Put in full featured £500 board with £200 tuned ram. Invest a chunk in cooling. Down clock CPU. Some Fix 🤷 Hopefully some "dreaded" bios updates will resolve the issues satisfactorily for all.
If people are going to buy a 13900/14900kS they better have a custom loop and be knowledgeable on what they are doing in the BIOS. These are overclocking CPUs.
@@hadleys.4869 this is special case, 14900ks is degrading too fast even not under overclocking. i know people fine with 13900k/14900k but not with 14900ks.
This just goes to show that everyone is biased, I'm sure Frame Chasers truly believes he's neutral and data driven but man these are the blind spot he doesn't see. It's okay to admit you're an intel shill and/or AMD disliker.
His whole business model would become irrelevant if he was to promote AMD CPUs since you don't really manually tune those beyond doing a curve optimizer which is 30 min testing and even a baby can do it. Shilling for Intel is part of the business to sell his overclocking "services".
He has a point about the 1% dips on the 7800X3D being terrible vs the 14900k @t very high refresh gaming (only really effects e-sports) BUT the 7800X3D is the more stable, reliable, WAY!!!!!!! lower powered, low heat plug and play CPU that is the better option for 99% of gamers. the new 9800X3D will continue that unless the new intel chip is something special. Both companies are dodgy :) both products have issues.. you need to figure out the best of the two.
Exactly. I use this account whenever I make posts related to Intel as a way of being up front with people. I know my bias, but I also know that the points I make and ideas I share are valid.
not sure i agree with the 33% user error statement, this shit is supposed to just work, cant expect all pc customers to be framechasers discord members. Lets say you do high level 3d editing or whatever stresses the cpu, you just wanna buy a high end PC and get to work and not waste time and money playing around with voltages and what not
@@kramnull8962 Yeah don't remind me of how many times I've had to update my BIOS over the course of 3 years just to get a stable system. The AMD experience.
One if the problems is professional users buying gaming motherboards because they are cheaper, when they should be getting workstation motherboards, especially if doing professional work for a living.
You say 33% Intel, 33% Mobo, and 33% User. However, this is 110% Intel's fault. Intel gives vague baselines, which both ASUS and Gigabytes version of "Baseline" is different. Intel don't care and give motherboard no limits which has the following Intel wants to compete with AMD, so they don't give clear limits to Motherboard companies. Then motherboard companies compete with each other, so they push their luck in 'default' as this is where most benchmarks are done. This is 110% without a doubt intel's fault. I don't know how your not getting that, 99.9% of the world isn't going to understand that 'default' in this case is actually overclock mode.
I'm chilling here with my boomer 10900k. I want to thank people on both the Intel and AMD side for alpha and beta testing these new limits and technologies.
I remember when my friend got a 10900K 3090 like it was yesterday, do think that was 4K well spent. 12900KF 4090 I have is actually fine (I did turn off MCE with all this going on to be safe). None of my 12th gen rigs have issues, I was thinking of upgrading them but then this all came out. I had read before the crashes in some reviewers machines, so clearly it wasn't like nobody knew outside of the enthusiasts that something was a bit off. I waited a bit for things to mature though AM5 motherboards had their issues with power limits also. I do think the motherboards should have more options assuming a baseline default and then have some enthusiast options. 12th gen it's been a separate issue with DDR5 tuning and speeds.
I just set my 13900k to offset of -25mV, turned on XMP on 7200Mhz DDR5, and set vdroop to lvl4, on MSI tomahawk z790, no issues since release of the CPU, over a year now?
I had a 13900k with a similar undervolt no issues (until I tried to delid it and broke it), and a 14900k now on a -0.055v using 5.5p 4.1e and had no issues and still get C23 all core score of 38,500 (and at ambients around 25c highest core is not going much about 90c). Maxes out 1.3v and only uses about 220w. There's no way this issue should exist, the 13900k and 14900k could be super stable and very efficient but the chase for pointless cinebench points.. doing 5.6p/4.4e you're only getting another ~2500 cores but wasting anywhere from 50 to 170 more watts
So glad I don't have to deal with AMDips because my Intel CPU just works. Might be unstable after a few months and it's Intels fault, who cares it just works. Maybe a huge mess and motherboard vendors can't figure out what to do, but it just works. I guess it kinda doesn't work, but whatever it's better than trying to convince myself that AMDip isn't a thing.
If you google CPU results or benchmarks, and see "Userbenchmark" just flag it as unrelevant, etc. Eventually it'll get removed from front page recommendations.
2:15 the Intel copum is real. Maybe you should be less bias. You claim at 0:48 that your community had/has a fix for this for some time. What's that, using the stock Intel Baseline, getting less or maybe equal to 7800X3D and 7950X3D performance? Just from your tone, I'll bet you've got a Intel branded boot next to your office door you kiss every day. AMD won the performance crown this round, maybe Intel can come back with a fixed arch and new design next time. The reason you don't have GN, der8aur, HU, etc levels of subscribers or funds, are due to their testing methods being as unbiased as possible....unfortunatly for you, your bias is visible to all. People aren't as dumb and gullible as you'd wish.
he manages to find enough fools to earn himself some bread and butter. I think many people carry bias towards amd from fx era and look for someone who would support their views. this dude deserves a meme status like that of the userbenchmark
@@MoltenPie I had a FX 8350 a while ago because it's all I could afford. I have a 5900X (maybe 7950X or 3D variant soon) and 7900XTX. My home server is a Xeon and Quadro setup. I use what works. Yes, the FX was a disaster, but the way FC is, he ostracizes anyone who doesn't march lock'n step with him.
The guy is an idiot who uses clickbait titles to farm his clicks. Look at his latest vid, he basically doesn't even mention AMD. What he doesn't understand though is that it still doesn't work to pull in views as like you said, he is extremely biased and doesn't produce factual content. He just blabbers on and on about Nvidia and Intel are the best and AMD are bad, Intel just works till intel doesn't just work then he tries to shift the blame. I have no idea why people even come to him for info at all as he has very little knowledge on OCing as well... Which is what he is apparently a pro at. There have been streams where he claims a CPU is stable and it crashes instantly upon loading anything but Warzone lmao, so not stable at all.
So when Intel said that unlocked limits are in spec they lied? Intel is dirty for throwing the mb manufacturers under the bus for this one after they said if the is no limits its all good just dont touch the multipliers.
intels limits are 253w when boosted. they didnt restrict the mobo manufacturers on this and they are boosting upwards of 350w with voltage spikes at like 1.6 or 1.7 to make their motherboard seem better than others. everyone on youtube was aware of this from the get go through their power consumption tests. so the motherboard manufacturers are overclocking the cpu's and intel is looking the other way because it makes their product look better. what should happen is that the limit should always be 253w out of the box with stock clocks, and the user should oc it themselves if they want to. i think it would only be 10% user error on this because of all the information on it, the rest is split between intel and the board partners.
Ian Cutress: One of the things we’ve seen with the parts that we review is that we’re taking consumer or workstation level motherboards from the likes of ASUS, ASRock, and such, and they are implementing their own values for that PL2 limit and also the turbo window - they might be pushing these values up until the maximum they can go, such as a (maximum) limit of 999 W for 4096 seconds. From your opinion, does this distort how we do reviews because it necessarily means that they are running out of Intel defined spec? Guy Therien: Even with those values, you're not running out of spec, I want to make very clear - you’re running in spec, but you are getting higher turbo duration. We’re going to be very crisp in our definition of what the difference between in-spec and out-of-spec is. There is an overclocking 'bit'/flag on our processors. Any change that requires you to set that overclocking bit to enable overclocking is considered out-of-spec operation. So if the motherboard manufacturer leaves a processor with its regular turbo values, but states that the power limit is 999W, that does not require a change in the overclocking bit, so it is in-spec.
It's 100% Intel's fault by allowing AIB Board partners free reign to "Unlock limits" for their specific bios. If intel would've made it clear about their spec sheets, and what was within safe parameters, then we wouldn't be having this problem.
@@timothygibney159 Actually, no. They're enabled by default. That's why CPUs are performing far beyond Intels' spec because it's simply plug and play. All these higher end boards have what's essentially unlimited package power draw from the CPU set by default, everything on auto. This is due to Intel being negligent in their arrogance thinking their chips can handle whatever AIB partners deem suitable for their boards. When in reality, it's pushing far outside of reasonable spec for these chips. So Intel is fully responsible for this. The partners simply followed what Intel told them.
@timothygibney159 I know. The board sets the power, while the CPU draws what said board allows. Intel specifies 307A - 253W base profile limit is safe, with 400A - 320W in the extreme profile for KS chips only. The problem is that Intel never instructed them to stay within those limits for the K or KS series. So they essentially removed most of said limits by default, resulting in our current predicament. At the end of the day, Intel is responsible for instructing AIB partners as to what is reasonable but still within spec.
@timothygibney159 and AMD never intended their chips to operate long-term at 95c. That's the maximum temperature allowed that is considered "safe" before throttling. Intel is even higher at 100c - 115c.
@@scottstamm7022 They were bad. I remember them being better at Intel limits but prime 95 still had threads with errors. No CPU should be that hard to get stable out of the box. They are back with the supplier and I have my money back thank goodness.
Thats not really a fix that just locking the cores so it isnt triggered as much the fix is. PL1/PL2 isnt the main issue and is just a red herring Asus/Gigabyte/MSI etc have been playing fast and loose with Load Line (LLC) + AC/DC Load Line with asus being by far the most agressive Load Line Spec (LLC) 1.100 mOhm (Standard or Normal) DC LL Same as LLC 1.100 mOhm (So Reported power is correct) AC LL Same as DC LL 1.100 mOhm (but a superior board design can lower this so trust your manufacturer default for this 0.600 mOhm 13900k 0.700 mOhm 12900k Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite AX) I have Heard of some Asus Boards using 0.28 mOhm for AC LL which i think is way to low and the cause of alot of problems coming from asus that is just crazy low and the vrm load line just cant keep up at times e.g. if i set my AC LL to 0.500 mOhm from what gigabyte auto set 0.600 mOhm i will also be crashing so gigabyte are already pushing the boat out and are close to the edge at 0.600 mOhm nevermind what asus are setting lol Droop is there for a reason I have been manually setting mine to spec above leaving Gigabyte to set AC LL on my 13900k + 12900k with unlimited pl1/pl2 both are rock stable the 13900k scores 41200 with Cinebench R23 Passes 24 hours karhu with fpu load / Prime 95 AVX Small FFT etc etc..
