Well I'm getting a I9 10900K

[Poop King]

All because my Asus Z390 itx had a broken CMOS battery and I couldn't find a suitable replacement after getting it refunded, so I'm upgrading to Z490. I'm using a Gigabyte Z390 I just got from Amazon that was the last place with stock, but it won't overclock my micron E Die ram to even 3333 MHz despite being advertised as supporting 4400 MHz ram so I already have an RMA for it too.

________

New parts:

Intel I9 10900K

Asus Z490-I Strix Gaming

Phanteks Evolv White ITX Tempered Glass case (current case not enough cooling)

Raijintek 280mm Orcus AIO (current case only fits 140mm AIO and 140mm high coolers)

Stuff I already have:

2x16 GB Crucial Ballistix Micron E Die (4000 MHz CL 18 capable on Asus boards)

Gigabyte triple fan GTX 1080 Ti

2x2 Tb Adata M.2 Nvme SSDs in Raid 0

2x6 Tb Seagate Barracuda Pros in Raid 1 for backups and storage

128 Gb Crucial M4 boot drive

EVGA T2 1000w PSU (overkill now, I used to have SLI up to 980 Tis with this)

Custom cablemod white and black braided PSU cables/

__________

Literally because my crappy t topology Gigabyte Z390 replacement won't overclock my ram at all, and my 9700K wouldn't overclock as much in it, but just 5.2 GHz Vs 5.3 GHz on Asus with the same voltage.

I am a slave to Asus's superior CPU and Memory overclocking, never again will I manage without a 2 dimms only Asus board with glorious Optimem II. While people might say memory overclocking doesn't help much, we are talking about 3200 CL16 on a gigabyte board vs 4000 CL18 on an Asus board so yea, that much kind of like does.

[xSOSxHawkens]

Hung Boxer님이 먼저 게시:

xSOSxHawkens님이 먼저 게시:

I will point out that the 10900 is a total flop and you should *seriously* consider something else.

Buying a 10900 is about like buying an FX9590 in 2013... Was the 9590 fast enough in 2013, sure. Was it still a bad buy, yes. Today the 10900K is no different.

And if you like overclocking look at MSi... Their boards hold many modern OC records for a reason.

No, I had a £450 MSI godlike and it stopped booting in under 6 months. Its not just their low tier boards but also their high tier ones, they use ♥♥♥♥ VRMs.

xSOSxHawkens님이 먼저 게시:

only in their lower end models, which have about the same issues as any lower end boards from any other makers.

How about we keep the discussion to boards worth buying, hes talking i9 (or if we look to the other side R9 level parts, his board should be no less than 250 bucks). Nothing in the $250+ range from MSi on either side (AMD/Intel) has such issues. And again, their high end boards hold a large number of current records.

Buy crap level from *any* maker and you get crap parts. Asus, AsRock, Gigabyte, they are all the same in that regard.

Personally, having owned three high end MSI baords in a row now not a single one has any issues (with me, or in reviewers published reviews) with VRM or power delivery.

Skimping on the MB is just as stupid as skimping on the PSU.

Buying any motherboard by MSI is skimping on the Motherboard. Asus strix or better, or Asrock fatality. OTher motherboards shouldnt even exist.

Then you got a bad board, not a bad design. Things like that happen. Also happen with Asus and AsRock and others (I have 3 dead Asus high ends in the house now). Bad luck on ur part.

You can claim they have bad VRM's all you want, but on the high end boards their lineup has just as good if not better VRM's. Yes, at launch, on about 3 models of x570, they sucked, aside from that they have a pretty decent track record historically. They are not always the coolest, but they *do* often offer some of the best in class OC potential, with their boards regularly outpacing Asus or others.

You can claim they suck, but I will take my Meg x570 Unify over any asus board any day. Same for my Z97 Mpower (another world record OC'er) or my Z77A-GD65, all of which serve me wonderfully (and all of which run quite cool might I add). The two intel ones are great OC'ers too, pushing i7's to 4.8 daily /5.0 bench (Z97) and 4.6daily (z77). I havent pushed x570 yet, as Im on the Wraith and dont need more performance yet.

