Apollo190

I just used the thermal paste everywhere instead of thermal pads and it worked out fine.

I just updated the hwinfo and I noticed there's now a vram temp reading. Is it normal/safe for gddr6x to reach 100+°C ? My settings in msi afterburner are +100MHz on core clock and +1000MHz on memory clock. When I'm playing games I set the power limit to 110% which results in ~350W in Cyberpunk 2077 for example. After about 10-15 minutes in cyberpunk, gpu core hits ~65°C while VRAM peaks at 88°C. When I run folding@home, vram hits 94°C. But that's not even the worst. Every now and then I like to leave my pc on overnight to mine ethereum while I sleep to make some extra money on the side, since I already have a good gpu, figured why not. I set the power limit to 65% (which results in 220W) and leave other settings the same (core and memory clocks). That gives me the average hashrate of 97MH/s. But the vram temps peak at 104°C! I've been doing it since January (not 24/7, but every now and then) and haven't noticed any issues/damage so far. Are these temps safe or should I do something about it?

Alrighty then, thank you!

I currently have only one rtx 3080 and use it mainly for gaming. However, sometimes I leave it mining overnight while I'm sleeping (I decrease the power limit to 65% though, which is 220W and gpu never goes above 50C so I guess it's safe). My motherboard is tuf gaming z490 plus and has one more pcie x16 slot that's empty right now. If I got another rtx 3080 in there, would I be able to choose which gpu the mining runs on? Then I'd be able to keep mining even when I'm gaming, run games on primary gpu, run mining on the second one. And when I go to sleep I'd leave both gpus mining. I mine using T-Rex btw.

I just saw a post where some guy connected 78 RTX 3080s together in his mining rig. But how is that possible, I thought even SLI (dual gpus) is impossible with 3080, let alone 78. Can someone explain this?

Damn, +190 is insane. I'd trade my memory clock for your core . Yeah it would seem so. But I made sure to test in many programs and games as well, as I said, and it still seemed stable.

I know that unstable memory doesn't cause artifacts anymore because of new error correction thing, but it's supposed to affect performance negatively if it's unstable, both in benchmarks and in games. All the overclocking guides I've seen so far, recommend increasing it by 100MHz at a time and running a benchmark like timespy to check the score. The idea is to keep increasing until the score starts getting lower. Following that logic, I maxed out the memory clock at +2850MHz in asus gpu tweak II, although it doesn't actually increase the clock by 2850MHz when testing, but by 1425MHz. When I open msi afterburner it also shows +1425 on memory clock so it's correct. I guess gpu tweak II scales it differently. Anyway, my score still kept increasing even at that level. I thought maybe it's a fluke, so I ran timespy 5 times at +2850 (+1425) and 5 times at +2700 (+1350), in order to compare the average of 5. All tests were ran at +140MHz on core, 110% power and 100% voltage, with fans on auto (temperature never went above 65C). At +1425, average graphics score was 18185.4 and average total score was 17375.4, while at +1350 average graphics score was 18136.8 and average total score was 17346.4 . The fps in games kept increasing as well. So according to that, +1425 is stable, but I find that hard to believe, especially when comparing to other people's oc results. Jayz here started to lose fps at +750 already. Also, +140 on core seems a bit too high as well, but I had no crashes so far (tested in timespy, unigine heaven, valley, superposition, kombustor, furmark, cyberpunk (cyberpunk did crash at +150 core), far cry primal, far cry 5). Even the 0.1% and 1% lows improved. Am I missing something here, or is this some sort of golden sample silicon ?

I posted pictures of the old cooler in my previous posts here, the contact seemed to be good. I installed the new aio on the top as an exhaust, maybe the case needed more exhaust before and now that's helping as well, I'm not sure, but I'm happy with the results . Also I tested with the dust filter installed on top, and without it, and didn't notice any difference in temperature, so I'll keep it on, because when pc is off the dust will fall inside if there's no filter. Just want to figure out if this voltage is normal now, hoping I got a decent chip.

The kraken z73 finally arrived yesterday. I was blown away by how much cooler the cpu runs now. I was able to run realbench for 1 hour now, peak temperature was 77C while average was 73-74. Considering I was throttling at 100C with drp4 within 5 minutes, this could be well over 23C difference. I was also able to lower the load voltage during realbench stress test from 1.288v to 1.243 and remain stable (I guess the cooler the cpu is the less voltage it needs). At 1.234v however, I started getting whea errors in hwinfo, so 1.243v should be the limit for 4.9GHz here. Is that a normal result? I mean compared to other 10900k chips out there? I feel like it should be able to go lower at 4.9GHz, somewhere around 1.2v, or is that possible only for the lucky golden sample chips?

Nice, seems very similar to 3080

It's the msi afterburner on-screen display. There was a new nvidia driver aimed for cyberpunk, few hours before release. Maybe you didn't install it yet. Otherwise, it's possible that your system can't handle ultra settings without DLSS. As you can see even 3080 gets only 40fps without dlss if everything is on ultra at 1440p. DLSS basically makes your system render at lower resolution and then it uses AI to upscale to higher resolution, that's my understanding of it at least.

I just took couple of screenshots at spawn, with same orientation, to compare all the options: https://imgur.com/a/rShHYJu

It could've been the same for 9XXXK, but he did it with 10900k as well. I also found this comparison between conductonaut and kryonaut (on stock IHS it seems). If the difference is that small on direct die as well, I don't know if it's worth risking damaging the cooler or worse frying the components if it leaks. I could also try to find the new kryonaut extreme, as it seems to have a bit better thermal conductivity (14,2 W/mK, while kryonaut has 12,5 W/mk). But it would probably perform almost the same.

der8auer said he got about 7C difference with liquid metal under IHS. Do you think I'd see similar results with direct die + kryonaut? I saw gamer nexus post this some time ago: "If you're direct die mounting and eliminating the IHS, it's best to use a good thermal paste (not LM) for long-term viability and for peak performance. LM is good, but delta is minimal vs. paste in direct die. What most people don't understand is that the biggest improvement from delidding and re-lidding w/ liquid metal isn't from the liquid metal itself, but rather the removal of a layer of silicone adhesive and thus an air gap die-to-IHS. LM helps a lot, but isn't everything" . Don't know how accurate that is however.

I'm not 100% sure yet, but I think I'm going to delid my 10900k with rockitcool delidding tool. In fact, I plan on doing the direct die cooling as well. My quesiton is, how much of a difference would conductonaut make here compared to kryonaut? I saw gamer nexus recommend using normal paste with direct die. To quote them, they said: "If you're direct die mounting and eliminating the IHS, it's best to use a good thermal paste (not LM) for long-term viability and for peak performance. LM is good, but delta is minimal vs. paste in direct die. What most people don't understand is that the biggest improvement from delidding and re-lidding w/ liquid metal isn't from the liquid metal itself, but rather the removal of a layer of silicone adhesive and thus an air gap die-to-IHS. LM helps a lot, but isn't everything." Is that true? Again, how many degrees (°C) would the difference be between the two (kryonaut and conductonaut) on direct die? I don't think I can use conductonaut with direct die because I'll probably switch to kraken z73 which has a copper coldplate, not nickel, plus it's really risky since it's conductive. Also, I saw a video on youtube where some guy couldn't get a proper contact between arctic lf2 and cpu die, and he was using the same rockitcool's direct die frame. Could it have the same issue with kraken z73?