You're correct. I have an unstable 13900K running on an Asus ROG Maximus Z690 Hero. Problems began about 3 months ago, out of the blue. None of the "common" tips worked for me: setting Intel's stock power limits, disabling ASUS MCE, down boosting, setting the boost at a fixed number, turning up or down the Vcore offset, etc. None stopped the crashes until I learned, by miracle, about the LLC and adjusted variables there. I'm negotiating with Intel for a refund, not being easy. And by the time I began troubleshooting the i9, I had already been reading and troubleshooting everything else. Very frustrating, time consuming and I can tell most users won't go through all this or even have an idea of how to...
What do you mean they allowed it?? Of course they did, that’s what an unlocked CPU is for. This ain’t happening on their locked CPUs. There is no way intel could stop it without disabling OC or locking the voltage in the on chip firmware. Then whole enthusiast community and OC dies. In my opinion this is 100% on mobo manufacturers, intel gave them the limits and they chose to ignore. The mobo manufacturers have all these specs 1-2 years before a chip hits market. They have engineering samples etc. there is no excuse.
I still don't understand this instability...If the CPU/motherboard auto-downclocks according to a) temps b) current (amps), c) total power draw (current x voltage) then how could there be any instability...even if, say, you have a terrible cooler...I still don't understand this whole thing.
“It Just Works”… i really enjoy your content Jufes but man lets get real for a sec … if there was another AMD thing you’ll be acting like a clown dude… just saying 😅 don’t get me wrong here
@@leoariasyt Because this has only recently came to light? the ryzen issue was due to high soc voltages its no different here HIGH stock vcore is degrading cpu's to be honest its mainly due to terrible auto oc or mce.
@@TheBURBAN111 AMD did actually have the exact same issues. Luckily they're fixed now and my 7800x3d build went very smooth overall. CPU also doesn't use anywhere near the amount of power any of the high end Intel CPUs are using. Unless you're doing video editing or some kind of very compute heavy tasks I don't see why you'd want an intel CPU for just gaming, you get 2.5x the power draw, and +30C for less frames and double the price lol
@@timothygibney159 And who's fault is it that they don't ? th-cam.com/video/OdF5erDRO-c/w-d-xo.html Steve from HUB and GN have been talking about it for like 5 years now and Intel ignored it
This worked surprisingly well. Previously I undervoted the CPU as shown by others, which worked to reduce temps. But when I saw the cpu always trying to boost to 6Ghz I tried the method in the video. I had to increase the voltage by a bit (1.35v in stress test as opposed to the 1.30v before), but the cpu now runs 10C cooler in games with no loss to performance at all, since it could have never reached 6Ghz in game (or even at desktop) with the settings before.
What about 14700K? Mine degraded in 3 months running at fixed clock/voltage, no power limits. 13700K in the other machine works fine without any signs of degradation for 6 months now with the same mobo and bios settings.
Are you sure your CPU is degrading? Check your thermal paste. My 13900kf isn't hurt by variable voltage. It's seen from 1.6 to .638, had it since they came out and had worse cooling than most replying here. Some thermal pastes like MX-4 can separate and let part of your CPU get real hot. Same with liquid metal if you run a heavy load for a long time the hot spots can oxidize dry and not cool well enough. Suspiciously high temps are a good clue. And higher temps need more volts for the same clocks, which isn't degradation. Reapplying fixes the LM, but bad thermal paste will keep separating so just go with something different.
@@rluker5344it degraded, it wasn't stable even at 5.3 with HT disabled and +0.50mv offset. It also wasn't stable on another PC. I already RMA it and got a replacement that works fine for a few weeks now.
@@auritro3903 i7s don't have the high single/double core boosts that i9s have. Which is a bit of evidence in support of the fix suggested in this video.
7:50 or maybe, you use the tools they gave you, and adjust VF Curves (Asus) and ACLL + LLC, to fix transient stability while also maintaining control of all core voltage.
SHOCKER the dude selling $2k cpus is blaming the users. None of this is our fault. It’s their fault for knowing and letting it happen just for benchmarks. And if the government had a backbone against corpos this wouldn’t happen
🤣. Weak man weak....if you are in your house you are the king. Even if she is the queen....she still needs the approval of the King. Otherwise you are her 🐝 yatch. What happened to all you "men". Pathetic. Don't twist my words either. My wife is my partner. She's told me I'm the only man she's ever felt safe around. Because get this I'm actually masculine....put her in her place when needed, and thus she knows I'll do it when she needs protection from some creep. Your gal doesn't respect you. It's that simple. I see divorce in YOUR FUTURE. Now listening to this in public or at someone else's house that's different.... respect their boundaries as you'd want yours in your castle. However the moment you as my King let others run your kingdom and make decrees..... You are no longer king....so you to gave your crown to the queen. Good I'm luck with that
I frankly love the F Bombs because it's a break from the normal TH-cam standard channels. I asked him one time why his channel doesn't show more subscribers and he said it's because he curses, and TH-cam has his channel kind of gimped. So, he doesn't get money. His gets his stuff mostly free form his die hard discord fans who send him stuff and he sells bundles and all that. He should have over a million subs easily but its always stuck at the same number. Hés honest and that's why I like his channel. He tells it like it is.
I just capped temps at 70c. Done and dusted. Too many people want their hand held when almost every answer to most problems is right there in front of them.
Undervolting and lowering clock speed to a realistic all core level or something is usually a better idea than lowering your Thermal Junction limit, you will just throttle your clock speeds when you hit 70c instead of 100/110c right?
@@liamm8518 Im older and dont need to live on the bleeding edge. It works for me and I dont notice a performance issues. My point was that there are easy solutions other than blaming the internet.
Not really....you think it's a lot by UT at most it's less than 5 to 10 fps in games in most cases. Stability is the name of the game. Having 110fos for 30 min or 97fps for hours on end....the answer is obvious.
I can confirm that they are definatly, at a minimum, having qc problems. I bought my first 14900ks two weeks ago. First boot I cleared the cmos then enabled xmp. Couldnt run a single game from first boot. Even when enabling intel limits (on my board, ASRock Z790 Riptide Wifi, Load Intel Power Limits the PL1=253 and Pl2=253) I still could not run a single game. I was able to get it to run somewhat stably by limiting the current to 350amps. This would limit the watts to around 200 on this chip. I still would have a random bsod until I got my replacment chip today. Once again I cleared the cmos enabled xmp and intel power limits for first boot. Everything runs perfectly cinebench and all games. Cinebench only hits 80c.
Got the same board with a 14900k but cant even run xmp stock no matter what. Occt linpack crashes, not even trying VST yet. Cpu cant handle the slightest undervolt. Shit is driving me insane.
What Frequency are you running the Chip at ? 5. what ??? I had to take my 14900KS out and put my 13900K back in until I could reevaluate what was the solution, because it worked fine for about 2 days then started crashing in all games with Direct X issues and then Blue Screens. I didnt know how to correctly lower the power setting and to what value in the BIOS and so just got frustrated with it and swapped it out. But after much research on TH-cam as to how to set it up correctly I will try again. Im gonna run it at 5.7 to start with and set the caps on the Voltages to 253 and set the core voltage at 1.425 just like the 13900K. Basically if that works then add a little more to find where the sweet spot for temps and voltage are at. I dont think with my 360MM cooler I will get much more than 5.8 if even that. I need to get the Arctic 420MM cooler. The BIOS rating on my cooler says it sucks to be honest.
Single threaded boost literally doesnt matter outside of marketing. All apps use 3+ threads and youll never see the single core boost speeds anyways. All core oc has always been the actual cpu performance indicator.
@@yosixxxfrequency and core count affects IPC. Cripple either one and ipc goes down. This “fix” is bullshit - real world is crippled by this imo. Meanwhile all load will have the same issue. Simple real fix is to cap pl1 and pl2 - ideally adjust alc llc - I do agree it’s a vrm issue - only factually information provided
Thanks for covering! Might be old news for y'all but this 14900K is my first Intel CPU in over a decade. So far set BIOS to enforce all limits, got 253W and 415 (IIRC) amps on PL1 and PL2 and slight undervolt and I've only had like one crash in the 4 or 5 days since I did it.
Stability test always. You just mentioned you undervolted. Did you make sure your undervolt is stable. Crashes can happen for a lot of reasons outside of the CPU. Is XMP applied? Can you chip and MB handle your XMP? I've found more issues regarding high unstable XMP profiles not liking the IMC or the MB than with any CPU core voltages.
@@battlephenom8508 I got rid of the undervolt, went back to default settings, then enabled "enforce all limits" and put sync all cores to 57. I'm using stock XMP setting for my RAM. I got a Maximus Hero Z790 and Corsair Dominator Platinum 7200mhz 16GBx2 RAM.
@cemsengul16 exactly yea and this is happening on auto profiles which are enabled by default... so obviously the normal user who isn't tuning their i9 or i7 isn't going to realize that or mess with settings that cause instability let alone any bios setting. The majority of people I talk to across the gaming community aren't bios tuners (or even enter the bios outside initial installation) like me lol and I'm assuming you.
