About i9-9900 (non-K) Boost performance
About i9-9900 (non-K) Boost performance
Hello. Your setup is performing well with a stable 3.6Ghz boost clock while keeping temperatures under 60°C. The tweaks you've applied—boost power cap, core voltage offset, and cache voltage offset—seem appropriate for your i9-9900 processor. It looks like you're managing performance without exceeding safe limits. If you're aiming for slightly higher sustained speeds, consider fine-tuning other XTU parameters such as voltage scaling or thermal throttling thresholds. No need to push the CPU beyond its power ratings unless you want to explore advanced optimization. Let me know if you'd like guidance on specific settings!
Can you lower the power cap even more? Just keep pushing until your cooling system handles it. Intel doesn’t treat higher power limits as overclocking. Most hobbyist rigs are set to infinite power by default. Remember, Prime95 is an AVX task and often runs slower than regular code. Checking it out, your CPU can theoretically hit 4.6 GHz per core if no other restrictions apply. For instance, Cinebench R15 might need a higher limit.
Intel lists their power limits at the starting frequency. Staying under 65W won’t cause a performance jump. There’s no fixed "maximum power" rating, just maximum temperature. It’s normal to run at full capacity and still have over 50% more power usage during peak speeds. The restrictions exist only to help system designers adjust for weak power delivery and cooling needs.
Thanks for sharing your experience. Running with unlimited power caused temperatures to reach 98°C, which prompted you to stop P95 right away. After testing, you found a balance by setting the 140W long boost limit and keeping the 200W short boost at its default. With P95, you now achieve around 4.3Ghz at 77°C—still within a reasonable range. Your Cinebench results (4.6Ghz at 65°C, 4.5Ghz at 66°C) also show good performance. Everything seems to be working as expected.
The temperature of 98°C is within safe limits and can be handled without issue. I don’t really grasp why others get nervous about keeping their desktop processors just under the maximum threshold—most laptops, including some less powerful models like MacBooks, manage this consistently.
Prime95 is among the most demanding tasks for a CPU, producing significant heat compared to other programs. This is typical behavior. You can manage it using power limits as you have done before. For less intense jobs, limits are less likely to be applied. If the process finishes drawing the image, it indicates completion and is normal. The execution time varies based on the CPU speed. Cinebench R20 presents a tougher challenge than R15, which explains why clocks may run slightly slower. Achieving 4.6 with R15 suggests turbo has reached its full potential.
I thought the CPU would automatically turn off at T-junction 100C to avoid damage. It’s only about two degrees away from that point. The heat sink fan becomes quite loud when temperatures rise above 80°C. And the hotter it gets, the more likely hardware issues or failures become.
Indeed, my daily workload does not remotely approach the beating P95 doles out on the CPU. I was tinkering more out of curiosity and boredom. Thanks for your assistance, I'm getting a steady 4.5Ghz at 77C with power limit set to 140W and the cooler fan running silent. I'm happy with this outcome.
The system is managed by the motherboard, but usually it reduces performance to avoid overheating. On my new unit, possibly due to marketing pressure, it didn’t follow that rule and let the CPU hit 106°C without limiting or shutting down. After adjusting the BIOS settings, I set the maximum temperature to 98 and it now always behaves correctly.