16 minutes ago, Daedalus said:

Thank you very much @FunknNasty : ) Yes, this is what I try to achieve. Right now I added a 2 factor AVX and reduced the Vcore at 1.35v trying to see how stable it will be. I think I will stick to the XMP profile for the RAM and try not to change it.

There is some performance to be found at the northbridge chipset  ...you have what looks like 4200 ....I'd try to work that into your final build at around 4500.

 

Edited November 12, 20187 yr by FunknNasty

oh, and echoing what Martin is saying about XMP  ....don't be afraid to drop your mems down to something like 3200 c14 to get a stable 5.0. I'd take a 5.0 setup with 3200 c14 over a 4.7 with 3600 cXXXX any day of the week.

16 minutes ago, Daedalus said:

Thank you very much @FunknNasty : ) Yes, this is what I try to achieve. Right now I added a 2 factor AVX and reduced the Vcore at 1.35v trying to see how stable it will be. I think I will stick to the XMP profile for the RAM and try not to change it.

 

Edited November 12, 20187 yr by FunknNasty

16 minutes ago, FunknNasty said:

oh, and echoing what Martin is saying about XMP  ....don't be afraid to drop your mems down to something like 3200 c14 to get a stable 5.0. I'd take a 5.0 setup with 3200 c14 over a 4.7 with 3600 cXXXX any day of the week.

 

Oh thanks..That was something I never thought as a possibility. I will certainly try the stability in such case. I'm thinking (and wishing) that maybe instability in my case is not a factor of Vcore only but also high RAM frequency. Thank you very much for this!

Edited November 12, 20187 yr by Daedalus

One other thought the overclock game:

Until this thread 9900K/9700K Overclock performance review I was running my machine at 5000, the cache bus (north bridge) at 4500 and the mems at 4133 c17. Now I'm running 5200/4800 with mems at 3866 c16.  I gave up a little on the mem's, but the sacrifice was more than offset by the additional horse power I get with cpu and north bridge speeds. Oh, and on top of that, my overall system latency (as measured by Aida64) has actually improved.

1 hour ago, martin-w said:

It's not an i9)

Spot-on, Martin. My goof. It's an i7.but I am pretty certain you mentioned a Hero along the lines, somewhere, and that what caught my eye as I do like Asus MoBos. Have never given me any probs over the years.

Must have been the Maximus X Hero. I like Asus boards too, in fact I have to go right back to my first bought PC to find anything different.

I did raise an eyebrow recently regarding Asus's decision to cut costs with a 4 phase VRM on the Maximus XI Hero... but even that isn't a big deal for most purchasers of the board. 

I like other features of Asius boards too. I actually like Ai Suite, although i know in the past some have had issues with it. Use it for Fan Xpert. 

The only issue I've had was one Asus board that went bonkers and took out my PSU and surge protector. Now that was very weird... and a long story.

9 minutes ago, martin-w said:

I did raise an eyebrow recently regarding Asus's decision to cut costs with a 4 phase VRM on the Maximus XI Her

I read that too, but the current Custom PC, give it their Premium Grade marks. Was a tad sceptical when I read that Australian guy giving it the mark-down. As I utterly abhor anything to do with Gigabyte after their below 3rd Class RTB Warranty in Ca., of all places, I thought, no rush getting a MoBo for that i7-8086k. Wait to see the flow first.

Edited November 12, 20187 yr by vc10man

9 minutes ago, martin-w said:

I actually like Ai Suite,

I too use it to o/c my i5-2500k

I'm now running an 8086K on a Maximus XI Hero.  The only nontrivial issue I had to sort to get this thing running at 5.3GHz (NB at 4.8) was finding the right voltage for my RAM...it was throwing the very occasional (but very unacceptable) memory error in Memtest 86+ at its rated speed and voltage (3600 CAS 15 @ 1.35v).  It took a modest bump in voltage to 1.365v to get it stable at XMP timings.

I'm really liking both the CPU and the Hero motherboard.

Regards

7 minutes ago, vc10man said:

I read that too, but the current Custom PC, give it their Premium Grade marks. Was a tad sceptical when I read that Australian guy giving it the mark-down. As I utterly abhor anything to do with Gigabyte after their below 3rd Class RTB Warranty in Ca., of all places, I thought, no rush getting a MoBo for that i7-8086k. Wait to see the flow first.

 

It is actually true that it's a 4 phase, and more than likely a cost cutting exercise. Gamers Nexus did a a very good analysis. VRM temp will be higher, but for the average enthusiast who isn't hammering the hell out of his PC 24/7 it's not an issue. Just an eyebrow raiser that a fairly expensive board has a cost cutting measure in place and the other board manufactures haven't in respect of VRM.

Edited November 12, 20187 yr by martin-w

1 minute ago, martin-w said:

 

It is actually true that it's a 4 phase, and more than likely a cost cutting exercise. Gamers Nexus did a a very good analysis. VRM temp will be higher, but for the average enthusiast who isn't hammering the hell out of his PC 24/7 it's not an issue. Just an eyebrow raiser that a fairly expensive board has a cost cutting measure in place and the other board manufactures haven't.

Agree, Martin, on the high cost of £270.

Following your response on the i7-8086k another thread. Pray tell what is an MCE, please. I feel foolish now buying the i7-8086k thinking the 5.1 o/c was across all cores, not just a solitary one. But, then again, £600 for the 'emperor', i.e.. i9-9900k is way too much for me. Even CPc state it is over-priced.

48 minutes ago, w6kd said:

I'm now running an 8086K on a Maximus XI Hero.  The only nontrivial issue I had to sort to get this thing running at 5.3GHz (NB at 4.8) was finding the right voltage for my RAM...it was throwing the very occasional (but very unacceptable) memory error in Memtest 86+ at its rated speed and voltage (3600 CAS 15 @ 1.35v).  It took a modest bump in voltage to 1.365v to get it stable at XMP timings.

I'm really liking both the CPU and the Hero motherboard.

Regards

Nice!

1 hour ago, martin-w said:

It is actually true that it's a 4 phase, and more than likely a cost cutting exercise.

I'll disagree with you there, it really depends on the quality of the components being used.  I've seen 8 phase designs that are actually "cheaper" than a quality 4 phase design.  It really depends on the components, it's the quality not quantity of power phases.

Cheers, Rob.

5 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

I'll disagree with you there, it really depends on the quality of the components being used.  I've seen 8 phase designs that are actually "cheaper" than a quality 4 phase design.  It really depends on the components, it's the quality not quantity of power phases.

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

Gamers Nexus did a full analysis and concluded it was a cost cutting exercise. They looked at the specific components. 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, vc10man said:

Agree, Martin, on the high cost of £270.

Following your response on the i7-8086k another thread. Pray tell what is an MCE, please. I feel foolish now buying the i7-8086k thinking the 5.1 o/c was across all cores, not just a solitary one. But, then again, £600 for the 'emperor', i.e.. i9-9900k is way too much for me. Even CPc state it is over-priced.

 

 

If manually overclocking it is across all cores, you set the overclock to "sync all cores" or with MCE on, "turbo"  is across all cores. You've not been foolish. The previous thread was about "per core" overclocking.

MCE is Multi Core Enhancement.

Intel Turbo overclocks one core  to the max turbo frequency (5 GHz for 8086K) but only if that one core  is the only core active. As the other cores become activated, the frequency for those cores drops, until by the time all cores are active you reach the minimum turbo frequency. 

MCE overrides Intel Turbo  and sets "all cores" to the max turbo frequency. So in the case of 8086K to 5 GHz. 

Edited November 12, 20187 yr by martin-w