I just set all cores to x59 and leave x60 single core boost on two cores and use TVB. Set LLC until stable then I look at temps under gaming loads and cap it if necessary. Got it capped at 90c at the moment, just to make sure it doesn't pass that. It usually stays way below that anyway, but it's just for peace of mind. Lose a bit of performance at the absolute top end, but if I am just gaming then I only really care about that.
not at all, when you oc your system youre setting the voltages yourself. my 13900k has never had any issues. i oc ram and cpu and 0 issues. i have a msi motherboard. i oc'd mine myself though but still the same. you also set cores like in vid when oc'ing. mine are set to 5.7 or 5.8 i believe. been a minute for sure
i don't like this video.... mostly as you seem to lack in depth knowledge about some functions and features by what i picked up on. This is not 50 50 this is 100% intel. The reasons: * They don't have clear power limits. * they did not test this properly before marketing to Partners, media & clients. This is simply the case of their silicon yet again falling short of their own expectations and them embellishing to make it look like it did meet expectation. I am glad this is happening. This might just be what they need to go back to the drawing board and make something actually good instead of just overclocking everything to oblivion.
Hey, I have heard that decreasing current limit to 288 from 512 (on z790) will help prevent degradation. Is this true? Edit: I looked further into the matter and it seems 400A is recommended spec, and given Power = Amps*Volts, it seems mathematically sound assuming an average of 1.3v.
I just always assume stock setting are garbage. Just quickly locked in the all core frequency and set a negative offset voltage while I was waiting for my IceMan direct die block to arrive. Went from stock pulling 430 watts at 1.5v in Cinebench R23 and pegging 100c before to now seeing 1.2v vcore under load pulling less than 300w and sitting in the high 70's c getting a better score. While gaming its sitting in the high 40's to low 50c range using close to the same power draw as my 7800x3d. Using the MSI z690 Torpedo EK X motherboard monoblock in a custom loop along with the Alphacool Eisblock 4090 waterblock and two 360mm Corsair xr5 radiators. I'm more than happy with it now and I kind of don't feel like taking it all apart to delid the CPU and run the direct die block anymore.
This doesn't work on my 14900ks. It was one of the first things I tried when I got it. What happens is when I set 59x all core in the bios, for whatever reason voltage drops a lot (like 100mv) and then the CPU isn't stable at all anymore. This is on a white Apex with the 2102 bios.
Hopefully this works. I got a I9 12900k 690 ASUS rog stix mb and some days trying to play warzone the game or the pc will crash while loading and some during games
GL. Am stable 12900KF 4090 Z690 Asus TUF Gaming Wifi (have 2 of them total for each rig), I turned off MCE. My DDR5 speeds aren't what they should be but it's stable on latest BIOS. Am sure someone more knowledgeable could tune everything better.
the thing I don't like about this solution is it wastes power and generates more heat than it should. in theory boost is the smart way of handling dynamic load on the CPU, only boost those cores that are under heavy load and let the rest to run slow. that way the cpu saves power. Power throttle shouldn't be disabled by default, also the max time the cpu can consume extra power shouldn't be disabled. Default should be all 100% stable.. and let the user modify the BIOS if they have the knowledge.. but as Judus says, manufactures just want to be at the top of the chart (auto overclock should be just a 2-3% performance boost, not a 10%, that's crazy unsafe)
i can agree about user error being there, but 33%??? NAH gtfo most ppl dont know how to EVEN CHANGE THE Hz ON A MONITOR, WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THEYD GO INTO BIOS AND OC OR SOMETHING????????????????????????? NOWADAYS PPL DONT WANA BREAK THEIR PC AT THAT PRICE RANGE SO..........THEY..........WILL........... NOT...........GO..........INTO.......BIOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! bro that take is hella dumb, i can be NICE and say 15% MAX and 7.5% Min user Error
Yay have no idea how good 11th Gen is cuz of those fooltubers, but also. You guys should know that cache is requiring more voltage than the cores, it's actually the cache you need to set min to auto, max to all core sync at load - 10 bin for cache. Auto ring down. Faster ddr xmp = more cache voltage needed
I add 20-30mv to my L2 cache and it has made my chip more stable with no noticeable extra heat. There are a lot of sections to these chips and when the whole thing starts pulling 300+ watts there may be some vdroop going on in some unintended places. Good to check more than just the cores when tracking down a problem. And that 11th gen has been buried away in tests ever since Alder came out.
@@redclaw72666 nah it's better with gear 1 than anything else out there. 350- 480 fps in cod me compared to AMD 245-315. You probably have not used it, just like those monkey head render squads who don't even play games
@@rluker5344 noobtubers refuse to admit it's good cuz they "already said it was bad" as quoted. But as a user of it, it blows everything out of the water in terms of frame times . My numbers don't lie, but noobtubers do
i have a mo ra fan 42O and its run at 27 ° (pic max 1 sec 6O° ) . if you buy a bugatti motor you should buy the bugatti colling systeme with it . simple like that
I donno Jufes, it’s like everyone got used to being spoon fed their OC, AI extreme tweaker, turbo boost etc. The reality is that not one person that knows how to OC would run into this issue. First thing we do is disable c-states, turbo, speed step all that crap. We lock the frequency to 100mhz above the all core and lock voltage to 1.4 and see if she boots. Then start working to find the sweet spot between mhz and voltage based on our cooler and what temps we are comfy with. The one thing everyone and you as well forgot is to manually set the voltage. The Auto setting is putting in WAY more volts than required. My MSI mobo was feeding my 12600k 1.42v at stock. I run 1.3v with a +200mhz all core OC. So guys, for the love of god set your voltage to manual as well. No need for 1.4+ volts running stock all core. You are putting in an extra 10-15c for no reason.
I know you are paid by intel, but Fault is 100% INTEL, im telling you this bc cpu's shouldn't come as squeezed as they come from factory, motherboard does a little voltage and oc but if cpu didn't come so much overclocked stock we wouldn't have issues whatsoever.
We're talking about unlocked chips, correct? What do people buy unlocked Intel chips for? Overclocking and undervolting, right? How are you, under that presumption, not able to hop into bios and click one button "Enforce all limits" considering when you first boot the system it takes you to bios anyways. Furthermore, there's 100's of guides out their to tune and OC your unlocked chip. This isn't complicated and really isn't new for intel. You got a bunch of braindead noobs that just want to plug and play and are willing to throw their old 240-280mm AIO on there and call it a day and then cry foul when things don't work like they did in the review they watched. So, not 100% Intel's fault. You are accountable for understanding what it is your buying and any requirements it may need to function as expected.
@@battlephenom8508 you need to understand that if intel wanted they would overclock their chips to the max prior to launch just so people get more performance vs competition, thats exactly what they did but the problem is that in some cases there is no more room and K lets you change multiplier, it doesn't mean that you have oc headroom in your chip. Problem is Intel 100% they pushed it to the limit of voltages and motherboard manufacturers just give a little more or less, but it was already at its limits, the K era is gone anyway. Nowdays someone can pay for the best get it built and don't understand anything about hardware or overclocking, they buy the best to have the best experience, they don't need to know how to mess with settings! Also regarding issues with temps, problem is 100% Intel again bc 14000 series is 12000 series with serious overclock on top, nothing more, intel couldn't make another evolution in time to compete so they squeezed all they could like 11000 gen, this is bs 300/400w cpu is insane and not needed as amd has same performance if not better with 1/5 of power consumption. When you buy a v12 biturbo your expecting it to work without any more tune, but you can tune it if you like ofc.
after we sync all cores..... what we do with multicore enhancement ? let's bios optimize or disabled enforce all limits? .. for me i dont have any issue i use let's bios optimize
What do all AMD fans like to say? "I use AMD and have no issues"? :)) I can say the same thing with my 12700K PC, from day one: 0 issues. Having something that just works all the time, play some games and enjoy it is the best for me in the PC space. Yes, it just works.
lol I can say it with my i7 6700k 🤣 My guess it intel is using “bad”bins which can’t handle these volt/freq/ etc…. They can’t promise you OC right? People buy these unlocked products to use it for OC but I guess no one included Intel can’t promise you it will eventually work as it should my guess yeah it sucks and I really think that Intel should release these products with better bins so eventually these unlocked products work as it should. I really want to know if good bins is affected too hope that somebody will test that soon, that’s going to answer a lot of questions for us
My 1290KF & 12700KF have no issues (probably best I didn't upgrade and read news, except for people who really know what they are doing). I assume the 12400F on B760M works too but haven't used it in a while. Not hugely concerned as the older machines will also just work, my 9600K should have been a 9900K but live and learn. Only issues I've had for 12th were ram speed/tuning even with QVL kits.
I work in physics research. I'm the guy that everyone leans on for thermal solutions. I design and machine my own CPU and GPU blocks. My knowledge of cooling CPUs had me guessing that this issue is often times the customers fault. Other times it's Intel's based on the crap I've seen underneath their IHSs. The motherboard BIOS updates constatnly changing power management is another red flag. I fully agree with you.
Funny how its user error but the b760 and non k chips get wrecked the same with the stock cooler not able to cool them. The power limits should be set by default but they are not.
The intel chips still downlclock and park as per normal. I thought the same thing until I f'ed around with a 13700K. The thing idles and does regular PC stuff cooler and quieter than my PBO tuned 5900X did. I have same power usage as my 5900X did in targeted 120fps gaming- if not less with similair if not better thermals. Now when all cores are fired up, yeah, 253W is where it will sit as opposed to like 160W on my 5900X, but that's shader comp and goes by faster.
Thanks guys I have a 13900K but the socket pins are bent so it doesn't even post. Before that damn thing would easily jump up to 100C and it started giving me BSOD. Pretty sure the chip is also fired too. If I get it running again I will definitely use this trick. Hopefully it's not complicated to to setup with an MSI motherboard. @@Greez1337
Thanks guys I have a 13900K but the socket pins are bent so it doesn't even post. Before that damn thing would easily jump up to 100C and it started giving me BSOD. Pretty sure the chip is also fired too. If I get it running again I will definitely use this trick. Hopefully it's not complicated to to setup with an MSI motherboard. @Greez1337 @@Greez1337
@@Abstrahues MSI mobo's are probably my fave Bios. Just do what Ivan reccomends and don't set the all core too high. Power limits be kept sensible. Another thing is also SA voltage, i heard some people say raising this helped them sometimes - I had to raise it for Memory tuning. I have it limited to 1.29, as this was for memory tuning. But if you're chip s really jacked up, who knows... nothing might work.
