It depends mainly on two things:
1) Your CPU model, meaning how much power it would like to draw with the power limits maxed out. The lower the model, the less of a performance impact there will be on average. With the 14700K probably being a slight exception, since it also likes to draw
>300W at full load when unrestricted, worse than a 13900K. Only the 14900K(S) is more bonkers.
2) The type of load, wether we are talking full multicore load like Cinebench, where with a 14900K for example you'd see a higher performance loss, but then in games, where the CPU is only half loaded at the most, you would see no loss or a small loss.
Since 2020 at the latest (on here anyway), i always promoted lowering the "CPU Lite Load" setting more to what the CPU actually needs, than what MSI deemed necessary to add as a "safety margin".
Here is a post from the next day, showing already on the 10th gen CPUs how crazy it is to run them with maxed out power limits (the i9-9900K was the first "monster", but from 10th gen onwards they really pushed the i9 models too hard).
Above 200-250W - depending on the CPU model - the performance becomes what i like call "
junk performance", the last few percent of performance gains in fully multithreaded load are bought with a skyrocketing power consumption. I believe no CPU of the current technology/silicon should be allowed to draw more, except when a) time is money (the faster a job is finished, the better), and b) the cooling is exceptional (high-end 360mm AIO or better, or custom loop), and c) the CPU is a 13900K(S) or 14900K(S). Because if you have a 14700K, time is not money, otherwise you would've gotten the 14900K. Because if your cooling is not exceptional, you will run into thermal throttling. And of course the efficiency goes down the drain. So it's better to wait a couple seconds/minutes longer for the result and have it done at better efficiency. Of course, lowering CPU Lite Load at the same time is ideal.
I see the main reason in setting the power limits that the cooling is protected, that the temperatures are under control under all circumstances. I then see optimizing "CPU Lite Load" as a great method of lowering power consumption by bringing the voltage to a more sane level according to the specific CPU. Both steps are explained
here for example.
When using the CPU Lite Load Control "Advanced" mode, it becomes possible to set different AC and DC loadlines, but modifying the DC Loadline would mean modified power consumption measurements and VIDs, and if setting AC loadline to a different value than DC loadline, the power consumption readouts and VID values will become more inaccurate. I like to keep them synchronized, and then one might as well use the normal mode.
Advanced mode could give more fine-grained control in 1/100 m
(Milli
ohm) steps, but i don't recommend going to the edge of stability anyway, it's better to have some stability headroom. So i would first find the lowest stable mode (one above the first unstable one!), and then i would raise it by one additional step to be on the absolute safe side even under worse conditions like higher ambient temperature.
MSI and the other board makers are very hesitant to lower their high default voltages, for example they also like to use very high IMC (memory controller)-related voltages once XMP/EXPO is enabled with a sufficient speed, to ensure the highest amount of stability and the lowest amount of support questions. When the BIOS applies high voltages there, it has a better chance of stabilizing the RAM, even though it's very blunt and unsophisticated method and often uses way more voltage than necessary. They will only ever lower voltages when there is a
major problem like there was with AMD AM5 which were actually blowing up from too high SoC voltage.
Similarly, for the CPU, they will favour settings that emphasize performance over efficiency or lower power draw, otherwise they look worse in the board reviews vs. the competition for example. So the kind of things we're seeing now, them scrambling to release BIOS updates with "Intel Baseline" profiles because the CPUs are unstable at defaults, these are extraordinary circumstances, hopefully this will shift something not only for the board makers, but also for the buying public. We need to get away from these high-end CPUs that are pushed far beyond their comfort zone from factory, and the boards then letting them off the leash completely.
