F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop 10920x 4.7 OC – Vcore not found in hwinfo / Safe vccin?

10920x 4.7 OC – Vcore not found in hwinfo / Safe vccin?

10920x 4.7 OC – Vcore not found in hwinfo / Safe vccin?

Pages (2): 1 2 Next
I
ITz_NoY
Member
240
10-04-2023, 08:29 PM
#1
I
ITz_NoY
10-04-2023, 08:29 PM #1

D
Dave1304
Member
180
10-05-2023, 12:51 AM
#2
CPU input voltage matches VCCIN. Cascade Lake behaves similarly to Skylake-X in this regard. Increasing it can improve VRM thermal performance at a minor CPU temperature rise. I’d suggest setting it around 2V if possible. To keep things low, maintain it just above the Vcore by 0.5V. Make sure your software is current.
D
Dave1304
10-05-2023, 12:51 AM #2

CPU input voltage matches VCCIN. Cascade Lake behaves similarly to Skylake-X in this regard. Increasing it can improve VRM thermal performance at a minor CPU temperature rise. I’d suggest setting it around 2V if possible. To keep things low, maintain it just above the Vcore by 0.5V. Make sure your software is current.

M
Minrin
Junior Member
13
10-05-2023, 06:03 AM
#3
Thank you for your prompt response. Updates on Mobo drivers, nzxt cam, and NVIDIA software are confirmed. I suspect a possible hwinfo update might be related to the missing vcore. It seems your voltages and values are within acceptable ranges. At 1.22 vcore, using 1.72 VCC appears preferable over 1.9 VCC.
M
Minrin
10-05-2023, 06:03 AM #3

Thank you for your prompt response. Updates on Mobo drivers, nzxt cam, and NVIDIA software are confirmed. I suspect a possible hwinfo update might be related to the missing vcore. It seems your voltages and values are within acceptable ranges. At 1.22 vcore, using 1.72 VCC appears preferable over 1.9 VCC.

R
Reltdeast
Member
151
10-09-2023, 08:23 PM
#4
VID indicates the voltage the CPU requests. I'm a bit unfamiliar with the X299, but it seems similar to Haswell's FIVR, where the final voltage adjustment happens on the CPU itself. VccIN is likely the power supply voltage for the integrated regulator. On non-FIVR CPUs, the core voltage comes from the motherboard's VRM, whereas a FIVR CPU relies entirely on the CPU for regulation. This implies only the CPU can display core voltage, the motherboard doesn't know about it. It should appear alongside core temperatures and VID in HWiNFO. It's possible Vcore follows VID directly here. /If I owned a CPU for my X299 Raider, I could check this/
R
Reltdeast
10-09-2023, 08:23 PM #4

VID indicates the voltage the CPU requests. I'm a bit unfamiliar with the X299, but it seems similar to Haswell's FIVR, where the final voltage adjustment happens on the CPU itself. VccIN is likely the power supply voltage for the integrated regulator. On non-FIVR CPUs, the core voltage comes from the motherboard's VRM, whereas a FIVR CPU relies entirely on the CPU for regulation. This implies only the CPU can display core voltage, the motherboard doesn't know about it. It should appear alongside core temperatures and VID in HWiNFO. It's possible Vcore follows VID directly here. /If I owned a CPU for my X299 Raider, I could check this/

T
ToxicBurek
Junior Member
6
10-11-2023, 06:54 AM
#5
Yes, the VID corresponds to the core voltage.
T
ToxicBurek
10-11-2023, 06:54 AM #5

Yes, the VID corresponds to the core voltage.

M
malanyg
Member
57
11-01-2023, 08:44 PM
#6
Perhaps you should consider using VID as Vcore input. The built-in voltage regulator performs better with VID readings than any separate VRM. Are you applying loadline calibration? Yes, most manufacturers provide standard values for this purpose. Undervolting VCCIN typically doesn't significantly boost efficiency—it's mainly about VRM cooling. At this stage, either value works well; the 10920x at 1.22V provides enough power without requiring high Vccin.
M
malanyg
11-01-2023, 08:44 PM #6

Perhaps you should consider using VID as Vcore input. The built-in voltage regulator performs better with VID readings than any separate VRM. Are you applying loadline calibration? Yes, most manufacturers provide standard values for this purpose. Undervolting VCCIN typically doesn't significantly boost efficiency—it's mainly about VRM cooling. At this stage, either value works well; the 10920x at 1.22V provides enough power without requiring high Vccin.

K
KidzBeEz
Member
242
11-01-2023, 10:57 PM
#7
Yes, maintaining the LLC Level 2 designation makes sense. The CPU performance data and the auto-save setting confirm your decision. It seems you made the correct choice.
K
KidzBeEz
11-01-2023, 10:57 PM #7

Yes, maintaining the LLC Level 2 designation makes sense. The CPU performance data and the auto-save setting confirm your decision. It seems you made the correct choice.

M
Marijntje
Member
149
11-03-2023, 02:50 PM
#8
The LLC is designed for a maximum of two levels. Going beyond that isn't advised since the system will handle the remaining capacity without exceeding limits.
M
Marijntje
11-03-2023, 02:50 PM #8

The LLC is designed for a maximum of two levels. Going beyond that isn't advised since the system will handle the remaining capacity without exceeding limits.

B
byZeto
Junior Member
42
11-03-2023, 04:41 PM
#9
LLC Level 2 out of 8 feels a bit off. Under the "turbo mode parameters" (power limit, time window, VR current), are you aiming to push performance to its maximum? I recall der8auer suggesting this approach for the 8700k and it paid off well. Regarding VR fault management and efficiency settings, do you need adjustments on the second screen? Thank you for your patience and questions!
B
byZeto
11-03-2023, 04:41 PM #9

LLC Level 2 out of 8 feels a bit off. Under the "turbo mode parameters" (power limit, time window, VR current), are you aiming to push performance to its maximum? I recall der8auer suggesting this approach for the 8700k and it paid off well. Regarding VR fault management and efficiency settings, do you need adjustments on the second screen? Thank you for your patience and questions!

T
TheMinemee
Junior Member
26
11-18-2023, 06:25 PM
#10
You may mention raising it to level 5 LLC. Yes, fault should be automatic along with the cases that lack power or current limits. Power phase control can reach its maximum capacity.
T
TheMinemee
11-18-2023, 06:25 PM #10

You may mention raising it to level 5 LLC. Yes, fault should be automatic along with the cases that lack power or current limits. Power phase control can reach its maximum capacity.

Pages (2): 1 2 Next