can be had from lapping the die on these HCC parts.


Sounds risky enough that I wouldn't recommend it. Unless someone wants to volunteer. 



> The large differences in core temps seem like a byproduct of an uneven die surface. MikeGold seemed to have a lot of success with this combined with direct-to-die.


This is normal. Different cores have different vcore and leakage. Cores in the middle of the die may be warmer than the ones on the edge since heat will spill to adjacent cores.


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Don't forget to lap/ flatten that velocity too if it's not flat


But if I lap it and then copper is exposed, isn't it dangerous when it comes in contact with Liquid Metal?




Jpmboy said:


> you're welcome. Keep us informed as it all comes together. :thumb:


I will both here and maybe I start a build thread for the fun of it. The only problem with a build thread though is time which I don't have because I have a lot of work...then again if I did not have a lot of work I would not have money for buying nice hardware & stuff, LOL....


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> But if I lap it and then copper is exposed,* isn't it dangerous when it comes in contact with Liquid Metal*?
> I will both here and maybe I start a build thread for the fun of it. The only problem with a build thread though is time which I don't have because I have a lot of work...then again if I did not have a lot of work I would not have money for buying nice hardware & stuff, LOL....


nah, not dangerous. the gallium in LM will "stain" the copper... it's actually a surface amalgum of Ga and Cu.


----------



## fgh

RichKnecht said:


> My Die frame is sitting in my drawer once again. Either my die or block isn't perfectly flat (convex) for the frame to work long term. When I first put it on, I get amazing temps. But after a week or so temps creep back up because the LM loses contact with the ends of the die.



I have 7900x with Direct Die. First I used them with Kryonaut (temps were about the same as before deliding) and after few days temps became much worse. When I took LM and applied it, I had 2-3 cores 20-30 degrees hotter. It turned out I haven't tightened enough Direct Die to the MB. Now, 3 days later, I still have 8 degrees diff between the hottest and the coldest core.
I'm using EK EVO full nickel block bought two months ago. The previous EK EVO block has one screw for the top which doesn't hide completely after tightening it.
I hope temps will be fine after a week.


----------



## Abaidor

Jpmboy said:


> nah, not dangerous. the gallium in LM will "stain" the copper... it's actually a surface amalgum of Ga and Cu.


Cool, I was under the impression that it might cause corrosion but did not do any research about it so good to know. If it comes down to it, I will lap the base of the Velocity....


----------



## WarlockSix

Abaidor said:


> Cool, I was under the impression that it might cause corrosion but did not do any research about it so good to know. If it comes down to it, I will lap the base of the Velocity....





Jpmboy said:


> nah, not dangerous. the gallium in LM will "stain" the copper... it's actually a surface amalgum of Ga and Cu.


This post may be of interest regarding Gallium and Copper:

http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...-compatibility-with-copper-heat-sinks.800890/


----------



## Jpmboy

Eutectic mixture... not an alloy.


----------



## Abaidor

WarlockSix said:


> This post may be of interest regarding Gallium and Copper:
> 
> http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...-compatibility-with-copper-heat-sinks.800890/


Ah yes, this is the exact article I came across in the past and made me worry....I did not pay a lot of attention back then though...Anyway, lapping the velocity will also cause the nickel plating to flake as it happened with others but at this point its early to judge since I will first attempt to achieve contact without any lapping...

At the end of the day I can always fall back to using the IHS if things don't work out the way I want to but I am not the one to give up easily..Once I start I will see how it goes and insist on it till the end..


----------



## RichKnecht

fgh said:


> I have 7900x with Direct Die. First I used them with Kryonaut (temps were about the same as before deliding) and after few days temps became much worse. When I took LM and applied it, I had 2-3 cores 20-30 degrees hotter. It turned out I haven't tightened enough Direct Die to the MB. Now, 3 days later, I still have 8 degrees diff between the hottest and the coldest core.
> I'm using EK EVO full nickel block bought two months ago. The previous EK EVO block has one screw for the top which doesn't hide completely after tightening it.
> I hope temps will be fine after a week.


My EVO is a RGB Nickel block that is pretty new. I know about the screws and they all sit below the surface. When it worked the temps were awesome with ~6-8C between coolest and hottest cores. I have a copper base for my EVO and I'm going sand it flat and give it another try when I switch to the Omega board which "should" be here Monday.


----------



## ThrashZone

Abaidor said:


> Ah yes, this is the exact article I came across in the past and made me worry....I did not pay a lot of attention back then though...Anyway, lapping the velocity will also cause the nickel plating to flake as it happened with others but at this point its early to judge since I will first attempt to achieve contact without any lapping...
> 
> At the end of the day I can always fall back to using the IHS if things don't work out the way I want to but I am not the one to give up easily..Once I start I will see how it goes and insist on it till the end..


Hi,
Yeah I saw that too I wouldn't worry about it 
The way we upgrade stuff it won;t matter too much if any reaction occurs on a water block eventually/ maybe....

Besides the only thing I got out of it was comparisons to aluminum and LM lol copper is a tad different :doh:

I've also read after time and the copper gets stained.. heat transfer get better not worse so whom to believe :wheee:


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I saw that too I wouldn't worry about it
> The way we upgrade stuff it won;t matter too much if any reaction occurs on a water block eventually/ maybe....
> 
> Besides the only thing I got out of it was comparisons to aluminum and LM lol copper is a tad different :doh:
> 
> I've also read after time and the copper gets stained.. heat transfer get better not worse so whom to believe :wheee:


I read most of the pages on the thread linked above and the consensus is that the reaction with copper and Conductonaut is only a surface one. However, it looks like it is better to apply LM once, let the process of "alloying" take place and then reapply WITHOUT sanding or removing completely the stain that has formed on the surface of copper. This prevents the process of this forming again and the second time you apply LM it will last much longer (like no worries).....In any case good contact without air in between the LM and copper or nickel is critical to the success. 

So I am not going to be worried if it comes down to sanding the base of the Velocity and based on those guys experiences (strange forum though for such things) it looks like it is true....The second application is where it gets better..

Damn this is certainly not a hassle free experience....how do I always get my self into such ordeals (with ALL my hobies) is remarkable...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Most people refer to that trait as Over thinking I've been guilty of that many times :heyyou:


Talk about over thinking 

Okay I flushed all the cryocrap out yeah I've still been using it just filtered it when ever I drain/ clean out the blocks... put it back in.
Running distilled water so far and I swear temps are higher by 5c at the least :/

Water I imagine has a lower boiling point than premix fluids is all I can get out of anything and there is the problem 
Swapped back to high rpm fans/ hub plus speed controller and temps go to normal or what I would call normal

So water gets hotter but cools better on higher air transfer through rads ?


----------



## RichKnecht

Abaidor said:


> Damn this is certainly not a hassle free experience....how do I always get my self into such ordeals (with ALL my hobies) is remarkable...


I have found the X299 platform to be extremely frustrating and equally rewarding at times. It seems that if you want to squeeze every once of performance out of it, you really have to put in the effort.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
More like tossing money than effort


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Most people refer to that trait as Over thinking I've been guilty of that many times :heyyou:
> 
> 
> Talk about over thinking
> 
> Okay I flushed all the cryocrap out yeah I've still been using it just filtered it when ever I drain/ clean out the blocks... put it back in.
> Running distilled water so far and I swear temps are higher by 5c at the least :/
> 
> Water I imagine has a lower boiling point than premix fluids is all I can get out of anything and there is the problem
> Swapped back to high rpm fans/ hub plus speed controller and temps go to normal or what I would call normal
> 
> So water gets hotter but cools better on higher air transfer through rads ?


what you are seeing is (assuming it is not from air in your rads after flushing and that you are measuring coolant temperature too) is that water has poor surface "wetting" properties (related to its surface tension). Additives like dow-corning antifoam, or Redline water wetter (from you auto parts store) fix this. Check places like Martin's liquid lab for data. DW+ wetter+antimicrobial has he best cooling properties.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> what you are seeing is (assuming it is not from air in your rads after flushing and that you are measuring coolant temperature too) is that water has poor surface "wetting" properties (related to its surface tension). Additives like dow-corning antifoam, or *Redline water wetter (from you auto parts store) fix this*. Check places like Martin's liquid lab for data. DW+ wetter+antimicrobial has he best cooling properties.


Hi,
I asked for your input on this redline water wetter CptSpig dropped in a water cooling thread 
What mixture do you use ?
https://www.overclock.net/forum/61-...cool-additives-protectors-2.html#post27760324


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I asked for your input on this redline water wetter CptSpig dropped in a water cooling thread
> What mixture do you use ?
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/61-...cool-additives-protectors-2.html#post27760324


Looked at that stuff before. The only thing that kept me from getting it was that I don't want pink coolant. That's why I went with clear Cryofuel. No issues with it, but the clear is hard to find.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Looked at that stuff before. The only thing that kept me from getting it was that I don't want pink coolant. That's why I went with clear Cryofuel. No issues with it, but the clear is hard to find.


Hi,
Yeah I have some ek clear concentrate debating if I want to use it after all of the cryocrap premix ordeal I've been dealing with for the last 1.5 years.

Redline water wetter sounds interesting and somewhat easy to get autozone says thay have it
Only question is mixture and soft hosing compatibility flushing and or lifetime expectancy 
I'm ready for a switch

It's either this or mayhems x1 clear concentrate which is a performance pc deal and might come yellowish so pink well lol I'd imagine mixture plays a larg part in that pinkish verses yellowish


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> what you are seeing is (assuming it is not from air in your rads after flushing and that you are measuring coolant temperature too) is that water has poor surface "wetting" properties (related to its surface tension). Additives like dow-corning antifoam, or Redline water wetter (from you auto parts store) fix this. Check places like Martin's liquid lab for data. DW+ wetter+antimicrobial has he best cooling properties.


JP is absolutely correct. I run 70% DW + 30% coolant + a bottle of Water Wetter in my super charged high HP car and it never reaches 1/2 way on the gauge. Even in 110f days with the air conditioning on full blast. :wheee:


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> JP is absolutely correct. I run 70% DW + 30% coolant + a bottle of Water Wetter in my super charged high HP car and it never reaches 1/2 way on the gauge. Even in 110f days with the air conditioning on full blast. :wheee:


Hi,
Yep forgot to mention your computer coolant Koolance premix clear as second option from x1 clear


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I have some ek clear concentrate debating if I want to use it after all of the cryocrap premix ordeal I've been dealing with for the last 1.5 years.
> 
> Redline water wetter sounds interesting and somewhat easy to get autozone says thay have it
> Only question is mixture and soft hosing compatibility flushing and or lifetime expectancy
> I'm ready for a switch
> 
> It's either this or mayhems x1 clear concentrate which is a performance pc deal and might come yellowish so pink well lol I'd imagine mixture plays a larg part in that pinkish verses yellowish


I run Koolance 702 Liquid Coolant, High-Performance, UV Blue and it keeps things very cool. I have not seen any build up in my cooling system in more than two years. Idle temps 21c and never reach 38c while gaming. Running a single Phobya G-Changer Xtreme NOVA 1080 Radiator 60mm with nine fans lots of tubbing and six QDC's. Two DDC 3.2 PWM pumps. Awesome cooling. 

https://koolance.com/liq-702-liquid-coolant-bottle-high-performance-700ml-blue


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> I run Koolance 702 Liquid Coolant, High-Performance, UV Blue and it keeps things very cool. I have not seen any build up in my cooling system in more than two years. Idle temps 21c and never reach 38c while gaming. Running a single Phobya G-Changer Xtreme NOVA 1080 Radiator 60mm with nine fans lots of tubbing and six QDC's. Two DDC 3.2 PWM pumps. Awesome cooling.
> 
> https://koolance.com/liq-702-liquid-coolant-bottle-high-performance-700ml-blue


Hi,
Yes that does have priority over x1 clear... 
Not looking too bad today little cooler 72 degrees ambient or 22c how ever you want to look at it usually 78 degrees or 25c.


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yes that does have priority over x1 clear...
> Not looking too bad today little cooler 72 degrees ambient or 22c how ever you want to look at it usually 78 degrees or 25c.


That looks great! My temps in the post are during the summer when it's 78f inside. Right now my idle is about 18c gaming 2 hours around 34 to 35c. Benching hook up the chiller for 5 to 7c got to watch out for the condensation.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I have some ek clear concentrate debating if I want to use it after all of the cryocrap premix ordeal I've been dealing with for the last 1.5 years.
> 
> Redline water wetter sounds interesting and somewhat easy to get autozone says thay have it
> Only question is mixture and soft hosing compatibility flushing and or lifetime expectancy
> I'm ready for a switch
> 
> It's either this or mayhems x1 clear concentrate which is a performance pc deal and might come yellowish so pink well lol I'd imagine mixture plays a larg part in that pinkish verses yellowish


I use the premixed EK stuff and never have any issues with it. Never tried their concentrate.


----------



## Abaidor

RichKnecht said:


> I have found the X299 platform to be extremely frustrating and equally rewarding at times. It seems that if you want to squeeze every once of performance out of it, you really have to put in the effort.





ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> More like tossing money than effort


LOL - OK yes and the thing is that the small items add up. This build is going non stop for over a year and I am still looking for things plus shipping, a lot of shipping no matter how hard I try to optimize my orders....However, I feel like my 7940X can do much better than now that is sitting undelidded and the reason I got it over a 7960X or 7980X was because I wanted the highest possible clocks along with a good number of cores..I also intend to keep for at least 2 more years until DDR5 & PCIE-4/5 are here and the platforms supporting them mature enough. 

The fact that I want my case mods as well along with high quality watercooling equipment doesn't help with costs either but their not mandatory. 




RichKnecht said:


> Looked at that stuff before. The only thing that kept me from getting it was that I don't want pink coolant. That's why I went with clear Cryofuel. No issues with it, but the clear is hard to find.


I bought 8 bottles of Clear Cryofuel and have ZERO issues with it in my loop - crystal clear for the last 10 months but I went lunatic with cleaning everything before I start using the loop. I even used an external filter before installing the blocks and run it for over 48 hours that helped me get some oil for the EK monoblock o-ring (that was pooish....)


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah if I were to name a machine build as a lot of people do here it would have to be Money Pit 

Well 5-48 and 5-47 blender classroom stable about the same temps as the unstable one I had posted yarns ago which crash nearly instantly on classroom
Various core voltage offsets + & - yeah Jp - 

Might save this profile and start lowering the voltage by 0.005 until it borks see where the bottom is.
VCCIO & PCH 1.0
VCCSA 0.9
LLC-4
Standard power phase
CPU current capability 140% Dimm 130%


----------



## fgh

After 20min Blender classroom (2 frames rendered).
MB - Taichi XE
LLC level 3
AVX2/AVX512 offset 3.
It seems blender doesn't use avx2/avx512 for most of the time. I didn't see other app that uses more avx2/avx512(--asm avx512) than x265.

Taichi XE doesn't have negative offset for specific core when "Specific per core" option is used. Does Apex and Evga Dark have such option?


----------



## KCDC

I'm noticing that, at idle, with balanced performance turned on, I'm still drawing 170 watts and easily jumps to 270w with basic internetting on the 9900x.
On my 6900k, it would normally idle at about 40 watts. It had two less cores, but is the power consumption on these 79/99xx chips really that high at idle? Not using a watt meter, just corsair iCue on my 1500i. Also showing efficiency at 0%. This is with my current OC settings, all voltages are adaptive on the cores, auto on cache at 31.


----------



## Jpmboy

fgh said:


> After 20min Blender classroom (2 frames rendered).
> MB - Taichi XE
> LLC level 3
> AVX2/AVX512 offset 3.
> It seems blender doesn't use avx2/avx512 for most of the time. I didn't see other app that uses more avx2/avx512(--asm avx512) than x265.
> 
> *Taichi XE doesn't have negative offset for specific core when "Specific per core" option is used. Does Apex and Evga Dark have such option*?


no. only a single offset (but with asus it is applied to the lowest turbo multi set in the stack)


KCDC said:


> I'm noticing that, at idle, with balanced performance turned on, I'm still drawing 170 watts and easily jumps to 270w with basic internetting on the 9900x.
> On my 6900k, it would normally idle at about 40 watts. It had two less cores, but is the power consumption on these 79/99xx chips really that high at idle? Not using a watt meter, just corsair iCue on my 1500i. Also showing efficiency at 0%. This is with my current OC settings, all voltages are adaptive on the cores, auto on cache at 31.


what are the c-states set to?


----------



## ThrashZone

fgh said:


> After 20min Blender classroom (2 frames rendered).
> MB - Taichi XE
> LLC level 3
> *AVX2/AVX512 offset 3.
> It seems blender doesn't use avx2/avx512 for most of the time. I didn't see other app that uses more avx2/avx512(--asm avx512) than x265.*
> 
> Taichi XE doesn't have negative offset for specific core when "Specific per core" option is used. Does Apex and Evga Dark have such option?


Hi,
Those are some nice temps 
I'd have drop to 4.5 and 1.185 to get those numbers 
You'll have to share some picture of that rig :thumb:

Blender doesn't use as far as I can tell avx 512 but does use avx on and off throughout the render 
I use avx 2 and 512-3 for 4.7 and avx-3 and 512-4 for 4.8 and my clocks do drop to 4.5 pretty much my no avx offset is needed is 4.5.


----------



## tistou77

tistou77 said:


> The answer I got from Koolance about the convex base (the same thing for EKWB I guess)
> 
> And so, a minor flexing with tightening screws
> 
> I had an answer from EKWB for the jet plate at the time, I try to find it


I found the answer of ekwb



> Thank you for contacting us.
> The jet plate is allocating the liquid evenly to all the fins of the cold plate so the cooling is more sufficient.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I looked at it and the space the default jet plate takes half the space of the o-ring so the o-ring is thicker so it doesn't cause any bowing 
The thinner really wouldn't and might probably rattle


----------



## Abaidor

This is for the EVO though. 

Anyway, the thinner jetplate is the appropriate one for the 2066 socket (it's in the manual) and since they are identical as far as the opening in the middle is concerned then why do they state in the manual to use the 0.8mm vs the 1mm? It does not make sense and the more I think about it the only thing that makes sense is that it does effect the bow...not betting my finger on it but why include a thinner jet plate (less pressure --> smaller bow???) for the larger dies..


----------



## tistou77

It's for EVO and Velocity


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
The only bowing I could see is tightening the block onto the socket.


----------



## KCDC

Jpmboy said:


> no. only a single offset (but with asus it is applied to the lowest turbo multi set in the stack)
> 
> what are the c-states set to?



This was with c-state disabled as well as speedshift/p-states, or at least everything I could have disabled in my BIOS AFAIK



I went and turned them on to try again, and now the curve stays solid at 160 instead of fluctuating above and below 160w


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> The only bowing I could see is tightening the block onto the socket.


If there is any bowing difference I don't expect it to be visible with the naked eye...anyway I wonder what EK has to say in their response that was specific to this...
I will use the thinner jetplate anyway since it is the one for 2066 socket and take it from there.


----------



## Jpmboy

KCDC said:


> This was with c-state disabled as well as speedshift/p-states, or at least everything I could have disabled in my BIOS AFAIK
> 
> 
> 
> I went and turned them on to try again, and now the curve stays solid at 160 instead of fluctuating above and below 160w


if you are on win10, enable c-states to c6, leave speedstep on auto and enable speedshift if you want the CPU to isle in a low power state. If you disable step, shift and c-states, the cpu will idle in a high p-state (or as though you have the windows power plan on High performance). check the windows powerplan adv settings, and set min processor state to 5% or 0%.


----------



## KCDC

Jpmboy said:


> if you are on win10, enable c-states to c6, leave speedstep on auto and enable speedshift if you want the CPU to isle in a low power state. If you disable step, shift and c-states, the cpu will idle in a high p-state (or as though you have the windows power plan on High performance). check the windows powerplan adv settings, and set min processor state to 5% or 0%.



I'll do this tonight, thank you sir.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I asked for your input on this redline water wetter CptSpig dropped in a water cooling thread
> What mixture do you use ?
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/61-...cool-additives-protectors-2.html#post27760324


 ah, I missed it. So I have 5 separate water cooled rigs running right now.. and as you can imagine, dozens going back. Redline wetter will stain some types of clear tubing (some tygons, but not the poly urethane "clear-white). Obviously wih colored tubing it's a non-issue. Grocery store DW + wetter works the best IME. But if you want clear tubes and clear liquid, DW + an antimicrobial is fine. May want to add like 0.1% clear glycol just to make it wet better - some of the clear polyether pool algecide works really well for this. i also use, and buy the 2 or 3 gallon jugs of Koolance clear - works great. Among the premixes I have tried, the aquacomputer "Double Protect" is very good stuff (and even recommended for their Aquaduct units) and it comes in colors. any system gets added DW to top off as needed (only the water component evaporates) I have never used the milky mixes.
With any mix, pre or home made, the main thing is to check pH periodically. Any (and nearly all non-galvanic) corrosion really comes down to a low pH over time.
Just as an FYI - like home potable water systems in non-chlorinated water (copper in, plastic out), copper is toxic to anything chlorophyll, so, copper rads suppress green growth. "Yellow growth" is killed by glycols.


----------



## KCDC

Jpmboy said:


> if you are on win10, enable c-states to c6, leave speedstep on auto and enable speedshift if you want the CPU to isle in a low power state. If you disable step, shift and c-states, the cpu will idle in a high p-state (or as though you have the windows power plan on High performance). check the windows powerplan adv settings, and set min processor state to 5% or 0%.



Shift/Step/c6 are on in the bios with no change in power. Now resting at 230w then eventually down to 170w. On Balanced with minimum cpu at 0% Tried c6 non retention and retention. 



Should the 9900x be resting at a lower idle power? If anyone has any insight on this. 



I am also noticing via AIDA that while typing this, nothing else running, cpu is at 11-40 watts, so I think this has to do with something else on my machine. I know this is just at a software level, but it's in the ballpark for a reading. Both GPUs are running very low power currently, so perhaps it's my Asus thunderbolt EX3 card or the Hyper M.2 card. The Thunderbolt BIOS settings are unfamiliar to me, so I am going to investigate them and see if they may be the culprit. Or maybe running my OS off of the Hyper M.2 is causing this, but I thought the m.2 raid would be low power.


EDIT: Have a killawat meter on the way, I'll see if this Link dongle is the issue since removing the Thunderbolt card changed nothing.


----------



## fgh

Jpmboy said:


> no. only a single offset (but with asus it is applied to the lowest turbo multi set in the stack)



Thanks for the info.




ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Those are some nice temps
> I'd have drop to 4.5 and 1.185 to get those numbers
> You'll have to share some picture of that rig :thumb:
> 
> Blender doesn't use as far as I can tell avx 512 but does use avx on and off throughout the render
> I use avx 2 and 512-3 for 4.7 and avx-3 and 512-4 for 4.8 and my clocks do drop to 4.5 pretty much my no avx offset is needed is 4.5.



EK XE 360 P/P + EK CE 280 P/P + EK DDC Elite + EK EVO full nickel (CSQ) + Direct Die - in Enthoo Primo. Only the CPU is in the loop.
Before delidding temps of the two hottest cores were ~97 degrees @4500 non-avx (vcore offset -0.040) in prime95 blend, 23 degrees difference between the coldest and the hottes cores, AVX/512 offset 2. Now temps are ~70 degrees of the hottest core @4800 non-avx (vcore offset -0.010), 8 degrees difference between the coldest and the hottest core, AVX/512 offset 3.

Yes, Blender does use AVX but not heavily.
For stable AVX/512 @4600 I need more than 0.030 vcore.


----------



## ThrashZone

fgh said:


> EK XE 360 P/P + EK CE 280 P/P + EK DDC Elite + EK EVO full nickel (CSQ) + Direct Die - in Enthoo Primo. Only the CPU is in the loop.
> Before delidding temps of the two hottest cores were ~97 degrees @4500 non-avx (vcore offset -0.040) in prime95 blend, 23 degrees difference between the coldest and the hottes cores, AVX/512 offset 2. Now temps are ~70 degrees of the hottest core @4800 non-avx (vcore offset -0.010), 8 degrees difference between the coldest and the hottest core, AVX/512 offset 3.
> 
> Yes, Blender does use AVX but not heavily.
> For stable AVX/512 @4600 I need more than 0.030 vcore.


Hi,
Nice love to see the system direct die mount that explains a lot :thumb:

I'm liking 1201 bios so far 
Back to adaptive offset mode just needed to much to be stable 
Played with 4.5 and went to the basement on vid's on it 
6 runs of classroom looks a lot better than manual 1.21 I was using


----------



## Abaidor

So I got a reply from EK support regarding the Jetplate in the Velocity and what I suspected is correct along with the comments in the Techpowerup review. The Jetplate DOES indeed affect the bow of the base. 



*Here is my question to EK Suppot*






> Hello,
> 
> We are having a discussion about the convexity of the EK Velocity base here at overclock.net
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...e-x-combined-discussion-910.html#post27819042
> 
> We are trying to determine whether the convexity of the base of the EK velocity is reduced by installing the thinner (J2 – 0.8mm ) jetplate vs the J1 1mm plate. My guess was that since it is thinner it pushes the base less vs the 1mm version so the bow at the base is decreased.
> 
> Is this the case? The reason of examining this is because we trying to determine the best possible contact between the EK velocity and a bare die (NO HIS) of a Skylake HCC CPU (7920X-79080XE).
> 
> It would be really helpful if you can give me an answer so that I can avoid time consuming trial and error installations.
> 
> Thank you in advance.



And here is their answer




> Hello
> 
> Thank you for contacting us.
> Yes, that is correct.
> Thinner jet plate "bends" it less than the thicker jet plate does.
> 
> As for the delidded CPU, we don't have a block that would fit it, so sadly we can't help you with this one at the moment.
> 
> Best regards, Igor



Obviously, the comment about the delidded CPU is none of our concern here since the Frame should take care of that.


----------



## tistou77

Abaidor said:


> So I got a reply from EK support regarding the Jetplate in the Velocity and what I suspected is correct along with the comments in the Techpowerup review. The Jetplate DOES indeed affect the bow of the base.


We do not have the same answers depending on the person who answers at EK about the thickness of the jet plate 



> the thickness of the jet plate depends on the socket you are using.
> The water block can be used with the already installed jet plate on every socket with no problem. The temperature difference if the jet plate is changed to the optimal one would be around 1C.
> So if you are ok with let's say 37 degrees and not the 36, you do not need to change the jet plate.


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> So I got a reply from EK support regarding the Jetplate in the Velocity and what I suspected is correct along with the comments in the Techpowerup review. The Jetplate DOES indeed affect the bow of the base.
> *Here is my question to EK Suppot*
> And here is their answer
> Obviously, the comment about the delidded CPU is none of our concern here since the Frame should take care of that.


sorry - but I cannot believe Igor. Maybe if the block was a solid metal (machined) top... but even then I for one, would have to see data supporting his statement.


----------



## Abaidor

tistou77 said:


> We do not have the same answers depending on the person who answers at EK about the thickness of the jet plate


We did not have the same questions either though.

My question was very specific and to the point. The same for their answer and the same was mentioned in the Techpowerup review. Yet, it makes total sense to me and it is logical based on the design of their plexi top which to me seems perfectly fine to push the base down. 

On top of that there would be absolutely no reason to have a second jetplate of reduced thickness (the only difference) in the box for use with the larger dies that of course have a larger area and require less convexity. The base can be bent.

As far as I am concerned the way to reduce the bow is to use the thinner jetplate according to the manufacturer as well. To further reduce the bow I will lap the jetplate or custom make a thinner one.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Well if it bows the block it is prebent from ek and if disassembled does not flatten out so what does that tell you


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah man. "trust but verify"


----------



## tistou77

Abaidor said:


> We did not have the same questions either though.
> 
> My question was very specific and to the point. The same for their answer and the same was mentioned in the Techpowerup review. Yet, it makes total sense to me and it is logical based on the design of their plexi top which to me seems perfectly fine to push the base down.
> 
> On top of that there would be absolutely no reason to have a second jetplate of reduced thickness (the only difference) in the box for use with the larger dies that of course have a larger area and require less convexity. The base can be bent.
> 
> As far as I am concerned the way to reduce the bow is to use the thinner jetplate according to the manufacturer as well. To further reduce the bow I will lap the jetplate or custom make a thinner one.


I have made explicit not to ask a question focused on the "bend" of the base
I asked "what role does the jet plate play on the loop and the base of the Velocity

When we have the base of the Velocity (or even the EVO) in the hand, we realize that a simple jet plate can not play on the bend of the base

I agree with Jpmboy's opinion
The tightening of the waterblock can play on the "bend", that's all


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Well if it bows the block it is prebent from ek and if disassembled does not flatten out so what does that tell you


It does bow the block and it is not prebent - its flat without the jet plate. Not only this but I just tested it and swapped jet plates. *Taking the spin test with the thinner jet plate comes out flatter..........it does not spin anymore.* I have two Velocity blocks the one with the thicker jet plate spins around the one with the thinner does not. 

It tells me that it is designed like this and the plexi top bends less or not at all compared to the base. I am not surpirsed at all because the design of the plexi top looks perfectly capable of withstanding this pressure while the base not only isn't that thick but the water channels also reduce its rigidity. Simply put, the space between the plexi top and the water channels (where the jet plate lies) is less than the thickness of the 1mm jet plate so when the base is tightened to the block it is bowed. With the 0.8mm it bows less (does not spin anymore) or none. EK support confirmed it, techpowerup review confirmed it, my test confirms, my understanding of the design confirms it so what other proof do I need? My older (12-13 years old) Swiftech block also worked similarly.

At this point I am certain that if I need further "flattness" sanding the thin jet plate will do the trick. That is if it still exerts any pressure to the base. Will find out.

Lastly, there is not single reason for the inclusion of the thinner jet plate in the package (which the manual says is for 2066 socket) if not for what all the evidence says it does. There is no other difference between them but the thickness (and some cut outs to differentiate their looks only). 

Personally, I am quite excited with the above and I can't wait to test the direct frame now.


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> It does bow the block and it is not prebent - its flat without the jet plate. Not only this but I just tested it and swapped jet plates. *Taking the spin test with the thinner jet plate comes out flatter..........it does not spin anymore.* I have two Velocity blocks the one with the thicker jet plate spins around the one with the thinner does not.
> 
> It tells me that it is designed like this and the plexi top bends less or not at all compared to the base. I am not surpirsed at all because the design of the plexi top looks perfectly capable of withstanding this pressure while the base not only isn't that thick but the water channels also reduce its rigidity. Simply put, the space between the plexi top and the water channels (where the jet plate lies) is less than the thickness of the 1mm jet plate so when the base is tightened to the block it is bowed. With the 0.8mm it bows less (does not spin anymore) or none. EK support confirmed it, techpowerup review confirmed it, my test confirms, my understanding of the design confirms it so what other proof do I need? My older (12-13 years old) Swiftech block also worked similarly.
> 
> At this point I am certain that if I need further "flattness" sanding the thin jet plate will do the trick. That is if it still exerts any pressure to the base. Will find out.
> 
> Lastly, there is not single reason for the inclusion of the thinner jet plate in the package (which the manual says is for 2066 socket) if not for what all the evidence says it does. There is no other difference between them but the thickness (and some cut outs to differentiate their looks only).
> 
> Personally, I am quite excited with the above and I can't wait to test the direct frame now.


good test. stick with the 2066 jet plate.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Mine were both bent before and after disassembling them.


----------



## Abaidor

tistou77 said:


> I have made explicit not to ask a question focused on the "bend" of the base
> I asked "what role does the jet plate play on the loop and the base of the Velocity
> 
> When we have the base of the Velocity (or even the EVO) in the hand, we realize that a simple jet plate can not play on the bend of the base
> 
> I agree with Jpmboy's opinion
> The tightening of the waterblock can play on the "bend", that's all


Read my previous message....we have to agree to disagree on this one and EK themselves confirmed what I say.


----------



## tistou77

Abaidor said:


> It does bow the block and it is not prebent - its flat without the jet plate. Not only this but I just tested it and swapped jet plates. *Taking the spin test with the thinner jet plate comes out flatter..........it does not spin anymore.* I have two Velocity blocks the one with the thicker jet plate spins around the one with the thinner does not.
> 
> It tells me that it is designed like this and the plexi top bends less or not at all compared to the base. I am not surpirsed at all because the design of the plexi top looks perfectly capable of withstanding this pressure while the base not only isn't that thick but the water channels also reduce its rigidity. Simply put, the space between the plexi top and the water channels (where the jet plate lies) is less than the thickness of the 1mm jet plate so when the base is tightened to the block it is bowed. With the 0.8mm it bows less (does not spin anymore) or none. EK support confirmed it, techpowerup review confirmed it, my test confirms, my understanding of the design confirms it so what other proof do I need? My older (12-13 years old) Swiftech block also worked similarly.
> 
> At this point I am certain that if I need further "flattness" sanding the thin jet plate will do the trick. That is if it still exerts any pressure to the base. Will find out.
> 
> Lastly, there is not single reason for the inclusion of the thinner jet plate in the package (which the manual says is for 2066 socket) if not for what all the evidence says it does. There is no other difference between them but the thickness (and some cut outs to differentiate their looks only).
> 
> Personally, I am quite excited with the above and I can't wait to test the direct frame now.


The jet plate 0.8 (2066 I believe) is better than the 1.0 then ?

I have 0.8 I think (I will check) and the contact was not good with the direct die, I handed over the IHS

But a test to do to see if the contact is good with the direct die, it is to put the thermal paste on the die and to put the waterblock on the die, to see if it does indeed a trace "square" on the waterblock
And test the 2 jet plate and see the difference in the "marking" of the thermal paste

If the frame is incorrectly mounted (tighter on one side of the other, etc ...) the contact will not be good


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Mine were both bent before and after disassembling them.


I would return them. Mine are flat without the jet plate - they do not spin either without or with the thin jet plate tested on thick glass. That is unless there is a factor of "randomness" at play here hence the difference between your's an mine. What else can I say? 

"Thinner jet plate "bends" it less than the thicker jet plate does" EK Support? 


Something else that might be taking too far what I say....

When you change to the thin jet plate the way you tighten the screws might or might not play its part in the flatness of the bow depending on what is going on within the threads...In any case always tighten in a cross pattern and really slowly. What I mean is tighten two screws diagonally but not much, then the next two (again not much) and continue in this pattern until the base is secured. Tightening completely two diagonal screws (full force) and then the next two could also cause extra convexity depending on what is going on in the threads.


----------



## Abaidor

tistou77 said:


> The jet plate 0.8 (2066 I believe) is better than the 1.0 then ?
> 
> I have 0.8 I think (I will check) and the contact was not good with the direct die, I handed over the IHS
> 
> But a test to do to see if the contact is good with the direct die, it is to put the thermal paste on the die and to put the waterblock on the die, to see if it does indeed a trace "square" on the waterblock
> And test the 2 jet plate and see the difference in the "marking" of the thermal paste


The 0.8mm Jet Plate is the one you have to insert for 2066 socket CPUs according to the manual (page 5) and that is how I started looking into this. Unless you did change it before you installed the block then you have the 1mm one in there. 

The way to distinguish between them can be seen in the following photo. The thinner 0.8mm jet plate has a notch on its sides so look at your Velocity Box to see which one you have in your block if you don't remember.


----------



## Abaidor

Well, lets forget the CPU block for a second....

Is the Skylake-X bare die completely flat? I think that I've read somewhere that it is not in which case the "complexity" of achieving perfect contact with LM is high. Not only that a certain degree of randomness is at play as well which could explain why some users get better results than other.


----------



## tistou77

Abaidor said:


> The 0.8mm Jet Plate is the one you have to insert for 2066 socket CPUs according to the manual (page 5) and that is how I started looking into this. Unless you did change it before you installed the block then you have the 1mm one in there.
> 
> The way to distinguish between them can be seen in the following photo. The thinner 0.8mm jet plate has a notch on its sides so look at your Velocity Box to see which one you have in your block if you don't remember.


But according to your tests, 0.8 is better then ?


----------



## Abaidor

tistou77 said:


> But according to your tests, 0.8 is better then ?


Yes, the block becomes flatter and does not spin...

I wish you could test as well but I understand that your blocks are installed while mine are in their boxes so it was easy to test.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep well maybe nickle on both sides stiffens the newer blocks up a little more.


----------



## RichKnecht

I find it hard to believe that the jet plate can cause the base to bow. Not saying it doesn't, but it seems crazy. I still do not think that is my issue with the direct die and my 7900X. Either my die is bowed, or the block is bowed. I am going to remove the nickel base and install the copper base on my Evo when I swap boards. I will sand down the base of the block when it is all together so that I will remove any bow that the jet plate may create. Then install the die frame and see what happens.


----------



## Abaidor

RichKnecht said:


> I find it hard to believe that the jet plate can cause the base to bow. Not saying it doesn't, but it seems crazy. I still do not think that is my issue with the direct die and my 7900X. Either my die is bowed, or the block is bowed. I am going to remove the nickel base and install the copper base on my Evo when I swap boards. I will sand down the base of the block when it is all together so that I will remove any bow that the jet plate may create. Then install the die frame and see what happens.


If dies are bowed then there is not much we can do about it than fill it with TIM....I am not lapping my die. I am willing to risk that much with an expensive CPU. 

If all my efforts to achieve good contact with the bare die go south, then I will buy a copper IHS from rockit and try this instead after trying the stock IHS. But I am optimistic that if I make the effort I will make the CPU block - "hug" the bare die tight....we'll see.


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> Yes, the block becomes flatter and does not spin...
> 
> I wish you could test as well but I understand that your blocks are installed while mine are in their boxes so it was easy to test.


i have a few ek blocks (intel and AMD) in addition to several koolance blocks laying around - if I have time, I'l try the spin... but I also have calibrated micrometers and true-flat edge standards.


----------



## Abaidor

Jpmboy said:


> i have a few ek blocks (intel and AMD) in addition to several koolance blocks laying around - if I have time, I'l try the spin... but I also have calibrated micrometers and true-flat edge standards.


That's interesting and you could indeed do proper testing then.However, I don't know if the same applies for the EK Supremacy as it does with the Velocity....I have found ONE reference in Reddit indicating that the J3 jetplate on the EVO affects the bow but this is one user - on top of other sporadic references I have come accross..here is the quote:

"The IHS on LGA 2011-3 is concave as opposed to convex so blocks with less bow work best. Hence the super thin jetplate J3"

https://www.reddit.com/r/watercooli...k_one_on_ekwb_cpu_supremacy_evo_not_changing/


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> That's interesting and you could indeed do proper testing then.However, I don't know if the same applies for the EK Supremacy as it does with the Velocity....I have found ONE reference in Reddit indicating that the J3 jetplate on the EVO affects the bow but this is one user - on top of other sporadic references I have come accross..here is the quote:
> 
> "*The IHS on LGA 2011-3 is concave as opposed to convex so blocks with less bow work best*. Hence the super thin jetplate J3"
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/watercooli...k_one_on_ekwb_cpu_supremacy_evo_not_changing/



yeah, with the evo, there's the diverter, insert and jet plate. I use a tourque scewdriver for these typesof things - the EVO is 10 in-lbs on the 4 mount screws. For direct die - you absolutely want to use what ever combination of things give the flat contact surface... but I would not (ever) lap the die on an HCC chip. 

I gotta admit tho, I'm having a rough time following the "thread of logic" in the bolded text. But that's not unusual for Reddit, or me. :blinksmil


----------



## Abaidor

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, with the evo, there's the diverter, insert and jet plate. I use a tourque scewdriver for these typesof things - the EVO is 10 in-lbs on the 4 mount screws. For direct die - you absolutely want to use what ever combination of things give the flat contact surface... but I would not (ever) lap the die on an HCC chip.
> 
> I gotta admit tho, I'm having a rough time following the "thread of logic" in the bolded text. But that's not unusual for Reddit, or me. :blinksmil


For the EVO, and after seeing its internals it also looks to me that bowing the base is not that easy as in the Velocity...I also have a rough time with his comment but anyway..it's just a comment I came through while looking for answers.

What worries me more is how flat will be the die of my 7940X once I delid it...and no I am not going to lap it....If it can't be cooled properly with the Velocity, I prefer to test another block or even go with the IHS + LM underneath in the worst case scenario....it will still be much better than stock.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jpmboy said:


> nah, not dangerous. the gallium in LM will "stain" the copper... it's actually a surface amalgum of Ga and Cu.


Just to elaborate:
the problem that happens is, when gallium gets absorbed into the copper, it leaves the indium and tin behind, which no longer can remain liquid at room temperature, because it needs the gallium in the mix in order to remain liquid. So the tin and indium hardens and then causes issues with heat transfer due to uneven pressure and surface transfer area remaining.

When this happens, (which will be obvious because your temps will rise sharply), you need to remove the heatsink and then wipe the hardened layer until it's perfectly smooth again. Very fine grit sandpaper (3000+) can make this easier. Do NOT sand the stain down at all. You want to leave the gallium copper alloy as much as possible, while not leaving any uneven surface. If you manage to do this, then the stained area will help prevent more gallium absorption next time. So then just reapply the liquid metal in a new coating and it should last much longer.

It helps even more if you can apply an airtight seal, like a polyurethane foam barrier covering (which also helps protect against runoff). I don't know if those conformal coatings will do that job, as that's supposed to be an insulating layer to stop LM short circuits on exposed SMD's/traces, but that's up to you guys. Basically, the presence of oxygen causes greatly accelerated absorption of the gallium into the copper (even more with heat, since heat excites air molecules obviously). If you can insulate against oxygen, this helps prevent absorption even more. With a full barrier, the CU->GA layer can remain liquid for years.


----------



## Hydroplane

Anyone here with 9980XE? What's a typical OC under water for one?


----------



## KCDC

After some more bios fiddling, I finally figured out what was causing my machine to use 160w+ power constantly.


After switching to MFC Driver Override under CPU power management and getting rid of turbo boost max 3 in windows, my power now drops to 40w on idle. Not as consistently as I'd like, but at least it drops to it now.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Hello there,

i am having question regarding y-cruncher and AVX offsets. Someone on my local (language-wise) hardware site/msg boards posted a topic with the default y-cruncher Pi test (bench), just to compare for fun against other people, so i gave it a try to see how this works.

In the process i found out few things, i like to ask about:

1. I am absolutely at loss about the AVX offsets. I have been told before, that the frequency offsets from the highest one you have set - meant as if i have 4,1GHz all core OC and 4,6GHz single core (or in my case 4 cores) OC, then it will offset from the 4,6GHz even during all-core load. From my testing yesterday, this does not seem to be the case, as i saw multithreaded test run at 3,1GHz (i had AVX512 offset set at 10). On another hand, i tried to run the test at Optimized Defaults BIOS settings and to my surprise the test ran at 3,8GHz...AFAIK the default BIOS offset for 512 is 5, the default max all core turbo is 3,8GHz....so the test was supposed to run at 3,3GHz, right? Instead, it ran, as i said, at 3,8GHz, which would point more toward the offset being from max default single core clock (4,3GHz)....simply i dont see any consistency in how it works there. Can anyone give me conclusive answer regarding this?

2. I had some issues to run it even at 3,1GHz...got "Coefficient too large" message few times, which apparently is a sign of unstable OC. Funnily, running those Optimized defaults, thus even higher clocks, got the computer totally locked :-D, the display did shut down, and i had to reboot manually :-D Anyway, i managed to finish the test few times as well after that, on those 3,1GHz clocks and with my 7940x and those low clocks i beat the others guy result (9900k at 5GHz) by fair margin - 168 seconds to 255 seconds, going for 5 billion digit result. Anyway, seeing the stability issues i had already at those low clocks i wonder how did he manage to finish at 5GHz! 

3. I tried loosen the offset from 10 to 8 - now the test ran at 3,3GHz... sort of confirming the offset is from the actual highest clock...anyway the result was only slightly better, 166 seconds to 168...wonder why? Could there be any of those phantom throttling involved? I was looking at temps and power usage for CPU package and temps did not go past 70C, nor did the power rise above 250W (which is usual reported consumption during Cinebench runs at those 4,1GHz)...so i dont see much reason for throttling, but what do i know...

4. I cant do the single core test at all. I suppose it tries to run at 10 offset from 4,6GHz and fails - either i get the coefficient error message or the computer reboots itself... is there anything else i can do, except either further increasing the offset past 10, or increasing voltages? I guess there is no way to have separate AVX offsets for single and multicore loads?

Thx for answers


----------



## Dwofzz

Hydroplane said:


> Anyone here with 9980XE? What's a typical OC under water for one?


Lower than a delidded 7980XE that's for sure.


----------



## Hydroplane

Dwofzz said:


> Lower than a delidded 7980XE that's for sure.


So far I haven't been willing to delid mine, too expensive to risk it lol. If I only gained 200 MHz from solder I don't think it would be worth it. 400 MHz maybe. Right now there is a new 9980XE on ebay for $1700. I could probably sell my 7980XE for $1400 or so. Right now mine clocks at 4.3 1.10v 24/7 with reasonable temps under water.


----------



## Dwofzz

Hydroplane said:


> So far I haven't been willing to delid mine, too expensive to risk it lol. If I only gained 200 MHz from solder I don't think it would be worth it. 400 MHz maybe. Right now there is a new 9980XE on ebay for $1700. I could probably sell my 7980XE for $1400 or so. Right now mine clocks at 4.3 1.10v 24/7 with reasonable temps under water.


That chip could probably do 4.6GHz at 1.16-1.18v if you can cool it, if you can't then you can't cool a 9980XE at higher clocks. What is the point of "upgrading" to the same chip?


----------



## arrow0309

Hi, after some occasional error / windows 10 logon freeze with the ram at 4000 (and many gaming crashes) I've downclocked to their XMP values (3200 cl14) not sure if some of the crashes (most of them i suppose in the end) were related to my new 2080ti FE OC (lousy overclocker even under wc).
I've recently discover the german utility p95helper (which is really handy for targeted OC) although interrupted work (and with some bugs under the final stage of the Skylake-X run):

https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...-mit-prime-95-27-9-new-0-9-0-7-a-1075658.html
https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...7-9-new-0-9-0-7-a-1075658-4.html#post26764395

I've tested and successfully passed all the tests (I really wanted to test my oc with the latest prime95 as well since I've only tested with RealBench) and with the screens generated by p95helper so I've uploaded them here:

https://imgur.com/a/WHtrNum

I've also passed the "Skylake-X" one but because of some bugs it's not included, I've asked directly to them and they've confirmed me about the memory bugs:

https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...7-9-new-0-9-0-7-a-1075658-4.html#post26764155

OK, now I'd like to return to my 4000 ram settings (1.45v training, 1.40v eventual) stable enough with Hci Memtest while ago:

https://i.postimg.cc/dJHqKd4J/ram4000-cl17-Hci-t-Rfc321-shot-01-11-2018.jpg

And also increase some more the cache from 3.1 (+0.175v offset) to 3.2 and test again with all the above p95 tests and eventually with something else as well.

My questions are:

- should I test them together (with the both cache & ram increased values) or start with one setting first (and which one)?
- what offset value you suggest me to add for the 3.2Ghz Uncore?
- except those p95 tests which other would you indicated me to specifically test the uncore and ram settings in oc?

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Hydroplane

Dwofzz said:


> That chip could probably do 4.6GHz at 1.16-1.18v if you can cool it, if you can't then you can't cool a 9980XE at higher clocks. What is the point of "upgrading" to the same chip?


Not much lol, so I probably won't. I do have a need for more speed (or frequency, more specifically) in certain lightly threaded tasks. Right now I run 18c/36t at 4.3 1.10v. Then I have a second set of bios settings I can switch to with the Asus OC profile that allows me to run a profile at 4c/4t 5.0 1.39v. Basically I cherry picked the coolest running cores which gives me roughly a 15% performance gain for these cpu limited tasks. I might add two more cores to that since many of the games in the past year are starting to use 6 cores, a few even 8. Cheaper than building a second rig with a 9900K, lol

Temp wise I am mainly limited by the thermal paste. The water from the CPU then feeds into my GPUs. When running prime95 smallFFT on 36 threads, the GPUs are still at 25-27c so I know the water is at least that cold


----------



## ThrashZone

Hydroplane said:


> So far I haven't been willing to delid mine, too expensive to risk it lol. If I only gained 200 MHz from solder I don't think it would be worth it. 400 MHz maybe. Right now there is a new 9980XE on ebay for $1700. I could probably sell my 7980XE for $1400 or so. Right now mine clocks at 4.3 1.10v 24/7 with reasonable temps under water.


Hi,
Toast it and rma for a 99..xe


----------



## Hydroplane

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Toast it and rma for a 99..xe


I put 5.15 GHz 1.55v through it and it hasn't blow up yet, pretty durable


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
At least you have 3 year warranty on it so try try again


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> Not much lol, so I probably won't.* I do have a need for more speed (or frequency, more specifically) in certain lightly threaded tasks*. Right now I run 18c/36t at 4.3 1.10v. Then I have a second set of bios settings I can switch to with the Asus OC profile that allows me to run a profile at 4c/4t 5.0 1.39v. Basically I cherry picked the coolest running cores which gives me roughly a 15% performance gain for these cpu limited tasks. I might add two more cores to that since many of the games in the past year are starting to use 6 cores, a few even 8. Cheaper than building a second rig with a 9900K, lol
> 
> Temp wise I am mainly limited by the thermal paste. The water from the CPU then feeds into my GPUs. When running prime95 smallFFT on 36 threads, the GPUs are still at 25-27c so I know the water is at least that cold


That is exactly why there is a per core OC available in (asus) bios, better for that scenario... "By core usage". Use it, it works.


----------



## CptSpig

arrow0309 said:


> Hi, after some occasional error / windows 10 logon freeze with the ram at 4000 (and many gaming crashes) I've downclocked to their XMP values (3200 cl14) not sure if some of the crashes (most of them i suppose in the end) were related to my new 2080ti FE OC (lousy overclocker even under wc).
> I've recently discover the german utility p95helper (which is really handy for targeted OC) although interrupted work (and with some bugs under the final stage of the Skylake-X run):
> 
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...-mit-prime-95-27-9-new-0-9-0-7-a-1075658.html
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...7-9-new-0-9-0-7-a-1075658-4.html#post26764395
> 
> I've tested and successfully passed all the tests (I really wanted to test my oc with the latest prime95 as well since I've only tested with RealBench) and with the screens generated by p95helper so I've uploaded them here:
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/WHtrNum
> 
> I've also passed the "Skylake-X" one but because of some bugs it's not included, I've asked directly to them and they've confirmed me about the memory bugs:
> 
> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/communi...7-9-new-0-9-0-7-a-1075658-4.html#post26764155
> 
> OK, now I'd like to return to my 4000 ram settings (1.45v training, 1.40v eventual) stable enough with Hci Memtest while ago:
> 
> https://i.postimg.cc/dJHqKd4J/ram4000-cl17-Hci-t-Rfc321-shot-01-11-2018.jpg
> 
> And also increase some more the cache from 3.1 (+0.175v offset) to 3.2 and test again with all the above p95 tests and eventually with something else as well.
> 
> My questions are:
> 
> - should I test them together (with the both cache & ram increased values) or start with one setting first (and which one)?
> - what offset value you suggest me to add for the 3.2Ghz Uncore?
> - except those p95 tests which other would you indicated me to specifically test the uncore and ram settings in oc?
> 
> Thanks in advance!


You can test memory only with GSAT or test both memory and cache with HCI MemTest.
Cache: sweet spot is 30 if you go higher it will effect your memory OC.
I do not use p95 no need to push that hard. Two hours of RealBeach is all I use and my OC is very stable.


----------



## djgar

CptSpig said:


> You can test memory only with GSAT or test both memory and cache with HCI MemTest.
> Cache: sweet spot is 30 if you go higher it will effect your memory OC.
> I do not use p95 no need to push that hard. Two hours of RealBeach is all I use and my OC is very stable.


I can never figure why some do 7-8 hours of RB, unless they're doing some bizarrely strenuous 24/7 process I can't conjure a guess at.


----------



## CptSpig

djgar said:


> I can never figure why some do 7-8 hours of RB, unless they're doing some bizarrely strenuous 24/7 process I can't conjure a guess at.


My OC has been stable for about a year and absolutely no issues. :thumb:


----------



## Mysticial

Timmaigh! said:


> Hello there,
> 
> i am having question regarding y-cruncher and AVX offsets. Someone on my local (language-wise) hardware site/msg boards posted a topic with the default y-cruncher Pi test (bench), just to compare for fun against other people, so i gave it a try to see how this works.
> 
> In the process i found out few things, i like to ask about:
> 
> 1. I am absolutely at loss about the AVX offsets. I have been told before, that the frequency offsets from the highest one you have set - meant as if i have 4,1GHz all core OC and 4,6GHz single core (or in my case 4 cores) OC, then it will offset from the 4,6GHz even during all-core load. From my testing yesterday, this does not seem to be the case, as i saw multithreaded test run at 3,1GHz (i had AVX512 offset set at 10). On another hand, i tried to run the test at Optimized Defaults BIOS settings and to my surprise the test ran at 3,8GHz...AFAIK the default BIOS offset for 512 is 5, the default max all core turbo is 3,8GHz....so the test was supposed to run at 3,3GHz, right? Instead, it ran, as i said, at 3,8GHz, which would point more toward the offset being from max default single core clock (4,3GHz)....simply i dont see any consistency in how it works there. Can anyone give me conclusive answer regarding this?


 What motherboard is this? Gigabyte? Asus?

On the Gigabyte boards, the offsets are applied last. And they are relative to the current core's max setting. So ignore the offset first. Then compute what frequency you're supposed to run at based on the load (# of cores running) and what the core is set to. Then apply the offset last.

On Asus boards, if you're using per-core overclocking, then the offsets will all be relative to the highest of all the cores.

3.8 GHz is the all-core non-AVX turbo for stock settings. It shouldn't be running AVX512 all-core 3.8 GHz - unless you have one of the earlier BIOS's where the vendors didn't do the offsets correctly. 



> 2. I had some issues to run it even at 3,1GHz...got "Coefficient too large" message few times, which apparently is a sign of unstable OC. Funnily, running those Optimized defaults, thus even higher clocks, got the computer totally locked :-D, the display did shut down, and i had to reboot manually :-D


Instability at stock settings is not a good sign, unless (as I mention above) you have a very early BIOS where the AVX(512) offsets aren't done properly.



> Anyway, i managed to finish the test few times as well after that, on those 3,1GHz clocks and with my 7940x and those low clocks i beat the others guy result (9900k at 5GHz) by fair margin - 168 seconds to 255 seconds, going for 5 billion digit result. Anyway, seeing the stability issues i had already at those low clocks i wonder how did he manage to finish at 5GHz!


The 9900K doesn't have AVX512. So it's much easier to run at 5.0 GHz.

The AVX512 on your 7940X is doing two things here:


It's holding back your speed. (thus the massive offsets)
It's making the computation a lot faster.

The 7940X has about ~2x the cores, and ~half the frequency. So you'd expect those to largely offset. But the AVX512 tips things heavily in favor of the 7940X.



> 3. I tried loosen the offset from 10 to 8 - now the test ran at 3,3GHz... sort of confirming the offset is from the actual highest clock...anyway the result was only slightly better, 166 seconds to 168...wonder why? Could there be any of those phantom throttling involved? I was looking at temps and power usage for CPU package and temps did not go past 70C, nor did the power rise above 250W (which is usual reported consumption during Cinebench runs at those 4,1GHz)...so i dont see much reason for throttling, but what do i know...


What's your memory running at? Unless it's upwards of 4000 MT/s, the y-cruncher benchmarks are going to be noticeably memory-bound.

Assuming memory bandwidth is holding back performance, it will also cap the power usage since the CPU is just waiting for memory the whole time. What it caps to will depend on a lot of things. But 250W is reasonable.

Phantom throttling is possible, but hard to diagnose with the information you've given so far.



> 4. I cant do the single core test at all. I suppose it tries to run at 10 offset from 4,6GHz and fails - either i get the coefficient error message or the computer reboots itself...


This is somewhat expected. But there can be a lot of variation. At least one of the cores on your 7940X cannot run AVX512 @ 3.6 GHz with your vcore settings. My 7940X is similar, it needs +0.030v offset to be AVX512 stress-stable at 3.7 GHz. But all 10 cores on my 7900X can do 4.0+ AVX512 at stock voltages.



> is there anything else i can do, except either further increasing the offset past 10, or increasing voltages? I guess there is no way to have separate AVX offsets for single and multicore loads?
> 
> Thx for answers


Unfortunately, you can't have both. So you'll need to pick which one you want to tune for (non-AVX, AVX, AVX512) or somewhere in between them.


----------



## arrow0309

CptSpig said:


> You can test memory only with GSAT or test both memory and cache with HCI MemTest.
> Cache: sweet spot is 30 if you go higher it will effect your memory OC.
> I do not use p95 no need to push that hard. Two hours of RealBeach is all I use and my OC is very stable.


Aye aye captain :specool:
Gonna start tomorrow with this 30mv (so +0.205) and test, unfortunately I won't use Gsat anymore (I don't have the spare drive nor the mood to do it). 

I was also realbench-wise stable (4h) and yet got those occasional freezes and a couple of black screens when waking up from sleep. 
I found the above prime95 @p95helper quick (30') tests and the two final 60' and 90' proper to give you a bit of more sense of stability (if the temps are OK which in my case they were). 
No way I'm gonna do the final prime95 custom full 1440' (24h) test but I'll finish with realbench once again.


----------



## Hydroplane

Jpmboy said:


> That is exactly why there is a per core OC available in (asus) bios, better for that scenario... "By core usage". Use it, it works.


I have used it before, only problem is the heat from the other cores is still present, so it limits the OC somewhat. I think I got like 10 cores up to 4.6 and 2 up to 4.8. None up to 5.0 though  The per-core OC (with 18 cores enabled) allowed me to max my Cinebench score and take advantage of the thermal envelope for every core. However disabling cores helped get the clocks up further on the remaining ones. Allows me to approach the single thread performance of the "mainstream" chips. Works well for things such as getting the top score in Unigine Heaven


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> I have used it before, only problem is the heat from the other cores is still present, so it limits the OC somewhat. I think I got like 10 cores up to 4.6 and 2 up to 4.8. None up to 5.0 though  The per-core OC (with 18 cores enabled) allowed me to max my Cinebench score and take advantage of the thermal envelope for every core. However disabling cores helped get the clocks up further on the remaining ones. Allows me to approach the single thread performance of the "mainstream" chips. *Works well for things such as getting the top score in Unigine Heaven*


lol - SLI 2080Tis doesn't hurt either. :thumb:


----------



## Dwofzz

Hydroplane said:


> Not much lol, so I probably won't. I do have a need for more speed (or frequency, more specifically) in certain lightly threaded tasks. Right now I run 18c/36t at 4.3 1.10v. Then I have a second set of bios settings I can switch to with the Asus OC profile that allows me to run a profile at 4c/4t 5.0 1.39v. Basically I cherry picked the coolest running cores which gives me roughly a 15% performance gain for these cpu limited tasks. I might add two more cores to that since many of the games in the past year are starting to use 6 cores, a few even 8. Cheaper than building a second rig with a 9900K, lol
> 
> Temp wise I am mainly limited by the thermal paste. The water from the CPU then feeds into my GPUs. When running prime95 smallFFT on 36 threads, the GPUs are still at 25-27c so I know the water is at least that cold


I would stick with the 7980XE.. And if you need more speed just grab some big kahonas and a delidding tool 

The only scenario for the 9980XE is if you ain't going to oc it or if you are going to run it cold (LN2). Just my 2000$ x)


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> lol - SLI 2080Tis doesn't hurt either. :thumb:


Hi,
Yeah really and on a host of other benchmarks like super position...


----------



## Hydroplane

Jpmboy said:


> lol - SLI 2080Tis doesn't hurt either. :thumb:


That was with 1080 Ti SLI, wait till I get my hands on RTX


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> That was with 1080 Ti SLI, wait till I get my hands on RTX


lol - I just corrected the benchmark thread table. had you there with 2080Tis.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hydroplane said:


> That was with 1080 Ti SLI, wait till I get my hands on RTX


Hi,
My local micro center just got a couple evga 2080ti ftw3 ultra gaming cards 
Sadly I'm not getting one way too much 1500.+ tax
EVGA bumped the price they were 1350.

Hydro copper is a better deal at 1600.


----------



## Norlig

Just got my ICE MAN Delid die guard in the mail: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/283046096016

waiting for the <noname> delid Cap Opener from ebay and I'll get my 7800x to stay below 90'c and hopefully 5Ghz 
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/263718962561


----------



## Chimera619

How bad is the 6950X compared to 9900k ?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Only bad thing about either are silicon lottery 
9900k will obviously oc higher 

Big negative of 6950x is if one has a asus board no more bios updates and it was borked oc'ing wise from a MS update that killed oc'ing.
Read from this page backwards for details
https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1601679-broadwell-e-thread-774.html

Other board manufatures haven't dumped bios support yet though like gigabyte and possibly asrock not sure one would have to research which ones have updated bios in late 2018/ 2019.

6950x is a good chip just can't oc as high but I image can still get pretty close to a 9900k if a good sample can get to 4.5 or more.


----------



## Jpmboy

Chimera619 said:


> How bad is the 6950X compared to 9900k ?


 Bad? Seems your question is answering the question the way you want...


That said, you are comparing a chip 2 generations older than the 9900K. For many graphics uses (including benchmarks) the x99/6950X still does better than the next two gens (you can see this on HWBOT subs gfx scores). IPC on the 6950X is very good, but it will not run the same frequencies as a 9900K.
As far as lack of bios support... not a single issue here running my 6950X/R5E-10 all day, every day concurrently encoding video from 3 security cameras and running [email protected] on the 2 Titan XPs in that rig... all 24/7/365. Bios work great on the this ASUS board, not one issue and it has a bunch of connected devices including the OC panel, an Aquaero, blue ray, 4K monitor, 2 d5 pumps and lots of rad space. Tri boot rig... win10Pro, Win7Pro, Linux Ubuntu.


if you are buying new, building a new rig, the 9900K is a better choice if PCIE lanes are not an issue. ALWAYs buy the best board you can afford. :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> My local micro center just got a couple evga 2080ti ftw3 ultra gaming cards
> Sadly I'm not getting one way too much 1500.+ tax
> EVGA bumped the price they were 1350.
> 
> *Hydro copper is a better deal at 1600*.


or 2 FEs flashed and with EK water blocks ... less expensive and will clock as well.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> Bad? Seems your question is answering the question the way you want...
> 
> 
> That said, you are comparing a chip 2 generations older than the 9900K. For many graphics uses (including benchmarks) the x99/6950X still does better than the next two gens (you can see this on HWBOT subs gfx scores). IPC on the 6950X is very good, but it will not run the same frequencies as a 9900K.
> *As far as lack of bios support... not a single issue here running my 6950X/R5E-10 all day, every day concurrently encoding video from 3 security cameras and running [email protected] on the 2 Titan XPs in that rig... all 24/7/365. Bios work great on the this ASUS board*, not one issue and it has a bunch of connected devices including the OC panel, an Aquaero, blue ray, 4K monitor, 2 d5 pumps and lots of rad space. Tri boot rig... win10Pro, Win7Pro, Linux Ubuntu.
> 
> 
> if you are buying new, building a new rig, the 9900K is a better choice if PCIE lanes are not an issue.


Hi,
When was your last bios released ?
Odd others have issues and you never do


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> When was your last bios released ?
> Odd others have issues and you never do


 march 2018. It may not be the last/latest... I generally do not flash to a new bios unless there is a problem with the one I'm using.
folding for 5 days since the last restart (for an update) and recording 3 sec cams.


----------



## Nizzen

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> When was your last bios released ?
> Odd others have issues and you never do



What "problems" do people have?

I have Rve 10 and 6900k, and no issues...


Making up "issues" much?


----------



## ThrashZone

Nizzen said:


> What "problems" do people have?
> 
> I have Rve 10 and 6900k, and no issues...
> 
> 
> Making up "issues" much?


Hi,
FYI 
This is a hyperlink it goes to a thread that I already posted too
https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1601679-broadwell-e-thread-774.html

Top response shows the fix 
Second post is the newest member with the issue GRABibus nothing I did to "make up" the issue it's actually microsoft that did that


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> or 2 FEs flashed and with EK water blocks ... less expensive and will clock as well.


Hi,
I'm out of the market maybe next release but still won't be an ek block heatkiller maybe.

4-2018 was the last bios update for my asus board pretty much I believe everyone else was using for broadwell-e don't know really it's tough to get info sometimes I'd have to read back and see if anyone stated which bios they were using @GRABibus might say which bios he is using he's the most resent victim of oc issues


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I'm out of the market maybe next release but still won't be an ek block heatkiller maybe.
> 
> 4-2018 was the last bios update for my asus board pretty much I believe everyone else was using for broadwell-e don't know really it's tough to get info sometimes I'd have to read back and see if anyone stated which bios they were using
> @GRABibus might say which bios he is using he's the most resent victim of oc issues


Not sure why anyone would jump on a new bios update. I did with my old Strix board and it wound up making my temps a lot higher. I rolled it back to a bios that was released 3 updates ago and temps returned to "normal" and I had 0 issues. So far I am running the Omega "stock" just to make sure all is good. I will post my OC results when I have time to sit down and tune the system.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> Not sure why anyone would jump on a new bios update. I did with my old Strix board and it wound up making my temps a lot higher. I rolled it back to a bios that was released 3 updates ago and temps returned to "normal" and I had 0 issues. So far I am running the Omega "stock" just to make sure all is good. I will post my OC results when I have time to sit down and tune the system.


Nice! Post back on your experience with the Omega. Hellofa motherboard by the specs. :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Not sure why anyone would jump on a new bios update. I did with my old Strix board and it wound up making my temps a lot higher. I rolled it back to a bios that was released 3 updates ago and temps returned to "normal" and I had 0 issues. So far I am running the Omega "stock" just to make sure all is good. I will post my OC results when I have time to sit down and tune the system.


Hi,
I've been bad and forth trying newest .... bios 
So far 1301 seems the best for me :/

Wicked board you have deep pockets going for it :thumb:


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I've been bad and forth trying newest .... bios
> So far 1301 seems the best for me :/
> 
> Wicked board you have deep pockets going for it :thumb:


LOL...deep pockets for some things  It's for my business computer (editing/processing photos) so at the end of the year, it's a write-off. When I had my Strix, bios 1401 worked great. Chip ran much cooler and overclocking was pretty smooth overall, but I think the Rampage will get me more with cooler VRM temps. Plus, when I make the move to a 7980XE, I will be ready. Can't wait to try some overclocking with this board to see what I can get.


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> march 2018. It may not be the last/latest... I generally do not flash to a new bios unless there is a problem with the one I'm using.
> folding for 5 days since the last restart (for an update) and recording 3 sec cams.


Same here....I think I am on 1401 and it runs great! No need to fix it if it's not broke. :wheee:


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> Same here....I think I am on 1401 and it runs great! No need to fix it if it's not broke. :wheee:


Hi,
I looked at your last benchmark subs says 1301 bios


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I looked at your last benchmark subs says 1301 bios


Thanks man for the clarification! 1301 is great. No need for me to change. :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> Thanks man for the clarification! 1301 is great. No need for me to change. :thumb:


Hi,
Jp is also using 1301 so I'm taking notice of what the big boys are using


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Jp is also using 1301 so I'm taking notice of what the big boys are using


I was using 1301 and now I am using 1503 with 49 (tistou77 version) microcode but might test 1301 again since for me it's the best with Q-Fan....1603 breaks any control of my High Amp header --- I really don't know what to say about Asus & Software anymore....


----------



## ThrashZone

Abaidor said:


> I was using 1301 and now I am using 1503 with 49 (tistou77 version) microcode but might test 1301 again since for me it's the best with Q-Fan....1603 breaks any control of my High Amp header --- I really don't know what to say about Asus & Software anymore....


Hi,
I gave completely up on q fan control indeed asus is nuts

I just found a couple controllers I had and a fan hub using them now

I gave the board a couple sp140mm fans just to keep it happy otherwise I just turn a couple knobs for adjustments for top and front fans 
Fans are master fan pros 800-2800 rpm work great on the adjusters too 

Ordered another hub and couple knob adjusters for x99 rig too q fan is not good on it either the fan adjusters just fit on the front of my radiator box I made 
All I have to do is pull the filter up a little and turn the knobs


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I gave completely up on q fan control indeed asus is nuts


I have been using AI Suite since I went to X299 with my Strix board. Now with the Omega, it continues to work without a hitch. Even installed the fan expansion card and I can control every fan and create profiles. I guess I am one of the lucky ones


----------



## Dwofzz

So today I finally got my delidding tool and... 


The 7940x survived and dropped 10c (I am using TIM since I'm going to use it with LN2 later on)! at 4.5GHz 1.16v, I'm leaving it at that for now until all the bubbles are out, And I need to test it some more first.
It took me like an hour to lapp it by hand and does grey spots didn't want to go away so I said F*** it..


----------



## Abaidor

RichKnecht said:


> I have been using AI Suite since I went to X299 with my Strix board. Now with the Omega, it continues to work without a hitch. Even installed the fan expansion card and I can control every fan and create profiles. I guess I am one of the lucky ones


It was working fine up to BIOS 1301 for 17 Fans, 2X D5 Pumps and several sensors - it still does but not with 1603 BIOS......

Anyway, I will get an Aquaero sometime in the future when I am in the mood to re-wire everything since control through windows is nice vs rebooting and AI - Junk - Suite never worked for me (never saved my profiles properly). On top of that I really don't like all the services and startup items Asus installs. 




ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I gave completely up on q fan control indeed asus is nuts
> 
> I just found a couple controllers I had and a fan hub using them now
> 
> I gave the board a couple sp140mm fans just to keep it happy otherwise I just turn a couple knobs for adjustments for top and front fans
> Fans are master fan pros 800-2800 rpm work great on the adjusters too
> 
> Ordered another hub and couple knob adjusters for x99 rig too q fan is not good on it either the fan adjusters just fit on the front of my radiator box I made
> All I have to do is pull the filter up a little and turn the knobs


I've had automated fan control since 2005 with T-Balancer back then so I am spoiled lol....if I have update the BIOS and Q-Fan stops working I will get the Aquaero...for now it is working.


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I gave completely up on q fan control indeed asus is nuts


I just plug the fans in the PWM pins on the board. Setup a fan curve for each one in the bios and it works great. :wheee:


----------



## djgar

CptSpig said:


> I just plug the fans in the PWM pins on the board. Setup a fan curve for each one in the bios and it works great. :wheee:


I do the same on my Strix, works fine for me. I have almost 20 fans including radiator controlled by Q-Fan.


----------



## Hydroplane

CptSpig said:


> I just plug the fans in the PWM pins on the board. Setup a fan curve for each one in the bios and it works great. :wheee:


Ya I did the same on mine, through the bios. I actually control mine off the VRM rather than the CPU. That way, there is a nice gradual fan speed increase when I load the CPU, instead of full blast 3000 rpm automatically at 75c. 1500 rpm on these industrial fans has no problem removing the heat from my 7980XE @ 4.3 fully loaded with water temps under 30c.


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> Ya I did the same on mine, through the bios. I actually control mine off the VRM rather than the CPU. That way, there is a nice gradual fan speed increase when I load the CPU, instead of full blast 3000 rpm automatically at 75c. 1500 rpm on these industrial fans has no problem removing the heat from my 7980XE @ 4.3 fully loaded with water temps under 30c.


On the APEX you can dampen that rapid ramp up for transient temperature effects (hysteresis) - at least on a couple of the fan headers.


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> On the APEX you can dampen that rapid ramp up for transient temperature effects (hysteresis) - at least on a couple of the fan headers.


Yes, use the PWM not the FS (Full Speed) headers. Then you can set a curve in the bios. :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> On the APEX you can* dampen that rapid ramp up* for transient temperature effects (hysteresis) - at least on a couple of the fan headers.


Hi,
Yeah that is why I gave up ramping was just the end of the line


----------



## tistou77

Have some used the Rockit IHS Copper? Do you have a temperature gain compared to the original IHS ?
I'm a little stumped on this IHS (even if it is "wider" than the original)

Thanks


----------



## ThrashZone

tistou77 said:


> Have some used the Rockit IHS Copper? Do you have a temperature gain compared to the original IHS ?
> I'm a little stumped on this IHS (even if it is "wider" than the original)
> 
> Thanks


Hi,
Only member that I believe might of gotten one is @nycgtr


----------



## Abaidor

The der8auer Direct Die frame that Jpmboy sent me is here! Unfortunately I won't be able to test it until next weekend due to work obligations...
Once I install it I will post my results here for others too know and meanwhile I will prepare for it to the best of my abilities..


----------



## nycgtr

tistou77 said:


> Have some used the Rockit IHS Copper? Do you have a temperature gain compared to the original IHS ?
> I'm a little stumped on this IHS (even if it is "wider" than the original)
> 
> Thanks


I saw no real difference between multi core temps and temps in general. You are talking like 1-2c maybe? Your better off just going direct die.


----------



## tistou77

@ThrashZone Ok thanks 

For Direct Die (der8auer) I have one, but the first mounting attempts failed, I put it back in the cupboard
I re-try maybe


----------



## ThrashZone

tistou77 said:


> @ThrashZone Ok thanks
> 
> For Direct Die (der8auer) I have one, but the first mounting attempts failed, I put it back in the cupboard
> I re-try maybe


Hi,
No problem :thumb:

Try to use a straight edge of some type across the top of the chip and use feeler gauges on the direct die mount top so you might get stopping points for tightening 
Maybe it will help maybe not


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> No problem :thumb:
> 
> Try to use a straight edge of some type across the top of the chip and use feeler gauges on the direct die mount top so you might get stopping points for tightening
> Maybe it will help maybe not


Most probably it has a lot to do with how flat the bare die is....I am really wondering about mine too.

Hey guys, next time one of you opens an IHS please try to test if your bare die is even or convex - maybe a spin test but I doubt its possible with the bare die....


----------



## ThrashZone

Abaidor said:


> Most probably it has a lot to do with how flat the bare die is....I am really wondering about mine too.
> 
> Hey guys, next time one of you opens an IHS please try to test if your bare die is even or convex - maybe a spin test but I doubt its possible with the bare die....


Hi,
Doubt the actual silicon is weird 
The cap is the enemy 

I already lapped the top problem I didn't lap the inside of it 
I'm sure it's shape is identical to how bad the top was.


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Doubt the actual silicon is weird
> The cap is the enemy
> 
> I already lapped the top problem I didn't lap the inside of it
> I'm sure it's shape is identical to how bad the top was.



I hope so but have a look at this thread:

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/liquid-metal-is-not-all-its-cracked-out-to-be.18832333/


A quote from there:



> The problem is that the silicon die itself is slightly convex at its top. This apparently is a common issue for Skylake-X CPUs (especially the many core ones, as pointed out by no other than Der8auer himself in a video he made on the issue) - the CPU chip itself not being perfectly flat. It is less of an issue with conventional thermal paste, which is much thicker than liquid metal and can be applied as a thick coat to make up for any die/heat-sink/cold-plate warping or imperfections.


----------



## ThrashZone

nycgtr said:


> I saw no real difference between multi core temps and temps in general. You are talking like 1-2c maybe? Your better off just going direct die.


Hi,
Thank you for commenting by the way :thumb:



Abaidor said:


> I hope so but have a look at this thread:
> 
> https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/liquid-metal-is-not-all-its-cracked-out-to-be.18832333/
> 
> 
> A quote from there:


Hi,
I don't doubt that for larger chips indeed 
7900x isn't really bad since it's not all that big and more horizontal.

I just figured the shape of the cap on mine was so weird because of SL's comment about "using Extreme pressure" to stick the chip back together after delid.
Shape looked like a cup had pressed into the cap like a delid tool has on it.
High spot middle of the chip and high around the outside of it too 
Recesses where a circle.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Well I bit the bullet and bought a 9980xe from newegg. Should be here early this week. Going into an Apex VI that I bought when first launched in late 2017. Couple of 3600 CL15 TridentZ kits for the ram. Time to read up on this platform, currently on a 9900k system.

Very excited!


----------



## ThrashZone

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Well I bit the bullet and bought a 9980xe from newegg. Should be here early this week. Going into an Apex VI that I bought when first launched in late 2017. Couple of 3600 CL15 TridentZ kits for the ram. Time to read up on this platform, currently on a 9900k system.
> 
> Very excited!


Hi,
Congrats that's large purchase hope all works out :thumb:
At least you get to dust off that nice apex everyone wanted


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

That's funny you say dust, I did have to dust off the box lol.


----------



## ThrashZone

MrTOOSHORT said:


> That's funny you say dust, I did have to dust off the box lol.


HI,
Yep those top shelves never get dusted


----------



## fireedo

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Well I bit the bullet and bought a 9980xe from newegg. Should be here early this week. Going into an Apex VI that I bought when first launched in late 2017. Couple of 3600 CL15 TridentZ kits for the ram. Time to read up on this platform, currently on a 9900k system.
> 
> Very excited!


waiting to hear about overclock that 9980XE result, how far difference 9980XE vs 7980XE in the overclock performance


----------



## djgar

ThrashZone said:


> HI,
> Yep those top shelves never get dusted


The Apex VI is definitely Top Shelf .


----------



## Jpmboy

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Well I bit the bullet and bought a 9980xe from newegg. Should be here early this week. Going into an Apex VI that I bought when first launched in late 2017. Couple of 3600 CL15 TridentZ kits for the ram. Time to read up on this platform, currently on a 9900k system.
> 
> Very excited!


 lol - the very high-end desktop step. :thumb:
I think the parts combo you list is gonna work great - sounds very familiar!




fireedo said:


> waiting to hear about overclock that 9980XE result, how far difference 9980XE vs 7980XE in the overclock performance


so far, the main benefit over the 7980XE is that you do not need to delid a $2000 CPU and void any warranty to make it work/OC as any "Extreme" CPU should. INtel heard us.


----------



## Hydroplane

fireedo said:


> waiting to hear about overclock that 9980XE result, how far difference 9980XE vs 7980XE in the overclock performance


I will be interested to see too


----------



## JustinThyme

fireedo said:


> waiting to hear about overclock that 9980XE result, how far difference 9980XE vs 7980XE in the overclock performance


If we are talking about leaving them as they come out of the box the soldered IHS will outperform hands down. Id think the comparison between the 9980XE and a 7980XE delidded and LM replacing the toothpaste TIM will be very close. The only real difference between latter two comparisons is process that has matured by a year. 

Whats comical is when they went to using toothpaste TIM the world was crying about it. Now that they have gone back to solder.......the world is crying about it. DOH!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
99.. series won't be crying as much as delid 79.. series if the chip dies within three years seeing they will still have a warranty and delids are SOL


----------



## JustinThyme

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 99.. series won't be crying as much as delid 79.. series if the chip dies within three years seeing they will still have a warranty and delids are SOL


SOL? Isnt that how they say SUN in España? Guess both apply equally as in they will be cooked. Yeah I never liked the idea of losing the warranty on such a high $$ item. Thats one thing that made SL worth their services was buying a chip with at least a one year warranty. As Jpmboy already said we shouldn't have had to even go there in the first place.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Wasn't 1 year SL warranty only on binned chips not for delid only ?


----------



## Dwofzz

The fact that Intel is using ****ty stim on their HEDT platform is still disgusting.. But it is better then toothpaste altho not good enough.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah most wondering how Intel messed up solder


----------



## Timmaigh!

Mysticial said:


> What motherboard is this? Gigabyte? Asus?
> 
> On the Gigabyte boards, the offsets are applied last. And they are relative to the current core's max setting. So ignore the offset first. Then compute what frequency you're supposed to run at based on the load (# of cores running) and what the core is set to. Then apply the offset last.
> 
> On Asus boards, if you're using per-core overclocking, then the offsets will all be relative to the highest of all the cores.
> 
> 3.8 GHz is the all-core non-AVX turbo for stock settings. It shouldn't be running AVX512 all-core 3.8 GHz - unless you have one of the earlier BIOS's where the vendors didn't do the offsets correctly.
> 
> Instability at stock settings is not a good sign, unless (as I mention above) you have a very early BIOS where the AVX(512) offsets aren't done properly.
> 
> The 9900K doesn't have AVX512. So it's much easier to run at 5.0 GHz.
> 
> The AVX512 on your 7940X is doing two things here:
> 
> 
> It's holding back your speed. (thus the massive offsets)
> It's making the computation a lot faster.
> 
> The 7940X has about ~2x the cores, and ~half the frequency. So you'd expect those to largely offset. But the AVX512 tips things heavily in favor of the 7940X.
> 
> What's your memory running at? Unless it's upwards of 4000 MT/s, the y-cruncher benchmarks are going to be noticeably memory-bound.
> 
> Assuming memory bandwidth is holding back performance, it will also cap the power usage since the CPU is just waiting for memory the whole time. What it caps to will depend on a lot of things. But 250W is reasonable.
> 
> Phantom throttling is possible, but hard to diagnose with the information you've given so far.
> 
> This is somewhat expected. But there can be a lot of variation. At least one of the cores on your 7940X cannot run AVX512 @ 3.6 GHz with your vcore settings. My 7940X is similar, it needs +0.030v offset to be AVX512 stress-stable at 3.7 GHz. But all 10 cores on my 7900X can do 4.0+ AVX512 at stock voltages.
> 
> Unfortunately, you can't have both. So you'll need to pick which one you want to tune for (non-AVX, AVX, AVX512) or somewhere in between them.



Thank you for replying Mysticial! Sorry to respond this late, i was not active around here past few days.

I have Gigabyte - Gaming 7 rev. 1.0 board and the BIOS is either F7 and F8 - they are about year old, not sure how many came after them. I say 2 BIOSes, cause the board likes to cycle through them - every couple of weeks they swap. It used to come alongside my OC reset as well, sometimes the OC remains active though. It was annoying at first, but i set-up same OC profile on both BIOSes  I think we were already talking about this before, its probably down to CMOS battery, since the rig is otherwise rock-stable (disregarding any hours-long torture tests).

Anyway, i decided i am OK with AVX512 even at 3,3GHz...as you said i can only choose one setting (instruction-wise) and tune that, i want to concentrate on non-avx stuff, since thats what i run i guess 99 percent of time. If not 100 percent.

The question is, is there even space for that? I tried to get higher clocks - but i am running into hard temp limit already at 4,4GHz on my undelidded chip - i set the vcore to Normal with 0,1V offset and VRIN to 1,82V. This takes the core VIDs per HWinfo during load to 1,18 - 1,22V range (depending on the core). It will pass Cinebench runs and it will pass Blender Benchmark Quick Test (bmw + class) in cca 10 minutes without crashing, but the temps at the end are past 90C at most cores, the worst one even hitting 100C! Then i read about people running their CPUs at 4,8GHz at 1,22V and 1,75 VRIN - i wonder how? Did they win silicon lottery, or is they run undelidded + custom loop? I tried 4,6 with those 2 particular settings and could not even get to Windows, lol.

All in all, i wonder what else i am supposed to do to run at least 4,4GHz all core without throttling after 10 mins...should i now try to decrease VRIN and/or increase that Vcore offset until it becomes unstable and if it happens too soon, then i suppose i really cant run my chip at that frequency at lower volts/thus lower temps...and there is nothing more i can do? Well, except delid/custom loop. 

Finally, to be honest, i am somewhat disappointed with the capability of my AiO. Its Eisbaer 360 cooler - i read some good stuff about it before i bought. Copper radiator, high-end AiO - yet it cant properly cool 300W CPU. Not to mention the noise at full load - i replaced the fans with Fractal Venturi HP fans, which are apparently great for rads and silent - well, as i found out, they are loud as hell.


----------



## Mysticial

Timmaigh! said:


> Thank you for replying Mysticial! Sorry to respond this late, i was not active around here past few days.
> 
> I have Gigabyte - Gaming 7 rev. 1.0 board and the BIOS is either F7 and F8 - they are about year old, not sure how many came after them. I say 2 BIOSes, cause the board likes to cycle through them - every couple of weeks they swap. It used to come alongside my OC reset as well, sometimes the OC remains active though. It was annoying at first, but i set-up same OC profile on both BIOSes  I think we were already talking about this before, its probably down to CMOS battery, since the rig is otherwise rock-stable (disregarding any hours-long torture tests).
> 
> Anyway, i decided i am OK with AVX512 even at 3,3GHz...as you said i can only choose one setting (instruction-wise) and tune that, i want to concentrate on non-avx stuff, since thats what i run i guess 99 percent of time. If not 100 percent.
> 
> The question is, is there even space for that? I tried to get higher clocks - but i am running into hard temp limit already at 4,4GHz on my undelidded chip - i set the vcore to Normal with 0,1V offset and VRIN to 1,82V. This takes the core VIDs per HWinfo during load to 1,18 - 1,22V range (depending on the core). It will pass Cinebench runs and it will pass Blender Benchmark Quick Test (bmw + class) in cca 10 minutes without crashing, but the temps at the end are past 90C at most cores, the worst one even hitting 100C! Then i read about people running their CPUs at 4,8GHz at 1,22V and 1,75 VRIN - i wonder how? Did they win silicon lottery, or is they run undelidded + custom loop? I tried 4,6 with those 2 particular settings and could not even get to Windows, lol.
> 
> All in all, i wonder what else i am supposed to do to run at least 4,4GHz all core without throttling after 10 mins...should i now try to decrease VRIN and/or increase that Vcore offset until it becomes unstable and if it happens too soon, then i suppose i really cant run my chip at that frequency at lower volts/thus lower temps...and there is nothing more i can do? Well, except delid/custom loop.
> 
> Finally, to be honest, i am somewhat disappointed with the capability of my AiO. Its Eisbaer 360 cooler - i read some good stuff about it before i bought. Copper radiator, high-end AiO - yet it cant properly cool 300W CPU. Not to mention the noise at full load - i replaced the fans with Fractal Venturi HP fans, which are apparently great for rads and silent - well, as i found out, they are loud as hell.



What's your power draw when the temps get into the 90s? If you can't sustain 300W, then either your chip is really bad, or there's other problems like your cooler.

By the looks of it, your chip is really leaky. My own 7940X can run 4.7 GHz all cores (no AVX) with +0.030 offset. The VIDs range from 1.200 - 1.380. Those 1.2v cores are very leaky and run very hot. But they really can do 4.7 with only 1.2. The 1.3+v cores are the exact opposite and require insane voltages. But they're really cold despite putting almost 1.4v into them.

I'm running the Floe Riing 360 with stronger fans. It'll handle 380W for some seconds before the cores start throttling from temps (90C+). 4.5 GHz is more reasonable. Though 300W is around the max it can sustain without throttling. The chip is not delidded.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Mysticial said:


> What's your power draw when the temps get into the 90s? If you can't sustain 300W, then either your chip is really bad, or there's other problems like your cooler.
> 
> By the looks of it, your chip is really leaky. My own 7940X can run 4.7 GHz all cores (no AVX) with +0.030 offset. The VIDs range from 1.200 - 1.380. Those 1.2v cores are very leaky and run very hot. But they really can do 4.7 with only 1.2. The 1.3+v cores are the exact opposite and require insane voltages. But they're really cold despite putting almost 1.4v into them.
> 
> I'm running the Floe Riing 360 with stronger fans. It'll handle 380W for some seconds before the cores start throttling from temps (90C+). 4.5 GHz is more reasonable. Though 300W is around the max it can sustain without throttling. The chip is not delidded.


The Coretemp shows the Package Load at 300W give or take during the Blenchmark... i think it was even slightly higher through Cinebench, maybe up to 330W, but not really sure now. It is about 230W - 250W (CB runs) at my standard OC of 4,1GHz, which i have been running for a year. About 150W during gaming - Ashes Escalation benchmark...

this brings the question, can i run that 4,4GHz anyway, as during regular computer usage it never draws 300W, even during all-core loads, so those 90+ temps dont come really into play?


----------



## Mysticial

Timmaigh! said:


> The Coretemp shows the Package Load at 300W give or take during the Blenchmark... i think it was even slightly higher through Cinebench, maybe up to 330W, but not really sure now. It is about 230W - 250W (CB runs) at my standard OC of 4,1GHz, which i have been running for a year. About 150W during gaming - Ashes Escalation benchmark...
> 
> this brings the question, can i run that 4,4GHz anyway, as during regular computer usage it never draws 300W, even during all-core loads, so those 90+ temps dont come really into play?


Drop your Tj.Max to 80 or 85 or whatever you're comfortable with sustaining 24/7. Then let the throttling do its job.

I should probably preach this more often. But if you want your temperatures to dictate what your highest overclock should be, you can do exactly that by picking your own Tj.Max.

Personally, I set an 80C Tj.Max. After several minutes of sustained P95 non-AVX, my 7940x will reach a steady-state of 4.0 - 4.5 GHz on the cores. All cores running at the same temperature (right at Tj.Max).

Cores that are normally hotter run slower. Cores that normally run cooler run faster.
In the winter, the box runs faster. In the summer, it runs slower.

The only downside is that you get very inconsistent benchmarks.


----------



## ESRCJ

My 7980XE temps seem to be getting progressively worse. It took me 4 attempts with the liquid metal application to get it right the first time and my max Cinebench temps at 4.6GHz 1.21V were in the low 70s. Now they're in the high 80s. I can't even attempt 4.8GHz anymore. Any ideas? Loop is as follows:

Res - D5 - D5 - 420 rad - 2080 Ti block - CPU block - VRM block - 480 rad - 480 rad

I scraped off all of the silicon adhesive from the IHS, but not much from the PCB. I didn't reseal. I just used to left over adhesive as a guide and used the mounting pressure of the block. Another note: my motherboard is vertical in my PC.

I'll also note that the max temperature delta between cores is 30C.


----------



## Hydroplane

gridironcpj said:


> My 7980XE temps seem to be getting progressively worse. It took me 4 attempts with the liquid metal application to get it right the first time and my max Cinebench temps at 4.6GHz 1.21V were in the low 70s. Now they're in the high 80s. I can't even attempt 4.8GHz anymore. Any ideas? Loop is as follows:
> 
> Res - D5 - D5 - 420 rad - 2080 Ti block - CPU block - VRM block - 480 rad - 480 rad
> 
> I scraped off all of the silicon adhesive from the IHS, but not much from the PCB. I didn't reseal. I just used to left over adhesive as a guide and used the mounting pressure of the block. Another note: my motherboard is vertical in my PC.
> 
> I'll also note that the max temperature delta between cores is 30C.


You certainly have plenty of cooling. I have roughly half the rad space, an extra GPU, and can keep the water below 30c without issue. Heck, you even have the same rads lol. The 30c differential is high so it's probably sitting unevenly. 4.6 1.21 with low 70s temp is pretty good, about right for a delidded chip under ambient water. Without resealing the IHS could shift slightly over time.

The idea of using the custom TJMax is actually a REALLY good idea, I'll have to try that. I have some cores at 65c while others are at 88c.


----------



## kingofblog

..


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Hi guys, I've recently started dabbling in benchmarks and want to see how far I can push my delidded 7960x rig in a few nights since the weather report is showing a low of 11 F and running the rig outside in my breezeway seems to do wonders for OCing.

Last time i tried it in 30 F, and with minimal fiddling got the CPU passing 3dmark tests at 5.2ghz on 1.425v i think. Max core temps were low 60 C range. 

My questions mainly are am I fine to raise voltage more as long as temps stay fine (especially since this is just temporary for a few benchmarks in sub-freezing ambient)? Should i be adjusting other settings besides just vcore and ratio? 

I've got all the power duration settings max anyway, but for 24/7 i just run it at 4.7 with c states enabled and on 1.25v 

I'm also trying to push my Titan RTX cards but it seems like they are a lot simpler and better cooling is the only thing that will help them at this point. They'll do 2115mhz core around 32 F ambient but i wasn't able to get through any benchmarks higher than that even though they never passed about 40c


----------



## Hydroplane

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Hi guys, I've recently started dabbling in benchmarks and want to see how far I can push my delidded 7960x rig in a few nights since the weather report is showing a low of 11 F and running the rig outside in my breezeway seems to do wonders for OCing.
> 
> Last time i tried it in 30 F, and with minimal fiddling got the CPU passing 3dmark tests at 5.2ghz on 1.425v i think. Max core temps were low 60 C range.
> 
> My questions mainly are am I fine to raise voltage more as long as temps stay fine (especially since this is just temporary for a few benchmarks in sub-freezing ambient)? Should i be adjusting other settings besides just vcore and ratio?
> 
> I've got all the power duration settings max anyway, but for 24/7 i just run it at 4.7 with c states enabled and on 1.25v
> 
> I'm also trying to push my Titan RTX cards but it seems like they are a lot simpler and better cooling is the only thing that will help them at this point. They'll do 2115mhz core around 32 F ambient but i wasn't able to get through any benchmarks higher than that even though they never passed about 40c


I've been up to 1.55v on mine (not on all 18 cores) and it does not appear to have caused any degradation.


----------



## ThrashZone

Mysticial said:


> What's your power draw when the temps get into the 90s? If you can't sustain 300W, then either your chip is really bad, or there's other problems like your cooler.
> 
> By the looks of it, your chip is really leaky. My own 7940X can run 4.7 GHz all cores (no AVX) with +0.030 offset. *The VIDs range from 1.200 - 1.380.* Those 1.2v cores are very leaky and run very hot. But they really can do 4.7 with only 1.2. The 1.3+v cores are the exact opposite and require insane voltages. But they're really cold despite putting almost 1.4v into them.
> 
> I'm running the Floe Riing 360 with stronger fans. It'll handle 380W for some seconds before the cores start throttling from temps (90C+). 4.5 GHz is more reasonable. Though 300W is around the max it can sustain without throttling. The chip is not delidded.


Hi,
Wow that's wild 
I was freaking over 0.030 vid differences which at high clocks cause instability 
I have to close the distance to gain stability past 4.7 :/


----------



## Mysticial

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Wow that's wild
> I was freaking over 0.030 vid differences which at high clocks cause instability
> I have to close the distance to gain stability past 4.7 :/


 Here's what it looks like. Stock voltages + 0.030 offset.

I have since lowered it from 4.7 to 4.5 so it wouldn't throttle as hard. But the voltages are good for 4.6 GHz and stress-stable at 4.7. (though I did see a couple crashes for the year I had it at 4.7)


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Hydroplane said:


> I've been up to 1.55v on mine (not on all 18 cores) and it does not appear to have caused any degradation.


haha thanks! so I should be fine to temporarily push mine a bit more as long as temps stay cool it sounds like!


----------



## Hydroplane

Mysticial said:


> Here's what it looks like. Stock voltages + 0.030 offset.
> 
> I have since lowered it from 4.7 to 4.5 so it wouldn't throttle as hard. But the voltages are good for 4.6 GHz and stress-stable at 4.7. (though I did see a couple crashes for the year I had it at 4.7)


Nice wallpaper, she's cute lol

I tried the custom TJmax method on mine and initially the temps skyrocketed. I went back to my normal setting of 4.3 1.10v and they were still high! I realized that HWmonitor calculates them wrong with a custom TJmax. So when I dropped the TJmax from 105C to 90C, HWMonitor took the 15C difference and added it to all my temps! Coretemp seems to read accurately.


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> Nice wallpaper, she's cute lol
> 
> I tried the custom TJmax method on mine and initially the temps skyrocketed. I went back to my normal setting of 4.3 1.10v and they were still high! I realized that HWmonitor calculates them wrong with a custom TJmax. So when I dropped the TJmax from 105C to 90C, HWMonitor took the 15C difference and added it to all my temps! Coretemp seems to read accurately.


 that chip is delidded - right?


btw - here's a decent R15 workout for the HCC cpu: https://www.overclock.net/forum/21-...icial-mod-hedt-platforms-post-your-score.html


----------



## Mysticial

Hydroplane said:


> Nice wallpaper, she's cute lol



Carrot from Dynamix.



> I tried the custom TJmax method on mine and initially the temps skyrocketed. I went back to my normal setting of 4.3 1.10v and they were still high! I realized that HWmonitor calculates them wrong with a custom TJmax. So when I dropped the TJmax from 105C to 90C, HWMonitor took the 15C difference and added it to all my temps! Coretemp seems to read accurately.


Yeah, they read distance from Tj.Max. So if they get Tj.Max wrong, everything shifts with it.


----------



## Hydroplane

Jpmboy said:


> that chip is delidded - right?
> 
> 
> btw - here's a decent R15 workout for the HCC cpu: https://www.overclock.net/forum/21-...icial-mod-hedt-platforms-post-your-score.html


Nope, stock poop on mine lol. Those temps were from p95 smallFFT. I believe Mystical's 7940X is delidded. It sounds weird but I can actually fail an OC more quickly with repeated cinebench runs than with p95. Saves time when benching.


----------



## Mysticial

Hydroplane said:


> Nope, stock poop on mine lol. Those temps were from p95 smallFFT. I believe Mystical's 7940X is delidded. It sounds weird but I can actually fail an OC more quickly with repeated cinebench runs than with p95. Saves time when benching.


Mine's not delidded.

Can't be bothered with it. This particular chip is an ES that I was allowed to "hold onto". So I'm keeping it pristine as a collectors item for when I'm done with it.

If I cared enough, I'd send my 7900X in for a delid. But that's my main machine right now and I can't really take it offline for any amount of time.


----------



## Hydroplane

Mysticial said:


> Carrot from Dynamix.
> 
> Yeah, they read distance from Tj.Max. So if they get Tj.Max wrong, everything shifts with it.


Would cosplay, lol.

Those temps are very good for stock poop! Under 80c at 4.5-4.7 and very even too! My cores are 21c apart lol


----------



## djgar

Hydroplane said:


> Would cosplay, lol.
> 
> Those temps are very good for stock poop! Under 80c at 4.5-4.7 and very even too! My cores are 21c apart lol


Hmmm ... is that Lain as your avatar? Are you on the Wired? Just finished binging on that so it caught my eye


----------



## Mysticial

Hydroplane said:


> Would cosplay, lol.


Any bets on the number of Chika cosplayers for this year? haha



> Those temps are very good for stock poop! Under 80c at 4.5-4.7 and very even too! My cores are 21c apart lol


They're throttling in that screenshot - some all the way down to 4.2 GHz. That's what's keeping them at 80C.

Though to be more specific, you can't have a negative distance to Tj.Max. So if it's higher than 80C, it'll still read as 80C. So I imagine there will be transient states where the temperature shoots above Tj.Max before the throttling can counter it.

-----

The part that I find the most telling is that the ones with the lower VIDs tend to be the ones that run hotter and throttle harder.

IOW, the pattern that I'm seeing is:


Low VID cores are leakier. But require less voltage to achieve certain speeds.
High VID cores are not as leaky. But require more voltage to achieve certain speeds.


----------



## Hydroplane

djgar said:


> Hmmm ... is that Lain as your avatar? Are you on the Wired? Just finished binging on that so it caught my eye


Celestia Ludenberg from Dangan Ronpa, but I know who you mean. I never did finish watching Serial Experiments Lain, but it was interesting. I need to buy a few more monitors so my setup can look like hers lol.

I'm gonna try the custom TJMax on mine to see if I can increase my clocks. How does the adaptive voltage work? Is there a way I could reduce the voltage (and thus heat) some of my cores run at? Right now I have all 18 cores at the same clock speed and voltage.


----------



## Mysticial

Hydroplane said:


> How does the adaptive voltage work? Is there a way I could reduce the voltage (and thus heat) some of my cores run at? Right now I have all 18 cores at the same clock speed and voltage.


I'm not using adaptive. Just offset. So those are the stock VIDs programmed into the chip + 0.030v.

I'm 90% sure the 1.35v+ cores are getting more than they need, and the 1.20v cores are capping it to "only" 4.7 GHz. But the Gigabyte boards don't have per-core voltage control.

That ES 7940X does have a lot more variability than all the other (retail) chips I've played with: 7900X, 7940X, and 7980XE.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Cinebench extreme 
https://www.guru3d.com/files-details/cinebench-r15-extreme-edition-download.html

A little lower than I expected 703 for 4.7 all core just a quickie x99 still down for flush/ rad change and waiting for a fan controller to show up to finish :/
Temps are so-so


----------



## Dwofzz

Well so this is now happening to me as well for no reason.. Came out of the blue earlier today.

Look at the temps, does 3 cores are going straight to tjmax and the cpu package/PP0 is waaaay up there aswell (I used to se mid 70's at 1.22v 4.7GHz) now this.. And I'm not using LM I use paste so WHAT THE!?

I even booted with the XOC bios and changed indivudual core settings but they just don't care.. core 3,5,10,13 (usually) goes straing to the limit.


----------



## legandaryheavyg

HI

I am planning an x299 build. Going for an intel i9 9820x or an i9 9900x cpu cooled by NZXT x62 aio. I can not find much 24/7 all core overclocking results. Maybe in this post there are some willing to share results of temperatures and voltages or can tell me what to expect and tell me if the 9820x is good enough for my use. Noise is no issue to me so the x62 aio can run at max speed. Going for an Asus WS X299 PRO Motherboard the simple version, seems like they do not sell that one in the US but in Europe we have it . Using a define r6 case with the radiator top mounted and the rear fan removed.

My aim is to use 1.15 volt maximum hoping to get around 4,2-4,5 GHz all core at 80C max.....would like to know if this is about right?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hydroplane said:


> I'm gonna try the custom TJMax on mine to see if I can increase my clocks. *How does the adaptive voltage work? Is there a way I could reduce the voltage (and thus heat)* some of my cores run at? Right now I have all 18 cores at the same clock speed and *voltage*.


Hi,
That is how you find the good and bad core running same clock and voltage.

Adaptive works fine usually additional turbo voltage is the weird one 
Most I've read say adaptive offset Auto and additional turbo tends to vary 1.185 is a good starting point

I like DooRules not sure he's still using it or not but his first recommendation or screen shots he shared used 
Adaptive -0.035 and additional turbo 1.185 

That works for 4.7 for me
After 4.7 the vid's get to spread out being the high/ low vid gets too great and creates instability 
So I have to use by spasific core tuning to rase the low/ lazy core up and lower the high cores to close the gap 
Looks like if I keep the vids within 0.015 of each other it works okay.

If core temps get too high I have to back down the core multiplier 
Raise the core multiplier on the cooler cores.

I do find it more straight forward to use offset mode first for tuning and after switch to adaptive and play with additional turbo voltage.


----------



## Jpmboy

legandaryheavyg said:


> HI
> 
> I am planning an x299 build. Going for an intel i9 9820x or an i9 9900x cpu cooled by NZXT x62 aio. I can not find much 24/7 all core overclocking results. Maybe in this post there are some willing to share results of temperatures and voltages or can tell me what to expect and tell me if the 9820x is good enough for my use. Noise is no issue to me so the x62 aio can run at max speed. Going for an Asus WS X299 PRO Motherboard the simple version, seems like they do not sell that one in the US but in Europe we have it . Using a define r6 case with the radiator top mounted and the rear fan removed.
> 
> *My aim is to use 1.15 volt maximum hoping to get around 4,2-4,5 GHz all core at 80C max.....would like to know if this is about right*?


probably doable. ya can;tr know for sure until you try a specific CPU. :thumb:


----------



## Hydroplane

I tried the offset voltage on mine and after a lot of trouble, it seems to have helped a bit. First I updated the Apex bios to 1602. I didn't know that would wipe out 100% of my bios settings so I spent some time figuring out and re-entering those. I know all 18 cores can run stably at 4.3 GHz with 1.10V, so I knew that my worst core could run at that voltage while the others could potentially be lower. A -0.14 offset would have given the worst cores 1.10v and the others less. Unfortunately, it boots with the offset at stock clocks then once the bios loads it bumps it up to 4.3. The result was not even being able to POST since it was trying to use like 0.83V at 2.6 GHz. -0.13 was the same result, but -0.12 and -0.125 could boot into Windows. Without the boot issue I could probably knock off .015 to .025 more volts, and lower temps further.

HWinfo64 was the only program I found that could tell me the individual core VIDs.


----------



## CptSpig

Hydroplane said:


> I tried the offset voltage on mine and after a lot of trouble, it seems to have helped a bit. First I updated the Apex bios to 1602. I didn't know that would wipe out 100% of my bios settings so I spent some time figuring out and re-entering those. I know all 18 cores can run stably at 4.3 GHz with 1.10V, so I knew that my worst core could run at that voltage while the others could potentially be lower. A -0.14 offset would have given the worst cores 1.10v and the others less. Unfortunately, it boots with the offset at stock clocks then once the bios loads it bumps it up to 4.3. The result was not even being able to POST since it was trying to use like 0.83V at 2.6 GHz. -0.13 was the same result, but -0.12 and -0.125 could boot into Windows. Without the boot issue I could probably knock off .015 to .025 more volts, and lower temps further.
> 
> HWinfo64 was the only program I found that could tell me the individual core VIDs.


Any time you update the bios it wipe your settings. Good to run a text file of your settings before the bios update. You should try a per core oc it works really well for 24/7.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
It better not to use hwmonitor while using hwinfo 

You can get another hwinfo window by using the double arrow on the bottom left symbol and I believe drag the temps on it 
You can use click to select the top item and hold shift click to select everything between the clicks
Then drag them all to the other hwinfo page.
Save some time.

You can also select all the tj max and right click and select Hide to get rid of a lot of useless listings


----------



## Hydroplane

CptSpig said:


> Any time you update the bios it wipe your settings. Good to run a text file of your settings before the bios update. You should try a per core oc it works really well for 24/7.


At -.125 offset it tries to boot at 2.6 GHz with .714 volts, LOL. I bumped it back to -.12 to improve boot stability. I will have to see if there is a setting to help that. -.125 passed all stability tests (when it could actually boot to Windows) and I feel like -.13 to .-14 may even work. May be less of an issue if I need less offset at a higher clock speed.

As for the HWMonitor, I like it because it shows temps 2c lower


----------



## ThrashZone

Hydroplane said:


> At -.125 offset it tries to boot at 2.6 GHz with .714 volts, LOL. I bumped it back to -.12 to improve boot stability. I will have to see if there is a setting to help that. -.125 passed all stability tests (when it could actually boot to Windows) and I feel like -.13 to .-14 may even work. May be less of an issue if I need less offset at a higher clock speed.
> 
> *As for the HWMonitor, I like it because it shows temps 2c lower*


Hi,
lol 
Yeah I don't like the evil cpu package temp reading either but it's probably accurate where as the happy cpu package temp that is the same as highest core temp reading is preferred


----------



## Hydroplane

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> lol
> Yeah I don't like the evil cpu package temp reading either but it's probably accurate where as the happy cpu package temp that is the same as highest core temp reading is preferred


The package temp in HWMonitor increased by 5c with the bios update, since it changed the package TJMax from 105C to 110C. HWMonitor uses distance to TJMax to calculate temps. Rather than reading the actual value it just assumes 105C. So when it's different, it reads wrong. If I set a custom core TJMax of 90C, all of my temps magically increase by exactly 15C in HWMonitor lol


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I'm still on 1301 bios and it's still 105c tj max.

Which doesn't mean much when pulling 950w out the wall at 4.8 lol


----------



## Hydroplane

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I'm still on 1301 bios and it's still 105c tj max.
> 
> Which doesn't mean much when pulling 950w out the wall at 4.8 lol


Does yours pull the same amount? Lol I posted pictures of the kill a watt display from when I was running cinebench at 4.8 and a lot of people doubted me. Especially on the W-3175X thread, wonder what kind of numbers that bad boy could hit :O


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I also had my x99 doing 4.5 with 1.3v 
Now on 4.0 
4.9 on 5 cores 4.8 on 5 cores pulled 900w 
Yeah killawatt ez is cool 
But also confirms my APC kicks on at 925w so I need a 20amp breaker asap


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Installed the 9980xe and Apex VI yesterday. Feeling it out. Not stable, but here are the settings for the screenshot:

core volts: 1.25v
cache volts: 1v
input: 1.8v
SA: 1v
IO: 1v

Seems 4.4GHz would be my 24/7 all core 1.1v. Cache @3GHz. Ram @4GHz CL16. Still working on it though.


----------



## Hydroplane

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Installed the 9980xe and Apex VI yesterday. Feeling it out. Not stable, but here are the settings for the screenshot:
> 
> core volts: 1.25v
> cache volts: 1v
> input: 1.8v
> SA: 1v
> IO: 1v
> 
> Seems 4.4GHz would be my 24/7 all core 1.1v. Cache @3GHz. Ram @4GHz CL16. Still working on it though.


Dang 4.8 1.25V is pretty good. Are those max temps from Cinebench? Making me want to buy 9980XE lol


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Wow do you vape because that's smoking


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Wow do you vape because that's smoking






Hydroplane said:


> Dang 4.8 1.25V is pretty good. Are those max temps from Cinebench? Making me want to buy 9980XE lol


Yep, the max temps in Cinebench R15. Happy I can get this speed in ambient water loop. Can't wait to bench this in cold weather. See what I get.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Tough few points 3-48 7-48 
The evil cpu package


----------



## tistou77

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Seems 4.4GHz would be my 24/7 all core 1.1v. Cache @3GHz. Ram @4GHz CL16. Still working on it though.


What are the temperatures for this OC ?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Temps high 70s with real bench. Small loop, 480x60mm of rad. But my PC is in the basement where it's low ambient.


----------



## Hydroplane

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Yep, the max temps in Cinebench R15. Happy I can get this speed in ambient water loop. Can't wait to bench this in cold weather. See what I get.


In all honestly with those temps 4.7-4.8 on a 9980XE with ambient water 24/7 is probably doable. That would give me a nice boost in single core speed. Ebay prices, $1600 for new 9980XE, $1400 for used 7980XE, very tempting lol.

Per silicon lottery statistics, 4.4 stable 1.10v is a very good chip. Probably top 5% of 9980XE


----------



## ESRCJ

Hydroplane said:


> You certainly have plenty of cooling. I have roughly half the rad space, an extra GPU, and can keep the water below 30c without issue. Heck, you even have the same rads lol. The 30c differential is high so it's probably sitting unevenly. 4.6 1.21 with low 70s temp is pretty good, about right for a delidded chip under ambient water. Without resealing the IHS could shift slightly over time.
> 
> The idea of using the custom TJMax is actually a REALLY good idea, I'll have to try that. I have some cores at 65c while others are at 88c.


Well I had a lot of issues with the initial delid. It took 4 tries to get it right, as the initial 3 attempts exhibited 1 to 3 cores running over 90C at just 4.5GHz 1.16V. The hot cores were different every delid attempt as well. I will scrape off all of the remaining silicon adhesive and reseal this time. Hopefully my results improve because it's a bit disappointing to see my current temps with my overkill cooling. I will admit this is a below average 7980XE though. 1.21V for 4.6GHz is pretty bad. It's amazing how there is so much variation in the silicon quality for a near-$2000 CPU.


----------



## tistou77

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Temps high 70s with real bench. Small loop, 480x60mm of rad. But my PC is in the basement where it's low ambient.


OK, thanks
I hesitated to replace my 7980XE, but nothing motivating


----------



## tistou77

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Installed the 9980xe and Apex VI yesterday. Feeling it out. Not stable, but here are the settings for the screenshot:
> 
> core volts: 1.25v
> cache volts: 1v
> input: 1.8v
> SA: 1v
> IO: 1v
> 
> Seems 4.4GHz would be my 24/7 all core 1.1v. Cache @3GHz. Ram @4GHz CL16. Still working on it though.


And you have a TJMax at 95° with your 9980XE and Apex (bios 1602) ?


----------



## ThrashZone

gridironcpj said:


> Well I had a lot of issues with the initial delid. It took 4 tries to get it right, as the initial 3 attempts exhibited 1 to 3 cores running over 90C at just 4.5GHz 1.16V. The hot cores were different every delid attempt as well. *I will scrape off all of the remaining silicon adhesive and reseal this time.* Hopefully my results improve because it's a bit disappointing to see my current temps with my overkill cooling. I will admit this is a below average 7980XE though. 1.21V for 4.6GHz is pretty bad. It's amazing how there is so much variation in the silicon quality for a near-$2000 CPU.


Hi,
Are you referring to the original Intel stuff ?
That would of been best removed the first time 
You'd have to use a ton of LM to leave it like silicon lottery uses


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

tistou77 said:


> And you have a TJMax at 95° with your 9980XE and Apex (bios 1602) ?



It was set to 95'C yes.


----------



## fgh

Hydroplane said:


> At -.125 offset it tries to boot at 2.6 GHz with .714 volts, LOL. I bumped it back to -.12 to improve boot stability. I will have to see if there is a setting to help that. -.125 passed all stability tests (when it could actually boot to Windows) and I feel like -.13 to .-14 may even work. May be less of an issue if I need less offset at a higher clock speed.
> 
> As for the HWMonitor, I like it because it shows temps 2c lower



Why not using Adaptive Offset? It not touching the core voltage at idle, only affects the voltage during high load.


----------



## aerotracks

I tried fooling with memory clock, and it turned out to work  seems 4200 is the new 4000. 
Will try tightening primaries to 17-18-17 next.

VDIMM 1.45V


----------



## ESRCJ

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Are you referring to the original Intel stuff ?
> That would of been best removed the first time
> You'd have to use a ton of LM to leave it like silicon lottery uses


Yeah the stock silicon adhesive. I removed all of it from the IHS, just not from the PCB. I will definitely remove all of it when I get around to delidding the CPU again.


----------



## tistou77

MrTOOSHORT said:


> It was set to 95'C yes.


OK, thanks
You have set manually in the bios I guess ?

With the R6E, if I manually set in the bios (105° for example with the new microcode), it always remains at 110° under Windows (distance between the TJMax and the temperature of the core)
But the indicated TJmax is well 105°


----------



## Jpmboy

aerotracks said:


> I tried fooling with memory clock, and it turned out to work  seems 4200 is the new 4000.
> Will try tightening primaries to 17-18-17 next.
> 
> VDIMM 1.45V


were you able to increase the cache frequency? I'm seeing a bit of a limit for cache above 4000 (which kinda hurt the performance in my case overall. 30 vs 28 on a 7980XE)


----------



## aerotracks

Jpmboy said:


> were you able to increase the cache frequency? I'm seeing a bit of a limit for cache above 4000 (which kinda hurt the performance in my case overall. 30 vs 28 on a 7980XE)


Cache limits aren't as pronounced on LCC die compared to big CPUs. Writes were severely capped by cache on my 7940X, on 7820X it just keeps scaling.
I found some limitations in Read and Copy. Pushing the mesh clocks from 3400MHz to 3500MHz gives me another 1.5GB/s in Read and 0.75GB/s in Copy. 

Moving to DDR4-4300 (had to loosen some Subtimings and relax RTL to Auto) I saw Reads pretty much capped, Write and Copy were continuing to scale.


*Bandwidth gets uncorked moving from daily C17 to a nice tight C12 setting, so cache related capping is not the whole story here.


----------



## Jpmboy

aerotracks said:


> Cache limits aren't as pronounced on LCC die compared to big CPUs. Writes were severely capped by cache on my 7940X, on 7820X it just keeps scaling.
> I found some limitations in Read and Copy. Pushing the mesh clocks from 3400MHz to 3500MHz gives me another 1.5GB/s in Read and 0.75GB/s in Copy.
> 
> Moving to DDR4-4300 (had to loosen some Subtimings and relax RTL to Auto) I saw Reads pretty much capped, Write and Copy were continuing to scale.
> 
> 
> *Bandwidth gets uncorked moving from daily C17 to a nice tight C12 setting, so cache related capping is not the whole story here.


 at least on HCC chip IMCs frequency can be capped by cache, so (as you know) lower the cache freq can open up higher ram frequencies.
Post your stuff in the 24/7 ram thread...


----------



## aerotracks

Jpmboy said:


> at least on HCC chip IMCs frequency can be capped by cache, so (as you know) lower the cache freq can open up higher ram frequencies.
> Post your stuff in the 24/7 ram thread...


Ah, got it now. Not being a native speaker language does get in the way some times.  
I haven't yet tried lowering Cache ratio, been at 34-35 all along. 3600MHz Mesh doesn't boot at all no matter which memory speed, probably needs cold.

Have you tried 4266 and 4400 memory ratios? At least on EVGA board they are completely borked, even lowering to known stable memory frequencies via BCLK it doesn't train.


----------



## Nizzen

aerotracks said:


> I tried fooling with memory clock, and it turned out to work  seems 4200 is the new 4000.
> Will try tightening primaries to 17-18-17 next.
> 
> VDIMM 1.45V



Very nice on x299 ! Great job


----------



## Hydroplane

Apparently adaptive voltage can only add to the offset in turbo mode, not subtract. I need to boot at like 2.6 with -.10 (or less) offset then go to -.14 offset at 4.3.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep 
I'm not even sure additional turbo voltage does anything frankly sure doesn't change any vid's from just using pure offset mode.


----------



## fgh

Hydroplane said:


> Apparently adaptive voltage can only add to the offset in turbo mode, not subtract. I need to boot at like 2.6 with -.10 (or less) offset then go to -.14 offset at 4.3.



I have offset prefix. When prefix "-" is set with adaptive offset, vcore in turbo mode is less than VID.


----------



## MunneY

I finally got my 7900x sorted out today. I have a 7980xe on the way but wanted to get back to previous levels with this chip... I'm able to run 4.7ghz at 1.237ish. I havent really pushed it much furtheer. I really need to get some quicker ram. This 2400 will run at 3000 but I feel like its really holding this CPU back.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep
> I'm not even sure additional turbo voltage does anything frankly sure doesn't change any vid's from just using pure offset mode.


what? .. what's changing "any VIDs"? :blinksmil


----------



## ThrashZone

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep
> I'm not even sure* additional turbo voltage* does anything frankly *sure doesn't change any vid's* from just using pure *offset mode*.





Jpmboy said:


> what? .. what's changing "any VIDs"? :blinksmil


Hi,
Key words buddy Turbo doesn't change any vid's seems like a simple statement


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Key words buddy Turbo doesn't change any vid's seems like a simple statement


as it should not.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Tough few points 3-48 7-48
> The evil cpu package


Love to know how you got your gore temps so even. Mine are all over the place


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Love to know how you got your gore temps so even. Mine are all over the place


Hi,
Bunch of different offsets 
Freaking chip likes even vid voltages across core multipliers to be stable 
All the 0.020...+- uneven crap just borks it every single time.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> Love to know how you got your gore temps so even. Mine are all over the place


 it's all in the LM application and block mount. Be sure to clean off all the OEM silicon glue.
Here's my 7980XE crunching Boinc at a modest ~260W on the CPU - it's been running like this for over a week now. (right now, as I'm typing this)
Clean the underside of the IHS, use 100% isopropyl alcohol (if you have it), and paint the LM on both surfaces... and keep a lucky charm nearby.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
LOL yeah a chiller and lucky charm


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> it's all in the LM application and block mount. Be sure to clean off all the OEM silicon glue.
> Here's my 7980XE crunching Boinc at a modest ~260W on the CPU - it's been running like this for over a week now. (right now, as I'm typing this)
> Clean the underside of the IHS, use 100% isopropyl alcohol (if you have it), and paint the LM on both surfaces... and keep a lucky charm nearby.


The glue has been gone since I delidded it. I never resealed it, the IHS just sits on the die and the mounting mechanism holds it in place. I just can't seem to get the core temps close to each other. Below is a screenshot from a few minutes ago.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
That vccin is 2592 max about melt down mode 
I'd set vccin to 1.92v or so at LLC-5


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> That vccin is 2592 max about melt down mode
> I'd set vccin to 1.92v or so at LLC-5


Vccin is set to 1.95. The latest version of HWInfo had all the voltages wrong, wrong fan speeds, and the waterpump wasn't registering ANY speed. This new BETA version of HWInfo fixed all of those things with the exception of the vccin.


----------



## CptSpig

RichKnecht said:


> Vccin is set to 1.95. The latest version of HWInfo had all the voltages wrong, wrong fan speeds, and the waterpump wasn't registering ANY speed. This new BETA version of HWInfo fixed all of those things with the exception of the vccin.


Use SIV64x: http://www.rh-software.com/ and everything will be correct. :thumb:
:thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Vccin is set to 1.95. The latest version of HWInfo had all the voltages wrong, wrong fan speeds, and the waterpump wasn't registering ANY speed. This new BETA version of HWInfo fixed all of those things with the exception of the vccin.


Hi,
hwinfo v6.0 3620 seems fine maybe just your newer board it has an issue with :/


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> LOL yeah a chiller and lucky charm


no chiller at the moment... it's winter here in PA and if I close the windows in my office it turns into a sauna. (lol- throw more water on the rock please!)


RichKnecht said:


> The glue has been gone since I delidded it. I never resealed it, the IHS just sits on the die and the mounting mechanism holds it in place. I just can't seem to get the core temps close to each other. Below is a screenshot from a few minutes ago.


 14C spread is a lot but not like I haven;t seen it before. Was the chip run hard with the stock TIM? If you run a lower load or lower clocks does the spread decrease significantly? Was the spread the same before delid? Sometimes the DTS just has a bad per-core calibration (its a cpu thing not the board or mount)

oh... and drop HWi on that board (or the whole x299 platform). SIV64 is spot on (on the apex at least)


----------



## Hydroplane

Got 4.3 stable with an average of 1.074V, pretty good  I basically took the voltages the board set for -0.11 offset. The worst core was at 1.139V. I knew I needed 1.10V to get it stable with a constant voltage on all cores. So from that I knew the worst core would run at 1.10V. I subtracted 0.039V from the -0.11 offset voltages then manually entered them. First try, this was unstable so then I bumped them all up (except for the worst one already at 1.10V) by 0.005V. That got it stable. Time to go for 4.4-4.5.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> no chiller at the moment... it's winter here in PA and if I close the windows in my office it turns into a sauna. (lol- throw more water on the rock please!)
> 
> 14C spread is a lot but not like I haven;t seen it before. Was the chip run hard with the stock TIM? If you run a lower load or lower clocks does the spread decrease significantly? Was the spread the same before delid? Sometimes the DTS just has a bad per-core calibration (its a cpu thing not the board or mount)
> 
> oh... and drop HWi on that board (or the whole x299 platform). SIV64 is spot on (on the apex at least)


SIV64 shows all the wrong voltages like HWInfo did ( I already had it). The chip was delidded a week after I got it. I never tried overclocking it when it was stock. I'll try lowering the OC and voltages to see if the spread remains. Funny thing is that I thought 3 360mm radiators would cool this chip a bit better that what I am experiencing. Perhaps there is still air in the loop as the water level in the resevoir has dropped a bit since I filled it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah sorry siv64 is just way too freaking complicated for me 
Life is too short to deal with that much clutter for simple min max at a glance.

hwinfo works bottom line just not on Rich's newer board developer will get it going drop a line there 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/21-...ion/1235672-official-hwinfo-32-64-thread.html


----------



## ThrashZone

Hydroplane said:


> Got 4.3 stable with an average of 1.074V, pretty good  I basically took the voltages the board set for *-0.11 offset.* The worst core was at 1.139V. I knew I needed 1.10V to get it stable with a constant voltage on all cores. So from that I knew the worst core would run at 1.10V. I subtracted 0.039V from the* -0.11 offset voltages* then manually entered them. First try, this was unstable so then I bumped them all up (except for the worst one already at 1.10V) by 0.005V. That got it stable. Time to go for 4.4-4.5.


Hi,
Yeah I always get a weird chuckle when I state -offsets so be aware these chiller/ nature cooling/ adaptive +Auto voltage crew are very closed minded to sub 1.2v land 

Otherwise welcome to the -offset crew :thumb:


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah sorry siv64 is just way too freaking complicated for me
> Life is too short to deal with that much clutter for simple min max at a glance.
> 
> hwinfo works bottom line just not on Rich's newer board developer will get it going drop a line there
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/21-...ion/1235672-official-hwinfo-32-64-thread.html


Thanks, just posted there. Really want to get started pushing this board, just want to get temps in order first.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Hope for a cold front


----------



## Hydroplane

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I always get a weird chuckle when I state -offsets so be aware these chiller/ nature cooling/ adaptive +Auto voltage crew are very closed minded to sub 1.2v land
> 
> Otherwise welcome to the -offset crew :thumb:


The voltages that the board chooses for overclocking are much higher than needed. I effectively have -0.144 now  although with the values manually input. I think the temps in my screenshot may actually be 5C high due to the TJMax offset, because the minimum temps are about 5C higher than they used to be. The water temp is still ~27C. If so I will have extra OC headroom 

Edit: It might just be because I disabled speedstep, for now


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> SIV64 shows all the wrong voltages like HWInfo did ( I already had it). The chip was delidded a week after I got it. I never tried overclocking it when it was stock. I'll try lowering the OC and voltages to see if the spread remains. Funny thing is that I thought 3 360mm radiators would cool this chip a bit better that what I am experiencing. Perhaps there is still air in the loop as the water level in the resevoir has dropped a bit since I filled it.


 drop Ray (RedRay) a note and he'll address any problems you note with SIV64... if you want to use it. Its GUI is a bit more "obtuse" but EVERYTHING is in there.
HWi is fine if/when it is reporting correctly.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hydroplane said:


> The voltages that the board chooses for overclocking are much higher than needed. I effectively have -0.144 now  although with the values manually input. I think the temps in my screenshot may actually be 5C high due to the TJMax offset, because the minimum temps are about 5C higher than they used to be. The water temp is still ~27C. If so I will have extra OC headroom
> 
> Edit: It might just be because *I disabled speedstep,* for now


Hi,
I usually disable that too along with multicore enhancement working out avx offset and making sure it's actually showing the avx offset as the minimum MHz instead of 1200... bs.


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> The voltages that the board chooses for overclocking are much higher than needed. I effectively have -0.144 now  although with the values manually input. I think the temps in my screenshot may actually be 5C high due to the TJMax offset, because the minimum temps are about 5C higher than they used to be. The water temp is still ~27C. If so I will have extra OC headroom
> 
> Edit: It might just be because I disabled speedstep, for now


to your "edit"... are you leaving speedshift enabled when speedstep is disabled?


----------



## wingman99

On my motherboard disabling speed step disables speed shift.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> drop Ray (RedRay) a note and he'll address any problems you note with SIV64... if you want to use it. Its GUI is a bit more "obtuse" but EVERYTHING is in there.
> HWi is fine if/when it is reporting correctly.


The new beta version of HWInfo is working fine. Now to decide if I want to redo my LM and block mounting.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> The new beta version of HWInfo is working fine. Now to decide if I want to redo my LM and block mounting.


Hi,
I sealed mine across the bottom just in case some LM dropped down had something to catch it 
And just a couple dots on each top corner just to hold it.
Used some regular quick dry home caulking clamped for about 5 minutes and installed it on the board with water block.

I just got lucky application wise the first time I'm guessing cores 10c+ a hair apart from high/ low 
The rest is just adjusting offsets per core.


----------



## Hydroplane

Jpmboy said:


> to your "edit"... are you leaving speedshift enabled when speedstep is disabled?


Not sure but it stays at 4.3 constant. I disabled anything that had "speed" on it lol


----------



## fgh

Jpmboy said:


> it's all in the LM application and block mount. Be sure to clean off all the OEM silicon glue.
> *Here's my 7980XE crunching Boinc at a modest ~260W on the CPU - it's been running like this for over a week now. (right now, as I'm typing this)*
> Clean the underside of the IHS, use 100% isopropyl alcohol (if you have it), and paint the LM on both surfaces... and keep a lucky charm nearby.



What is the situation when the power consumption is 400W+?

I have ~7 degrees difference with ~250W and ~15 degrees difference with ~400W.


----------



## Jpmboy

fgh said:


> What is the situation when the power consumption is 400W+?
> 
> I have ~7 degrees difference with ~250W and ~15 degrees difference with ~400W.


Different leakage per core, or it can simply be related to the per core DTS calibration (differing temp-drift on each core). at 400W the chip is so far outside its AOR (acceptable operating range) that it would be unusual for the sensors to behave linearly in a range they are not calibrated for.


----------



## Norlig

So I just delid-ed my i7 7800x in hopes that I could get it from 4.8Ghz to atleast 5.0 Ghz.

I used this device
I mounted the CPU with This Delid Die Guard

Afterwards, I am having some issues...

I can get the PC to boot at 4.8Ghz, but not with the RAM at 3200mhz anymore, I get a boot error "bd" with that. (google search leaves me with Bad mounting preassure on CPU (too much or too little))
All of the RAM is detected though.
I have also updated the Firmware of my Motherboard to the latest one.

I can get it to boot at 4.8Ghz and 2800Mhz RAM, but the PC crashes when I try to load it in Prime95 (Was stable before delid-ing)

At 4.5Ghz and 2800Mhz, the PC is stable.

I am planning to re-mount the CPU this week, If I can get around to it (a slight hassle with my Watercooling).

But I was wondering if anyone had any other suggestions if that fails to deliver?

Thx!


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

^^

Has to be bad mounting pressure. Make sure the cpu contacts are clean and the socket is free is bent pins or debris.


----------



## RichKnecht

Norlig said:


> So I just delid-ed my i7 7800x in hopes that I could get it from 4.8Ghz to atleast 5.0 Ghz.
> 
> I used this device
> I mounted the CPU with This Delid Die Guard
> 
> Afterwards, I am having some issues...
> 
> I can get the PC to boot at 4.8Ghz, but not with the RAM at 3200mhz anymore, I get a boot error "bd" with that. (google search leaves me with Bad mounting preassure on CPU (too much or too little))
> All of the RAM is detected though.
> I have also updated the Firmware of my Motherboard to the latest one.
> 
> I can get it to boot at 4.8Ghz and 2800Mhz RAM, but the PC crashes when I try to load it in Prime95 (Was stable before delid-ing)
> 
> At 4.5Ghz and 2800Mhz, the PC is stable.
> 
> I am planning to re-mount the CPU this week, If I can get around to it (a slight hassle with my Watercooling).
> 
> But I was wondering if anyone had any other suggestions if that fails to deliver?
> 
> Thx!


It is definitely mounting pressure. I tried my Der Bauer frame countless times with many different errors and I finally gave up. Every time I would do a remount of the frame, a new/different error would pop up. In the end, I figured that the extra 4C of cooling was simply not worth my time any longer.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah fishing for 5c is minimal compared to LM oozing out and getting on something causing damage for such small gains 
Seems toying with a chiller would cost a lot more but gains are pretty much insured 
Only concern being condensation not usually an issue with 20-25c water temp but that will give pretty good gains just within that water temp range a lot better than 35c water does


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah fishing for 5c is minimal compared to LM oozing out and getting on something causing damage for such small gains
> Seems toying with a chiller would cost a lot more but gains are pretty much insured
> Only concern being condensation not usually an issue with 20-25c water temp but that will give pretty good gains just within that water temp range a lot better than 35c water does


I take my water temp to 6c with no condensation all the time. You just need watch the dew point. If you stay at or 1c above the dew point you will not have issues.


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> I take my water temp to 6c with no condensation all the time. You just need watch the dew point. If you stay at or 1c above the dew point you will not have issues.


 Hi,
I won't be buying a chiller mail order for sure 

Maybe locally if I run across one
PPC doesn't do returns so they are out nothing is 100% guaranteed to work out the box as they expect it to be with no returns policy they can keep them.


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I won't be buying a chiller mail order for sure
> 
> Maybe locally if I run across one
> PPC doesn't do returns so they are out nothing is 100% guaranteed to work out the box as they expect it to be with no returns policy they can keep them.


Yes, when the store has a no return policy best to stay away.


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> Yes, when the store has a no return policy best to stay away.