I locked my 13900k at 5.7. I tried to tweak it out, but everything would cause it to crash, so I locked it at 5.7 and set everything else to auto. I couldn't tweak my ram, so I have that on auto as well. My cpu is delieded and can do 5.8 but because of all these issues coming up I keep it at 5.7. Its my cod gaming pc and temps dont go over 65 with 200 fps and up on 1440p.
Benchmarks and games are different. Although shader compilation does use all cores in most games,beyond that games hardly use all the cores much to such a high usage its not the same as a benchmark.
@@thelittledetailscr7231 Turbo is for making graphs look good benchmarking apps. Boost is a benchmark gimmick essentially for being the top of some graphs but only a few percent,..., in games specifically.. many cores are activated making the boost downclock anyway. So use a fixed allcore clockspeed instead over boost, enjoy less voltage and heat no matter the workload. My fixed allcore 5.0 vs 5 2 is 4%, can't even tell without a measurement. But much cooler and less voltage needed, also no crashing.
@@kramnull8962 idk man AMD has been great for me. Built my first budget PC with a 2600x and now just built a 7800x3d build, both boot up in like 15 seconds. All the issues I've had have actually stemmed from Nvidia lol, used DDU like 5 times within the last two weeks
I think the mobo makers are even worse about it because they have to go to extremes to stand out when they have to run the same CPUs, the same chipsets, and same memory as the competing AIBs. Mobo makers are also the ones putting those settings in place _out of the box._ This leans even harder on the user that _doesn't_ know what they're doing because they expect stock settings to be stable. At what point do you expect Intel to mommy their AIBs? It just screams AMD fanboism to place this solely at Intel's feet like HUB did when there's so many other viable bitches to have with Intel. Blaming Intel alone is equivalent to blaming a gun store for selling a gun that someone committed a crime with later.
Nah man, I'm pretty pissed about this fiasco and not even sure if my 14700k is affected, so far I've undervolted -40mv and capped 240/253W PL1/PL2. Blaming intel is equivalent to blaming the gun manufacturer for not warning users to not use over-pressured rounds when ammo manufacturers try to sell you over-pressured rounds as regular ammo to make you think that your gun shoots faster velocities/hit harder when in fact the receiver/barrel can't realistically handle these rounds on a repeated basis for a long time. Either it'll explode on your face as end user or it'll degrade/jam/malfunction in the near future when realistically, these guns can last almost a lifetime.
@@kamizerox Both of those instances are fixed with basic common sense. My 14700k is set at -50mv and 253, but that was to keep thermals in check while stress testing all core workloads. Not because of being scared of the 4000watt boogieman. It's still the mobo maker that left everything unlimited out of the box. Which is why I blame them. (Which I'll note MSI _didn't_ do unlike Asus) I've had zero issues and the more than a few other 13th and 14th gen systems I've built haven't either. I'm sure it's a real issue, but if it was anywhere near what it's being exaggerated as you'd have had customers up in arms 2 years ago. You just have too many kids that don't know what they're doing throwing together systems without testing them for thermals and stability.
If they can blame AIBs for frying up Zen 4 CPUs, then we can also blame AIBs for jacking up the voltages for Intel 14th gen. It's crazy how there's a double standard, like freaking GamerNexus rushed out a damage control video ASAP for AMD lol
AM5 was released after intel lga 1700. Your option was AM4 or the newer Intel LGA 1700. Those of us who bought into intel, I would think, was a good decision, at that time. AM5, which followed, had problems and still has problems? So, we stick with what we have and wait for more stable, better performing set ups in the future. I'm not losing any sleep over any of this. I'm more irate about being betrayed by AMD with my Threadripper investments.
I've come to realise Cinebench is a restarted benchmark. The benchmark is calculated after the first run, there is no chance for these CPU's to thermal soak, the benchmark means nothing in every day usage.
you'd have to use a custom setting to have Cinebench run at 10 minutes or 30 minutes. You can do this with CB r23 and 2024. r15, r20 and older versions are one and done.
You can see all the scores. Stick CB on 30min loop and watch scores drop over time. New PL1 and PL2 setting dropoff is pretty annoying if you're doing anything all core.
Can anyone recommend me settings for acoustic noise mitigation on an Asus Dark Hero motherboard on latest bios? I don't understand the true/false fast or slew rate shit.
I always had sync all cores but it was still unstable. I had to set the SVID Behavior to Intel’s Fail Safe on my 14900K on the Apex Encore. Boom stable. I think my 14900k is just a bad copy.
@@yosixxx It's quite high, between 1,348 and 1,515 when I play games. Temperatures are around 70c. If that's too high for 24/7 and it dies then I'll do an RMA lol
@@Grumpy_DNA I would just undervolt it until its maximum 1.38v gaming loads. If its not stable in all core workloads you can try higher llc. It wont die but you risk certain degradation over long term
let's buy 700 usd unlocked cpu, then underclock it to cap it and make sure less bluescreen appears
at this point why buy i9, just get an i7 or ryzen
Put in full featured £500 board with £200 tuned ram. Invest a chunk in cooling.
Down clock CPU.
Some Fix 🤷
Hopefully some "dreaded" bios updates will resolve the issues satisfactorily for all.
If people are going to buy a 13900/14900kS they better have a custom loop and be knowledgeable on what they are doing in the BIOS. These are overclocking CPUs.
@@hadleys.4869 this is special case, 14900ks is degrading too fast even not under overclocking. i know people fine with 13900k/14900k but not with 14900ks.
This just goes to show that everyone is biased, I'm sure Frame Chasers truly believes he's neutral and data driven but man these are the blind spot he doesn't see. It's okay to admit you're an intel shill and/or AMD disliker.
His whole business model would become irrelevant if he was to promote AMD CPUs since you don't really manually tune those beyond doing a curve optimizer which is 30 min testing and even a baby can do it. Shilling for Intel is part of the business to sell his overclocking "services".
He has a point about the 1% dips on the 7800X3D being terrible vs the 14900k @t very high refresh gaming
(only really effects e-sports) BUT the 7800X3D is the more stable, reliable, WAY!!!!!!! lower powered, low heat plug and play CPU that is the better option for 99% of gamers. the new 9800X3D will continue that unless the new intel chip is something special. Both companies are dodgy :) both products have issues.. you need to figure out the best of the two.
Exactly. I use this account whenever I make posts related to Intel as a way of being up front with people. I know my bias, but I also know that the points I make and ideas I share are valid.
@@Zoomborg Of course AMD works fine out of the box *proceeds searching how to fix core-parking on 7950X3D* lol
not sure i agree with the 33% user error statement, this shit is supposed to just work, cant expect all pc customers to be framechasers discord members.
Lets say you do high level 3d editing or whatever stresses the cpu, you just wanna buy a high end PC and get to work and not waste time and money playing around with voltages and what not
@@kramnull8962 Yeah don't remind me of how many times I've had to update my BIOS over the course of 3 years just to get a stable system. The AMD experience.
buy from dell then and not enthusiast products
There's non-K CPU variants for those who don't want to waste their time dealing with voltages.
it takes longer to type this comment than to just lock the cores at 5x ghz.
One if the problems is professional users buying gaming motherboards because they are cheaper, when they should be getting workstation motherboards, especially if doing professional work for a living.
I expected 66% AMD fault tbh.
Definitely intel's fault because they knew about it and did nothing until it blew up. And then they threw the mb vendors under the bus lol
and more than 33% 🤣🤣🤣🤣
You say 33% Intel, 33% Mobo, and 33% User.
However, this is 110% Intel's fault.
Intel gives vague baselines, which both ASUS and Gigabytes version of "Baseline" is different.
Intel don't care and give motherboard no limits which has the following
Intel wants to compete with AMD, so they don't give clear limits to Motherboard companies.
Then motherboard companies compete with each other, so they push their luck in 'default' as this is where most benchmarks are done.
This is 110% without a doubt intel's fault. I don't know how your not getting that, 99.9% of the world isn't going to understand that 'default' in this case is actually overclock mode.
I'm chilling here with my boomer 10900k. I want to thank people on both the Intel and AMD side for alpha and beta testing these new limits and technologies.
Right here with you. P-core e-core bull. Just set frequency, ring and voltages
I remember when my friend got a 10900K 3090 like it was yesterday, do think that was 4K well spent. 12900KF 4090 I have is actually fine (I did turn off MCE with all this going on to be safe). None of my 12th gen rigs have issues, I was thinking of upgrading them but then this all came out. I had read before the crashes in some reviewers machines, so clearly it wasn't like nobody knew outside of the enthusiasts that something was a bit off. I waited a bit for things to mature though AM5 motherboards had their issues with power limits also. I do think the motherboards should have more options assuming a baseline default and then have some enthusiast options. 12th gen it's been a separate issue with DDR5 tuning and speeds.
11900k over here…
10700k here. Holding out for zen 5 for my next upgrade🙏🙏
@@jamesrodriguez8899 I think I’m going to hold for the 16900k
"It just works" was a lie all along
hes paid by intel.
IT JUST WORKS 😂
Yap
@@pav1u his contract is for like 6 million a product release. that's why he sells bundles and dog doodoo memory.
Yall sound like real haters. Just go back to console and play your 30 fps games in peace ☮️
33% inter
33% mobo
33% user
1% Jufes
🤣
I just set my 13900k to offset of -25mV, turned on XMP on 7200Mhz DDR5, and set vdroop to lvl4, on MSI tomahawk z790, no issues since release of the CPU, over a year now?
That's about what I set mine to.
