1 hour ago, martin-w said:

I wouldn't use any of them these days.  RealBench is more applicable for our needs. And for a tough test Cinebench.

Well, I followed the guide and that's what was recommended and I followed the instructions and it worked out just fine. When testing with Cinebench my temps went into mid 60s.. when I run the sim they go to upper 70s and lower 80s. So... 

I do in fact use Blender too 😉

53 minutes ago, Ted Striker said:

Glad to hear it worked out for you. I recommend Nick's guide because he tries to get you to think about what you are doing and why. I hope you have a better understanding of how your system works after having read it.

Ted

I actually do. Before I was just entering the numbers I saw on Youtube. Never the best idea.

16 hours ago, Tomaz Drnovsek said:

Well, I followed the guide and that's what was recommended and I followed the instructions and it worked out just fine. When testing with Cinebench my temps went into mid 60s.. when I run the sim they go to upper 70s and lower 80s. So... 

I do in fact use Blender too 😉

 

Was that with Cinebench R20?

Try Real bench for me if you don't mind, out of interest, I be interested in the temps. The stress test, not the benchmark. 

This is the difference in philosophy that exists in the overclocking world. Do we...

1. Stress test with utilities that push the CPU far above the demands of our everyday programs, subject the CPU to a synthetic test that isn't really ever going to be encountered in normal use. Thus end up with a lower overclock?

OR

2. Use a more realistic stress test that subjects our CPU's to something we might occasionally face in real world use?

Most overclockers these days use option 2. Option 1 is old school. I use option 2. 

RealBench does run AVX by the way, in fact it runs blender during the test. Not the extreme  of AVX instructions though.

The important thing is that you are happy though. 

https://rog.asus.com/articles/news/realbench-v2-43-new-version-available-now/

 

Intel XTU is useful too these days. If you have an Asus board it may have come with it.

 

 

7 hours ago, martin-w said:

Was that with Cinebench R20?

Try Real bench for me if you don't mind, out of interest, I be interested in the temps.

It was the laster, R23 or something.

I did a Realbench test, temps were in the mid to high 80s.

1 hour ago, Tomaz Drnovsek said:

.

I did a Realbench test, temps were in the mid to high 80s.

 

Oh right. Don't know what your ambient temp was, but seems you are at your best (sensible) OC. 👍

On 2/26/2021 at 3:13 AM, martin-w said:

RealBench does run AVX by the way, in fact it runs blender during the test. Not the extreme  of AVX instructions though.

The important thing is that you are happy though. 

https://rog.asus.com/articles/news/realbench-v2-43-new-version-available-now/

Seems that the link given earlier is for an out of date version of RealBench.  Here's the only place on the Asus site I've seen a link for its most current version via the Download RealBench button.

https://rog.asus.com/rog-pro/realbench-v2-leaderboard/

This tool really kicks the snot out of your processor.  Though all its components are realistic use apps, the manner which RB goes about running them is not, at least for what I do with my computer which include video editing and compression.  This means to me that when using this tool if you're maintaining stability while maxing your computer's power consumption and controlling the associated temps, everything else you realistically do with your computer is a walk in the park.  BTW, my i7 10700k's 5.0Ghz OC is taken to the wall by RB, with temps occasionally hitting into the low 80's (if it wasn't I'd go for 5.1).

On 2/20/2021 at 3:51 PM, Ted Striker said:

I don't have a 10900k but you might get some clues from Nick's guide here:

https://www.simforums.com/forums/building-a-10900k-system-and-clocking-it_topic64274.html

I used an older guide of his to build and overclock my current system. It has been rock solid stable. I plan on using this guide to build my next one.

Ted

I noticed that a lot of the bios settings in this guide are not in my bios. Is it possible that Gigabyte has a lot of these settings listed under a different name than the ones mentioned in the guide?

12 hours ago, sho69607 said:

I noticed that a lot of the bios settings in this guide are not in my bios. Is it possible that Gigabyte has a lot of these settings listed under a different name than the ones mentioned in the guide?

 

Yes. All board makes vary. 

On 3/27/2021 at 6:19 PM, sho69607 said:

Is it possible that Gigabyte has a lot of these settings listed under a different name than the ones mentioned in the guide?

Not just possible but most likely. I suggest performing internet searches for overclocking guides and forum threads specific to your motherboard. I was in the same position when I overclocked my system. I found that many of the functions existed with different names but some functioned differently and I had to do my own research and testing to determine the optimal settings for some functions. Getting a good stable overclock is not a quick process but you learn a lot about how your system works.

Ted

On 3/27/2021 at 5:19 PM, sho69607 said:

I noticed that a lot of the bios settings in this guide are not in my bios. Is it possible that Gigabyte has a lot of these settings listed under a different name than the ones mentioned in the guide?

Not sure your level of knowledge about overclocking, but here is a rather thorough OC guide that is generic and discusses enough details to give one a good idea of all the facets of overclocking.  Even though it's for a 9th gen cpu, the concepts are identical.

Above I mentioned using RealBench to stress test my overclock.  My comment about my 5.0 OC hitting the low 80's is incorrect running RB, it's really the low 90's...huge difference and a bit nerve racking at that.  My NH-D15S gets pushed to its limits around 220W.

HT should not have any impact on flight simulators. Turning it off should help a lot with temps and stability.