This site may earn affiliate commissions from the links on this page. Terms of use.

core i9

One of the major features Intel has claimed with for its new Ten-Series of CPUs (both the Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X) is that they're all unlocked, with higher TDP ratings and a top-end platform to pair with the fries, dubbed X299. Nonetheless, according to overclocker der8auer, at that place's a serious fix of problems with every X299 lath he's tested to engagement.

The first issue is that at to the lowest degree some X299 boards are only aircraft with a single eight-pin power connector for the CPU. An overclocked Skylake-X pushing above 4.5GHz tin pull more than 300W. According to his tests, the viii-pin cable temperature on his open up testbed is hitting 65C in an air conditioned room.

That's significant, because most people don't run their PCs in open testbeds, may not have air conditioning, and may not have proper cooling at the lesser of the chassis (I confess, until this video, I'd never actually considered how hot an eight-pin power cable gets under load.) He suspects that in a closed-example configuration an overclocked Skylake-X with just i 8-pin cablevision could exist hit 90C-95C and recommends against any Skylake-X motherboard express to simply one 8-pin connector.

But the larger problem is the VRM design. Every motherboard der8auer tested — and he mentions iii by name: the Gigabyte Aorus X299 Gaming 3 motherboard, the Asus Prime X299-A, and the MSI X299 Pro Gaming Carbon — were tested with the aforementioned CPU, a Skylake-X overclocked to 4.6GHz at 1.25v. According to der8auer, this fleck is known to hit 5GHz and was chosen for these tests precisely because its beliefs had been well-characterized. The cores were tested in the not-AVX version of Prime95 for 10 minutes and temperature readings were taken from the forepart and back of the motherboard.

We've condensed der8auer'south reported temperatures into a graph, shown below:

X299Temps

Data past der8auer, graph by ExtremeTech. Click to enlarge.

Note that der8auer isn't certain his temperature probe was in the proper spot on the dorsum of the Asus motherboard, as the gap between front and back temperatures is normally larger than what he observed. Simply either way, these temperatures testify extremely loftier VRM heatsink temps and information technology has a directly impact on the CPU'due south ability to hold its overclock. As the VRM temps rise, the CPU starts underclocking to 1.2GHz. The MSI board's better temperatures are apparently explained by more aggressive throttling when the CPU is under load.

In at to the lowest degree two cases, der8auer simply removed the VRM heatsinks altogether, aimed a 120mm fan at the motherboard, and cut the ambient VRM temperature by up to 40C. Nosotros'd expect passive heatsinks to be enhanced by adding an air libation. But the performance of the passive VRM cooling clearly isn't up to snuff if your goal is to overclock beyond stock speeds.

What manufacturers hope vs. what they evangelize

There's a nasty tangle of expectations and reality when it comes to high-terminate overclocking, motherboard functioning, and what consumers expect. Der8auer puts the blame for this trouble on Intel's decision to pull its X299 launch in by several months, and thinks that boards with meliorate cooling should be shipping before long. Only at the same time, it's not as if motherboards but added VRMs, or as if the X299 platform is the offset Intel chipset to require practiced cooling to overclock well.

The bottom line is this: When enthusiasts invest in overclocking, they often want that investment to pay off with something like a guarantee of performance, stability, and longevity for the parts in question. People pay for larger power supplies, better cooling, and what they believe are higher-quality components out of a conventionalities that said components are required for safe overclocking — and to be clear, sometimes they very much are.

The problem is, from the viewpoint of pretty much everyone, overclocking components voids your warranty. This holds true fifty-fifty if Gigabyte or Asus sells you an overclocked card themselves. If the box says the GPU volition hold a 1.6GHz stock clock, they guarantee the flake at that frequency, even if they as well advertise overclocking performance. Even the boutique OEM system builders merely offering warranties on the overclocks they perform in-house.

The final problem is that it's a lot less expensive to advertise high-cease overclocking than it is to use the components that absolutely guarantee information technology. Motherboard companies are typically penny pinchers, and their high-end X299 boards aren't going to motility huge volumes compared to mainstream products. I'm not calling out any unmarried company here (or justifying the practice), only pointing out that there's a nasty standoff between what users want, what companies are willing to support, and what their fiscal incentives are.

Ultimately, I concord with der8auer that this VRM situation is, at best, going to require some replacement of VRM coolers, better thermal paste, or an active fan to resolve. Customers who want to aggressively overclock should be aware of this as a potential event. If you don't plan to overclock, there may be no problem here — only if you do, be enlightened that better VRM cooling may be required.

Now read: Intel Announces New Core X-Series, Including eighteen-Cadre i9 CPU