Questions about 10850k/Z590

[Grisweld]

I've recently purchased a gigabyte z590 aorus pro ax (price/m.2/usb) and a 10850k, I've left everything stock in bios except xmp but noticed that it runs at 4.8ghz at 1.36v in bios and while running test and doing daily task I've seen vcore go up to 1.46v and 227w on power. The highest clocks on all cores I've seen not under load has been 5.0 and under load like a multicore test 4.7. Temps seem to be okay. My question is about the voltage from what I've read and comprehend it seems a bit high for a factory clocked chip. If someone has the time to help me out id appreciate it id hate to have to return for a bad silicon but will if I need to.

[Mister Woof]

Gigabyte you want to be looking at VR VOUT sensor for voltage reporting. Is that the sensor you're seeing? Make sure you're not confusing it with VID, which isn't the same.

 

Once you're sure about the readout, know that idle/lightly threaded apps don't worry about voltage; 1.36v is fine. Generally under 1.45v is fine for lightly threaded loads. You will thermally throttle all-core over 1.3v on most cooling setups anyway.

 

Personally, I have set mine to 1.37v fixed vcore to maintain lightly threaded boost clocks, and vdroops to 1.28v all-core. At that voltage for me at 5.1ghz all-core, my chip will definitely pull 220w+ under full load.

 

4.8ghz is normal all-core for that chip, and 5.0 in lighter loads is within normal limits.4.7ghz is from TVB throttling if it's over 70c, also normal.

 

Gigabyte boards also ignore power limits.

[Somerandomtechyboi]

29 minutes ago, Grisweld said:

I've left everything stock in bios

Lmfao

 

Get a 5800x if you arent overclocking or atleast a 10900(f)

5800x will pretty much obliterate a non oced 10900/10850

 

So unless you got a good deal this is a really questionable choice of parts

 

 

And mobos tend to wayyy overvolt intel cpus, i think 4.8ghz with a 10850k only requires around 1.2v vcore

[Mister Woof]

7 minutes ago, Somerandomtechyboi said:

Lmfao

 

Get a 5800x if you arent overclocking or atleast a 10900(f)

5800x will pretty much obliterate a non oced 10900/10850

 

So unless you got a good deal this is a really questionable choice of parts

 

 

And mobos tend to wayyy overvolt intel cpus, i think 4.8ghz with a 10850k only requires around 1.2v vcore

They aren't asking about AMD systems and they already purchased and used the Intel parts.

[Somerandomtechyboi]

1 minute ago, Mister Woof said:

Is it necessary to Intel shame all the time? This is a very common theme on this forum and it gets old pretty fast. I suffered through it even when Ryzen sucked, and now that there is a minor lead the AMD camp is insufferable. 

 

Besides, in real world typical workloads, differences are minimal if even perceivable. 

 

Regardless, he isn't asking about AMD systems and they already purchased and used the Intel parts. 

You go intel you better get a good deal or are willing/know how to mess with voltages and stuff or overclock

 

On amds side its just a matter of turning on pbo and thatll auto oc for you, though like most auto ocing stuff it still has a long way to go cause non optimal voltages, but pretty much decently optimal and its just plug and play

 

On intels side itll run but the boards tend to just overvolt the absolute sht out of the cpus so if you dont know or want to mess around with vcore you are kinda screwed, esp if you have a rather weak cooler

 

 

Amd = plug and play, efficiency

Intel = potentially really good deals, may need to manually tune the voltages in the bios

 

 

Yea i think my wording is garbage

¯\_ (ツ) _/¯ 

[Mister Woof]

5 minutes ago, Somerandomtechyboi said:

You go intel you better get a good deal or are willing/know how to mess with voltages and stuff or overclock

 

On amds side its just a matter of turning on pbo and thatll auto oc for you, though like most auto ocing stuff it still has a long way to go cause non optimal voltages, but pretty much decently optimal and its just plug and play

 

On intels side itll run but the boards tend to just overvolt the absolute sht out of the cpus so if you dont know or want to mess around with vcore you are kinda screwed, esp if you have a rather weak cooler

 

 

Amd = plug and play, efficiency

Intel = potentially really good deals, may need to manually tune the voltages in the bios

 

 

Yea i think my wording is garbage

¯\_ (ツ) _/¯ 

Not disagreeing with you, and I updated my post to be more friendly but not fast enough for you to see it I guess.