I have had too many assu products go belly up to ever trust them again with a major purchase. Not one, many. Only major tech vendor that has had multiple failures over the course of the past 20 years. Every one of the major tech companies have failed me at least once, and a few twice in that time, but asus... Every one of their products has eventually died (except my second hand GTX-670 thats still kickin...)

[xSOSxHawkens]

Hung Boxer님이 먼저 게시:

OTher motherboards shouldnt even exist.

Also, specific to this last bit. What a joke.

Aside from MSi...

Gigabyte makes fine boards which also OC quite well.

AsRock and Asus *also* make a good fair number of crappy boards (and some good ones).

lol

[Poop King]

xSOSxHawkens님이 먼저 게시:

Hung Boxer님이 먼저 게시:

OTher motherboards shouldnt even exist.

Also, specific to this last bit. What a joke.

Aside from MSi...

Gigabyte makes fine boards which also OC quite well.

AsRock and Asus *also* make a good fair number of crappy boards (and some good ones).

lol

I'm literally sat here with a Gigabyte Auros that claims '4400+ MHZ ram OC' on the box, but wont even OC to 3300 Mhz ram as my OP already explains. Same ram does 4000 Mhz on Asus boards.

Thats nowhere near fine. I doubt you have any experience of enthusiast level products or overclocking in general, you probably couldn't even afford it.

I specifically stated 'Asus STRIX or better' and 'Asrock FATALITY' as they are the tried and proven boards for overclocking, I didnt state that they don't make lower end products. Gigabtye Auros doesnt overclock anything, and MSI godlikes blow up in under 6 months.

A £450 motherboard from MSI or Gigabyte is the same as a £150 motherboard from Asus. Neither MSI or Gigabyte even know how to make something of the same tier as Asus Strix and upwards or Asrock Fatality.

Then you got a bad board, not a bad design. Things like that happen. Also happen with Asus and AsRock and others (I have 3 dead Asus high ends in the house now). Bad luck on ur part.

It was a widespread problem at least 20% of their motherboards were having and everyone was raging on their forums (same boot error codes across all their 'high end' motherboards, and MSI did nothing to investigate or explain the issue. Stop defending ♥♥♥♥ tier products.

[Poop King]

Also I dont get why people keep saying 'AMD is better for everything now' ... The 9700K still outperforms AMD's entire lineup in all gaming tests?

[xSOSxHawkens]

Hung Boxer님이 먼저 게시:

xSOSxHawkens님이 먼저 게시:

Also, specific to this last bit. What a joke.

Aside from MSi...

Gigabyte makes fine boards which also OC quite well.

AsRock and Asus *also* make a good fair number of crappy boards (and some good ones).

lol

I'm literally sat here with a Gigabyte Auros that claims '4400+ MHZ ram OC' on the box, but wont even OC to 3300 Mhz ram as my OP already explains. Same ram does 4000 Mhz on Asus boards.

Thats nowhere near fine. I doubt you have any experience of enthusiast level products or overclocking in general, you probably couldn't even afford it.

I specifically stated 'Asus STRIX or better' and 'Asrock FATALITY' as they are the tried and proven boards for overclocking, I didnt state that they don't make lower end products. Gigabtye Auros doesnt overclock anything, and MSI godlikes blow up in under 6 months.

A £450 motherboard from MSI or Gigabyte is the same as a £150 motherboard from Asus. Neither MSI or Gigabyte even know how to make something of the same tier as Asus Strix and upwards or Asrock Fatality.

Then you got a bad board, not a bad design. Things like that happen. Also happen with Asus and AsRock and others (I have 3 dead Asus high ends in the house now). Bad luck on ur part.

