# TIM is Behind Ivy Bridge Temperatures After All



## btarunr (May 12, 2012)

It's proven: the thermal interface material (TIM) used by Intel, inside the integrated heatspreader (IHS) of its Core "Ivy Bridge" processors are behind its higher than expected load temperatures. This assertion was first made in late-April by an Overclockers.com report, and was recently put to test by Japanese tech portal PC Watch, in which an investigator carefully removed the IHS of a Core i7-3770K processor, removed the included TIM and binding grease, and replaced them with a pair of aftermarket performance TIMs, such as OCZ Freeze and Coolaboratory Liquid Pro. 

PC Watch findings show that swapping the TIM, if done right, can shave stock clock (3.5 GHz, Auto voltage) temperatures by as much as 18% (lowest temperatures by the Coolaboratory TIM), and 4.00 GHz @ 1.2V temperatures by as much as 23% (again, lowest temperatures on the Coolaboratory TIM). The change in TIM was also change the overclockability of the chip, which was then able to sustain higher core voltages to facilitate higher core clock speeds. The report concluded that Intel's decision to use thermal paste inside the IHS of its Ivy Bridge chips, instead of fluxless solder, poses a very real impact on temperatures and overclockability. 



 

 

 



*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 12, 2012)

so basically someone was thinkin it be cheaper or to cater to extreme overclockers


----------



## SuperSonic X 316 (May 12, 2012)

I upgraded to an Ivy Bridge from a Phenom II; this is pretty disappointing to hear and has kind of left me with a bad image of Intel. :\ Still looking forward to Haswell for another upgrade though.


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 12, 2012)

supersonic x 316 said:


> i upgraded to an ivy bridge from a phenom ii; this is pretty disappointing to hear and has kind of left me with a bad image of intel. :\ still looking forward to haswell for another upgrade though.



1150


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (May 12, 2012)

Odd. Earlier tests showed no temp change.


----------



## arterius2 (May 12, 2012)

i'm sure someone will come up with the idea to mount the HSF directly to the bare chip (without the IHS) and lower the temps even further


----------



## swirl09 (May 12, 2012)

SuperSonic X 316 said:


> I upgraded to an Ivy Bridge from a Phenom II; this is pretty disappointing to hear and has kind of left me with a bad image of Intel. :\ Still looking forward to Haswell for another upgrade though.



Not exactly fightin' words ;-p How bad does that make AMD look, you moved from them to intel, dont like the news about your new chip and your still looking forward to another chip from intel ^_^'

Anyway... I did read those posts about cheap grease being the possible culprit to ivy's higher temps, but not being much of an OCer it didnt deter me and I must say Im pretty happy with the temps on mine so far.





Those are cooler than average temps. Typical idle so far is about 30c, all Ive done with the chip is EZ mode ^.^ Gaming has the chip running @4.22 on 1.19V which results in max 51c


----------



## SuperSonic X 316 (May 12, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> 1150



Socket? Yes, I'm aware I'm going to need to switch motherboards. This one will be reused on my media PC. I went with a cheaper one too due to that, an ASUS Maximus V Gene; I only needed 1 PCI-E slot and I didn't want to pay another extra 100 just for the extra 2-3 PCI-E slots I wouldn't touch.


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 12, 2012)

SuperSonic X 316 said:


> Socket? Yes, I'm aware I'm going to need to switch motherboards. This one will be reused on my media PC. I went with a cheaper one too due to that, an ASUS Maximus V Gene; I only needed 1 PCI-E slot and I didn't want to pay another extra 100 just for the extra 2-3 PCI-E slots I wouldn't touch.



If the Price on that board drops, otherwise for a HTPC any motherboard will due (It comes to my notion it wont be overclocked)


----------



## reverze (May 12, 2012)

sad to hear, will need a revision to make it interesting for enthousiasts


----------



## DualAmdMP (May 12, 2012)

SuperSonic X 316 said:


> I upgraded to an Ivy Bridge from a Phenom II; this is pretty disappointing to hear and has kind of left me with a bad image of Intel. :\ Still looking forward to Haswell for another upgrade though.



I think you are wrong about Intel. I'm actually glad that they used TIM instead of solder on the core. You need to try to put a waterblock directly on the core (once in your life) and you will be surprised how well it conducts heat into water compare to IHS + waterblock. XS forum has a lot of info on this topic.

I has few Athlon X2 (65nm/90nm) running with waterblock directly on the Core. No matter how much voltage i pumped into the CPU, the temperatures were always great!

I hope AMD doesthe same thing with their new FX line.

If you don't care about watercooling the CPU for max overclock or low temperature, then just ignore me


----------



## function69 (May 12, 2012)

Hey, at least it's a cheap and easy fix; 10 minutes and you have a 15 degree drop in temps.

Also, how about ditching the IHS altogether and attaching the cooler directly to the core, or will the pressure cause it to crack?


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 12, 2012)

I recall everyone bitching at how the Core Line Up You couldnt remove the IHS without wrecking the core, now people are bitching they used a cheap TIM on it so you could remove the IHS to get further in capability, I dont get the Intel fans honestly, does anything satisfy them???


----------



## Xzibit (May 12, 2012)

Since its Friday.  I will be the first one to call B.S. on this.

1) I'm lazy and I could have done that graph

2) No video

3) The OC just looks lazy like .05.  More of a graph you find on the back of the Freeze and Liquid Pro so back to 1^

4) From the few pics hes got up there this guy is no Doctor with his hands.

5) I cant read spanish that well

6) W1z didnt include a temp review on the Ivy-Bridge so i'll have to say it isnt true


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (May 12, 2012)

Xzibit said:


> Since its Friday.  I will be the first one to call B.S. on this.
> 
> 1) I'm lazy and I could have done that graph
> 
> ...



you must be high. We don't need a video for this. The overclock is not lazy at all from 3.5ghz to 4.6, and maybe you should learn another language so you can read these things


----------



## RejZoR (May 12, 2012)

Still, it's a very sloppy job. Tell me, what will happen after 3 or 5 years when this crappy TIM will turn into an useless powder? Things will get even worse just because someone at Intel wanted to save some bucks. Not cool. I'll skip this series anyway since they wouldn't really give me much extra compared to my good ol' Bloomfield at 3,8GHz...


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 12, 2012)

RejZoR said:


> Still, it's a very sloppy job. Tell me, what will happen after 3 or 5 years when this crappy TIM will turn into an useless powder? Things will get even worse just because someone at Intel wanted to save some bucks. Not cool. I'll skip this series anyway since they wouldn't really give me much extra compared to my good ol' Bloomfield at 3,8GHz...



you have more capability than 1155 atleast with slot configurations


----------



## PopcornMachine (May 12, 2012)

If I were shopping for a CPU now, I would gladly pay an extra penny, maybe even a nickel, for a chip with fluxless solder.

Fortunately for me, I'm not shopping for a CPU.


----------



## wolf (May 12, 2012)

I hope intel fixes this with later batches... well at least the K and X series chips you know, this means a lot to people.