 

As far as overvolting, it really depends. I can't tell you how much voltage the Z590 gave to my 10900KF because I never ran it at stock for any length of time. I seem to recall it being highish though, so touche. Same goes for my 8700k on the Z370.

 

As far as lengthy stock numbers, the only results I have are for a my wife's Gigabyte Z390 with a 9900k....1.15v most of the time and at most 1.22v. That's stock because my wife hates it when I mess with her stuff.

[unclewebb]

@Grisweld The default voltage table for the 10850K tends to be on the high side. That is the whole reason why your CPU became a 10850K and not a 10900K. High voltage chips consume more power and run hotter compared to low voltage chips. 

 

Do you only want to run it at its default speed? Some users prefer an all core overclock so it runs at a constant speed regardless of how many cores are active.

 

At default settings, the 10850K can use a 52 multiplier. When the multiplier goes up, the peak voltage will need to go up too to maintain stability. I prefer to run my 10850K at a fixed 5000 MHz. This allows me to keep the voltage at a reasonable level. The voltage curve tends to go way up when you push these CPUs beyond this speed.

 

The amount of voltage required also depends on what speed you are running your CPU cache at. I like 50X core and 47X cache. With an Asus board you can run a negative offset voltage and get the voltage curve down to a more reasonable level. Voltage at 1.252V while running steady at 5000 MHz is not too bad. Less voltage helps keep the temperatures at a very reasonable level. 

 

 

 

A Ryzen 5800X needs liquid nitrogen to beat a mildly overclocked 10850 K in Cinebench R23. 

 

 

No need to be a brain surgeon either. Run ThrottleStop and push the all core 51 multiplier button. 

 

 

Edit - Here are some real world Ryzen R23 numbers. 

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/kuqndd/5800x_cinebench_r23_score/

 

[Grisweld]

43 minutes ago, Somerandomtechyboi said:

Lmfao

 

Get a 5800x if you arent overclocking or atleast a 10900(f)

5800x will pretty much obliterate a non oced 10900/10850

 

So unless you got a good deal this is a really questionable choice of parts

 

 

And mobos tend to wayyy overvolt intel cpus, i think 4.8ghz with a 10850k only requires around 1.2v vcore

I do not plan on going amd anytime soon, never stated that i was not gonna oc and tbh i dont see what is questionable when it comes to my choice of parts if you could clarify this it would be helpful. It just seems that for everything being stock without any tuning its running higher voltages. 

[Mister Woof]

37 minutes ago, Grisweld said:

I do not plan on going amd anytime soon, never stated that i was not gonna oc and tbh i dont see what is questionable when it comes to my choice of parts if you could clarify this it would be helpful. It just seems that for everything being stock without any tuning its running higher voltages. 

I think he means if you don't plan on OC then "it's a waste" which is debatable. Real world difference between an OC 10900k and stock 10850k isn't really that meaningful. But to you original question - what sensor are you reading these voltages from?

[Somerandomtechyboi]

6 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

Not disagreeing with you, and I updated my post to be more friendly but not fast enough for you to see it I guess.

I think im the idiot here that cant put words together correctly

 

What goes around comes around

¯\_ (ツ) _/¯ 

 

 

6 hours ago, Grisweld said:

i dont see what is questionable when it comes to my choice of parts if you could clarify this it would be helpful.

Intel is a great option if you can find a good deal, the questionable thing here is, why a k cpu and a z590 if you arent even going to overclock?