It was a widespread problem at least 20% of their motherboards were having and everyone was raging on their forums (same boot error codes across all their 'high end' motherboards, and MSI did nothing to investigate or explain the issue. Stop defending ♥♥♥♥ tier products.

Sounds like you should have gotten RAM known to work with your board. Asus has kits it doesnt like too. I have used multiple Gigabyte boards over the years across multple generations of DDR standards, and all of them have run any RAM kit used, incluing high performance low lattency, with the only single exception being a no-name kit from china. Thats just cheap RAM for you. You might not have had cheap ram, but that doesnt mean that the kit was going to play nice with ur board. Should have read up on ur board and bought a kit known to work well. As you should with any board. From any maker.

Also, lolz on the no experiance with enthusiast parts... FFS man, I run a 3900x in my main and the motherboards in my top two rigs hold multiple (and more) overclocking records than anything you are using from Asus... But you keep talking smak there bud. I will enjoy the fact that I sold *off* of Intel x299 to jump to x570, and revel in the *fact* that my budy who bout the Asus x299s Prime from me and then spent 900$ on a second hand i9 12c, then delided it and LM it, and OC'd it under a high end aio loop STILL cant beat my stock 3900x in any CPU bound benchmark single or multithreaded....lolz

Hung Boxer님이 먼저 게시:

Also I dont get why people keep saying 'AMD is better for everything now' ... The 9700K still outperforms AMD's entire lineup in all gaming tests?

People are saying it b/c its now true. Perhaps you havent paid attention in the past couple of weeks, but here, let me sum it up a bit for you...

Ryzen 3000/Zen2+ has been shown in *multiple* tests to be about equal to Intel parts at gaming in a *clock to clock* comparison, while trashing intel in anything else beside gaming...

They *only* way Intel has held a lead in games is b/c of their high core speeds, and yes in certain specific build cases, mainly now in the lower-mid range gamer builds, they still hold some marginal dominance with the likes of the 9700k... Barely. In most cases by sub-10% while lacking in non-game areas by more.

But on the mobile front AMD now matches and beats intel in every way, including games now with the R7/R9 4K chips. But production or real work is even more a thrashing for Intel...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooz7ozw-lpo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs55aPczQos

In lower end desktops, the new R3-3300X is such a beast that at stock it ebats the 7700K and anything before it, and with good overclocking, due to the better clock for clock, it can match the 9700k in games despite being a chip with the cores/threads.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JE0JPeahK4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sq0OHhRQwA8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD8Yk7JrBL8

And on the high end AMD trashes intel in all ways that would be important to someone wanting 10+ cores, even if you lose 3-5FPS in games.

And in the *ultra* high end (read 28-21c minimum) AMD will hands down give you more for less at every turn, even up to and including Epyc vs Xeon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwETLRMandY

(remember from the HWUnboxed testing above we know that clock for clock, watt for watt, and core for core the AMD offers more in every productivity suite app aside from DPF edditing... So their gains are not just in video edditnig but in most real work style loads)

And even in that one specific place mentioned above where Intel holds a specific lead in games (the lower end i7/upper end i5) there are *plenty* of equally priced AMD options that will offer substantial benefit in non-gaming loads at a minor penalty to gaming, something many people would rather have than a weaker overall system at the benefit of games.

So yeh, thats why...Intel only has purpose in one small segment of the consumer space, and even there it is hotly contested if its worth sacrificing 10% in games for 20%+ in other areas...

[Poop King]

Sounds like you should have gotten RAM known to work with your board.

Sounds like you should learn how to read, I already had the ram, I required a board that works for it.

If you don't even know what Micron E Die is which clearly you dont, then stop trying to act like you know anything, it the second highest overclockable DDR4 IC after Samsung B Die across any motherboard.

