pastrychef's Asus ROG Strix Z370-G Gaming (WI-FI AC) build w/ i9-9900K + AMD 6600 XT

[elfcake]

Yes.

Progress!

 

[scottkendall]

To The Nines!!

So besides all the extra work you did to to make the CPU run cooler and the spoofing of the the IGPU was there anything you really had to do to make it work?

Intel said they are going to take the faulty I7 8700k back but they are not going to give me a replacement they are going to give me a refund. So it just makes sense to get the 9900k since what they are going to refund is most of the cost of the 9900k.

 

[pastrychef]

So besides all the extra work you did to to make the CPU run cooler and the spoofing of the the IGPU was there anything you really had to do to make it work?

Intel said they are going to take the faulty I7 8700k back but they are not going to give me a replacement they are going to give me a refund. So it just makes sense to get the 9900k since what they are going to refund is most of the cost of the 9900k.

Nope. All I had to do was spoof Coffee Lake IGPU. Supposedly, the macOS Mojave 10.14.2 beta corrects the IGPU issue and spoofing isn't required. Hopefully, the fix sticks and shows up in the final release of 10.14.2.

The delidding stuff is, of course, strictly optional. I'm old fashioned and stubborn so I did what all that I could to make it all run smoothly on air cooling.

 

[scottkendall]

Nope. All I had to do was spoof Coffee Lake IGPU. Supposedly, the macOS Mojave 10.14.2 beta corrects the IGPU issue and spoofing isn't required. Hopefully, the fix sticks and shows up in the final release of 10.14.2.

The delidding stuff is, of course, strictly optional. I'm old fashioned and stubborn so I did what all that I could to make it all run smoothly on air cooling.

I never used W/C till recently and I got an AIO, I do like all the extra space it creates around the CPU area. Also I never really messed with OC till recently. However, I noticed on the fault 8700 that 4.9 looked like it was only slightly hotter then stock settings, but when I juiced 5.0 it got overly hot. If I do any OC to the 9900k it will be mild.

 

[Enderal]

Thanks for the detailed anwser!
I tried all of them but no luck

- install SSDT file from shathenine: issue still persist, I'm already using 10.13.4, so the FB name is correct without the SSDT file
- Lilu.kext, Shiki.kext, and WhateverGreen.kext: issue still persist, I was using EFI for RX500-Vega v3.2, so I actually tried them before...
- I have a 2K display, which don't have this issue even connect via DP port, I tried use the cable from that display to connect my 4K display, but issue persist
- I can't find an option to disable HDCP, I see some threads on DELL's forum, which says "it's illegal to disable HDCP, so it's not possible"

I see multiple build configuration very similar to mine, but all of them don't mention this issue.
I started to thinking this is a hardware issue. and considering to return this card and get another one.

Previously I'm using the Sapphire Pulse RX 570 8G, it's very smooth, works OOB. It seems like Vega graphics card have lot more issues compare to RX500 series. At least I encountered these problems (which not exist on RX500 series):

- High speed fan when Idle (Solved by using shathenine's RadeonVega64AirCoolingFansFix.kext)
- GPUTach load meter led blinks when Idle (Not Solved)
- Dual Monitor/HotPlug Issues (Solved by using VegaGraphicsFixup.kext)
- No 4K resolution during boot (Not Solved)
- 4K display HDCP issue I mentioned previously (Not Solved)

Does the MSI Air Boost one have some those issues too?

Where can I download the RadeonVega64AirCoolingFansFix.kext ?

 

[pastrychef]

I never used W/C till recently and I got an AIO, I do like all the extra space it creates around the CPU area. Also I never really messed with OC till recently. However, I noticed on the fault 8700 that 4.9 looked like it was only slightly hotter then stock settings, but when I juiced 5.0 it got overly hot. If I do any OC to the 9900k it will be mild.

The i9-9900K is definitely hotter than the i7-8700K. I've kept my overclocking very mild for now too. But even with this mild overclock, everything feels really fast so I'm in no hurry to push things any further.

 

[Stork]

@pastrychef, I'm am soooo tempted to get the Sapphire RX Vega 64 @ Newegg's Black Friday sale for $400 to replace Gene's GTX 1080 FE. Whatcha think?

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202326&ignorebbr=1

I've been reading/following this thread at MacRumor's Mac Pro forum section > https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/amd-polaris-vega-gpu-macos-support.2083168/

 

[pastrychef]

@pastrychef, I'm am soooo tempted to get the Sapphire RX Vega 64 @ Newegg's Black Friday sale for $400 to replace Gene's GTX 1080 FE. Whatcha think?

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202326&ignorebbr=1

I've been reading/following this thread at MacRumor's Mac Pro forum section > https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/amd-polaris-vega-gpu-macos-support.2083168/

I saw a Vega 64 for about $440 last week. The prices have really come down a lot since the crypto currency mining craze.

The Vega cards are very good but at stock, they draw a lot of power and run quite hot. If you are willing to spend a little time to tweak them, you can improve performance while lowering power consumption and heat. Once tweaked properly, the Vegas can be very competitive with GTX 1080s or even 1080 Tis.

In macOS, I've found my Vega to be much smoother than the GTX 1080 I previously had. Although I'm still a bit bitter at Nvidia for their extremely buggy High Sierra drivers, I also have them to thank for forcing me to go AMD. I have zero regrets about the switch. Words can't describe how much better AMD is in macOS.

 

[trs96]

I'm am soooo tempted to get the Sapphire RX Vega 64 @ Newegg's Black Friday sale for $400 to replace Gene's GTX 1080 FE. Whatcha think?

Are you using the Gene build mostly for Logic Pro audio work ? If so the Vega 64 is much more horsepower than you need. A 570 or 580 that works OOB is more than adequate. If you work with 4K video or edit high res photos then the Vega 64 is the way to go. It is really power hungry though so figure that into your decision.

The performance of both Vega cards comes at a significant power cost. For the RX 500 series, we mused that load consumption is where AMD paid the piper. Here, the piper has taken AMD to the cleaners. In Battlefield 1, Vega 64 consumes 150W more system-wide power than the GTX 1080, its direct competitor. To be clear, additional power draw is expected, since Vega 64 is larger in both shader count (4096 vs. 2560) and die size (486mm2 vs. 314mm2) to the GTX 1080

Anandtech

 

[scottkendall]

I saw a Vega 64 for about $440 last week. The prices have really come down a lot since the crypto currency mining craze.

The Vega cards are very good but at stock, they draw a lot of power and run quite hot. If you are willing to spend a little time to tweak them, you can improve performance while lowering power consumption and heat. Once tweaked properly, the Vegas can be very competitive with GTX 1080s or even 1080 Tis.

In macOS, I've found my Vega to be much smoother than the GTX 1080 I previously had. Although I'm still a bit bitter at Nvidia for their extremely buggy High Sierra drivers, I also have them to thank for forcing me to go AMD. I have zero regrets about the switch. Words can't describe how much better AMD is in macOS.

Are you using Vegatab to tweak your card, and other then heat what does power consumption really matter.