Gigabyte's new motherboard and CPU combo takes the guesswork out of overclocking

[Shawn Knight]

Bottom line: It takes a great deal of skill to squeeze every ounce of performance out of a CPU but truth be told, there’s also a bit of luck involved as no two processors are exact equals. While they may be rated for the same default speeds and have the same model number, some chips are simply capable of being pushed further than others.

For many, getting their hands on a highly overclockable processor is all part of the game – the thrill of the chase, so to speak. This can be achieved through sheer luck of the draw or by sourcing a chip that is “guaranteed” to meet a certain performance threshold, either through testing via a vendor or based on when it rolled off the assembly line (some batches get a reputation for being solid performers while others, you’ll want to avoid).

You’ll typically pay a premium for a binned chip and that is essentially what Gigabyte is offering with its latest combo.

The Z390 Aorus Xtreme Waterforce 5G Premium Edition Bundle pairs an Intel Core i9-9900K with its Z390 Aorus Xtreme Waterforce motherboard. What’s unique about this combo is the fact that Gigabyte is including chips that have been handpicked and pre-tested to hit 5.1GHz on all cores.

Gigabyte’s combo also utilizes “highly efficient” thermal paste and comes with a pre-configured BIOS. Gigabyte has additionally stress tested these motherboards to ensure reliability.

The Z390 Aorus Xtreme Waterforce 5G Premium Edition Bundle is “now available on the market” although I wasn’t able to find it on sale anywhere. Unfortunately, Gigabyte didn’t list pricing information in its press release, either.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/79509-gigabyte-new-motherboard-cpu-combo-takes-guesswork-out.html

 

[OutlawCecil]

I've custom built quite a few PCs and I gotta say Gigabyte MOBOs seem to be the way to go. Friendly and powerful BIOS menus, straightforward booting methods, high customization...etc. Every other brand seems to have odd quirks. I've also never had a Gigabyte MOBO fail on me. Anybody else notice the same?

 

[ShagnWagn]

"pre-tested to hit 5.1GHz "

Default the chip is 5.0GHz. So we pay premium prices for a 2% increase? LOL

The point in overclocking (I believe for the majority of us) is to get a chip at a certain price point and have it run faster than a much more expensive chip. The industry keeps on increasing prices on components that "allows" overclocking. If you just buy a standard motherboard you could use the extra cash instead to buy the already faster chip - running at default speeds and voltages.

 

[shm0wie]

I've custom built quite a few PCs and I gotta say Gigabyte MOBOs seem to be the way to go. Friendly and powerful BIOS menus, straightforward booting methods, high customization...etc. Every other brand seems to have odd quirks. I've also never had a Gigabyte MOBO fail on me. Anybody else notice the same?

My sentiments exactly. ASUS has gone downhill big time - My last system had an STRIX X99 that fried my CPU - lots of other people had the same issue. Gigabyte mobos are just great, simple, and properly priced.

 

[QuantumPhysics]

I don't overclock because I value my warranty. Nothing worse than trying to make equipment overwork itself into an early grave. My CPU was around $1800. No way I'd take any risks. I've got liquid cooling and I run at factory recommendations for CPU life.

 

[lipe123]

I don't overclock because I value my warranty. Nothing worse than trying to make equipment overwork itself into an early grave. My CPU was around $1800. No way I'd take any risks. I've got liquid cooling and I run at factory recommendations for CPU life.

1. OC doesn't void any warranty.
2. OC doesn't overwork anything if you can keep it cool.
3. All modern cpu's and gpu's have factory overclock already built into them depending on how hot they get.
4. You silly man!

This idea is really cool, I like that its a hard to mess up option. All you need to do is screw in water connectors and fire it up! It also looks like they are cooling the PWM chips near the cpu which should help a lot with system stability.

 

[NightAntilli]

I might be the only one left, but after the GPP I won't be buying products from anyone that supported it. This basically leaves me with Asrock.

That being said, even though this seems like an interesting initiative, chances are you're better off buying a chip from siliconlottery.

 

[pcnthuziast]

*ignores cpu completely* That motherboard is insane!

 

[learningcaff]

Thank you for sharing information.It was very useful.
Well done

 

[bluetooth fairy]

I might be the only one left, but after the GPP I won't be buying products from anyone that supported it. This basically leaves me with Asrock.

What does your GPP stand for? Is it smth similar to gluten free diet?

I'd personally prefer one of the following:
* Genuine People Personality
* Generalized Poisson Process (not to be confused with "poison")
* God's People Party (South Africa)

 

[hahahanoobs]

"pre-tested to hit 5.1GHz "

Default the chip is 5.0GHz. So we pay premium prices for a 2% increase? LOL

The point in overclocking (I believe for the majority of us) is to get a chip at a certain price point and have it run faster than a much more expensive chip. The industry keeps on increasing prices on components that "allows" overclocking. If you just buy a standard motherboard you could use the extra cash instead to buy the already faster chip - running at default speeds and voltages.