Still, no reason for me to ditch the trusty 2500K in sight


----------



## NC37 (May 12, 2012)

SuperSonic X 316 said:


> I upgraded to an Ivy Bridge from a Phenom II; this is pretty disappointing to hear and has kind of left me with a bad image of Intel. :\ Still looking forward to Haswell for another upgrade though.





eidairaman1 said:


> 1150



Exactly. You'll need to buy a new board for Haswell. Might as well get as much out of Ivy as you can.


----------



## kajson (May 12, 2012)

I would be amazed if there'd be a stepping later on with a proper IHS, because that would mean that someone like myself would just have to fry their cpu, and use my 20$ intel no questions asked insurance policy to get a brand new flashy high oc cpu in return.


----------



## Rowsol (May 12, 2012)

when I first heard of this someone said it was just the prerelease chips.  Now I'm hearing all the chips are like this.  I hope they fix this with a new revision.


----------



## dj-electric (May 12, 2012)

Now shiz gets real... I also really hope intel will fix it. This was a big deal breaker for me.


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (May 12, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> I recall everyone bitching at how the Core Line Up You couldnt remove the IHS without wrecking the core, now people are bitching they used a cheap TIM on it so you could remove the IHS to get further in capability, I dont get the Intel fans honestly, does anything satisfy them???



Weak sauce man. When are you going to upgrade?

Anyways if they were insane enough to do that for extreme clockers (like .001% of buyers) they'd of said something about it to put a positive spin on this mess.


----------



## Dent1 (May 12, 2012)

Where is Trickson? He has spent  years in every AMD Forum and thread bashing AMD. Now where is he when Intel are looking like a bad choice. 


As far as this topic, maybe Intel can fix the temparatures with an stepping revision?


----------



## blibba (May 12, 2012)

I feel I should point out that a change in load temperature from 61 degrees Celcius (334K) to 50 degrees Celcius (323K) is a change of 3.29%, not 18%.


----------



## 1nf3rn0x (May 12, 2012)

This actually might be a deal breaker for me. I might go the 2500k route not the 3570k.


----------



## Aquinus (May 12, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> Where is Trickson? He has spent years in every AMD Forum and thread bashing AMD. Now where is he when Intel are looking like a bad choice.



Stop trying to start a flame war, I mean Trickson hasn't even posted so your obsession with his fanboy-ism is kind of disturbing. Grow up and stop mentioning Trickson every time Intel appears to do something incorrect, but correct me if I'm wrong but IVB is still faster than anything AMD has got so I wouldn't even start on this battle considering it isn't what this thread is about. I'm sick and tired of your fueling every AMD flame war that shows up on TPU and you really need to learn when enough is enough.

As far as the TIM, people who have IVB already have it so a stepping won't do them any good. Going on, if Intel is planning on releasing another stepping, replacing the TIM might not be a bad idea, but honestly, if an enthusiast want to OC higher, the user might just try replacing the TIM them-self.


----------



## Completely Bonkers (May 12, 2012)

blibba said:


> I feel I should point out that a change in load temperature from 61 degrees Celcius (334K) to 50 degrees Celcius (323K) is a change of 3.29%, not 18%.


pædagogans!


----------



## jamdox (May 12, 2012)

Meh. Ivy isn't supposed to be given more than 1.35 volts anyway. All the action came at 1.4+, really 1.5/5GHz.

Would Ivy have better thermals with a soldered IHS? Sure. But do bad thermals impair the OCability of the chip?

That's a question for the lawyers. I'll bet you dollars to donuts they'll argue that electromigration is more damaging to Ivy Bridge than heat. So:

Intel put the paste on because it was good enough.

The paste is good enough because Ivy can't handle high voltages.

End of story. According to Intel's lawyers. I don't know how it works in reality, but I'm satisfied getting my 3570k up to 4.7.


----------



## RejZoR (May 12, 2012)

blibba said:


> I feel I should point out that a change in load temperature from 61 degrees Celcius (334K) to 50 degrees Celcius (323K) is a change of 3.29%, not 18%.



Actually the decrease is 19,355% (going from 62°C to 50°C)


----------



## jihadjoe (May 12, 2012)

blibba said:


> I feel I should point out that a change in load temperature from 61 degrees Celcius (334K) to 50 degrees Celcius (323K) is a change of 3.29%, not 18%.



Since you're being pedantic, I'd like to point out that we should be comparing delta Ts, i.e. temperature difference from ambient which was 24°C according to the first image.

So the change was from (61-24) 37°ΔC to (50-24) 26°ΔC , or a change of 29.7%


----------



## Bjorn_Of_Iceland (May 12, 2012)

Imo, I'd remove the IHS and place my block directly on that chip oldschool. That would definitely give me better temps.


----------



## RejZoR (May 12, 2012)

The main problem with direct contact is that you can actually crumble the chip if you apply too much pressure or you apply the pressure on one edge too strongly.


----------



## Laurijan (May 12, 2012)

What a pity that they use TIM. I wonder why? Gonna get an Ivy even with the temps - I want PCIE 3.0 for my next GPU upgrade.


----------



## Widjaja (May 12, 2012)

Strange TIM is indeed placed under the IHS on these chips.

They could have at least place TIM under the non K chips.


----------



## nikko (May 12, 2012)

TIM is easier to use with MCP package chips that haswell and broadwell will be I guess. So get used to it. Besides the cpu doesn't need any more oc headroom. Anyway the scaling is bad above 1.2V with only 100Mhz for each 0.1V so I don't like it.


----------



## SuperSonic X 316 (May 12, 2012)

NC37 said:


> Exactly. You'll need to buy a new board for Haswell. Might as well get as much out of Ivy as you can.



Thing is, for the people who don't want to touch their CPU it's a bad thing tbey decided to use the weaker material. I am interested in removing the IHS if it's safe when done correctly but not yet. This is really the first chip and board I got to bothee to OC with and it looks like I'll have to go that route eventually.


----------



## Dent1 (May 12, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> Stop trying to start a flame war, I mean Trickson hasn't even posted so your obsession with his fanboy-ism is kind of disturbing. Grow up and stop mentioning Trickson every time Intel appears to do something incorrect, but correct me if I'm wrong but IVB is still faster than anything AMD has got so I wouldn't even start on this battle considering it isn't what this thread is about. I'm sick and tired of your fueling every AMD flame war that shows up on TPU and you really need to learn when enough is enough.






May I say that I never mentioned the word AMD in a defensive way or insinuated performance results or a consumer choice. So Maybe the fanboy or flame war starter is closer to home.




Aquinus said:


> As far as the TIM, people who have IVB already have it so a stepping won't do them any good. Going on, if Intel is planning on releasing another stepping, replacing the TIM might not be a bad idea, but honestly, if an enthusiast want to OC higher, the user might just try replacing the TIM them-self.



I've been looking to upgrade my rig to Ivy for weeks now. This TIM stuff has put me off. I'm hoping Intel has something in the works otherwise my money is staying in my wallet.