 

Cause overclocking chipset and cpu is very much questionable to me, esp if the board and cooler are expensive and have good vrms/cooling performance

 

Cheap z series but non oc cpu isnt that questionable since cheap z board usually has a better vrm than a mid range b board board

 

 

And if you are the type of person that just wants plug and play and nothing to do with manual tuning, why an overclockable intel chip + a board that ignores power limits (aka overvolting the sht out of the cpu) instead of amd where its just plug and play and all you need to do is turn on amds xmp equivalent in the bios, you donteven need to turn on pbo if you just want it to run efficiently

[MrP6k]

9 hours ago, Somerandomtechyboi said:

You go intel you better get a good deal or are willing/know how to mess with voltages and stuff or overclock

 

On amds side its just a matter of turning on pbo and thatll auto oc for you, though like most auto ocing stuff it still has a long way to go cause non optimal voltages, but pretty much decently optimal and its just plug and play

 

On intels side itll run but the boards tend to just overvolt the absolute sht out of the cpus so if you dont know or want to mess around with vcore you are kinda screwed, esp if you have a rather weak cooler

 

 

Amd = plug and play, efficiency

Intel = potentially really good deals, may need to manually tune the voltages in the bios

 

 

Yea i think my wording is garbage

¯\_ (ツ) _/¯ 

dude, OP's did not ask for alternative CPUs. so curb your fanboyism

(I've also seen my 3200g spiking up to 1,5v before, got me worried enough to post on the forum. so AMD's not so perfect after all, eh?)

 

I'm all up for shitting on companies for making bad products, but this is not the place, nor the time. 

 

Also remember that AMD and INTEL are BOTH just in it for the cash primarily, so stop fanboying all over them.

[xg32]

9 hours ago, Grisweld said:

.

i think he was just looking for the oppotunity to tell any1 to go amd really , the 5900x is probably better if you were gonna run stock, but that's all im gonna say on this.

 

As for the voltage, 1.46v is single core is pretty damn high even for just single core if you are sure the reading is correct 225w isn't even true 100% load, so careful testing further on your current settings @Mister Woof and @unclewebb knows a better ballpark than i do

 

According to silicon lottery, you can probably run 4.8 on alot lower voltage, in your case you can either use a -.05v offset (can try .-09v but will prolly be unstable when idle), or set a fixed voltage of 1.325v 

 

https://siliconlottery.com/collections/cometlake/products/10900k49g?variant=32927024840790

 

it says 10900k, but it'll run, i know you were gonna leave it at stock, but doing a bit of tuning will probably get you 5.0 easy, or at worst 4.8 at a much lower voltage. glhf.

 

[unclewebb]

19 minutes ago, xg32 said:

i know you were gonna leave it at stock

 

9 hours ago, Grisweld said:

never stated that i was not gonna oc

He originally said he was getting high voltages at stock settings. That is normal on all boards and seems to be a bigger problem on some Gigabyte boards.

 

He never said that he was not going to overclock. 

[Somerandomtechyboi]

2 hours ago, MrP6k said:

I've also seen my 3200g spiking up to 1,5v before, got me worried enough to post on the forum. so AMD's not so perfect after all, eh?

Ofc they arent

 

Plus 1st and 2nd gen ryzen are trash anyways, even an epyc 7603, a literal 32 core cpu gets beaten by a 5950x, which has half the cores

 

So if you were considering ryzen 1st or 2nd gen over intel 10th gen then obv id laugh at you since the efficiency argument doesnt exist cause 1st and 2nd gen arent 7nm and they also suck ass performance wise, not to mention i dont think you can even use pbo on a 1st or 2nd gen ryzen so pretty much worse than intel 10th gen for the same price

 

10th gen intel >>> ryzen 1st and 2nd gen

 

 

Tbh i wouldnt worry about 1.5v, intel 14nm spec is 1.52v and not sure on ryzen but 12nm is prob the same, 1.5v is prob ok for those, though 1.5v on a 7nm id def worry about considering most xoc that i see on 7nm ryzen only goes to around 1.75v, idk if thats a board limit or the death zone for 7nm but for all i know -0.3v from a death zone voltage is completely fine, so 1.7v is completely fine on 45nm core since 2v is a death zone voltage, though -0.2 from death zone is where it starts to get abit sketchy

 

 

Also i think ill try wording my posts better next time cause remember that im pretty garbage at wording

 

And no there is no such thing as perfect

[Freakwise]

5 minutes ago, Somerandomtechyboi said:

even an epyc 7603, a literal 32 core cpu gets beaten by a 5950x, which has half the cores