 Hi,
I haven't been to Petco in years maybe they have saltwater fish and chillers for them :/


Yep 
Aqua Euro USA Max Chill Aquarium Chiller, 1/13 HP 450.us
1/10th hp 499.us


----------



## Norlig

MrTOOSHORT said:


> ^^
> 
> Has to be bad mounting pressure. Make sure the cpu contacts are clean and the socket is free is bent pins or debris.





RichKnecht said:


> It is definitely mounting pressure. I tried my Der Bauer frame countless times with many different errors and I finally gave up. Every time I would do a remount of the frame, a new/different error would pop up. In the end, I figured that the extra 4C of cooling was simply not worth my time any longer.





ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah fishing for 5c is minimal compared to LM oozing out and getting on something causing damage for such small gains
> Seems toying with a chiller would cost a lot more but gains are pretty much insured
> Only concern being condensation not usually an issue with 20-25c water temp but that will give pretty good gains just within that water temp range a lot better than 35c water does


Reinstalled it yesterday, lost half my memory. (that was with a little more mounting pressure.
Reinstalled it today (less mounting pressure), regained half my memory, but still getting error code "BD" if I set my RAM to anything above 2800Mhz.

Gonna try using the normal IHS next time, possibly in the weekend or so.


----------



## ThrashZone

Norlig said:


> Reinstalled it yesterday, lost half my memory. (that was with a little more mounting pressure.
> Reinstalled it today (less mounting pressure), regained half my memory, but still getting error code "BD" if I set my RAM to anything above 2800Mhz.
> 
> Gonna try using the normal IHS next time, possibly in the weekend or so.


 Hi,
Yeah I think we've talked about trying to straight edge across the chips top to where the mounting plate is and close to where the water block might hit and see if there is anything that can be gauged for spacing and use feeler gauges to get to that height without guessing pressure ....
Seems like a lot of fun and time 


Chiller 400.us locally sounds better and on my to do list


----------



## Hydroplane

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I think we've talked about trying to straight edge across the chips top to where the mounting plate is and close to where the water block might hit and see if there is anything that can be gauged for spacing and use feeler gauges to get to that height without guessing pressure ....
> Seems like a lot of fun and time
> 
> 
> Chiller 400.us locally sounds better and on my to do list


I might go for the Hailea chiller myself. Not sure if the 500, 1000, or 2200 would fit my needs best. Only available on Alibaba or Ebay so may not be for you lol


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I haven't been to Petco in years maybe they have saltwater fish and chillers for them :/
> 
> 
> Yep
> Aqua Euro USA Max Chill Aquarium Chiller, 1/13 HP 450.us
> 1/10th hp 499.us


Wow! I paid less than half that. Daaum!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hydroplane said:


> I might go for the Hailea chiller myself. Not sure if the 500, 1000, or 2200 would fit my needs best. Only available on Alibaba or Ebay so may not be for you lol


 Hi,
I'd rather buy local a lot easier to deal with petco than ebay or even performance pc which has this unit for 350.us plus tax and shipping but No Returns blows them off completely 

Ebay you can get good support for purchases they even pay for return shipping costs or make seller do so but still 100.us more for a local purchase is straight forward as it gets 

10% off instore pick up would cover local tax.
That 1/13 horse power is good for 50 gallons so it would be good for 2-3 computers 



Yep Jp they don't give them away anymore


----------



## Hydroplane

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I'd rather buy local a lot easier to deal with petco than ebay or even performance pc which has this unit for 350.us plus tax and shipping but No Returns blows them off completely
> 
> Ebay you can get good support for purchases they even pay for return shipping costs or make seller do so but still 100.us more for a local purchase is straight forward as it gets
> 
> 10% off instore pick up would cover local tax.
> That 1/13 horse power is good for 50 gallons so it would be good for 2-3 computers
> 
> 
> 
> Yep Jp they don't give them away anymore


I will be curious if 1/10HP can keep 7900X @ 4.8-4.9 cold


----------



## ThrashZone

Hydroplane said:


> I will be curious if 1/10HP can keep 7900X @ 4.8-4.9 cold


 Hi,
1/10 hp is good for 80 gallons lol


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> I will be curious if 1/10HP can keep 7900X @ 4.8-4.9 cold


the BTUs of the chiller tell ya that... about 250W out of that CPU when loaded - right?


----------



## Hydroplane

Jpmboy said:


> the BTUs of the chiller tell ya that... about 250W out of that CPU when loaded - right?


Typically 1000 BTU/hr for 1/10HP


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> Typically 1000 BTU/hr for 1/10HP


so it will keep it good and cold (10C or so)... it an aquarium chiller, you hvae to mod the controller to go any lower. There is an OCN "how-to" thread


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
All this one states is high btu rating nothing more 

https://www.petco.com/shop/en/petco...ua-euro-usa-max-chill-aquarium-chiller-113-hp


----------



## Jpmboy

THat earlier capacity seemed high, so I did a little digging. 1hp ~ 2500BTU/H (1BTU/H ~ 0.3W) of cooling. so for example the koolance chiller is ~ 1HP and can keep the coolant on a 7980XE and 2 GPUs below 20C when under full load with the room at 22C etc (~ 575-600W on the AX1500i readout). see the pics below which I only now see "predict" the same - heck, koolance actually measured things! A 1/10th hp chiller should hold a 250W cpu just below ambient. I use my 1/10th HP aquarium chiller to get the water down to 10C (below which Liquid metals like CLU and CLP may freeze) and do some benching or testing on 1151-level rigs, 8 cores now. The Koolance can keep an 18 core and 2 GPUs coolant below 20C... always.
Just want folks to have realistic expectations. A 1/10hp chiller will get the temps low, but will struggle to keep the coolant below ambient.


----------



## MunneY

Jpmboy said:


> 1hp ~ 2500W of cooling. so for example the koolance chiller is ~ 1HP and can keep the coolant on a 7980XE and 2 GPUs below 20C when under full load with the room at 22C etc (~ 600W on the AX1500i output). see the pics below. A 1/10th hp chiller should hold a 250W cpu just below ambient. I use my 1/10th HP aquarium chiller to get the water down to 10C (below which Liquid metals like CLU and CLP may freeze) and do some benching or testing on 1151-level rigs, 8 cores now. The Koolance can keep an 18 core and 2 GPUs coolant below 20C... always.
> Just want folks to have realistic expectations. A 1/10hp chiller will get the temps low, but will struggle to keep the coolant below ambient.


I can't imagine what kind of reservoir you'd need for a 1hp chiller :-D


----------



## Jpmboy

MunneY said:


> I can't imagine what kind of reservoir you'd need for a 1hp chiller :-D


hey bud. note the correction, 1HP ~ 2500BTU/H. THe koolance chiller holds like 2L I think. It's that little box next to the mid tower with the three blue fans in front. NOt huge or anything...


----------



## djgar

Jpmboy said:


> hey bud. note the correction, 1HP ~ 2500BTU/H. THe koolance chiller holds like 2L I think. It's that little box next to the mid tower with the three blue fans in front. NOt huge or anything...


:specool: Soo ... where's the beer??


----------



## MunneY

Jpmboy said:


> hey bud. note the correction, 1HP ~ 2500BTU/H. THe koolance chiller holds like 2L I think. It's that little box next to the mid tower with the three blue fans in front. NOt huge or anything...


Always been a little envious of your setup... I'd love to have a chiller but I think I'm just gonna go with a mo-ra with the build coming up.


----------



## Hydroplane

Jpmboy said:


> THat earlier capacity seemed high, so I did a little digging. 1hp ~ 2500BTU/H (1BTU/H ~ 0.3W) of cooling. so for example the koolance chiller is ~ 1HP and can keep the coolant on a 7980XE and 2 GPUs below 20C when under full load with the room at 22C etc (~ 575-600W on the AX1500i readout). see the pics below which I only now see "predict" the same - heck, koolance actually measured things! A 1/10th hp chiller should hold a 250W cpu just below ambient. I use my 1/10th HP aquarium chiller to get the water down to 10C (below which Liquid metals like CLU and CLP may freeze) and do some benching or testing on 1151-level rigs, 8 cores now. The Koolance can keep an 18 core and 2 GPUs coolant below 20C... always.
> Just want folks to have realistic expectations. A 1/10hp chiller will get the temps low, but will struggle to keep the coolant below ambient.


That sounds about right. 1 Btu/hr is equivalent to about 0.29W. So a 7900X at 250W produces 862 Btu/hr. A 1/10 HP chiller should roughly cancel that out, or reduce the temps slightly below ambient. Nice setup, btw. I want mine to look like that eventually


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep 1/6th hp out of stock 629.99

https://www.petco.com/shop/en/petco...s/aqua-euro-usa-apex-16th-hp-aquarium-chiller

1/4 hp almost twice as much as performance pc list the hailea hc 300a for 399.95 :/

http://www.performance-pcs.com/hot-...hp-395watt-cooling-capacity-waterchiller.html

699.95
https://www.petco.com/shop/en/petco...qua-euro-usa-max-chill-aquarium-chiller-14-hp


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep 1/6th hp out of stock 629.99
> 
> https://www.petco.com/shop/en/petco...s/aqua-euro-usa-apex-16th-hp-aquarium-chiller
> 
> 1/4 hp almost twice as much as performance pc list the hailea hc 300a for 399.95 :/
> 
> http://www.performance-pcs.com/hot-...hp-395watt-cooling-capacity-waterchiller.html
> 
> 699.95
> https://www.petco.com/shop/en/petco...qua-euro-usa-max-chill-aquarium-chiller-14-hp


the hailea is a well made solid unit.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> the hailea is a well made solid unit.


 Hi,
I believe it's more PPC's return policy that is the largest turn off 

But at nearly half the price :/
Not really close to half because of shipping and no discount on already discounted item only 175.us less.


----------



## Jpmboy

fish food for thought


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> fish food for thought


 Hi,
Indeed just need to get with petco and get the warranty info off them on those units/ in store warranty options.... and go from there 



Doesn't seem too tough to simulate a 2-3 gallon tank to give a healthy reservoir for the chiller to cool and the system to pull from and dump into.


----------



## radrok

Hello guys, I have tried searching but I didn't find much info so I thought about posting here. 

Anyone gaming with these HCC chips? I recently assembled a workstation to both work with and play games. I'm having issues where I have brief intermittent hiccups in the 7960x system compared to my 9900k build.

By brief intermittent hiccups I mean microstuttering, happens once or twice in a minute

Both have RTX 2080 Ti GPU and 3600C16 bdie ram.

Could it be that on some games HCC chips perform badly due to high thread count or mesh/L3 cache different arrangement?


----------



## CptSpig

radrok said:


> Hello guys, I have tried searching but I didn't find much info so I thought about posting here.
> 
> Anyone gaming with these HCC chips? I recently assembled a workstation to both work with and play games. I'm having issues where I have brief intermittent hiccups in the 7960x system compared to my 9900k build.
> 
> By brief intermittent hiccups I mean microstuttering, happens once or twice in a minute
> 
> Both have RTX 2080 Ti GPU and 3600C16 bdie ram.
> 
> Could it be that on some games HCC chips perform badly due to high thread count or mesh/L3 cache different arrangement?


I am running a 7980Xe, 3600C B-Die memory @ 4000 Mhz and Nvidia 2080ti FE. I found a per core OC works best for gaming. I have the video settings on ultra with the DXR on high and getting over 100 fps in battlefield V with no other issues.


----------



## ThrashZone

radrok said:


> Hello guys, I have tried searching but I didn't find much info so I thought about posting here.
> 
> Anyone gaming with these HCC chips? I recently assembled a workstation to both work with and play games. I'm having issues where I have brief intermittent hiccups in the 7960x system compared to my 9900k build.
> 
> By brief intermittent hiccups I mean microstuttering, happens once or twice in a minute
> 
> Both have RTX 2080 Ti GPU and 3600C16 bdie ram.
> 
> Could it be that on some games HCC chips perform badly due to high thread count or mesh/L3 cache different arrangement?


 Hi,
What clocks are you running 

Quite a bit of difference in clocks between 9900k and 7960x 


You probably would need to push to 4.3 with 30 max cache on 7960x
Memory would be fine at default clock 2666 or rated speed 3600C16.


----------



## radrok

CptSpig said:


> I am running a 7980Xe, 3600C B-Die memory @ 4000 Mhz and Nvidia 2080ti FE. I found a per core OC works best for gaming. I have the video settings on ultra with the DXR on high and getting over 100 fps in battlefield V with no other issues.


Do you play overwatch by any chance? thanks 



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> What clocks are you running
> 
> Quite a bit of difference in clocks between 9900k and 7960x
> 
> 
> You probably would need to push to 4.3 with 30 max cache on 7960x
> Memory would be fine at default clock 2666 or rated speed 3600C16.


Im running 4,6 allcore stable and 32 mesh


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Maybe 32 cache is too much :/


----------



## CptSpig

radrok said:


> Do you play overwatch by any chance? thanks
> 
> 
> 
> Im running 4,6 allcore stable and 32 mesh


No I don't. I agree with Thrash lower your cashe/ring to 30 that seems to be the sweet spot on this platform. :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Wonder if he used DDU = display driver uninstaller for the 2080ti swap :/


----------



## toncij

radrok said:


> Hello guys, I have tried searching but I didn't find much info so I thought about posting here.
> 
> Anyone gaming with these HCC chips? I recently assembled a workstation to both work with and play games. I'm having issues where I have brief intermittent hiccups in the 7960x system compared to my 9900k build.
> 
> By brief intermittent hiccups I mean microstuttering, happens once or twice in a minute
> 
> Both have RTX 2080 Ti GPU and 3600C16 bdie ram.
> 
> Could it be that on some games HCC chips perform badly due to high thread count or mesh/L3 cache different arrangement?


Not sure if gaming is a good choice here. All of these offer only up to 4.5GHz (9900X probably at 4.7?) at average prior to chiller, sanding the core etc. while 9900K goes from 5.0 to usually 5.2 on all cores with normal water loop. In games, if you're gaming on a TITAN RTX or 2080Ti, that means you'll be missing out on 1440px or 1080px gaming performance. That might mean 124 instead of 144 FPS. 

But I might be wrong...


----------



## RichKnecht

First let me say the the X299 platform is the most frustrating platform I have ever used. I redid my LM application 5 times today and temps between cores is still pretty spread out. I think I am just going to give up and let it be, as I just don't have this much time to fiddle with it. What will probably happen is that this 7900X will go back into the Strix for another build and a 7980XE will find its home in the Omega. If anyone has any pointers on how to apply LM or pictures of what a "correct" application looks like, I am all for it.


----------



## Nizzen

RichKnecht said:


> First let me say the the X299 platform is the most frustrating platform I have ever used. I redid my LM application 5 times today and temps between cores is still pretty spread out. I think I am just going to give up and let it be, as I just don't have this much time to fiddle with it. What will probably happen is that this 7900X will go back into the Strix for another build and a 7980XE will find its home in the Omega. If anyone has any pointers on how to apply LM or pictures of what a "correct" application looks like, I am all for it.


Direct die cooling


----------



## RichKnecht

Nizzen said:


> Direct die cooling


Tried it. Couldn't get it to work long term to save my life. The Die Frame is in the drawer beside me just sitting there.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Well x299 has been a money hungry platform for sure 

Not any special tricks to delid
Remove all the intel stuff 
Cover the sinsative areas with liquid elect tape or nail polish 

Thin coat of LM on each surface 
Little line of caulk across the bottom and a couple dots on the top 
Clamp lightly and let it dry 
Use fast dry and it's done in 1 hour for install.

Caulk where yellow squares are about the only thing I did out of the ordinary most completely seal it.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Well x299 has been a money hungry platform for sure
> 
> Not any special tricks to delid
> Remove all the intel stuff
> Cover the sinsative areas with liquid elect tape or nail polish
> 
> Thin coat of LM on each surface
> Little line of caulk across the bottom and a couple dots on the top
> Clamp lightly and let it dry
> Use fast dry and it's done in 1 hour for install.
> 
> Caulk where yellow squares are about the only thing I did out of the ordinary most completely seal it.


Yep, pretty much what mine looks like, but all the silicone is gone and I left it unsealed. I'll let it settle for a few days and see what happens.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
That was a 7820k I believe just an example where I put the sealant 

I personally like said used fast dry regular home caulk so after 10 minutes it was tacky evough to stay together and get into the socket 
Clamped and installed cpu water block.

I just got lucky I suppose 
I had thoughts of trying to get the lm spread a little better for core temps but less than 10c apart is looking okay so I just left well enough alone and lapped the chip and done for a while


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I hate to hear your woes, my X299 experience has been 100% opposite - the most painless build I've had in years.

Hope things start to turn around for you. I know what it's like to have uncooperative systems.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Unsealed not sure what holds it together 
I mean you don't need much 
The bottom line is just so if the lm drops/ runs and there is something there to catch it otherwise it could work it's way out of the chip and on something it's not supposed to be on


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> First let me say the the X299 platform is the most frustrating platform I have ever used. I redid my LM application 5 times today and temps between cores is still pretty spread out. I think I am just going to give up and let it be, as I just don't have this much time to fiddle with it. What will probably happen is that this 7900X will go back into the Strix for another build *and a 7980XE will find its home in the Omega*. If anyone has any pointers on how to apply LM or pictures of what a "correct" application looks like, I am all for it.


it's what that board deserves... or a 9980XE. Mr.T is certainly enjoyingh his 9980XE. 


RichKnecht said:


> Tried it. Couldn't get it to work long term to save my life. *The Die Frame is in the drawer beside me just sitting there*.


sold mine - was not worth the time for the few degrees. Frankly, I was curious about the frame, but not much more that that.


----------



## RichKnecht

OK, as I sit here drinking margaritas and fine tuning core voltages, I was thinking ( uh oh) perhaps it is not my LM application, but my method of applying TIM to the IHS. I have been spreading it evenly across the top of the IHS. This is great, but what if the block is slightly concave? That would mean that the center of the block isn't making great contact with the IHS. Now when I remove the block, the TIM appears fine, but who knows. Maybe if I use the "pea method" and place a blob in the center of the IHS, the TIM will apply pressure to the center of the IHS and fill any gaps caused by the block being a bit concave. Sort of makes sense....right? I mean there is no way that EVERY time I applied the LM, temps did not change at all. Sometimes they even went higher by a couple degrees. The only thing that did not change was the fact that I was spreading the TIM across the IHS.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Pea method here. Matches my brain.


----------



## toncij

Jpmboy said:


> it's what that board deserves... or a 9980XE. Mr.T is certainly enjoyingh his 9980XE.
> 
> sold mine - was not worth the time for the few degrees. Frankly, I was curious about the frame, but not much more that that.


Can his reach 4266 memory?


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> OK, as I sit here drinking margaritas and fine tuning core voltages, I was thinking ( uh oh) perhaps it is not my LM application, but my method of applying TIM to the IHS. I have been spreading it evenly across the top of the IHS. This is great, but what if the block is slightly concave? That would mean that the center of the block isn't making great contact with the IHS. Now when I remove the block, the TIM appears fine, but who knows. Maybe if I use the "pea method" and place a blob in the center of the IHS, the TIM will apply pressure to the center of the IHS and fill any gaps caused by the block being a bit concave. Sort of makes sense....right? I mean there is no way that EVERY time I applied the LM, temps did not change at all. Sometimes they even went higher by a couple degrees. The only thing that did not change was the fact that I was spreading the TIM across the IHS.


Hi,
Well you should flatten the cpu top for one to get rid of any concave... which mine was odd a hell shaped looked like it was over clamped maybe by SL with how they say is "extreme pressure" :zip:

Otherwise thermal paste yes #metoo pea size dot for much the same reason 
Just squish it around with the water block a little.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Well you should flatten the cpu top for one to get rid of any concave... which mine was odd a hell shaped looked like it was over clamped maybe by SL with how they say is "extreme pressure" :zip:
> 
> Otherwise thermal paste yes #metoo pea size dot for much the same reason
> Just squish it around with the water block a little.


My IHS is most definitely flat. I checked the block and it looks flat, but who knows. I am not going to sand down the nickel. The TIM is the only thing I haven't done differently and after trying LM so many times, it sort of makes sense. FWIW, every time I mess with this PC, I think that I should have gone with a different Intel platform. I would have gotten 80% of the performance with 40% of the price.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> My IHS is most definitely flat. I checked the block and it looks flat, but who knows. I am not going to sand down the nickel. The TIM is the only thing I haven't done differently and after trying LM so many times, it sort of makes sense. FWIW, every time I mess with this PC, I think that I should have gone with a different Intel platform. I would have gotten 80% of the performance with 40% of the price.


put an 18core in there and end the coulda-shoulda.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> put an 18core in there and end the coulda-shoulda.


...and go through this whole delidding process again. It's definitely the "right chip". but I'm not sure I can do it. And judging from the 9980XE results, they OC worse than a delidded 7980XE, so they are off the list.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> My IHS is most definitely flat. I checked the block and it looks flat, but who knows. I am not going to sand down the nickel. The TIM is the only thing I haven't done differently and after trying LM so many times, it sort of makes sense. FWIW, every time I mess with this PC, I think that I should have gone with a different Intel platform. I would have gotten 80% of the performance with 40% of the price.


Hi,
Top of my chips seemed flat 
Wasn't till I sanded a little till I saw it had really a cup shape 
High in the center and high around the outside 
Between those areas it sunk down perfect shape for some sort of cup shaped clamp.

Most I've run across had 8700k's some binned and delidded 
And have gone to 9900k's same deal or just retail 
These people have already paid for 7940x's and still haven't got the performance benchmark wise of a 7900x.

They can only do 5.0++ and still can't beat a 7900x cpu score at 4.6 or 4.7 so yeah pick your platform poison but money wise and upgrade wise which above sound more efficient.

Skylake-x has been a money hungry ride but most has been thermal frustration test and error and finally figuring out what really make a difference.

I'll add this 
I use NT-H1 thermal paste works just fine.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Top of my chips seemed flat
> Wasn't till I sanded a little till I saw it had really a cup shape
> High in the center and high around the outside
> Between those areas it sunk down perfect shape for some sort of cup shaped clamp.
> 
> Most I've run across had 8700k's some binned and delidded
> And have gone to 9900k's same deal or just retail
> These people have already paid for 7940x's and still haven't got the performance benchmark wise of a 7900x.
> 
> They can only do 5.0++ and still can't beat a 7900x cpu score at 4.6 or 4.7 so yeah pick your platform poison but money wise and upgrade wise which above sound more efficient.
> 
> Skylake-x has been a money hungry ride but most has been thermal frustration test and error and finally figuring out what really make a difference.
> 
> I'll add this
> I use NT-H1 thermal paste works just fine.


I did my own TIM testing a while back and have EVERY popular TIM you can think of from AS5 to Kryonaut. My best performer to date is Cooler MasterGel Maker Nano. My Microcenter used to carry it, but it seems that they don't any longer. The Hydronaut and Kryonaut stuff is all hyped up by DerBauer, but they perform worse than the CM stuff. I also have Nt-H1 but it never impressed me with the temps I got.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
There's not a heck of a lot of difference in thermal paste 
I like nt-h1 because it's within 1-2c of the hyped overpriced grizzly stuff and it's locally available no mail order only nonsense 

I read the nano is pretty good too have yet to actually remember to get some from amazon... on orders.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I used Gelid Extreme since I had a couple of tubes of it in a drawer. After my pump speed test, where the temps reacted immediately to change in pump speed, I think the block to IHS interface is fine. I have a couple of cores that'll bump up to 81~82 when I'm really pouring the coal to it, but everything generally stays in 70s @ 4.6GHz. I can live with that. CLU on die to inside of IHS, FWIW.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Wish there was a document of core location for chips 
Might give us a better idea of where issues are


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Wish there was a document of core location for chips
> Might give us a better idea of where issues are


Yeah, that would be ideal. I'm going to redo the block mount and post back with results.


----------



## Hydroplane

Tried to use a constant offset then individual core multipliers... didn't work so well. My -0.11 offset increased to -0.01 for any amount of stability as I increased the clocks on some cores. But the higher voltage required meant I also had to decrease the clocks on others. In the end my average clock speed was 4.27 GHz, lower than where I started lol.


----------



## Turbowhite

My recommendation with LM:

After cleaning die and cpu block, I uses a toothpick with thermal PASTE on the die just to see the pattern and to see the area where I need to paint the LM on the CPU (not to mention the easy cleanup). I dropped small dots across all areas to see the imprint and had to do this twice as I put too little on the first past. After doing this, I could tell where the die contact was a little low or high. Yes, I installed the CPU three times with Paste and then when I spread the LM for the production run, I let the LM pool a little in the areas where I felt. I still didn’t use a lot of LM its just that LM leaves small pools or dots after painting anyway. I also painted the CPU but did not pool it as I felt the pooling on the die would be enough. The end result was great as on startup my CPU temps (10 cores) were all at 31 0r 32 degrees. 7900x pushed to 4.9 1.35v stable, 93 degree pkg with testing, could not do 5.0. Currently at 4.6 and quiet. Not to mention the peace of mind on the contact.


----------



## Turbowhite

Ah yes, the above is naked. So with my Rockit copper IHS and EK monobloock on x299-xe, I always use the Rockit delidder base as my cpu workbench and never my MB. After placing the cpu in the base and cleaning, I would use the same toothpick method with paste. Then removed and checked for patterns. Finally LM and install the IHS but placed the Intel IHS upside down on the copper with a washer and used the Rockit positioner/IHS installer with longer screws to make it snug. Then remove and checked. Again, all of the work is done outside of the MB. After that, used the pea method and installed everything with the monoblock on the MB. Peace of mind.


----------



## Hydroplane

I changed the Vccin from AUTO to 1.80V. It dropped core temps by about 2c across the board (somewhat within the margin of error, but water temp was stable at 28-29c the whole time). But the peak temps on the worst cores dropped by 5C!

1.80V crashed P95 after about 40 minutes, so I'm trying 1.85V now. Temps seem the same or even better, 22 minutes in. Core 12 dropped from a max of 98C to 92C!

I may have to bump the VCCIN up as I increase clock speed.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hydroplane said:


> Tried to use a constant offset then individual core multipliers... didn't work so well. My -0.11 offset increased to -0.01 for any amount of stability as I increased the clocks on some cores. But the higher voltage required meant I also had to decrease the clocks on others. In the end my average clock speed was 4.27 GHz, lower than where I started lol.


Hi,
Hot cores do get in the way 
I turned off a worst core Intel* tagged best core core *4 in bios oddly just to see what would happen

After the system did tag another core and yes both were two of the best cores 5*-6* now counting 4* but it's off.
It was okay just now a 9 core 7900x instead of a 10 core.

Reason I tried it is the system really didn't like running 4* and 5* bios listings with different clocks for example 4* at 4.8 or lower and 5* at 4.9... :/


----------



## Hydroplane

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Hot cores do get in the way
> I turned off a worst core Intel* tagged best core core *4 in bios oddly just to see what would happen
> 
> After the system did tag another core and yes both were two of the best cores 5*-6* now counting 4* but it's off.
> It was okay just now a 9 core 7900x instead of a 10 core.
> 
> Reason I tried it is the system really didn't like running 4* and 5* bios listings with different clocks for example 4* at 4.8 or lower and 5* at 4.9... :/


I think it chooses cores based on which ones need the lowest voltage, rather than lowest temps. At least, that's what I saw when I tried offset. The starred cores were also the lowest voltages ones.

Looks like I'll be trying a per core OC using manual voltages for each core. Trying to figure out an efficient way to do it, otherwise stress testing 18 cores individually will take forever.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hydroplane said:


> I think it chooses cores based on which ones need the lowest voltage, rather than lowest temps. At least, that's what I saw when I tried offset. The starred cores were also the lowest voltages ones.
> 
> Looks like I'll be trying a per core OC using manual voltages for each core. Trying to figure out an efficient way to do it, otherwise stress testing 18 cores individually will take forever.


Hi,
Yes it does take a while but offset and then adaptive offset is where I always end up at 
Ofset first just to get away from dealing with additional turbo voltage 
Then after tuning vids I'll switch to adaptive and mess with additional... 

The problem I ran into to larger the vid differences were the more instability there was 
Keeping the vid's within say 0.015 of each other on the same clocks was really helpful to bring in stability.

Yes that meant raising the lowest vid's and lowering the highs.


----------



## RichKnecht

Hydroplane said:


> I changed the Vccin from AUTO to 1.80V. It dropped core temps by about 2c across the board (somewhat within the margin of error, but water temp was stable at 28-29c the whole time). But the peak temps on the worst cores dropped by 5C!
> 
> 1.80V crashed P95 after about 40 minutes, so I'm trying 1.85V now. Temps seem the same or even better, 22 minutes in. Core 12 dropped from a max of 98C to 92C!
> 
> I may have to bump the VCCIN up as I increase clock speed.


My 7900X is not stable unless I use 1.95V vccin. Anything less and it gets unstable during Realbench and Cinebench scores drop dramatically.


----------



## Hydroplane

RichKnecht said:


> My 7900X is not stable unless I use 1.95V vccin. Anything less and it gets unstable during Realbench and Cinebench scores drop dramatically.


You are probably clocked much higher  I have seen this behavior as well, if it's too low my Cinebench score gets cut in half


----------



## RichKnecht

Is there such a thing as an overclock "ceiling"? My 7900X is overclocked to 4.7 on all cores, which is just fine. However if I go to 4.8 and get it stable, my Cinebench score actually drops or stays just about the same. I have tried bumping up vccin and vcore, but it remains the same. I know there is a "sweet spot" for vccin with these chips and it would make sense that if you raise the vcore, vccin would need to be raised too. Am I missing another parameter that would make a difference? Perhaps the added heat from the higher vcore needed for 4.8 is driving down the score?


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> Is there such a thing as an overclock "ceiling"? My 7900X is overclocked to 4.7 on all cores, which is just fine. However if I go to 4.8 and get it stable, my Cinebench score actually drops or stays just about the same. I have tried bumping up vccin and vcore, but it remains the same. I know there is a "sweet spot" for vccin with these chips and it would make sense that if you raise the vcore, vccin would need to be raised too. Am I missing another parameter that would make a difference? Perhaps the added heat from the higher vcore needed for 4.8 is driving down the score?


how high with vccin did you try for 4.8?


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> how high with vccin did you try for 4.8?


I tried raising it .01V at a time until I hit 2.1. 1.97V made a difference, but only by 13pts. Hardly worth the effort. Perhaps my Vcore (1.295) was too low?


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> I tried raising it .01V at a time until I hit 2.1. 1.97V made a difference, but only by 13pts. Hardly worth the effort. Perhaps my Vcore (1.295) was too low?


unlikely it's vcore (would crash). May be power or thermal throttling.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> unlikely it's vcore (would crash). May be power or thermal throttling.


No signs of throttling. Power is from a 1300W power supply and the 12V reading remains rock solid while using any benchmarking software. I even tried going to 200% on the CPU power setting in bios and it did nothing. Still not sure what setting it higher than 140% does anyway. VRMs don't go above 49C.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> No signs of throttling. Power is from a 1300W power supply and the 12V reading remains rock solid while using any benchmarking software. I even tried going to 200% on the CPU power setting in bios and it did nothing. Still not sure what setting it higher than 140% does anyway. VRMs don't go above 49C.


guess you should try higher vcore. rule-of-thumb: each 100MHz usually costs 10mV per core (8-15mV) depending where the chip is on its mV/Hz response curve (which does top out). From a known-stable vcore
so a 1 multi on a 10 core may be +100mV


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Is there such a thing as an overclock "ceiling"? My 7900X is overclocked to 4.7 on all cores, which is just fine. However if I go to 4.8 and get it stable, my Cinebench score actually drops or stays just about the same. I have tried bumping up vccin and vcore, but it remains the same. I know there is a "sweet spot" for vccin with these chips and it would make sense that if you raise the vcore, vccin would need to be raised too. Am I missing another parameter that would make a difference? Perhaps the added heat from the higher vcore needed for 4.8 is driving down the score?


Hi,
Auto input does some crazy high voltages 
I usually peg it at 1.94 and use llc-4...


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Auto input does some crazy high voltages
> I usually peg it at 1.94 and use llc-4...


Auto sets all the voltages higher than necessary IMO. My chip @ 4.7 runs best at 1.95 vccin. If I lower it, Cinebench scores drop. I have my LLC on 5. Set on 4, it fails Realbench after 9 minutes.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Auto sets all the voltages higher than necessary IMO. My chip @ 4.7 runs best at 1.95 vccin. If I lower it, Cinebench scores drop. I have my LLC on 5. Set on 4, it fails Realbench after 9 minutes.


Hi,
I believe that last image was using by core usage set at 48 and adaptive +0.001 and additional turbo to 1.185

Might try it again in a little while see what happens I've flashed my bios so many times not sure what I have going now set in profiles


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I believe that last image was using by core usage set at 48 and adaptive +0.001 and additional turbo to 1.185
> 
> Might try it again in a little while see what happens I've flashed my bios so many times not sure what I have going now set in profiles


That yielded 1.29V? That's interesting. I know the CPU has a set voltage curve, but setting it at 1.185 with a +.001V offset and getting 1.29V is kind of crazy :0


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> That yielded 1.29V? That's interesting. I know the CPU has a set voltage curve, but setting it at 1.185 with a +.001V offset and getting 1.29V is kind of crazy :0


Hi,
Yep try auto instead of +0.001 it's an insured way of hitting 1.3+
think defender is cranky about spectre nonsense switched off getting system service exception today seems a waste of time.


----------



## RichKnecht

Working on my overclock on this snowy day and trying to figure out what heats a chip up more...raising the multiplier or voltage? I know it goes hand in hand as the multiplier gets higher, but what if you use 1.2V with both a 4.5OC and a 4.6OC. Is it normal for the higher ratio(with the same voltage) to run hotter?


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> Working on my overclock on this snowy day and trying to figure out what heats a chip up more...raising the multiplier or voltage? I know it goes hand in hand as the multiplier gets higher, but what if you use 1.2V with both a 4.5OC and a 4.6OC. *Is it normal for the higher ratio(with the same voltage) to run hotter*?


yes... current pull is based on load and frequency... and voltage. (all going to Watts)


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Too low of a manual core voltage would also cause bsod.


----------



## RichKnecht

So, with testing an OC, I usually run RealBench for 30 minutes to an hour to see if everything is "good to go". I have seen other using Intels's XTU. With RealBench, the CPU warms up a lot more than with XTU. Seems that RealBench uses quite a bit of AVX instructions. However, XTU barely heats up the CPU. So, is XTU really a useful program to test an OC? I have never used Prime95 with this CPU as I feel surviving an hour of RealBench is good enough for me.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> yes... current pull is based on load and frequency... and voltage. (all going to Watts)


Hi,
Scone don't like oc.net referrals does on asus forum does he


----------



## CptSpig

RichKnecht said:


> So, with testing an OC, I usually run RealBench for 30 minutes to an hour to see if everything is "good to go". I have seen other using Intels's XTU. With RealBench, the CPU warms up a lot more than with XTU. Seems that RealBench uses quite a bit of AVX instructions. However, XTU barely heats up the CPU. So, is XTU really a useful program to test an OC? I have never used Prime95 with this CPU as I feel surviving an hour of RealBench is good enough for me.


One hour of RealBench with avx offsets is all I run to test my final build. My machine has been stable for more than a year no issues. Try X265 bench if you want to test just the CPU for stability. You can go to HWBOT to download X265.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

CptSpig said:


> One hour of RealBench with avx offsets is all I run to test my final build. My machine has been stable for more than a year no issues. Try X265 bench if you want to test just the CPU for stability. You can go to HWBOT to download X265.


And the more X overkill you add will cause the test to run longer. The 4K version at 8X overkill will keep things ramped up for a few minutes - the only downside is you have to turn the HPET clock on to run it (and back off if you want to run most anything else).


----------



## RichKnecht

GnarlyCharlie said:


> And the more X overkill you add will cause the test to run longer. The 4K version at 8X overkill will keep things ramped up for a few minutes - the only downside is you have to turn the HPET clock on to run it (and back off if you want to run most anything else).


Isn't the HEPT on by default? Is there a benefit of turning HPET off for day to day use?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I usually loop blender classroom 6 times is about one hour.
Way better temp reading than realbench will produce 
Not sure if I ever noticed realbench as using avx offsets or not I don't believe it does.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

RichKnecht said:


> Isn't the HEPT on by default? Is there a benefit of turning HPET off for day to day use?


Mine isn't on by default in Windows 10. Download the X.265 bench and try to run it - it won't run with the HPET off, so there's a good way to check.

And if it's on, run Realbench and you can see the difference instantly. Instead of the montage of renders in the first test zipping by in a flash, they creep by very slowly. I don't know what the impact is on everyday stuff outside of benches, I just leave it off.

Edit: I keep the commands in a word doc so I can cut and past the Command Prompt (Admin) commands to turn it on and off, and you'll have to re-boot after turning on and re-boot after turning off. I can copy the commands here, they aren't too hard to find if you Google HPET command prompt.


----------



## djgar

GnarlyCharlie said:


> Mine isn't on by default in Windows 10. Download the X.265 bench and try to run it - it won't run with the HPET off, so there's a good way to check.
> 
> And if it's on, run Realbench and you can see the difference instantly. Instead of the montage of renders in the first test zipping by in a flash, they creep by very slowly. I don't know what the impact is on everyday stuff outside of benches, I just leave it off.
> 
> Edit: *I keep the commands in a word doc so I can cut and past the Command Prompt (Admin) commands to turn it on and off, and you'll have to re-boot after turning on and re-boot after turning off.* I can copy the commands here, they aren't too hard to find if you Google HPET command prompt.


I use Notepad


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Indeed code is best in notepad 
MS doc's have way too much format sludge.


----------



## Norlig

Norlig said:


> Reinstalled it yesterday, lost half my memory. (that was with a little more mounting pressure.
> Reinstalled it today (less mounting pressure), regained half my memory, but still getting error code "BD" if I set my RAM to anything above 2800Mhz.
> 
> Gonna try using the normal IHS next time, possibly in the weekend or so.


Got the CPU back on with the stock retention bracket and with Conductonaut between die and IHS and MX-4 between IHS and block.

I can again boot to 4.8Ghz and 3200Mhz RAM, so it was definately the mounting pressure 

Oh well, atleast its alot cooler now than with the stock TIM between the Die and IHS 

Now to try and re-sell the Direct-Die Guard to some fool


----------



## ThrashZone

Norlig said:


> Got the CPU back on with the stock retention bracket and with Conductonaut between die and IHS and MX-4 between IHS and block.
> 
> I can again boot to 4.8Ghz and 3200Mhz RAM, so it was definately the mounting pressure
> 
> Oh well, atleast its alot cooler now than with the *stock TIM between the Die and IHS*
> 
> Now to try and re-sell the Direct-Die Guard to some fool


Hi,
You had pigeon poop put back in


----------



## RichKnecht

GnarlyCharlie said:


> Mine isn't on by default in Windows 10. Download the X.265 bench and try to run it - it won't run with the HPET off, so there's a good way to check.
> 
> And if it's on, run Realbench and you can see the difference instantly. Instead of the montage of renders in the first test zipping by in a flash, they creep by very slowly. I don't know what the impact is on everyday stuff outside of benches, I just leave it off.
> 
> Edit: I keep the commands in a word doc so I can cut and past the Command Prompt (Admin) commands to turn it on and off, and you'll have to re-boot after turning on and re-boot after turning off. I can copy the commands here, they aren't too hard to find if you Google HPET command prompt.


It's off by default here too.


----------



## Norlig

I get EE and E8 errors in Prime95 now though! >.<




ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> You had pigeon poop put back in


No? 

I meant that its cooler now with Liquid metal, than with the stock TIM.


----------



## ThrashZone

Norlig said:


> No?
> 
> I meant that its cooler now with Liquid metal, than with the stock TIM.


Hi,
:thumb:


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Indeed code is best in notepad
> MS doc's have way too much format sludge.


It might be Notepad, just someplace to stash a couple lines of text that's easy to get to. I'm not at that rig right now, so I'm not sure what the actual program was I used.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> Isn't the HEPT on by default? Is there a benefit of turning HPET off for day to day use?


there are very few every-day programs that benefit from the HPET. For benchmarks, it is there so you cannot tweak the real-time-clock and fool a timed benchmark into thinking it ran faster than it did... and not all platforms (or OSes) are capable of RTC hacks. x299 and win 10 are (but not x299 and win 7  ). HPET was, at one time, a bios/hardware toggle, Windows took it over since win10.


GnarlyCharlie said:


> Mine isn't on by default in Windows 10. Download the X.265 bench and try to run it - it won't run with the HPET off, so there's a good way to check.
> 
> And if it's on, run Realbench and you can see the difference instantly. Instead of the montage of renders in the first test zipping by in a flash, they creep by very slowly. I don't know what the impact is on everyday stuff outside of benches, I just leave it off.
> 
> Edit: I keep the commands in a word doc so I can cut and past the Command Prompt (Admin) commands to turn it on and off, and you'll have to re-boot after turning on and re-boot after turning off. I can copy the commands here, they aren't too hard to find if you Google HPET command prompt.


It will run, but you can't sub the score to HWBOT.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## JustinThyme

kingofblog said:


> Today, I tried overclocking my i9-7900X that I had been running at stock for about a year. It can seemingly hit 4.8 GHz without any voltage boost at all (1.13-1.2 VID). The thermals are better than I expected too, only reaching ~90 C under Prime95 non-AVX. It scores ~2740 in CineBench R15.
> 
> Do these numbers check out? I am thinking of having this delidded, as it looks like it might be able to hit 5 GHz on an AIO.


whats the rest of your rig and is that 4.8 on all cores?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

kingofblog said:


> Today, I tried overclocking my i9-7900X that I had been running at stock for about a year. It can seemingly hit 4.8 GHz without any voltage boost at all (1.13-1.2 VID). The thermals are better than I expected too, only reaching ~90 C under Prime95 non-AVX. It scores ~2740 in CineBench R15.
> 
> Do these numbers check out? I am thinking of having this delidded, as it looks like it might be able to hit 5 GHz on an AIO.


Numbers check out for 4.8GHz in Cinebench. Congrats, looks like a golden 7900x.


----------



## ThrashZone

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Numbers check out for 4.8GHz in Cinebench. Congrats, looks like a golden 7900x.


Hi,
Higher than mine for sure 
Input voltage must of been hitting close to 2.0v plus a few others like system agent off the scale on auto


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Jpmboy

kingofblog said:


> It turns out I remembered wrong. I actually only got 2628 CB points. At 4.5 GHz, I got 2469 points. Since the score is still showing a scaling factor of 6.4%, I assume the conclusion is the same. If delidding can help with core #2 and #8, which are the bottleneck, I should be able to push for 4.9 or even 5.0.
> 
> 
> 
> However, for cooling, the AIO pump is starting to hit the limit. The CPU temperatures are a lot higher than the liquid temperature (34 C) would suggest. Is there anything (non-Asetek) I can buy which would have higher flow, or do I need to assemble a custom loop? I would rather not be connecting hoses/fittings unless they are the idiot-proof quick-disconnect kind.
> 
> Also, has anyone been able to push uncore beyond 3.2-3.3 GHz? I have not tried going higher yet, but it looks like I have another 100-200 mV of headroom.


the cpu temperature is the result of the stock die-to-IHS TIM. YOu really need to delid the cpu.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Jpmboy

kingofblog said:


> Going from 4.5 to 4.8 GHz required +100 mV. I assume 5 GHz will require at least that much. If delidding gets another 15 C of headroom, I am not convinced that would be enough for 100 mV, which is why I asked about pumping.


 the temp-mHZ-voltage relationship is not gonna be linear that high in the VID stack... but yes, 10mV/100MHz/core is about what to expect given the same level of stability (which is always conditional. HOwever, delidding the 7900X routinely results in at least +100MHz vs best-OEM frequency. Temperature in these SKL-X chips is really impactful, and shedding it fast is really important (especially on the small scale dies).
Frankly, not delidding a decent 7900X is a silicon-sin.


----------



## RichKnecht

kingofblog said:


> It turns out I remembered wrong. I actually only got 2628 CB points. At 4.5 GHz, I got 2469 points. Since the score is still showing a scaling factor of 6.4%, I assume the conclusion is the same. If delidding can help with core #2 and #8, which are the bottleneck, I should be able to push for 4.9 or even 5.0.
> 
> 
> 
> However, for cooling, the AIO pump is starting to hit the limit. The CPU temperatures are a lot higher than the liquid temperature (34 C) would suggest. Is there anything (non-Asetek) I can buy which would have higher flow, or do I need to assemble a custom loop? I would rather not be connecting hoses/fittings unless they are the idiot-proof quick-disconnect kind.
> 
> Also, has anyone been able to push uncore beyond 3.2-3.3 GHz? I have not tried going higher yet, but it looks like I have another 100-200 mV of headroom.


My 7900X at 4.7 scores ~2630 at 1.23V. Temps climb VERY fast when getting to 1.28 and above, even on delidded chips. The 7900X die is very small and it can be a challenge to get rid of the heat. I would definitely delid that chip and seriously consider a custom loop.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I have a spare X299 mobo and CPU block - neither what my first choice would be if buying new, but I'm going to build a rig for some kinfolk out of it.

The Egg has 7920X as the cheapest 79XXX series right now, $50 cheaper than the 7900X. I doubt they'd ever run SLI, especially since this will be their first watercooled rig, so I don't know that PCIE lanes will be all that important.

I don't want to go much more horsepower, I think I'm going to try to stick with a 420 & 280 as total rad space.

And they won't be getting a super-duper death OC, the rig they have now is a 6700K @ mid 4s, I don't really remember how far I pushed that one, it's not de-lidded.

De-lidded 7920X worthwhile? Keeping in mind it's a gift to a pack of hellions - not something I'm going to keep for myself.


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> I have a spare X299 mobo and CPU block - neither what my first choice would be if buying new, but I'm going to build a rig for some kinfolk out of it.
> 
> The Egg has 7920X as the cheapest 79XXX series right now, $50 cheaper than the 7900X. I doubt they'd ever run SLI, especially since this will be their first watercooled rig, so I don't know that PCIE lanes will be all that important.
> 
> I don't want to go much more horsepower, I think I'm going to try to stick with a 420 & 280 as total rad space.
> 
> And they won't be getting a super-duper death OC, the rig they have now is a 6700K @ mid 4s, I don't really remember how far I pushed that one, it's not de-lidded.
> 
> De-lidded 7920X worthwhile? Keeping in mind it's a gift to a pack of hellions - not something I'm going to keep for myself.


the 7920X is a decent chip... but if the hellions (I have a murder-of-hellions also) need only a single gpu and if it is any cheaper, the *7740X (4c8t)* hits 5.0 nearly 100% of the time, and is very fast in the hellion rigs I've passed down. In fact, it still has the best IPC with maybe the 8086K and 9900K in a close second.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Pretty high avx offset if I read that screen shot right avx offset was 8 lol that would throttle you to 4.0 if any hit 
3 is fairly typical which would throttle to 4.5 if running at 4.8
512 avx is usually higher at 5-...

Still pretty good.


----------



## JustinThyme

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Pretty high avx offset if I read that screen shot right avx offset was 8 lol that would throttle you to 4.0 if any hit
> 3 is fairly typical which would throttle to 4.5 if running at 4.8
> 512 avx is usually higher at 5-...
> 
> Still pretty good.



I generally start with 3 and 5, get my clock where I want it then roll down from there. Sitting at 2 and 4 ATM.


----------



## Jpmboy

if you guys don't test AVX512 with y-prime, at least cycle the time spy extreme cpu test with AVX512 selected in the custom settings.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Jpmboy said:


> if you guys don't test AVX512 with y-prime, at least cycle the time spy extreme cpu test with AVX512 selected in the custom settings.


I looped it a few times, but couldn't figure out how the stop the loop and keep the details. Anyway, only got my demon hot core up to 62.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## JustinThyme

GnarlyCharlie said:


> I looped it a few times, but couldn't figure out how the stop the loop and keep the details. Anyway, only got my demon hot core up to 62.


You running a chiller or have the machine sitting outside in the cold?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

JustinThyme said:


> You running a chiller or have the machine sitting outside in the cold?


The min temps reported were about what it was in that part of the house, high yesterday was 15F here and I keep it about 65F - down on the floor under a desk it was probably pretty cool. That and I have a 420 GTX push pull, 240 GTX push pull, 480 GTX push and a 240 GTX 2 push 1 pull. It takes quite a bit to even move my loop temp up a degree or 2.

Edit: I'll try to remember to do a run in the morning - I sleep at 63F, but turn the thermostat down before I get on the elliptical so the furnace doesn't come on while I'm on it. Should be pretty chilly back there by then.


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> The min temps reported were about what it was in that part of the house, high yesterday was 15F here and I keep it about 65F - down on the floor under a desk it was probably pretty cool. That and I have a 420 GTX push pull, 240 GTX push pull, 480 GTX push and a 240 GTX 2 push 1 pull. It takes quite a bit to even move my loop temp up a degree or 2.
> 
> Edit: I'll try to remember to do a run in the morning - I sleep at 63F, but turn the thermostat down before I get on the elliptical so the furnace doesn't come on while I'm on it. Should be pretty chilly back there by then.


what AVX512 offset? 4.6GHz is the max non-AVX clock hit during FM sysinfo scan.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I think it's at 2 & 4, I'd have to look. Maybe 3 & 5.

Edit 2 & 5, so 44 and 41

60F back here at lunch,


----------



## ThrashZone

kingofblog said:


> I set AVX offset to throttle to 4.0 GHz, because that is the last VID entry for AVX. If I go any higher, I would have to run AVX at the OC voltage of 1.2 V, which is too hot. 4.0 GHz AVX-512 is already 300 W in Linpack!


Hi,
Fair enough cinebench doesn't use any avx so it was hitting on 4.8 all through the test.


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> I think it's at 2 & 4, I'd have to look. Maybe 3 & 5.
> 
> Edit 2 & 5, so 44 and 41
> 
> 60F back here at lunch,


you may want to check the wattage pull at 4.1 under avx512. could be shocking if it is not power throttling. 17K seems low for 4.1. I'l have to pause Boinc on this rig to compare... maybe in the next day or two, but I recall higher 512 physics... may just be an age-related memory thing.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I don't have a Kill a Watt, but other AVX stuff really seems to load this thing up a lot more. And my TimeSpy scores in general seem to be pretty poor in the physics part - and graphics, too, with a stock Titan X not even Xp. So not sure what's up with the thing.


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> I don't have a Kill a Watt, but other AVX stuff really seems to load this thing up a lot more. And my TimeSpy scores in general seem to be pretty poor in the physics part - and graphics, too, with a stock Titan X not even Xp. So not sure what's up with the thing.


 No that's the idea of 512. It runs faster and since it is more efficient, it will use less power than the same (slower) calc with SSE. Set too high tho, 512 can quickly fry a CPU, so with a non-AVX setting of 4.6, I usually run a 512 offset of 6 or more (11 is my preferred). There is no table entry in the stack for 512 VIDs above 4.0 on these HCC chips. Server class cpus did not provide access to these offsets to the user. And the big chips run 512 at 3.0GHz. As the saying goes, for benchmarking, "smoke 'em if you got 'em". For actual work loads, best to keep the AVX512 frequency well below 4.0.

Hwi or SIV64 seem to give a reasonable CPU power use reading (cacluation... Voltage x current).


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

SO I really need to keep my 512 under 4.0 so the VIDs don't go haywire?


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## PWn3R

Has anyone here found a way to stop the BSOD from running Adaptive voltage with CS:GO? I did some looking and tried some stupid stuff suggested elsewhere. This included adding 50mv to my voltages. I reverted to just running override voltages and it's working again.

I am thinking of trying to go for 5ghz on my best cores again. They are doing 4.9 on 4 cores at 1.27v and it hits 58-68 across the cores. The rest are at 4.6 ranging between 1.204 and 1.254.

My concern has always been degredation, but I've seen many others running 1.3 - 1.35v. This is a 7980xe for anyone who is wondering. It's delidded with LM inside and outside and it's an EK monoblock that's been slightly modified cooling it. The loop only has CPU and of VRMs on it with a 480mm radiator.

Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> SO I really need to keep my 512 under 4.0 so the VIDs don't go haywire?


 KoB explained it. I mean, unless you have specific (known) workloads that will call AVX512, an offset such that 512 would run in the 30-35 range is a good fail-safe. With the exception of a few benchmarks and even fewer sci calc that have been re-coded to use 512, a large 512 offset will have no effect on daily or gaming use. However, if you happen to trip over a serious AVX load, the cpu will downclock and downvolt... hopefully keeping the power in the 2 times-ish TDP range.
if you want to punish the cpu, run the 512 version of *y-cruncher* (sorry, y-prime is a company I use to consult for ).


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I don't know - set the offsets to 5 & 10 (the values from the .txt you sent) and the score and temps went down. The graph along the bottom is showing solid 4.6Ghz (purple trace), but I guess even a couple of cores doing 4.6 would cause that.

Closed SIV to reset temps, ran Blender Classroom:


----------



## Abaidor

I finally managed to install the Direct Die Frame on my 7940X and well.......as expected no easy way with it..

I have two cores with too high temps shooting over 100C, meaning that my waterblock is not making perfect contact with the cpu die..

Before I install it I also made a spin test on glass and the die IS NOT flat! 

So now what? Any ideas besides re-sitting maybe with more LM?


----------



## ocvn

PWn3R said:


> Has anyone here found a way to stop the BSOD from running Adaptive voltage with CS:GO? I did some looking and tried some stupid stuff suggested elsewhere. This included adding 50mv to my voltages. I reverted to just running override voltages and it's working again.
> 
> I am thinking of trying to go for 5ghz on my best cores again. They are doing 4.9 on 4 cores at 1.27v and it hits 58-68 across the cores. The rest are at 4.6 ranging between 1.204 and 1.254.
> 
> My concern has always been degredation, but I've seen many others running 1.3 - 1.35v. This is a 7980xe for anyone who is wondering. It's delidded with LM inside and outside and it's an EK monoblock that's been slightly modified cooling it. The loop only has CPU and of VRMs on it with a 480mm radiator.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


Newest 9990xe cpu VID: 1.35V for 5GHz based on de8euer testing.


----------



## RichKnecht

Abaidor said:


> I finally managed to install the Direct Die Frame on my 7940X and well.......as expected no easy way with it..
> 
> I have two cores with too high temps shooting over 100C, meaning that my waterblock is not making perfect contact with the cpu die..
> 
> Before I install it I also made a spin test on glass and the die IS NOT flat!
> 
> So now what? Any ideas besides re-sitting maybe with more LM?


Honestly, your best bet is to reinstall the IHS. If you try to use more LM on the edges of the die, it will eventually "creep" towards the lower part of the die. You will get great temps at first, but they will slowly rise to the point where you will need to take it apart to fix it. I know this because this is what happened with my 7900X. Temps were great at first, but due to the die being convex, the LM around the edges slowly crept to the lower edge of the die leaving the upper portions with barely any LM and temps were horrible. The only way around this, is to get a case, or test bench, where the MB mounts horizontally which will prevent the LM from dripping down.


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> I finally managed to install the Direct Die Frame on my 7940X and well.......as expected no easy way with it..
> 
> I have two cores with too high temps shooting over 100C, meaning that my waterblock is not making perfect contact with the cpu die..
> 
> Before I install it I also made a spin test on glass and the die IS NOT flat!
> 
> So now what? Any ideas besides re-sitting maybe with more LM?


well, since Ek claimed the water jet provides some level of "flatness" to the block base (hard for me to accept this tho), why not try removing the jet plate and maybe get a more concave base to match the convex die better? IDK, direct die cooling has never been this hard before.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I looked the EK Supremacy Evo over really closely before mounting it up, and it's not flat. Slightly convex - enough so that I'd never even dream of trying to mount it directly to a die. And I can't imagine that jet plate influencing the flatness of the block, it's just a chunk of plastic and the screws holding the thing together don't exert any pressure over o-ring seating. I wish now I would have checked the flatness with and without the jet plate in there.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
About you can do if you want to keep trying direct die is remove the jet plate 

Did yo cover around the chip with liquid electrical tape or something ?

Worst case turn off the really bad cores


----------



## Abaidor

RichKnecht said:


> Honestly, your best bet is to reinstall the IHS. If you try to use more LM on the edges of the die, it will eventually "creep" towards the lower part of the die. You will get great temps at first, but they will slowly rise to the point where you will need to take it apart to fix it. I know this because this is what happened with my 7900X. Temps were great at first, but due to the die being convex, the LM around the edges slowly crept to the lower edge of the die leaving the upper portions with barely any LM and temps were horrible. The only way around this, is to get a case, or test bench, where the MB mounts horizontally which will prevent the LM from dripping down.


That seems to be the case! Meanwhile I took the Velocity "off" and checked what is going on underneath. There were corners top left and bottom right that made no contact. I added some LM and it improved somehow not exceeding 100C now (lol 99c) on the same cores..

I know where this is heading though.....-----------> IHS...




Jpmboy said:


> well, since Ek claimed the water jet provides some level of "flatness" to the block base (hard for me to accept this tho), why not try removing the jet plate and maybe get a more concave base to match the convex die better? IDK, direct die cooling has never been this hard before.


I am really not that "excited" to start going down this route now that I know the die is not flat..Intel knows why but it is what it is and it certainly does not help cooling..

Playing with the Velocity's mounting screws/springs does alter the core temps real-time....however there does not seem to be a way to make contact with the whole surface...

I will play with it a bit more (no need to drain my loop since I have soft tubes on the CPU block lines) and if there are no signs of improvement I will have to resort to using the IHS...maybe..


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Was the chip delid before the direct die attempt or was this a combo delid/ direct die mount ?


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> About you can do if you want to keep trying direct die is remove the jet plate
> 
> Did yo cover around the chip with liquid electrical tape or something ?
> 
> Worst case turn off the really bad cores



The Jet plate is such a hassle now and I don't know how it would affect performance....there must be a reason it is in there...I mean if I lose some performance why bother with the direct die then in the end...and yet it looks like there is no easy way to make the waterblock "hug" the die...the thing is concave it did spin on glass...lol

I did clean the die thoroughly & the IHS (see images) and then applied liquid tape + Kampton tape on the outer area.....it can literally bath in LM and I am not worried. 

Look at the image after I took the block off. It looks like the edges get "no love" at all....

I added some LM and will check again and post a second image but I don't know whether adding more LM will do any good. The gap must be substantial.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I think it will help a little without the jet plate it's supposed to be pretty thin though so no telling how much

The base of the block is pretty thin too so any pressure will allow it to flex
Jet plate is a focus slot that is all 
If you notice it fits between plastic legs so it stays in place 
Those legs make contact on the flat sides of the block so that is the absolute bottom point of the base plates flex.


----------



## tistou77

I tested several mounting with Direct Die but unsuccessfully
Apart from a DIE that is not perfectly flat, if the frame is not perfectly parallel to the DIE, then the base of the waterblock that "poses" on the frame will not be fully in contact with the DIE


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Was the chip delid before the direct die attempt or was this a combo delid/ direct die mount ?


No the chip was not delid, it was a combo attempt! 

I did re-seat the block and tightened the direct die frame a bit (was having some memory boot issues - resolved now) and most of the temps are great besides the 3 bad cores.....

The block is now fully tightened....if only those 3 could be a bit cooler!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep there is one at 81c but indeed looks fiddly to say the least 
Not sure a delid alone would be much better either but like you said you can flood the cpu cap full of LM so maybe worth a try


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Makes me wonder if the bios has the dang AVX512 code in there or something. I decided to turn it up to 4.7 - runs like a top, never crashes.

Ran X.265, it doesn't do AVX512, but the AVX2 downclock seemed to be happening. Got up to nearly 290 watts and finally saw a core hit 80C.

Ran that AVX512 Time Spy bench, score went up, never cracked 80C on any core.

Tried CB15 and CBE, got better scores in both of those.

Before I realized that the adaptive core voltage would overshoot anything anything entered in the per core entries if the VID demanded it, I was reducing those. I got down to 1.165v on all of them. Looking back at some of the ealier runs, I saw that a few of those cores were actually running at 1.165v. A few at 1.174 or something, and always 3 cores just over 1.2v. So I went back and increased the additional adaptive voltage to 1.185, and now it seems all those cores run at that except the 3 that still do the 1.2+ on their own. Nothing seems to run any hotter.

But I thought that if a core was "starved" of voltage, it'd just crash. Seems like the ones that ran at 1.165v before would still run at that even though I've allowed 1.185v, but they just run at the higher voltage and the 3 1.2v cores just do their own thing. Like the 1.165v capable cores don't need 1.185v, but they'll use it, and the 1.2v cores don't give a hoot what I enter, they'll run 1.2v

Anyway, just a strange system to me.


----------



## Abaidor

tistou77 said:


> I tested several mounting with Direct Die but unsuccessfully
> Apart from a DIE that is not perfectly flat, if the frame is not perfectly parallel to the DIE, then the base of the waterblock that "poses" on the frame will not be fully in contact with the DIE


The more I play with the frame screws the better it gets lol! I start wondering whether the protective film on the 3M stickers at the back plays any role....I am using two of the stickers and the other two have the red film on them (i.e. a bit thicker although a tiny amount)... 



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep there is one at 81c but indeed looks fiddly to say the least
> Not sure a delid alone would be much better either but like you said you can flood the cpu cap full of LM so maybe worth a try


Now that core (81C) got better after resiting and adding even more LM...

Core #1 looks like it has a mind of its own. As if it is on another place lol!

OK I will let it settle for 1-2 days and see how it goes since in case the LM is moving down then we have another problem....I wish I knew where exactly it is located so I could target the LM and tightening of the block better. 

At this point and after all I went through waiting on the frame I will give it some more time (and effort) before I abandon all hope.


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> Makes me wonder if the bios has the dang AVX512 code in there or something. I decided to turn it up to 4.7 - runs like a top, never crashes.
> 
> Ran X.265, it doesn't do AVX512, but the AVX2 downclock seemed to be happening. Got up to nearly 290 watts and finally saw a core hit 80C.
> 
> Ran that AVX512 Time Spy bench, score went up, never cracked 80C on any core.
> 
> Tried CB15 and CBE, got better scores in both of those.
> 
> Before I realized that the adaptive core voltage would overshoot anything anything entered in the per core entries if the VID demanded it, I was reducing those. I got down to 1.165v on all of them. Looking back at some of the ealier runs, I saw that a few of those cores were actually running at 1.165v. A few at 1.174 or something, and always 3 cores just over 1.2v. So I went back and increased the additional adaptive voltage to 1.185, and now it seems all those cores run at that except the 3 that still do the 1.2+ on their own. Nothing seems to run any hotter.
> 
> But I thought that if a core was "starved" of voltage, it'd just crash. Seems like the ones that ran at 1.165v before would still run at that even though I've allowed 1.185v, but they just run at the higher voltage and the 3 1.2v cores just do their own thing. Like the 1.165v capable cores don't need 1.185v, but they'll use it, and the 1.2v cores don't give a hoot what I enter, they'll run 1.2v
> 
> Anyway, just a strange system to me.


 Strange, but good! yeah, the per core VID thing can look concerning... but your rig looks to be running well. For comparison, I just hit print screen while this rig is doing Boinc compute (cpu and gpu) in the background. It runs all day (for weeks) at 250 to 300W on the CPU alone at 4.0/1.05V in bios, and another 200W+ on the GPUs (2 titan Vs running in P2 for Cuda). It sits in front of a window cracked open and it is still winter here in PA (gotta find a groundhog to blame  )


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

It runs so good, it's hard for me to wrap my head around it. That 5960X RVE rig never ran like this. Little things like just web surfing, seems like the little loading circle thing would spin for a bit longer than even my old Ivy Bridge 3770K rig before it'd load a page (I ought to give that one to the hellions). This thing just zips along. And I still like to rip Blu Rays, man this thing can chew through some of that. By far and away the best rig I've built in a while, if ever. And it's still never crashed while running. Not a single BSOD of any flavor (I don't count the RAM OCing experiment, but it never really crashed then, just hung while loading Windows and had to do some recovery mode). I've never OCd a rig that'll even touch this and not have a few to a few too many BSODs getting it dialed in. That 5960X was on the ragged edge at 4.6, no way it'd do 4.7 and do any work by doing nothing but upping the multiplier. This thing runs 4.6, 4.7, whatever (I have dialed it back to 4.6 - I told myself if I could get a stable 4.6 OC out of it I'd never ask for more)

I love this thing, I'd hate to do any damage to it trying to eek out any more performance.

I even have Quake III Arena loaded on here.


----------



## Jpmboy

Enjoy!


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Yeah,


----------



## JustinThyme

A little cooler there than here. Id never get away with 65F in the house. The wifey complains with 70 as it is. Been contemplating a chiller myself but would want to do everything. Not to sub ambient so much but to keep the liquid at ambient, maybe a little below. May have to run two for everything so that would mean an additional electrical circuit as Im already pushing the one Im on. If the weed goes up my butt far enough I may go back to geothermal cooling. That always kept my loop at 65F all year.


----------



## Abaidor

OK things are certainly improving but I really do not know whether this is going to last....
I keep re-applying LM and tightening - untightening the fram/block..lol maybe it's beginning to take the form of the die. I don't know but why the die is not flat is beyond me since all this would be so easy if it was and would get great temps.


****EDIT****

Still holding & raising clocks now...I am at 

1X Cores 4,8GHz
3X Cores 4,7GHz
8X Cores 4,6GHz
1X Cores 4.4GHz
1X Cores 4.2GHz (the hot stubborn core that at least has been tamed somehow)


By the way the new Cinebench R20 is a nice test and it can now be set to run for as long as you like continuously. I have it set at 5mins for quick testing the overclock since it also pushes the clocks to the max and generates some heat.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Nizzen

kingofblog said:


> Does the new R20 trigger AVX offset?


Using AVX 2 i think...


Maxon Tuesday unveiled its Cinebench R20 benchmark designed to test CPU performance at photorealistic rendering using the company's Cinema 4D R20 technology. The benchmark runs on any PC with at least 4 GB of memory and SSE3 instruction-set support, although it can scale across any number of cores, memory, and supports exotic new instruction-sets such as AVX2. Maxon describes Cinebench R20 as using four times the memory, and eight times the CPU computational power as Cinebench R15. The benchmark implements Intel Embree ray-tracing engine. Maxon is distributing Cinebench R20 exclusively through the Microsoft Store on the Windows platform.

Unlike its predecessor, Cinebench R20 lacks a GPU test. The CPU test scales by the number of CPU cores and SMT units available. It consists of a tiled rendering of a studio apartment living room scene by Render Baron, which includes ray-traced elements, high resolution textures, illumination, and reflections. The number of logical processors available determines the number of rendering instances. The benchmark does indeed have a large memory footprint, and rewards HTT or SMT and high clock-speeds, as our own quick test shows. A 4-core/8-thread Core i7-7700K beats our Core i5-9400F 6-core/6-thread processor. 


https://www.techpowerup.com/253317/maxon-releases-cinebench-r20-benchmark


----------



## djgar

I ran CB R20 with default settings, it ran with AVX speed (4500 instead of 4600) and I got 4442cb??!  

R15 gave me 1948.


----------



## RichKnecht

So...I was in Microcenter today just looking around and started chatting with another customer about X299 (he owns a 7900X also) and the associated heat issues. He mentioned direct die cooling and how he tried it and it didn't work for him, etc. I also shared my experience with direct die. He said he bought the Iceman version (der bauer knockoff?) and it looked nice, but he couldn't get it to work and he was just going to "pitch it". I told him (jokingly) that I would like to try it and he said he had it in the car and if I wanted it, it was mine. Hmmm..OK. What the heck. So I took it, came home and within 30 minutes it was installed on the Omega. Installation was a lot easier than the DerBauer frame as it uses the OEM backplate. IMO, it fits worlds better than the DerBauer frame. Guess what? It booted perfectly the FIRST time with no issues at all! It took me countless times to get the Der Bauer frame to boot with no issues. So I spent about an hour redoing the OC on my 7900X and I was a bit surprised at the results. With IHS/LM @ 4.7 all-core I needed 1.242V to get the chip stable. With the Iceman frame, it now sits at 1.22V at the same OC. Temps dropped quite a bit and temps between the cores has also evened out pretty good. Here is a screenshot after 40 minutes of Real Bench. I also used CL Liquid Pro instead of LM as it is less runny to see if that prevents temps from creeping up due to the LM "sagging" on the die.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Glad to see you making progress, here's hoping it stays running cool for you - I don't know if I would have had the patience.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Abaidor

GnarlyCharlie said:


> Glad to see you making progress, here's hoping it stays running cool for you - I don't know if I would have had the patience.


I am just stubborn and since I really made an effort to gather everything and plan this delid I won't give up easily...

Anyway, I am testing clocks core by core right now after changing multipliers one after the other in BIOS.

Right now I have tested the following:

7X Cores @ 4.8GHz
5X Cores @ 4.7GHz
1X Core @ 4.4GHz (just need to set and test)
1X Core @ 4.2GHz (the Rebel core lol)

And this with voltages on Auto so I am certain I can further optimize down the line...

Here are some quick scores:

Cinebench R15 : 3544
Cinebench R20 : 8457

Tested with Asus Real Bench for 1 Hour and 30mins Prime95 with AVX (offset 5/8)

The "bad" core does not throttle but hits 100C plus in Small FFTs Prime 95...

The thing is whether the LM will last under the waterblock...we shall see.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Yeah, I've been following your progress, too. You direct die diehards are way more hardcore than me, de-lidding the dang things is about as much as I want to take on.


----------



## Abaidor

GnarlyCharlie said:


> Yeah, I've been following your progress, too. You direct die diehards are way more hardcore than me, de-lidding the dang things is about as much as I want to take on.


It's a nice upgrade in speed after running undelidded for almost a year and a half....we'll see how it does in a few weeks time. For now I am satisfied and happy with what I am seeing.


----------



## JustinThyme

When I put my 7900X back in service I may try DD. Still trying to decide what Im going to use it for.


----------



## Abaidor

JustinThyme said:


> When I put my 7900X back in service I may try DD. Still trying to decide what Im going to use it for.


You can possibly hit 5.0GHz or more on some cores and since it is a "spare" you can take all the time needed to fine tune it..


----------



## RichKnecht

JustinThyme said:


> When I put my 7900X back in service I may try DD. Still trying to decide what Im going to use it for.


If you do decide to go DD, get the Iceman kit. Fitment is worlds better than DerBauers. With DerBauer's, when you put the frame over the die, the gap between the board and the base of the frame is huge. This makes mounting the frame with even pressure a pain. With Iceman's frame, it uses the OEM back plate and the gap between the frame and the board is small. So tightening the frame is just like mounting the OEM locking mechanism. There seems to be just enough pressure to hold the chip in place. I had all kinds of issues when mounting DerBauers frame. Memory not getting recognized, no video, etc. With the Iceman frame, it fired right up with no problems whatsoever on the first try. I'll see if it lasts, but so far so good.


----------



## Abaidor

RichKnecht said:


> If you do decide to go DD, get the Iceman kit. Fitment is worlds better than DerBauers. With DerBauer's, when you put the frame over the die, the gap between the board and the base of the frame is huge. This makes mounting the frame with even pressure a pain. With Iceman's frame, it uses the OEM back plate and the gap between the frame and the board is small. So tightening the frame is just like mounting the OEM locking mechanism. There seems to be just enough pressure to hold the chip in place. I had all kinds of issues when mounting DerBauers frame. Memory not getting recognized, no video, etc. With the Iceman frame, it fired right up with no problems whatsoever on the first try. I'll see if it lasts, but so far so good.


I had to play with the screws or else I had memory issues at the beginning...I wonder if the IceMan frame allows for better contact with the die too. I might order one to have in hand if the experiment with the der8auer fails in the end. 

What kinda saved the day for me was a comment from tistou77 & yours that made me play with the frame mounting..he should have use a different type of screws since I now strongly believe that those stick pads at the back are quite thick and maybe have an impact on how parallel to the die the frame sits..


----------



## RichKnecht

Abaidor said:


> I had to play with the screws or else I had memory issues at the beginning...I wonder if the IceMan frame allows for better contact with the die too. I might order one to have in hand if the experiment with the der8auer fails in the end.
> 
> What kinda saved the day for me was a comment from tistou77 & yours that made me play with the frame mounting..he should have use a different type of screws since I now strongly believe that those stick pads at the back are quite thick and maybe have an impact on how parallel to the die the frame sits..


I am sure you noticed, but the DerBauer frame seems to put a lot of uneven pressure on the chip due to the space between the frame and the board. This makes getting even mounting pressure a struggle. I gave up on it and it's sitting in my desk drawer. If I didn't get the Iceman version for free, I would have never tried it as I would have thought "been there, done that". If you do order it, make sure you get the right one. They make one for 7900X and lower, and one for the higher core count chips.


----------



## Abaidor

RichKnecht said:


> I am sure you noticed, but the DerBauer frame seems to put a lot of uneven pressure on the chip due to the space between the frame and the board. This makes getting even mounting pressure a struggle. I gave up on it and it's sitting in my desk drawer. If I didn't get the Iceman version for free, I would have never tried it as I would have thought "been there, done that". If you do order it, make sure you get the right one. They make one for 7900X and lower, and one for the higher core count chips.


Yes, I have it bookmarked! I was about to order it but jmpboy offered to send me his and put an end to the endless wait from Caseking...so I made the effort to try it and right now it is working. However, for fear that things might go south with it I don't mind ordering the IceMan version as well although it will take forever to reach me..it's cheap though and nice to have. I might be even able to achieve better results with it. 

This is another excellent tool I found for delidding besides the overpriced der8auer tool that looked like the only one available in Europe..

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Strong-CPU...-Lake-X-NEW-/263763415173?hash=item3d69865085

It actually comes in fancy colors and I could not believe how well made it is and precise...


----------



## RichKnecht

Abaidor said:


> Yes, I have it bookmarked! I was about to order it but jmpboy offered to send me his and put an end to the endless wait from Caseking...so I made the effort to try it and right now it is working. However, for fear that things might go south with it I don't mind ordering the IceMan version as well although it will take forever to reach me..it's cheap though and nice to have. I might be even able to achieve better results with it.
> 
> This is another excellent tool I found for delidding besides the overpriced der8auer tool that looked like the only one available in Europe..
> 
> https://www.ebay.com/itm/Strong-CPU...-Lake-X-NEW-/263763415173?hash=item3d69865085
> 
> It actually comes in fancy colors and I could not believe how well made it is and precise...


I used the Rockit delidding tool for my 7900X. Worked great and it wasn't expensive at all.


----------



## Abaidor

RichKnecht said:


> I used the Rockit delidding tool for my 7900X. Worked great and it wasn't expensive at all.


Yes but it costs the same as the der8auer with shipping and taxes to Greece where I live..so I tested the above tool and it's great too for Europeans.


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> Yes but it costs the same as the der8auer with shipping and taxes to Greece where I live..so I tested the above tool and it's great too for Europeans.


looks like it's a printed tool?


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> If you do decide to go DD, get the Iceman kit. Fitment is worlds better than DerBauers. With DerBauer's, when you put the frame over the die, the gap between the board and the base of the frame is huge. This makes mounting the frame with even pressure a pain. With Iceman's frame, it uses the OEM back plate and the gap between the frame and the board is small. So tightening the frame is just like mounting the OEM locking mechanism. There seems to be just enough pressure to hold the chip in place. I had all kinds of issues when mounting DerBauers frame. Memory not getting recognized, no video, etc. With the Iceman frame, it fired right up with no problems whatsoever on the first try. I'll see if it lasts, but so far so good.


Neither kit would address a convex die issue.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I'd hate to look back and see what the chip was like with pigeon poop inside with the high cores :/


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> Neither kit would address a convex die issue.


This is true. It does depend on how convex the die is, and I am sure they are not all the same. Like I mentioned, I used Liquid Ultra this time as it seems thicker and less "runny" than Conductonaut LM. I know LM is more conductive as far as heat transfer goes, but if this works long term, I am fine with a 1-3C difference. Still not sure my loop is doing a great job, as people with less rad space than I have are getting better temps than I am at higher voltages. However, I can't fit a second pump in the case anyway, so it is what it is.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
You still on a cpu only loop ?

These ek blocks do pick up every little item in the fluid and eventually get clogged.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> This is true. It does depend on how convex the die is, and I am sure they are not all the same. Like I mentioned, I used Liquid Ultra this time as it seems thicker and less "runny" than Conductonaut LM. I know LM is more conductive as far as heat transfer goes, but if this works long term, I am fine with a 1-3C difference. Still not sure my loop is doing a great job, as people with less rad space than I have are getting better temps than I am at higher voltages. However, I can't fit a second pump in the case anyway, so it is what it is.


Hi,
Your top thick rad needs two thing I believe 
One it needs to be intake 
Two in needs push/ pull fans.


----------



## ThrashZone

Abaidor said:


> OK things are certainly improving but I really do not know whether this is going to last....
> I keep re-applying LM and tightening - untightening the fram/block..lol maybe it's beginning to take the form of the die. I don't know but why the die is not flat is beyond me since all this would be so easy if it was and would get great temps.
> 
> 
> ****EDIT****
> 
> Still holding & raising clocks now...I am at
> 
> 1X Cores 4,8GHz
> 3X Cores 4,7GHz
> 8X Cores 4,6GHz
> 1X Cores 4.4GHz
> 1X Cores 4.2GHz (the hot stubborn core that at least has been tamed somehow)
> 
> 
> By the way the new Cinebench R20 is a nice test and it can now be set to run for as long as you like continuously. I have it set at 5mins for quick testing the overclock since it also pushes the clocks to the max and generates some heat.


Hi,
Yeah a little more heat than reg 15 
Still think the extreme is a better test for pressure cooking than 20 is but a lot better than 15 for sure 
Still no avx pay load in it but i guess that is what blender is for


----------



## djgar

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah a little more heat than reg 15
> Still think the extreme is a better test for pressure cooking than 20 is but a lot better than 15 for sure
> Still no avx pay load in it but i guess that is what blender is for


I'm wondering if there's no AVX payload why did it trigger my AVX OC?


----------



## ThrashZone

djgar said:


> I'm wondering if there's no AVX payload why did it trigger my AVX OC?


Hi,
No telling sure didn't trigger mine at all avx on 4 and 512 at 6 :/


----------



## djgar

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> No telling sure didn't trigger mine at all avx on 4 and 512 at 6 :/


Weird. It's definitely triggering mine. I switched it from 1 to 4 and sure enough my clock monitored by AIDA OSD went from 4500 to 4200 during the run and my score went from 4420 to 4160. Both are interestingly close to the clock speed.

Could be a hardware controlled thing? I do have a lame GPU .


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

My score stayed the same with AXV at 0 - still had 512 at 8 I think it was


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Don't believe gpu is used I didn't apply any oc on mine anyway.

I'd rebuild the oc see if it acts right after.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Your top thick rad needs two thing I believe
> One it needs to be intake
> Two in needs push/ pull fans.


Not sure it needs to be 

Not sure either of those things will change anything with load temps. Under load, there is plenty of air going through the rads and water temps go from equalized @ ~23 to 27C when running RealBench for 30 minutes or more. It takes about 10 minutes for the water to return to 23. I don't think the block is clogged and changing the orientation of the block does nothing. I guess maybe I am expecting too much from 3 360mm rads.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Not sure it needs to be
> 
> Not sure either of those things will change anything with load temps. Under load, there is plenty of air going through the rads and water temps go from equalized @ ~23 to 27C when running RealBench for 30 minutes or more. It takes about 10 minutes for the water to return to 23. I don't think the block is clogged and changing the orientation of the block does nothing. I guess maybe I am expecting too much from 3 360mm rads.


Hi,
Well the only other thing that might help flow if there is an issue is hit the cpu block first out the pump.
Otherwise peace out you've tried and discounted just about all suggestions


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> This is true. It does depend on how convex the die is, and I am sure they are not all the same. Like I mentioned, I used* Liquid Ultra* this time as it seems thicker and less "runny" than Conductonaut LM. I know LM is more conductive as far as heat transfer goes, but if this works long term, I am fine with a 1-3C difference. Still not sure my loop is doing a great job, as people with less rad space than I have are getting better temps than I am at higher voltages. However, I can't fit a second pump in the case anyway, so it is what it is.


... and CLP is a bit more viscous than CLU. I stick with CLP... well except when I use the 10g bottle of gallium/indium eutectic I bought off ebay for $20. 


ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah a little more heat than reg 15
> Still think the extreme is a better test for pressure cooking than 20 is but a lot better than 15 for sure
> Still no avx pay load in it but i guess that is what blender is for


triggered the AVX2 offset on two rigs here...


djgar said:


> I'm wondering if there's no AVX payload why did it trigger my AVX OC?


yeah, it does on my 1151 rig too. Maybe not on this 2066 rig. have to check again. As Mystical pointed out, there are more than 3 load states (and therefore P-states) on these HCC chips.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Did a 4.8 all and it did drop the clocks so maybe it's hit and miss :/
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=257814&d=1551974221


----------



## djgar

We're talking about R20, right? Well, my new 1903 BIOS will not let me use 0 for AVX, it keeps going back to 1, although I can enter higher numbers.


----------



## Jpmboy

djgar said:


> We're talking about R20, right? Well, my new 1903 BIOS will not let me use 0 for AVX, it keeps going back to 1, although I can enter higher numbers.


 Auto = 0 ... right?


edit: on another note, I picked up 3 of these Noctura NF-F12 industrial PPC 120mm PWM fans to put on a 360 rad. Damn these are strong fans! Can get a bit "whiney" above 1500rpm, but the cooling improvement is outstanding. (and no, they are not that "loose stool" brown color Noctua seems to like - they are black)


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Well the only other thing that might help flow if there is an issue is hit the cpu block first out the pump.
> Otherwise peace out you've tried and discounted just about all suggestions


You know, that's the only thing I haven't tried, and it may make sense. If I could get another D5 to fit in there, I would just go buy one and give it a go (what's another $125), but I have no idea where to put it  BTW, I am not "discounting" any suggestions, I appreciate all help I get here and have learned A LOT!


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> You know, that's the only thing I haven't tried, and it may make sense. If I could get another D5 to fit in there, I would just go buy one and give it a go (what's another $125), but I have no idea where to put it  BTW, I am not "discounting" any suggestions, I appreciate all help I get here and have learned A LOT!


Hi,
Look at either of my builds dude they both have D5 tops on them coming out the top rad and going into the cpu inlets so where there is a will there is a way


----------



## djgar

Jpmboy said:


> Auto = 0 ... right?


Bingo, forgot about Auto, so now AVX = 0 and got a 4505.

I have 12 NF-F12s on my 2 rads, but mine are that nature-spawned beige/brown (different color interpretation ) which I like. I can easily see them rotating through my case grill. And low power consumption!


----------



## Abaidor

Jpmboy said:


> looks like it's a printed tool?


It is and I ordered it because I wanted it sooner rather than later and it was in Europe...I did not expect much from it but I was pleasantly surprised. It is VERY sturdy and did the job fine..


----------



## pantsaregood

Does the refreshed Skylake-X line have any additional clock headroom on mesh? My 7820X brick walls at 3.2 GHz.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## wheatpaste1999

kingofblog said:


> The refreshed 9000-series aren't a new stepping or process, so no.


^^ This. 

Tested a 9800x and two 9900x and they could run 32x on the mesh generally without issue. Bumping any higher was not stable at all. Even 32x mesh on the Skylake-x chips I've tested wasn't always stable... most seemed happier for daily operation at 30x.


----------



## Abaidor

It looks like I've hit a wall after all but I am sure that I am also missing something when it comes to UEFI settings....not that experienced to be honest..

Right now I manged the following:

13X Cores @ 4.8GHz
1X Core @ 4.00GHz 


The 1X Core will certainly clock up there too but temps cannot be tamed and I am afraid to touch the waterblock again...It is hitting 4.3 sometimes and it can also run 4.4GHz but it hits 100C and I reduced it to 40 for the stress tests..

Anyway, whenever I try to set any core multiplier @ 49X or 50X the PC boots but Aida64 Cache & Memory benchmark results in a blue screen while Cinebench 20 freezes after 2-3 mins. At 48X no problem at all.

Do you know what is causing it? I tried playing with several settings

*Current Settings*


CPU Input Voltage : 2
CPU VCCIO: 1.03
CPU System Agent : 1.10
PCH Core Voltage: 1.01250
CPU Load Line Calibration : Level 5


By the all my cores are set at adaptive with Auto Turbo voltage except Core#4 & #3 that are set at 1.29V additional turbo voltage.

Any tips on how to optimize the core voltages either to reduce heat or increase clocks?


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> It is and I ordered it because I wanted it sooner rather than later and it was in Europe..*.I did not expect much from it but I was pleasantly surprised*. It is VERY sturdy and did the job fine..


why not expect much? Heck, there are now 3D printers that pump cement! :thumb:


----------



## pantsaregood

kingofblog said:


> The refreshed 9000-series aren't a new stepping or process, so no.


I'm aware, but the 9xxx series appears to clock better (presumably) as a result of a more mature process.

It's also plausible that they're just binned, though.


----------



## wheatpaste1999

pantsaregood said:


> I'm aware, but the 9xxx series appears to clock better (presumably) as a result of a more mature process.
> 
> It's also plausible that they're just binned, though.


They basically clock the same, at least if we're talking about max clocks. Stock/turbo/TBM3 clocks are modestly higher going from 79xx to 99xx, but that doesn't really mean anything if you're overclocking. 

99xx CPUs may stay ahead by a multiplier or two because the out of the box thermal performance is a little better vs a non-delidded 79xx CPU. Delidded 79xx CPUs still generally clock higher than equivalent 99xx with soldered heat spreader. I don't have any HCC (12+ core) chips, but to me the thermal spread between cores in the 99xx CPUs is better than the 79xx CPUs, unless you do the perfect delid/LM application on the 79xx chip. 

But... of course every chip is different. I personally don't think the 99xx CPUs are binned any better than the 79xx CPUs based on the results I've seen, but I don't think we have solid data for confirming this one way or another.


----------



## ThrashZone

Abaidor said:


> It looks like I've hit a wall after all but I am sure that I am also missing something when it comes to UEFI settings....not that experienced to be honest..
> 
> Right now I manged the following:
> 
> 13X Cores @ 4.8GHz
> 1X Core @ 4.00GHz
> 
> 
> The 1X Core will certainly clock up there too but temps cannot be tamed and I am afraid to touch the waterblock again...It is hitting 4.3 sometimes and it can also run 4.4GHz but it hits 100C and I reduced it to 40 for the stress tests..
> 
> Anyway, whenever I try to set any core multiplier @ 49X or 50X the PC boots but Aida64 Cache & Memory benchmark results in a blue screen while Cinebench 20 freezes after 2-3 mins. At 48X no problem at all.
> 
> Do you know what is causing it? I tried playing with several settings
> 
> *Current Settings*
> 
> CPU Input Voltage : 2
> CPU VCCIO: 1.03
> CPU System Agent : 1.10
> PCH Core Voltage: 1.01250
> CPU Load Line Calibration : Level 5
> 
> By the all my cores are set at adaptive with Auto Turbo voltage except Core#4 & #3 that are set at 1.29V additional turbo voltage.
> 
> Any tips on how to optimize the core voltages either to reduce heat or increase clocks?


Hi,
If you look back at my 4.9 cores it takes me 1.34v+- to get them stable most using adaptive +0.055 additional turbo 1.185v
Input 1.94 with llc-5 140%
Power phase optimized
vrm spred spectrum disabled

Enhanced intel speed step tech disabled
vccio 1.0
system agent 0.95v
same as your pch core 1.01250

Multicore enhancement disabled


----------



## Abaidor

Jpmboy said:


> why not expect much? Heck, there are now 3D printers that pump cement! :thumb:


True! I was just unaware of the fact that the material could be so sturdy. It comes down to the structural design of course and to be honest I might be tempted to get a 3D printer in the future..the specific item design is available on the internet for free I think among other nice things..maybe we could design and print our own direct die frames with some effort.



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> If you look back at my 4.9 cores it takes me 1.34v+- to get them stable most using adaptive +0.055 additional turbo 1.185v
> Input 1.94 with llc-5 140%
> Power phase optimized
> vrm spred spectrum disabled
> 
> Enhanced intel speed step tech disabled
> vccio 1.0
> system agent 0.95v
> same as your pch core 1.01250
> 
> Multicore enhancement disabled


Yes I noticed so this means another huge round of testing to find how many cores can make it there and honestly I am exhausted for now. However, I think there is still potential in the CPU. First and foremost though I need to see how the LM holds the following weeks before I push any further since if it deteriorates I will need to find another solution. 

For now, I can say that I am satisfied and the effort was worth it (thanks Jpmboy again!) and also had the chance to make a series of other upgrades in my build (hard lines everywhere besides the CPU block until I am done with the OC, some lighting, an extra top exhaust fan that reduced RAM temps quite a lot and of course custom sleeved cables)

Right now the CPU block is weird with the soft tubes but I don't know how many more swaps I might need with LM so I will wait a bit..the funny thing is that my GPU temps improved with the vertical orientation and now GPU does not exceed 36C under load @ 2075/12000..


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Sure does look nice :thumb:

I fear 5.0 will take 1.38v 

4.8 at 1.30v to 4.9 at 1.340 was 7-8c increase on those best four cores.
Ambient was 23c.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Sure does look nice :thumb:
> 
> I fear 5.0 will take 1.38v
> 
> 4.8 at 1.30v to 4.9 at 1.340 was 7-8c increase on those best four cores.
> Ambient was 23c.





kingofblog said:


> Use a different voltage on each core... SKX has the FIVR for a reason. You should leverage it.


I will first rest a bit and then get down to optimizing the voltages core by core and then maybe theres room left for 4.9 but honestly if the voltage delta is high it's not worth it..

Should I use Adaptive + Additional turbo for each core? I really need to read about the relationship of all the settings like offset and adaptive and then offset when choosing adaptive since it is there as an option in my BIOS. What does the offset do when I choose adaptive vs when selecting offset only.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## wingman99

Abaidor said:


> I will first rest a bit and then get down to optimizing the voltages core by core and then maybe theres room left for 4.9 but honestly if the voltage delta is high it's not worth it..
> 
> Should I use Adaptive + Additional turbo for each core? I really need to read about the relationship of all the settings like offset and adaptive and then offset when choosing adaptive since it is there as an option in my BIOS. What does the offset do when I choose adaptive vs when selecting offset only.


Adaptive applies SVID to turbo core voltage only. Offset applies SVID to core voltage from base clock to turbo.


----------



## ThrashZone

Abaidor said:


> Should I use Adaptive + Additional turbo for each core? I really need to read about the relationship of all the settings like offset and adaptive and then offset when choosing adaptive since it is there as an option in my BIOS. What does the offset do when I choose adaptive vs when selecting offset only.


Hi,
Not really sure as I've said before additional turbo voltage does not increase the vid that are produced with the offset setting 
Jp sort of chuckled when I said that as in no kidding 

But either way indeed I use offset first and find happy balance of vid and per core temp 
After I switch to adaptive just for the heck of it and set to same 1.185 additional it doesn't seem to hurt or as also said change vid's.


----------



## D4NI3L3

wheatpaste1999 said:


> They basically clock the same, at least if we're talking about max clocks. Stock/turbo/TBM3 clocks are modestly higher going from 79xx to 99xx, but that doesn't really mean anything if you're overclocking.
> 
> 99xx CPUs may stay ahead by a multiplier or two because the out of the box thermal performance is a little better vs a non-delidded 79xx CPU. Delidded 79xx CPUs still generally clock higher than equivalent 99xx with soldered heat spreader. I don't have any HCC (12+ core) chips, but to me the thermal spread between cores in the 99xx CPUs is better than the 79xx CPUs, unless you do the perfect delid/LM application on the 79xx chip.
> 
> But... of course every chip is different. I personally don't think the 99xx CPUs are binned any better than the 79xx CPUs based on the results I've seen, but I don't think we have solid data for confirming this one way or another.


Hi, I'm thinking of changing my 7820X CPU with an highest core count one. I'm struggling between series 7 and series 9.

If I buy a i9 79xx processor I'll go with delid for sure to try to reach a stable Oc of 4.4 - 4.5 GHz. I'm basically need more cores, not more GHz. If I buy a 99xx processor I will not mod it and I'm trying to understand if soldering will be a better choice thinking about temperatures (it seems it is not by reading what are you saying here).

Any advice from you all will be a great thing for me.

Thank you.


----------



## cx-ray

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Not really sure as I've said before additional turbo voltage does not increase the vid that are produced with the offset setting


Let's say for example you set your CPU to 4.6GHz. 
Leave everything on Auto and the resulting VID is 1.2V (just a random number used to illustrate). 

Enable Adaptive Mode
Offset Mode Sign +
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.250
Offset Voltage Auto

Total Adaptive Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.250

Your VID should now be 1.250 when monitored in Windows


Now do the same but with an Offset:

Enable Adaptive Mode
Offset Mode Sign +
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.250
Offset Voltage 0.100

Total Adaptive Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.350

Your VID should now be around 1.35V when monitored in Windows. The resulting voltage with Offset added is possibly less exact, but you get the idea.

There are some conditions for it to work as well. Shamino made a detailed post about it recently here:
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...-Maximus-XI-Formula-9900k&p=762259#post762259


----------



## Abaidor

kingofblog said:


> Adaptive/offset voltage works the exact same way per-core. You can always consult the factory VIDs to see which cores are the leakiest (lowest voltage). Leaky cores can achieve higher frequency at the same voltage. If you have hotspots with a fixed voltage, it could be that you are using more voltage than needed for the leakage level. Lowering the voltage on the offending core will obviously alleviate hotspots, but there are other benefits from reducing the package-level power, such as lower coolant temperature.


How to check factory VIDs? Are the values I see on HWINFO64 the factory VIDs fo cores that are set on AUTO in BIOS?



wingman99 said:


> Adaptive applies SVID to turbo core voltage only. Offset applies SVID to core voltage from base clock to turbo.


Thanks. 




ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Not really sure as I've said before additional turbo voltage does not increase the vid that are produced with the offset setting
> Jp sort of chuckled when I said that as in no kidding
> 
> But either way indeed I use offset first and find happy balance of vid and per core temp
> After I switch to adaptive just for the heck of it and set to same 1.185 additional it doesn't seem to hurt or as also said change vid's.




There are two places in the BIOS to set Adaptive or Offset. One is in the main area of "Extreme Tweaker" where you set: 

CPU Core Voltage
Offset Mode Sign
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage 

And then the same (I think) in "per core" settings..

If I go for per core tuning should I leave the main setting on auto and then fine tune each core independently in the per core settings?

Then let's say I want CORE#1 to get 1.28 vs 1.30V max (on turbo) that is getting now (Auto) in order to get lower temperatures given that the core can take it and is stable.

How do I go about it in per core settings? Do I need to enter something in both the "Offset" and "Additional Turbo....." fields?


Also what these settings

VCCIN is set at 2.0 volts now. Should I lower it? 
CPU VCCIO - I have it on Auto


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> How to check factory VIDs? Are the values I see on HWINFO64 the factory VIDs fo cores that are set on AUTO in BIOS?
> Thanks.
> There are two places in the BIOS to set Adaptive or Offset. One is in the main area of "Extreme Tweaker" where you set:
> 
> CPU Core Voltage
> Offset Mode Sign
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage
> 
> And then the same (I think) in "per core" settings..
> 
> *If I go for per core tuning should I leave the main setting on auto and then fine tune each core independently in the per core settings?*
> 
> Then let's say I want CORE#1 to get 1.28 vs 1.30V max (on turbo) that is getting now (Auto) in order to get lower temperatures given that the core can take it and is stable.
> 
> How do I go about it in per core settings? Do I need to enter something in both the "Offset" and "Additional Turbo....." fields?
> 
> 
> Also what these settings
> 
> VCCIN is set at 2.0 volts now. Should I lower it?
> CPU VCCIO - I have it on Auto


 vccin is a bit high. Try 1.95 or lower at this point. YOu can always dial it up later
Yes, for per core, leave the settings you mention on Auto.
VCCIO on Auto should be fine (it's the IMC/IO voltage.
here's an example per core as a txt file. this one has 2x46 and 16x45


----------



## Abaidor

cx-ray said:


> Let's say for example you set your CPU to 4.6GHz.
> Leave everything on Auto and the resulting VID is 1.2V (just a random number used to illustrate).
> 
> Enable Adaptive Mode
> Offset Mode Sign +
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.250
> Offset Voltage Auto
> 
> Total Adaptive Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.250
> 
> Your VID should now be 1.250 when monitored in Windows
> 
> 
> Now do the same but with an Offset:
> 
> Enable Adaptive Mode
> Offset Mode Sign +
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.250
> Offset Voltage 0.100
> 
> Total Adaptive Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.350
> 
> Your VID should now be around 1.35V when monitored in Windows. The resulting voltage with Offset added is possibly less exact, but you get the idea.
> 
> There are some conditions for it to work as well. Shamino made a detailed post about it recently here:
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...-Maximus-XI-Formula-9900k&p=762259#post762259



So what is the difference between setting 1.350 in the first case as well without an offset and the second case where we add a 0.100 offset?
Where does the offset voltage apply? In lower multipliers than the turbo ones?


----------



## Abaidor

Jpmboy said:


> vccin is a bit high. Try 1.95 or lower at this point. YOu can always dial it up later
> Yes, for per core, leave the settings you mention on Auto.
> VCCIO on Auto should be fine (it's the IMC/IO voltage.
> here's an example per core as a txt file. this one has 2x46 and 16x45


Thanks for the file! I will start testing settings one by one for the 48X multipliers since it does not look like 49-50X can be achieved without going overboard in voltages..I am ok with 11X 4.8GHz cores and safer voltages along with less heat. 

Will test and report back starting with VCCIN.


----------



## ThrashZone

cx-ray said:


> Let's say for example you set your CPU to 4.6GHz.
> Leave everything on Auto and the resulting VID is 1.2V (just a random number used to illustrate).
> 
> Enable Adaptive Mode
> Offset Mode Sign +
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.250
> Offset Voltage Auto
> 
> Total Adaptive Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.250
> 
> Your VID should now be 1.250 when monitored in Windows
> 
> 
> Now do the same but with an Offset:
> 
> Enable Adaptive Mode
> Offset Mode Sign +
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.250
> Offset Voltage 0.100
> 
> Total Adaptive Mode CPU Core Voltage 1.350
> 
> Your VID should now be around 1.35V when monitored in Windows. The resulting voltage with Offset added is possibly less exact, but you get the idea.
> 
> There are some conditions for it to work as well. Shamino made a detailed post about it recently here:
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...-Maximus-XI-Formula-9900k&p=762259#post762259


Hi,
Thanks life would be easier if it did indeed increase as additional turbo was applied but it doesn't 
Use pure offset mode of 0.050 then switch to adaptive with 1.185 additional turbo and the vid is the exact same max reading.




Abaidor said:


> How to check factory VIDs? Are the values I see on HWINFO64 the factory VIDs fo cores that are set on AUTO in BIOS?
> Thanks.
> 
> There are two places in the BIOS to set Adaptive or Offset. One is in the main area of "Extreme Tweaker" where you set:
> 
> CPU Core Voltage
> Offset Mode Sign
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage
> 
> And then the same (I think) in "per core" settings..
> *
> If I go for per core tuning should I leave the main setting on auto and then fine tune each core independently in the per core settings?*
> 
> Then let's say I want CORE#1 to get 1.28 vs 1.30V max (on turbo) that is getting now (Auto) in order to get lower temperatures given that the core can take it and is stable.
> 
> How do I go about it in per core settings? Do I need to enter something in both the "Offset" and "Additional Turbo....." fields?
> 
> Also what these settings
> 
> VCCIN is set at 2.0 volts now. Should I lower it?
> CPU VCCIO - I have it on Auto


Hi,
Yes if using per core adjustments do all adjustments there.
Leave main cpu core voltage at auto.

VCCIN yes lower that 2.0v is whack 1.94v with LLC-4 or 5 should be fine and is where I'm at usually 
Jp uses I believe 1.92v

Offset is what I use +0.050 will likely give you 1.345v vid max
Offset +0.010 will probably be close to 1.30v max vid

Anything lower than 1.30v I personally have to switch the +- symbol to negative.
About as low as one can go on + is +0.001 and what ever vid is produced is bare minimum on the + symbol which for me +0.001 ends up being 1.290v+-

Example I use for 4.7 where I use the - negative symbol for mostly all 10 cores to get well below 1.3v vid readings

Offset mode and average because all cores end up being different numbers would be -0.035 "Jp chuckles at this"  which would produce a vid max of 1.25v

Again I use a negative from -0.025 to -0.050 adjusting the vid's to get them all within 0.015+- of each other because quite often the vids on adaptive or offset using the same setting will produce a vid difference of 0.030 or more.

That large gap I've found produces instability on my board.... so I narrow the large gap, sort of average it by raising the lowest vid's "which I call Intel* lazy* cores*" and lowering the highest.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Thanks life would be easier if it did indeed increase as additional turbo was applied but it doesn't
> Use pure offset mode of 0.050 then switch to adaptive with 1.185 additional turbo and the vid is the exact same max reading.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> Yes if using per core adjustments do all adjustments there.
> Leave main cpu core voltage at auto.
> 
> VCCIN yes lower that 2.0v is whack 1.94v with LLC-4 or 5 should be fine and is where I'm at usually
> Jp uses I believe 1.92v
> 
> Offset is what I use +0.050 will likely give you 1.345v vid max
> Offset +0.010 will probably be close to 1.30v max vid
> 
> Anything lower than 1.30v I personally have to switch the +- symbol to negative.
> About as low as one can go on + is +0.001 and what ever vid is produced is bare minimum on the + symbol which for me +0.001 ends up being 1.290v+-
> 
> Example I use for 4.7 where I use the - negative symbol for mostly all 10 cores to get well below 1.3v vid readings
> 
> Offset mode and average because all cores end up being different numbers would be -0.035 "Jp chuckles at this"  which would produce a vid max of 1.25v
> 
> Again I use a negative from -0.025 to -0.050 adjusting the vid's to get them all within 0.015+- of each other because quite often the vids on adaptive or offset using the same setting will produce a vid difference of 0.030 or more.
> 
> That large gap I've found produces instability on my board.... so I narrow the large gap, sort of average it by raising the lowest vid's "which I call Intel* lazy* cores*" and lowering the highest.


This is actually a great explanation of how to set voltages using adaptive. It's the first time I actually understood how to do it  So, I guess the advantage of setting voltages this way is to allow the chip to use less power at idle and low workloads. 

My chip/board also doesn't seem to like huge gaps in core to core voltage. I went through the whole deal of tuning each core for its ideal voltage, then added .01V just to be safe. It did nothing for heat output, which I thought was weird, but oh well. I have since gone back to static voltage (1.22) and all is well. Maybe I'll give the adaptive another go, but thanks to a modded bios, idle temps are the same as water temp (21C), so I am not sure what I will gain other than a lower(maybe) electric bill.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Like I said I use offset mode first to tune vid's and switch to adaptive after nothing really changes vid's anyway.

This is mostly for max vid reading I don't really care about non load conditions 
I mostly only care about full load vid's and temperatures on those max vid's
All power saving settings are off.


----------



## cx-ray

Abaidor said:


> So what is the difference between setting 1.350 in the first case as well without an offset and the second case where we add a 0.100 offset?
> Where does the offset voltage apply? In lower multipliers than the turbo ones?


Offset affects the whole CPU programmed voltage curve from idle to (including) Turbo. 

Adaptive only sets a higher Turbo voltage when two conditions are met: 1) multiplier has to be higher than the single core max turbo, 2) Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage has to be higher than default VID (Auto) at given frequency.


----------



## ThrashZone

cx-ray said:


> Offset affects the whole CPU programmed voltage curve from idle to (including) Turbo.
> 
> Adaptive only sets a higher Turbo voltage when two conditions are met: 1) multiplier has to be higher than the single core max turbo, 2) *Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage has to be higher than default VID (Auto) at given frequency*.


Hi,
That is really why it gets mucked up 
Why adaptive even has an offset at all beside +- set additional turbo voltage and be done with it 

As far as #1 is concerned it will always be higher than the defuault turbo frequency oc'ing and all.


----------



## cx-ray

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> That is really why it gets mucked up
> Why adaptive even has an offset at all beside +- set additional turbo voltage and be done with it


I haven't experienced it myself, but I guess it's possible to trigger conditions where default voltages below Turbo can become unstable, thereby requiring an Offset adjustment. I'm guessing it can occur with high RAM speeds and agressively set timings or higher Base Clock settings, etc.



> As far as #1 is concerned it will always be higher than the defuault turbo frequency oc'ing and all.


I think it depends on how high the max Turbo of a CPU is and what someone wants to achieve. Take the 9900K for example with max single core turbo of 5GHz. Many users I think would be perfectly happy if they can get that speed for all cores and call it a day. In that instance only Offset would work if you need more voltage.


----------



## Jpmboy

this _required or necessary _offset + turbo voltage is an isolated/outlier problem. Unless the CPU is very odd - eg, it is unstable at non-turbo multipliers or frequencies below the stock max-turbo frequency, adaptive works the same on the past 4 or 5 gen boards and across brands (asrock, asus, gigabyte - tho Giga has it's usual nomenclature issues). For every CPu here (back to a 2700K and up to a 9700K, 6950X, 4960X, 2x7740X, 7980XE, 6600K - all running right now) adaptive vcore and dynamic clocks simply look to a table of miltipliers and vcore hard coded into the CPU - there is no changing VID at a constant frequency unless it moves to a different VID look-up table associated with specific instruction sets (like AVX512, or AVX2). What you see in HWi etc is just wrong. When you manually set a multiplier that is higher than the stock max turbo multiplier, the "additional" turbo voltage, looks to the VID for that multiplier and ADDs any ADDITIONAL voltage to the VID to deliver the "Total" Additional Turbo Voltage (ATV) you set in bios... there are two consequences of this: 1) if the VID is higher than the ATV set, the higher VID is delivered - remember it can only add to the VID. In this scenario, it is best to use manual override since you have a very good CPU that can run stable BELOW the VID for that frequency; 2) this "multiplier-based" VID look-up table, and not a frequency-based VID is the reason why you cannot use adaptive voltage at high strap/bclk (like 125 or 166... tho the new x390 chipset/bios introduced BCLK Adaptive Vcore). You guys are making this way too complicated and making generalizations based on a sample size of one... which IMO, is an outlier.
With ASUS boards, you have access to controls to tame VID.. SVID "Best case scenario, worst case.. etc), IA AC and DC load lines, BCLK-adaptive vcore... there are some good explanations/tutorials here on OCN and in the ROG forums.
No need to make it more complicated than it really is.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Frankly I just try to avoid auto seeing it over shoots everything at all times of load even leaving offset on auto is a guarantied way to hit 1.3v at any multiplier under full load 

The only thing complicated on x299 is the heat it produces.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Frankly I just try to avoid auto seeing it over shoots everything at all times of load even leaving offset on auto is a guarantied way to hit 1.3v at any multiplier under full load
> 
> The only thing complicated on x299 is the heat it produces.


I am also against "Auto" on quite a few things. My main two are VCore and LLC. My Omega sets LLC at 7 when on "Auto", that's not necessary at all. I have it set to 5 and everything is just humming along. To be honest, thanks to you guys, this is the happiest I have been with my rig since I moved up to X299. I appreciate all the help and info you provided.


----------



## RichKnecht

Here is a screenshot of my finished OC after 40 minutes of Real Bench with the modded Omega bios by tistou. It consistently scores 2630 at 4.7 @ 1.22V. If I go to 4.8, it needs 1.29V and scores go to 2675 but temps start hitting the 80s. I think I will leave it as it is and enjoy the cooler temps at the lower voltage.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
@DooRules got me playing with negative offsets so a lot of thanks goes to him :thumb:
Of which 1301 bios really doesn't like it too much all others under didn't mine it at all.
Testing now for the same cold start bugs and none happening on manual voltage.

No cold startup bugs with -0.050 and under though just above that range which I used for 4.5 to get somewhere around 1.2v or a hair lower 
Now I just peg it manually at 1.21v and be done with it and no cold startup bugs.

Adaptive.. may have come a long ways but it's still sort of garbage frankly


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> @DooRules got me playing with negative offsets so a lot of thanks goes to him :thumb:
> Of which 1301 bios really doesn't like it too much all others under didn't mine it at all.
> Testing now for the same cold start bugs and none happening on manual voltage.
> 
> No cold startup bugs with -0.050 and under though just above that range which I used for 4.5 to get somewhere around 1.2v or a hair lower
> Now I just peg it manually at 1.21v and be done with it and no cold startup bugs.
> 
> Adaptive.. may have come a long ways but it's still sort of garbage frankly


Why are you always trashing Adaptive? It works great for a lot of our comrades hear on OCN. Be kind to us adaptive freaks! :wheee:


----------



## RichKnecht

CptSpig said:


> Why are you always trashing Adaptive? It works great for a lot of our comrades hear on OCN. Be kind to us adaptive freaks! :wheee:


I've tried adaptive many times and always go back to static. Adaptive always tends to overshoot my target voltage unless I am doing something really wrong  It seems to take too much fiddling around trying to get it right when I can just dial in a static vcore and it works (hopefully).


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Thanks life would be easier if it did indeed increase as additional turbo was applied but it doesn't
> Use pure offset mode of 0.050 then switch to adaptive with 1.185 additional turbo and the vid is the exact same max reading.
> 
> Hi,
> Yes if using per core adjustments do all adjustments there.
> Leave main cpu core voltage at auto.
> 
> VCCIN yes lower that 2.0v is whack 1.94v with LLC-4 or 5 should be fine and is where I'm at usually
> Jp uses I believe 1.92v
> 
> Offset is what I use +0.050 will likely give you 1.345v vid max
> Offset +0.010 will probably be close to 1.30v max vid
> 
> Anything lower than 1.30v I personally have to switch the +- symbol to negative.
> About as low as one can go on + is +0.001 and what ever vid is produced is bare minimum on the + symbol which for me +0.001 ends up being 1.290v+-
> 
> Example I use for 4.7 where I use the - negative symbol for mostly all 10 cores to get well below 1.3v vid readings
> 
> Offset mode and average because all cores end up being different numbers would be -0.035 "Jp chuckles at this"  which would produce a vid max of 1.25v
> 
> Again I use a negative from -0.025 to -0.050 adjusting the vid's to get them all within 0.015+- of each other because quite often the vids on adaptive or offset using the same setting will produce a vid difference of 0.030 or more.
> 
> That large gap I've found produces instability on my board.... so I narrow the large gap, sort of average it by raising the lowest vid's "which I call Intel* lazy* cores*" and lowering the highest.



I am now at 1.28V on 12 Cores except one (1.29 @ 4.8Ghz or crash) and the "turd" core that is 1.1 anyway due to lower frequency.

VCCIN is @ 1.95V and works fine but LLC is at 6 and will have to test lower with lower VCCIN too...

In the next round I will test 1.26V or 1.24V to see which cores make it....temps keep dropping too...

I also tested everything under many scenarios from 4K gaming to Adobe After Effects / Photoshop / Illustrator / Acrobat workflow and all is well. Now test some virtual machines too and all go smoothly..

I can feel the speed difference prior to delidding or maybe it is my idea but my minimum framerates in Assassins Creed Origins & Rise of the Tomb Raider @ 4K are better.

Will keep testing until I find the lowest possible voltage each core can take for 4.8GHz stable operation.


----------



## djgar

I love adaptive


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> Why are you always trashing Adaptive? It works great for a lot of our comrades hear on OCN. Be kind to us adaptive freaks! :wheee:


Hi,
It's fine for 1.29v bro but anything lower and maybe for 1.25v as I said for 4.7 but anything else adaptive is totally insane the amount of voltage it produces for should be easy clocks like 4.2-4.4-4.5-4.6-4.7 where the system will work fine with much lower voltage and only manual seems to be able to get there without cold start issues.

Maybe I just need to roll back bios to one that actually works instead of 1301.



Abaidor said:


> I am now at 1.28V on 12 Cores except one (1.29 @ 4.8Ghz or crash) and the "turd" core that is 1.1 anyway due to lower frequency.
> 
> VCCIN is @ 1.95V and works fine but LLC is at 6 and will have to test lower with lower VCCIN too...
> 
> In the next round I will test 1.26V or 1.24V to see which cores make it....temps keep dropping too...
> 
> I also tested everything under many scenarios from 4K gaming to Adobe After Effects / Photoshop / Illustrator / Acrobat workflow and all is well. Now test some virtual machines too and all go smoothly..
> 
> I can feel the speed difference prior to delidding or maybe it is my idea but my minimum framerates in Assassins Creed Origins & Rise of the Tomb Raider @ 4K are better.
> 
> Will keep testing until I find the lowest possible voltage each core can take for 4.8GHz stable operation.


Hi,
Yep lots of work per core is at least you got 12 cores working together


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> It's fine for 1.29v bro but anything lower and maybe for 1.25v as I said for 4.7 but anything else adaptive is totally insane the amount of voltage it produces for should be easy clocks like 4.2-4.4-4.5-4.6-4.7 where the system will work fine with much lower voltage and only manual seems to be able to get there without cold start issues.
> 
> Maybe I just need to roll back bios to one that actually works instead of 1301.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> Yep lots of work per core is at least you got 12 cores working together


The "turd" core I am sure that can clock higher too but the problem is contact with the waterblock...LOL I am afraid to touch it for fear that I will have to deal with 3-4 cores going crazy again! 

For the moment I will enjoy and keep dropping voltages..

If you look at my screenshot below some cores look like hitting 4,937 Ghz in bursts? Is HWINFO misreporting? Strange while my multis are at max 48!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
You using the stand alone or the installer ?
I use the stand alone package personally never seen it show anything but what was being used clocks wise never way above :/
Only drops were avx applied.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I see what it is you bus clock/ pci-e clock is 103. or memory blck that's why your clocks are spiking above 4.8


----------



## Abaidor

I will check it out but I was just curious and I see no issues...BTW I use the portable HWINFO.


BTW - Is there any point in clocking the Cache higher than 30X?


----------



## arrow0309

Abaidor said:


> I will check it out but I was just curious and I see no issues...BTW I use the portable HWINFO.
> 
> 
> BTW - Is there any point in clocking the Cache higher than 30X?


I used to keep it at 31x (max) and offset +0.200 from day one.
Yesterday I bumped it to 3200 and yes, imo there is a point in doing it.
Better general (memory) performance and (little) gaming performance.

Guys what is the best non avx stress testing so far?


----------



## Jpmboy

arrow0309 said:


> I used to keep it at 31x (max) and offset +0.200 from day one.
> Yesterday I bumped it to 3200 and yes, imo there is a point in doing it.
> Better general (memory) performance and (little) gaming performance.
> 
> Guys what is the best non avx stress testing so far?


 those memory benchmarks move simulated data around in ways you will not while gaming... and no one could ever "feel" a difference between 30 and 32 cache gaming, especially if the ram is tuned properly.


use p95 26.6


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I can't personally monitor cache voltage because asus neglected to add a voltage sensor to my board so I set it and forget it at 30..
I get a chuckle at the voltage settings I use but what ever adaptive +0.050 and additional 0.150 for min cache auto and max cache 30


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Mine runs at 30. Won't even boot at 31.


----------



## ThrashZone

GnarlyCharlie said:


> Mine runs at 30. Won't even boot at 31.


Hi,
What voltage settings do you use ?


----------



## arrow0309

Jpmboy said:


> those memory benchmarks move simulated data around in ways you will not while gaming... and no one could ever "feel" a difference between 30 and 32 cache gaming, especially if the ram is tuned properly.
> 
> 
> use p95 26.6


I tend to agree 
However I was looking for a memory low latency where 50ns is a good value.
So I used to have 51.2 ns with 1004 bios (prior to mitigations and microcode fixes) with my old 3100 cache:

And now I'm doing 52.6 ns at 3200:

Sow I think I'm gonna stay at 3200 as long as it's stable and the temps are not an issue:

Btw:
Thanks for the tip, yeah I knew about prime 26.6, just talked with a buddy yesterday.
I've finished all those prime95 (avx2) tests, all 30', 60' and 90' run.
I'm gonna do 2-3h of prime 26.6 tomorrow and perhaps 8h of Realbench next week.


----------



## arrow0309

How is the Cinebench R20 score?


----------



## ThrashZone

arrow0309 said:


> How is the Cinebench R20 score?


Hi,
Not bad 
I pulled 6428 the other day last day of a cold front [email protected]
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=257826&d=1551975957

My 4.8 was 6354 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=257814&d=1551974221


----------



## Abaidor

Well I have to say that I am a stubborn kind of person and sometimes I have it my way. So, after redoing my LM application, and playing with the frame screws taking in and out the waterblock for more than 15 times (lost count) today, I finally got what I want. 

14 X Cores @ 4.8GHz with not high shooting temps!!!! Horay!!!

I really can't believe it! I was so scared to remove the waterblock after my previous results but I could not stare at that shameful core hitting 104C under stress. So I took everything apart and then it was bad, really bad..I was back to having 3-4 cores shooting up high with temps over 104C. It was so bad that thermal throttling would reduce all multis! Then I said one more time and was carefully watching the LM spots on the die and waterblock that were not making contact. Many times depending on how I tightened the frame I would get Memory Code 80 boot erros....damn what an ordeal and I was ready to give up and install the IHS while cursing me for not leaving it alone in the first place. But one more last attempt proved to be golden! 

The bottom line is that using the Direct Die Frame is a PITA and if I have to remove it again I don't know if I can go through the same "Odyssey" again. This process can not be repeated successfully without luck.


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ Looks real good! well worth the campaign to get it right. what's the secret?


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Not bad
> I pulled 6428 the other day last day of a cold front [email protected]
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=257826&d=1551975957
> 
> My 4.8 was 6354
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=257814&d=1551974221


Way better even at 4.8 considering your both ram and cache at lower clocks.
I wonder then if my os is a bit messy and / or the R20 uses avx (and then my -1 lower molty @4.7 will obviously score less).

BTW:
just finished a ~ 2.5h prime95 26.6 (blend, no avx) run at 4.8 and new 3.2 cache & 4000 ram, seems ok (VRM at 70C max though)


----------



## Abaidor

Jpmboy said:


> ^^ Looks real good! well worth the campaign to get it right. what's the secret?


Hehe, it sure was! The thing is my fingers are hurting right now as if I was tightening thumbscrews all day long...wait! I actually did that

I was examining the frame after each installation and noticed that some LM was present at the edger of the inner opening but not on all the sides...hint --> that side of the frame was probably higher than the CPU die there meaning an angle. So I was playing with the screws and then had to deal with memory boot errors. Hell, I even held the block on the CPU with my hand until windows loaded and checked temps lol! 

Then I noticed the LM pressure pattern and tried to apply more/less depending on the spot appearance. Well tedious and many many failed attempts but in the end one of those was the right one. 

I thing the way the frame attaches to the backplate is far from ideal and even the stick pads may play a role in it (thick and soft)...Maybe that's why the other dude mentioned how the "Iceman" frame did not have those issues, I don't know. What I know is that I do not want to take the block or CPU out of its slot for a long time but how well the LM will hold is going to determine this. In any case, I know I tried.

I almost forgot! Thanks again for your help and the frame.


----------



## cx-ray

Have any of you tried to re-encode a 4K video to H.265 in Handbrake with 3200MHz Cache frequency? Handbrake uses AVX2 instructions. I found it requires a disproportional increase in voltage to be stable compared to 3000MHz Cache on my CPU (7900X, 4.8GHz, 32GB 4000 RAM, etc.).

I recommend making a system image before testing though lol


----------



## ThrashZone

arrow0309 said:


> Way better even at 4.8 considering your both ram and cache at lower clocks.
> I wonder then if my os is a bit messy and / or the R20 uses avx (and then my -1 lower molty @4.7 will obviously score less).
> 
> BTW:
> just finished a ~ 2.5h prime95 26.6 (blend, no avx) run at 4.8 and new 3.2 cache & 4000 ram, seems ok (VRM at 70C max though)


Hi,
Yeah you need more vccin buddy set to LLC-5 and 1.94v input voltage


----------



## xarot

Abaidor said:


> Hehe, it sure was! The thing is my fingers are hurting right now as if I was tightening thumbscrews all day long...wait! I actually did that
> 
> I was examining the frame after each installation and noticed that some LM was present at the edger of the inner opening but not on all the sides...hint --> that side of the frame was probably higher than the CPU die there meaning an angle. So I was playing with the screws and then had to deal with memory boot errors. Hell, I even held the block on the CPU with my hand until windows loaded and checked temps lol!
> 
> Then I noticed the LM pressure pattern and tried to apply more/less depending on the spot appearance. Well tedious and many many failed attempts but in the end one of those was the right one.
> 
> I thing the way the frame attaches to the backplate is far from ideal and even the stick pads may play a role in it (thick and soft)...Maybe that's why the other dude mentioned how the "Iceman" frame did not have those issues, I don't know. What I know is that I do not want to take the block or CPU out of its slot for a long time but how well the LM will hold is going to determine this. In any case, I know I tried.
> 
> I almost forgot! Thanks again for your help and the frame.


Sounds like you've had quite the road to get it right. I've tested it on two CPUs and only time when the temps skyrocketed badly was when I hadn't paint the block base at all to match the die size where LM was also applied. Looked like surface tension when the block was tightened down prevented all contact with the block. And one time when the LM on the block didn't cover all the die area. My experiences have been in and out of the case so in either case the mobo could also bend etc to make it harder. I think I never attached those stickers to the mobo side and left the protective on as I was fearing those would rip the mobo apart when removed.  Good to hear you got it right.

Also a week or two back I removed the block and checked the LM contact...no difference after I mounted it back.


----------



## Abaidor

xarot said:


> Sounds like you've had quite the road to get it right. I've tested it on two CPUs and only time when the temps skyrocketed badly was when I hadn't paint the block base at all to match the die size where LM was also applied. Looked like surface tension when the block was tightened down prevented all contact with the block. And one time when the LM on the block didn't cover all the die area. My experiences have been in and out of the case so in either case the mobo could also bend etc to make it harder. I think I never attached those stickers to the mobo side and left the protective on as I was fearing those would rip the mobo apart when removed.  Good to hear you got it right.
> 
> Also a week or two back I removed the block and checked the LM contact...no difference after I mounted it back.


I had made an outline on the block to match the opening of the frame and applied LM there..the area was smaller than the CPU die but I ended up covering most of it. Before the final mounting I had to clean some LM from the edges and the CPU die but nothing to worry about. I am glad that I used both Liquid Tape + Kampton Tape on the Die surrouning area that made cleaning easy plus extra protection. 

In between trials there were areas that did not make proper contact and for me this is the frames fault that offers no standard way to ensure 100% parallel to the die placement and being made of aluminium makes it flex somehow (mobo too)...machining costs though are cheaper on alu vs steel so...

In any case the end result is worth it but I keep wondering why Intel makes the Die convex in the first place...it would be so much easier if it was perfectly flat and the same holds for waterblocks...It must be a manufacturing necessity I guess.

BTW - The heating is off and the room is at 18C right now with windows open (sunny sunny day). My idle temps are quite low lol!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Wish my ambient was that cool 
Stuck here at 24c last cold front last week missed my 5.0 push


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah you need more vccin buddy set to LLC-5 and 1.94v input voltage


Thanks bud, done
Increased to 6337 :specool:


----------



## ThrashZone

arrow0309 said:


> Thanks bud, done
> Increased to 6337 :specool:


Hi,
:thumb:
Now drop your cache to 30 and see if the score goes up


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> :thumb:
> Now drop your cache to 30 and see if the score goes up


Went dawn to my previous 31 and the score went down a little (to 6325).
I'll keep it at 32 but thanks again


----------



## ThrashZone

arrow0309 said:


> Went dawn to my previous 31 and the score went down a little (to 6325).
> I'll keep it at 32 but thanks again


Hi,
Yep never know till you try 

The rest of the voltages looked okay maybe giving system agent a little bump might give a little more 
On auto dang thing pulls 1.2v


----------



## fgh

cx-ray said:


> Have any of you tried to re-encode a 4K video to H.265 in Handbrake with 3200MHz Cache frequency? Handbrake uses AVX2 instructions. I found it requires a disproportional increase in voltage to be stable compared to 3000MHz Cache on my CPU (7900X, 4.8GHz, 32GB 4000 RAM, etc.).
> 
> I recommend making a system image before testing though lol



Not only x265 but also x264 with one of the slowest presets (versylow/placebo) will expose unstable mesh while for example realbench (2.43/latest) will run without problems. Also AVX2 load of x265 (with preset >slower) is much heavier than prime95 AVX2/realbench 2.5*/blender.

Btw x265 version of HWBOT is very old. The latest x265 versions has AVX512 option "--asm avx512".


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep never know till you try
> 
> The rest of the voltages looked okay maybe giving system agent a little bump might give a little more
> On auto dang thing pulls 1.2v


Hi, thks, used to keep it at 1.000v (lately, even a bit lower formerly) and it showed 1.024 (inside the bios) now I bumped it to 1.050v (and seen like 1.088v if I remember right).
However increased the score again to 6343 

Nice, now I'm good for 4.8 daily, next weekend I'll test a benchmark OC @4.9


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

And now for something completely different (Still @ stock on air, just got it running)


----------



## ThrashZone

arrow0309 said:


> Hi, thks, used to keep it at 1.000v (lately, even a bit lower formerly) and it showed 1.024 (inside the bios) now I bumped it to 1.050v (and seen like 1.088v if I remember right).
> However increased the score again to 6343
> 
> Nice, now I'm good for 4.8 daily, next weekend I'll test a benchmark OC @4.9


Hi,
Accoding to the last temp readings 4.9 and 5.0 for that matter could like a nice walk in the park


----------



## Abaidor

LOL! I just realized that I have put the my waterlines on the EK Velocity the other way round of what they're supposed to be. 

I.e. Water goes in through outlet and comes out from inlet to the GPU..still temps are fine but I guess they will be better if I swap ports. 
I was just selecting which fittings I will use to replace those two last soft tubes with hard lines and realized it..


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Accoding to the last temp readings 4.9 and 5.0 for that matter could like a nice walk in the park


You've just unleashed the monkey. 
Now I just need to decide what's the max vcore I can afford to give in daily and what avx2 offset to use (right now I'm using - 1 but I previously used to keep it at the same 4.8 clock) between 0 and - 2. :thinking:


----------



## RichKnecht

Abaidor said:


> LOL! I just realized that I have put the my waterlines on the EK Velocity the other way round of what they're supposed to be.
> 
> I.e. Water goes in through outlet and comes out from inlet to the GPU..still temps are fine but I guess they will be better if I swap ports.
> I was just selecting which fittings I will use to replace those two last soft tubes with hard lines and realized it..


Believe it or not, I don't think your temps will change much. I did the same thing and it was like that for a month before I noticed I had them backwards. After I fixed it, temps dropped 1C.


----------



## Abaidor

RichKnecht said:


> Believe it or not, I don't think your temps will change much. I did the same thing and it was like that for a month before I noticed I had them backwards. After I fixed it, temps dropped 1C.


Well it looks like it's one those optimizations manufacturers do to squeeze the last bit of performance. In any case it is working fine as it is anyway!


----------



## RichKnecht

Abaidor said:


> Well it looks like it's one those optimizations manufacturers do to squeeze the last bit of performance. In any case it is working fine as it is anyway!


I am sure the flow is terrible when hooked up the wrong way, but fluid still contacts the block and dissipated heat.


----------



## RichKnecht

arrow0309 said:


> Way better even at 4.8 considering your both ram and cache at lower clocks.
> I wonder then if my os is a bit messy and / or the R20 uses avx (and then my -1 lower molty @4.7 will obviously score less).
> 
> BTW:
> just finished a ~ 2.5h prime95 26.6 (blend, no avx) run at 4.8 and new 3.2 cache & 4000 ram, seems ok (VRM at 70C max though)


Great temps and nice low voltage at 4.8. Is it bare die cooled or is it still under an IHS?


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> And now for something completely different (Still @ stock on air, just got it running)


 oh man... you are in for some fun. I have the G9 and G7. Core OC is good. Ram OC gave me headaches - big time.
Here's the G9 with EK MB block:


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Jpmboy said:


> oh man... you are in for some fun. I have the G9 and G7. Core OC is good. Ram OC gave me headaches - big time.
> Here's the G9 with EK MB block:


Avoiding the fun is why I bought the RVIEO for myself ;-) But I think this will be a viable mobo to get the hellions up and running, seemed like a shame to just leave it (and a Phanteks CPU block) laying around. I was also avoiding this first gen RTX card thing, but I'm moving the Titan X Pascal from the War Pig over to this rig (the hellions have a 1070 Strix on air right now) and got me a 2080Ti and Heatkiller block (and some 8mOhm resistors) for my rig. Win/Win!

And you know me and RAM OC - if I can just get this stuff the run at its rated speed it'll be a miracle. And all the Gigabyte software isn't bad, that RGB app they have let me turn the disco lights off on this thing.

You'd have got a kick out of it. I booted the 7980XE up in this board and even ran it on air a bit w/64GB of RAM installed. No problem. But yesterday I slapped the 7920X and 32GB of ram in it and mounted it in the case. When I turned the PSU on, just a quick flash of light on the board and nothing else - turning Eco mode off on the PSU and the fan wouldn't even spin. So got the self tester out, PSU powers up. Great. Pull the mobo out and see if it's dead or what - just my luck for not trying it on a box lid first.

I never actually tried the power button on the board when it was in the case, the quick flash then dead kinda freaked me out, tried it on the box and of course it powers up - the board detected a different configuration and just needed a CLR CMOS. Duh. So I stick it back in the case and it runs fine. Except I forgot to put the I/O shield in and had to pull it back out again. All this with the big ol' Noctua air cooler hanging off the thing the whole time, using an EVGA 660Ti GPU I keep around for just such an occasion.

Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're an idiot.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep inlet/ outlet lol Oops take the jet plate out no difference


----------



## Abaidor

RichKnecht said:


> I am sure the flow is terrible when hooked up the wrong way, but fluid still contacts the block and dissipated heat.


That explains why I had to increase my 2 D5's speed! It felt like I needed more flow! Anyway, I was planning to remove the two CPU lines anyway because I temporarily have left soft tubes on those to facilitate swaps of the block while I was experimenting with the direct die frame. I will run it like that for a week if all is well with the LM I will swap them and install the hard lines. 




ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep inlet/ outlet lol Oops take the jet plate out no difference


Haha....I like it how I was worried about losing performance if was to take the jet plate out! And, lol, here I am!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Flow does matter and so will using the correct hose inlet and outlet 

If it just piped better rotate the block when you get tiered of it lol


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Flow does matter and so will using the correct hose inlet and outlet
> 
> If it just piped better rotate the block when you get tiered of it lol



I will rotate the room first before I touch this block after all I went through lol! No worries I will do them correctly soon.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
lol I knew that was coming


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> Avoiding the fun is why I bought the RVIEO for myself ;-) But I think this will be a viable mobo to get the hellions up and running, seemed like a shame to just leave it (and a Phanteks CPU block) laying around. I was also avoiding this first gen RTX card thing, but I'm moving the Titan X Pascal from the War Pig over to this rig (the hellions have a 1070 Strix on air right now) and got me a 2080Ti and Heatkiller block (and some 8mOhm resistors) for my rig. Win/Win!
> 
> And you know me and RAM OC - if I can just get this stuff the run at its rated speed it'll be a miracle. And all the Gigabyte software isn't bad, that RGB app they have let me turn the disco lights off on this thing.
> 
> You'd have got a kick out of it. I booted the 7980XE up in this board and even ran it on air a bit w/64GB of RAM installed. No problem. But yesterday I slapped the 7920X and 32GB of ram in it and mounted it in the case. When I turned the PSU on, just a quick flash of light on the board and nothing else - turning Eco mode off on the PSU and the fan wouldn't even spin. So got the self tester out, PSU powers up. Great. Pull the mobo out and see if it's dead or what - just my luck for not trying it on a box lid first.
> 
> I never actually tried the power button on the board when it was in the case, the quick flash then dead kinda freaked me out, tried it on the box and of course it powers up - the board detected a different configuration and just needed a CLR CMOS. Duh. So I stick it back in the case and it runs fine. Except I forgot to put the I/O shield in and had to pull it back out again. All this with the big ol' Noctua air cooler hanging off the thing the whole time, using an EVGA 660Ti GPU I keep around for just such an occasion.
> 
> Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're an idiot.


lol - that's too funny... and also very familiar. I keep an HH-D15 handy simply for the purpose of hanging a Kg weight on a MB while jostling it around. Checks all those tiny traces for weakness. :no-smile


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

EK Pump/Res and GPU block/backplate (and 8mOhm resistors) came today - my first Heatkiller gear. 2080Ti says tomorrow, already talked to the Fedex guy and told him to bring it out here to work if I'm not home. That's all I was needing to finish the conversion of War Pig to 2080Ti and finish this 7920X loop. Seems like just a couple weeks ago I was finishing up a loop, I must love the frustration and hassle technical challenge.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## arrow0309

RichKnecht said:


> Great temps and nice low voltage at 4.8. Is it bare die cooled or is it still under an IHS?


Hi, it's bare die with a Delid Die Guard from IceMan
Low voltage for 4.8, hmmmm
If you say so



kingofblog said:


> I finally got my i9-7900X delidded. It certainly runs cooler now, and I was able to reach 5.0 GHz at 1.29-1.33 V with no issues. My CineBench R15 score rose to 2729, so it looks like the result is valid and not hindered by throttling.
> 
> 
> 
> In terms of thermal performance, my 280 mm AIO still hits Tjmax on Prime95. The power usage according to SVID was 400 W in Prime95 and 300 W in CB.


Not bad at all, I doubt mine would hold at 5ghz with that vcore
I'm gonna try 4.9 soon though.

Btw:
Any avx negative offset that you're using (for 5Ghz)?


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## RichKnecht

arrow0309 said:


> Hi, it's bare die with a Delid Die Guard from IceMan
> Low voltage for 4.8, hmmmm
> If you say so
> 
> 
> 
> Not bad at all, I doubt mine would hold at 5ghz with that vcore
> I'm gonna try 4.9 soon though.
> 
> Btw:
> Any avx negative offset that you're using (for 5Ghz)?


DeLid Die Guard here too with a 7900X. I am at 4.7 with 1.22V. I can't do 4.8 unless I hit it with 1.3V. Mind sharing some of your other settings for the 7900X? Stuff like vccin, etc?


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## RichKnecht

kingofblog said:


> It turns out I was having "phantom throttling" (VCCIN underrun) during frequency transitions. After I raised VCCIN to 1.9 V, the throttling went away, and game performance is smoother (but still low). CB R15 increased slightly from 2729 to 2740.


Raise vccin incrementally to ~1.95-1.96 and see where your scores go. My 7900X seems to score its highest at 1.95V vccin.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> DeLid Die Guard here too with a 7900X. I am at 4.7 with 1.22V. I can't do 4.8 unless I hit it with 1.3V. Mind sharing some of your other settings for the 7900X? Stuff like vccin, etc?


Hi,
Read back 
vccsa 1.05
vccin 1.94 on LLC-5
vccio at standard 1.0v or 1.01250


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Read back
> vccsa 1.05
> vccin 1.94 on LLC-5
> vccio at standard 1.0v or 1.01250


We need a "show us your 7900X specs" thread. Seems that there is a ton of variation with these chips. I have also found that they have an OC "ceiling" when it comes to bench marks such as Cinebench. For example, my chip:

4.5 OC @ 1.15V CB= 2421
4.6 OC @ 1.15V CB= 2545
4.7 OC @ 1.22V CB= 2630
4.8 OC @ 1.30V CB= 2643

So, it doesn't make sense to go to 4.8 even if the chip is stable as the performance vs heat ratio starts getting high. Not sure if you find the same results.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah temperatures always get in the way of doing higher clocks a stable 4.8 indeed for me as well takes 1.3v and 4.9 1.34v hard to pull that off on all core without 20c ambient 
Not sure I have any records of CB scores for different clocks though.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> We need a "show us your 7900X specs" thread. Seems that there is a ton of variation with these chips. I have also found that they have an OC "ceiling" when it comes to bench marks such as Cinebench. For example, my chip:
> 
> 4.5 OC @ 1.15V CB= 2421
> 4.6 OC @ 1.15V CB= 2545
> 4.7 OC @ 1.22V CB= 2630
> 4.8 OC @ 1.30V CB= 2643
> 
> So, it doesn't make sense to go to 4.8 even if the chip is stable as the performance vs heat ratio starts getting high. Not sure if you find the same results.


how did you scale VCCIN with going from 1.15V to 1.3V vcore?


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> how did you scale VCCIN with going from 1.15V to 1.3V vcore?


For the OCs that were at 1.15V, I had vccin set to 1.9. For the higher OCs, I left it at 1.9 at first and everything seemed OK, but eventually scaled it up until my CB scores peaked and remained constant. I did try to go higher, but scores actually dropped a bit.


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah, you'd need to increase vccin with vcore for cinebench... it's just how CB works (same with hwbot x265 benchmark)


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## arrow0309

RichKnecht said:


> DeLid Die Guard here too with a 7900X. I am at 4.7 with 1.22V. I can't do 4.8 unless I hit it with 1.3V. Mind sharing some of your other settings for the 7900X? Stuff like vccin, etc?





ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Read back
> vccsa 1.05
> vccin 1.94 on LLC-5
> vccio at standard 1.0v or 1.01250





RichKnecht said:


> We need a "show us your 7900X specs" thread. Seems that there is a ton of variation with these chips. I have also found that they have an OC "ceiling" when it comes to bench marks such as Cinebench. For example, my chip:
> 
> 4.5 OC @ 1.15V CB= 2421
> 4.6 OC @ 1.15V CB= 2545
> 4.7 OC @ 1.22V CB= 2630
> 4.8 OC @ 1.30V CB= 2643
> 
> So, it doesn't make sense to go to 4.8 even if the chip is stable as the performance vs heat ratio starts getting high. Not sure if you find the same results.


Some settings (except bclk 100.1, ram 4000 cl 17-18-17, avx -1, 512 -6):


----------



## RichKnecht

kingofblog said:


> I used 1.95 V first, but I switched to 1.9 V after finding it amounted to the same. I am only increasing Vcore by 100 mV over VID, so VCCIN only needs a corresponding 100 mV offset. As I mentioned, I only saw VCCIN underruns during frequency changes, not during steady-state workloads.
> 
> 
> 
> My i9-7900X experience:
> 4.5 GHz (VCCIN 1.8 V, VID - 80 mV: 1.085-1.130 V) = 2469 cb
> 4.8 GHz (VCCIN 1.8 V, VID + 20 mV: 1.185-1.230 V) = 2628 cb
> 5.0 GHz (VCCIN 1.9 V, VID + 120 mV: 1.285-1.330 V) = 2740 cb
> 
> Memory is 4x 16 GB 2Rx8 DDR4-3200 16-18-18-38-1N. Uncore is 3.2 GHz at 1.1 V, except for the 4.5 GHz run where it was 3.0 GHz at 0.965 V.


Nice. You won the lottery with that chip.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## RichKnecht

kingofblog said:


> The problem is cooling. Even after delidding, my AIO can still only handle ~280 W before the chip reaches 85 C, or ~320 W at 95 C. The liquid temperature gets up to 40 C (22 C ambient), so a custom loop could certainly get me another 18 C if I made an enormous loop with multiple radiators, but it would also cost a lot of money just to handle Prime95. The other option I contemplated was to replace the stock fans (140 mm, 1800 rpm limit) with 3000 rpm Noctuas, but I am not sure how much extra cooling that would provide.


I'm running mine with with direct die cooling and 3 360mm rads. My temps rarely hit 72C under normal use and will go to ~79 after about 30-40 minutes of Real Bench. Still can't get it higher than 4.7 though without adding a lot of Vcore.


----------



## Barefooter

RichKnecht said:


> We need a "show us your 7900X specs" thread. Seems that there is a ton of variation with these chips. I have also found that they have an OC "ceiling" when it comes to bench marks such as Cinebench. For example, my chip:
> 
> 4.5 OC @ 1.15V CB= 2421
> 4.6 OC @ 1.15V CB= 2545
> 4.7 OC @ 1.22V CB= 2630
> 4.8 OC @ 1.30V CB= 2643
> 
> So, it doesn't make sense to go to 4.8 even if the chip is stable as the performance vs heat ratio starts getting high. Not sure if you find the same results.


Here is my results with 1.95 VCCIN for both. The 4.8 profile will be my everyday overclock, still not 100% dialed in but getting closer. The 5.0 setting at least made it through Cinebench but no plans to run it that high except for a benchmark or two.

4.8 OC @ 1.24V CB= 2561
5.0 OC @ 1.30V CB= 2678


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Jpmboy

kingofblog said:


> I am sure I can run low-intensity workloads (including CineBench) all day. Any additional cooling would be to sustain Prime95 workloads for longer periods. Right now, I can only do about 1 minute of P95 before the coolant gets too hot. I have 18 C of thermal overhead in the loop right now. Based on my research, heat transfer is roughly linear with airflow, so getting the 3000 rpm Noctuas should be about the same effectiveness as a dual-radiator custom loop, except louder. However, this would only get me back half of the dT, which is 9 C.
> 
> dT estimates
> 280 mm AIO: 18 C
> 280 mm AIO w/ 3k rpm: 9 C
> 2x rad custom loop: 9 C
> 2x rad custom loop w/ 3k rpm: 5 C
> 3x rad custom loop: 6 C
> 3x rad custom loop w/ 3k rpm: 3 C
> 
> Anything beyond replacing the fans is really expensive for a few% performance increase, and only for sustained workloads. For the custom loops, there are diminishing returns, and it looks like a chiller would be a better use of money than lots of radiators.
> 
> This is all brainstorming though. I have no experience with exotic cooling.
> 
> Edit: Also not sure how bearable 3000 rpm fans are.


a chiller is not exotic... and 3000rpm fans (from any maker) are not "silent".  The thing about the noctua industrial fans is the air pressure they push even at 1500rpm and below (where they are silent).


----------



## Hydroplane

kingofblog said:


> I am sure I can run low-intensity workloads (including CineBench) all day. Any additional cooling would be to sustain Prime95 workloads for longer periods. Right now, I can only do about 1 minute of P95 before the coolant gets too hot. I have 18 C of thermal overhead in the loop right now. Based on my research, heat transfer is roughly linear with airflow, so getting the 3000 rpm Noctuas should be about the same effectiveness as a dual-radiator custom loop, except louder. However, this would only get me back half of the dT, which is 9 C.
> 
> dT estimates
> 280 mm AIO: 18 C
> 280 mm AIO w/ 3k rpm: 9 C
> 2x rad custom loop: 9 C
> 2x rad custom loop w/ 3k rpm: 5 C
> 3x rad custom loop: 6 C
> 3x rad custom loop w/ 3k rpm: 3 C
> 
> Anything beyond replacing the fans is really expensive for a few% performance increase, and only for sustained workloads. For the custom loops, there are diminishing returns, and it looks like a chiller would be a better use of money than lots of radiators.
> 
> This is all brainstorming though. I have no experience with exotic cooling.
> 
> Edit: Also not sure how bearable 3000 rpm fans are.


I can confirm that the Noctua Industrial fans are unbearably loud at 3000 RPM, but also work extremely well. I also have an iPPC-2000 on the test bench and I'm surprised at how reasonable it is - not quiet, but certainly usable day-to-day. I only run my Industrial fans at 800 RPM for gaming and general use with 1080 Ti SLI and a 7980XE. I will put them up to 1500-2000 RPM for benching, no point in more than that since the water is already as close to room temp as it will go!

With an AIO, not sure how much they would help though. AIO performance tends to be more limited by low pump speed.

Also, some chillers can get exotic


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> I can confirm that the Noctua Industrial fans are unbearably loud at 3000 RPM, but also work extremely well. I also have an iPPC-2000 on the test bench and I'm surprised at how reasonable it is - not quiet, but certainly usable day-to-day. I only run my Industrial fans at 800 RPM for gaming and general use with 1080 Ti SLI and a 7980XE. I will put them up to 1500-2000 RPM for benching, no point in more than that since the water is already as close to room temp as it will go!
> 
> With an AIO, not sure how much they would help though. AIO performance tends to be more limited by low pump speed.
> 
> Also, some chillers can get exotic


 looks like that chiller needs a few beers or a white wine. 

that would be exotic


----------



## Hydroplane

Jpmboy said:


> looks like that chiller needs a few beers or a white wine.
> 
> that would be exotic


Yes literally, the methanol I was using there is too toxic to keep indoors, need ethanol instead  It has similar chemical properties and would not freeze at -30C


----------



## RichKnecht

kingofblog said:


> I am sure I can run low-intensity workloads (including CineBench) all day. Any additional cooling would be to sustain Prime95 workloads for longer periods. Right now, I can only do about 1 minute of P95 before the coolant gets too hot. I have 18 C of thermal overhead in the loop right now. Based on my research, heat transfer is roughly linear with airflow, so getting the 3000 rpm Noctuas should be about the same effectiveness as a dual-radiator custom loop, except louder. However, this would only get me back half of the dT, which is 9 C.
> 
> dT estimates
> 280 mm AIO: 18 C
> 280 mm AIO w/ 3k rpm: 9 C
> 2x rad custom loop: 9 C
> 2x rad custom loop w/ 3k rpm: 5 C
> 3x rad custom loop: 6 C
> 3x rad custom loop w/ 3k rpm: 3 C
> 
> Anything beyond replacing the fans is really expensive for a few% performance increase, and only for sustained workloads. For the custom loops, there are diminishing returns, and it looks like a chiller would be a better use of money than lots of radiators.
> 
> This is all brainstorming though. I have no experience with exotic cooling.
> 
> Edit: Also not sure how bearable 3000 rpm fans are.


Those numbers are purely theoretical. In the "real world", a custom loop will far outperform any AIO. I experienced this first hand when I was first getting into the X299 platform. Started with a 280MM AIO and temps were way too high for what I use my PC for. Then I delidded it. Better, but still not all that great. It was when I added the custom loop that things started looking up. Lower core temps can mean lower voltages to achieve the same OC. That also means less heat. A win-win in my book.


----------



## Abaidor

OK after all the dust settled with my ordeal with the direct die frame and my 14X48 overclock it was time for some stability testing. 
For the last few days I am constantly stress testing my configuration and to cut a long story short I realized that one or more cores were causing a failure of Asus Real Bench at about 52-55 minutes consistently. 

So I went back to the "drawing" board and started tuning again. Right now I identified the core that misbehaves (Core #10) since Asus Real Bench runs fine for hours with 13X48 on all other cores and with 47X on Core #10 @ 1.28. I also reduced AVX offset from 6 to 4 since I can also run 14X47 with no AVX offset. Will reduce further but I am testing max temps right now. 

So I need to optimize Core #10. Real Bench is running right now and this core shows a VID of 1.219v @ 4.7GHz with a max of 1.265v so it does not even use 1.28v that I have set in the BIOS. If I set it @ 48X though (again with 1.28V) it becomes unstable.....at least it did before I started this test cycle since the only other thing changed is VCCIO from 1.95 to 1.96 (higher Cinebench score too). 

When this Real Bench finishes should I try 1.29 or 1.30 or more? When on Auto with all cores @48X it gets 1.30v but Real Bench still fails after 50-55minutes consistently. I don't get a blue screen but an "instability detected" (Handbrake) message - I can run handbrake for 2 hours encoding a Blu-Ray to H.265 no problem with this core.

Also I have 5X Cores running perfectly @48X 1.28v and never exceeding 67C-68C (mostly 53-58C) should I boost them further? I think I need over 1.30V for 5Ghz.. and the problem is that the total packge temperature will increase. Maybe not worth it but might try anyway unless someone suggests it is dangerous to exceed 1.30v.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I don't see anything wrong with 1.3v as long as the package temp isn't too high to use.

Failing in realbench could simply mean too high system agent or possibly too low.
Same thing for avx offset usually too low not sure RB even uses avx payload frankly :/


On another note 3k fans are nice to have it and not need it than need it and not have it lol 
Personally I have 2800 rpm fans same as above


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I don't see anything wrong with 1.3v as long as the package temp isn't too high to use.
> 
> Failing in realbench could simply mean too high system agent or possibly too low.
> Same thing for avx offset usually too low not sure RB even uses avx payload frankly :/
> 
> 
> On another note 3k fans are nice to have it and not need it than need it and not have it lol
> Personally I have 2800 rpm fans same as above


R15 and R20 run at the non-AVX frequency on my 9900X (and all 1151 cpus I've tried).


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> R15 and R20 run at the non-AVX frequency on my 9900X (and all 1151 cpus I've tried).


Hi,
Yeah I was referring to realbench not sure if it uses avx not CB as I've already stated it doesn't in my runs except one quirk run at 4.8 clocks dropped probably because of something else I ran and forgot to mention like my favorite bench classroom which does indeed use avx.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I was referring to realbench not sure if it uses avx not CB as I've already stated it doesn't in my runs except one quirk run at 4.8 clocks dropped probably because of something else I ran and forgot to mention like my favorite bench classroom which does indeed use avx.



ah, yes realbench uses AVX2, not AVX512


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 
> 
> Failing in realbench could simply mean too high system agent or possibly too low.
> Same thing for avx offset usually too low not sure RB even uses avx payload frankly :/


Hmmm...never realized that system agent voltage could be an issue in Real Bench. Thanks for that tidbit


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I'd use blender classroom first and render animation for an hour or so then attack real bench :/


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> ah, yes realbench uses AVX2, not AVX512


I figured as much as the cores would drop to 4400 on occasion while running Real Bench. All I know is the chip runs much hotter during Real Bench than it does in Prime95 26.6. I do have a question though. What's the deal with XTU? The "stress test" doesn't even get the chip warm enough to where the fans spool up.


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I don't see anything wrong with 1.3v as long as the package temp isn't too high to use.
> 
> Failing in realbench could simply mean too high system agent or possibly too low.
> Same thing for avx offset usually too low not sure RB even uses avx payload frankly :/
> 
> 
> On another note 3k fans are nice to have it and not need it than need it and not have it lol
> Personally I have 2800 rpm fans same as above



But I am not failing with 13X48 + Core#10 X 47......can system agent by too high or too low only when Core #10 is @ 4.8 vs 4.7GHz? It could be that it adds to the whole package some extra stress but such a low margin? Just that extra 100Mhz on ONE core...well it could be there is a limit in everything I guess.

Anyway I am testing Core #10 @ 1.31V now since temps are low on this core...quite low on max load actually - less than 70C peaks.

BTW - RB indeed runs at AVX frequencies..

Do AVX frequencies require higher voltages? What is the limiting factor with these besides *temperature?


*EDIT*
Regarding fans...my 9X ML140 Pros can spin up to 2000rpm....but on my External MO-RA 420 they need not rise above 1150rpm because nothing better happens beyond that..Simply put the radiator is optimized for fan speeds at the range of 400-1000 rpm...
My water temps never exceed 27C (water in is at 23C) even after hours of Real Bench and the system can't overwhelm my cooling...this is not a problem and although I am thinking of adding a second MO-RA 420 I doubt if there is any point in it besides running Real Bench and other stress tests at low fans speeds of 500rpm...
I am never going back to internal radiators again after the MO-RA.


Look at the screenshot below 40 minutes into Real Bench - besides two cores (the hard to make contact with the block) that occasionally peak at 85C under stress the rest enjoy a cool life. Look at the minimum temps and the average too..19C ambient right now in here though.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> I figured as much as the cores would drop to 4400 on occasion while running Real Bench. All I know is the chip runs much hotter during Real Bench than it does in Prime95 26.6. I do have a question though. What's the deal with XTU? The "stress test" doesn't even get the chip warm enough to where the fans spool up.


 I've not encountered a VSA related realbench fail.. but ya never know. Anyway, here's a much better video compression stress test: enter the number of loops, the thread count (some like to use 1.5x actual for some reason) and type normal...
https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7gpMyj43ZFjSzJ4Nm0xT3pobjA


----------



## ThrashZone

Abaidor said:


> But I am not failing with 13X48 + Core#10 X 47......can system agent by too high or too low only when Core #10 is @ 4.8 vs 4.7GHz? It could be that it adds to the whole package some extra stress but such a low margin? Just that extra 100Mhz on ONE core...well it could be there is a limit in everything I guess.
> 
> Anyway I am testing Core #10 @ 1.31V now since temps are low on this core...quite low on max load actually - less than 70C peaks.
> 
> BTW - RB indeed runs at AVX frequencies..
> 
> Do AVX frequencies require higher voltages? What is the limiting factor with these besides temperature?


Hi,
Last I read you weren't using any avx offsets at 4.7 
I myself have to keep avx offset to where I throttle to 4.5 no matter what I use.

System agent just start with 1.0v and see what happens.


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Last I read you weren't using any avx offsets at 4.7
> I myself have to keep avx offset to where I throttle to 4.5 no matter what I use.
> 
> System agent just start with 1.0v and see what happens.


That was @ 4.7 and the VIDs are less than 1.28v on Auto...something like 1.216v peaks on average if I remember correctly. 
I am trying to finalize max frequencies on all cores now so I am stress testing with AVX offset and will work my way up in AVX frequencies too. That's for general use and gaming....

The all cores @ 4.7 profile with NO AVX offsets has been tested for "simple" avx but no AVX 512 yet..It is stable though and temps for the too "rebel" cores peak at 88C occasionally - I am fine with it...The profile is saved in the BIOS as stable and ready for use.

Damn I am overwhelmed by the amount of testing / time needed to fine tune everything....lol.......that's why some Boutique PC builders charge an arm and a leg fro custom watercooled overclocked PCs.....


**Real Bench** passed the 55m mark where it used to crash (65m now) with 14X48 and Core #10 at 1.31v (this was causing the failure). It has not passed 64C either even at 1.31v.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Okay see your screen shot now throttling to 4.3 
1 and 7 the bad boy cores of the group looks good for 4.8 though :thumb:

Can't see all the vid's though but keeping them within 0.020 or 0.015 of each other might help stability if lost.


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Okay see your screen shot now throttling to 4.3
> 1 and 7 the bad boy cores of the group looks good for 4.8 though :thumb:
> 
> Can't see all the vid's though but keeping them within 0.020 or 0.015 of each other might help stability if lost.


It's not throttling....its AVX offset 5! I did it on purpose to isolate Core#10 @ 4.8 1.31V - which now at 92 minutes of Real Bench is going strong.

Did not know this about vids - 12X are at 1.28v , 1X at 1.29v and the nasty but cool Core #10 is at 1.31v. 112 minutes into Real Bench now and still going strong. 
Damn the system is a bit laggy while Real Bench runs...I typing on it now!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Same difference


----------



## Abaidor

double post!


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Same difference


Hehe ok, yes..will start reducing once I find the max frequency of every core above 4.8GHz...I wonder if any can do 4.9 or 5.0 with 1.30v max..
It's a shame we can't set AVX offsets per core though...

BTW - I removed the soft tubes from the CPU block and installed hard tubes to the proper inlet-outlet so I got maybe 1-2c improved temps and better flow.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
As far as I know avx is applied to the max core speed so not sure what per core avx would matter it's the throttle point for all cores.

Inlet on ek blocks is mandatory 

Yeah would be nice but short changing vcore only makes testing longer best to lower it last till it borks especially if temps allow a higher vcore.


----------



## Abaidor

Ok Real Bench Passed 2H so maybe I will try 5.0GHz on the coolest cores but winter is over and summer is coming so my ambient temps will certainly rise....it won't be a problem for normal workloads and gaming though and at worst case I turn on the AC unit..


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I guesstimated about 1.38v for 5.0 for me lol


----------



## wingman99

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I was referring to realbench not sure if it uses avx not CB as I've already stated it doesn't in my runs except one quirk run at 4.8 clocks dropped probably because of something else I ran and forgot to mention like my favorite bench classroom which does indeed use avx.


Realbench V2.56 uses AVX.


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I guesstimated about 1.38v for 5.0 for me lol


I am not even going to try that much VID....

And a new Cinebench R20 high for me.


----------



## wingman99

Jpmboy said:


> ah, yes realbench uses AVX2, not AVX512


Is it AVX2 or AVX?


----------



## ThrashZone

wingman99 said:


> Is it AVX2 or AVX?


Hi,
Same 
avx 512 is different that is what Jp was clarifying wasn't being used


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
On another note I just reserved a x299 tuf mark 2 like the first one I had and returned due to bent socket pin 

This prime deluxe is going back and going to be the forth open box Micro center has in stock lol there has to be something wrong with them 
Personally i believe it just has a horrible power delivery bloated....

Nope no prime-A or the newer prime 2 either.... they do have them I'm not interested put the left over instore credit towards something else


----------



## wingman99

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Same
> avx 512 is different that is what Jp was clarifying wasn't being used


 There is no difference from AVX and AVX2?

"Advanced Vector Extensions 2 (AVX2), also known as Haswell New Instructions,[5] is an expansion of the AVX instruction set introduced in Intel's Haswell microarchitecture. AVX2 makes the following additions:

expansion of most vector integer SSE and AVX instructions to 256 bits
three-operand general-purpose bit manipulation and multiply
Gather support, enabling vector elements to be loaded from non-contiguous memory locations
DWORD- and QWORD-granularity any-to-any permutes
vector shifts.
Sometimes another extension using a different cpuid flag is considered part of AVX2; those instructions are listed on their own page and not below:

three-operand fused multiply-accumulate support (FMA3)" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Vector_Extensions


----------



## Jpmboy

realbench v2.56 implements Blender 2.77 ... so it uses up to AVX (x264). Not AVX2. x265 uses AVX2. Corrected.


----------



## Abaidor

Dang....it looks like adding voltage to the cool cores in order to reach 4.9 or 5.0Ghz has an adverse effect on other cores' temperature....I think I am staying at 4.8Ghz with 4 AVX offset in my one profile and 4.7GHz all cores with no AVX offset (sync all cores on Auto) that passed successfully Real Bench....Performance is nice and I am good (for now).....

Now I don't know how to start with memory overclocking....

Haw anyone successfully overclocked RAM on the Rampage VI? (not the Omega)


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## ThrashZone

Abaidor said:


> Dang....it looks like adding voltage to the cool cores in order to reach 4.9 or 5.0Ghz has an adverse effect on other cores' temperature....I think I am staying at 4.8Ghz with 4 AVX offset in my one profile and 4.7GHz all cores with no AVX offset (sync all cores on Auto) that passed successfully Real Bench....Performance is nice and I am good (for now).....
> 
> Now I don't know how to start with memory overclocking....
> *
> Has anyone successfully overclocked RAM on the Rampage VI*? (not the Omega)


Hi,
A better question 
Has anyone successfully oc'ed 64gb's of memory .... 

I noticed yes some cores get warm even though they aren't clocked the same 
They seem close to the higher voltage/ clocked cores so they get hot no matter what they are clocked at 

Finally found the air vrm cooler for the prime it was hiding in the x299 mono block box :doh:
Might tare down the x299 and turn it in tomorrow see how bad the weather is in the morning.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Good to know but I believe 32gb is too much and that's at 4x8 and I sure wouldn't buy to kits to get 32bg's


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> A better question
> Has anyone successfully oc'ed 64gb's of memory ....
> 
> I noticed yes some cores get warm even though they aren't clocked the same
> They seem close to the higher voltage/ clocked cores so they get hot no matter what they are clocked at
> 
> Finally found the air vrm cooler for the prime it was hiding in the x299 mono block box :doh:
> Might tare down the x299 and turn it in tomorrow see how bad the weather is in the morning.


I don;t have a 64gb kit for x299, but I do have a 64GB 8x8GB 3200c14 kit in my R5E-10/6950X. Weak IMC generation cpu, but that kit has been at 3400c13 with 1.45V since the platform launched... what, 2+ years now? I can;t remember when it came out, but seeing as I've had this x299APEX and 7980Xe since October 2017, the x99 rig has to be close to 3 years old now. 
That said... I hear a second 3600c16 4x8GB calling me for the R6EO. 
All rigs here are spending the nights doing that Boinc Sprint thing...


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> I don;t have a 64gb kit for x299, but I do have a 64GB 8x8GB 3200c14 kit in my R5E-10/6950X. Weak IMC generation cpu, but that kit has been at 3400c13 with 1.45V since the platform launched... what, 2+ years now? I can;t remember when it came out, but seeing as I've had this x299APEX and 7980Xe since October 2017, the x99 rig has to be close to 3 years old now.
> That said...* I hear a second 3600c16 4x8GB calling me for the R6EO*.
> All rigs here are spending the nights doing that Boinc Sprint thing...


Hi,
Not C15 oh my what happened


----------



## Abaidor

kingofblog said:


> A "custom loop" can outperform an AIO by using more/denser radiators. Connecting your own fittings does not inherently increase performance. In my case, the AIO radiator is only 16 fpi, so it could be possible that a dual radiator custom loop with 30 fpi radiators would more than halve the dT. On the other hand, *doubling the air speed also doubles the cooling*. I did some research yesterday and found reports that iPPC-3000 fans decreased dT by 4 degrees on Broadwell-E. Since Broadwell-E (i7-6800K) draws only about half the power of Skylake-X, that means I could see 8 degrees with a fan replacement on AIO, which is inline with my estimate.
> 
> I just need to hear the fans in person to get a grasp on how loud they really are. YouTube videos are uninformative in this aspect...


Ermm...it does not work like this actually. It depends on the radiator and it how it is constructed / optimized. In simple words for example my Radiator is optimized for low fan speeds and I know that above 1150rpm my fans are just producing noise....doubling the speed DOES not double the performance. This is not how radiators work. Replacing your fans might increase your performance but doubling it? No way..you need more RAD surface, better fans, better pump and COOLER air intake to REALLY increase performance.




ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> A better question
> Has anyone successfully oc'ed 64gb's of memory ....
> 
> I noticed yes some cores get warm even though they aren't clocked the same
> They seem close to the higher voltage/ clocked cores so they get hot no matter what they are clocked at
> 
> Finally found the air vrm cooler for the prime it was hiding in the x299 mono block box :doh:
> Might tare down the x299 and turn it in tomorrow see how bad the weather is in the morning.



Ok I get it! I can't find any info on overclocked 64GB kits on X299....But I need them since I run some VMs along with Adobe Creative Cloud apps + Autocad and lots of other (Browsers, Outlook,) and sometimes I hit a tad more than 32GB. I did not want to limit my self in the future so I got 64Gb to be a bit more future proof. 

I guess I could just try some tighter timings but damn, testing ram is hideous it seems...


----------



## ESRCJ

Abaidor said:


> Ermm...it does not work like this actually. It depends on the radiator and it how it is constructed / optimized. In simple words for example my Radiator is optimized for low fan speeds and I know that above 1150rpm my fans are just producing noise....doubling the speed DOES not double the performance. This is not how radiators work. Replacing your fans might increase your performance but doubling it? No way..you need more RAD surface, better fans, better pump and COOLER air intake to REALLY increase performance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok I get it! I can't find any info on overclocked 64GB kits on X299....But I need them since I run some VMs along with Adobe Creative Cloud apps + Autocad and lots of other (Browsers, Outlook,) and sometimes I hit a tad more than 32GB. I did not want to limit my self in the future so I got 64Gb to be a bit more future proof.
> 
> I guess I could just try some tighter timings but damn, testing ram is hideous it seems...


It can be hit or miss depending on the CPU's IMC, memory kit quality, and the motherboard. It doesn't hurt to try though... unless you end up corrupting your OS. That's unlikely though if you go at it methodically! The DDR4 stability thread can be quite useful.


----------



## RichKnecht

Abaidor said:


> Ermm...it does not work like this actually. It depends on the radiator and it how it is constructed / optimized. In simple words for example my Radiator is optimized for low fan speeds and I know that above 1150rpm my fans are just producing noise....doubling the speed DOES not double the performance. This is not how radiators work. Replacing your fans might increase your performance but doubling it? No way..you need more RAD surface, better fans, better pump and COOLER air intake to REALLY increase performance.


Exactly. Changing out fans, in my experience, does nothing to improve the cooling capacity of any given AIO. Tried it and have a drawer full of fans to prove it. If fans would have "fixed" my heat issue, I would have been able to save a boat load of money. People running Skylake-X chips have custom loops for a reason....they work. Good luck with the fans though.


----------



## Abaidor

gridironcpj said:


> It can be hit or miss depending on the CPU's IMC, memory kit quality, and the motherboard. It doesn't hurt to try though... unless you end up corrupting your OS. That's unlikely though if you go at it methodically! The DDR4 stability thread can be quite useful.


Baby steps...lol...I might try bumping the frequency to 3866 or so and see if it even boots. Alternatively, I could try some tighter timings. This will happen during the weekend where I might have some extra time.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Jpmboy

kingofblog said:


> Convective heat transfer is in fact linearly proportional to airflow (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_transfer_coefficient#Forced_convection). You can see that in both equations the airflow (as either Re or j) is a linear or near-linear term in the transfer coefficient. If running your fans harder does not decrease dT, that means they are not actually producing more airflow, because of leakage or some other issue. In my case, it is pretty clear that airflow helps, since adding a case fan (previous page) decreased by dT by 30%.


this is why I stick 2 t-sensors on the inflow and out flow sides of rads. you can see when heat transfer is peaked at any given loop (rad) temperature.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> We need a "show us your 7900X specs" thread. Seems that there is a ton of variation with these chips. I have also found that they have an OC "ceiling" when it comes to bench marks such as Cinebench. For example, my chip:
> 
> 4.5 OC @ 1.15V CB= 2421
> 4.6 OC @ 1.15V CB= 2545
> 4.7 OC @ 1.22V CB= 2630
> 4.8 OC @ 1.30V CB= 2643
> 
> So, it doesn't make sense to go to 4.8 even if the chip is stable as the performance vs heat ratio starts getting high. Not sure if you find the same results.


Hi,
I made this thread long ago didn't get a lot of suggestions boy times have changed since then 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1643516-oc-advice-settings-i9-7900x.html


----------



## Abaidor

kingofblog said:


> Convective heat transfer is in fact linearly proportional to airflow (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_transfer_coefficient#Forced_convection). You can see that in both equations the airflow (as either Re or j) is a linear or near-linear term in the transfer coefficient. If running your fans harder does not decrease dT, that means they are not actually producing more airflow, because of leakage or some other issue. In my case, it is pretty clear that airflow helps, since adding a case fan (previous page) decreased by dT by 30%.


No leakage or other issue --- I am not amateur..lol - They are Corsair ML140 Pros (good static pressure) perfectly fitted on a MO-RA 420 Pro Radiator (Stainless Steel Edition - finish is important too )

What you read is not wrong but pointless to a degree when your rad surface and pump are inadequate. For example you can't put a JET Engine (or 10X) pulling air from SIBERIA on a 120mm RAD and COOL a nuclear reactor with it....:specool:

Running my fans harder does decrease dt up to a certain degree but after a point there are diminishing returns against noise and comfort. 
There are many factors at play and honestly:

Who likes noisy 3,000rpm fans next to his head? 
How are these going to disrupt the rest of your system's airflow balance? 
What about dust?
What a bout flow rate? 

Thhe hard truth is that no matter what you do your AIO radiator space is overwhelmed by the heat output of your system and no fan can get around this limitation. At least buy fans that you can use in a custom loop later so they don't go to waste.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## arrow0309

So, tried the 4.9 and increased the vcore up to 1.3v gradually 
Still bsod after 1h+ in blend, prime95 26.6 (since I kept the same 4.7 / -2 avx offset)
Increasing the vcore over 1.3 won't make me feel comfortable, nor the cpu package temps that will probably get easily up to 80C+ (under sustained stress test).
I don't know, maybe increasing the vccio (still low) may help?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Blank page after submit :/
I would need for 4.9 at least avx-4


----------



## Abaidor

kingofblog said:


> Obviously if your dT is already very low, then increasing flow rate does nothing. For your example, a jet turbine can not cool a reactor through a 120 mm radiator, but it would certainly cool the radiator itself down to ambient.
> 
> 
> 
> (1) I only need 3000 rpm fans to run benchmarks. My existing (bad) airflow setup can already run my daily workloads.
> (2) This is an actual problem. I need high-flow exhaust fans too, and then the total cost of all the fans is approaching $200.
> (3) Do higher fan speeds imply faster dust accumulation?
> 
> I understand that more radiators can deliver the same cooling at lower fan RPM, but the upfront cost of a new loop is high. Buying fans is also expensive, but a new loop would also need new fans, so the cost is additive. To be honest, the way I am leaning right now is to just let the CPU thermal throttle instead of spending any more money.


(3) If you think about it higher fan speeds = more air @ higher pressure and speed coming in attracting more dust or at a faster rate. Proper balance of case pressure is what keeps dust out of your case but your intake filters must be good and regularly cleaned. 

Regarding spending more or not for the sake of benchmarking, well it's up to you really.


----------



## radrok

Hi guys some time ago I posted about occasional stutters in game with my Skylake-X system compared to my 9900k, same GPU (RTX 2080 Ti).

Well I returned my CPU and took a new one and the problem has gone away, got a nice overclocker too.

Undelidded ATM on custom loop 4,8GHz full stable 1.19v - 7960x.

Looking forward to delid, or do you guys advise against?

Thanks.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Delid or not usually depends on if temps are okay or not 
Also if a three year Intel warranty is something one wants to flush down the crapper or not


----------



## Hydroplane

kingofblog said:


> Obviously if your dT is already very low, then increasing flow rate does nothing. For your example, a jet turbine can not cool a reactor through a 120 mm radiator, but it would certainly cool the radiator itself down to ambient.
> 
> 
> 
> (1) I only need 3000 rpm fans to run benchmarks. My existing (bad) airflow setup can already run my daily workloads.
> (2) This is an actual problem. I need high-flow exhaust fans too, and then the total cost of all the fans is approaching $200.
> (3) Do higher fan speeds imply faster dust accumulation?
> 
> I understand that more radiators can deliver the same cooling at lower fan RPM, but the upfront cost of a new loop is high. Buying fans is also expensive, but a new loop would also need new fans, so the cost is additive. To be honest, the way I am leaning right now is to just let the CPU thermal throttle instead of spending any more money.


I have 8 of the 3000 RPM fans, no dust filters, but surprisingly very little dust accumulation. Pretty much just had to dust the GPU backplates after a year. Probably because the fans run at 800 rpm 99% of the time. My old air cooled rig, with dust filters, used to get packed full of it!

I also only use mine at 3000 RPM for benchmarks. Wouldn't want them at that speed for anything else, lol.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Real dust filtering is easy to concoct 
I had some old speaker filter material and used it for my front and top intakes after making some frames to wrap it around
A lot better than the normal screen case manufactures use


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Blank page after submit :/
> I would need for 4.9 at least avx-4


OK but why since it is stable with avx -1 at 4.8 (4.7) and it worked even at avx 0, same 4.8 (kept for a while earlier).
And the bsod was within prime95 26.6, without any avx support.


----------



## Mysticial

kingofblog said:


> Despite the release notes, if CineBench R20 is using AVX, Maxon sure is hiding it well. I just ran a 5 GHz run on my i9-7900X and did not see any offset activating, and I would know, since my offset is -10.
> 
> Performance:
> 4.5 GHz core + 3.0 GHz uncore = 5917
> 4.8 GHz core + 3.2 GHz uncore = 6297
> 5.0 GHz core + 3.2 GHz uncore = 6555
> 
> R20 uses a lot more power than R15 though. It actually produces a higher temperature than Prime95 here, despite lower overall power. I saw thermal throttling at my custom Tjmax (85 C) once my liquid temperature reached 27 C, which is harsher than Prime95. To get the 6555 score, I had to wait about half an hour for my liquid temperature to settle at 20 C.
> 
> EDIT: I disassembled Cinebench.exe and found it only uses 128-bit AVX instructions. However, it does execute FMAs, which explains why the thermal density is worse than Prime95 26.6 (128-bit non-FMA).
> 
> The top function in R20 (embree.dll):
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> vmovups xmm0, xmmword ptr [r11+rsi*1+0x20]
> vmovups xmm2, xmmword ptr [rdx+rsi*1+0x20]
> vmovups xmm3, xmmword ptr [rax+rsi*1+0x20]
> vmovups xmm4, xmmword ptr [r15+rsi*1+0x20]
> vmovups xmm5, xmmword ptr [r14+rsi*1+0x20]
> vmovups xmm5, xmmword ptr [r13+rsi*1+0x20]
> vfmsub213ps xmm0, xmm13, xmm9
> vfmsub213ps xmm2, xmm12, xmm10
> vfmsub213ps xmm3, xmm8, xmm11
> vfmsub213ps xmm4, xmm13, xmm9
> vfmsub213ps xmm5, xmm12, xmm10
> vfmsub213ps xmm1, xmm8, xmm11
> vpmaxsd xmm0, xmm0, xmm2
> vpmaxsd xmm3, xmm3, xmm7
> vpminsd xmm4, xmm4, xmm5
> vpminsd xmm5, xmm1, xmm6
> vpmaxsd xmm0, xmm0, xmm3
> vpminsd xmm0, xmm0, xmm3
> vpcmpgtd xmm0, xmm0, xmm3
> vmovmskps edi, xmm0
> xor rdi, 0xf
> jz -112
> 
> Outside of Embree, the Cinema4D code itself only executes scalar instructions.
> 
> Edit2: Turns out my cooling problems were because I had no exhaust fans. After adding 700 rpm exhaust (X299 DARK doesn't support fan curves for case fans, ***!), I can consistently complete one run of R20 without throttling.


Are there any stand-alone mirrors of the R20 left? I missed the boat before everything went to hell.

If there are, I can run it through VTune this weekend. That'll give a breakdown of what R20 is actually using and how much of each.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Not sure buddy it's just how I have to accommodate avx for my system :/

Leak testing now on my budget tuf mark 2 board got this morning still got 200.us left over from the credit on the prime deluxe return :thumb:


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Mysticial said:


> Are there any stand-alone mirrors of the R20 left? I missed the boat before everything went to hell.
> 
> If there are, I can run it through VTune this weekend. That'll give a breakdown of what R20 is actually using and how much of each.


I didn't have to even log into the M$ site to download it there. It was a new rig so I'm sure there weren't any cookies to recognize, I don't even remember my login there - seems like I had to log in there once to play a game or something, but a totally different rig.


----------



## Jpmboy

Mysticial said:


> Are there any stand-alone mirrors of the R20 left? I missed the boat before everything went to hell.
> 
> If there are, I can run it through VTune this weekend. That'll give a breakdown of what R20 is actually using and how much of each.



here ya go:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=18DOoQElb9TsRc1VVmis-CjOJNZ_7SZ_U


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Mysticial

Jpmboy said:


> here ya go:
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=18DOoQElb9TsRc1VVmis-CjOJNZ_7SZ_U



Thanks.




kingofblog said:


> I just installed the Store version. It doesn't require a Microsoft account. Here is what I see in vTune:
> 
> 
> 
> The vector function at the top is the Embree BVH function. The remaining scalar functions are shading(?) routines from Cinema4D. The [Others] are additional scalar functions for C4D, with the occasional miscellaneous Embree function. All Cinema4D functions are scalar.


 Oh that's dumb... If they really advertised AVX, then this is totally a bait-and-switch. lol

Now I'm wondering why Intel is winning if it's still 128-bit...


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## SirWaWa

is it worth it going from a 7820x to a 9800x?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

9800x, more pci-E lanes and cache vs 7820x.


----------



## Lucius5nm

kingofblog said:


> I just installed the Store version. It doesn't require a Microsoft account. Here is what I see in vTune:
> 
> 
> 
> The vector function at the top is the Embree BVH function. The remaining scalar functions are shading(?) routines from Cinema4D. The [Others] are additional scalar functions for C4D, with the occasional miscellaneous Embree function. All Cinema4D functions are scalar.


What is the difference?
https://twitter.com/kokolordas/status/1103034078113292290


----------



## Lucius5nm

@Mysticial, Congratulations on breaking the world record for calculating Pi.


----------



## SirWaWa

MrTOOSHORT said:


> 9800x, more pci-E lanes and cache vs 7820x.


so you're saying other than lanes, it's not an upgrade?


----------



## ThrashZone

SirWaWa said:


> so you're saying other than lanes, it's not an upgrade?


Hi,
3% looks like a hair bump grade 
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-9800X-vs-Intel-Core-i7-7820X/m651256vs3928


----------



## Jpmboy

SirWaWa said:


> so you're saying other than lanes, it's not an upgrade?


 pretty slim... but comparing at stock is pretty meaningless - this is OVERclock.net.
The 9800 will not need to be delidded, and the new i9s have a higher ram frequency capability. Not sure why you would buy a cpu that is 2 years old and EOL. That said, x299 is pretty mature, but absent any great increase in socket performance for consumers/gamers, x299 will be viable for some time yet.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> pretty slim... but comparing at stock is pretty meaningless - this is OVERclock.net.
> The 9800 will not need to be delidded, and the new i9s have a higher ram frequency capability. *Not sure why you would buy a cpu that is 2 years old and EOL*. That said, x299 is pretty mature, but absent any great increase in socket performance for consumers/gamers, x299 will be viable for some time yet.


Hi,
9800x isn't 2 years old 
7820x is but he already has one so he's not buying it


----------



## Mysticial

Lucius5nm said:


> @*Mysticial* , Congratulations on breaking the world record for calculating Pi.



Thanks!


----------



## D-EJ915

SirWaWa said:


> so you're saying other than lanes, it's not an upgrade?


Nope, sidegrade at best. Unless you NEED those extra PCIE lanes, not worth it at all imo.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 9800x isn't 2 years old
> 7820x is but he already has one so he's not buying it


ah, I thought it was a choice between the two. Yep, not even a side grade considering the time-cost of cash.


----------



## RichKnecht

A quick question. I know what LLC is and what it does. However, say I can run a particular OC at 1.22V and a LLC level of 6. Now, that same overclock can be achieved by raising VCore to 1.225 and lowering LLC to 5. From what I am seeing, the setting with higher vcore but lower LLC seems to run cooler in all benchmarks. Does this make sense, or am I imagining things?


----------



## Abaidor

Well I would also like to know from the experts here since I am at LLC6 and was wondering the same.


----------



## RichKnecht

Abaidor said:


> Well I would also like to know from the experts here since I am at LLC6 and was wondering the same.


I was actually able to go from LLC6 to LLC4 by raising vcore from 1.22 to 1.225 and temps are a bit (3-4C) lower under load. Wondering if it's worth fiddling with.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> A quick question. I know what LLC is and what it does. However, say I can run a particular OC at 1.22V and a LLC level of 6. Now, that same overclock can be achieved by raising VCore to 1.225 and lowering LLC to 5. From what I am seeing, the setting with higher vcore but lower LLC seems to run cooler in all benchmarks. Does this make sense, or am I imagining things?


 THere's two ways to look at LLC on any voltage rail it is implemented on. The thing you are trying to control is call a Load Line Transient.
From a durability perspective, LLC is there to mitigate V_ovs. V_ovs is the inherent overshoot (milli sec) that occurs when you abruptly change the current flow on any voltage-clamped circuit (eg, VCCIN on x299). At stock settings the spec is somewhere around 50mV normal op, 200mV virus-mode (eg, heavy stability testing). The LLC-permitted droop creates a compensation window/margin for the overshoot that mitigates (most or some of) V_ovs ABOVE what you set as the voltage in bios. So, when running these HEDT chips at an average overclock (what, +20%) you can expect occasional vccin excursions in the higher mV range, especially when doing things like 995 - tho new VRs control this much better than than before. It's a current-based effect, this is why you see more droop at high(er) current loads.
The other way to look at this is LLC also lets you compensate for the inherent undershoot (it's a oscillation around the set value) by starting at a higher voltage before vdroop... ever have a very cpu-intensive benchmark fail right when the bench ends? That's from undershoot. It's a balance.
Basically, IMO, for a 24/7 system, it is s good idea to allow for some "healthy" amount of droop of the rail LLC is acting on (VCCIN or vcore). Extreme benchmarking is different, and undershoot is the concern. In my experience (even in most benchmarks) I've never really experienced a scenario where it is better to meet voltage requirements with LLC increases (eg, lowering vdroop) than by simply increasing the voltage setting and allowing vdroop. In many implementations, LLC simply adds voltage to the value you set in bios... that's the wrong way to use LLC, IMO.
In the pics below, "vdroop" is labeled as "offset" in the early days. These are from socket 775 - when LLC settings were first made available in bios.


----------



## ThrashZone

kingofblog said:


> LLC applies to Vccin, not Vcore, because SKX is driven by *FIVR*. You can either increase Vccin or increase LLC to combat Vccin underrun ("phantom throttling"), but I would recommend increasing Vccin to using LLC. LLC causes higher voltage droops, because of the controller delay, which would result in *FIVR *undervoltage during transient loads.


Hi,
Decoder ring is in the shop with no eta for return 
So with that in mind what is FIVR 

Abbreviations are okay but assume everyone knows what they mean


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Decoder ring is in the shop with no eta for return
> So with that in mind what is FIVR
> 
> Abbreviations are okay but assume everyone knows what they mean


Fully Integrated Voltage Regulator :thinking:


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> Fully Integrated Voltage Regulator :thinking:


Hi,
Boom thank you Mr. Translator :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

here's my 9900X @ 5.0 R6EO in R20. Approx 80mV droop on VCCIN while running (adaptive vcore, LLC5). A bit hot for me. There is definitely no AVX being used.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> here's my 9900X @ 5.0 R6EO in R20. Approx 80mV droop on VCCIN while running (adaptive vcore, LLC5). A bit hot for me. There is definitely no AVX being used.


That's what I am seeing now. I have ~80mv drop under load, drops from 1.96 to 1.88 and everything is just fine. Funny thing is the Strix board would blue screen with drops like that. I guess the Omega has a better, or more consistent power delivery system. I'm impressed that you can get 5GHz out of the chip with those temps. I can't even get to 4.8 without throwing over 1.3V at it and even then, performance gains are very minimal. So, for this chip, 4.7 will have to do. The good thing is, the Iceman frame is still working great and temps don't go above 70C under normal day to day use. I just ran Real Bench for an hour and max temp was 78C. Without the frame, my max temps were ~86C. BTW, what are you using to cool it?


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> That's what I am seeing now. I have ~80mv drop under load, drops from 1.96 to 1.88 and everything is just fine. Funny thing is the Strix board would blue screen with drops like that. I guess the Omega has a better, or more consistent power delivery system. I'm impressed that you can get 5GHz out of the chip with those temps. I can't even get to 4.8 without throwing over 1.3V at it and even then, performance gains are very minimal. So, for this chip, 4.7 will have to do. The good thing is, the Iceman frame is still working great and temps don't go above 70C under normal day to day use. I just ran Real Bench for an hour and max temp was 78C. Without the frame, my max temps were ~86C. BTW, what are you using to cool it?


that's 5.0 at 1.4V :no-smil ... water cooled with a koolance 380i block. 2 360 rads. Open bench... the HWbot benchtable.


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> that's 5.0 at 1.4V :no-smil ... water cooled with a koolance 380i block. 2 360 rads. Open bench... the HWbot benchtable.


Hmmm...I really think I need to add another pump to my loop after reading this. Still have yet to install my flow meter, but I really think that 3 360mm radiators and 11 fans should be doing a better job with my setup. The block is clean and there is no air trapped in any of the radiators. The loop can't adequately cool my chip at 1.3V as temps spike to~87-90C. And that is with direct die cooling.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> that's 5.0 at 1.4V :no-smil ... water cooled with a koolance 380i block. 2 360 rads. Open bench... the HWbot benchtable.


Hi,
Yep I guessed it would probably take nearly 1.4v to get 5.0
I was guessing 1.38v but assuming 0.040 for that jump from 4.9's 1.34v


----------



## Abaidor

RichKnecht said:


> Hmmm...I really think I need to add another pump to my loop after reading this. Still have yet to install my flow meter, but I really think that 3 360mm radiators and 11 fans should be doing a better job with my setup. The block is clean and there is no air trapped in any of the radiators. The loop can't adequately cool my chip at 1.3V as temps spike to~87-90C. And that is with direct die cooling.


Not only that, he also has 2X GPUs and some Quick Disconnect (added restriction) on his loop....

I guess the following could be restricting your performance..

Fans? What fans are you using? 
Radiators not getting enough fresh air...
What is your CPU block?

I might be wrong though.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Got my 7920X delidded last night, I'll put the lid back on tonight and see if it'll run. I got the block and shunt mod on the 2080Ti last night, too. Ran it just long enough without water to make shure I didn't bork the shunt mod. I bought the wrong dang resistors, instead of the solid end caps like the ones I used before, these had a tiny little metal tab on the bottom that just barely stuck out past the ends. PITA to solder these and I roached a couple in the process - good thing they are cheap and I bought 10. Now I have to tear down the loop on War Pig to get the TX out of it and put the 2080Ti in, and then build a loop for the 7920X rig with the TX in it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Sounds like fun Charlie


----------



## RichKnecht

Abaidor said:


> Not only that, he also has 2X GPUs and some Quick Disconnect (added restriction) on his loop....
> 
> I guess the following could be restricting your performance..
> 
> Fans? What fans are you using?
> Radiators not getting enough fresh air...
> What is your CPU block?
> 
> I might be wrong though.


Oh, I've been going over this for a LONG time  I am using 3 ML120 fans on each radiator, an EK Supremacy, and a D5 pump-res combo. Thrash said to add a second pump, which I am probably going to do. There are quite a few 90 degree fittings in the loop which restrict flow quite a bit. Plus, the one EK XE360 is reported to be pretty restrictive as far as rads go. The other 2 are PE360s and they are fine as far as restriction goes. I just ran a test where I did a few CB runs with the pump at 100%. Temps just touched 70C. Then I ran a few more CB tests with the pump at 70% and temps rose 5-6C which leads me to believe that the pump NEEDS to run at 100% in order for the loop to cool the CPU down. I am guessing ( big word when talking about X299) if I add another pump, flow would increase by quite a bit. With the voltage I am using (1.223), 3 360mm radiators and direct die cooling should keep the chip in the low 60s under load not in the 70s. But who knows...I could be wrong just like I have been in the past.


----------



## Jpmboy

Abaidor said:


> Not only that, he also has 2X GPUs and some Quick Disconnect (added restriction) on his loop....
> 
> I guess the following could be restricting your performance..
> 
> Fans? What fans are you using?
> Radiators not getting enough fresh air...
> What is your CPU block?
> 
> I might be wrong though.


 the QDCs really do not add restriction to the loop. The QDC3s are quite high flow. But then Again, I have to turn the pump down so there is sufficient residence time in the rads for the crap to cool down. Too fast and the loop just runs hotter.
Anyway, it all comes off the HWBT and into a case soon... been looking for something like the corsair 1000D that does not cost $500!. 



GnarlyCharlie said:


> Got my 7920X delidded last night, I'll put the lid back on tonight and see if it'll run. I got the block and shunt mod on the 2080Ti last night, too. Ran it just long enough without water to make shure I didn't bork the shunt mod. I bought the wrong dang resistors, instead of the solid end caps like the ones I used before, these had a tiny little metal tab on the bottom that just barely stuck out past the ends. PITA to solder these and I roached a couple in the process - good thing they are cheap and I bought 10. Now I have to tear down the loop on War Pig to get the TX out of it and put the 2080Ti in, and then build a loop for the 7920X rig with the TX in it.


I am sooo tempted to send you my 2080Tis for a clean mod...


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

You probably have plenty of rads/fans, more rads won't help with short term spikes just long term loop temp stability.

Right after I did my 7980XE build, I did a similar experiment. All my pumps and fans are controlled from bios, so I can't really adjust on the fly. I didn't think flow (as long as it was "flowing", not just stagnant) was that big of a deal. My pumps go to 100% if I disconnect the fan header, so I started running something (maybe Blender Classroom since it takes a while to run), opened Afterburner since it has a CPU temp graph option, and just unplugged the fan header. The CPU temps dropped like 10 degrees before I could even look back at the monitor, so I ran them up to about 45% on a flat fan curve (I hate stuff ramping up and down anytime the CPU load changes) and that seemed to be a good spot, not a lot of temp difference from there to 100% - not nearly as much as from where I had 'em which was probably 20% or something to 45%. Not as silent as before, but not near loud and the sound never changes regardless of what I throw at it.

So yeah, I might be able to drop my temps a bit more if I ran the pumps at 100%, but it's good enough where it is now. I will say that I really do like pumps that go to 100% with no signal, I also have pumps that barely run with no signal and filling a loop like that is just tedious. I keep a spare PSU on hand to do loops so I don't have to disconnect everything and use the system PSU for loop changes/filling. I ought to break down and try one of those nice fan controllers.



Jpmboy said:


> I am sooo tempted to send you my 2080Tis for a clean mod...


You notice I didn't take any pictures of this go around? Yeah, there's a reason ;-)

It would have been fine if I had bought the right resistors, it was not a fun evening. The picture on the Mouser website showed what I thought I was getting, but there's a disclaimer that it's just representative. So yeah, it was a 8mOhm 2512, but just a different style. On the bright side, I know what's inside of them now. And that's what threw me, I melted the end of the "body" on one that was soldered fine - just no area on the solder strip to get the iron on there without touching it. So removing that one removed the body part and the actual resistor is just a metal strip in between the solder pads. I think it'd be easier to just ditch the body part and solder it that way and cover it back with liquid tape - or buy the right resistors in the first place.


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> You probably have plenty of rads/fans, more rads won't help with short term spikes just long term loop temp stability.
> 
> Right after I did my 7980XE build, I did a similar experiment. All my pumps and fans are controlled from bios, so I can't really adjust on the fly. I didn't think flow (as long as it was "flowing", not just stagnant) was that big of a deal. My pumps go to 100% if I disconnect the fan header, so I started running something (maybe Blender Classroom since it takes a while to run), opened Afterburner since it has a CPU temp graph option, and just unplugged the fan header. The CPU temps dropped like 10 degrees before I could even look back at the monitor, so I ran them up to about 45% on a flat fan curve (I hate stuff ramping up and down anytime the CPU load changes) and that seemed to be a good spot, not a lot of temp difference from there to 100% - not nearly as much as from where I had 'em which was probably 20% or something to 45%. Not as silent as before, but not near loud and the sound never changes regardless of what I throw at it.
> 
> So yeah, I might be able to drop my temps a bit more if I ran the pumps at 100%, but it's good enough where it is now. I will say that I really do like pumps that go to 100% with no signal, I also have pumps that barely run with no signal and filling a loop like that is just tedious.* I keep a spare PSU on hand to do loops so I don't have to disconnect everything and use the system PSU for loop changes/filling. I ought to break down and try one of those nice fan controllers.*
> 
> 
> 
> You notice I didn't take any pictures of this go around? Yeah, there's a reason ;-)
> 
> It would have been fine if I had bought the right resistors, it was not a fun evening. The picture on the Mouser website showed what I thought I was getting, but there's a disclaimer that it's just representative. So yeah, it was a 8mOhm 2512, but just a different style. On the bright side, I know what's inside of them now. And that's what threw me, I melted the end of the "body" on one that was soldered fine - just no area on the solder strip to get the iron on there without touching it. So removing that one removed the body part and the actual resistor is just a metal strip in between the solder pads. I think it'd be easier to just ditch the body part and solder it that way and cover it back with liquid tape - or buy the right resistors in the first place.


Of course a PSU is fine.. absent that I use a little 12V 3A power brick-transformer - like from a charger or what ever. Put a 4-pin molex on the end and good to go. Runs D5s, DCCs, and 400s. one of those "easy button" things.


----------



## ocvn

RichKnecht said:


> That's what I am seeing now. I have ~80mv drop under load, drops from 1.96 to 1.88 and everything is just fine. Funny thing is the Strix board would blue screen with drops like that. I guess the Omega has a better, or more consistent power delivery system. I'm impressed that you can get 5GHz out of the chip with those temps. I can't even get to 4.8 without throwing over 1.3V at it and even then, performance gains are very minimal. So, for this chip, 4.7 will have to do. The good thing is, the Iceman frame is still working great and temps don't go above 70C under normal day to day use. I just ran Real Bench for an hour and max temp was 78C. Without the frame, my max temps were ~86C. BTW, what are you using to cool it?


re-sit your die-guard again. With 1.25V Vcore after 8 hours RB 2.43 (non AVX version), only 1 core pass 73.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

7920X delid a success. Still no OC and still on air, but I ran the CPU-Z "stress" test before de-lid and got a high of 58 degrees, knocked 15 degrees off that and all cores are nice and close together. I realize this isn't much of a benchmark, I just wanted something repeatable to go by and see if I had any cores off the map or something wack. Seems OK, so that means I have to do some work now. Tearing a working system down is not all that fun with hard tube, but that's how I roll.


----------



## RichKnecht

GnarlyCharlie said:


> 7920X delid a success. Still no OC and still on air, but I ran the CPU-Z "stress" test before de-lid and got a high of 58 degrees, knocked 15 degrees off that and all cores are nice and close together. I realize this isn't much of a benchmark, I just wanted something repeatable to go by and see if I had any cores off the map or something wack. Seems OK, so that means I have to do some work now. Tearing a working system down is not all that fun with hard tube, but that's how I roll.


Good news. Having the cores close together as far as temps go under load is a big bonus.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I got my 7980XE system back together with the 2080Ti in it, and I verified the 2080Ti would operate in the 7920X system, same driver. But I can't get drivers to install. Keep getting "This driver is not compatible with this operating system" or something like that. W10 64 bit 1607 14393.2214. Uninstalled old driver, uninstalled Afterburner.

So I try to let it scan the system to find a driver that will work, needs Java. I only have Chrome and Edge, neither support Java.

Went through the whole GeForce Experience - it downloaded the same driver that I tried before that wouldn't work.

1607 is supposed to be recent enough to work with this driver generation. Did a sfc /scannow, no system issues. GPU-Z recognizes the TU-102 chip, but with no driver it calls it a basic display adapter or something. Tried disabling the basic display adapter in Device Manger, driver still won't install.

Beats me. I'll post this in the Nvidia section, maybe somebody will have an idea there.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Did you have the titan Xp installed before installing the 2080ti ?
If so you'd need to use DDU display driver uninstaller before removing the titan 

But you can use it now too.
https://www.guru3d.com/files-details/display-driver-uninstaller-download.html


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Yeah, I'm down with DDU, I'm just not having any luck getting the new driver to install - says it's not compatible with this version of Windows. I don't have another version of Windows handy, and this one is updated to this morning.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
You might install 1809 isn't that the build needed for 2080ti ?


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah, with RTX you need 1809 or 1903 (which I have on two rigs here - works fine). Gotta upgrade the OS. you can get the image direct from MS or use the mediacreationtool1809


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I don't know, I thought Windows updated to the latest version on it's own. Seems like every time I turn one of these W10 rigs on there's a another gigabyte of upgrades pending. Dang thing worked on the other W10 rig, and it was installed off the same USB stick.

Edit: OK, looks like an OS upgrade in my future.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I gave up on 1809 there was way too much Blue in it for my taste on good clocks


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> I don't know, I thought Windows updated to the latest version on it's own. Seems like every time I turn one of these W10 rigs on there's a another gigabyte of upgrades pending. Dang thing worked on the other W10 rig, and it was installed off the same USB stick.


 I have 1709 iso, 1809 and 1903 came down via update. Activate windows insider, permit "Slow" so you get releases that have some legs and not true Test releases.


I'm uploading 1709 onto my google drive for ya... but you need 1809 for the 2080Ti. Maybe a jump from 16xx is not automatic...


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I bet that 7920X rig updated to 1809 or something on it's own before I activated it - I had it running quite a bit before activation. I know it went through a load of downloads.


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> I bet that 7920X rig updated to 1809 or something on it's own before I activated it - I had it running quite a bit before activation. I know it went through a load of downloads.


 yeah, it must have. The new ports on the 2080ti and instruction set(s) need their OS "enablers". 
*here's a 1709 iso*

get a free copy of Rufus to make a USB upgrade drive (very easy)


windows web page: https://www.microsoft.com/en-au/software-download/windows10


A cool way to get the version you want: https://pureinfotech.com/windows-10-1809-iso-download/


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Not sure why you'd offer 1709 it's eol next month.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Not sure why you'd offer 1709 it's eol next month.


because... I felt like it.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

So it's a re-install of the OS? Man, I was hoping it'd be an update. I miss the days when you knew if you had W7, then it was incompatible with W10 stuff. Now W10 stuff is incompatible with other W10 stuff, but I still get gigabytes of updates.

On a lighter note, the loop swap was a breeze. Had to make 2 new tubes, real easy when you already have the ones you are replacing to go by. Bleeding this thing is no fun, it's so heavy I had to do it all on the floor, no way I was going to try to get that thing back on the bench. I assembled all of the stuff in the basement a couple of years ago, including the drain valve. When I went to open that thing, it was so stiff that fingertips couldn't do it, I had to unplug all the cables from the PSU to be able to get a whole hand in there.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Only good for his titan Xp rig unless all have 2080ti now :/
Good for me frankly but i have a dvd with most builds I use already no need to waste usb's for installers


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Only good for his titan Xp rig unless all have 2080ti now :/
> Good for me frankly but i have a dvd with most builds I use already no need to waste usb's for installers


DVDs? but we can teach old dogs new tricks.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Charlie like myself love dvd's


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Only good for his titan Xp rig unless all have 2080ti now :/
> Good for me frankly but i have a dvd with most builds I use already no need to waste usb's for installers


I catch flack for putting optical drives in all my builds, even this 7920X where I had to do some major case surgery to keep it in there and still get some rads in there. I still rip BluRays - all those benches that have some Handbrake in there? I run actual Handbrake (an OCd 7980XE can chew through a file in about 15 minutes that would take an OCd 5960X an hour and change)

https://www.overclock.net/forum/161...ase-club-lovers-owners-2027.html#post27885054


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep I need one too :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

GnarlyCharlie said:


> I catch flack for putting optical drives in all my builds, even this 7920X where I had to do some major case surgery to keep it in there and still get some rads in there. I still rip BluRays - all those benches that have some Handbrake in there? I run actual Handbrake (an OCd 7980XE can chew through a file in about 15 minutes that would take an OCd 5960X an hour and change)
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/161...ase-club-lovers-owners-2027.html#post27885054


Hi,
Nicely done by the way 

I simply added a second floor for the rad


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> I catch flack for putting optical drives in all my builds, even this 7920X where I had to do some major case surgery to keep it in there and still get some rads in there. I still rip BluRays - all those benches that have some Handbrake in there? I run actual Handbrake (an OCd 7980XE can chew through a file in about 15 minutes that would take an OCd 5960X an hour and change)
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/161...ase-club-lovers-owners-2027.html#post27885054


 yeah - I put BR burners in some builds... but external burners are where the user base is at (portable between machines). Fact is, almost every new TV uses USb ports, and the encoded videos play directly from the USBs. My samsung QLED and Sony AF8 use the USB storage for this, but the AF8 will stream 4K directly from a pc/server. Besides, DVDs and BR disks are low capacity. 128GB sticks are pretty cheap these days. 
Handbrake and redray encoders here.


----------



## djgar

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Only good for his titan Xp rig unless all have 2080ti now :/
> Good for me frankly but i have a dvd with most builds I use already no need to waste usb's for installers





Jpmboy said:


> DVDs? but we can teach old dogs new tricks.


Yeah, I use DVDs with the MediaCreator . I have a bunch of blanks I have no other use for now ... hell, I have a bunch of blank CDs I don't know what to do with


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I got all the tube bending stuff out last night to modify the War Pig, now I need to get bending and get that one plumbed up - I needed that Titan X to go any further. The kids this one is going to will be coming to town at the end of April, get that thing dialed in before then I hope.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
CD's I still burn music to them although I did it with linux a while back haven't in a while though 
My linux mint mate killed a crucial ssd so since then I've never reinstalled think it was mm 17.1 or something.

Been accumulating ssd's and I have several samsung 2.5" ssd's which I don't believe have issues with linux filling them up.


----------



## djgar

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> CD's I still burn music to them although I did it with linux a while back haven't in a while though
> My linux mint mate killed a crucial ssd so since then I've never reinstalled think it was mm 17.1 or something.
> 
> Been accumulating ssd's and I have several samsung 2.5" ssd's which I don't believe have issues with linux filling them up.


My MP3s go on USB


----------



## CptSpig

GnarlyCharlie said:


> I got all the tube bending stuff out last night to modify the War Pig, now I need to get bending and get that one plumbed up - I needed that Titan X to go any further. The kids this one is going to will be coming to town at the end of April, get that thing dialed in before then I hope.


Time to change the War Pig to a open bench with QDC's. :headscrat:


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Nah, I'm old school - computers in cases. With optical drives ;-)

OK, the 7920X rig had upgraded to 1803 is why the 2080Ti driver worked there. Never paid any attention, got the 1809 DL in progress now.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I've got two cases where that one open bench is of course I have no wall behind my desk though

Two story open bench is doable though tough to direct hot air away or anywhere for that matter keeping in mind no water chiller being used.


----------



## Jpmboy

CptSpig said:


> Time to change the War Pig to a open bench with QDC's. :headscrat:


is the single 2080Ti good to go on the monitor?


GnarlyCharlie said:


> Nah, I'm old school - computers in cases. With optical drives ;-)
> 
> OK, the 7920X rig had upgraded to 1803 is why the 2080Ti driver worked there. Never paid any attention, got the 1809 DL in progress now.


 just no floppies. 
(bro, I still have 8-tracks)
anyway, once you load 1809, Wupdate will load a driver (I think it's 417.xx or something) best to scrub that with DDU and load the most recent. I think you will find 1809 more stable than 16xx. Only time 1809 can cause (invisible) issues, is when it is an auto update from 1709 and there remains a borked profile background that can show many "warning" in event viewer. I have a regedit fix for that problem if you see it. (event ID1534).


----------



## djgar

Jpmboy said:


> is the single 2080Ti good to go on the monitor?
> 
> just no floppies.
> (bro, I still have 8-tracks)
> anyway, once you load 1809, Wupdate will load a driver (I think it's 417.xx or something) best to scrub that with DDU and load the most recent. I think you will find 1809 more stable than 16xx. Only time 1809 can cause (invisible) issues, is when it is an auto update from 1709 and there remains a borked profile background that can show many "warning" in event viewer. I have a regedit fix for that problem if you see it. (event ID1534).


I still have my Amiga floppies


----------



## RichKnecht

I think I am still on 1803. At least that's what it says under "system". Is that bad?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Next month whom ever is on 1709 will be on 1803 so no 1803 isn't bad 
1809 has come a ways but still weird as hell frankly.


----------



## djgar

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Next month whom ever is on 1709 will be on 1803 so no 1803 isn't bad
> 1809 has come a ways but still weird as hell frankly.


Weird how for you? Just curious.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Next month whom ever is on 1709 will be on 1803 so no 1803 isn't bad
> 1809 has come a ways but still weird as hell frankly.


you should opt into the insider program and provide feedback...


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Still makes me wonder how that 7920X rig made the jump to 1803 while the 7980XE rig was stuck at 1607 even though it's probably been online about a month longer, both installed off the same USB stick - not even sure what build is on that stick, but I'll be making a new one after this deal. Not activating the 7920X rig for so long is all I can think of - MS just had its way with that OS for several days.

I didn't realize there was that big of a difference between W10 versions, I just though it updated to the new version when they rolled it out and never really paid attention to what it was, just W10 Pro 64 bit to me.


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> is the single 2080Ti good to go on the monitor?
> 
> just no floppies.
> (bro, I still have 8-tracks)
> anyway, once you load 1809, Wupdate will load a driver (I think it's 417.xx or something) best to scrub that with DDU and load the most recent. I think you will find 1809 more stable than 16xx. Only time 1809 can cause (invisible) issues, is when it is an auto update from 1709 and there remains a borked profile background that can show many "warning" in event viewer. I have a regedit fix for that problem if you see it. (event ID1534).


Mild OC 100+ FPS G-sync, everything on ultra except DXR on high and DX12 enabled. Looks amazing! :wheee:


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Next month whom ever is on 1709 will be on 1803 so no 1803 isn't bad
> 1809 has come a ways but still weird as hell frankly.


Weird? It's awesome best version to date. :headscrat:


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

1809 is what I got, I just let that updater do its thing, it was loaded up and waiting on me to select my options when I got home. Vid driver loaded up, running smooth. No Power perf cap! Still unsure on dialing the OC on the 2080Ti in, seems like different apps have widely different views on the clock rate. 35C max temp so far, so block mounting seems OK.


----------



## CptSpig

GnarlyCharlie said:


> 1809 is what I got, I just let that updater do its thing, it was loaded up and waiting on me to select my options when I got home. Vid driver loaded up, running smooth. No Power perf cap! Still unsure on dialing the OC on the 2080Ti in, seems like different apps have widely different views on the clock rate. 35C max temp so far, so block mounting seems OK.



:wheee:


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> 1809 is what I got, I just let that updater do its thing, it was loaded up and waiting on me to select my options when I got home. Vid driver loaded up, running smooth. No Power perf cap! Still unsure on dialing the OC on the 2080Ti in, seems like different apps have widely different views on the clock rate. 35C max temp so far, so block mounting seems OK.


 I like this tool for the 2080Ti (or RTX titan). And the voltage slider actually locks the card in P0 - which can be beneficial. You can get it direct from GALAX if you prefer.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1FSCp_tP4to6631kt8zvRr5JoeeKCa9ju


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Jpmboy said:


> I like this tool for the 2080Ti (or RTX titan). And the voltage slider actually locks the card in P0 - which can be beneficial. You can get it direct from GALAX if you prefer.
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1FSCp_tP4to6631kt8zvRr5JoeeKCa9ju


I'll have to fiddle with it - I never even really got that OCing by graph down with Pascal, and this thing is really touchy when you change stuff. 

And I kinda freaked out. That no power perf cap in GPU-Z is only with the power limit is at +123 in AB. I turned it down to see if I could balance the clocks and power settings and looked and green everywhere on the perf cap bar. I don't know if that's right or if the thing is semi-borked (in retrospect I should have re-ordered resistors, I'm not taking it back apart now), but it seems to run OK - not a golden example on clocks it seems. But at +123, no green so that's what I got there.


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> I'll have to fiddle with it - I never even really got that OCing by graph down with Pascal, and this thing is really touchy when you change stuff.
> 
> And I kinda freaked out. That no power perf cap in GPU-Z is only with the power limit is at +123 in AB. I turned it down to see if I could balance the clocks and power settings and looked and green everywhere on the perf cap bar. I don't know if that's right or if the thing is semi-borked (in retrospect I should have re-ordered resistors, I'm not taking it back apart now), but it seems to run OK - not a golden example on clocks it seems. But at +123, no green so that's what I got there.


yeah, the galax tool does not use the graph thing, just sliders. Note, that some versions of MSI AB's sliders actually show half the implemented frequency...


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, the galax tool does not use the graph thing, just sliders. Note, that some versions of MSI AB's sliders actually show half the implemented frequency...


And the GPU-Z render test doesn't fully ramp this card up. I loaded GPU-Z up mainly for the perf cap indicator, quick and easy to see. Start the render test, gets 1350Mhz. OK, add about 250 to the slider and let 'er rip! Boosted up to 2450 or something for about 10 frames in FS... :-Q


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
lol yeah I'm done with the insiders bs builds thanks but no thanks been there done that in the very beginning 

Frankly it's been a while since I've used 1809 so no telling what it's like now 
When it first came out and a few months after it's favorite color shown was bsod blue 

From my memory 1809 removes some older basic apps can't remember if it did or not notepad... ?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
On a happy note don't get them very often but 
This x299 tuf mark 2 mother board darned if hwinfo shows a cpu cache/ mesh listing for it lol 0.913 max just sitting here doing nothing at default 2700


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

We'll see, I'm on 1809 now w/ War Pig - never had a BSOD yet. If I get any now it'll be a first for this rig.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I've been on 1709 just for benchmarking not really caring too much how or where ms has gone on 1809 improvements/ fixes.... from first release which was a joke by the way 
1809 Released/ pulled/ released....


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> And the GPU-Z render test doesn't fully ramp this card up. I loaded GPU-Z up mainly for the perf cap indicator, quick and easy to see. Start the render test, gets 1350Mhz. OK, add about 250 to the slider and let 'er rip! Boosted up to 2450 or something for about 10 frames in FS... :-Q


i think the gpuz render is insufficient to push the card into P0... I'd have to test that again. Been awhile. Also, the new content developers NV driver seems to be working very well with turing - 419.67. in the galax tuner, put the voltage slider at 1.06V (or the P0 voltage for your card - it's right around 1.06V). Without touching anyu other slider, click apply. That's hte base boost clock. You can then move the sliders and apply, and see the boost clocks (before bin drops due to temp - first is at 40C). 


ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> lol yeah I'm done with the insiders bs builds thanks but no thanks been there done that in the very beginning
> 
> Frankly it's been a while since I've used 1809 so no telling what it's like now
> When it first came out and a few months after it's favorite color shown was bsod blue
> 
> From my memory 1809 removes some older basic apps can't remember if it did or not notepad... ?


notepad is there...


GnarlyCharlie said:


> We'll see, I'm on 1809 now w/ War Pig - never had a BSOD yet. If I get any now it'll be a first for this rig.


1809 is quite stable now. 1903 is behaving very well on my G9 Auros x299 rig. It's been on for weeks straight with restsrts only for "quality" updates.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I only use 10 for benchmarking and that is about a done deal now seeing I'm not going to get a 2080ti 
cpu is done winter is over, no chiller in sight it was maxed with 4-4.9 and 6-4.8
So time on 10 will be nonexistent for the near future I'm not ever curious about new builds so have fun with it... 

Only good thing is I saved 200.us on finally pulling the trigger returning the crap prime deluxe only cost 30.us for another win-7 pro key didn't even bother with another 10 pro key :thumb:


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Jpmboy said:


> i think the gpuz render is insufficient to push the card into P0... I'd have to test that again. Been awhile. Also, the new content developers NV driver seems to be working very well with turing - 419.67. in the galax tuner, put the voltage slider at 1.06V (or the P0 voltage for your card - it's right around 1.06V). Without touching anyu other slider, click apply. That's hte base boost clock. You can then move the sliders and apply, and see the boost clocks (before bin drops due to temp - first is at 40C).


I haven't even tried voltage adjustment yet, I added like 5mv (baby steps) and got terrible stutter/frames so it's been on the left peg ever since. And I was wondering what you meant about being able to go straight to P0, now I see what you meant.


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> We'll see, I'm on 1809 now w/ War Pig - never had a BSOD yet. If I get any now it'll be a first for this rig.


unless you have some old software or drivers in there, 1809 is pretty solid at this point. Again, 1903 will be out soon. 



GnarlyCharlie said:


> I haven't even tried voltage adjustment yet, I added like 5mv (baby steps) and got terrible stutter/frames so it's been on the left peg ever since. And I was wondering what you meant about being able to go straight to P0, now I see what you meant.


yeah, try the galax tool for awhile. I find it works better that Precision with the 2080Ti. AB is fine, but with two cards that clock differently it is less than ideal.


----------



## Hydroplane

Changed SVID from auto to enabled, now I've got power consumption numbers. Some interesting results:

P95 smallFFT 365W
P95 largeFFT 305W
P95 blend 260W
Cinebench 345W
Idle 105W (all of the speed step stuff disabled, so at 4.3 GHz)

All are for 7980XE 4.3 GHZ, 1.10V fixed. P95 is non-AVX.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

On previous builds, I could set my Power Plan to High Performance and the processor would ramp up to it maximum frequency without any load. It's probably something I have set in BIOS, or maybe it's just different in X299, but I have to turn on something like CPU-Z stress to get my max processor speed to show up even in High Performance.

Any advice?

TIA


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> On previous builds, I could set my Power Plan to High Performance and the processor would ramp up to it maximum frequency without any load. It's probably something I have set in BIOS, or maybe it's just different in X299, but I have to turn on something like CPU-Z stress to get my max processor speed to show up even in High Performance.
> 
> Any advice?
> 
> TIA


afaik, it's a speed step and speed shift thing (with 1709 or higher w10). I believe for WPP to force P0 in the OS you need to disable shift in bios, disable c6(?), and use MFC override (vs OS Native)? I have not looked at this recently...


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Thanks. It doesn't seem like High Performance does a whole lot these days - I'm not going to jump through all those hoops just to get my processor speed to show up.

Another thing, and it's something I think I read but not real sure where. When I do something like that CB20 thing, I can get a higher score every successive run for about 8 times, then it hits a cap. Seems like I read something about LLC having an impact on this (not sure how, considering different runs), maybe VCCIN (LLC is at 5 right now, VCCIN 1.94). Or maybe that's just normal behavior.

Edit: 7920X rig loop done:


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Bends on that top radiator looked fun to do


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> Thanks. It doesn't seem like High Performance does a whole lot these days - I'm not going to jump through all those hoops just to get my processor speed to show up.
> 
> Another thing, and it's something I think I read but not real sure where. When I do something like that CB20 thing, I can get a higher score every successive run for about 8 times, then it hits a cap. Seems like I read something about LLC having an impact on this (not sure how, considering different runs), maybe VCCIN (LLC is at 5 right now, VCCIN 1.94). Or maybe that's just normal behavior.
> 
> Edit: 7920X rig loop done:


Handsome rig Charlie!
Cinebench does that to everyone. It's not uncommon - in fact, I know it is common - for those folks seeking WRs in R15, R20, or just trying to hit the max possible R15 in a frequency-capped competition, that hitting the run button 30 times is not unusual when squeezing out the final few winning points. This is true even when using a shaved OS with all background services disabled. It's baest to run a few minutes after a fresh boot. After a number of successive runs, a decline in score is more likely OS-based. Two things to try:
1) once you open the R20 program, open task manager and change it's priority to "Realtime". Don't panic about the scene not developing before your eyes, it is in the background and will display when complete.

2) if using win7, boot in diagnostic mode, use realtime and run (you may need to enable windows management instrumentation for cpuz, gpuz etc). (I'm not recommending diagnostic mode in w10 unless you modify the bootloader so you can F8 and bcdedit from the command prompt to recover windows in the event of a hard crash.

The last few points in r15/20 are all ram based once at max core and cache frequency... and mostly RTLs once at the chipset limits for timings.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Bends on that top radiator looked fun to do


The one from the top rad to bottom rad was a challenge. The tube was too long to be able to fit in the case as it was done, and it didn't turn out perfect (needed to be about 1/4" longer between the bend into the rad and the bend behind the drive bay), but it's good enough that I'm not going to re-bend it.


----------



## Jpmboy

hard pipez are pretty, but waaay to permanent for my liking. 
do you use the "leak doctor" before filling? (air pressure test)


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I've never had a leak yet, knock on wood. The Primochill Revolver fittings are pretty much bullet proof, that GPU is good to go, never used a Phanteks CPU block - it came with the mobo but had been run before - so if the rads and pump don't leak, should be shiny.

It only took an evening to swap out the GPU and the two tubes to/from it on War Pig, 90% of that time was draining/filling/bleeding. Doing new tubes is easy if you have one to go off of. That's the first parts swap I've done on a loop, of course the Heatkiller and EK blocks were just different enough that the tubes wouldn't fit, but it wasn't a huge deal. It would be a lot less of an issue on this little rig, I can still pick it up. That fully stuffed 900D has to weigh 75lbs, just no way to get ahold of the thing to try to get it back on a table to work on. I have a clean new 100ft garden hose that I use to drain or flush the hot water tank, so dragging a drain hose through the house isn't too bad. Drain it where it sits.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I shifted/ changed so much in the last 1.5 years hard tubing would of been a nightmare


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I just build new rigs. ;-)


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> I've never had a leak yet, knock on wood. The Primochill Revolver fittings are pretty much bullet proof, that GPU is good to go, never used a Phanteks CPU block - it came with the mobo but had been run before - so if the rads and pump don't leak, should be shiny.
> 
> It only took an evening to swap out the GPU and the two tubes to/from it on War Pig, 90% of that time was draining/filling/bleeding. Doing new tubes is easy if you have one to go off of. That's the first parts swap I've done on a loop, of course the Heatkiller and EK blocks were just different enough that the tubes wouldn't fit, but it wasn't a huge deal. It would be a lot less of an issue on this little rig, I can still pick it up. That fully stuffed 900D has to weigh 75lbs, just no way to get ahold of the thing to try to get it back on a table to work on. I have a clean new 100ft garden hose that I use to drain or flush the hot water tank, so dragging a drain hose through the house isn't too bad. Drain it where it sits.


drag a drain hose thru the house...


----------



## ThrashZone

GnarlyCharlie said:


> I just build new rigs. ;-)


Hi,
Thankfully I'm done for a while 
Oldest system is four years old good for another four hopefully then I might look at something else 

GPU upgrade wise never know but nothing worth jumping on from what I have now.


----------



## wingman99

GnarlyCharlie said:


> On previous builds, I could set my Power Plan to High Performance and the processor would ramp up to it maximum frequency without any load. It's probably something I have set in BIOS, or maybe it's just different in X299, but I have to turn on something like CPU-Z stress to get my max processor speed to show up even in High Performance.
> 
> Any advice?
> 
> TIA


My Z370 High performance power plan ramps the clock speed to Maximum with all power saving features enabled. Must be something different with the x299.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Thankfully I'm done for a while
> Oldest system is four years old good for another four hopefully then I might look at something else
> 
> GPU upgrade wise never know but nothing worth jumping on from what I have now.




It wasn't 6 months ago I said I was done building rigs for a while, now I've built two X299 rigs in a month or so. The kicker is that my ol' Z77/1155 rig from 2012 is still the one I use more than any of them, I just like building computers I guess. Luckily this one will hopefully find a new home, I'm about out of room for anything bigger than a NUC.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

wingman99 said:


> My Z370 High performance power plan ramps the clock speed to Maximum with all power saving features enabled. Must be something different with the x299.


Yeah, I think I could poke around in BIOS with the hints Jpmboy gave, but it's not that big of a deal. I always liked the idea of the processor being ramped up before the start of a benchmark, but two years into the CPU cycle probably isn't the time to start benching the thing.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Using adaptive voltage tends to fluctuate vid even on high performance power plan 

Think all that is needed is to disable enhanced intel speedstep and it stops fluctuating.
Speed shift Jp always says to enable but auto is fine too or at least how I leave it.


----------



## Jpmboy

here's the R6EO with 9900X with "OS-native" step disabled, shift enabled, C6 enabled. The rig is doing this month's FAT so I can do the same Wednesday night with mfc override/step enabled.
The system hits stock turbo on cores that are not under load with these settings.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Posting on watercooled 7920X rig. I might have trouble parting with it, depending on how the OC goes ;-)

I like these BeQuiet fans, wish they weren't $22.

No leaks, posting on a 27" monitor from across the room so I can't see if it's making sense. The rig is nice, hope I can decipher the bios.


----------



## RichKnecht

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Using adaptive voltage tends to fluctuate vid even on high performance power plan
> 
> Think all that is needed is to disable enhanced intel speedstep and it stops fluctuating.
> Speed shift Jp always says to enable but auto is fine too or at least how I leave it.


I have actually started using adaptive mode and I have it working pretty good (for once). I am getting very stable load voltages and temps at idle are downright chilly  Here is a screenshot after 30 minutes of Real Bench.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## ThrashZone

kingofblog said:


> Having adaptive voltage is essential for thermal throttling to work. On adaptive voltage, the processor can run at intermediate frequencies between factory (VID) and overclocked ("additional turbo voltage"). Consider an example where VID specifies 4.5 GHz @ 1.2 V and overclocking to 5.0 GHz @ 1.4 V is possible. If you overheat while on adaptive voltage, the processor will throttle to 4.9 GHz @ 1.36 V, 4.8 GHz @ 1.32 V, etc. On static/override voltage, reaching Tjmax causes emergency throttling to 400 MHz instead of gradual turbo attenuation.
> 
> *Some macho dude here might be thinking "I'm a real man, I don't throttle!"* but that is wrong. Running only at voltages that you can cool in worst-case scenarios (e.g. Prime95) means not running as fast as possible in other workloads. In other words, thermal throttling increases performance by enabling the highest possible frequency on a per-workload basis.


Hi,
Nothing "macho" about simply seeing if the minimum clock actually hits where the avx offset is supposed to make it hit (for me to 4.5) instead of the bs 1200 MHz norm usually shown for minimum MHz


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Thanks for the news flash


----------



## PWn3R

I can't use Adaptive with an OC, Counterstrike just crashes the computer no matter how much padding I give on voltages, and I've tried stupid amounts. Given the 9990xe pushes 1.35 from the factory, I'm going for 18core 5ghz this weekend.

Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## wingman99

PWn3R said:


> I can't use Adaptive with an OC, Counterstrike just crashes the computer no matter how much padding I give on voltages, and I've tried stupid amounts. Given the 9990xe pushes 1.35 from the factory, I'm going for 18core 5ghz this weekend.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


Have you tried Load line calibration on AUTO?


----------



## PWn3R

I did. I tried several levels including what it's on for the override voltage right now. I wasn't able to get it stable after like 3 weeks of testing so I just went back to override.

Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## ThrashZone

PWn3R said:


> I did. I tried several levels including what it's on for the override voltage right now. I wasn't able to get it stable after like 3 weeks of testing so I just went back to override.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


Hi,
What adaptive settings did you use ?
for something near 1.35v I'd thing offset +0.090 would get you there.
Then just set additional turbo to 1.185.


----------



## Jpmboy

PWn3R said:


> I did. I tried several levels including what it's on for the override voltage right now. I wasn't able to get it stable after like 3 weeks of testing so I just went back to override.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


what MB and cpu?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Jpmboy, I know you have a couple of these Gigabyte X299 boards. This 7920X is in the Aorus Gaming 7 Pro. 

So far I have it running nice at 47 @1.25v, just went the easy way and XMP my 3600 C16 DRAM, but 16-16-16-36-1T (XMP is 2T) @1.4V. 30 on uncore, auto voltage there.

Running great, downclocks fine but not downvolts. Runs 1.25v at idle or load. I'm a dolt on those C States as you know, and I dang sure can't figure them out in this bios.

Temps are great, I haven't DL'd much, copied that CB15 Extreme Mod over from War Pig, about all I have as a stress test (DLing my game bundle from the 2080Ti deal, got my tin cans and string working overtime) so far. 

But I think this 7920X is gonna be a keeper (even though I'm not keeping it myself), sure had no sweat getting right up to 47 w/max temps in the low 70s so far.

If I could figure out how to make it downvolt, I'd quit right here. Maybe try 48 ;-)

Edit: 48 hanging in so far, haven't hit 80C yet on any cores.. I should be able to DL some real stress tests tomorrow.


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> Jpmboy, I know you have a couple of these Gigabyte X299 boards. This 7920X is in the Aorus Gaming 7 Pro.
> 
> So far I have it running nice at 47 @1.25v, just went the easy way and XMP my 3600 C16 DRAM, but 16-16-16-36-1T (XMP is 2T) @1.4V. 30 on uncore, auto voltage there.
> 
> Running great, downclocks fine but not downvolts. Runs 1.25v at idle or load. I'm a dolt on those C States as you know, and I dang sure can't figure them out in this bios.
> 
> Temps are great, I haven't DL'd much, copied that CB15 Extreme Mod over from War Pig, about all I have as a stress test (DLing my game bundle from the 2080Ti deal, got my tin cans and string working overtime) so far.
> 
> But I think this 7920X is gonna be a keeper (even though I'm not keeping it myself), sure had no sweat getting right up to 47 w/max temps in the low 70s so far.
> 
> If I could figure out how to make it downvolt, I'd quit right here. Maybe try 48 ;-)
> 
> Edit: 48 hanging in so far, haven't hit 80C yet on any cores.. I should be able to DL some real stress tests tomorrow.



You can switch to what giga calls DVID (it's actually Offset). Initially put DVID, multis and vcore back to auto, post to bios and note the vcore. boot to windows, and under load note the vcore. post back to bios and put the difference in the offset... then you need to tune the same with the multiplier set to the value you want (probably lower the offset since VID tables are ) for optimal load voltage... or


Just stick with manual override, ignore idle voltage since it really means nothing on x299 - it's idle power (amps, watts) that matters - compare these values, not vcore. Enable all c-states, at least up to C6. The higher c-states will actually completely drop the voltage to specific _idle'd_ cores but you cannot see this voltage in an FIVR system - you only see the "_vcore_" (which is actually the VID). On-die the vcore will be very low, but we cannot see this. Like in the picture below ( I think this is the 20th time I posted this). Unlike 1151 socket systems, on x299 you never actually see the real vcore from the OS (and you will note that high-end x299 boards with "Probeit" contacts on the board only let you measure vccin whereas, on 1151 boards you can measure vcore)


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I think I'll just go with leave it. The clocks and temps both drop at idle, the dang thing really runs great. For unknown (to me) gear like Giga board and Phanteks CPU block, I'm really happily surprised with how it came together.

I went ahead and put my golden Xp in it, put the X Pascal in the little 7700K mITX rig and it's moving on to a guy at work who wanted a gaming rig but had a heart attack when we ran down thru what one (like I tend to build) would cost. "Can I build it for $1000?" Yeah, chip in a few hundred more and you can get the video card and water block. "Gulp".


----------



## PWn3R

Jpmboy said:


> what MB and cpu?


ASROCK Taichi XE with 7980xe.

Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## Jpmboy

PWn3R said:


> ASROCK Taichi XE with 7980xe.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


 IMO - best to stick with manual override. Whether or not adaptive will work depends on the individual core's VIDs... and a per core OC is a campaign to ghet right.

That is a very good MB! Override + C-states, when using win10 1809+ with speedshift (not speed step) enabled will work just fine.


----------



## PWn3R

I'm using per core right now with override.

Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## Jpmboy

PWn3R said:


> I'm using per core right now with override.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


Does that board have "Per Specific Core"... where you can set the multi and voltage for each core independently?


----------



## RichKnecht

Anyone have any ideas on why bclk would go from my set point (100.1) to 105.3? It only happens while doing extensive work in Photoshop. Of course, when the bclk spikes, so does my OC, some times reaching 4.98 GHz on most of the cores. This, of course, causes a blue screen, especially at 1.223V vcore.


----------



## ThrashZone

RichKnecht said:


> Anyone have any ideas on why bclk would go from my set point (100.1) to 105.3? It only happens while doing extensive work in Photoshop. Of course, when the bclk spikes, so does my OC, some times reaching 4.98 GHz on most of the cores. This, of course, causes a blue screen, especially at 1.223V vcore.


Hi,
I asked hwinfo developer 



Mumak said:


> Not sure on which CPU is that, but in case of Skylake-X there's a problem with measuring the correct BCLK, especially when the system is under high load.
> Skylake Desktop/Mobile CPUs can report BCLK pretty accurately, but not the -X parts. There one needs to use certain measuring techniques, which are not very accurate.
> If you want to avoid fluctuations on BCLK, disable the "Periodic polling" option in "CPU Clock Measurement" settings in HWiNFO.


----------



## Jpmboy

simply misreading the bclk in HWi probably is not causing his rig to bluescreen.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah weird only the newer beta does this older versions are fine for me.

CPU strap on auto or something :/


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> simply misreading the bclk in HWi probably is not causing his rig to bluescreen.


That's the weird thing. It will not blue screen in any bench marking programs. It only happened once while doing a large batch process in Photoshop. I was shocked to see most of the cores at ~4998MHz and the bclk was at 105.3. Not sure what I have the strap set at (maybe auto?). Does it matter?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Never know I usually just peg it at 100 and be done but then again are you on xmp profile ?


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> That's the weird thing. It will not blue screen in any bench marking programs. It only happened once while doing a large batch process in Photoshop. I was shocked to see most of the cores at ~4998MHz and the bclk was at 105.3. Not sure what I have the strap set at (maybe auto?). Does it matter?


the bclk thing is just a polling/sensor error - and thay are more common when using a full load in a real program. I seriously doubt that the board is jumping that much. Yeah, passing benchmarks has little to do with actual real-world use. And unless the app has a built-in synthetic "system validator" the only way to know is to use it. You should set bclk and strap to 100, disable BCLK Spreadspectrum also. One simple way to avoid any vcore-induced fails is to find a good OC (say realbench stable) and add 20mV. That simple method (Raja's wisdom) has yet to fail me.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Additional bumps are purely temperature restricted


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> the bclk thing is just a polling/sensor error - and thay are more common when using a full load in a real program. I seriously doubt that the board is jumping that much. Yeah, passing benchmarks has little to do with actual real-world use. And unless the app has a built-in synthetic "system validator" the only way to know is to use it. You should set bclk and strap to 100, disable BCLK Spreadspectrum also. One simple way to avoid any vcore-induced fails is to find a good OC (say realbench stable) and add 20mV. That simple method (Raja's wisdom) has yet to fail me.


I set CPU strap and bclk to 100. I also disabled bclk spread spectrum which was enabled. I'll see what happens next time I run a large batch. I'll try a bump in vcore if it happens again.


----------



## Pedropc

Good, I currently have the 7940x with a DDF, I have seen a video of Debauer doing laping to the DIE of the CPU, is it safe in the long term to do them ???, greetings.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Well local micro center has 4 different 99..x chips


----------



## Jpmboy

Pedropc said:


> Good, I currently have the 7940x with a DDF, I have seen a video of Debauer doing laping to the DIE of the CPU, is it safe in the long term to do them ???, greetings.


No.


----------



## Pedropc

Jpmboy said:


> No.


OK, I'll leave the matter, thank you very much. A greeting.


----------



## Jpmboy

Pedropc said:


> OK, I'll leave the matter, thank you very much. A greeting.


 a wise decision to not lap the die on your cpu especially after asking if it is "safe". 

If you are doing direct to die cooling, first check for uniform flatness on the cooling block. (otherwise, why ask about lapping a die?)


----------



## KCDC

Now that the weather's turning here, I've decided to go all-in at getting each core to run as cool as possible with the lowest voltage possible for each instead of my blanket setting I currently have. 



I was going to tackle this one of two ways: Turn off all but one core and tweak it until it's at the most optimal freq/voltage, stress test that core until satisfied, rinse/repeat. Or keep a stable overall core/voltage setting with all cores on and tweak each freq/voltage accordingly. I feel like getting to the end result would be faster with the former, but may run into stability issues trying to get there running on only one core, don't know never tried it. Just wondering if anyone's tried it that way or if it's even possible.


----------



## Pedropc

Jpmboy said:


> a wise decision to not lap the die on your cpu especially after asking if it is "safe".
> 
> If you are doing direct to die cooling, first check for uniform flatness on the cooling block. (otherwise, why ask about lapping a die?)


My intention was to get lower temperatures, but if you can see problems, I do not risk it. A greeting.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Pedropc said:


> My intention was to get lower temperatures, but if you can see problems, I do not risk it. A greeting.



Have u seen Xevipiu's lapped 7980xe images (missing capacitors) in spanish EOL??? 

xDDDDD


----------



## Jpmboy

Pedropc said:


> My intention was to get lower temperatures, but if you can see problems, I do not risk it. A greeting.


sorry, my point is: before even considering lapping of silicon, first check that the cooling block is flat with a quality metal flat-edge. Otherwise, lapping a cpu makes no sense at all if the block is not absolutely flat. That said, no one should be using the word "safe" in the same sentence with "lapping the die".


----------



## Pedropc

vmanuelgm said:


> Have u seen Xevipiu's lapped 7980xe images (missing capacitors) in spanish EOL???
> 
> xDDDDD


If vmanuelgm, I'm aware of Xevi's lapping, you know he's very rough. But the temperature drop was very large.
A greeting mate, you miss yourself.


----------



## vmanuelgm

Pedropc said:


> If vmanuelgm, I'm aware of Xevi's lapping, you know he's very rough. But the temperature drop was very large.
> A greeting mate, you miss yourself.



Wow, google translator not working great!!! xDDDD


----------



## Pedropc

vmanuelgm said:


> Wow, google translator not working great!!! xDDDD


Sorry !!!!!!!!, I have no idea of English, a greeting.


----------



## yv35pool

hello everyone
i'm from switzerland and have been reading on this board since a loooong time  i used to overclock years ago and haven't really since. so now i just completed a new build (my first ever hardtubing build) and want to get back into it with all the new tech that's around now. there's a pic of the build attached in case anyone is interested in how it looks 
the hardware i used is as follows:
- i9 9900x
- rampage vi extreme omega
- 3200mhz corsair rgb pro
- 2 x 1080ti (still had those around)


now at the moment i have been reading a lot and even though there's so many new settings and changes since i last touched oc (i.e. mesh vs. cache etc.) and i figured on this board there's really good people with lots of knowledge how can maybe share some tipps as of settings. 

this is what i set so far:
- xmp
- cpu cora ratio: sync all cores
- all-core ratio limit: 47
- min. cpu cache ratio: auto
- max cpu cache ratio: 30
- dram-frequency: 3200mhz
- xtreme tweaking: enabled
- cpu svid support: disabled
- cpu core voltage: manual mode

- cpu core voltage override: 1.258
- cpu cache voltage: manual mode
- cpu cache voltage override: 1.000
- cpu input voltage: 1.900
- dram voltage (cha, chb): 1.3500 (set by xmp)
- dram voltage (chc, chd): 1.3500 (set by xmp)
- cpu load-line calibration: level 4
- cpu current capability: 140%
- vrm spread spectrum: disabled
- cpu power phase control: extreme
- enhanced intel speed step technology: disabled
- hyperthreading: disabled (temps shoot up a lot if enabled and i only game on that thing atm.).


the rest is all on auto or default as it was set.


now i would like to know what i could do better, or auto settings which experienced users don't leave on auto etc. 



any input would be awesome 


thanks a lot and looking forward to get into a active state after all on this board!


cheers from switzerland


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Disabling hyper threading will drop temps usually 50% seeing 10 threads are dropped 
Benchmarks will also take a huge hit but gaming wise doubt it will matter.


----------



## Hydroplane

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Disabling hyper threading will drop temps usually 50% seeing 10 threads are dropped
> Benchmarks will also take a huge hit but gaming wise doubt it will matter.


On mine disabling HT removed about 8C-10C of temp across the board so I could clock 100 MHz higher. Not a big difference, but for benches that don't use all cores, it can help.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
It wasn't pretty when I tried hyper threading off except temps wise which was besides the point and goal at the time


----------



## Jpmboy

yv35pool said:


> hello everyone
> i'm from switzerland and have been reading on this board since a loooong time  i used to overclock years ago and haven't really since. so now i just completed a new build (my first ever hardtubing build) and want to get back into it with all the new tech that's around now. there's a pic of the build attached in case anyone is interested in how it looks
> the hardware i used is as follows:
> - i9 9900x
> - rampage vi extreme omega
> - 3200mhz corsair rgb pro
> - 2 x 1080ti (still had those around)
> 
> 
> now at the moment i have been reading a lot and even though there's so many new settings and changes since i last touched oc (i.e. mesh vs. cache etc.) and i figured on this board there's really good people with lots of knowledge how can maybe share some tipps as of settings.
> 
> this is what i set so far:
> - xmp
> - cpu cora ratio: sync all cores
> - all-core ratio limit: 47
> - min. cpu cache ratio: auto
> - max cpu cache ratio: 30
> - dram-frequency: 3200mhz
> - xtreme tweaking: enabled
> - cpu svid support: disabled
> - cpu core voltage: manual mode
> 
> - cpu core voltage override: 1.258
> - cpu cache voltage: manual mode
> - cpu cache voltage override: 1.000
> - cpu input voltage: 1.900
> - dram voltage (cha, chb): 1.3500 (set by xmp)
> - dram voltage (chc, chd): 1.3500 (set by xmp)
> - cpu load-line calibration: level 4
> - cpu current capability: 140%
> - vrm spread spectrum: disabled
> - cpu power phase control: extreme
> - enhanced intel speed step technology: disabled
> - hyperthreading: disabled (temps shoot up a lot if enabled and i only game on that thing atm.).
> the rest is all on auto or default as it was set.
> now i would like to know what i could do better, or auto settings which experienced users don't leave on auto etc.
> any input would be awesome
> thanks a lot and looking forward to get into a active state after all on this board!
> cheers from switzerland


 Nice build!
I have most of the same components, R6EO, 9900X, a 3000c16 ram kit, 2 gpus (2080Tis). Your settings are fine, but unlike older gen CPUs, there is no real reason to disable hyperthreading for gaming, you have disabled speed step - I assume you have speed shift enabled? some suggestions:
1) enable hyperthreading. MOdern games actually know how to use it.
2) with a cache multiplier of 30, you can leave the cache voltage on auto, it behaves well on this board. (will run 0.9-1.05V, uneventfully)
3) Switch to Adaptive: CPU SVID to Enabled, select Adaptive in the dropdown list, enter the same voltage in the Adaptive field. When gaming, just use the windows High Performance Plan. This will enable ther system to idle at less than 1 volt.
4) If you find that the system is not quite completely stable under use, change to LLC 5
:thumb:


----------



## yv35pool

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Disabling hyper threading will drop temps usually 50% seeing 10 threads are dropped
> Benchmarks will also take a huge hit but gaming wise doubt it will matter.




hey 

yeah that was why i disabled ht, i had the cpu running at 48 multi at first, temps were fine except for stresstesting, when i disabled ht they were around 10 degrees lower. for benchmarking i enable them (my system ranks #2 for timespy with this hardware-config at the moment), but for gaming etc. i disable them since it doens't seem to make a negative difference. at least on the games i tested i wasn't able to detect any.


----------



## yv35pool

Jpmboy said:


> Nice build!
> I have most of the same components, R5EO, 9900X, a 3000c16 ram kit, 2 gpus (2080Tis). Your settings are fine, but unlike older gen CPUs, there is no real reason to disable hyperthreading for gaming, you have disabled speed step - I assume you have speed shift enabled? some suggestions:
> 1) enable hyperthreading. MOdern games actually know how to use it.
> 
> 2) with a cache multiplier of 30, you can leave the cache voltage on auto, it behaves well on this board. (will run 0.9-1.05V, uneventfully)
> 3) Switch to Adaptive: CPU SVID to Enabled, select Adaptive in the dropdown list, enter the same voltage in the Adaptive field. When gaming, just use the windows High Performance Plan. This will enable ther system to idle at less than 1 volt.
> 
> 4) If you find that the system is not quite completely stable under use, change to LLC 5
> :thumb:


hey  thanks! 

ah nice! if i didn't have the waterblocks for the 1080ti's i would have switched to 2080's as well, but i didn't want to spend half a car's cash to get new gpu's and waterblocks haha ;-)

okay awesome, thanks for all your inputs, will try it tonight!

i wanted to go adaptive in the first place, but then i read somewhere that people seem to have problem with running adaptive even with the same voltage as override (don't ask me, i just read it lol), but i will happily try that later on and report back!

awesome, thank you in advance and i will see how everything runs and report back

edit: yeah i enabled speed shift. i will also enable hyper threading again and see what voltage i need to run it on 4.7ghz with ht on, i think the one i've set won't be enough for 10 more threads.


----------



## Jpmboy

yv35pool said:


> hey
> 
> yeah that was why i disabled ht, i had the cpu running at 48 multi at first, temps were fine except for stresstesting, when i disabled ht they were around 10 degrees lower. for benchmarking i enable them (my system ranks #2 for timespy with this hardware-config at the moment), but for gaming etc. i disable them since it doens't seem to make a negative difference. at least on the games i tested i wasn't able to detect any.


what does that mean? "#2 for this hardware configuration" ...


----------



## yv35pool

Jpmboy said:


> what does that mean? "#2 for this hardware configuration" ...



using a 9900x with 2 1080ti's it shows my result as second ranked  https://www.3dmark.com/search#/?mode=advanced&url=/proxycon/ajax/search/cpugpu/spy/P/2423/1127/20699?minScore=18400&cpuName=Intel Core i9-9900X Processor&gpuName=NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti


----------



## Jpmboy

well done. :thumb:


----------



## yv35pool

Jpmboy said:


> well done. :thumb:




thanks 

well anyways, so i'm home soon and will start to play around with your input 


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk


----------



## KCDC

yv35pool said:


> using a 9900x with 2 1080ti's it shows my result as second ranked  https://www.3dmark.com/search#/?mode=advanced&url=/proxycon/ajax/search/cpugpu/spy/P/2423/1127/20699?minScore=18400&cpuName=Intel Core i9-9900X Processor&gpuName=NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti


I didn't even realize I was #1 until I clicked that link! Thanks!


----------



## yv35pool

KCDC said:


> I didn't even realize I was #1 until I clicked that link! Thanks!


haha no worries, good score


----------



## yv35pool

Jpmboy said:


> Nice build!
> I have most of the same components, R5EO, 9900X, a 3000c16 ram kit, 2 gpus (2080Tis). Your settings are fine, but unlike older gen CPUs, there is no real reason to disable hyperthreading for gaming, you have disabled speed step - I assume you have speed shift enabled? some suggestions:
> 1) enable hyperthreading. MOdern games actually know how to use it.
> 2) with a cache multiplier of 30, you can leave the cache voltage on auto, it behaves well on this board. (will run 0.9-1.05V, uneventfully)
> 3) Switch to Adaptive: CPU SVID to Enabled, select Adaptive in the dropdown list, enter the same voltage in the Adaptive field. When gaming, just use the windows High Performance Plan. This will enable ther system to idle at less than 1 volt.
> 4) If you find that the system is not quite completely stable under use, change to LLC 5
> :thumb:


i have one problem trying to use your settings: when i select adaptive mode in the dropdown, i can't type in the voltage, i can only select the offset mode sign (+/-) and set the cpu core offset (from 0.001 to 0.999v) and also set the additional turbo mode cpu core voltage.


----------



## CptSpig

yv35pool said:


> i have one problem trying to use your settings: when i select adaptive mode in the dropdown, i can't type in the voltage, i can only select the offset mode sign (+/-) and set the cpu core offset (from 0.001 to 0.999v) and also set the additional turbo mode cpu core voltage.


CPU Core Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
- Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage [1.120] (This number will depend on the amount of voltage for your OC.)


----------



## yv35pool

CptSpig said:


> CPU Core Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> - Offset Mode Sign [+]
> CPU Core Voltage Offset [Auto]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage [1.120] (This number will depend on the amount of voltage for you OC.)


aaah i didn't realize this setting can be used like this  thanks a lot!!


----------



## Barefooter

Jpmboy said:


> Nice build!
> I have most of the same components, R5EO, 9900X, a 3000c16 ram kit, 2 gpus (2080Tis). Your settings are fine, but unlike older gen CPUs, there is no real reason to disable hyperthreading for gaming, you have disabled speed step - I assume you have speed shift enabled? some suggestions:
> 1) enable hyperthreading. MOdern games actually know how to use it.
> 2) *with a cache multiplier of 30, you can leave the cache voltage on auto, it behaves well on this board. (will run 0.9-1.05V, uneventfully)*
> 3) Switch to Adaptive: CPU SVID to Enabled, select Adaptive in the dropdown list, enter the same voltage in the Adaptive field. When gaming, just use the windows High Performance Plan. This will enable ther system to idle at less than 1 volt.
> 4) If you find that the system is not quite completely stable under use, change to LLC 5
> :thumb:


Would this apply to the RE6 board too? I'm on adaptive 1.05v with cache also at 30. With 1.02v adaptive on the cache it froze during Real Bench testing.


----------



## Jpmboy

Barefooter said:


> Would this apply to the RE6 board too? I'm on adaptive 1.05v with cache also at 30. W*ith 1.02v adaptive on the cache it froze during Real Bench testing.[*/QUOTE]
> 
> adaptive only applies the voltage you set to the max turbo multiplier... and 30 on the cache is not a turbo multiplier. Adaptive cache will not work at that cache multiplier... probably will not boot with any turbo multi set for cache (too high). So, do not use adaptive for cache.
> Regarding the R6E, at 30 with auto it should be fine. Just look at what voltage Auto uses with the max cache multi set to 30. :thumb:


----------



## yv35pool

so yesterday evening i played around and the settings you recommended @Jpmboy work fine  except i didn't enable hyperthreading yet, i have to first check if i might be able to lower the voltage a bit. those 9900x generate a lot of heat ^^ what voltage and multi do you use on yours? (i know every chip's different, just interested in what others use / can use)


----------



## Jpmboy

yv35pool said:


> so yesterday evening i played around and the settings you recommended @Jpmboy work fine  except i didn't enable hyperthreading yet, i have to first check if i might be able to lower the voltage a bit. those 9900x generate a lot of heat ^^ what voltage and multi do you use on yours? (i know every chip's different, just interested in what others use / can use)


here's a bunch of screenshots


----------



## ThrashZone

yv35pool said:


> so yesterday evening i played around and the settings you recommended @Jpmboy work fine  except i didn't enable hyperthreading yet, i have to first check if i might be able to lower the voltage a bit. those 9900x generate a lot of heat ^^ what voltage and multi do you use on yours? (i know every chip's different, just interested in what others use / can use)


Hi,
Skylake-x in general produces a lot of heat 
Voltage depends on what clocks you want to go for
I'd say a 4.8 would be if you want to use all core try adaptive and +0.035 and additional turbo voltage of 1.185

You might be able to tune down some of the cores from +0.035 if you use per core adjustments but that should get you to 1.3v max vid's for 4.8 in general.


----------



## Jpmboy

using an offset with adaptive voltage is unusual configuration. It might be needed for a few odd CPUs, but I would not "profer" it as a standard.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Using auto on offset is just a guarantied way of always being above 1.3v max vid no matter what clocks are being used 

Jp you should always state you use a chiller and auto voltages are very different for you and CptSpig as well


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Skylake-x in general produces a lot of heat
> Voltage depends on what clocks you want to go for
> I'd say a 4.8 would be if you want to use all core try adaptive and +0.035 and additional turbo voltage of 1.185
> 
> You might be able to tune down some of the cores from +0.035 if you use per core adjustments but that should get you to 1.3v max vid's for 4.8 in general.





Jpmboy said:


> using an offset with adaptive voltage is unusual configuration. It might be needed for a few odd CPUs, but I would not "profer" it as a standard.


I agree with JP do not use a offset. If this is the way you have been setting up your adaptive mode might be why you are having issues with stability Thrash. Or maybe it's your CPU.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I don't have stability issues using - offset for under 4.7 only issue with + offset is temperatures not stability for 4.8 and above.


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> I agree with JP do not use a offset. If this is the way you have been setting up your adaptive mode might be why you are having issues with stability Thrash. Or maybe it's your CPU.


Hi,
Prime example of thermal limits not stability limits 
I believe the package was at 90c+ here in November 
https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/29764386

Here's the sub I'll just post a link to the image highest core 85c which would put cpu package above 90c easily
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=227116&d=1540527544


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Prime example of thermal limits not stability limits
> I believe the package was at 90c+ here in November
> https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/29764386
> 
> Here's the sub I'll just post a link to the image highest core 85c which would put cpu package above 90c easily
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=227116&d=1540527544


We are talking about adaptive mode and using a + with a numbered offset. Use + and CPU Core Voltage Offset (auto) with Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage (I use 1.1230 fore 4.6 OC). :headscrat:


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I do not use auto offset above was 4.8 spastic core average adaptive offset +0.035 vid's basically hair lower than 1.3v


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I do not use auto offset above was 4.8 spastic core average adaptive offset +0.035 vid's basically hair lower than 1.3v


That's cool what ever works for your setup. I have used auto as high as 5.0 with no issues. Maybe it's just the big core CPU? :thinking:


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Using *auto on offset is just a guarantied way of always being above 1.3v* max vid no matter what clocks are being used
> 
> Jp you should always state you use a chiller and auto voltages are very different for you and CptSpig as well


 That's specific to a cpu's VID - right? Remember, Adaptive can only add voltage to the VID. If a cpu sample as a VID which is higher than the necessary (adaptive) vcore, ...well it runs the voltage higher because of the VID, not because offset is on auto. My 8086K is like this - I run manual override.
Just for clarity... I have a chiller (or 2), but they are not kept in any loop. I hook them in via QDCs when cold is needed, otherwise all rigs here are on rads. Besides, using a chiller is not going to affect whether or not using an offset with adaptive turbo voltage is a "unusual" configuration or affect the Auto rules for adative vcore.


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Using auto on offset is just a guarantied way of always being above 1.3v max vid no matter what clocks are being used
> 
> Jp you should always state you use a chiller and auto voltages are very different for you and CptSpig as well


I only use a chiller for bench marks. I use this for 24/7 computing. :thumb:


----------



## RichKnecht

Jpmboy said:


> That's specific to a cpu's VID - right? Remember, Adaptive can only add voltage to the VID. If a cpu sample as a VID which is higher than the necessary (adaptive) vcore, ...well it runs the voltage higher because of the VID, not because offset is on auto. My 8086K is like this - I run manual override.
> Just for clarity... I have a chiller (or 2), but they are not kept in any loop. I hook them in via QDCs when cold is needed, otherwise all rigs here are on rads. Besides, using a chiller is not going to affect whether or not using an offset with adaptive turbo voltage is a "unusual" configuration or affect the Auto rules for adative vcore.


I'm using "by specific core" and adaptive voltage. I have negative offsets on every core. Offset values vary by core. Is this wrong? How did I figure out the voltages you ask? I set it to "auto" and looked at what each core's voltage was (under load) at my present overclock, and wrote them down. I then went into bios and changed to adaptive and dialed in the -offset value for each core. As of now, each core is at 1.23V ( which was my static value) under load and voltages drop dramatically during idle and low usage states.


----------



## CptSpig

RichKnecht said:


> I'm using "by specific core" and adaptive voltage. I have negative offsets on every core. Offset values vary by core. Is this wrong? How did I figure out the voltages you ask? I set it to "auto" and looked at what each core's voltage was (under load) at my present overclock, and wrote them down. I then went into bios and changed to adaptive and dialed in the -offset value for each core. As of now, each core is at 1.23V ( which was my static value) under load and voltages drop dramatically during idle and low usage states.


See Spoiler for a example.



Spoiler



PCH Core Voltage [1.01230]
PLL Reference Offset Mode Sign [+]
PLL Reference Offset Value [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 0 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 0 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 1 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 1 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 2 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 2 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 3 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 3 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 4 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 4 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 5 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 5 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 6 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 6 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 7 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 7 [Auto]
Core-1 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-1 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-1 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-1 Voltage [1.210]
Core-2 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-2 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-2 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-2 Voltage [1.210]
Core-3 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-3 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-3 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-3 Voltage [1.210]
Core-4 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-4 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-4 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-4 Voltage [1.210]
Core-5 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-5 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-5 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-5 Voltage [1.210]
Core-6 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-6 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-6 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-6 Voltage [1.210]
Core-7 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-7 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-7 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-7 Voltage [1.210]
Core-8 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-8 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-8 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-8 Voltage [1.210]
Core-9 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-9 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-9 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-9 Voltage [1.210]
Core-10 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-10 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-10 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-10 Voltage [1.210]
Core-11 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-11 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-11 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-11 Voltage [1.210]
*Core-12 Max Ratio [46]
CPU Core-12 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-12 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-12 Voltage [1.235]
Core-13 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-13 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-13 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-13 Voltage [1.210]
Core-14 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-14 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-14 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-14 Voltage [1.210]
*Core-15 Max Ratio [46]
CPU Core-15 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-15 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-15 Voltage [1.2350]
Core-16 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-16 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-16 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-16 Voltage [1.210]
Core-17 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-17 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-17 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-17 Voltage [1.210]
Core-18 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-18 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-18 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-18 Voltage [1.210]


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> I'm using "by specific core" and adaptive voltage. I have negative offsets on every core. Offset values vary by core. Is this wrong? How did I figure out the voltages you ask? I set it to "auto" and looked at what each core's voltage was (under load) at my present overclock, and wrote them down. I then went into bios and changed to adaptive and dialed in the -offset value for each core. As of now, each core is at 1.23V ( which was my static value) under load and voltages drop dramatically during idle and low usage states.


if it works - cool. But you are using NEGATIVE OFFSET which is how one can wrestle the high vid issue - not a positive offset. Why not just use manual override? Idle voltage is meaningless (idle current flow is nominal) and with proper C-states any core can actually receive zero volts until a load is scheduled for it. I posted these power states diagrams in this thread within the past week or so. note: these low power states are also active with adaptive voltage - you cannot see the actual on-die voltage with FIVR systems. only the requested voltage - VID, so there is no OS software that can report vcore on x299. You also cannot measure it from the board either - hence no x299 board has a vcore "DMM" measure-here point either. Only vccin can be measured off the MB.
on x299, seeing a LOW idle vcore is an illusion, it is the idle VID, you (we) are not seeing the vcore change at all. Unfortunately, VCCIN is not dynamic and would be analogous to what we have seen on non-FIVR platforms like socket 1151 as vcore.


----------



## Barefooter

Jpmboy said:


> Barefooter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would this apply to the RE6 board too? I'm on adaptive 1.05v with cache also at 30. W*ith 1.02v adaptive on the cache it froze during Real Bench testing.[*/QUOTE]
> 
> adaptive only applies the voltage you set to the max turbo multiplier... and 30 on the cache is not a turbo multiplier. Adaptive cache will not work at that cache multiplier... probably will not boot with any turbo multi set for cache (too high). So, do not use adaptive for cache.
> Regarding the R6E, at 30 with auto it should be fine. Just look at what voltage Auto uses with the max cache multi set to 30. :thumb:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok that makes sense. I changed the cache to Auto and it works fine like that :thumb:
> 
> Thank you!
Click to expand...


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> if it works - cool. But you are using NEGATIVE OFFSET which is how one can wrestle the high vid issue - not a positive offset. Why not just use manual override? .


Hi,
Manual voltage is a hard ceiling if not high enough bsod follows that's why adaptive or pure offset is preferred for me anyway 
Low vid cores "I call lazy cores, you call them good cores" don't need as much voltage and get a lot hotter if they do get more voltage which others may needs to be stable

Deal I've found *if one keeps the cores within 0.020 of each* other works very well and that less 0.020 vid helps lower those lazy cores a bit.

Everyone has hot cores usual thing is to set those as a lower multiplier the other way until one hits a thermal limit is the lower the vid of them they already need less to begin with.

4.8 yes is on the positive but anything under will work fine on the negative as long as the above is also done.


As far as cache/ mesh is I've not seen any issue using adaptive at all even while running it blind with no way to monitor voltages.


----------



## Jpmboy

Barefooter said:


> Jpmboy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok that makes sense. I changed the cache to Auto and it works fine like that :thumb:
> Thank you!
> 
> 
> 
> good to know it's working! Enjoy!
> it's the same reason why adaptive vcore does not work with 125 or 166 strap or very high BCLK,
> 
> 
> 
> ThrashZone said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> Manual voltage is a hard ceiling if not high enough bsod follows that's why adaptive or pure offset is preferred for me anyway
> Low vid cores "I call lazy cores, you call them good cores" don't need as much voltage and get a lot hotter if they do get more voltage which others may needs to be stable
> Deal I've found *if one keeps the cores within 0.020 of each* other works very well and that less 0.020 vid helps lower those lazy cores a bit.
> Everyone has hot cores usual thing is to set those as a lower multiplier the other way until one hits a thermal limit is the lower the vid of them they already need less to begin with.
> 4.8 yes is on the positive but anything under will work fine on the negative as long as the above is also done.
> As far as cache/ mesh is I've not seen any issue using adaptive at all even while running it blind with no way to monitor voltages.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> :blinksmil
> we hashed this over too many times. I have no idea what you got going there... but it performs the way you want so be happy.
Click to expand...


----------



## yv35pool

what i noticed, is, i set adaptive with additional Turbo voltage of 1.248v. when i look at hwinfo, the worst core uses up to 1.273v. if i set configure Manual mode, i can get away with 1.248 for 8 cores and hyperthreading on, but then of Course it lacks the Advantage of idling under 1v etc. (yeah, at the Moment i run 8 cores with ht on instead of 10 cores and ht off..). i'm still trying to figure out what cpu config (10 cores active / no ht vs. 8 cores active with ht) is best suited for my use. i did set an avx ofset of 3 and avx512 ofset of 5, but still, that chip gets damn hot.. i have an alphacool 480 rad with 4 x 120 Corsair ll fans in push config set up as the cpu loop..and have to honestly say that i knew from reading that i can expect quite some heat. but the heat i see i seriously didn't excpect haha


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
That's pretty much why usually everyone uses by specific core instead of all core so we can tune cores because they are all different.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ +1


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> ^^ +1


Hi,
Did hell freeze over 
You +1 a negative offset suggestion 

Very surprised you didn't say lower additional turbo voltage on the high core 0.025


----------



## yv35pool

holy sh... okay your post made me realize two things:

1. i have no idea what i'm doing
2. i need to find a new hobby, like mowing lawns or something 

xD

haha j.k..thanks a lot!!!

okay so now i'll be busy studying that one post for the rest of the year ^^ 

so from what i've understood (or think i did) so far, that somewhat translates into: per core / adaptive / on that one core (i.e.) (-) 25mv offset / additional turbo voltage i.e. 1.248v.


"First I run a benchmark to load all cores to 4.5 GHz, then I write down the VIDs in HWINFO64"

i think the 7900x default-max is 4.3ghz right? so you set it to 4.5 and using what setting for v in order to determine the auto voltage? what i mean is, how does one go at determinging an autovoltage for a clock that is higher than stock?

sorry for the questions..but since your post i just realized there's much more questions than i thouht there were ^^


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## tistou77

Someone has already tested ?









https://www.caseking.de/thermal-grizzly-carbonaut-waermeleitpad-38-38-0-2-mm-zuwa-180.html


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Did hell freeze over
> You +1 a negative offset suggestion
> 
> Very surprised you didn't say lower additional turbo voltage on the high core 0.025


huh? there's a bit of aphasia here... I think you need to re-read my posts.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Wasn't much to read content wise lol just *^^ +1* 

Anyhow doesn't look like any new bios says anything about 99..x series compatibility stuff in them so bios is good to go even 1301 or so opposed to 1701 newest :/


----------



## RichKnecht

tistou77 said:


> Someone has already tested ?
> 
> View attachment 265114
> 
> 
> https://www.caseking.de/thermal-grizzly-carbonaut-waermeleitpad-38-38-0-2-mm-zuwa-180.html


I saw this on You Tube. Seems like it performs similar to a decent thermal paste. However, the liquid metal type pastes are still superior in performance.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Would be nice to get away from the thermal paste mess though 

Broke down after paying taxes and got a 9940x friend said he's interested in my 7900x 
Looking okay core temp wise (still a hot chip) or at least the spread between core is fairly tight highest 82c/ lowest 74c package 83c all core on it's turbo 4.4 with 1.2v :/
BMW/ Classroom one run only 
Default cache/ mesh is weirdly low 2400MHz uncore clock 0.903v max

Cinebench R20 8006 also did the single core test 435


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Would be nice to get away from the thermal paste mess though
> 
> Broke down after paying taxes and got a 9940x friend said he's interested in my 7900x
> Looking okay core temp wise (still a hot chip) or at least the spread between core is fairly tight highest 82c/ lowest 74c package 83c all core on it's turbo 4.4 with 1.2v :/
> BMW/ Classroom one run only
> Default cache/ mesh is weirdly low 2400MHz uncore clock 0.903v max
> 
> Cinebench R20 8006 also did the single core test 435


nice! I think you're gonna like the i9 !!


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> nice! I think you're gonna like the i9 !!


Hi,
Think I'm going to break down and get a heatkiller iv pro 
EK is doing okay had to rotate it to it's default mounting position really upside down for piping better but a lot better than jet plate horizontally mounted like i had for the 7900x

Got it at 4.5 now 1.2v still and cache pumped to 3000Mhz and adaptive +0.150 for 1.047v

8247 and single core test at 469


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Think I'm going to break down and get a heatkiller iv pro
> EK is doing okay had to rotate it to it's default mounting position really upside down for piping better but a lot better than jet plate horizontally mounted like i had for the 7900x
> 
> Got it at 4.5 now 1.2v still and cache pumped to 3000Mhz and adaptive +0.150 for 1.047v
> 
> 8247 and single core test at 469


Speed is up, temps are down - looks nice!


----------



## ThrashZone

GnarlyCharlie said:


> Speed is up, temps are down - looks nice!


Hi,
Thanks yeah I had an odd one though 
Those scores so far are without anything on memory clocks just pure default at what 2133/ 2666 ?

I put 3600C16 timings and only get 6 points more 
I use my 3200C14 timings like on my x99 kit uses and get 34 more points  @Jpmboy


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Thanks yeah I had an odd one though
> Those scores so far are without anything on memory clocks just pure default at what 2133/ 2666 ?
> 
> I put 3600C16 timings and only get 6 points more
> *I use my 3200C14 timings like on my x99 kit uses and get 34 more points*
> @*Jpmboy*


 it's probably the secondary timings. post up some timings... in the DDR4 thread.
remember - R20 only uses a limited instruction set. mix up the initial testing with some other loads. 
And... do us a favor, post a screeen shot of the main voltage bios page. Adaptive cache eh?


----------



## wheatpaste1999

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Think I'm going to break down and get a heatkiller iv pro
> EK is doing okay had to rotate it to it's default mounting position really upside down for piping better but a lot better than jet plate horizontally mounted like i had for the 7900x
> 
> Got it at 4.5 now 1.2v still and cache pumped to 3000Mhz and adaptive +0.150 for 1.047v
> 
> 8247 and single core test at 469


If you're looking for other x299 CPU blocks, I've been using this Bitspower one with pretty good success on my 9900x. It's pretty cheap, has a large cold plate, and microchannels that cover a good chunk of the IHS/die compared to many other CPU blocks. Seems like it's made specifically for X299 based on the size and orientation:

http://www.performance-pcs.com/bits...acrylic-designed-for-intel-x299-platform.html

It's simple but looks good and you can RGB (or not) if you're into that.


----------



## ThrashZone

wheatpaste1999 said:


> If you're looking for other x299 CPU blocks, I've been using this Bitspower one with pretty good success on my 9900x. It's pretty cheap, has a large cold plate, and microchannels that cover a good chunk of the IHS/die compared to many other CPU blocks. Seems like it's made specifically for X299 based on the size and orientation:
> 
> http://www.performance-pcs.com/bits...acrylic-designed-for-intel-x299-platform.html
> 
> It's simple but looks good and you can RGB (or not) if you're into that.


Hi,
Bitspower summit yes I have one and got worse temps with it still on ek evo supremacy so yeah still pondering heatkiller iv pro seriously only nickles around though no coppers. :/


----------



## wheatpaste1999

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Bitspower summit yes I have one and got worse temps with it still on ek evo supremacy so yeah still pondering heatkiller iv pro seriously only nickles around though no coppers. :/


LOL nevermind then!


----------



## ThrashZone

wheatpaste1999 said:


> LOL nevermind then!


