This leaves a bar missing from each processor, respectively totalling, 15%, 5% and 11% that do not make the grade what so ever.

"250 Watts for 56 seconds" almost sounds like a cheat. We bump wattage to 250w for a minute only to score good benchmarks. Sounds useless for anything else.

Reddoguk:

"250 Watts for 56 seconds" almost sounds like a cheat. We bump wattage to 250w for a minute only to score good benchmarks. Sounds useless for anything else.

It helps a little, many workloads are mixed intensity, not a lot though.

Astyanax:

This leaves a bar missing from each processor, respectively totalling, 15%, 5% and 11% that do not make the grade what so ever.

So I chopped up a fixed version: 😉

Reddoguk:

"250 Watts for 56 seconds" almost sounds like a cheat. We bump wattage to 250w for a minute only to score good benchmarks. Sounds useless for anything else.

It worked like this for ages, even for 4 cores, which tended to remain under the power limit/TDP. It's also quite irrelevant, since manufacturers will implement these power limits however they want anyway, since Intel only offers "guidance", instead of requirements. That means that these limits will be disabled for the better motherboards with VRM that can handle these CPUs. For example, I have a cheap MSI Gaming Plus Z370, and a 8700K. With the first half of the BIOS releases, MSI simply locked the PL1 to the TDP of 95W, and the PL2 to 1.25xTDP=118W-ish, for 10 or 20 seconds, I forgot which exactly. In the next BIOS releases, MSI just chose to ditch the PLs and max them at 255W (this is a cheap 4 phase board so that's a reasonable max I'd say). For the 8700K this doesn't impact benchmark performance since the CPU stays below the TDP unless you're running prime95 or so. For the 9700k, 9900k and the new CPUs this is however no longer the truth, so the PL2 helps. Most likely though, who buys a 10900K will also buy a decent motherboard that won't have the PLs enabled by default.

spine:

So I chopped up a fixed version: 😉

D for Defective 😀