Z390-F 9700k 4.9 seems like the limit (Got my 5Ghz!)

[Eclipt]

Greetings!

I've spent a few days playing around with the new Intel 9700k and will try to share my experience with some feedback expectations. I've got to a stable 4.9 non-AVX overclock on my chip, but trying 5GHz feels like a lottery failure. Cinebench crashes even with 1.36v LLC6 and I know this is already out of my cooling territory.

System
ASUS ROG Z390-F
Intel 9700k
Corsair h110i AiO intake pull 2x14
3x12 Deep Cool case fans
ASUS ROG RTX 2080
Kingston HyperX Predator 16gb
Samsung EVO 850 256gb
WD Black 1TB
WD Blue 1TB

Overclock Results
All cores stable at 4.9GHz and 4.7GHz AVX at 1.34V LLC4
Temps peak 81 during Cinebench (1586 score, 8 thread CPU)
Temps peak low 80s during XTU Benchmark (AVX) (this one is crazy, even my MB is screaming) (3130 score, 8 thread CPU)
Temps <70 on 3DMark and even lower in every day use (11 192 score, 8 thread CPU)

BIOS Settings
XMP 1 at 3200
Asus MultiCore Enhancement - OFF
BCLK 100
Sync all cores at 49 ratio
AVX Negative Offset 2
Load Line Calibration 4
Power/Current unlimited
Adaptive Voltage 1.34

Discussion
Feels like I wasn't too lucky in the lottery, given that I need so much voltage to get to 5GHz and going over 1.36 does not seem worth the additional cooling investment. Or do you guys feel that I could try some settings changes to get passed the 5GHz mark?

[Silent_Scone]

I wouldn't get hung up on trying to get 5GHz on all cores, not all CPU can achieve this. That said, LLC4 is likely too little. Try LLC6, although cooling will also be a factor here, too.

[Eclipt]

Silent Scone@ASUS wrote:
I wouldn't get hung up on trying to get 5GHz on all cores, not all CPU can achieve this. That said, LLC4 is likely too little. Try LLC6, although cooling will also be a factor here, too.

1.36v and LLC6 did not provide a stable non-AVX 5GHz and ended up in crashing Cinebench. And this would be already way out of my cooling zone. So seems like 4.9 is the optimal point of my chip and cooler 🙂

[HiVizMan]

Not to bad at all. The real world difference of 100Mhz is so small. Personally I prefer to have a rock solid system for 24.7 use


Enjoy your PC mate you have a very good set up there.

[JustinThyme]

Ive not tried a 9700K. Weird chip with no hyperthreading.
Cooling always plays a part in OC. Your temps arent bad at all. I hit close to the 100 mark at 5GHz on all 10 cores with a pretty beefy WC build. I keep mine at 4.8 GHz for daily use as that 200MHz needed a much higher Vcore and of course more heat. Same bench marks slightly lower performance but a 20C drop in temps.

[Eclipt]

JustinThyme wrote:
Ive not tried a 9700K. Weird chip with no hyperthreading.
Cooling always plays a part in OC. Your temps arent bad at all. I hit close to the 100 mark at 5GHz on all 10 cores with a pretty beefy WC build. I keep mine at 4.8 GHz for daily use as that 200MHz needed a much higher Vcore and of course more heat. Same bench marks slightly lower performance but a 20C drop in temps.

I went with 9700k as I mostly focus on gaming and don't really need a lot of threads 🙂 Also, for the same reason I have optimized another profile with 4.9GHz 1.33V LLC3, which keeps my stress temps even lower sacrificing AVX. Interestingly, with Adaptive 1.33V it pops to 1.34V sometimes, meaning I'm at stock voltage territory.

[Carlyle2020]

Eclipt wrote:

Discussion
Feels like I wasn't too lucky in the lottery, given that I need so much voltage to get to 5GHz and going over 1.36 does not seem worth the additional cooling investment. Or do you guys feel that I could try some settings changes to get passed the 5GHz mark?

Hi there,

would you mind posting a screenshot of HWinfos sensors? It will be a pain. you might have cut and copy it together.
It might help to determine where the bottleneck is.

Start HWinfo64 sensors only.
Run Your 4.9 Config and use ... cinebench 6 times before making the screenshot.
( If HWinfo64 will not show VRM temps can you access the VRM with your finger and touch it afterwards?)

Which PSU are you using btw?

No hyperthreading = less heat.
I would like to see such a chip reach at least 5Ghrz 🙂

Thanks in advance.

[Eclipt]

Heya, I was a bit away during the holidays 🙂

So I flashed my bios and redone my full overclock. I believe I have missed some settings which were interfering with my voltages. Now I finally feel that everything is right under control. And with all that, I have hit my stable 5GHz and dialed in two profiles:

1. 5GHz (4.7 AVX), 1.36v, LLC5, 85C XTU Stress Test
This seems super optimal as LLC5 gives a very close voltage under load. From 1.359v it drops to around 1.344v under full load (LLC6 overshoots quite a bit) and provides a stable system under stress testing. The super stressing AVX benchmark in XTU works well with a -2 offset to 4.7GHz at these settings. Furthermore, it is right with the the stock VID on Adaptive and no offset is needed here.

2. 4.9GHz (4.7 AVX), 1.31v, LLC5, 80C XTU Stress Test
I am considering this as a 24/7 profile, but I just don't find anything to be pushing my temperatures towards 80C with 5GHz in real world usage. Thus I am just keeping this as a backup. With LLC5 this goes to 1.296v under load, so I have no idea why some people are recommending LLC6 with this processor. Adaptive runs great at 1.305v with 1.36v and -0.050v offset.

[x-rated]

if voltage drops from 1,359 to 1,344 with LLC 5, then it is not full load 🙂
and XTU is not super stressing AVX benchmark 😄
try latest prime95 with avx enabled (by default) and run small FFTs for at least an hour 🙂

[Silent_Scone]

x-rated wrote:
if voltage drops from 1,359 to 1,344 with LLC 5, then it is not full load 🙂
and XTU is not super stressing AVX benchmark 😄
try latest prime95 with avx enabled (by default) and run small FFTs for at least an hour 🙂

Hi, without knowing the user's workload this is poor advice. No need hammering the CPU with current for 8 hours if the system is otherwise stable.