Hi,
No problem man I have it on my x99 and it's a good water block 
Heatkiller iv pro is similar design flow as the ek evo.. so no telling if it will do any better but plexi/ nickle is about 75.us +.. so not a big purchase 
Might just go to watercool and have them assemble one with copper base since it's not a stock item :/
I do like the plexi top just to see the fluid...


----------



## yv35pool

sorry guys, just wanted to let you know i've been sick and that's why i don't really write @ the moment. will be back as soon as i'm ok again  (just so you don't think i ask for advice and then just take off xD).

i wish you all nice easter time (or however you call it in english ^^)


----------



## Section31

I don't think you will see significant boast with heatkiller block. Maybe 1-2degrees max. The best block on the market is the aquacomputer with display and optimium pc one but even they are maybe 3-4degrees lower. I would suggest just to wait out till the Amd 7nm/Intel 10nm to come out. Thats only way to really solve the temperature issues with 14nm at near 5.0ghz. While the X299 series is a good cpu, I am looking at getting 7nm/10nm as soon as its available (I expect 7nm to be paper launch at first).

That being said, heatkiller stuff is much better than ekwb if they are same price. The big jump in quality is worth it on its own and I like the look of there blocks and other products in general. However that design is getting old and at this point I would wait for the heatkiller V cpu block as they can make the channels even smaller and thats how the new optimum/swiftech heirloom perform about 5 degrees cooler. 

Theres also chance that cpu overclocking could be dead with 10nm/7nm too. So I will take near 5.0ghz on 16core/32threads at temperature under 70degrees (stress load) and be done with it.


----------



## Jpmboy

block comparisons are fraught with issues of mount quality and bond-line (tim) variances. Ole "skinnyLabs" did the best waterblock comparisons. 
All these perform equally well imo (number is how many I have on hand):
EK (3)
Koolance (2 380i, 1 390i)
Bitspower (2)
Aquacomputer (3 everythng from an OG cuplex kryos to "Next" copper/silver)
it's really the block mount quality that matters


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah like I said the flow design is pretty similar to the ek evo 
Only item hk iv pro doesn't have is metal razor blade water jet otherwise I'd imaging the performance to be pretty close to each other I haven't counted the fins the evo actually has though

Chip dies are getting huge so if the cooling fins area doesn't get bigger not sure what good these water blocks are


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Jpmboy said:


> block comparisons are fraught with issues of mount quality and bond-line (tim) variances. Ole "skinnyLabs" did the best waterblock comparisons.
> All these perform equally well imo (number is how many I have on hand):
> EK (3)
> Koolance (2 380i, 1 390i)
> Bitspower (2)
> Aquacomputer (3 everythng from an OG cuplex kryos to "Next" copper/silver)
> it's really the block mount quality that matters


I bought an EK block for the 7980XE because the Phanteks block that came with the used CPU/MoBo combo was an unknown factor. Then I ended up using that Phanteks block on the 7920X and it seems to be doing fine on that one. Yeah, less cores but more OC and more V, it's hanging in there nicely.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Heatkiller iv pro 78 fins so they say.


----------



## Section31

Bigger issue is cpu design than cpu block. Hence why watercooling is not that efficient. Hopefully 7nm/10nm improves watercooling benefits but i doubt it. 

Get the block that looks the best for your rig. Performance difference is marginal at best unless its an really old design. You will want to replace the block every couple of years anyways.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Issue is really ek evo was okay for a x99 system where as x299 2066 is a lot bigger.

The bitspower summit is written as x299 block and is pretty big but it was actually pretty bad temp wise 

Anyway yeah might as well wait for the newer heatkillers at this late point evo is hanging in there I guess the chip is flat enough.


----------



## Hydroplane

My Z390 system takes 11 seconds to boot and my X299 system takes 48 seconds... not sure why this is lol


----------



## ThrashZone

Hydroplane said:


> My Z390 system takes 11 seconds to boot and my X299 system takes 48 seconds... not sure why this is lol


Hi,
How are you judging that ?
This 
https://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/720-restart-time.html

Account for login time too this does count that too sort of silly.


----------



## Hydroplane

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> How are you judging that ?
> This
> https://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/720-restart-time.html
> 
> Account for login time too this does count that too sort of silly.


I measure from between time I hit the power button to landing at the Windows desktop


----------



## Section31

I actually notice same thing. What motherboard are you using. For me its an X229 Apex and Z390 Gigabyte Master. In my case, its likely something settings related with the asus bios. Both my drives are NVME (one is 960 pro 1Tb and other 500GB WD Black)

I suspect the windows boot time is similar (from Windows Logo to login screen). The difference is the time from power button to bios appearing on the screen. My Apex cycles through a lot of boot codes before the asus bios screen appears.


----------



## wingman99

Hydroplane said:


> My Z390 system takes 11 seconds to boot and my X299 system takes 48 seconds... not sure why this is lol


Do you have the X299 OS boot drive on number 0 SATA controller?


----------



## Hydroplane

Section31 said:


> I actually notice same thing. What motherboard are you using. For me its an X229 Apex and Z390 Gigabyte Master. In my case, its likely something settings related with the asus bios. Both my drives are NVME (one is 960 pro 1Tb and other 500GB WD Black)
> 
> I suspect the windows boot time is similar (from Windows Logo to login screen). The difference is the time from power button to bios appearing on the screen. My Apex cycles through a lot of boot codes before the asus bios screen appears.


I have the X299 Apex and the EVGA Z390 Dark. Windows loads quickly on both, but the Apex seems to take a while loading the bios and whatnot. Boot drive on the Apex is a 960 evo 1tb nvme, not sure what slot it's in


----------



## Jpmboy

Section31 said:


> I actually notice same thing. What motherboard are you using. For me its an X229 Apex and Z390 Gigabyte Master. In my case, its likely something settings related with the asus bios. Both my drives are NVME (one is 960 pro 1Tb and other 500GB WD Black)
> 
> I suspect the windows boot time is similar (from Windows Logo to login screen). The difference is the time from power button to bios appearing on the screen. My Apex cycles through a lot of boot codes before the asus bios screen appears.


yeah, post time on the apex can involve a bunch of "tests" before OS handoff. Once you have windows set to fastboot, and bios fast boot enabled, it really comes down to the manual settings. You will actually get a much faster POST time at Optimized Defaults than with an overclock in nvram.


----------



## Hydroplane

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, post time on the apex can involve a bunch of "tests" before OS handoff. Once you have windows set to fastboot, and bios fast boot enabled, it really comes down to the manual settings. You will actually get a much faster POST time at Optimized Defaults than with an overclock in nvram.


It's just kind of weird that the Z390 would be so much quicker lol, my decade old Q9550 would do it in 32 seconds. I will have to try the fastboot settings, thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> It's just kind of weird that the Z390 would be so much quicker lol, my decade old Q9550 would do it in 32 seconds. I will have to try the fastboot settings, thanks


yeah - bugs me too (a little). Both my R6A and R6EO post kinda slow. My Gigabyte Aorus G9 x299 boots really fast... and the Asrock taichi x470 can boot so fast that it is impossible to get back into bios without using the app they provide to boot back to bios (from the OS).


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I've been messing around with the Giga X299 Gaming 7 Pro quite a bit lately, putting it and the 7920X through the paces since it's due to make its way to its new home at the end of the month. Anyway, it does boot fast. I went to fire the R6EO (RVIEO?) rig up and it seemed like a lot of time had passed - great, failed boot, let's see what the error code is - and about that time, here it comes. 

Good news is, R6EO still has had no failed boots, no BSODs since built. Far and away my favorite rig ever. And that Giga/7920X is just dang near too sweet to give away


----------



## Jpmboy

that's the key.. a fast but failed post is not a positive. Have you tried a Ram oC on that Giga board yet?


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

Jpmboy said:


> that's the key.. a fast but failed post is not a positive. Have you tried a Ram oC on that Giga board yet?


Nope, XMP and happy camper here. They aren't "enthusiasts", I'm not going to try to have a high strung DRAM OC'd thing several states away. Shoot, I don't even try to OC my own DRAM much anymore. Reliable and repeatable = happiness here. It's still 32GB of C16 @ 3600, that'll be fine.


----------



## Jpmboy

GnarlyCharlie said:


> Nope, XMP and happy camper here. They aren't "enthusiasts", I'm not going to try to have a high strung DRAM OC'd thing several states away. Shoot, I don't even try to OC my own DRAM much anymore. Reliable and repeatable = happiness here. *It's still 32GB of C16 @ 3600,* that'll be fine.


good stuff!


----------



## toncij

Was thinking about moving to Omega from old Extreme, having so many problems with my RAM and oc stability on 7980XE, but I'm kinda loosing the incentive to even try. Having Ryzen 3 behind the corner with Threadripper probably reaching if not beating Intel at 5.0GHz, with 16 cores, I see even less need to spend money now.


----------



## Jpmboy

then don't bother.


----------



## toncij

Jpmboy said:


> then don't bother.


Hoped you'd say "it's worth it!" or "TR won't be nearly as good as expected" or something like that.


----------



## Jpmboy

toncij said:


> Hoped you'd say "it's worth it!" or "TR won't be nearly as good as expected" or something like that.


 lol - I can certainly say that the R5EO is an amazing mother board. I can't compare to the R6E, but vs the Apex... it's absolutely comparible and with VRM fans built in things stay cool(er). 
I was "amused" about having ram headaches on intel x299 and then mentioning a Ryzen platform as a remedy. :blinksmil


----------



## tistou77

RichKnecht said:


> I saw this on You Tube. Seems like it performs similar to a decent thermal paste. However, the liquid metal type pastes are still superior in performance.


and compared to Kryonaut ?


----------



## Section31

toncij said:


> Was thinking about moving to Omega from old Extreme, having so many problems with my RAM and oc stability on 7980XE, but I'm kinda loosing the incentive to even try. Having Ryzen 3 behind the corner with Threadripper probably reaching if not beating Intel at 5.0GHz, with 16 cores, I see even less need to spend money now.


I am in same boat as you. However all x299 owners can be patient even if Ryzen/Tr3 are good as advertised. The x299 stuff cpu can hold out till intel 7nm is out. Let the 7nm stuff mature a bit before you go in. I have feeling 7nm at launch will be another paper launch.


----------



## SirWaWa

Hydroplane said:


> My Z390 system takes 11 seconds to boot and my X299 system takes 48 seconds... not sure why this is lol


interesting...
for me both are almost the same, I'd say the x299 is a tad faster with nearly identical setups. This excludes asus z390 triple boot nonsense.




do you guys have "wake up" lag with x299? If I have my monitor off and idle and then go back the mouse lags for 1-2 secs. This doesn't happen on my z390. I tried different power saving options and it did nothing. Is it because I have a dp monitor on the x299? Z390 is hdmi. Both are running nvme ssd.


----------



## toncij

Section31 said:


> I am in same boat as you. However all x299 owners can be patient even if Ryzen/Tr3 are good as advertised. The x299 stuff cpu can hold out till intel 7nm is out. Let the 7nm stuff mature a bit before you go in. I have feeling 7nm at launch will be another paper launch.


Yes, in theory. And it should be 10nm tho, but 7nm TSMC is pretty much what 10nm intel is, at least in real sizes. I guess it'll all be revealed with Ryzen. If Ryzen 3000 gets single core performance of an overclocked 9900K (5GHz), that means TR3 will offer at least 16 as fast cores, meaning 9980XE at 5GHz level, but cheaper and cooler. If they fail to catch up with 9900K, I can safely go with further investment in X299 and wait for Sunny Cove in 2020-2021 or later (since they're already late on their December roadmap, aiming for mid 2019 which is not happening). Intel instead opted for yet another 14nm HEDT and a 9 series refresh. Guess 2021 looks promising.


----------



## Section31

On the bright side, it allows us all to save up for 2021. Not only will you need new motherboard and cpu but you have to invest in ddr5 and will likely buy an 7nm GPU too. Thats going to cost a lot. Maybe possibly an new monitor if those 4k true hdr10 with microzones ips monitors comeout in an affordable price range (not the crazy prices atm).


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

I've been building PCs since Slot A Athlon days and have never re-purposed a mobo yet. Or any other piece, really. Build 'em and go on - by the time a new CPU comes out, mobo features have generally progressed, anyway.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
If I hadn't tripped over a buyer for my 7900x I wouldn't of ever thought to get a 99--x series at all


----------



## Section31

At least you found an buyer. Often with me is when i preorder the new stuff, i wait till the new stuff is actually comes to me and then install it. By the time i finish it all up, whole process was 3months. I ended up holding my previous rig stuff too long and its value is too low enough so i give it to a friend instead(rather help out good friends first).


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I believe 79..x series is more desirable seeing cooling wise there are more options like delid and direct die mounts 
But yes I sold to a friend for 600. originally bought at micro center for 900.us with tax and that got me a 9940x for an additional 800.us./ 1400.us with tax.


----------



## toncij

GnarlyCharlie said:


> I've been building PCs since Slot A Athlon days and have never re-purposed a mobo yet. Or any other piece, really. Build 'em and go on - by the time a new CPU comes out, mobo features have generally progressed, anyway.


Yes... applies to me since 1998 - things never change. I either sell or gift my old machine. Not worth the dust job to diassemble and repurpose. Fells like OEM a bit.


----------



## PWn3R

Dude you're getting a Toncij?

Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## tistou77

Hello

If I remember correctly, at the exit of Skylake-X, it was inadvisable to use Prime95 (latest version) because of AVX instructions, consumptions that went up too high
It's the same with Linpack ?

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> Hello
> 
> If I remember correctly, at the exit of Skylake-X, it was inadvisable to use Prime95 (latest version) because of AVX instructions, consumptions that went up too high
> It's the same with Linpack ?
> 
> Thanks


power draw depends on the clocks for AVX and non-AVX. p95 has other issues as the "universal" stress test, power draw vs end result is my principle negative. Left unchecked, it is not much more than a power virus, but if you have the proper offsets, it's fall from grace is not solely a power issue. Once you get into NCC chips, it's usefulness in defining 24/7 clocks is poor... that is unless you are hunting primes 24/7.


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> power draw depends on the clocks for AVX and non-AVX. p95 has other issues as the "universal" stress test, power draw vs end result is my principle negative. Left unchecked, it is not much more than a power virus, but if you have the proper offsets, it's fall from grace is not solely a power issue. Once you get into NCC chips, it's usefulness in defining 24/7 clocks is poor... that is unless you are hunting primes 24/7.


Ok thanks, you, for your h24, you're at 4600/4100/3600 right ?

I wonder as my OC passes Aida64, Realbench, etc ... But crashes with the new OCCT and Linpack for example (which uses the AVX512 according to the frequencies during the test)

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> Ok thanks, you, for your h24, you're at *4600/4100/3600 right *?
> 
> I wonder as my OC passes Aida64, Realbench, etc ... But crashes with the new OCCT and Linpack for example (which uses the AVX512 according to the frequencies during the test)
> 
> Thanks


not for things like Boinc or other heavy number crunching. For stuff that uses heavy AVX and AVX2 (boinc) I run 40/35/30 at 1.05V. This keeps the power draw under 300W for the CPU for days-long crunching. YOur system may not actually be crashing, but may be hitting one of the power limit settings in bios or even tripping the PSU OCP (I can on my 1500i with only the CPU loaded if it is not in single rail mode). Check the PL settings in bios...


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> not for things like Boinc or other heavy number crunching. For stuff that uses heavy AVX and AVX2 (boinc) I run 40/35/30 at 1.05V. This keeps the power draw under 300W for the CPU for days-long crunching. YOur system may not actually be crashing, but may be hitting one of the power limit settings in bios or even tripping the PSU OCP (I can on my 1500i with only the CPU loaded if it is not in single rail mode). Check the PL settings in bios...


Aa ok thanks, and for your h24 (without using Boinc or heavy calculation) ?
I found your settings in your "bios" file that you posted and it was 4500 and AVX 5 and 10

Where is the PL settings in the bios ?

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> Aa ok thanks, and for your h24 (without using Boinc or heavy calculation) ?
> I found your settings in your "bios" file that you posted and it was 4500 and AVX 5 and 10
> 
> Where is the PL settings in the bios ?
> 
> Thanks


for all but heavy crunching, 45 (or 46) with AVX 5/6 and AVX512 10/11 offsets. (eg, 40 AVX and 35 AVX 512)


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> for all but heavy crunching, 45 (or 46) with AVX 5/6 and AVX512 10/11 offsets. (eg, 40 AVX and 35 AVX 512)


Thanks :thumb:

And for PLL settings ?


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> Thanks :thumb:
> 
> And for PLL settings ?


which one? but no matter, no difference for the 24.7 settings. For calculations at 4.0, they are on auto. I donlt remember changing PLL for 24/7 or 4.0 (or for 4.8 for that matter)


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> which one? but no matter, no difference for the 24.7 settings. For calculations at 4.0, they are on auto. I donlt remember changing PLL for 24/7 or 4.0 (or for 4.8 for that matter)


You told me about PLL, but if I can leave in AUTO for h24 :thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> You told me about PLL, but if I can leave in AUTO for h24 :thumb:


... lol, I don't remember. What did I say?


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Hydroplane said:


> My Z390 system takes 11 seconds to boot and my X299 system takes 48 seconds... not sure why this is lol


 hpet? That can cause slowdowns.


----------



## GnarlyCharlie

HPET is off on my X299 rig (unless I'm running the HWBOT H265 bench) and it still takes a while to boot. Worth it though, I love that thing when it gets up and running.


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> ... lol, I don't remember. What did I say?


It's PL, not PLL
and it's That 



Jpmboy said:


> not for things like Boinc or other heavy number crunching. For stuff that uses heavy AVX and AVX2 (boinc) I run 40/35/30 at 1.05V. This keeps the power draw under 300W for the CPU for days-long crunching. YOur system may not actually be crashing, but may be hitting one of the power limit settings in bios or even tripping the PSU OCP (I can on my 1500i with only the CPU loaded if it is not in single rail mode). *Check the PL settings in bios...*


----------



## SirWaWa

I get wake up lag when the monitor is turned off after idling for so long on x299 xe board. It doesn't happen if I idle when the monitor is not off.
How to fix and why?


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> It's PL, not PLL
> and it's That


ah, you originally asked about PLL, PL = power limit(s)




SirWaWa said:


> I get wake up lag when the monitor is turned off after idling for so long on x299 xe board. It doesn't happen if I idle when the monitor is not off.
> How to fix and why?


most likely HDCP handshake issues since it does not occur when the monitor is not turned off (and HDCP is not interrupted). how long is the lag? seconds or minutes?


----------



## SirWaWa

Jpmboy said:


> most likely HDCP handshake issues since it does not occur when the monitor is not turned off (and HDCP is not interrupted). how long is the lag? seconds or minutes?


seconds
if I turn the monitor on, wait until its fully on, then shake the mouse there is still wake up lag
hmm... in that case i'm considering switching to hdmi, this monitor still gets 144hz, other models downgrade to 120hz
any cons going from dp to hdmi? this monitor isn't hdr and it isn't 4k
I don't get wakeup lag with hdmi, atleast not on other rigs I've seen


----------



## Jpmboy

SirWaWa said:


> seconds
> if I turn the monitor on, wait until its fully on, then shake the mouse there is still wake up lag
> hmm... in that case i'm considering switching to hdmi, this monitor still gets 144hz, other models downgrade to 120hz
> *any cons going from dp to hdmi? *this monitor isn't hdr and it isn't 4k
> I don't get wakeup lag with hdmi, atleast not on other rigs I've seen


not at 1440p.


----------



## cx-ray

SirWaWa said:


> seconds
> if I turn the monitor on, wait until its fully on, then shake the mouse there is still wake up lag
> hmm... in that case i'm considering switching to hdmi, this monitor still gets 144hz, other models downgrade to 120hz
> any cons going from dp to hdmi? this monitor isn't hdr and it isn't 4k
> I don't get wakeup lag with hdmi, atleast not on other rigs I've seen


Could be monitor specific. Does it also take a few seconds when you change resolution or refresh rate?


----------



## SirWaWa

cx-ray said:


> Could be monitor specific. Does it also take a few seconds when you change resolution or refresh rate?


no, almost instant
I really think it's a dp thing or an asus dp thing (leaning more towards a dp thing)
I briefly tried dual monitor with dp, hated it
It behaves like a connected device rather than just a persistent connected device


----------



## ThrashZone

SirWaWa said:


> no, almost instant
> I really think it's a dp thing or an asus dp thing (leaning more towards a dp thing)
> I briefly tried dual monitor with dp, hated it
> It behaves like a connected device rather than just a persistent connected device


Hi,
If using 1080ti I'd lean to it's power delivery out of dp frankly 
Mine has never liked my g-sync monitor during post.. it flickers like a strobe light 
1080/ 980 even titan Xp never did that crap 
I don't use sleep/ hybrid sleep.. all I use is slide show after a while so can't say anything about sleep/ wake issues.


----------



## SirWaWa

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> If using 1080ti I'd lean to it's power delivery out of dp frankly
> Mine has never liked my g-sync monitor during post.. it flickers like a strobe light
> 1080/ 980 even titan Xp never did that crap
> I don't use sleep/ hybrid sleep.. all I use is slide show after a while so can't say anything about sleep/ wake issues.


I had dp monitors briefly with 1080 (non-ti) to be clear and it behaved the same. It acts like a connected device rather than a monitor.


----------



## Jpmboy

SirWaWa said:


> I had dp monitors briefly with 1080 (non-ti) to be clear and it behaved the same. It acts like a connected device rather than a monitor.


DP does behave as a connected device, and transfers EID info so your PC knows what the device is... what do you see in Device manager? Generic PnP or the monitor EDID?


----------



## cx-ray

SirWaWa said:


> I get wake up lag when the monitor is turned off after idling for so long on x299 xe board. It doesn't happen if I idle when the monitor is not off.
> How to fix and why?


Is there perhaps a "Deep Sleep" option in the monitor settings? Perhaps, there's a way to disable it. I'm asking cause I just a got a new monitor with it and it also takes long to turn on with it enabled...haven't checked for lag though.


----------



## SirWaWa

I fixed it... (if you wanna call it a fix)
switched to HDMI instead of DP, no loss in functionality, still get 144hz
no more wake up lag
oddly the monitor itself seems to wake up faster with DP than HDMI but I rather not have wake up lag (we're talking like maybe a second faster)
only happens on cold boot, sometimes restarts waiting for signal
no problem seeing bios either way (known problem with DP on certain setups)

deep sleep sounds like a power saving option, I don't have a deep sleep just variations of dimming options to save power (eco mode)

device manager shows monitor EDID but I also installed the monitor driver from the disc


----------



## The Stilt

Could some of the 9920X owners take a screenshot of HWInfo64, showing the CPU details (as below)?
The used settings do not matter.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
9940x I show no Operating Points section.


----------



## JustinThyme

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 9940x I show no Operating Points section.


They are there, not in the sensors section. Just extend "Central Proccessor"

My 9940X


----------



## ThrashZone

JustinThyme said:


> They are there, *not in the sensors section.* Just extend "Central Processor"
> 
> My 9940X


Hi,
Boom thank you I always just use sensors only


----------



## The Stilt

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Boom thank you I always just use sensors only


Thanks, but I'd still need the 9920X dump.
9940X has different clocks, so the fuses are also different.


----------



## ThrashZone

The Stilt said:


> Thanks, but I'd still need the 9920X dump.
> 9940X has different clocks, so the fuses are also different.


Hi,
Yep a little different 
@Jpmboy has a 9900x I don't know of anyone with a 9920x yet maybe his can help you split the difference or something 
I think mine was all core 42 which is 2 less than it's default turbo speed of 44

Not sure what these fuss readings are going to help you figure out either


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
4.5 shouldn't need any avx offset at all
If you crash vcore isn't enough but 1.2v should be plenty 
Still crashing you have other issues like memory or cache causing the crash or as said cooling not working well in some way/ thermal paste spread....

I don't and probably never will use prime for testing.
Blender demo files classroom/ bmw/.. are more realistic work loads.

https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/


----------



## Mysticial

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 4.5 shouldn't need any avx offset at all
> If you crash vcore isn't enough but 1.2v should be plenty
> Still crashing you have other issues like memory or cache causing the crash or as said cooling not working well in some way/ thermal paste spread....
> 
> I don't and probably never will use prime for testing.
> Blender demo files classroom/ bmw/.. are more realistic work loads.
> 
> https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/


Then you have a really good chip. On both of mine, there are multiple cores that can't do AVX512 at 4.5 GHz. My 7940x has at least one that won't do it at even 3.8 GHz even with higher than stock vcore.


----------



## ThrashZone

Mysticial said:


> Then you have a really good chip. On both of mine, there are multiple cores that can't do AVX512 at 4.5 GHz. My 7940x has at least one that won't do it at even 3.8 GHz even with higher than stock vcore.


Hi,
On manual core voltage ?
On adaptive voltage I'd probably agree if the vid's get to far apart it does or did for me cause instability 
But that was on higher clocks 4.6....

The vid spread between cores was pretty bad +-0.040 that is usually the problem.
+-0.020 and it gets a lot more stable.


----------



## Mysticial

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> On manual core voltage ?
> On adaptive voltage I'd probably agree if the vid's get to far apart it does or did for me cause instability
> But that was on higher clocks 4.6....
> 
> The vid spread between cores was pretty bad +-0.040 that is usually the problem.
> +-0.020 and it gets a lot more stable.


Offset voltage, IIRC +0.030.


----------



## ThrashZone

Mysticial said:


> Offset voltage, IIRC +0.030.


Hi,
Even with offset I had to tune in each core to get the vid's closer together otherwise same deal as adaptive occurred :/
A lot of tuning to get 10 cores happy 
9940x are a lot better and about the same 4.5 no avx offset needed 
But I only use blender demo files/ classroom too and then lastly real bench...


----------



## Mysticial

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Even with offset I had to tune in each core to get the vid's closer together otherwise same deal as adaptive occurred :/
> A lot of tuning to get 10 cores happy
> 9940x are a lot better and about the same 4.5 no avx offset needed
> But I only use blender demo files/ classroom too and then lastly real bench...


I have a Gigabyte board so I don't have per-core voltage. Yes, there's a huge vcore spread across the different cores (0.130v spread @ 4.5 GHz), but there isn't anything I can do about it.

The only option is to lock the vcore for all cores to a specific voltage regardless of load or clock which is not what I want.


----------



## ThrashZone

Mysticial said:


> I have a Gigabyte board so I don't have per-core voltage. Yes, there's a huge vcore spread across the different cores (0.130v spread @ 4.5 GHz), but there isn't anything I can do about it.
> 
> The only option is to lock the vcore for all cores to a specific voltage regardless of load or clock which is not what I want.


Hi,
Wow that's a bad spread 
Might be worth rma have you seen other giga boards that bad ?


----------



## Mysticial

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Wow that's a bad spread
> Might be worth rma have you seen other giga boards that bad ?


It's not the board. The VIDs are specified by the CPU. My 14 core has cores on both extremes (leaky/low-vcore, and not-leaky/high-vcore)

The two TB3 cores are stable 4.7 GHz (non-AVX) with only 1.24 vcore. While there's 4 others that can't do it at even 1.35v.


----------



## ThrashZone

Mysticial said:


> It's not the board. The VIDs are specified by the CPU. My 14 core has cores on both extremes (leaky/low-vcore, and not-leaky/high-vcore)
> 
> The two TB3 cores are stable 4.7 GHz (non-AVX) with only 1.24 vcore. While there's 4 others that can't do it at even 1.35v.


Hi,
Heck post hwinfo at what ever clocks and manual voltage you've used and lets see the core temp spread.
If the core temps are way off too like more than 10c could be a liquid metal application problem lord knows I had that problem too from silicon lottery it only lasted 9-10 months before I had to redo it.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Well 1.2v is what is needed for 4.5

5.0 I estimated 1.37v would be needed for me on 7900x temp wise wasn't going to happen 
1.34v for 4.9 on a cool day was as good as I ever got.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Almost pulled 8900 dang it 

Edit single core score just finished 502 mp ratio 17.70x


----------



## JustinThyme

The Stilt said:


> Thanks, but I'd still need the 9920X dump.
> 9940X has different clocks, so the fuses are also different.


Sorry cant help with that. Only 7900X and 9940X. Just have to hold out to see if anyone else buys a 9920X


----------



## Section31

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Heck post hwinfo at what ever clocks and manual voltage you've used and lets see the core temp spread.
> If the core temps are way off too like more than 10c could be a liquid metal application problem lord knows I had that problem too from silicon lottery it only lasted 9-10 months before I had to redo it.


Interesting. That might explain my temperature issues partially. However, I don't have the time to actually examine and reapply the liquid metal. Its cheaper for me just to upgrade.


----------



## JustinThyme

Section31 said:


> Interesting. That might explain my temperature issues partially. However, I don't have the time to actually examine and reapply the liquid metal. Its cheaper for me just to upgrade.


Ran a sillicon ottery 7900X at 5Ghz for over a year with my only problem being stupid enough to buy a monoblock. Two cores always hotter. Went to seperate blocks and never had another issue. Ive since replaced that with a 9940X and couldnt be happier. Managed to get a good sample that will run 5GHz on all cores under water, no chiller. Just over kill single loop with 2X 480 and one 360 rad with serial D5 pumps.


----------



## Section31

If that is what is needed to cool this platform that is a lot. I need an sma8a for that. Sounds like i should get an heatkiller mora down the road.


----------



## clannagh

Artah said:


> I wanted to preorder a CPU but none of the motherboards I'm considering is going to be released yet. I'm looking at EVGA dark and RVIE or Apex.


EVGA seem to be having a lot of issues lately including laying off a heap of staff.


----------



## Barefooter

JustinThyme said:


> Ran a sillicon ottery 7900X at 5Ghz for over a year with my only problem being stupid enough to buy a monoblock. Two cores always hotter. Went to seperate blocks and never had another issue. Ive since replaced that with a 9940X and couldnt be happier. Managed to get a good sample that will run 5GHz on all cores under water, no chiller. Just over kill single loop with 2X 480 and one 360 rad with serial D5 pumps.


Yeah I use two separate blocks too only way to go! On my Silicon Lottery 7900X I have a 5.0 GHz bench profile, but use a 4.8 GHz profile for everyday use.

Edit: just noticed this is the 10,000th post here :thumb:

.


----------



## ThrashZone

Section31 said:


> Interesting. That might explain my temperature issues partially. However, I don't have the time to actually examine and reapply the liquid metal. Its cheaper for me just to upgrade.


Hi,
That really doesn't make much sense but if scared to redo the delid I can understand that better than no time to do it verses spending another 1k.us+ to buy another chip


----------



## Section31

There are other reasons I want to upgrade including intel security holes and I want to avoid buying more radiator as it appears it is necessary to keep this cpu cool. Also. I want to slightly downsize from my Caselabs S8. I'm thinking about going single 360 and adding a Mora Radiator. My upgrade is switching to ryzen 3000 and x570. Costs wise are less than 1k US as I only need to buy CPU, Mobo. When Intel 7nm comes out, I will think about switching back.


----------



## Medusa666

I kindly ask for your advice 

So I have the option to buy a 7980XE for a good price, 950$. I do not have a X299 motherboard, but if I buy the 7980XE I would have to purchase a mobo, and they look pretty expensive. I figure that I can't just buy any X299 board for this CPU, (been looking at the cheaper options like the Raider, Strix, etc) due to VRM being to weak for a 7980XE overlocked? If I get it I want to run it around 4,4-46GHz 24/7. 

I was thinking of going for 3950X and a decent X570 motherboard until this offer came up. 

TLDR; Do you guys think it is worth that kind of money still, considering Ryzen 2 release in july with 16 cores, and most likely Threadripper 2 year 2020?


----------



## Section31

Wait for reviews before you decide. You also need to ask yourself 
1. How urgent do you need your PC. There will always be newer tech coming in 2020/2021/2022.
2. Do I need more than 28PCIE channels. If so then you need X299 or wait for threadripper 7nm
3. How much cooling are you prepared to invest in. Ryzen 3000 should require less cooling but we won't know extent till reviews are in. You need either: chillers,external radiators,multiple 480mm radiators for 7980XE 4.5ghz+.

If you still decide X299 after the reviews, just go pick up an used X299 Motherboard or wait for retailers to drop the price. I'm jumping to X570 as well myself. The best deal X299 CPU and mobo would be mine. If I was selling, I am only looking for 300USD for 7920X and X299 Apex. However, there is an waiting list with my best friend being given first opportunity. 

The 16core Ryzen 3000 won't be out till September for your information btw.


----------



## D-EJ915

You guys think it's worthwhile to get a different chip or board at this point? EVGA seems to have no idea how to get the 2nd U.2 port to work with the 9900X they suggested RMA but the second board has the same problem.

Edit: ended up that only 1 out of 3 cables work on this second port so I'd suggest not using the U.2 ports or buying the specific cable I did that works which is this one on amazon: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01LYUF8L8/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1


----------



## JustinThyme

Medusa666 said:


> I kindly ask for your advice
> 
> So I have the option to buy a 7980XE for a good price, 950$. I do not have a X299 motherboard, but if I buy the 7980XE I would have to purchase a mobo, and they look pretty expensive. I figure that I can't just buy any X299 board for this CPU, (been looking at the cheaper options like the Raider, Strix, etc) due to VRM being to weak for a 7980XE overlocked? If I get it I want to run it around 4,4-46GHz 24/7.
> 
> I was thinking of going for 3950X and a decent X570 motherboard until this offer came up.
> 
> TLDR; Do you guys think it is worth that kind of money still, considering Ryzen 2 release in july with 16 cores, and most likely Threadripper 2 year 2020?


18 ccores and 40 lanes, go for it.
There is always something on the horizon. If you wait for the next best thing you will be waiting in your grave. Lotta talk abpout the 3950X but at this point.....thats all it is. Personally if I was to go that route Id wait for the second gen of it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep worth reselling too maybe that is an expensive chip pigeon poop still or was it delid already ?


----------



## JustinThyme

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep worth reselling too maybe that is an expensive chip pigeon poop still or was it delid already ?


Thats an expensive pigeon!!!
Yes of course history of the chip is everything. If its been run through the wringer or an outright spud then the curb appeal diminishes.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Hey all, recently I have tried to push my mesh back up to 3.2 on my 7820x, currently at 3.1 and I'm having trouble getting it stable.
Voltage is currently at 1.16 for 3.1. I managed to pass realbench at 1.18 but near insta-crashed in Apex Legends afterwards. I upped it to 1.2, and same thing. Passed 30 minutes of realbench but crashed quickly in games. 

Do I keep upping the mesh voltage? Is there something else I can tweak? CPU clockspeed is 4.6ghz @ 1.22, and my ram configuration is in my sig.

I'm trying to get as much out of this chip as possible as getting a 9900k or possibly a new Ryzen is tempting but probably not worth it. I'm willing to push the mesh voltage higher even for that .1gh I just don't want the chip to degrade TOO quickly. From what I understand 1.2 is about the max you want the mesh voltage but I haven't seen it discussed here which I trust more.


----------



## Section31

At this point, if you hold X299 just up it to max everything and see how high you can OC to. Slow CPU degradation doesn't matter as you will want to update in 2-3 years time anyways. Treat these Intel chips are more or less worth nothing since the ongoing security issues at cpu design level and high power consumption have more or less killed the resale value going forward.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Section31 said:


> At this point, if you hold X299 just up it to max everything and see how high you can OC to. Slow CPU degradation doesn't matter as you will want to update in 2-3 years time anyways. Treat these Intel chips are more or less worth nothing since the ongoing security issues at cpu design level and high power consumption have more or less killed the resale value going forward.


I will probably give this chip to a friend when I do upgrade. So I don't want to go too far. What is the max mesh voltage you recommend? 1.25? 1.3?


----------



## Section31

Stick to Intel reccomended max.


----------



## ThrashZone

aDyerSituation said:


> I will probably give this chip to a friend when I do upgrade. So I don't want to go too far. What is the max mesh voltage you recommend? 1.25? 1.3?


Hi,
Manual at 1.2v last I've been told by Jp.


----------



## cx-ray

aDyerSituation said:


> Do I keep upping the mesh voltage? Is there something else I can tweak? CPU clockspeed is 4.6ghz @ 1.22, and my ram configuration is in my sig.


Increasing VCCIO and Uncore voltage can also help Mesh stability.


----------



## aDyerSituation

cx-ray said:


> Increasing VCCIO and Uncore voltage can also help Mesh stability.



Isn't uncore voltage mesh voltage in case? 

anyways my VCCIO is at 1.0 and my VCCSA is at .8


----------



## cx-ray

aDyerSituation said:


> Isn't uncore voltage mesh voltage in case?
> 
> anyways my VCCIO is at 1.0 and my VCCSA is at .8


Whether Uncore voltage is exposed might be motherboard dependent. 

On the Rampage VI Apex you have Uncore and Cache voltage settings. The latter is what Asus uses to refer to Mesh.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I've never set uncore voltage I just leave it on auto Jp and some others use this at 3.0 though


Code:


CPU Cache Voltage [Manual Mode]
CPU Cache Voltage Override [1.175]
Uncore Voltage Offset [0.400]
Uncore Voltage Offset Prefix [+]

I have tried 3.2 on cache with offset of 0.195 wasn't too bad not sure how stable it was seeing I was just benchmarking a little no crashing but I don't see any reason to go 24/7 with it 30 seems just fine even on auto cache voltage on 9940x chip.

VCCIO is usually needed if pushing memory past rated speed no telling if mesh is affected.


----------



## Barefooter

I was running my mesh at 3.1 GHz then switched to a different set of RAM sticks, and it would not even boot until I put the mesh down to 3.0. I also switched to auto mesh voltage per jpmboy's suggestion and it works fine.


Most people I have seen try to run 3.2 GHz on their mesh are also complaining about stability issues. I doubt you would see much difference between 3.1 and 3.2 in any benchmarks either.


----------



## aDyerSituation

Barefooter said:


> I was running my mesh at 3.1 GHz then switched to a different set of RAM sticks, and it would not even boot until I put the mesh down to 3.0. I also switched to auto mesh voltage per jpmboy's suggestion and it works fine.
> 
> 
> Most people I have seen try to run 3.2 GHz on their mesh are also complaining about stability issues. I doubt you would see much difference between 3.1 and 3.2 in any benchmarks either.


I just hate seeing that number, 3.1..but not enough to lower it to 3.0 haha

so you had good luck with auto voltage on mesh?


----------



## Barefooter

aDyerSituation said:


> I just hate seeing that number, 3.1..but not enough to lower it to 3.0 haha
> 
> so you had good luck with auto voltage on mesh?



Yeah so far it is just fine on auto. If the rest of your overclock is stable I think you'll be good :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Keep in mind mesh/ cache 30 and auto voltage is on 99..x series not 79..x series 
I've not seen anyone using auto cache voltage on a 79..x series yet at max cache 30 or higher for that matter.


----------



## iTTT

i try to OC my 9920X with Asus Deluxe II.

setup each core by offset mode:

3 cores to 4.8G and 9 cores to 4.7G

the Max v is 1.299v and the Min core v is 1.282v

so far so good.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi, @iTTT
Nice 
But at nearly 1.3v you could be at 5.0 
4.8 should only need 1.24v

Use rig builder and add your build to your signature.


----------



## CptSpig

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> @iTTT
> Nice
> But at nearly 1.3v you could be at 5.0
> 4.8 should only need 1.24v
> 
> Use rig builder and add your build to your signature.


All builds take different voltages to get a stable OC. You can't just say 1.3v will get him 5.0 on his build as hardware and cooling are a big factors. :headscrat:


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> All builds take different voltages to get a stable OC. *You can't just say 1.3v will get him 5.0 on his build as hardware and cooling are a big factors.* :headscrat:


Hi,
I can say it doesn't mean it's true but would likely post


----------



## JustinThyme

A more accurate statement perhaps is that that kind of juice should not be needed for 4.8GHz. Im running 2 more cores with less juice and get 5GHz on all 14.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

GnarlyCharlie said:


> HPET is off on my X299 rig (unless I'm running the HWBOT H265 bench) and it still takes a while to boot. Worth it though, I love that thing when it gets up and running.


my boot time its like 10 seconds without fast boot and no uefi i like my legacy XD


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Indeed uefi/ gpt is for the birds it only make recovery more difficult and gives MS the ability to make a mess of ssd/ hdd with numerous/ unlimited 450-600..mb partition clutter.


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> my boot time its like 10 seconds without fast boot and no uefi i like my legacy XD


I get around 26ec true boot time according to MS Event viewer... this is a post OS-handoff timer on my R6EO/9900X rig. Windows fast boot and Bios Fast boot are different things and affect times differently... POST time will vary according to how many manually set parameters there are in the bios settings. Fastest POST times will be with all things on Auto (true Defaults) IME.


----------



## djgar

My Areca disk controller card adds about 15 seconds before BIOS can even register.


----------



## Jpmboy

djgar said:


> My Areca disk controller card adds about 15 seconds before BIOS can even register.


 ... and by the attached devices.


----------



## djgar

Jpmboy said:


> ... and by the attached devices.


Four 3TB drives in RAID 10 ...


----------



## Jpmboy

djgar said:


> Four 3TB drives in RAID 10 ...


you need to add a 5th as an in-place spare. Belt, suspenders and elastic waistband!


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> you need to add a 5th as an in-place spare. Belt, suspenders and elastic waistband!


Hi,
Think you can upload a x99 bios text file on you 6950x ?
Getting one tonight sometime 
I've looked way back on the BW-E thread and got some bios images and your clock screen shots but a bios text file would be wonderful


----------



## djgar

Jpmboy said:


> you need to add a 5th as an in-place spare. Belt, suspenders and elastic waistband!


:thumbsups


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Think you can upload a x99 bios text file on you 6950x ?
> Getting one tonight sometime
> I've looked way back on the BW-E thread and got some bios images and your clock screen shots but a bios text file would be wonderful


 sure... but as it is right now it is set up for compute work at only 4.2. Will do tho.
found recent one for 4.4GHz (may 2019)


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> sure... but as it is right now it is set up for compute work at only 4.2. Will do tho.
> found recent one for 4.4GHz (may 2019)


Hi,
Boom thanks text file would of sufficed :thumb: 
Looks like you've changed some settings back to the way you deal with skylake-x platform offset auto instead of 1-2 years ago I saw you using offset 0.010


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Where i can find that aluminum oxide 40u sandpaper im thinking on flattening my 7940x die i know the risks but im willing to take them. Ebay, Amazon?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
You delid that 7940x ?
If so what risk warranty already gone


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> You delid that 7940x ?
> If so what risk warranty already gone


yeah my 7940x is already delided>> i think my chip is really convex on the die


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> yeah my 7940x is already delided>> i think my chip is really convex on the die


Hi,
If silicon lottery did the delid I'd bet you were right 
They "sl" say they use extreme pressure 
It leaves a clear cup depression once you sand it a little you can see it like night and day.

You could buy a copper cap if that makes you feel better rockit 88 sells one for 2066.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> yeah my 7940x is already delided>> i think my chip is really convex on the die
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> If silicon lottery did the delid I'd bet you were right
> They "sl" say they use extreme pressure
> It leaves a clear cup depression once you sand it a little you can see it like night and day.
> 
> You could buy a copper cap if that makes you feel better rockit 88 sells one for 2066.
Click to expand...

Nah, this one i took the virginity myself lol.

I bought a spare ihs so i can lap it myself. But i am seriously thinking in lapping the actual die as well.


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> Nah, this one i took the virginity myself lol.
> 
> I bought a spare ihs so i can lap it myself. But i am seriously thinking in lapping the actual die as well.


Hi,
Okay but ouch not lapping the die :wheee:
Just get the direct die mount 

I tried a while back to order the coolman or what ever it was called through aliexpress darn thing never showed up and it showed it was delivered after 28 days
I disputed through credit card said it was fraud seller they agreed and full refund this was like 3 months ago still has not showed up

Aliexpress was a joke of so called support be warned


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Okay but ouch not lapping the die /forum/images/smilies//wheee.gif
> Just get the direct die mount
> 
> I tried a while back to order the coolman or what ever it was called through aliexpress darn thing never showed up and it showed it was delivered after 28 days
> I disputed through credit card said it was fraud seller they agreed and full refund this was like 3 months ago still has not showed up
> 
> Aliexpress was a joke of so called support be warned /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif


i even tried the direct die cooling and everything end selling the der8uer kit forward as it didnt do what i wanted still have the other one which i modded bcuz it was for 7920x and under... The ihs was better contact everytime 0 problems not worth the hazzle and i knew too it wasnt going to help, i tried direct die cooling bunch of times before and its too finicky to get it right my case its too small for the amount of hardware that it has inside... .. so playing with a bunch of re-mounts its a no no  i will have to take the whole thing apart everytime lol

X299 dual 1080tis 3 x 240s on a TT 20VT case, to take it apart its a pita i have few ways taking top rads out first or removing the gpus first then disconnect all the pipe work in between rads and mobo/gpus slide mobo from the left side out so i can play with it outside the case XD.. had to remove pci express locks for this. The rest for cooling its on the outside xD so enough rad i do have xD


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep even Jpmboy had issues with that direct die mount and finally found someone to dump it on 
The iceman is supposed to work better but the user hasn't been around in quite a while so maybe he killed his processor/ board with LM leaking no telling.


----------



## PWn3R

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 
> Yep even Jpmboy had issues with that direct die mount and finally found someone to dump it on
> 
> The iceman is supposed to work better but the user hasn't been around in quite a while so maybe he killed his processor/ board with LM leaking no telling.


My temps (on Haswell) were better with good thermal paste and direct die than lm + heatspreader + lm and no leakage concerns. The LM on the last layer just wasn't worth the risk for me, but I also didn't cover the SMDs with anything.

Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep even Jpmboy had issues with that direct die mount and finally found someone to dump it on
> The iceman is supposed to work better but the user hasn't been around in quite a while so maybe he killed his processor/ board with LM leaking no telling.


I had problems with fitment/die contact that could have been fixed with a Dremel on the retention plate. I did not see any irregularities in the die itself (which would certainly translate to the delidded/LM/IHS interface anyway...


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep even Jpmboy had issues with that direct die mount and finally found someone to dump it on
> The iceman is supposed to work better but the user hasn't been around in quite a while so maybe he killed his processor/ board with LM leaking no telling.


I have the iceman one remember i modified the crap out of it lol.. 

So i got the ihs spare yesterday waiting to be lapped now 😕 it was already "lapped" a user in ebay was selling them like that. I check with a razor is very flat. Finishing on top is so so lots of scratches no mirror finish tho i had done better laps jobs than that. So im going to sand it to a mirror finish with a 2000 grit maybe today. Deciding which block to use on it. I have right now a bykski on the x299, but i also have an ek evo or the koolance 380 the 380 is the best block i have tried so far since water cooling. Idk why but havent find a better one yet it just perform lol . I have all the brackets for him intel and amd i even made him am4 compatible was a easy job drill holes in the current amd bracket and join the holes xD

Now i need to find those 3m 40u for the die . The ones i seeing are expensive as hell. Im tempted to go straight 2000 grit on it instead.


----------



## JustinThyme

Strange, Ive never had any luck with koolance. Considered them junk long ago and not never used anything they make since it turned my loop of DI green in less than two weeks. 
3 Blocks Ive tried on X299 are EK Evo, EK monoblock and Heatkiller IV Pro. The Evo was OK but nothing stellar, The monoblock is pretty but hanging on the performance wall of shame along with the koolance parts. The Heatkiller IV pro difference is design aesthetics, fit and finish was enough to convert me. Ive not even considered EK since. Only thing EK left in my build is the heat spreader for M2 SSD. Problem with watercool is finding what you need in stock. After ordering GPU blocks from their online store I found out they stock nothing. When it says available it really means that a production run of that part is scheduled. Might be in a few days or might be a few weeks or in my case 6 weeks. They will not run one part or two for that matter. When orders for parts are sufficient enough they will then schedule a production run.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

JustinThyme said:


> Strange, Ive never had any luck with koolance. Considered them junk long ago and not never used anything they make since it turned my loop of DI green in less than two weeks.
> 3 Blocks Ive tried on X299 are EK Evo, EK monoblock and Heatkiller IV Pro. The Evo was OK but nothing stellar, The monoblock is pretty but hanging on the performance wall of shame along with the koolance parts. The Heatkiller IV pro difference is design aesthetics, fit and finish was enough to convert me. Ive not even considered EK since. Only thing EK left in my build is the heat spreader for M2 SSD. Problem with watercool is finding what you need in stock. After ordering GPU blocks from their online store I found out they stock nothing. When it says available it really means that a production run of that part is scheduled. Might be in a few days or might be a few weeks or in my case 6 weeks. They will not run one part or two for that matter. When orders for parts are sufficient enough they will then schedule a production run.


I even have 3 koolance universal 220 blocks that i love
Their cooling is awesome. I also swapped my ek 1080ti full block for swiftech and the swiftech blocks are miles away on cooling vs ek. I also have a ek universal gpu which is so so the koolance 220 is the best universal gpu block i have tried to date.


----------



## CptSpig

zGunBLADEz said:


> I even have 3 koolance universal 220 blocks that i love
> Their cooling is awesome. I also swapped my ek 1080ti full block for swiftech and the swiftech blocks are miles away on cooling vs ek. I also have a ek universal gpu which is so so the koolance 220 is the best universal gpu block i have tried to date.


I have to agree with zGunBLADEz. I have a Koolance 390ci CPU block I like way better than any of my EKWB blocks. :blinksmil


----------



## zGunBLADEz

This is the ihs i got from ebay at least he saved me a couple of hrs of work.. only used 2000 sandpaper ready to go xX


----------



## JustinThyme

zGunBLADEz said:


> This is the ihs i got from ebay at least he saved me a couple of hrs of work.. only used 2000 sandpaper ready to go xX


nice finish!


----------



## JustinThyme

CptSpig said:


> I have to agree with zGunBLADEz. I have a Koolance 390ci CPU block I like way better than any of my EKWB blocks. :blinksmil


Glad to hear they are working for someone. I havent used anything of theirs recently as I deemed them junk long ago and never looked back.


----------



## CptSpig

JustinThyme said:


> Glad to hear they are working for someone. I havent used anything of theirs recently as I deemed them junk long ago and never looked back.


Well maybe you will give Koolance a second chance in the future. You will not be disappointed.


----------



## JustinThyme

CptSpig said:


> Well maybe you will gove Koolance a second chance in the future. You will not be disappointed.


No disrespect intended but Id highly doubt it. Honestly speaking nearly all of them perform thermally within a margin of error, the latest koolance block is among the most restrictive. Once jaded I seldom look back. 

The only thing they have that Ive eyeballed recently is a chiller. Only problem is they dont have one that will cool both GPUs and CPU and their top dog is like $1800 USD. WHOA!!!


----------



## Jpmboy

the koolance EXC-800 chiller cools my cpu and dual gpus (2080Tis or Titan Vs or TXPs) very well and it hooks into any of the rigs using koolance QDCs. ;p
Their equipment is top shelf stuff.


----------



## JustinThyme

Jpmboy said:


> the koolance EXC-800 chiller cools my cpu and dual gpus (2080Tis or Titan Vs or TXPs) very well and it hooks into any of the rigs using koolance QDCs. ;p
> Their equipment is top shelf stuff.



Thanks for the info


----------



## CptSpig

JustinThyme said:


> No disrespect intended but Id highly doubt it. Honestly speaking nearly all of them perform thermally within a margin of error, the latest koolance block is among the most restrictive. Once jaded I seldom look back.
> 
> The only thing they have that Ive eyeballed recently is a chiller. Only problem is they dont have one that will cool both GPUs and CPU and their top dog is like $1800 USD. WHOA!!!





Jpmboy said:


> the koolance EXC-800 chiller cools my cpu and dual gpus (2080Tis or Titan Vs or TXPs) very well and it hooks into any of the rigs using koolance QDCs. ;p
> Their equipment is top shelf stuff.


I can second that my EXC-800 also cools my rig down to 5c with ease for benching. It will go lower but the condensation is a problem.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

CptSpig said:


> I can second that my EXC-800 also cools my rig down to 5c with ease for benching. It will go lower but the condensation is a problem.


how long it takes to get from ambient to 5c? how much it power cycles when watts are thrown at it?


----------



## JustinThyme

I dont know about 5C nor am I looking to go that far. If anything just a little under ambient. My other issue is noise. How loud is the compressor and whats the current draw? I may go with a self made chiller I can put in the basement and plumb up to the second floor.


----------



## ESRCJ

Has anyone done a CPU block comparison for Skylake-X, specifically the HCC dies?


----------



## zGunBLADEz

JustinThyme said:


> I dont know about 5C nor am I looking to go that far. If anything just a little under ambient. My other issue is noise. How loud is the compressor and whats the current draw? I may go with a self made chiller I can put in the basement and plumb up to the second floor.


 i have a 1/4 HP unit from active aqua its not that loud less than an AC the fan its the loudest... but between that and dew point its not that spectacular to be honest. It does the job but i think i need a bigger reservoir like 5 gallons at least too much power cycling. Plus i was testing it on a 30-32c ambient the dewpoint was like 18c-20c the lowest so its even worst lol. My limit is 10c because of liquid metal on die.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ESRCJ said:


> Has anyone done a CPU block comparison for Skylake-X, specifically the HCC dies?


i havent but im changing my bykski block for the supremacy evo "rings" all nickel pretty soon after seeing this yesterday when i swap my ihs for the lapped one.

https://proclockers.com/reviews/cooling/ek-water-blocks-ek-velocity-cpu-water-block-review/page/0/5


----------



## CptSpig

zGunBLADEz said:


> how long it takes to get from ambient to 5c? how much it power cycles when watts are thrown at it?


It will go from 25c to 5c in about ten minutes. When at 5c it will cycle every 20 to 30 seconds. It sounds like a small refrigerator when running. It will go below 5c to freezing but you will need to protect your board like you would with LN2.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

CptSpig said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> how long it takes to get from ambient to 5c? how much it power cycles when watts are thrown at it?
> 
> 
> 
> It will go from 25c to 5c in about ten minutes. When at 5c it will cycle every 20 to 30 seconds. It sounds like a small refrigerator when running. It will go below 5c to freezing but you will need to protect your board like you would with LN2.
Click to expand...

 did you try a bigger reservoir? That's whats killing it for me the power cycles. Even when its not that loud. Im thinking adding a 5gallon to see if i can drop those power cycling to 3-5min in between.

I builded a dew controller with a relay using arduino with a bunch of safety stuff and what not xD


----------



## CptSpig

zGunBLADEz said:


> did you try a bigger reservoir? That's whats killing it for me the power cycles. Even when its not that loud. Im thinking adding a 5gallon to see if i can drop those power cycling to 3-5min in between.
> 
> I builded a dew controller with a relay using arduino with a bunch of safety stuff and what not xD


No, I only use the chiller for benching not everyday use. I use a nine fan rad. for 24/7 use. :thinking:


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> i havent but im changing my bykski block for the supremacy evo "rings" all nickel pretty soon after seeing this yesterday when i swap my ihs for the lapped one.
> 
> https://proclockers.com/reviews/cooling/ek-water-blocks-ek-velocity-cpu-water-block-review/page/0/5


I have the velocity copper/plexi on my 9900X/R6EO rig. Works very well, but I can;t honestly say that it's any better than the koolance 380i or EK supremacy that I tried before assembling it into a case. These comparisons are really hard to do properly.. mount quality is sooo critical. (remember SkinnyLabs experiments on mount quality?)


CptSpig said:


> I can second that my EXC-800 also cools my rig down to 5c with ease for benching. *It will go lower but the condensation is a problem*.


damn dew point! 


zGunBLADEz said:


> did you try a bigger reservoir? That's whats killing it for me the power cycles. Even when its not that loud. Im thinking adding a 5gallon to see if i can drop those power cycling to 3-5min in between.
> 
> I builded a dew controller with a relay using arduino with a bunch of safety stuff and what not xD


 Loop volume make a big difference, but unless the added "tank" (I use an aquacomputer Gigant 1680 as the primary rads) is first on the hot side and can somehow help to shed heat from the loop at thermal equlibrium, loop volume will just slow the cooldown time.
I toyed with putting the chiller in the basement (right bleow my office) and running tubing thru the floor... but too much bother since I move it around to different rigs as needed. Yeah, it's l;ouder than a beer fridge.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

i have the loop on the pc with 3 240s and the phobya 1260 outside then from there goes to the chiller and then back in the pc. if i have fans on it will add heat inside the loop when chiller is on.


----------



## PWn3R

I was running 3 cores @ 5ghz @1.310v and 15 @ 4.6ghz at varying voltages between 1.2 and 1.259. I had some instability yesterday after no issues in 4 months, so I dropped the 3 cores back to 4.8ghz at 1.26v. I was never able to get the adaptive voltage even with a much higher amount to work for CSGO. That's why I went static. I am suspecting slight deg, since it was override voltage.

I am planning to try adaptive voltage again this weekend as I'd like it to not idle at 300w from the wall for my system. Anyone else with. 7980xe and an ASRock Taichi XE got adaptive working correctly? The BSOD was only on CSGO at startup and occured 100% of the time. Adjusting the LLC didn't impact it and this thing is running off a 1200w Seasonic Prime, so it shouldn't be a power issue. I also have a battery backup infront of the whole system.

Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## zGunBLADEz

PWn3R said:


> I was running 3 cores @ 5ghz @1.310v and 15 @ 4.6ghz at varying voltages between 1.2 and 1.259. I had some instability yesterday after no issues in 4 months, so I dropped the 3 cores back to 4.8ghz at 1.26v. I was never able to get the adaptive voltage even with a much higher amount to work for CSGO. That's why I went static. I am suspecting slight deg, since it was override voltage.
> 
> I am planning to try adaptive voltage again this weekend as I'd like it to not idle at 300w from the wall for my system. Anyone else with. 7980xe and an ASRock Taichi XE got adaptive working correctly? The BSOD was only on CSGO at startup and occured 100% of the time. Adjusting the LLC didn't impact it and this thing is running off a 1200w Seasonic Prime, so it shouldn't be a power issue. I also have a battery backup infront of the whole system.
> 
> Sent from my Mi MIX 3 using Tapatalk


either that or was never stable from the beginning and you just hit a nerve or something changed in between


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## pantsaregood

Have newer Skylake-X CPUs scaled any further on mesh clock? My 7820X from around the launch brickwalled at 3.2 GHz. Just curious to know if yields improved to the point it would go further.


----------



## Jpmboy

kingofblog said:


> What is the COP on a typical aquarium/PC chiller? The websites never list this, only the maximum current. I assume these use single-speed compressors, so they run in duty cycles. Maybe air conditioning would actually be a more cost-effective way to go "sub-ambient."


 duty-cycle is correct. Only the stupidly expensive ones have varible speed compressors. COP?
AC or chiller for 24/7, when you go below the dew point you will get condensation... it's a good idea to mask and then spray the board with conformal coating (MG Industries) to waterproof the board and put dielectric grease in populated slots (ram and pcie)


----------



## hotrod717

One thing to be aware of with dialectic grease or vaseline, it can get caked into slots and cause issues with pins making proper contact with ram, particularly if you are changing ram out frequently. There are small cavities along the slot corresponding to the contacting pins. These pins spring back as they make contact with the ram contacts. If the there is something(grease or vasoline) packed in the relief cavities, it can prevent the pins from moving or flexing freely in either direction.
This may be more of an issue with extreme cooling, thermal cycling, or frequently reinstalling memory, but something to be aware of.
If you have an issue, you will have to blow the vasoline or grease out of the slot.


----------



## JustinThyme

Oh the woes of going extreme. Why I quit and if I ever go back to a chiller its going to remain above the dew point so I dont have to "sweat" over it. More like liquid cooled without all the rad space and fans in the case. If I get up off my lazy a$$ and run some copper to where my rig sits now I still have the floor heating coils buried under the slab in the basment. That works quite well and nothing but a pump in the basement and 5 gal bucket for a reservoir with a few check valves. That system normally equalizes out with liquid temps in the 20-22 range. Cold dirt and 30 sqft of floor heater coils. (if they havent corroded to hell and back by now) put them in there on a whim when I had to dig up the basement.


----------



## kingofblog

.


----------



## ThrashZone

JustinThyme said:


> Oh the woes of going extreme. Why I quit and if I ever go back to a chiller its going to remain above the dew point so I dont have to "sweat" over it. More like liquid cooled without all the rad space and fans in the case. If I get up off my lazy a$$ and run some copper to where my rig sits now I still have the floor heating coils buried under the slab in the basment. That works quite well and nothing but a pump in the basement and 5 gal bucket for a reservoir with a few check valves. That system normally equalizes out with liquid temps in the 20-22 range. Cold dirt and 30 sqft of floor heater coils. (if they havent corroded to hell and back by now) put them in there on a whim when I had to dig up the basement.


Hi,
Yeah I think I'd just go air conditioner type chilling 
60-65f air would do just fine in summer especially if room temp was 75f.


----------



## JustinThyme

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah I think I'd just go air conditioner type chilling
> 60-65f air would do just fine in summer especially if room temp was 75f.


Thats pretty much what Im doing ATM. I have 10x12 office area off of the master suite on the second floor. Needs seperate AC in summer anyhow so there is a 5k BTU window unit who's output vent just happens to dump half of its air right into the backside of my case where most of my air intake comes from. In the enthoo elite one of the radiator options is right nest to the MOBO where a 360 rad can be mounted with a cutout and air filter in the back and you can blank it off if you want. I leave it open with the filter in place and not using the rad feature as thats where my D5 Pumps. 2.5+ SSDs and res reside. I took the magnetic filter off the top as a push pull 480x60mm rad is in the roof exhausting from the case and its not needed, that is placed on the rear where the 140mm intake and open space near the PCIE and I/O panel is.


----------



## sblantipodi

Guys do you think that cascade lake X will be the best hedt CPU in the 1000/1200 dollars segment?
Will be better than the next threadripper? Is intel ready to fight back or it will be the same CPU like kabylake X at a lower price?


----------



## D-EJ915

sblantipodi said:


> Guys do you think that cascade lake X will be the best hedt CPU in the 1000/1200 dollars segment?
> Will be better than the next threadripper? Is intel ready to fight back or it will be the same CPU like kabylake X at a lower price?


I feel like their workstation Xeon pricing is going to kill them still as they won't price them too low otherwise no one will buy the Xeons.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Didn't Intel call 9900k's skylake-x.

Why would anyone think Intel would drop prices 
They will do what they always do add 2 more cores and boom a new chip.


----------



## ESRCJ

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Didn't Intel call 9900k's skylake-x.
> 
> Why would anyone think Intel would drop prices
> They will do what they always do add 2 more cores and boom a new chip.


No that's Coffee Lake. I wouldn't put it past Intel to actually lower prices and be competitive with Threadripper, especially considering how many more cores AMD delivers at this point and the nice IPC improvements with Zen 2. As far as how low Intel would actually lower prices, who knows. I don't think Intel can add anymore cores to X299, as the HCC die tops out at 18 cores and they'd have to design a new die for more on X299. Given the layout of the HCC die, they would add no less that 4 more cores (another row of cores). That's what LGA 3647 is for though, more cores (up to 28). More pins, larger die, etc.


----------



## sblantipodi

ESRCJ said:


> ThrashZone said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> Didn't Intel call 9900k's skylake-x.
> 
> Why would anyone think Intel would drop prices
> They will do what they always do add 2 more cores and boom a new chip.
> 
> 
> 
> No that's Coffee Lake. I wouldn't put it past Intel to actually lower prices and be competitive with Threadripper, especially considering how many more cores AMD delivers at this point and the nice IPC improvements with Zen 2. As far as how low Intel would actually lower prices, who knows. I don't think Intel can add anymore cores to X299, as the HCC die tops out at 18 cores and they'd have to design a new die for more on X299. Given the layout of the HCC die, they would add no less that 4 more cores (another row of cores). That's what LGA 3647 is for though, more cores (up to 28). More pins, larger die, etc.
Click to expand...

Based on this reasoning the only things intel can do is to lower price. Isn't a clock bump possible?


----------



## ESRCJ

sblantipodi said:


> Based on this reasoning the only things intel can do is to lower price. Isn't a clock bump possible?


Yes I would expect a clock speed boost since Cascade is on 14nm++, whereas Skylake-X was 14nm+. I wouldn't expect more than 200MHz more on average though when it comes to all-core OC. Maybe the memory controller will be improved as well.


----------



## sblantipodi

ESRCJ said:


> sblantipodi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Based on this reasoning the only things intel can do is to lower price. Isn't a clock bump possible?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes I would expect a clock speed boost since Cascade is on 14nm++, whereas Skylake-X was 14nm+. I wouldn't expect more than 200MHz more on average though when it comes to all-core OC. Maybe the memory controller will be improved as well.
Click to expand...

This means that intel is desperate and that it must lower the price to respect what it shown in the last slides where it claimed that next hedt CPUs will have double the performance per price.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Since skylake-x refresh 99..x didn't even get any security hardware fixes and 9900k.. did about all that Intel might do is that
99..x got a little better cache supposedly but even it is only 2400Mhz on auto where as 79..x was 2700 on auto.
This is all a sad joke compared to 9900k.. cache so that can I imagine be improved.

Pick and choose what real time performance is as well not sure that even applies to manual oc'ing just auto turbo...
Most of the pr on this is wishy washy at best.


----------



## JustinThyme

Intel wont lower prices so long as they are making sales. Their stock is doing just fine, steadily climbing, not by a lot but still an upward graph for the last several years.

Keep in mind that HEDT is a VERY niche market. They charge accordingly for supply and demand. More than we would like but so long as people buy them the price will only go up. AMDs lower prices is what keeps them in the game.


----------



## carlhil2

How else can Intel get a 74-109% performance per dollar advantage over SKL-X core for core?


----------



## dansi

https://www.anandtech.com/show/14146/intel-xeon-scalable-cascade-lake-deep-dive-now-with-optane

Look at the cascade lake prices, Intel can based off Xeon gold 6200, up to 24cores. They will remove upi links, 6->4 channels, 4S scalability, increase tdp and cut prices.


----------



## rdr09

dansi said:


> https://www.anandtech.com/show/14146/intel-xeon-scalable-cascade-lake-deep-dive-now-with-optane
> 
> Look at the cascade lake prices, Intel can based off Xeon gold 6200, up to 24cores. They will remove upi links, 6->4 channels, 4S scalability, increase tdp and cut prices.


Still no proper defense against foreshadow and spongebob, so HT still needs to be disabled for full mitigation.


----------



## cx-ray

According to Intel Foreshadow L1TF vulnerability has hardware mitigation in Cascade Lake.

https://www.phoronix.com/image-viewer.php?id=intel-cascadelake-linux&image=intel_cascadelake_3_lrg


----------



## Martin778

Yeah, after the lastest AGESA I ended my adventure with Zen2, really looking forward to what Cascade Lake X is going to do in terms of thermals, will it still have these insane delta between cores.


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> Yeah, after the lastest AGESA I ended my adventure with Zen2, really looking forward to what Cascade Lake X is going to do in terms of thermals, will it still have these insane delta between cores.


My delidded 7980xe has small "thermal" delta between cores. Only delta is different "vid" on the cores. There is no insane delta


----------



## Martin778

I had both 7920X and 7980XE = 20*C between cores


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> I had both 7920X and 7980XE = 20*C between cores



My peak difference is 12C in stresstest


----------



## Martin778

OC'ed?


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> OC'ed?


yes


----------



## ESRCJ

Martin778 said:


> I had both 7920X and 7980XE = 20*C between cores


Mine would also be around 20C if the hottest core was hitting 80C or above for peak temperature. The difference narrows when the CPU is running cooler. I don't think Cascade Lake-X will "fix" this issue. Gamersnexus had a 9980XE with even wider deltas between cores and those were soldered just like Cascade Lake-X will be (most likely).


----------



## Wizzzard

Does anyone foresee any issues running the same two kits in a single system
G.Skill TridentZ 64 GB (4x16) @ 3200 MHz XMP
G.Skill TridentZ 32 GB (4x8) @ 3200 MHz XMP

Same sub timings on both?


----------



## D-EJ915

Wizzzard said:


> Does anyone foresee any issues running the same two kits in a single system
> G.Skill TridentZ 64 GB (4x16) @ 3200 MHz XMP
> G.Skill TridentZ 32 GB (4x8) @ 3200 MHz XMP
> 
> Same sub timings on both?


I don't use that but how do you have them set up? 

Like
16 8 16 8 16 8 16 8 or 16 16 16 16 8 8 8 8 ? You should put same sticks in both slots per channel.


----------



## JustinThyme

Yes, Cardinal rule is never use separate kits and really never use different sizes. If you use the exact same part number you might get lucky but its a coin toss. Hard enough to get them to run XMP as kits the higher the frequency goes and nearly impossible when they are not binned together in kits.


----------



## Wizzzard

D-EJ915 said:


> I don't use that but how do you have them set up?
> 
> Like
> 16 8 16 8 16 8 16 8 or 16 16 16 16 8 8 8 8 ? You should put same sticks in both slots per channel.


Seems like it will be ok: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000005657/boards-and-kits.html

I know i've done similar things on intel servers without issue.

The 64 GB kit will go in slots 1-4, and the 32 GB kit will go in slots 5-8.

Both kits are of exactly same part number family, just different size.


----------



## ESRCJ

WCCF has leaked some prices for Cascade Lake-X.

https://wccftech.com/intel-core-i9-...ricing-launch-date-leaked-coming-october-7th/

If true, then that's a nice price reduction per tier, especially for the 18-core.

Edit: It was Videocardz who provided the leak. My mistake. And they are indeed correct. GN did a video on this.

https://videocardz.com/82105/intel-...cascade-lake-x-final-specs-and-pricing-leaked


----------



## dansi

carlhil2 said:


> How else can Intel get a 74-109% performance per dollar advantage over SKL-X core for core?


By screwing sklx owners overcharging them at double the new msrp

https://www.anandtech.com/show/14925/intel-cascade-lakex-for-hedt-18-cores-for-under-1000


----------



## Wizzzard

Refresh boards on amazon:


Asus Prime X299 Edition 30 $750
16 VRM Stages, active cooling
https://www.amazon.com/X299-30-Motherboard-Thunderbolt-Front-Panel/dp/B07YD79TJ8

ASUS ROG Strix X299-E Gaming II $450
12 VRM Stages, active cooling
https://www.amazon.com/ASUS-ROG-Strix-Gaming-Motherboard/dp/B07YD7GHJ6/

These are not listed yet:


ROG Rampage VI Extreme Encore
Prime X299-A II


----------



## Nizzen

No new Apex, no new buy 😉

I'll stick with my Asus Apex vi x299


----------



## carlhil2

dansi said:


> By screwing sklx owners overcharging them at double the new msrp
> 
> https://www.anandtech.com/show/14925/intel-cascade-lakex-for-hedt-18-cores-for-under-1000


True. at least my upgrade will be cheaper for once. LOL.


----------



## Jpmboy

Wizzzard said:


> Does anyone foresee any issues running the same two kits in a single system
> G.Skill TridentZ 64 GB (4x16) @ 3200 MHz XMP
> G.Skill TridentZ 32 GB (4x8) @ 3200 MHz XMP
> 
> Same sub timings on both?



Yes, mixing kits of different density is asking for issues. Maybe okay at SPD (probably not XMP tho)


----------



## KCDC

New ASUS 2002 BIOS for my TUF Mk1


TUF X299 MARK 1 BIOS 2002
1.Add support for Intel® Core™ X-Series 10000 Processor Family
2.Improve system performance and stability.
3. Change the default setting for ASUS MultiCore Enhancement to disabled.


----------



## tistou77

Hello

I had done the relid about 4 months ago, and today the temperatures of 3, 4 cores have increased by more than 10° (much less for other cores)
I bad reapplied the Metal Liquid at the time (although I had good temperature) ?
Or it can be something else ("clogged" WB, etc ...) ?

If it's already happened to someone with the Metal Liquid

Thanks


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> Hello
> 
> I had done the relid about 4 months ago, and today the temperatures of 3, 4 cores have increased by more than 10° (much less for other cores)
> I bad reapplied the Metal Liquid at the time (although I had good temperature) ?
> Or it can be something else ("clogged" WB, etc ...) ?
> 
> If it's already happened to someone with the Metal Liquid
> 
> Thanks


is the board vertical or horizontal mount?


----------



## ThrashZone

tistou77 said:


> Hello
> 
> I had done the relid about 4 months ago, and today the temperatures of 3, 4 cores have increased by more than 10° (much less for other cores)
> I bad reapplied the Metal Liquid at the time (although I had good temperature) ?
> Or it can be something else ("clogged" WB, etc ...) ?
> 
> If it's already happened to someone with the Metal Liquid
> 
> Thanks


Hi,
I'd bet of clogged water block fins 
Been there many times

I added a glass gas filter to mine as I refill run for a couple days or until it doesn't show anything else 
It picks up all kinds of small crap cpu block has the tightest cooling fins and picks up everything
Gpu has much deeper cooling fins and doesn't pickup near as much stuff.

After all is clean 
I took apart a replacement filter I just wanted the material to add to a koolance inline filter screen I've been using so it picks up smaller stuff and isn't as restrictive as the gas filter is with it design with small ports/..... but great to see what it's catching easily 

http://koolance.com/ins-fltr03-inline-coolant-filter

https://www.autozone.com/fuel-syste...performance-clear-view-fuel-filter/352786_0_0


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> is the board vertical or horizontal mount?


Hi Jpmboy

vertical mount (in a case) :thumb:

Thanks



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I'd bet of clogged water block fins
> Been there many times
> 
> I added a glass gas filter to mine as I refill run for a couple days or until it doesn't show anything else
> It picks up all kinds of small crap cpu block has the tightest cooling fins and picks up everything
> Gpu has much deeper cooling fins and doesn't pickup near as much stuff.
> 
> After all is clean
> I took apart a replacement filter I just wanted the material to add to a koolance inline filter screen I've been using so it picks up smaller stuff and isn't as restrictive as the gas filter is with it design with small ports/..... but great to see what it's catching easily
> 
> http://koolance.com/ins-fltr03-inline-coolant-filter
> 
> https://www.autozone.com/fuel-syste...performance-clear-view-fuel-filter/352786_0_0


Hi

I was waiting for the new ekwb block to test it, but I think I'll see if the block is clogged, before 

Thanks for the links and your help


----------



## Jpmboy

tistou77 said:


> Hi Jpmboy
> 
> vertical mount (in a case) :thumb:
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Hi
> 
> I was waiting for the new ekwb block to test it, but I think I'll see if the block is clogged, before
> 
> Thanks for the links and your help


yeah, check the block for flow, or back flush the loop. There's been a few reports of LM squeeze-out in vertical mounts... but only a few.


----------



## tistou77

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, check the block for flow, or back flush the loop. There's been a few reports of LM squeeze-out in vertical mounts... but only a few.


Ok thanks :thumb:


----------



## arrow0309

Hi, I'd like to improve my ram latency at 4000 which is ~53-54 under cachemem of aida64.
I was thinking to improve the timings (17-18-17-38-320-1t) or the cache (3.2 @+0.200v offset) or even both.
Any tip to start with?


----------



## ESRCJ

arrow0309 said:


> Hi, I'd like to improve my ram latency at 4000 which is ~53-54 under cachemem of aida64.
> I was thinking to improve the timings (17-18-17-38-320-1t) or the cache (3.2 @+0.200v offset) or even both.
> Any tip to start with? /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


Can you post a screenshot of the rest of your timings shown in the ASRock Timing Configurator or Asus Memtweakit? I sense that your second and third timings could use some work, given your latency.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Wrong thread for memory tweaking 
Try this one after reading... the op 
https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread.html


----------



## arrow0309

ESRCJ said:


> Can you post a screenshot of the rest of your timings shown in the ASRock Timing Configurator or Asus Memtweakit? I sense that your second and third timings could use some work, given your latency.


Hi, ok here ya go:

However before gettin to those timings I thought I may try some more tightening with the primary timings, vdram right now 1.40v (1.45v training).


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Another 2002 bios victim although dude sounds like he's had the issue for a long time only bios that works he says is 1503
https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?113827-Rampage-VI-Extreme-bios-2002-issue


----------



## Jpmboy

arrow0309 said:


> Hi, ok here ya go:
> 
> However before gettin to those timings I thought I may try some more tightening with the primary timings, vdram right now 1.40v (1.45v training).


You'll struggle to get sub 50ns latency with quad channel platforms. With the timings below I get 51ns, cache at 3000 on my 7980XE. Sub 40ns latency is routine for z370, z390 etc.


----------



## D-EJ915

D-EJ915 said:


> I feel like their workstation Xeon pricing is going to kill them still as they won't price them too low otherwise no one will buy the Xeons.


Well my idea was correct lol. Intel cut prices on the W series chips as well.

https://www.techpowerup.com/259879/...ries-and-revised-pricing-on-xeon-w-processors


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Another 2002 bios victim although dude sounds like he's had the issue for a long time only bios that works he says is 1503
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?113827-Rampage-VI-Extreme-bios-2002-issue


I'm fine with the 1404 bios, I'll only update if I'll get a new 10920X, we'll see. 



Jpmboy said:


> You'll struggle to get sub 50ns latency with quad channel platforms. With the timings below I get 51ns, cache at 3000 on my 7980XE. Sub 40ns latency is routine for z370, z390 etc.


Hi Jpmboy, 16-17-17 was not achievable abou a year ago, I'll try 17-17-17, what's the max vdram you advice to go up to? 
I know about our quad ch higher latency, ~50 will be enough for me. 
Also the cache, I may wanna try 3.3ghz, if it's gonna hold with 0.230v offset it's done.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah new bios never hardly fix anything think they're as bad if not worse than windows 10 updates frankly 
Just 1902 or what ever it is was acting weird on cold start where I press the power button and nothing happens
1705 doesn't do it at all and starts right as normal every time :/


----------



## ESRCJ

arrow0309 said:


> I'm fine with the 1404 bios, I'll only update if I'll get a new 10920X, we'll see.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Jpmboy, 16-17-17 was not achievable abou a year ago, I'll try 17-17-17, what's the max vdram you advice to go up to?
> I know about our quad ch higher latency, ~50 will be enough for me.
> Also the cache, I may wanna try 3.3ghz, if it's gonna hold with 0.230v offset it's done.


Here are my timings for 4000MHz. You have some headroom with your secondary timings. The highest tested vdimm by manufacturers is 1.5V, as they sell some kits at that voltage. So that should be safe for the most part.


----------



## sblantipodi

Is there anyone who trust intel that pushed 18 cores to 5.1GHz with a standard cooler?


----------



## Martin778

There is no 'standard cooler' for HEDT, which one do you mean? Everything above 4.5-4.6GHz all core on 18 cores is a fable, or "cinebench temps".


----------



## Martin778

ESRCJ said:


> Here are my timings for 4000MHz. You have some headroom with your secondary timings. The highest tested vdimm by manufacturers is 1.5V, as they sell some kits at that voltage. So that should be safe for the most part.


What are your IO/SA voltages?


----------



## ThrashZone

sblantipodi said:


> Is there anyone who trust intel that pushed 18 cores to 5.1GHz with a standard cooler?


Hi,
They also say 110c is okay :rolleyess


----------



## sblantipodi

https://wccftech.com/intel-hedt-core-i9-10980xe-5-1-ghz-oc-all-cores/

I hate intel for this dumb marketing


----------



## Jpmboy

arrow0309 said:


> I'm fine with the 1404 bios, I'll only update if I'll get a new 10920X, we'll see.
> Hi Jpmboy, 16-17-17 was not achievable abou a year ago, I'll try 17-17-17, what's the max vdram you advice to go up to?
> I know about our quad ch higher latency, ~50 will be enough for me.
> Also the cache, I may wanna try 3.3ghz, if it's gonna hold with 0.230v offset it's done.


Cache buys a lot in the AID64 memory test. 3.3 is up there... what is the actual Vcache with a 230mV offset? Remember, the offset is added to the VID (stack) value.

1.45V VDIMM on the x299 platform is a safe zone on the 79xx series chips. I had my Omega at 1.5V VDIMM (4200c17 with 64GB) for several months... until the 9900X CPU died. Not sayin it was the VDIMM... just that it was at 1.5. The ram sticks are fine. I also have a pair of Royals running at 1.6V 24/7 on z370/8086K right now... no "adverse" effects yet on that platform.


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> https://wccftech.com/intel-hedt-core-i9-10980xe-5-1-ghz-oc-all-cores/
> 
> I hate intel for this dumb marketing


Did the official Intel post this, or is this an "interview" ? Did it came from the marketingteam?

I "hate" both AMD and Intel for being "dumb", but I still have both


----------



## sblantipodi

Nizzen said:


> sblantipodi said:
> 
> 
> 
> https://wccftech.com/intel-hedt-core-i9-10980xe-5-1-ghz-oc-all-cores/
> 
> I hate intel for this dumb marketing
> 
> 
> 
> Did the official Intel post this, or is this an "interview" ? Did it came from the marketingteam?
> 
> I "hate" both AMD and Intel for being "dumb", but I still have both /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif
Click to expand...

It's that kind regards of figure from Intel that spreads bull**** to convince people that they are incredible


----------



## arrow0309

ESRCJ said:


> Here are my timings for 4000MHz. You have some headroom with your secondary timings. The highest tested vdimm by manufacturers is 1.5V, as they sell some kits at that voltage. So that should be safe for the most part.


Nice timings, quite tight, a way more aggressive than mine (all of them), you think they can safely work on a daily setup, not a benchmark one?
Let's say I'll start trying them, which of them should I start with? 
I currently have 1.45v training and 1.40v all the rest so I could do 1.50v training / 1.45v windows. 



sblantipodi said:


> Is there anyone who trust intel that pushed 18 cores to 5.1GHz with a standard cooler?


It sais "standard liquid cooling" that's standard custom water cooling like we all have (mostly), not LN2, water chiller nor a mere AIO.



Jpmboy said:


> Cache buys a lot in the AID64 memory test. 3.3 is up there... what is the actual Vcache with a 230mV offset? Remember, the offset is added to the VID (stack) value.
> 
> 1.45V VDIMM on the x299 platform is a safe zone on the 79xx series chips. I had my Omega at 1.5V VDIMM (4200c17 with 64GB) for several months... until the 9900X CPU died. Not sayin it was the VDIMM... just that it was at 1.5. The ram sticks are fine. I also have a pair of Royals running at 1.6V 24/7 on z370/8086K right now... no "adverse" effects yet on that platform.


Agree to 1.45v, can I still use a higher training voltage?
About the cache, I was keeping it for like 6 months at +0.230 offset at 3.2Ghz now it's +0.200 which is about 1.12v under hwinfo64, Asus EC, Cpu Cache/Mesh (1.119 - 1.122).

AIDA cache and memory test added (@ +0.200), over 4h stable 
Ran at +0.180 and there was instability in half an hour.


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> It's that kind regards of figure from Intel that spreads bull**** to convince people that they are incredible


7980xe is 2 years old and is still rocking when overclocked. Way lower lantency than 3900x overclocked, so yes Intel IS incredible  (7980xe is on topic)

Optane 900/905p is way faster than any other "ssd", so yes Intel IS incredible


----------



## Martin778

Well bloody hell these manufacturers, all of them. I got rid of 3900X / X570 Xtreme when they released the ABBA AGESA which I still find is overclocking the CPU above it's potential and is just simply unnecessary as the boosts were all over the place, 4400 then 3600 then 4500 then 4200 and god knows what else.
So sad to see intel going the same fake-boost route - hitting 5.1GHz for 0.000001s and only achievable if a tibetan monk farts through a horn at the top of Mt.Everest at exactly 4:20AM while wearing pink pyjamas.


----------



## Jpmboy

arrow0309 said:


> Nice timings, quite tight, a way more aggressive than mine (all of them), you think they can safely work on a daily setup, not a benchmark one?
> Let's say I'll start trying them, which of them should I start with?
> I currently have 1.45v training and 1.40v all the rest so I could do 1.50v training / 1.45v windows.
> 
> 
> 
> It sais "standard liquid cooling" that's standard custom water cooling like we all have (mostly), not LN2, water chiller nor a mere AIO.
> 
> 
> 
> *Agree to 1.45v, can I still use a higher training voltage?
> About the cache, I was keeping it for like 6 months at +0.230 offset at 3.2Ghz now it's +0.200 which is about 1.12v under hwinfo64, Asus EC, Cpu Cache/Mesh (1.119 - 1.122).*
> 
> AIDA cache and memory test added (@ +0.200), over 4h stable
> Ran at +0.180 and there was instability in half an hour.


 yes. training at 1.47 (or higher) should be fine. Just recognize that if the rig is on for long periods... drifting may occur.
Good cache! Up to 1.2V is fine 24/7. Above that is a Si lottery draw.


----------



## Hydroplane

Jpmboy said:


> yes. training at 1.47 (or higher) should be fine. Just recognize that if the rig is on for long periods... drifting may occur.
> Good cache! Up to 1.2V is fine 24/7. Above that is a Si lottery draw.


My 3200c14 have been at 1.5v on X299 for 2 years, have not killed my CPU yet. They sell DDR4 sticks that use 1.5V by design (the 4800 sticks, I think) so I figure it is okay. But maybe I am more of a risk taker than most, lol


----------



## ESRCJ

Martin778 said:


> What are your IO/SA voltages?


SA 1V, IO 1.12V. The latter is more for my 3.2GHz mesh. I never bothered working SA down, as it doesn't seem to make much of a difference on thermals. 



arrow0309 said:


> Nice timings, quite tight, a way more aggressive than mine (all of them), you think they can safely work on a daily setup, not a benchmark one?
> Let's say I'll start trying them, which of them should I start with?
> I currently have 1.45v training and 1.40v all the rest so I could do 1.50v training / 1.45v windows.
> 
> 
> 
> It sais "standard liquid cooling" that's standard custom water cooling like we all have (mostly), not LN2, water chiller nor a mere AIO.
> 
> 
> 
> Agree to 1.45v, can I still use a higher training voltage?
> About the cache, I was keeping it for like 6 months at +0.230 offset at 3.2Ghz now it's +0.200 which is about 1.12v under hwinfo64, Asus EC, Cpu Cache/Mesh (1.119 - 1.122).
> 
> AIDA cache and memory test added (@ +0.200), over 4h stable
> Ran at +0.180 and there was instability in half an hour.



A lot of the secondaries take some trial and error. There are a few guidelines for some of them. For example, you can set tFAW as low as 4x tRRD. tRFC is an important one, but it looked like you already adjusted that one a bit. tREFI can be set as high as 32767 on this platform and should be feasible for most setups. I would say take a look at some of the stable timings from the DDR4 stability thread (Intel) for some examples. The timings I posted are for 24-7 use. Passed 2 hours of GSAT, 10,000% coverage in Ramtest, and 1000% coverage in HCI. I have vdimm at 1.47V. You may want to point a fan at the modules though when running memory stability tests. Some modules can be very sensitive to temperature.

Also, 4000MHz on 7000 series is already difficult to achieve according to some of the people I've talked to with this platform and a few of Buildzoid's videos, who suggests 3800MHz if 4000MHz is giving you trouble. It could come down to the IMC, where those lucky enough will manage 4000MHz stable. I can't even boot at 4200MHz no matter how much vdimm I throw at it, yet my kit can boot 4000 CL17 (all timings auto) at 1.35V and pass stability tests. So that gives me the idea the IMC is the limiting factor in my case for higher frequencies.


----------



## D-EJ915

Jpmboy said:


> Cache buys a lot in the AID64 memory test. 3.3 is up there... what is the actual Vcache with a 230mV offset? Remember, the offset is added to the VID (stack) value.
> 
> 1.45V VDIMM on the x299 platform is a safe zone on the 79xx series chips. I had my Omega at 1.5V VDIMM (4200c17 with 64GB) for several months... until the 9900X CPU died. Not sayin it was the VDIMM... just that it was at 1.5. The ram sticks are fine. I also have a pair of Royals running at 1.6V 24/7 on z370/8086K right now... no "adverse" effects yet on that platform.


I swear the 9900X chips were all just duds, my first one wouldn't read less than 50C on the CPU temp (worked normally for core temps). Second one I've been using stock for a few months up and died the other day after flashing my bioses to support the new 10 series chips.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> Cache buys a lot in the AID64 memory test. 3.3 is up there... what is the actual Vcache with a 230mV offset? Remember, the offset is added to the VID (stack) value.
> 
> 1.45V VDIMM on the x299 platform is a safe zone on the 79xx series chips. I had my Omega at 1.5V VDIMM (4200c17 with 64GB) for several months... *until the 9900X CPU died.* Not sayin it was the VDIMM... just that it was at 1.5. The ram sticks are fine. I also have a pair of Royals running at 1.6V 24/7 on z370/8086K right now... no "adverse" effects yet on that platform.





D-EJ915 said:


> *I swear the 9900X chips were all just duds,* my first one wouldn't read less than 50C on the CPU temp (worked normally for core temps). *Second one* I've been using stock for a few months up and died the other day after flashing my bioses to support the new 10 series chips.


Hi,
Ouch thought I was the only 99 series victim 
I'm on my second 9940x now it's much worse than the first 
First was great 10c between core temps 
Second is 20c at 4.8 gets worse as clocks go up. 

Finally got my copper plexi vrm water block for the apex probably start breaking it down tomorrow morning.
Try and suicide this *crappy #2* = appropriate numbering  9940x shortly after vrm's were hitting 86c with a fan on them full blast 

Maybe 3rds the charm I'll take lots of cpu socket images too so if Intel asks for them boom here yeah go bioches they didn't ask on the first rma just told them 7900x is working fine in the board :buttkick:


----------



## Jpmboy

D-EJ915 said:


> I swear the 9900X chips were all just duds, my first one wouldn't read less than 50C on the CPU temp (worked normally for core temps). Second one I've been using stock for a few months up and died the other day after flashing my bioses to support the new 10 series chips.


oh daum... well, I'll likely replace it with a 10980XE and throw the 9900X into the HTPC which has a 7740X(ES) in it right now (tho it has been completely "kid" proof at 5.0GHz with a noctua air cooler  )


----------



## JustinThyme

I got a great 9940X on the first try. Will do 5Ghz ut a little warm at 80C. Dial it back to 4.8 and it never passes 50C package temp loaded and hottest to coolest core spread is under 10C loaded. Nabbed one of the first ones from Amazon.


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> Is there anyone who trust intel that pushed 18 cores to 5.1GHz with a standard cooler?


"Intel's EMEA Technical PR Manager, Mark Walton, told PCGamesN: "You can overclock the heck out of these and get some really interesting results. For example, we've had the 10980XE, the eighteen-core processor, up as high as 5.1GHz in the lab using standard liquid cooling. And that, I believe, is all cores". Walton continued, making sure that the world knows that not every single Core i9-10980XE processor would be a crazy overclocker, adding: "Just to be clear on that, every chip is different, some chips will overclock better than others, but it is possible".

Read more: https://www.tweaktown.com/news/68001/intel-core-i9-10980xe-18c-36t-cores-5-1ghz-boost/index.html
"


----------



## Hydroplane

Nizzen said:


> "Intel's EMEA Technical PR Manager, Mark Walton, told PCGamesN: "You can overclock the heck out of these and get some really interesting results. For example, we've had the 10980XE, the eighteen-core processor, up as high as 5.1GHz in the lab using standard liquid cooling. And that, I believe, is all cores". Walton continued, making sure that the world knows that not every single Core i9-10980XE processor would be a crazy overclocker, adding: "Just to be clear on that, every chip is different, some chips will overclock better than others, but it is possible".
> 
> Read more: https://www.tweaktown.com/news/68001/intel-core-i9-10980xe-18c-36t-cores-5-1ghz-boost/index.html
> "


I like how he used the term "liquid" cooling, not "water" cooling. Like maybe you need methanol running at -20c in your loop to hit 5.1 lol

For memory, my X299 did like 4200 then the next day decided to never work at 4000+ ever again. So I settled for 3800 and tightened the timings. The same sticks can push 4400+ on Z390, so it probably is the IMC.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Big question is will 10...x die a quick death like 99..x series are doing.


----------



## arrow0309

Jpmboy said:


> yes. training at 1.47 (or higher) should be fine. Just recognize that if the rig is on for long periods... drifting may occur.
> Good cache! Up to 1.2V is fine 24/7. Above that is a Si lottery draw.





ESRCJ said:


> SA 1V, IO 1.12V. The latter is more for my 3.2GHz mesh. I never bothered working SA down, as it doesn't seem to make much of a difference on thermals.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of the secondaries take some trial and error. There are a few guidelines for some of them. For example, you can set tFAW as low as 4x tRRD. tRFC is an important one, but it looked like you already adjusted that one a bit. tREFI can be set as high as 32767 on this platform and should be feasible for most setups. I would say take a look at some of the stable timings from the DDR4 stability thread (Intel) for some examples. The timings I posted are for 24-7 use. Passed 2 hours of GSAT, 10,000% coverage in Ramtest, and 1000% coverage in HCI. I have vdimm at 1.47V. You may want to point a fan at the modules though when running memory stability tests. Some modules can be very sensitive to temperature.
> 
> Also, 4000MHz on 7000 series is already difficult to achieve according to some of the people I've talked to with this platform and a few of Buildzoid's videos, who suggests 3800MHz if 4000MHz is giving you trouble. It could come down to the IMC, where those lucky enough will manage 4000MHz stable. I can't even boot at 4200MHz no matter how much vdimm I throw at it, yet my kit can boot 4000 CL17 (all timings auto) at 1.35V and pass stability tests. So that gives me the idea the IMC is the limiting factor in my case for higher frequencies.


Nice tips, thank you :specool:
For the moment I'm testing the cache at 3.3 @+0.250 / 1.160-1.170v, tried yesterday evening and got a bsod after 7 min.
But thanks to your post @ESRCJ I remembered I used to keep the vccio pretty low (1.005v).
Now after increasing it to 1.10v in bios (1.12v like you said under hwinfo64) it is stable (aida's cache & memory), one hour passed so far so good (fingers crossed).
Will the 4h run be enough (like I did the last time) or should I continue with the HCI Pro?
It's only the cache that I'm testing for now.

And btw, I'll come back to this post soon and try your primary timings first (and 1.47-1.48v vdram) and then we'll see about the rest.
Thanks guys!


----------



## Hydroplane

Hydroplane said:


> I like how he used the term "liquid" cooling, not "water" cooling. Like maybe you need methanol running at -20c in your loop to hit 5.1 lol
> 
> For memory, my X299 did like 4200 then the next day decided to never work at 4000+ ever again. So I settled for 3800 and tightened the timings. The same sticks can push 4400+ on Z390, so it probably is the IMC.


Correction: They are at 4133c16 1.5V on Z390. Although, now I am wondering what I could do at 4400 for timings... guess I have something to try lol
@Jpmboy what kind of gains did you see going from 1.5v to 1.6v on the royals? maybe a little off topic as that is Z370, but I am curious. For me when I try to push past 1.5v I usually just get a black screen


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> Correction: They are at 4133c16 1.5V on Z390. Although, now I am wondering what I could do at 4400 for timings... guess I have something to try lol
> 
> @*Jpmboy* what kind of gains did you see going from 1.5v to 1.6v on the royals? maybe a little off topic as that is Z370, but I am curious. For me when I try to push past 1.5v I usually just get a black screen


1.6V is letting me run 4600c16 with v tight secondaries and RTLs (60/61/6/7) with my 8700K or 8086K. Lower voltage gave an occasional 49 q-code (typical of bad rtls on the Apex X). I do not think these sticks would need 1.6V on a Z390/9900K platform.


----------



## Hydroplane

Jpmboy said:


> 1.6V is letting me run 4600c16 with v tight secondaries and RTLs (60/61/6/7) with my 8700K or 8086K. Lower voltage gave an occasional 49 q-code (typical of bad rtls on the Apex X). I do not think these sticks would need 1.6V on a Z390/9900K platform.


Not bad  Kind of want the Jewel encrusted royals lol


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> Not bad  Kind of want the Jewel encrusted royals lol


they sure are sparkly


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Liberace would be proud to wear them bad boys


----------



## KCDC

Jpmboy said:


> they sure are sparkly



I've got their 64GB 3200 CL14 kit of this, fun to link the leds to iCue. I haven't attempted to OC any of it due to the capacity but now y'all got me wondering if I should try, might help render times. I tried a quick OC a couple times in BIOS, but didn't amount to anything stable. Tried reading through some of the DDR4 thread and I have a fairly decent clue of where to start but it's so massive. DLed 2.02.39 memtweakit from softpedia, might play with it tonight.


----------



## Jpmboy

KCDC said:


> I've got their 64GB 3200 CL14 kit of this, fun to link the leds to iCue. I haven't attempted to OC any of it due to the capacity but now y'all got me wondering if I should try, might help render times. I tried a quick OC a couple times in BIOS, but didn't amount to anything stable. Tried reading through some of the DDR4 thread and I have a fairly decent clue of where to start but it's so massive. DLed 2.02.39 memtweakit from softpedia, might play with it tonight.


see ya over in the *intel 24/7 ram thread*! :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Just testing something


----------



## Martin778

Passed 300% memtest BUT the RAM must be actively cooled. These are 2 separate G.Skill Royal GTRG 3200 CL14 kits but from the same month of production.
X72 says nope in RealBench though. It 'd need 2000RPM+ fans.


----------



## Hydroplane

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Just testing something


I see that sometimes... usually frozen when I am testing extreme settings lol


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> I see that sometimes... usually frozen when I am testing extreme settings lol


he's not testing, he's grabbing screen gifs.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> he's not testing, he's grabbing screen gifs.


Hi,
Yep 
That one is weird slow as hell uploading it here but looks normal in chasy's draw


----------



## arrow0309

Hi, I'd like to try a new oc on my 7900X (currently 4.8 all core, adaptive vcore up to 1.271 vid, 3.2 cache w/t 0.200 offset, -1 avx/2 offset, 4000 ram w/t 1.40v).
I do have a lot of cooling power now since I've removed away my 2080ti from the loop (have a 2080 super X-Trio on air now and same 3 rads, RX360 and ut280 internal and a 420 monsta external), w/t ~205 l/h flowrate.
And after a bios upgrade from 1401 to 1602 (mCode59) I was looking to try a 4.9 or 5.0 cpu HT off (using for gaming only for the moment).
I wasn't sure what to choose between fixed and offset vcore (kinda like to try it offset this time) and all core or per core OC (even a nice 4c to 5.0 and the rest to 4.9 will be sweet).
And I don't know what vocre / vid should I take as max limit (if the temps were ok).
Thanks


----------



## JustinThyme

This will be more about the capability of the chip (silicon lottery) and of course good cooling. From the looks of things your loop has plenty capacity. Next question is the chip delidded with the toothpaste that intel put on there removed and liquid metal put back in its place. I got my 7900X to 5Ghz but only after a delid. that was all cores and HT on. Before I couldnt even get stable at 4.8. Too damn hot. Look in the 5Ghz club for examples and temps in the proof tab column. You will see very few that hit 5GHz all cores and those who squeezed out a few more are on chillers, its obvious when you see 1.39V and a temp of less than 60C. I had mine on a lower voltage and at 5Ghz I was peaking 95C. Dialed it back to 4.8 for every day use all cores HT on andd 1.185 Vcore. At that point it didnt top 80C under heavy load.


----------



## arrow0309

JustinThyme said:


> This will be more about the capability of the chip (silicon lottery) and of course good cooling. From the looks of things your loop has plenty capacity. Next question is the chip delidded with the toothpaste that intel put on there removed and liquid metal put back in its place. I got my 7900X to 5Ghz but only after a delid. that was all cores and HT on. Before I couldnt even get stable at 4.8. Too damn hot. Look in the 5Ghz club for examples and temps in the proof tab column. You will see very few that hit 5GHz all cores and those who squeezed out a few more are on chillers, its obvious when you see 1.39V and a temp of less than 60C. I had mine on a lower voltage and at 5Ghz I was peaking 95C. Dialed it back to 4.8 for every day use all cores HT on andd 1.185 Vcore. At that point it didnt top 80C under heavy load.


Thanks, mine it is indeed delidded and even bare die mounted with a Skylake X delid die guard (LCC version for the 7900X, from ali express) and Coolaboratory Liquid Pro (have my Heatkiller 4 nickel copper version).
I'll see soon what would be best, at least 4.9 HT.
You were on fixed, offset or adaptive vcore?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I generally use manual mode first to get an idea of what vid is needed for whatever clock.
Then switch to adaptive and see how bad the vid's differ 
If it's unstable I switch to by core and tune each core so the vid's are closer together more than 0.030 vid difference seems to bring instability for me and vid's on adaptive can be quite a lot more than 0.030 between cores.

So yes manual is a hell of a lot easier but hot cores will spoil the day just a matter of how many


----------



## JustinThyme

arrow0309 said:


> Thanks, mine it is indeed delidded and even bare die mounted with a Skylake X delid die guard (LCC version for the 7900X, from ali express) and Coolaboratory Liquid Pro (have my Heatkiller 4 nickel copper version).
> I'll see soon what would be best, at least 4.9 HT.
> You were on fixed, offset or adaptive vcore?


I always use adaptive. Works better for me that way its not running full bore unless It needs to and use a balanced power plan. If I know Im going to be pegging the CPU for all its worth Ill jjust open the power plan and set it to high performance where it will stay at max volatage and frequency. If you can maintain 4.8 with HT and keep the temps in check then thats respectable. Like I said I could hit 5.0 HT on but that got quite toasty at 95C. Didnt throttle but a bit too warm for my tastes. Thats even running 2x 480x60 rads and a 360x60 rads. The issue has never been keeping the loop temps under control, its getting the heat off the die in the first place. Havent done a direct die since the days before heat spreaders even existed. Just ran mine with an EK monoblock at first which left me with two cores that were 20C over the next highest. Put that garbage on my wall of shame and went to HK IV pro and never looked back. Very solid performing block. Had an EK evo laying around and it was better than the monoblock but the HK gave me an easy 5C drop. Biggest think, dont use the monoblocks unless all you are worried about are looks. The are nice looking blocks and easier than running two separate blocks for the CPU and VRMs and just want it to run stock clocks but not at all good if your plan is to crank up the juice to the CPU.


----------



## Hydroplane

JustinThyme said:


> I always use adaptive. Works better for me that way its not running full bore unless It needs to and use a balanced power plan. If I know Im going to be pegging the CPU for all its worth Ill jjust open the power plan and set it to high performance where it will stay at max volatage and frequency. If you can maintain 4.8 with HT and keep the temps in check then thats respectable. Like I said I could hit 5.0 HT on but that got quite toasty at 95C. Didnt throttle but a bit too warm for my tastes. Thats even running 2x 480x60 rads and a 360x60 rads. The issue has never been keeping the loop temps under control, its getting the heat off the die in the first place. Havent done a direct die since the days before heat spreaders even existed. Just ran mine with an EK monoblock at first which left me with two cores that were 20C over the next highest. Put that garbage on my wall of shame and went to HK IV pro and never looked back. Very solid performing block. Had an EK evo laying around and it was better than the monoblock but the HK gave me an easy 5C drop. Biggest think, dont use the monoblocks unless all you are worried about are looks. The are nice looking blocks and easier than running two separate blocks for the CPU and VRMs and just want it to run stock clocks but not at all good if your plan is to crank up the juice to the CPU.


That is my experience as well, my 7980XE is at 95C running prime, the water comes out of the block and straight into the GPU which is idling at 27c lol, tells me the water is staying cool


----------



## KCDC

JustinThyme said:


> I always use adaptive. Works better for me that way its not running full bore unless It needs to and use a balanced power plan. If I know Im going to be pegging the CPU for all its worth Ill jjust open the power plan and set it to high performance where it will stay at max volatage and frequency. If you can maintain 4.8 with HT and keep the temps in check then thats respectable. Like I said I could hit 5.0 HT on but that got quite toasty at 95C. Didnt throttle but a bit too warm for my tastes. Thats even running 2x 480x60 rads and a 360x60 rads. The issue has never been keeping the loop temps under control, its getting the heat off the die in the first place. Havent done a direct die since the days before heat spreaders even existed. Just ran mine with an EK monoblock at first which left me with two cores that were 20C over the next highest. Put that garbage on my wall of shame and went to HK IV pro and never looked back. Very solid performing block. Had an EK evo laying around and it was better than the monoblock but the HK gave me an easy 5C drop. Biggest think, dont use the monoblocks unless all you are worried about are looks. The are nice looking blocks and easier than running two separate blocks for the CPU and VRMs and just want it to run stock clocks but not at all good if your plan is to crank up the juice to the CPU.


I used the EK monoblock for my strix x99 build, looked cool but if you want to take it off to clean or whatever you have to take the entire board out due to how they are fastened to the back of the mobo. They're also more difficult to maintain due to all the extra bits going on and the main gasket being rather annoying to reseat. I also found the screws to be shoddy quality with a couple of the heads stripping pretty easily only using hand tools and proper sized bits. I think my next cpu block will be from Optimus just out of curiosity.


----------



## sblantipodi

But when 10980XE supposed to be released?


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> But when 10980XE supposed to be released?


25.11


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Micro center yesterday slashed their last lonely 9980xe to 999.99 so they are getting ready for some newbies to show up.


----------



## Nizzen

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Micro center yesterday slashed their last lonely 9980xe to 999.99 so they are getting ready for some newbies to show up.


They cut the prizes 2 weeks ago here in Norway.


----------



## JustinThyme

Yes they did across the board on all 99XX CPUs


----------



## chibi

@Nizzen, did you get your 10980XE yet?


----------



## Nizzen

chibi said:


> @Nizzen, did you get your 10980XE yet?


They can't send it before 25.11


----------



## chibi

Nizzen said:


> They can't send it before 25.11



Ah, I'm excited to see what the new chips can do. Will have to live this gen through you brother!


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Just before Thanksgiving sort of ironic but hope rebate checks are cut before then or heck Intel already has 99..x series rma addresses just send a cascade lake chip for free would work too


----------



## timerwin63

What's the general consensus on what qualifies as a good 7800X? Mine does 4.6 @ 1.21v. Temps sit around 70c +/- 2. I haven't done fine-tuning on anything but the core, seeing as this is my first time using X299/HEDT and I'm not sure what all the settings do. I have yet to push the clock higher as I'm on a 240mm AIO, but plan on doing a delid and will be moving to custom water around Christmas.

The other thing I'm curious about is the "CPU Package Power" reporting in HWinfo64. My chip is reporting 130w at full load under Cinebench, but I know that can't be right with my OC. What kinds of power draw can I realistically expect from this chip at these kids of clocks?

Edit: Figured I should mention I'm running the chip on an ASRock X299E-ITX/ac. What an amazing little board it is...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
If you want to know what the cpu or system in general is pulling get a Kill A WATT EZ and plug your computer to it.
https://www.amazon.com/P3-International-P4460-Electricity-Monitor/dp/B000RGF29Q

https://www.walmart.com/ip/P3-International-P4460-Kill-A-Watt-EZ-Energy-Monitor/14282371


----------



## Martin778

Protip - don't    You will scare yourself what an OC'ed SKL-X is pulling from the wall. 
With 1080Ti and 7980XE I was pulling 1.1kW peak.


----------



## iamjanco

Martin778 said:


> Protip - don't    You will scare yourself what an OC'ed SKL-X is pulling from the wall.
> With 1080Ti and 7980XE I was pulling 1.1kW peak.


That's at 220V right? Five amps AC from the wall? Here in the states with our 120VAC, that equates to ~9-10 amps.

_Buy more, get bigger breakers._


----------



## Hydroplane

Martin778 said:


> Protip - don't    You will scare yourself what an OC'ed SKL-X is pulling from the wall.
> With 1080Ti and 7980XE I was pulling 1.1kW peak.


Ye, my lights dim when I hit the run button in cinebench (seriously) lol


----------



## JustinThyme

Hydroplane said:


> Ye, my lights dim when I hit the run button in cinebench (seriously) lol



Yes you will. Had to up my online UPS. 1600Va not enough with 9840X and a pair of 2080Tis. I run anything that taxes the 1600watt PSU and I was hearing a strange beeping sound. I was like wut da fut then found it was the UPS going into overload. Had to up it to a 2200Va and pull a dedicated 20 amp circuit.


----------



## RichKnecht

Was at Microcenter and almost bought a 9980xe for $999. I asked my salesperson why so cheap and they said the new 100XX processors were being released soon. So glad I stuck with my 7900X for all this time as I think the new 10980XE is going to be its replacement. Seems like the thing to do, especially since it's going to come in at $979! Just updated the bios in the Rampage VI Omega to support the new chip. Can't wait to start the overclock process again.


----------



## timerwin63

Martin778 said:


> Protip - don't    You will scare yourself what an OC'ed SKL-X is pulling from the wall.
> With 1080Ti and 7980XE I was pulling 1.1kW peak.


That's crazy! I'm running a 7800X and the Zotac 1080Ti mini off of a 700w Silverstone SFX unit. I'm sure I'm pushing the thing, but I didn't figure it would be anywhere near that bad D:


----------



## Jpmboy

timerwin63 said:


> That's crazy! I'm running a 7800X and the Zotac 1080Ti mini off of a 700w Silverstone SFX unit. I'm sure I'm pushing the thing, but I didn't figure it would be anywhere near that bad D:


it's probably not. The HCC chips draw much more power. :thumb:


----------



## JustinThyme

Jpmboy said:


> it's probably not. The HCC chips draw much more power. :thumb:


Yeah what he said, You wont be pushing that much out of 7800X

The other huge difference is stock Vs OC. 9400X at 5Ghz about made my eyeballs pop out when I saw the power hitting peaks in the 550+ watt range just on the CPU. Like I said from the wall I use my UPS to track power consumption and it sends a dual conversion online 1600Va .8PF into overload which is 1280 watts at 100%. Overload doesn't trigger until 105% for 5 seconds and doesn't stay there for long but long enough. Havent had any issues since I bumped it up to a 2200Va.


----------



## KCDC

I wore out my Cyberpower 1500VA/900W UPS battery on my 6900k/2x1080ti build within a month. That's what I get for going cheap and/or not properly measuring how much wattage I was really using back then. They don't make replacing batteries on those very easy either. My current rig build maxes out around 960W when gpu rendering/sim calculating on CPU, but that's also with all three monitors plugged into the same kill-a-watt, so maybe minus 100w due to them.


----------



## D-EJ915

It took my gaming PC off UPS because it wasn't worth it to keep replacing the batteries, I tried both 2U and 4U APC 1500/1400 variants and they both killed their batteries pretty fast lol. (2U uses a bunch of small batteries wired together, 4U uses the giant battery like the floor units). They just aren't designed to have high loads consistently from what I've seen. In our server room at work we've got like 20 1500 2U ones and replace they batteries pretty infrequently.

Well the original reason I took it off the 2U was because my rig would hit the overdraw protection circuit on it and I also had to get a 1250W psu because my 1100W psu would hard cut off lol. Once I ditched my tri GTX 480s I slapped on one of my 4U variants and used it until the battery died.


----------



## Hydroplane

You guys all using UPS systems, meanwhile here I am just yanking the plug out of the wall when my extreme OC attempts fail lol... actually had this thing hooked up to a light switch at one point so I could restart it quickly while testing highly unstable OCs for cinebench top score  probably been hard reset 200+ times LOL


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> You guys all using UPS systems, meanwhile here I am just yanking the plug out of the wall when my extreme OC attempts fail lol... actually had this thing hooked up to a light switch at one point so I could restart it quickly while testing highly unstable OCs for cinebench top score  probably been hard reset 200+ times LOL


why in the world would you subject the system to an AC cut like that. Just press the reset button.


----------



## Hydroplane

Jpmboy said:


> why in the world would you subject the system to an AC cut like that. Just press the reset button.


That is 5 seconds too long


----------



## KCDC

D-EJ915 said:


> It took my gaming PC off UPS because it wasn't worth it to keep replacing the batteries, I tried both 2U and 4U APC 1500/1400 variants and they both killed their batteries pretty fast lol. (2U uses a bunch of small batteries wired together, 4U uses the giant battery like the floor units). They just aren't designed to have high loads consistently from what I've seen. In our server room at work we've got like 20 1500 2U ones and replace they batteries pretty infrequently.
> 
> Well the original reason I took it off the 2U was because my rig would hit the overdraw protection circuit on it and I also had to get a 1250W psu because my 1100W psu would hard cut off lol. Once I ditched my tri GTX 480s I slapped on one of my 4U variants and used it until the battery died.


Initially, I was doing much more freelance vfx work at home and LA was getting a lot of brown outs at that time, plus the house I was in had decades old dirty power, so I needed it to at least be able to save up projects with at least a 30 second window. The UPS I needed to deal with this workload was just out of my budget to justify it, so I ended up putting auto-saves at a 5 minute window instead of shelling out $$$$$ for a server grade UPS. I still used the cyberpower to at least filter a bit of the dirty power coming in so my PSU wouldn't buzz so much. For gaming, it just doesn't seem like a practical idea to me.


----------



## Jpmboy

Hydroplane said:


> That is 5 seconds too long


 well then, put some of that to use *here
*
:thumb:


----------



## JustinThyme

D-EJ915 said:


> It took my gaming PC off UPS because it wasn't worth it to keep replacing the batteries, I tried both 2U and 4U APC 1500/1400 variants and they both killed their batteries pretty fast lol. (2U uses a bunch of small batteries wired together, 4U uses the giant battery like the floor units). They just aren't designed to have high loads consistently from what I've seen. In our server room at work we've got like 20 1500 2U ones and replace they batteries pretty infrequently.
> 
> Well the original reason I took it off the 2U was because my rig would hit the overdraw protection circuit on it and I also had to get a 1250W psu because my 1100W psu would hard cut off lol. Once I ditched my tri GTX 480s I slapped on one of my 4U variants and used it until the battery died.





KCDC said:


> Initially, I was doing much more freelance vfx work at home and LA was getting a lot of brown outs at that time, plus the house I was in had decades old dirty power, so I needed it to at least be able to save up projects with at least a 30 second window. The UPS I needed to deal with this workload was just out of my budget to justify it, so I ended up putting auto-saves at a 5 minute window instead of shelling out $$$$$ for a server grade UPS. I still used the cyberpower to at least filter a bit of the dirty power coming in so my PSU wouldn't buzz so much. For gaming, it just doesn't seem like a practical idea to me.



Lucky for you guys you have a Manufacturer rep in the house.


Batteries don't die because of load condition, they die because evidently your circuit feeding it is dropping voltage so far its running out of the tolerance window and causing an on battery condition. Your best bet is first to make sure you have a dedicated circuit all the way from the panel to the UPS then have the right UPS. The cheap crap you get out of Best Buy or Cyberpower no matter the manufacturer is just that, cheap crap with a power factor of like 0.6 which means that 1500Va is good for 800 watts. If its not a dual conversion online UPS it isn't filtering anything. Line interactive feeds utility straight through until an outage is detected then it will remove the reverse bias to the inverter output SCRS and go on battery operation. After it clears its back to on utility. A bunch of peaks that cause small hits on the batteries will cause premature failure. Only thing worse is a long slow discharge but most machines have built in protection that prohibit this. 3T is industry standard for when you hit battery run time > 3 times the rated run time it will shut down as a long slow discharge like a light plugged in running for a day or two is certain death for the batteries and they wont recover. We do have clients without generators that want to run it for all its worth and we will change that parameter but they have to sign a waiver stating they understand that if they run their batteries dead in this fashion they will have to replace them and it wont be done under warranty.

Something like the APC SMT2200 is dual conversion online so no switching and its pure sinwave conditioned power out. With the technology comes a price tag. About the best you are going to find is $1000 on one of these. Im fortunate that I dont have to worry about it. I can simply walk into a huge area where they come in for testing or refurb work and sign on the dotted line and take one home. This machine will provide all you need for a HCC rig at just short of 2KW actual power and still remain on a 120V circuit. You can go up to a 3000Va but then its no longer 120V in, has to be 208-240. You can get them floor standing or rack mount and get extended battery modules to go with them. Single most important factor is a dedicated circuit. When I see things like "My lights dim" there is a problem in power distribution. If you are running a laptop or small machine that's one thing but the beasts need dedicated 20A breaker and 12 gauge wire all to itself.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Local in store warranty should pretty much take care of any dead battery issues 2-3 year which ever works out.
Better than shipping fee's and wait time on rma's.


----------



## JustinThyme

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Local in store warranty should pretty much take care of any dead battery issues 2-3 year which ever works out.
> Better than shipping fee's and wait time on rma's.


Most battery manufacturers don't go past a year, we pass on double what we get from the battery manufacturer except we don't prorate. It dies in less than two years its a direct replacement. We dont just ship them out though. Send in old ones and if the serials match up and they are deemed to have failed due to defect and replacements are sent out. With a good set up and proper circuit feeding it you should get 4-5 years out of the batteries. If you have really bad utility company then it dwindles, a lot of small hits are bad. Better to let it run down more than to take small hits. If the batteries are subjected to higher temps it cuts the lifespan pretty dramatically. 25C is the magic number to get a balance between decent run time and longevity. For every 10C above that the lifespan is cut in half. Keep batteries hot you get a hell of a long run time but they wont last. Keep them cool the run time wont be as long but they will last longer. Batteries are not a finite thing. Its a chemical reaction with a lot of variables. Ive seen them fail in a less than a year that was not due to defect of the battery. The APC boxes have 3 years warranty on everything else. Stores in the US don't do jack unless its in their return period.


----------



## Maargan

I'm having a problem with extremely high current draw from my 7980XE. Other relevant components are PSU: Corsair AX1600i and MB: Asrock X299 XE.



As an example I set the all core frequency to 4 GHz with no AVX offset, and voltage to 1 V. In Prime 95 small FFT with 18 threads enabled this causes a current draw of ~100 A combined on the two 8 pin connectors (52 A + 48 A) on according to Corsair Link. 



If I try to run the same test with 36 threads, or other benchmarks with high overclocks (Timespy [email protected] or [email protected]) the computer shuts down instantaneously. This happens at lower overclocks if I don't enable single rail mode on the PSU (OCP limit is then 40A at each rail). The temperature of the hottest core is only 52 C in the Prime95 example (direct die + liquid metal with 15 C water temperature) so I doubt my problems are temperature related.


Are these numbers/issues normal, and if not is the culprit most likely the CPU or PSU?


----------



## JustinThyme

Please list rest of components.
Prime 95=how to make PC into space heater. I dont get why people use it. 
100 amps on 12V rail is 1200Watts and not unheard of with no AVX offset.
What GPU/s?
What motherboard? It may not be capable of the power delivery.


----------



## JustinThyme

Hydroplane said:


> That is 5 seconds too long


Smoke em if you got em!
Sounds a bit harsh to me. No something Id try unless I just had a heap of hardware to replace at will.


----------



## ThrashZone

JustinThyme said:


> Most battery manufacturers don't go past a year, we pass on double what we get from the battery manufacturer except we don't prorate. It dies in less than two years its a direct replacement. We dont just ship them out though. Send in old ones and if the serials match up and they are deemed to have failed due to defect and replacements are sent out. With a good set up and proper circuit feeding it you should get 4-5 years out of the batteries. If you have really bad utility company then it dwindles, a lot of small hits are bad. Better to let it run down more than to take small hits. If the batteries are subjected to higher temps it cuts the lifespan pretty dramatically. 25C is the magic number to get a balance between decent run time and longevity. For every 10C above that the lifespan is cut in half. Keep batteries hot you get a hell of a long run time but they wont last. Keep them cool the run time wont be as long but they will last longer. Batteries are not a finite thing. Its a chemical reaction with a lot of variables. Ive seen them fail in a less than a year that was not due to defect of the battery. The APC boxes have 3 years warranty on everything else. *Stores in the US don't do jack unless its in their return period*.


Hi,
Micro center has excellent in store warranty options.

Online places like amazon use affirm or whatever it is but it's a shipping and wait rma not simple take it back and swap it out for another thing


----------



## Maargan

JustinThyme said:


> Please list rest of components.
> Prime 95=how to make PC into space heater. I dont get why people use it.
> 100 amps on 12V rail is 1200Watts and not unheard of with no AVX offset.
> What GPU/s?
> What motherboard? It may not be capable of the power delivery.



Thanks for replying. I have a single 2080Ti pulling less than 5A idling, and an Asrock X299 Taichi XE motherboard (that has two eight pin power connectors for the CPU). I also have 3 SSDs.
An earlier test I did with an AVX512 frequency of 3.1 GHz, Vcore of 1 V, and 36 active threads had a current draw of around 80 A for just the CPU connectors, but the power consumption of the whole system was only 500 W (according to Corsair Link) which doesn't really make sense.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
5.0 with no avx offset lol boom doa not surprising 
You'd be lucky to run 5.0 with 5 avx offsets which would drop it down to 4.5.


----------



## Nizzen

JustinThyme said:


> Please list rest of components.
> Prime 95=how to make PC into space heater. I dont get why people use it.
> 100 amps on 12V rail is 1200Watts and not unheard of with no AVX offset.
> What GPU/s?
> What motherboard? It may not be capable of the power delivery.


+1

Prime 95 in 2019 XD

Ps: I use 2x Antec 1300 HCP with my 7980xe + 2x 2080ti.


----------



## Chobbit

Hi, I'm new to Skylake and the X series, I have a 9960X and just wonder if there's any guides to overclocking these or if anyone has experience and advice?

It's on a custom watercooling loop going through a 560 radiator & ROG EK block (GPU's are on their own loop) on an ROG Rampage VI Extreme Omega board. So I'm sure there's plenty of cooling and OC petential but know nothing about overclocking these and their limits. 

Usually a thread has a lot of information on the OP but I couldn't see any and couldn't look through every page of this long thread to find the answers, so any helpful guidance would be much appreciated. Cheers


----------



## ESRCJ

Maargan said:


> JustinThyme said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please list rest of components.
> Prime 95=how to make PC into space heater. I dont get why people use it.
> 100 amps on 12V rail is 1200Watts and not unheard of with no AVX offset.
> What GPU/s?
> What motherboard? It may not be capable of the power delivery.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for replying. I have a single 2080Ti pulling less than 5A idling, and an Asrock X299 Taichi XE motherboard (that has two eight pin power connectors for the CPU). I also have 3 SSDs.
> An earlier test I did with an AVX512 frequency of 3.1 GHz, Vcore of 1 V, and 36 active threads had a current draw of around 80 A for just the CPU connectors, but the power consumption of the whole system was only 500 W (according to Corsair Link) which doesn't really make sense.
Click to expand...

Which FFTs are you running on Prime95? Have you tuned your memory? Both of these matter if you're going to use Prime95 to test stability or get an idea of temperatures in a heavy load. Higher FFTs will put more stress on the memory and IMC. If you're rocking XMP, then the bottleneck in this test will be your memory and so the CPU will be drawing less power. Tune various timings (even some of the less popular ones) and this is no longer the case, as you'll see CPU power draw ramp up. Now if you're running smaller FFTs, then your memory will matter much less, with the load being heavier on cache. That's why small FFTs are so demanding.

I would recommend Realbench over Prime95 for stability testing for a multitude of reasons. I suspect you will experience the same issue with Realbench as you're having with Cinebench and 3dmark. I don't think your issue is temperature-related, but likely related to current. Did you crank up your CPU current capability to the max?


----------



## Jpmboy

Chobbit said:


> Hi, I'm new to Skylake and the X series, I have a 9960X and just wonder if there's any guides to overclocking these or if anyone has experience and advice?
> 
> It's on a custom watercooling loop going through a 560 radiator & ROG EK block (GPU's are on their own loop) on an ROG Rampage VI Extreme Omega board. So I'm sure there's plenty of cooling and OC petential but know nothing about overclocking these and their limits.
> 
> Usually a thread has a lot of information on the OP but I couldn't see any and couldn't look through every page of this long thread to find the answers, so any helpful guidance would be much appreciated. Cheers


 with the exception of per-core OC, a "synch all cores" type of OC is really no different than haswell or broadwell... eg, VCCIN is the power rail that feeds vcore and essentially all on-die voltages. On the Omega, 1.9 to 1.95V VCCIN should handle the majority of 24/7 OC (this is the rail with droop, vcore is an on-die down-converted voltage). set a modest vcore of 1.2V or where you are comfortable with a first stab and then set a multiplier one notch above the base frequency - boot? If yes, then keep raising the multi until it fails to boot, back off 1 multi and test for stability and temperature with something simple like the stressor in CPUZ. If good (tempa and no loss of "score" while running) ... rinse and repeat. Once y0ou find a good base vcore and multiplier across all cores, with all other voltages and ram at default settings (eg, no XMP). Save it and either probe for the highest multiplier at a higher vcore.
When you are ready for cache and ram post back. BTW, the ASUS thread may be more focused on your specific gear. there's a general z370 guide in my sig.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...therboard-series-official-support-thread.html
https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...asus-rampage-vi-extreme-x299-owners-club.html


:thumb:


----------



## Chobbit

Thanks this a good starting guide 🙂 

I've just seen a video focusing on the 7960X and it mentions if you crash instantly on stressing to a black screen then offset the AVX by 1 at a time till stable as this is likely the issue before your core multiplier is an issue, then if it boots that's your max AVX multiplier. So then continue to raise the multiplier (and voltage if needed) but also reduce 1 AVX offset with every multiplier added. Is this the same for the 9960X?




Jpmboy said:


> Chobbit said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi, I'm new to Skylake and the X series, I have a 9960X and just wonder if there's any guides to overclocking these or if anyone has experience and advice?
> 
> It's on a custom watercooling loop going through a 560 radiator & ROG EK block (GPU's are on their own loop) on an ROG Rampage VI Extreme Omega board. So I'm sure there's plenty of cooling and OC petential but know nothing about overclocking these and their limits.
> 
> Usually a thread has a lot of information on the OP but I couldn't see any and couldn't look through every page of this long thread to find the answers, so any helpful guidance would be much appreciated. Cheers
> 
> 
> 
> with the exception of per-core OC, a "synch all cores" type of OC is really no different than haswell or broadwell... eg, VCCIN is the power rail that feeds vcore and essentially all on-die voltages. On the Omega, 1.9 to 1.95V VCCIN should handle the majority of 24/7 OC (this is the rail with droop, vcore is an on-die down-converted voltage). set a modest vcore of 1.2V or where you are comfortable with a first stab and then set a multiplier one notch above the base frequency - boot? If yes, then keep raising the multi until it fails to boot, back off 1 multi and test for stability and temperature with something simple like the stressor in CPUZ. If good (tempa and no loss of "score" while running) ... rinse and repeat. Once y0ou find a good base vcore and multiplier across all cores, with all other voltages and ram at default settings (eg, no XMP). Save it and either probe for the highest multiplier at a higher vcore.
> When you are ready for cache and ram post back. BTW, the ASUS thread may be more focused on your specific gear. there's a general z370 guide in my sig.
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...therboard-series-official-support-thread.html
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/6-i...asus-rampage-vi-extreme-x299-owners-club.html
> 
> 
> /forum/images/smilies/thumb.gif
Click to expand...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I've had pretty good luck with no avx at all until past 4.5 on 9940x and 7900x
Just add 1 to each avx per multiplier past 4.5 and should be okay.
I usually use blender classroom demo files for stability since it's more realistic workload than prime...
https://www.blender.org/


https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/

Also there is blender opendata it's a beast too all in one download 
https://opendata.blender.org/


----------



## Maargan

ESRCJ said:


> Which FFTs are you running on Prime95? Have you tuned your memory? Both of these matter if you're going to use Prime95 to test stability or get an idea of temperatures in a heavy load. Higher FFTs will put more stress on the memory and IMC. If you're rocking XMP, then the bottleneck in this test will be your memory and so the CPU will be drawing less power. Tune various timings (even some of the less popular ones) and this is no longer the case, as you'll see CPU power draw ramp up. Now if you're running smaller FFTs, then your memory will matter much less, with the load being heavier on cache. That's why small FFTs are so demanding.
> 
> I would recommend Realbench over Prime95 for stability testing for a multitude of reasons. I suspect you will experience the same issue with Realbench as you're having with Cinebench and 3dmark. I don't think your issue is temperature-related, but likely related to current. Did you crank up your CPU current capability to the max?



The FFTs were the "small FFT" preset, so there should be little memory dependency. The shutdowns happen regardless of whether or not I have set the power and current limits to max in BIOS.


I know 36 threads of constant AVX 512 load might not be the most realistic load, but it's extremely annoying to be subjected to shutdowns in Cinebench and 3dmark when CPU stability might not be the bottleneck.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
As said shutdowns on high loads are like power source issues not avx offset.
Test wall outlet see what else is on that circuit too.
Make sure it's at least 20amp breaker.


----------



## Chobbit

Thanks it will probably be tomorrow by the time I get to the cache and things with making sure things are stable but I've definitely never overclocked the Cache lol



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I've had pretty good luck with no avx at all until past 4.5 on 9940x and 7900x
> Just add 1 to each avx per multiplier past 4.5 and should be okay.
> I usually use blender classroom demo files for stability since it's more realistic workload than prime...
> https://www.blender.org/
> 
> 
> https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/
> 
> Also there is blender opendata it's a beast too all in one download /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> https://opendata.blender.org/


----------



## ThrashZone

Chobbit said:


> Thanks it will probably be tomorrow by the time I get to the cache and things with making sure things are stable but I've definitely never overclocked the Cache lol


Hi,
Not much to cache it's so limited on this platform so don't expect much
Max cache 30 cache voltage auto you're pretty much done.


----------



## Maargan

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> As said shutdowns on high loads are like power source issues not avx offset.
> Test wall outlet see what else is on that circuit too.
> Make sure it's at least 20amp breaker.



That's a good point. I hadn't considered that the problem might exist upstream of the PSU. I have 240 V supply voltage, and have run a 2 KW heater from the same outlet so I think it should be fine though.


----------



## JustinThyme

Maargan said:


> That's a good point. I hadn't considered that the problem might exist upstream of the PSU. I have 240 V supply voltage, and have run a 2 KW heater from the same outlet so I think it should be fine though.


2Kw heater is different than a PC power supply. heater can still run with a voltage drop. If you have the ability to put a DVM in the same outlet and watch what the voltage is doing going in when you peak it out that would eliminate it at least. something with a min/max function is preferable although I understand not everyone has one or can justify the expense just to test an outlets power. For me its tools of the trade up to an Oscope to see and record waveforms if necessary. 

An earlier suggestion to go 3 on avx and 5 on avx512 offests is not bad advice. Thats generally a starting point for me then I try running them back a digit at a time until I lose stability. Currently dialed back my OC on a 9940X after getting it to 5Ghz with the aforementioned AVX offsets to 4.8 with 1 and 3 for 24x7 use in adaptive Vcore.


----------



## JustinThyme

Maargan said:


> That's a good point. I hadn't considered that the problem might exist upstream of the PSU. I have 240 V supply voltage, and have run a 2 KW heater from the same outlet so I think it should be fine though.





ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Micro center has excellent in store warranty options.
> 
> Online places like amazon use affirm or whatever it is but it's a shipping and wait rma not simple take it back and swap it out for another thing


Extended warranties are an entirely different story. As a rule of thumb on most items I pass as its just too expensive. The only thing I carry a warranty/insurance on are my mobile devices as Im hard on them and they do like to break and there are too many thieves on the planet. All that I have covered from me dropping it in a toilet to some thieving Jack Wagon with an overnight replacement. APC also offers extended warranties and our biggest money maker for enterprise data centers is service contracts where we come in once or twice a year and give everything a once over, update firmware and part revisions etc. All that varies by the customer and how much they want to spend. The big dogs go with an ultimate contract where all parts and labor are included and they get a guaranteed 4 hour response for any "emergency" situations. Most of those places run UPS that make the things we use on our toys look like....well....toys. Small one in one of those is an 800kVA and we have multiple financial institutions running 50 megawatts of UPS power with a price tag of about $10K per MW/yr on the contracts. Yeah thats a lot of money but when you look at what goes through these places its chump change and they cant afford any outages period so its not only a lot its all very redundant and automated where if one UPS drops off another will take the load with zero break. I was talking to a BOA rep and he said that particular site handles and average of $8,300,000,000 a day in transactions. They go down its a free for all with disaster recovery and a good 10-12 hours before they get back to an operational state. Sure they have machines go down and servers fail but the level of redundancy is just stupidly insane and thats just on the premises. Weigh in that they have at least one more location usually a good distance away thats a mirror. Some of the stuff I see every day is just amazing. We go from consumer to small 100kVA data centers up to the mega data centers.