I had a 13900k with a similar undervolt no issues (until I tried to delid it and broke it), and a 14900k now on a -0.055v using 5.5p 4.1e and had no issues and still get C23 all core score of 38,500 (and at ambients around 25c highest core is not going much about 90c). Maxes out 1.3v and only uses about 220w. There's no way this issue should exist, the 13900k and 14900k could be super stable and very efficient but the chase for pointless cinebench points.. doing 5.6p/4.4e you're only getting another ~2500 cores but wasting anywhere from 50 to 170 more watts
Is youtuber fault, all suggesting remove PL limits, turn off C-States, turn on elevate performance energy profile, all bad for these CPUs.
😮 How dare you tell Jeffoos he's wrong for having you turn your 14900K 400W CPU into Chernobyl!
So glad I don't have to deal with AMDips because my Intel CPU just works. Might be unstable after a few months and it's Intels fault, who cares it just works. Maybe a huge mess and motherboard vendors can't figure out what to do, but it just works. I guess it kinda doesn't work, but whatever it's better than trying to convince myself that AMDip isn't a thing.
Userbenchmark is going to have a meltdown lmao😂😂😅
If you google CPU results or benchmarks, and see "Userbenchmark" just flag it as unrelevant, etc. Eventually it'll get removed from front page recommendations.
Nah, they'll just say AMD's neanderthal marketing army manufactured it all
It's definetly not user error, this stuff is supposed to 'just work' like jensen said.
2:15 the Intel copum is real. Maybe you should be less bias. You claim at 0:48 that your community had/has a fix for this for some time. What's that, using the stock Intel Baseline, getting less or maybe equal to 7800X3D and 7950X3D performance? Just from your tone, I'll bet you've got a Intel branded boot next to your office door you kiss every day.
AMD won the performance crown this round, maybe Intel can come back with a fixed arch and new design next time.
The reason you don't have GN, der8aur, HU, etc levels of subscribers or funds, are due to their testing methods being as unbiased as possible....unfortunatly for you, your bias is visible to all. People aren't as dumb and gullible as you'd wish.
he manages to find enough fools to earn himself some bread and butter. I think many people carry bias towards amd from fx era and look for someone who would support their views. this dude deserves a meme status like that of the userbenchmark
@@MoltenPie I had a FX 8350 a while ago because it's all I could afford. I have a 5900X (maybe 7950X or 3D variant soon) and 7900XTX. My home server is a Xeon and Quadro setup. I use what works.
Yes, the FX was a disaster, but the way FC is, he ostracizes anyone who doesn't march lock'n step with him.
The guy is an idiot who uses clickbait titles to farm his clicks. Look at his latest vid, he basically doesn't even mention AMD. What he doesn't understand though is that it still doesn't work to pull in views as like you said, he is extremely biased and doesn't produce factual content. He just blabbers on and on about Nvidia and Intel are the best and AMD are bad, Intel just works till intel doesn't just work then he tries to shift the blame. I have no idea why people even come to him for info at all as he has very little knowledge on OCing as well... Which is what he is apparently a pro at. There have been streams where he claims a CPU is stable and it crashes instantly upon loading anything but Warzone lmao, so not stable at all.
So when Intel said that unlocked limits are in spec they lied? Intel is dirty for throwing the mb manufacturers under the bus for this one after they said if the is no limits its all good just dont touch the multipliers.
intels limits are 253w when boosted. they didnt restrict the mobo manufacturers on this and they are boosting upwards of 350w with voltage spikes at like 1.6 or 1.7 to make their motherboard seem better than others. everyone on youtube was aware of this from the get go through their power consumption tests. so the motherboard manufacturers are overclocking the cpu's and intel is looking the other way because it makes their product look better. what should happen is that the limit should always be 253w out of the box with stock clocks, and the user should oc it themselves if they want to. i think it would only be 10% user error on this because of all the information on it, the rest is split between intel and the board partners.
Ian Cutress: One of the things we’ve seen with the parts that we review is that we’re taking consumer or workstation level motherboards from the likes of ASUS, ASRock, and such, and they are implementing their own values for that PL2 limit and also the turbo window - they might be pushing these values up until the maximum they can go, such as a (maximum) limit of 999 W for 4096 seconds. From your opinion, does this distort how we do reviews because it necessarily means that they are running out of Intel defined spec?
Guy Therien: Even with those values, you're not running out of spec, I want to make very clear - you’re running in spec, but you are getting higher turbo duration.
We’re going to be very crisp in our definition of what the difference between in-spec and out-of-spec is. There is an overclocking 'bit'/flag on our processors. Any change that requires you to set that overclocking bit to enable overclocking is considered out-of-spec operation. So if the motherboard manufacturer leaves a processor with its regular turbo values, but states that the power limit is 999W, that does not require a change in the overclocking bit, so it is in-spec.
It's 100% Intel's fault by allowing AIB Board partners free reign to "Unlock limits" for their specific bios. If intel would've made it clear about their spec sheets, and what was within safe parameters, then we wouldn't be having this problem.
Intel did give a spec. It’s disabled by default on all boards
@@timothygibney159 Actually, no. They're enabled by default. That's why CPUs are performing far beyond Intels' spec because it's simply plug and play. All these higher end boards have what's essentially unlimited package power draw from the CPU set by default, everything on auto. This is due to Intel being negligent in their arrogance thinking their chips can handle whatever AIB partners deem suitable for their boards. When in reality, it's pushing far outside of reasonable spec for these chips. So Intel is fully responsible for this. The partners simply followed what Intel told them.
@@joshuapicarello That’s the board the sets the power. Not the chip. AMD is bad too with 95c by design. I see lots of worn out chips ahead of
@timothygibney159 I know. The board sets the power, while the CPU draws what said board allows. Intel specifies 307A - 253W base profile limit is safe, with 400A - 320W in the extreme profile for KS chips only. The problem is that Intel never instructed them to stay within those limits for the K or KS series. So they essentially removed most of said limits by default, resulting in our current predicament. At the end of the day, Intel is responsible for instructing AIB partners as to what is reasonable but still within spec.
@timothygibney159 and AMD never intended their chips to operate long-term at 95c. That's the maximum temperature allowed that is considered "safe" before throttling. Intel is even higher at 100c - 115c.
I had to rma two 14900ks through instant instability. Others have been ok.
I'm sorry to hear. Try another but use the default Intel Baseline profile, maybe it'll fix your issue?
@@scottstamm7022 They were bad. I remember them being better at Intel limits but prime 95 still had threads with errors. No CPU should be that hard to get stable out of the box. They are back with the supplier and I have my money back thank goodness.
Thats not really a fix that just locking the cores so it isnt triggered as much the fix is.
PL1/PL2 isnt the main issue and is just a red herring
Asus/Gigabyte/MSI etc have been playing fast and loose with
Load Line (LLC) + AC/DC Load Line with asus being by far the most agressive
Load Line Spec (LLC) 1.100 mOhm (Standard or Normal)
DC LL Same as LLC 1.100 mOhm (So Reported power is correct)
AC LL Same as DC LL 1.100 mOhm (but a superior board design can lower this so trust your manufacturer default for this 0.600 mOhm 13900k 0.700 mOhm 12900k Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite AX)
I have Heard of some Asus Boards using 0.28 mOhm for AC LL which i think is way to low and the cause of alot of problems coming from asus
that is just crazy low and the vrm load line just cant keep up at times
e.g. if i set my AC LL to 0.500 mOhm from what gigabyte auto set 0.600 mOhm i will also be crashing so gigabyte are already pushing the boat out and are close to the edge at 0.600 mOhm
nevermind what asus are setting lol
Droop is there for a reason
I have been manually setting mine to spec above leaving Gigabyte to set AC LL on my 13900k + 12900k with unlimited pl1/pl2 both are rock stable the 13900k scores 41200 with Cinebench R23
Passes 24 hours karhu with fpu load / Prime 95 AVX Small FFT etc etc..
this has been the only fix to me as well not changing frequencies or pl1 pl2. Only fiddling with LLC & AC LL
You're correct. I have an unstable 13900K running on an Asus ROG Maximus Z690 Hero. Problems began about 3 months ago, out of the blue.
None of the "common" tips worked for me: setting Intel's stock power limits, disabling ASUS MCE, down boosting, setting the boost at a fixed number, turning up or down the Vcore offset, etc. None stopped the crashes until I learned, by miracle, about the LLC and adjusted variables there. I'm negotiating with Intel for a refund, not being easy. And by the time I began troubleshooting the i9, I had already been reading and troubleshooting everything else.
Very frustrating, time consuming and I can tell most users won't go through all this or even have an idea of how to...
@@wiccanTV it just works
Pretty sure you can blame intel for "factory overclocking" their CPU's so they don't look like a joke in benchmarks vs AMD
intel's fault, they allowed it.
The same way AMD CPUs burning up was AMDs Fault Right? Double Standard much?
@@NBWDOUGHBOY u weird
@@Ravenx217how is he weird?
@@horchatakevin because i never brought up amd and bro talkin like im his nemesis- idk him
What do you mean they allowed it?? Of course they did, that’s what an unlocked CPU is for. This ain’t happening on their locked CPUs. There is no way intel could stop it without disabling OC or locking the voltage in the on chip firmware. Then whole enthusiast community and OC dies. In my opinion this is 100% on mobo manufacturers, intel gave them the limits and they chose to ignore. The mobo manufacturers have all these specs 1-2 years before a chip hits market. They have engineering samples etc. there is no excuse.
I still don't understand this instability...If the CPU/motherboard auto-downclocks according to a) temps b) current (amps), c) total power draw (current x voltage) then how could there be any instability...even if, say, you have a terrible cooler...I still don't understand this whole thing.
Winter time, average: intel 14th gen 200W paired with 4090 or 7900xtx +-400W nice hot air. For the rest of the season u need to buy AC
Intel 🤮
ryzen 💪
“It Just Works”… i really enjoy your content Jufes but man lets get real for a sec … if there was another AMD thing you’ll be acting like a clown dude… just saying 😅 don’t get me wrong here
Yeah, Ryzen 7800X3D was a good purchase.
had the exact same issue at launch if not worse.. lol
@@TheBURBAN111 At launch, with intel is still happening... Lol ?