5GHz is single core Turbo....

 

[Kashim]

"pre-tested to hit 5.1GHz "

Default the chip is 5.0GHz. So we pay premium prices for a 2% increase? LOL

No offense, but if you're going to make a comment on a tech article like this at least know the basics or take 30 seconds to Google it.
Default speed is NOT 5GHz, it's 3.6GHz. It can turbo boost to 5GHz on a single core, but NOT on all cores.

 

[brucek]

Whenever I see a vendor selling binned chips, it makes me wonder who is getting the chips that didn't make the bin. Reminds me of the poker saying: "If you don't know who the sucker is - it's you."

Although in this case, I think Intel is binning the chips before Gigabyte is. By the time Intel was ready to sell this bit of a silicon as a 9900K, it probably already stood a very high chance of being able to make these targets given sufficient cooling and settings.

I'm still a little curious what Gigabyte's internal projections are for percent of those chips they buy that won't make they cut and where they go. Are they selling desktops or laptops with this part?

 

[hahahanoobs]

Whenever I see a vendor selling binned chips, it makes me wonder who is getting the chips that didn't make the bin. Reminds me of the poker saying: "If you don't know who the sucker is - it's you."

Although in this case, I think Intel is binning the chips before Gigabyte is. By the time Intel was ready to sell this bit of a silicon as a 9900K, it probably already stood a very high chance of being able to make these targets given sufficient cooling and settings.

I'm still a little curious what Gigabyte's internal projections are for percent of those chips they buy that won't make they cut and where they go. Are they selling desktops or laptops with this part?

Intel sells the binned chips at a cost. Everyone else gets the non-binned chips.

 

[ShagnWagn]

No offense, but if you're going to make a comment on a tech article like this at least know the basics or take 30 seconds to Google it.
Default speed is NOT 5GHz, it's 3.6GHz. It can turbo boost to 5GHz on a single core, but NOT on all cores.

I did, although it didn't take 30 seconds. I'm not using dial-up. And Intel's own site says the default turbo speed IS 5.0GHz, not 3.6 like you said. Do I really need to share a link to google results? So yes, Intel states a core can run at 5.0, so I still am not impressed.

Unless you are trying to tell us there is only a single designated core where Intel says can only run 5.0? That would be news to me. Please link the article if so.

 

[brucek]

Intel sells the binned chips at a cost. Everyone else gets the non-binned chips.

Intel is for sure explicitly binning in the form of their dozens of SKUs. But are you saying that in addition to that, they are also further binning even within the same SKU? Do you suspect this or know it for sure?

One of the appeals of overclocking used to be that at least with certain chips, you really did stand a good chance of being able to get a meaningful performance boost. It sounds like this is getting less and less true, with everything already being divided over a ton of SKUs anyway, and now it sounds like you're saying that even for the top model they are skimming off all the lottery winners so the regular buyer never had a chance anyway.

Certainly not illegal, but still kind of crappy for a chip that is sold at premium price on the basis of being "overclockable" - which is maybe not so true if their binning process has already demonstrated that the chip will not in fact be overclockable.

 

[warmonked]

No offense, but if you're going to make a comment on a tech article like this at least know the basics or take 30 seconds to Google it.
Default speed is NOT 5GHz, it's 3.6GHz. It can turbo boost to 5GHz on a single core, but NOT on all cores.

I did, although it didn't take 30 seconds. I'm not using dial-up. And Intel's own site says the default turbo speed IS 5.0GHz, not 3.6 like you said. Do I really need to share a link to google results? So yes, Intel states a core can run at 5.0, so I still am not impressed.

Unless you are trying to tell us there is only a single designated core where Intel says can only run 5.0? That would be news to me. Please link the article if so.

On Intel's own site, if you hover over the "I" next to Max Turbo Frequency, it does say it only applies to a single core. So yes, when you are only using one core, it can go up to 5ghz. This overclock is 5.1Ghz when using all cores.

 

[Aus spot]

" So yes, Intel states a core can run at 5.0, so I still am not impressed."

Yes a core is guaranteed to run at 5ghz. Not all. So while it could be any core, due to thermal limits it is highly unlikely all cores could hit 5ghz.

If you do some basic techspot research they have an article in the poor thermals of this chip.

But this is a troll right? No one actually believes the upper limit applies to all cores, do they?