----------



## Aquinus (May 12, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> May I say that I never mentioned the word AMD in a defensive way or insinuated performance results or a consumer choice. So Maybe the fanboy or flame war starter is closer to home.
> 
> I've been looking to upgrade my rig to Ivy for weeks now. This TIM stuff has put me off. I'm hoping Intel has something in the works otherwise my money is staying in my wallet.



I'm not talking about AMD, I'l talk about you trying to start a flame war with Trickson for what he believes. Stop getting on his case when he isn't around.


----------



## zomg (May 12, 2012)

who care about i5/i7 with attached overpriced crappy video chip

big question is what they will put in Xeon parts (which have HT, no vga, and better priced)

we will know after 14th may 2012 (xeon ivy release date)




zomg said:


> best value Ivy Bridge model is Xeon E3-1230 v2 (3.3 GHz, 3.7 GHz turbo, 4C/8T, Hyper-Threading, 8mb cache, $215)
> 
> Core i5-3550 vs Xeon E3-1230 v2 (same socket, same base/turbo frequency, same price)
> Xeon have more cache (8mb > 6mb), less TDP (69w < 77w), HyperThread (8threads > 4 threads), no crappy gpu (thx for lower tdp)
> ...


----------



## dicobalt (May 12, 2012)

If only Intel would say WHY they decided to use TIM instead of solder.  Maybe they are retooling and didn't want to delay Ivy, so they used TIM in the meantime?  Was there a technical problem using solder on Ivy?  They could have went on Newegg and ordered some better TIM.  The whole situation seems totally unnecessary and a result of carelessness during planning.


----------



## 20mmrain (May 12, 2012)

Well if Intel is true hopefully they will do something about this. 

I just bought an IB CPU.... serves me right for adopting early. Well I can sell this and my SB and buy a SB-E setup!


----------



## Aquinus (May 12, 2012)

zomg said:


> who care about i5/i7 with attached overpriced crappy video chip
> 
> big question is what they will put in Xeon parts (which have HT, no vga, and better priced)
> 
> we will know after 14th may 2012 (xeon ivy release date)



Not if you want to overclock. If you leave your hardware stock, it might be faster for the same price, yes.


----------



## [XC] Oj101 (May 12, 2012)

Removed.


----------



## zomg (May 12, 2012)

if you want overclock - it is better to use sandy bridge
ivy i5/i7 is useless for everyone except fans of intel gpu
sandy for overclockers
xeon ivy to take advantage of new tech - for stability performance and temperatures


----------



## radrok (May 12, 2012)

zomg said:


> ivy i5/i7 is useless for everyone except fans of intel gpu



Ivy Bridge still has better IPC than Sandy Bridge and the temperatures aren't THAT bad, you can reach high clocks with adequate cooling so why would you say that it is useless?


----------



## RejZoR (May 12, 2012)

Can you even get CPU's without stupid GPU being integrated in the die?


----------



## blibba (May 12, 2012)

zomg said:


> if you want overclock - it is better to use sandy bridge
> ivy i5/i7 is useless for everyone except fans of intel gpu
> sandy for overclockers
> xeon ivy to take advantage of new tech - for stability performance and temperatures



IB is faster clock for clock. An IB typical max OC ends up performing better than a SB typical max OC despite the clockspeed deficit, and uses less power in the process.



RejZoR said:


> Actually the decrease is 19,355% (going from 62°C to 50°C)



a) You've missed my point.
b) Where did you get 62°C from?



jihadjoe said:


> Since you're being pedantic, I'd like to point out that we should be comparing delta Ts, i.e. temperature difference from ambient which was 24°C according to the first image.
> 
> So the change was from (61-24) 37°ΔC to (50-24) 26°ΔC , or a change of 29.7%



The article text references temperatures rather than temperature deltas, but as it happens I think you make a good point. 29.7% should probably be the headline figure.


----------



## bmwmaster (May 12, 2012)

Hahahahaa !

I sucessfully shaved IHS off from my 3570k.
Removed socket holder and directly mounted the Heatkiller waterblock on it !

I now have 15 °C better Temps !

Before i had 4,6 Hhz @ 1.32 V @ 80°C

Now i have the same config @ 65 °C.

So its a nice drop !!!


----------



## reverze (May 12, 2012)

same temps / voltage / clocks as my i2500k on air


----------



## ensabrenoir (May 12, 2012)

bmwmaster said:


> Hahahahaa !
> 
> I sucessfully shaved IHS off from my 3570k.
> Removed socket holder and directly mounted the Heatkiller waterblock on it !
> ...





BRAVE....BRAVE...SOUL......


----------



## Atom_Anti (May 12, 2012)

Here is an Intel Pentium 4 Celeron 1,7GHz (Willamette, SL69Z), which also used Thermal paste:






My job and photo.


----------



## qubit (May 12, 2012)

I can't believe Intel spent a decade and poured all those billions into developing their impressive 3D transistors, only to squander that advantage over some crappy TIM! 

I promise you it wasn't the engineers that wanted it, but the marketers and beancounters within the company. The arguments must have been something else. Shame none of that leaked out.

I'm so glad I didn't jump into IB and got my lovely 2700K. 

*Right, you heard this prediction here first: Intel will backpedal on this decision now that this is out and make a new version of IB with either better TIM or a proper solder connection. They will then offer an optional recall of these processors soon after for the fixed versions.*


----------



## Laurijan (May 12, 2012)

bmwmaster said:


> Hahahahaa !
> 
> I sucessfully shaved IHS off from my 3570k.
> Removed socket holder and directly mounted the Heatkiller waterblock on it !
> ...



Tell us how you removed it please.


----------



## Dent1 (May 12, 2012)

bmwmaster said:


> Hahahahaa !
> 
> I sucessfully shaved IHS off from my 3570k.
> Removed socket holder and directly mounted the Heatkiller waterblock on it !
> ...



Those are not great temps. Your CPU should not reach 65c unless its at 100% load for an extended period of time.


----------



## bmwmaster (May 12, 2012)

I have made an IHS removal movie !!! I will upload it tomorrow for those who are interested.
But it isn´t so difficult, just used an razor and cut around. About 15 minutes of work.

The 65° C of course are under 100 % load with linx.

Now i can tell something about behavior with higher Vcore.

I raised vCore from 1.32 V to 1.44 V. Temps went up from 65°C to 73°C (also raised clock to 4.8 Ghz).

Ivy bridge for me now behaves like sandy bridge did. Temps are near the same. I can push cpu now about 200 Mhz further with higher Vcore and lower temp. 

I think 4.8 Ghz is the Wall for my CPU..........anyway, so it still doeasn´t clock so good like Sandy bridge.


----------



## badtaylorx (May 12, 2012)

not trieng to be a dik here.....but your temps will drop if you re install that heat spreader with a proper tim!!!


----------



## cadaveca (May 12, 2012)

bmwmaster said:


> Ivy bridge for me now behaves like sandy bridge did. Temps are near the same. I can push cpu now about 200 Mhz further with higher Vcore and lower temp.



