Hey gang,
So I have been running my i9 9900k Z390 Dark rig for about 5 weeks now.
I have been extremely pleased with this new rig, have all 8 cores running at 5.1 GHz. Core temps under load running around 70c.
 
Anyway to my question. I am currently running my vcore set to Adaptive with +90 % vdroop. This gives me the lowest voltage under load while also allowing the vcore to get down below 1v when idle or not doing much, which I like.
Now with doing it this way, my vcore in bios is set to 1.208 and is stable. However under load even with the max vdroop, it will usually fluctuate between 1.32v-1.35v.
 
I have notice some have their vcore set to "override" rather than "adaptive". Is one better than the other? I would assume by setting to override the vcore probably stays closer to what it actually would be under load, for instance if mine requires 1.32-1.35 under heavy load, then if I set to override I would likely set a higher vcore in the bios, rather than something like 1.208 I should set it closer to say the 1.32v or a little higher? And if set this way, then the vcore remains at that constantly even at idle?
 
Thanks for any clarification on this. Just something I am trying to get my head wrapped around. Pretty happy with how I have it set now was mainly curious on differences between adaptive and override.
 
 

"curious on differences between adaptive and override."
 
Most of the following are opinions. YMMV.
 
Relaxing core voltage between load peaks, just like reducing core clock via EIST, saves power, heat stress on the CPU.  Variable voltage and clocks go with Windows Balanced power plan.  The CPU usually idles at less than 5 watts.  If performance in games, loading applications and in productive workflows are adequate, I think adaptive and balanced power is the better way to go with any 24/7 cooling scheme.  I use this combination in 24/7 rigs to promote longevity. 
 
Override Core voltage keeps the CPU ready for a burst of activity without waiting for that brief delay while the motherboard VRM spins up.  When used with Windows Performance power plan, both clock and voltage are ready.  Performance is a little quicker, especially with intermittent spiking loads.  Such loads are common in 3D gaming, all 3D benchmarks and some 2D benchmarks like Geekbench.  The downside is that the CPU idles at a constant 20 or so watts.  I use this combination for all competitive benchmarking.
 
The higher average power and sustained voltage stress (just a minor stress at 1.3Vcore) are worth it when
a.  Expected CPU life of 5+ years is not an issue
b.  Spikes of load need better responsiveness
c.  Competitive benchmarking

honestly, after doing this for years and keeping a reasonable overclock, I've not seen CPU degradation.   I plan on leaving my vcore and frequency for 5.1   if heat is an issue, then do it your way.   anything under 75 C should be ok for long term.   But that's based on what I've seen over the past decade of keeping mine overclocked.  I just retired a Q6600 and nothing wrong with the performance.  That was on a work computer.