And you know the use case of epyc cpu? It's literally not designed to be used on ANY consumer pc 

[Somerandomtechyboi]

Just now, Freakwise said:

And you know the use case of epyc cpu? It's literally not designed to be used on ANY consumer pc 

Yea more pcie lanes yada yada

 

But cpu performance it still loses to a 5950x

 

If you really need the pcie lanes just wait for milan to fully release and watch those epyc rome prices fall right out of the sky as everyone starts upgrading to milan, tbh there used to be some cheap rome es cpus on ebay but seems like most of em have been bought up, either by ppl looking for a cheap cpu with tons of cores or overclockers

 

Even if its not for consumers if one was willing enough and needed the cores then theres nothing stopping you from building a system with an amd epyc in it, just buy all the sht from ebay

 

Heck ive found epyc 7551 usually going around 500$

 

 

And can we please stop hijacking op thread?

[Grisweld]

On 9/15/2021 at 3:24 PM, Mister Woof said:

I think he means if you don't plan on OC then "it's a waste" which is debatable. Real world difference between an OC 10900k and stock 10850k isn't really that meaningful. But to you original question - what sensor are you reading these voltages from?

Vcore in bios, and also VR VOUT in HWiNFO. 

[Mister Woof]

19 minutes ago, Grisweld said:

Vcore in bios, and also VR VOUT in HWiNFO. 

What is your VR ROUT under all-core load

[Grisweld]

19 hours ago, Somerandomtechyboi said:

I think im the idiot here that cant put words together correctly

 

What goes around comes around

¯\_ (ツ) _/¯ 

 

 

Intel is a great option if you can find a good deal, the questionable thing here is, why a k cpu and a z590 if you arent even going to overclock?

 

Cause overclocking chipset and cpu is very much questionable to me, esp if the board and cooler are expensive and have good vrms/cooling performance

 

Cheap z series but non oc cpu isnt that questionable since cheap z board usually has a better vrm than a mid range b board board

 

 

And if you are the type of person that just wants plug and play and nothing to do with manual tuning, why an overclockable intel chip + a board that ignores power limits (aka overvolting the sht out of the cpu) instead of amd where its just plug and play and all you need to do is turn on amds xmp equivalent in the bios, you donteven need to turn on pbo if you just want it to run efficiently

I do plan to OC later down the road, basically I'm trying to see where I am stock before moving the bar. as for a z590 mobo the one I'm using has 4 m.2 slots 3 are useful 1 is useless being 10th gen cpu. the 10850k was a good deal the mobo was meh. This mobo supports 2 for the most part unhindered m.2 slots and 1 that shares lanes causing a loss in a sata port. Also the mobo has a ton of usb ports. 4 usb gen1 3.1, 4 usb gen 2, and 4 2.9/1.1 ports. and ofc wifi atm as I have yet to move my router and whatnot up the steps because I'm lazy after remodeling the upstairs of a 120 YO house. I dont even need a i9 for myself but the misses will shortly and I'll upgrade to what I require and she will have this mobo/cpu. my old 6700k was pushed as hard as it could take and was second hand so it was a time to upgrade. The 6700k wont even run unless oc, the old owner beat brakes off the thing but how could you say no to a free cpu and mobo, wasnt even a real upgrade from my 6700 at the time but free is free.

[Mister Woof]

2 minutes ago, Grisweld said:

I do plan to OC later down the road, basically I'm trying to see where I am stock before moving the bar. as for a z590 mobo the one I'm using has 4 m.2 slots 3 are useful 1 is useless being 10th gen cpu. the 10850k was a good deal the mobo was meh. This mobo supports 2 for the most part unhindered m.2 slots and 1 that shares lanes causing a loss in a sata port. Also the mobo has a ton of usb ports. 4 usb gen1 3.1, 4 usb gen 2, and 4 2.9/1.1 ports. and ofc wifi atm as I have yet to move my router and whatnot up the steps because I'm lazy after remodeling the upstairs of a 120 YO house. I dont even need a i9 for myself but the misses will shortly and I'll upgrade to what I require and she will have this mobo/cpu. my old 6700k was pushed as hard as it could take and was second hand so it was a time to upgrade. The 6700k wont even run unless oc, the old owner beat brakes off the thing but how could you say no to a free cpu and mobo, wasnt even a real upgrade from my 6700 at the time but free is free.