----------



## D-EJ915

JustinThyme said:


> Lucky for you guys you have a Manufacturer rep in the house.
> 
> 
> Batteries don't die because of load condition, they die because evidently your circuit feeding it is dropping voltage so far its running out of the tolerance window and causing an on battery condition. Your best bet is first to make sure you have a dedicated circuit all the way from the panel to the UPS then have the right UPS. The cheap crap you get out of Best Buy or Cyberpower no matter the manufacturer is just that, cheap crap with a power factor of like 0.6 which means that 1500Va is good for 800 watts. If its not a dual conversion online UPS it isn't filtering anything. Line interactive feeds utility straight through until an outage is detected then it will remove the reverse bias to the inverter output SCRS and go on battery operation. After it clears its back to on utility. A bunch of peaks that cause small hits on the batteries will cause premature failure. Only thing worse is a long slow discharge but most machines have built in protection that prohibit this. 3T is industry standard for when you hit battery run time > 3 times the rated run time it will shut down as a long slow discharge like a light plugged in running for a day or two is certain death for the batteries and they wont recover. We do have clients without generators that want to run it for all its worth and we will change that parameter but they have to sign a waiver stating they understand that if they run their batteries dead in this fashion they will have to replace them and it wont be done under warranty.


These are the 3 models I've had personally:
https://www.apc.com/shop/us/en/products/APC-Smart-UPS-1500VA-USB-Serial-RM-2U-120V/P-SUA1500RM2U
https://www.apc.com/shop/us/en/products/APC-Smart-UPS-XL-1400VA-RM-3U-120V/P-SU1400RMXL3U
https://www.apc.com/shop/us/en/products/APC-Smart-UPS-XL-1400VA-RM-3U-120V-Black/P-SU1400RMXLB3U

The last one was the one in my rack which was used "normally" and lasted far longer than the other two which had constant load though less time used on battery since I'd power off my desktop then have to go down and power off the servers lol. The white one let out the blue smoke and I gave the 2U to a friend, the black one I still have in my rack though I don't use the rack currently. I really don't think the wall voltage is the issue, I just measured and it was 119V though that is now not then lol.

We have one of those double conversion APC units at my office (https://www.apc.com/shop/us/en/products/APC-Smart-UPS-RT-2200VA-RM-120V/P-SURTA2200RMXL2U). I'd suggested we buy it because of double conversion being better ideally but this most recent battery replacement it said battery disconnected pretty quickly so I took it out of service. I also didn't like that one because to do anything you had to use the serial cable. A former client had Liebert double conversions and those didn't kill batteries as fast, if I'd go for a UPS again I'd probably get one of theirs to try out even though that was only one client lol. We get APC at work because of the discount. I've never used other brands like tripp lite or cyber power but minuteman is absolute garbage never get those.

The newest one we tried was this it is definitely lower quality unit it killed the batteries the fastest so far and this was on our generator system as well so low battery time. 
https://www.apc.com/shop/us/en/prod...SmartConnect/P-SMC1500-2UC?isCurrentSite=true

I guess this is way more info than necessary but whatever lol. If you got any suggestions for a new model that will work better for me to try for a 15A circuit go ahead and for work we have 20A circuits to the UPSes.


----------



## Chobbit

I seem to have a problem with temp readings, I have a separate loop for the CPU as mentioned but using AIDA64 and Core Temp the temps at stock on a CPU stress are reading very erratic per core between 60-85 degreesC variance with alot of jumping around.

If I did an FPU test (still on stock) it instantly hits 110 degC on some cores which I stopped instantly worried.

I turned the pump up to max and all fans to max flow/speed which made no difference to the temps.

I have two sensors in the water (just before the radiator and just after the CPU block) which when I run the CPU stress for an hour went from 27 degC to 30 degC on max pump/fans setting and only 32 degC on low/auto pump/fan mode.

This didn't make sense the water being so far away from the reported core temps over such a long period.

I then ran the FPU for 15 mins with no issues, blue screen or crash. Decided to drop both AVX offsets by 5 which made little to no difference to the temps on FPU test.

So just ignored the temp readings and started overclocking and because I can't seem to see actual temps kept it at 1.2v and got to 4.8 stable with an offset of 3 AVX. This ran fine for an hours test of both CPU and then FPU stress test as well as a few runs of cinebench.

I'm sure I could push a bit more if I added more voltage but I don't know what a safe voltage range is?





ThrashZone said:


> Chobbit said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks it will probably be tomorrow by the time I get to the cache and things with making sure things are stable but I've definitely never overclocked the Cache lol
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> Not much to cache it's so limited on this platform so don't expect much
> Max cache 30 cache voltage auto you're pretty much done.
Click to expand...


----------



## JustinThyme

D-EJ915 said:


> These are the 3 models I've had personally:
> https://www.apc.com/shop/us/en/products/APC-Smart-UPS-1500VA-USB-Serial-RM-2U-120V/P-SUA1500RM2U
> https://www.apc.com/shop/us/en/products/APC-Smart-UPS-XL-1400VA-RM-3U-120V/P-SU1400RMXL3U
> https://www.apc.com/shop/us/en/products/APC-Smart-UPS-XL-1400VA-RM-3U-120V-Black/P-SU1400RMXLB3U
> 
> The last one was the one in my rack which was used "normally" and lasted far longer than the other two which had constant load though less time used on battery since I'd power off my desktop then have to go down and power off the servers lol. The white one let out the blue smoke and I gave the 2U to a friend, the black one I still have in my rack though I don't use the rack currently. I really don't think the wall voltage is the issue, I just measured and it was 119V though that is now not then lol.
> 
> We have one of those double conversion APC units at my office (https://www.apc.com/shop/us/en/products/APC-Smart-UPS-RT-2200VA-RM-120V/P-SURTA2200RMXL2U). I'd suggested we buy it because of double conversion being better ideally but this most recent battery replacement it said battery disconnected pretty quickly so I took it out of service. I also didn't like that one because to do anything you had to use the serial cable. A former client had Liebert double conversions and those didn't kill batteries as fast, if I'd go for a UPS again I'd probably get one of theirs to try out even though that was only one client lol. We get APC at work because of the discount. I've never used other brands like tripp lite or cyber power but minuteman is absolute garbage never get those.
> 
> The newest one we tried was this it is definitely lower quality unit it killed the batteries the fastest so far and this was on our generator system as well so low battery time.
> https://www.apc.com/shop/us/en/prod...SmartConnect/P-SMC1500-2UC?isCurrentSite=true
> 
> I guess this is way more info than necessary but whatever lol. If you got any suggestions for a new model that will work better for me to try for a 15A circuit go ahead and for work we have 20A circuits to the UPSes.


The office one is the only online model, the rest are line interactive which means you are on utility until the power dips or peaks out of tolerance and have a much wider window on that power of +/- 15% If the last was going through batteries faster then you have some pretty crappy power that sags too much and you were spending a lot of time on battery. The models that you serial into can have an NMC card added that can be set up to email in the event of disturbances or logged into when set up with a static IP. Just because its on generator doesnt change batteries going any faster. Most generators are set up at +/- 15% where that. 

Thing is when it comes to UPS models, like anything else you get what you pay for, this model is what I use at home with the network card so I can monitor it and get alerts anywhere. I samples every 15 seconds. Has a much wider input tolerance because the only thing the input is used for is to make AC into DC, the output stays 120VAC 60HZ regardless of what the input is doing because the DC is converted back to AC. Thing is with this technology you are spending 3-4 times the cost of a line interactive. 
This is also the best I can recommend for rack mounted small UPS systems.
https://www.apc.com/shop/us/en/prod...2200VA-RM-120V-Network-Card/P-SRT2200RMXLA-NC


For any sensitive data applications Its down to spending some money if you want a rock solid critical power system. It should have a cooperative study done and the entire system designed from the utility to the outlets. Most of the DIY type IT depts know precisely nothing about critical power and also wont take the advice given. I deal with it every day when I walk into a small data center and see a dozen or more rack mount line interactive models, worse yet the customer doing another DIY of putting in one larger decent UPS then killing the entire concept by feeding all the rack mounts with it calling that their dual power paths. The machine I was there for was a 150kVA model that kept smoking output capacitors. When I looked at the output current power quality which is all load related I saw the issue of the rack mounts being fed from the larger UPS. This is a huge NO NO!! All of the servers were dual corded so after telling them the root cause of failure and that we wont repair it and put the machine back into service until they corrected it they finally listened. They just had to have their electrical contractor install a 480/208-120 transformer and panel to feed the rack mounts. After that it was just a matter of separating all the PDUs (big power strips with monitoring capabilities) to A and B side where A was the main UPS and B was the rack mount for that rack only and one cord from server into A and the other into B. Repaired main UPS and that was 5 years ago, still chugging along although in the end they decided to can all the rack mounts and just use utility for the redundant PSUs. Moral of that story is one large dual conversion UPS beats out smaller ones every day and dual conversion beats out line interactive 200% of the time. The scalable dual conversion machines can get as low as 20kVa and that same rack can go up to 100kVA just by adding more power modules and more battery packs. or just a single 20kVA that has the power modules, battery packs and output distribution in one cabinet. 

https://www.se.com/us/en/product/ISX20K20F_APC/infrastruxure-20kw,-208v/
or newer Galaxy VS
https://www.se.com/us/en/product-range-presentation/65772-galaxy-vs/
Just commissioned one of these yesterday. 40kVA with enough lithium batteries to run at full load tor 3 days. Bank disaster recovery with no generator. 


Or we go up to machines that are 1.5MW and can be paralleled for 6MW in a single system for the larger enterprise systems. This is the latest product line for that market.
https://www.se.com/us/en/product-range/63732-galaxy-vx/


----------



## ThrashZone

Chobbit said:


> I seem to have a problem with temp readings, I have a separate loop for the CPU as mentioned but using AIDA64 and Core Temp the temps at stock on a CPU stress are reading very erratic per core between 60-85 degreesC variance with alot of jumping around.
> 
> If I did an FPU test (still on stock) it instantly hits 110 degC on some cores which I stopped instantly worried.
> 
> I turned the pump up to max and all fans to max flow/speed which made no difference to the temps.
> 
> I have two sensors in the water (just before the radiator and just after the CPU block) which when I run the CPU stress for an hour went from 27 degC to 30 degC on max pump/fans setting and only 32 degC on low/auto pump/fan mode.
> 
> This didn't make sense the water being so far away from the reported core temps over such a long period.
> 
> I then ran the FPU for 15 mins with no issues, blue screen or crash. Decided to drop both AVX offsets by 5 which made little to no difference to the temps on FPU test.
> 
> So just ignored the temp readings and started overclocking and because I can't seem to see actual temps kept it at 1.2v and got to 4.8 stable with an offset of 3 AVX. This ran fine for an hours test of both CPU and then FPU stress test as well as a few runs of cinebench.
> 
> I'm sure I could push a bit more if I added more voltage but I don't know what a safe voltage range is?


Hi,
Weird shouldn't be near that bad at stock clocks 
Possibly the pump on the cpu isn't running or at a very low rpm ?

I mainly go by hwinfo read outs 
Core temp is okay though.
Post what hwinfo states 
Just click a couple times the double arrow on the bottom left to expand to another page automatically 
A lot of the stuff like TJ Max/... stuff can be removed click top item and hold shift and click last item and all between are selected just right click after and select Hide.
Way too much info just need voltages and core temps/ clocks 

https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php


----------



## Jpmboy

Chobbit said:


> I seem to have a problem with temp readings, I have a separate loop for the CPU as mentioned but using AIDA64 and Core Temp the temps at stock on a CPU stress are reading very erratic per core between 60-85 degreesC variance with alot of jumping around.
> 
> If I did an FPU test (still on stock) it instantly hits 110 degC on some cores which I stopped instantly worried.
> 
> I turned the pump up to max and all fans to max flow/speed which made no difference to the temps.
> 
> *I have two sensors in the water (just before the radiator and just after the CPU block) which when I run the CPU stress for an hour went from 27 degC to 30 degC on max pump/fans setting and only 32 degC on low/auto pump/fan mode.*
> 
> This didn't make sense the water being so far away from the reported core temps over such a long period.
> 
> I then ran the FPU for 15 mins with no issues, blue screen or crash. Decided to drop both AVX offsets by 5 which made little to no difference to the temps on FPU test.
> 
> So just ignored the temp readings and started overclocking and because I can't seem to see actual temps kept it at 1.2v and got to 4.8 stable with an offset of 3 AVX. This ran fine for an hours test of both CPU and then FPU stress test as well as a few runs of cinebench.
> 
> I'm sure I could push a bit more if I added more voltage but I don't know what a safe voltage range is?


 this sounds like a cooling block mounting issue or TIM issue. I'd remount the block and use a top-line TIM. TGK, Gelid, or TIM-MATE TIM2 are very good for these HCC chips if you do not go liquid metal.
Also - I would not jump right to an FPU stress test - most only run a single instruction set and just repeat the same IS. Begin with something like ASUS REalBench h.265 or other proper encoding software that uses AVX more realistically rather than as a power virus.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
One note about vccin/ input voltage 
Left on auto would likely come close to 2.0v oops where as 1.93v is a better for temps lower if stability isn't lost.


----------



## tistou77

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> One note about vccin/ input voltage
> Left on auto would likely come close to *1.2v* where as 1.93v is a better for temps lower if stability isn't lost.


1.2v ??


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Oops near 2.0v


----------



## tistou77

No worries :thumb:

I have 1.87v (idle) and ~1.83v (load)


----------



## ThrashZone

tistou77 said:


> No worries :thumb:
> 
> I have 1.87v (idle) and ~1.83v (load)


Hi,
You're obviously not on auto :thumb:


----------



## cgpyos

yay

https://www.eteknix.com/intel-core-i9-10900x-i9-10940x-processor-review/


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

hi guys - I decided to do some maintenance after running Primochill VUE a few times, and getting some funky organic buildup without taking apart the CPU block all this time (EK monoblock for Asus Rampage VI Extreme).

After reinstalling I was noticing that temps seemed to be alarmingly high - idling around 32-33 C (where previously they were usually more like 25-28 C depending on room ambient), and trying to run a quick Cinebench R15 crashed - with core temps hitting 90c in HWINFO64 before the crash.

This all struck me as a liquid metal contact issue, so I removed the IHS today and sure enough it wasn't making good contact (big obvious dry spot right in the center of the IHS and die), so I cleaned everything up, reapplied LM and reinstalled the CPU, then remounted the monoblock with the motherboard horizontal - taking care to turn each of the 4 mounting thumb screws only about 1/4 turn at a time in an X pattern. 

Just letting it run a bit for the loop temp to stabilize - after about 15 minutes sitting at the desktop with HWiNFO64 running it looks like all cores are sitting at 27-28 C (still same OC of 4.7ghz Sync All Cores, and voltage set to 1.27v). Does this seem fine temp-wise indicating the LM is making proper contact now before I dive in and try to get a proper OC dialed in? I'm just worried after seeing some older posts of people saying that their 7960x and 7980xe's were idling around 22-23 C.


----------



## RichKnecht

Kalm_Traveler said:


> hi guys - I decided to do some maintenance after running Primochill VUE a few times, and getting some funky organic buildup without taking apart the CPU block all this time (EK monoblock for Asus Rampage VI Extreme).
> 
> After reinstalling I was noticing that temps seemed to be alarmingly high - idling around 32-33 C (where previously they were usually more like 25-28 C depending on room ambient), and trying to run a quick Cinebench R15 crashed - with core temps hitting 90c in HWINFO64 before the crash.
> 
> This all struck me as a liquid metal contact issue, so I removed the IHS today and sure enough it wasn't making good contact (big obvious dry spot right in the center of the IHS and die), so I cleaned everything up, reapplied LM and reinstalled the CPU, then remounted the monoblock with the motherboard horizontal - taking care to turn each of the 4 mounting thumb screws only about 1/4 turn at a time in an X pattern.
> 
> Just letting it run a bit for the loop temp to stabilize - after about 15 minutes sitting at the desktop with HWiNFO64 running it looks like all cores are sitting at 27-28 C (still same OC of 4.7ghz Sync All Cores, and voltage set to 1.27v). Does this seem fine temp-wise indicating the LM is making proper contact now before I dive in and try to get a proper OC dialed in? I'm just worried after seeing some older posts of people saying that their 7960x and 7980xe's were idling around 22-23 C.


What temp is you cooling fluid? My chip will usually idle at ~ 1-2 degrees above water temp.


----------



## Jpmboy

Kalm_Traveler said:


> hi guys - I decided to do some maintenance after running Primochill VUE a few times, and getting some funky organic buildup without taking apart the CPU block all this time (EK monoblock for Asus Rampage VI Extreme).
> 
> After reinstalling I was noticing that temps seemed to be alarmingly high - idling around 32-33 C (where previously they were usually more like 25-28 C depending on room ambient), and trying to run a quick Cinebench R15 crashed - with core temps hitting 90c in HWINFO64 before the crash.
> 
> This all struck me as a liquid metal contact issue, so I removed the IHS today and sure enough it wasn't making good contact (big obvious dry spot right in the center of the IHS and die), so I cleaned everything up, reapplied LM and reinstalled the CPU, then remounted the monoblock with the motherboard horizontal - taking care to turn each of the 4 mounting thumb screws only about 1/4 turn at a time in an X pattern.
> 
> Just letting it run a bit for the loop temp to stabilize - after about 15 minutes sitting at the desktop with HWiNFO64 running it looks like all cores are sitting at 27-28 C (still same OC of 4.7ghz Sync All Cores, and voltage set to 1.27v). Does this seem fine temp-wise indicating the LM is making proper contact now before I dive in and try to get a proper OC dialed in? I'm just worried after seeing some older posts of people saying that their 7960x and 7980xe's were idling around 22-23 C.


 27C idle is not bad.. depending on the temp of the waterloop. You have LM on the IHS and the stock TIM under? If yes, try something less stressful than R15, the simple cpu stressor in CPUZ is good for this purpose. CLU will dry out and crack eventually. CLP is less prone to to this.
lol - my 7980XE has not been at idle for 12 days now, but the min temps recorded in SIV64 range 27-31C. It's been running at a constant 240-260W (1.5X TDP) with min 13GB ram in use all that time. Thing is a workhorse and the x299 platform (Apex VI) solid as they come.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

RichKnecht said:


> What temp is you cooling fluid? My chip will usually idle at ~ 1-2 degrees above water temp.





Jpmboy said:


> 27C idle is not bad.. depending on the temp of the waterloop. You have LM on the IHS and the stock TIM under? If yes, try something less stressful than R15, the simple cpu stressor in CPUZ is good for this purpose. CLU will dry out and crack eventually. CLP is less prone to to this.


I have LM on the CPU die under the IHS, Kryonaut on top of the IHS (between IHS and monoblock).

Let me get back to you on the loop temp (CPU is on its own loop with a 560mm radiator but I've just updated the bios from 1603 to 2002 so still getting everything set up again).


----------



## JustinThyme

Kalm_Traveler said:


> hi guys - I decided to do some maintenance after running Primochill VUE a few times, and getting some funky organic buildup without taking apart the CPU block all this time (EK monoblock for Asus Rampage VI Extreme).
> 
> After reinstalling I was noticing that temps seemed to be alarmingly high - idling around 32-33 C (where previously they were usually more like 25-28 C depending on room ambient), and trying to run a quick Cinebench R15 crashed - with core temps hitting 90c in HWINFO64 before the crash.
> 
> This all struck me as a liquid metal contact issue, so I removed the IHS today and sure enough it wasn't making good contact (big obvious dry spot right in the center of the IHS and die), so I cleaned everything up, reapplied LM and reinstalled the CPU, then remounted the monoblock with the motherboard horizontal - taking care to turn each of the 4 mounting thumb screws only about 1/4 turn at a time in an X pattern.
> 
> Just letting it run a bit for the loop temp to stabilize - after about 15 minutes sitting at the desktop with HWiNFO64 running it looks like all cores are sitting at 27-28 C (still same OC of 4.7ghz Sync All Cores, and voltage set to 1.27v). Does this seem fine temp-wise indicating the LM is making proper contact now before I dive in and try to get a proper OC dialed in? I'm just worried after seeing some older posts of people saying that their 7960x and 7980xe's were idling around 22-23 C.



EK Monoblock and delidded chips don''t play well at all. I finally hung mine on the wall of shame and moved on. They look nice and all but even EK will tell you they suck for delidded chips. Problem is there is zero tolerance. They have a set height that changes with delidding. Ive seen a few people go through the trouble to shave off the mounts a little and use thinner tape on the VRMs. I went with two separate blocks and never looked back. Heat Killer was my choice but pretty much any block that floats with spring pressure instead of a set height will give you a better change on a delidded chip. 

Where your temps idle has everything to do with the liquid temp. Anyone idling at 22C is either running a chiller or lives above the arctic circle with their machine on a balcony. My room ambient is about 22C, Liquid temp at 26C (fans at 400rpm) and my 9400X idles at 28C.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

JustinThyme said:


> EK Monoblock and delidded chips don''t play well at all. I finally hung mine on the wall of shame and moved on. They look nice and all but even EK will tell you they suck for delidded chips. Problem is there is zero tolerance. They have a set height that changes with delidding. Ive seen a few people go through the trouble to shave off the mounts a little and use thinner tape on the VRMs. I went with two separate blocks and never looked back. Heat Killer was my choice but pretty much any block that floats with spring pressure instead of a set height will give you a better change on a delidded chip.
> 
> Where your temps idle has everything to do with the liquid temp. Anyone idling at 22C is either running a chiller or lives above the arctic circle with their machine on a balcony. My room ambient is about 22C, Liquid temp at 26C (fans at 400rpm) and my 9400X idles at 28C.


haha thank you, that's good to know 

now that i have all the fans set correctly (just PWM auto, standard profile, but the radiator fans set to run based on their respective loop T sensor temp) in BIOS CPU temp is 28-29 C, its loop temp sensor is reporting 26 C.

I'm also not sure how hard to crank down on those monoblock mounting thumb screws - I could probably to crank them a little bit more but they are pretty tight. You may be on to something with the separate blocks idea though. I like having the VRMs cooled for mid-winter outdoor OC adventures but for daily (hopefully) 4.7-4.8ghz on this chip I'd not be surprised if their stock heatsink was adequate.


----------



## JustinThyme

Kalm_Traveler said:


> haha thank you, that's good to know
> 
> now that i have all the fans set correctly (just PWM auto, standard profile, but the radiator fans set to run based on their respective loop T sensor temp) in BIOS CPU temp is 28-29 C, its loop temp sensor is reporting 26 C.
> 
> I'm also not sure how hard to crank down on those monoblock mounting thumb screws - I could probably to crank them a little bit more but they are pretty tight. You may be on to something with the separate blocks idea though. I like having the VRMs cooled for mid-winter outdoor OC adventures but for daily (hopefully) 4.7-4.8ghz on this chip I'd not be surprised if their stock heatsink was adequate.


If I recall correctly the standard fan curve for the VRMs is set for 65C which is a bit warm to me. I wouldn't crank down too hard on those screws. Snug then maybe 1/8 turn past that. Thats just another thing I worry about is that it has the MOBO sandwiched between the mounting posts and the pretty small screws on the back where the separate blocks the mounts screw into the back plate and you run those nice and tight as the spring tension is what dictates the pressure. when delidded that distance is less. If you can get it to work for you then great. There are lots of fail posts here and on ROG forums with the monoblock and delidded chips. I tried it on a non delidded chip and still wasnt happy. had 2 hot cores with 2 more still a bit above the rest. After changing they are all within 5C or so under load.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

JustinThyme said:


> If I recall correctly the standard fan curve for the VRMs is set for 65C which is a bit warm to me. I wouldn't crank down too hard on those screws. Snug then maybe 1/8 turn past that. Thats just another thing I worry about is that it has the MOBO sandwiched between the mounting posts and the pretty small screws on the back where the separate blocks the mounts screw into the back plate and you run those nice and tight as the spring tension is what dictates the pressure. when delidded that distance is less. If you can get it to work for you then great. There are lots of fail posts here and on ROG forums with the monoblock and delidded chips. I tried it on a non delidded chip and still wasnt happy. had 2 hot cores with 2 more still a bit above the rest. After changing they are all within 5C or so under load.


Yeah I'm not sure - been running this hardware for coming up on 2 years, just never really sat down to dial in a proper OC. Last winter I was playing around with some outdoor OC and managed to post some (at the time) decent 3dmark scores with it set to 5.2ghz all core, but been running 4.7ghz daily. 

So far with it at stock idle core temps are still all 27-28 C but package temp dropped from ~ 40c to 30c (dropping from my original 4.7ghz settings).

*EDIT*

Just started working on an OC after trying to find some info on the best way to handle these, and just blazed through my best Cinebench R15 run to date - 4122. This is with the BIOS voltage on auto (just wanted to see what it would do with a 48 multiplier) - max was 1.3v and the core temps were mostly 77-83 though one hit 90 C.

Going to have to put some more time into this tomorrow but I think at this point it's making 'good enough' contact. My room ambient temp right now is 23.2 C so not exactly a cold room to begin with.

Thanks again for your help and moral support guys


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Everyone who told me to go away from the monoblock after delidding - huge THANK YOU.

System had been crashing randomly for the last few weeks, even at stock idle temps were sitting around 31-36 C...

Just today Heatkiller CPU and VRM blocks arrived from Germany and have been installed - made zero other changes so far and now core temps idling around 24-26 C, after a few Cinebench R20 and Fire Strike Extreme runs max temp on any core was 51 C. 

Going to see if I can bleed any air out, then get back to working on finding max stable OC for daily use. If it was sub-freezing outside here at night I'd be tempted to work on some benchmark runs but that'll have to wait a bit (last winter I chose a couple nights of ~ 10 F ambient to do my outdoor OC shenanigans).


----------



## JustinThyme

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Everyone who told me to go away from the monoblock after delidding - huge THANK YOU.
> 
> System had been crashing randomly for the last few weeks, even at stock idle temps were sitting around 31-36 C...
> 
> Just today Heatkiller CPU and VRM blocks arrived from Germany and have been installed - made zero other changes so far and now core temps idling around 24-26 C, after a few Cinebench R20 and Fire Strike Extreme runs max temp on any core was 51 C.
> 
> Going to see if I can bleed any air out, then get back to working on finding max stable OC for daily use. If it was sub-freezing outside here at night I'd be tempted to work on some benchmark runs but that'll have to wait a bit (last winter I chose a couple nights of ~ 10 F ambient to do my outdoor OC shenanigans).


Welcome to the well informed! LOL
The monoblocks look great but........Delidded they suck bad, even EK will tell you that and even with the IHS never touched they dont cool all that well. Id say their niche is for those who prefer the look and dont intend on running past stock clocks.

Im running the HKIV pro and their VRM block as well. couldnt be happier.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

JustinThyme said:


> Welcome to the well informed! LOL
> The monoblocks look great but........Delidded they suck bad, even EK will tell you that and even with the IHS never touched they dont cool all that well. Id say their niche is for those who prefer the look and dont intend on running past stock clocks.
> 
> Im running the HKIV pro and their VRM block as well. couldnt be happier.


Hey those blocks look familiar hehe

*EDIT*

not sure why the forum rotated the picture... I have the cpu block oriented correctly, the motherboard itself is sideways...


----------



## JustinThyme

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Hey those blocks look familiar hehe
> 
> *EDIT*
> 
> not sure why the forum rotated the picture... I have the cpu block oriented correctly, the motherboard itself is sideways...


Yep, Very familiar! 

Forum is a PITA wih photos, It always wants to pull them in landscape and even that is iffy. Only way I know to make them display as intended is to open them in paint or something similar and save as PNG then they display as intended.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep tried several heatkiller 4 pro doing the best along with even a universal vrm block does loads better than mono block.


----------



## Xeq54

Hey guys, just a heads up.

Got my hands on a 10900X and its a really bad overclocker, even compared to my old 7820X. Seems Intel is using really bad bin for these. There are 6 cores which can do 5ghz at 1.4v the other four are complete trash so my highest allcore clock is 4,8ghz @ 1.4 volts. Cache max is 3ghz.

The 14 core seems to do allcore 5ghz sub 1.3v in all reviews compared to this.

Really bad compared to my old 7820x which could do 5.0 Ghz all core & 3,3 cache. I understand that it is a lottery and there may be better chips, but I really think they are using lowest bins for these 10 core chips.

Thankfully I am in the EU so I'll be returning it and will wait until 10940X is in stock. Got this one just to try it since it was the only available SKU here so far.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
7900x was I guess a high bin 78 series i7 ?


----------



## JustinThyme

Xeq54 said:


> Hey guys, just a heads up.
> 
> Got my hands on a 10900X and its a really bad overclocker, even compared to my old 7820X. Seems Intel is using really bad bin for these. There are 6 cores which can do 5ghz at 1.4v the other four are complete trash so my highest allcore clock is 4,8ghz @ 1.4 volts. Cache max is 3ghz.
> 
> The 14 core seems to do allcore 5ghz sub 1.3v in all reviews compared to this.
> 
> Really bad compared to my old 7820x which could do 5.0 Ghz all core & 3,3 cache. I understand that it is a lottery and there may be better chips, but I really think they are using lowest bins for these 10 core chips.
> 
> Thankfully I am in the EU so I'll be returning it and will wait until 10940X is in stock. Got this one just to try it since it was the only available SKU here so far.


The way the turbo boost is running is crippling. They go after 4 cores and everything else........nothing. Hell I got my 7900X to 5GHz all cores with a little work after delid and hanging the EK monoblock on my wall of shame. Never came close to 1.4V! 1.016 Vcore.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Question for you fellow Skylake-X+ owners.. 

my 7960x has been running just peachy on a daily 4.8ghz OC for about 2 years now, with the 3200mhz Gskill RAM never OC'd beyond its rated 3200mhz etc, however recently I noticed it seemed to be running hotter than it should so I took it out, removed the IHS and redid the LM, removing all the silicon adhesive from the pcb and making sure to use only a super thin amount when reassembling. 

This brought the overall height down enough that under the existing EK monoblock (Rampage VI Extreme mb), the CPU was not getting good flush contact anymore which I thought to be the cause for random system freezing after reassembly (as well as idle temps higher than expected even at stock - around 10-13 C over ambient).

So... I took it out again, checked the LM which appeared fine, relidded again with super thin silicon, and swapped from the monoblock to a Heatkiller CPU block and separate VRM block. This immediately brought temps down, idle core temps at stock settings were in the 2-6 C over ambient range and I thought the system crashing was gone but after a few days indeed it is still crashing.

Next I thought perhaps something had become bad with some RAM, (4 DIMMs of 16gb each, Gskill Trident Z RGB 3200mhz Samsung B-die) so I tried first removing two at a time to boot in dual channel using the 2 grey DIMM slots closest to the CPU, same crashing. Then I swapped to some brand new 4000mhz DIMMs of the same product line that I have for a 9900ks rig I'm just about to assemble this weekend. It will not even POST with those at their rated speed - boot sequence gets stuck on B0 error 'Detect Memory'.

So now I'm wondering if it's perhaps one of 2 possibilities - either the IMC on this 7960x is dying, or the pins on the motherboard maybe got bent funny from having uneven pressure from the previous monoblock installed? 

Do either of these make sense?

Anywho - if I am missing a troubleshooting step please let me know. At this point I'm ready to just plunk down on a different MB + CPU because I'm sick of this thing not being stable, but then the question is do I sidegrade the MB to a Rampage VI Extreme Omega and CPU to 10980xe, or maybe switch over to the even more pointlessly-overkill Dominus Extreme + Xeon W 3175x (adding 2 more DIMMs of course) which I'm not even sure will mount correctly in my Thermaltake Tower 900 case....

What do you guys think?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Which bios are you on older for skylake-x or newer for 99 series or newest for 10 series ?
I believe 1705 is best but that was really needed for 99 series.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Which bios are you on older for skylake-x or newer for 99 series or newest for 10 series ?
> I believe 1705 is best but that was really needed for 99 series.


Just updated to 2002 bios and Windows 10 1909 about a week ago.


----------



## ThrashZone

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Just updated to 2002 bios and Windows 10 1909 about a week ago.


Hi,
Any relation to when the issue started ?
1909 is risky enough it's still green and probably has a new micro code too.


----------



## fireedo

received today my 10980XE will replace my "same old" 7980XE .... really hope this cpu will clock better than my 7980XE (if at least I can get 4.9 Ghz all core below 1.25v, I will really happy....lol ) , one can only hope
waiting for other watercooling parts arrive
also I will use Rampage Encore board (already use this board for 4 days with my 7980XE)


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Somebody have issues with pci lanes getting drop? Tried 2 different mobos and 3 different gpus (2x1080 tis and one 5700xt) the second pci ex on both of my mAtx boards is working at 3.0 @ 4x max on a 7940x it was working fine before now it dont get out of 4x.. it do the same on both boards. So its not the gpus or the cpu socket or the pci slot unless the cpu burned both mobo traces towards the pci ex lanes which im not sure about it.. or something went kaput inside the cpu. Everything else is working as intended... every nvme/sata/lan etc every port works fine..and 1st pci ex slot works at 16x 0 problems


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

ThrashZone said:


> Kalm_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just updated to 2002 bios and Windows 10 1909 about a week ago.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> Any relation to when the issue started ?
> 1909 is risky enough it's still green and probably has a new micro code too.
Click to expand...

The crashing was happening prior to both for a week or so - after relidding to address temps that I assumed were due to poor mounting pressure from the monoblock. 

What's really strange to me is that this crashing is happening with everything at completely stock settings.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Kalm_Traveler said:


> The crashing was happening prior to both for a week or so - after relidding to address temps that I assumed were due to poor mounting pressure from the monoblock.
> 
> What's really strange to me is that this crashing is happening with everything at completely stock settings.


reapplying lm in this cpus are a pita specially mounting wise i gave up bare die too on them .. you can have a good application and the net time you do it you can have 3-4 cores hitting tjmax on idle... XD
i have to re paste the damn cpu 4 times before i got good contact i went a little bit excessive in both sides this time. You need more than a regular cpu for good contact too .


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

zGunBLADEz said:


> Kalm_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> 
> The crashing was happening prior to both for a week or so - after relidding to address temps that I assumed were due to poor mounting pressure from the monoblock.
> 
> What's really strange to me is that this crashing is happening with everything at completely stock settings.
> 
> 
> 
> reapplying lm in this cpus are a pita specially mounting wise i gave up bare die too on them .. you can have a good application and the net time you do it you can have 3-4 cores hitting tjmax on idle... XD
> i have to re paste the damn cpu 4 times before i got good contact i went a little bit excessive in both sides this time. You need more than a regular cpu for good contact too .
Click to expand...

Good point. I'll try redoing it again tonight, going to try lightly sanding the ihs to give the LM something to adhere to because it doesn't seem to want to stay put on the super slick polished metal. 

I'm just worried that the cpu or socket was damaged by that old monoblock not having even pressure due to the reduced cpu height.


----------



## Jpmboy

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Good point. I'll try redoing it again tonight, going to try lightly sanding the ihs to give the LM something to adhere to because it doesn't seem to want to stay put on the super slick polished metal.
> 
> I'm just worried that the cpu or socket was damaged by that old monoblock not having even pressure due to the reduced cpu height.


This is a property of the LM itself. CLP "paints" much better than CLU or other LM TIMs in my experience. Also, if you use drug-store alcohol to clean the surface, it has 5+% water, so the surface is actually wet unless you dry it with a heat gun. 100% iPA (isopropyl alcohol) is... anhydrous and does not wet a surface (as much... air drying will condense water onto the surface). LM adheres to a dry surface much better than a wet one.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Jpmboy said:


> Kalm_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good point. I'll try redoing it again tonight, going to try lightly sanding the ihs to give the LM something to adhere to because it doesn't seem to want to stay put on the super slick polished metal.
> 
> I'm just worried that the cpu or socket was damaged by that old monoblock not having even pressure due to the reduced cpu height.
> 
> 
> 
> This is a property of the LM itself. CLP "paints" much better than CLU or other LM TIMs in my experience. Also, if you use drug-store alcohol to clean the surface, it has 5+% water, so the surface is actually wet unless you dry it with a heat gun. 100% iPA (isopropyl alcohol) is... anhydrous and does not wet a surface (as much... air drying will condense water onto the surface). LM adheres to a dry surface much better than a wet one.
Click to expand...

TIL! 

Good thing the humidity here is often in the teens. I imagine that would facilitate faster drying?


----------



## Jpmboy

Kalm_Traveler said:


> TIL!
> 
> Good thing the humidity here is often in the teens. I imagine that would facilitate faster drying?


sure would! Just like sinuses


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Well, I cleaned the CPU very very thoroughly with this 92% Isopropyl alcohol and a thin razor blade to remove every last spec of silicon adhesive, very lightly sanded both the CPU die and underside of the IHS with some 3000 grit sandpaper ('wet' sanded with both wet from the alcohol), cleaned again just to be safe, then reapplied new liquid metal, a new very thin bit of silicon, and have it sitting in the delid/relid tool now while I let the silicon cure.

I forget who here suggested that gentle sanding of both surfaces but it REALLY makes a huge difference. When I removed the IHS tonight there was a very obvious pool of LM on one corner, but such a small amount was necessary this time that both the cpu die and IHS have that perfect ultra thin coating done with a drop the size of a pinhead (the smaller pinheads, not the larger orb-shaped pinheads).

If this thing gives me any grief whatsoever I'm about ready to just say screw it and snag the next 10980xe that shows up on NewEgg and a Rampage VI Extreme Omega.


----------



## Jpmboy

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Well, I cleaned the CPU very very thoroughly with this 92% Isopropyl alcohol and a thin razor blade to remove every last spec of silicon adhesive, very lightly sanded both the CPU die and underside of the IHS with some 3000 grit sandpaper ('wet' sanded with both wet from the alcohol), cleaned again just to be safe, then reapplied new liquid metal, a new very thin bit of silicon, and have it sitting in the delid/relid tool now while I let the silicon cure.
> 
> I forget who here suggested that gentle sanding of both surfaces but it REALLY makes a huge difference. When I removed the IHS tonight there was a very obvious pool of LM on one corner, *but such a small amount was necessary* this time that both the cpu die and IHS have that perfect ultra thin coating done with a drop the size of a pinhead (the smaller pinheads, not the larger orb-shaped pinheads).
> 
> If this thing gives me any grief whatsoever I'm about ready to just say screw it and snag the next 10980xe that shows up on NewEgg and a Rampage VI Extreme Omega.


LM needs to be a very thin (essentially painted) layer ideally on both surfaces. LM forms the best thermal bond line with itself.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Jpmboy said:


> LM needs to be a very thin (essentially painted) layer ideally on both surfaces. LM forms the best thermal bond line with itself.


Aye, this is my 6th (and first!) LM'd cpu so far - I'm actually not sure how it had so much to pool from before but that was literally my first time so I must have just used way too much.

In any case, I'm still concerned about the memory issue and crashing - but it seems reasonable given that there were no issues until I monkeyed with the IHS 2 weeks ago that everything might be just fine now.

Still....

2 more cores that will probably OC higher, and better VRMs... 

Tempting


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah only silicon lottery floods the cpu with lm mostly because they don't remove the Intel original sealant
This is what my 7900x looked like opened up after it was just horrible core temp wise
lm dropped off the chip eventually or lost contact


----------



## Hydroplane

Wondering if I should delid my 7980XE and run direct die... would have to ditch the monoblock. A new waterblock, VRM block, delid kit, and direct die kit are still a lot cheaper than a 10980XE. Wonder how much I would gain? Max out at 4.3 now due to ~25c variation in core max temps, stock poop.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hydroplane said:


> Wondering if I should delid my 7980XE and run direct die... would have to ditch the monoblock. A new waterblock, VRM block, delid kit, and direct die kit are still a lot cheaper than a 10980XE. Wonder how much I would gain? Max out at 4.3 now due to ~25c variation in core max temps, stock poop.


Hi,
79 series better 
Might test waters and put it up for auction before delidding.

Hell just buy a 10980xe supposed to be 1000.us instead of scrapping intel warranty or at least wait till the warranty is eol.

I might add I just got approved on a rma for core temp spread of 20c difference 
RMA that sucker and refunded like Jp did on his dead 9900x because no stock at intel


----------



## chibi

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Aye, this is my 6th (and first!) LM'd cpu so far - I'm actually not sure how it had so much to pool from before but that was literally my first time so I must have just used way too much.
> 
> In any case, I'm still concerned about the memory issue and crashing - but it seems reasonable given that there were no issues until I monkeyed with the IHS 2 weeks ago that everything might be just fine now.
> 
> Still....
> 
> 2 more cores that will probably OC higher, and better VRMs...
> 
> Tempting



May I offer an alternate method to reseal the IHS? On my 8700K, I used a toothpick and dabbed a small amount of RTV on each corner of the IHS. Just barely enough to hold the IHS on so it does not shift and it held up great. There was no problems socketing and closing the latch and IHS did not shift either. Give that a try next time to lower the chances of raised areas due to sealant.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

chibi said:


> May I offer an alternate method to reseal the IHS? On my 8700K, I used a toothpick and dabbed a small amount of RTV on each corner of the IHS. Just barely enough to hold the IHS on so it does not shift and it held up great. There was no problems socketing and closing the latch and IHS did not shift either. Give that a try next time to lower the chances of raised areas due to sealant.


definitely and thank you!

I did something similar to that on an 8086k and it worked very well. 

For last night's re-sealing of this 7960x I used a tube with a narrow opening to achieve hopefully a similarly-thin layer of RTV, and immediately put the cpu back in the delid/relid tool to smoosh the IHS down with force as the RTV cures.

Going to reinstall it now and hope that the odd memory issues/crashing are cured so please cross your fingers for me.


----------



## chibi

Kalm_Traveler said:


> definitely and thank you!
> 
> I did something similar to that on an 8086k and it worked very well.
> 
> For last night's re-sealing of this 7960x I used a tube with a narrow opening to achieve hopefully a similarly-thin layer of RTV, and immediately put the cpu back in the delid/relid tool to smoosh the IHS down with force as the RTV cures.
> 
> Going to reinstall it now and hope that the odd memory issues/crashing are cured so please cross your fingers for me.



Fingers crossed budd, gl! :thumb:


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

chibi said:


> Fingers crossed budd, gl! :thumb:


Thanks! I think you did it.

No boot issues, set everything to auto for now, except enabling XMP for the RAM to run at its rated 3200mhz.

under light load all cores are sitting between 26-30 C, if i close everything and just leave HWInfo open, some of them are dropping to 22-24 C (room ambient at the moment is ~22 C).

Going to start running some CPU and memory stress tests but so far everything looks perfect. Don't want to speak too soon, but I think that light 3000 grit wet sanding of the IHS and CPU die did the trick since it allowed me to easily apply that ultra-thin 'painted on' layer of liquid metal.

*edit* 

nvm spoke too soon, system froze up after about 2.5 hours of just running a few Chrome tabs and HWMonitor. No events just prior to the crash in System Event logs - just the booting up again errors telling me the system shutdown was not expected.

Looks like that 10980xe and Rampage VI Extreme Omega might be happening after all...


----------



## Jpmboy

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Thanks! I think you did it.
> 
> No boot issues, set everything to auto for now, except enabling XMP for the RAM to run at its rated 3200mhz.
> 
> under light load all cores are sitting between 26-30 C, if i close everything and just leave HWInfo open, some of them are dropping to 22-24 C (room ambient at the moment is ~22 C).
> 
> Going to start running some CPU and memory stress tests but so far everything looks perfect. Don't want to speak too soon, but I think that light 3000 grit wet sanding of the IHS and CPU die did the trick since it allowed me to easily apply that ultra-thin 'painted on' layer of liquid metal.
> 
> *edit*
> 
> nvm spoke too soon, system froze up after about 2.5 hours of just running a few Chrome tabs and HWMonitor. No events just prior to the crash in System Event logs - just the booting up again errors telling me the system shutdown was not expected.
> 
> Looks like that 10980xe and Rampage VI Extreme Omega might be happening after all...


 did it freeze or actually power cycle by itself? If it just froze while running XMP and every other seting on Auto. Set it up the same, note the VCCIN and VCache, go back into bios and set the vccin manually to a value close to the value you saw on windows desktop (eg, if auto was pumping 1.95V or higher at stock, set it to 1.95 to 1.92V) and add 25-50mV to the Vcache value you saw in windows. XMP programming may require this bump in Vcache, and the auto rules for VCCIN tend to consider the worst case scenario (CPU quality)...
That said, a 10980XE and Omega would also be a good "fix"


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Jpmboy said:


> did it freeze or actually power cycle by itself? If it just froze while running XMP and every other seting on Auto. Set it up the same, note the VCCIN and VCache, go back into bios and set the vccin manually to a value close to the value you saw on windows desktop (eg, if auto was pumping 1.95V or higher at stock, set it to 1.95 to 1.92V) and add 25-50mV to the Vcache value you saw in windows. XMP programming may require this bump in Vcache, and the auto rules for VCCIN tend to consider the worst case scenario (CPU quality)...
> That said, a 10980XE and Omega would also be a good "fix"


Just froze - the image displayed at time of freeze became static, audio blitzed forever etc. I rebooted and it's been fine now for about 10 hours. While running, I decided to finish up some cable management and installed an Aquaero 6 XT in place of the old-and-useless Asus OC Panel II.

If it crashes on me again I'll check those voltages - or order the new CPU and MB. Maybe both  Thanks again my friend!

*EDIT*

crashed (froze) again after about 5 mins post-bootup this morning. I just set literally everything back to Auto (no XMP), but this is the last straw. NowInStock.net alert for the 10980xe is being set up 

*EDIT 2*

You may be onto something with the voltages. I don't recall exactly what I had set with the original OC (before flashing this 2002 BIOS update), but with everything full auto now (no XMP), it passed 10 hours of memtestx86, Intel CPU diagnostics, no core files corrupted with an sfc scan... and I just updated a few drivers (ME firmware + driver, Turbo boost 3.0 driver, Samsung NVME driver).

not a hitch at all... checking VCC in on full stock it is reporting 1.904v in HWinfo, but I don't see anything that looks like Vcache.


----------



## Jpmboy

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Just froze - the image displayed at time of freeze became static, audio blitzed forever etc. I rebooted and it's been fine now for about 10 hours. While running, I decided to finish up some cable management and installed an Aquaero 6 XT in place of the old-and-useless Asus OC Panel II.
> 
> If it crashes on me again I'll check those voltages - or order the new CPU and MB. Maybe both  Thanks again my friend!
> 
> *EDIT*
> 
> crashed (froze) again after about 5 mins post-bootup this morning. I just set literally everything back to Auto (no XMP), but this is the last straw. NowInStock.net alert for the 10980xe is being set up
> 
> *EDIT 2*
> 
> You may be onto something with the voltages. I don't recall exactly what I had set with the original OC (before flashing this 2002 BIOS update), but with everything full auto now (no XMP), it passed 10 hours of memtestx86, Intel CPU diagnostics, no core files corrupted with an sfc scan... and I just updated a few drivers (ME firmware + driver, Turbo boost 3.0 driver, Samsung NVME driver).
> 
> not a hitch at all... checking VCC in on full stock it is reporting 1.904v in HWinfo, *but I don't see anything that looks like Vcache*.


 I don't use HWi on the x299 rigs here. Download the latest version of SIV64, start it, click the "Status" button on the bottom and post that screen.


AND lol - I like your build.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Jpmboy said:


> I don't use HWi on the x299 rigs here. Download the latest version of SIV64, start it, click the "Status" button on the bottom and post that screen.
> 
> 
> AND lol - I like your build.


Thank you! Working on a "little" gaming rig now as well - I'll post up some pics in the appropriate thread once its ready. Love your builds as well!

I think these two voltages in SIV are what you were talking about, yes? (This is with everything in the BIOS at Auto - no XMP, so stock CPU everything, 'stock' DDR4 2133mhz CL15 nonsense).


----------



## Jpmboy

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Thank you! Working on a "little" gaming rig now as well - I'll post up some pics in the appropriate thread once its ready. Love your builds as well!
> 
> I think these two voltages in SIV are what you were talking about, yes? (This is with everything in the BIOS at Auto - no XMP, so stock CPU everything, 'stock' DDR4 2133mhz CL15 nonsense).


Okay, monitor the cache voltage with SIV64... when you overclock ram (XMP is an overclock) with no overclock on the cache (cache multipliers on auto) it's best to bump the Vcache. Undervolted cache will cause that exact type of screen freeze (with no BSOD).


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Jpmboy said:


> Okay, monitor the cache voltage with SIV64... when you overclock ram (XMP is an overclock) with no overclock on the cache (cache multipliers on auto) it's best to bump the Vcache. Undervolted cache will cause that exact type of screen freeze (with no BSOD).


Thank you so much! you're a genius! 

Just to make sure i'm not losing my mind I've had this thing running for ~ 7 hours so far, been watching videos, playing games etc just to ease my mind from thinking it was a hardware issue.

Time to get the OC dialed back in - minding your cache voltage assistance!


----------



## Jpmboy

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Thank you so much! you're a genius!
> 
> Just to make sure i'm not losing my mind I've had this thing running for ~ 7 hours so far, been watching videos, playing games etc just to ease my mind from thinking it was a hardware issue.
> 
> Time to get the OC dialed back in - minding your cache voltage assistance!


Post back with how the "journey" ends up.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

I use blender to stress test this type of cpus. The switching between the avx divider and regular multiplier and actual load is more realistic than hammering the cpu with an actual stress test. Run blender on "animation" for a couple of hrs is good for voltages/avx divider/ power consumption y thermal testing.. Then i dial some handbrake encoding test "cpu only" with some videos on a queue list. Im doing specific type of runs Instead of hammering the cpu with an stress test. 

That P95 "stable" set of mind aint working with me no more lol.


@Jpmboy do you know what can cause a drop on pci lanes on a cpu out of nowhere? My second pci ex slot on both of my mobos "same cpu" dropped from 16x to 8x then now is 4x it dont go up no more. I tried 4 different gpus individually .. Its not the GPU or the mobos thats for sure looks like something went bad cpu wise. Theres no burn spots on the cpu neither capacitors missing. It was working before 16/16x both GPUs.


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> I use blender to stress test this type of cpus. The switching between the avx divider and regular multiplier and actual load is more realistic than hammering the cpu with an actual stress test. Run blender on "animation" for a couple of hrs is good for voltages/avx divider/ power consumption y thermal testing.. Then i dial some handbrake encoding test "cpu only" with some videos on a queue list. Im doing specific type of runs Instead of hammering the cpu with an stress test.
> 
> That P95 "stable" set of mind aint working with me no more lol.
> 
> 
> @*Jpmboy* do you know what can cause a drop on pci lanes on a cpu out of nowhere? My second pci ex slot on both of my mobos "same cpu" dropped from 16x to 8x then now is 4x it dont go up no more. I tried 4 different gpus individually .. Its not the GPU or the mobos thats for sure looks like something went bad cpu wise. Theres no burn spots on the cpu neither capacitors missing. It was working before 16/16x both GPUs.


wow. That is a really rare event. The PCIE CPU lanes allocation are controlled by the CPU (as you know) but the board defines where they go. So, can you disable any PCIe (not PCH) lanes being used by drives or say a CPU DIMM.2 card (holding drives) and if ther are any PCIE SSDs like a p900 or 950, define those as 4x limited. You've certainly ID'd the problem - sounds like a failing CPU PCIE. :sadsmiley


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Surprisingly memory BLK can drop pci-e speed even as little as 102.00
So if you switched from 100 blk to 125 I wouldn't be surprised if pci-e speed was effected a lot.

Or cpu strap 100/ 125.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Surprisingly memory BLK can drop pci-e speed even as little as 102.00
> So if you switched from 100 blk to 125 I wouldn't be surprised if pci-e speed was effected a lot.
> 
> Or cpu strap 100/ 125.


 Yeah, in the ole days that was a problem, but it really depends on the platform. On x299, the PCIE and BCLK bus freq are uncoupled (this happened when "Strap" was made available on x79)... known as the "PEG". So, Dram and CPU BCLK remain coupled, PCIE BCLK is different (which on many x299 can be adjusted independently) And even z390, 370 etc, the BCLK clock is not coupled to the PCIE clock. This is why BCLKs of 200 -600 are not very complicated on these 1151 platforms. 
You are right though about using really odd BCLKs like 107 or something, but this is not due to a change in the PCIE bus clock.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Man 1968 they didn't have no consumer computers 

9940x replacement is ready to be shipped out showed that Saturday though guess it didn't make it to ups in time.
Doubt I'll see it before christmas but soon after.
Probably just repackage the one I sent to them


----------



## sblantipodi

fireedo said:


> received today my 10980XE will replace my "same old" 7980XE .... really hope this cpu will clock better than my 7980XE (if at least I can get 4.9 Ghz all core below 1.25v, I will really happy....lol ) , one can only hope
> waiting for other watercooling parts arrive
> also I will use Rampage Encore board (already use this board for 4 days with my 7980XE)


don't want to troll, I like Intel as much as I like AMD but why buy a 10980XE when there is the 3950X or the 3960X?


----------



## ThrashZone

sblantipodi said:


> don't want to troll, I like Intel as much as I like AMD but why buy a 10980XE when there is the 3950X or the 3960X?


Hi,
Coming from you because amd release is a failure


----------



## fireedo

sblantipodi said:


> don't want to troll, I like Intel as much as I like AMD but why buy a 10980XE when there is the 3950X or the 3960X?


well I do also built an AMD PC, using 3950x and Gigabyte x570 Xtreme for the sake of comparison ...Lol

here my Two PC side by side :


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

sblantipodi said:


> don't want to troll, I like Intel as much as I like AMD but why buy a 10980XE when there is the 3950X or the 3960X?


If one already has an X299 motherboard and/or wants PCIE lanes for days.... cost. Funny to think of Intel as the budget route for anything after all these years...


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> don't want to troll, I like Intel as much as I like AMD but why buy a 10980XE when there is the 3950X or the 3960X?


3950x and 3960x will be an downgrade in many programs/games compared to proper overclocked 7980xe/10980xe. 4600mhz+ core, 30+ mesh and 4000+ tweaked memory ~50ns memorylatency. That is why I'm not downgrading to a Threadripper gen 3. 

Stock x299 sux, but overclocked with tweaked memory (120+GB/s read and 50ns mem latency) it rocks 

My x399 16core threadripper is for ubuntu server and [email protected]


----------



## keeph8n

Nizzen said:


> 3950x and 3960x will be an downgrade in many programs/games compared to proper overclocked 7980xe/10980xe. 4600mhz+ core, 30+ mesh and 4000+ tweaked memory ~50ns memorylatency. That is why I'm not downgrading to a Threadripper gen 3.
> 
> Stock x299 sux, but overclocked with tweaked memory (120+GB/s read and 50ns mem latency) it rocks
> 
> My x399 16core threadripper is for ubuntu server and [email protected]





Proper memory on the Threadripper and latency is hilariously fast for the amount of cores.


----------



## Nizzen

keeph8n said:


> Proper memory on the Threadripper and latency is hilariously fast for the amount of cores.


Can you show me fast, then maybe I'll change my mind 

It's like upgrading from Adata sx8200pro with ~75MB/s 4k random read @QD=1 to Corsair pci-e 4.0 with higher sequential speeds, but slower 4k random [email protected]=1 (60MB/s)

I want faster on everything, no compromises


----------



## Jpmboy

fireedo said:


> well I do also built an AMD PC, using 3950x and Gigabyte x570 Xtreme for the sake of comparison ...Lol
> 
> here my Two PC side by side :


send a few 3950X over here at MSRP. I'll pay shipping.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> send a few 3950X over here at MSRP. I'll pay shipping.


Hi,
Still got 1 lonely 3960x sitting at micro center Houston 1400.us no takers for almost 1 week.


----------



## Hydroplane

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Still got 1 lonely 3960x sitting at micro center Houston 1400.us no takers for almost 1 week.


You live down in Houston? I've spent a lot of time in the deer park/ship channel area


----------



## ThrashZone

Hydroplane said:


> You live down in Houston? I've spent a lot of time in the deer park/ship channel area


Hi,
Yep Sugarland though 
Got my first dwi in deer park


----------



## Hydroplane

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep Sugarland though
> Got my first dwi in deer park


Haven't been down to Sugarland yet, usually stay up on center st off 225 when I'm down there. Lots of good seafood over there, I like the monument, baytown, and capt. benny's


----------



## ThrashZone

Hydroplane said:


> Haven't been down to Sugarland yet, usually stay up on center st off 225 when I'm down there. Lots of good seafood over there, I like the monument, baytown, and capt. benny's


Hi,
Yeah I don't eat out much way too expensive and frankly I'm usually a better cook


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> I use blender to stress test this type of cpus. The switching between the avx divider and regular multiplier and actual load is more realistic than hammering the cpu with an actual stress test. Run blender on "animation" for a couple of hrs is good for voltages/avx divider/ power consumption y thermal testing.. Then i dial some handbrake encoding test "cpu only" with some videos on a queue list. Im doing specific type of runs Instead of hammering the cpu with an stress test.
> 
> That P95 "stable" set of mind aint working with me no more lol.
> 
> 
> @*Jpmboy* do you know what can cause a drop on pci lanes on a cpu out of nowhere? My second pci ex slot on both of my mobos "same cpu" dropped from 16x to 8x then now is 4x it dont go up no more. I tried 4 different gpus individually .. Its not the GPU or the mobos thats for sure looks like something went bad cpu wise. Theres no burn spots on the cpu neither capacitors missing. It was working before 16/16x both GPUs.
> 
> 
> 
> wow. That is a really rare event. The PCIE CPU lanes allocation are controlled by the CPU (as you know) but the board defines where they go. So, can you disable any PCIe (not PCH) lanes being used by drives or say a CPU DIMM.2 card (holding drives) and if ther are any PCIE SSDs like a p900 or 950, define those as 4x limited. You've certainly ID'd the problem - sounds like a failing CPU PCIE. /forum/images/smilies/sadsmiley.gif
Click to expand...

😕 so still trying to see what's wrong with the cpu try disabling everything on bios from ht to vtd to usb3ports, csm, ssds, nvmes all that. 

I found this 12v reading on siv64 kind of strange. I get 12v on bios and i get 12v with multimeter on the molex 12v line when cpu is under stress..... 

Im wondering whats that 9-10v reading from as i get in hwinfo64 as well i google few screenies and everybody have 12v+ there.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Still got 1 lonely 3960x sitting at micro center Houston 1400.us no takers for almost 1 week.


That is a very different CPU than the 3950X, right? different socket.


zGunBLADEz said:


> 😕 so still trying to see what's wrong with the cpu try disabling everything on bios from ht to vtd to usb3ports, csm, ssds, nvmes all that.
> 
> I found this 12v reading on siv64 kind of strange. I get 12v on bios and i get 12v with multimeter on the molex 12v line when cpu is under stress.....
> 
> Im wondering whats that 9-10v reading from as i get in hwinfo64 as well i google few screenies and everybody have 12v+ there.


that +12V is via the ATX line afaik. Do you have a spare PSU? Is the PSU single rail?


----------



## toncij

What is considered a good clock under room temperature water for 10980X?
Can you run 5GHz all cores realistically without a chiller? Do you need an exceptional silicon lottery win to do it?


----------



## ESRCJ

toncij said:


> What is considered a good clock under room temperature water for 10980X?
> Can you run 5GHz all cores realistically without a chiller? Do you need an exceptional silicon lottery win to do it?


Are we talking stable for heavy workloads such as rendering? It's hard to say since every CPU is different. I'm currently running my delidded 7980XE at 4.8GHz at 1.28V with an AVX offset of 3 and AVX-512 offset of 5 for daily use. This passed both the non-AVX and AVX versions of Realbench with all cores averaging 70-80C in steady state. I could probably manage 4.9GHz at 1.32V for daily use, but I'm content with my current configuration. On average, a 10980XE is going to have better silicon than a 7980XE given that it's 14nm++ versus 14nm+. However, delidded with liquid metal between the die and IHS will be more efficient at transferring heat versus solder, so that's one disadvantage the 10980XE has. Still, I would expect almost any 10980XE to manage a better daily configuration than my 7980XE with the same cooling.

If you're aiming for high benchmark scores, 5GHz should not be out of the realm of possibility even in Cinebench, but this will depend on your cooling effectiveness, in particular the performance of your waterblock since Cinebench is such a short benchmark that radiator capacity means less since your fluid temps will never reach a steady state. You'll be able to get away with more for light loads such as 3dmark physics tests.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

@Jpmboy do you have a link to a good x299 OC guide? I can't find whichever one I used last year when I first set this 7960x OC up, and finally have some time this weekend to get it dialed in again (plus by turning my room heaters off the ambient is a nice OC-friendly 17 C!)


----------



## ThrashZone

Kalm_Traveler said:


> @Jpmboy do you have a link to a good x299 OC guide? I can't find whichever one I used last year when I first set this 7960x OC up, and finally have some time this weekend to get it dialed in again (plus by turning my room heaters off the ambient is a nice OC-friendly 17 C!)


Hi,
You can check out Jp's 4.6 oc bios text file



Code:


[2018/04/16 10:44:03]
Ai Overclock Tuner [Manual]
CPU Strap [100]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
ASUS MultiCore Enhancement [Auto]
AVX Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [5]
AVX-512 Instruction Core Ratio Negative Offset [10]
CPU Core Ratio [By Specific Core]
Min. CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
Max. CPU Cache Ratio [30]
BCLK Frequency : DRAM Frequency Ratio [Auto]
DRAM Frequency [DDR4-4000MHz]
Xtreme Tweaking [Enabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
CPU SVID Support [Auto]
BCLK Aware Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
CPU Cache Voltage [Manual Mode]
CPU Cache Voltage Override [1.175]
Uncore Voltage Offset [0.400]
Uncore Voltage Offset Prefix [+]

CPU Input Voltage [1.920]
DRAM Voltage(CHA, CHB) [1.4000]
DRAM Voltage(CHC, CHD) [1.4000]
CPU VCCIO Voltage [1.02500]
CPU System Agent Voltage [0.80000]
PCH Core Voltage [1.01250]

PLL Reference Offset Mode Sign [+]
PLL Reference Offset Value [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 0 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 0 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 1 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 1 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 2 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 2 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 3 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 3 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 4 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 4 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 5 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 5 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 6 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 6 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Limit 7 [Auto]
Turbo Ratio Cores 7 [Auto]
Core-1 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-1 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-1 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-1 Voltage [1.180]
Core-2 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-2 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-2 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-2 Voltage [1.175]
Core-3 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-3 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-3 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-3 Voltage [1.195]
Core-4 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-4 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-4 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-4 Voltage [1.188]
Core-5 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-5 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-5 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-5 Voltage [1.210]
Core-6 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-6 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-6 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-6 Voltage [1.200]
Core-7 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-7 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-7 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-7 Voltage [1.180]
Core-8 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-8 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-8 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-8 Voltage [1.188]
Core-9 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-9 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-9 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-9 Voltage [1.180]
Core-10 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-10 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-10 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-10 Voltage [1.180]
Core-11 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-11 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-11 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-11 Voltage [1.180]
*Core-12 Max Ratio [46]
CPU Core-12 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-12 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-12 Voltage [1.260]
Core-13 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-13 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-13 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-13 Voltage [1.185]
Core-14 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-14 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-14 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-14 Voltage [1.200]
*Core-15 Max Ratio [46]
CPU Core-15 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-15 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-15 Voltage [1.260]
Core-16 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-16 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-16 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-16 Voltage [1.200]
Core-17 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-17 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-17 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-17 Voltage [1.180]
Core-18 Max Ratio [45]
CPU Core-18 Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
Offset Mode Sign [+]
CPU Core-18 Voltage Offset [Auto]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core-18 Voltage [1.185]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHC [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHD [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank0 BL7 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM0 Rank1 BL7 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank0 BL7 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHC DIMM1 Rank1 BL7 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank0 BL7 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM0 Rank1 BL7 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank0 BL7 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL0 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL1 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL2 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL3 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL4 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL5 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL6 [Auto]
DRAM DATA REF Voltage on CHD DIMM1 Rank1 BL7 [Auto]

VIN Tracker [Auto]
Self-tracked Clocking [Auto]
PCIe Gen3 PLL Clock Control [Enabled]
PLL Post Divider Adjust [Auto]
Change PLLTRIM Prefix [+]
Change PllTrim Value [Auto]
Change MC-PLLTRIM Prefix [+]
Change MC-PllTrim Value [Auto]

Turbo Residence Tweak 0 [8]
Turbo Residence Tweak 1 [6]
Turbo Residence Tweak 2 [4]
Turbo Residence Tweak 3 [2]
Initial BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU BCLK Amplitude [Auto]
CPU BCLK Spread Spectrum [Auto]
CPU BCLK Frequency Slew Rate [Auto]
CPU BCLK Slew Rate [Auto]
PCIE/DMI Slew Rate [Auto]
CPU AUX1 Voltage [0.00000]
CPU AUX2 Voltage [0.00000]
CPU Input Reset Voltage [Auto]
VTTDDR Voltage(CHA, CHB) [Auto]
VTTDDR Voltage(CHC, CHD) [Auto]
VPPDDR Voltage (CHA, CHB) [Auto]
VPPDDR Voltage (CHC, CHD) [Auto]

DMI Voltage [Auto]
DRAM Eventual Voltage(CHA, CHB) [Auto]
DRAM Eventual Voltage(CHC, CHD) [Auto]
Eventual CPU Standby Voltage [Auto]
Eventual PLL Termination Voltage [Auto]
Eventual DMI Voltage [Auto]
Maximus Tweak [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [Auto]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Delay [Auto]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [Auto]
DRAM Command Rate [Auto]
DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay L [Auto]
DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay S [Auto]
DRAM REF Cycle Time [Auto]
DRAM Refresh Interval [Auto]
DRAM WRITE Recovery Time [Auto]
DRAM READ to PRE Time [Auto]
DRAM FOUR ACT WIN Time [Auto]
DRAM WRITE to READ Delay [Auto]
DRAM WRITE to READ Delay L [Auto]
DRAM WRITE to READ Delay S [Auto]
DRAM CKE Minimum Pulse Width [Auto]
DRAM Write Latency [Auto]
tRDRD_sg [Auto]
tRDRD_dg [Auto]
tRDWR_sg [Auto]
tRDWR_dg [Auto]
tWRWR_sg [Auto]
tWRWR_dg [Auto]
tWRRD_sg [Auto]
tWRRD_dg [Auto]
tRDRD_dr [Auto]
tRDRD_dd [Auto]
tRDWR_dr [Auto]
tRDWR_dd [Auto]
tWRWR_dr [Auto]
tWRWR_dd [Auto]
tWRRD_dr [Auto]
tWRRD_dd [Auto]
TWRPRE [Auto]
TRDPRE [Auto]
tREFIX9 [Auto]
OREF_RI [Auto]
MRC Fast Boot [Auto]
DRAM CLK Period [Auto]
Memory Scrambler [Enabled]
Channel C DIMM Control [Enable both DIMMs]
Channel D DIMM Control [Enable both DIMMs]
MCH Full Check [Auto]
DLLBwEn [Auto]
DRAM SPD Write [Disabled]
XTU Setting [Auto]

DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Delay [17]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [17]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [36]
DRAM Command Rate [Timing 1T]
DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay [4]
DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay L [6]
DRAM REF Cycle Time [374]
DRAM Refresh Interval [32767]
DRAM WRITE Recovery Time [12]
DRAM READ to PRE Time [4]
DRAM FOUR ACT WIN Time [16]
DRAM WRITE to READ Delay [6]
DRAM WRITE to READ Delay L [10]
DRAM CKE Minimum Pulse Width [6]
DRAM Write Latency [12]
tRRDR [0]
tRRDD [0]
tRWDR [7]
tRWDD [0]
tWRDR [0]
tWRDD [0]
tWWDR [2]
tWWDD [2]
tRWSR [14]
tCCD [0]
tCCD_L [Auto]
tCCDWR [0]
tCCDWR_L [Auto]
tRRDS [0]
tRWDS [8]
tWRDS [2]
tWWDS [3]
DRAM CLK Period [10]
Attempt Fast Boot [Auto]
Attempt Fast Cold Boot [Auto]
DRAM Training [Auto]
WR CRC feature Control [Auto]
Duty Cycle Training [Auto]
Read Vref Centering [Auto]
Eye Diagrams [Auto]
Turnaround Time Optimization [Auto]
PDA [Auto]
Write Vref Centering [Auto]
Enhanced Training(CHA) [Auto]
Enhanced Training(CHB) [Auto]
Enhanced Training(CHC) [Auto]
Enhanced Training(CHD) [Auto]
DRAM RTL INIT value [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC DIMM0 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC DIMM0 Rank1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC DIMM1 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC DIMM1 Rank1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD DIMM0 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD DIMM0 Rank1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD DIMM1 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD DIMM1 Rank1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC DIMM0 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC DIMM0 Rank1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC DIMM1 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC DIMM1 Rank1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD DIMM0 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD DIMM0 Rank1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD DIMM1 Rank0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD DIMM1 Rank1) [Auto]
CHC IO_Latency_offset [Auto]
CHD IO_Latency_offset [Auto]
CHC RFR delay [Auto]
CHD RFR delay [Auto]
DRAM RTL INIT value [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHA D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHA D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHA D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHA D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHB D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHB D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHB D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHB D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHC D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM RTL (CHD D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHA D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHA D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHA D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHA D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHB D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHB D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHB D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHB D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHC D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD D0 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD D0 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD D1 R0) [Auto]
DRAM IOL (CHD D1 R1) [Auto]
DRAM IO Comp (CHA) [Auto]
DRAM IO Comp (CHB) [Auto]
DRAM IO Comp (CHC) [Auto]
DRAM IO Comp (CHD) [Auto]
MC Vref(CHA) [Auto]
MC Vref(CHB) [Auto]
MC Vref(CHC) [Auto]
MC Vref(CHD) [Auto]
DRAM Vref(CHA) [Auto]
DRAM Vref(CHA) [Auto]
DRAM Vref(CHC) [Auto]
DRAM Vref(CHC) [Auto]
CTL Vref (CHA) [Auto]
CTL Verf (CHB) [Auto]
CTL Vref (CHC) [Auto]
CTL Verf (CHD) [Auto]
Receiver DQ Pre-emphasis [Auto]
Receiver DQ De-emphasis [Auto]
Transmitter DQ Pre-emphasis [Auto]
Transmitter DQ De-emphasis [Auto]
Receiver DQS Pre-emphasis [Auto]
Receiver DQS De-emphasis [Auto]
Transmitter DQS Pre-emphasis [Auto]
Transmitter DQS De-emphasis [Auto]
Receiver CMD Pre-emphasis [Auto]
Receiver CMD De-emphasis [Auto]
Transmitter CMD Pre-emphasis [Auto]
Transmitter CMD De-emphasis [Auto]
ODT RTT WR (CHC) [Auto]
ODT RTT PARK (CHC) [Auto]
ODT RTT NOM (CHC) [Auto]
ODT RTT WR (CHD) [Auto]
ODT RTT PARK (CHD) [Auto]
ODT RTT NOM (CHD) [Auto]
ODT_READ_DURATION [Auto]
ODT_READ_DELAY [Auto]
ODT_WRITE_DURATION [Auto]
ODT_WRITE_DELAY [Auto]
Data Rising Slope [Auto]
Data Rising Slope Offset [Auto]
Cmd Rising Slope [Auto]
Cmd Rising Slope Offset [Auto]
Ctl Rising Slope [Auto]
Ctl Rising Slope Offset [Auto]
Clk Rising Slope [Auto]
Clk Rising Slope Offset [Auto]
Data Falling Slope [Auto]
Data Falling Slope Offset [Auto]
Cmd Falling Slope [Auto]
Cmd Falling Slope Offset [Auto]
Ctl Falling Slope [Auto]
Ctl Falling Slope Offset [Auto]
Clk Falling Slope [Auto]
Clk Falling Slope Offset [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHA D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHA D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHB D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHB D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHC D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHC D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHD D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTWR(CHD D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHA D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHA D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHB D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHB D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHC D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHC D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHD D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTNOM(CHD D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHA D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHA D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHB D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHB D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHC D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHC D1) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHD D0) [Auto]
ODT RTTPARK(CHD D1) [Auto]
Data Rising Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
Data Rising Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
Data Rising Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
Data Rising Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
Cmd Rising Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
Cmd Rising Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
Cmd Rising Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
Cmd Rising Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
Ctl Rising Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
Ctl Rising Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
Ctl Rising Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
Ctl Rising Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
Data Falling Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
Data Falling Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
Data Falling Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
Data Falling Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
Cmd Falling Slope Falling Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
Cmd Falling Slope Falling Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
Cmd Falling Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
Cmd Falling Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
Ctl Falling Slope (CHAB) [Auto]
Ctl Falling Slope (CHCD) [Auto]
Ctl Falling Slope Offset (CHAB) [Auto]
Ctl Falling Slope Offset (CHCD) [Auto]
IMC Interleaving [Auto]
Channel Interleaving [Auto]
Rank Interleaving [Auto]

CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 5]
CPU Current Capability [200%]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
VRM Spread Spectrum [Disabled]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Optimized]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
DRAM Current Capability [140%]
DRAM Power Phase Control [Optimized]

DRAM Switching Frequency [Auto]
CPU Input Boot Voltage [Auto]
CPU System Agent Boot Voltage [Auto]
CPU VCCIO Boot Voltage [Auto]
Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology [Disabled]
Turbo Mode [Enabled]

Long Duration Package Power Limit [600]
Package Power Time Window [127]
Short Duration Package Power Limit [Auto]
CPU Integrated VR Current Limit [Auto]
CPU Integrated VR Fault Management [Disabled]
CPU Integrated VR Efficiency Management [Balanced]

Thermal Monitor [Enabled]
Active Processor Cores [All]
Intel Virtualization Technology [Disabled]
Hardware Prefetcher [Enabled]
Adjacent Cache Line Prefetch [Enabled]
Boot performance mode [Auto]
Tcc Offset Time Window [Auto]
SMM Code Access Check [Disabled]
SMM Use Delay Indication [Disabled]
SMM Use Block Indication [Disabled]
Intel(R) SpeedStep(tm) [Auto]
Turbo Mode [Enabled]
CPU C-states [Auto]
CFG Lock [Disabled]

Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology [Enabled]
Number of P states [0]
Acoustic Noise Mitigation [Disabled]
Disable Fast PKG C State Ramp for IA Domain [FALSE]
Slow Slew Rate for IA Domain [Fast/2]
Disable Fast PKG C State Ramp for GT Domain [FALSE]
Slow Slew Rate for GT Domain [Fast/2]
Disable Fast PKG C State Ramp for SA Domain [FALSE]
Slow Slew Rate for SA Domain [Fast/2]
Configurable TDP Boot Mode [Nominal]
Configurable TDP Lock [Disabled]
CTDP BIOS control [Disabled]
Power Limit 1 [0]
Power Limit 2 [0]
Power Limit 1 Time Window [0]
ConfigTDP Turbo Activation Ratio [0]
Power Limit 1 [0]
Power Limit 2 [0]
Power Limit 1 Time Window [0]
ConfigTDP Turbo Activation Ratio [0]
Power Limit 1 [0]
Power Limit 2 [0]
Power Limit 1 Time Window [0]
ConfigTDP Turbo Activation Ratio [0]
Overclocking Lock [Disabled]
Hyper-Threading [ALL] [Enabled]
Max CPUID Value Limit [Disabled]
Execute Disable Bit [Enabled]
Hardware Prefetcher [Enabled]
Adjacent Cache Prefetch [Enabled]
VMX [Enabled]
Boot performance mode [Max Performance]
Maximum CPU Core Temperature [Auto]
MSR Lock Control [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 0 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 1 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 2 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 3 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 4 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 5 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 6 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 7 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 8 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 9 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 10 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 11 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 12 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 13 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 14 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 15 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 16 [Enabled]
Active Processor Core 17 [Enabled]

Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology [Disabled]
Turbo Mode [Enabled]
Autonomous Core C-State [Enabled]
Enhanced Halt State (C1E) [Enabled]
CPU C6 report [Enabled]
Package C State [C0/C1 state]
Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology [Enabled]
MFC Mode Override [OS Native Support]

PCI Express Native Power Management [Disabled]
PCH DMI ASPM [Disabled]
ASPM [Disabled]
DMI Link ASPM Control [Disabled]
PEG - ASPM [Disabled]
PTID Support [Enabled]
PECI Access Method [Direct I/O]
PCI Express Native Power Management [Disabled]
BDAT ACPI Table Support [Disabled]
Low Power S0 Idle Capability [Disabled]
Lpit Recidency Counter [SLP S0]
PCI Delay Optimization [Disabled]
ZpODD Support [Disabled]
PEP CPU [Enabled]
PEP Graphics [Enabled]
PEP SATA [Storage Controller]
PEP UART [Enabled]
PEP I2C0 [Enabled]
PEP I2C1 [Enabled]
PEP I2C2 [Enabled]
PEP I2C3 [Enabled]
PEP I2C4 [Enabled]
PEP I2C5 [Enabled]
PEP SPI [Enabled]
PEP XHCI [Enabled]
PEP Audio [Enabled]
PEP EMMC [Enabled]
PEP SDXC [Enabled]
Intel® VT for Directed I/O (VT-d) [Enabled]
MCTP [Disabled]
ACS Control [Disabled]
Link Speed [Auto]
Link Speed [Auto]
Link Speed [Auto]
Link Speed [Auto]
Link Speed [Auto]
VDOC Profile requested [VDOC Profile 0]
Frequency divider ratio (Step size) [Step size -  100 KHz]
Number of steps [1000]
Number of steps [1000]
Number of steps [1000]
Number of steps [1000]
Frequency divider ratio (Step size) [Step size -  100 KHz]
Number of steps [1000]
Number of steps [1000]
Number of steps [1000]
Number of steps [1000]
VT-d [Disabled]
Primary Display [Auto]
RC6(Render Standby) [Enabled]
DVMT Pre-Allocated [32M]
DMI Max Link Speed [Auto]
PCIEX16_1 Link Speed [Auto]
PCIEX16_2 Link Speed [Auto]
PCIe Speed [Auto]
SATA Controller(s) [Enabled]
SATA Mode Selection [AHCI]
S.M.A.R.T. Status Check [Enabled]
Aggressive LPM Support [Disabled]
SATA6G_1 [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
SATA6G_2 [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
SATA6G_3 [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
SATA6G_4 [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]
Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
Spin Up Device [Disabled]
SATA Device Type [Hard Disk Drive]

Topology [Unknown]
DITO Configuration [Disabled]
DITO Value [625]
DM Value [15]
PCI Express Root Port 21 [Enabled]
Topology [Unknown]
ASPM [Auto]
L1 Substates [L1.1 & L1.2]
Gen3 Eq Phase3 Method [Software Search]
UPTP [5]
DPTP [7]
ACS [Enabled]
URR [Disabled]
FER [Disabled]
NFER [Disabled]
CER [Disabled]
CTO [Disabled]
SEFE [Disabled]
SENFE [Disabled]
SECE [Disabled]
PME SCI [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Advanced Error Reporting [Enabled]
PCIe Speed [Auto]
Transmitter Half Swing [Disabled]
Detect Timeout [0]
Extra Bus Reserved [0]
Reserved Memory [10]
Reserved I/O [4]
PCH PCIE21 LTR [Enabled]
Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Non Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Force LTR Override [Disabled]
PCIE21 LTR Lock [Disabled]
PCIE20 CLKREQ Mapping Override [Default]
PCI Express Root Port 22 [Enabled]
Topology [Unknown]
ASPM [Auto]
L1 Substates [L1.1 & L1.2]
Gen3 Eq Phase3 Method [Software Search]
UPTP [5]
DPTP [7]
ACS [Enabled]
URR [Disabled]
FER [Disabled]
NFER [Disabled]
CER [Disabled]
CTO [Disabled]
SEFE [Disabled]
SENFE [Disabled]
SECE [Disabled]
PME SCI [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Advanced Error Reporting [Enabled]
PCIe Speed [Auto]
Transmitter Half Swing [Disabled]
Detect Timeout [0]
Extra Bus Reserved [0]
Reserved Memory [10]
Reserved I/O [4]
PCH PCIE22 LTR [Enabled]
Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Non Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Force LTR Override [Disabled]
PCIE22 LTR Lock [Disabled]
PCIE20 CLKREQ Mapping Override [Default]
PCI Express Root Port 23 [Enabled]
Topology [Unknown]
ASPM [Auto]
L1 Substates [L1.1 & L1.2]
Gen3 Eq Phase3 Method [Software Search]
UPTP [5]
DPTP [7]
ACS [Enabled]
URR [Disabled]
FER [Disabled]
NFER [Disabled]
CER [Disabled]
CTO [Disabled]
SEFE [Disabled]
SENFE [Disabled]
SECE [Disabled]
PME SCI [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Advanced Error Reporting [Enabled]
PCIe Speed [Auto]
Transmitter Half Swing [Disabled]
Detect Timeout [0]
Extra Bus Reserved [0]
Reserved Memory [10]
Reserved I/O [4]
PCH PCIE23 LTR [Enabled]
Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Non Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Force LTR Override [Disabled]
PCIE23 LTR Lock [Disabled]
PCIE20 CLKREQ Mapping Override [Default]
PCI Express Root Port 24 [Enabled]
Topology [Unknown]
ASPM [Auto]
L1 Substates [L1.1 & L1.2]
Gen3 Eq Phase3 Method [Software Search]
UPTP [5]
DPTP [7]
ACS [Enabled]
URR [Disabled]
FER [Disabled]
NFER [Disabled]
CER [Disabled]
CTO [Disabled]
SEFE [Disabled]
SENFE [Disabled]
SECE [Disabled]
PME SCI [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Advanced Error Reporting [Enabled]
PCIe Speed [Auto]
Transmitter Half Swing [Disabled]
Detect Timeout [0]
Extra Bus Reserved [0]
Reserved Memory [10]
Reserved I/O [4]
PCH PCIE24 LTR [Enabled]
Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Non Snoop Latency Override [Auto]
Force LTR Override [Disabled]
PCIE24 LTR Lock [Disabled]
PCIE20 CLKREQ Mapping Override [Default]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
HDA-Link Codec Select [Platform Onboard]
iDisplay Audio Disconnect [Disabled]
PME Enable [Disabled]
SPI0 Controller [Disabled]
SPI1 Controller [Disabled]
UART0 Controller [Disabled]
UART1 Controller [Disabled]
UART2 Controller [for debug only]
GPIO Controller [Disabled]
Additional Serial IO devices [Disabled]
SerialIO timing parameters [Disabled]
I2C IO Voltage Select [3.3V]
Connected device [Disabled]
I2C IO Voltage Select [3.3V]
Connected device [Disabled]
I2C IO Voltage Select [1.8V]
I2C IO Voltage Select [1.8V]
I2C IO Voltage Select [3.3V]
I2C IO Voltage Select [3.3V]
ChipSelect polarity [Active High]
Finger Print Sensor [Disabled]
Bluetooth Device [Disabled]
Wireless Charging Mode [WC Disabled]
Hardware Flow Control [Enabled]
Hardware Flow Control [Enabled]
Hardware Flow Control [Enabled]
GPIO IRQ Route [IRQ14]
Select Camera [Ivcam]
Delay needed for Ivcam power on [0]
Delay needed for Ivcam power off [0]
Rotation [0]
DFU support [Disabled]
Wake support [Disabled]
Vcc Core voltage override enable [Disabled]
Vcc Core voltage [1300]
Vcc SA voltage override enable [Disabled]
Vcc SA voltage [1050]
Vcc SFR OC voltage override enable [Disabled]
Vcc SFR OC voltage [1200]
Vcc IO voltage override enable [Disabled]
Vcc IO voltage [950]
Vcc SFR voltage override enable [Disabled]
Vcc SFR voltage [1000]
Vcc ST SFR Vout voltage override enable [Disabled]
Vcc ST SFR Vout voltage [1000]
ASF support [Enabled]
USB Provisioning of AMT [Disabled]
Activate Remote Assistance Process [Disabled]
CIRA Timeout [0]
PET Progress [Enabled]

WatchDog [Disabled]
OS Timer [0]
BIOS Timer [0]
Secure Erase mode [Simulated]
Force Secure Erase [Disabled]
MEBx hotkey Pressed [Disabled]
MEBx Selection Screen [Disabled]
Hide Unconfigure ME Confirmation Prompt [Disabled]
MEBx OEM Debug Menu Enable [Disabled]
Unconfigure ME [Disabled]
Non-UI Mode Resolution [Auto]
UI Mode Resolution [Auto]
Graphics Mode Resolution [Auto]
Security Device Support [Enable]
Security Device Support [Enable]
Pending operation [None]
Platform Hierarchy [Enabled]
Storage Hierarchy [Enabled]
Endorsement Hierarchy [Enabled]
TPM2.0 UEFI Spec Version [TCG_2]
Physical Presence Spec Version [1.3]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Prefetchable Memory [10]

Q-Code LED Function [POST Code Only]
PCIEX16/X8_1 [Disabled]
PCIEX8_2 [Disabled]
PCIEX16/X8_3 [Disabled]
PCIEX8_4 and CPU_DIMM.2 [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
Q-Code Display [Enabled]
PCIEX8_4 bandwidth configuration [X4 Mode]
Asmedia Back 1A/1C USB 3.1 Gen2 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch [Auto]
Asmedia Front 1C USB 3.1 Gen2 Controller [Enabled]
ASMedia Storage Controller [Enabled]
ASPM Support [Disabled]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [Off]
Wi-Fi 802.11ac Controller [Enabled]
Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN PXE Option ROM [Disabled]
Detect Non-Compliance Device [Disabled]
Primary PEG [Auto]
Primary PCIE [Auto]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
USB Mass Storage Driver Support [Enabled]
USB Keyboard and Mouse Simulator [Disabled]
Generic Flash Disk 8.07 [Auto]
U31G2_EC1 [Enabled]
U31G2_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_E1 [Enabled]
U31G1_E2 [Enabled]
U31G1_E3 [Enabled]
U31G1_E4 [Enabled]
USB_10 [Enabled]
USB_11 [Enabled]
USB_12 [Enabled]
USB_13 [Enabled]
USB_14 [Enabled]
Hide Asus Logo [Disabled]
TPM Device Selection [dTPM]
PTP aware OS [PTP Aware]
Me FW Image Re-Flash [Disabled]
Local FW Update [Enabled]
HECI Timeouts [Enabled]
Force ME DID Init Status [Disabled]
Disable CPU Replaced Polling [Disabled]
ME DID Message [Enabled]
HECI Retry Disable [Disabled]
HECI Message check Disable [Disabled]
MBP HOB Skip [Disabled]
HECI2 Interface Communication [Disabled]
KT Device [Enabled]
IDER Device [Enabled]
End Of Post Message [Send in DXE]
D0I3 Setting for HECI Disable [Disabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
CPU_DIMM.2 Sensor 1 [Monitor]
CPU_DIMM.2 Sensor 2 [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
VRM Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
Water In T Sensor [Monitor]
Water Out T Sensor [Monitor]
PCH_DIMM.2 Sensor 1 [Monitor]
PCH_DIMM.2 Sensor 2 [Monitor]


Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E/PCI Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
PCH SATA Boot Only [Disabled]
USB Boot [Enabled]
Watchdog Support [Disabled]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
Load from Profile [1]
Profile Name [46per]
Save to Profile [1]
CPU Input Voltage [Auto]
CPU System Agent Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16/X8_1]


----------



## Wizzzard

Can someone with a 10980XE please post a picture showing your stock voltages at 4.8 GHz and temps non-AVX loads? Maybe after a CINEBENCH R20 run?

I'm curious what a typical default VID for these chips look like from the factory for 4.8 GHz vs what we've been setting the 79##X and 99##X chips to.


----------



## ThrashZone

Wizzzard said:


> Can someone with a 10980XE please post a picture showing your stock voltages at 4.8 GHz and temps non-AVX loads? Maybe after a CINEBENCH R20 run?
> 
> I'm curious what a typical default VID for these chips look like from the factory for 4.8 GHz vs what we've been setting the 79##X and 99##X chips to.


Hi,
Might drop a line here too Elmor might be around today
https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1737048-intel-core-i9-10980xe-5-ghz-18-cores.html


----------



## JustinThyme

toncij said:


> What is considered a good clock under room temperature water for 10980X?
> Can you run 5GHz all cores realistically without a chiller? Do you need an exceptional silicon lottery win to do it?


Dont think there are enough test samples out there yet. Had one guy posted up 5.8 but thats no doubt a chiller or LN2. 
The architecture didnt change much and I believe the microcode natively only boosts like 2 cores up to the higher frequency by default.


----------



## fireedo

toncij said:


> What is considered a good clock under room temperature water for 10980X?
> Can you run 5GHz all cores realistically without a chiller? Do you need an exceptional silicon lottery win to do it?


for me even using custom water cooling since my room temperature rather high (28-30c) my daily and stable OC for my 10980XE are like this :
2 [email protected] ; 6 [email protected] and the rest/all @4.7Ghz, I have passed Realbench, Cinebench20, 3DMark stress test, AIDA64 stability test, handbrake couple of video encoding with cpu package temperature reach max @ 95-100c ... LoL
I know it high temp but it works 

I can set all cores overclock at 4.7Ghz with 1.200v manual voltage setting and input voltage at 1.85v
I also can boot windows with all cores @ 4.8Ghz with 1.25v but crash when running Cinebench20

While gaming just running @ 60-70c


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> that +12V is via the ATX line afaik. Do you have a spare PSU? Is the PSU single rail?


Single rail, seasonic x-1050w but why so??? i cant see that reading on bios or my multimeter which says 12v..

yes i do have an spare psu. i will try that later as i got tired the last time taking my build apart multiple times (LIKE 10+) lol..


----------



## Wizzzard

Here's an interesting thing I learned that I've never seen on any forums...


OC'ing my 9960X,


VCCIN: 1.95 v

Mesh: +310 mv which results in ~1.2 v

Uncore: +300 mv

VCCIO: 1.15 v

With an all core of 4.6, and an AVX offset of 4, resulting in 4.2 GHz for AVX loads, a mesh of x32 isn't stable. No matter how many volts I throw at this config, RealBench 2.56 stress test fails.

What I was seeing is brief freezes and then the system would just reboot itself when stress testing.

However, an all core of 4.6 and an AVX offset of 6, resulting in 4.0 GHz for AVX loads, a mesh of x32 IS stable with modest voltages.

For my workloads, I'll keep the AVX offset resulting in 4.0 GHz for AVX loads and keep the mesh of x32.


----------



## ThrashZone

Wizzzard said:


> Here's an interesting thing I learned that I've never seen on any forums...
> 
> 
> OC'ing my 9960X,
> 
> 
> VCCIN: 1.95 v
> 
> Mesh: +310 mv which results in ~1.2 v
> 
> Uncore: +300 mv
> 
> VCCIO: 1.15 v
> 
> With an all core of 4.6, and an AVX offset of 4, resulting in 4.2 GHz for AVX loads, a mesh of x32 isn't stable. No matter how many volts I throw at this config, RealBench 2.56 stress test fails.
> 
> What I was seeing is brief freezes and then the system would just reboot itself when stress testing.
> 
> However, an all core of 4.6 and an AVX offset of 6, resulting in 4.0 GHz for AVX loads, a mesh of x32 IS stable with modest voltages.
> 
> For my workloads, I'll keep the AVX offset resulting in 4.0 GHz for AVX loads and keep the mesh of x32.


Hi,
4.5 should be doable without any avx offset at all 
32 well that is a crap shoot think manual at below 1.2v should do it on some benchmarks but never really hard stable 
Otherwise 30 max cache at auto voltage.

I se you have the prime deluxe 
I returned mine it's not a great board think your mark 1 is better I know my mark 2 was better.
Now I'm on apex.


----------



## Wizzzard

My 9960X is on a ASUS Prime x299 Edition 30. I really like the board. The active VRM cooling is really good.

4.5 AVX is too hot in a stress test. Might be ok for typical loads.


----------



## ThrashZone

Wizzzard said:


> My 9960X is on a ASUS Prime x299 Edition 30. I really like the board. The active VRM cooling is really good.
> 
> 4.5 AVX is too hot in a stress test. Might be ok for typical loads.


Hi,
Okay 30 better choice

Not P95 but blender open data is a good test short and long test and is a good one for real work loads it's my p95 substitute 
9940x short test under 9 minutes
Long test under 32 minutes.

https://opendata.blender.org/


----------



## JustinThyme

X32 on the mesh is pushing it I run mine at x30 and leave it as more voltage means higher packages temps with no return for it. 4.6 is my AVX offset with 4.5 my AVX 512 with all cores set to 4.8

You also have to consider the silicon lottery. may be thats your ceiling. 4.6 isnt horrible, seen some that cant pass 4.4. Whats the rest of your rig and whats the temps doing? Looks like all the X299 MOBOs are not much different other than cosmetics since the Omega.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Been tinkering around today to dial back in a daily OC on my 7960x and it looks like there was a good reason I had it at 4.7ghz all core before... can't get it stable at room temperature any higher than that. I tried tweaking a bunch for 4.8ghz but it just couldn't maintain it. Outdoors in sub-freezing ambient I can get it to pass 3dmark runs at 5.2ghz on ~ 1.4v but at room temperature it was flaky on 4.8 at any voltage, passed a single Cinebench R15 run on 1.325v but just wasn't happy. 

After that I gave in and dropped it back to 4.7 all core on 1.245v, cache also on 1.26v at 30x (wasn't happy at 31, wouldn't finish loading Windows at 32). VCCIN 1.900v 

XMP is on for this Gskill 3200mhz CL14, just running the stock XMP profile.

Ran a few back-to-back benchmarks then decided to go for some real-world gaming testing. Played Star Wars: Jedi Fallen Order for about 6 hours, between the benchmarks and gaming, hottest any core reached was 68 C, and that's in a room that heated up to 24.2 C while myself and my buddy were in here gaming all evening (he was using the 9900ks + Kingpin 2080 Ti rig).
After about 30 mins at the beginning, with the cache voltage at 1.25v it did that hard freeze I mentioned a few weeks ago after updating the BIOS and forgetting to save my OC settings prior, so I bumped up cache voltage to 1.26v and the remaining ~ 6 hours of Jedi action were without incident.

Is there anything else I may want to tweak?

Overall pretty happy with this, especially considering it's only a 14nm+, not ++++++


----------



## zGunBLADEz

My 7940x do 31x mesh with 1.105mV. I hope this 7980xe i got dont dissapoint.

I also have input at 1.78mV no vdroop with no phantom throttling on the micro2 evga .

I think my 7940x have a pci ex signaling problem in just that slot ... i put the 7980xe and the slot went 16x on the first boot not a biggie for single gpu usage but sli will suck ... i will look later at the top of the pcb an check those caps again close up. Its the only issue the cpu has . everything else works fine even that slot at 4x it just dont do 16x. The 7980xe do 32x mesh with less than 1.100mV @[email protected] im testing slowly at 45x @ 1.15mV with -1 avx and then i go from there droping the voltages.. So far 1.78mV input, 1.15mV vcore... vccio auto and vsa too ram is at 4000mhz same tweaked ram settings as before. I need to redelid have 2 particular cores giving me headaches lol. The previous owner put loctite.... i prefer having the lid loose once delidded. The 7940x Probably will do better on another atx mobo instead. Where the pci ex signaling is different.


----------



## arrow0309

Hi, according to this new "Inside Intel's Secret Overclocking Lab" speaking of a "safe voltage" for our Skylake-X cpus:

https://www.tomshardware.com/features/inside-intels-secret-overclocking-lab/7

"For Skylake-X, the team says they run their personal machines anywhere from 1.4V to 1.425V if they can keep it cool enough, with the latter portion of the statement being strongly emphasized."

You agree to it?
I have a poisonous desire to push mine to its limits or a little less


----------



## Jpmboy

arrow0309 said:


> Hi, according to this new "Inside Intel's Secret Overclocking Lab" speaking of a "safe voltage" for our Skylake-X cpus:
> 
> https://www.tomshardware.com/features/inside-intels-secret-overclocking-lab/7
> 
> "For Skylake-X, the team says they run their personal machines anywhere from 1.4V to 1.425V if they can keep it cool enough, with the latter portion of the statement being strongly emphasized."
> 
> You agree to it?
> I have a poisonous desire to push mine to its limits or a little less


AS the article points out, it not simply voltage alone... it the current draw and peak/sustained temps. Knowing that, what's the risk... buy the intel tuning plan. :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Well if I had a skylake-x/ cascade-x/.. chip tree at work I'd be punishing them too but as it is I have to buy the darn things without any chance of a employee discount or five finger discount


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Well if I had a skylake-x/ cascade-x/.. chip tree at work I'd be punishing them too but as it is I have to buy the darn things without any chance of a employee discount or five finger discount /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


I find funny too. Its like watching linus e-peen everytime he has a chance with all that free hardware and the still lack of knowledge behind, anthony been throwing the blankies lately 😕.


----------



## Jpmboy

arrow0309 said:


> Hi, according to this new "Inside Intel's Secret Overclocking Lab" speaking of a "safe voltage" for our Skylake-X cpus:
> 
> https://www.tomshardware.com/features/inside-intels-secret-overclocking-lab/7
> 
> "For Skylake-X, the team says they run their personal machines anywhere from 1.4V to 1.425V if they can keep it cool enough, with the latter portion of the statement being strongly emphasized."
> 
> You agree to it?
> I have a poisonous desire to push mine to its limits or a little less


what is ironic about this INtel Lab article is how they recommend using adaptive voltage control, but yet end up programming in stupidly high VIDs thus making adaptive useless for many SKUs out of their shop. Forest and Trees issue it seems.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah like beating the hell out of 2-4 cores or something when there is 18 of them and 16-14 wasted.

What is it a Quad or Dual 18 core


----------



## arrow0309

I only have 10c lol and using adaptive even if they're all running at the same freq (not happy of their different vids though).
And still would like to keep it the same way even with bumped vcores, I'd like to try 4c at 5ghz and all at cores at 4.8.
Cause I still have to beat the hell out of them


----------



## sblantipodi

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Still got 1 lonely 3960x sitting at micro center Houston 1400.us no takers for almost 1 week.


pretty glad that no one buys it.
1400€ for a desktop CPU is simply stupid if not for some really nichy use cases.

hope that they will stop with this madness but I doubt now that we have 1 grand mainstream CPU.


----------



## ThrashZone

sblantipodi said:


> pretty glad that no one buys it.
> 1400€ for a desktop CPU is simply stupid if not for some really nichy use cases.
> 
> hope that they will stop with this madness but I doubt now that we have 1 grand mainstream CPU.


Hi,
That lonely 3960x found a home shortly after posting that 
Micro center hasn't gotten any others though 

They have moved 4 3950x in one day plus another 4 in one day a or two later too so I think they were testing the waters with both
Or amd shipping out to retailers so pretty limited and slow.

Still no 10 series so maybe mid Feb is right.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> arrow0309 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi, according to this new "Inside Intel's Secret Overclocking Lab" speaking of a "safe voltage" for our Skylake-X cpus:
> 
> https://www.tomshardware.com/features/inside-intels-secret-overclocking-lab/7
> 
> "For Skylake-X, the team says they run their personal machines anywhere from 1.4V to 1.425V if they can keep it cool enough, with the latter portion of the statement being strongly emphasized."
> 
> You agree to it?
> I have a poisonous desire to push mine to its limits or a little less /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif
> 
> 
> 
> what is ironic about this INtel Lab article is how they recommend using adaptive voltage control, but yet end up programming in stupidly high VIDs thus making adaptive useless for many SKUs out of their shop. Forest and Trees issue it seems.
Click to expand...

Did you try using a high vid with a high negative offset? this to aim an specific voltage when using adaptive..

Thats what works for me wonders in my 7940x and 7980xe now.

Thing is if you use a high avx offset it will look like is way too much vid discrepancy. For example in my 7980xe my input in adaptive is 1.260mV with and offset of -075mV this will do around 1.180mV tops for voltage... if i use avx -2 or -3 the vids will be all over the place even to low.... some if not all cores will hit 1.180mV some others will hit for a brief moment but settle a bit lower... But if the avx is like minus 2-3 the vids uffff horrible.... I try to domino them as close as possible lowering the avx as close to the main multi instead of raising it. Aim for your desired avx multi the lower the better. 1.4+v is very doable on exotic cooling with a good - offset that should fix the vid discrepancy for adaptive usage and some power savings.

This is my 7980XE @ 46X with -1 AVX offset for 45x with less than 1.18mV on all cores using adaptive xD

Now i need to recrack him open as i have a core like 20c higher is driving me crazy but wanted to test him first before hand doing that to reapply lm myself


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> Did you try using a high vid with a high negative offset? this to aim an specific voltage when using adaptive..
> 
> Thats what works for me wonders in my 7940x and 7980xe now.
> 
> Thing is if you use a high avx offset it will look like is way too much vid discrepancy. For example in my 7980xe my input in adaptive is 1.260mV with and offset of -075mV this will do around 1.180mV tops for voltage... if i use avx -2 or -3 the vids will be all over the place even to low.... some if not all cores will hit 1.180mV some others will hit for a brief moment but settle a bit lower... But if the avx is like minus 2-3 the vids uffff horrible.... I try to domino them as close as possible lowering the avx as close to the main multi instead of raising it. Aim for your desired avx multi the lower the better. 1.4+v is very doable on exotic cooling with a good - offset that should fix the vid discrepancy for adaptive usage and some power savings.
> 
> This is my 7980XE @ 46X with -1 AVX offset for 45x with less than 1.18mV on all cores using adaptive xD
> 
> Now i need to recrack him open as i have a core like 20c higher is driving me crazy but wanted to test him first before hand doing that to reapply lm myself


My 7980XE's VID stack is not high at all, and no neg offset is needed - it's been running adaptive since launch (well, except for a few "sporting excursions"  ) . This 10980XE is asking for 1.45V for 4.8GHz, when only 1.275V is needed. IDK, we're talking about a -175mV offset. I could try it, but I'm sure light/low load operations will suffer. will see what happens.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> My 7980XE's VID stack is not high at all, and no neg offset is needed - it's been running adaptive since launch (well, except for a few "sporting excursions"  ) . This 10980XE is asking for 1.45V for 4.8GHz, when only 1.275V is needed. IDK, we're talking about a -175mV offset. I could try it, but I'm sure light/low load operations will suffer. will see what happens.


Hi,
Yeah offset or adaptive just shows how really far apart vids are 
For me the higher the clock those high differences just caused instability 

So I just use manual core voltage.
Leave adaptive for low clocks where is doesn't matter.


----------



## Jpmboy

So on my Omega. Bios 0802. VCCIN @ 1.78V, LLC 5 (droops to 1.68-ish)
I'm just using the CPUZ stress test to scope this out. (I do not use p95 on HCC CPUs)
At 4.7GHz Manual Override at 1.2V is stable to all my stress tests Hot core hits 68C in cpuz
At 4.6GHz Auto settings (should be VID) pumps 1.289V hot core hits 74C
at 4.7GHz Auto settings pump 1.367V (hot core hits 84C)
I tried a -165mV offset - fails to boot.
Every time I've tried to compensate for overly high VIDs with negative offset - I get the same result. Maybe down at 4.0GHz the VID aligns with the vcore, but I'm not running this chip that low.
Ended it there. We need control of the VR slope on x299 or what ever would give use control over the SVID (AC and DC loadlines maybe?) (negative adaptive voltage?)
Will stick with manual override for now.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> So on my Omega. Bios 0802. VCCIN @ 1.78V, LLC 5 (droops to 1.68-ish)
> I'm just using the CPUZ stress test to scope this out. (I do not use p95 on HCC CPUs)
> At 4.7GHz Manual Override at 1.2V is stable to all my stress tests Hot core hits 68C in cpuz
> At 4.6GHz Auto settings (should be VID) pumps 1.289V hot core hits 74C
> at 4.7GHz Auto settings pump 1.367V (hot core hits 84C)
> I tried a -165mV offset - fails to boot.
> Every time I've tried to compensate for overly high VIDs with negative offset - I get the same result. Maybe down at 4.0GHz the VID aligns with the vcore, but I'm not running this chip that low.
> Ended it there. We need control of the VR slope on x299 or what ever would give use control over the SVID (AC and DC loadlines maybe?) *(negative adaptive voltage?)*
> Will stick with manual override for now.


Hi,
lol used that for a long time on 79 series 

Only bad thing is on cold start might get a failed oc message F1....
Nothing bad just leaving on... believe someone used to say offset instead of adaptive works best.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

In my case my vcore hits 1.18mv when using the regular multi and with avx load using the avx divider it will pop the desired vid if it hits 1.18mV on the switch from 46x to avx divider and crash i raise vcore more till it stop asking for the top vcore cap it has to settle below that max voltage. If i desired 1.2mv i will try adaptive 1.3mV with an -100mV and observe the vids on avx loads and push the avx the highest i can... the main multi its just a bonus after that it can be 1-2x over avx divider.... I notice the heat "of course", the cache if you touching it and the adaptive voltage with a drastic "discrepancies" with low vids on the switching from regular multi to avx load which is not enough voltage for the avx load making the whole system unstable and using static voltage in this system is brute forcing it it works but you know how it goes.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

For some reason the crashing just continues. I'm trying with higher RAM, cpu cache, VCCIN, CPU input, and SA voltages but so far none of them make a difference. This is super sticky to figure out because all I am sure of is that it doesn't happen if the RAM is running at base DDR4 2133 stock settings.

3200mhz RAM isn't even that fast, and no issues whatsoever for the last 1.5-2 ish years that I've been using it at it's rated 3200mhz speed, literally until I updated the BIOS and redid the LM on the cpu for maintenance a month or so ago.

Am I just going crazy?


----------



## D-EJ915

Kalm_Traveler said:


> For some reason the crashing just continues. I'm trying with higher RAM, cpu cache, VCCIN, CPU input, and SA voltages but so far none of them make a difference. This is super sticky to figure out because all I am sure of is that it doesn't happen if the RAM is running at base DDR4 2133 stock settings.
> 
> 3200mhz RAM isn't even that fast, and no issues whatsoever for the last 1.5-2 ish years that I've been using it at it's rated 3200mhz speed, literally until I updated the BIOS and redid the LM on the cpu for maintenance a month or so ago.
> 
> Am I just going crazy?


Have you tried reverting your BIOS? Sometimes BIOS update can have weird effects.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

D-EJ915 said:


> Have you tried reverting your BIOS? Sometimes BIOS update can have weird effects.


That's a good point, honestly hadn't even considered that the new BIOS could be the real cause of this. Going to try the older 1902 BIOS from 2019 July and see if the issue clears up.

If it doesn't, I may just try to run a few monitoring programs and disable screen power save so I can at least see what is happening at the freeze point since everything on screen will get stuck.


----------



## ThrashZone

Kalm_Traveler said:


> That's a good point, honestly hadn't even considered that the new BIOS could be the real cause of this. Going to try the older 1902 BIOS from 2019 July and see if the issue clears up.
> 
> If it doesn't, I may just try to run a few monitoring programs and disable screen power save so I can at least see what is happening at the freeze point since everything on screen will get stuck.


Hi,
Yeah if you don't have a 10 or 99 series go way back in bios
1704 at least or was the last sort of okay bios for 99 series.
1902 was just okay and had issues with memory newer just got worse.

Frankly for 79 series 1503 or what ever it was is best before 99 series compatibility was added.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah if you don't have a 10 or 99 series go way back in bios
> 1704 at least or was the last sort of okay bios for 99 series.
> 1902 was just okay and had issues with memory newer just got worse.
> 
> Frankly for 79 series 1503 or what ever it was is best before 99 series compatibility was added.


Looking at the downloads page they have:

2002 (what I'm on now and what has been mystery locking up) from 2019/10/04
1902 (I never used this) from 2019/07/19
1704 (never used) from 2019/02/21
1503 (might have used but I don't have the download so probably not) from 2018/09/07

Funny thing is, looking in my downloads for the R6E it would appear I was actually running BIOS 1603 which has a download date of 2018/12/04 but does not exist on their website at least anymore. Going farther down the list I don't see any notes of adding the 9000 series support.

Little curious why they would have removed 1603 since I was definitely running that for a year with zero issues. Would you say just flash back to that one since I know it was working properly for me?


----------



## ThrashZone

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Looking at the downloads page they have:
> 
> 2002 (what I'm on now and what has been mystery locking up) from 2019/10/04
> 1902 (I never used this) from 2019/07/19
> 1704 (never used) from 2019/02/21
> 1503 (might have used but I don't have the download so probably not) from 2018/09/07
> 
> Funny thing is, looking in my downloads for the R6E it would appear I was actually running BIOS 1603 which has a download date of 2018/12/04 but does not exist on their website at least anymore. Going farther down the list I don't see any notes of adding the 9000 series support.
> 
> Little curious why they would have removed 1603 since I was definitely running that for a year with zero issues. Would you say just flash back to that one since I know it was working properly for me?


Hi,
Yeah asus pulled bios 1503 from my apex too 

Either way 1704 is probably best 
I have 1903 on bios 2 but stopped using it no real reason just switched back to 1704 bios perk of having dual bios but on 99 series it's the minimum bios I can use since again asus pulled 15 or 1400 bios :/


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah asus pulled bios 1503 from my apex too
> 
> Either way 1704 is probably best
> I have 1903 on bios 2 but stopped using it no real reason just switched back to 1704 bios perk of having dual bios but on 99 series it's the minimum bios I can use since again asus pulled 15 or 1400 bios :/


ahh I googled a bit and it looks like right around that time Asus had a TDP bug in those BIOS versions which is why they pulled them. 

I made one small change this morning (added a + .400 offset to Uncore voltage after reading some more x299 OC stuff, something I've never adjusted in the past mind you) and have been letting the rig just sit idle to see if it still freezes up. If (let's be honest, WHEN) it freezes again I'll drop back to 1704 and say a prayer to the hardware gods.

Standby


----------



## ThrashZone

Kalm_Traveler said:


> ahh I googled a bit and it looks like right around that time Asus had a TDP bug in those BIOS versions which is why they pulled them.
> 
> I made one small change this morning (added a + .400 offset to Uncore voltage after reading some more x299 OC stuff, something I've never adjusted in the past mind you) and have been letting the rig just sit idle to see if it still freezes up. If (let's be honest, WHEN) it freezes again I'll drop back to 1704 and say a prayer to the hardware gods.
> 
> Standby


Hi,
You haven't said anything about cache oc 
30 and auto should work or drop down to 27 and auto.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> You haven't said anything about cache oc
> 30 and auto should work or drop down to 27 and auto.


Cache ratio is at 30, I've tried voltages between 1.15 and 1.30. Right now it's at 1.25v

The really interesting thing about this freezing is that I can't cause it to happen. It takes some random amount of time, so far between almost immediately after booting into Windows up to over 12 hours of heavy use and gaming all day.


----------



## ThrashZone

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Cache ratio is at 30, I've tried voltages between 1.15 and 1.30. Right now it's at 1.25v
> 
> The really interesting thing about this freezing is that I can't cause it to happen. It takes some random amount of time, so far between almost immediately after booting into Windows up to over 12 hours of heavy use and gaming all day.


Hi,
Think 1.2 is the max limit I've read you shouldn't even need that much for 30.
Here's a shot from Jp's oc of 30 cache


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Think 1.2 is the max limit I've read you shouldn't even need that much for 30.


ahh I meant 1.245, if I raise it to 1.250 the color changes from yellow to that pink/purple.

on Auto IIRC it was pumping the cache above 1.30


----------



## ThrashZone

Kalm_Traveler said:


> ahh I meant 1.245, if I raise it to 1.250 the color changes from yellow to that pink/purple.
> 
> on Auto IIRC it was pumping the cache above 1.30


Hi,
Probably barbecued the chip pumping that much voltage in cache this isn't Kabylake


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Probably barbecued the chip pumping that much voltage in cache this isn't Kabylake


ooh I just meant recently with this new BIOS.

Honestly I have no idea what 1603 was doing - i never messed with the cache until now... kept meaning to dial in max daily OC and never made the time to do it until last month (hence the BIOS update in the first place).

Keep in mind if I drop the RAM back to stock 2133, no freezing happens at all (I left it on for 3 days and used it as normal during that time, no strange behavior at all).


----------



## ThrashZone

Kalm_Traveler said:


> ooh I just meant recently with this new BIOS.
> 
> Honestly I have no idea what 1603 was doing - i never messed with the cache until now... kept meaning to dial in max daily OC and never made the time to do it until last month (hence the BIOS update in the first place).
> 
> Keep in mind if I drop the RAM back to stock 2133, no freezing happens at all (I left it on for 3 days and used it as normal during that time, no strange behavior at all).


Hi,
Well memory oc'ing using xmp has seen some shots 
Plenty of reports on ROG forum and plenty of visitors to ocn 24/7 oc stability thread me included asking for help on timings to help that.
Pick a number 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread.html


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Well memory oc'ing using xmp has seen some shots
> Plenty of reports on ROG forum and plenty of visitors to ocn 24/7 oc stability thread me included asking for help on timings to help that.
> Pick a number
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread.html


haha yep so I am hearing. 

Until this BIOS update and it's accompanying OC fiddling, I'd been on BIOS 1603 since December 2018 and as far as I remember all I had done back then was enable the XMP profile, set CPU ratio to sync all cores 47 and set the core voltage to adaptive around 1.25 ish. I definitely did not adjust everything as I have now. It never did this freezing nonsense until after the 2002 BIOS update for sure.


----------



## ThrashZone

Kalm_Traveler said:


> haha yep so I am hearing.
> 
> Until this BIOS update and it's accompanying OC fiddling, I'd been on BIOS 1603 since December 2018 and as far as I remember all I had done back then was enable the XMP profile, set CPU ratio to sync all cores 47 and set the core voltage to adaptive around 1.25 ish. I definitely did not adjust everything as I have now. It never did this freezing nonsense until after the 2002 BIOS update for sure.


Hi,
I had the memory issues starting with 1704 for 9940x so only good bios was pulled 1503 I believe but can't use it on a 9940x but there was a first release bios for 99 series 160? which it was pulled too ROG forum has a concoction of it

150? still exists for asus tuf mark 2 and prime deluxe just not for apex though 

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/TUF-X299-MARK-2/HelpDesk_Download/


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I had the memory issues starting with 1704 for 9940x so only good bios was pulled 1503 I believe but can't use it on a 9940x but there was a first release bios for 99 series 160? which it was pulled too ROG forum has a concoction of it
> 
> 150? still exists for asus tuf mark 2 and prime deluxe just not for apex though
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/TUF-X299-MARK-2/HelpDesk_Download/


Do you think adding the +.400 Uncore offset could have fixed it? This thing's been running all day so far (I want to say for about 8 hours as of this post) and hasn't frozen yet. The reason I added that is I read that sometimes a small Uncore boost like that can help with memory stability.


----------



## ThrashZone

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Do you think adding the +.400 Uncore offset could have fixed it? This thing's been running all day so far (I want to say for about 8 hours as of this post) and hasn't frozen yet. The reason I added that is I read that sometimes a small Uncore boost like that can help with memory stability.


Hi,
Switch to the bios settings I uploaded and see if those work too.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Switch to the bios settings I uploaded and see if those work too.


will do as soon as it crashes again... just passed 12 hours and the dang thing is still running this time (after adding a + 0.400 Uncore offset this morning).

I had MediaMonkey playing through my FLAC collection all day to add some load. Going to try gaming now. I probably ought to research what Uncore is now that this might actually have fixed things.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
yeah you've already put way too much voltage through cache/ uncore so no telling.
But once again 1.2v is max.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> yeah you've already put way too much voltage through cache/ uncore so no telling.
> But once again 1.2v is max.


ah I was doing some googling and it finally froze again . There's an x299 Supermicro OC guide and they recommend 1.2 to 1.25v for the cache ratio of 30 to 32.

Anywho, trying to flash back to an older BIOS and the utility keeps telling me that all the older versions are 'not a proper BIOS'. 

Seems I am stuck on 2002.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Usually like system freezes without bsod are related to ram/cache i find quite high 1.2mV for just 30x .. Can also happen on adaptive when it goes to idle and the offset is to low.

My 7820/7940 and 7980xe do 30x with like 1.05-1.10mV with ram tweaked and overclocked..

About the bios flashback yeah the "no proper bios" its known in some mobos.. Probably bcuz of the microcode for Intel. Also this microcodes can enter new stability issues..

Looks like ur issues are in the cache/ram area what you dial on the ram?

Put ram voltage to 1.45mV test that just for the sake of it. Then you see if the system behaves. Lower the cache voltage to 1.105mV @ 30x also some boards tie that with an offset so it would be like 1.105mV + another setting like in my asrock board, so watch for that aswell.


----------



## JustinThyme

Kalm_Traveler said:


> ah I was doing some googling and it finally froze again . There's an x299 Supermicro OC guide and they recommend 1.2 to 1.25v for the cache ratio of 30 to 32.
> 
> Anywho, trying to flash back to an older BIOS and the utility keeps telling me that all the older versions are 'not a proper BIOS'.
> 
> Seems I am stuck on 2002.


What board are you running? With My RVIE I can flash anywhere I want to go. Put whatever BIOS you want on USB (formatted fat32 with nothing on it but the BIOS file) rename to R6E.CAP, put it in the USB labeled BIOS and push and hold the BIOS flashback button until it starts flashing. Machine powered down of course, Dont even need components installed. I updated the first time with no CPU, no ram and no GPU. Light flashes, takes a minute or two and once its done flashing its over. I tried 2002 and flipped it back to 1603.

May be different if you are doing it through the BIOS.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

JustinThyme said:


> Kalm_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> 
> ah I was doing some googling and it finally froze again . There's an x299 Supermicro OC guide and they recommend 1.2 to 1.25v for the cache ratio of 30 to 32.
> 
> Anywho, trying to flash back to an older BIOS and the utility keeps telling me that all the older versions are 'not a proper BIOS'.
> 
> Seems I am stuck on 2002.
> 
> 
> 
> What board are you running? With My RVIE I can flash anywhere I want to go. Put whatever BIOS you want on USB (formatted fat32 with nothing on it but the BIOS file) rename to R6E.CAP, put it in the USB labeled BIOS and push and hold the BIOS flashback button until it starts flashing. Machine powered down of course, Dont even need components installed. I updated the first time with no CPU, no ram and no GPU. Light flashes, takes a minute or two and once its done flashing its over. I tried 2002 and flipped it back to 1603.
> 
> May be different if you are doing it through the BIOS.
Click to expand...

Rampage VI Extreme, and I think you're right the BIOS flashback might work. 

Last night after that last crash I reset BIOS to optimized defaults and tried setting things up again from scratch. Played games for a couple hours and left the machine running over night - still running when I left for work this morning. 

RAM is 4x 16gb Gskill 3200mhz CL14, I'm running its stock xmp profile so 1.35v (bios and siv64x report it pulling 1.36v)

If it hasn't frozen by the time I'm home tonight I think it'll be OK, but not sure what would have caused the freezing previously. 

Changes I made from defaults last night:
Set oc to xmp profile
Disabled svid
Set cpu to sync all cores
Core voltage adaptive, auto, additional turbo voltage 1.245v
Cache ratio auto, 30
Cache voltage adaptive, auto, additional turbo voltage 1.170v
Uncore offset + .400v
Extreme tweaking enabled
Cpu input voltage 2.1v
System agent voltage 1.15v
Vccio 1.10v

Under cpu power management:
LLC5
Power phase control to extreme
Cpu current capability 140%
Long duration power limit max
Package power time window max
Short duration power limit max


I think that's everything


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

hah well it froze up again at 10:15 this morning apparently. Can't see anything odd about the numbers here in SIV64x either. 

Is it conceivable that something could just be bad with the memory controller on the CPU or 1/2/3/4 of my RAM DIMMS?


----------



## Wizzzard

That screenshot is so hard to read.

I'm going toassume this is your 7960 rig.

If you want to push 5.0 GHz, you're going to need upwards of 1.35 V. Your screenshot shows ~1.25 V.


----------



## Jpmboy

Kalm_Traveler said:


> hah well it froze up again at 10:15 this morning apparently. Can't see anything odd about the numbers here in SIV64x either.
> 
> Is it conceivable that something could just be bad with the memory controller on the CPU or *1/2/3/4 of my RAM DIMMS*?


It's possible, but if the ram was failing, the POST process will too (eventually). If you are running XMP, be sure to bump the Vcache accordingly. remember, the min cache multiplier should not be lower than the ran frequency (eg, for 3000 ram speed - 1500 frequency - the min cache multi is 15 (x100). Bios auto rules know this.
Do not use adaptive cache, use manual override for cache voltage.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Wizzzard said:


> That screenshot is so hard to read.
> 
> I'm going toassume this is your 7960 rig.
> 
> If you want to push 5.0 GHz, you're going to need upwards of 1.35 V. Your screenshot shows ~1.25 V.


hmm it's pretty clear on my screen...

Anyway, not trying to push 5 ghz at all. OC is dialed to 4.7ghz on 1.245v in BIOS. Ever since I updated the BIOS to 2002 and approximately at the same time pulled the CPU to redo the liquid metal the thing randomly freezes anywhere from 1-2 mins after bootup to over 12 hours later of heavy use. Hard freeze, no rebooting - just wherever it was it stays there (screen freeze, infinite audio blitz, etc).

This only happens with XMP enabled, and only started happening after the aforementioned BIOS update and LM refresh.

I'm going to try the BIOS Flashback now to roll back to 1704 and see if that somehow does the trick but if it continues with the older BIOS it's looking like it may just be something wrong with the CPU / MB / RAM. 

was going to opt for a 10980xe + Rampage VI Extreme Omega motherboard and some 3600mhz CL16 RAM to replace everything but I can't find a 10980xe anywhere and since the whole point of this rig is absolute pointless overkill I might just pick up a Threadripper 3970x since they're actually in stock and 32 threads sounds like fun. Dumb as it sounds, the only hesitation I have is that this 7960x has been doing 4.7ghz all core just fine for 2 years, and I don't think I can get a 3970x to do 4.7 all core so although it will destroy in multi-threaded workloads... gaming performance would likely be a bit lower (than the 7960x @ 4.7ghz I mean)


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Jpmboy said:


> It's possible, but if the ram was failing, the POST process will too (eventually). If you are running XMP, be sure to bump the Vcache accordingly. remember, the min cache multiplier should not be lower than the ran frequency (eg, for 3000 ram speed - 1500 frequency - the min cache multi is 15 (x100). Bios auto rules know this.
> Do not use adaptive cache, use manual override for cache voltage.


heeey buddy! thanks - yeah right now I have the cache minimum on Auto and max on 30, voltage was 1.17 overnight, I just bumped it up to 1.25 but it's been on adaptive so I can try manual. Standby.

Also if you find a legit 10980xe let me know. If I can't get this thing to settle down this week I'm upgrading to something that will stop crashing. Having to use the gaming PC, laptop, or HTPC to do my homework at night has been sketchy.


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah, once you change to manual cache voltage, I'm betting (hoping?) the freezes stop.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, once you change to manual cache voltage, I'm betting (hoping?) the freezes stop.


Many thanks 

Reverted back to BIOS 1704 as well (again I was actually on the flawed-and-deleted 1603 until this recent update to 2002, with no crashing), set everything back as listed previously with the exception of making the cache voltage static at 1.17v

I'll give it one last chance tonight but so help me, if it still won't behave, Kalm will be platform swapping on Friday.


----------



## JustinThyme

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Many thanks
> 
> Reverted back to BIOS 1704 as well (again I was actually on the flawed-and-deleted 1603 until this recent update to 2002, with no crashing), set everything back as listed previously with the exception of making the cache voltage static at 1.17v
> 
> I'll give it one last chance tonight but so help me, if it still won't behave, Kalm will be platform swapping on Friday.


Ive been running 1603 for a long time. Its not the standard one, been modded just a bit by Tistou77


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

JustinThyme said:


> Ive been running 1603 for a long time. Its not the standard one, been modded just a bit by Tistou77


yeah I googled a bit when I realized that 1603 is what I have downloaded previous to 2002 so I must have been running that one, but you can't find it on Asus website anymore.

You can find some forum threads on the ROG forums where it appears that 1603 has some bugs with TJMax and fan headers not working properly. I never had any issues with it at all but oh well.

So far on 1704 for a few hours now, with many Chrome tabs, ripping an audio cd, going to try doing some homework.

If this doesn't crash, I'm curious if the fix was the BIOS version or Jpmboy's suggestion of a manual cache voltage (curious why manual 1.170 would be fine but adaptive crashing if that turns out to be the case).

Anywho, I'll post back either when it crashes again or if it makes it through to tomorrow evening without crashing.

If it does, I'm pretty much jumping ship to Threadripper since I can't find a 10980xe in stock anywhere.


----------



## Jpmboy

Kalm_Traveler said:


> yeah I googled a bit when I realized that 1603 is what I have downloaded previous to 2002 so I must have been running that one, but you can't find it on Asus website anymore.
> 
> You can find some forum threads on the ROG forums where it appears that 1603 has some bugs with TJMax and fan headers not working properly. I never had any issues with it at all but oh well.
> 
> So far on 1704 for a few hours now, with many Chrome tabs, ripping an audio cd, going to try doing some homework.
> 
> If this doesn't crash, I'm curious if the fix was the BIOS version or Jpmboy's suggestion of a manual cache voltage (curious why manual 1.170 would be fine but adaptive crashing if that turns out to be the case).
> 
> Anywho, I'll post back either when it crashes again or if it makes it through to tomorrow evening without crashing.
> 
> If it does, I'm pretty much jumping ship to Threadripper since I can't find a 10980xe in stock anywhere.


Adaptive runs off Turbo level multipliers and unless you are using very high ache freqs, adaptive has problems... same reason adaptive does not work with 125 or 166 strap/bclk.


----------



## Wizzzard

Don't use adaptive for cache. Use offset or fixed voltage.


----------



## JustinThyme

Kalm_Traveler said:


> yeah I googled a bit when I realized that 1603 is what I have downloaded previous to 2002 so I must have been running that one, but you can't find it on Asus website anymore.
> 
> You can find some forum threads on the ROG forums where it appears that 1603 has some bugs with TJMax and fan headers not working properly. I never had any issues with it at all but oh well.
> 
> So far on 1704 for a few hours now, with many Chrome tabs, ripping an audio cd, going to try doing some homework.
> 
> If this doesn't crash, I'm curious if the fix was the BIOS version or Jpmboy's suggestion of a manual cache voltage (curious why manual 1.170 would be fine but adaptive crashing if that turns out to be the case).
> 
> Anywho, I'll post back either when it crashes again or if it makes it through to tomorrow evening without crashing.
> 
> If it does, I'm pretty much jumping ship to Threadripper since I can't find a 10980xe in stock anywhere.


If you want I have 1603 modded with MCU59. Thats what Ive been running as it dropped core temps like 2-3C just weith the modded microcode. Runs a 9940X no problem. Just shooot me a PM if you want a copy and ill upload it to google docs or something for you.


Ive even got the 1002 and 1004 LOL If I look deep enough Ive probably got every one they have released and every one Tistou has modded.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Jpmboy said:


> Adaptive runs off Turbo level multipliers and unless you are using very high ache freqs, adaptive has problems... same reason adaptive does not work with 125 or 166 strap/bclk.


ah! thanks again sir - I honestly haven't read that anywhere before, and admittedly hadn't adjusted cache frequency or voltage from stock until this whole crashing nonsense to begin with.

Do you think I can drop CPU input voltage down from 2.1v back to say 1.9v?


----------



## Wizzzard

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Do you think I can drop CPU input voltage down from 2.1v back to say 1.9v?



2.1 V is way too high. You should be fine at 1.9 even with a heavy OC for a 7960X on ambient.

For my asus board, here are the VCCIN ranges I've measured for various configs:

VCCIN: 1.85 V, LLC 6 (1.792 V - 1.840 V) (This is the one I run)
VCCIN: 1.90 V, LLC 2 (1.728 V - 1.872 V)
VCCIN: 1.90 V, LLC 5 (1.808 V - 1.872 V)
VCCIN: 1.95 V, LLC 2 (1.728 V - 1.920 V)

Your chip will also run cooler with a lower VCCIN


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Wizzzard said:


> 2.1 V is way too high. You should be fine at 1.9 even with a heavy OC for a 7960X on ambient.
> 
> For my asus board, here are the VCCIN ranges I've measured for various configs:
> 
> VCCIN: 1.85 V, LLC 6 (1.792 V - 1.840 V) (This is the one I run)
> VCCIN: 1.90 V, LLC 2 (1.728 V - 1.872 V)
> VCCIN: 1.90 V, LLC 5 (1.808 V - 1.872 V)
> VCCIN: 1.95 V, LLC 2 (1.728 V - 1.920 V)
> 
> Your chip will also run cooler with a lower VCCIN


Not disagreeing since i'm still very much a noob, but where did you get that info? All the guides I read recommended 2.000 to 2.100 for 45 ratio or higher on the 7960x and 7980xe so I was just basing it off that. I've also seen here on this forum folks recommending LLC5 for daily use on the R6E specifically.

Can definitely drop it back down (pretty sure I was passing a few hours of CBR20 looped with VCCIN on 1.8v honestly) but just want to learn as much as I can during this whole shindig. 

Cooler will definitely be nicer - at low load cores are around 28-30 C right now.


----------



## Wizzzard

I've been X299 OC'ing for a while.


Those numbers are numbers I've tested on my current 9960X rig, paired with an Asus Prime X299 Edition 30 motherboard (rig in the sig).


Higher VCCIN = Higher CPU Heat


What you want to watch is what your VCCIN droops too under heavy load. Does it fall under 1.80? Might be time to bump it up.. Ideally you want to keep it 1.80 1.85. This is to avoid "phantom throttling". On some boards you can disable phantom throttling, on other boards you can't, and it may kick in at high 1.7x's.

I've also seen less stability with greater VCCIN droop.

The latest asus bios default uses an LLC 7 with a V of 1.8 (i think) and has almost no droop.


Also, looping CINEBENCH R20 is a horrible way to stability test. You'll waste DAYS trying to test if certain configs are stable. I've found RealBench is a better stability test (using stress test).

Here's what I do:
Setup your system in a base config. Should be a very mild OC, nothing extreme. Makes you can pass 8hr RealBench with it set to use half your system memory.

Then, slowly make adjustments and make sure you can pass 1hr RealBench stress test.