 

[Do Mor3 G]

Although this really does take the "effort" out of getting a nicely tuned CPU and Motherboard, I still think the premium isn't worth it.

I've got the Z390 Aorus Xtreme and a 9900K, and unfortunately the 5GHz all core OC dream wasn't in reach, so had to settle for an everyday 4.8GHz all core OC.

Still happy.

 

[Mr Majestyk]

The i9900 is so expensive becuase it’s a hand picked part in the first place. Intel has done the OC’ing for you so why get sripped-off for a piddly 100kHz. It’d make more sense if they were offering hand picked 9600K’s that offered 500kHz boost with all four cores.

 

[Questors]

I've custom built quite a few PCs and I gotta say Gigabyte MOBOs seem to be the way to go. Friendly and powerful BIOS menus, straightforward booting methods, high customization...etc. Every other brand seems to have odd quirks. I've also never had a Gigabyte MOBO fail on me. Anybody else notice the same?

No. My experiences with Gigabyte have been very different. I have had Gigabyte MBs fail once too often for me to trust them just yet. Trust is a hard thing to rebuild with me. It's why I also haven't liked MSI boards.

I have some annoying, but overall minor issues with ASUS, ASRock, DFI, Abit, EPoX and Intel boards in the past, but no failures.

That said, the motherboard maker I prefer is EVGA (for Intel). I have had many boards from EVGA from mini-ITX up to EATX and zero problems with the boards themselves. There are sometimes quirks to a specific board one may have not experienced before, but a bit of patience works it out. Also, having dealt with product support from each maker listed here, EVGA is easily the best. Out of the names left in the game, ASRock has done right by me, but it takes more time than I really care for to get through their process.

Video cards are a different matter. I have used ASUS, Gigabyte, MSI and EVGA, PowerColor and Sapphire over the years with little to no issues from any. Gigabyte recently RMAed an RX580 that I had BIOSed flashed no questioned asked. I was up front with the flashing when contacting them. They replaced it with a new card. Dishonesty doesn't serve anyone.

 

[hahahanoobs]

Intel is for sure explicitly binning in the form of their dozens of SKUs. But are you saying that in addition to that, they are also further binning even within the same SKU? Do you suspect this or know it for sure?

One of the appeals of overclocking used to be that at least with certain chips, you really did stand a good chance of being able to get a meaningful performance boost. It sounds like this is getting less and less true, with everything already being divided over a ton of SKUs anyway, and now it sounds like you're saying that even for the top model they are skimming off all the lottery winners so the regular buyer never had a chance anyway.

Certainly not illegal, but still kind of crappy for a chip that is sold at premium price on the basis of being "overclockable" - which is maybe not so true if their binning process has already demonstrated that the chip will not in fact be overclockable.

I have no idea what you're even talking about. Can someone help me?

 

[bluetooth fairy]

The i9900 is so expensive becuase it’s a hand picked part in the first place. Intel has done the OC’ing for you so why get sripped-off for a piddly 100kHz. It’d make more sense if they were offering hand picked 9600K’s that offered 500kHz boost with all four cores.

i5-9600 is a mass product, and I doubt it can be hand picked.
But I'm feeling supersonic of your post, and my 6th sense is going to appear finally.

 

[bluetooth fairy]

Intel is for sure explicitly binning in the form of their dozens of SKUs. But are you saying that in addition to that, they are also further binning even within the same SKU? Do you suspect this or know it for sure?

One of the appeals of overclocking used to be that at least with certain chips, you really did stand a good chance of being able to get a meaningful performance boost. It sounds like this is getting less and less true, with everything already being divided over a ton of SKUs anyway, and now it sounds like you're saying that even for the top model they are skimming off all the lottery winners so the regular buyer never had a chance anyway.

Certainly not illegal, but still kind of crappy for a chip that is sold at premium price on the basis of being "overclockable" - which is maybe not so true if their binning process has already demonstrated that the chip will not in fact be overclockable.

I have no idea what you're even talking about. Can someone help me?

I can understand him, more or less. But I don't know what he wants from you. Looks like you were lucky to respond to him, so that he feels he can spill then all his techie knowledge on your weak shoulders. Hold on, mate.

PS Jeebus, what a thread.

 

[brucek]

I was not trying to be difficult or obtuse. If you have a question about what I said I can try to explain it better. Maybe I didn't use the exact right words.

My specific question to you was about your statement that "Intel sells the binned chips at a cost. Everyone else gets the non-binned chips."

Are you saying, perhaps because you work in the industry, you know for a fact that Intel has a non-public policy under which they sell two different kinds of the i9-9900K, one that has been binned to a certain higher standard than published for the regular i9-9900K, and one that has not? Or if you have a public source for this I'd be genuinely curious about it.