Monday, May 11th 2020

Intel Core i9-10900K Stressed, Package Power Reads 235W, Temperatures 93°C

A stock Intel Core i9-10900K 10-core processor was subjected to FPU stress by Chinese PC enthusiast @WolStame. The power and temperature values of the processor are inside HEDT territory. With a Furmark GPU stress running on the side, under AIDA64 FPU stress, the i9-10900K measured a package power draw of up to 235.17 W, as measured using HWInfo64. The CPU package temperature shot up to 93 °C. A 240 mm AIO liquid CPU cooling solution was used in the feat. Interestingly, the processor is able to sustain clock speeds of 4.77 GHz, which is close to the advertised 4.80 GHz all-core turbo boost frequency, called for by the multi-core FPU stress.

To show that the values weren't obtained in a few seconds of test, the AIDA64 Stability Test window keeps a timestamp log and displays time elapsed into the stress. In this particular case, the all-core stress has been running for close to 48 minutes; and yet the processor is keeping up with its advertised all-core boost speed, making this an impressive feat.
Sources: @WolStame (Weibo), @9550pro (Twitter)
Add your own comment

106 Comments on Intel Core i9-10900K Stressed, Package Power Reads 235W, Temperatures 93°C

#2
Berfs1
4900 MHz is the advertised all core boost frequency of the 10900K/F, but wowzers it can't even perform it's stock all core frequency under A LIQUID cooler.. wowwwww
Posted on Reply
#3
Mats
This is both impressive and very bad at the same time.
Posted on Reply
#4
Berfs1
svan71
only 93?
I think what happened was, it peaked at 93 because the AIO fans may not have been running at a constant speed, so it was adaptive to temperature and once it spiked past 90C it probably sped up. I don't know if that's what happened, but if you run your fans at a constant speed, it removes a lot of variables.
Posted on Reply
#5
MxPhenom 216
ASIC Engineer
Berfs1
4900 MHz is the advertised all core boost frequency of the 10900K/F, but wowzers it can't even perform it's stock all core frequency under A LIQUID cooler.. wowwwww
An AIO you mean with very little fluid and terrible fluid flow rates. A legit loop with a good, maybe double thick radiator 240 or 360 would probably be fine.
Posted on Reply
#6
Berfs1
Also I recommend using CPU-z to show frequency, not Task Manager as sometimes it is incorrect
MxPhenom 216
An AIO you mean with very little fluid and terrible fluid flow rates. A legit loop with a good, maybe double thick radiator 240 or 360 would probably be fine.
No mention of the actual cooler so who knows?!
Posted on Reply
#8
Mats
Berfs1
4900 MHz is the advertised all core boost frequency of the 10900K/F, but wowzers it can't even perform it's stock all core frequency under A LIQUID cooler.. wowwwww
It's Furmark, a super boring game.
Posted on Reply
#9
londiste
No AVX offset any more?
What motherboard is this with power limits all disabled?
Posted on Reply
#10
Caring1
MxPhenom 216
An AIO you mean with very little fluid and terrible fluid flow rates. A legit loop with a good, maybe double thick radiator 240 or 360 would probably be fine.
Why not a 2.5HP chiller under the table? :D
Posted on Reply
#11
Lokran88
Berfs1
4900 MHz is the advertised all core boost frequency of the 10900K/F, but wowzers it can't even perform it's stock all core frequency under A LIQUID cooler.. wowwwww
Actually the advertised All Core Boost would be 4,8 GHZ.