@@leoariasyt Because this has only recently came to light? the ryzen issue was due to high soc voltages its no different here HIGH stock vcore is degrading cpu's to be honest its mainly due to terrible auto oc or mce.
@@TheBURBAN111 AMD did actually have the exact same issues. Luckily they're fixed now and my 7800x3d build went very smooth overall. CPU also doesn't use anywhere near the amount of power any of the high end Intel CPUs are using. Unless you're doing video editing or some kind of very compute heavy tasks I don't see why you'd want an intel CPU for just gaming, you get 2.5x the power draw, and +30C for less frames and double the price lol
@@ezechieldzimeyor4541 Thank you, that's something that @theBURBAN111 Fail to understand.
Who are you kidding? 100% Intels fault.
He's a fan boy , did you expect anything else? If he says its Intel's fault people might stop buying his overpriced bundles
It’s the motherboards fault. These boards are over volted and watted by default out of spec
@@timothygibney159 Wrong!!
@@adi6293 show me a single board that runs in spec with Intel when you turn it on that is z790?
@@timothygibney159 And who's fault is it that they don't ? th-cam.com/video/OdF5erDRO-c/w-d-xo.html Steve from HUB and GN have been talking about it for like 5 years now and Intel ignored it
My 14900kf crashes on desktop with stock settings z690 unify x. Had to manually set it 5.6 ghz and load line 3 - now works 100%
1000% intels fault wtf u talking about??
"user error" What ?
you should have locked all core frequency. if you didn't it's your fault your cpu is crashing. amd is trash by the way
@@MoltenPie what
hahah glad i never fell into the intel cult. 7800x3d rocks!!
Only at gaming.
@@ZackSNetwork i do nothing but game. My phone does the office stuff 😀😄
This worked surprisingly well. Previously I undervoted the CPU as shown by others, which worked to reduce temps. But when I saw the cpu always trying to boost to 6Ghz I tried the method in the video. I had to increase the voltage by a bit (1.35v in stress test as opposed to the 1.30v before), but the cpu now runs 10C cooler in games with no loss to performance at all, since it could have never reached 6Ghz in game (or even at desktop) with the settings before.
What about 14700K? Mine degraded in 3 months running at fixed clock/voltage, no power limits. 13700K in the other machine works fine without any signs of degradation for 6 months now with the same mobo and bios settings.
Are you sure your CPU is degrading? Check your thermal paste. My 13900kf isn't hurt by variable voltage. It's seen from 1.6 to .638, had it since they came out and had worse cooling than most replying here. Some thermal pastes like MX-4 can separate and let part of your CPU get real hot. Same with liquid metal if you run a heavy load for a long time the hot spots can oxidize dry and not cool well enough. Suspiciously high temps are a good clue. And higher temps need more volts for the same clocks, which isn't degradation. Reapplying fixes the LM, but bad thermal paste will keep separating so just go with something different.
@@rluker5344it degraded, it wasn't stable even at 5.3 with HT disabled and +0.50mv offset. It also wasn't stable on another PC. I already RMA it and got a replacement that works fine for a few weeks now.
the only i7's that seem to be facing the issues are extreme overclocked ones; from what it seems the non-OC'd ones arent facing any problems
@@auritro3903 i7s don't have the high single/double core boosts that i9s have. Which is a bit of evidence in support of the fix suggested in this video.
So glad I bought the 7800x3d. 0 issues for almost an year now, $30 cooler and temps are always in check
7:50 or maybe, you use the tools they gave you, and adjust VF Curves (Asus) and ACLL + LLC, to fix transient stability while also maintaining control of all core voltage.
SHOCKER the dude selling $2k cpus is blaming the users. None of this is our fault. It’s their fault for knowing and letting it happen just for benchmarks. And if the government had a backbone against corpos this wouldn’t happen
How’s the $30,000 intel rigs doing in base performance😂😂😂😂
Thanks for not cursing as much. Girlfriend hates me if she hears you.
What a petty thing to be upset about..
🤣. Weak man weak....if you are in your house you are the king. Even if she is the queen....she still needs the approval of the King. Otherwise you are her 🐝 yatch.
What happened to all you "men". Pathetic.
Don't twist my words either. My wife is my partner. She's told me I'm the only man she's ever felt safe around. Because get this I'm actually masculine....put her in her place when needed, and thus she knows I'll do it when she needs protection from some creep. Your gal doesn't respect you. It's that simple. I see divorce in YOUR FUTURE.
Now listening to this in public or at someone else's house that's different.... respect their boundaries as you'd want yours in your castle. However the moment you as my King let others run your kingdom and make decrees..... You are no longer king....so you to gave your crown to the queen. Good I'm luck with that
I frankly love the F Bombs because it's a break from the normal TH-cam standard channels. I asked him one time why his channel doesn't show more subscribers and he said it's because he curses, and TH-cam has his channel kind of gimped. So, he doesn't get money. His gets his stuff mostly free form his die hard discord fans who send him stuff and he sells bundles and all that. He should have over a million subs easily but its always stuck at the same number. Hés honest and that's why I like his channel. He tells it like it is.
AMDip : 300 to 200 fps, GET SHITTED ALL DAY, ALL YEAR LONG
Intel : 300fps into blue screen, 33% USERS FAULT
WHAT AN INTEL SHILL
UNSUBBED 😂
He sells tuned Intel CPU/motherboard combos so what do you expect! AMD systems do not require this tuning so there's no profit to be had.
@@davidg2731 true tho
I just capped temps at 70c. Done and dusted. Too many people want their hand held when almost every answer to most problems is right there in front of them.
where you can do it on bios ?
Undervolting and lowering clock speed to a realistic all core level or something is usually a better idea than lowering your Thermal Junction limit, you will just throttle your clock speeds when you hit 70c instead of 100/110c right?
@@liamm8518 Im older and dont need to live on the bleeding edge. It works for me and I dont notice a performance issues. My point was that there are easy solutions other than blaming the internet.
and now you lost a lot of performance, nice.
Not really....you think it's a lot by UT at most it's less than 5 to 10 fps in games in most cases. Stability is the name of the game. Having 110fos for 30 min or 97fps for hours on end....the answer is obvious.
Thank you bro your a life saver just did what you said 5500 on 14700k no crashing insta fix. OMG weeks of BS and all I had to do was that.
For 14700k some cpus might have to drop to 5400 for stability
@@yosixxx Or just turn of shitty mce and auto oc.
The single core jumping up and down is not the fix.
The crashes mostly happen during shader build in Unreal 5, that is allcore max multithread.
I can confirm that they are definatly, at a minimum, having qc problems. I bought my first 14900ks two weeks ago. First boot I cleared the cmos then enabled xmp. Couldnt run a single game from first boot. Even when enabling intel limits (on my board, ASRock Z790 Riptide Wifi, Load Intel Power Limits the PL1=253 and Pl2=253) I still could not run a single game. I was able to get it to run somewhat stably by limiting the current to 350amps. This would limit the watts to around 200 on this chip. I still would have a random bsod until I got my replacment chip today. Once again I cleared the cmos enabled xmp and intel power limits for first boot. Everything runs perfectly cinebench and all games. Cinebench only hits 80c.
Got the same board with a 14900k but cant even run xmp stock no matter what. Occt linpack crashes, not even trying VST yet. Cpu cant handle the slightest undervolt. Shit is driving me insane.
Your L1 tdp is 150w on the ks it´s for your baseclock. L2 is indeed 253w for your boost clock.
What Frequency are you running the Chip at ? 5. what ??? I had to take my 14900KS out and put my 13900K back in until I could reevaluate what was the solution, because it worked fine for about 2 days then started crashing in all games with Direct X issues and then Blue Screens. I didnt know how to correctly lower the power setting and to what value in the BIOS and so just got frustrated with it and swapped it out. But after much research on TH-cam as to how to set it up correctly I will try again. Im gonna run it at 5.7 to start with and set the caps on the Voltages to 253 and set the core voltage at 1.425 just like the 13900K. Basically if that works then add a little more to find where the sweet spot for temps and voltage are at. I dont think with my 360MM cooler I will get much more than 5.8 if even that. I need to get the Arctic 420MM cooler. The BIOS rating on my cooler says it sucks to be honest.
Single threaded boost literally doesnt matter outside of marketing. All apps use 3+ threads and youll never see the single core boost speeds anyways. All core oc has always been the actual cpu performance indicator.
Not really, its mostly ipc. Not single core active but ipc.
@@yosixxx over your head and between your legs
@@yosixxxfrequency and core count affects IPC. Cripple either one and ipc goes down.
This “fix” is bullshit - real world is crippled by this imo. Meanwhile all load will have the same issue. Simple real fix is to cap pl1 and pl2 - ideally adjust alc llc - I do agree it’s a vrm issue - only factually information provided
Thanks for covering! Might be old news for y'all but this 14900K is my first Intel CPU in over a decade. So far set BIOS to enforce all limits, got 253W and 415 (IIRC) amps on PL1 and PL2 and slight undervolt and I've only had like one crash in the 4 or 5 days since I did it.
The fact that it crashed on 253 PL2 is insane
Stability test always. You just mentioned you undervolted. Did you make sure your undervolt is stable. Crashes can happen for a lot of reasons outside of the CPU. Is XMP applied? Can you chip and MB handle your XMP? I've found more issues regarding high unstable XMP profiles not liking the IMC or the MB than with any CPU core voltages.
@@battlephenom8508 I got rid of the undervolt, went back to default settings, then enabled "enforce all limits" and put sync all cores to 57. I'm using stock XMP setting for my RAM. I got a Maximus Hero Z790 and Corsair Dominator Platinum 7200mhz 16GBx2 RAM.
@@user-vsmsdos What's funny is on that power limit, it only reaches 5.2 ghz all core when stress testing in Cinebench.
