F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop Issues with the i5-9400f processor performance

Issues with the i5-9400f processor performance

Issues with the i5-9400f processor performance

Pages (3): 1 2 3 Next
S
Superjulo
Member
121
08-04-2016, 11:35 PM
#1
I'm just starting out with my i5-9400f. It has a boost clock listed as 4.1 GHz, which seems like single-core speed. But when I run Cinebench r20, none of the cores ever reach that number—they stay around 3.9 GHz or lower. I've used an aftermarket cooler and adjusted BIOS settings to lock the frequency at 4.1 GHz. I also increased the voltage, but nothing changed the boost behavior. Recently, I tried a BCLK overclock to see if it could help, but it didn’t affect performance beyond that point. When I cranked up the voltage, power consumption rose noticeably (from 40 to 60 watts), yet speed stayed the same. Where is the extra energy going?
S
Superjulo
08-04-2016, 11:35 PM #1

I'm just starting out with my i5-9400f. It has a boost clock listed as 4.1 GHz, which seems like single-core speed. But when I run Cinebench r20, none of the cores ever reach that number—they stay around 3.9 GHz or lower. I've used an aftermarket cooler and adjusted BIOS settings to lock the frequency at 4.1 GHz. I also increased the voltage, but nothing changed the boost behavior. Recently, I tried a BCLK overclock to see if it could help, but it didn’t affect performance beyond that point. When I cranked up the voltage, power consumption rose noticeably (from 40 to 60 watts), yet speed stayed the same. Where is the extra energy going?

M
Maxwell2010
Junior Member
16
08-05-2016, 01:43 AM
#2
For CPU frequency details, use CPU-Z version 2. Turbo settings include 4,100 MHz for single core, 4,000 MHz for two cores, 4,000 MHz for three cores, 4,000 MHz for four cores, 3,900 MHz for five cores, and 3,900 MHz for six cores—ensuring optimal performance.
M
Maxwell2010
08-05-2016, 01:43 AM #2

For CPU frequency details, use CPU-Z version 2. Turbo settings include 4,100 MHz for single core, 4,000 MHz for two cores, 4,000 MHz for three cores, 4,000 MHz for four cores, 3,900 MHz for five cores, and 3,900 MHz for six cores—ensuring optimal performance.

L
liliansweet92
Junior Member
22
08-06-2016, 01:12 PM
#3
Accept the details provided. Based on my observations, I believe Intel CPUs rarely reach their maximum single-core performance even when set to default levels. Probably only noticeable in Cinebench single-core tests, while actual applications tend to show limited gains beyond full cores.
L
liliansweet92
08-06-2016, 01:12 PM #3

Accept the details provided. Based on my observations, I believe Intel CPUs rarely reach their maximum single-core performance even when set to default levels. Probably only noticeable in Cinebench single-core tests, while actual applications tend to show limited gains beyond full cores.

R
Robospik3
Junior Member
18
08-06-2016, 04:39 PM
#4
It’s nearly unfeasible to run just one processor in Windows. The task manager will always rely on two or more, so using a single core feels like a dream come true
R
Robospik3
08-06-2016, 04:39 PM #4

It’s nearly unfeasible to run just one processor in Windows. The task manager will always rely on two or more, so using a single core feels like a dream come true

G
gamernuttcase
Junior Member
41
08-06-2016, 08:59 PM
#5
In short, the "4.1 Ghz boost" claimed by Intel is primarily promotional rather than a concrete technical improvement.
G
gamernuttcase
08-06-2016, 08:59 PM #5

In short, the "4.1 Ghz boost" claimed by Intel is primarily promotional rather than a concrete technical improvement.

E
EpicteatimeHD
Junior Member
18
08-06-2016, 09:13 PM
#6
AMD follows the same pattern. If you own a Z board and decide to tweak it, BCLK overclocking might give you a slight boost. I achieved around 4ghz on my 9400 (actually close to 3.98ghz). However, the jump from 3.8 to 4.1 is only about 200mhz—hard to notice.
E
EpicteatimeHD
08-06-2016, 09:13 PM #6

AMD follows the same pattern. If you own a Z board and decide to tweak it, BCLK overclocking might give you a slight boost. I achieved around 4ghz on my 9400 (actually close to 3.98ghz). However, the jump from 3.8 to 4.1 is only about 200mhz—hard to notice.

H
hrgriff
Senior Member
573
08-08-2016, 03:28 PM
#7
Closer to its maximum capabilities rather than its peak performance
H
hrgriff
08-08-2016, 03:28 PM #7

Closer to its maximum capabilities rather than its peak performance

H
126
08-09-2016, 01:00 PM
#8
It works perfectly, the issue lies with Windows.
H
HUNGERGAMEMARK
08-09-2016, 01:00 PM #8

It works perfectly, the issue lies with Windows.

S
Sheylizs
Member
81
08-09-2016, 09:09 PM
#9
It might handle additional tasks, though the main issue lies with Intel's restrictions
S
Sheylizs
08-09-2016, 09:09 PM #9

It might handle additional tasks, though the main issue lies with Intel's restrictions

X
xKPainZx
Junior Member
45
08-09-2016, 11:30 PM
#10
Some people can't afford the 9600K, so Intel offers the cheaper 9400F. Even though it's faster, you only get what you pay for.
X
xKPainZx
08-09-2016, 11:30 PM #10

Some people can't afford the 9600K, so Intel offers the cheaper 9400F. Even though it's faster, you only get what you pay for.

Pages (3): 1 2 3 Next