Official HWBOT Partner
Official HWBOT Partner

Submission Details

10 sec 388 ms with
Ryzen 9 9900X @ 6150.00 MHz
Elite Submitted

Rankings and Points

World Record Rank
223rd out of 6786
12 Cores Global Rank
12 Cores Ryzen 9 9900X  Rank
13th out of 79 27.4 Points
12 Cores Team Power Rank

Images

Hardware Details

Processor

Model
Ryzen 9 9900X Granite Ridge
Cooling
Liquid Nitrogen
Cores
6,150.00 MHz  (28%)

Memory

Type
32 GB  G.Skill  DDR5 SDRAM Speed @ 4,100 MHz
Timings
tCAS: 32.0  tRCD: 46  tRP: 36  tRAS: 54

Videocard

Model
GeForce GTX 1650 (GDDR5) (TU117) (GeForce 1000 Series)
Speed
1,485.00 MHz  /  2,000.00 MHz

Comments

Seby commented on own score:
quick efficiency test, waiting for new ver decision
I.nfraR.ed
I.nfraR.ed

Not bad. New bios/agesa actually seems faster than 2505 when tuned.

Seby
Seby
2 hours ago, I.nfraR.ed said:

Not bad. New bios/agesa actually seems faster than 2505 when tuned.

But I had lots of issues on LN2 with this bios, main one is that instead of the usual CBB behavior of C5 or whatever, the board just didn’t react to start button. Then also just that high memory clock on ln2 was way less stable and I could only run -88. Lastly, this cpu did -180 to -190 before and now it freezes at -110. Also got socket replaced on it since then but I need to test old bios again.

 

Main purpose of this anyway though was to compare ambient to ln2 frequency to gauge what my ambient goal needs to be :P

I.nfraR.ed
I.nfraR.ed

Oh, good to know as I plan to test LN2 soon. By old bios, do you mean 2505? Maybe I'll go back to 2505 to recheck if I can run the same settings and compare.

Seby
Seby
16 minutes ago, I.nfraR.ed said:

Oh, good to know as I plan to test LN2 soon. By old bios, do you mean 2505? Maybe I'll go back to 2505 to recheck if I can run the same settings and compare.

Yeah 2505, I would start on 2702 and if you have bad CB and can’t solve, try 2505 before giving up.