Видео

😂😂😂😂😂😂

didnt ts die like 20 years ago(i played it on my mom's ipad like when i was 7)

Respectfully your settings are terrible. Docp is meant for amd.your running your cpu at extremely low performance. your ram should offer xmp not docp. Have you tried Asus memory pre sets for the ram? You can easily run your p core's at 5.7 (57) and e core's at 4.5 (45). I'm pretty sure just running stock f5 would give better performance than what you've set sorry if I sound harsh I'm seriously not trying to. Hope you don't mind.

Dude you have a 110 SP chip and with these settings you are just wasting it, i bet it can easily do 5.8GHZ all cores with 1.35v or maybe low and the fix voltage will also ensure it does not degrade. I delidded my CPU the day i got it. didn't even run it with stock IHS. The reaosn mine didnt degrade or had instability is because I locked it at 1.385v 5.8Ghz P cores and 4.6 E Cores and it has been running pretty good ever since. My sp score is just 100 so pretty sure yours can do much better at even lower voltgaes than mine

CarX Srt

I tried showing my nikkes to my mom once, i ended up with a slap on the face lol

I would never show my mom this lol.

C C C NC mmm mmm bbbb C C Vic N C

Your making too many changes bro this is not how to fix it

Hey, you don’t need any of these settings, they are all wrong. You have a good CPU, just cap the best two cores to 57x and set SVID to Trained. And use your VF Table, you should have max VF below 1.42xV, so you don’t have to worry with this Intel issue. I have an SP106 and I run 5.7x, LLC4, you’ll have an excessive overshoot set to 1. If you have a flat line set to a high LLC and try with Vcore Voltage, but again, you don’t need this. You also don't have any problem if you increase the CPU LLC Level to 2 and for example set COU input voltage to 1.85V, for example if you wanted to stabilize YC at 8400/8533/8600, which is not possible on a Hero Use MCE Enable remote all limits to 90, set PL1 and 2 to 253W, ICCMAX to 320A/340, IVR at 1.5 and enjoy your CPU. This configuration that are you showing in this video is worse than a 13700k.

0:10 this dude finger is faster than his SSD🤣🤣🤣

Intel beats AMD, good useful video thank you 👋

Great memories I assume 🎉❤

Nice chip, good bin 👍

Oi

VID table issues, ringbus issue, singlecore issue, you'r screwed, 5ghz you just could have bought i5 lol whats the point then in spending more?

I'm not a pro too, anyway i copy some settings like Overclock TVB, voltage load line lvl 3, svid to typical behavior and other settings that avoided Overclock boosts, i set the chip to asus profile and from 37.7 on cinebench23 i get now 38.3, also single core boosted from 2337 to 2349, on voltages max i get for now was 1.43, temperature package cpu 83C

Ain’t no way you would be a TBW main 😭😭😭 So good bru, keep going 🫶🏻

Good job mate, thanks for the video.

hi

in tweakers paradise that you said NOPE .you can actually go and set max vcore limits so your motherboard doesn't auto vcore shoot to the sky for no reason. your settings are rly bad optimised for performance, like a LOT . your llc at 1 have massive vdroop and terrible transient response.( 3to 5 depending the workload has the best transient response) also the settings for vrm efficiency has nothing to do with how much voltage the cpu receives but for how clean , fast and how stable will come. Your settings are for your motherboard's lifespan that actually never have issues if you got a decent motherboard. mosfets have temperature min limit to 115 if you check it😂 you can't set it lower!

6:21 with 110sp chip it should use best case scenario for svid behaviour. Unless the table is stupidly low or your motherboard has rly bad voltage regulation.

for people that are afraid to not degrade the chip i always advise them to do a manual vcore cpu overclock, step by step and see how their frequency steps scale with voltage until they find out where the cpu needs a lot more vcore for the next step in frequency. Thats the only way to see if you're falling off the efficiency curve of your silicon quality and also you know that holding back a bit from that you can't harm the cpu (at reasonable voltages and temperatures) For example. (prime95 small ffts stability test) you need 1.2volt for 5.5ghz all core Then for 5.6 all core 1.250v for 5.7 1.3v for 5.8 1.35v for 5.9 1.42v for 6ghz 1.52v Your efficiency curve starts falling off at 5.8ghz and if you want to not degrade the chip you have to either run the cpu at easier workloads or and a lot lower temperatures. or never go over the efficiency curve.* I can't imagine a silicon to not degrade at 1.5+ over 50c maybe a rly old 45+nm silicon from 2000s (or fx amd😂)

I have a i9 13900KF that I got right when it came out. The only thing I have done to it was set a offset of -0.060. I have never had one problem. No crashing, vcore never above 1.38. It's baffling to me, almost as if the more recent batches have an issue.

Ahh Intel, the reason Intel wanted to boost the processors power is to stay on the top of the leader board in tasking and gaming no matter what it takes to be in #1 spot even if it heave to sacrifice the stability and life time of the processors, they will do it.... 😂 The problem is that Intel didn't came up with new architecture at all that should be power efficient and good performance but they just used last generation and boosted the power limit and increased the voltages to squeeze as much as possible from the cpu to be called a new generation.... 😂😂😂

110 sp is insane

My opinion: dont lock your cores. You have a really good cpu, sp 110 for 14900k is the best you can get. What is killing these cpu is the ring, not handling the voltage for p cores, e cores, and the memory controller. By your sp score, your vid table has likely very low vids for the p core frequency. I would let the bios on intel default, remove-enable limits and work on LLC, Dc and Ac LL. You will have low VID and will never go above 1.4v if not 1.385v based on your SP. You have a beautiful chip to lock at 5.0ghz.

