i7-4930K Overclocked at 4.4GHz vs a Stock i9-9900K Temperatures

Dave3000

Senior member
Jan 10, 2011
915
4
81
#1
I right now have an i7-4930K and it reaches around 80C during Prime 95's small FFTs test if overclocked at 4.4GHz and with 1.245v after 5-10 minutes. This is with a Hyper 212 EVO (with a single BladeMaster fan 120mm fan, not the stock fan). I'm wondering if this CPU cooler will be able to handle the heat from an i9-9900k at stock without throttling. I also have a 2nd BladeMaster 120 mm fan that I'm not using right now but I have the option to add to the 212 EVO for a dual fan configuration if it will make a huge difference in temperatures of the 9900k. I'm planning on either purchasing a Ryzen 3800x or i9-9900k within the next 7 days but I might have to purchase a new cooler if I get the 9900k if my current one with dual fans installed is not good enough and the Ryzen 3800x includes a fan so there is savings there in not having to buy a separate CPU cooler for the Ryzen and the Ryzen 3800x is $50 cheaper at Microcenter than the 9900k. Is a stock 9900k still going to run hotter than my i7-4930k overclocked at 4.4GHz with the same CPU cooler.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
18,178
2,133
136
#2
Yes, the 9900k will run hotter and I doubt that 212 evo will cool it.

And you might think about the 3700x, as I have not seen proof that the 3800x is better. Probably early bios.
 

ehume

Golden Member
Nov 6, 2009
1,424
23
91
#3
No. You would need the best air cooling for that. The 212 has 4 heatpipes. The best air-coolers have had six, and they can barely keep an i7 8700k in the 80's on AVX2 & 5GHz. God knows if one of the new heatsinks with 7 heatpipes will keep that i9 9900k under 90 on AVX-512. Linpack spikes, so if you want to keep from throttling to 100c, your cooling solution will have to keep you in the low 80's. Best bet: stay in your system until you go to a really big jump; and then you should consider AiO.
 
Apr 27, 2000
12,759
1,563
126
#4
If you are going to get a 9900K, consider the 9900KF instead. Apparently the binning on 9900K has gotten worse (thanks to the upcoming 9900KS). You are taking a risk with the 9900K that you will get one of the newer chips that can't even hit 5 GHz. It's like automatically losing the silicon lottery.
 

Dave3000

Senior member
Jan 10, 2011
915
4
81
#5
If you are going to get a 9900K, consider the 9900KF instead. Apparently the binning on 9900K has gotten worse (thanks to the upcoming 9900KS). You are taking a risk with the 9900K that you will get one of the newer chips that can't even hit 5 GHz. It's like automatically losing the silicon lottery.
Currently Microcenter has the 9900K for $450 but no 9900KF and Newegg has the 9900KF for $480. It's a one hour drive for me to get to Microcenter and I can get it bundled with a motherboard with their CPU/motherboard bundle discount promotion.
 
Apr 27, 2000
12,759
1,563
126
#6
Hmmm. There's probably no way for you to check the batch before buying, too. Maybe MC will be cool and let you find an older batch chip?

Relavent Silicon Lottery post from reddit.

You are looking for earlier than L918xxxx. Also 9900KF allegedly clocks worse than older 9900K chips anyway. So might not be worth it to get the KF at all.
 

maddie

Platinum Member
Jul 18, 2010
2,734
688
136
#7
Isn't he saying "stock" 9900K?
 

ehume

Golden Member
Nov 6, 2009
1,424
23
91
#8
Basically, what you're saying is that OP should steer clear of the 9xxx generation of Intel CPUs. I would 2d or 3d that, saying OP should not spend money on a CPU from Intel, and spend it instead on a 6-heatpipe heatsink from Noctua.
 
Apr 27, 2000
12,759
1,563
126
#9
Isn't he saying "stock" 9900K?
It still could be worse to get a low-binned 9900K from a recent batch, even if he sticks to default PL1 behavior (~160W). Or maybe not.

In any case there's no way that 212 will cool a 9900K regardless of its batch.
 

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
3,359
887
136
#10
Isn't he saying "stock" 9900K?
"Stock" has lost it's meaning with the 9900K. We would need to have a specific discussion on the motherboard type (and maybe even BIOS version) in order to establish what "stock" is.

Personally I think the 212 can handle 9900K @ 95W TDP (PL1 @ 95W, PL2 @ 125W for 30 seconds), but I doubt this is what the OP aims for.
 