4,9 GHZ allcore would be Thermal Velocity Boost, and you obviously won't reach this one with a cooling solution that does not fit this CPU.
Posted on Reply
#12
Vya Domus
What will this even get you, 9900K performance within 5% in your favorite e-sports game that already runs at god knows how many hundreds frames a second in exchange for what ? Threadripper like power consumption ? Amazing stuff. I bet it's fun being an engineer for Intel, optimizing for the same thing over and over and watching how products get progressively worse just to meet these braindead goals.
MxPhenom 216
An AIO you mean with very little fluid and terrible fluid flow rates. A legit loop with a good, maybe double thick radiator 240 or 360 would probably be fine.
Even a standard 120 AIO can easily dissipate around 200W. It's not the cooling, it's the chip, eventually people will have to accept that. They've been struggling to explain every fault with Intel's approach since the 7700K. Whether it was the soldered IHS, the clock speeds way out of any optimal power curve, the aging node, it's evident by now that throwing insane amounts of cooling at this problem doesn't work.
Posted on Reply
#13
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Berfs1
4900 MHz is the advertised all core boost frequency of the 10900K/F, but wowzers it can't even perform it's stock all core frequency under A LIQUID cooler.. wowwwww
Advertised all-core boost of 10900K/KF is 4800 MHz. It's short by just 30 MHz.
Posted on Reply
#14
freeagent
I’m not surprised to see 10 cores running at 93c, I’m not surprised to see it pull 235w in software, but I am surprised to see all of that in one pic.

A stressed 10 core running at 4800 in the same case as a maxed out 2080 is pretty decent if you ask me, which you haven’t. If you can’t get that air from the 2080 out, it’s gonna be warm in there no matter how you slice it.
Posted on Reply
#15
DR4G00N
Could also just be a hot running sample, not common but some chips just run super hot even with custom water and tame voltages.
Posted on Reply
#16
BArms
I wonder which AIO they used, low end ones might be quieter but they perform worse than a lot of air coolers. And if it's like the 8700K, they can shave 20c off simply by de/relidding and applying a liquid metal compound.
Posted on Reply
#18
claes
freeagent
I’m not surprised to see 10 cores running at 93c, I’m not surprised to see it pull 235w in software, but I am surprised to see all of that in one pic.

A stressed 10 core running at 4800 in the same case as a maxed out 2080 is pretty decent if you ask me, which you haven’t. If you can’t get that air from the 2080 out, it’s gonna be warm in there no matter how you slice it.
Me too quite a surprise, wonder if it was a case or bench
Posted on Reply
#19
Tomgang
This clearly shows the cons and pros of staying on 14 NM for several years.

Pros:
Very refined die process allows for high core clock even on cpu with a decent amount of cores.

Cons:
While it is refined, it is still 14nm and pushing high core clock out of a old uneficient process while slamming 2 ekstra cores in as well has a down side to it. High wattage use and that gives a hot running cpu as a side effect of high wattage use and clearly shows why it is about time intel moves to 10 or 7 nm now. 14nm is just to old now and way to uneficient.
Posted on Reply
#20
TheLostSwede
Apparently with AVX enabled, these chips can hit 400W...
Posted on Reply
#21
tabascosauz
BArms
I wonder which AIO they used, low end ones might be quieter but they perform worse than a lot of air coolers. And if it's like the 8700K, they can shave 20c off simply by de/relidding and applying a liquid metal compound.
The 8700K had TIM and the usual terrible stuff at that...the 9900K was soldered and the 10900K not only continues that trend but is even experimenting with removing unnecessary layers off the top of the die to facilitate a thicker IHS, all in the name of handling the heat.

And it's a goddamn 240mm AIO; it's not going to perform worse "than a lot of air coolers". 93C degrees is not even close to attaining the 70C requirement for TVB to kick in for that max rated 4.9 boost.

There's no wiggle room left on this process, period. All you can hope for is rolling the dice on a good 10-core bin that can shave off a few millivolts at the top end and stay stable.
Posted on Reply
#22
Cranky5150
And....did we really expect anything else here...
Posted on Reply
#23
GoldenX
The most DOA product since FX.
Posted on Reply
#24
Bee9
Wow, color me impressed to see the core clock and the temperature. I wonder what is the ambient temperature of this test...
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment