First pc build ever

[SpecTre12345]

1 hour ago, lee32uk said:

*snip*

 

How have you been disproved exactly? Well, if you do not know, then you have more important issues to deal with than winning an argument about Motherboards on the Internet. I mean you keep bringing up the Extreme 4, ignoring the fact that it was you who introduced it into this disagreement in the first place (clearly intentional gaslighting [or maybe not]). Now here you are saying, it's irrelevant... Well golly gee, isn't that convenient. 

 

Again, you are not at all remaining accurate or scientific or more importantly, consistent. You make claims, and I show you facts that counter your claims. Here you are again claiming, "The Phantom 4 is a low end board and should not be anywhere near a 9900K." I posted here plenty of instances where a low end board handles the 9900k fine: 

 

 

It seems to be, that you are attempting to cherry pick your examples to use as points for your argument, but when refuted you decide to move the goal posts.

 

You want me to "watch this video" but then say "the Phantom 4 isn't included but the ASRock Z390 Pro 4 is in there." This sounds a lot like what happened with the Extreme 4 or the ITX. But for the sake of the argument (and sanity), we will say okay, you have Hardware Unboxed and Tom's Hardware in your corner as sources that "lower end boards" can't handle a 9900k and I have TweakTown, Vortez, Eteknix, and Think Computers that says they can. 

 

Finally, I'm glad we can agree on something, "You can certainly spend less on a Gigabyte board and get more for your money than you would with the likes of Asus."

[Guest]

You are the one who is bringing up the Extreme 4 as an argument. I posted one review on it and that was it. You then took it on yourself to post a whole lot of reviews. The Tweaktown review clearly shows the 9900K running at stock. How is that the same as an overclocked cpu exactly ? They also had a 120mm fan above the VRM area as well. You take that away and you will get worse thermal results. So I guess that is another one 'In my corner' as you put it. The other two reviews don't state testing conditions from what I can see as well as no VRM temps. Just because you can reach 5GHz doesn't mean the thing isn't running hot.

 

The Z390 Pro 4 and Phantom 4 are 99.99% using the same VRM. That is pretty much the same for any manufacturer. They just stick the same VRM on until a certain price point. So if the Pro 4 failed then the Phantom 4 isn't going to be any different.

 

Not going to argue on the Gigabyte point. Spending more isn't always better but you need to research first. You can spend top dollar on an Asus board and still end up with a dud.

 

[SpecTre12345]

3 hours ago, lee32uk said:

You are the one who is bringing up the Extreme 4 as an argument. I posted one review on it and that was it. You then took it on yourself to post a whole lot of reviews. The Tweaktown review clearly shows the 9900K running at stock. How is that the same as an overclocked cpu exactly ? They also had a 120mm fan above the VRM area as well. You take that away and you will get worse thermal results. So I guess that is another one 'In my corner' as you put it. The other two reviews don't state testing conditions from what I can see as well as no VRM temps. Just because you can reach 5GHz doesn't mean the thing isn't running hot.

 

The Z390 Pro 4 and Phantom 4 are 99.99% using the same VRM. That is pretty much the same for any manufacturer. They just stick the same VRM on until a certain price point. So if the Pro 4 failed then the Phantom 4 isn't going to be any different.

 

Not going to argue on the Gigabyte point. Spending more isn't always better but you need to research first. You can spend top dollar on an Asus board and still end up with a dud.

 

I took it upon myself to post the other reviews, because you posted a review to use as a source for showing that the Phantom 4 will throttle with a 9900k because it does so with the Extreme 4 (and I wanted to show you that doesn't exactly sound correct, because Tom's experience isn't indicative compared to 3-4 other reviewers). How do you not understand the reasoning behind that? Yes, the TweakTown review shows it running at stock, because again, the argument wasn't only if the board could handle a 9900k overclock, but if it could handle the 9900k period. Nevertheless, I also posted other reviews that shows it handling an overclock (albeit pretty hefty ones). 

 

Yeah, you can take away the fan, but in a case, there are usually blow holes on the left panel/door and even if there aren't; any decent case even with only average Air Flow could simulate that same effect (blowing over the VRM area to keep the temps in check).

 

You keep saying the "other reviews don't show VRM Temps." I keep explaining to you that if they aren't making sure to touch upon that specific subject, doesn't that tell you something? That maybe there were no issues. You say "Just because you can reach 5GHz doesn't mean it isn't running hot," while neglecting the fact that it equally doesn't mean it's not running cool or at acceptable temps either.

 

I mean did you completely glance over this? -- 

 

 

https://thinkcomputers.org/asrock-z390-extreme4-motherboard-review/5/

 

A stable overclock of 5.1 GHz across all eight cores, @ 100% Load without throttling! Using deductive reasoning, that has to tell you that the Phantom 4 can at least handle a 4.7/4.8GHz overclock on all cores, which would be a solid result for the price of the motherboard.

 

Unfortunately, without actual benchmarks or reviews, simply claiming they are "pretty much the same" or "isn't going to be any different" isn't going to cut it (no more than it would with the Extreme 4 or Phantom ITX - which you seem to be against). I'm not sure if you have checked out the specifications for the Phantom 4 but the Super Alloy, Digi Power, and Solid Capacitor design means the motherboard is robust, will offer good power delivery, voltage regulation, stability, longevity etc.

 

Another thing, when checking the CPU Support List, you are welcomed with the following: 

 

 

Showing both support for the 9900k and 9900kf: https://www.asrock.com/MB/Intel/Z390 Phantom Gaming 4/index.asp#CPU

 

Legally, I'm not sure it would be in ASRock's best interest to put the 9900k in their CPU Support List for the Phantom Gaming 4, if it couldn't actually handle the CPU...

[trevb0t]

@BiG StroOnZ @lee32uk I'm sure there is another place you guys could do this. I doubt it's helpful to OP.

[Guest]

9 hours ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

 

I took it upon myself to post the other reviews, because you posted a review to use as a source for showing that the Phantom 4 will throttle with a 9900k because it does so with the Extreme 4 (and I wanted to show you that doesn't exactly sound correct, because Tom's experience isn't indicative compared to 3-4 other reviewers). How do you not understand the reasoning behind that? Yes, the TweakTown review shows it running at stock, because again, the argument wasn't only if the board could handle a 9900k overclock, but if it could handle the 9900k period. Nevertheless, I also posted other reviews that shows it handling an overclock (albeit pretty hefty ones). 

 

Yeah, you can take away the fan, but in a case, there are usually blow holes on the left panel/door and even if there aren't; any decent case even with only average Air Flow could simulate that same effect (blowing over the VRM area to keep the temps in check).

 

You keep saying the "other reviews don't show VRM Temps." I keep explaining to you that if they aren't making sure to touch upon that specific subject, doesn't that tell you something? That maybe there were no issues. You say "Just because you can reach 5GHz doesn't mean it isn't running hot," while neglecting the fact that it equally doesn't mean it's not running cool or at acceptable temps either.

 

I mean did you completely glance over this? -- 

 

 

https://thinkcomputers.org/asrock-z390-extreme4-motherboard-review/5/

 

A stable overclock of 5.1 GHz across all eight cores, @ 100% Load without throttling! Using deductive reasoning, that has to tell you that the Phantom 4 can at least handle a 4.7/4.8GHz overclock on all cores, which would be a solid result for the price of the motherboard.

 

Unfortunately, without actual benchmarks or reviews, simply claiming they are "pretty much the same" or "isn't going to be any different" isn't going to cut it (no more than it would with the Extreme 4 or Phantom ITX - which you seem to be against). I'm not sure if you have checked out the specifications for the Phantom 4 but the Super Alloy, Digi Power, and Solid Capacitor design means the motherboard is robust, will offer good power delivery, voltage regulation, stability, longevity etc.

 

Another thing, when checking the CPU Support List, you are welcomed with the following: 

 

 

Showing both support for the 9900k and 9900kf: https://www.asrock.com/MB/Intel/Z390 Phantom Gaming 4/index.asp#CPU

 

Legally, I'm not sure it would be in ASRock's best interest to put the 9900k in their CPU Support List for the Phantom Gaming 4, if it couldn't actually handle the CPU...

