Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


This user doesn't have any awards

About Idkwhat2putheresowhatever

  • Title

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    A small country in Southeast Asia, around 60km wide
  • Interests
  • Biography


  • CPU
    I don't update this lmao read my signature

Recent Profile Visitors

893 profile views
  1. Try heading over to the Nvidia Control Panel and under manage 3d settings, change the power management mode to maximum performance
  2. Getting 5GHz is kinda my goal haha. I try to get break the next GHz barrier with every new CPU if you get what I mean. (1.3GHZ Pentium SU4100 > 2.58GHz Pentium N3530 > 3.5GHz i7-7500U > 4.3GHz i7-8700). Im talking about boost clocks here though and the 9900k boosts to 5GHz but of course being able to OC to that clock speed will be lit af lol. Of course I can get an FX9590 but that will be stupid and pointless. Reviews seem to be rather positive but hey whats done has been done.
  3. It seems to be configured roughly the same as Gaming Pro Carbon but with the heatsink design of the Godlike gaming (i think). I guess it should OC to 5GHz fine as well?
  4. Well according to a VRM Tier list this board sits above the Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon so I'm sure it will do just fine. Its also in the supported CPU list
  5. Im not gonna spend that much just to get like 150MHz out of my RAM. It seems that BeamNG.drive (I play this most of the time) is pushing my CPU to its limits so getting a 9900k will help quite a bit. Im also getting an RTX 3080 which I have saved up for a long time to get so getting an i9 wouldn't be a bad decision considering that I already have a Z370 board
  6. Guess I'll get a 9900k and see how it goes. Right now they are going for $400 (USD) in my area. I seen a few 9900kf go for around $30 lower but they are hard to find.
  7. So right now is the daisy chain board and the poorer IMC both factors to causing the issue? So let's say if I were to get a 9900k but use the 1st and 3rd slots would the better IMC make up for the design disadvantage?
  8. So what I'm getting right now is that having RAM on the 2nd and 4th slots reduces stress on the IMC and can achieve higher memory clocks whereas on the 1st and 3rd slots the pressure is higher due the the board's daisy-chained topography which can't be avoided in most cases unless a high end board is used. So the solution is to get a better CPU with a better IMC. Is that correct?
  9. Well if the 9900k can't fix that then I would just give up on life lmao. The gaming m5 wasnt a cheap board.
  10. Are T-topology (if thats what its called) only found on higher end boards like those with HEDT chipsets? I'm kind of a noob with these sort of things.
  11. It is indeed kind of odd that XMP will only work at 3600MHz on the 2nd and 4th slots and not 1st and 3rd (by that I mean 2 sticks). If I boot the PC with ram only in the 1st and 3rd slots the board will show a screen telling me to shift it to the 2nd and 4th slots for optimum performance. I guess its maybe MSI and their motherboard design? At this point I'm not really sure if its the board or the IMC.
  12. Ah well then guess I'll just use it this way for now. Intel probably didnt expect many to run high frequency RAM on a locked CPU.
  13. The IMC is on the CPU correct? I'm getting an i9 in a few months so will that help?