----------



## Jpmboy

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Not disagreeing since i'm still very much a noob, but where did you get that info? All the guides I read recommended 2.000 to 2.100 for 45 ratio or higher on the 7960x and 7980xe so I was just basing it off that. I've also seen here on this forum folks recommending LLC5 for daily use on the R6E specifically.
> 
> Can definitely drop it back down (pretty sure I was passing a few hours of CBR20 looped with VCCIN on 1.8v honestly) but just want to learn as much as I can during this whole shindig.
> 
> Cooler will definitely be nicer - at low load cores are around 28-30 C right now.


yeah, those guides are wrong period (and I know who's guides you mean). Disabled the VIN Tracker (tweaker menu) and lower VCCIN a lot. I run my 10980XE/Omega at 4.8 with 1.2V manual override VCCIN is at 1.7V LLC5 with droop under load down to 1.584V (under x265 4K 12x override) and INT. Blender bench droops to 1.596V. My 7080XE at at 1.7V VCCIN also.
On x299, Vcore kills are rare... VCCIN kills are not (for the few kills there have been).
VCCIN @ 2V is waaay too high.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, those guides are wrong period (and I know who's guides you mean). Disabled the VIN Tracker (tweaker menu) and lower VCCIN a lot. I run my 10980XE/Omega at 4.8 with 1.2V manual override VCCIN is at 1.7V LLC5 with droop under load down to 1.584V (under x265 4K 12x override) and INT. Blender bench droops to 1.596V. My 7080XE at at 1.7V VCCIN also.
> On x299, Vcore kills are rare... VCCIN kills are not (for the few kills there have been).
> VCCIN @ 2V is waaay too high.


Hi,
With that low of a vccin you'll never do very well on cinebench scoring


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, those guides are wrong period (and I know who's guides you mean). Disabled the VIN Tracker (tweaker menu) and lower VCCIN a lot. I run my 10980XE/Omega at 4.8 with 1.2V manual override VCCIN is at 1.7V LLC5 with droop under load down to 1.584V (under x265 4K 12x override) and INT. Blender bench droops to 1.596V. My 7080XE at at 1.7V VCCIN also.
> On x299, Vcore kills are rare... VCCIN kills are not (for the few kills there have been).
> VCCIN @ 2V is waaay too high.


ooh wow that's crazy but the good kind! 

I'll give those tweaks a try tonight if the system hasn't frozen mid workday. So far we're going on about 10 hours after rebooting with a lowered VCCIN (dropped it from 2.100 to 1.87 last night before going to bed). 


On a plus side - loop temps overnight are looking nice... CPU loop settled at 5c over ambient, graphics card loop 9c over ambient. Would be fun to see how close to ambient I can get the CPU loop /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif

*edit*
Haha spoke too soon... Just froze again. 

Going to do a little bit of hunting today for a 10980xe but looks like tonight will be upgrade ordering time.

*edit 2*

Had to raise VCCIN to 1.82 to get it through a CBR20 run, insta-crashed with 1.80 and below. SA is set to manual 1.160 and VCCIO is set to 1.110 but both report higher in SIV here. Anywho, I think at this point something is definitely wrong with either the CPU's memory controller, this RAM, or maybe the mb. I could just run the RAM slower but that's counter to the whole reason this machine exists.

Also - I tried booting it up with the 4000 mhz DIMMS I have in the 9900ks rig and it won't even POST with their XMP profile which seems to also point to a memory controller weakness, no?


----------



## glocked89

hwinfo64 has a “PMAX Limit/VCCIN Under-Voltage” status


----------



## Jpmboy

no low vin throttling: and x265 cause more droop (so.. core current pull) than blender.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
4.6 lowered avx to 2 
Still looking good just started long test at 4.7


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

in somewhat unexpected (to me at least) news... this 7960x rig has been up for 26 hours without freezing. I increased RAM voltage from 'stock' XMP 1.35v to 1.375v but for some reason they're showing 1.392v in SIV64X.

Oh well, R6E Omega and 8gb x 8 3600mhz CL16 RAM kit will be here tomorrow and a 10980xe will show up eventually


----------



## shiokarai

How much power draw for the 7920x or 7940x at 4.9/5.0 assuming delidded + direct die? Anyone can share the info/insight into this? Trying to decide on motherboard... 8 + 4 EPS (RVIE) vs 8 + 8 EPS (RVIEO or STRIX X299-II) vs 8 + 8 EPS + 6 PCIE (RVIEE)


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

shiokarai said:


> How much power draw for the 7920x or 7940x at 4.9/5.0 assuming delidded + direct die? Anyone can share the info/insight into this? Trying to decide on motherboard... 8 + 4 EPS (RVIE) vs 8 + 8 EPS (RVIEO or STRIX X299-II) vs 8 + 8 EPS + 6 PCIE (RVIEE)


I can't speak to those, but my 7960x has been fine on the R6E. Last February I had it doing 5.2ghz all core for benchmark runs in ~ -10 C ambient (I do benchmark runs outside in the middle of winter at night).


----------



## shiokarai

Kalm_Traveler said:


> I can't speak to those, but my 7960x has been fine on the R6E. Last February I had it doing 5.2ghz all core for benchmark runs in ~ -10 C ambient (I do benchmark runs outside in the middle of winter at night).


Didn't OCP on the board went off with such a high amp draw? RVIE has "only" 8 + 4 EPS connectors right? 5.2 on 16 cores was probably about 600w?


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

shiokarai said:


> Didn't OCP on the board went off with such a high amp draw? RVIE has "only" 8 + 4 EPS connectors right? 5.2 on 16 cores was probably about 600w?


Not sure what the draw was - I move the machine outside to a converted breezeway that just happens to have a 20A circuit. 5.2ghz was needing 1.45v if I remember correctly. 

OCP did not go off, no. Works just fine as long as ambient is sub-freezing like that. Core temps were hitting mid 80's C with -10 C ambient, pump and radiator fans at 100% speed and a ~ 24 inch fan meant for drying carpet keeping a large volume of very freezing air coming to the PC.

Yes Rampage VI Extreme has 8 + 4 EPS connectors (I use both of course).


----------



## chibi

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Not sure what the draw was - I move the machine outside to a converted breezeway that just happens to have a 20A circuit. 5.2ghz was needing 1.45v if I remember correctly.
> 
> OCP did not go off, no. Works just fine as long as ambient is sub-freezing like that. Core temps were hitting mid 80's C with -10 C ambient, pump and radiator fans at 100% speed and a ~ 24 inch fan meant for drying carpet keeping a large volume of very freezing air coming to the PC.
> 
> Yes Rampage VI Extreme has 8 + 4 EPS connectors (I use both of course).



Geez that sounds like fun! I crack the window open slightly now and my wife is "freezing her buns off!" and that's a no go. :lachen:


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

chibi said:


> Geez that sounds like fun! I crack the window open slightly now and my wife is "freezing her buns off!" and that's a no go. :lachen:


haha yeah I can imagine the wife doesn't like that too much 

It is super fun but hands start going numb after a couple hours despite 4-5 layers of winter clothes on. I want to give this 7960x one more go before switching over to the 10980xe setup but hoping for below 20 F evening temps and it's not looking quite cold enough yet.


----------



## D-EJ915

shiokarai said:


> How much power draw for the 7920x or 7940x at 4.9/5.0 assuming delidded + direct die? Anyone can share the info/insight into this? Trying to decide on motherboard... 8 + 4 EPS (RVIE) vs 8 + 8 EPS (RVIEO or STRIX X299-II) vs 8 + 8 EPS + 6 PCIE (RVIEE)


Unless you want the bling I'd skip the RVIE and go for the Encore or Strix II, the Omega is kind of a meh choice at this point unless you really want that U.2 port since the PCIE x4 slot is mostly useless being blocked by 2nd GPU lol. Plus it costs more. If you are not opposed to MSI bios the Creation is a nice board too, I imagine the Creator is too but I've not used it. The whole IO cover on the back is part of the aluminum heatsink for the vrm too so it probably has slightly better temps than the Creation..


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

D-EJ915 said:


> Unless you want the bling I'd skip the RVIE and go for the Encore or Strix II, the Omega is kind of a meh choice at this point unless you really want that U.2 port since the PCIE x4 slot is mostly useless being blocked by 2nd GPU lol. Plus it costs more. If you are not opposed to MSI bios the Creation is a nice board too, I imagine the Creator is too but I've not used it. The whole IO cover on the back is part of the aluminum heatsink for the vrm too so it probably has slightly better temps than the Creation..


I have the R6E and R6EO here, far as I understand their main benefit of interest for us is power delivery, and in my case I much prefer Asus BIOS over MSI or Gigabyte. Haven't personally used EVGA motherboards yet but I hear their BIOS is very good too. If I couldn't have bought the Rampage VI Extreme Omega for my 10980xe upgrade, I'd have probably gone for an EVGA x299 Dark.

To each their own of course, but I don't care about accessing the m.2 slots outside of new system builds - though if one was worried about that I would suggest using the DIMM.2 card instead. Much easier access than an on-MB socket, cover or no cover.


----------



## shiokarai

D-EJ915 said:


> Unless you want the bling I'd skip the RVIE and go for the Encore or Strix II, the Omega is kind of a meh choice at this point unless you really want that U.2 port since the PCIE x4 slot is mostly useless being blocked by 2nd GPU lol. Plus it costs more. If you are not opposed to MSI bios the Creation is a nice board too, I imagine the Creator is too but I've not used it. The whole IO cover on the back is part of the aluminum heatsink for the vrm too so it probably has slightly better temps than the Creation..


That's the impression I have - either STRIX II X299 or RVIE Encore...leaning towards the Encore, as this has more room for OC/Stability.


----------



## Jpmboy

shiokarai said:


> That's the impression I have - either STRIX II X299 or RVIE Encore...leaning towards the Encore, as this has more room for OC/Stability.


For any given socket, the EPS lines 8+4 or 8+8 is not a good way to determine what the board's power delivery/limit capability is. Each EPS will deliver what ever the PSU can on that rail. With anything less than 16 cores, focus more on the VRM components than the wires, assuming you are not doing LN2.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Just bcuz xD "no chiller" manage 51x on 6 cores and [email protected] single went up to 230 single cb15 also mesh @ 33x tdp is around 230-250w on rogbench


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> Just bcuz xD


Hi,
You're doing something right 
Dang just noticed you're in Chicago 
Optimus country :thumb:


----------



## tistou77

zGunBLADEz said:


> Just bcuz xD


Problem with the score with your 7980XE @5GHZ ?

Mine @4.6ghz


----------



## zGunBLADEz

tistou77 said:


> Problem with the score with your 7980XE @5GHZ ?
> 
> Mine @4.6ghz
> 
> View attachment 319796


not really look closely to the picture


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> You're doing something right
> Dang just noticed you're in Chicago
> Optimus country :thumb:


im doing rog stress test to see if is stable.. for "gaming purposes settings" also have 10-12cores variants with similar clock speeds just needs to validate them thru the stress process .

yeah we got some pretty good snow too today... next couple of days is going to be in the minus outside :/


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Jpmboy said:


> For any given socket, the EPS lines 8+4 or 8+8 is not a good way to determine what the board's power delivery/limit capability is. Each EPS will deliver what ever the PSU can on that rail. With anything less than 16 cores, focus more on the VRM components than the wires, assuming you are not doing LN2.


VRM config is what I was looking at. I actually haven't seen the lower tier boards without their VRM heatsinks on but had ignorantly assumed based on visuals that the Extreme and Extreme Omega appeared to have more phases.


----------



## ThrashZone

Kalm_Traveler said:


> VRM config is what I was looking at. I actually haven't seen the lower tier boards without their VRM heatsinks on but had ignorantly assumed based on visuals that the Extreme and Extreme Omega appeared to have more phases.


Hi,
I have seen cheaper vrm's 
Once a water block is on them they are good 
Prime deluxe and tuf mark 2 are identical vrm setup.


----------



## tistou77

I will surely go from R6E to R6EE, better VRMs and it seems that those of the R6EE in aircooling, heats "as much" as those of the R6E watercooled


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Quite a bit for better vrm air cooling
Redesigned but still hard to justify the gouge in price to me frankly.
750.00 amazon or 700.00 newegg


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Quite a bit for better vrm air cooling
> Redesigned but still hard to justify the gouge in price to me frankly.
> 750.00 amazon or 700.00 newegg


I picked up the R6E Omega for not much more than that. No regrets.


----------



## ThrashZone

Kalm_Traveler said:


> I picked up the R6E Omega for not much more than that. No regrets.


Hi,
Omega yeah amazon had some cheap ones Open box cheap for 450.us I almost got but canceled.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

But what kind of vrms temps you guys want? To what you getting now?


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> But what kind of vrms temps you guys want? To what you getting now?


Hi,
60c range but already got that but was no where near 6-750.us board to get it 
I'm sure someone will eventually make s vrm water block too.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> But what kind of vrms temps you guys want? To what you getting now?
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 60c range but already got that but was no where near 6-750.us board to get it /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> I'm sure someone will eventually make s vrm water block too.
Click to expand...

 my poor asrock was getting hammered with the 7940x lol to the point it will go to thermal vrm throttling on blender. Thats why i got the micro2 no need for water block on this baby


----------



## tistou77

On my R6E, the watercooled VRMs are at around 52° (max) with RealBench, Aida64, etc ...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
VRM water block is usually only 50.00 bucks for copper universal


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> VRM water block is usually only 50.00 bucks for copper universal /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


 i tried that chinese one i consulted with you its too wide for both of my boards the first it wasnt even long enough bought second one as i eyehawk the size of the first one before taking apart my rig...


so now i have 2 in the pile for future projects lol.. But looking on how this cpu behaves on my board i dont think i will need to watercool the vrms. My CPU likes 1.72mV as input no matter what settings i throw at it.... lower than that it will phantom throttling.


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> i tried that chinese one i consulted with you its too wide for both of my boards the first it wasnt even long enough bought second one as i eyehawk the size of the first one before taking apart my rig...
> 
> 
> so now i have 2 in the pile for future projects lol.. But looking on how this cpu behaves on my board i dont think i will need to watercool the vrms. My CPU likes 1.72mV as input no matter what settings i throw at it.... lower than that it will phantom throttling.


Hi,
You really need to at the least add your hardware to your signature in text 
Or use rig builder.

I wouldn't expect the koolance vrm cooler to fit a omega or encore unless you made a custom sized cold plate....


----------



## Jpmboy

Kalm_Traveler said:


> VRM config is what I was looking at. I actually haven't seen the lower tier boards without their VRM heatsinks on but had ignorantly assumed based on visuals that the Extreme and Extreme Omega appeared to have more phases.


The omega and Encore have better cooling than the Extreme (or Apex for that matter). All four have a power array capable of 1000W+. The "better" aspect of VRMs/MOSFETs comes down to the quality of the power delivered. 


tistou77 said:


> I will surely go from R6E to R6EE, better VRMs and it seems that those of the R6EE in aircooling, heats "as much" as those of the R6E watercooled


Yeah, the Encore is the ASUS x299 board de'jure. And it's a good one!


zGunBLADEz said:


> But what kind of vrms temps you guys want? To what you getting now?


Most vrm arrays really don't start misbehaving until 90C+. But, keeping them under 60C is a good thing in any use scenario.


----------



## shiokarai

Jpmboy said:


> The omega and Encore have better cooling than the Extreme (or Apex for that matter). All four have a power array capable of 1000W+. The "better" aspect of VRMs/MOSFETs comes down to the quality of the power delivered.
> 
> Yeah, the Encore is the ASUS x299 board de'jure. And it's a good one!
> 
> Most vrm arrays really don't start misbehaving until 90C+. But, keeping than under 60C is a good thing in any use scenario.



I wonder about reports of boards shutting down when OC with 7980XE, eg. GamersNexus had this happen to them when reviewing 7980XE afaik (although with Gigabyte Gaming 9? 8 + 8 EPS board), also from the new crop of boards Der8auer reviewed Strix x299-II and mentioned VRM is good for 400-450w power draw (even with air cooler, again 8 + 8 EPS board). Just trying to make my way trough, but pretty much decided for RVIE Encore... we'll see.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Some people I imagine underestimate power 
1) Wall outlet demands 
2) Power supply wattage needs


----------



## Jpmboy

shiokarai said:


> I wonder about reports of boards shutting down when OC with 7980XE, eg. GamersNexus had this happen to them when reviewing 7980XE afaik (although with Gigabyte Gaming 9? 8 + 8 EPS board), also from the new crop of boards Der8auer reviewed Strix x299-II and mentioned VRM is good for 400-450w power draw (even with air cooler, again 8 + 8 EPS board). Just trying to make my way trough, but pretty much decided for RVIE Encore... we'll see.


yeah, I have the G9 and never had the board OCP with my 7980XE, but I was running only 4.6-4.8. I'd be very surprised if the Giga used anything but the top-line mosfets available at the time. It was Gigiabyte's flagship x299 mobo. Mine has been retired to a monoblock now. Running a lil-ole 7740X (ES) at 5.2 and is in one of those corsair all-glass cases. *Extremely *quick 4-core rig.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

@Jpmboy thats what i tought. It seems its worst i was wondering since when 50-60 even 70-80 vrm temps are a bad thing specially with at the amp's this cpu pull.


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> @Jpmboy thats what i tought. It seems its worst i was wondering since when 50-60 even 70-80 vrm temps are a bad thing specially with at the amp's this cpu pull.


THose temps are not outside the spec operating range, but as they get hot most begin to loose "cleanliness". I mean, I hate seeing any computer part holding 80C. It that's you too, don't get a Radeon VII cause the "GPU Hotspot" will drive ya nutz.


----------



## coccosoids

I have a humble request: can someone with a 9000x / 10000x series overclocked CPU run a series of tests?!

The overclock doesn't have to be extreme. Somewhere around 4.5, 4.6?! I heard these chips should be good for that.

I am mainly interested in single threaded performance but can use multi threaded results as well. Some of the tests I'm interested in: geekbench 5, passmark, cinebench r20, vray next benchmark.


----------



## Jpmboy

coccosoids said:


> I have a humble request: can someone with a 9000x / 10000x series overclocked CPU run a series of tests?!
> 
> The overclock doesn't have to be extreme. Somewhere around 4.5, 4.6?! I heard these chips should be good for that.
> 
> I am mainly interested in single threaded performance but can use multi threaded results as well. Some of the tests I'm interested in: geekbench 5, passmark, cinebench r20, vray next benchmark.


here's R20 with a fairly well tuned 4.9 AVX-3, cache 30 but modest ram clocks. I've posted R20 at 4.8 earlier in this thread. Vray @ 4.8 wth AVX-3 I'll get to GB5 when current jobs finish. Passmark is pretty much crapware IMO. Someone else can help you there. :thumb:


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> @Jpmboy thats what i tought. It seems its worst i was wondering since when 50-60 even 70-80 vrm temps are a bad thing specially with at the amp's this cpu pull.
> 
> 
> 
> THose temps are not outside the spec operating range, but as they get hot most begin to loose "cleanliness". I mean, I hate seeing any computer part holding 80C. It that's you too, don't get a Radeon VII cause the "GPU Hotspot" will drive ya nutz. /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif
Click to expand...

I know they shouldn't have put that reading looks odd lol my 5700xt is the same but i haven't use it too much if at all. I got the card and block still there looking at me... 

Got me one of these to make a water "battery" reservoir project... My goal is to put that after the phobya 1260... So it goes GPUs/CPU/Phobya 1260/chiller if is on/5 gallon battery reservoir back inside pc which also have 3x240s.. 

Without that 5gallon my current Ambient vs Water is around 2c no chiller on. But im hoping to save chiller cycles and achieve longer and better sustained temps when i turn the chiller on. Still have miss feelings about the chiller, use it a couple of times im not feeling it. 

I guess that phobya is doing a fine job those 140mm fans at the lowest speed possible its the best feature quiet as it can be... My chiller is set up to dew point exactly made a controller on arduino for that... If i can keep the water cooled at dewpoint longer it be better, thats why im trying this.


----------



## coccosoids

Jpmboy said:


> here's R20 with a fairly well tuned 4.9 AVX-3, cache 30 but modest ram clocks. I've posted R20 at 4.8 earlier in this thread. Vray @ 4.8 wth AVX-3 I'll get to GB5 when current jobs finish. Passmark is pretty much crapware IMO. Someone else can help you there. :thumb:


Thank you. 

Why not Cinebench 20 single core too? 
And why not the latest vray benchmark? 

Would you say a typical 10xxx intel can do those frequencies and cache overclocks or expectations should be lowered once you factor in silicon quality and cooling capacity?


----------



## Jpmboy

coccosoids said:


> Thank you.
> 
> Why not Cinebench 20 single core too?
> And why not the latest vray benchmark?
> 
> Would you say a typical 10xxx intel can do those frequencies and cache overclocks or expectations should be lowered once you factor in silicon quality and cooling capacity?


ugh - forgot to run the single core R20. THat's the vray I had on the machine. I can DL the update....
Yeah, I'll venture to say that 4.8 will be common. My cooling is ambient water. Nothing special or strange.


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> I know they shouldn't have put that reading looks odd lol my 5700xt is the same but i haven't use it too much if at all. I got the card and block still there looking at me...
> 
> Got me one of these to make a water "battery" reservoir project... My goal is to put that after the phobya 1260... So it goes GPUs/CPU/Phobya 1260/chiller if is on/5 gallon battery reservoir back inside pc which also have 3x240s..
> 
> Without that 5gallon my current Ambient vs Water is around 2c no chiller on. But im hoping to save chiller cycles and achieve longer and better sustained temps when i turn the chiller on. Still have miss feelings about the chiller, use it a couple of times im not feeling it.
> 
> I guess that phobya is doing a fine job those 140mm fans at the lowest speed possible its the best feature quiet as it can be... My chiller is set up to dew point exactly made a controller on arduino for that... If i can keep the water cooled at dewpoint longer it be better, thats why im trying this.


yeah, adding a "heatsink" to the loop can reduce the on-off cycles in the short term, can't help long term tho.


----------



## ThrashZone

coccosoids said:


> I have a humble request: can someone with a 9000x / 10000x series overclocked CPU run a series of tests?!
> 
> The overclock doesn't have to be extreme. Somewhere around 4.5, 4.6?! I heard these chips should be good for that.
> 
> I am mainly interested in single threaded performance but can use multi threaded results as well. Some of the tests I'm interested in: geekbench 5, passmark, cinebench r20, vray next benchmark.


Hi,
No idea what vray is 
I have plenty of blender opendata benchmarks 4.5-4.6-4.7-4.8 to see the thermal differences on 9940x 
Think i have a passmark9 somewhere but it's not a very good benchmark
https://www.tenforums.com/benchmark...rformance-test-benchmark-112.html#post1721107

All 4.5-4.8 opendata temps...


Spoiler



https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=315540&d=1577927911
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=318836&d=1579020838
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=318848&d=1579024837
https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=318886&d=1579034115


R20 no single core run


Spoiler



https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=274584&d=1560573246


----------



## Wizzzard

Single core R20 @ 4.8 ~492
Single core R20 @ 5.0 ~519


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Micro center just got some 10900x in stock 600.us

https://www.microcenter.com/product...-cascade-lake-37-ghz-lga-2066-boxed-processor


----------



## carlhil2

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Micro center just got some 10900x in stock 600.us
> 
> https://www.microcenter.com/product...-cascade-lake-37-ghz-lga-2066-boxed-processor


From my local MC, should be selling online soon for in-store pickup...


----------



## coccosoids

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> No idea what vray is
> I have plenty of blender opendata benchmarks 4.5-4.6-4.7-4.8 to see the thermal differences on 9940x
> Think i have a passmark9 somewhere but it's not a very good benchmark
> https://www.tenforums.com/benchmark...rformance-test-benchmark-112.html#post1721107
> 
> All 4.5-4.8 opendata temps...
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=315540&d=1577927911
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=318836&d=1579020838
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=318848&d=1579024837
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=318886&d=1579034115
> 
> 
> R20 no single core run
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=274584&d=1560573246


Thank you. I will try the blender benchmark myself.


----------



## coccosoids

Wizzzard said:


> Single core R20 @ 4.8 ~492
> Single core R20 @ 5.0 ~519


Thanks!


----------



## ThrashZone

coccosoids said:


> Thank you. I will try the blender benchmark myself.


Hi,
Opendata rocks 

https://opendata.blender.org/

Those temps only happen with an awesome cpu block 

https://optimuspc.com/products/foundation-cpu-block-intel


----------



## ThrashZone

carlhil2 said:


> From my local MC, should be selling online soon for in-store pickup...


Hi,
Yep getting ready to plop some down finally 
Going to be tough to pass :/


----------



## ThrashZone

coccosoids said:


> Thank you. I will try the blender benchmark myself.


Hi,
4.9 R20
Single and full


----------



## Uriette

Hi Skylake-X / Kaby Lake-X Club !

I'm new on Overclock.net (registered today lol), I am seeking to switch to a used i9 7980XE / 9980XE soon, so I'll join your family in the next weeks/month(s). 

According to the Rules, I can't post anything on the Marketplace of the forum, because of the 35 REP needed, so it will be a pleasure to shre with you first.


----------



## JustinThyme

Uriette said:


> Hi Skylake-X / Kaby Lake-X Club !
> 
> I'm new on Overclock.net (registered today lol), I am seeking to switch to a used i9 7980XE / 9980XE soon, so I'll join your family in the next weeks/month(s).
> 
> According to the Rules, I can't post anything on the Marketplace of the forum, because of the 35 REP needed, so it will be a pleasure to shre with you first.


Takes awhile. I been here well over 3 years and just got to the min number to post in market place. Meant to keep the spam and hit and runs out of there.


----------



## Uriette

Finally, plan have changed yesterday. I bought an i9 7960X Delid with LM from the french overclocker Wizerty. Despite my efforts to find an i9 7980XE / 9980XE I was unable to find one used available in the market in my budget. But still, 16c/32t is a monstruous amount of compute power, It will be way much better than my current 2700X. 

A good overclock on it and I'm good for the 5-6 next years easily without changing my platform.

I should get the 7960X middle of the next week, and I still have to grab the UD4 Pro from my friend beginning on February. 750d Obsidian should be here next week aswell so I'll be able to build all my new parts and add the others later to achieve my full PC upgrade.


----------



## Jpmboy

Uriette said:


> Finally, plan have changed yesterday. I bought an i9 7960X Delid with LM from the french overclocker Wizerty. Despite my efforts to find an i9 7980XE / 9980XE I was unable to find one used available in the market in my budget. But still, 16c/32t is a monstruous amount of compute power, It will be way much better than my current 2700X.
> 
> A good overclock on it and I'm good for the 5-6 next years easily without changing my platform.
> 
> I should get the 7960X middle of the next week, and I still have to grab the UD4 Pro from my friend beginning on February. 750d Obsidian should be here next week aswell so I'll be able to build all my new parts and add the others later to achieve my full PC upgrade.


any reason you didn't just drop a 3950X in your current X470 AM4 socket board?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah i'm having a hard time 
3950x 750.00
10980 999.99 for just two more cores and can likely do 5.0
Still though this is pretty good and amd single core is supposed to be a lot better than 79-99-10 series 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/21-...our-cinebench-r20-scores-43.html#post28260850


----------



## Uriette

Jpmboy said:


> any reason you didn't just drop a 3950X in your current X470 AM4 socket board?


Only reason is the used 7960X Delid LM is on my budget atm (750€) and I will use the rest to buy others parts from my Planned upgrades. The 3950X don't (999€ in France still) (not a lot but I can't add more money for the moment it's complicated for me, it's money on my Paypal exclusively use for Hardware upgrades).


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah prices are crazy region to region :/


----------



## Uriette

Yes and those insane prices is the reason why I gave up, as it was my primary goal : acquire the 3950X.

No need to tell you my reaction when the first prices hit the french market... 
Speechless and demoralized.

Then I cancel this option and start considering an other one. The X299 platform with 16/18c was the best I can grab with my allowed budget. And luckily, I found someone selling one CPU I was looking after months of search everywhere.


----------



## ESRCJ

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah i'm having a hard time
> 3950x 750.00
> 10980 999.99 for just two more cores and can likely do 5.0
> Still though this is pretty good and amd single core is supposed to be a lot better than 79-99-10 series
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/21-...our-cinebench-r20-scores-43.html#post28260850


That's a very good score for 16 cores. AMD single threaded performance does much better against Intel in R20 than in R15. Overall I'm very impressed with Zen 2, but I will hold off until Zen 3 Threadripper releases.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah i'm having a hard time
> 3950x 750.00
> 10980 999.99 for just two more cores and can likely do 5.0
> Still though this is pretty good and amd single core is supposed to be a lot better than 79-99-10 series
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/21-...our-cinebench-r20-scores-43.html#post28260850


at this point and current 2066 prices i cant grasp the idea of a 3950x for $750 that if you find one at that price then you need a motherboard to go with it...
x299 for me is a much better deal... jeez the micro2 cost me $175 and this board screams "EVGA "BABY DARK" type of performance" Also evga have it right now @ $150 plus $20mir
then to me the other cpu worth it over if you can find a 7980XE used at good price is the 24 core TR as the 32 core its just been not than substantial in all those benchmarks if you render stuff the difference is merely seconds in most tests. So the 24 would be a more expensive (twice as expensive maybe) counterpart in the end. Couple months ago this would not be the case tho..

60c vrms @ 7980XE @ 1.255mV (220m into rog bench) thats like 500w+ out of the wall... btw dont mind my package temp thats my demon core when it goes ballistic XD


----------



## Jpmboy

GUys - you do know that the way AMD chips process the instruction sets used in blender/R15/R20/Vray is (beneficially) different than Intel - this is a low-level coding "trick". And there are other benchmarks where Intel has a processing architecture advantage. So, don't put all your eggs in the Cinebench/Blender basket.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Jpmboy said:


> GUys - you do know that the way AMD chips process the instruction sets used in blender/R15/R20/Vray is (beneficially) different than Intel - this is a low-level coding "trick". And there are other benchmarks where Intel has a processing architecture advantage. So, don't put all your eggs in the Cinebench/Blender basket.


Good to know  My 7960x @ 4.7ghz core 3ghz cache only does ~ 9650 on CBR20


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> GUys - you do know that the way AMD chips process the instruction sets used in blender/R15/R20/Vray is (beneficially) different than Intel - this is a low-level coding "trick". And there are other benchmarks where Intel has a processing architecture advantage. So, don't put all your eggs in the Cinebench/Blender basket.


Hi,
Does that account for Intel swiss cheese security holes patched


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Does that account for Intel swiss cheese security holes patched


unrelated... but snooping and prefetch certainly are.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> unrelated... but snooping and prefetch certainly are.


Hi,
Very related to intel performance hits.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Very related to intel performance hits.


but not related to cinebench/blender


----------



## carlhil2

Kalm_Traveler said:


> Good to know  My 7960x @ 4.7ghz core 3ghz cache only does ~ 9650 on CBR20


Mine scored 9940 with 12 cores at 4.7Ghz, 4 cores at 5.0Ghz. my chip was a dud. 2 cores were horrible.......


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> GUys - you do know that the way AMD chips process the instruction sets used in blender/R15/R20/Vray is (beneficially) different than Intel - this is a low-level coding "trick". And there are other benchmarks where Intel has a processing architecture advantage. So, don't put all your eggs in the Cinebench/Blender basket.


i can vouch those ryzen cpus can perform if you "tweak them" right tho. i owned several 1700/1800x/2700x and various boards too specially ram tweaking was a blast on ryzen XD


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> i can vouch those ryzen cpus can perform if you "tweak them" right tho. i owned several 1700/1800x/2700x and various boards too specially ram tweaking was a blast on ryzen XD


yeah, I have a 2700X on a Taichi X470 Ultimate rock solid at 4.0 running 24/7 Boinc. AIO cooler and temps are 60-ish. It's been on without a restart for some months now... gotta do those windows updates here soon. Very snappy CPU for sure. Been very tempted to drop a 3950X in that AM4 board.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, I have a 2700X on a Taichi X470 Ultimate rock solid at 4.0 running 24/7 Boinc. AIO cooler and temps are 60-ish. It's been on without a restart for some months now... gotta do those windows updates here soon. Very snappy CPU for sure. Been very tempted to drop a 3950X in that AM4 board.


Hi,
Micro center already dropped 10.00 off of 3950x shows add to cart too 
So looks like sells are slowing down.
Another month... will be fun to watch how far discounts will go Intel too if they ever appear anyway


----------



## zGunBLADEz

@Jpmboy i got now why you like vdroop as much as i do xD

I manage to get 50x on my 7980xe without HT in every core except in the demon core that one i have it lock at 46x for now @ 1.186mV.. Im trying to stay in the 375w tdp reading from hwinfo "pout" not from the wall. Its about 200-220amps aroundish without phantom throttling. I have the vin input at 1.72mV which reads 1.73mV right in the perfect spot where it triggers the undervoltage setting and goes back up right away it will drop to 48-49x in mere second this window creates stability on my chip. The window it does this is not that close together so its like 50x at all times worst case scenario if a a regular load manage to pull that much amps its barely noticeable... I have a few cores that are asking like 0.010-0.015mV than the main ones is about 6 of them. Raising my voltage to 1.365mV... The bmw render in a loop helped me to iron out which core needed the boost. Rog bench stress package is around 80c.. Funny thing is i tried to see if i can drop my everyday oced which is 46x no avx divider or nothing this chip dont like that divider for some weird reasons... Still ask for the same voltage as with ht on so go figures..


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Found a easier way to narrow the problematic cores somebody can confirm my finding? @Jpmboy @ThrashZone

Use intel XTU or bios or any app that let you set cores individually put your CPU @ 45x on all cores then use adaptive 1.200 with a negative offset use like -0.030mV

Now run cb15 or 20 watch voltage in hwinfo individually. Any core that its not locked at straight 1.170mV its a problematic voltage core and it would need more voltage than the rest of the cores. My cpu would need between 0.020-0.030mV extra on those cores. I have 6 cores exactly lol.. The ones in blue including my demon core the one in red is a problematic core and it needs more voltage than the rest.

X264 v2 its a good app to test for errors. Either bsod your ass or skip a current work where is nearly stable it will skip a work task works with lowering the voltage on good cores and raising the bad ones if needed.. But if you have a set overclock on static you can lower the good individually cores voltages and leave the problematic ones already on previous stable voltage.

I manage to drop 0.025mV on the good cores on my 24/7 overclock which is 46x with no avx divider from 1.186mV to 1.160mV on all good cores. i gained more not only on temps less power usage too less amps as well. Also stabilize my 50x on all cores except the demon core lol with no HT.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I usually call your demon core a lazy core since it always shows a lower vid than all others will for the same clocks.
The higher the clock the larger the vid distance eventually causes instability 
I found that out long ago past 0.030 is where it starts messing up clocks 0.040... bsod watchdog land.

I gave up on per core tuning and adaptive too long ago not worth the time 
All core manual voltage for oc'ing and I really don't care about lower everyday clocks either manual voltage works just fine there too 
I'm not worried about the power bill 

On another note just saw micro center just in stocked a few 10920x's


----------



## zGunBLADEz

I dont mind the power bill either but the stability i found and the easy way to find the cores and the thermal gains were worth it. Now i know my CPU stability all way up to 50x xD 

Now is just a piece of cake to overclock it knowing the problematic cores.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Just using adaptive or pure offset would show the same wild vids no need to use negative offsets to see them.
Negative offset works short term but messes up on cold start and even restart at times so a little more annoying than it's worth using to me.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Just using adaptive or pure offset would show the same wild vids no need to use negative offsets to see them.
> Negative offset works short term but messes up on cold start and even restart at times so a little more annoying than it's worth using to me.


i havent had problems with them tho... the thing i posted wasnt related to using adaptive or wild vids perse tho.. it works on static too... the way was to show the problematic cores to you thats all.

so you against lowering 0.020mV to 0.030mV on 10-12 cores that your current static all cores at the same voltage ?

Btw my lazy core wants more voltage than the rest not less. its one of the problematic cores that requires more vid..


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Whether it's the highest or lowest vid I was saying the difference between those is the problem.
Sure you can manually tune each core 

Is it worth it = not to me personally Jp does though last i saw his clock text file on his 7980xe.
10980xe all this is useless though since Intel seems to have locked minimum vid's using adaptive or offset on some cores so only manual and using c states/... can make vid's lower under no load... or energy saving stuff.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Whether it's the highest or lowest vid I was saying the difference between those is the problem.
> Sure you can manually tune each core
> 
> Is it worth it = not to me personally Jp does though last i saw his clock text file on his 7980xe.
> 10980xe all this is useless though since Intel seems to have locked minimum vid's using adaptive or offset on some cores so only manual and using c states/... can make vid's lower under no load... or energy saving stuff.


Yeah the problem cores that require more vid. What i posted should fix that. You know whats funny? The way i have it right now.. Lets say i move the offset a tiny bit on one of them second bad core to last the other problematic cores vid will fluctuate too with it for not appereant reason... the "good" ones dont have this behavior theres something coded on the CPU itself i think that creates that almost certain thats what creates problems on overclocks using adaptive. But if you have it fixed it shouldn't act erratic. Also ir works in static. Once you know the erratic cores your overclock is spot on.


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> Yeah the problem cores that require more vid. What i posted should fix that. You know whats funny? The way i have it right now.. Lets say i move the offset a tiny bit on one of them second bad core to last the other problematic cores vid will fluctuate too with it for not appereant reason... the "good" ones dont have this behavior theres something coded on the CPU itself i think that creates that almost certain thats what creates problems on overclocks using adaptive.


Hi,
Elmor's thread on 10980xe 5.0 exploded with off topic clouding the info but most of this was posted there about what Jp ran into about locked vid minimums I believe even maybe elmor posted about it too I don't remember.


----------



## Uriette

7960X Delidded at home. Can't wait to get my hands on my X299 moterboard. Obsidian 750D Airflow grabbed yesterday and Cooler Master V1200 PSU ready in it's box. My big upgrade is coming ! :wubsmiley

Feel strange to see a polished IHS for the first time. And first time with an HEDT CPU for me !


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Uriette said:


> 7960X Delidded at home. Can't wait to get my hands on my X299 moterboard. Obsidian 750D Airflow grabbed yesterday and Cooler Master V1200 PSU ready in it's box. My big upgrade is coming ! /forum/images/smilies/wubsmiley.gif
> 
> Feel strange to see a polished IHS for the first time. And first time with an HEDT CPU for me ! /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


You'll love it. I delidded my 7960x right out of the box a couple years ago and had a blast last winter during outdoor evening sub-freezing benchmark sessions


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah the problem cores that require more vid. What i posted should fix that. You know whats funny? The way i have it right now.. Lets say i move the offset a tiny bit on one of them second bad core to last the other problematic cores vid will fluctuate too with it for not appereant reason... the "good" ones dont have this behavior theres something coded on the CPU itself i think that creates that almost certain thats what creates problems on overclocks using adaptive.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> Elmor's thread on 10980xe 5.0 exploded with off topic clouding the info but most of this was posted there about what Jp ran into about locked vid minimums I believe even maybe elmor posted about it too I don't remember.
Click to expand...

I read that thread theres nothing exciting there to be honest it looks just like he did a cb run to check power consumption did a p95 12k "rolleyes" "p95" "rolleyes again" and 3th gen of cpus and still need over 1.325mV vid for 50x "questionable stable" and for cb runs "rolleyes" that and soldered ihs i wouldnt trade a 7th gen for that anyway. What i posted has nothing to do with adaptive overclocking perse at all..

Even if you use static i think it will benefit you. Once you know which core requires more voltage because of that vid fluctuation that it does which it dont do on static but it will show on adaptive the way i described easy to find those cores like that and you already have a stable set overclock from before lowering the vids on the good cores its all you need to do. Just leave the bad cores at the current stable voltage overclock you have. In my case i have 12 cores that i can lower vid so its way worth it.


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ Yeah, static per specific core OC works just fine with manual override.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
With the newer cpu block and tighter core temps it really isn't an issue going per core as much now 

Before it was mostly needed because cores were way over 10c apart 
Now nice and at least 10c or under with the foundation so welcome back to all core and manual voltage 7900x delid was like that


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah, I basically do manual (or adaptive, but not with this 10980XE) per core not so much to tame hot cores, but to take advantage of the tighter cores. That is to say, run those cores at a lower vcore at the same clocks, or level-up one multi at the same voltage. 
Many times those cores that you call hot, if not due to bad tim under or on top of the hood, actually clock higher at a lower voltage than neighboring cores, especially when the wafer size is getting large in the HCC chips. This is not usually an issue in smaller dies with larger gates. As the etching size shrinks, crystal/wafer uniformity is the varible.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah I really dread swapping out blocks the foundation is working pretty well I hate to change things


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, I basically do manual (or adaptive, but not with this 10980XE) per core not so much to tame hot cores, but to take advantage of the tighter cores. That is to say, run those cores at a lower vcore at the same clocks, or level-up one multi at the same voltage. /forum/images/smilies/wink.gif
> Many times those cores that you call hot, if not due to bad tim under or on top of the hood, actually clock higher at a lower voltage than neighboring cores, especially when the wafer size is getting large in the HCC chips. This is not usually an issue in smaller dies with larger gates. As the etching size shrinks, crystal/wafer uniformity is the varible.


. 

That works too raise multi in the good ones if you want the same voltage on all cores why not. Intel perf 3.0 would do the rest for you. Im redoing all my overclocks now again. For 48x on static the sucker was asking all way up to 1.280mV thats like 30-50watts more out of the socket vs the 1.220mV im testing now.. Theres 2 particular cores that are a no no and they require alot of vid making a all core same voltage for simplicity all around too much and unnecessary. Even if i have to lock those 2 cores at 1.280mV when im done testing 48x is way better than having all of them at 1.280mV you wouldnt even notice those cores are at a higher vid .. my package temp would still lower in the end way lower with lower power consumption too.

My demon core can make my package temp 25c higher than my coldest core if i dont count him is only 12c tops. Which i think once i finish testing i redo the liquid metal again as i havent done it yet hopefully it narrows it down. Im planning to lap underneath the ihs on the spare ihs i have. I need to make a rig where i can sand flat where the recess is at i need to scrap alot of metal the 2 edges for example instead of lapping the die which i was thinking of doing. Idk if is done before worth a try if the top isnt that flat i bet the bottom either. Was looking at it its more possible than lapping underneath the ihs for ie 8700k/9900k underneath.. You still have the legs on the corner that hold the ihs against the cpu for support on the 2066 cpu


----------



## xarot

I did some second hand shopping and I put the W-3175X and Dominus Extreme to my main PC and will be running 7980XE/R6E in the second...with several other X299 boards and chips. Might not be many owners there and W-3175X seems to behave exactly like X299.

Oh my god. If you ever had problems with mount try LGA3647. CPU is not clamped down, it just sits in the socket and then you put on the cooling solution. You can only tighten from the center and upper right and lower left corners. Did around 15 mounts with a boot in between to get all memory channels detected with 6x DIMMs.

Not maybe looking to delid this one due to the mounting mechanism. It would be troublesome. Trying only 4 GHz with SmallFFTs, CPU is hitting 100c on two cores with under 40c water. Max OC around 4.6 at 1.24V. 4.7 can work but not really due to heat. Running few cores now at 4.6 and rest at 4.0. It's like trying to cool down 7900X and 7980XE together


----------



## zGunBLADEz

How many watts from the socket you pulling with that puppy?


----------



## Jpmboy

xarot said:


> I did some second hand shopping and I put the W-3175X and Dominus Extreme to my main PC and will be running 7980XE/R6E in the second...with several other X299 boards and chips. Might not be many owners there and W-3175X seems to behave exactly like X299.
> 
> Oh my god. If you ever had problems with mount try LGA3647. CPU is not clamped down, it just sits in the socket and then you put on the cooling solution. You can only tighten from the center and upper right and lower left corners. Did around 15 mounts with a boot in between to get all memory channels detected with 6x DIMMs.
> 
> Not maybe looking to delid this one due to the mounting mechanism. It would be troublesome. Trying only 4 GHz with SmallFFTs, CPU is hitting 100c on two cores with under 40c water. Max OC around 4.6 at 1.24V. 4.7 can work but not really due to heat. Running few cores now at 4.6 and rest at 4.0. It's like trying to cool down 7900X and 7980XE together


 :drool: you found a second hand 3175X? Amazing. Yeah, bench or horizontal board mount is the only way.


----------



## Uriette

So guys, got some news of my delidded 7960X aquired recently. I give it to a friend who have an X299 UD4 Pro from Gigabyte and I'm gonna buy his mobo for 100€. He did some tests to see how the CPU works, the temps and did some tests with his open-air bench table.

He manage to reach 4.6 GHz all-cores with a Noctua on it (dunno the model) and a Voltage of 1.18. Pretty sure he can lower the voltage a little bit (sure 1.15 is reachable), we'll try to improve later but first tests were very promising. Package CPU temps during Cinebench R15 88°C max reached. Individual temps on each Core are very random, mostly 65-75°C, one or two cores are at 59°C. R15 score of 3824. (His Windows 7 setup wasn't optimized when doing the benchmark). VRM temps 58°C max only !

What do you think ? Seems I have a good chip here, and the delid with LM seems to have been done very well.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Uriette said:


> So guys, got some news of my delidded 7960X aquired recently. I give it to a friend who have an X299 UD4 Pro from Gigabyte and I'm gonna buy his mobo for 100€. He did some tests to see how the CPU works, the temps and did some tests with his open-air bench table.
> 
> He manage to reach 4.6 GHz all-cores with a Noctua on it (dunno the model) and a Voltage of 1.18. Pretty sure he can lower the voltage a little bit (sure 1.15 is reachable), we'll try to improve later but first were very promising. Package CPU temps during Cinebench R15 88°C max reached. Individual temps on each Core are very random, mostly 65-75°C, one or two cores are at 59°C. R15 score of 3824. (His Windows 7 setup wasn't optimized when doing the benchmark). VRM temps 58°C max only !
> 
> What do you think ? Seems I have a good chip here, and the delid with LM seems to have been very well.


Sounds like a decent chip. I don't know what mine would do 4.6 on but I run it at 4.7 on 1.245v (custom loop, 560mm radiator). Under full synthetic load some cores top out around 83 I believe (spread was about 73-83 if I recall), but under normal use I never see anything above about 50c.


----------



## Uriette

I will go for some Prime95/OCCT to confirm this OC is fully stable. Temps looks very good with his Noctua rad, I imagine it will be better with my planned 360mm AIO push-pull on it. Can't wait to have it at home ! ♥

EDIT: Hope there's no phantom throttling aswell.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
60-88c lowest to highest core temp 
I'd call that a pretty bad core temp spread.

Try the short test with this yes I have a open data fetish 
https://opendata.blender.org/

Also use hwinfo not hwmonitor

https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php


----------



## Uriette

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 60-88c lowest to highest core temp
> I'd call that a pretty bad core temp spread.
> 
> Try the short test with this yes I have a open data fetish
> https://opendata.blender.org/
> 
> Also use hwinfo not hwmonitor
> 
> https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php


Oh yes, you think ? Seems not to bad to me at 4.6 GHz and that voltage tbh. (I'm new to OC and first time for me with an HEDT CPU)

I think I found the cooler he was using according to the photo he send me: it's an U12S with only one fan on it. Not a bad cooler, but there's better. And yes I know, HWinfo 64 is better for monitoring, but my friend did the test without my presence, and he uses the softs he enjoy the most.


----------



## ThrashZone

Uriette said:


> Oh yes, you think ? Seems not to bad to me at 4.6 GHz and that voltage tbh.
> 
> I think I found the cooler he was using according to the photo he send me: it's an U12S with only one fan on it. Not a bad cooler, but there's better. And yes I know, HWinfo 64 is better for monitoring, but my friend did the test without my presence, and he uses the softs he enjoy the most.


Hi,
28c difference is terrible core temp spread.
Good is 10c apart from coolest to hottest at any clock not just 4.6 at 1.18v

Looking again is 60-77c difference the Package temp is 88c which is pretty bad too 
17c apart is still pretty bad core temp spread.

Yeah 59-78 oops but still really bad contact


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 60-88c lowest to highest core temp
> I'd call that a pretty bad core temp spread.
> 
> Try the short test with this yes I have a open data fetish /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> https://opendata.blender.org/
> 
> Also use hwinfo not hwmonitor
> 
> https://www.hwinfo.com/download.php


 you and you core temp spread xD


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> you and you core temp spread xD


Hi,
Are you saying 19c difference is good ?


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> you and you core temp spread xD
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> Are you saying 19c difference is good ?
Click to expand...

You too worry about temp spreads specially when you throw the coldest core into the equation.


----------



## Uriette

If I have to worry about this, what are the consequences of this ?

Bad delid ? It was done by the french overclocker Wizerty, and according of his own experience in OC and delid in general, I really have doubts about this.
Bad cooler positioning or bad thermal compound application ?
Wrong sensor reading from mobo/internal CPU sensors/software ?

Another reason ?

I repeat I'm new to OC and with HEDT CPU (it's my first with it) and I'm learning tons of new stuff about this niche platform everyday. So please understand I can't know everything.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
That is one reason I asked to use a different monitoring utility hwinfo to see if it reads the same because hwmonitor isn't very popular around here 
Or even coretemp it's a simple little utility that just displays core temperatures 
http://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/core_temp.html

Also try cinebench R20 it's a bit more stressful than R15 version.
https://www.techpowerup.com/download/maxon-cinebench/

Coolest cores show great contact either with liquid metal/ delid part and or thermal paste 
Hottest cores show not so good contact ".................................................................."

As far as the core temperatures go depending on your room temperature they aren't really bad it's just a wild difference between coolest and hottest not normal the delid person should be asked why even my 7900x was only 10c difference 
And when it was more needed delid again.

I rma'ed a 9940x because it was 19c difference core spread and intel agreed this is not normal.
New one is within 10c


----------



## Uriette

I understand now, thank you very much for all the clarifications. o/

I'll consider a careful monitoring of all the temps for the next weeks and use both HWinfo and Core Temp to see what temp I'll have when the platform will be setup in my PC. (it's stil currently in the hands of my friends, grab it next week)


----------



## ThrashZone

Uriette said:


> I understand now, thank you very much for all the clarifications. o/
> 
> I'll consider a careful monitoring of all the temps for the next weeks and use both HWinfo and Core Temp to see what temp I'll have when the platform will be setup in my PC. (it's stil currently in the hands of my friends, grab it next week)


Hi,
No problem 
Just use something more stressful R15 isn't very long and maybe all cores aren't getting a good workout


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> you and you core temp spread xD


Hi,
Yes I have a couple fetishes 
Core temp spread 
Blender opendata 

At least I know how to take proper screen shots so what's up with the camera nonsense you are clearly not a photographer


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yes I have a couple fetishes
> Core temp spread
> Blender opendata
> 
> At least I know how to take proper screen shots so what's up with the camera nonsense you are clearly not a photographer


Those are vices, a fetish should reward a different part of the CNS. :laughings


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> Those are vices, a fetish should reward a different part of the CNS. :laughings


Hi,
Yeah I'm bad American


----------



## Uriette

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> No problem
> Just use something more stressful R15 isn't very long and maybe all cores aren't getting a good workout


Yup, I'll go for some longer tests, especially to see if all of the setup is fine and full stable (mostly OC and for the V1200 Platinum PSU). Prime95, AIDA64, some 3DMark and PassMark for it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Uriette said:


> Yup, I'll go for some longer tests, especially to see if all of the setup is fine and full stable (mostly OC and for the V1200 Platinum PSU). Prime95, AIDA64, some 3DMark and PassMark for it.


Hi,
No need to use P95.


----------



## Uriette

Ok, so remove it from the list ! 

TY


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> you and you core temp spread xD
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> Yes I have a couple fetishes
> Core temp spread
> Blender opendata /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> At least I know how to take proper screen shots so what's up with the camera nonsense you are clearly not a photographer /forum/images/smilies/tongue.gif
Click to expand...

I didnt know this was a camera pictures specialty place sorry xD Win + Prt Scrn you may ask? You want emojis on it too like FB?


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> I didnt know this was a camera pictures specialty place sorry xD Win + Prt Scrn you may ask? You want emojis on it too like FB?


Hi,
Sure snipping tool or print screen key are way too tough than a photo op


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> zGunBLADEz said:
> 
> 
> 
> I didnt know this was a camera pictures specialty place sorry xD Win + Prt Scrn you may ask? You want emojis on it too like FB?
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> Sure snipping tool or print screen key are way too tough than a photo op /forum/images/smilies/whistle.gif
Click to expand...

 too much things to nit pick around xD


----------



## JustinThyme

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> No need to use P95.


+1
P95=how to make PC into space heater.

Run the HWbot version of realbench in a loop. All real world workloads.


----------



## radrok

Hello, been lurking for a while thanks for all your input guys.

Been running a 7960x on direct die for almost one year then a friend of mine decided to sell me his 7980xe, couldn't pass up for 530€

Running 4,7 Ghz allcore 1,23v so far so good, highest temp is 73c on the hottest core.










Which stress tests do you recommend? I haven't had a single crash on my daily workloads.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

radrok, looks sweet!

Just use Realbench, some Cinebench R20 and just everyday tasks really. Don't use prime95. Some people like OCCT. 

For ram, memtestPro is good.


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

hey guys it's going to be about 10 F here tonight so I'm going to try benchmarks again while waiting for a 10980xe to start existing.

Last year I was passing them with the 7960x multiplier at 52 on 1.400v but that was stock cache, and stock XMP 3200mhz CL14 4 sticks of DDR4, as well as an EK monoblock.

Now, 8 sticks of 3600mhz CL16 DDR4 (seems daily stable doing 14-14-14-34 though on 1.44v), and swapped the monoblock for Heat Killer CPU + VRM separates. ah yeah and cache is on 30 with 1.225v. Also - graphics card blocks swapped from Bitspower to Aqua Computer.


Question is... for very short term benchmarking runs tonight what is the max voltage I should be willing to try - assuming temps stay below say 100 C or so?


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

Well I was out there for about 5 hours tonight. Dialed in the max stable graphics card settings for Port Royal, then started to work on the Cpu but the best I got it to do was chug to a crash. Tried for hours with 5.3, 5.2, 5.1, 5.0 and finally 4.9 all core with manual voltage as high as 1.535, no dice.

According to SIVX the hottest any core reached was 72 C so definitely wasn't a heat problem but as I dropped the ratio the behavior didn't change at all. Last year I had this thing stable all core 5.2 with adaptive voltage at 1.425v I believe. It was still chugging to a crash at 4.9 manual 1.45v

Starting to think it might be motherboard related so tomorrow I'm going to swap up to the R6E Omega and see if that makes any difference.


----------



## ocvn

radrok said:


> Hello, been lurking for a while thanks for all your input guys.
> 
> Been running a 7960x on direct die for almost one year then a friend of mine decided to sell me his 7980xe, couldn't pass up for 530€
> 
> Running 4,7 Ghz allcore 1,23v so far so good, highest temp is 73c on the hottest core.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which stress tests do you recommend? I haven't had a single crash on my daily workloads.


Realbench 2.43 1h for non avx, realbench 2.56/ x264 v2 for avx256, linkpack extreme for avx512


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

as per usual - I forgot to check the PCI-E slot spacing between the Rampage VI Extreme and Extreme Omega... of course Asus dropped the 16x slots from 4 slot spacing down to 3, so I need to order a shorter NVLink bridge and figure out some way to connect the water blocks. With 4 slot spacing I had just barely enough room with soft tubing to slide a short tube onto a fitting, tighten down its cap, slide the other cap on, then push the tube onto the other fitting and tighten the 2nd cap.

With only 3 slots spacing I don't think I'll be able to do this.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Kalm_Traveler said:


> as per usual - I forgot to check the PCI-E slot spacing between the Rampage VI Extreme and Extreme Omega... of course Asus dropped the 16x slots from 4 slot spacing down to 3, so I need to order a shorter NVLink bridge and figure out some way to connect the water blocks. With 4 slot spacing I had just barely enough room with soft tubing to slide a short tube onto a fitting, tighten down its cap, slide the other cap on, then push the tube onto the other fitting and tighten the 2nd cap.
> 
> With only 3 slots spacing I don't think I'll be able to do this.


 with hard tubing that would be easy. They sell those link ones that are resizeable too..

Or you can also do the soft tubing outside the case and just drag both gpus together and slide them like is a bridge lol. Problem is well its like they are welded together but means meats ends xD

Inb4 waiting for the picture police lol


----------



## Jpmboy

Kalm_Traveler said:


> as per usual - I forgot to check the PCI-E slot spacing between the Rampage VI Extreme and Extreme Omega... of course Asus dropped the 16x slots from 4 slot spacing down to 3, so I need to order a shorter NVLink bridge and figure out some way to connect the water blocks. With 4 slot spacing I had just barely enough room with soft tubing to slide a short tube onto a fitting, tighten down its cap, slide the other cap on, then push the tube onto the other fitting and tighten the 2nd cap.
> 
> With only 3 slots spacing I don't think I'll be able to do this.


 yeah, I have both the 3 and 4 space nvlink for that reason. The Apex is 4, the Omega is 3. I use the Koolance SLI variable spacers (2) when moving GPUs between the rigs. I use 4 of these to connect (parallel) 3 Titan Vs on the Apex VI. Never had them leak - ever. Been using them for years.
these are them in black: https://www.amazon.com/Koolance-CNT...1_78?keywords=koolance&qid=1580913676&sr=8-78


silver:
https://www.amazon.com/Koolance-CNT...166?keywords=koolance&qid=1580913784&sr=8-166


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

zGunBLADEz said:


> with hard tubing that would be easy. They sell those link ones that are resizeable too..
> 
> Or you can also do the soft tubing outside the case and just drag both gpus together and slide them like is a bridge lol. Problem is well its like they are welded together but means meats ends xD
> 
> Inb4 waiting for the picture police lol





Jpmboy said:


> yeah, I have both the 3 and 4 space nvlink for that reason. The Apex is 4, the Omega is 3. I use the Koolance SLI variable spacers (2) when moving GPUs between the rigs. I use 4 of these to connect (parallel) 3 Titan Vs on the Apex VI. Never had them leak - ever. Been using them for years.
> these are them in black: https://www.amazon.com/Koolance-CNT...1_78?keywords=koolance&qid=1580913676&sr=8-78
> 
> 
> silver:
> https://www.amazon.com/Koolance-CNT...166?keywords=koolance&qid=1580913784&sr=8-166


aha thanks both of you!

Ordered two of those things, and preordered a 3 slot NVLink bridge (everyone and their dog is out of the Asus bridge for some reason)


----------



## axiumone

Here's the asus nvlink bridge available. 

https://www.microcenter.com/product/600940/asus-rog-nvlink-bridge-3


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

axiumone said:


> Here's the asus nvlink bridge available.
> 
> https://www.microcenter.com/product/600940/asus-rog-nvlink-bridge-3


ah shoot I should have looked at this sooner... already pre-ordered with B&H and got super impatient so ordered an EVGA bridge from Amazon in the mean time.

*EDIT*

Rather than make another post...
@Jpmboy you said you have both the Omega and Encore, right? 

I don't see functional differences between them besides the slot spacing, Encore having better VRM components, and Omega retaining the U.2 port. Is that everything? Just want to make sure I'll be fine with the Omega and don't have any real need to swap to the Encore.


----------



## Jpmboy

Kalm_Traveler said:


> ah shoot I should have looked at this sooner... already pre-ordered with B&H and got super impatient so ordered an EVGA bridge from Amazon in the mean time.
> 
> *EDIT*
> 
> Rather than make another post...
> 
> @Jpmboy you said you have both the Omega and Encore, right?
> 
> I don't see functional differences between them besides the slot spacing, Encore having better VRM components, and Omega retaining the U.2 port. Is that everything? Just want to make sure I'll be fine with the Omega and don't have any real need to swap to the Encore.


I have the Omega and Apex, not the Encore. I doubt there is any real need to switch from either of those to the other in any scenario outside the U.2 port. Both are top-flight boards. :thumb:


----------



## JustinThyme

Kalm_Traveler said:


> ah shoot I should have looked at this sooner... already pre-ordered with B&H and got super impatient so ordered an EVGA bridge from Amazon in the mean time.
> 
> *EDIT*
> 
> Rather than make another post...
> 
> @Jpmboy you said you have both the Omega and Encore, right?
> 
> I don't see functional differences between them besides the slot spacing, Encore having better VRM components, and Omega retaining the U.2 port. Is that everything? Just want to make sure I'll be fine with the Omega and don't have any real need to swap to the Encore.


Have a slightly used ASUS Nvlink bridge. Works great. Had to go to Nvidia 2 slot for quadro RTX6000 because no one else makes a 2 slot and I took my cards vertical. That one was a PITA to source though. Ive since painted it all flat black as the silver with green stripes was clashing with my build. Also put HK IV GPU blocks in. Just had to wait an eternity for both HK and EK to produce one. Pretty sad when TT beats them to market. The phanteks performs well just had to go with no back plate or use the stock one. I changed over mostly to get the passive cooling of the HK backplate. EK doesnt perform as well and IMO their Strix blocks are just ugly as hell.


----------



## JustinThyme

Jpmboy said:


> I have the Omega and Apex, not the Encore. I doubt there is any real need to switch from either of those to the other in any scenario outside the U.2 port. Both are top-flight boards. :thumb:


I contemplated upping to the encore, better board layout IMO....its what the Omega should have been, No U2 killed it as Im using an intel 905P U2 drive for OS and dont want ganked up looking U2-M2 adapter cable up in there. Bought one i the beginning with that drive and ran it to the DIMM.2 and just didnt look right no matter how I went about it.


----------



## radrok

MrTOOSHORT said:


> radrok, looks sweet!
> 
> Just use Realbench, some Cinebench R20 and just everyday tasks really. Don't use prime95. Some people like OCCT.
> 
> For ram, memtestPro is good.


Thanks!

Looks like I'm stable at 4.8Ghz with adaptive volt 1.2v + 0.025 offset which loads almost all cores to 1.25v 

Ambient 19c max package temp 72c


----------



## Kalm_Traveler

JustinThyme said:


> I contemplated upping to the encore, better board layout IMO....its what the Omega should have been, No U2 killed it as Im using an intel 905P U2 drive for OS and dont want ganked up looking U2-M2 adapter cable up in there. Bought one i the beginning with that drive and ran it to the DIMM.2 and just didnt look right no matter how I went about it.


yeah I was comparing the two and trying to figure out how the Omega is still marketed as the highest tier x299 board Asus makes, with the Encore being offered as 2nd best. 

If the Encore has better VRMs, lacks the U.2 port, and has the 3rd physical x16 PCI-E slot wired only for x4... that last part is really the only thing I can see making it clearly worse in a functional way - and only if you were wanting to use that slot for a 3rd graphics card or something.

If I were buying again I would probably get the Encore now that I think about it, but I think my Newegg return period for the Omega is over and I don't think that I'd notice any improvement switching to the Encore aside from not having to buy another dang NVLink bridge.


----------



## D-EJ915

Kalm_Traveler said:


> yeah I was comparing the two and trying to figure out how the Omega is still marketed as the highest tier x299 board Asus makes, with the Encore being offered as 2nd best.
> 
> If the Encore has better VRMs, lacks the U.2 port, and has the 3rd physical x16 PCI-E slot wired only for x4... that last part is really the only thing I can see making it clearly worse in a functional way - and only if you were wanting to use that slot for a 3rd graphics card or something.
> 
> If I were buying again I would probably get the Encore now that I think about it, but I think my Newegg return period for the Omega is over and I don't think that I'd notice any improvement switching to the Encore aside from not having to buy another dang NVLink bridge.


Well that's a bit special, didn't even realize that board wasn't x8 on that slot on the 7xxx chips. The omega would be fine except the PCH x4 slot location is completely stupid and useless lol.


----------



## JustinThyme

Kalm_Traveler said:


> yeah I was comparing the two and trying to figure out how the Omega is still marketed as the highest tier x299 board Asus makes, with the Encore being offered as 2nd best.
> 
> If the Encore has better VRMs, lacks the U.2 port, and has the 3rd physical x16 PCI-E slot wired only for x4... that last part is really the only thing I can see making it clearly worse in a functional way - and only if you were wanting to use that slot for a 3rd graphics card or something.
> 
> If I were buying again I would probably get the Encore now that I think about it, but I think my Newegg return period for the Omega is over and I don't think that I'd notice any improvement switching to the Encore aside from not having to buy another dang NVLink bridge.


Yeah I hear ya, Im just gonna sit it out for awhile and see what comes down the pipe. My RVIE works just fine with active cooling on VRMS. the newer ones have a better power delivery but they screwed the pooch on the Omega layout as far as Im concerned. Should have left all the abilities with same number of PCIE slots and just went with the EEB form factor like the Dominus extreme or CEB like the WS Sage instead of cramming all that on an EATX and ditching PCIE slots and cramming the top so tight you need a tool to get the ram out. I get the upgrade to the power delivery to match the EVGA X299 DARK. They chose to clip the ram to fit it on their board but maintained 2 U2 ports and 4 X16 PCIE slots.


----------



## radrok

What do you think guys?

Temps are good, no?

Delidded with LM direct die


----------



## Nizzen

radrok said:


> What do you think guys?
> 
> Temps are good, no?
> 
> Delidded with LM direct die


I think you're ambient temp is very low... So the temp is pretty normal.


----------



## radrok

Nizzen said:


> I think you're ambient temp is very low... So the temp is pretty normal.


It was 18.3c 

Thanks for the feedback


----------



## zGunBLADEz

This is what i call to hit the nail in the head in one swing

now i hope i dont mess up when i tap the new holes lol


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Nice I got the copper plexi 
Mounted no problem on apex


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Nice I got the copper plexi
> Mounted no problem on apex


you using the same one? sweet i bite the bullet on a gamble it was only $10 might as well throw the dice on it.... i got no luck with the china versions...
well spare watercooling parts for the pile...

You also tap it or it did fit as it is? how it compares to the koolance one?

My main issue/concern was the little things "smds" you see in the picture in front of the vrms they actually taller than the vrms so i needed something that touches the vrms but not those.. i mean i could use a thermal pad and squeeze it down but they are taller than the vrms themselves... so contact was a issue i had on mind. then the chokes how tall they were.. i wasnt too concern about if it didnt actually touch them but preventing the block to touch the vrms.... But i see i got both too contact with 0 issues..


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> you using the same one? sweet i bite the bullet on a gamble it was only $10 might as well throw the dice on it.... i got no luck with the china versions...
> well spare watercooling parts for the pile...
> 
> You also tap it or it did fit as it is? how it compares to the koolance one?
> 
> My main issue/concern was the little things "smds" you see in the picture in front of the vrms they actually taller than the vrms so i needed something that touches the vrms but not those i mean i could use a thermal pad and squeeze it down but they are taller than the vrms themselves... so contact was a issue i had on mind


Hi,
Yep that's it up top costs more than 10 bucks though 
This one fit like a glove holes in the right place...
Use a Koolance universal too on x299 mark 2 it have a pretty flexible mount didn't have to much at all on it 
Also got a heatkiller universal all copper that one I had to drill the holes in the cold plate and a little bigger on the mother board holes yes that was fun


----------



## zGunBLADEz

remember this is an evga micro2 im using a vrm block for the rampage iv black i got from frozencpu $10
all it needs new screw taps and is already to roll.. chokes and vrms contact lol


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> remember this is an evga micro2 im using a vrm block for the rampage iv black i got from frozencpu $10
> all it needs new screw taps and is already to roll.. chokes and vrms contact lol


Hi,
Oops yep you'll have more fun than I had


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Oops yep you'll have more fun than I had


well you had all the fun with the koolance tho... all i have to do is tap new screw holes and im set


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> well you had all the fun with the koolance tho... all i have to do is tap new screw holes and im set


Hi,
I did have to drill some hole and cut to size the kollance cold plate though now that I think of it and find some screws for that were not supplied.
Only issue with the Koolance vrm block is it got some corrosion on the plug end so I got the all copper heatkiller universal to replace it with.


----------



## Caffinator

I was able to narrow down some COD:MW crashes to a bad overclock. Redid all my settings and lowered from 4.7GHz to 4.5GHz in order to properly stress test it without thermal throttling. I was able to crank up my settings a lot - also getting 280GFlops in linpack, which is more than before. But cinebench is about 4% slower, which makes sense.

I have i7 7800x. Not sure which batch, it came in non-retail packaging from superbiiz. Sadly, I just noticed Superbiiz is closing their storefront(effective a couple months ago). 

Anyways, I found this interesting because all my other games played just fine. I think COD:MW really taxes the system in bursts, and that causes the game to crash if your OC isn't 100% good.


----------



## blackmore

This might not be the adequate subforum to ask this question, but since I'm new around here, hopefully you'll forgive me 
I've received an offer to trade 7700K + Asus PRIME Z270-A for 7820X + AsRock Killler X299 SLI/ac + $250.

My main concern is about 7820X OC ability. My 7700K is not the best OC example, but 7820X's clocks aren't so impressive either (although I'd be getting 4C and 8T for sub $300). I currently have a custom water loop so I guess cooling it down wouldn't be a problem.

So the question is: should I pull the trigger and do it? I only use my PC for gaming and I'm also a total HEDT noob, but I'm willing to learn


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Depends what you want 
8 core verses 4 core :thinking:

Also depends on if you want to delid the 7820x which it has pigeon poop inside so thermally at a disadvantage to the 7700k which is soldered chip.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Depends what you want
> 8 core verses 4 core /forum/images/smilies/thinking.gif
> 
> Also depends on if you want to delid the 7820x which it has pigeon poop inside so thermally at a disadvantage to the 7700k which is soldered chip.


 the 7700k and the 8700k uses pigeon poop xD. Not soldered.. 9900k was the back to soldered..

And about the trade i don't think is a bad trade till you add 4chan memory needed and cooling if you already have this well.. 7820x its not bad CPU its kind of limited vs the other ones less pci lanes etc...

You aint getting too much out of it either the 7700k. 
So its a investment of $200 for 8core and possible upgrade all way up to 18/36T cpu with a big variety of chips to choose for later. Stick to the 7th series if thats the case xD


----------



## blackmore

I have delidded my 7700K, it uses thermal paste under IHS, its IHS isn't soldered as @zGunBLADEz already said.
I'd delid the 7820X absolutely, can't stand that crap Intel puts under the IHS.
When you say "stick to the 7th series if that's the case", does that mean that I should accept the trade or not?

I'm in no rush to upgrade my PC, I'll almost definitely get the Comet Lake flagship once it comes out, I just wanted to know if $200 is justifiable (even with the further chip upgrade path, not sure how 7th gen HEDT lineup is gonna stand compared to 10900K when it comes out).

If I upgrade to 7820X I'll probably miss out on Comet Lake, but by then I'm stuck on X299 platform. HEDT platform chips upgrade path is core-oriented, not towards higher clocks, and that's my main concern since I don't do heavy workloads, mostly gaming.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Last I noticed gaming doesn't care if you use 4 cores or 18 cores so whether you traid for a 8 core chip it's basically budget 
10900k seems like it would be a better opt in 10 core oc 5.0 easily I'd imagine just like 9900k.. new board though.


----------



## blackmore

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> *Last I noticed gaming doesn't care if you use 4 cores or 18 cores* so whether you traid for a 8 core chip it's basically budget
> 10900k seems like it would be a better opt in 10 core oc 5.0 easily I'd imagine just like 9900k.. new board though.


It sure doesn't, however it does care about high clock speeds (which HEDT CPUs tend to lack in comparison to mainstream platform).
Core count is important but only to a certain extent - 4C/8T is not sufficient anymore, I wouldn't even consider anything below 8C/16T.

10900K at 5GHz+ would be ideal and yes, I'd be getting Asus ROG Maximus XII Apex in that case. It's a hefty price for sure, but I doubt I'd be changing that platform anytime soon.

However, with X299 I can later get a 18C/36T CPU with the same board - the question is, how will the core clocks impact the game performance? I think 10900K will blow out the water many HEDT CPUs (at least those with "normal" and not insane prices).


----------



## ThrashZone

blackmore said:


> It sure doesn't, however it does care about high clock speeds (which HEDT CPUs tend to lack in comparison to mainstream platform).
> Core count is important but only to a certain extent - 4C/8T is not sufficient anymore, I wouldn't even consider anything below 8C/16T.
> 
> 10900K at 5GHz+ would be ideal and yes, I'd be getting Asus ROG Maximus XII Apex in that case. It's a hefty price for sure, but I doubt I'd be changing that platform anytime soon.
> 
> However, with X299 I can later get a 18C/36T CPU with the same board - the question is, how will the core clocks impact the game performance? I think 10900K will blow out the water many HEDT CPUs (at least those with "normal" and not insane prices).


Hi,
Cache is more important for gaming not core amount or core multipliers if you're at least on around 4.0 you've exceeded most gaming recommended spec's

Cache/ mesh is a handicap on x299 
x99 for an example didn't have this handicap because x99 could do max cache 38 easily x299 we're stuck on a lame 30 max cache so yes you can game but it's far less a gaming platform than 8700-9900-10900k's are because they use darn near the same max cache as they do core clocks 
Example 5.0 and these chips cache can go to around 4.8 that's not going to happen on x299 ever


----------



## zGunBLADEz

blackmore said:


> I have delidded my 7700K, it uses thermal paste under IHS, its IHS isn't soldered as @zGunBLADEz already said.
> I'd delid the 7820X absolutely, can't stand that crap Intel puts under the IHS.
> When you say "stick to the 7th series if that's the case", does that mean that I should accept the trade or not?
> 
> I'm in no rush to upgrade my PC, I'll almost definitely get the Comet Lake flagship once it comes out, I just wanted to know if $200 is justifiable (even with the further chip upgrade path, not sure how 7th gen HEDT lineup is gonna stand compared to 10900K when it comes out).
> 
> If I upgrade to 7820X I'll probably miss out on Comet Lake, but by then I'm stuck on X299 platform. HEDT platform chips upgrade path is core-oriented, not towards higher clocks, and that's my main concern since I don't do heavy workloads, mostly gaming.


i would bite the bullet to be honest... unless you want to expend more money $200ish seems reasonable in a platform like x299 with a 7820x to start with..

what i mean stick to the 7th series i mean on x299 cpus.. the delid alone would accomplish more in the end i havent seen nothing that wows me to give me enough reason to swap a 7th gen for 9 or 10th.. even thinking take into consideration.

I dont think its even questionable the gaming perf.. and if you turn off ht and you will pwn any of those cpus thats not even funny real cores vs ht look the 9700k its almost on par in most tests against the 9900k lol
https://youtu.be/H0vLYcPa3uk?t=1069
mind you this is just ballpark not even good tweaked system

x299 @ stock sucks.. x299 overclocked its a whole different game thats why i swapped from ryzen it got in a good price point 

I do not play on cpu bound scenarios but in my rightmark ppm custom tweaked power table it would put the final nail on the 9900k XD if i turn ht off and let the cpu boost from 0-18 as needed instead of the default windows ones


----------



## blackmore

So you reckon that I bite the bullet and buy it? Imagine sticking a 7980XE inside someday LOL !
I mean, I'm still not sold 'cause I'll use it only for gaming, but it sure sounds tempting...

How hard can I OC these CPUs? (7820X and 7980XE)
Also, I sure as hell need an upgrade from a Seasonic Focus Pro 750W


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
You'd run into thermal barriers first so it depends on cooling rather than oc ability.


----------



## KCDC

I like to check around on cpu prices as we all do I'm sure. Definitely noticing stock falling in the 99**x series, prices haven't budged. Doubtful to see 10 series coming back any time soon due to Corona I speculate. Makes me worried even pushing my 9900x anymore as I don't even know if I would get a replacement under the tuning plan or am I being too paranoid?


----------



## ThrashZone

KCDC said:


> I like to check around on cpu prices as we all do I'm sure. Definitely noticing stock falling in the 99**x series, prices haven't budged. Doubtful to see 10 series coming back any time soon due to Corona I speculate. Makes me worried even pushing my 9900x anymore as I don't even know if I would get a replacement under the tuning plan or am I being too paranoid?


Hi,
Jp got a refund because no more stock of 9900x's
I wished for a refund on my 9940x rma but they had some so I got a new :/

As long as 10...x series is mia 99x and even 79x series will stay high gougers at play.
Micro center slashed prices same as 10 series price and they were gone so guess where = gougers.


----------



## KCDC

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Jp got a refund because no more stock of 9900x's
> I wished for a refund on my 9940x rma but they had some so I got a new :/
> 
> As long as 10...x series is mia 99x and even 79x series will stay high gougers at play.
> Micro center slashed prices same as 10 series price and they were gone so guess where = gougers.



So I'd get a refund to spend it on a backordered cpu hahaha. Ok, gonna back off my OC for the time being...


----------



## ThrashZone

KCDC said:


> So I'd get a refund to spend it on a backordered cpu hahaha. Ok, gonna back off my OC for the time being...


Hi,
Full price not Intel 10 series pricing which 7900x was 1k.us
With that I'd hold out for a 10980xe costs the same so yeah I'd do that in a heart beat


----------



## blackmore

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> You'd run into thermal barriers first so it depends on cooling rather than oc ability.


Well I'd like to think that my custom water loop can handle it pretty well, that's why I asked.
Also I've noticed people are disabling HT on higher-core count CPUs, that's interesting.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

blackmore said:


> So you reckon that I bite the bullet and buy it? Imagine sticking a 7980XE inside someday LOL !
> I mean, I'm still not sold 'cause I'll use it only for gaming, but it sure sounds tempting...
> 
> How hard can I OC these CPUs? (7820X and 7980XE)
> Also, I sure as hell need an upgrade from a Seasonic Focus Pro 750W /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif


 yeah why not i dont see nothing wrong with it specially in the long run.. Ryzen is getting better but at the same time hotter. I notice it on the 2700x vs the 1700x/1800x same voltage and everything. Eventually they will catch on to intel including the heats that goes with it xD.. My 1800x never saw temps over 55-60c tops. My 2700x was at least 10c+ hotter with the same vid... Using avx loads. Also avx instructions perse are weaker on amd.


On the same loop... 

A good comeback would be to offer 16core cpus that perform the same at half the tdp off an 16c intel @50x or similar ipc other than that i dont see big movement other than pricing..


----------



## zGunBLADEz

blackmore said:


> ThrashZone said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> You'd run into thermal barriers first so it depends on cooling rather than oc ability.
> 
> 
> 
> Well I'd like to think that my custom water loop can handle it pretty well, that's why I asked.
> Also I've noticed people are disabling HT on higher-core count CPUs, that's interesting.
Click to expand...

For gaming alone purposes at this time yes i would recommend to turn ht off on HCC cpus.. Ht would get in your way with that many threads


----------



## zGunBLADEz

So i tapped new screws messed up a bit on one of them sucky drill bit... but for function purposes its fine it holds the screw.. The thermal pad of 1mm wasnt enough no contact also i needed to cover those little smds that are taller than the vrms by tiny fraction but still a risk from making direct contact with the block metal as well needed something taller so thermal grizzly 2mm did the job on the vrms and the 1mm for the chokes perfect contact... Btw those pads seems very good and looks very reusable over and over.. The ones i had that came with the vrm block almost got destroyed by the chokes alone lol


----------



## KCDC

10940x in stock @ b&h


https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1507538-REG/intel_bx8069510940x_core_i9_10940x_3_5_ghz.html


----------



## KCDC

Who here has a 10940x with any OC that holds stable? It's already surpassing my 9900x at stock, but of course I'd like to push it. Thx for any info. Tried 49 all core 1.26v and computer just shuts down. Is an ax1500i really not enough for my rig? 



EDIT: Sig updated


EDIT 2: I also noticed hwinfo reporting much higher core voltages (1.340+) when I clamp them adaptive at 1.26.


I reflashed BIOS when I installed this CPU, is hwinfo not up to date with the 10 series? Using latest. 6.24-4120


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
4.9 1.3v is a little wonky but will make it through realbench a few loops on 9940x.


----------



## KCDC

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 4.9 1.3v is a little wonky but will make it through realbench a few loops on 9940x.



Ok, so on my TUF mk1 board, I can't use adaptive at all. Manual is fine, voltages remain where they should monitoring via hwinfo etc. Once I try adaptive, the voltages jump. hwi reports 1.35-36-37 when I want to clamp at 1.25


If I run benchmarks with manual at 1.25, no problem. On adaptive, instant hard crash with cinebench. 



Is this a 10x series issue on older x299 mobos? I don't want to run CPUs on manual forced voltage 24/7


Left cache on auto for this test.


48 @ 1.24 is stable on manual realbench 1hr


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
At that added core voltage on adaptive I'd wonder what that did to your vrm temps ?

I'd also post over here on elmor's thread
https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-intel-cpus/1737048-intel-core-i9-10980xe-5-ghz-18-cores.html


----------



## Ki2Is87

KCDC said:


> ThrashZone said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 4.9 1.3v is a little wonky but will make it through realbench a few loops on 9940x.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, so on my TUF mk1 board, I can't use adaptive at all. Manual is fine, voltages remain where they should monitoring via hwinfo etc. Once I try adaptive, the voltages jump. hwi
> reports 1.35-36-37 when I want to clamp at 1.25
> 
> 
> If I run benchmarks with manual at 1.25, no problem. On adaptive, instant hard crash with cinebench.
> 
> 
> 
> Is this a 10x series issue on older x299 mobos? I don't want to run CPUs on manual forced voltage 24/7
> 
> 
> Left cache on auto for this test.
> 
> 
> 48 @ 1.24 is stable on manual realbench 1hr
Click to expand...


Do you run it with an AVX offset ?
Reason I'm asking, I've achieved only ALLCORE 4.5ghz 1.237v no AVX offset = 0 on my 7900x.
1.200v OCCT (small data set) 1H stable +0.037v =1.237v 24/7 voltage.
I use adaptive voltage.
Mobo: Evga x299 ftw k

I've tried 3 cores @ 4.8ghz, 2 @ 4.6ghz and rest @4.7ghz, as well.
Can't get it percore stable even when adding 0.137v on top of the OCCT (small data set) 1H stable voltages.
E.g. 1st core is 4.8ghz 1.275v 1H stable in OCCT (small data set), but crashing on boot, even at 1.412v. It's just crashing on boot, no issues when rendering 4hours at all.


----------



## KCDC

Ki2Is87 said:


> Do you run it with an AVX offset ?
> Reason I'm asking, I've achieved only ALLCORE 4.5ghz 1.237v no AVX offset = 0 on my 7900x.
> 1.200v OCCT (small data set) 1H stable +0.037v =1.237v 24/7 voltage.
> I use adaptive voltage.
> Mobo: Evga x299 ftw k
> 
> I've tried 3 cores @ 4.8ghz, 2 @ 4.6ghz and rest @4.7ghz, as well.
> Can't get it percore stable even when adding 0.137v on top of the OCCT (small data set) 1H stable voltages.
> E.g. 1st core is 4.8ghz 1.275v 1H stable in OCCT (small data set), but crashing on boot, even at 1.412v. It's just crashing on boot, no issues when rendering 4hours at all.



Yes, AVX offsets are both @4, but the issue for me is voltages going up to 1.37, 1.39v even though I set adaptive to 1.2x, It doesn't matter what voltage I decide to use, the cores still get a lot of volts sent to them without my control the moment I use adaptive. This is with + or -, per core or sync all cores.


----------



## JustinThyme

Ran my 9940X at 1.285 for a few benches at 5.0, 1.295 for a boot and CPUZ verification for 5.1, locked up about 5 mins into a blender run and crashed on CB though. Too hot for my liking at 4.9 0r 5.0 with no avx offset. I run it 24x7 at 4.8 with no AVX offset. Try to keep it under 80, 85 tops. When I see 90 I get nervous. I hear all the time of how these chips are made to shut down on thermal blah blah blah and everysone says that including me until I saw a 7960X go POOF. Just a puff of smoke and it was GONE!! Of course it was delidded so no warranty.
1500 is right on the cusp of not enough but not for CPU only loads. should be good so long as you aren't cranking both. I have similar and went the extra 100 watts to a 1600AXI. I knew I was going to have issues when my 1600vA online UPS was hitting overload here and there when both CPU and pair of OCd 2080Tis were being pushed. Upped that to 2200Va which is the next size up on that product line. I've had my 9940X pulling over 900watts out of the UPS by itself.......well GPUs at idle, fans and pumps full bore added as well. 

One thing I did note is the new microcode is hot as hades. Added 10C for me. Screw that mess went to modded BIOS with MC49. Dont know if that will work on a 109XX chip but it should as those were already in there before the last BIOS updates with newer microcode came about. Ive given thought to the 10980XE just because of the price point being less than what I paid for my 9940X but they are phantoms at this point. I dont have a warm fuzzy on the overcharging factory drop ship places. Not many out there at this point.

I sync all cores, 1.225 adaptive and in the additional voltage block is where you put in the 1.225, dont mess with the +/-

Leave ram at stock as well as mesh until you get your CPU settled. Sometime if you do too much at once you end up chasing your tail ust to find out it wasnt the CPU, it was the mesh or the ram. What board? Still the Tuff with passive VRM cooler? That may be your stumbling block.


----------



## KCDC

This happened on the TUF 1 and my current Encore.


This was never an issue with the 9900x, adaptive with 1.29 on turbo. 



With this 10940x, the voltages jump as I stated earlier, using the same method as we always do, adaptive, add voltage to Turbo. Doesn't matter what control voltage I use, they still jump to 1.36 and above. One went to almost 1.40! I know it's not just a software read issue because once I try any sort of bench or stress, instant hard crash. At this point I'm staying Manual 49 @1.290. Worried to keep trying, sending so many volts to the cores. Weird I'm the only one dealing with this? I thought I remembered @*Jpmboy* mentioning the 10x cpus not able to use adaptive properly? Correct me if I am wrong. I'm not doing anything weird or crazy, just the usual OC method I've used since my 6900k.


Side note, I tried again with BIOS 0401, before the MC fix. With ram at stock settings and same issue


----------



## truehighroller1

KCDC said:


> This happened on the TUF 1 and my current Encore.
> 
> 
> This was never an issue with the 9900x, adaptive with 1.29 on turbo.
> 
> 
> 
> With this 10940x, the voltages jump as I stated earlier, using the same method as we always do, adaptive, add voltage to Turbo. Doesn't matter what control voltage I use, they still jump to 1.36 and above. One went to almost 1.40! I know it's not just a software read issue because once I try any sort of bench or stress, instant hard crash. At this point I'm staying Manual 49 @1.290. Worried to keep trying, sending so many volts to the cores. Weird I'm the only one dealing with this? I thought I remembered @*Jpmboy* mentioning the 10x cpus not able to use adaptive properly? Correct me if I am wrong. I'm not doing anything weird or crazy, just the usual OC method I've used since my 6900k.
> 
> 
> Side note, I tried again with BIOS 0401, before the MC fix. With ram at stock settings and same issue


You have to set each core by usage, voltage wise. I had my 10900x figured out by the time I said heck with it and took it back because it wasn't a good clocker anyway compared to my 7900x.


----------



## KCDC

truehighroller1 said:


> You have to set each core by usage, voltage wise. I had my 10900x figured out by the time I said heck with it and took it back because it wasn't a good clocker anyway compared to my 7900x.



Forgot to mention I tried per core as well. Same issue. 



Well, that was on the Tuf. I'll try on this Encore but I expect the same issue. Fingers crossed.


EDIT: No difference.


----------



## KCDC

This is what I get when running adaptive 49 @1.28v or any volts, either per core or sync all cores.


----------



## Wizzzard

When you run Adaptive, the actual voltage you will get will be what ever is higher of these two:
- The programmed VIN for the given frequency (or the highest frequency programmed if you're past that)
- The adaptive voltage you've set

In many cases, adaptive is not useful because the programmed VID is higher than what you actually want.

DO NOT USE NEGATIVE ADAPTIVE VOLTAGE.. you're just asking for random crashes at idle and transient loads.

You're basically let with using a fixed voltage, which really isn't that bad.


----------



## KCDC

Wizzzard said:


> When you run Adaptive, the actual voltage you will get will be what ever is higher of these two:
> - The programmed VIN for the given frequency (or the highest frequency programmed if you're past that)
> - The adaptive voltage you've set
> 
> In many cases, adaptive is not useful because the programmed VID is higher than what you actually want.
> 
> DO NOT USE NEGATIVE ADAPTIVE VOLTAGE.. you're just asking for random crashes at idle and transient loads.
> 
> You're basically let with using a fixed voltage, which really isn't that bad.



Yeah, staying manual 1.29 doesn't show more temps when the frequency follows power settings. Just wanted to be able to use adaptive as I have been in the past. No sense sending the 10940x back then, this is a version issue?


----------



## Wizzzard

It's not a version issue.


That is how adaptive works with Intel CPU's.

It hasn't been a problem before like it is now because intel wasn't boosting these CPU's so high, thus, the VID table wasn't defined at such high frequencies and voltages.


----------



## JustinThyme

Wizzzard said:


> It's not a version issue.
> 
> 
> That is how adaptive works with Intel CPU's.
> 
> It hasn't been a problem before like it is now because intel wasn't boosting these CPU's so high, thus, the VID table wasn't defined at such high frequencies and voltages.


Your adaptive should never pass your “additional” voltage settings. 

Also do you have Svid enabled? Is cstates disabled? What’s you CPU setting for turbo modes? 

This is definitely overshooting by A LOT. With my 9940X I set my adaptive for 1.225 and it never passes that. If I set it for high performance power mode it goes to max freq and rock solid 1.225 across all cores. I set it for my modified balanced mode and it works as it should with freq dropping to 1200 and Vcore to 800mV. I’m more inclined to believe this is a BIOS setting issue. Adaptive can be confusing. You should do nothing but change from auto to adaptive then enter the number in the block for additional adaptive voltage and not mess with the +/- or anything else. 

What happens when you set it to manual and plug in the same value? That should give you a steady Vcore at what you set, nothing more, nothing less. I understand that’s not what you want, just a troubleshooting step. Something else you can do is plug in a USB drive and in the tools tab export bios and you should get a txt file with all your settings. Put that up so everyone can have a look, just make sure to use the spoiler code as it’s a lot of text but that will allow everyone to have a look and maybe find out what’s making you overshoot like that. 

My guess is it’s a BIOS setting that is easily taken care of.


----------



## truehighroller1

JustinThyme said:


> Your adaptive should never pass your “additional” voltage settings.
> 
> Also do you have Svid enabled? Is cstates disabled? What’s you CPU setting for turbo modes?
> 
> This is definitely overshooting by A LOT. With my 9940X I set my adaptive for 1.225 and it never passes that. If I set it for high performance power mode it goes to max freq and rock solid 1.225 across all cores. I set it for my modified balanced mode and it works as it should with freq dropping to 1200 and Vcore to 800mV. I’m more inclined to believe this is a BIOS setting issue. Adaptive can be confusing. You should do nothing but change from auto to adaptive then enter the number in the block for additional adaptive voltage and not mess with the +/- or anything else.
> 
> What happens when you set it to manual and plug in the same value? That should give you a steady Vcore at what you set, nothing more, nothing less. I understand that’s not what you want, just a troubleshooting step. Something else you can do is plug in a USB drive and in the tools tab export bios and you should get a txt file with all your settings. Put that up so everyone can have a look, just make sure to use the spoiler code as it’s a lot of text but that will allow everyone to have a look and maybe find out what’s making you overshoot like that.
> 
> My guess is it’s a BIOS setting that is easily taken care of.


It shouldn't but it does with these new cpu's. I wish I still had mine I would be able to tell him how I managed to get it to act right but I took it back. I might have just set a offset I think but I'm guessing and believe that was per core usage as well.. I had it working right though for sure. It's very wonky though like he's stating. It took me days to figure it all out with my crazy work schedule.


----------



## Wizzzard

JustinThyme said:


> Your adaptive should never pass your “additional” voltage settings.
> 
> Also do you have Svid enabled? Is cstates disabled? What’s you CPU setting for turbo modes?
> 
> This is definitely overshooting by A LOT. With my 9940X I set my adaptive for 1.225 and it never passes that.


You don't have an issue with the 9940X because the VID tables only go up to 4.4 GHz.

On these newer CPU's, the VID table is defined up to 4.8 GHz (which requires a LOT of voltage to be factory stable)

This is why you can use things like Adaptive and Positive Offset on the 99##X CPU's but not on the 109##X CPU's.


----------



## JustinThyme

Wizzzard said:


> You don't have an issue with the 9940X because the VID tables only go up to 4.4 GHz.
> 
> On these newer CPU's, the VID table is defined up to 4.8 GHz (which requires a LOT of voltage to be factory stable)
> 
> This is why you can use things like Adaptive and Positive Offset on the 99##X CPU's but not on the 109##X CPU's.


I don’t use any offset is what I’m getting at. 14 cores on both and I run 4.8 stable with no AVX offset no adaptive offset with Adaptive Vcore additional voltage set to1.225V all day long and all week behind it. It scales back as it should. 

If I can’t control my Vcore and that’s due to the 109xx then I’ll not be trying one. Worked on 79XX and 99XX perfectly with no change and that scale is different.


----------



## Wizzzard

I do the same as you with a 9960X. It works great, low volts at idle and higher volts when I need them at 4.8 - 4.9 GHz.

You will not be able to do that with the 109##X CPU's because the VID table for 4.8 GHz has values at 1.35 V or higher.

With the 109##X CPU's, you must use a manual (fixed) voltage when OC'ing.


----------



## Jpmboy

My 9900X ran adaptive on this R6EO... can't get it to do the same with this 10980XE at anything above stock (where it still overvolts the CPU)


----------



## JustinThyme

Jpmboy said:


> My 9900X ran adaptive on this R6EO... can't get it to do the same with this 10980XE at anything above stock (where it still overvolts the CPU)


ouch....
Well that settles it, No craplakeX for me unless I change my mind and run it manual Vcore which it probably still overshoots. Im happy with what I have and if I see another 9980XE pop up for cheap Ill jump on that instead. After this the platform is finished anyhow.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Nothing wrong with manual core voltage.
Why would anyone want to see a few cores using 0.050+- voltage all the time ?


----------



## Jpmboy

Manual vcore is not subject to overvolting like adaptive since the voltage is not "dynamic" with multiplier. It runs what you set in bios, and reports it as the VID... since it is in Manual Override. No matter what system tool you use, all you can see is VID, not vcore.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
If someone wants to save power use an ipad


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> If someone wants to save power use an ipad


lol - yeah, there's maybe a couple of watts difference at most if you have c-states enabled. In either mode with win10 and speedshift (OS-native), the higher C-states (lower power states, like P8) all drop the same on-die voltage rails. Allowing package C-states also helps if ya start pinching micro-pennies (on a $2000+ PC)


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah if vids weren't so freaking different it wouldn't be so bad but it's just stupid different to look at so I set manual and forget it till I raise multiplier.

2020 census was easy for once what happened


----------



## zGunBLADEz

I like adaptive and negative offset 0 issues here specially if using an avx offset works like a charm and whats it was intended for xD


----------



## tistou77

I use negative adaptive mode (-) for Vcore and no problem


----------



## KCDC

Thanks to all for the info regarding 109x and adaptive. I'm fine leaving it manual I just wanted the option for adaptive.


----------



## KCDC

That said, is this something that can be addressed in a BIOS update or is there no way past it?


----------



## Wizzzard

This is a limitation in the chip itself. It cannot be changed by a bios update.


----------



## JustinThyme

KCDC said:


> That said, is this something that can be addressed in a BIOS update or is there no way past it?


I get the chip requirements. I also get that the BIOS is still buggy at best. Even with a 99XX the ram has been an issue until 505 it got a little better. I wasn’t happy having to run my 3600 cl18 ram at 3200 cl18 when it ran 3800 CL 16 on R6E. It’s at least now running at XMP. I’ll get to playing with that later. To get it to run XMP even on 505 I had to jack the mesh voltage up 100mV. Manual didn’t even work. Before 505 on my dominator platinum kit that’s not on the QVL but vengeance is? Very picky board on ram.


----------



## alexandruchitu

*overclock noob*

My system :

ASUS TUF X299 MARK 2
i7 7820X
GeForce GTX 1080 8gb
Corsair Vengeance LPX Red 32gb DDR4 3733MHz CL17
Corsair Hydro Series H110i

I'm new on this things, so I'm afraid of doing changes in MSI Afterburner by myself.

With what should I start? 

Thanks !


----------



## ThrashZone

alexandruchitu said:


> My system :
> 
> ASUS TUF X299 MARK 2
> i7 7820X
> GeForce GTX 1080 8gb
> Corsair Vengeance LPX Red 32gb DDR4 3733MHz CL17
> Corsair Hydro Series H110i
> 
> I'm new on this things, so I'm afraid of doing changes in MSI Afterburner by myself.
> 
> With what should I start?
> 
> Thanks !


Hi,
For one msi afterburner is only for graphic's card overclocking not processors.

Used to be a good youtube video on how to use voltage curve in afterburner but it was taken down.

Processor wise just watch some youtube videos or read this thread plenty of settings posted 
All core 4.5 should be fine at manual core voltage 1.18v


----------



## arrow0309

Hi, I'm running mine at 4.8 (-1 avx) adaptive, ~1.255v (including a -20mv negative offset).
What would ya suggest to add to that in order to increase it to 4.9 (4.8 avx or 4.7 avx)?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Remove the avx offset would be more beneficial than seeking 4.9 with avx 2
You'd still be running the same clock on avx content being 4.7

But typically 4.9 would need 1.3v maybe less if you get lucky maybe more depending on stability.


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Remove the avx offset would be more beneficial than seeking 4.9 with avx 2
> You'd still be running the same clock on avx content being 4.7
> 
> But typically 4.9 would need 1.3v maybe less if you get lucky maybe more depending on stability.


Hi, I'll try +1 up square, (4.9, -1 avx offset) since most of what I do is gaming and they don't use it often.
Ok, I'll try with +40mv and see if it's stable or just needs more.

About the vcore's negative offset, should I still keep it?


----------



## ThrashZone

arrow0309 said:


> Hi, I'll try +1 up square, (4.9, -1 avx offset) since most of what I do is gaming and they don't use it often.
> Ok, I'll try with +40mv and see if it's stable or just needs more.
> 
> About the vcore's negative offset, should I still keep it?


Hi,
No I'd dump the offset and set it to auto 
Apply 1.3v to additional turbo voltage instead for 4.9 and avx 1 
Your lower voltage rounded down to 1.25v additional turbo for 4.8 avx auto.
AVX 512 just set it to 5 and leave it.


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> No I'd dump the offset and set it to auto
> Apply 1.3v to additional turbo voltage instead for 4.9 and avx 1
> Your lower voltage rounded down to 1.25v additional turbo for 4.8 avx auto.
> AVX 512 just set it to 5 and leave it.


Thanks,
A quicker stability test (vcore oriented) before I run realbench?


----------



## ThrashZone

arrow0309 said:


> Thanks,
> A quicker stability test (vcore oriented) before I run realbench?


Hi,
Quicker 8 minute short test or 30 minute long opendata test always do pretty well to get ready for realbench 
Realbench is easy compared to this 
https://opendata.blender.org/


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Quicker 8 minute short test or 30 minute long opendata test always do pretty well to get ready for realbench
> Realbench is easy compared to this
> https://opendata.blender.org/


Hi, thanks
Gonna do it right now


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I'd try the 4.8 at 1.25v first 
Open opendata and download all the render files it shows that would be the long test.


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I'd try the 4.8 at 1.25v first
> Open opendata and download all the render files it shows that would be the long test.


Why? I dont want 4.8 anymore, used it for too long lol. 
Don't worry, gonna make this work. 
It's running at 4.8 anyway because of the avx - 1.
I've downloaded all 6 benchmarks (scenes) from the launcher (last version) and running the second one. 
Don't get what's the short method. 
Core max 69C so far, bios 3xxx mc69, if I remember well (latest with the higher tjmax).

Edit:
The third one is up and running, so far so good
Vids are though:


----------



## arrow0309

Done all:

Should I try with less than 1.30 before using anything else?
What do you guys use for testing the OC freq without avx?


----------



## JustinThyme

arrow0309 said:


> Done all:
> 
> Should I try with less than 1.30 before using anything else?
> What do you guys use for testing the OC freq without avx?


You can also download bender then get the scenes separately. Classroom and Barcelona loads it up pretty good. Them open file on the render drop down select animation and it will just render it non stop until you stop it. The blender bench does some weak stuff and some heavier loads. I already know I can do the weak crap. Give me the heavy stuff and I loop it. 

I’m doing 4.8 on a 9940X with no AVX offset at 1.225 it will do 4.9 at 1.250 and 5.0 at 1.285 but gets a bit toasty. 5.1 it takes 1.3 but I’m up around 95C then and not stable on heavy loads. I’m comfortable at the 4.8 mark maxing out at 80C after 2 hours of the classroom render non stop. It gets to the max in about 15 mins after the loop get saturated but doesn’t go over as my fan control keep the loop under 32C so at 30C there’s lots of fans cranking near 2000 rpms. I’m actually pulling some Corsair SP 120ML fans in push pull to just push or pull on my large rads with the Noctua 2000RPM industrial fans. They seem to move more air at the same speed and while loud nowhere near as loud as twice as many Corsair fans. Gonna see how it works. Pulled a 480x45 up top with push pull, same deal and replace rad with HWL GTR 420 and it’s keeping the same with less room and only 3 140mm fans instead of 8 120s.


----------



## ThrashZone

arrow0309 said:


> Done all:
> 
> Should I try with less than 1.30 before using anything else?
> What do you guys use for testing the OC freq without avx?


Hi,
Yeah just drop 0.010 until you loose stability and raise it back up 0.005 or 0.010 and you should be done.


----------



## arrow0309

JustinThyme said:


> You can also download bender then get the scenes separately. Classroom and Barcelona loads it up pretty good. Them open file on the render drop down select animation and it will just render it non stop until you stop it. The blender bench does some weak stuff and some heavier loads. I already know I can do the weak crap. Give me the heavy stuff and I loop it.
> 
> I’m doing 4.8 on a 9940X with no AVX offset at 1.225 it will do 4.9 at 1.250 and 5.0 at 1.285 but gets a bit toasty. 5.1 it takes 1.3 but I’m up around 95C then and not stable on heavy loads. I’m comfortable at the 4.8 mark maxing out at 80C after 2 hours of the classroom render non stop. It gets to the max in about 15 mins after the loop get saturated but doesn’t go over as my fan control keep the loop under 32C so at 30C there’s lots of fans cranking near 2000 rpms. I’m actually pulling some Corsair SP 120ML fans in push pull to just push or pull on my large rads with the Noctua 2000RPM industrial fans. They seem to move more air at the same speed and while loud nowhere near as loud as twice as many Corsair fans. Gonna see how it works. Pulled a 480x45 up top with push pull, same deal and replace rad with HWL GTR 420 and it’s keeping the same with less room and only 3 140mm fans instead of 8 120s.





ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah just drop 0.010 until you loose stability and raise it back up 0.005 or 0.010 and you should be done.


Thanks for the tips, I'm OK with 4.9 (4.8 avx) and will see to get the proper vcore and rest.
This morning just had a black screen cold boot (code bd?) and it wasn't doing it for a month or so with my old 4.8 setup.

Might be related to the ram or imc?
Should I increase a little bit the vvcsa?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I don't start up with high clocks
I switch to an everyday clock which is much lower and shutdown....


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I don't start up with high clocks
> I switch to an everyday clock which is much lower and shutdown....


Let me get it right, so you're suggesting I should load a lower clock profile every-time when I shutdown and then boot with the lower clock first then load back the higher clock profile / settings?
I just checked and I have vccio 1.000 (1.008) and sa 0.900 (0.928), I'm bumping the sa to 0.950.
Also lowered the vcore by 10mv.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
That's what I do 
I'm not always doing high clocks is why 
No need to browse the web at 4.8 or 4.9.. lol 

Bios offers one to save profiles so I use that feature for higher and lower clocks.


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> That's what I do
> I'm not always doing high clocks is why
> No need to browse the web at 4.8 or 4.9.. lol
> 
> Bios offers one to save profiles so I use that feature for higher and lower clocks.


But if you use adaptive and some power savings you'll also get way lower clocks at idle won't you?
I switch to max performance only when intensive gaming or benchmarking.
However yeah, got your point anyway :specool:

In the meantime, just finished the benchmark with less vcore but (maybe) the slightly more vccsa added 1C (72C max for both package and cores).
Maybe it's not that bad, later I'm gonna do some gaming


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah gaming is the best funnest way to test


----------



## JustinThyme

Mine stays at 4.8 with no AVX I don’t change any settings. If you are set up right with a balanced power profile it’s not going to boot nor stay at the high end. You may see one core go up while things are loading. Then settle back down. Light loads mine lives at like 1.2 with a Vcore of 0.7 and will throttle up to 4.8 when needed. If I’m going to bench I have. A shortcut to power profiles on my desktop and switch over to high performance that locks it in at 4.8 and max Vcore of 1.225. 

Code BD is one of a few things.
1) you have hit your ceiling and the memory Controller is giving you the bird. 
2) VCCSA but cautiously as too much can be worse than not enough.
3) Block screwed down too tight. 
4) Ram not we’ll seated
5) Ram can’t take it. 

4.8 with a 7900X is respectable. I hit 5.0 with an AVX of 2 and 512 of 3 with a 7900X delidded but I cheated and bought a binned chip. In the end I chopped it back to 4.8 and no AVX offsets. Where I wasn’t worrying about it overheating. 

Don’t believe everything some folks tell you as the next step will be to take a side grinder to your IHS, using Home Depot parts for a mount and mig welding your block to the rear chassis.


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah gaming is the best funnest way to test


I'm getting ****tier cache and memory values with aida64 now with more sa and less vcore:

Hmmmmmmm


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Looks like your Bus clock is fluctuating a bit I noticed on your prior screen shots 100.1-100.3 :/


----------



## arrow0309

JustinThyme said:


> Mine stays at 4.8 with no AVX I don’t change any settings. If you are set up right with a balanced power profile it’s not going to boot nor stay at the high end. You may see one core go up while things are loading. Then settle back down. Light loads mine lives at like 1.2 with a Vcore of 0.7 and will throttle up to 4.8 when needed. If I’m going to bench I have. A shortcut to power profiles on my desktop and switch over to high performance that locks it in at 4.8 and max Vcore of 1.225.
> 
> Code BD is one of a few things.
> 1) you have hit your ceiling and the memory Controller is giving you the bird.
> 2) VCCSA but cautiously as too much can be worse than not enough.
> 3) Block screwed down too tight.
> 4) Ram not we’ll seated
> 5) Ram can’t take it.
> 
> 4.8 with a 7900X is respectable. I hit 5.0 with an AVX of 2 and 512 of 3 with a 7900X delidded but I cheated and bought a binned chip. In the end I chopped it back to 4.8 and no AVX offsets. Where I wasn’t worrying about it overheating.
> 
> Don’t believe everything some folks tell you as the next step will be to take a side grinder to your IHS, using Home Depot parts for a mount and mig welding your block to the rear chassis.


I have enough cooling power (3 big rads, D5 at 100% always with no gpu block right now) and direct die mount with Heatkiller IV and delid die guard (Liquid Pro as tim).
And if it's going to die (which I honestly don't think) will buy myself a 10920X 
Yeah, the ram is maybe at it's limits (4000, cl17-18-17-38-320-1T) @1.40v (1.45 training) and I've had some issues when I was using the cache at 3.2, now at 3.1 seemed stable enough with everything at 4.8 (avx -1).



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Looks like your Bus clock is fluctuating a bit I noticed on your prior screen shots 100.1-100.3 :/


Maybe because it's set to 100.1?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep memory blk or something is set to something other than 100.00 making that reading fluctuate.


----------



## arrow0309

OK so I went back to 1.30v and sa 0.900 
And then sa to 0.925v
Now it's even better (and since it seemed stable with less vcore should be like best perf right now)


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
You're brave for using newer bios on 79 series 
I stick with 1705 even on 99 series


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> You're brave for using newer bios on 79 series
> I stick with 1705 even on 99 series


LOL, I'm ready for the new 109 series 

Btw, small improvement over my last 4.8 daily:

https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/2142754?baseline=1905107


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Nice I've got 1903 or what ever it is on bios 2 but I like 1705 better.
10 series well think we missed that boat off b & h photo pre-order only 10940x around now and I don't need another 14 core.

Pretty much why I'm more looking at 10900k/ KFC or amd 4k release than another hedt 10980xe chip that will likely not be around anytime soon.


----------



## arrow0309

Today I got my first freeze, idle one (cpu was in power saving profile or balanced) so I had to force powering down.
Not a single issue elsewhere, a lot of gaming on High Perf. profile (also perfect boots) and like 58C max temp.
Should I run RealBench like for example 4h or what could it be?


----------



## Jpmboy

arrow0309 said:


> Today I got my first freeze, idle one (cpu was in power saving profile or balanced) so I had to force powering down.
> Not a single issue elsewhere, a lot of gaming on High Perf. profile (also perfect boots) and like 58C max temp.
> Should I run RealBench like for example 4h or what could it be?


adaptive + negative offset?


----------



## arrow0309

Jpmboy said:


> adaptive + negative offset?


No, I removed the offset so 1.30v adaptive only.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah do a benchmark realbench would be okay 
Show your vids you get on all the cores 

If the vids get way different or more than 0.025 things got a little wonky so I would tune the cores differently to get the vids closer together 
Easiest thing is to use manual override on the same voltage see if you have an issue again = dump adaptive.


----------



## arrow0309

arrow0309 said:


> Why? I dont want 4.8 anymore, used it for too long lol.
> Don't worry, gonna make this work.
> It's running at 4.8 anyway because of the avx - 1.
> I've downloaded all 6 benchmarks (scenes) from the launcher (last version) and running the second one.
> Don't get what's the short method.
> Core max 69C so far, bios 3xxx mc69, if I remember well (latest with the higher tjmax).
> 
> Edit:
> The third one is up and running, so far so good
> Vids are though:


These are the vids under Blender

Gosh I hate this new ocn with the pics on attachments only


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah do a benchmark realbench would be okay
> Show your vids you get on all the cores
> 
> If the vids get way different or more than 0.025 things got a little wonky so I would tune the cores differently to get the vids closer together
> Easiest thing is to use manual override on the same voltage see if you have an issue again = dump adaptive.


"Maybe" it has something to do with the low vids in idle?
A little bit of positive offset (taken from the adaptive amount) could help improve stability on "Balanced" profile?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Just replied on elmors thread 
Yeah the difference between vids is the issue 
You'll have to tune up the lazy cores that don't pull as much voltage as the others.


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Just replied on elmors thread
> Yeah the difference between vids is the issue
> You'll have to tune up the lazy cores that don't pull as much voltage as the others.


So in my case its core 3, 4 and 9 right (or 4, 5 and 10).
Please explain me how to tune up the cores. 

Btw:
Just seen your post on "Intel Core i9-10980XE: 5 GHz on 18 cores"
That guy had vid differences way higher then mine, from 1.206 to 1.3v that's insane imho.

Maybe tuning up with 10 - 20 mv positive offset and / or increasing the LLC (currently on Lev 5) might help in my case?
Talking about keeping "all core" settings.


----------



## ThrashZone

arrow0309 said:


> So in my case its core 3, 4 and 9 right (or 4, 5 and 10).
> Please explain me how to tune up the cores.
> 
> Btw:
> Just seen your post on "Intel Core i9-10980XE: 5 GHz on 18 cores"
> That guy had vid differences way higher then mine, from 1.206 to 1.3v that's insane imho.
> 
> Maybe tuning up with 10 - 20 mv positive offset and / or increasing the LLC (currently on Lev 5) might help in my case?
> Talking about keeping "all core" settings.


Hi,
Yes increasing LLC can make the vids tighter too I'd start with 5 could get some of the lazy cores up a little more than now llc 6 max
But indeed trying to get the vids closer does help 0.025 or so I gave up on adaptive long ago on high clocks way too much fiddling when manual override is boom done.

Pure offset mode or adaptive either one they act the same just don't use offset with adaptive just add to additional turbo or lower it to split the differences a little more.

Might add llc effects input voltage not vids.


----------



## arrow0309

So, I've had this:


----------



## arrow0309

Went from llc5 to llc 6 and it didn't change any of the idle vids.
So I added 20mv + (offset) lowering to 1.280 the additional turbo (keeping the llc on 6)
Now I have slightly higher idle vids and (also) little higher load vids (for the LLC 6 i suppose)
Done the 6 benchmark Blender, all fine. I think I'm gonna try it this way for a while.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah llc only really effects input voltage/ vccin which can be another place instability can happen but probably not yours
Most can use 1.8v vccin and llc 1 - 5

Adjusting vids well that is a tedious chore good you only have 10 instead of 18 

Per core or really by specific core 
Same setting on all 10 cores entered separately

And raise the lower vids by half the amount of the difference in the highest vids.


----------



## Jpmboy

arrow0309 said:


> No, I removed the offset so 1.30v adaptive only.


if the system is crashing at idle or say at the end of a reasonable load, it is either under volt or undershoot. You can try lowering the adaptive vcore and using an equal amount in positive offset (this will increase voltage across the VID table not only at adaptive-active multipliers. You can also see if the LLC is causing a low volt condition, either by adjusting LLC so there is less vdroop on vccin or (if available in bios) adjusting the IA AC and DC load lines.
First simply try a positive offset and adaptive equaling the same vcore that is stable with adaptive only (or manual override voltage control).


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah llc only really effects input voltage/ vccin which can be another place instability can happen but probably not yours
> Most can use 1.8v vccin and llc 1 - 5
> 
> Adjusting vids well that is a tedious chore good you only have 10 instead of 18
> 
> Per core or really by specific core
> Same setting on all 10 cores entered separately
> 
> And raise the lower vids by half the amount of the difference in the highest vids.


And that's The Way I'm gonna do it but not with my 10c, a little further away with a 12 or 14 core cpu 



Jpmboy said:


> if the system is crashing at idle or say at the end of a reasonable load, it is either under volt or undershoot. You can try lowering the adaptive vcore and using an equal amount in positive offset (this will increase voltage across the VID table not only at adaptive-active multipliers. You can also see if the LLC is causing a low volt condition, either by adjusting LLC so there is less vdroop on vccin or (if available in bios) adjusting the IA AC and DC load lines.
> First simply try a positive offset and adaptive equaling the same vcore that is stable with adaptive only (or manual override voltage control).


This is what I wanted to hear mate, I knew it somehow 
So I'll drop back to 5 the LLC and increase the offset (from 20mv to 50mv) lowering by 30mv the additional turbo.
Btw, vccin is set to ~1.95 or 1.96 since years ago.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep just need to add a little offset to the lazy cores only 
Only problem is you have to use by specific core and deal with all separately


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yep just need to add a little offset to the lazy cores only
> Only problem is you have to use by specific core and deal with all separately


Yeah, you may be right mate.
Because I just did what I said 15' ago and now I have too much overshot on some cores in full load (even with llc5).


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah the two with the highest vid you can probably lower those cores additional turbo by 0.020 
Add offset to the lazy ones with the same additional turbo.
PITA but if you want vid relaxing got to do it.

You can forget all this on 10 series


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah the two with the highest vid you can probably lower those cores additional turbo by 0.020
> Add offset to the lazy ones with the same additional turbo.
> PITA but if you want vid relaxing got to do it.
> 
> You can forget all this on 10 series


No, setting "by specific core" won't give me both offset and additional turbo voltage for any of the cores, only max turbo multiplier and vcore setting for any of the 10 cores (manual override I suppose).
So I went back to "all cores" setting a +25 offset and 1.275 turbo (total 1.295v vcore).
But I don't like it in full load:


----------



## arrow0309

arrow0309 said:


> Went from llc5 to llc 6 and it didn't change any of the idle vids.
> So I added 20mv + (offset) lowering to 1.280 the additional turbo (keeping the llc on 6)
> Now I have slightly higher idle vids and (also) little higher load vids (for the LLC 6 i suppose)
> Done the 6 benchmark Blender, all fine. I think I'm gonna try it this way for a while.


I think this is my best "all cores" settings so far (and in time maybe lowering a little the additional turbo voltage if permitting)


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
If you're on a asus board adaptive is the same as all core options show using by specific core.


----------



## arrow0309

Hi, it's been ~10 days and seemed all stable everywhere, gaming, light loads, every single boot.
However I did try a standard Firestrike this morning and got an ugly score, combined score especially.
Tried a second run, same:
Any clues?


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> If you're on a asus board adaptive is the same as all core options show using by specific core.


Hi, could my bios 3006 be responsible for the lower physics / combined scores on the 1080p Firestrike? 
Would you highly recommend the 1750 bios instead? 

I even tried a zero avx offset and manual vcore (1.31v) and got quite an improvement to GS (over 31k) and the cpu score (over 28k) but the bloody combined score was even worse, little over 4000.
This cpu / or Windows, driver, software seems buggy here honestly.


----------



## arrow0309

Update, I may have solved it or at least about the (useless) Firestrike at default 1080p settings:

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/47174256

What I did change was only the bus clock (from 100.1 to 100.0), the uncore max freq from 3.1 to 3.2 and the cache offset from 0.200 to 0.250.
All the same like before with adaptive voltage and 25mv positive offset.
Also a small Timespy increase:

https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/47174443

And some quick Cinebench R20 and aida64's cache and memory:


----------



## arrow0309

I'd like to hear some of your opinions and also if it's worth replacing my cpu with a new 10900X.
I'm only gaming for now and I don't think will gonna need more that 10c20t any soon, of course maybe a 10900k will be some better alternative but I'd like not to change everything (motherboard, ram, redo all the liquid loop) and I still need some extra cpu pcie lanes.
Will the newer 10900X (with it's bigger l3 cache) do better (gaming fps) at the same speed (and OC easily to 4.9 or 5.0)?
Also mine is already delidded and bare die mounted (I have the delid die guard) and the temps are OK, how about the soldered 10900X?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yes 10900k will kick it gaming seeing it is a gaming chip cache 48-50 plus 5.2 easily plus if you can cool it.
10900x were mostly defective lots didn't live very long, surprised yours is still alive 
If you kill the 9900x intel will likely give you a full refund like they did Jpmboy... because they have no stock


----------



## arrow0309

Bro, you're talking too fast and I struggle to follow you (let alone the 10900k that I'm not after yet) 
What cpu, mine is a 7900X, what warranty, don't have any left (twas an OEM, 1 year only).
Is this one below worth the change (given my cpu and oc performance) or not? 

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/inte..._CxPs_JIUB0DsDajgsG6RoCYXUQAvD_BwE#free_items


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I did type that fast entered 10900x instead of 9900x 

But I wouldn't get a 10900x HEDT mesh sucks stuck on 30-31 maybe max cache way too limited gaming wise
10900k is much better bottom line compared.


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I did type that fast entered 10900x instead of 9900x
> 
> But I wouldn't get a 10900x HEDT mesh sucks stuck on 30-31 maybe max cache way too limited gaming wise
> 10900k is much better bottom line compared.


OK, got your point
Then I "may" be looking for a 10900k, when finding a bargain :specool:


----------



## tistou77

Hello

Any news about possible future CPU 22 cores ?
And the next gen, Icelake-X I think, which seemed to be planned for the end of 2020, will probably be postponed ?


----------



## ThrashZone

arrow0309 said:


> OK, got your point
> Then I "may" be looking for a 10900k, when finding a bargain :specool:


Hi,
Yeah real point is your 7900x is better so sit tight 

10900k well I have one but got it from micro center locally 
No board yet but a 10 core real gaming chip is I'd say about freaking time I had one lol 

Board should be here this weekend or early next week maximus formula 

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B087LHPYT6?tag=duckduckgo-ffab-20&linkCode=osi&th=1&psc=1


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah real point is your 7900x is better so sit tight
> 
> 10900k well I have one but got it from micro center locally
> No board yet but a 10 core real gaming chip is I'd say about freaking time I had one lol
> 
> Board should be here this weekend or early next week maximus formula
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B087LHPYT6?tag=duckduckgo-ffab-20&linkCode=osi&th=1&psc=1


Lol, looking forward to get my eyes on one @£400 on amazon.co.uk, who knows when?
Close to never 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/ASUS-mothe...ximus+xii+fprmula&qid=1590600336&sr=8-3-spell


----------



## ThrashZone

arrow0309 said:


> Lol, looking forward to get my eyes on one @£400 on amazon.co.uk, who knows when?
> Close to never
> 
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/ASUS-mothe...ximus+xii+fprmula&qid=1590600336&sr=8-3-spell


Hi,
This is an interesting watch 
Talk about never is the 750.us extreme lol


----------



## arrow0309

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> This is an interesting watch
> Talk about never is the 750.us extreme lol
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cssbWlpmTho


yikes


----------



## arrow0309

Last update and goodbye 7900X 

Got a new 10900K and a Z490 ACE, quick 5.2 OC all core avx and went from ... to ... :specool:
(and I still have to overclock the ram)


----------



## ThrashZone

arrow0309 said:


> Last update and goodbye 7900X
> 
> Got a new 10900K and a Z490 ACE, quick 5.2 OC all core avx and went from ... to ... :specool:
> (and I still have to overclock the ram)


Hi,
Yeah 10900k is nice and stupid fast can't wait to see what it will do with a 3080ti stuck on a 1080ti atm.


----------



## Jpmboy

Yeah, I can get my hands on the APEX XII, but I'm not all that excited about the unlocked 10 core... How much longer to the next Intel HEDT? :thinking:


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah, I can get my hands on the APEX XII, but I'm not all that excited about the unlocked 10 core... How much longer to the next Intel HEDT? :thinking:


HI,
Micro center has flipped out selling 10900x for 800.us lol 
Mesh sucks

10900k 539.99 my first real gaming chip since 5930k so I'm enjoying it immensely and a real cache


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> HI,
> Micro center has flipped out selling 10900x for 800.us lol
> Mesh sucks
> 
> 10900k 539.99 my first real gaming chip since 5930k so I'm enjoying it immensely and a real cache


Yeah, tho I game very (very) little these days, those here that do ALWAYS want the 5.2GHz 8086K. I really do not see a difference with a pair of 2080Tis on this [email protected] vs the same cards on the [email protected] (5.0 cache) when they are hooked to 4k60 or 1440P/144Hz. Old eyes I guess.


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah, tho I game very (very) little these days, those here that do ALWAYS want the 5.2GHz 8086K. I really do not see a difference with a pair of 2080Tis on this [email protected] vs the same cards on the [email protected] (5.0 cache) when they are hooked to 4k60 or 1440P/144Hz. Old eyes I guess.


Hi,
Yeah I only had 5930k and 7900x/ 9940x to game on and preferred 5930k just it's cache at 38 made a lot of difference even on a 1080ti ftw3 opposed to titan Xp 
I wasn't counting fps either just fluid gaming.

So 10900k is just flat out wicked different lol 
I believe you even were saying your 8700k build was stupid fast gaming so to build off that if I may I would say the same about 10900k 
GPU matters but cpu/ cache does too


----------



## Jpmboy

Yeah, funny thing is, I gave my nephew a golden 7350K (2c4t)@ 5.4/5.0 Apex IX rig with a 1070Ti, [email protected], and with the 120Hz 1080P monitor hooked to it, he claims it "crushes" anything here at his uncle's house for his favorite games. IDK, gaming rigs are like fitting a prosthetic device.


----------



## VULGARORK

HI all, so quick question regarding RAM on your rigs, what's everyone running?
8x4GB, 4000?
4x8GB 3600?
8x8GB ?????
4x16GB 3600?
8x16GB at what speed?

Busy building a X299 RIG and the guys on my thread were helpful yesterday, just wanting to see what everyone is running.
10920X/10940X.

Also, is it true that best throughput on the memory controller is achieved at 6 DIMMs?

Regards


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Unless you have some applications or work that needs more than 32gb 4x8gb kits are usually way more memory needed and 8gb stick oc pretty well
3600c16 4x8 for myself 

https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232585


----------



## Jpmboy

VULGARORK said:


> HI all, so quick question regarding RAM on your rigs, what's everyone running?
> 8x4GB, 4000?
> 4x8GB 3600?
> 8x8GB ?????
> 4x16GB 3600?
> 8x16GB at what speed?
> 
> Busy building a X299 RIG and the guys on my thread were helpful yesterday, just wanting to see what everyone is running.
> 10920X/10940X.
> 
> Als*o, is it true that best throughput on the memory controller is achieved at 6 DIMMs*?
> 
> Regards


really cannot answer your question without knowing what MB you are using. In general, 4x8GB of samsung B die will run the highest frequency and lowest latency. But, on some 8 slot boards, filling all slots, even running at a lower frequency can yield higher throughput (bandwidth). 
6 dimms on a quad channel layout... not good in any 8slot MB


----------



## D4NI3L3

I forgot the question in this thread so I'll link it, could someone help me choosing between 10920X and 10940X?

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...ave-x299-motherboard-i9-10920x-i9-10940x.html

Thank you.


----------



## Jpmboy

D4NI3L3 said:


> I forgot the question in this thread so I'll link it, could someone help me choosing between 10920X and 10940X?
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...ave-x299-motherboard-i9-10920x-i9-10940x.html
> 
> Thank you.


Which one can you find available? ... either will do fine and +/- 2 cores will not matter in anything except benchmarks that use all cores/threads.


----------



## D4NI3L3

Jpmboy said:


> Which one can you find available? ... either will do fine and +/- 2 cores will not matter in anything except benchmarks that use all cores/threads.


Actually the 10920X is available for 780 euros, the 10940X should be available soon and costs 100 euros more.

For gaming I don't worry about cores, the actual 7820X is enough and it will be for a long time to come. I'm thinking more about music production, I use Reaper and it is great in multithreading but...I don't know if I could have benefits from a +2 core difference. The OC should be slightly worse on 10940X that has a stock boost of 4.1 GHz all cores VS 4.3 GHz of the 10920X. I'd like to achieve 4.4 GHz or 4.5GHz all cores with those CPUs and actually with Prime95 I reach 100 °C but I reach a maximum around 70° with normal usage and here is summer so we hit 40 °C outside. In winter it is better...

I would like to get similar results knowing that the thermal transimssion of the GEN 10 CPUs is better than the first X299 GEN.

What would you say to me?

Thank you.


----------



## Jpmboy

If you think the 2 more cores will make the system more productive (16% or so) go with it. A 4.4 vs 4.6 (or even 4.8) OC is less of a difference. Stock boost has little to do with OC overhead when changing core count under the same TDP.
Then... delete p95 from your HCC rig and do not use it on these high core count chips. :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
14 cores pulls a lot of power out the wall 20 amp breaker needed stout psu too that g2-850w might not be enough 1000w or higher.


----------



## D4NI3L3

Jpmboy said:


> If you think the 2 more cores will make the system more productive (16% or so) go with it. A 4.4 vs 4.6 (or even 4.8) OC is less of a difference. Stock boost has little to do with OC overhead when changing core count under the same TDP.
> Then... delete p95 from your HCC rig and do not use it on these high core count chips. :thumb:


The problem is that I don't know if I will need them or not but reading the post down here...



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 14 cores pulls a lot of power out the wall 20 amp breaker needed stout psu too that g2-850w might not be enough 1000w or higher.


...I think that the best choice would be the 10920X since I don't want to change the PSU right now. Am I right?


----------



## Jpmboy

a 20A dedicated circuit is not necessary


----------



## D4NI3L3

Jpmboy said:


> a 20A dedicated circuit is not necessary


So...indecision again...


----------



## ThrashZone

D4NI3L3 said:


> The problem is that I don't know if I will need them or not but reading the post down here...
> 
> 
> 
> ...I think that the best choice would be the 10920X since I don't want to change the PSU right now. Am I right?


Hi,
It's close
G2 isn't all that great of a psu series sadly, P2 850w is better but guess you just have to see, depends on how hard you push it really 5.0+ iffy even 4.8 will sucks some juice 

Also see how many other wall outlets are on this computers circuit and breaker size always good to know in advance


----------



## ThrashZone

Jpmboy said:


> a 20A dedicated circuit is not necessary


Hi,
Depends on how many other outlets are on it and what is powered off it too really.


----------



## D4NI3L3

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> It's close
> G2 isn't all that great of a psu series sadly, P2 850w is better but guess you just have to see, depends on how hard you push it really 5.0+ iffy even 4.8 will sucks some juice
> 
> Also see how many other wall outlets are on this computers circuit and breaker size always good to know in advance


I really would like to do some light OC maybe 4.4 - 4.5 GHz maximum on all core.


----------



## ThrashZone

D4NI3L3 said:


> I really would like to do some light OC maybe 4.4 - 4.5 GHz maximum on all core.


Hi,
Should be fine on 12 or 14 cores.
I still would trace everything on this circuit so you at least know what is on it too.


----------



## D4NI3L3

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Should be fine on 12 or 14 cores.
> I still would trace everything on this circuit so you at least know what is on it too.


Ok thank you, so...indecision again...

I tried with my DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) and with my actual CPU it spreads the load evenly on every core, by using a 256 buffer size in some passages I reach almost 100% on every core. This means that more cores = more space to spread the load...

About the temperatures what do you think?

I actually have all the cores at 4.4 GHz with 1.165 V per core but I think I could reach 4.5 with the same voltage, the temperatures with prime95 (I will leave it as suggested) are terrible but normal usage is fine, even in summer...


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Depends on how many other outlets are on it and what is powered off it too really.


Very true... but anyone who's hook up their HEDT to the same circuit as the kids hair dryers or the window AC won't have to wait long before looking for another socket.


----------



## ThrashZone

D4NI3L3 said:


> Ok thank you, so...indecision again...
> 
> I tried with my DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) and with my actual CPU it spreads the load evenly on every core, by using a 256 buffer size in some passages I reach almost 100% on every core. This means that more cores = more space to spread the load...
> 
> About the temperatures what do you think?
> 
> I actually have all the cores at 4.4 GHz with 1.165 V per core but I think I could reach 4.5 with the same voltage, the temperatures with prime95 (I will leave it as suggested) are terrible but normal usage is fine, even in summer...


Hi,
Stay away from p95 
Every chip is different maybe look into a better 9940x at least adaptive core voltage works


----------



## D4NI3L3

Jpmboy said:


> Very true... but anyone who's hook up their HEDT to the same circuit as the kids hair dryers or the window AC won't have to wait long before looking for another socket.


Sorry I didn't answer about this, I have a dedicated circuit and protection for my studio and I asked a "bigger cable" for it, so I think I'm good on that side.

I will try to avoid too much power consumption/high temperature by keeping the OC as lite as possible as I said before. Maybe I could try to start from 4.8 to test how good the chip is and if my PSU is able to enduring the load. Then I will go down to a more stable frequency.

I will also buy an RTX 3000 in the near future (if it's worth it) so I have to be careful about power.



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Stay away from p95
> Every chip is different maybe look into a better 9940x at least adaptive core voltage works


Yeah ok, I will. Another useful stability test to use?

Ok I'll think about it this days. Maybe I will head towards 14 cores, if it doesn't work well I could always send it back to Amazon.


----------



## ThrashZone

D4NI3L3 said:


> Sorry I didn't answer about this, I have a dedicated circuit and protection for my studio and I asked a "bigger cable" for it, so I think I'm good on that side.
> 
> I will try to avoid too much power consumption/high temperature by keeping the OC as lite as possible as I said before. Maybe I could try to start from 4.8 to test how good the chip is and if my PSU is able to enduring the load. Then I will go down to a more stable frequency.
> 
> I will also buy an RTX 3000 in the near future (if it's worth it) so I have to be careful about power.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah ok, I will. Another useful stability test to use?
> 
> Ok I'll think about it this days. Maybe I will head towards 14 cores, if it doesn't work well I could always send it back to Amazon.