Ivy isn'y Sandy; expecting similar stuff from an entirely differnt process is well...um...yeah...


Cool you get some results, to eb honest, but at the same time, I think that Intel has done the right thing. Many OC'ers will outright pull IHS, viod warranty, and all is good. Other will not, and will retain warranty, albeit while running slightly lower clocks and volts.


Voiding warranty for 200 MHz, to me seems not worth it?


----------



## SuperSonic X 316 (May 12, 2012)

Quick question, for an air heatsink cooler, can you just remove the HIS, reapply the paste, and put the heatsink over the exposed CPU or do you have to use certain heatsinks / do something else?


----------



## cadaveca (May 12, 2012)

any heatsink will do, but IHS shoudl be repalced after using new TIM. Surface tension of the paste and pressure from retention bracket should keep IHS in place.


----------



## ironwolf (May 12, 2012)

As posed in a previous post by someone else over warranty, I am presuming everyone doing this doesn't give a hoot about any warranty?  I have never personally had a CPU die (don't OC or anything personally), so maybe it's not a real worry?


----------



## 20mmrain (May 12, 2012)

I have been playing with a i7 3770K for about 18 hours now. Somethings I've noticed with temps....

The temps don't seem to be helped all that much with Water cooling. (this I don't quit Understand) for example I am running mine @ 4.5 Ghz 1.17v to 1.18v and I get 67c hottest core during Large FTT Prime and 71c Hottest core during 20 runs of LinX. (The rest of the cores are in the high 50c's and 1 low 60c's)
It seems with a good Air cooler people are not experiencing that much higher temps... then what I am getting at similar clocks and voltages.

Some good news I noticed is... while playing Metro 2033, BF3, and Crysis I saw the hottest core get up to 40c. (Other cores were in the mid to upper 30c's range) So while these Cpu's do get hot under stress testing they stay rather cool under normal gaming usage even overclocked.

So I just thought I would throw this out there.... I have tried re-seating my CPU block several times.... I am using a high end TIM.
The reason I am bringing this up is Because I don't know if I believe these temps are only related to the TIM under the (IHS) or not. Sure I believe that removing it will help some what... but it would on most CPU's.... so would lapping the CPU.
I think that we are all just going to have to face it.... and realize that Ivy Bridge is a warm running CPU.
On the other hand.... it sure would be nice if Intel would change the TIM being used and do a recall. It would for sure help somewhat!

If I decide not to sell this CPU.... I might try taking off the IHS for my own experiments.... but i am not sure about that yet. 

BTW... Does anyone know if Intel released a Tcase temp for this CPU yet?


----------



## cadaveca (May 12, 2012)

20mmrain said:


> BTW... Does anyone know if Intel released a Tcase temp for this CPU yet?



Yes, it's in the Whitepapers for 3rd Generation Core i5/i7 CPUs on their site.


----------



## bmwmaster (May 12, 2012)

I can say that the tim under the ihs is the main reason for high temps. With ihs i never would push 1.44 V on core cause temps would go fastly above 100 °C.

Without ihs they are at 73°C and that is similary like other cpus i had (q9550, i7 920, i7 950, i7 2700k)

I dont think replacing cooler, more pressure, better tim etc. will help. I tested all and nothing helped.

I just waited that someone proves that tim is the reason for the heat and not cpu itself. 
As i read the news, it was clear that i have to take ihs off and im happy with it.
I would do it again..........especially cause summer comes and temps are getting hotter here.


----------



## cadaveca (May 12, 2012)

Until there is proof that the high temps that Ivy reports are affecting stability or the lifespan of the CPU, then I might have interest in any of this, but as it stands, Sure, it allows for lower temps, which then allow for more voltage, but I've yet to ehar that it's helped anyone get more with the same voltage!!!


Like, what is these chips are fine @ 90c and 1.25 V for 5 years? and what if 1.3V will kill CPU in 18 months no matter the temps....removal of IHS may actually give false security that may lead to many dead chips in the future....


----------



## jihadjoe (May 12, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> not trieng to be a dik here.....but your temps will drop if you re install that heat spreader with a proper tim!!!



How? Reinstalling the IHS means you have two layers of thermal interface, as opposed to just one. It's nothing but a metal plate, so you might as well seat your HSF/waterblock directly on top of the CPU.

I honestly can't see how:
CPU -> TIM -> IHS -> TIM -> HSF

can be cooler than:
CPU -> TIM -> HSF


----------



## cadaveca (May 12, 2012)

jihadjoe said:


> How? Reinstalling the IHS means you have two layers of thermal interface, as opposed to just one. It's nothing but a metal plate, so you might as well seat your HSF/waterblock directly on top of the CPU.
> 
> I honestly can't see how:
> CPU -> TIM -> IHS -> TIM -> HSF
> ...



You cannot use retention bracket with IHS removed, which makes it hard to give CPU correct pressure. It is also not quite that easy to get even pressure across the core when using block mountings. With very careful block palcement, it could be better, for sure, but it's much easier to just replace TIMM, put IHS on top, and crank it down as far as it will go..with no fear of cracking the core.


----------



## Jstn7477 (May 12, 2012)

I'm a little disappointed they used thermal paste on these, because anyone who deals with older builds and early lidded CPUs (P4/Athlon 64) knows that they definitely run hotter the more they've aged. I'm pretty sure all my old Northwoods and Athlon 64s idle around 50c but I haven't done any real testing with those recently.


----------



## T4C Fantasy (May 12, 2012)

SuperSonic X 316 said:


> I upgraded to an Ivy Bridge from a Phenom II; this is pretty disappointing to hear and has kind of left me with a bad image of Intel. :\ Still looking forward to Haswell for another upgrade though.



there is nothing to be disappointed about, the phenom cant beat the 3770k in any benchmark anyways lol


----------



## tttony (May 12, 2012)

15°???

wow that is lot temps diff!!


----------



## D007 (May 12, 2012)

I'm not surprised. Look at the stock coolers that come with intel processors. Absolute garbage. You pretty much have to replace them.



Dent1 said:


> Those are not great temps. Your CPU should not reach 65c unless its at 100% load for an extended period of time.



65c "under load" is totally normal in this day and age imo.


----------



## Xzibit (May 12, 2012)

Unless I'm reading this wrong with the translator

This is on AIR

A Ivy-Bridge 3770K 4.6ghz @ 1.2V = a Sandy-Bridge 2600k 4.8ghz @ 1.4

Doesnt sound that out of the ordinary even with the temps


----------



## 20mmrain (May 12, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Yes, it's in the Whitepapers for 3rd Generation Core i5/i7 CPUs on their site.



Show me.... or.... type it out please


----------



## OneCool (May 12, 2012)

arterius2 said:


> i'm sure someone will come up with the idea to mount the HSF directly to the bare chip (without the IHS) and lower the temps even further




^This


----------



## erocker (May 12, 2012)

T4C Fantasy said:


> there is nothing to be disappointed about, the phenom cant beat the 3770k in any benchmark anyways lol



But if you have a 2600k/2700k, there's no reason to get Ivy Bridge.. Unless your current SB chip is a complete dud.