PL 2 253 w intel spec , u sure u know how to use google? i dont believe u can hold 5 ghz on full load with 125 w ,at this point we wasting money buying a i9

You can just HOLD the del key.... USB keeps sending check requests. No need to spam.

If your system is already crashing with Intel 13th/14th Gen you need it replaced. Im a hardware engineer and see many red flags with this behavior on these chips. Intel needs to replace all of them because large server companies are losing money & switching to AMD Server chips quickly. If I had one of the chips I would RMA it ASAP. Only bad things can happen to Intel from this point forward without fixing the problem. Thanks

any dx12 game would instantly crash for me but the recent bios update for my asus z790 e gaming wifi has seemed to fix the crashing issues. has run flawlessly for around a month now and i no longer have to force dx11 or undervolt the shit out of my 13900k

This has to be a troll video. I understand you want to protect your cpu but you literally just chopped its legs off and crippled it with those settings.

If you just xtu and lock the cores to 5.0 instead through the bios and i dissable ecores and idle volts is 1.2ish

feel yah , had lots of blood work this year and coming up on a second major surgery had SRS last month and FFS being planned for November. Game on! :)

you add 3 more fans for a push/pull on that 420 artic AIO get about 9-12C lower temps recommended if not.

Not sure why im here but i have been an intel user for years and just decently switched to my first amd just because i wanted to try something new and different and what do you know a few months after i build my pc i hear about all these intel problems. Wow i got some really good luck somehow lol.

Who even needs 3 PCs bro

Spicy

You have a golden chip there. If it were me I'd be running it no lower than 5.8ghz P core and 4.6ghz e core at 1.35-1.4v vcore. You should be very safe under 1,4v vcore and under 1.3v on sa. The reason some of these chips are running into degradation issues is because they are overvolting the chip. I've seen as high as 1.6v on vcore. Rule of thumb for the longest time with Intel is don't go over 1.4v. Also, no one should be getting an i9 if they don't have sufficient cooling.

I had to watch this at 1.5 speed

THE **FIX** PLUS EXPLANATION OF THE INTEL CPU PROBLEM: This is not a mystery or drama anymore. From J2C's BSODs, Actually Hardcore Overclocking, + many more, we've now observed multiple examples of EXACTLY what the issue is: The crashing and damage is caused when a single core goes into boost behavior. It can be two cores also, but it's the same problem. The CPU has a max voltage. But if you make ALL of that voltage available to one or two cores that want to boost to 5.8GHz, then they will get 1.55 or 1.6 volts. Whatever voltage is required to reach that frequency. That damages your CPU silicon. And that is an intentional design choice made by both Intel and AMD. It's not a manufacturing problem. Why doesn't this issue affect Xeon chips? Because most Xeon CPUs don't have single core boost clocks. When all cores boost together, the max voltage enforced by the chip's microcode is distributed across all cores, and no single core can get crazy high voltage. Anything over 1.5v has the potential to damage that core. Or possibly the cache package strapped to that core. The "FIX" is to lock/synch all the cores together, eliminate single core boost. This stops a single core from getting 1.6v. It's simple. If you already have damage, you may have to reduce your all core max boost frequency multiplier, because the damaged cores can no longer reach those freq. and will crash your PC. First, lock the cores together, no single core boost. I would recommend also putting a cap on the max voltage. Maybe 1.4v max, but because there's overshoot, personally I'd go lower. Not to mention the challenge of temps if all core turbo is too high. Validate what works with your CPU, what is a reasonable match between freq., voltage and temp. That's it. You're done. And no more damage. No more shouting into the void. The point of single core boost is stupid anyway. It's literally to get on the top of some reviewer's chart. But since both Intel and AMD allow their chips to do it, and we're at the limits of what the substrate can provide, we will keep seeing this. Lock/Synch your cores together, so when Win Update suddenly runs, a single stupid core isn't provided 1.6v so it can reach 6GHz. Problem solved.

Just by activating Synch All Cores you have fixed the problem. What cooks these CPUs is when a single core, even for a background task, asks to boost to 5.8Ghz. Then, to reach that freq. it is given 1.55, or even 1.6v, depending on the individual CPU. THAT'S what's killing it. Even though the chip has power limits, when only one core wants to boost, all of the power is offered. This is a feature just so Intel can get a good CineBench score by reviewers. It's totally stupid. Lock those cores together and you're good.

Cool

Just sell and buy ryzen.

this is what i did to my 13700k immediately when i bought my 13700k: disable hyperthreadding, set max core voltages to 1.35v lock down clocks to 5.5ghzP 4.4ghzE. thing runs like a charm and wont be peaking 1.4xx+v during idle.

can you show us the VF offset page in extreme/AI tweaker. i wanna see your 5.6/5.8 and 6.0 GHZ VIDs in bios. thats a crazy cpu at 110 sp

SP 110 IS CRAZY

altho the wild support is nice, the nolife copium comments is kinda...... depressing ngl 😅

This new bios bricked my 13700K haha

Wow why pay i9 prices for an i5 level of performance, if it does not work return it simple intel users need to punish intel for a defective product period. Imagine buying chocolate ice cream and getting vanilla 😂