The Extreme 4 is a higher end board than the Phantom 4. If that is showing thermal issues with one review site then what makes you think an entry level board with a worse VRM would cope ? I have showed you a video that clearly shows the ASRock Z390 Pro 4 (Which has the same VRM/Heatsink) failing with a 9900K. So how is the Phantom 4 going to be any different when it uses the same design ? Not sure why you can't grasp a simple fact. If the VRM is the same across those two boards (Pro 4 and Phantom 4) then performance isn't going to be vastly different is it ? 

 

 

As for case fans they do not blow directly over the VRM. If you have a crap VRM to start with then you would need direct airflow over it to help with temps as mentioned in that Tweaktown review. Some air coolers like the BeQuiet TF can help cool the VRM as it is a top down cooler so it will blow directly over the cpu area. 

 

 

A lot of reviews don't show VRM temps as they might not have the equipment to do so. Pretty sure it is only recently that Tweaktown have started showing thermals images. Also it depends on the reviewer how in depth they go. Same can be said for any pc hardware review. Some psu reviews are fairly basic compared to other sites as some do not have expensive equipment for testing.

 

 

As for the Phantom 4 supporting the 9900K well of course it supports it, as does any Z390 Motherboard along with Z370 and H370. That doesn't mean you should do it. A lot of X399 boards can't handle the high end 32 core Threadripper cpu's even though they support it. In fact Asus had to redesign one of their higher end boards as it was throttling. It was posted on Der8auer's youtube channel as he is the one who found the problem if I recall correctly.

 

I mean this cpu cooler will fit on a Z390 board, so I guess it must be fine to use with a 9900K if your logic is anything to go by ?

 

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/BbBv6h/zalman-cpu-cooler-cnps80f

[SpecTre12345]

7 hours ago, lee32uk said:

*snip*

 

Sigh, you continually move the goal posts, to avoid the fact that you're wrong (as seen from the incredible amount of evidence, sources, citations, information etc. provided to you, without you changing your opinions/theories to fit the facts, not even so much as a slight budge). Every single time you get proven wrong, with an innumerable amount of examples and data, you quickly change your tune; pivoting your newly established argument to suit your backpedaling - while conveniently ignoring all previous sources, graphs, charts, etc. shown to you. 

 

Now since you have been doing this continually throughout the entire discussion/debate - no matter what. You have finally proven to me you have nothing to contribute; other than willful ignorance, an inflated ego and too much pride. As I have attempted many times to remain civil, and redirect your tunnel vision on the topic. But your absurd immaturity, and ineptness, coupled with pretentiousness (and never ending logical fallacies), leaves me no choice, other than to block you (since you are unwilling to change or be honest).

 

Welcome to my ignore list! Have a good day, and enjoy the rest of your life.  

[Guest]

48 minutes ago, BiG StroOnZ said:

 

Sigh, you continually move the goal posts, to avoid the fact that you're wrong (as seen from the incredible amount of evidence, sources, citations, information etc. provided to you, without you changing your opinions/theories to fit the facts, not even so much as a slight budge). Every single time you get proven wrong, with an innumerable amount of examples and data, you quickly change your tune; pivoting your newly established argument to suit your backpedaling - while conveniently ignoring all previous sources, graphs, charts, etc. shown to you. 

 

Now since you have been doing this continually throughout the entire discussion/debate - no matter what. You have finally proven to me you have nothing to contribute; other than willful ignorance, an inflated ego and too much pride. As I have attempted many times to remain civil, and redirect your tunnel vision on the topic. But your absurd immaturity, and ineptness, coupled with pretentiousness (and never ending logical fallacies), leaves me no choice, other than to block you (since you are unwilling to change or be honest).

 

Welcome to my ignore list! Have a good day, and enjoy the rest of your life.  

What is this so called evidence you have shown me that proves that the ASRock Z390 Phantom 4 can handle a 9900K ? You know the board that you put in your spec on the previous page. Pretty sure you haven't shown a damn thing on that. I have posted a video clearly showing that a board with the same VRM as the Phantom 4 failing under load with an overclocked i9 9900K but you seem to ignore that point. So no you haven't proven me wrong on anything. You seem to think you know more than you actually do.