Also the reason why Gigabyte boards dont overclock ram has nothing to do with the ram itself. They use 'T Topology' which is optimization for when 4 ram slots are filled, but this severely limits any high frequency overclocking with just 2 sticks used. Oddly I have a board with only 2 ram slots, but in hardware software it is still detected as having 4 dimms because they never changed the hardware to be optimized for only 2 slots and it still features T Topology. Asus Optimem II on te other hand is fully focused on achieving maximum frequencies from one channel filled whihc is exactly what overclocking requires, and this is something that neither Gigabyte nor MSI have even the slightest clue on how to achieve.

Gigabyte T Toplology is known to severely hinder ram overclocking period.

Also the rest of your post is all about mobile and not desktop chips, and your overt need to appeal to authority with all those videos shows that you yourself dont know anything. Literally every actual benchmark on the Internet shows universally across the vast majority of games, Intel 9700K+ are still better. Using 'clock for clock' isnt a valid excuse when AMD chips cannot even match Intel's clocks in the first place, you actually have to underclock an Intel CPU to achieve that.

Keep being jealous that you cant afford a fast CPU, ram or anything, and that you have absolutely not the slightest clue what you keep on talking about. Feel free to carry on buying ♥♥♥♥ tier MSI or Gigabyte boards that cannot overclock anything, or blow up within 6 months of trying.

Stick to your AMD because you dont know how to overclock or how to achieve overall greater performance from tweaking everything, not that you even can in the first place as you use a rubbish motherboard as a base.

[xSOSxHawkens]

Hung Boxer님이 먼저 게시:

Sounds like you should have gotten RAM known to work with your board.

Sounds like you should learn how to read, I already had the ram, I required a board that works for it.

If you don't even know what Micron E Die is which clearly you dont, then stop trying to act like you know anything, it the second highest overclockable DDR4 IC after Samsung B Die across any motherboard.

Also the reason why Gigabyte boards dont overclock ram has nothing to do with the ram itself. They use 'T Topology' which is optimization for when 4 ram slots are filled, but this severely limits any high frequency overclocking with just 2 sticks used. Oddly I have a board with only 2 ram slots, but in hardware software it is still detected as having 4 dimms because they never changed the hardware to be optimized for only 2 slots and it still features T Topology. Asus Optimem II on te other hand is fully focused on achieving maximum frequencies from one channel filled whihc is exactly what overclocking requires, and this is something that neither Gigabyte nor MSI have even the slightest clue on how to achieve.

Gigabyte T Toplology is known to severely hinder ram overclocking period.

Also the rest of your post is all about mobile and not desktop chips, and your overt need to appeal to authority with all those videos shows that you yourself dont know anything. Literally every actual benchmark on the Internet shows universally across the vast majority of games, Intel 9700K+ are still better. Using 'clock for clock' isnt a valid excuse when AMD chips cannot even match Intel's clocks in the first place, you actually have to underclock an Intel CPU to achieve that.

Keep being jealous that you cant afford a fast CPU, ram or anything, and that you have absolutely not the slightest clue what you keep on talking about. Feel free to carry on buying ♥♥♥♥ tier MSI or Gigabyte boards that cannot overclock anything, or blow up within 6 months of trying.

Stick to your AMD because you dont know how to overclock or how to achieve overall greater performance from tweaking everything, not that you even can in the first place as you use a rubbish motherboard as a base.

I post vids because unlike you Im not a troll and I back my claims up.

I posted vids about destop parts too, you just chose to ignore.

I posted vids about server parts too, you just chose to ignore.

I clearly stated I use high end parts, and each and every part I have from every generation is high end for its respective time, going back to my Pentium MMX build, yet you ignore.

I personally run Samsung B-Die in my secondary rig and Mircon on my main rig.

You keep on thinking a 3900x w/3600Mhz cl16 RAM on x570

OR

A 4790K w/2400Mhz CL10 on Z97

Are low end. Sure the i7 is old, but both of those builds represent high end for their respective times, and one of them is in the time of NOW. lol

Im calling it. Ur a troll. Go home under your bridge or bring some real arguments, cuz most of ur data is out of date bud.