When you manually OC, things will be different. At stock values, the motherboard will usually apply more voltage than is actually required for your sample so that it can accommodate the vast majority of samples - they need to make sure any chip you put in there will work even if it's a low bin - the 10850k being even more so due to it being a lower binned 10900K. 

 

Honestly unless you want to spend a whole lot of time messing with things for the fun of it, performance differences aren't huge. I would just let it go as it is and as long as all-core load isn't too high of voltage and heat, leave it.

[Grisweld]

14 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

When you manually OC, things will be different. At stock values, the motherboard will usually apply more voltage than is actually required for your sample so that it can accommodate the vast majority of samples - they need to make sure any chip you put in there will work even if it's a low bin - the 10850k being even more so due to it being a lower binned 10900K. 

 

Honestly unless you want to spend a whole lot of time messing with things for the fun of it, performance differences aren't huge. I would just let it go as it is and as long as all-core load isn't too high of voltage and heat, leave it.

(All core load) 1.235v-1.296v current/ 1.235v min/ 1.396v max, hottest core is 81c. All cores are 75c-81 running Cinebench r23 for 10 mins. all core 4.7 under load. (Idle) 34c, 4.8-5.0, VR VOUT 1.225v current/ 1.197v min/1.325v max. Tbh its way more then I need but for misses it will be what she needs. She just does not need it right this moment and her budget is accounted for with a ipad pro costing close to 3x what I spent on this. Already had the ram, PSU, a GPU, case, AIO, and storage.  

[Mister Woof]

13 minutes ago, Grisweld said:

(All core load) 1.235v-1.296v current/ 1.235v min/ 1.396v max, hottest core is 81c. All cores are 75c-81 running Cinebench r23 for 10 mins. all core 4.7 under load. (Idle) 34c, 4.8-5.0, VR VOUT 1.225v current/ 1.197v min/1.325v max. Tbh its way more then I need but for misses it will be what she needs. She just does not need it right this moment and her budget is accounted for with a ipad pro costing close to 3x what I spent on this. Already had the ram, PSU, a GPU, case, AIO, and storage.  

VR VOUT 1.225v current/ 1.197v min/1.325v max.

 

Seems fine to me.

[Somerandomtechyboi]

4 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

performance differences aren't huge. I would just let it go as it is and as long as all-core load isn't too high of voltage and heat, leave it.

Tbh just set an all core of 4.8 or something and undervolt your cpu to ~1.25v vcore, basically nothing to be gained even if you overclock the absolute sht out of your cpu

 

Instead just buy some fast ram and overclock the absolute sht out of that cause i think fast rams give more benifit than overclocking to cpu performance nowadays

 

Correct me if im wrong but i think to acheive these clocks you actually need more volts on amd than on intel, kinda ironic tbh so that does confuse things abit in terms of efficiency

 

Is 14nm running at 1.25v more efficient or atleast lower power draw than 7nm running at 1.35v?

[Mister Woof]

It's not apples to apples anyway, since they have different architectures

6 minutes ago, Somerandomtechyboi said:

Tbh just set an all core of 4.8 or something and undervolt your cpu to ~1.25v vcore, basically nothing to be gained even if you overclock the absolute sht out of your cpu

 

Instead just buy some fast ram and overclock the absolute sht out of that cause i think fast rams give more benifit than overclocking to cpu performance nowadays

 

Correct me if im wrong but i think to acheive these clocks you actually need more volts on amd than on intel, kinda ironic tbh so that does confuse things abit in terms of efficiency

 

Is 14nm running at 1.25v more efficient or atleast lower power draw than 7nm running at 1.35v?

 

[Somerandomtechyboi]

2 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

It's not apples to apples anyway, since they have different architectures

 

Though will 7nm at 1.35v draw more than a 14nm at 1.25v?

 

Maybe its just the mobos overvolting the sht out of intel cpus that give the impression of intel cpus running like nuclear reactors