----------



## OneCool (May 12, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> You cannot use retention bracket with IHS removed, which makes it hard to give CPU correct pressure



that can be addressed without much problem


----------



## cadaveca (May 12, 2012)

OneCool said:


> that can be addressed without much problem



You bet. I'm actually kind of hoping though, that we see shims for sale again, to make it much easier for average users to take advantage of.


----------



## Xzibit (May 12, 2012)

erocker said:


> But if you have a 2600k/2700k, there's no reason to get Ivy Bridge.. Unless your current SB chip is a complete dud.



Lower power usage overall.  S-B doesnt scale well in power usage once overclocked compare to I-B
Improved Memory controller
PCI-E 3.0 - If you want this then your getting a new board and USB 3.0 native support and other improved perks like improved memory speed support on boards.

People upgrade for farless especially the so-called Enthusiast. 3770K and 2600k/2700k are all mainstream chips.  I agree if you have a 2nd Gen i-Chip there isnt much to it. Although if your coming from a 1st gen i-Chip or lower the $10-$20 dollar differance is a no-brainer to go with Ivy-Bridge.


----------



## marcthpro (May 12, 2012)

Well this mean buyer will have to change the Thermal paste i hope some guide soon tell the buyer how to do it safely  4.6Ghz at 1.2V for +20$ then Sandy look Tempting for new buyer


----------



## Dippyskoodlez (May 12, 2012)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> you must be high. We don't need a video for this. The overclock is not lazy at all from 3.5ghz to 4.6, and maybe you should learn another language so you can read these things



4.6 isn't that hefty.

However, its a good reference point at displaying differences between a single variable and stock.


----------



## T4C Fantasy (May 12, 2012)

erocker said:


> But if you have a 2600k/2700k, there's no reason to get Ivy Bridge.. Unless your current SB chip is a complete dud.



the thing is if you dont already have sandy bridge go for ivy if you have sandy stick with it.... ivy bridge is close to the same price


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (May 12, 2012)

By the time they fix this you might as well get haswell.


----------



## Xzibit (May 12, 2012)

LAN_deRf_HA said:


> By the time they fix this you might as well get haswell.



Seeing people systems specs and reading the forums I havent read many post that this will actually effect them.

Its more of a look we found an issue so we pile on and everyone seams to jump on the bandwagon to justify there purchase or lack of it.
More like a child saying no I want same temps and same volts on I-B that I had on S-B, no no no..

I dont know, I bet 1% of people here it will make a differance to.  The overcloakers that arent penny pinching. Could probably count them on one hand but then again they arent buying mainstream chips either.

There goes that theory eh?


----------



## erocker (May 12, 2012)

Xzibit said:


> Lower power usage overall.  S-B doesnt scale well in power usage once overclocked compare to I-B
> Improved Memory controller
> PCI-E 3.0 - If you want this then your getting a new board and USB 3.0 native support and other improved perks like improved memory speed support on boards.
> 
> People upgrade for farless especially the so-called Enthusiast. 3770K and 2600k/2700k are all mainstream chips.  I agree if you have a 2nd Gen i-Chip there isnt much to it. Although if your coming from a 1st gen i-Chip or lower the $10-$20 dollar differance is a no-brainer to go with Ivy-Bridge.



Yes, I know about IB. PCI-E 3.0 doesn't make a difference, USB 3.0 isn't a part of IB but the chipset. IB takes more voltage to overclock and scales about the same.


----------



## sergionography (May 12, 2012)

I dont think intel would shoot themselves in the arm land do that for no reason. They just dont wanna compete with themselves. Meaning ivy bridge being equal tosandy bridge is a win for them as ivy have a tiny 160mm2 die sizes so their margin is even  bigger, what ivy is targeted at is mobile, if u comparesb mobile and ivy bridge mobile u willl notice that ivy achieves much higher frequencies and not ivy ultrabooks will perform like sandy bridge notebooks which is a big improvement.
So ivy takes the mobile market as thats what tocks are practical for as being improved process and lower power/TDP while they keep the high end with sb extreme where for thst market po wer consumption isnt as important as max overclock and oc headroom.


----------



## Xzibit (May 12, 2012)

erocker said:


> Yes, I know about IB. PCI-E 3.0 doesn't make a difference, USB 3.0 isn't a part of IB but the chipset. IB takes more voltage to overclock and scales about the same.



Here is one example of the power usage scale

I-5 3570K Review including power usage at stock and overcloacked


----------



## erocker (May 12, 2012)

Xzibit said:


> Here is one example of the power usage scale
> 
> I-5 3570K Review including power usage at stock and overcloacked



I'm not really concerned with power usage since SB really doesn't use that much to begin with.


----------



## Xzibit (May 12, 2012)

erocker said:


> I'm not really concerned with power usage since SB really doesn't use that much to begin with.



17 at idle and 69 at load differance isnt exactly same

Well to say your not concern with it is one thing but saying its wasnt there is ignoring a feature and an improvement thats there.


----------



## cadaveca (May 12, 2012)

erocker said:


> IB takes more voltage to overclock and scales about the same.




SB does 4.5 GHz @ 1.2V on avg???


----------



## Hayder_Master (May 12, 2012)

i just want to know how INTEL with the best engineers and testers miss something stupid like that?????


----------



## NinkobEi (May 12, 2012)

Hayder_Master said:


> i just want to know how INTEL with the best engineers and testers miss something stupid like that?????



Maybe it was intentional? Tired of OC'ers getting stupidly high performance from their CPUs. There's no real-world usage reason to upgrade when all you have to do is plop up the clocks a few Ghz.

If you think about it, today's IB i5's at stock clock are probably comparable to a 4600mhz qx9650. So a 5ghz 2700k is probably comparable to the next gen's processors at stock clock. Basically a free 3 years of RnD.. surely that costs intel some money?


----------



## qubit (May 12, 2012)

Hayder_Master said:


> i just want to know how INTEL with the best engineers and testers miss something stupid like that?????





NinkobEi said:


> Maybe it was intentional? Tired of OC'ers getting stupidly high performance from their CPUs. There's no real-world usage reason to upgrade when all you have to do is plop up the clocks a few Ghz.
> 
> If you think about it, today's IB i5's at stock clock are probably comparable to a 4600mhz qx9650. So a 5ghz 2700k is probably comparable to the next gen's processors at stock clock. Basically a free 3 years of rnd.. surely that costs intel some money?



It had to be intentional and I believe I may have nailed it with the marketers and beancounters: 



qubit said:


> I can't believe Intel spent a decade and poured all those billions into developing their impressive 3D transistors, only to squander that advantage over some crappy TIM!
> 
> I promise you it wasn't the engineers that wanted it, but the marketers and beancounters within the company. The arguments must have been something else. Shame none of that leaked out.
> 
> ...