Dave3000

Senior member
Jan 10, 2011
915
4
81
#11
If you are going to get a 9900K, consider the 9900KF instead. Apparently the binning on 9900K has gotten worse (thanks to the upcoming 9900KS). You are taking a risk with the 9900K that you will get one of the newer chips that can't even hit 5 GHz. It's like automatically losing the silicon lottery.
Don't CPU yields generally improve the longer they are in production? So I made a poor decision to continue using my 4930k and not just upgrading to the 9900k 5 or 6 months ago if I wanted to upgrade to a 9900k initially? Should I wait for the 9900KS? My i7-4930k I bought over 5 years ago is the longest used CPU I ever owned by far.
 

ehume

Golden Member
Nov 6, 2009
1,424
23
91
#12
Don't CPU yields generally improve the longer they are in production? So I made a poor decision to continue using my 4930k and not just upgrading to the 9900k 5 or 6 months ago if I wanted to upgrade to a 9900k initially? Should I wait for the 9900KS? The i7-4930k I bought over 5 years ago is the longest used CPU I ever owned by far.
My experience with the 4790k exactly tracks your first sentence. But Intel seems to have more on their mind lately, so indeed all bets are off.
 

Dave3000

Senior member
Jan 10, 2011
915
4
81
#13
How much better is a Kraken X62 AIO than a Hyper 212 EVO (with dual fans). I'm getting 73C in Prime 95 small FFTs after about 10 minutes on my 4930k overclocked to 4.4GHz with dual fans installed on my Hyper 212 EVO. Would an X62 significantly improve on that? Also if I end up buying an X62 I'm going to have to buy a new case as my current one won't support a 280mm AIO.
 

ehume

Golden Member
Nov 6, 2009
1,424
23
91
#14
How much better is a Kraken X62 AIO than a Hyper 212 EVO (with dual fans). I'm getting 73C in Prime 95 small FFTs after about 10 minutes on my 4930k overclocked to 4.4GHz with dual fans installed on my Hyper 212 EVO. Would an X62 significantly improve on that? Also if I end up buying an X62 I'm going to have to buy a new case as my current one won't support a 280mm AIO.
You do realize that Prime 95 will not stress your CPU and cooling system, right? As long as you don't expect more than it can give, it's all right.
 
Nov 18, 2009
144
68
101
www.teraknor.net
#15
I am shocked that you can cool a 4930K with a 212Evo. 1.245v is really low though. My 3930K was always a terrible overclocker and takes a lot of voltage to get good clocks out of and is VERY tricky to cool.
 

Dave3000

Senior member
Jan 10, 2011
915
4
81
#16
I might keep what I have and wait for the 9900KS.
 
Last edited:

Shmee

Memory and Storage, Graphics Cards
Super Moderator
Sep 13, 2008
3,871
66
126
#17
A 4930k at 4.4 GHz, especially at low voltage like that, is really good IMO. My 4930k in another system I have seems to be a really poor OCer, it is a launch ES. I run it stock with 4x4GB 2133 DDR3, and at times on startup the BIOS gives a message that the overclock failed, and then the XMP is reset. XMP runs fine though, so I just enter BIOS and save the settings, and it works fine, also no memory errors on memtest, so possibly a board or memory controller issue.

My board is the Gigabyte X79UP4, what board are you running yours on? Again that is a pretty good combo you got, only downside is the lack of NVMe and only 2 Sata 6G ports from Intel.
 
Apr 27, 2000
12,759
1,563
126
#18
Don't CPU yields generally improve the longer they are in production?
Yes. But Intel is binning recent 9900K chips and reserving the good ones for the upcoming 9900KS. So if you buy a 9900K from the batches that have all the golden chips set aside for the KS, you wind up with a dud.
 
Nov 18, 2009
144
68
101
www.teraknor.net
#19
A 4930k at 4.4 GHz, especially at low voltage like that, is really good IMO. My 4930k in another system I have seems to be a really poor OCer, it is a launch ES. I run it stock with 4x4GB 2133 DDR3, and at times on startup the BIOS gives a message that the overclock failed, and then the XMP is reset. XMP runs fine though, so I just enter BIOS and save the settings, and it works fine, also no memory errors on memtest, so possibly a board or memory controller issue.

My board is the Gigabyte X79UP4, what board are you running yours on? Again that is a pretty good combo you got, only downside is the lack of NVMe and only 2 Sata 6G ports from Intel.
Depending on the mobo, you can patch in NVMe support to the BIOS. I have done this on my Asus P9X79 Pro and currently boot natively from a UEFI NVMe 960 Evo. It's pretty slick.
 

Shmee

Memory and Storage, Graphics Cards
Super Moderator
Sep 13, 2008
3,871
66
126
#20
Yes I have heard about that, its pretty cool. Of course you will need a PCIe to m.2 adapter.
 
Nov 18, 2009
144
68
101
www.teraknor.net
#21
Yes I have heard about that, its pretty cool. Of course you will need a PCIe to m.2 adapter.
Yeah, exactly. I will be able to ditch it when I move over to the 3900X system in a little bit here. I have almost all of the parts, one more rad to arrive friday and then I need to get ram, but I have everything else!
 


ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS