3900x & 9900k: Not Worth Overclocking?

[Mackerel Ice Cream]

What do you guys thinks? Both cpus doesn't seem like it's worth it to overclock at all and just stick with stock.

[Jurrunio]

9900k is definitely worth overclocking. the 3900x could be squeezed more with BCLK and PBO, but I'd say it's not nearly as noticeable as memory overclocking.

[Fasauceome]

the 9900K overclocks farther, but its single threaded performance at stock is enough for 144Hz gaming and the like, so not there's not really a reason. same story with the 3900X. Down the line, when performance is lacking, an overclock does indeed assist performance.

[GOTSpectrum]

The 9900k would benefit more from OCing, but tbh with the power consumption of the intel part at stock I'd not bother overclocking unless it really is needed.

 

On a side note, if you are interested in putting your chip to work for the betterment of man kind and potentially wining some prizes then why not consider signing up to the LTT Official folding month. You need to actually participate in order to be entered for the prize draw.

 

 

[Zberg]

The current dichotomy is that you can get some sweet performance gains with intel with overclocking, given you have some good cooling.  And you will need the cooling.  You get a more noticeable gain than ryzen will get.  And you will get better clocks and the benefits that go with that.

 

Ryzen doesn't overclock much, and the gains you get from it are really kinda, meh at best.  All that said...out of the box it comes performing almost tip-top, and can really do great with the stock coolers they come with.  Can you get a couple 100 mhz more with a 150$ AIO?  Ya sure, but it's a huge waste of money.  Ryzen comes screaming out of the box with great performance that matches (or beats) intel so there is something to said about that ease of use.

[Mackerel Ice Cream]

29 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

9900k is definitely worth overclocking. the 3900x could be squeezed more with BCLK and PBO, but I'd say it's not nearly as noticeable as memory overclocking.

9900k gets so hot though while ocing and I don't feel comfortable with that as I will be using an all-in-one.

30 minutes ago, Fasauceome said:

the 9900K overclocks farther, but its single threaded performance at stock is enough for 144Hz gaming and the like, so not there's not really a reason. same story with the 3900X. Down the line, when performance is lacking, an overclock does indeed assist performance.

I like the 9900k's boost a lot and hope I won't be asking too much out of the 3900x or 9900k while running virtualization plus vr gaming.

 

26 minutes ago, GOTSpectrum said:

The 9900k would benefit more from OCing, but tbh with the power consumption of the intel part at stock I'd not bother overclocking unless it really is needed.

 

On a side note, if you are interested in putting your chip to work for the betterment of man kind and potentially wining some prizes then why not consider signing up to the LTT Official folding month. You need to actually participate in order to be entered for the prize draw.

 I was hoping to oc it for vmware guest os? and vr gaming, but it just doesn't seem like it's worth it. They aren't sandy bridges. Sigh. That's actually something I haven't done before, but always meant to. Fold.

9 minutes ago, Zberg said:

The current dichotomy is that you can get some sweet performance gains with intel with overclocking, given you have some good cooling.  And you will need the cooling.  You get a more noticeable gain than ryzen will get.  And you will get better clocks and the benefits that go with that.

 

Ryzen doesn't overclock much, and the gains you get from it are really kinda, meh at best.  All that said...out of the box it comes performing almost tip-top, and can really do great with the stock coolers they come with.  Can you get a couple 100 mhz more with a 150$ AIO?  Ya sure, but it's a huge waste of money.  Ryzen comes screaming out of the box with great performance that matches (or beats) intel so there is something to said about that ease of use.

I don't know if it's worth turning off the single or two core boosting though for an all core oc on 9900k.

 

I was looking at getting a 3900x for those beautiful, sexy cores and threads for 24/7 virtualization, I'm going to use my linux guest os as my main driver and then just alt tab into windows for gaming, but the 9900k has some pretty good benchmarks for the gaming side. I'm so conflicted. 12 cores / 24 threads vs 8 cores / 16 threads.

[GOTSpectrum]

2 minutes ago, lowao said:

That's actually something I haven't done before, but always meant to. Fold.

Well now is the perfect time to get on board!

[Mackerel Ice Cream]

11 minutes ago, GOTSpectrum said:

Well now is the perfect time to get on board!

It looks like I will have an extra computer soon. Ha!

[GamerDude]

Out of the box, my 3900X is screaming fast, that's for sure. But, what concerns me is the voltage, it is at 1.475v......though idle temp's at 36C'ish, so it isn't bad (using Thermaltake Water 3.0 360 AIO). I'd read that it isn't good for the longevity of the CPU to have the voltage set at that level. I used Profile setting to run all cores at 4.4ghz at 1.3375v and it now idles at a cool 34C. Room temp set on my AC is 25C, so I'm happy with the temps.....and speed of my rig. Played games and ran some benchmarks with no issue....