Intel is *solidly* in their FX era...

You look about as silly now as AMD fans did then if they said FX was some amazing i7 killer. I like AMD, I even likeFX and still think its usable, but it is not great and never was. I can admit the flaws that AMD had in their FX line, both then and now...

You seem to be unable to do the same now that Intel is on the bottom taking it so hard... lol

Its time to back yourself up, or pack it up. You talk trash, but dont source, then discount sources from others. Where are yours? You make such a big deal about ur high end parts and experience, lets see it. Wheres ur HWBot profile with ur rigs and benches bud? Wheres that CPUZ link to that 10980XE you are rocking already cuz you are *so* high end?... Wheres those CPUZ validations on those multiple previous i9s?...

do you even bench bro?

lolol

I might not have access to 10K$ rigs. Never claimed I did. But I do have a rig that most on here would class a decently high end. Wheres urs? What do *you* run that is sooo amazing.... Cuz even if it bests mine in one way or another there are always bigger fish in the sea than you ;)


Oh, and some actual advice... If you *know* you will be running two sticks... And if you *know* you will want to run them at speeds that are stupid with no benefit outside of E-Peen...

Maybe buy a board made for it to begin with instead of ones made with 4 stick RAM configs in mind...

Many people (myself included) like to run 4 sticks, either immediately or in the end as EOL upgrades. To me, having a stable 4 stick board at good OC rates (for ddr4 to me thats about 3600/3800, anything higher is a waste of time and money) is far more important than a board that runs 2 sticks at speeds that dont matter... Gigabyte boards are not bad just cuz they target a different stability and performance factor. To many consumers maxing capacity at good speeds > than maxing speeds at lower capacity. Both are equally high end. I would argue that 4*8GB 3600 cl16 is far more useful than 2*8 4000 cl16. Specially on Ryzen where you hit a 2:1 IF ratio past 3600Mhz. Same in a 4*4/3600 vs 2*4/4000. Even on intel though, gains are marginal at best, if there are any gains at all.

[xSOSxHawkens]

Hung Boxer님이 먼저 게시:

Stick to your AMD because you dont know how to overclock or how to achieve overall greater performance from tweaking everything, not that you even can in the first place as you use a rubbish motherboard as a base.

LMAO. Troll confirmed.

Also 4790K @ 5.0 Bench, 4.8 24/7, and locked 4.0 @ 1.0v undervolt. (MSI Z97)
Also 2700K @ 4.8 Bench, 4.6 24/7 on air (MSI Z77)
Also (for intel)
Q6700 @ 3.6 w/1866Mhz FSB (air) (Gigabyte P45)
Pentium 4 3.0E @ 3.9Ghz (Asus i865PE)
Pentium D 2.53 @ ~3.5 (same asus board)

Not mine personally, but additional experience mentoring and helping those I know on both 6700k and 7700k.

Also plenty of AMD side OCing from about every generation, now including Ryzen (limited tweaking so far).

But no... I dont know how to OC at all...

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1648465904

(old result before the 2400 cl10 samsung bdie kit)

Either way, we and back on track...

10900K is a joke...

[xSOSxHawkens]

To back up the 10900K is a joke statement...

https://wccftech.com/intel-core-i9-10900k-10-core-cpu-hot-power-hungry-at-stock-benchmarks-reveal/

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-10900k-stress-test

[Poop King]

xSOSxHawkens님이 먼저 게시:

To back up the 10900K is a joke statement...

https://wccftech.com/intel-core-i9-10900k-10-core-cpu-hot-power-hungry-at-stock-benchmarks-reveal/

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-10900k-stress-test

Nobody runs stress tests 24/7 you absolute clown. Thats like trying to run furmark 24/7 on a high end GPU and then complaining when it dies a week later.

No CPU or GPU is ever made with the intent to be ran permanently at 100% load.

