- Joined
- Sep 17, 2014
- Messages
- 20,902 (5.97/day)
- Location
- The Washing Machine
Processor | i7 8700k 4.6Ghz @ 1.24V |
---|---|
Motherboard | AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370 |
Cooling | beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3 |
Memory | 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16 |
Video Card(s) | ASRock RX7900XT Phantom Gaming |
Storage | Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD |
Display(s) | Gigabyte G34QWC (3440x1440) |
Case | Fractal Design Define R5 |
Audio Device(s) | Harman Kardon AVR137 + 2.1 |
Power Supply | EVGA Supernova G2 750W |
Mouse | XTRFY M42 |
Keyboard | Lenovo Thinkpad Trackpoint II |
Software | W10 x64 |
That's what happens when you test the AC but your brakes are the issue.
Actually being serious, I hate IBT.. that is one of the more useless stress tests around.
The only pro IBT really has is that you can get an idea of relative performance between settings/runs because it gives you a simple number, and heat. Lots of heat.
its a bit like a Furmark with a bench score.
Personally still partial to OCCT for quick testing, and then on to real workloads until the OC falls apart, basically I do still think a synthetic test is essential because you need some sort of similar testing/starting situation to analyze stuff. And the graphs, OCCTs graphs are great.
Ok, I'm going full off-topic here, but do people really run their CPUs at max overclock? I mean, if a stress tool told me the CPU is stable at, say, 5GHz, I'd dial that back 5% or so if I was going for stability.
I don't... I'll even happily back down another 100-200mhz if it means a big reduction in voltage/heat/noise. Given the actual clock, 200mhz is negligible anyway.
Last edited: