Temps are good, push it some more.

bass junkie xl wrote:
is the 9900kf currently avalible ? is it a lot better then the 9900k ? or should i wait for the 9900 ks 5 ghz out of the box and hope for low volts ? whats your guys opinion ?
im on a 8700k @ 5.1 ghz and 4000 mhz cl-17 ram on a asus x hero am i missing out ?

KF is a lot better than 9900k. Temperature is about 10 degrees decrease.
I'm not sure about temp whether it benefits from removing igpu or improve production quality .
If you're not in hurry, wait for KS results first.
IF you need it now go for KF. Because everyone will run at 5.0 ghz all core same as KS.

ps.
latest update ddr4 5360 mhz dual channel

Pun_VI wrote:
KF is a lot better than 9900k. Temperature is about 10 degrees decrease.
I'm not sure about temp whether it benefits from removing igpu or improve production quality .
If you're not in hurry, wait for KS results first.
IF you need it now go for KF. Because everyone will run at 5.0 ghz all core same as KS.

ps.
latest update ddr4 5360 mhz dual channel

wowzers man !!! look at that mem and cache benchmark 70 + k and under 35 ns @ 5300 mhz

1.5 v on cpu a little high but we are over clockers once they start to degrade we sell them and upgrade nice over clocks man

i bet arma 3 would see a massive fps boost from 5300 mzh ram specialy cl-18 !! could you do a fps benchmark with these settings ?

cpu @ 5 ghz and ram @ 3200 cl-14 1440p resultion no msaa
vs
cpu @ 5.3 ram @ 5300 mhz 1440p msaa off

test some fps games and show use the fps min / avg / max with that ram oc ?

making sure gpu usage is not 100% pegged before the test to see actual gains ?