Funny that you post nothing but OCing results for CPUs when my issue was purely about OCing my Micron E Die ram, which I know as a fact Gigabyte motherboards featuring t topology cannot and will not ever do, and I dont need to provide links when you can simply google just how bad t topology boards are for ram overclocks and go ahead and read 100+ links and experiences confirming this. Gigabyte boards cannot even get any DDR4 ram to 3800 Mhz, yet continue to falsely advertise that their products are DDR4 4400 Mhz+ capable.

[Snow]

Hung Boxer님이 먼저 게시:

No CPU or GPU is ever made with the intent to be ran permanently at 100% load.

Right, CPUs and GPUs are made to just lay there on the shelf.

Wait a second, why exactly running at 100% is a bad thing?

[Poop King]

Snow님이 먼저 게시:

Hung Boxer님이 먼저 게시:

No CPU or GPU is ever made with the intent to be ran permanently at 100% load.

Right, CPUs and GPUs are made to just lay there on the shelf.

Wait a second, why exactly running at 100% is a bad thing?

Run intel burn test for a whole month and tell me if your CPU survives.

Because NOTHING outside of stress tests will ever do this.

The actual point of more cores is to REDUCE the strain on each core. This is why 4 core processors become more efficient in mobile hardware than 2 core ones, but if you were to run them at 100% load, your phone would literally melt or blow up.

[xSOSxHawkens]

Hung Boxer님이 먼저 게시:

xSOSxHawkens님이 먼저 게시:

To back up the 10900K is a joke statement...

https://wccftech.com/intel-core-i9-10900k-10-core-cpu-hot-power-hungry-at-stock-benchmarks-reveal/

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-10900k-stress-test

Nobody runs stress tests 24/7 you absolute clown. Thats like trying to run furmark 24/7 on a high end GPU and then complaining when it dies a week later.

No CPU or GPU is ever made with the intent to be ran permanently at 100% load.

I quite regularly have my CPU cruching down 4K footage for hours, or even days at a time.

When I got it I had nearly 1TB of 4K Raw backlogged. It spend nearly every hour of every day its first week alive stressed to 100%. And I didnt stop the encodes just to game, I simply took 4c/8t away from handbrake and jumped into game, so it litteraly spent upwards of 5 days loaded.

After that, and while it was still cool here, I put both my CPU and GPU to work folding for covid, though I have stopped now that warm days are here as I dont need ~500w dumping into my front room 24/7 anymore.

Just had the comp crunch through ~14hrs (CPU time, not raw footage) of 4K night before last, and had it render out another 5hrs worth today.

So yeh, some people *do* stress their rigs out like that for days on end. I see no reason not to be able to. If every system I have ever had can do that on air, why cant the 10900K?...

Heck, even my 3900x holds a ~4.0 boost under full loads on all 24t and thats on the included stock air cooler... How far can you get with the included Intel cooler with that 10900K?... can you even hold stock BASE speeds, much less boost?... Oh... wait... You didnt even get one. Better get out that wallet again ;)

[Snow]

Hung Boxer님이 먼저 게시:

The actual point of more cores is to REDUCE the strain on each core.

The actual point of more cores is to increase performance is apps that can use that much cores.

Hung Boxer님이 먼저 게시:

This is why 4 core processors become more efficient in mobile hardware than 2 core ones, but if you were to run them at 100% load, your phone would literally melt or blow up.

What do you mean by efficiency? Also, I don't see how running 2-core mobile CPU at 100% load would melt the phone, but running 4-core mobile CPU at 100% load doesn't. Or do you think 4-core mobile CPUs never reach full load?

[xSOSxHawkens]

Hung Boxer님이 먼저 게시:

Funny that you post nothing but OCing results for CPUs when my issue was purely about OCing my Micron E Die ram...

Funny how you want to do nothing but bash on motherboards and talk about RAM OC'ing in a thread that is about CPU's and the 10900k...

Kinda where you would *want* to be looking at things like OC results, thermals, performance/watt, etc...