Definitely do not agree with the user error part. It's on intel and the mobo manufacturers.
Yeah that's bullshit because the majority of users/customers are not tuners.
@cemsengul16 exactly yea and this is happening on auto profiles which are enabled by default... so obviously the normal user who isn't tuning their i9 or i7 isn't going to realize that or mess with settings that cause instability let alone any bios setting. The majority of people I talk to across the gaming community aren't bios tuners (or even enter the bios outside initial installation) like me lol and I'm assuming you.
@@Texastalon Yeah I don't do any tuning. I don't even know how to make tight ram timings etc.
I just set all cores to x59 and leave x60 single core boost on two cores and use TVB. Set LLC until stable then I look at temps under gaming loads and cap it if necessary. Got it capped at 90c at the moment, just to make sure it doesn't pass that. It usually stays way below that anyway, but it's just for peace of mind. Lose a bit of performance at the absolute top end, but if I am just gaming then I only really care about that.
Has this affected some of your clients since you overclock their systems really hard?
not at all, when you oc your system youre setting the voltages yourself. my 13900k has never had any issues. i oc ram and cpu and 0 issues. i have a msi motherboard. i oc'd mine myself though but still the same. you also set cores like in vid when oc'ing. mine are set to 5.7 or 5.8 i believe. been a minute for sure
Ryzen master is great for a baseline, then undervolt. No Amdip here.
My 13900KS has been shit gaming and this has been why. I've spent too much time fixing and not playing.
13900KS is bad for just gaming, just get a 7800X3D if you want to just game man
@@iLegionaire3755 not even close to true
i don't like this video.... mostly as you seem to lack in depth knowledge about some functions and features by what i picked up on.
This is not 50 50 this is 100% intel.
The reasons:
* They don't have clear power limits.
* they did not test this properly before marketing to Partners, media & clients.
This is simply the case of their silicon yet again falling short of their own expectations and them embellishing to make it look like it did meet expectation.
I am glad this is happening. This might just be what they need to go back to the drawing board and make something actually good instead of just overclocking everything to oblivion.
Hey, I have heard that decreasing current limit to 288 from 512 (on z790) will help prevent degradation. Is this true?
Edit: I looked further into the matter and it seems 400A is recommended spec, and given Power = Amps*Volts, it seems mathematically sound assuming an average of 1.3v.
I just always assume stock setting are garbage. Just quickly locked in the all core frequency and set a negative offset voltage while I was waiting for my IceMan direct die block to arrive. Went from stock pulling 430 watts at 1.5v in Cinebench R23 and pegging 100c before to now seeing 1.2v vcore under load pulling less than 300w and sitting in the high 70's c getting a better score. While gaming its sitting in the high 40's to low 50c range using close to the same power draw as my 7800x3d.
Using the MSI z690 Torpedo EK X motherboard monoblock in a custom loop along with the Alphacool Eisblock 4090 waterblock and two 360mm Corsair xr5 radiators. I'm more than happy with it now and I kind of don't feel like taking it all apart to delid the CPU and run the direct die block anymore.
This is what we need solid information.. good job I would like to add 12900k is doing 5.1 all core modestly.. thats what I have it at.. with low temps
This doesn't work on my 14900ks. It was one of the first things I tried when I got it. What happens is when I set 59x all core in the bios, for whatever reason voltage drops a lot (like 100mv) and then the CPU isn't stable at all anymore. This is on a white Apex with the 2102 bios.
Are the Asrock boards like the Nova having these issues?
Just bought a 14900k. Would setting a power limit (PL2) of 200 watts do the job or do I need to do what he does in the video?
Shoving high voltages to the cpu to market a high boost clock and get better score is stupid, misleading and lazy.
Hopefully this works. I got a I9 12900k 690 ASUS rog stix mb and some days trying to play warzone the game or the pc will crash while loading and some during games
GL. Am stable 12900KF 4090 Z690 Asus TUF Gaming Wifi (have 2 of them total for each rig), I turned off MCE. My DDR5 speeds aren't what they should be but it's stable on latest BIOS. Am sure someone more knowledgeable could tune everything better.
the thing I don't like about this solution is it wastes power and generates more heat than it should. in theory boost is the smart way of handling dynamic load on the CPU, only boost those cores that are under heavy load and let the rest to run slow. that way the cpu saves power. Power throttle shouldn't be disabled by default, also the max time the cpu can consume extra power shouldn't be disabled. Default should be all 100% stable.. and let the user modify the BIOS if they have the knowledge.. but as Judus says, manufactures just want to be at the top of the chart (auto overclock should be just a 2-3% performance boost, not a 10%, that's crazy unsafe)
i can agree about user error being there, but 33%??? NAH gtfo most ppl dont know how to EVEN CHANGE THE Hz ON A MONITOR, WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THEYD GO INTO BIOS AND OC OR SOMETHING????????????????????????? NOWADAYS PPL DONT WANA BREAK THEIR PC AT THAT PRICE RANGE SO..........THEY..........WILL........... NOT...........GO..........INTO.......BIOS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! bro that take is hella dumb, i can be NICE and say 15% MAX and 7.5% Min user Error
pro tip. if asus tjeck the vf curve category it show what voltage is needed for each frequenzy under full load :)
normal user should not have to deal with bios shit this is all intels fault.
What programs trigger this instability? My 13900kF has been fine for a year
Yay have no idea how good 11th Gen is cuz of those fooltubers, but also. You guys should know that cache is requiring more voltage than the cores, it's actually the cache you need to set min to auto, max to all core sync at load - 10 bin for cache. Auto ring down. Faster ddr xmp = more cache voltage needed
11th gen 🗑️🗑️🗑️
I add 20-30mv to my L2 cache and it has made my chip more stable with no noticeable extra heat. There are a lot of sections to these chips and when the whole thing starts pulling 300+ watts there may be some vdroop going on in some unintended places. Good to check more than just the cores when tracking down a problem.
And that 11th gen has been buried away in tests ever since Alder came out.
@@redclaw72666 nah it's better with gear 1 than anything else out there. 350- 480 fps in cod me compared to AMD 245-315. You probably have not used it, just like those monkey head render squads who don't even play games
@@rluker5344 noobtubers refuse to admit it's good cuz they "already said it was bad" as quoted. But as a user of it, it blows everything out of the water in terms of frame times . My numbers don't lie, but noobtubers do
@@Doshi-lp4tn11th Gen is slower than zen 3 stop the BS.
i have a mo ra fan 42O and its run at 27 ° (pic max 1 sec 6O° ) . if you buy a bugatti motor you should buy the bugatti colling systeme with it . simple like that
just buy a 7800x3d for a cheap price and your done men, why so difficult ?
Those things if setup properly can cool even a 14900KS without a delid. The mora are no joke.
@@bosco9028 but why ? Paying more for cpu, cooling material, knowledge too tune for 3% more fps ?
Just buy 7800x3d plug it and done ?
@@bosco9028 True man and you can keep it for life
"It just works" except it DOESN'T ;) If you have to "fix it" IT JUST DONES'T WORK ....
I donno Jufes, it’s like everyone got used to being spoon fed their OC, AI extreme tweaker, turbo boost etc. The reality is that not one person that knows how to OC would run into this issue. First thing we do is disable c-states, turbo, speed step all that crap. We lock the frequency to 100mhz above the all core and lock voltage to 1.4 and see if she boots. Then start working to find the sweet spot between mhz and voltage based on our cooler and what temps we are comfy with. The one thing everyone and you as well forgot is to manually set the voltage. The Auto setting is putting in WAY more volts than required. My MSI mobo was feeding my 12600k 1.42v at stock. I run 1.3v with a +200mhz all core OC. So guys, for the love of god set your voltage to manual as well. No need for 1.4+ volts running stock all core. You are putting in an extra 10-15c for no reason.
"Were here to play games not whine on the internet." I Absolutely Love This.
I know you are paid by intel, but Fault is 100% INTEL, im telling you this bc cpu's shouldn't come as squeezed as they come from factory, motherboard does a little voltage and oc but if cpu didn't come so much overclocked stock we wouldn't have issues whatsoever.
We're talking about unlocked chips, correct? What do people buy unlocked Intel chips for? Overclocking and undervolting, right? How are you, under that presumption, not able to hop into bios and click one button "Enforce all limits" considering when you first boot the system it takes you to bios anyways. Furthermore, there's 100's of guides out their to tune and OC your unlocked chip. This isn't complicated and really isn't new for intel. You got a bunch of braindead noobs that just want to plug and play and are willing to throw their old 240-280mm AIO on there and call it a day and then cry foul when things don't work like they did in the review they watched. So, not 100% Intel's fault. You are accountable for understanding what it is your buying and any requirements it may need to function as expected.
@@battlephenom8508 you need to understand that if intel wanted they would overclock their chips to the max prior to launch just so people get more performance vs competition, thats exactly what they did but the problem is that in some cases there is no more room and K lets you change multiplier, it doesn't mean that you have oc headroom in your chip.
Problem is Intel 100% they pushed it to the limit of voltages and motherboard manufacturers just give a little more or less, but it was already at its limits, the K era is gone anyway.
Nowdays someone can pay for the best get it built and don't understand anything about hardware or overclocking, they buy the best to have the best experience, they don't need to know how to mess with settings!
Also regarding issues with temps, problem is 100% Intel again bc 14000 series is 12000 series with serious overclock on top, nothing more, intel couldn't make another evolution in time to compete so they squeezed all they could like 11000 gen, this is bs 300/400w cpu is insane and not needed as amd has same performance if not better with 1/5 of power consumption.
When you buy a v12 biturbo your expecting it to work without any more tune, but you can tune it if you like ofc.
socket 1700 rip. and never walk back.start this socket,jump up problems.bios shit.pciexpres shit.black screen shit blue screen shit :D
so looks like your prefer CPU brand is bad as hell as the AMD counterpart
after we sync all cores..... what we do with multicore enhancement ? let's bios optimize or disabled enforce all limits? .. for me i dont have any issue i use let's bios optimize
So is ‘Apply all limits’ to Intel (253w) similar to syncing all P cores? Or would I do both? 14900KF
What do all AMD fans like to say? "I use AMD and have no issues"? :))
I can say the same thing with my 12700K PC, from day one: 0 issues.