----------



## ensabrenoir (May 12, 2012)

Yup...... Intels main competitor is itself.....overclocked last generation  equal current gen.....the true ivy bridge would go toe to toe with has...a...well...full of profit for intel


----------



## PopcornMachine (May 12, 2012)

Hayder_Master said:


> i just want to know how INTEL with the best engineers and testers miss something stupid like that?????



I've been assured that they did this on purpose and it was an excellent business decision.... 





I don't agree with them however.  I think it was really stupid.


----------



## ensabrenoir (May 12, 2012)

Unless intel has a 'special' ...black/ultra/XX version around the corner without any tatical errors


----------



## swaaye (May 13, 2012)

It is a mystery why they switched back to thermal paste. It must be cheaper, or easier to assemble, or there's something special to 22nm? 

AMD still uses paste, I think. 

To me, Ivy Bridge is most interesting in low power applications. Can't wait to see the new ultrabooks. For desktop, bring on Haswell...


----------



## Jurassic1024 (May 13, 2012)

Hahaha.  Once I saw and posted the delidding here, I knew it wasn't a power density issue.  Intel is too smart for that.  Now the question is why use TIM vs Fluxless?  If they used fluxless, would 5GHz be too easily obtainable maybe?  I don't know, but I can't wait to find out.


----------



## Jurassic1024 (May 13, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> You bet. I'm actually kind of hoping though, that we see shims for sale again, to make it much easier for average users to take advantage of.



Won't happen.  Two chips alone (3770K and 3750K) are not enough to justify the expense for the R&D, especially with maaaaybe a chance of a new revision.  By then, Haswell will be out or close to it.


----------



## cadaveca (May 13, 2012)

Jurassic1024 said:


> Won't happen.  Two chips alone (3770K and 3750K) are not enough to justify the expense for the R&D, especially with maaaaybe a chance of a new revision.  By then, Haswell will be out or close to it.



Bullshit. A shim is a bit of metal that will brace the CPU agains the heatsink, and prevent damage to the core. NO R&D involved, jsut a couple of measurements, and cutting some metal, or even plastic.

like this:















You can pretty much guarantee that extreme guys are gonna want one.


----------



## qubit (May 13, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Bullshit. A shim is a bit of metal that will brace the CPU agains the heatsink, and prevent damage to the core. NO R&D involved, jsut a couple of measurements, and cutting some metal, or even plastic.
> 
> like this:
> 
> ...


That's true, it's a quick thing to design.

Your AMD pic reminds me of when I tried buying a shim for my Athlon XP. I put it on, put the paste on and then the heatsink... and the CPU nearly burned up through lack of proper contact. That particular bit of metal found itself in the bin in no time flat.


----------



## Jurassic1024 (May 13, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Bullshit. A shim is a bit of metal that will brace the CPU agains the heatsink, and prevent damage to the core. NO R&D involved, jsut a couple of measurements, and cutting some metal, or even plastic.
> 
> like this:
> 
> ...



Oh some homemade job?  Thought so, because these won't be mass produced, which is what I was talking about.  Hence the R&D reference.


----------



## Mussels (May 13, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Bullshit. A shim is a bit of metal that will brace the CPU agains the heatsink, and prevent damage to the core. NO R&D involved, jsut a couple of measurements, and cutting some metal, or even plastic.
> 
> like this:
> 
> ...



cheap to make, and worth their weight in gold to people on watercooling after de-lidding their IHS


----------



## Jurassic1024 (May 13, 2012)

qubit said:


> That's true, it's a quick thing to design.
> 
> Your AMD pic reminds me of when I tried buying a shim for my Athlon XP. I put it on, put the paste on and then the heatsink... and the CPU nearly burned up through lack of proper contact. That particular bit of metal found itself in the bin in no time flat.



If you tried to buy it, how did it get on your CPU?


----------



## Jurassic1024 (May 13, 2012)

Mussels said:


> cheap to make, and worth their weight in gold to people on watercooling after de-lidding their IHS



Weird that people did that.  I had to google back to 2002-2007 to see any reference of it.


----------



## Mussels (May 13, 2012)

Jurassic1024 said:


> Weird that people did that.  I had to google back to 2002-2007 to see any reference of it.



its been a while since we've needed (or even been able to) remove an IHS. i did it on my socket 939 systems to replace the TIM, iirc.


----------



## Jurassic1024 (May 13, 2012)

Mussels said:


> its been a while since we've needed (or even been able to) remove an IHS. i did it on my socket 939 systems to replace the TIM, iirc.



Why not just delid, apply better paste, then relid, rather than go right for direct contact at the risk of damaging the die?  Just curious.


----------



## Mussels (May 13, 2012)

Jurassic1024 said:


> Why not just delid, apply better paste, then relid, rather than go right for direct contact at the risk of damaging the die?  Just curious.



for the same reason we dont stack heatsinks on top of each other, better temps.


i did replace the TIM and re-lid, but i tested without and had better temps. i just didnt want to leave it that way, since i moved my system a lot to LAN parties.


----------



## Jurassic1024 (May 13, 2012)

Mussels said:


> for the same reason we dont stack heatsinks on top of each other, better temps.
> 
> 
> i did replace the TIM and re-lid, but i tested without and had better temps. i just didnt want to leave it that way, since i moved my system a lot to LAN parties.



What kind of temps were you getting with it on versus off?


----------



## Mussels (May 13, 2012)

Jurassic1024 said:


> What kind of temps were you getting with it on versus off?



since i was on air, about 3-5C. had i been on water, i bet the difference would have been larger.


----------



## Jurassic1024 (May 13, 2012)

Mussels said:


> since i was on air, about 3-5C. had i been on water, i bet the difference would have been larger.



Not bad.  Thanks.


----------



## qubit (May 13, 2012)

Jurassic1024 said:


> If you tried to buy it, how did it get on your CPU?



Eh?  An Athlon XP dates from 2003, so I'm talking about a decade ago, lol. Dang, TPU didn't even _exist_ then!


----------



## zomg (May 13, 2012)

RejZoR said:


> Can you even get CPU's without stupid GPU being integrated in the die?



xeon ivy bridge may have gpu part on die, but it will be disabled on most models, so you will save some temperatures and tdp
making xeon ivy bridge best alternative for i7/i5 "without K" models
especially for i5 models, because most xeons have HT, and i5 don't


----------



## Velvet Wafer (May 13, 2012)

good for overclockers with heart, and bad for stock buyers, that dont want to cut their IHS


----------



## vega22 (May 13, 2012)

its good to see data which doesnt tally with what intel is saying but i want more data before i an convinced.


----------



## OneCool (May 13, 2012)

qubit said:


> Eh?  An Athlon XP dates from 2003, so I'm talking about a decade ago, lol. Dang, TPU didn't even _exist_ then!




Yep.Back in the day. Just as fun then


----------



## _JP_ (May 13, 2012)

zomg said:


> xeon ivy bridge may have gpu part on die, but it will be disabled on most models, so you will save some temperatures and tdp
> making xeon ivy bridge best alternative for i7/i5 "without K" models
> especially for i5 models, because most xeons have HT, and i5 don't


You have just changed my upgrade plans completely. I had forgotten about the Xeons entirely.


----------



## reverze (May 13, 2012)

and xeon has 8mb cache compared to 6mb that i5 has


----------



## zomg (May 13, 2012)

xeon ivy bridge release date is tomorrow

but they was fabricated for some time, asian market already have them

so it is still a big question what thermal solution they have inside


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 13, 2012)

I felt this was a good move actually. Overclocking took effort. I see it like this go big or go home


----------



## SK-1 (May 13, 2012)

Tim who?


----------



## beck24 (May 13, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> so basically someone was thinkin it be cheaper or to cater to extreme overclockers



I hope some bean counter's head will roll! Unacceptable for Intel to cut quality on a new launch.


----------



## TheLostSwede (May 13, 2012)




----------



## eidairaman1 (May 13, 2012)

beck24 said:


> I hope some bean counter's head will roll! Unacceptable for Intel to cut quality on a new launch.



They wont n intel is not perfect


----------



## jihadjoe (May 13, 2012)

I don't get the aversion to using shims. Re-lidding the CPU is very inefficient compared to direct touch. Anyways we all did that shimming thing back in the day, and I'm willing to bet most people here didn't have any problems. 

Those old Athlon XP/Duron days were awesome.


----------



## _JP_ (May 13, 2012)

TheLostSwede said:


> http://akiba-pc.watch.impress.co.jp/hotline/20120519/image/smxa7.jpg


I have no idea why Ivy Xeons with the IGP are listed with 6MB L2 cahce in wiki's page.
The source must have been wrong.


----------



## Disruptor4 (May 14, 2012)

I've got a 3770k and am happy with it. Sure, it idles at 30C and can get up to around 60C on full load, but knowing that they skimped out on A) the quality of TIM used and B) the fact that they wanted to save a few bucks by not soldering the IHS, and then charge more for the CPU, it does annoy me quite a bit. If they change that with a new revision that's dodgy as well imo.


----------



## Xzibit (May 14, 2012)

Disruptor4 said:


> I've got a 3770k and am happy with it. Sure, it idles at 30C and can get up to around 60C on full load, but knowing that they skimped out on A) the quality of TIM used and B) the fact that they wanted to save a few bucks by not soldering the IHS, and then charge more for the CPU, it does annoy me quite a bit. If they change that with a new revision that's dodgy as well imo.



Thats actually better then the OP test but I dont get the big deal maybe its just me

If the 3770k is is doing 34C on idle and 61C on load i thinks its fine.

61C @ 3.9ghz on stock cooler

84C @ 5ghz on stock cooler

Unless everyone missed the part where he left Turbo Boost on the chip turned on.

For Air cooling I think thats fine


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 14, 2012)

jihadjoe said:


> I don't get the aversion to using shims. Re-lidding the CPU is very inefficient compared to direct touch. Anyways we all did that shimming thing back in the day, and I'm willing to bet most people here didn't have any problems.
> 
> Those old Athlon XP/Duron days were awesome.



I shimmed mine, Ive even crushed a CPU before because I bent the HS Clip to add more pressure


----------



## Disruptor4 (May 14, 2012)

Xzibit said:


> Thats actually better then the OP test but I dont get the big deal maybe its just me
> 
> If the 3770k is is doing 34C on idle and 61C on load i thinks its fine.
> 
> ...



Well I am using a Coolermaster Hyper 212 Evo with Arctic Silver 5 paste. It's always nice to have cooler temps though and I would've liked for it to be a bit cooler but really not too fussed. More just in my head thinking it's bad because of all the press, but I'm actually happy with it though and I won't be kicking up a stink tbh because I moved from an AM2 4200+ system!

As a side note, Mussles, you live a couple hours away from me. Wanna take my IHS off, reapply some good TIM and then put the IHS back on and see if we see a nice drop in temps? 
Seriously though, if Intel offered a optional recall to have better TIM on it as a revision, i'd take it in a heart beat. Free new CPU with cooler temps!


----------



## Wile E (May 14, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> You cannot use retention bracket with IHS removed, which makes it hard to give CPU correct pressure. It is also not quite that easy to get even pressure across the core when using block mountings. With very careful block palcement, it could be better, for sure, but it's much easier to just replace TIMM, put IHS on top, and crank it down as far as it will go..with no fear of cracking the core.



Easier, but not better. I can say I honestly don't know how people manage to crack their cores. If you use spring loaded bolts and nuts, and tighten 2 of the heatsinks/block's mounting screws diagonal from each other at the same rate at the same time, you'll never crack a core. Then you do the same to the other 2 until the reach the same tension. You don't need to crank them down on a bare core, just need them snug enough to not move.

I would totally do this to a $300 or less cpu. Not to a more expensive one though, at least not until it's already out of warranty. That's the entire reason my 980 still has it's lid. lol.



erocker said:


> But if you have a 2600k/2700k, there's no reason to get Ivy Bridge.. Unless your current SB chip is a complete dud.



I'd have to agree there. If I were building a new system, I would definitely go IB though. The only way I would go from SB to IB is if I were going from a 2500 to a 3770 to gain hyperthreading.


----------



## douglatins (May 14, 2012)

Xzibit said:


> Thats actually better then the OP test but I dont get the big deal maybe its just me
> 
> If the 3770k is is doing 34C on idle and 61C on load i thinks its fine.
> 
> ...



I doubt it. 5ghz was going over 100C in reviews. With WC.

All this TIM thing is a bad move, that ihs is for protection against damage and uneven pressure that could crush the transistors.

For average users those temps are going to escalate in time since tim gets bad after long periods to the point that will harm the CPU. For the average overclocker it's the worst, its hard to have the guts to maybe potentially destroy the CPU. Removing that thing is tricky.
Why would intel release a product that is worse for 99% of customers and better for 1%?

removing the ihs and replacing the tim and putting back the ihs is just proving that it was the worst idea ever. Fixing their job, really? There is only 2 options, use it as is and have bad temps, and remove it risking losing the high value chip for better temps.
Sure the 3 option is remove it, place new tim and place it again, but again this is just proving how bad this design is.
I hope this won't happen ever again and is fixed with new revisions. If they wish to get that 1% release batches with tim, like 3750kk? or something


----------



## CaptainFailcon (May 14, 2012)

sombody needs to start breaking some dies and figuring out exactly what kind of forces they can take as well as start machining shims


----------



## Xzibit (May 14, 2012)

douglatins said:


> I doubt it. 5ghz was going over 100C in reviews. With WC.



I got the stock cooler part wrong

A 3770k on Turbo Boost will upscale 400mhz.

*Disruptor4* said he was using a Coolermaster Hyper 212 Evo with Arctic Silver 5 paste and the reviewer is using a Thermalright Silver Arrow

So before he take out the *TIMMY!!!!*
Hes getting 5ghz on load when he leaves Turbo Boost on at 4.6ghz@1.2V witha max temp of 84C

Focus on the top bar  on each run









If you go to this chart before he removes poor one legged *TIMMY!!!!*
Hes able to base clock it to 4.9ghz@1.45V and run Cinbench without a Themal Shutdown so if Turbo Boost is on hes getting 5.3ghz before reaching 105C

Thats not bad Air Cooled considering Sandy-Bridges had issues getting to 4.5ghz stable. Factor in the SB to IB differance and its like running a Sandy-bridge at 5.6ghz air cooled.

