Adjusting performance beyond specifications for the i9 10900K
Adjusting performance beyond specifications for the i9 10900K
Hey everyone, a couple of days back I got my i9 10900K, but it seems like I missed the silicon lottery with this one, hehe. I managed to hit around 5.1 GHz with decent stability (just solid in games) at 1.36 volts using load line calibration 4. I also pushed the ring bus frequency from 4.3GHz to 4.6GHz, but that was the max I could reach. Many folks have reported stable 5.2 GHz on this model, so maybe my setup isn't unique? In my case, 5.2 isn't even reliable at 1.43V, so I didn’t push voltage further. I kept the VCCIO and CPU system agent voltages at their defaults, though they look a bit high to me. Just check this spec sheet: the default settings seem higher than what’s listed. Thanks for the help! P.S. In the photo I shared, my CPU’s VCCIO is 1.423V by default and the system agent is 1.52V, sorry about the low quality.
I'm sorry to hear that. My i7 8700k didn't perform well and caused a lot of frustration. During testing with i7 8700k, i7 8086k, and an i9 9900k, I noticed the biggest improvement came at 5GHz, with little gain afterward. I didn't reach 5.3GHz because my cooling wasn't sufficient. I suggest running some games at their default settings first—5GHz and 5.1—to compare frame rates. It might not be worth overclocking if Thermal Velocity Boost isn't effective.
Don't trust what you see online. The 5.2 figure doesn’t seem real, or it’s some kind of fake prize. 5.1 is the top bin on SL, and the "easy" OCs usually come with an AVX offset. Check out this link: https://siliconlottery.com/collections/c...1332728918. For the vccio, 1.3v PL is 1.15v or 1.2v—hard to say about the Z490 agent. I’m using the same RAM as you do (CL16 4000 TFaw 280, 1.45v works fine). It won’t speed up much beyond that unless you need 32GB. Also, if your GPU is drawing 300W and CPU 300W, you might be stressing your PSU—so I’d lower the OCs a bit.