Hi,
Blender opendata or free demo rendering files is a real life stress and stability test I use 
ASUS Realbench too although it's old and not updated anymore

Just check the boxes for all the render files it shows it's the full test
https://opendata.blender.org/

Install blender and download Classroom demo file just point blender to where you extracted all too with file open,
It's good if you want it to loop for a while just use render animation instead of render image.
https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/


----------



## D4NI3L3

Thank you I will look at that, do you think that we will see a new HEDT CPU series in 2021?


----------



## ThrashZone

D4NI3L3 said:


> Thank you I will look at that, do you think that we will see a new HEDT CPU series in 2021?


Hi,
I'm sure intel will keep releasing seems pretty slim pickens for the US maybe mad about orange man seeing intel is a China company they just dripped release the 10...xe here darn jerks 
Well I just have to live with my 10900k build happily as a 10980xe substitute games better anyway


----------



## D4NI3L3

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I'm sure intel will keep releasing seems pretty slim pickens for the US maybe mad about orange man seeing intel is a China company they just dripped release the 10...xe here darn jerks
> Well I just have to live with my 10900k build happily as a 10980xe substitute games better anyway


Where do you keep all this PCs? xD

I'm thinking for a long time to build a second PC dedicated to gaming and VR by leaving the first one as a workstation only but then I would have two PC in my studio (so a lot of heat) and my desk is already full of displays used for the workstation, I should find a sort of switch that allows me to change the video signal source but I fear I could build an over complicated setup.


----------



## ThrashZone

D4NI3L3 said:


> Where do you keep all this PCs? xD
> 
> I'm thinking for a long time to build a second PC dedicated to gaming and VR by leaving the first one as a workstation only but then I would have two PC in my studio (so a lot of heat) and my desk is already full of displays used for the workstation, I should find a sort of switch that allows me to change the video signal source but I fear I could build an over complicated setup.


Hi,
Got x299 & z490 on my desk atm 
Got another hanging in my entertainment center old q9550 with on board graphic's but found a cheap 980ti for it a week ago for 150.00 little meager for x99 though
Got x99 in pieces z490 build stole it's 1080ti and case...

So yeah I'm gpu lacking and waiting for a decent 30 series gpu to play with on x299 and z490


----------



## toncij

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Got x299 & z490 on my desk atm
> Got another hanging in my entertainment center old q9550 with on board graphic's but found a cheap 980ti for it a week ago for 150.00 little meager for x99 though
> Got x99 in pieces z490 build stole it's 1080ti and case...
> 
> So yeah I'm gpu lacking and waiting for a decent 30 series gpu to play with on x299 and z490


I've also hoped for a HEDT built around a Comet core... but wishes...


----------



## ThrashZone

toncij said:


> I've also hoped for a HEDT built around a Comet core... but wishes...


Hi,
Yep finally said f-it and moved on as soon as I saw the 10900k plop at local micro center for 540.us verses now 600.us :thumb:
Apex 440.us with tax so yeah still under what 10980xe cost.


----------



## tps3443

Ok, it took me nearly (3) years. But I finally purchased a Intel 7980XE. I went ahead and ordered a X299 motherboard, another matching 2x8GB DDR4 kit to my current memory, and a Asetek 280MM AIO unit. 

Ready for beast mode!! I have dreamed for a 7980XE for a very long time. I’m gonna run it another 3 years easily.

I found really good deals on my components too.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

tps3443 said:


> Ok, it took me nearly (3) years. But I finally purchased a Intel 7980XE. I went ahead and ordered a X299 motherboard, another matching 2x8GB DDR4 kit to my current memory, and a Asetek 280MM AIO unit.
> 
> Ready for beast mode!! I have dreamed for a 7980XE for a very long time. I’m gonna run it another 3 years easily.


Thats good news.

I am staying with my 10980xe for now. I have a 10900k and Apex XII on the shelf that will go into my son's pc eventually when I find another Arctic Freezer II 360 in stock. The 10900k does 5.1Ghz easily and at the time(couple months ago) was excited to try and go for another 10900k and try the 5.3GHz+ lottery. There is a $600 CAD obo unopened 10900k here locally on Kijiji. But honestly, I could care less now about z490 now. Maybe in a few months I'll change my mind. This 10980xe chip is running great @4.7GHz 4x16gb 3800MHz Cl16. Uncore @3200MHz.

Just getting ready for the next Nvidia cards to launch.


----------



## tps3443

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Thats good news.
> 
> I am staying with my 10980xe for now. I have a 10900k and Apex XII on the shelf that will go into my son's pc eventually when I find another Arctic Freezer II 360 in stock. The 10900k does 5.1Ghz easily and at the time(couple months ago) was excited to try and go for another 10900k and try the 5.3GHz+ lottery. There is a $600 CAD obo unopened 10900k here locally on Kijiji. But honestly, I could care less now about z490 now. Maybe in a few months I'll change my mind. This 10980xe chip is running great @4.7GHz 4x16gb 3800MHz Cl16. Uncore @3200MHz.
> 
> Just getting ready for the next Nvidia cards to launch.


Yeah I considered a 10900K. But I felt like I wasn’t getting my monies worth with the cost of motherboards, and then CPU cost too. I would have rather just continued running my 5.3Ghz 8086K, which was pretty quick.

Plus, I got everything for a really good deal. And X299 motherboards are in huge availability for really good prices. 


The platform is the clear choice even in 2020.


----------



## Jpmboy

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Thats good news.
> 
> I am staying with my 10980xe for now. I have a 10900k and Apex XII on the shelf that will go into my son's pc eventually when I find another Arctic Freezer II 360 in stock. The 10900k does 5.1Ghz easily and at the time(couple months ago) was excited to try and go for another 10900k and try the 5.3GHz+ lottery. There is a $600 CAD obo unopened 10900k here locally on Kijiji. But honestly, I could care less now about z490 now. Maybe in a few months I'll change my mind. This 10980xe chip is running great @4.7GHz 4x16gb 3800MHz Cl16. Uncore @3200MHz.
> 
> *Just getting ready for the next Nvidia cards to launch*.


^^ that's where I'm at too. :thumb:


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Thrice


----------



## amder

Just picked up a i7 7740x for $250 Canadian and a EVGA X299 Micro for $225 on amazon. Just bought to tinker around and do some overclocking. Is prime95 not a good stress tester anymore? I seen a few posts back not to use it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Micro center just came up with some 10940 & 10920x's


----------



## Jpmboy

amder said:


> Just picked up a i7 7740x for $250 Canadian and a EVGA X299 Micro for $225 on amazon. Just bought to tinker around and do some overclocking. Is prime95 not a good stress tester anymore? I seen a few posts back not to use it.


yeah, use something like realbench or x264 stress test...


----------



## amder

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, use something like realbench or x264 stress test...


Thank you, I will have to give those a try.


----------



## Jpmboy

amder said:


> Thank you, I will have to give those a try.


Here's a good x264: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7gpMyj43ZFjSzJ4Nm0xT3pobjA/view?usp=sharing
just set the number of threads (some say using 1.5x actual threads is best, I use the actual #of threads). Start with like 10 loops, if temps stay in your preferred range, 50 to 100 covers the CPU well.
As importantly, a good ram test is critical. A bad CPU OC just BSDOs, a bad ram OC (even XMP) can silently corrupt an OS install. 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-i...-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread.html


----------



## Middleman

Man, I got a golden 7820X chip, Im running 24/7 1.21v fixed for 4.8ghz cpu and 3.3ghz cache. During the cooler season I run it at 1.319 5ghz cpu/3.3ghz cache. There are a couple cores that get upset when i run @ 1.2v or 1.29 so i just bumped it up by a bit.


I got a 9900k in the boys PC and that thing needs 1.265v for 4.8ghz stable w/ 4.6ghz cache.


Personally, I'm torn with wanting the 10920x, or buying the 10980x and dropping it to 12cores to maintain a certain power envelope. What I like about the hcc chips is the bigger die surface area for cooling surface. 



I'm running Direct Die Frame and VRM heatsink with a custom water cooling loop, 360rad+280rad. Its pretty much in the 58-63c range for highs - but core0 and core 7 peak a bit higher. 80c/68c when running intense apps.


And If i do buy the CSLX, then I may as well buy a new mobo, so its a bit of a money pit with mobo prices, $1000 cad bucks for the encore. I should of bought two rampages at the time lol.


Note to self: next HEDT, buy "backup mobo" : P


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Only way I'd get a 10980xe is if bestbuy pops up with one at it's sell price of 999.99.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Middleman said:


> Man, I got a golden 7820X chip, Im running 24/7 1.21v fixed for 4.8ghz cpu and 3.3ghz cache. During the cooler season I run it at 1.319 5ghz cpu/3.3ghz cache. There are a couple cores that get upset when i run @ 1.2v or 1.29 so i just bumped it up by a bit.
> 
> 
> I got a 9900k in the boys PC and that thing needs 1.265v for 4.8ghz stable w/ 4.6ghz cache.
> 
> 
> Personally, I'm torn with wanting the 10920x, or buying the 10980x and dropping it to 12cores to maintain a certain power envelope. What I like about the hcc chips is the bigger die surface area for cooling surface.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm running Direct Die Frame and VRM heatsink with a custom water cooling loop, 360rad+280rad. Its pretty much in the 58-63c range for highs - but core0 and core 7 peak a bit higher. 80c/68c when running intense apps.
> 
> 
> And If i do buy the CSLX, then I may as well buy a new mobo, so its a bit of a money pit with mobo prices, $1000 cad bucks for the encore. I should of bought two rampages at the time lol.
> 
> 
> Note to self: next HEDT, buy "backup mobo" : P


Don't get the Encore, get the x299 Dark:

*https://www.evga.com/products/productlist.aspx?type=1&family=Motherboard+Family&chipset=Intel+X299*

Can't beat the price.

I bought one a couple days ago, with duty $241 CAD shipped.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
All the evga x299 boards are pretty much the same price lol wild 
evga z490 on the other hand is an whopping 550.us and out of stock.


----------



## Middleman

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Don't get the Encore, get the x299 Dark:
> 
> *https://www.evga.com/products/productlist.aspx?type=1&family=Motherboard+Family&chipset=Intel+X299*
> 
> Can't beat the price.
> 
> I bought one a couple days ago, with duty $241 CAD shipped.



Thanks brother, I just made an impulse buy and bought one lol. It was out of stock earlier today and it just opened up for new orders just now.
So ya for $209 cad before duty why the heck not! 



I got spare RAM so - maybe i should wait for BlackFriday for 10920x....for 800-900 bucks?


----------



## Jpmboy

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Don't get the Encore, get the x299 Dark:
> 
> *https://www.evga.com/products/productlist.aspx?type=1&family=Motherboard+Family&chipset=Intel+X299*
> 
> Can't beat the price.
> 
> I bought one a couple days ago, with duty $241 CAD shipped.


Wow! I'm tempted just for grins... they are clearing the warehouse in advance of? 
You gonna use this with the 10980XE?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Jpmboy said:


> Wow! I'm tempted just for grins... they are clearing the warehouse in advance of?
> You gonna use this with the 10980XE?



No the 9980xe that is laying around now 

EDIT:

Bought another one, the price is just too good. Will have it as backup, or might get another cpu for it.:thumb:


----------



## Jpmboy

MrTOOSHORT said:


> No the 9980xe that is laying around now
> 
> EDIT:
> Bought another one, the price is just too good. Will have it as backup, or might get another cpu for it.:thumb:


It really is too good of a price to pass up... I'd have to use one to replace the Apex, or R6EO or G9? The G7 (itx) is in a case too small to hold the Dark. It is a very good board. EVGA sent a bunch with Joe ("steponz") to the PA OC meet last summer - they OC very well!


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Jpmboy said:


> It really is too good of a price to pass up... I'd have to use one to replace the Apex, or R6EO or G9? The G7 (itx) is in a case too small to hold the Dark. It is a very good board. EVGA sent a bunch with Joe ("steponz") to the PA OC meet last summer - they OC very well!


Back up to $349.99, glad I got another one before the sale was over.


----------



## Jpmboy

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Back up to $349.99, glad I got another one before the sale was over.


lol - that's crazy... "Flash Sale" !


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah the last dump was on their ebay store not on evga site it showed regular price.


----------



## ITAngel

Question has been change and converted to a friend question. Do you think Intel will release a Rocket Lake X for the X299? He is looking into a X299 because he cannot find a 10900K in a 250miles radius.


----------



## tps3443

Finally got this build going together! Waiting on a matching memory set to come in for quad channel, and I’ll
be ready to go guys!

My 7980XE has warranty until the end of 2022, but yet I want to delid it so bad. I’m very torn about this.

I have also downgraded from a 2080Ti that ran 2,130 steady to a 1660Ti. Waiting on Ampere. 

Just for fun, I Power modded the 1660Ti haha! 

Anyways, I’m so excited about running a 7980XE! I’ve always wanted one. And I’ve finally got one! I’ll most likely delid it. I dunno who I’m kidding. I’d like to manage a stable 4.5Ghz with my 240MM AIO. I’ve got a 1200 watt Seasonic platinum PSU, so I should be good to go with stable power.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

$300 ?? I’d delid no doubt. 

Both my evga Dark x299 came in. Both sealed retail boxes. Was thinking some refurb brown boxes for the cheap price but no it’s all good!


----------



## tps3443

Testing my 7980XE. It looks great so far! No delid or anything. Just a moddest OC, and I am still only running dual channel. I think I have some pretty good silicon, this CPU was built in late around 8-10 months ago? So, this is a very new new 7980XE. I still have well over 2 years of warranty on it too.


----------



## Nizzen

tps3443 said:


> Testing my 7980XE. It looks great so far! No delid or anything. Just a moddest OC, and I am still only running dual channel. I think I have some pretty good silicon, this CPU was built in late around 8-10 months ago? So, this is a very new new 7980XE. I still have well over 2 years of warranty on it too.


Run R20. R15 is just too fast to heat up the system  Looks like a good sample


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Really use R15 extreme at least 
https://www.guru3d.com/files-details/cinebench-r15-extreme-edition-download.html


----------



## tps3443

Nizzen said:


> Run R20. R15 is just too fast to heat up the system  Looks like a good sample



I know R15 is very easy lol, but it is still a measuring stick. Yes R20 is AVX! Heavy load! This is R20 with a -2 AVX offset. It runs extremely cool though, stays in the low 70's. I have more room with this CPU for sure! It is not even delidded, and on a small 240MM AIO. I love it! I am not a liar, so technically this is really only 4.3Ghz because of the AVX offset. But, hey! it is a (18) core processor without a soldered IHS it is what it is guys. Still a very good chip I think.

Also, I am only running Dual Channel ram currently. Waiting on another matching kit to come USPS.


----------



## tps3443

MrTOOSHORT said:


> $300 ?? I’d delid no doubt.
> 
> Both my evga Dark x299 came in. Both sealed retail boxes. Was thinking some refurb brown boxes for the cheap price but no it’s all good!


I have (2) 7980XE’s, the one I’m running was more expensive and years newer. Even has a much nicer retail box, paper board construction, magnetic lid, gold clear plastic presentation shell inside. I didn’t know there was a different retail packing for them? I thought 7980XE boxes would all be the same thing?? But my $300 dollar 7980XE is in a cheap skimpy looking box in comparison haha. 

Anyways, here’s a picture of both styles of the packaging I’ve got.


upload pictures


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

My 10980xe and 9980xe have the same pro box, the bottom one in that pic.


----------



## tps3443

R15 extreme = 1,195 points. 

For some reason R15 extreme says I have windows 8??


----------



## carlhil2

Finally got my chip('bout damn time) and I have HT disabled for gaming. will be locking in my OC this weekend..


----------



## tps3443

MrTOOSHORT said:


> My 10980xe and 9980xe have the same pro box, the bottom one in that pic.


Your right. My 2nd 7980XE was in a 9980XE/10980XE box lol. The white sticker is peeled off.

I just googled it, and the 7980XE boxes were the smaller boxes.


----------



## tps3443

carlhil2 said:


> Finally got my chip('bout damn time) and I have HT disabled for gaming. will be locking in my OC this weekend..


Seeing this makes me very happy about my 7980XE! I love my new processor. I booted my new build up for the first time today. These 18 cores are marvelous! I’m coming from a 8086K that was at 5.3Ghz.


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> R15 extreme = 1,195 points.
> 
> For some reason R15 extreme says I have windows 8??


Hi,
Temperatures would of been nice to see, r15 extreme stresses the chip close as r20 does.


----------



## tistou77

It is true that the Extreme Mod is hotter 

@4700


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah people don't like it because the score is too low lol


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Temperatures would of been nice to see, r15 extreme stresses the chip close as r20 does.


It froze, so I took the picture with my phone. 
I put my case door back on earlier, and the difference makes my cpu unstable in R15 extreme at 4.5Ghz. 
It still runs R20 with no issues. But, I like to leave my case door off anyways. It has been off for months.

I’m seeing peak temps of 69,71,77,82C on all cores during a R20 run. My CPU is not delidded yet. Voltage is at 1.135V.


----------



## tps3443

I changed some bios settings last night, CPU power from Auto to 140%, VRM phase control to extreme, and disabled phase spread spectrum to help OCing.

Now my system gets wayyyy hotter under a load. And seems to pull way more juice.

Could anyone explain these things? I have a Asus X299 motherboard.


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah people don't like it because the score is too low lol


R15 Extreme feels like running R15 when i7’s were 4/8 processors lol.


----------



## tps3443

I just ran R20, with temps for anyone curious. I love this processor. I wish I would have purchased one back in 2017. A lot of people talked crap about these chips. I don't get it, these processors are just incredible! Very happy with the new build. Right now, I am at my limit of cooling. This CPU requires a delid, lapped IHS, and I need to lap my AIO block too. Then I could comfortably maintain 4.6Ghz " Maybe"

I am going to continue running it like this, just to make sure it works well any everything is solid.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Yep, rather have a 10980xe than a 10900k. I tried the 10900k and it was pretty good, but it went to my son and I run the 18 core primarily. They are good chips.


----------



## tps3443

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Yep, rather have a 10980xe than a 10900k. I tried the 10900k and it was pretty good, but it went to my son and I run the 18 core primarily. They are good chips.


Hey, is your 10980XE delidded? Or factory? I looked for a while, and tried to buy one. I even set notifications at B&H photo, and somewhere else I forget. I tried twice, with two email alerts from them. Both attempts within 30 minutes to an hour after getting a “In stock Alert” they were already sold out. Oh well, I’m definitely good now though.

People were taking advantage of the 10980XE that’s for sure. A lot of people were buying them all up for around $1,000 USD. And reselling them for $1,600-$2,000 dollars on eBay.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

No delid, it's fine the way it is. Anyways it is soldered, it's a bit tougher to delid.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

I got a dark the other day my preliminar testing im more inclined towards the micro 2 .. I have no cpu power watts readings even with svid enable maybe i check later with another hwinfo..... it doesnt do 4200 on the same kit of ram as my micro2 maybe is the cpu im using a 7940x for testing maybe the 7980xe would kick that out. The vrms for some reason are hotter than my micro2 pre vrm waterblock.. Board runs fine, but that evga micro2 its some kind of a freak lol... I love the features of the dark tho .. That 3 bios switch is golden for me to switch between settings without getting into bios or to have different bioses or daily setup like higher clocks with no ht for gaming etc.. xD

It also dont recover from a bad setting on the ram as my micro2 does she even boot with one stick if it have too usually it will drop 1-2 sticks this one never pass training them whatsoever.. Have to hard reset..

Have some nasty performance on a pci ex16x card with 3 nvmes sm961 on raid 0 L2 cache + primocache + L1 ram cache
My server with hdd spinners would love that crap..

Budget was only around $150 for the pci card i got in ebay for $30 used and 4x 256gb sm961 $30 a pop..
Cheap fast 1tb "cache drive" for spinners xD


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Funny I was so close to buying the Micro 2 last week, but held off. Few hours later I looked at EVGA again, the Dark x299 was $159.99 all of a sudden. So bought two. Might have been happy with the Micro 2 I'm sure.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Funny I was so close to buying the Micro 2 last week, but held off. Few hours later I looked at EVGA again, the Dark x299 was $159.99 all of a sudden. So bought two. Might have been happy with the Micro 2 I'm sure.


I have 2 one i kill it by mistake with a coffee spill the other one still up and running is my daily They both behaved the same it wasnt a fluke it was a good 6-7months between swaps too.. That little vrm heatsink can keep up with a 7980xe i tell you that. But i ended using a rampage black iv vrm block.. It only needed 2 holes tapped and a 2mm thermal pad for the vrm section because of some little caps are a bit taller than the vrms northside so the 2mm thermal pad will be cushion for them to prevent shorting 12v lines and she was good to go.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

zGunBLADEz said:


> I have 2 one i kill it by mistake with a coffee spill the other one still up and running is my daily They both behaved the same it wasnt a fluke it was a good 6-7months between swaps too.. That little vrm heatsink can keep up with a 7980xe i tell you that. But i ended using a rampage black iv vrm block.. It only needed 2 holes tapped and a 2mm thermal pad for the vrm section because of some little caps are a bit taller than the vrms northside so the 2mm thermal pad will be cushion for them to prevent shorting 12v lines and she was good to go.


Yes I seen what you did there with the VRM block, good job.


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> Hey, is your 10980XE delidded? Or factory? I looked for a while, and tried to buy one. I even set notifications at B&H photo, and somewhere else I forget. I tried twice, with two email alerts from them. Both attempts within 30 minutes to an hour after getting a “In stock Alert” they were already sold out. Oh well, I’m definitely good now though.
> 
> People were taking advantage of the 10980XE that’s for sure. A lot of people were buying them all up for around $1,000 USD. And reselling them for $1,600-$2,000 dollars on eBay.


Hi,
Yeah B & H got some in stock last I checked this morning not a good time for me though

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1507537-REG/intel_bx8069510980xe_core_i9_10980xe_3_0_ghz.html


----------



## tps3443

I almost bought one of the Evga Micro 2 boards as well. I found a brand new retail sealed version for only like $125 or something like that. I am running a Asus Tuff Mark 1. Which is good so far with my 7980XE. It has tons of overclocking settings, and board VRM power settings. I am able to hold a steady 4.5Ghz with no power issues at all. I bought my current board brand new for $135.00 on mercari, and it had quite a bit of features for the money. I have (10) Fan headers! And a bios with more settings than I have ever seen on even the most premium of Z370/Z390 motherboards. So, I am very happy with it for only $135 bucks new.


----------



## tps3443

Overclocking this 7980XE. And owning one for the first time reminds me of when I owned a Clevo DTR laptop with a desktop CPU in it. The thermals are very similar.


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah B & H got some in stock last I checked this morning not a good time for me though
> 
> https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1507537-REG/intel_bx8069510980xe_core_i9_10980xe_3_0_ghz.html


I already purchased a 7980XE. So I am good to go now.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

I'll sleep better at night when I know @ThrashZone buys a 10980xe...


----------



## tps3443

I may grab one in a few years. Who knows. I plan to ride this 7980XE out for years though. I think the High core count race has finally slowed down some with AMD and Intel. Anyways, these CPU's are such overkill for my needs. I just wanted one because they are the coolest!


----------



## NYU87

tps3443 said:


> I may grab one in a few years. Who knows. I plan to ride this 7980XE out for years though. I think the High core count race has finally slowed down some with AMD and Intel. Anyways, these CPU's are such overkill for my needs. I just wanted one because they are the coolest!



Just upgraded from 7900X to a 10980XE and I agree.


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> I already purchased a 7980XE. So I am good to go now.


Hi,
2-3 years ago that 7980xe would of cost 2k.us and still needed a delid not what you paid 



MrTOOSHORT said:


> I'll sleep better at night when I know @ThrashZone buys a 10980xe...


Hi,
lol I wouldn't sleep well though, tempting but reality set in and controlled my finger add to cart spasm


----------



## tps3443

Maybe you guys could help me out.

I have achieved a very solid 4.5Ghz overclock on my new CPU. I’ve got a -2 AVX offset, and a -4 AVX 512 offset. My 7980XE can run practically anything currently 100% stable with no issues at these settings.

I am trying to run my DDR4 at XMP 3733Mhz, but once I do my system fails during Intel burn test. It’ll pass R20, pass R15 Extreme no matter how many loops. But always fail Intel Burn Test. 

I have isolated this to my DDR4 causing the issue 100%.

Here’s what I’ve tried. 

I have tried 1.5 volts to my DDR4 modules, I have tried a 2.1 volts input voltage, I’ve tried 1.250V on the VCCIO, and I’ve tried a mesh offset voltage of up to +0.600V. I have also tried increasing the timings on this ram.

I am scratching my head. 

I had a issue with this ram kit on Z370 motherboard with my 8086K too. I never could get it to run 3,733Mhz in that setup either lol. Only 3466Mhz C16

The memory kit is Patriot Viper 3733 C17 Samsung B-Die.

What am I doing wrong? Or is it just a bunk memory set? I am in the process of buying a better DDR4 quad channel set from “Mr.Fox”

But there’s gotta be something I am doing wrong here. I’ve ordered a 2nd set of this stuff for quad channel already. But, now I am considering just selling this memory set and the other matching one coming in the mail too.


----------



## Jpmboy

tps3443 said:


> Maybe you guys could help me out.
> 
> I have achieved a very solid 4.5Ghz overclock on my new CPU. I’ve got a -2 AVX offset, and a -4 AVX 512 offset. My 7980XE can run practically anything currently 100% stable with no issues at these settings.
> 
> I am trying to run my DDR4 at XMP 3733Mhz, but once I do my system fails during Intel burn test. It’ll pass R20, pass R15 Extreme no matter how many loops. But always fail Intel Burn Test.
> 
> I have isolated this to my DDR4 causing the issue 100%.
> 
> Here’s what I’ve tried.
> 
> I have tried 1.5 volts to my DDR4 modules, I have tried a 2.1 volts input voltage, I’ve tried 1.250V on the VCCIO, and I’ve tried a mesh offset voltage of up to +0.600V. I have also tried increasing the timings on this ram.
> 
> I am scratching my head.
> 
> I had a issue with this ram kit on Z370 motherboard with my 8086K too. I never could get it to run 3,733Mhz in that setup either lol. Only 3466Mhz C16
> 
> The memory kit is Patriot Viper 3733 C17 Samsung B-Die.
> 
> What am I doing wrong? Or is it just a bunk memory set? I am in the process of buying a better DDR4 quad channel set from “Mr.Fox”
> 
> But there’s gotta be something I am doing wrong here. I’ve ordered a 2nd set of this stuff for quad channel already. But, now I am considering just selling this memory set and the other matching one coming in the mail too.


Well, first thing I'd do is stop trying to test ram stability with p95. You can always come back to it (if you must) after using something like HCi Memtest, or GSAT under the W10 linux subsystem. Once you get that done, If p95 fails you likely need more Vcache and maybe Vcore. Any increase in frequency on the Ram is also an in crease in load on the core and cache (mainly interconnect IO).
Those patriot b-die should do 4000c16 with a decent IMC at under 1.5V... at least up to 32GB.


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> Well, first thing I'd do is stop trying to test ram stability with p95. You can always come back to it (if you must) after using something like HCi Memtest, or GSAT under the W10 linux subsystem. Once you get that done, If p95 fails you likely need more Vcache and maybe Vcore. Any increase in frequency on the Ram is also an in crease in load on the core and cache (mainly interconnect IO).
> Those patriot b-die should do 4000c16 with a decent IMC at under 1.5V... at least up to 32GB.


I do appreciate the help. I use memtest86 on a bootable USB Drive. The only reason I use ITB, is because it quickly lets me test In seconds on my desktop and I’d always get a fail pretty quickly if my memory OC was bad. And then I’d move on to something else if it passed. 

I couldn’t imagine [email protected] with this DDR4. I have always had a struggle with them in the past going beyond just 3,500Mhz at C16.


----------



## tps3443

My 7980XE is running fantastic at [email protected] Volts. I am finally figuring this chip out pretty good. No mesh OCing just yet.

Here is a R15 Extreme run on it. The temps are not accurate due to "High Priority" 

Between all 18 cores my core temp average is 85.2C. At the wall during R15 extreme it was pulling 560 watts.

You guys thing this 4.6Ghz, with 1.2v is safe for long term 24/7 ?



best place to post photos


----------



## Nizzen

tps3443 said:


> My 7980XE is running fantastic at [email protected] Volts. I am finally figuring this chip out pretty good. No mesh OCing just yet.
> 
> Here is a R15 Extreme run on it. The temps are not accurate due to "High Priority"
> 
> Between all 18 cores my core temp average is 85.2C. At the wall during R15 extreme it was pulling 560 watts.
> 
> You guys thing this 4.6Ghz, with 1.2v is safe for long term 24/7 ?
> 
> 
> 
> best place to post photos


4.6 ghz with -2 avx offset is 4400mhz. Some new games even use AVX, so you are running pretty much 4400mhz


----------



## tps3443

Nizzen said:


> 4.6 ghz with -2 avx offset is 4400mhz. Some new games even use AVX, so you are running pretty much 4400mhz


Hey, I’m very happy with it though. And, its not really just 4.4Ghz. Only in a AVX load which draws extreme power and generates a ton of heat it becomes 4.4. So, R20 at 4.4Ghz pulls 10 more watts than R15 extreme at 4.6Ghz.

And, R15 extreme is not AVX at all, so it’s easy to run 4.6Ghz. And other than BFV, I am not aware of any games that use AVX at all.

My chip is not delidded, I don’t think I could run 4.6Ghz with no AVX offset through R20 and survive. I am totally fine with using a AVX offset though. This is a 18 core chip, it generates a lot of heat.


It is better to tell you I run a -2 AVX offset. Than just run 4.6Ghz and ignore R20 as a benchmarking suite all together like some people do.. And they’ll say I am stable at 4.6Ghz with no AVX offset haha. 


Can you run no AVX 4.6 in R20? I’m sure you probably can.


----------



## Nizzen

tps3443 said:


> Hey, I’m very happy with it though. And, its not really just 4.4Ghz. Only in a AVX load which draws extreme power and generates a ton of heat it becomes 4.4. So, R20 at 4.4Ghz pulls 10 more watts than R15 extreme at 4.6Ghz.
> 
> And, R15 extreme is not AVX at all, so it’s easy to run 4.6Ghz. And other than BFV, I am not aware of any games that use AVX at all.
> 
> My chip is not delidded, I don’t think I could run 4.6Ghz with no AVX offset through R20 and survive. I am totally fine with using a AVX offset though. This is a 18 core chip, it generates a lot of heat.
> 
> 
> It is better to tell you I run a -2 AVX offset. Than just run 4.6Ghz and ignore R20 as a benchmarking suite all together like some people do.. And they’ll say I am stable at 4.6Ghz with no AVX offset haha.
> 
> 
> Can you run no AVX 4.6 in R20? I’m sure you probably can.


This is the best I can do with my delidded 7980xe. 

Delidding is the key


----------



## tps3443

Nizzen said:


> This is the best I can do with my delidded 7980xe.
> 
> Delidding is the key


I have a good bit of warranty left, So I may hold out on the delid. 

Here's mine, only 2% slower.

Obviously your gonna have better FPS, and overall IPC. 4.7Ghz no AVX is very good! I’m really glad to see people getting such good results.


----------



## tps3443

tps3443 said:


> I have a good bit of warranty left, So I may hold out on the delid.
> 
> Here's mine, only 2% slower.
> 
> Obviously your gonna have better FPS, and overall IPC. 4.7Ghz no AVX is very good! I’m really glad to see people getting such good results.


This result is actually with a -3 AVX offset. So, the CPU was only running 4.3Ghz. I run a pretty well optimized Windows 10 LTSC, with high priority.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
R20 doesn't have enough avx content to trigger a set avx offset never has for me.
Intel pigeon poop inside series


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> R20 doesn't have enough avx content to trigger a set avx offset never has for me.
> Intel pigeon poop inside series


I was wondering why my scores were reflecting so well. And yes, I have Pigeon poop inside. I did manage to drop power usage and temps quite a bit under a load though. I was running higher voltages to CPU input voltage, VCCIO voltage, Cache voltage, uncore voltages. I restored all of these to Auto and I dropped my system power draw by 35-40 watts from the wall. Temps are slightly lower too.


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> I was wondering why my scores were reflecting so well. And yes, I have Pigeon poop inside. I did manage to drop power usage and temps quite a bit under a load though. I was running higher voltages to CPU input voltage, VCCIO voltage, Cache voltage, uncore voltages. I restored all of these to Auto and I dropped my system power draw by 35-40 watts from the wall. Temps are slightly lower too.


Hi,
If you want to check your core clock stability and how much avx to add to it for temps use blender opendata or loop classroom free demo file
https://www.blender.org/
https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/

https://opendata.blender.org/


----------



## Jpmboy

Guys - RT20 simply does not use AVX for the render (SSE up to 4 I believe)


----------



## tps3443

My system restarts during Intel burn test 2.54. It did not do this before. Trying to figure out what may be causing this. My temps are good, and I can run R20 and R15 extreme without issues. I could run intel burn test a couple days ago just fine a couple days ago.

I’ve tried stock memory settings, and I still have a restart. Lowering my CPU overclock to stock fixes the issue. 

Not sure what has happened here though, maybe my PSU is failing, or my motherboard just sucks?? System is 100% stable otherwise. And my temps are really good considering.

I assume I am tripping something, thermals are all good, and my power wattage meter is around maybe 380 watts during Intel burn test. About 180-200 less power than what I see in R15 extreme or R20, both of which run perfectly fine. So I am lost as to what may be causing the restarts as soon as I initiate ITB test??


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> My system restarts during Intel burn test 2.54. It did not do this before. Trying to figure out what may be causing this. My temps are good, and I can run R20 and R15 extreme without issues. I could run intel burn test a couple days ago just fine a couple days ago.
> 
> I’ve tried stock memory settings, and I still have a restart. Lowering my CPU overclock to stock fixes the issue.
> 
> Not sure what has happened here though, maybe my PSU is failing, or my motherboard just sucks?? System is 100% stable otherwise. And my temps are really good considering.
> 
> I assume I am tripping something, thermals are all good, and my power wattage meter is around maybe 380 watts during Intel burn test. About 180-200 less power than what I see in R15 extreme or R20, both of which run perfectly fine. So I am lost as to what may be causing the restarts as soon as I initiate ITB test??





ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> If you want to check your core clock stability and how much avx to add to it for temps use blender opendata or loop classroom free demo file
> https://www.blender.org/
> https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/
> 
> https://opendata.blender.org/


Hi,
Try blender.


----------



## Jpmboy

tps3443 said:


> My system restarts during Intel burn test 2.54. It did not do this before. Trying to figure out what may be causing this. My temps are good, and I can run R20 and R15 extreme without issues. I could run intel burn test a couple days ago just fine a couple days ago.
> 
> I’ve tried stock memory settings, and I still have a restart. Lowering my CPU overclock to stock fixes the issue.
> 
> Not sure what has happened here though, maybe my PSU is failing, or my motherboard just sucks?? System is 100% stable otherwise. And my temps are really good considering.
> 
> I assume I am tripping something, thermals are all good, and my power wattage meter is around maybe 380 watts during Intel burn test. About 180-200 less power than what I see in R15 extreme or R20, both of which run perfectly fine. So I am lost as to what may be causing the restarts as soon as I initiate ITB test??


IBT will use AVX-2 essentially as a power virus. If it is doing that like a "black out" with no bug report, it is either the MB Bios hitting a power limit, or the PSU doing an OCP. Remember, the 7980 can pull up to 700W+ on the EPS lines. What PSU are you using??


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> IBT will use AVX-2 essentially as a power virus. If it is doing that like a "black out" with no bug report, it is either the MB Bios hitting a power limit, or the PSU doing an OCP. Remember, the 7980 can pull up to 700W+ on the EPS lines. What PSU are you using??


Seasonic Platinum Prime 1200. I have the 8 pin connected, and the 4 pin motherboard cable connected. I leave the hybrid fan option disabled. I don't know why this started happening.

I was in the process of buying a X299 Dark from another member for a good deal, unfortunately that has fallen through.


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Try blender.


I will. I am downloading it now.


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> If you want to check your core clock stability and how much avx to add to it for temps use blender opendata or loop classroom free demo file
> https://www.blender.org/
> https://www.blender.org/download/demo-files/
> 
> https://opendata.blender.org/


I’m running 4.2Ghz AVX2 through Blender benchmark. I’m gonna say this will most likely be my limit “Without a Delid” Core temps are 74C-93C “Max” 

Most of the cores are in the 70’s to the 80’s only (2) cores are in the low 90’s.

4.2Ghz AVX2 is fine with me. But, I think it is time to delid.

If I delid my processor, and lap my AIO cold plate, what kind of temps could I drop? 20C?


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> I’m running 4.2Ghz AVX2 through Blender benchmark. I’m gonna say this will most likely be my limit “Without a Delid” Core temps are 74C-93C “Max”
> 
> Most of the cores are in the 70’s to the 80’s only *(2) cores are in the low 90’s.*
> 
> 4.2Ghz AVX2 is fine with me. But, I think it is time to delid.
> 
> If I delid my processor, and lap my AIO cold plate, what kind of temps could I drop? 20C?


Hi,
Bad contact on those two cores for sure 
No telling if you take it apart put a straight edge across your 7980xe see how flat it is 
Then compare it to the aio cold plate 

AIO didn't last 6 hours on my old 7900x lol it was reboxed and returned to micro center 
Hard to say what will happen you might try rotating the water block 90 degrees see if that helps a little before lapping it.
Make note of core temps before and compare after rotation.


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Bad contact on those two cores for sure
> No telling if you take it apart put a straight edge across your 7980xe see how flat it is
> Then compare it to the aio cold plate
> 
> AIO didn't last 6 hours on my old 7900x lol it was reboxed and returned to micro center
> Hard to say what will happen you might try rotating the water block 90 degrees see if that helps a little before lapping it.
> Make note of core temps before and compare after rotation.


Hey what kind of performance are you getting in the blender benchmark? My CPU overclocked is performing worse than stock results on the internet that I am finding.

I managed 77 seconds in BMW 2.81 blender. I’m
Not sure if this is good or bad? I saw a stock 10980xe get 75 seconds. I’m to the blender benchmark.

Right now I am testing the CPU stock.


----------



## tps3443

So it is easier to run no AVX offset, and just set all of my cores at 4.4Ghz with only 1.15V temps are much lower. Otherwise I am running 4.6Ghz with a -4 AVX offset with 1.203V and temps are much hotter with only 4.2Ghz AVX performance. 

So currently I am running straight 4.4Ghz no AVX offset with lower temps


----------



## tps3443

Blender 2.81 BMW passed in 73 seconds.


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> IBT will use AVX-2 essentially as a power virus. If it is doing that like a "black out" with no bug report, it is either the MB Bios hitting a power limit, or the PSU doing an OCP. Remember, the 7980 can pull up to 700W+ on the EPS lines. What PSU are you using??


I changed my CPU input voltage back to 2.1V, instead of Auto. Intel Burn Test is running fine again now full ram usage. I had it at 2.1V before. But, I switch it back to Auto lowering power usage. “Thinking the system was stable” 

2.1V is safe right? I am concerned reading some of your post saying “Be careful VCCIN can instant kill a CPU”


----------



## xarot

Input 2.1 is on the high side, personally I would not go much over 1.9 V under load with LLC.


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> Hey what kind of performance are you getting in the blender benchmark? My CPU overclocked is performing worse than stock results on the internet that I am finding.
> 
> I managed 77 seconds in BMW 2.81 blender. I’m
> Not sure if this is good or bad? I saw a stock 10980xe get 75 seconds. I’m to the blender benchmark.
> 
> Right now I am testing the CPU stock.


Hi,
Time really doesn't matter, completing the render is more important 
I'm on a 9940x so no competition for a 18 core chip to beat it.

BMW is an entry level render move on to classroom render for final stability checks 

VCCIN yeah way too much I don't go over 1.95v and llc-5 or 6 and this is just for benchmarks not everyday.
Everyday llc-4 and 1.85v


----------



## Jpmboy

tps3443 said:


> I changed my CPU input voltage back to 2.1V, instead of Auto. Intel Burn Test is running fine again now full ram usage. I had it at 2.1V before. But, I switch it back to Auto lowering power usage. “Thinking the system was stable”
> 
> 2.1V is safe right? I am concerned reading some of your post saying “Be careful VCCIN can instant kill a CPU”


On a 7980XE, you are running that thing past red-line if that's your 24/7. For benchmarking, run what you want - it's benchmarking/suicide play. But yeah, VCCIN is the main rail that can "flash-bulb" the chip.


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Time really doesn't matter, completing the render is more important
> I'm on a 9940x so no competition for a 18 core chip to beat it.
> 
> BMW is an entry level render move on to classroom render for final stability checks
> 
> VCCIN yeah way too much I don't go over 1.95v and llc-5 or 6 and this is just for benchmarks not everyday.
> Everyday llc-4 and 1.85v


I ran all of the blender test together multiple times at 4.4Ghz NO AVX offset. It passes everything very well. And it runs much quicker and much cooler in the blender test than 4.6 with an AVX offset. Because 4.6 requires more voltage.


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> On a 7980XE, you are running that thing past red-line if that's your 24/7. For benchmarking, run what you want - it's benchmarking/suicide play. But yeah, VCCIN is the main rail that can "flash-bulb" the chip.


I have backed down to the standard Auto or 1.8V input voltage. I run the CPU at a straight 4.4Ghz with no AVX2/AVX3 offsets at all. It only requires 1.12 volts to be 100% stable in ITB and Blender too. My memory is stable at 3733Mhz in quad channel Cas 17.

Im satisfied with it. Once I delid it, I will go after a higher frequency. The AVX offset just doesn’t help at all because if I run 4.6Ghz with a -4 AVX offset, it still requires 1.203 volts,which pulls much more power and heat than 4.4Ghz would with only 1.12V with no AVX offset at all.

Running Blender classroom at 4.4Ghz 0 AVX with only 1.12V, simultaneously recording my screen with an external camera recording too, I was pulling 560 watts of power at the wall.


----------



## tps3443

Finally overclocked the Mesh frequency to x30. Idle power usage increases a lot. 

I may pay Silicon Lottery to delid my chip. It would be cheaper than doing it my self. I dont have a Skylake X delid tool


----------



## tps3443

I updated my bios to the newest version and lost around 3-5% performance. It really does takes days to fine tune a new system. It takes forever. So, I flashedback to the older bios. So, I will go up one bios at a time.


----------



## xarot

This is the Skylake-X & Kaby Lake-X but anyway...since the Xeon W-3175X behaves exactly like Skylake-X chips, anyone got this CPU and delidded it successfully?


----------



## tps3443

xarot said:


> This is the Skylake-X & Kaby Lake-X but anyway...since the Xeon W-3175X behaves exactly like Skylake-X chips, anyone got this CPU and delidded it successfully?


I figure when a 3175X is about the same age as my 7980XE, I’ll be able to afford one. And I’ll certainly let you know lol.


----------



## amder

Delidded my 7740x. Could not break the 5GHz barrier without throttling so I swapped out the terrible crusty Intel TIM for some liquid metal. Sitting at 5GHz now with a max temp of 87c stressed under p95 and a core voltage of 1.325. Still a dud chip but its doing its job still.


----------



## D-EJ915

xarot said:


> This is the Skylake-X & Kaby Lake-X but anyway...since the Xeon W-3175X behaves exactly like Skylake-X chips, anyone got this CPU and delidded it successfully?


I got one a little while ago but after watching der8auer's video where he seemed to think it was not worth doing it I decided not to on mine. This one also isn't that amazing ocer either it seems, 32x mesh ratio seems impossible no matter what.


----------



## tps3443

carlhil2 said:


> Finally got my chip('bout damn time) and I have HT disabled for gaming. will be locking in my OC this weekend..


Hey, your single thread is really fast. Does the 10980XE have faster IPC? Do you have a single core running at 5Ghz?


----------



## tps3443

amder said:


> Delidded my 7740x. Could not break the 5GHz barrier without throttling so I swapped out the terrible crusty Intel TIM for some liquid metal. Sitting at 5GHz now with a max temp of 87c stressed under p95 and a core voltage of 1.325. Still a dud chip but its doing its job still.


Send more voltage to it. My 8086K needed 1.435V for 5.3Ghz. I know these are totally different chips, but still. I would send more voltage.


----------



## Middleman

7820x @ 5.1Ghz


----------



## tps3443

I have upgraded my motherboard to the X299 Dark, this board is pretty fat so I had to cut some case material away for it to fit. I also expanded my Celcius AIO with a reservoir and a additional 120MM radiator.

My 7980XE is running great at 4.6Ghz. And I have the memory at 3733 CL17 quad channel.


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ that's a fine MB! 4.6GHz is very snappy on a 7980XE. And yes, the single thread IPC and IPT on the 10980XE is slightly better... but that test is subject to all sorts of variability from Win10 and whether or not the core running is also the one W10 has set as the primary core. IBT can mess things up if it is enabled in the background services.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> ^^ that's a fine MB! 4.6GHz is very snappy on a 7980XE. And yes, the single thread IPC and IPT on the 10980XE is slightly better... but that test is subject to all sorts of variability from Win10 and whether or not the core running is also the one W10 has set as the primary core. IBT can mess things up if it is enabled in the background services.


did your try/test this board? im having this weird readings on the 12v line and it aint the psu i tried 2 different ones and it do the same... the reading that is dropping is from the one that board shows on the screen led on the board itself thats where i noticed it first hwinfo will capture it as well..... i seen it drop to 4v even when stress testing/hammering the cpu without issues tho... hoping its just a bad reading...


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> did your try/test this board? im having this weird readings on the 12v line and it aint the psu i tried 2 different ones and it do the same... the reading that is dropping is from the one that board shows on the screen led on the board itself thats where i noticed it first hwinfo will capture it as well..... i seen it drop to 4v even when stress testing/hammering the cpu without issues tho... hoping its just a bad reading...


You seen the fintek or the IFR sensor report 4V in HWI? It may simply be a polling clash with HWI if it is the fintek.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> You seen the fintek or the IFR sensor report 4V in HWI? It may simply be a polling clash with HWI if it is the fintek.


No, its the last one i have aida64 and it doesnt do that i dont know what to make out of it...
a drop like that would be a instant crash on a stress load


----------



## zGunBLADEz




----------



## Jpmboy

Yeah, that's gotta be a polling or mutex violation. as you said, 4V on that line would likely do a black out.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah, that's gotta be a polling or mutex violation. as you said, 4V on that line would likely do a black out.


I think im going to add a little volt meter straight to the psu and hide that particular sensor so it dont annoy me and just follow the one that is closer to the real that follows the real voltmeter after adjustments..


----------



## tps3443

Edit.


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> I think im going to add a little volt meter straight to the psu and hide that particular sensor so it dont annoy me and just follow the one that is closer to the real that follows the real voltmeter after adjustments..



Mine is solid so far. I actually bought my X299 Dark on eBay as a untested “As-is” for $100 dollars Shipped. I figured if it didn’t work, I could get EVGA to fix it through warranty.

And sure enough, It works beautifully! One of the Debug LED’s fell off sometime in its life, and it is missing. but, I still have the one that reports cpu package temps.

The x299 Dark is Very reliable. My old Asus TUF Mark 1 X299 would black out under any heavy AVX load beyond 4.3Ghz-4.4Ghz. I could play games and run normal loads at higher frequencies. But any stress testing would instantly shut off my entire PC With my old “Asus TUF gamer marketed X299 board”

Im glad the issue is gone with the X299 Dark. I can actually push the CPU in to being temperature limited.

I am going to delid my 7980XE in a few days. I am borrowing a delid tool from another forum member.

Here is a pic of my HWINfO, and it shows (2) 12V areas. I’m not sure which one your referring to. But, here is a picture of mine while running “Intel Burn Test” One of them
hits 4V?? But the other is beyond 12V?

I can assure you my PSU is solid, it is a Seasonic Platinum Prime 1200. I’m not really sure why it shows that 12V at a minimum of 4V


----------



## zGunBLADEz

So your having the same readings there as well weird. Yeah if you follow that particular its under "evga dark only" (theres 3 sections where you see 12v readings) where it shows all the readings from the board itself and start reading in a graph like i did and observed it, it will "show" drops to 7v-4v the board 80 port led will also display this value "drops" they sporadic so you have to keep a close eye to it ... But if you get drops like that in a stress load thats a guaranteed you will crash specially if it drops all way down to 4v like it says is doing..

Btw, for an estimate on the power draw "heat" on your cpu as this one doesnt show even with svid enabled "my Micro 2 board does shows this reading very well" you can add a multiply by x10 (edit 7x using siv64 as a reference for power draw readings) on hwinfo values under power draw sensor. Also, the cpu die readings are not from the package temp "hottest core" so is kind of useless to follow.. You need to keep an eye on the real package temp and disregard the cpu die reading from the board. Look at package temps and match that with the board one on hwinfo on cpu tab or look all the core temps and the one to follow is the hottest core.


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> I think im going to add a little volt meter straight to the psu and hide that particular sensor so it dont annoy me and just follow the one that is closer to the real that follows the real voltmeter after adjustments..


Probably easier to just ignore it or hide that particular sensor which (to me) is not relaying useful information. Do you see the same thing with the most recent version of SIV64?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
+12v I always thought was psu 12v rail reading.

No telling what that v12 reading is under it I don't have it or any of the other v5.... stuff either on evga 1200p2

Interesting you also have a chassis intrusion listing lol what is this a dell computer


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> SIV64


i dont know if is evga boards and the app siv64 but it never read that 12v line... its saying 9v like the Micro2 and this are 2 different psus..

The multi meter is reading fine 0 problems straight out of a molex on load with not vdrops to 7-4v lol but @*tps3443 is having the same "readings" on the same board and probably in the 80port it will show that as well on his side. hwinfo captures it what the board is displaying on the 80port code screen... thats why i was kind of iffy bcuz the board was showing the drop and hwinfo confirms it too on the software side.. But theres no way in hell the system would be chewing alone a stress tests with drops like that..*


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> +12v I always thought was psu 12v rail reading.
> 
> No telling what that v12 reading is under it I don't have it or any of the other v5.... stuff either on evga 1200p2
> 
> Interesting you also have a chassis intrusion listing lol what is this a dell computer
> View attachment 2459071


 i mean is "software" reading its not 100% accurate but good enough to have a guide lol you can fix an offset if you that finicky even XD


that intrusion is like a default on the app i always hide it on the daily rig lol


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> i mean is "software" reading its not 100% accurate but good enough to have a guide lol you can fix an offset if you that finicky even XD
> 
> 
> that intrusion is like a default on the app i always hide it on the daily rig lol


Hi,
Yeah none would be 100% accurate but like I said +12v is power supply rail.
You ask hwinfo developer yet ?









[OFFICIAL] HWiNFO/32/64 Thread


Hi all, I'm the author of HWiNFO/32/64 tools, which I noticed are quite successfully used here. I decided to create a thread on this forum to provide support for these tools, listen to your feedback, opinions and ideas. Feel free to ask/request/share thoughts about HWiNFO/32/64 here and I hope...




www.overclock.net


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Im going to try in evga forums first as this looks to me more a board issue than the software.. as @tps3443 manage to capture it as well on his board.


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> i dont know if is evga boards and the app siv64 but it never read that 12v line... its saying 9v like the Micro2 and this are 2 different psus..
> 
> The multi meter is reading fine 0 problems straight out of a molex on load with not vdrops to 7-4v lol but @*tps3443 is having the same "readings" on the same board and probably in the 80port it will show that as well on his side. hwinfo captures it what the board is displaying on the 80port code screen... thats why i was kind of iffy bcuz the board was showing the drop and hwinfo confirms it too on the software side.. But theres no way in hell the system would be chewing alone a stress tests with drops like that..*


Yeah, don't forget, that on many past/earlier platforms HWi was always known to report "sensors" that either did not exist on the board, or were incorrectly read off the SIO.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah, don't forget, that on many past/earlier platforms HWi was always known to report "sensors" that either did not exist on the board, or were incorrectly read off the SIO.


yeah, but remember i noticed first on the code screen on the mobo itself while display only the 12v line on her code screen thats why i was kind of wth moment.. decided to use hwinfo to see if it records it and it did as well.. So that particular sensor is behaving like that from well inside the mobo itself..


----------



## tps3443

Does anyone have the X299 Dark accessories they would be willing to let go? I literally only have a board and nothing else lol.


----------



## tps3443

@Jpmboy Hey, I am going to invest in to a good 32GB/ 4X8 memory set for my 7980XE/X299 Dark platform for the long term, as I plan to run this for a few years minimum.

I am looking at a G.Skill memory set that is DDR4 4000 at 15-16-16 timmings at 1.5V.
Are such speeds possible with my motherboard and CPU? Or maybe even higher frequencies? 

Im trying to get the fastest memory possible, with the lowest possible timmings.

I think it would be worth it from a 1440P 165HZ standpoint.

My current memory is total garbage. It is mixed B-Die and Hynix. it’ll barely run 3466 at C16-18-18-38.


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> yeah, but remember i noticed first on the code screen on the mobo itself while display only the 12v line on her code screen thats why i was kind of wth moment.. decided to use hwinfo to see if it records it and it did as well.. So that particular sensor is behaving like that from well inside the mobo itself..


Yeah, if it reports to the Q-code LED, the sensor is "real". I'd ask EVGA 'bout that. Have you tried a bios reflash... maybe the Bios SIO from that fintek (?) got fouled?


tps3443 said:


> @Jpmboy Hey, I am going to invest in to a good 32GB/ 4X8 memory set for my 7980XE/X299 Dark platform for the long term, as I plan to run this for a few years minimum.
> 
> I am looking at a G.Skill memory set that is DDR4 4000 at 15-16-16 timmings at 1.5V.
> Are such speeds possible with my motherboard and CPU? Or maybe even higher frequencies?
> Im trying to get the fastest memory possible, with the lowest possible timmings.
> I think it would be worth it from a 1440P 165HZ standpoint.
> My current memory is total garbage. It is mixed B-Die and Hynix. it’ll barely run 3466 at C16-18-18-38.


Well... I just upgraded my R6A/7980XE to 4x16GB sticks (@3600c15 1T... a speed downgrade!). And happen to have two 2x8GB GSkill 3600c15 kits laying around . These are samsung B-die. I had them at 4000c16-16-16 with 1.45V for quite awhile with tight RTLs. I was not putting them up for sale, but... PM me if interested.
Is that 4x8GB 4000c15 1.5V kit for x299? (doubtful).


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah, if it reports to the Q-code LED, the sensor is "real". I'd ask EVGA 'bout that. Have you tried a bios reflash... maybe the Bios SIO from that fintek (?) got fouled?
> 
> Well... I just upgraded my R6A/7980XE to 4x16GB sticks (@3600c15 1T... a speed downgrade!). And happen to have two 2x8GB GSkill 3600c15 kits laying around . These are samsung B-die. I had them at 4000c16-16-16 with 1.45V for quite awhile with tight RTLs. I was not putting them up for sale, but... PM me if interested.
> Is that 4x8GB 4000c15 1.5V kit for x299? (doubtful).


No the kit is not directly marketed towards X299. But, it is a 4x8GB matching set at 4000 C15-16-16.

I am imagining it would take some tweaking to get it working at these speeds. But I was only asking if it is realistically possible?









G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com


----------



## tps3443

Hey guys, I went ahead and delidded my 7980XE today. Everything went smooth. I took the time to remove every piece of residue and even reseal the IHS back on With black silicon. It even looks factory,

“May still pass intel warranty one day if I’m desperate lol”

I don’t know how, but 4.8GHz at 1.270 volts is very easy.

My CPU is like a totally different processor. I used a very thin layer of LM.

I am running my 7980XE 300Mhz faster with +0.100 Voltage, more power, and it still runs 10C cooler package temps than my previous non delidded 4.5Ghz OC. Core to core temps are good, but we’re good before too.


----------



## Jpmboy

amazing! That's a 1%-er 7980XE!


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> amazing! That's a 1%-er 7980XE!


Seriously? That’s amazing.

Hey I purchased this set of memory It was $439.99 on Newegg. I actually bought the last one they had! 

4x8GB DDR4 4000 at CL15! Supposed to be the absolute best Samsung B-Die. I’ve seen (2) reviewers hit 4,200Mhz at 12-12-12-28 Timmings with 1T this seems insane. I doubt I can get that but still, amazing set of memory.







This should help my 7980XE out some with 1440P 165HZ gaming.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

anything you see high MHz like that and with 12s and 13s are no way close to be stable and is just for benching


----------



## Jpmboy

^^ this.


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> Hey guys, I went ahead and delidded my 7980XE today. Everything went smooth. I took the time to remove every piece of residue and even reseal the IHS back on With black silicon. It even looks factory,
> 
> “May still pass intel warranty one day if I’m desperate lol”
> 
> I don’t know how, but 4.8GHz at 1.270 volts is very easy.
> 
> My CPU is like a totally different processor. I used a very thin layer of LM.
> 
> I am running my 7980XE 300Mhz faster with +0.100 Voltage, more power, and it still runs 10C cooler package temps than my previous non delidded 4.5Ghz OC. Core to core temps are good, but we’re good before too.


Hi,
4.8 should be good at 1.25v and still might be too much.
Nice job 
10980xe are all over the place now and dropping in price 1k.us at micro center B & H also dropped a little.


----------



## REAN1MAT0R

Does anyone expirienced memory overclocking increasing with 10xxx series over 7xxx series ?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

REAN1MAT0R said:


> Does anyone expirienced memory overclocking increasing with 10xxx series over 7xxx series ?


Pretty much the same.


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> anything you see high MHz like that and with 12s and 13s are no way close to be stable and is just for benching


I know, I am expecting realistic results. But it’s still about as good as it gets for extreme DDR4 memory. I just want to maximize every drop of performance on my 7980XE.

I am hoping to reach around 4000Mhz-4133Mhz speeds at around CL14-14-14-32-1T. This should be realistically achievable with my motherboard and CPU.

My Gskill Royal 4000Mhz 4x8GB CL15 kit will be here tomorrow! I’m extremely excited to finally have some good memory to
tune.

I have been running a garbage 4x8GB 3733Mhz patriot Hynix kit that crashes even well below its rated XMP speeds. So, I was happy to throw those in a bin.


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 4.8 should be good at 1.25v and still might be too much.
> Nice job
> 10980xe are all over the place now and dropping in price 1k.us at micro center B & H also dropped a little.


4.8Ghz at 1.25V is Pretty low. What kinda CPU’s do you have? Thats incredible! I don’t think I could achieve that. But, I did manage 4.7Ghz at 1.215V.

4.8Ghz was not realbench 2.56 stable with any less voltage than 1.270V at 4,800Mhz.


Yes I’ve seen the 10980XE pricing stabilize. I considered selling my newly acquired 7980XE to get one. But, I wouldn’t manage 4.8Ghz stable with a 10980XE as easily. My temperatures would go up about 6-10C maybe. And the clocks would come down.

I think if people are running a mild OC, or even running a 10980XE stock. It is a phenomenal CPU. Because it runs cool, and boost higher by default.

But my 7980XE can hit 4.8Ghz with lower temperatures, and pretty low power usage too.

I’m hitting 11,200 in R20 with super slow DDR4 with crazy high timmings.

Once my extreme DDR4 kit gets here tomorrow I’ll be happy with my setup. Now I just need a RTX3080. Or even a used 2080Ti Would do.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

tps3443 said:


> I know, I am expecting realistic result. But it’s still about as good as it gets for extreme DDR4 memory. I just want to maximize every drop of performance on my 7980XE.
> 
> I am hoping to reach around 4000Mhz-4133Mhz at around CL14-14-14-32-1T. This should be realistically achievable with my motherboard and CPU.


ermmm good luck in that one too bcuz thats way too far from realistically achievable and i have a good cpu which actually does 4200 and is stress tested stable..


btw did i mention the cpu die temp represented on the 80port is not the actual temp of the dies? is the TCase and is not useful to present real actual temp of the chip itself btw.. the code only read the actual temp when is put on bios only mode.. if you put cpu die temperature its showing TCase not package fyi... already have a complaint on evga forums about that and some other stuff with this board..


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

tps3443 said:


> I know, I am expecting realistic results. But it’s still about as good as it gets for extreme DDR4 memory. I just want to maximize every drop of performance on my 7980XE.
> 
> I am hoping to reach around 4000Mhz-4133Mhz speeds at around CL14-14-14-32-1T. This should be realistically achievable with my motherboard and CPU.
> 
> My Gskill Royal 4000Mhz 4x8GB CL15 kit will be here tomorrow! I’m extremely excited to finally have some good memory to
> tune.
> 
> I have been running a garbage 4x8GB 3733Mhz patriot Hynix kit that crashes even well below its rated XMP speeds. So, I was happy to throw those in a bin.


Realistically you will be maxing out 4000MHz cl16 1T 1.4v stable.


----------



## tps3443

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Realistically you will be maxing out 4000MHz cl16 1T 1.4v stable.


Well, I’m gonna hope they can just run the factory XMP frequency with default Voltage of 1.5V


Heres my kit, that’ll be here tomorrow.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

tps3443 said:


> Well, I’m gonna hope they can just run the XMP frequency at default Voltage of 1.5V
> 
> My memory kit is DDR4 4000 CL15 1.5V XMP.
> 
> 
> This doesn’t sound so crazy to me.


problem is the mesh on the cpu is really holding it back "i say in a good way" if it wasnt for that it would be even worst for stability purposes


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> 4.8Ghz at 1.25V is Pretty low. What kinda CPU’s do you have? Thats incredible! I don’t think I could achieve that. But, I did manage 4.7Ghz at 1.215V.
> 
> 4.8Ghz was not realbench 2.56 stable with any less voltage than 1.270V at 4,800Mhz.
> 
> 
> Yes I’ve seen the 10980XE pricing stabilize. I considered selling my newly acquired 7980XE to get one. But, I wouldn’t manage 4.8Ghz stable with a 10980XE as easily. My temperatures would go up about 6-10C maybe. And the clocks would come down.
> 
> I think if people are running a mild OC, or even running a 10980XE stock. It is a phenomenal CPU. Because it runs cool, and boost higher by default.
> 
> But my 7980XE can hit 4.8Ghz with lower temperatures, and pretty low power usage too.
> 
> I’m hitting 11,200 in R20 with super slow DDR4 with crazy high timmings.
> 
> Once my extreme DDR4 kit gets here tomorrow I’ll be happy with my setup. Now I just need a RTX3080. Or even a used 2080Ti Would do.


Hi,
9940x on apex so only 14 cores
Did all my water block testing using with 4.8-4.5 all at 1.25v just to heat it up a little more than normal cooling wise didn't make any difference just wanted to make sure test would complete

Using blender opendata long test pretty brutal it's my p95 substitute 
It will run real bench all day long with that.


https://www.overclock.net/attachments/sigv2-4-5-4-8-shootout-ek-magnitude-4-1-20-jpg.336504/





https://www.overclock.net/attachments/foundation-4-8-4-5-shootout-verses-ek-acetal-all-polished-jpg.336920/


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> Well, I’m gonna hope they can just run the factory XMP frequency with default Voltage of 1.5V
> 
> 
> Heres my kit, that’ll be here tomorrow.


Hi,
Wild voltage 
4000c19 only needs 1.35v with 19-19-19-39


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Wild voltage
> 4000c19 only needs 1.35v with 19-19-19-39


Should be safe with 1.5V daily.

PCGamer magazine managed 4500 at 16-16-16-36 at 1.5V and 4000Mhz 14-14-14-32 at 1.4V

I just wanted a XMP kit that had really tight timmings and tight secondary timmings at 4,000Mhz. Without much tweaking needed. The default XMP profile is already blazing quick. And if I can further reduce timmings or add speed on top of that, then that’s good too. If not then I’ll run standard XMP.

A lot of the Samsung B-Die kits I see have the loosest timmings for 4,000Mhz and beyond like 19-23-23-45 XMP, but these kits will still run like 16-16-16-36 easily with 1.4-1.5 volts at 4,000Mhz. But you’ve gotta spend a lot of time tweaking all of the timmings for optimal performance. And with this kit I shouldn’t have to do that, it’s already done for the most part.


----------



## Jpmboy

tps3443 said:


> Should be safe with 1.5V daily.
> 
> *PCGamer magazine managed 4500 at 16-16-16-36 at 1.5V and 4000Mhz 14-14-14-32 at 1.4V*
> 
> I just wanted a XMP kit that had really tight timmings and tight secondary timmings at 4,000Mhz. Without much tweaking needed. The default XMP profile is already blazing quick. And if I can further reduce timmings or add speed on top of that, then that’s good too. If not then I’ll run standard XMP.
> 
> A lot of the Samsung B-Die kits I see have the loosest timmings for 4,000Mhz and beyond like 19-23-23-45 XMP, but these kits will still run like 16-16-16-36 easily with 1.4-1.5 volts at 4,000Mhz. But you’ve gotta spend a lot of time tweaking all of the timmings for optimal performance. And with this kit I shouldn’t have to do that, it’s already done for the most part.


Just check that those timings and speeds were on x299 (quad channel) and dual channel. They are very different IMCs


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> Just check that those timings and speeds were on x299 (quad channel) and dual channel. They are very different IMCs


I know. I’m hoping to just run XMP at 4000Mhz 15-16-16 at 1.5V or maybe 4000MHz 15-15-15-32.

I have never had a good set of
memory before in my life. I’ve always bought cheap junk DDR4 that barely runs it’s rated XMP speed.

So spending nearly $500 bucks with tax and shipping on a 4x8GB set of DDR4 was extremely hard to swallow.

Shipping has been delayed until tomorrow.

I also ordered (3) intel 665P 512GB m.2 SSD’s. Can I Raid these all together directly on the motherboards available (3) M.2 slots?

Or do I need a external pci-e raid card?

I was hoping to run a raid 0 setup through the bios, and then I’d have a 1.5TB intel 665P drive.


----------



## REAN1MAT0R

tps3443 said:


> Should be safe with 1.5V daily.


it will overheat slowly
i think it can be possible only for two dimms not sticked near each other in mobo
in case of 4 sticks they will overheat in middle

you want 4000mhz with top perfomance but you dont want to tweak, dont want to take off standart poor radiators and put on watercooling on ram. 1.45v and 16-16-16 is best you can get then


----------



## tps3443

REAN1MAT0R said:


> it will overheat slowly
> i think it can be possible only for two dimms not sticked near each other in mobo
> in case of 4 sticks they will overheat in middle
> 
> you want 4000mhz with top perfomance but you dont want to tweak, dont want to take off standart poor radiators and put on watercooling on ram. 1.45v and 16-16-16 is best you can get then


I am going to do whatever it takes to get the speeds I desire. I’m in a learning curve with this, this is the first time trying for extreme memory overclocking. If I have to build a fancy water loop with memory cooling, then I will cross that bridge when I get to it.

I have literally just delidded my 7980XE and hit 4.8Ghz, now my memory was holding me back. So I am going one step at a time.

I like to overclock on paper in my mind a lot lol.

My set of memory was delayed until
tomorrow and so were my M.2 drives for my Raid 0 setup.


----------



## Jpmboy

tps3443 said:


> I know. I’m hoping to just run XMP at 4000Mhz 15-16-16 at 1.5V or maybe 4000MHz 15-15-15-32.
> I also ordered (3) intel 665P 512GB m.2 SSD’s. Can I Raid these all together directly on the motherboards available (3) M.2 slots?
> Or do I need a external pci-e raid card?
> I was hoping to run a raid 0 setup through the bios, and then I’d have a 1.5TB intel 665P drive.


Raid on M.2 via PCH is really not gonna gain much (compared to running an M.2 on the CPU lanes). And frankly, putting the OS on a Raid 0 using the DIMM.2 slot is not something I'd advise since you need to disable CSM and anytime you have a reset or bios flash, the raid must be reconfigured, not necessarily rebuilt... but there is always that risk. If you want a simple Raid 0 data (game) drive, sure a bios (hardware-ish) or a simple Windows raid 0 will increase the drive size. But, IMO, a high end SSD (enterprise level) is basically faster than the combined interconnects. I run a 900P a 905P and an older 750 on the PCIE. Very fast drives.


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> Raid on M.2 via PCH is really not gonna gain much (compared to running an M.2 on the CPU lanes). And frankly, putting the OS on a Raid 0 using the DIMM.2 slot is not something I'd advise since you need to disable CSM and anytime you have a reset or bios flash, the raid must be reconfigured, not necessarily rebuilt... but there is always that risk. If you want a simple Raid 0 data (game) drive, sure a bios (hardware-ish) or a simple Windows raid 0 will increase the drive size. But, IMO, a high end SSD (enterprise level) is basically faster than the combined interconnects. I run a 900P a 905P and an older 750 on the PCIE. Very fast drives.



What do you mean by the dimm 2 slot? I was going to just use a 665P in M.2 slot 1, and a 665P in m.2 slot 2 right In the motherboard.

There is a 3rd m.2 slot, but it is for WiFi I believe.

I can fill both motherboard M.2 slots and run on cpu lanes right for Raid 0?


----------



## Jpmboy

tps3443 said:


> What do you mean by the dimm 2 slot? I was going to just use a 665P in M.2 slot 1, and a 665P in m.2 slot 2 right In the motherboard.
> There is a 3rd m.2 slot, but it is for WiFi I believe.
> I can fill both motherboard M.2 slots and run on cpu lanes right for Raid 0?


Yeah, for some reason I thought you had the R6E Omega. I do not know if the Dark will raid direct to the CPU with NVME drives vs the usual PCH bus. I'm 99% sure a PCH raid with NVME drives will be fine.


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah, for some reason I thought you had the R6E Omega. I do not know if the Dark will raid direct to the CPU with NVME drives vs the usual PCH bus. I'm 99% sure a PCH raid with NVME drives will be fine.


It has a option for PCH or CPU in the bios. What is the difference? Which should I use?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

tps3443 said:


> It has a option for PCH or CPU in the bios. What is the difference? Which should I use?


Cpu is faster, use that if you can.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

so playing around with my d5s i did some 12v to 24v converters to test them.... the varios dont give 24v "performance" they will take the 24v input no problems but they will not give you 24v performance only the 3 koolance 405s i have those are true 24v pumps performers.. thats why people and tests out there cannot confirm the difference in performance... it have to be a TRUE D5 STRONG or the koolance 405s which is the same thing lol ...

So i guess the pwn ones are out of the question as well...

was hoping i didnt have to swap the pumps of the 1260 phobya and mora but that out of the window now :/

That big motor controller can do 7amps passive and 10amps active, it run a delta 1212DE like it aint crap it didnt even got warm to the touch and probably can run 2 of them with active cooling... it have 2 big ass mosfets underneath that heatsink compared to the other 2s.. Using 1 for all the fans "BIG OVERKILL" the little one can do that, but it costed less than 4 bucks x unit so price => overkill and the other one is for the 24v pump.. They also have an actual off switch... the one in the middle doesnt just big shamu and baby huy does have the off switch lol..

The one in the top is the step up voltage controller.. small as the pwn controllers rated for 100w but with that heatsink i will not push my luck... It did got a little warm @ 24v and 40w which 24v 405s sucks but not something to get worried about it be sufficient for that only with no vdroop either..

probably going to seperare the PWN (with a rocker switch for on and off)/RPM sensor to throw to the mobo so i dont loose that feature and use the pwm motor for manual controller and voltage feed in that way i have total control on my fans and pump.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

tps3443 said:


> I know. I’m hoping to just run XMP at 4000Mhz 15-16-16 at 1.5V or maybe 4000MHz 15-15-15-32.
> 
> I have never had a good set of
> memory before in my life. I’ve always bought cheap junk DDR4 that barely runs it’s rated XMP speed.
> 
> So spending nearly $500 bucks with tax and shipping on a 4x8GB set of DDR4 was extremely hard to swallow.
> 
> Shipping has been delayed until tomorrow.
> 
> I also ordered (3) intel 665P 512GB m.2 SSD’s. Can I Raid these all together directly on the motherboards available (3) M.2 slots?
> 
> Or do I need a external pci-e raid card?
> 
> I was hoping to run a raid 0 setup through the bios, and then I’d have a 1.5TB intel 665P drive.


Again you been too optimistic on the ram im telling you it aint that easy 

You can raid anything under windows spaces... the dark only has 2 nvme slots (one which is for optane but you can use it for any nvme) the third one is thru u2 you would need a converter the other slot is for like a wifi card. i put in there this AX200 version one and 0 issues is a tight fit bcuz of the heatsink but it works once is there.









im using a pci 16x nvme card which allows to put 4x nvmes more..

So you have i think if im not mistaken..

if using only 1 gpu

you can run 7 nvmes one of them would be sharing pch bw with the right hardware combo


----------



## tps3443

I got raid 0 VROC WORKING!! Awesome!

My fresh memory built 9/20 amazing. XMP works fabulously guys!! 4000Mhz at CL15-16-16-36 1T.

I will test further soon. It passed my bootable memtest 86.


----------



## Jpmboy

you definitely want to test the stability of that ram. Use GSAT or Ram test. Even *TM5* is good stuff.


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> you definitely want to test the stability of that ram. Use GSAT or Ram test. Even *TM5* is good stuff.


I will test it thoroughly. stability is very important to me.

Running 4000Mhz 15-15-15-36 1T no issues at all So far.


----------



## Jpmboy

cool.


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> Again you been too optimistic on the ram im telling you it aint that easy
> 
> You can raid anything under windows spaces... the dark only has 2 nvme slots (one which is for optane but you can use it for any nvme) the third one is thru u2 you would need a converter the other slot is for like a wifi card. i put in there this AX200 version one and 0 issues is a tight fit bcuz of the heatsink but it works once is there.
> View attachment 2459889
> 
> 
> im using a pci 16x nvme card which allows to put 4x nvmes more..
> 
> So you have i think if im not mistaken..
> 
> if using only 1 gpu
> 
> you can run 7 nvmes one of them would be sharing pch bw with the right hardware combo


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Bcuz you can run an aida mem test bench doesnt mean thats stable its the same people running 12/12/12 on suicide benches.. I have 125gbs reads and 50ns latency @ 4200 thats 100% HCI/RAMTEST stable like days and days of stress tests back to back stable.. But i swapped that for density, now i have [email protected]


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> Bcuz you can run an aida mem test bench doesnt mean thats stable its the same people running 12/12/12 on suicide benches.. I have 125gbs reads and 50ns latency @ 4200 thats 100% HCI/RAMTEST stable like days and days of stress tests back to back stable.. But i swapped that for density, now i have [email protected]


Hi,
Yeah I got a cheap 5.us ebay key of aida64 and it's not very good, not sure what all the rave was about people saying it's a got to have utility lol


----------



## zGunBLADEz

I use it for quick tests to ballpark mem performance i really dislike their stress test suite its too weak .

I prefer realbench for a whole overview specially if you use adaptive and avx offsets those quick changes will trigger a stability quicker there..and blender for a real heavy workload that is not a power virus like P95.... P95 is just frustrating in the end bcuz you end overshooting voltages all over the place fighting with heat you never going to see. Specially in this HCC cpus.. Not the same doing it on a 4/8T cpu than a behemoth that can throw 400-500w all in heat by itself.. Before it was like a mandate to be P95 stable now i look at it the same way i look furmark.. Useless.


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> I use it for quick tests to ballpark mem performance i really dislike their stress test suite its too weak .
> 
> I prefer realbench for a whole overview specially if you use adaptive and avx offsets those quick changes will trigger a stability quicker there..and blender for a real heavy workload that is not a power virus like P95.... P95 is just frustrating in the end bcuz you end overshooting voltages all over the place fighting with heat you never going to see. Before it was like a mandate to be P95 stable now i look at it the same way i look furmark.. Useless.


Hi,
Yeah I get more out of cmd and winsat mem lol


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> Bcuz you can run an aida mem test bench doesnt mean thats stable its the same people running 12/12/12 on suicide benches.. I have 125gbs reads and 50ns latency @ 4200 thats 100% HCI/RAMTEST stable like days and days of stress tests back to back stable.. But i swapped that for density, now i have [email protected]


I have already tested with bootable memtest86, it passed that just fine. And if my system never BSODS with what I am doing then who really cares what test I run. I only test with Intel burn test, and I use realbench with 8GB of ram usage. Realbench passed 1 hour so far, I will try a longer run tonight, but for now I have other things to do. I have seen systems fail with Realbench beyond 2 hours. " NOT WITH THIS SETUP" But, I will run a longer test overnight.

I am 15-15-15-36-1T 4000MHZ, This doesnt seem extreme or me. And I am not sure what the big deal is about it.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yeah this was a good one lol


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

*@tps3443*


Regards to aida, 59ns is slow and something is wrong. Should be at ~49ns or maybe ~48ns with those speeds.

Here an old screen shot of aida and 9980xe:


----------



## tps3443

MrTOOSHORT said:


> *@tps3443*
> 
> 
> Regards to aida, 59ns is slow and something is wrong. Should be at ~49ns or maybe ~48ns with those speeds.
> 
> Here an old screen shot of aida and 9980xe:
> 
> View attachment 2459973


Good to know! I am working on it. Thanks.

Any idea what it could be?? My L3 copy bandwidth is half of what your is too. Strange.


----------



## tps3443

MrTOOSHORT said:


> *@tps3443*
> 
> 
> Regards to aida, 59ns is slow and something is wrong. Should be at ~49ns or maybe ~48ns with those speeds.
> 
> Here an old screen shot of aida and 9980xe:
> 
> View attachment 2459973


I found the issue. tRAS, and tRFC needed to come down drastically. I dropped them a little and it brought me down to 52ns. So, I am still tweaking it a little. Almost there!


----------



## zGunBLADEz

It is trfc it was on 700s ..

Btw, im just saying about testing ram but i guess im to anal about it thats just me xD.

Thats one thing i dont want its unstable ram in my system thats why my methodology of stress testing them. Memtest aint going to cut it either for me...
A failure on ram always can be a critical one thats why...


Like literally i maxed out the system @4200 playing with suicide benches dont give me more speed or more latency. It is what it is..


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> It is trfc it was on 700s ..
> 
> Btw, im just saying about testing ram but i guess im to anal about it thats just me xD.
> 
> Thats one thing i dont want its unstable ram in my system thats why my methodology of stress testing them. Memtest aint going to cut it either for me...
> A failure on ram always can be a critical one thats why...
> 
> 
> Like literally i maxed out the system @4200 playing with suicide benches dont give me more speed or more latency. It is what it is..



Having memory stable is very important for me too. That's why I invested in a quality set to tinker with. I couldn't seem to get my old 4X8GB Hynix 3733 CL17-19-19-39 set stable no matter what I tried. I finally managed to get them at 3,400Mhz with CL17-21-21-41-2T-640 stable. Or "Kind of Stable" They would still force close games sometimes to the desktop. I hated that set. 

Right now I have my timmings at CL15-16-16-28-350-1T. Running CL15-15-15 doesn't seem to show an improvement? 

I have managed to get the memory latency down to 51.8

My Read bandwidth is around 113GBPS. I cannot get my MESH stable at x32 for the life of me.

My bandwidth seems a little low. Is that because my mesh is not a X32 like other people?


----------



## zGunBLADEz

My honest opinion tho? Im just trying to help you here... 1.27 on a 7980xe you should have put that money you spent on ram towards custom cooling instead... bcuz that aio i highly doubt can manage that on a long test. Btw, intel do not recommend going higher than 85c on package temp..
Board evga dark cpu die temp reading is wrong too if you follwing it, it only read actual die on bios only mode ... Just making sure you are getting the actual reading and not thinking the cpu is cool @ 1.27 an aio it aint.. Either that or you are not properly testing it..

Most ppl run mesh at 30x i have mine at 31x she does 33x but i don't see benefits vs 31x @ 1.05v vs 32-33x at higher voltage but see the temp increase..
48&50ns are between variance and probably the lowest you going to see.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

One reason i stop going to intel ddr stress test topic ppl were just suicide benching and not even doing stress tests they think because they chewing %s faster they can do hci runs in a matter of couple of hrs for them thats just stable lol.. Lets not start with the fool that was shooting 270amps+ to his cpu and wondering why his psu was ocping... Like :rollseyes: he didnt even have a clue lol. 

You need to get those sticks warm and consistent on the hammering...


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> One reason i stop going to intel ddr stress test topic ppl were just suicide benching and not even doing stress tests they think because they chewing %s faster they can do hci runs in a matter of couple of hrs for them thats just stable lol.. Lets not start with the fool that was shooting 270amps+ to his cpu and wondering why his psu was ocping... Like :rollseyes: he didnt even have a clue lol.
> 
> You need to get those sticks warm and consistent on the hammering...


The AIO 240MM could not cool it at all. Then I added a 120MM radiator, and a XSPC reservoir.

So, I have a 240MM, a 120MM, and it has its own reservoir just for the CPU. This alone dropped temps drastically!

Then I recently delidded the CPU. So, it actually runs much cooler.


This is my temps at 4.8/ 1.27 through a R20 run. The increased water capacity, and extra radiator helped so much with the AIO. It’ll be gone soon. I just need a block and a pump, to create a full custom loop. I might order those tomorrow. Right now it’s a ghetto loop!


----------



## zGunBLADEz

do some blender tests like tHrash recommended
I use to do classroom in a loop then i start doing the whole suit bcuz each test is different


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> The AIO 240MM could not cool it at all. Then I added a 120MM radiator, and a XSPC reservoir.
> 
> So, I have a 240MM, a 120MM, and it has its own reservoir just for the CPU. This alone dropped temps drastically!
> 
> Then I recently delidded the CPU. So, it actually runs much cooler.
> 
> 
> This is my temps at 4.8/ 1.27 through a R20 run. The increased water capacity, and extra radiator helped so much with the AIO. It’ll be gone soon. I just need a block and a pump, to create a full custom loop. I might order those tomorrow. Right now it’s a ghetto loop!


Hi,
Seeing you're in the USA check out the optimus foundation great water block 








Foundation CPU Block - Intel


INTEL 12TH GEN ALDER LAKE READY The Foundation CPU block forms the foundation of an ultra performance system. The Foundation Block is designed for the latest Intel CPUs and features extreme build quality and the same cold plate and performance design as our premium Signature block for maximum...




optimuspc.com


----------



## Jpmboy

tps3443 said:


> *I have already tested with bootable memtest86, it passed that just fine. And if my system never BSODS with what I am doing then who really cares what test I run*. I only test with Intel burn test, and I use realbench with 8GB of ram usage. Realbench passed 1 hour so far, I will try a longer run tonight, but for now I have other things to do. I have seen systems fail with Realbench beyond 2 hours. " NOT WITH THIS SETUP" But, I will run a longer test overnight.
> 
> I am 15-15-15-36-1T 4000MHZ, This doesnt seem extreme or me. And I am not sure what the big deal is about it.


memtest 86 is not a stress test, it is a functional test (ie, broken sticks). Yeah, no one really cares what you do. But if you ask for advice from folks, well... you are asking them to care. Otherwise, don't ask - right?


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> do some blender tests like *thrash* recommended
> I use to do classroom in a loop then i start doing the whole suit bcuz each test is different


Hi,
Let me fix that for you


----------



## Jpmboy

^ lol


----------



## Jpmboy

@MrTOOSHORT did you manage to snag a 3090 in the fray?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Think he said he was going to wait for the big dog KPE.


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Let me fix that for you


what in the world haha.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Jpmboy said:


> @MrTOOSHORT did you manage to snag a 3090 in the fray?


HeyJP, no I'll wait for the KPE or just see how it goes with other top cards. I'm in no rush and seeing how ppl have been getting shafted trying to get one, I'm more than happy to wait instead of stressing out trying to snag one.


----------



## tps3443

Any ideas why my memory bandwidth is low? Or why my L3 Cache read/write speeds are half of @MrTOOSHORT speeds?

Maybe it’s a low voltage issue? I’ve backed the CPU down just to confirm, I have fixed my latency issue I’m around 50.6NS now. But my read/writes are 114GBPS/101000GBPS.

Timmings are 15-15-15-28-290-1T at 4000Mhz

And his memory is at like 4000Mhz 17-17-17 and he is murdering my scores Lol.


----------



## CptSpig

MrTOOSHORT said:


> HeyJP, no I'll wait for the KPE or just see how it goes with other top cards. I'm in no rush and seeing how ppl have been getting shafted trying to get one, I'm more than happy to wait instead of stressing out trying to snag one.


Nvidia always gets the best of people who buy the first cards that become available. Rumors of ti cards with more memory and higher clock speeds in the future. I will wait as well.


----------



## ThrashZone

CptSpig said:


> Nvidia always gets the best of people who buy the first cards that become available. Rumors of ti cards with more memory and higher clock speeds in the future. I will wait as well.


Hi,
Pretty much this
Sadly I believe the 3090 is the 3080ti but might be a 3080 super duper


----------



## Jpmboy

MrTOOSHORT said:


> HeyJP, no I'll wait for the KPE or just see how it goes with other top cards. I'm in no rush and seeing how ppl have been getting shafted trying to get one, I'm more than happy to wait instead of stressing out trying to snag one.


yeah, that's where I'm at. Can;t actually say that 2080Tis are holding me back. If I can snag an FE or the Strix I might dabble and sell if a KPE or a full die comes out. BTW, I don't know who vince will "engineer" a new KPE with. Tin left EVGA.  😕


----------



## D-EJ915

tps3443 said:


> Any ideas why my memory bandwidth is low? Or why my L3 Cache read/write speeds are half of @MrTOOSHORT speeds?
> 
> Maybe it’s a low voltage issue? I’ve backed the CPU down just to confirm, I have fixed my latency issue I’m around 50.6NS now. But my read/writes are 114GBPS/101000GBPS.
> 
> Timmings are 15-15-15-28-290-1T at 4000Mhz
> 
> And his memory is at like 4000Mhz 17-17-17 and he is murdering my scores Lol.


You're probably getting errors.


----------



## tps3443

I got the speed and timmings worked out! I fixed the latency. tRFC, and tREFI was causing extremely low bandwidth, and high latency! tRFC was at 700, and tREFI was at 15,600. I dropped tRFC to 250, and changed tREFI to 32767. My latency fell, and bandwidth jumped about 12-14GBP.

I am running 14-15-15-23-1T 250 right now. I am checking stability. 

Smoking fast! Running 4,200Mhz requires other sytem voltage increases, and increases package temps so it’s not really worth it?

I think 4,000Mhz low timming is where it’s at on X299.


----------



## tps3443

I am testing stability with Aida 64 memory test. This is a strenuous memory test yes? It found errors pretty quickly lol. I’m back to 15-15-15 now.

Is 2 hours good? I might let it run longer.


----------



## tps3443

@ThrashZone, So I have my memory at XMP 1.5V default passes memory stress testing pretty well. 

With further optimized timmings, I see failures In memory stress testing.

My VSA voltage, and VCCIO voltage are all on auto. What is a good starting point for increasing these to help with ram stability?

I have my VMesh at 1.250V, does this help with memory stability or just the mesh correct?


image hosting


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> @ThrashZone, So I have my memory at XMP 1.5V default passes memory stress testing pretty well.
> 
> With further optimized timmings, I see failures In memory stress testing.
> 
> My VSA voltage, and VCCIO voltage are all on auto. What is a good starting point for increasing these to help with ram stability?
> 
> I have my VMesh at 1.250V, does this help with memory stability or just the mesh correct?
> 
> 
> image hosting


Hi,
I don't have a dark

This is what I use for 4k mhz memory on 3600c16 4x8gb set on apex I do not run this 24/ 7 just for benchmarks !
Dimm voltage 1.41 think it pulls a bit more in the os according to hwinfo64
CPU VCCIO Voltage [1.13125]
CPU System Agent Voltage [0.93500]
PCH Core Voltage [1.01250]

Last I saw Jp use for 4k mhz
Vccio 1.025
Vccsa 0.8
PCH 1.0125


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Let me fix that for you


Ops my bad bro +1


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> Ops my bad bro +1


I let me DDR4 4000Mhz CL15 memory run for about 12 hours. I just woke up and it is still running. This is on the Aida64 memory stress test. I decided to try XMP default first and make sure I am good at the default CL15 profile. Now I am going to go for
tighter timmings. Mostly the tRFC, and tRFEI.


----------



## ThrashZone

MrTOOSHORT said:


> HeyJP, no I'll wait for the KPE or just see how it goes with other top cards. I'm in no rush and seeing how ppl have been getting shafted trying to get one, I'm more than happy to wait instead of stressing out trying to snag one.





CptSpig said:


> Nvidia always gets the best of people who buy the first cards that become available. Rumors of ti cards with more memory and higher clock speeds in the future. I will wait as well.





Jpmboy said:


> yeah, that's where I'm at. Can;t actually say that 2080Tis are holding me back. If I can snag an FE or the Strix I might dabble and sell if a KPE or a full die comes out. BTW, I don't know who vince will "engineer" a new KPE with. Tin left EVGA.  😕


Hi,
Might be best to wait until this gets sorted out









The possible reason for crashes and instabilities of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 and RTX 3090 | Investigative | igor'sLAB


Not only the editors and testers were surprised by sudden instabilities of the new GeForce RTX 3080 and RTX 3090, but also the first customers who were able to get board partner cards from the first…




www.igorslab.de





EVGA wise looks good to go  





Message about EVGA GeForce RTX 3080 POSCAPs - EVGA Forums


Hi all, Recently there has been some discussion about the EVGA GeForce RTX 3080 series. During our mass production QC testing we discovered a full 6 POSCAPs solution cannot pass the real world applications testing. It took almost a week of R&D effort to find the cause and reduce the PO...



forums.evga.com


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> I let me DDR4 4000Mhz CL15 memory run for about 12 hours. I just woke up and it is still running. This is on the Aida64 memory stress test. I decided to try XMP default first and make sure I am good at the default CL15 profile. Now I am going to go for
> tighter timmings. Mostly the tRFC, and tRFEI.


Hi,
You need to install *asrock memory configurator 4.0.4* utility and post it's timing reads in the os
I'd upload the zip but not allowed on this new crappy format
Here it is though just scroll down some to Support/ Downloads and it's near the bottom of the list








ASRock X299 OC Formula


Supports Intel Core™ X-Series Processor Family for the LGA 2066 Socket; 13 Phase CPU Power Design + 2 Phase Memory Power Design, Dr. MOS; Supports Quad Channel DDR4 4600+(OC) Memory; 5 PCIe 3.0 x16, 1 PCIe 3.0 x4, 1 PCIe 2.0 x1; NVIDIA 4-Way SLI™, AMD 4-Way CrossFireX™; 7.1 CH HD Audio (Realtek...




www.asrock.com


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> You need to install *asrock memory configurator 4.0.4* utility and post it's timing reads in the os
> I'd upload the zip but not allowed on this new crappy format
> Here it is though just scroll down some to Support/ Downloads and it's near the bottom of the list
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASRock X299 OC Formula
> 
> 
> Supports Intel Core™ X-Series Processor Family for the LGA 2066 Socket; 13 Phase CPU Power Design + 2 Phase Memory Power Design, Dr. MOS; Supports Quad Channel DDR4 4600+(OC) Memory; 5 PCIe 3.0 x16, 1 PCIe 3.0 x4, 1 PCIe 2.0 x1; NVIDIA 4-Way SLI™, AMD 4-Way CrossFireX™; 7.1 CH HD Audio (Realtek...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.asrock.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2460128


I took the screenshot while the test was still running. So far, memory tuning is very time
consuming. Ive been wondering what app that was I see people using.


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> I took the screenshot while the test was still running. So far, memory tuning is very time
> consuming. Ive been wondering what app that was I see people using.


Hi,
Always fun to find lol but yeah there it is clean download global listing.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

if you read and follow advice you would know what to use ... aida sucks for stress testing..

@ThrashZone i never find an asrock timing app that worked on my evga boards
and the new update to win 10 mess up asus memtweak it

@Jpmboy have any info about the asus mem tweak workaround? its with KB4571756


We'll be back.


----------



## Dreamliner

I just realized today that the 10900X is a X299 chip (I thought it was a new version of the 9900K). Does that mean it will work on my Asus TUF X299 Mark 1?

I've been considering getting a 3900x or 3950x but that means a new board and probably new memory (I have 4x Crucial Ballistix 2400 8GB sticks).

If I get a 10900X chip I can keep my board and memory, right?

I'm wondering how much of a difference I will see between a 7820X @ 4.4 and a 10900X.

The only reason I'm thinking of upgrading at all is there is still some value in the chip and board I currently have (ironically going the 3900x route will still probably be cheaper than a 10900X after selling my current stuff but I'd rather have a 3950x...and of course new chips are coming soon...).


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Dreamliner said:


> I just realized today that the 10900X is a X299 chip (I thought it was a new version of the 9900K). Does that mean it will work on my Asus TUF X299 Mark 1?
> 
> I've been considering getting a 3900x or 3950x but that means a new board and probably new memory (I have 4x Crucial Ballistix 2400 8GB sticks).
> 
> If I get a 10900X chip I can keep my board and memory, right?
> 
> I'm wondering how much of a difference I will see between a 7820X @ 4.4 and a 10900X.
> 
> The only reason I'm thinking of upgrading at all is there is still some value in the chip and board I currently have (ironically going the 3900x route will still probably be cheaper than a 10900X after selling my current stuff but I'd rather have a 3950x...and of course new chips are coming soon...).



Yes you can use a 10900x in your current set up. Just update your bios to the latest first before putting your 10900x chip in. The 10 core will surely overclock better than your 4.4GHz 8 core. Should be nice upgrade.


----------



## Dreamliner

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Yes you can use a 10900x in your current set up. Just update your bios to the latest first before putting your 10900x chip in. The 10 core will surely overclock better than your 4.4GHz 8 core. Should be nice upgrade.


What about cooling? The 7820X was limited at 4.8Ghz because of temps (tested with a EVGA CLC 240), so I backed it down to 4.4 and put it on air (reliability).


----------



## zGunBLADEz

with the 10core you need beefier cooling if you plan to overclock.. i would also recommend getting rid of the ram and get something about the 3600 mark


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> if you read and follow advice you would know what to use ... aida sucks for stress testing..
> 
> @ThrashZone i never find an asrock timing app that worked on my evga boards
> and the new update to win 10 mess up asus memtweak it
> 
> @Jpmboy have any info about the asus mem tweak workaround? its with KB4571756
> 
> 
> We'll be back.


Hi,
That's too bad you try others 
4.0.4 has always worked but I don't update 10 very often sort of bad policy for a benchmark rig to update anything but gpu driver maybe 
4.0.3 was good for x99 at one time but stopped Jp gave me 3.0.6 to try
3.0.6 good for x99 maybe others haven't tried.


----------



## ThrashZone

Dreamliner said:


> What about cooling? The 7820X was limited at 4.8Ghz because of temps (tested with a EVGA CLC 240), so I backed it down to 4.4 and put it on air (reliability).


Hi,
7820x is not a soldered chip
10900x is soldered so it should cool better than 7820x with pigeon poop inside still


----------



## Dreamliner

Now I'm thinking about not doing anything. When I went from my 5820K to the 7820X I basically just gained two more cores. I know benchmark wise there is some small IPC improvement but I don't think I noticed it. Truthfully, I've been so busy with other things that I haven't used my PC for much more than Chrome since I got this 7820X. I could have stayed with the 5820K no problem but the deal on this 7820X system was too good to pass up. Heck, I've had a 1080Ti in this system for over a year and I've never played a game with it. Of course, I sold it in anticipation of a 3080 and now I'm questioning whether to even get that or not.

When I look at the 7820X, 10900X and even the 10980XE I see the IPC stays around the same, just more cores. When comparing IPC, even a Ryzen 7 3700X is around the same performance. Looking at gaming comparisons a lot of these chips are all about the same. If I do get a 3080 I guess I just don't want to end up with my CPU/configuration hanging things up. OC'd my 7820X will get a Cinebench R15 Single-Core score of 201 (package temp at 82C, highest core at 68C).

I thought about getting faster memory, but benches show that going from 2400 to even 3600 on Intel barely does anything.

I might be able to get a 10980XE for cheap, cheap enough that I will most likely jump on it no matter what. Even still though, it barely outpaces the 3950X, OC'd it takes 500w and the 3950X only needs half that.

Part of the whole reason I'm talking about any of this is simply because I had the thought of "maybe I could sell this, add just a few hundred and get something way better, like a 3950X system," then I realized the 10900X would work in my board, then I saw the 10980XE, then I saw the power draw...perhaps I should simply wait until chips pass a single-core Cinebench R15 score of 300 where I'd actually notice an improvement for my money.


----------



## tps3443

Dreamliner said:


> Now I'm thinking about not doing anything. When I went from my 5820K to the 7820X I basically just gained two more cores. I know benchmark wise there is some small IPC improvement but I don't think I noticed it. Truthfully, I've been so busy with other things that I haven't used my PC for much more than Chrome since I got this 7820X. I could have stayed with the 5820K no problem but the deal on this 7820X system was too good to pass up. Heck, I've had a 1080Ti in this system for over a year and I've never played a game with it. Of course, I sold it in anticipation of a 3080 and now I'm questioning whether to even get that or not.
> 
> When I look at the 7820X, 10900X and even the 10980XE I see the IPC stays around the same, just more cores. When comparing IPC, even a Ryzen 7 3700X is around the same performance. Looking at gaming comparisons a lot of these chips are all about the same. If I do get a 3080 I guess I just don't want to end up with my CPU/configuration hanging things up. OC'd my 7820X will get a Cinebench R15 Single-Core score of 201 (package temp at 82C, highest core at 68C).
> 
> I thought about getting faster memory, but benches show that going from 2400 to even 3600 on Intel barely does anything.
> 
> I might be able to get a 10980XE for cheap, cheap enough that I will most likely jump on it no matter what. Even still though, it barely outpaces the 3950X, OC'd it takes 500w and the 3950X only needs half that.
> 
> Part of the whole reason I'm talking about any of this is simply because I had the thought of "maybe I could sell this, add just a few hundred and get something way better, like a 3950X system," then I realized the 10900X would work in my board, then I saw the 10980XE, then I saw the power draw...perhaps I should simply wait until chips pass a single-core Cinebench R15 score of 300 where I'd actually notice an improvement for my money.


I ran a 8086K at 5.3Ghz all cores. So, IPC was just about as good as anything for gaming purposes. It was a fast chip for sure. But, I wanted a faster cpu for multithreaded apps and rendering things quick as light!

So, I bought a 7980XE and a X299 Dark motherboard. This thing is a absolute beast! I absolutely love it, and it is the most fun I e ever had with a processor in my entire life of building computers, and that goes back to around 2004. I could’ve purchased whatever setup I wanted honestly, I could’ve bought a 10900K/Z490 or even an AMD 3950X/X570 setup. But, I wanted the 7980XE and it was certainly more expensive than any of the other options. I don’t regret a thing about it. Yes it uses a ton of juice at 4.6Ghz or 4.8Ghz pushing heavy cpu intensive loads on all cores. But, that’s under full loads. During games It is no where near this, the CPU practically idles through gaming and temps don’t even go up on the darn thing lol. And if you actually run one of these CPU’s stock they are actually very efficient. My 7980XE at 3.4Ghz all core boost pulls around 275 watts total system power at the wall bone stock with only a 100% CPU load running, and jumps to around 600+ Watts at 4.6Ghz and will go past 750 watts with higher frequencies or even just 4.5Ghz on a heavy AVX load, but you’d certainly never see this type of power draw during gaming, usually only stress testing. IPC is still very fast! This is a 3 year old CPU and it has absolutely no trouble beating a Ryzen 3950X. And this was one of the reasons why I wanted it so bad, with a mild OC it can easily outperform everything else in heavy loads. As for memory speeds, I can see a drastic performance improvement in 1440P 165Hz gaming running a non XMP profile at 2133Mhz CL15 and then going to my XMP profile of 4000Mhz at CL15. I spent quite a bit on my matching quad channel DDR4 set, trying to get the most IPC and performance I could out of this system for years to come. It won’t have any trouble pushing a RTX3080/3090 to full potential in 1440P gaming.

X299 is a fantastic platform, and there are several CPU’s to choose from. I would however recommend some good memory too, CL14 DDR4 3200-3600 in quad channel would offer excellent performance.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Ugh cooling will always be the first thing to limit you
Soldered 5820k and pigeon poop 7820x not much difference well no kidding lol
Skylake-x was a total waste without delid because it's a thermal defect.

Get a nice 10900k you should be able to do 5.0 on an air cooler or your 240 aio and at least have a good gaming rig.

10980xe's are just about everywhere now at 1k.us


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Ugh cooling will always be the first thing to limit you
> Soldered 5820k and pigeon poop 7820x not much difference well no kidding lol
> Skylake-x was a total waste without delid because it's a thermal defect.
> 
> Get a nice 10900k you should be able to do 5.0 on an air cooler or your 240 aio and at least have a good gaming rig.
> 
> 10980xe's are just about everywhere now at 1k.us


Before I delidded my 7980XE, I could barely scrape by on 4.4Ghz with Asus realbench and blender. I mean literally just barely, even just a hot day in my house could throw this off.

After delid and expanding my AIO, I can easily manage 4.6Ghz in either of these. And I still have some cusion between temperatures.

My 7980XE running stock before delid ran super cool though. I was pretty impressed. Even running something like 4.3Ghz was pretty decent. I was expecting much worse.


----------



## Dreamliner

I've actually had pretty good luck with temps. My 7820X on AIO was thermally limited at 4.8GHz with RealBench, I've seen people that couldn't even get to 4.4GHz without having thermal issues. I just ran Cinebench at 4.7GHz on air and package temp was at 82C, highest core at 68C.

I've decided on a Define 7 XL case which will support a 360 AIO and has enough room for all my storage drives. Perhaps a case swap will quell my upgrade itch. Looking at reviews, I'm really not seeing a reason to go 10980XE over a 3950X, they trade blows in performance even with the two extra cores on the Intel. Even OC'd (pulling 2X the power) the 10980XE will still get bested in some benches and the price difference easily pays for a motherboard. Perhaps if the 10980XE was the price of the 10900X...

Now I'm wondering what difference I'd actually see with memory. I have 4x8GB sticks of 2400 Crucial Ballistix memory now. If I upgrade I'll likely end up with 4x16GB or 4x32GB sticks of 3600 G.Skill memory. A video I saw though showed about a 5% gain from faster memory. $450 is a lot for 5%. Even if I stayed with the same amount of memory (I wouldn't), the cost would still be $150.

I think logic may ultimately win out. With a 4K/60 panel, no matter which CPU I pick (7820/3950/10900/10980) the 3080 will have no issues maxing out the panel. If I upgrade my screens it'll likely be a 4K/120 flanked by my current two panels, but that day is a long way off.


----------



## ThrashZone

Dreamliner said:


> I've actually had pretty good luck with temps. My 7820X on AIO was thermally limited at 4.8GHz with RealBench, I've seen people that couldn't even get to 4.4GHz without having thermal issues. I just ran Cinebench at 4.7GHz on air and package temp was at 82C, highest core at 68C.
> 
> I've decided on a Define 7 XL case which will support a 360 AIO and has enough room for all my storage drives. Perhaps a case swap will quell my upgrade itch. Looking at reviews, I'm really not seeing a reason to go 10980XE over a 3950X, they trade blows in performance even with the two extra cores on the Intel. Even OC'd (pulling 2X the power) the 10980XE will still get bested in some benches and the price difference easily pays for a motherboard. Perhaps if the 10980XE was the price of the 10900X...
> 
> Now I'm wondering what difference I'd actually see with memory. I have 4x8GB sticks of 2400 Crucial Ballistix memory now. If I upgrade I'll likely end up with 4x16GB or 4x32GB sticks of 3600 G.Skill memory. A video I saw though showed about a 5% gain from faster memory. $450 is a lot for 5%. Even if I stayed with the same amount of memory (I wouldn't), the cost would still be $150.
> 
> I think logic may ultimately win out. With a 4K/60 panel, no matter which CPU I pick (7820/3950/10900/10980) the 3080 will have no issues maxing out the panel. If I upgrade my screens it'll likely be a 4K/120 flanked by my current two panels, but that day is a long way off.


Hi,
New amd is supposed to be even better and only a couple more months to go before it drops.


----------



## Dreamliner

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> New amd is supposed to be even better and only a couple more months to go before it drops.


Exactly. With the 3950X trading blows with a 10980XE, then the 3950X replacement will smoke it. 

I am a bit hesitant to go back to AMD (haven’t had them since Athlon X2 days). I’ll wait and see I guess.


----------



## ThrashZone

Dreamliner said:


> Exactly. With the 3950X trading blows with a 10980XE, then the 3950X replacement will smoke it.
> 
> I am a bit hesitant to go back to AMD (haven’t had them since Athlon X2 days). I’ll wait and see I guess.


Hi,
I'm liking comet lake personally 10 core gaming chip but yeah I did think hard on 3960x but the price jump from 3950x was stupid so I passed.


----------



## tps3443

Dreamliner said:


> Exactly. With the 3950X trading blows with a 10980XE, then the 3950X replacement will smoke it.
> 
> I am a bit hesitant to go back to AMD (haven’t had them since Athlon X2 days). I’ll wait and see I guess.




The 3950X is a great value, but you’ve pretty much got what you’ve got with one. Theres not really any performance to squeeze out of a stock one. Maybe a little, but that’s it. This is a dual channel mainstream platform.

You can squeeze quite a bit out of a 10980XE. Even in these reviews they only run 3.8Ghz all cores running bone stock. You can get a lot more than that out of one.

In R20 my 7980XE is about 20% faster than even an overclocked 3950X.

The CPU does cost more, but X299 boards are so cheap. That was my mindset. As a matter of fact, a member just mailed me a EVGA X299 dark for cost of shipping alone lol.

The 10980XE is around $1,060 bucks. And I felt like buying a used 7980XE was a much better value at around $800 dollars used. The 3950X is cheaper, but has a lot less features, Other than PCI-e 4.0.

I considered the 3950X myself. And, I felt like I was buying a pre squeezed processor. I think next gen AMD will be really great, and will probably be the perfect all around cpu since Ryzen has started since 2017. Current Ryzen (16) core just didn’t impress me that much. You could literally buy a 3 year old chip from intel for around $700-$800 dollars add in a “Quality” dirt cheap motherboard and the platform would still beat it by 10-20% with a good stable overclock. And in certain applications, the 3950X just cannot keep up with the Intel processors running with higher system bandwidth.


Maybe you wouldn’t benefit from a 10980XE or having quad channel memory at all, or improving your X299 setup at all. And you might possibly just need a Z490/ or 10900K depending on what you are doing with your PC. I wanted to run VROC, and use extra PCI-e lanes just for mass storage, I also use applications that can leverage the 125GBPS+ in memory bandwidth, and I have a virtual machines that I manage. So these other platforms were not exactly the best options for me.

Even your current 7820X is a very capable CPU for 2020, and years to come. Especially for 4K gaming.


----------



## Dreamliner

This article compares a OC’d 10980XE to a OC’d 3950X. 









Intel Core i9-10980XE Review: Better Than AMD’s Ryzen 9 3950X?


Is Intel's new Core i9-10980XE better than AMD's Ryzen 9 3950X?




www.forbes.com





I’ll probably wait for benches on the next Ryzen chips to decide unless my guy comes through on the Intel chip for ultra cheap. I’ve pretty much decided if I upgrade on X299 it’ll be to the 10980XE. I don’t really see much of a point going from the 7820X to the 10900X, no matter what I do, single core doesn’t bump a ton.

I’m running quad channel memory at 2400, from what I understand going to 3600 gains me only about 5%.

I have decided to get a Define 7 XL, so now I’m deciding if I should get a 360 AIO, one of those cheap EK loop kits or just keep on with air.

I bought a Corsair Commander Pro to try and control my Noctua fans. I just can’t get my TUF X299 Mark 1 to spin them under 40% and it’s too noisy for my liking.


----------



## tps3443

Dreamliner said:


> This article compares a OC’d 10980XE to a OC’d 3950X.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intel Core i9-10980XE Review: Better Than AMD’s Ryzen 9 3950X?
> 
> 
> Is Intel's new Core i9-10980XE better than AMD's Ryzen 9 3950X?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.forbes.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I’ll probably wait for benches on the next Ryzen chips to decide unless my guy comes through on the Intel chip for ultra-cheap. I’ve pretty much decided if I upgrade on X299 it’ll be to the 10980XE. I don’t really see much of a point going from the 7820X to the 10900X, no matter what I do, single core doesn’t bump a ton.
> 
> I’m running quad-channel memory at 2400, from what I understand going to 3600 gains me only about 5%.
> 
> I have decided to get a Define 7 XL, so now I’m deciding if I should get a 360 AIO, one of those cheap EK loop kits or just keep on with air.
> 
> I bought a Corsair Commander Pro to try and control my Noctua fans. I just can’t get my TUF X299 Mark 1 to spin them under 40% and it’s too noisy for my liking.


I know you can probably squeeze more from a 10980XE than my 7980XE, so keep that in mind based on my screenshot. From what I have seen they require less voltage at the same frequency. This is my 7980XE at 4.8Ghz. I run this 24/7 with DDR4 4000 at CL14-15-15-23-1T G.Skill Memory. Based on my 7980XE's R20 Score I am right there with that AMD 2990WX performance-wise.

When I had my old crappy Hynix memory I was scoring practically the same. My current set of memory improved my 1440P FPS dramatically. But then you also must understand it isn't always 5% across the board, some things improve much better than that. My system memory latency dropped from around 68NS to 48NS. And my memory bandwidth also climbed 20%. This was running 3733Mhz high timmings crappy Hynix memory set to, Samsung B-Die 4000Mhz tight timmings.

These CPU’s pull some juice that’s the one down side. Sitting on the desktop at 200 watts from the wall. More like 225 typing this haha. 

I have a AIO expanded in to a very ghetto custom loop. My CPU is delidded. Every core stays just under 80C during R20 runs


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Single core performance unless you can oc the hell out of it are always pretty close together even amd verses intel.

Bottom line more cores = more heat lol not sure many people with aio's were very happy with 18-16-14-12-10 core processors using one one.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

cb20 its not stress test , cb15 either, aida either,, aida stress test suite its not a stress tester..

i dont need 14s to get 48s :/ none of this pictures are stable XD


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
If you loop R20 it can be a stress test rather than just 1... minute run but I don't think it's all that good even looping seeing a system can run R20/.. and still crash pretty quick with realbench/....


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> If you loop R20 it can be a stress test rather than just 1... minute run but I don't think it's all that good even looping seeing a system can run R20/.. and still crash pretty quick with realbench/....


i use it with an app that auto mouse clic by timer i do the run and then click and the app with auto click right after every run finished its ok for a ballpark but not something i will take seriously..

I need something that switches my frecuencys and avx offsets all at the same time like rog bench bcuz i use adaptive and you know how i dial my overclocks individually..


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> i use it with an app that auto mouse clic by timer i do the run and then click and the app with auto click right after every run finished its ok for a ballpark but not something i will take seriously..
> 
> I need something that switches my frecuencys and avx offsets all at the same time like rog bench bcuz i use adaptive and you know how i dial my overclocks individually..


Hi,
You can use the cinebench menus to loop as many times as you want too also.


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> cb20 its not stress test , cb15 either, aida either,, aida stress test suite its not a stress tester..
> 
> i dont need 14s to get 48s :/ none of this pictures are stable XD
> 
> 
> View attachment 2460444
> 
> View attachment 2460446
> 
> View attachment 2460445


I am not posting suicide runs. That’s what my machine runs at 24/7. It never crashes in my workload. I could loop R20 until the end of time. And it has passed realbench with 8GB of Vram usage for 2 hours. I did not run it any further than that.

I know that CL14 is not required for 48NS. I run CL14 just for slightly higher single thread scores in R15 and R20. So, I have been running is like that. And it has never presented a problem in my day to
day usage. But I will probably go back to 15-16-16 and reduce voltage off of 1.612V.

I am just a consumer and I run several different consumer applications and programs for school work, and work work, and even video games too. this is what it runs at and it is stable in all of my work loads so I don’t see an issue.

Im not doing a quick R20 runs with fans blasting on it, Crossing my fingers for hope to pass while saying a prayer for high numbers to the Royal silicon gods Lol. You can loop it literally until the end of time.

This is my cooling setup, and the CPU is delidded too. My hottest core in R20 was in the high 70’s. I do not use panels or doors on my case, not even a front panel is in place. I need maximum airflow. The is a open case. And this CPU puts out a lot of power under heavy loads.


----------



## tps3443

double post.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

im just going to post this and this is 100% stable LIKE for everything
thats how you stress test memory  and now im not praying when i click to run a cb20 lol









and this is my 64kit which got abused bad as well


















im very picky how i test ram overclocks i use various tools to do so.. and they are not rog bench


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> im just going to post this and this is 100% stable LIKE for everything
> thats how you stress test memory  and now im not praying when i click to run a cb20 lol
> View attachment 2460488
> 
> 
> and this is my 64kit which got abused bad as well
> 
> View attachment 2460489
> 
> View attachment 2460490
> 
> 
> im very picky how i test ram overclocks i use various tools to do so.. and they are not rog bench


I’ll give it a shot.


----------



## tps3443

I just run fixed voltages to my cpu. Adaptive is unstable for me no matter what I do. Running less the 1.6V to my memory is also
unstable with my current tight timmings. Games will force close to desktop


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> im just going to post this and this is 100% stable LIKE for everything
> thats how you stress test memory  and now im not praying when i click to run a cb20 lol
> View attachment 2460488
> 
> 
> and this is my 64kit which got abused bad as well
> 
> View attachment 2460489
> 
> View attachment 2460490
> 
> 
> im very picky how i test ram overclocks i use various tools to do so.. and they are not rog bench



Hey I am testing now at default XMP 4000Mhz CL15. I have 30 of these little apps open. With 1024MB each and one at 512MB for around 30,500MB coverage. My DDR4 temps are drastically different from one another. Maybe they need fans. I’ll report back once it finshes.


@zGunBLADEz 

How long do I let it run for? I thought it reaches 100% coverage on each app and it stops. But, it’s still going. I see yours is like 3,000+ some % coverage.


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> im just going to post this and this is 100% stable LIKE for everything
> thats how you stress test memory  and now im not praying when i click to run a cb20 lol
> View attachment 2460488
> 
> 
> and this is my 64kit which got abused bad as well
> 
> View attachment 2460489
> 
> View attachment 2460490
> 
> 
> im very picky how i test ram overclocks i use various tools to do so.. and they are not rog bench



Ok, I ran it for an hour. And I got really bored. This is with the stock XMP profile with my tFAW to 30, tRMEI to 32767. All on default 1.5 Voltage settings. I don't test my memory often, or ever. I know a hour probably isn't long. But, I wanted to get back to tuning in the bios lol. I will run it longer overnight. I pointed a fan on my memory. I have never seen temps like that, I have never looked at the memory temps either though. And thats the default XMP voltage of just 1.500V. It was hitting 57C and climbing. A fan brought it down quickly.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

i do multiple long runs.. Now i changed how i do it.. i start with Tm5 anta extreme then when i think is fine jump to ramtest couple of days worth of stress then i finalized with multiple runs like that on hci. Yeah you need to active cool the ram on those stress test..


----------



## zGunBLADEz

so, got me another vrm waterblock from xspc from the asus rampage black iv for the x299 dark and some 14gauge copper shims 1/4 wide 5" 1/2 long from ebay that i ordered today ..
only needed to cut with a dremel and flat the screwholes with the rest as they werent using a plastic spacer like the heatkiller one which was easy to take out with a plier... so the shim is flat against it and i be reusing the holes to screw the copper shim in top of it.. so 0.5mm for copper shim 0.5mm for vrms directly depends how far from those little caps that are a bit taller than the vrms maybe 1.5mm pads for the caps.. probably will tap a 3 hole in the middle so i can secure more flat the shim...


----------



## tps3443

Hey what are you guys thoughts on AVX 512 loads and using offsets?

Just our of curiosity I ran the adida 64 FPU stress which is AVX 512. And with my CPU at 4.8Ghz 1.275V with a -12 AVX 512 offset.

So this is 3,600Mhz at 1.275V AVX 512 stress load. my CPU was reaching 93C package temps. quite a bit hotter than running realbench at 4.8Ghz @1.275V with no AVX offsets at all.

Then I tested again at 4,400Mhz with no AVX 512 offsets and only 1.125V same
aida 64 FPU stress test, my package temps only reach about 78-85C but the CPU is running 800Mhz faster and a whole lot cooler.

So what is the point of an AVX offset? When it isn’t the frequency the CPU can’t handle, it is the voltage that it cannot handle.


How come we cannot run AVX offsets, with different voltage offsets?

4.4Ghz during a AVX load running 78-85C is substantially better than 3.6Ghz at 93C or even hotter.

The same goes for standard AVX2 as well.

If I run my CPU at 4.6Ghz at 1.203V with a -2 AVX offset for an effective 4,400Mhz frequency in realbench. Or if I just ran a straight 4,400Mhz with the lower voltage required of 1.125 and no AVX offsets at all. It would run much cooler, and consume a lot
less power and run just as fast with 4.4Ghz and only 1.125V.


So why do people run offsets? How come we cannot run multiple voltages?

A standard voltage for 4.8Ghz, then a -4 AVX 512 offset with a lower voltage to work with the offsets.

I suppose different overclocking profiles are all we could use to maximize work flow with AVX and non AVX applications.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

if you need to run AVX512 instructions your best bet is using adaptive and the offset as when it drop the multiplier the voltage will drop as well with it thats the magic on using adaptive in this cpu with avx offsets.. problem is you just need to do long testings to see where is the issue.. dialing a universal setting it aint going to help you with avx 512 is either you have a profile just for that tested low voltages of course and low multiplier as well.. but if you want a regular "all around" overclock you need to do alot of testing starting from main multi to avx offset testing to avx512 offsets for this you will need adaptive working... is kind of tricky as some boards dont go with the cpuvid table and overvolt the **** out of it depending of cpu table too i manage to do it on this 2 evga boards and both 7940x and 7980xe... the asrock board was no dice in adaptive..

I go adaptive with a negative offset to lower the cpuvid table down to where i wanted it...
Then from there i aim on sse/avx offset working first to make sure is stable then i just play with the avx512 i lowered till is "stable" i already have sse/avx offset set as daily.. but day to day you aint going to find too many applications that use avx512 anyway and to stress test it you have few applications like aida which i dont like, linpackextreme i use and watch it like a hawk and p95 which i wouldnt even bother with it lol.. then after i know is stable depending on ambients (bcuz is get hot here in chicago in the summer months i have had temps in the house over 95-100f+ i have no ac on where the "puter is at" lol) all i have to do is drop the avx offsets a notch in xtu to minus 1-2x dont touch anything else voltage wise, voltage would go accordingly with the drop in the multiplier all this on the fly..

btw i saw *spikes of power draw as heat* on linpack extreme which uses avx512 all way up to 500w of heat (do not confuse this with out of the AC wall power, this is actual heat you need to dissipate) with volts as low as 1.0v if i were you i be very careful with it..
But you never listen 

in this post i explained a bit better and the last of that post theres a spoiler which is my 7980xe notched individually percore on adaptive pulling almost 500w as heat and not even touching 80c on the hottest die.








Intel Core i9-10980XE: 5 GHz on 18 cores


I can't be certain because I also tightened the memory from XMP 4500-18-20-20-44 (running at 4000) to 4000-16-16-16-34 with tight sub-timings. The memory itself passes all tests, but it could have destabilized the core. When in doubt... go back to stock?




www.overclock.net


----------



## D-EJ915

The AVX units require more voltage than regular non-AVX loads, imagine they also factor heat output to fit TDP too but I have no idea really.

I looked up the table it seems it is -2 and -6 at default for 7980xe according to this table here: https://hexus.net/media/uploaded/2017/9/23568c8f-b3b1-4d8a-b060-0b3ab821814a.png

165w
7980
-2 -6
7960
-3 -6
7940
-3 -7

140w
7920
-4 -9
7900
-4 -7
7820
-3 -5
7800
-2 -3


----------



## tps3443

D-EJ915 said:


> The AVX units require more voltage than regular non-AVX loads, imagine they also factor heat output to fit TDP too but I have no idea really.
> 
> I looked up the table it seems it is -2 and -6 at default for 7980xe according to this table here: https://hexus.net/media/uploaded/2017/9/23568c8f-b3b1-4d8a-b060-0b3ab821814a.png
> 
> 165w
> 7980
> -2 -6
> 7960
> -3 -6
> 7940
> -3 -7
> 
> 140w
> 7920
> -4 -9
> 7900
> -4 -7
> 7820
> -3 -5
> 7800
> -2 -3


But if I ran 4.8Ghz with 1.275V and a -6 AVX 512 offset my CPU would cook it’s self to death while running at 4,200Mhz during a AVX 512 load at over 90C. Because it would still hammer it with 1.275V at 4,200Mhz.

Or instead I could just run 4,200Mhz with no offsets at all and run around 1.065V and my CPU would run about 65-70C.


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> if you need to run AVX512 instructions your best bet is using adaptive and the offset as when it drop the multiplier the voltage will drop as well with it thats the magic on using adaptive in this cpu with avx offsets.. problem is you just need to do long testings to see where is the issue.. dialing a universal setting it aint going to help you with avx 512 is either you have a profile just for that tested low voltages of course and low multiplier as well.. but if you want a regular "all around" overclock you need to do alot of testing starting from main multi to avx offset testing to avx512 offsets for this you will need adaptive working... is kind of tricky as some boards dont go with the cpuvid table and overvolt the **** out of it depending of cpu table too i manage to do it on this 2 evga boards and both 7940x and 7980xe... the asrock board was no dice in adaptive..
> 
> I go adaptive with a negative offset to lower the cpuvid table down to where i wanted it...
> Then from there i aim on sse/avx offset working first to make sure is stable then i just play with the avx512 i lowered till is "stable" i already have sse/avx offset set as daily.. but day to day you aint going to find too many applications that use avx512 anyway and to stress test it you have few applications like aida which i dont like, linpackextreme i use and watch it like a hawk and p95 which i wouldnt even bother with it lol.. then after i know is stable depending on ambients (bcuz is get hot here in chicago in the summer months i have had temps in the house over 95-100f+ i have no ac on where the "puter is at" lol) all i have to do is drop the avx offsets a notch in xtu to minus 1-2x dont touch anything else voltage wise, voltage would go accordingly with the drop in the multiplier all this on the fly..
> 
> btw i saw *spikes of power draw as heat* on linpack extreme which uses avx512 all way up to 500w of heat (do not confuse this with out of the AC wall power, this is actual heat you need to dissipate) with volts as low as 1.0v if i were you i be very careful with it..
> But you never listen
> 
> in this post i explained a bit better and the last of that post theres a spoiler which is my 7980xe notched individually percore on adaptive pulling almost 500w as heat and not even touching 80c on the hottest die.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intel Core i9-10980XE: 5 GHz on 18 cores
> 
> 
> I can't be certain because I also tightened the memory from XMP 4500-18-20-20-44 (running at 4000) to 4000-16-16-16-34 with tight sub-timings. The memory itself passes all tests, but it could have destabilized the core. When in doubt... go back to stock?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


I cannot get an adaptive offset stable to save my life on this motherboard and cpu setup I have.


----------



## D-EJ915

tps3443 said:


> But if I ran 4.8Ghz with 1.275V and a -6 AVX 512 offset my CPU would cook it’s self to death while running at 4,200Mhz during a AVX 512 load at over 90C. Because it would still hammer it with 1.275V at 4,200Mhz.
> 
> Or instead I could just run 4,200Mhz with no offsets at all and run around 1.070V and my CPU would run about 65-70C.


I mean if all you use is heavy AVX workloads go for it? For any normal use you're leaving performance on the table, find your stable OC and adjust offset as needed to find stability for AVX and heat output. Voltage+multiplier+heat do not really go 100% together, at same voltage and lower multiplier you'll get lower heat output. With so many variables going on here you can't say oh this will cook or no it has no effect obviously it is both so you adjust as needed to best suit your cpu, workload, cooling, etc. Intel's offsets are only to fit in their guidelines for stock use, once you overclock they aren't super useful so adjust as necessary. I see where you are coming from with adjusting voltage and offset but unfortunately we don't have that right now so we just try to hit a sweet spot for what we are doing.


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> I cannot get an adaptive offset stable to save my life on this motherboard and cpu setup I have.


Hi,
Try 4.5 using this at all core


----------



## zGunBLADEz

if you cant notch adaptive you will need to create profiles for avx512 instead bcuz what you want to do you will need adaptive working like i showed you..
You can do same static sse/avx offset and create one solely for avx512 if you use avx512... i would try to stay below 1.10V for that alone with enough cooling for it.


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> if you cant notch adaptive you will need to create profiles for avx512 instead bcuz what you want to do you will need adaptive working like i showed you..
> You can do same static sse/avx offset and create one solely for avx512 if you use avx512... i would try to stay below 1.10V for that alone with enough cooling for it.


I am considering going all out on water cooling, using (3) 480MM 60MM thick radiators. 

But I feel like I could add a chiller, a waterblock, and a pump to my current setup with better results. 

My radiators are weak. Once my water gets up to temp they struggle with radiating It off.


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> I am considering going all out on water cooling, using (3) 480MM 60MM thick radiators.
> 
> But I feel like I could add a chiller, a waterblock, and a pump to my current setup with better results.
> 
> My radiators are weak. Once my water gets up to temp they struggle with radiating It off.


Hi,
Yeah chiller or watercool mora 360 or 420 dude.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah chiller or watercool mora 360 or 420 dude.


i see i convert your ass lol how much you gained on your cpu temps before/after when you add it?

try to hunt for a phobya 1260 thats the best big rad out there i found one literally brand new the way the fins are are better than the mora ones.. i get litterally 3c Dt tops no matter the ambients after it gets out of the rad XD


The gpus love this rad lol... when i see the temps are rising without it on just 3x240s i turn the thing on and is almost ambient run for the gpus lol they run almost at the water/Dt lol


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> i see i convert your ass lol how much you gained on your cpu temps before/after when you add it?
> 
> try to hunt for a phobya 1260 thats the best big rad out there i found one literally brand new the way the fins are are better than the mora ones.. i get litterally 3c Dt tops no matter the ambients after it gets out of the rad XD
> 
> 
> The gpus love this rad lol... when i see the temps are rising without it on just 3x240s i turn the thing on and is almost ambient run for the gpus lol they run almost at the water/Dt lol


Phobya 1260? The name alone has me wanting one. once my water gets hot, I can’t get rid of it during a sustained load.

Edit.

So, I just looked at the Phobya 1260, it uses (9)-(18) 140MM fans. This should help me quite a bit. I would have to lay it behind my case. I really want something like this though.


Do you run one of these?


----------



## tps3443

@zGunBLADEz 

Do you think Prime95 small FFT’s with AVX disabled running for 24 hours is a good enough stress test to indicate daily system stability in real world scenarios?


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> i see i convert your ass lol how much you gained on your cpu temps before/after when you add it?
> 
> try to hunt for a phobya 1260 thats the best big rad out there i found one literally brand new the way the fins are are better than the mora ones.. i get litterally 3c Dt tops no matter the ambients after it gets out of the rad XD
> 
> The gpus love this rad lol... when i see the temps are rising without it on just 3x240s i turn the thing on and is almost ambient run for the gpus lol they run almost at the water/Dt lol


Hi,
Haven't really put it through the test 
Just one 360 mora did get my water temp 2c from my ambient so that alone has been something that has been 5c above in the past.



tps3443 said:


> @zGunBLADEz
> 
> Do you think Prime95 small FFT’s with AVX disabled running for 24 hours is a good enough stress test to indicate daily system stability in real world scenarios?


Hi,
Play BF5 for a while


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Haven't really put it through the test
> Just one 360 mora did get my water temp 2c from my ambient so that alone has been something that has been 5c above in the past.
> 
> 
> Hi,
> Play BF5 for a while


This was crazy good stress test for my 8086K because the game uses AVX, if it could run BFV for hours on end, you could run just about anything. BFV would stress all 12 threads to 100% and MSI AB would report around 170 watts sometimes with my 8086K at 5.4Ghz. But it doesn’t seem to phase my 7980XE the same way. At 4.8Ghz I can cruise through BF5 at around 45-48C. it just kinda idles through the game.


And what are the Mora radiators? You guys are actually managing 2C above ambient with water temps? My XSPC water reservoir gets quite warm. So, I am probably running more like 10C above ambient.


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> This was crazy good stress test for my 8086K because the game uses AVX, if it could run BFV for hours on end, you could run just about anything. BFV would stress all 12 threads to 100% and MSI AB would report around 170 watts sometimes with my 8086K at 5.4Ghz. But it doesn’t seem to phase my 7980XE the same way. At 4.8Ghz I can cruise through BF5 at around 45-48C. it just kinda idles through the game.
> 
> 
> And what are the Mora radiators? You guys are actually managing 2C above ambient with water temps? My XSPC water reservoir gets quite warm. So, I am probably running more like 10C above ambient.


Hi,
Mora's are built more like a air conditioner coil so no restriction
Low stock only two left in 360mm








Watercool MO-RA3 360 PRO - Black


The MO-RA3 is a heat exchanger featuring excellent cooling performance and various possibilities of application. Its reliability allows for usage in workstation and server environments and it is sturdy enough for industrial applications. And, of course, it is powerful enough to cool even the...




www.performance-pcs.com




There is also 420mm but all gone anything else would have to be ordered from watercool in Genmany I originally wanted a 420 but they were mostly gone only the very expensive stainless steel left back then




__





Watercooling Radiators


Radiators - Water Cooling




www.performance-pcs.com





Looks like they have four LT black I have one of these pretty good only brackets for fans on one side though Pro comes with both sides.








Watercool MO-RA3 360 LT - Black


The MO-RA3 is a heat exchanger featuring excellent cooling performance and various possibilities of application. Its reliability allows for usage in workstation and server environments and it is sturdy enough for industrial applications. And, of course, it is powerful enough to cool even the...




www.performance-pcs.com


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Mora's are built more like a air conditioner coil so no restriction
> Low stock only two left in 360mm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watercool MO-RA3 360 PRO - Black
> 
> 
> The MO-RA3 is a heat exchanger featuring excellent cooling performance and various possibilities of application. Its reliability allows for usage in workstation and server environments and it is sturdy enough for industrial applications. And, of course, it is powerful enough to cool even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.performance-pcs.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is also 420mm but all gone anything else would have to be ordered from watercool in Genmany I originally wanted a 420 but they were mostly gone only the very expensive stainless steel left back then
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watercooling Radiators
> 
> 
> Radiators - Water Cooling
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.performance-pcs.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like they have four LT black I have one of these pretty good only brackets for fans on one side though Pro comes with both sides.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watercool MO-RA3 360 LT - Black
> 
> 
> The MO-RA3 is a heat exchanger featuring excellent cooling performance and various possibilities of application. Its reliability allows for usage in workstation and server environments and it is sturdy enough for industrial applications. And, of course, it is powerful enough to cool even the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.performance-pcs.com


So the Mora is better than the Phobya 1080 or 1260?

I never knew such radiators existed. I have only seen them in photos, and always wondered what it was. One of them is sufficient? with just a single D5 or DDC pump being enough water pressure?


----------



## tps3443

Hey everyone, so I am considering going direct die and using standard thermal paste, and running a Mora radiator or something along these lines. Would I see drastically worse thermal performance using direct die with good thermal paste, VS using LM and a IHS?


----------



## CptSpig

tps3443 said:


> So the Mora is better than the Phobya 1080 or 1260?
> 
> I never knew such radiators existed. I have only seen them in photos, and always wondered what it was. One of them is sufficient? with just a single D5 or DDC pump being enough water pressure?