Having something that just works all the time, play some games and enjoy it is the best for me in the PC space.
Yes, it just works.
lol I can say it with my i7 6700k 🤣
My guess it intel is using “bad”bins which can’t handle these volt/freq/ etc….
They can’t promise you OC right? People buy these unlocked products to use it for OC but I guess no one included Intel can’t promise you it will eventually work as it should my guess yeah it sucks and I really think that Intel should release these products with better bins so eventually these unlocked products work as it should.
I really want to know if good bins is affected too hope that somebody will test that soon, that’s going to answer a lot of questions for us
My 1290KF & 12700KF have no issues (probably best I didn't upgrade and read news, except for people who really know what they are doing). I assume the 12400F on B760M works too but haven't used it in a while. Not hugely concerned as the older machines will also just work, my 9600K should have been a 9900K but live and learn. Only issues I've had for 12th were ram speed/tuning even with QVL kits.
@@dianaalyssa8726 hear hear on the 9900K :))
I too have some regrets because I didn't get that and went AMD. Like you said: live and learn.
I work in physics research. I'm the guy that everyone leans on for thermal solutions. I design and machine my own CPU and GPU blocks. My knowledge of cooling CPUs had me guessing that this issue is often times the customers fault. Other times it's Intel's based on the crap I've seen underneath their IHSs. The motherboard BIOS updates constatnly changing power management is another red flag. I fully agree with you.
Awesome mate.
thanks for the info 😊
Funny how its user error but the b760 and non k chips get wrecked the same with the stock cooler not able to cool them. The power limits should be set by default but they are not.
How does this affect power consumption though? DOes that mean they will always be at 5.5GHZ even when not under load?
The intel chips still downlclock and park as per normal. I thought the same thing until I f'ed around with a 13700K. The thing idles and does regular PC stuff cooler and quieter than my PBO tuned 5900X did. I have same power usage as my 5900X did in targeted 120fps gaming- if not less with similair if not better thermals. Now when all cores are fired up, yeah, 253W is where it will sit as opposed to like 160W on my 5900X, but that's shader comp and goes by faster.
I have a fixed allcore on my 10th gen 10850K and at idle I see like 30watta with a fixed vcore voltage. (No downclocking)
Thanks guys I have a 13900K but the socket pins are bent so it doesn't even post. Before that damn thing would easily jump up to 100C and it started giving me BSOD. Pretty sure the chip is also fired too. If I get it running again I will definitely use this trick. Hopefully it's not complicated to to setup with an MSI motherboard. @@Greez1337
Thanks guys I have a 13900K but the socket pins are bent so it doesn't even post. Before that damn thing would easily jump up to 100C and it started giving me BSOD. Pretty sure the chip is also fired too. If I get it running again I will definitely use this trick. Hopefully it's not complicated to to setup with an MSI motherboard. @Greez1337 @@Greez1337
@@Abstrahues MSI mobo's are probably my fave Bios. Just do what Ivan reccomends and don't set the all core too high. Power limits be kept sensible. Another thing is also SA voltage, i heard some people say raising this helped them sometimes - I had to raise it for Memory tuning. I have it limited to 1.29, as this was for memory tuning.
But if you're chip s really jacked up, who knows... nothing might work.
I locked my 13900k at 5.7. I tried to tweak it out, but everything would cause it to crash, so I locked it at 5.7 and set everything else to auto. I couldn't tweak my ram, so I have that on auto as well. My cpu is delieded and can do 5.8 but because of all these issues coming up I keep it at 5.7. Its my cod gaming pc and temps dont go over 65 with 200 fps and up on 1440p.
I locked the frequency, but then I get lower performance benchmarks.
Benchmarks and games are different.
Although shader compilation does use all cores in most games,beyond that games hardly use all the cores much to such a high usage its not the same as a benchmark.
@SKHYJINX so then wouldn't that means it's more advantageous to not lock them? Let the games boost one or two cores?
@@thelittledetailscr7231 Turbo is for making graphs look good benchmarking apps.
Boost is a benchmark gimmick essentially for being the top of some graphs but only a few percent,..., in games specifically.. many cores are activated making the boost downclock anyway.
So use a fixed allcore clockspeed instead over boost, enjoy less voltage and heat no matter the workload.
My fixed allcore 5.0 vs 5 2 is 4%, can't even tell without a measurement. But much cooler and less voltage needed, also no crashing.
@@SKHYJINX Gotcha.
The amount of copium is honestly funny
How do I get in the discord?
13700k on MSI Z690-I. Love this rig.
I find this funny as u were JUST shitting on AMD a few months bk 😂😂in
@@kramnull8962 idk man AMD has been great for me. Built my first budget PC with a 2600x and now just built a 7800x3d build, both boot up in like 15 seconds. All the issues I've had have actually stemmed from Nvidia lol, used DDU like 5 times within the last two weeks
so sync all cores is better overall for temps or what ?
I think the mobo makers are even worse about it because they have to go to extremes to stand out when they have to run the same CPUs, the same chipsets, and same memory as the competing AIBs. Mobo makers are also the ones putting those settings in place _out of the box._ This leans even harder on the user that _doesn't_ know what they're doing because they expect stock settings to be stable.
At what point do you expect Intel to mommy their AIBs? It just screams AMD fanboism to place this solely at Intel's feet like HUB did when there's so many other viable bitches to have with Intel.
Blaming Intel alone is equivalent to blaming a gun store for selling a gun that someone committed a crime with later.
Nah man, I'm pretty pissed about this fiasco and not even sure if my 14700k is affected, so far I've undervolted -40mv and capped 240/253W PL1/PL2. Blaming intel is equivalent to blaming the gun manufacturer for not warning users to not use over-pressured rounds when ammo manufacturers try to sell you over-pressured rounds as regular ammo to make you think that your gun shoots faster velocities/hit harder when in fact the receiver/barrel can't realistically handle these rounds on a repeated basis for a long time. Either it'll explode on your face as end user or it'll degrade/jam/malfunction in the near future when realistically, these guns can last almost a lifetime.
@@kamizerox Both of those instances are fixed with basic common sense. My 14700k is set at -50mv and 253, but that was to keep thermals in check while stress testing all core workloads. Not because of being scared of the 4000watt boogieman. It's still the mobo maker that left everything unlimited out of the box. Which is why I blame them. (Which I'll note MSI _didn't_ do unlike Asus)
I've had zero issues and the more than a few other 13th and 14th gen systems I've built haven't either. I'm sure it's a real issue, but if it was anywhere near what it's being exaggerated as you'd have had customers up in arms 2 years ago.
You just have too many kids that don't know what they're doing throwing together systems without testing them for thermals and stability.
If they can blame AIBs for frying up Zen 4 CPUs, then we can also blame AIBs for jacking up the voltages for Intel 14th gen. It's crazy how there's a double standard, like freaking GamerNexus rushed out a damage control video ASAP for AMD lol
Yep. Its all about painting a narrative for Clicks and Views in turn Making Money. Its a Money Play.
Yep, that's been my first go-to setting since 10th gen.
You are a legend man...!!! Good stuff... 👍🏻
I swear it’s so easy i don’t know why people like to argue about everything
Most users don't purchase I9's
This channel caters specifically to high end users.
Hey Frame chasers I have a question do you know if the Nvidia 5090 will be compatible with 14 GEN i9 CPUs I hope you can reach out to me soon thanks.
This dudes space weed is amazing! Where can i get some? On his Discord?
AM5 was released after intel lga 1700. Your option was AM4 or the newer Intel LGA 1700. Those of us who bought into intel, I would think, was a good decision, at that time. AM5, which followed, had problems and still has problems? So, we stick with what we have and wait for more stable, better performing set ups in the future. I'm not losing any sleep over any of this. I'm more irate about being betrayed by AMD with my Threadripper investments.
I've come to realise Cinebench is a restarted benchmark. The benchmark is calculated after the first run, there is no chance for these CPU's to thermal soak, the benchmark means nothing in every day usage.
you'd have to use a custom setting to have Cinebench run at 10 minutes or 30 minutes. You can do this with CB r23 and 2024. r15, r20 and older versions are one and done.
@@m8x425 I think that just stress tested the benchmark is only calculated on first cycle eg not averaged
You can see all the scores. Stick CB on 30min loop and watch scores drop over time.
New PL1 and PL2 setting dropoff is pretty annoying if you're doing anything all core.
Intel dared mobo vendors to push enough power to cause problems so that's what they did.
So that means that Intel doesn't "just work"? I'm glad that I went with a R7 7800X3D, doing additional stuff on BIOS? optional.
msi its just turbo ratio and you set the turbo to 57 on all the turbo cores
Can anyone recommend me settings for acoustic noise mitigation on an Asus Dark Hero motherboard on latest bios? I don't understand the true/false fast or slew rate shit.
I always had sync all cores but it was still unstable. I had to set the SVID Behavior to Intel’s Fail Safe on my 14900K on the Apex Encore. Boom stable. I think my 14900k is just a bad copy.
make sure its not shoving 1.5v into your cpu
@@yosixxx It goes to 1.5 in idle but goes down under load. I have a custom water loop on it and the temps are absolutely alright. Its fine I guess.
@@Grumpy_DNA I advise you check voltage under gaming loads. Usually gaming voltage is quite high with stock llc and ‘intel failsafe.’
@@yosixxx It's quite high, between 1,348 and 1,515 when I play games. Temperatures are around 70c. If that's too high for 24/7 and it dies then I'll do an RMA lol
@@Grumpy_DNA I would just undervolt it until its maximum 1.38v gaming loads. If its not stable in all core workloads you can try higher llc. It wont die but you risk certain degradation over long term