Jump to content

done12many2

Member
  • Content count

    8,201
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Awards


About done12many2

  • Title
    Veteran
  • Birthday February 27

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Virginia

System

  • CPU
    7900X
  • Motherboard
    Asus ROG Rampage VI Apex
  • RAM
    32 GB G.Skill TridentZ 3200 MHz (b-die) @ 4000 MHz
  • GPU
    4 x EVGA GTX 1080 Ti
  • Case
    Caselabs Mercury S8 (black) w/ Pedestal
  • Storage
    2 x Samsung 1TB 960 Evo M.2 (RAID 0) | 4 x Samsung 850 EVO (RAID 0) | Synology DS1815+
  • PSU
    EVGA SuperNOVA 1600 T2
  • Display(s)
    Samsung 34" Ultra-wide (S34E790C) | Samsung 28" 4k (U28D590D)
  • Cooling
    5 x 360mm EKWB Coolstream PE radiators | EKWB CPU & GPU water blocks | 23 x EKWB Vardar F4 120ER fans | 2 x EKWB D5 pumps | EK Res
  • Keyboard
    Corsair K70 RGB
  • Mouse
    Corsair Scimitar RGB
  • Sound
    Yamaha Receiver | Klipsch Speakers
  • Operating System
    Windows 10 Pro | Windows 8.1 Pro | Windows 7 Ultimate

Recent Profile Visitors

12,575 profile views
  1. Then just run it as it. If you want to see how it performs in its normal capacity, test it in its normal capacity. Have fun and good luck.
  2. You'll need to determine what it is that you are trying to accomplish with your benchmarks. Are you doing it to determine how your PC runs as is or are you trying to have some friendly competition with fellow enthusiasts? If you are just trying to get a baseline of your PC's performance, simply run it as it is. Remain consistent in your testing so that in the future, if you need to re-verify something, you can do so consistently. If you are trying to be somewhat competitive with others, there are tons of hardware and software based tricks to increase your score.
  3. 8700K @5GHz 1.28V

    I personally would never assume that because an overclock can do one small range for over an hour, that it will automatically pass 23 hours as I know first hand that's not true. With that said, you are still testing stability a great deal harder than most people do and I applaud you for that. As I'm sure you're aware, if you are testing with Prime95 small FFTs, you aren't stressing memory or IMC. More data across the RAM keeps CPU cycles fed more often, which increases load. This would be where you'd want to run large FFTs or a long-term 23hr blend test before climbing too high up on your horse about Vcore. Either way, I'm not questioning your overclock in the least bit nor did I at anytime do so. I'm sure it's every bit as stable as you need it to be and that is all that matters. If you'll go back through what I said, comparing it to another's overclock is pointless for very obvious reasons. There are just too many variables from system to system and environment to environment to make any sense out of comparing a known clock to a known voltage. Showing outputted work though, that's a bit different. If people want to demonstrate how fast their CPU can accomplish a task, that's quantifiable. I can guarantee that the guy with a better tweaked overclock despite having a lower clockspeed, will generally beat out the guy with a higher clockspeed, but using stock cache and weak memory settings (generally speaking). It will not make that much of a difference in life expectancy. At least not enough to justify more cooling unless you need more thermal overhead for other things. If you are operating safely while testing with Prime, it is safe to assume that you'll be perfectly fine in any other daily scenario that your CPU will face. Good luck man.
  4. 8700K @5GHz 1.28V

    Rockit makes a great and inexpensive tool. I have the Rockit tool for 3 different socket/cpu types and all of them work flawlessly. Good luck man. Delidding is great. https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/
  5. 8700K @5GHz 1.28V

    See the problem with that is that in addition to the reasons I already listed, other factors like LLC used, quality of board, memory overclock, cache overclock and a great deal more play into the comparisons. Some people intentionally overshoot LLC just to falsely show a lower VCore in a no or light load situation. One guy bragging that he is running 5 GHz at 1.25v with stock or XMP settings on his RAM and stock cache speed is not even comparable to another guy doing 5 GHz at 1.25v with super tight timings on his RAM and 5 GHz on the cache. There would be a night and day performance difference between the 2 overclocks compared meaning that the load on the 2nd overclock example is far greater during stress testing than the first example. The 2nd example would be a far greater chip. Cooling alone will dramatically impact voltage requirements on any chip. Fact, a cooler chip will require less voltage. You're absolutely right though, it is fun which is why everyone keeps doing it despite it being pointless.
  6. 8700K @5GHz 1.28V

    Comparing clockspeeds and voltages from 2 completely different setups operated in different environments with different cooling is a complete waste of time. Not only that, but each of you test stability completely differently. One guy just found a better way to show that his CPU runs at a lower voltage.
  7. Xeon overheating

    If both rigs are identical, something is still wrong with the server in question. That cooler should be more than enough for CPU as it's more than enough for the other identical CPU. Cooler or mounting remain the most likely issues.
  8. New motherboard for X299

    My x299 Asus Rog Rampage VI Apex is a great board. Definitely no limits with OC range at all and memory performance is pretty stellar. 7900x has seen 5.1 - 5.2 GHz on this board during benchmarks. Hope that helps.
  9. 1.4v on DDR4 With Ryzen?

    1.4v is completely fine. My 32GB (4x8) G.Skill Trident Z 3200 kit does 3466 MHz and 3600 MHz with my 1950x with timing even tightened up a bit. Remember that you may need to adjust SoC voltage. I've found stock SoC Voltage to be more than necessary, which adversely impacted memory overclocks/stability. Try adjusting SoC in your pursuit to 3466 before you raise the DRAM voltage. It might be all that you need.
  10. Get current. https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/934039-nvidia-no-next-gen-graphics-cards-for-a-long-time/
  11. Want to know about SLI'ability of two cards

    Pretty much hit the nail on the head. Lack of first-hand experience drives the repeated ignorant posts.
  12. Thanks for forcing me to blow the dust out of this rig! It hasn't run 3d in a half year. A few taps with a hammer and the GPUs stopped resisting. @Masada02 My man! Submission for the Leaderboard at your convenience. Thanks. 1080p Extreme HD: CPU: i7 7900X 5.1 GHz GPUs: 2x 1080 Ti @ 2113 MHz Core / 6105 MHz Memory Score: 8307 FPS: 198.5 1440p: CPU: i7 7900X 5.1 GHz GPUs: 2x 1080 Ti @ 2113 MHz Core / 6105 MHz Memory Score: 7764 FPS: 185.6 4k: CPU: i7 7900X 5.1 GHz GPUs: 2x 1080 Ti @ 2113 MHz Core / 6105 MHz Memory Score: 4286 FPS: 102.4 3440 x 1440: CPU: i7 7900X 5.1 GHz GPUs: 2x 1080 Ti @ 2113 MHz Core / 6105 MHz Memory Score: 6455 FPS: 154.3
  13. I don't know about that "no problem" stuff as you've laid down some nice numbers. Unfortunately, the 1080p test has become nothing more than a CPU test. With 1080s and 1080Tis at 1080p, draw calls are just too much for the CPU and the only way to increase scores is to push CPU clock speeds to very high levels (5GHz and higher with decent IPC). I'm not sure what you've tried so far for CPU clock speed, but there are a few tricks that can help. A "per core" OC or a "per usage" OC will allow you to clock individual cores higher than the rest without thermally saturating the chip. You could also disable cores and achieve slightly higher clocks with the remaining active cores thanks to lower temps (Valley only needs 1 core). At the end of the day, it's still more fun to reach whatever score you get with all cores active so a "per core" or "per usage" OC would probably be better. 1080p is a waste of time for a rig as powerful as yours.
×