I have the Phobya G-Changer Xtreme Nova 1080 Radiator 60mm and it works amazingly well. Link: Phobya G-Changer Xtreme NOVA 1080 Radiator 60mm


----------



## Abaidor

tps3443 said:


> So the Mora is better than the Phobya 1080 or 1260?
> 
> I never knew such radiators existed. I have only seen them in photos, and always wondered what it was. One of them is sufficient? with just a single D5 or DDC pump being enough water pressure?


I have the 9X140 Mora 420 Pro Stainless Steel version and the quality of this thing is amazing! I also got the diamond grill and acrylic feet (both extra)......Its so polished I even like to look at it......well worth the money....

I cool my signature rig (highly overclocked i9-7940X + 1080Ti and it doesn't break a sweat......


----------



## tps3443

CptSpig said:


> I have the Phobya G-Changer Xtreme Nova 1080 Radiator 60mm and it works amazingly well. Link: Phobya G-Changer Xtreme NOVA 1080 Radiator 60mm
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2461524


wow. You can probably run 5.2Ghz pretty easily. Even in an AVX load probably. Very nice setup.

What do you run your 7980XE at everyday?


----------



## tps3443

Abaidor said:


> I have the 9X140 Mora 420 Pro Stainless Steel version and the quality of this thing is amazing! I also got the diamond grill and acrylic feet (both extra)......Its so polished I even like to look at it......well worth the money....
> 
> I cool my signature rig (highly overclocked i9-7940X + 1080Ti and it doesn't break a sweat......


I am considering this because I will have it outside of my case. Probably in the floor, and the feet and enclosure design are really nice add on features. I am going to have to get some long tubbing and really invest in cooling my 7980XE the right way. I’m hoping to avoid running a water chiller if possible.


----------



## tps3443

Also, how would you guys compare these larger Mora rads, or Phobya Rads to something more traditional like the Monsta 480MM radiators?


----------



## tps3443

Anyone here ever try to find the exact voltage for each core on these HCC intel parts? I have found a great way to reduce temperatures and excess wasted power.

This is extremely time consuming. But, so far it is going really good.


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> wow. You can probably run 5.2Ghz pretty easily. Even in an AVX load probably. Very nice setup.
> 
> What do you run your 7980XE at everyday?


Hi,
Yeah this is more like three 60mm rads put together as one and likely has more restriction than a mora seeing it's constructed with round tubing and bends minimal soldering just where in/ outlets are....
I couldn't really find any but thanks to CptSpig for the link


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah this is more like three 60mm rads put together as one and likely has more restriction than a mora seeing it's constructed with round tubing and bends minimal soldering just where in/ outlets are....
> I couldn't really find any but thanks to CptSpig for the link


So a Mora is the best option for lowest temperatures then?


----------



## qwrty

Question regarding VCCIN and Vdroop on CLX. 

It seems to be that 1.85v/1.90v is the best settings (same as SLX) but what is the recommended vdroop on it ?

In my case I have 1.88v in bios, dropping to 1.82v in load.


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> So a Mora is the best option for lowest temperatures then?


Hi,
No mora best for flow the other is probably better performer seeing it's more like a normal 60mm rad x3 but probably also needs a d5 just for it.



qwrty said:


> Question regarding VCCIN and Vdroop on CLX.
> 
> It seems to be that 1.85v/1.90v is the best settings (same as SLX) but what is the recommended vdroop on it ?
> 
> In my case I have 1.88v in bios, dropping to 1.82v in load.


Hi,
ASUS boards LLC would be llc 5 which I believe is about 0.050 vdroop.
You seems to be using llc8 with little to no vdroop which is not recommended to run all the time
No vdroop llc-8 is a temporary setting while finding stable voltage.


----------



## qwrty

I was running LL5, but 1.88v is in BIOS, on desktop i'm running lower @1.86v
Finnally I end up with LL6 with 1.85v in BIOS which provide me a good compromise, 1.824v idle on desktop and 1.792v-1.802v in load.


----------



## ThrashZone

qwrty said:


> I was running LL5, but 1.88v is in BIOS, on desktop i'm running lower @1.86v
> Finnally I end up with LL6 with 1.85v in BIOS which provide me a good compromise, 1.824v idle on desktop and 1.792v-1.802v in load.


HI,
You must not be using a asus mother board. 
But still 0.020 is not much vdroop.


----------



## qwrty

I've an Asus MotherBoard 

What's recommended vdroop so ?


----------



## ThrashZone

qwrty said:


> I've an Asus MotherBoard
> 
> What's recommended vdroop so ?


Hi,
Generally llc-4 but even llc-5 should have more vdroop than you posted you had.
But I already stated 0.050 vdroop so try llc-4 again and loop cinebench R20 a few times see what vccin min/ max shows assuming you're using manual vcore.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

tps3443 said:


> @zGunBLADEz
> 
> Do you think Prime95 small FFT’s with AVX disabled running for 24 hours is a good enough stress test to indicate daily system stability in real world scenarios?


Im not too kind of p95 i dont recommend it even with avx disable whats the point if you shoot avx code you only tested sse instructions 
p95 is a power virus thats all it does..



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Haven't really put it through the test
> Just one 360 mora did get my water temp 2c from my ambient so that alone has been something that has been 5c above in the past.


I get 3c Dt with the 7980xe and 2x1080tis



CptSpig said:


> I have the Phobya G-Changer Xtreme Nova 1080 Radiator 60mm and it works amazingly well. Link: Phobya G-Changer Xtreme NOVA 1080 Radiator 60mm
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2461524





tps3443 said:


> wow. You can probably run 5.2Ghz pretty easily. Even in an AVX load probably. Very nice setup.
> 
> What do you run your 7980XE at everyday?


i highly doubt it lol
you cannot take the heat fast enough from the cpu this cpus and p95 avx loads dont go together.. no matter your cooling...
for 52x you would need alot of voltage to begin with thats 1khw+ from the wall a cb20 run would pull crazy amounts of watts and thats not even p95 with avx lol



tps3443 said:


> Also, how would you guys compare these larger Mora rads, or Phobya Rads to something more traditional like the Monsta 480MM radiators?


those monstas are not performers they are for silent setups


----------



## Timmaigh!

Hello there, i asked this before in the current ZEN 3 news thread and got some answers from one or 2 people, but seeking larger amount of responses to help me decide. I am contemplating dumping my 7940x and buying 10980xe. Not a matter of need, just to have to have the best CPU for the platform, which i dont foresee changing in next 2,3 years (if i was willing to spend to get something better, there are Threadrippers out there already), bit more fun around some basic overclocking and faster single-thread speeds. Would you do it, given the price and ZEN 3 almost here, being superior? Not that i would decide to buy 5950x then, but it kinda sucks knowing there is something better out there for less money.

The other question, what all-core OC can i expect with 360 AIO (Alphacool Eisbaer) - to stay under 90C. Is 4,5GHz achiebable? Or 4,3 at best.

Thx


----------



## ThrashZone

Timmaigh! said:


> Hello there, i asked this before in the current ZEN 3 news thread and got some answers from one or 2 people, but seeking larger amount of responses to help me decide. I am contemplating dumping my 7940x and buying 10980xe. Not a matter of need, just to have to have the best CPU for the platform, which i dont foresee changing in next 2,3 years (if i was willing to spend to get something better, there are Threadrippers out there already), bit more fun around some basic overclocking and faster single-thread speeds. Would you do it, given the price and ZEN 3 almost here, being superior? Not that i would decide to buy 5950x then, but it kinda sucks knowing there is something better out there for less money.
> 
> The other question, what all-core OC can i expect with 360 AIO (Alphacool Eisbaer) - to stay under 90C. Is 4,5GHz achiebable? Or 4,3 at best.
> 
> Thx


Hi,
If you haven't delidded the 7940x, do it it's a lot cheaper than a 1k.us 10980xe but 10980xe would cool better than 7940x seeing it's a soldered chip and 7940x is not.
But if delid is not something you want to do sell it virgin 7940x would go for a nice price.


----------



## Timmaigh!

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> If you haven't delidded the 7940x, do it it's a lot cheaper than a 1k.us 10980xe but 10980xe would cool better than 7940x seeing it's a soldered chip and 7940x is not.
> But if delid is not something you want to do sell it virgin 7940x would go for a nice price.


Delid is not really an option for me, i would need to send the CPU somewhere across the country for it to be done via mail, then wait for it to be returned, it could take days to weeks. It is not something done locally, this is sadly not like US  

What is the temp difference between 7000 and 10000 series BTW, i mean how much does solder improve cooling over the TIM in my 7940x? 10C, less, more?
Finally, how much do you reckon i could sell the CPU for? Its 3 years old by now, so no warranty anymore. I saw someone on a local used stuff reselling site offering his 7820x for 300 EUROs. I thought it was kinda steep, i thought i would sell mine for that much...given new 3900x costs 450 EUROs around here - which is about the same performance as 7940x.

thanks for response!


----------



## ThrashZone

Timmaigh! said:


> Delid is not really an option for me, i would need to send the CPU somewhere across the country for it to be done via mail, then wait for it to be returned, it could take days to weeks. It is not something done locally, this is sadly not like US
> 
> What is the temp difference between 7000 and 10000 series BTW, i mean how much does solder improve cooling over the TIM in my 7940x? 10C, less, more?
> Finally, how much do you reckon i could sell the CPU for? Its 3 years old by now, so no warranty anymore. I saw someone on a local used stuff reselling site offering his 7820x for 300 EUROs. I thought it was kinda steep, i thought i would sell mine for that much...given new 3900x costs 450 EUROs around here - which is about the same performance as 7940x.
> 
> thanks for response!


Hi,
4.5 should be fine if you use By core usage and not all core.
7940x virgin should go for roughly 500.us on ebay fairly easily.


----------



## Timmaigh!

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 4.5 should be fine if you use By core usage and not all core.
> 7940x virgin should go for roughly 500.us on ebay fairly easily.


Thank you! That is surprisingly good news, i wonder why it can be sold for such high price (as i said given the AMD pricing)... anyway, 10980xe goes for 940~1030 EUROs around here, so 500 EUROs expense on it aint so bad.


----------



## ThrashZone

Timmaigh! said:


> Thank you! That is surprisingly good news, i wonder why it can be sold for such high price (as i said given the AMD pricing)... anyway, 10980xe goes for 940~1030 EUROs around here, so 500 EUROs expense on it aint so bad.


Hi,
79 series is better if delid is done.


----------



## tps3443

I flashed my X299 Dark to the XOC bios last nigh. performance has gone up about 3-4%. Idle temps have dropped about 3-4C. And load temps are much lower. I’m using the bios with pre security melt down fix. what an improvement. Even my memory read bandwidth jumped 1.2GBPS.


----------



## tps3443

Timmaigh! said:


> Hello there, i asked this before in the current ZEN 3 news thread and got some answers from one or 2 people, but seeking larger amount of responses to help me decide. I am contemplating dumping my 7940x and buying 10980xe. Not a matter of need, just to have to have the best CPU for the platform, which i dont foresee changing in next 2,3 years (if i was willing to spend to get something better, there are Threadrippers out there already), bit more fun around some basic overclocking and faster single-thread speeds. Would you do it, given the price and ZEN 3 almost here, being superior? Not that i would decide to buy 5950x then, but it kinda sucks knowing there is something better out there for less money.
> 
> The other question, what all-core OC can i expect with 360 AIO (Alphacool Eisbaer) - to stay under 90C. Is 4,5GHz achiebable? Or 4,3 at best.
> 
> Thx


Zen 3 is not superior at all. Zen 3 is a totally different platform, and it looks like a 5950X is just shy of matching a overclocked 7980XE in multithreaded loads, which is an amazing feat for AMD. Obviously the 5950X is much faster in single thread applications too, and that’s great for AMD. But it is just a highly optimized 3950X, pretty sure the memory controller is identical too. If you want a 10980XE, I say go for it. They are soldered so temperatures should be pretty decent. Keep your eyes open for deals. Ive seen 10980XE’s for a little under $1,000.

Or better yet, buy a 7980XE for a little less money, possibly already delidded? You can achieve 4.4 AVX stable without a delid on a 7980XE with a good chip, and decent water cooling setup. That delid will give you quite a bit more head room.

I run my 7980XE at 4,776Mhz fairly easily. Voltage scales up with +0.025 for every 100Mhz all the way to 4.8Ghz. And I can even run (2) core at 5Ghz with 1.296 volts to those (2) specific best cores on the cpu.

I have never exceeded 1.3V with my CPU, it has been super reliable, and the most fun I have ever had with a CPU in my life!!!

You’ve already got a 7940X, which is a really powerful CPU. No issues running this for several more years.


----------



## tps3443

Anyone running a X299 Dark, should use this bios immediately! XOC version 03.

Performance has gone up! And the temps have come way down! This memory overclock is HCI Memetest stable too.

DDR4 4,100Mhz CL15-16-16-30-275-1T @1.5V

CPU is at 4,820Mhz fixed voltage of 1.286V. 

MESH is at 3,175Mhz. VCCIO voltage is what stabilizes the mesh frequency on X299 so I have that at 1.150 Volts


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Nice. Thx for the tip. I’m running the apex but do have nib dark. Nice to know there is an XOC bios for it.


----------



## tps3443

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Nice. Thx for the tip. I’m running the apex but do have nib dark. Nice to know there is an XOC bios for it.


I can run 4.9 with temps almost identical to how 4.8Ghz would run on my old bios, I just tested 4,920Mhz to see the temperatures. First time going over 1.3V on my 7980XE, I am not running this daily, I will stick to 4,820Mhz though. My memory bandwidth jumped up substantially too. About 1.5GBPS not bad for just a different firmware. I have fixed my memory timmings. So, I am getting around 126.5 to 127GBPS bandwidth in Aida 64, latency is 47.2 To 47.5 consistently.

They have a XOC bios that supports 10980XE, so you should be good to go! You can find all of the bios download links from XDEVS OC guide for the X299 Dark.




This is a picture of my temps after a R15 run at 4,820Mhz. It really doesn’t seem to break a sweat, which was not the case before with the standard 1.23 bios from evga.

Not really sure why the firmware is so amazing! But, it has changed my entire system. 4,800Mhz runs so easy.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

so wheres the hci run??


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> so wheres the hci run??


Your just gonna have to take my word as good enough. I used a powerful fan pointed at my open case to cool the memory during the run. And I’m not really interested in running it again. 

I ran it for over 10 hours at 4,100 15-16-16-30-275-1T with 1.5V.

It is stable.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

:rollseyes: i "believe" you


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> :rollseyes: i "believe" you


Ok I’ll post the HCI memtest. I’ll run it again tonight.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

tps3443 said:


> Ok I’ll post the HCI memtest. I’ll run it again tonight.


this is me on the 7940x as we speak need those 64gb SOLID stable


----------



## Jpmboy

tps3443 said:


> I can run 4.9 with temps almost identical to how 4.8Ghz would run on my old bios, I just tested 4,920Mhz to see the temperatures. First time going over 1.3V on my 7980XE, I am not running this daily, I will stick to 4,820Mhz though. My memory bandwidth jumped up substantially too. About 1.5GBPS not bad for just a different firmware. I have fixed my memory timmings. So, I am getting around 126.5 to 127GBPS bandwidth in Aida 64, latency is 47.2 To 47.5 consistently.
> 
> They have a XOC bios that supports 10980XE, so you should be good to go! You can find all of the bios download links from XDEVS OC guide for the X299 Dark.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a picture of my temps after a R15 run at 4,820Mhz. It really doesn’t seem to break a sweat, which was not the case before with the standard 1.23 bios from evga.
> 
> Not really sure why the firmware is so amazing! But, it has changed my entire system. 4,800Mhz runs so easy.


is that a 24/7 1.3V on that CPU?


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> is that a 24/7 1.3V on that CPU?


Like everything he has posted looks like a quick run.. Dont follow recomendations theres runs he have with fsb over 100 as well.

I have a 1.3v -10 offset adaptive for 24-7 overclock but i have the cooling for it and i tested for stability to the point that mine is dialed per core for max overclock lol. But you know how i am with that stuff i make sure is stable. But regular oced is 47x under 1.2vs on adaptive as well.


----------



## Jpmboy

zGunBLADEz said:


> Like everything he has posted looks like a quick run.. Dont follow recomendations theres runs he have with fsb over 100 as well.
> 
> I have a 1.3v -10 offset adaptive for 24-7 overclock but i have the cooling for it and i tested for stability to the point that mine is dialed per core for max overclock lol. But you know how i am with that stuff i make sure is stable. But regular oced is 47x under 1.2vs on adaptive as well.


Yeah, I was trying to give this guy some pointers:


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> is that a 24/7 1.3V on that CPU?


No it’s not. I cannot cool 1.338V at 4.9Ghz for 24/7 usage. That was only for testing purposes. I could probably do some gaming at that frequency, but other Than that I’m just running some benchmarks for fun.


I do run 4,820MHz 24/7 though at 1.286. It is very reliable. And has managed stable through anything I run. And realbench for about 4 hours. I’ve also tested my memory for about 10 hours with fans on them. 

Very reliable. I’ve spent so many hours tweaking and testing this system for stability, it’s crazy lol.

I have quite a few projects that I’m working on in unity and it works so well in this program. Uses all of the cores very consistently, and tons of ram. It is a fast setup. 

Now I just need a real GPU. This 1660Ti is killing me. literally! I sold my 2080Ti in anticipation for RTX 3000 series. That didn’t go well.


----------



## Dreamliner

Quick question, I am buying new memory and I want to know what would be the best to run. Of course I just missed the Prime Day Crucial Ballistix 3200 stuff, but I can get almost the same deal local, so I might grab that.

I was looking at my board specs and it skips from 2666 to 3600, so I am wondering if 3200 memory will work at 3200 speed or no?

7820X
Board: TUF X299 MARK 1 | Motherboards | ASUS USA

Which memory should I get? I will get 2 kits for the Quad Channel support. I'm now kind of leaning towards that Corsair 3600 stuff. I am open to suggestions. Kind of hoping whatever I get would also pair well with a potential Ryzen 5950x system. The Corsair & Crucial Kit are the exact same price for me, also open to suggestions. Let me know what you guys think.

I was planning to get the Ballistix but now I'm not sure??








Crucial Ballistix 3200 MHz DDR4 DRAM Desktop Gaming Memory Kit 32GB (16GBx2) CL16 BL2K16G32C16U4B (BLACK) - Newegg.com


Buy Crucial Ballistix 3200 MHz DDR4 DRAM Desktop Gaming Memory Kit 32GB (16GBx2) CL16 BL2K16G32C16U4B (BLACK) with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com












G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB DDR4 3200 RAM Memory - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C16D-32GVK with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com





or maybe?









CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB DDR4 3600 Desktop RAM - Newegg.com


Buy CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model CMK32GX4M2D3600C18 with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com












G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB DDR4 3600 RAM Memory - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C16D-32GVKC with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com


----------



## tps3443

Dreamliner said:


> Quick question, I am buying new memory and I want to know what would be the best to run. Of course I just missed the Prime Day Crucial Ballistix 3200 stuff, but I can get almost the same deal local, so I might grab that.
> 
> I was looking at my board specs and it skips from 2666 to 3600, so I am wondering if 3200 memory will work at 3200 speed or no?
> 
> 7820X
> Board: TUF X299 MARK 1 | Motherboards | ASUS USA
> 
> Which memory should I get? I will get 2 kits for the Quad Channel support. I'm now kind of leaning towards that Corsair 3600 stuff. I am open to suggestions. Kind of hoping whatever I get would also pair well with a potential Ryzen 5950x system. The Corsair & Crucial Kit are the exact same price for me, also open to suggestions. Let me know what you guys think.
> 
> I was planning to get the Ballistix but now I'm not sure??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Crucial Ballistix 3200 MHz DDR4 DRAM Desktop Gaming Memory Kit 32GB (16GBx2) CL16 BL2K16G32C16U4B (BLACK) - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy Crucial Ballistix 3200 MHz DDR4 DRAM Desktop Gaming Memory Kit 32GB (16GBx2) CL16 BL2K16G32C16U4B (BLACK) with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB DDR4 3200 RAM Memory - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C16D-32GVK with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or maybe?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB DDR4 3600 Desktop RAM - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model CMK32GX4M2D3600C18 with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB DDR4 3600 RAM Memory - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C16D-32GVKC with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com


It will run at 3,200Mhz just fine. You can set XMP in the bios and the memory will run at its rated speed. You can also run XMP and change how fast you want the memory to run, slower or faster.

If you are going to purchase a 5950X in the future, then I would recommend investing in to a quality Samsung B-Die Memory kit.


----------



## Dreamliner

tps3443 said:


> It will run at 3,200Mhz just fine. You can set XMP in the bios and the memory will run at its rated speed. You can also run XMP and change how fast you want the memory to run, slower or faster.


Okay thanks. I ended up going with (2X) Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB (2x16G) 3600 CL18 kits. I needed to be sure they fit under my CPU heatsink and it looks like the Ripjaws would be too tall. The Ballistix would have fit (probably) but from what I could gather, 3600 CL18 > 3200 CL16.

I am only doing this upgrade because someone gave me $85 for my old memory so it's less than $150 out of pocket to go from 32GB 2400 to 64GB 3600.

I'd rather have Crucial memory, but its too expensive. I do wish memory design was sleeker. I think the stuff I sold was the best looking stuff ever. Sleek, subtle and not extra tall. Some of those old OCZ modules looked nice but were too gaudy for me.


----------



## Dreamliner

tps3443 said:


> If you are going to purchase a 5950X in the future, then I would recommend investing in to a quality Samsung B-Die Memory kit.


I ended up getting this because it is 3600 and will fit under my CPU cooler:








CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB DDR4 3600 Desktop RAM - Newegg.com


Buy CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model CMK32GX4M2D3600C18 with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com





Would this work? What do you recommend instead?

Is 2x packs of that memory okay or do I need to buy a ONE 4X memory kit? I've heard about matched sets, does that mean just running the same memory or does that mean literally buying a 4X16GB memory kit?

What is a good memory benchmark tool?

50/50 I get a 5950X. Reality is though, like my earlier discussion about getting a 10980XE, my workload doesn't even justify my 7820X and this memory upgrade is only because of someone willing to pay what I thought was good value for the memory.

In fact, I go back and forth if I should have even sold the memory but going from 32 to 64GB was the deciding factor...just as long as the Corsair memory I've chosen isn't garbage. I might just wait for Zen 4, when I'll need new DDR5 memory anyhow (making me think I shouldn't have upgraded now).

If you haven't been able to tell I've been rather indecisive. I have a bit of an upgrade itch but it is entirely unnecessary and I recognize that. I do think it would probably be the most wise to have have stuck with my 5820k setup, but based on where I am now, probably best to stick with the 7820X until something comes along that my PC is too slow to handle.

Unless I start doing video editing that could be quite some time. Even 4K/60 gaming with a 3080 might not hit a CPU bottleneck with a 7820X at 4.5Ghz. That said, I should probably wait on the 3080 too (not hard since I can't find one), until I make it through my enormous backlog of unplayed Wii/PS3/WiiU/PS4/Switch games...by the time that happens I'll be able to pick up a fresh 6080 I'm sure.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> Yeah, I was trying to give this guy some pointers:


it wouldnt do phantom throttling there tho i mean the input goes with board/cpu depency i havent tried as a matter of fact in this evga dark thanks for the reminder lol

btw i think i over did my hci run lol last screenshot of the run 70hrs lol im anal about ram stress testing but even that.... i have to admit that is way too much lol









now im following up without restart with ramtest maybe upto 20000%










This is the Micro2 latest bios i wonder if tetsuo thats his name? can make me a custom bios without the spectre crap problem is its not like i have 3 bios to play with but, this board can flash without cpu so if the bios gets corrupted probably can be fixed (those in the dark would kick ass lol) chunking [email protected]@1t yesterday adjusted a few more settings on the fly like lowered trcf to 310 from 320 lowered tras to 32 and a few other crap like txp to 8
can bench at [email protected] all day without so much effort with a lil bit of shoot overvoltage lol

Inb4 >>...
@ThrashZone
<<
to admire my darkroom phone pictures lol

Like literally cant open chrome xD and i dont want to touch her just yet


----------



## Jpmboy

yeah, HCi for 70h is overkill to put it politely. You musta forgot it was running.


----------



## Jpmboy

tps3443 said:


> No it’s not. I cannot cool 1.338V at 4.9Ghz for 24/7 usage. That was only for testing purposes. I could probably do some gaming at that frequency, but other Than that I’m just running some benchmarks for fun.
> 
> 
> *I do run 4,820MHz 24/7 though at 1.286.* It is very reliable. And has managed stable through anything I run. And realbench for about 4 hours. I’ve also tested my memory for about 10 hours with fans on them.
> 
> Very reliable. I’ve spent so many hours tweaking and testing this system for stability, it’s crazy lol.
> 
> I have quite a few projects that I’m working on in unity and it works so well in this program. Uses all of the cores very consistently, and tons of ram. It is a fast setup.
> 
> Now I just need a real GPU. This 1660Ti is killing me. literally! I sold my 2080Ti in anticipation for RTX 3000 series. That didn’t go well.


If you look back... 4.8 at 1.25 to 1.275V is 10980XE territory. You found a good 7980XE (right?) years after they launched.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Hmmm i got very very nice results on this dark using adaptive and negative offset with the almost borderline to phantom but enough time to replenish those caps @Jpmboy.. need more testing tho definite on avx offsets...

My 7940x dont like nothing set below 1.74v but it vdroop to 1.7v 1.68v with vin enable no problems. My 7980xe is more forgiven in that regards.


----------



## Timmaigh!

Does anyone here have a Gigabyte board and can please explain how the per-core OC works there?

So i can set the classic clocks at number of active cores ratio, say any 2 cores active 46x, any 4 cores active 44x, all cores active 41x...
Then i have that "turbo per core limit control" - i assume this is there to limit max clocks specifically to each core. 

Now, am i right to assume, that:


if i allow the 46x multiplier only for 2 cores active (and say rest 41x), even if i then set max turbo to 46 to say core 1,2,3,4,5,6... it will always boost to max 41x, if more than 2 cores are loaded? Even if more than 2 cores have max turbo per core set higher than to 41x?
if i set up max turbos per core manually in a way that say core 1-4 are 46x, 5-8 are 44x, 9-14 are 41x, i will need to set all cores active to 46x, to see them run under full load (in Cinebench for example) at this mix of frequencies at the same time?


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> If you look back... 4.8 at 1.25 to 1.275V is 10980XE territory. You found a good 7980XE (right?) years after they launched.




I really thought it was just an average 7980XE at first, but I think the IMC is really good especially, I've posted at 4,266mhz not stable but still amazing i think! I saw a lot of 10980XE's running much lower voltage like 1.175 or 1.200 volts at 4.8Ghz. But, maybe that's just like a gaming overclock they tested. And not an actual stable overclock. Anyways, 4,820Mhz is great at 1.286v.

One amazing thing about this CPU is how well it can run 4,720Mhz. It can get by with core voltages ranging around 1.203-1.239 with per core voltage control. It takes a lot of time tunning each core for voltage but reduces the overall package temps quite a bit.


----------



## tps3443

Timmaigh! said:


> Does anyone here have a Gigabyte board and can please explain how the per-core OC works there?
> 
> So i can set the classic clocks at number of active cores ratio, say any 2 cores active 46x, any 4 cores active 44x, all cores active 41x...
> Then i have that "turbo per core limit control" - i assume this is there to limit max clocks specifically to each core.
> 
> Now, am i right to assume, that:
> 
> 
> if i allow the 46x multiplier only for 2 cores active (and say rest 41x), even if i then set max turbo to 46 to say core 1,2,3,4,5,6... it will always boost to max 41x, if more than 2 cores are loaded? Even if more than 2 cores have max turbo per core set higher than to 41x?
> if i set up max turbos per core manually in a way that say core 1-4 are 46x, 5-8 are 44x, 9-14 are 41x, i will need to set all cores active to 46x, to see them run under full load (in Cinebench for example) at this mix of frequencies at the same time?


Per core overclocking on Skylake X is actually setting each core to its own frequency and its own voltage. 

So when you boot in windows you could have it running like this all the time. Each core runs at its own specific frequency all the time. 

e.g
x47
x47
x47
x47
x50
x50
x46
x42
x49
x48

I would stress test the system and record the temperatures for each core. Run the hot cores slower, the cold cores fast, and the best cores the fastest! This is a very time consuming process. But, can and will squeeze the most out of a CPU especially with thermal limitation.


----------



## tps3443

Dreamliner said:


> I ended up getting this because it is 3600 and will fit under my CPU cooler:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB DDR4 3600 Desktop RAM - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model CMK32GX4M2D3600C18 with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Would this work? What do you recommend instead?
> 
> Is 2x packs of that memory okay or do I need to buy a ONE 4X memory kit? I've heard about matched sets, does that mean just running the same memory or does that mean literally buying a 4X16GB memory kit?
> 
> What is a good memory benchmark tool?
> 
> 50/50 I get a 5950X. Reality is though, like my earlier discussion about getting a 10980XE, my workload doesn't even justify my 7820X and this memory upgrade is only because of someone willing to pay what I thought was good value for the memory.
> 
> In fact, I go back and forth if I should have even sold the memory but going from 32 to 64GB was the deciding factor...just as long as the Corsair memory I've chosen isn't garbage. I might just wait for Zen 4, when I'll need new DDR5 memory anyhow (making me think I shouldn't have upgraded now).
> 
> If you haven't been able to tell I've been rather indecisive. I have a bit of an upgrade itch but it is entirely unnecessary and I recognize that. I do think it would probably be the most wise to have have stuck with my 5820k setup, but based on where I am now, probably best to stick with the 7820X until something comes along that my PC is too slow to handle.
> 
> Unless I start doing video editing that could be quite some time. Even 4K/60 gaming with a 3080 might not hit a CPU bottleneck with a 7820X at 4.5Ghz. That said, I should probably wait on the 3080 too (not hard since I can't find one), until I make it through my enormous backlog of unplayed Wii/PS3/WiiU/PS4/Switch games...by the time that happens I'll be able to pick up a fresh 6080 I'm sure.





I would have personally gone with this memory.







Are you a human?







www.newegg.com






Unless you need 64GB then that wouldn’t work.

This kit in the above link is Samsung B-Die. And it can be ran at “Up-To“ 4,200Mhz with X299 platform with tighter timings, with a really good CPU imc and motherboard. Or you could drop the speed to 3,800Mhz with really tight timings on Ryzen platform. Adding voltage helps greatly with this memory too. I’d recommend another fan clip.

Also, yes 4x8GB is generally better because they are matched to run together, and sequential in serial numbers. Usually 4X memory kits do cost more. Memory doesn’t cost less when you buy more of it, like a bulk discount or something. It cost more, because you are paying for all of this binning that’s is involved with these memory modules. 

I run a matched 4x8GB set of Royal Z gold 4000Mhz CL15 DDR4. I purchased and received them last month, and they were all (4) manufactured the exact same month when I got them in hand, with identical serial numbers ranging from 0078/0079/0080/0081. They do well with how I run them at 4,100Mhz CL15-16-16 with 1.5V.

If you are just a causal user, then B-Die is not really required. But, I wouldn’t expect anything fancy with overclocking beyond default XMP.


Another note, the 5950X stock gets 12,600 in CPU-z benchmark, my 7980XE at 4.8GHz gets a little over 13,300. This is very impressive for the 5950X considering it has 2 less cores. And my CPU is overclocked too. I do not expect much to be squeezed from a 5950X though.


----------



## Timmaigh!

tps3443 said:


> Per core overclocking on Skylake X is actually setting each core to its own frequency and its own voltage.
> 
> So when you boot in windows you could have it running like this all the time. Each core runs at its own specific frequency all the time.
> 
> e.g
> x47
> x47
> x47
> x47
> x50
> x50
> x46
> x42
> x49
> x48
> 
> I would stress test the system and record the temperatures for each core. Run the hot cores slower, the cold cores fast, and the best cores the fastest! This is a very time consuming process. But, can and will squeeze the most out of a CPU especially with thermal limitation.


Are you sure this is how it works with Gigabyte boards? I am pretty sure you dont have the ability to set per-core voltages on GB. Unless it was added with some more recent BIOS.


----------



## Dreamliner

tps3443 said:


> I would have personally gone with this memory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a human?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unless you need 64GB then that wouldn’t work.
> 
> This kit in the above link is Samsung B-Die. And it can be ran at “Up-To“ 4,200Mhz with X299 platform with tighter timings, with a really good CPU imc and motherboard. Or you could drop the speed to 3,800Mhz with really tight timings on Ryzen platform. Adding voltage helps greatly with this memory too. I’d recommend another fan clip.
> 
> Also, yes 4x8GB is generally better because they are matched to run together, and sequential in serial numbers. Usually 4X memory kits do cost more. Memory doesn’t cost less when you buy more of it, like a bulk discount or something. It cost more, because you are paying for all of this binning that’s is involved with these memory modules.
> 
> I run a matched 4x8GB set of Royal Z gold 4000Mhz CL15 DDR4. I purchased and received them last month, and they were all (4) manufactured the exact same month when I got them in hand, with identical serial numbers ranging from 0078/0079/0080/0081. They do well with how I run them at 4,100Mhz CL15-16-16 with 1.5V.
> 
> If you are just a causal user, then B-Die is not really required. But, I wouldn’t expect anything fancy with overclocking beyond default XMP.
> 
> 
> Another note, the 5950X stock gets 12,600 in CPU-z benchmark, my 7980XE at 4.8GHz gets a little over 13,300. This is very impressive for the 5950X considering it has 2 less cores. And my CPU is overclocked too. I do not expect much to be squeezed from a 5950X though.


I have 32GB 4x8 2400 Crucial Ballistix now. I was planning NOT to upgrade at all but someone has agreed to buy my kit for $95 which I figured would pretty much buy 2x16GB sticks of 3200 or 3600 memory. I figured $150 to go to from 32GB 2400 to 64GB 3600 and was a decent deal.

Now reading about dual ranked, single ranked (no idea what the Corsair I've chosen is) then reading about this Samsung B-Die (which apparently was discontinued) has me all confused. Plus, I cannot find any 4x16GB kits for the B-Die stuff,

I know I probably don't want to carry forward 2400 Ballistix memory to a Ryzen system since Ryzen is much more memory sensitive, which gives the point to doing all of this, but I know if I wait to Zen 3 I'll likely need new memory anyhow.

I am now very frustrated and conflicted on what to do. I look at benchmarks and see ~4% improvements from 2400 to 3600 and that is not worth $150, but for that $150 I am going to 64GB, which is why I did it. Now I'm reading about all these memory caveats and I just don't know what to do. 

I know for sure I am not spending $400 on memory and I'll probably never do more than enable XMP and/or DOCP (with whatever lines up with the 1:1 thing I keep reading about on AMD)....which is why I leaned towards 3600 to have more headroom for that sort of thing.

I'm just concerned now that purchasing 2X 2x16GB kits will cause stability or XMP problems. I don't know if this is an actual problem or a phantom forum problem. If I wanted to simply increase capacity with what I have now, would the forum suggest throwing it all out to buy a set of 8X matched set or would purchasing the IDENTICAL modules be enough (which is the pretty much the same as buying 2X kits now)?


----------



## Jpmboy

Timmaigh! said:


> Are you sure this is how it works with Gigabyte boards? I am pretty sure you dont have *the ability to set per-core voltages on GB*. Unless it was added with some more recent BIOS.


I don't on my 2 Giga x299 boards, but yeah maybe a new bios is out there (I have not looked). Heck, took me awhile to get "DVID" working solid for offset on an all core OC. Here's the thing with per core (vs by core) with Win10. Unless you assign work loads (apps) to the pumped-up cores, Win10 (using the OS-Native setting in bios and TB in the OS with speed step disabled and speed SHIFT enabled - the only way this can work) core assignment will not necessarily load the cores you have running at higher clocks . If you know how to assign cores to specific apps (ones that will not use more than the per-core OC has pumped-up) have at it. If not and you are looking to juice a low-core count app, just run an all-core OC... low core count apps benefit and don;t use a lot of watts/amps anyway. Save that OC in Profiles. If you run a mix of low and high core count apps, (simultaneously for example) you will need to assign the low core count apps to specific cores to see any benefit. And setting 2 cores to a +1 multiplier OC on an 18 core chip buys very (very) little in benchmark performance or regular use.
My 2 cents.


----------



## Jpmboy

Dreamliner said:


> I have 32GB 4x8 2400 Crucial Ballistix now. I was planning NOT to upgrade at all but someone has agreed to buy my kit for $95 which I figured would pretty much buy 2x16GB sticks of 3200 or 3600 memory. I figured $150 to go to from 32GB 2400 to 64GB 3600 and was a decent deal.
> 
> Now reading about dual ranked, single ranked (no idea what the Corsair I've chosen is) then reading about this Samsung B-Die (which apparently was discontinued) has me all confused. Plus, I cannot find any 4x16GB kits for the B-Die stuff,
> 
> I know I probably don't want to carry forward 2400 Ballistix memory to a Ryzen system since Ryzen is much more memory sensitive, which gives the point to doing all of this, but I know if I wait to Zen 3 I'll likely need new memory anyhow.
> 
> I am now very frustrated and conflicted on what to do. I look at benchmarks and see ~4% improvements from 2400 to 3600 and that is not worth $150, but for that $150 I am going to 64GB, which is why I did it. Now I'm reading about all these memory caveats and I just don't know what to do.
> 
> I know for sure I am not spending $400 on memory and I'll probably never do more than enable XMP and/or DOCP (with whatever lines up with the 1:1 thing I keep reading about on AMD)....which is why I leaned towards 3600 to have more headroom for that sort of thing.
> 
> *I'm just concerned now that purchasing 2X 2x16GB kits will cause stability or XMP problems. * I don't know if this is an actual problem or a phantom forum problem. If I wanted to simply increase capacity with what I have now, would the forum suggest throwing it all out to buy a set of 8X matched set or would purchasing the IDENTICAL modules be enough (which is the pretty much the same as buying 2X kits now)?


That is a legit thing to worry about. You can get B-die (or D-die, which is a smaller node process) in 16GB sticks, they are very expensive. (in the $500+ range). Or, you can just get a good 3200c14 B-die 8GB stick set and OC easy. Why do you think you will need 64GB??


----------



## Dreamliner

Jpmboy said:


> That is a legit thing to worry about. You can get B-die (or D-die, which is a smaller node process) in 16GB sticks, they are very expensive. (in the $500+ range). Or, you can just get a good 3200c14 B-die 8GB stick set and OC easy. Why do you think you will need 64GB??


I dunno, I just figured if I was getting new memory I'd increase the capacity. I probably would not have done anything if it was just to increase the speed. Sometimes we get super stuck in the numbers. What I have now is CAS 16 2400 and I am just running it with XMP. No matter what I bought today, even if it was the most expensive kit on the planet, DDR5 JEDEC would stomp all over it so what's the point? I guess now I'm questioning whether I should even do anything or just keep the 32GB 2400 stuff and ride it out to Zen3/DDR5.

Why is a 3200 B-Die better than a 3600 of something else?

If you had the option between 64GB of Corsair Vengeance CAS 18 3600 memory (or something else around the same price) or 32GB of Crucial Ballistix CAS 16 2400 memory with $145 in your pocket, which would you pick?

What free benchmark program can I use to see the benefits of doing this?


----------



## Jpmboy

Dreamliner said:


> I dunno, I just figured if I was getting new memory I'd increase the capacity. I probably would not have done anything if it was just to increase the speed. Sometimes we get super stuck in the numbers. What I have now is CAS 16 2400 and I am just running it with XMP. No matter what I bought today, even if it was the most expensive kit on the planet, DDR5 JEDEC would stomp all over it so what's the point? I guess now I'm questioning whether I should even do anything or just keep the 32GB 2400 stuff and ride it out to Zen3/DDR5.
> 
> *Why is a 3200 B-Die better than a 3600 of something else?*
> 
> If you had the option between 64GB of Corsair Vengeance CAS 18 3600 memory (or something else around the same price) or 32GB of Crucial Ballistix CAS 16 2400 memory with $145 in your pocket, which would you pick?
> 
> What free benchmark program can I use to see the benefits of doing this?


3200c14 and 3600c16 are the same. 1 cas per 100Hz (remember, ram speed is 2x Hz). XMP is not something I ever use - manual timings and voltages only. 
AID64 memory bench is the most used, tho the free version will not report all the data to you. Another is simply SuperPi 32M. Very memory sensitive when you hold all other things constant... more important than a benchmark is stability. Head over to the 24/7 ram stability thread for some guidance.


----------



## Dreamliner

Jpmboy said:


> 3200c14 and 3600c16 are the same. 1 cas per 100Hz (remember, ram speed is 2x Hz). XMP is not something I ever use - manual timings and voltages only.
> AID64 memory bench is the most used, tho the free version will not report all the data to you. Another is simply SuperPi 32M. Very memory sensitive when you hold all other things constant... more important than a benchmark is stability. Head over to the 24/7 ram stability thread for some guidance.


I'll I've ever done is XMP. I think the more I look into this the more I'm realizing I was right a few months ago when I said the cost difference wasn't worth upgrading. I think I was initially looking at going to a 4X8 3600c18 kit for $125 with someone willing to give me $95 for my 4x8 2400c16 kit so I jumped on it thinking ~$30 was cheap to make that upgrade. Then I started looking at doubling capacity, getting lost in the weeds of die & rank, and now I'm just about ready to keep what I have and do nothing.

I've had this memory forever, at XMP its rock solid stable, 4K gaming benches barely show any difference between memory speeds and since I'm quad channel I doubt there'd be any major productivity gains either. $30 to bump speed seems like nothing and that's why I jumped on the opportunity to sell, but the further I look into it, the more I worry about buying the wrong thing so perhaps I'm best to keep what I have.


----------



## Jpmboy

decisions, decisions... 🤙


----------



## Dreamliner

Jpmboy said:


> decisions, decisions... 🤙


I've posted in the memory forum. Apparently there is way more to memory than I thought so I don't want to drag it out here more. I still think all this money spent on high-spec memory and tons time tweeeeking is wasted just to get stomped on when DDR5 shows up 12 months. Whatever I do I'll wish I did the other. It's why I waiver on CPU's too. I was hoping that Amazon pricing of the 10980XE for $800 was legit, but even if it was, I just don't know if I'd be worth it for me. So indecisive!


----------



## tps3443

Dreamliner said:


> I've posted in the memory forum. Apparently there is way more to memory than I thought so I don't want to drag it out here more. I still think all this money spent on high-spec memory and tons time tweeeeking is wasted just to get stomped on when DDR5 shows up 12 months. Whatever I do I'll wish I did the other. It's why I waiver on CPU's too. I was hoping that Amazon pricing of the 10980XE for $800 was legit, but even if it was, I just don't know if I'd be worth it for me. So indecisive!


I wouldnt get too caught up in new hardware, or hardware that is not even out yet. There is DDR4 out right now that is just as fast as JEDEC DDR5. Honestly, probably even faster, now I know there will be some really good DDR5 but that will take time, and it’ll probably be very expensive too.. When DDR4 first came out, it really sucked. Obviously, it has matured after years and years. The last thing I am worried about is DDR5. As a matter of fact, I am going to go trade some hardware for a 2080Ti tomorrow, which is over 2 years old, to run with my 3+ year old CPU! The reason why is because, when you properly cool a 2080Ti, and swap the bios, or solder shunts on the back these 2 year old cards run within 3% of a RTX3080 which is 100% unobtanium right now. I have personally done it on a few 2080Ti's that I sold for a new GEN card that I could never get. So, I could care less about really having the newest of the new.

But, low end DDR4 is not going to run a 5950X the right way that's for sure.

I would just grab the Corsair 4000Mhz kit which is B-Die and be happy if you plan to upgrade your system, or don't upgrade but 2,400Mhz is pretty slow after all. This is more or less DDR4 from 2014.. But, you do need to tweak upon the XMP profile for optimal performance with a new kit anyways, if you are not going to run everything manually in the bios.. it is easy. I was a little over whelmed with memory timings too at first, but you just remember them like any other number. And you could key them all in with your eyes closed manually just about.


----------



## tps3443

Timmaigh! said:


> Are you sure this is how it works with Gigabyte boards? I am pretty sure you dont have the ability to set per-core voltages on GB. Unless it was added with some more recent BIOS.


I am probably wrong. I just know, I have had (2) X299 board brands, and they were all per-core frequency and per-core voltage.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> I don't on my 2 Giga x299 boards, but yeah maybe a new bios is out there (I have not looked). Heck, took me awhile to get "DVID" working solid for offset on an all core OC. Here's the thing with per core (vs by core) with Win10. Unless you assign work loads (apps) to the pumped-up cores, Win10 (using the OS-Native setting in bios and TB in the OS with speed step disabled and speed SHIFT enabled - the only way this can work) core assignment will not necessarily load the cores you have running at higher clocks . If you know how to assign cores to specific apps (ones that will not use more than the per-core OC has pumped-up) have at it. If not and you are looking to juice a low-core count app, just run an all-core OC... low core count apps benefit and don;t use a lot of watts/amps anyway. Save that OC in Profiles. If you run a mix of low and high core count apps, (simultaneously for example) you will need to assign the low core count apps to specific cores to see any benefit. And setting 2 cores to a +1 multiplier OC on an 18 core chip buys very (very) little in benchmark performance or regular use.
> My 2 cents.


There was this app/addon that integrates into win7 on the task mgr that remembered each process priority/affinity set on them even on a reboot cant recollect the name right now winprio or something like that... But it dont work on win10..
But im using now Process Lasso which do all that and then some.. When using per core and different multipliers i will assign background process to lowest multi on a profile x example.. In that way background process dont take cpu times from high multi cores then assign current app/load to where i want it and it will remember the settings even on reboot.


In ryzen the best approach.. I will use ppm mark and create my own power table and let the cpu on auto xfr/pbo his way up.. My power table would load each core in sucession/order and park/not load if not necessary or certain percentage is met in that way in light use on amd it just use one ccx and if needed or need more cores well it goes in order on the cores. Best approach on ryzen that and auto xfr/pbo for best gains. And minimize access to access randomly between ccx.

Theres also intel app to load cores by affinity highest multi to lowest. Best core etc...





Jpmboy said:


> That is a legit thing to worry about. You can get B-die (or D-die, which is a smaller node process) in 16GB sticks, they are very expensive. (in the $500+ range). Or, you can just get a good 3200c14 B-die 8GB stick set and OC easy. Why do you think you will need 64GB??


i got the 64gb kit 3733 b dies teamxtreem with xspc heatsinks and 2x 4xdimm sticks waterblocks... The sticks they dont even need the waterbock and everything second hand for $220 wasnt expecting miracles as they were to run on quad channel and density was the goal with a little bit of tweaking of course.. so the settings that i got considering is 16gb DR kits and 4x of them in quad channel... and @1t cmd rate in top of it im content.


----------



## tps3443

My system started acting a little wonky in certain situations. So, I was thinking my CPU was showing sign of degradation. So, I went back to 4.6Ghz with no / 0 AVX offsets with my usual 1.203V. Wanted to see If it still passed 2 hours ok, happy to see my CPU is still solid.

I am starting from scratch again, and working my way back up again to 4.8Ghz with a normal 100BCLK, and I will probably run a -1 offset at 4.8Ghz.. I think maybe the BCLK at 102.5 was making my system unstable with the XOC bios. I was running realbench at 4.820mhz and my cpu was flickering to 5Ghz then freezing. And I don't even know how that is even possible? I am running a new bios "XOC" so maybe that's got something to do with it.

I ran it for 120 minutes, which is a good minimum, with 16GB of memory usage. Anyways, looks like no degradation, so I have not abused it too hard. The 7980XE looks pretty resilient so far! And temps are still solid, so that's good too.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

bcuz it was never trully stable to begin with? all it take was 1+1 to see all your "benchmarks" runs to figure that out


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> bcuz it was never trully stable to begin with? all it take was 1+1 to see all your "benchmarks" runs to figure that out


It was stable, I ran the same test before hand. I just never retested stability when I flashed the bios to a version that was 2 years older than mine. I assumed it was ok. And, I don’t always have the most time in the world.

I have the thermal headroom for it. I was running x48 daily with a -1 offset.


----------



## tps3443

@Dreamliner

Hey, I almost bought these when I was shopping for my memory, been on eBay a little while. And I should have honestly grabbed them. This is a 64GB of DDR4 3600 CL16-16-16 memory set. An amazing kit! He swapped the standard RGB covers for the Royal Z style covers. It is a very high end set of Samsung B-Die. And it is honestly perfect for any X299 or X570/X670 setup!!

That memory would be closer to around $700 bucks if you were buying from Newegg. It’s also a very uncommon set in general.

If you actually need 64GB, that’s about as good as it gets!









G.SKILL Trident Z Neo 64GB (4x16GB) DDR4 F4-3600C16Q-64GTZN Samsung B die | eBay


Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for G.SKILL Trident Z Neo 64GB (4x16GB) DDR4 F4-3600C16Q-64GTZN Samsung B die at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!



www.ebay.com


----------



## zGunBLADEz

tps3443 said:


> It was stable, I ran the same test before hand. I just never retested stability when I flashed the bios to a version that was 2 years older than mine. I assumed it was ok. And, I don’t always have the most time in the world.
> 
> I have the thermal headroom for it. I was running x48 daily with a -1 offset.


The xoc bios on the dark should be easier to overclock and "cooler temps" havent swap my 7980xe in to him yet still in a hiatus on the case and procrastinating on the vrm block.. but looking at my 7940x it runs cooler and requiere less volts.




--------------



That kit is been in ebay for the longest at that price he aint going to sell it. Very hard to swallow... That was there when i got the 64gb kit i got. The user i bought my kit started at $500 bid $750 buy now then it drop to $300 so i msg him and he agreed to my offer.


----------



## Dreamliner

I’m not paying $400 for memory. 

I got my hands on 2X 2x8GB Crucial Ballistix 3600 CL16 kits and compared them to my Ballistix 2400 stuff:

16GB Dual Channel 2400: 36446 MB/s Read, 35000 MB/s Write, 32657 MB/s Copy (Ballistix 2400)
32GB Quad Channel 2400: 68836 MB/s Read, 70213 MB/s Write, 65313 MB/s Copy (Ballistix 2400)
32GB Quad Channel 3000: 77003 MB/s Read, 83274 MB/s Write, 76942 MB/s Copy (Unstable OC)
32GB Quad Channel 3600: 80705 MB/s Read, 89725 MB/s Write, 75478 MB/s Copy (Ballistix 3600)

I don't know what to 'do' to see if I see a difference, but I don't really. I'm thinking even for $68 out of pocket it just isn't worth it. Especially if I do go to Ryzen, I'll wish I had 2X16GB sticks instead of 4X8GB sticks or something.


----------



## tps3443

Dreamliner said:


> I’m not paying $400 for memory.
> 
> I got my hands on 2X 2x8GB Crucial Ballistix 3600 CL16 kits and compared them to my Ballistix 2400 stuff:
> 
> 16GB Dual Channel 2400: 36446 MB/s Read, 35000 MB/s Write, 32657 MB/s Copy (Ballistix 2400)
> 32GB Quad Channel 2400: 68836 MB/s Read, 70213 MB/s Write, 65313 MB/s Copy (Ballistix 2400)
> 32GB Quad Channel 3000: 77003 MB/s Read, 83274 MB/s Write, 76942 MB/s Copy (Unstable OC)
> 32GB Quad Channel 3600: 80705 MB/s Read, 89725 MB/s Write, 75478 MB/s Copy (Ballistix 3600)
> 
> I don't know what to 'do' to see if I see a difference, but I don't really. I'm thinking even for $68 out of pocket it just isn't worth it. Especially if I do go to Ryzen, I'll wish I had 2X16GB sticks instead of 4X8GB sticks or something.



Like I was saying, only if you really needed 64GB anyways.

Also, I get around 125,000MBPS memory bandwidth at 4,000Mhz CL15. Absolutely stomps my old 3733Mhz quad channel CL17 set.


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> The xoc bios on the dark should be easier to overclock and "cooler temps" havent swap my 7980xe in to him yet still in a hiatus on the case and procrastinating on the vrm block.. but looking at my 7940x it runs cooler and requiere less volts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------------
> 
> 
> 
> That kit is been in ebay for the longest at that price he aint going to sell it. Very hard to swallow... That was there when i got the 64gb kit i got. The user i bought my kit started at $500 bid $750 buy now then it drop to $300 so i msg him and he agreed to my offer.


There are two XOC bios for my CPU #03 and #04. And several variants for Cascade lake X too. I may try the newer of the two.

I haven’t had time to test anything higher so far. So, I will test 4.7 next and then go from there.


----------



## D-EJ915

Jpmboy said:


> If you look back... 4.8 at 1.25 to 1.275V is 10980XE territory. You found a good 7980XE (right?) years after they launched.


I run 48x HT disabled but got a 9980 the other day (batch L016G892 2020), compare to my 7980 (batch L814G047 2018) I got Oct last year at 1.23v the new one requires 1.24v both from Malaysia.

As for going for 16Gb sticks, I imagine they should work fine either 3200 C14, 3600 C16 or 4000 C17/C19. I'm not sure they'd make a real difference being DR vs SR in reality vs in benches. I don't have any in my rig I use so I've only run them in benches on my mainstream socket and scores are higher but can't say about real life scenarios/gaming.


----------



## tps3443

D-EJ915 said:


> I run HT disabled but got a 9980 the other day (batch L016G892 2020), compare to my 7980 (batch L814G047 2018) I got Oct last year at 1.23v the new one requires 1.24v both from Malaysia.
> 
> As for going for 16Gb sticks, should work fine either 3200 C14, 3600 C16 or 4000 C17/C19 should be fine. I'm not sure they'd make a real difference being DR vs SR in reality vs in benches. I don't have any in my rig I use so I've only run them in benches and scores are higher but can't say about real life scenarios/gaming.


I need that kind of voltage 1.23-1.24 for 4.7Ghz.

I could probably eeekkk by on 1.265v at 4.8Ghz. But, as soon as I run something AVX it’s gonna freeze.

that’s really good only 1.23-1.24 for a 7980XE at 4.8.


----------



## D-EJ915

tps3443 said:


> I need that kind of voltage 1.23-1.24 for 4.7Ghz.
> 
> I could probably eeekkk by on 1.265v at 4.8Ghz. But, as soon as I run something AVX it’s gonna freeze.
> 
> that’s really good only 1.23-1.24 for a 7980XE at 4.8.


Keep in mind I have hyper threading disabled which lets you use less vcore on this platform, I didn't try doing much with it enabled so can't really say what it woudl require for that.


----------



## Jpmboy

D-EJ915 said:


> I run 48x HT disabled but got a 9980 the other day (batch L016G892 2020), compare to my 7980 (batch L814G047 2018) I got Oct last year at 1.23v the new one requires 1.24v both from Malaysia.
> 
> As for going for 16Gb sticks, I imagine they should work fine either 3200 C14, 3600 C16 or 4000 C17/C19. I'm not sure they'd make a real difference being DR vs SR in reality vs in benches. I don't have any in my rig I use so I've only run them in benches on my mainstream socket and scores are higher but can't say about real life scenarios/gaming.


4.7 on my 7980XE needs way more than 1.25V to be stable for my use... and besides even delidded that ole work horse would run hot with a real workload at 4.7. Right now, I have it at 4.0 with 0.95V since it only needs to feed work to the 3 Titan Vs on that Apex VI. My 10980XE is at 4.7 with 1.165V and 1.7V VCCIN. Tho it likes 4.8 at 1.215 just fine. the 10980XE is pushing 8x8GB sticks at 3733c15 2T, the 7980XE is now pushing 4x16GB at 3600c15 1T. 4x8GB on either the R6EO or R6A is 4000c16 no problem.


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> 4.7 on my 7980XE needs way more than 1.25V to be stable for my use... and besides even delidded that ole work horse would run hot with a real workload at 4.7. Right now, I have it at 4.0 with 0.95V since it only needs to feed work to the 3 Titan Vs on that Apex VI. My 10980XE is at 4.7 with 1.165V and 1.7V VCCIN. Tho it likes 4.8 at 1.215 just fine. the 10980XE is pushing 8x8GB sticks at 3733c15 2T, the 7980XE is now pushing 4x16GB at 3600c15 1T. 4x8GB on either the R6EO or R6A is 4000c16 no problem.


So what is up with this misconception about the VCIN voltage? I am running 1.9 to mine. But, I really only applied that as a recommendation. So, is high VCIN not needed?


----------



## tps3443

I picked up a Fresh 2080Ti FE last night. Very late revision base on the S/N. It has like god tier Samsung GDDR6 too, been running +1200 in games, will test further. I’ve owned (4) 2080Ti(s). and I’ve never seen such good OCing memory on one before.

Anyways, I flashed the Galax 380 watt bios on there. Which is not really gonna seriously help until I water cool it and keep it below 50-55C for 2.1Ghz to 2.130Ghz

I will also solder on the 8 ohm resistors. It helps quite a bit. I did my other 2080Ti’s with bios flash, and stacking the resistors.

A watercooled 2080Ti at 2,130Mhz with all of the available power, is a poor mans RTX3080 for sure!


----------



## Jpmboy

tps3443 said:


> So what is up with this misconception about the VCIN voltage? I am running 1.9 to mine. But, I really only applied that as a recommendation. So, is high VCIN not needed?


what's the misconception?


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> what's the misconception?


Well every OC guide says set it to 1.9V or even 2.1V. Or you are losing performance lol.


----------



## Jpmboy

tps3443 said:


> Well every OC guide says set it to 1.9V or even 2.1V. Or you are losing performance lol.











Intel Core i9-10980XE: 5 GHz on 18 cores


Presenting Cascade Lake-X With Intel’s 10 nm products not yet being ready for the desktop market, they’ve had to get creative with their product releases. In a third processor update for the X299 platform they present us with Cascade Lake-X. It arrives with promises of increased performance...




www.overclock.net





read Elmor's posts, and others.


----------



## Jpmboy

elmor said:


> You can see the FIVR Vcore in CPU-Z, 1.25V. What other voltages would you like to see? I can make a new screenshot. *I've found you want to keep Vccin as low as possible on SKL-X/CL-X to helps reduce processor temperatures.* This was with 1.8V set and LLC = Level 2, which drops down to ~1.55-1.60V. As long as VIN Tracker is disabled, that does not cause Vccin throttling.


----------



## D-EJ915

A lot of boards don't have the vin tracker option is why, mainly.


----------



## Jpmboy

I'm pretty sure that if the option to disable it is not available in bios, it is already disabled... I believe the Dark behaves in that manner.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Jpmboy said:


> I'm pretty sure that if the option to disable it is not available in bios, it is already disabled... I believe the Dark behaves in that manner.


Yep, the evga boards you can disable and lower it as much as possible. Till you see is doing phantom throttling then raise a bit more and lock it. Cb15 on a loop is a good test to see this.

If you have it enable you can take advantage of it. You lower it as much as you can until you see the score that it goes down a bit but next runs will be back at original score and so back and forth just enough time for the caps to replenish back again on the success run. This would give you better temps on the CPU and vrms and better stability. You wouldnt even notice on a regular day to day usage overclock. The lower the temps on the vrms more efficient is.. More stability that edge of borderline phantom would net you better stability on an overclock. You dont want it to a point it just phantom throttling on the first run you want that timeframe where it will drop a few points but next run would be back a regular again. Thats why i do cb15 on a loop over and over it shoots high power draw right away over and over. Then after that you can use x264v2 and do some runs back to back and watch for times on completion on tasks.


----------



## ThrashZone

tps3443 said:


> Well every OC guide says set it to 1.9V or even 2.1V. Or you are losing performance lol.


Hi,
Auto will produce 2.1v on vccin lol nothing to set.


----------



## tps3443

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Auto will produce 2.1v on vccin lol nothing to set.


That’s pretty high. My old TUF Mark 1 ran around 1.75VCCIN. And I have (2) X299 Dark motherboards. Both apply around 1.875V by default.

From what I understand 2.1V input is pretty high. And any higher could instant kill a 7980XE or other HCC cpu’s couldn’t it? 

That’s what I’ve heard anyways.


----------



## tps3443

I picked up a 2080Ti last night, and went ahead and built in to my new Asus case with more room for my new custom loop setup. This 2080Ti has some freakin god like memory on it that is for sure! I’ve owned (4) 2080Ti’s and I’ve never seen one like this. 16,550 is 100% gaming stable for hours.

I am going to run some 360mm radiators. And a D5. All black tubing, and black fans, black pump, black block, block GPU block.

Piecing together my custom loop right now. I’m honestly curious to see how much I benefit from it. I mean, 4.6Ghz with no
AVX offset in realbench 2 hours with 16GB ram usage and only the hottest core hits like 72C maximum. The other cores run around 66-70C. So, I am curious to see what (2) thicker 360MM radiators and a D5 pump will offer.

Ive got my 8 Ohm resistors already for stacking, this works great, I’ve done a couple 2080Ti’s with this power sensing mod, card already flash to a Galax 380 watt. I’m mainly doing the custom loop for 2,100 to 2,130Mhz on the 2080Ti.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Auto will produce 2.1v on vccin lol nothing to set.


Evga both boards dont have any LLC. If disable it will lock it a set vin if not on auto. Havent tried left it on auto default bios boot is around 1.85ish if im not mistaken.


----------



## ThrashZone

zGunBLADEz said:


> Evga both boards dont have any LLC. If disable it will lock it a set vin if not on auto. Havent tried left it on auto default bios boot is around 1.85ish if im not mistaken.


Hi,
I've only seen it on asus boards.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> I've only seen it on asus boards.


Retesting the enable by cpu and lets say from 1.88v input it will drop down to 1.68-1.70v have some spikes back to 1.78v dont get near 1.88v as the input just on idle..

So it have a nice vdroop on it... problem is to find the right one. To cheat that overclock lol without any issues like bsod or just freezing.


----------



## tps3443

zGunBLADEz said:


> Retesting the enable by cpu and lets say from 1.88v input it will drop down to 1.68-1.70v have some spikes back to 1.78v dont get near 1.88v as the input just on idle..
> 
> So it have a nice vdroop on it... problem is to find the right one. To cheat that overclock lol without any issues like bsod or just freezing.


So I tested a lowered 1.7V input, and I ran R15 at 4.7 and it was like this.

Looks kinda crazy to me.

4572
4639
4681
4681
4651
4639
4631
4647


Changed input to 1.825. Ran it again.

4622
4639
4631
4664
4656
4673
4647
4639
4647


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Lower vccin has always produced lower cinebench scores.


----------



## Jpmboy

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Lower vccin has always produced lower cinebench scores.


Well that is not quite 100% correct. VCCIN level regarding R20 or R15 performance has a threshold effect. Eg, above a certain value there is zero improvement, and below the threshold, what occurs is power throttling, or clock bin drops or at worst a crash (both R20 and R15 can "halt" execution before an outright crash of the system by design, if things are really out of whack)


----------



## Jpmboy

tps3443 said:


> So I tested a lowered 1.7V input, and I ran R15 at 4.7 and it was like this.
> 
> Looks kinda crazy to me.
> 
> 4572
> 4639
> 4681
> 4681
> 4651
> 4639
> 4631
> 4647
> 
> 
> Changed input to 1.825. Ran it again.
> 
> 4622
> 4639
> 4631
> 4664
> 4656
> 4673
> 4647
> 4639
> 4647


yeah, a 125mV drop is not exactly "fine tuning". But those results look very similar.


----------



## Jpmboy

Jpmboy said:


> yeah, a 125mV drop is not exactly "fine tuning".
> 
> Stick with Elmor's advice - he knows what he's talking about... Lower VCCIN until there is no loss of performance.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

tps3443 said:


> So I tested a lowered 1.7V input, and I ran R15 at 4.7 and it was like this.
> 
> Looks kinda crazy to me.
> 
> 4572
> 4639
> 4681
> 4681
> 4651
> 4639
> 4631
> 4647
> 
> 
> Changed input to 1.825. Ran it again.
> 
> 4622
> 4639
> 4631
> 4664
> 4656
> 4673
> 4647
> 4639
> 4647


Yeah, thats between borderline it drops but not too much and catch at it again next run. Now you need to see if is stable on a run and it gives you perf.

Try x264v2 keep an eye on the fps and completion time do like 10-20loops it shouldnt fluctuate too much. You can save like in my case like 2-3c on some of the cores and vrms benefits the most i have mine watercooled right now at this ambients dont even touch 45c lol

If the pc just freezes you need to try another input starting voltages. It will run for awhile but ending on freezing if it cant keep up feeding power. You dont want that and ridiculous phantom throttling.. I prefer static but that just me but that inout by cpu could be useful to cheat an near stable overclock . Problem is it needs time to test him out  same as per core.

CB runs on a loop is just to see where it phantom throttle very quick. You need to stress test it. X264v2 is very good for that.


----------



## tps3443

Anyone here play death stranding yet? This game is so well optimized. it pushes all (36) threads to in to very high usage 60-100% utilization.

Ive never seen a game use my 7980XE this well. I’m blown away by this. Even BFV typically only uses around 15 or 16 threads as the others tend to use like 1-5% usage.

Death Stranding uses every single thread at almost identical utilization!


----------



## Caffinator

yes hello

why I cannot overclock my ram?

i am 3200mhz. Even 3300mhz, won't POST. 

I have Corsair RGB rams, the WHITE color 


https://www.amazon.com/CORSAIR-Vengeance-3200MHz-Desktop-Memory/dp/B07D5SN1ZK/ref=sxts_sxwds-bia-wc-p13n1_0?cv_ct_cx=corsair+ddr4+3200mhz+rgb&dchild=1&keywords=corsair+ddr4+3200mhz+rgb&link_code=qs&pd_rd_i=B07D5SN1ZK&pd_rd_r=3f7512f7-b144-40e0-bb33-dcd566142211&pd_rd_w=43IGl&pd_rd_wg=gNa0N&pf_rd_p=5be4970c-0256-4afe-9550-68021bd84e5b&pf_rd_r=N9Y5R0BQ528SZF404V51&psc=1&qid=1604371924&sr=1-1-791c2399-d602-4248-afbb-8a79de2d236f&tag=opera-20



I have 4 of these kits plugged into the computer, 64GB total


----------



## xarot

tps3443 said:


> Anyone here play death stranding yet? This game is so well optimized. it pushes all (36) threads to in to very high usage 60-100% utilization.
> 
> Ive never seen a game use my 7980XE this well. I’m blown away by this. Even BFV typically only uses around 15 or 16 threads as the others tend to use like 1-5% usage.
> 
> Death Stranding uses every single thread at almost identical utilization!


Well or badly optimized? It can also be a bug that it is for an unknown reason hogging all resources from the CPU. Similar case is with the A Plague Tale game.


----------



## ThrashZone

Caffinator said:


> yes hello
> 
> why I cannot overclock my ram?
> 
> i am 3200mhz. Even 3300mhz, won't POST.
> 
> I have Corsair RGB rams, the WHITE color
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/CORSAIR-Vengeance-3200MHz-Desktop-Memory/dp/B07D5SN1ZK/ref=sxts_sxwds-bia-wc-p13n1_0?cv_ct_cx=corsair+ddr4+3200mhz+rgb&dchild=1&keywords=corsair+ddr4+3200mhz+rgb&link_code=qs&pd_rd_i=B07D5SN1ZK&pd_rd_r=3f7512f7-b144-40e0-bb33-dcd566142211&pd_rd_w=43IGl&pd_rd_wg=gNa0N&pf_rd_p=5be4970c-0256-4afe-9550-68021bd84e5b&pf_rd_r=N9Y5R0BQ528SZF404V51&psc=1&qid=1604371924&sr=1-1-791c2399-d602-4248-afbb-8a79de2d236f&tag=opera-20
> 
> 
> 
> I have 4 of these kits plugged into the computer, 64GB total


Hi,
Sorry to say it's not a very good kit.
Lucky if it does rated speed.

Could make sure they are in the correct slots but you should also just look for a better set 
This can help
B-Die Finder


----------



## Dreamliner

Holy smokes boys, have you seen the new Ryzen 5000 series Cinebench R20 scores?! At stock speeds the ($800) 5950X is 648/10220! Even the ($550) 5900X gets 638/8491. RIP Intel. Glad I didn't get that 10980XE chip. What is the highest scores you guys have seen with your X299 intel chips without crazy cooling (like LN2). Nice to know my 7820X gets stomped by a $300 R5 5600X. In consolation, I guess it will be nice to finally see some big IPC gains. 

I'm still open to some finagling to swap out my 7820/x299 setup for a 5900X/X570 setup if the right deal came along but like what I went through with the memory (ironically which would definitely need to be upgraded) I probably would not notice the difference for my usage. I think at this point the only thing that will push me to AMD is if the 6800XT gains with SAM (Smart Access Memory) make it worthwhile to get over a 3080. I've been pretty firm with nVidia since the TNT2 days and the new Radeon benchmarks needed the SAM boost to compete with the 3080, so I have a feeling nVidia will still be better this cycle. Still my only real question is at 4K with a 3080, will my 7820K/X299 @ 4.4 cause any FPS issues? My 4K panel is only 60FPS, so I think I should be fine, right?

On a side note, what the heck is it with the supply issues? Why is it so difficult to simply take the orders and ship when stock arrives? I'd much rather just choose my retailer, pay for what I want and wait for it to ship. Much better than this ridiculous inventory status-check game.


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
Yep good not to drink too much of intel koolaid


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Dreamliner said:


> Holy smokes boys, have you seen the new Ryzen 5000 series Cinebench R20 scores?! At stock speeds the ($800) 5950X is* 648/10220!*


look at few benchmarks stock vs overclock are almost the same scores ermmm theres no fun in that ...
my 7980xe for example i get 11500 and thats a stable notched overclock... this is a 4yr system and 2015 uarch..

theres no reason in my mind for why they charging such prices for those cpus.. specially $300 for a 6 core one the only good value cpu in that line up is the 5900x the rest overpriced


----------



## Dreamliner

zGunBLADEz said:


> look at few benchmarks stock vs overclock are almost the same scores ermmm theres no fun in that ...
> my 7980xe for example i get 11500 and thats a stable notched overclock... this is a 4yr system and 2015 uarch..
> 
> theres no reason in my mind for why they charging such prices for those cpus.. specially $300 for a 6 core one the only good value cpu in that line up is the 5900x the rest overpriced


Very true. There just haven’t been any improvements...if you were buying today it probably wouldn’t be Intel. Also remember, your chip has two more cores than the AMD. 

It wouldn’t make sense for me to spend $1000 on a 10980XE when the 5950X exists. I will say though, your score is higher than I have seen from most people.

I have a feeling Intel will be using all of the overclock headroom to eek out performance in upcoming generations. At this point they can’t afford not to...

It’s crazy that I can get a 30% overclock out of the box without trying on my chip, Intel could have easily run all our chips almost 1GHz faster out of the box... especially if they would’ve used solder TIM.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Dreamliner said:


> Very true. There just haven’t been any improvements...if you were buying today it probably wouldn’t be Intel. Also remember, your chip has two more cores than the AMD.
> 
> It wouldn’t make sense for me to spend $1000 on a 10980XE when the 5950X exists. I will say though, your score is higher than I have seen from most people.
> 
> I have a feeling Intel will be using all of the overclock headroom to eek out performance in upcoming generations. At this point they can’t afford not to...
> 
> It’s crazy that I can get a 30% overclock out of the box without trying on my chip, Intel could have easily run all our chips almost 1GHz faster out of the box...


idk at the poinbt of purchase you will choose wisely..
i wouldnt get a 16 core $800 cpu on mainstream board like i was trying to get a 5900x from b&h with a itx board because i see useless anything over that on a mainstream system.... like at my point of view you loosing features for lets say 4x pci lanes pci ex4 vs pci lanes even if they are pci ex3 you have more lanes on x299.. you can find cheap boards now you can get a cheap 7xxx 2066 even cheaper... you can do more stuff on a x299 even if is "slower" than a 5th series amd mainstream cpu.. so still saying tr3 is the only upgrade path for x299 users not 5th mainstream ryzen...


Like i can have lets say 6nvmes on raid0 plus 16x gpu. i can have 3x pairs of nvmes on raid 0
i can have 2x gpus at 16x each + 2xnvmes on raid with 64gb ram even 128gb if using 10th i think is 256gb
i have 64gb @ 3800 very fast density ram setup..

i can do stuff like this for example










can do pci passthru with 4 different gpus using vms and all that stuff

it all depends what you have in mind..

I dont play on 1080P to me thats 2006 resolution.. since the beginnings of pc gaming i always been gpu bottlenecked so those gaming benchies mean nothing to me..


----------



## Dreamliner

zGunBLADEz said:


> idk at the poinbt of purchase you will choose wisely..
> i wouldnt get a 16 core $800 cpu on mainstream board like i was trying to get a 5900x from b&h with a itx board because i see useless anything over that on a mainstream system.... like at my point of view you loosing features for lets say 4x pci lanes pci ex4 vs pci lanes even if they are pci ex3 you have more lanes on x299.. you can find cheap boards now you can get a cheap 7xxx 2066 even cheaper... you can do more stuff on a x299 even if is "slower" than a 5th series amd mainstream cpu.. so still saying tr3 is the only upgrade path for x299 users not 5th mainstream ryzen...
> 
> 
> Like i can have lets say 6nvmes on raid0 plus 16x gpu. i can have 3x pairs of nvmes on raid 0
> i can have 2x gpus at 16x each + 2xnvmes on raid with 64gb ram even 128gb if using 10th i think is 256gb
> i have 64gb @ 3800 very fast density ram setup..
> 
> i can do stuff like this for example
> 
> can do pci passthru with 4 different gpus using vms and all that stuff
> 
> it all depends what you have in mind..
> 
> I dont play on 1080P to me thats 2006 resolution.. since the beginnings of pc gaming i always been gpu bottlenecked so those gaming benchies mean nothing to me..


Yeah if you need the PCIE lanes you have a point. If you don’t though, the line is getting blurred between Mainstream and HEDT. I do know what I have now is way more capable that what I’m using it for, for sure. 

I only look at the 4K benches. It barely makes a difference at that Rez. We need some more G-Sync 4K 120Hz panels. I’m thinking a video card and display are my next upgrades. A ~43” 4K/120 G-Sync panel flanked by 2 vertical 27” 4K panels should look nice. 

All that said, I’m fine waiting. I need a GPU since I sold my 1080Ti but the rest can wait. Perhaps if I find a 10980XE around $500 I’ll grab it and hang onto this system forever...


----------



## zGunBLADEz

it was to the point of ridiculous that i saw 400p benchies in some review places like any type of overclock would net you 50-100fps on those type of resolutions. They lowered the resolution to the lowest minimum the game allowed it..

Whats the point of that?

like most ppl that get those cheap cpus would be gpu bottlenecked in the end... so whats the point? i highly doubt you or anybody will pair a 5600x with a 3090 gpu..

like big average be looking for 1440p benches instead of 400p lol even so they going to get into gpu bottelencks regardless.









look how watch dogs legions made $1500 gpu sweat like aint crap and thats just the beginning of next gen AAA games


----------



## Caffinator

Dreamliner said:


> Very true. There just haven’t been any improvements...if you were buying today it probably wouldn’t be Intel. Also remember, your chip has two more cores than the AMD.
> 
> It wouldn’t make sense for me to spend $1000 on a 10980XE when the 5950X exists. I will say though, your score is higher than I have seen from most people.
> 
> I have a feeling Intel will be using all of the overclock headroom to eek out performance in upcoming generations. At this point they can’t afford not to...
> 
> It’s crazy that I can get a 30% overclock out of the box without trying on my chip, Intel could have easily run all our chips almost 1GHz faster out of the box... especially if they would’ve used solder TIM.


regarding PCIE lanes, that is typically why you go with X299 etc. 



ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Sorry to say it's not a very good kit.
> Lucky if it does rated speed.
> 
> Could make sure they are in the correct slots but you should also just look for a better set
> This can help
> B-Die Finder


hi, regarding "correct slots", I have 8x8GB installed. All the slots are full... that is why we have X299. If I wanted 2 sticks of ram and a rinky dink motherboard I would have a 10900k

Finally,
I have a 7800x. I also have 2x 960 Evo drives installed with a RTX 2070 Super. For SATA, I have 3x 860 Evo drives and 4x WD RE4 2TB HDD. So this is a total of 9 physical storage volumes. 
I also have a PCIE 1x USB 3.0 card installed(has 4 USB 3.0 ports on it)


I would like to install one more NVME, a 970 Evo Plus 1TB. I have a slot available - but will I run into PCIE lane issues with this 7800X? I can't tell how to observe how many are used/free.


----------



## Jpmboy

Caffinator said:


> regarding PCIE lanes, that is typically why you go with X299 etc.
> 
> 
> hi, regarding "correct slots", I have 8x8GB installed. All the slots are full... that is why we have X299. If I wanted 2 sticks of ram and a rinky dink motherboard I would have a 10900k
> 
> Finally,
> I have a 7800x. I also have 2x 960 Evo drives installed with a RTX 2070 Super. For SATA, I have 3x 860 Evo drives and 4x WD RE4 2TB HDD. So this is a total of 9 physical storage volumes.
> I also have a PCIE 1x USB 3.0 card installed(has 4 USB 3.0 ports on it)
> 
> 
> I would like to install one more NVME, a 970 Evo Plus 1TB. I have a slot available - but will I run into PCIE lane issues with this 7800X? I can't tell how to observe how many are used/free.


What MB??
your chip has 28 lanes. 16 are going to the GPU. Unless the 960 EVOs are physically on the PCIE (NVME drives can be on the PCH) you have 12 remaining... well you can do the arithmetic. There is not a great difference for an NVME on the PCH vs the PCIE if it is a data/storage drive. The OS and game loading benefits somewhat. The bus frequency is less of a bottle neck than the "fetch" time for a specific drive.


----------



## Caffinator

Jpmboy said:


> What MB??
> your chip has 28 lanes. 16 are going to the GPU. Unless the 960 EVOs are physically on the PCIE (NVME drives can be on the PCH) you have 12 remaining... well you can do the arithmetic. There is not a great difference for an NVME on the PCH vs the PCIE if it is a data/storage drive. The OS and game loading benefits somewhat. The bus frequency is less of a bottle neck than the "fetch" time for a specific drive.


hi, I have Gigabyte UD4 Pro

regarding PCH. I have two NVME dedicated slots on the motherboard. One is designated Q, the other is designated P. something like that. I have one NVME in the correct designated slot, which does NOT use the PCH. If I used that slot, it would block off like 4 SATA lanes. I have 7 SATA drives connected. So you may have been able to deduce this answer from my post already.

I also have a NVME SSD in the lower PCIEX16 slot. It only uses x4. 

Fun Fact: I have cutted my own adapter before, using PCIE riser(cut the Motherboard side down to X1, discard into trash). I was able to plug NVME into a PCIE_X1 slot (yes, X1) and working normally. However the drive was limited to about 800MB/s. This was a X58 board running only PCIE 2.0. Maybe X1 would be over 1400MB/S on PCIE 3.0.

I have my OS on 1TB Samsung 860 EVO, a SATA SSD. I have configured the storage volumes for my needs, which may be different from the typical "Gamer Bro 420 Yolo" individual.

So, to sum it up:

I have on PCIE
GPU x16
NVME x4
NVME x4
(add-in card) USB 3.0 x1

So I am using 25 lanes using that simple logic. 

I wonder if it will default an extra NVME to PCIE 3.0 x1 speeds. Which from my experience wouldn't be a bad thing. 

On X58 I would pull higher IOPS benchmark on the X1 slot because it was physically closer to the CPU. I would get 17000 IOPS in HD Tune compared to just 14000 IOPS on the far-away PCIE X4 slot.


----------



## Caffinator

also, I recently switched from 4.5GHz (HT ON) to 4.7GHz (HT OFF). To me it seems a little snappier. Placebo?


----------



## Jpmboy

Caffinator said:


> hi, I have Gigabyte UD4 Pro
> 
> regarding PCH. I have two NVME dedicated slots on the motherboard. One is designated Q, the other is designated P. something like that. I have one NVME in the correct designated slot, which does NOT use the PCH. If I used that slot, it would block off like 4 SATA lanes. I have 7 SATA drives connected. So you may have been able to deduce this answer from my post already.
> 
> I also have a NVME SSD in the lower PCIEX16 slot. It only uses x4.
> 
> Fun Fact: I have cutted my own adapter before, using PCIE riser(cut the Motherboard side down to X1, discard into trash). I was able to plug NVME into a PCIE_X1 slot (yes, X1) and working normally. However the drive was limited to about 800MB/s. This was a X58 board running only PCIE 2.0. Maybe X1 would be over 1400MB/S on PCIE 3.0.
> 
> I have my OS on 1TB Samsung 860 EVO, a SATA SSD. I have configured the storage volumes for my needs, which may be different from the typical "Gamer Bro 420 Yolo" individual.
> 
> So, to sum it up:
> 
> I have on PCIE
> GPU x16
> NVME x4
> NVME x4
> (add-in card) USB 3.0 x1
> 
> So I am using 25 lanes using that simple logic.
> 
> I wonder if it will default an extra NVME to PCIE 3.0 x1 speeds. Which from my experience wouldn't be a bad thing.
> 
> On X58 I would pull higher IOPS benchmark on the X1 slot because it was physically closer to the CPU. I would get 17000 IOPS in HD Tune compared to just 14000 IOPS on the far-away PCIE X4 slot.


You just have to check the board's bios and set the GPU to x8 if you want to add another NVME on the CPU. Else, just put it on the PCH bus. As I said, if it is not the OS or game-loader drive you will not sense or feel any difference with the drives (sure you can measure some effect, not not much real-world impact), and x8 on the GPU has only a marginal FPS impact - this has been published by many reviewers.


----------



## Caffinator

Jpmboy said:


> You just have to check the board's bios and set the GPU to x8 if you want to add another NVME on the CPU. Else, just put it on the PCH bus. As I said, if it is not the OS or game-loader drive you will not sense or feel any difference with the drives (sure you can measure some effect, not not much real-world impact), and x8 on the GPU has only a marginal FPS impact - this has been published by many reviewers.


Ok, thanks for the x8 BIOS setting suggestion

re: not feeling a difference

I feel a difference when copying 50-100GB worth of files, totaling over 100,000 individual files.


----------



## Caffinator

still 6% faster than stock Ryzen 9... as far as single core goes


----------



## Jpmboy

Caffinator said:


> Ok, thanks for the x8 BIOS setting suggestion
> 
> re: not feeling a difference
> 
> I feel a difference when copying 50-100GB worth of files, totaling over 100,000 individual files.
> 
> View attachment 2464817


Sure, like I said, it can me measured but not "felt" during normal operations. Moving blocks of files will always be capped by the bandwidth of the pipe. And if that's what you do with your rig more than anything else... well, frankly you have the wrong platform for file-copy. But for everyday use like gaming (where game-cache'ing and burst read rule) or production work where you are actually processing stuff before and after the read/write, burst performance has a very different behavior (even different OS's deal with this differently - eg compare to Linux). Why would you copy/move 100K individual files? That's an operation that you should do via image/deploy (which can be done on folders, discs, or even sectors). Check the block size speeds in a good disk bench if you do a lot of individual file copy/move ops.


----------



## Caffinator

Jpmboy said:


> Sure, like I said, it can me measured but not "felt" during normal operations. Moving blocks of files will always be capped by the bandwidth of the pipe. And if that's what you do with your rig more than anything else... well, frankly you have the wrong platform for file-copy. But for everyday use like gaming (where game-cache'ing and burst read rule) or production work where you are actually processing stuff before and after the read/write, burst performance has a very different behavior (even different OS's deal with this differently - eg compare to Linux). Why would you copy/move 100K individual files? That's an operation that you should do via image/deploy (which can be done on folders, discs, or even sectors). Check the block size speeds in a good disk bench if you do a lot of individual file copy/move ops.


Hi, I was asking a question about the X299 PCIE lane bifurcation, but you seem to be focused on whether I have purchased a build which suits my needs.

May I ask, why are you like this? What is your purpose, spewing garbage from your under-hole without data?

Completely disregarding real world experiences purveyed by the user(yours truly).

What are you going to tell me, to build a NAS and wire with optical or 10GbE? This stops here.


----------



## Jpmboy

Caffinator said:


> Hi, I was asking a question about the X299 PCIE lane bifurcation, but you seem to be focused on whether I have purchased a build which suits my needs.
> 
> May I ask, why are you like this? What is your purpose, spewing garbage from your under-hole without data?
> 
> Completely disregarding real world experiences purveyed by the user(yours truly).
> 
> What are you going to tell me, to build a NAS and wire with optical or 10GbE? This stops here.


nope, won't tell ya a thing anymore. 🤟


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> nope, won't tell ya a thing anymore. 🤟


WOW! JP I reckon some people just don't want help.


----------



## Jpmboy

CptSpig said:


> WOW! JP I reckon some people just don't want help.


Always surprises at OCN.


----------



## Dreamliner

IceGiant Cooling


IceGiantCooling



www.icegiantcooling.com





I wonder how well this would work on 2066. In the review he notes it works extremely well with Threadripper but not so well on a standard Intel because the die is not spread out enough.

I’ve been holding out on getting a D15s. It is extremely frustrating that Noctua doesn’t include the second fan...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
If you want to throw down click bait why not a good one lol


----------



## Dreamliner

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> If you want to throw down click bait why not a good one lol


It’s not clickbait if it is a product that exists that I can buy.


----------



## ThrashZone

Dreamliner said:


> It’s not clickbait if it is a product that exists that I can buy.


Hi,
All LTT is click bait.
Odds are you won't buy


----------



## Dreamliner

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> All LTT is click bait.
> Odds are you won't buy


Right now I have a Zalman CNPS14X which is about on par with a D15 but has a horrendous mounting mechanism (I don’t care since it’s mounted now but I don’t want to redo it ever again). 

I’ve been open to another cooler but I want it to be better than what I have and spending $90+ on a Noctua solution and still needing another fan is frustrating to me. I’ve considered the EVGA CLC360 but I’d rather stay away from water.

I don’t think the content of that review had any hyperbole in it. Comparison benches were provided.


----------



## ThrashZone

Dreamliner said:


> Right now I have a Zalman CNPS14X which is about on par with a D15 but has a horrendous mounting mechanism (I don’t care since it’s mounted now but I don’t want to redo it ever again).
> 
> I’ve been open to another cooler but I want it to be better than what I have and spending $90+ on a Noctua solution and still needing another fan is frustrating to me. I’ve considered the EVGA CLC360 but I’d rather stay away from water.
> 
> I don’t think the content of that review had any hyperbole in it. Comparison benches were provided.


Hi,
Yeah but you've been talking about buying stuff for seems like two years and you haven't 
So this is just one more item you won't buy odds are


----------



## Dreamliner

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> Yeah but you've been talking about buying stuff for seems like two years and you haven't
> So this is just one more item you won't buy odds are


You’re not wrong. 

There are lots of things I want but as I’ve gotten older realize I don’t really need. 

I sold my 1080ti in anticipation of a 3080 and I’m limping along on a 750ti, but even dealing with 30Hz on the second monitor (both 4K) I am wondering if it is even wise to buy anything since I have unplayed PS3 games still.

With all the things I have talked about recently, even though none of them are overly expensive, all of them together just seems silly.

My local Micro Center has the 10980XE for $809, so it got me thinking about all this stuff again.

Even though it is an interesting product, you are probably right, I should just do nothing.


----------



## ThrashZone

Dreamliner said:


> You’re not wrong.
> 
> There are lots of things I want but as I’ve gotten older realize I don’t really need.
> 
> I sold my 1080ti in anticipation of a 3080 and I’m limping along on a 750ti, but even dealing with 30Hz on the second monitor (both 4K) I am wondering if it is even wise to buy anything since I have unplayed PS3 games still.
> 
> With all the things I have talked about recently, even though none of them are overly expensive, all of them together just seems silly.
> 
> My local Micro Center has the 10980XE for $809, so it got me thinking about all this stuff again.
> 
> Even though it is an interesting product, you are probably right, I should just do nothing.


Hi,
Yeah priorities seem to overrule all our buying wish lists  
I'm in the same boat where 10980xe is involved 
I just did a z490 build instead so that pretty much took care of the 10980xe at any price lol 

Gpu rules for me as well but I'm not in any hurry amd or nvidia I don't care which ever is best after the dust settles


----------



## Dreamliner

ThrashZone said:


> Gpu rules for me as well but I'm not in any hurry amd or nvidia I don't care which ever is best after the dust settles


Nvidia still rules this generation. "SAM" helps but once Nvidia releases drivers that support resizable BAR then they'll increase the lead. It'll be interesting to see how the 6900XT stacks up, I'm sure it'll best the 3080 at everything but not quite achieve what the 3090 does, but it is significantly cheaper. Even though it is faster, the biggest weak point of the 30-series cards is the amount of VRAM. I also very much so distrust the Radeon driver reliability, pretty poor history there.

With availability shenanigans, it just pushes me further into the wait it out camp. At this point, even if a 3080 was available, I'd wonder how much longer until a 3080 Super/Ti is announced...


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
I'm sure nvidia won't miss the holiday cash so before Christmas lol


----------



## D-EJ915

I haven't used mine yet but I'm not sure the ice giant will do any better on 2066 socket reason being my eisblock pro doesn't work any better on 2066 compared to my standard version. If they had 3647 mounting mechanism I could try on 3175x but it doesn't.


----------



## Abaidor

It's been some time since I built my system and was wondering whether it makes sense to upgrade at this point........my 7940X is running 8 Cores 4.9GHz & 6 Cores 4.8GHz and I am not going to bother to push it any further. I have also tuned the memory (64GB Trident Z RGB 3600) down to about 50-53ns latency. 

Regarding my workflow I don't do any 3d rendering or something CPU intensive I am gradually assigning all these tasks to others and I only do heavy multitasking like lots of browsers open and checking out projects. I also almost never have time for gaming anymore.....ok I might play 1 or 2 games per year but this is it.....

It looks like any upgrade would be mostly because I really like a fast PC.....but would going to an 18 core 10980XE feel any different or should I wait for DDR5 platforms next year or so? How do you X299 users feel like at this point?


----------



## ThrashZone

Hi,
4 more hot cores I passed gpu more important atm.


----------



## D-EJ915

I did a quick test with the ice giant and after I found out it hits my dimm.2 card I swapped that out but anyway just stick with D15 if you are gonna use an air cooler on 2066.


----------



## Abaidor

ThrashZone said:


> Hi,
> 4 more hot cores I passed gpu more important atm.


That's what I am thinking.........a GPU should be enough to hold me over until DDR5 platforms are ready....


----------



## Dreamliner

D-EJ915 said:


> I did a quick test with the ice giant and after I found out it hits my dimm.2 card I swapped that out but anyway just stick with D15 if you are gonna use an air cooler on 2066.


Oh you have one? Cool! So the performance is about the same on the Ice Giant? 

What I've gathered so far is the D15 is better than pretty much any 240 AIO but can get bested by a 360 AIO. It also seems like the EVGA CLC360 is the best performing 360 AIO but screams like a banshee at 100%. When compared at the same acoustics, it seems to perform as well as any other 360 AIO. Going with any water solution makes me very nervous but seems to be a requirement if I end up with a 10980XE, 5950X or want to push my 7820X past 4.5Ghz. 

I have a Zalman CNPS14X now, its and older cooler with a horrendous mounting mechanism but seems to compare pretty similar to the Noctua NH-U14S (not a typo). Since it is older, there is no direct comparison to a D15, so I wonder how close it really is. I got it for $30 and have stuck with it for quite some time. I've got 3 fans on it but I wonder if the D15 (or Ice Giant) would give me any more headroom. I'd really like to compare the CNPS14X, D15, Ice Giant and CLC 360 and see how they stack up. I think the results would probably be in that same order, but I wonder how close they would be...


----------



## D-EJ915

You won't oc the 18 core for anything half decent on air, it just won't work, you'll gain 20c going on water. It honestly sucks on this platform but if you really want the ice giant I'll send you mine for cost ($120) + shipping.


----------



## tps3443

Hey everyone, I was just testing my 7980XE stock just to see how it does.

So, I set my CPU to stock speeds with turbo boost enabled. And my cpu flickers between 3.4Ghz all core, to some cores at 3.4Ghz and others at 2.6Ghz. How come all the cores will not just stay at 3.4Ghz and run beyond that? They bounce between 3.8 and 2.6Ghz..

Any ideas what’s causing this?? I figure this is a turbo boost setting or C state setting I have enabled wrong in the bios.

Obviously I can fix all cores to 3.4Ghz in the bios, but then my turbo boost will not function properly.


I am testing stock speeds out of just curiosity.


Any help us very much appreciated. Thank you!


I took these picture within seconds apart. and it shows all cores at 3.4, and then some at 2.6.

Is this norma??


----------



## LukkyStrike

tps3443 said:


> Hey everyone, I was just testing my 7980XE stock just to see how it does.
> 
> So, I set my CPU to stock speeds with turbo boost enabled. And my cpu flickers between 3.4Ghz all core, to some cores at 3.4Ghz and others at 2.6Ghz. How come all the cores will not just stay at 3.4Ghz and run beyond that? They bounce between 3.8 and 2.6Ghz..
> 
> Any ideas what’s causing this?? I figure this is a turbo boost setting or C state setting I have enabled wrong in the bios.
> 
> Obviously I can fix all cores to 3.4Ghz in the bios, but then my turbo boost will not function properly.
> 
> 
> I am testing stock speeds out of just curiosity.
> 
> 
> Any help us very much appreciated. Thank you!
> 
> 
> I took these picture within seconds apart. and it shows all cores at 3.4, and then some at 2.6.
> 
> Is this normal?


Edit: sorry I miss read your post. Disregard. Here is my response:

Does EVGA have multicore enhancement? Type setting?


----------



## JustinThyme

tps3443 said:


> Hey everyone, I was just testing my 7980XE stock just to see how it does.
> 
> So, I set my CPU to stock speeds with turbo boost enabled. And my cpu flickers between 3.4Ghz all core, to some cores at 3.4Ghz and others at 2.6Ghz. How come all the cores will not just stay at 3.4Ghz and run beyond that? They bounce between 3.8 and 2.6Ghz..
> 
> Any ideas what’s causing this?? I figure this is a turbo boost setting or C state setting I have enabled wrong in the bios.
> 
> Obviously I can fix all cores to 3.4Ghz in the bios, but then my turbo boost will not function properly.
> 
> 
> I am testing stock speeds out of just curiosity.
> 
> 
> Any help us very much appreciated. Thank you!
> 
> 
> I took these picture within seconds apart. and it shows all cores at 3.4, and then some at 2.6.
> 
> Is this norma??


Perfectly normal and depends on load. Run a heavy bench and they should all max out to your sync all cores setting. Then they will settle back down. Ultimately when nothing or next to nothing running should be lower that what you are getting now like all but one or two cores should drop back to multi of 12.


----------



## tps3443

JustinThyme said:


> Perfectly normal and depends on load. Run a heavy bench and they should all max out to your sync all cores setting. Then they will settle back down. Ultimately when nothing or next to nothing running should be lower that what you are getting now like all but one or two cores should drop back to multi of 12.



Ok thanks, first time ever really testing my CPU at the default settings. It has been overclocked since about June of last year.

I was checking to see the affects of my GPU temperatures with my CPU running at a substantially lower power consumption.


----------



## tps3443

LukkyStrike said:


> Edit: sorry I miss read your post. Disregard. Here is my response:
> 
> Does EVGA have multicore enhancement? Type setting?


The X299 dark does not. But you can use per core overclocking. You can overclock any core and adjust voltage however you like for whatever individual core. So I think that is much better than multicore enhancement.


----------



## Jpmboy

tps3443 said:


> The X299 dark does not. But you can use per core overclocking. You can overclock any core and adjust voltage however you like for whatever individual core. So I think that is much better than multicore enhancement.


do you have TB3 installed and running?


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> do you have TB3 installed and running?


What do you mean?


----------



## Jpmboy

during the stock run you posted, was Intel Turbo Boost Tech 3 operational? Cause your post shows the max non-turbo clock on the cores, not the max (stock) Turbo frequency, which is 4400. In order for the chip to hit this (on 2 cores max I believe) the TB3 driver and OS tool need to be running.


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> during the stock run you posted, was Intel Turbo Boost Tech 3 operational? Cause your post shows the max non-turbo clock on the cores, not the max (stock) Turbo frequency, which is 4400. In order for the chip to hit this (on 2 cores max I believe) the TB3 driver and OS tool need to be running.
> View attachment 2473816


I don’t think it is installed. I only see 4Ghz during idle, and around the same on some cores during load. Pretty sure I stripped anything like that from installed application previously. I will try and reinstall it though.


----------



## Jpmboy

No reason to install it if you plan to return to an all core OC.


----------



## JustinThyme

Jpmboy said:


> No reason to install it if you plan to return to an all core OC.


It’s hard to even find the driver let alone the TB3 software. I know mine acts weird if I have TB off in the BIOS even with speed step enabled. I max out at stock settings even on all core OC actually not even that as I get 3.0GHz all cores and thats all she wrote and that’s where it will stay Enable it driver or not and it will go to all cores what I set it at and throttle back when idle. I installed the driver just so I didn’t get the missing driver at boot but not the software. Don’t know if this is inherently 10980XE or not. Used to be it was hard to get rid of as windows update would push it back, had to manually disable the software.


----------



## D-EJ915

I remember people complaining on the EVGA forum that the Dark never actually functions in "stock" configuration, I'm not sure if they ever resolved that or not since I don't run at stock I never looked into it.


----------



## o1dschoo1

Just hit this on my x299 deluxe and 7900x.


----------



## JustinThyme

o1dschoo1 said:


> Just hit this on my x299 deluxe and 7900x.


Capable of a lot more so long as you can cool it. Mine in sig from a couple of years ago.


----------



## o1dschoo1

JustinThyme said:


> Capable of a lot more so long as you can cool it. Mine in sig from a couple of years ago.


Easily. More interested in trying to get that memory bandwidth up while I wait on my liquid metal to come in. I can't get my 7900x to boot ddr4 4000 at all...


----------



## tps3443

o1dschoo1 said:


> Just hit this on my x299 deluxe and 7900x.
> View attachment 2473889


That looks a little low to be honest. If I hit just XMP with my ram, with my CPU/mesh both bone stock I hit 122,000 with around 52ns latency.

Now my memory default xmp is 4000mhz CL15 1.5V so that certainly helps.

But I have seen tweaked 3800 speeds pass my stock XMP profile.

Try increasing your uncore voltage for higher ram frequencies. My X299 Dark sends like 1.430V by default with 4000Mhz. And send more VCCIO voltage for increasing your mesh frequency. “If you didn’t know already“

Outside of cpu vcore voltage, VCCIO voltage, and DDR4 voltage, and uncore voltage. I never touch the others. I don’t even touch the mesh voltage and I run a X32 mesh speed.


Anyways you can squeeze amazing performance from these platforms. You can even get the latency down similar or close to a “Non tuned” Z390 platforms latency.


----------



## o1dschoo1

tps3443 said:


> That looks a little low to be honest. If I hit just XMP with my ram, with my CPU/mesh both bone stock I hit 122,000 with around 50ns latency.


I can't boot 4000 for some reason  ik my ram can do it


----------



## o1dschoo1

tps3443 said:


> That looks a little low to be honest. If I hit just XMP with my ram, with my CPU/mesh both bone stock I hit 122,000 with around 52ns latency.
> 
> Now my memory default xmp is 4000mhz CL15 1.5V so that certainly helps.
> 
> But I have seen tweaked 3800 speeds pass my stock XMP profile.
> 
> Try increasing your uncore voltage for higher ram frequencies. My X299 Dark sends like 1.430V by default with 4000Mhz. And send more VCCIO voltage for increasing your mesh frequency. “If you didn’t know already“
> 
> Outside of cpu vcore voltage, VCCIO voltage, and DDR4 voltage, and uncore voltage. I never touch the others. I don’t even touch the mesh voltage and I run a X32 mesh speed.
> 
> 
> Anyways you can squeeze amazing performance from these platforms. You can even get the latency down similar or close to a “Non tuned” Z390 platforms latency.


Interesting imma have to play with uncore voltage. On my x299 deluxe it's done by offset so it's gonna take some tinkering. I never played with it honestly.
I'm running 3000 mesh as of now


----------



## tps3443

o1dschoo1 said:


> Interesting imma have to play with uncore voltage. On my x299 deluxe it's done by offset so it's gonna take some tinkering. I never played with it honestly.
> I'm running 3000 mesh as of now


Uncore voltage automatically increases with ram frequency on my board. But you probably need to manually increase it to find stability or even get it to post.


If I run 3000Mhz DDR4 it would apply around 1.25V uncore. If I ran 3600Mhz DDR4 it would apply around 1.34V uncore voltage. With my DDR4 4000 CL15 set at XMP it automatically applied like 1.430V uncore voltage. So the uncore voltage certainly compensates! And directly controls your ram stability.

Also maybe try BCLK overclocking. I can manage 4,160Mhz stable at CL15-16-16-30-280-1T 100% stable.

^ This gets the DDR4 bandwidth in the 130GBPS range. 

For everyday usage though, I just run 4000Mhz CL15-16-16-30-280-1T at 1.5V I have passed HCi memtest for probably 10-12 hours just fine with fans on my DDR4, as it gets toasty running such a strenuous test, at such a frequency. System runs it without even breaking a sweat really. Just XMP, F10 save, and boom! I have further tweaked upon the XMP for best performance. 

Just check your stability with HCI Memtest. And give it some voltage!!! Bdie loves it!


----------



## o1dschoo1

tps3443 said:


> Uncore voltage automatically increases with ram frequency on my board. But you probably need to manually increase it to find stability or even get it to post.
> 
> 
> If I run 3000Mhz DDR4 it would apply around 1.25V uncore. If I ran 3600Mhz DDR4 it would apply around 1.34V uncore voltage. With my DDR4 4000 CL15 set at XMP it automatically applied like 1.430V uncore voltage. So the uncore voltage certainly compensates! And directly controls your ram stability.
> 
> Also maybe try BCLK overclocking. I can manage 4,160Mhz stable at CL15-16-16-30-280-1T 100% stable.
> 
> ^ This gets the DDR4 bandwidth in the 130GBPS range.
> 
> For everyday usage though, I just run 4000Mhz CL15-16-16-30-280-1T at 1.5V I have passed HCi memtest for probably 10-12 hours just fine with fans on my DDR4, as it gets toasty running such a strenuous test, at such a frequency. System runs it without even breaking a sweat really. Just XMP, F10 save, and boom! I have further tweaked upon the XMP for best performance.
> 
> Just check your stability with HCI Memtest. And give it some voltage!!! Bdie loves it!


I passed hci memtest pro last night all 4 sticks 3800 15-15-15-30 5-5-290-30000 trefi and 30 tfaw with no fans on the sticks 1.45vdimm. let it run overnight. It's something cpu side or board side stopping me these sticks want more.


----------



## tps3443

o1dschoo1 said:


> I passed hci memtest pro last night all 4 sticks 3800 15-15-15-30 5-5-290-30000 trefi and 30 tfaw with no fans on the sticks 1.45vdimm. let it run overnight. It's something cpu side or board side stopping me these sticks want more.


For sure I see, well that’s fantastic nonetheless! Your memory seems to be good enough for 4000. I would try an X299 Dark then? Your CPU IMC Very well may just run the 4000 just fine.

Unless your happy with 3800 CL15 that is, which is still fantastic. And regardless, your bandwidth is far superior than what X299 would usually obtain.

I had a Asus TUF Mark 1 X299 ”Before my X299 Dark” and it could barely run 3733Mhz. And it still couldn’t stabilize that speed with HCI.


----------



## D-EJ915

I think the original asus boards have a worse memory layout than the newer boards, that may be your issue but I've not used one, oldest Asus I have is the RVIE and RVIA.


----------



## tps3443

D-EJ915 said:


> I think the original asus boards have a worse memory layout than the newer boards, that may be your issue but I've not used one, oldest Asus I have is the RVIE and RVIA.


I’ve booted in the bios just fine at 4,266Mhz and windows too. But it’s not stable. I would need to seriously tweak it for stability. And I would be sacrificing some timings most likely.


----------



## o1dschoo1

tps3443 said:


> For sure I see, well that’s fantastic nonetheless! Your memory seems to be good enough for 4000. I would try an X299 Dark then? Your CPU IMC Very well may just run the 4000 just fine.
> 
> Unless your happy with 3800 CL15 that is, which is still fantastic. And regardless, your bandwidth is far superior than what X299 would usually obtain.
> 
> I had a Asus TUF Mark 1 X299 ”Before my X299 Dark” and it could barely run 3733Mhz. And it still couldn’t stabilize that speed with HCI.


I'm talking to someone about a x299 apex right now so that might solve my issues


----------



## o1dschoo1

tps3443 said:


> For sure I see, well that’s fantastic nonetheless! Your memory seems to be good enough for 4000. I would try an X299 Dark then? Your CPU IMC Very well may just run the 4000 just fine.
> 
> Unless your happy with 3800 CL15 that is, which is still fantastic. And regardless, your bandwidth is far superior than what X299 would usually obtain.
> 
> I had a Asus TUF Mark 1 X299 ”Before my X299 Dark” and it could barely run 3733Mhz. And it still couldn’t stabilize that speed with HCI.


It was the uncore voltage I'm running 4k 16-16-16-30 and hitting 114 gbs now. Had to hit it with +.350 to run it stable


----------



## tps3443

o1dschoo1 said:


> It was the uncore voltage I'm running 4k 16-16-16-30 and hitting 114 gbs now. Had to hit it with +.350 to run it stable


And no one on google will say that either. It is very tough to find accurate information with overclocking the X299 platform.

People refer to uncore voltage as mesh voltage lol. They call stuff the wrong names, and increase the wrong voltages. And it is all very confusing!

I am very happy that you could increase the uncore and get the speed you need! That is absolutely awesome bro!


Also for your mesh, increase the VCCIO. I run 1.265V for X32 mesh. 100% stable too.

Too low ”VCCIO” voltage loves to BSOD with a high mesh OC

Anyways, I am glad it worked!


----------



## o1dschoo1

tps3443 said:


> And no one on google will say that either. It is very tough to find accurate information with overclocking the X299 platform.
> 
> People refer to uncore voltage as mesh voltage lol. They call stuff the wrong names, and increase the wrong voltages. And it is all very confusing!
> 
> I am very happy that you could increase the uncore and get the speed you need! That is absolutely awesome bro!
> 
> 
> Also for your mesh, increase the VCCIO. I run 1.265V for X32 mesh. 100% stable too.
> 
> Too low mesh voltage loves to BSOD.
> 
> Anyways, I am glad it worked!


Ty. I greatly appreciate the help. I finally broke 118gbs at 4k.


----------



## tps3443

o1dschoo1 said:


> Ty. I greatly appreciate the help. I finally broke 118gbs at 4k.


Try 1T with 23tFAW. It should jump right over that 120GBPS mark.


----------



## Jpmboy

just for an FYI... early in the 10980XE 5GHz thread, I posted the benefit if running +400mV on the uncore. Juicing the CPU AUX voltages can also help with stabilizing core and uncore and the IMC once you start pushing things.


----------



## o1dschoo1

Jpmboy said:


> just for an FYI... early in the 10980XE 5GHz thread, I posted the benefit if running +400mV on the uncore. Juicing the CPU AUX voltages can also help with stabilizing core and uncore and the IMC once you start pushing things.


I tried +400 and can't do 103 baseclock  my imc sucks


----------



## JustinThyme

The individual IMC on the chip plays a very big part. It may not be able to handle it. For mesh I’m running 28 min and 32 max with manual override on the juice to 1.1V. My ram won’t OC for sheet on a 10980XE but got the same kit to 4000CL 16 on a 7900X and a 9940X. Even a 3800 kit won’t do more than 3600. 3600 CL18 will run XMP all day long but change one setting and if it boots it crashes soon after. Just doesn’t like changes in memory clocks or BCLK. I may try putting my mesh to auto and see what I get.


----------



## RichKnecht

JustinThyme said:


> The individual IMC on the chip plays a very big part. It may not be able to handle it.* For mesh I’m running 28 min and 32 max with manual override on the juice to 1.1V. *My ram won’t OC for sheet on a 10980XE but got the same kit to 4000CL 16 on a 7900X and a 9940X. Even a 3800 kit won’t do more than 3600. 3600 CL18 will run XMP all day long but change one setting and if it boots it crashes soon after. Just doesn’t like changes in memory clocks or BCLK. I may try putting my mesh to auto and see what I get.


What do you use te test mesh arability? I never really played around with it on the chip. I just set it to min "auto" and max to 30 with 1.12V. I wonder if I am setting it too high.


----------



## JustinThyme

RichKnecht said:


> What do you use te test mesh arability? I never really played around with it on the chip. I just set it to min "auto" and max to 30 with 1.12V. I wonder if I am setting it too high.


Mine is set to min 28,max 32 and 1.1V manual. You can use AIDA 64 cache and memory benchmark. this one is silicon lottery. Some cant get it up at 30 and Ive seeen others run it as high as 36 but with more juice. Too much juice will add to your package temp. mine generally sits around 30 most of the time until I load it up then goes to 32. full auto i think out of the box is like 24.

If you dont have AIDA64 there is a short free trial. I just bought it, not overly expensive and I have it linked into my aquaero for some of the sensors, like VRM that you cant get elsewhere. integrates well with the aquaero software, not too diffiicualt to set up.


My crappy results


----------



## Jpmboy

RichKnecht said:


> What do you use te test mesh arability? I never really played around with it on the chip. I just set it to min "auto" and max to 30 with 1.12V. I wonder if I am setting it too high.


Run the AID64 Cache (only) stress test. Hours. Otherwise, HCi seems to give it a good workout during ram testing.


----------



## tps3443

@Jpmboy 

Hey friend, I wanted to chime in and ask for you help if possible about my single hot core in a (18) core cpu.

So I am running a 7980XE @4.8Ghz, and I have a very strange issue of just a single core running super super hot.

I have recently installed the der8auer direct die frame the other day, and a new Optimus Signature V2 waterblock with fresh LM lastnight. 

I applied LM very good to both the die and the block. I have delidded this 7980XE personally at least 3-4 times over the last year or so. And I have never seen anything like this. 


All of my temps are super good on all cores. Although, one core is just burning hot.

Any ideas? System is very stable in games and my applications. These temps are from running R15 maybe 2-3 times in normal ambient conditions.

One core reaches the mid- higher 90’s??

Is this contamination on the silicon that normal alcohol and cotton swab are not cleaning off?


----------



## JustinThyme

tps3443 said:


> @Jpmboy
> 
> Hey friend, I wanted to chime in and ask for you help if possible about my single hot core in a (18) core cpu.
> 
> So I am running a 7980XE @4.8Ghz, and I have a very strange issue of just a single core running super super hot.
> 
> I have recently installed the der8auer direct die frame the other day, and a new Optimus Signature V2 waterblock with fresh LM lastnight.
> 
> I applied LM very good to both the die and the block. I have delidded this 7980XE personally at least 3-4 times over the last year or so. And I have never seen anything like this.
> 
> 
> All of my temps are super good on all cores. Although, one core is just burning hot.
> 
> Any ideas? System is very stable in games and my applications. These temps are from running R15 maybe 2-3 times in normal ambient conditions.
> 
> One core reaches the mid- higher 90’s??
> 
> Is this contamination on the silicon that normal alcohol and cotton swab are not cleaning off?


Are you running the flat block? If not taking the Oring out of the non flat block reduces bow.


----------



## tps3443

JustinThyme said:


> Are you running the flat block? If not taking the Oring out of the non flat block reduces bow.


I have the Signature V2 with a bowed block for direct die use.

I ended up fixing the issue though. I removed the block again, then got my Q-Tip with LM on it, and I just rubbed the hell out of the silicon/die of my 7980XE with the Q-tip. (Then I wiped away the chunky soup looking contaminated LM that comes from rubbing the LM into the surface), then applied a little more fresh LM. I installed the waterblock again, and I am good to go! That one single core that was 96C dropped down to 60C. And the core that was 74C has dropped to 66C.

I think there was just a tiny bare spec/spot on the silicon that wasn’t coated/soaked in LM properly. Maybe the edge of the silicon, or a corner of the silicon just wasn’t properly coated.

Anyways, I set adaptive voltage of 1.200V with a offset of +135 and I set x50 multiplier for all cores, CPU booted just fine at 5Ghz with 1.358 volts.


I have only looped R15 about 10 times, hottest core reached 79C at 5Ghz. I played rust for a few hours and all seemed ok.

^ CPU is more than likely not stable lol. But I mostly just game at 1440P 165HZ. So it is definitely fun to play at 5Ghz on all 18 cores.

It is the summer time, and I do not own a water chiller. But I may be able to get this 5Ghz daily stable with some decent AVX offsets in place. It runs super cool (In realistic loads)

I will more than likely go for 4.9Ghz though, I have tested stability at 1.315V.


----------



## tps3443

[Double post]


----------



## JustinThyme

tps3443 said:


> I have the Signature V2 with a bowed block for direct die use.
> 
> I ended up fixing the issue though. I removed the block again, then got my Q-Tip with LM on it, and I just rubbed the hell out of the silicon/die of my 7980XE with the Q-tip. (Then I wiped away the chunky soup looking contaminated LM that comes from rubbing the LM into the surface), then applied a little more fresh LM. I installed the waterblock again, and I am good to go! That one single core that was 96C dropped down to 60C. And the core that was 74C has dropped to 66C.
> 
> I think there was just a tiny bare spec/spot on the silicon that wasn’t coated/soaked in LM properly. Maybe the edge of the silicon, or a corner of the silicon just wasn’t properly coated.
> 
> Anyways, I set adaptive voltage of 1.200V with a offset of +135 and I set x50 multiplier for all cores, CPU booted just fine at 5Ghz with 1.358 volts.
> 
> 
> I have only looped R15 about 10 times, hottest core reached 79C at 5Ghz. I played rust for a few hours and all seemed ok.
> 
> ^ CPU is more than likely not stable lol. But I mostly just game at 1440P 165HZ. So it is definitely fun to play at 5Ghz on all 18 cores.
> 
> It is the summer time, and I do not own a water chiller. But I may be able to get this 5Ghz daily stable with some decent AVX offsets in place. It runs super cool (In realistic loads)
> 
> I will more than likely go for 4.9Ghz though, I have tested stability at 1.315V.


They make a different one for direct die use where it’s flat. They have some blems up right now. Said they probably won’t make anymore as it’s too niche. 
EK Magnitude with a flat cold plate also works well but not cheap.

I run my 10980XE 4.7 @ 1.180Vcore daily. Not much of a performance hit and it runs a lot cooler. Took 1.36 to hit 5.1 GHz but getting toasty at that point. Not much less for 5GHz and not much under that again for 4.9. 4.7-4.8 seems to be the sweet spot. Low juice and temps. I’m not running direct die as I haven’t the bawlz to void the warranty. I’ll wait until it’s up before thinking about it. Much different on a soldered IHS. Popping off a 79XX was easy.


----------



## tps3443

JustinThyme said:


> They make a different one for direct die use where it’s flat. They have some blems up right now. Said they probably won’t make anymore as it’s too niche.
> EK Magnitude with a flat cold plate also works well but not cheap.
> 
> I run my 10980XE 4.7 @ 1.180Vcore daily. Not much of a performance hit and it runs a lot cooler. Took 1.36 to hit 5.1 GHz but getting toasty at that point. Not much less for 5GHz and not much under that again for 4.9. 4.7-4.8 seems to be the sweet spot. Low juice and temps. I’m not running direct die as I haven’t the bawlz to void the warranty. I’ll wait until it’s up before thinking about it. Much different on a soldered IHS. Popping off a 79XX was easy.


Yeah the perfect flat Signature V2 block is (ONLY) for using a lapped IHS, or a perfectly flat IHS. 

The Signature V2 with bow is designed to reach in and touch the die directly in the center portion of the waterblock. 

I almost F’ed up and bought the flat version..

As for warranty, my 7980XE is warranted until late 2022. But it doesn’t really apply anymore lol.

Ive delidded it and resealed it over and over again, and it has never had a problem. And now direct it’s all direct die! I love it. 


This 7980XE silicon isn’t too bad. 
4.6Ghz is 1.200
4.7Ghz is 1.243
4.8Ghz is 1.271
4.9Ghz is 1.315 (might can go slightly less)
5.0Ghz is 1.363


----------



## JustinThyme

Funny as Optimus said the flat was for flat IHS and direct die but if its working for you thats all that matters. I have a stock IHS on my 10980XE and so far the flat magnitude works the best. I just got a blem flat from Optimus but havent had a chance to try it out yet. The sig V2 worked better with the inner oring pulled out reducing the bow. Now things are different on my 9940X. Its good with the bow of the SigV2 and the stock set up of the Magnitude (both are too close to call a winner) The 79XX chip I have is a 7900X thats been delidded and LM applied instead of pigeon poop and IHS put back on. That sucker is HOT no matter what you do. Run it up to 5GHz and its pushing 100C. Before deliding I couldn't get past 4.6. After the 79XX series they all use the HCC die now. Im sure that was what caused the 7900 and 7920 to run hot, LCC dies. 7940 and up are HCC dies.

Im running a lot lower Vcores than you. I havent even bothered with less than 4.7. I jumped right to 4.8 then backed it off to 4.7 to stay with lower temps. Your 5.0 is just a hair more than my 5.1 at 1.360.
4.7 is 1.180 high 60s to low 70s
4.8 is 1.230 mid to high 70s
4.9 is 1.260 high 70s to low 80s
5.0 is 1.300 mid to high 80s
5.1 is 1.360 this puts me in the mid 90s though
Just updated to the 1004 Encore bios modded with newer microcodes and the temps went up a little. Still have 702 with older microcodes on the other BIOS but it doesnt work well with power profiles. Some of the cores will come down at idle but half stay at full speed. With the new BIOS all of them will come down to 1200.
I can probably get 5.2 but its going to take a good jump. I tried 1.380 and no dice. Dies loading windows with WHEA BSOD. Dont want to push it harder without better cooling which ill have soon. Adding MORA3 420 and if that doesn't do it a 1600W chiller keeping loop at ambient or slightly lower is next. Not going to fight condensation. Too much of a PITA. Been down that road some time ago with phase change. Fun for awhile then it gets old. Ran LN2 a couple of times but just not worth it to boot, get in a bench then shut down. At least the phase change was usable, just had to keep a close eye on it or lose a MOBO which is ultimately why I quit with it. Condensation will get you!!!


----------



## tps3443

JustinThyme said:


> Funny as Optimus said the flat was for flat IHS and direct die but if its working for you thats all that matters. I have a stock IHS on my 10980XE and so far the flat magnitude works the best. I just got a blem flat from Optimus but havent had a chance to try it out yet. The sig V2 worked better with the inner oring pulled out reducing the bow. Now things are different on my 9940X. Its good with the bow of the SigV2 and the stock set up of the Magnitude (both are too close to call a winner) The 79XX chip I have is a 7900X thats been delidded and LM applied instead of pigeon poop and IHS put back on. That sucker is HOT no matter what you do. Run it up to 5GHz and its pushing 100C. Before deliding I couldn't get past 4.6. After the 79XX series they all use the HCC die now. Im sure that was what caused the 7900 and 7920 to run hot, LCC dies. 7940 and up are HCC dies.
> 
> Im running a lot lower Vcores than you. I havent even bothered with less than 4.7. I jumped right to 4.8 then backed it off to 4.7 to stay with lower temps. Your 5.0 is just a hair more than my 5.1 at 1.360.
> 4.7 is 1.180 high 60s to low 70s
> 4.8 is 1.230 mid to high 70s
> 4.9 is 1.260 high 70s to low 80s
> 5.0 is 1.300 mid to high 80s
> 5.1 is 1.360 this puts me in the mid 90s though
> Just updated to the 1004 Encore bios modded with newer microcodes and the temps went up a little. Still have 702 with older microcodes on the other BIOS but it doesnt work well with power profiles. Some of the cores will come down at idle but half stay at full speed. With the new BIOS all of them will come down to 1200.
> I can probably get 5.2 but its going to take a good jump. I tried 1.380 and no dice. Dies loading windows with WHEA BSOD. Dont want to push it harder without better cooling which ill have soon. Adding MORA3 420 and if that doesn't do it a 1600W chiller keeping loop at ambient or slightly lower is next. Not going to fight condensation. Too much of a PITA. Been down that road some time ago with phase change. Fun for awhile then it gets old. Ran LN2 a couple of times but just not worth it to boot, get in a bench then shut down. At least the phase change was usable, just had to keep a close eye on it or lose a MOBO which is ultimately why I quit with it. Condensation will get you!!!


Yeah I run a older XOC bios from 2018 on my X299 Dark. It is version 1.07. The microcode is awesome though, temps are super cool. I have the newest bios on the board too, and when I flip the bios switch to test the newest bios v1.28 every now and then, I instantly see my cpu idles 8-9C warmer. Yeah just idling in the bios I have hotter temps. And the IPC is a tiny bit slower with the newer microcode (I think). So I stick to my xoc 1.05 or xoc 1.07 bios.

But yeah that’s actually what I purchased, a BLEM Optimus Signature V2. Amazing cpu block. Only $125 dollars. I couldn’t see any sort of blemish on mine. Maybe tiny imperfections on the cold plate (Tiny spots or discoloration in the copper around the edges where the cold plate wasn’t a perfect mirror finish) I could care less, it looked perfect to me.

I want one of those Koolance chillers. They are so expensive though, but easy and user friendly. But that would be my preference, ready to go with pumps and all pre-installed in a small package, if I were to purchase a chiller that’s what I would go for. I have another 2080Ti on my desk that I am gonna add to my system/loop in a few days. And it’ll heat this loop up even more.

Anyways, yeah it takes a lot of money to cool these chips down. As for 5Ghz, I just bench and game mostly. (Which is easy at 5Ghz)

Here is the info from Optimus website. I’d say you bought the correct one then. Because you can lap your 10980XE (since they’re soldered) and the flat Sig V2 would work out very well on that IHS.


----------



## JustinThyme

They obviously had some issues with the flat block and bare die, if you read in the thread it was introduced differently. I didnt even look at the page because they called out my name specifically on the standard not working so well on the 10980XE and blamed it on Intel having inconsistent IHS. Now go on the sig V2 page and it says "If you want the best CPU cooler for 10th gen and previous Intel CPUs, the Signature V2 is it." I have quite the collection of blocks. ATM the EK magnitude is mounted with the flat cold plate that isnt quite flat as its given me the best results on my sample of the 10980XE. I got the blem flat as the standard gave me better results with the inner Oring pulled but I think that reduces some pressure across the fins so Ill try the flat and see what happens although my IHS has not been lapped. The standard out of the box was only making contact across the middle edge to edge horizontally. So I also got the foundation to see if the acrylic top would have enough give to allow the cold plate to get better contact and it did. But out of the optimus blocks Ive put in the Sig V2 with Oring pulled performed the best on the 10980XE, 9940X worked fine as is out of the box although the contact pattern was similar but made it further across the IHS. 

I've not gone direct die in a very long time, as in that's what you had and nothing else, IHS didn't exist. I thought about it on my 7900X but too many horror stories of the direct die plates not working as they should and having to be modded as well as MOBOs CPU mounts corners cut off.


----------



## Jpmboy

tps3443 said:


> I have the Signature V2 with a bowed block for direct die use.
> 
> I ended up fixing the issue though. I removed the block again, then got my Q-Tip with LM on it, and I just rubbed the hell out of the silicon/die of my 7980XE with the Q-tip. (Then I wiped away the chunky soup looking contaminated LM that comes from rubbing the LM into the surface), then applied a little more fresh LM. I installed the waterblock again, and I am good to go! That one single core that was 96C dropped down to 60C. And the core that was 74C has dropped to 66C.
> 
> I think there was just a tiny bare spec/spot on the silicon that wasn’t coated/soaked in LM properly. Maybe the edge of the silicon, or a corner of the silicon just wasn’t properly coated.
> 
> Anyways, I set adaptive voltage of 1.200V with a offset of +135 and I set x50 multiplier for all cores, CPU booted just fine at 5Ghz with 1.358 volts.
> 
> 
> I have only looped R15 about 10 times, hottest core reached 79C at 5Ghz. I played rust for a few hours and all seemed ok.
> 
> ^ CPU is more than likely not stable lol. But I mostly just game at 1440P 165HZ. So it is definitely fun to play at 5Ghz on all 18 cores.
> 
> It is the summer time, and I do not own a water chiller. But I may be able to get this 5Ghz daily stable with some decent AVX offsets in place. It runs super cool (In realistic loads)
> 
> I will more than likely go for 4.9Ghz though, I have tested stability at 1.315V.


Hey bud, sorry for the late reply. (Hectic here lately) Yeah, LM application can be tricky as you know. You really need to "paint" it on very, very thin and remove any pools or blobs. Paint both surfaces really well as LM has very poor "wetting" properties (thermal bond line formation). The V2 block is a good one. One thing about Q-tips... a single cotton fiber can blow the whole LM application whether a delid or direct-die.
Lucky you! I tried a half dozen times to get an early production run of Roman's direct die kit to work. It must be my Apex. Never could get good contact. Sold it to a friend.
✌


----------



## tps3443

Jpmboy said:


> Hey bud, sorry for the late reply. (Hectic here lately) Yeah, LM application can be tricky as you know. You really need to "paint" it on very, very thin and remove any pools or blobs. Paint both surfaces really well as LM has very poor "wetting" properties (thermal bond line formation). The V2 block is a good one. One thing about Q-tips... a single cotton fiber can blow the whole LM application whether a delid or direct-die.
> Lucky you! I tried a half dozen times to get an early production run of Roman's direct die kit to work. It must be my Apex. Never could get good contact. Sold it to a friend.
> ✌


Yeah I was able to get the temps right. This thing runs super super cool now, with some very tight core to core temps. Running the Sig V2 on Der8auer direct die frame at 4.9Ghz is very solid so far. VRM’s on my X299 Dark with 100% fan speed during a sustained AVX 900 watt load are around 60-70C at the hottest areas. Hottest core never passes 81C. It is summer time too, so I think it’s good.

When I refer to Q-tip, I mean the black included Q-tips that come with LM kits lol. 

It is much easier running 4.9Ghz with (NO AVX offset with less voltage, than running straight 5Ghz with a -1 or even -2 AVX offset using more voltage) 

Also, I have a 2nd 2080Ti sitting on my desk for about a week now. Is it worth waterblocking it and putting it in my loop with my other water cooled 2080Ti?


----------



## JustinThyme

tps3443 said:


> Yeah I was able to get the temps right. This thing runs super super cool now, with some very tight core to core temps. Running the Sig V2 on Der8auer direct die frame at 4.9Ghz is very solid so far. VRM’s on my X299 Dark with 100% fan speed during a sustained AVX 900 watt load are around 60-70C at the hottest areas. Hottest core never passes 81C. It is summer time too, so I think it’s good.
> 
> When I refer to Q-tip, I mean the black included Q-tips that come with LM kits lol.
> 
> It is much easier running 4.9Ghz with (NO AVX offset with less voltage, than running straight 5Ghz with a -1 or even -2 AVX offset using more voltage)
> 
> Also, I have a 2nd 2080Ti sitting on my desk for about a week now. Is it worth waterblocking it and putting it in my loop with my other water cooled 2080Ti?


Is the 2080ti the same as the one you have? If so put that puppy in. I run 2x Strix 2080Ti 011G OC cards. You’ll need a Nvlink bridge for it that are getting hard to come by. One thing worth note is the bridge for the RTX 6000 quadro cards work perfectly on this platform. That’s what I went to when I put my cards vertical as no one else makes a 2 slot Nvlink bridge. Hated the Silver and green color scheme but nothing a little tape over the connections and a can of flat black plastic paint couldn’t handle. Some say SLI is dead. Depends on what you use it for. I use the compute power and have 50+ titles loaded for gaming that either support it natively or it can be forced using Nvidia Inspector. Some even work just by using an already existing profile. GTA V profile works in multiple games. It’s not that SLI is dead, far from it. It’s that game Devs don’t bother with adding the code for it. I heard the argument that Nvidia drivers won’t support it anymore as of Jan this year but I can tell you for certain I am running the latest drivers and it’s had no effect on SLI in the least. So if you have it already and want to use it and it’s a match for what you have then by all means put it in. If it’s not a match you may run into issues but it should run at the lesser of the two cards. I skipped 30XX as the only thing that beats a pair of 2080Tis is a pair of 3090s, anything less doesn’t have the capability. I’m not going to spend $4K+ MSRP (if you can actually get them for that) for two cards when both of my 2080Ti cards cost less than one.


----------



## tps3443

JustinThyme said:


> Is the 2080ti the same as the one you have? If so put that puppy in. I run 2x Strix 2080Ti 011G OC cards. You’ll need a Nvlink bridge for it that are getting hard to come by. One thing worth note is the bridge for the RTX 6000 quadro cards work perfectly on this platform. That’s what I went to when I put my cards vertical as no one else makes a 2 slot Nvlink bridge. Hated the Silver and green color scheme but nothing a little tape over the connections and a can of flat black plastic paint couldn’t handle. Some say SLI is dead. Depends on what you use it for. I use the compute power and have 50+ titles loaded for gaming that either support it natively or it can be forced using Nvidia Inspector. Some even work just by using an already existing profile. GTA V profile works in multiple games. It’s not that SLI is dead, far from it. It’s that game Devs don’t bother with adding the code for it. I heard the argument that Nvidia drivers won’t support it anymore as of Jan this year but I can tell you for certain I am running the latest drivers and it’s had no effect on SLI in the least. So if you have it already and want to use it and it’s a match for what you have then by all means put it in. If it’s not a match you may run into issues but it should run at the lesser of the two cards. I skipped 30XX as the only thing that beats a pair of 2080Tis is a pair of 3090s, anything less doesn’t have the capability. I’m not going to spend $4K+ MSRP (if you can actually get them for that) for two cards when both of my 2080Ti cards cost less than one.


My card in my system now is a 2080Ti FE with Samsung ram. (A bin) reference board.

The 2nd gpu on my desk is a 2080Ti XC Ultra with Hynix ram, (A bin) reference board

My 2080Ti FE is already flashed to the 380 galax bios, and I have 8 ohm resistors soldered and stacked. So it can manage up to 520 watts.

^ I would do the exact same thing to the other one too, if I run it. 

I just need a ekwb vector gpu block, and nvlink bridge. 

This is my PC. I also have a spare (2) slot I/O shield to replace the (3) a lot I/O on the XC Ultra card 2080Ti.






what is image hosting


----------



## JustinThyme

Dont know how that would work out but only one way to find out. With my Strix O11G OC cards they have Samsung Vram that clocks nicely. I ran the XOC BIOS, never did any shunt modding or soldering but did flash to the ASUS Matrix XOC BIOS that resulted in no power limits. In the end I was only able to squeeze another 15Mhz out of them and flashed them back to stock, Limitations of the lottery I guess but Ill take 2130 all day and with the Heat killer blocks they never pass 40C so never hit that first throttle point at 45C that knocks them back 15Mhz. 

Ive always had good results with Samsung but mixed on the Hynix. Its 50/50 at best. Had it on my 1080TIs and ran them alone before pairing them up and one Vram clocked higher than the other by like 300MHz. Put them together and they were bound by the lesser of the two. The pair I have now I got from Microcenter and are sequential serial numbers and run together perfectly.


----------