Focus on first table


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 14, 2012)

This should be expected from a tick anyway (Tock being an improvement in architecture, tick being a shrink) Im honestly not worried about the temps anyway, this chip looks catered to overclockers anyway. I wonder if 2011 has this chip per se



Xzibit said:


> I got the stock cooler part wrong
> 
> A 3770k on Turbo Boost will upscale 400mhz.
> 
> ...


----------



## H82LUZ73 (May 14, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Bullshit. A shim is a bit of metal that will brace the CPU agains the heatsink, and prevent damage to the core. NO R&D involved, jsut a couple of measurements, and cutting some metal, or even plastic.
> 
> like this:
> 
> ...



Good old Socket A 462 Duron .Thunderbird/Thoroughbred shims.....

For Socket 939 was not needed also The 462 Palomino chips,Just clarify the year 2000-2001  We seen the first IHS on AMD when socket(first gen x64  cores) 754 I think was out for a short time before the X64 send gen 939 boards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duron

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socket_754

Hm for Intel to do this ,They must have some reason,Do I think it is bad?, maybe Seeing how some user want to overclock the IB chip,But why I think SB is the better of the two.


----------



## Jurassic1024 (May 14, 2012)

qubit said:


> Eh?  An Athlon XP dates from 2003, so I'm talking about a decade ago, lol. Dang, TPU didn't even _exist_ then!



That made no sense whatsoever.  Your original comment was confusing enough, and now you just took it to a whole new level. aye yi yi.


----------



## Yellow&Nerdy? (May 14, 2012)

Apparently it's not only AMD that has non-competent marketing people... I have no idea why Intel chose to use cheap TIM instead of fluxless solder. I understand if it's cheaper, that they would use it on non K-series CPU's, but for the love of god, why didn't they go with fluxless solder on the unlocked CPU's? It can't be much cheaper to use TIM, and I for one would be glad to pay 10 - 15 bucks more for better thermals. Not that it's a critical problem, since a IB CPU overclocked to it's max is usually faster than a SB CPU clocked to it's max, even if the SB CPU is clocked higher. But it would still be nice to see this fixed in a later revision...


----------



## Octavean (May 14, 2012)

So who is this Tim and why is everyone so ticked off at him,…..?

LOL, just kidding. I expect Intel may address this with later revisions and start using more traditional fluxless solder.  It is something of a blessing to some though, just don’t crush your core in the process. 

My theory was that the chip got too hot even with fluxless solder so fusing it to the heat spreader may result in weakening its electrical connections as the heat spreader heats and cools (expands / contracts).  However, that’s probably not likely if the solder can help keep the temp down, which this artical seems to suggest,....


----------



## badtaylorx (May 14, 2012)

oi oi oi....you know taking off the heatspreader has been found counter-productive since the beginning of multi core architecture.....it's there for a reason...

IT WORKS

will replacing the tim help,,,  yes.

but ALL of the air heatsinks and water cooling cpu blocks were designed for use with a heatspreader...if only 1 heatpipe crosses your poor lil ivy chip, what good is that???


----------



## Casecutter (May 14, 2012)

Oops - Intel went cheap basically constrained or hobbled it this round to be able to later offer the same chips (with a simple fix) and a boost in clocks. Intel got caught!


----------



## Widjaja (May 14, 2012)

Intel can use TIM under their new chips as they do not NEED to try because they have no competition.

Sure they may get hotter with over clocking in comparison to Sandy Bridge but still beats the offerings of any chip of any other manufacturer.

So they can cheap out and still be ahead.


----------



## Random Murderer (May 14, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> I wonder if 2011 has this chip per se


i know the SB-E has fluxless solder under its hat and not TIM, but i don't think that's what you're asking.
would you mind elaborating a little on what it is you're asking? i'm sure between cadaveca, Aquinus, and me we'll be able to answer.


----------



## kajson (May 14, 2012)

I kinda wonder if maybe a company like Apple, who want to put these babies into their new macbook airs, will call Intel out on this and force em to apply a higher quality thermal solution... I've seen a guy post intel burn test temps of his brand new MSI Ivy laptop at 95 celcius, you cant really expect to pay $2000 for a brand new laptop just to, best case scenario have it's lifespan shortened conciderably / worst case demolish your fertility.


----------



## TheLostSwede (May 14, 2012)

kajson said:


> I kinda wonder if maybe a company like Apple, who want to put these babies into their new macbook airs, will call Intel out on this and force em to apply a higher quality thermal solution... I've seen a guy post intel burn test temps of his brand new MSI Ivy laptop at 95 celcius, you cant really expect to pay $2000 for a brand new laptop just to, best case scenario have it's lifespan shortened conciderably / worst case demolish your fertility.



Notebook CPUs don't have heat spreaders...


----------



## n-ster (May 14, 2012)

TheLostSwede said:


> Notebook CPUs don't have heat spreaders...



unless they have the desktop version in the laptop


----------



## Gradius2 (May 14, 2012)

This is totally UNACCEPTABLE !


----------



## Wile E (May 15, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> oi oi oi....you know taking off the heatspreader has been found counter-productive since the beginning of multi core architecture.....it's there for a reason...
> 
> IT WORKS
> 
> ...



The results achieved going lidless suggest otherwise.


----------



## largon (May 15, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> oi oi oi....you know taking off the heatspreader has been found counter-productive since the beginning of multi core architecture.....it's there for a reason...


Laws of physics disagree.


----------



## jaredpace (May 15, 2012)

Gradius2 said:


> This is totally UNACCEPTABLE !



Yup, this heat issue sucks.


----------



## badtaylorx (May 15, 2012)

physics....thats funny.

thats not what the physics say at all!!!

here...this is from XtreemSystems......there are some seriously smart mf'rs on this site....
Some people will read get 10-25C better temps by removing the IHS, then do so, and get disappointed when they see 15+C higher temps and realize they ruined their cpu.

Nobody gets 10-25C better temps by removing the IHS on a modern high power density 100W+ cpu, though a few claimed it without proof. I have removed the IHS on a few and my temps were worse as has another person that posted pics in previous thread with before/after temps. Old 40w cpus that just used paste, yes, those you could remove the ihs and get better temps, since replacing paste with paste and removing a layer.

2/3 or more of the gradient in modern cpus is from hot spot through the die substrate, that is via stanford article linked and pics in post here, also from drilling holes through ihs with calibrated thermocouples on ihs and in die. The copper laden die has thermal conductance of ~125W/MK, solder attach 80 w/mK but is only 20 microns thick, and copper is 400 w/mk, hence one would expect most of gradient is through the die. Also you can load 2 cores with coredamage/prime (set affinity in task bar to load just 2 cores of 4) and you will see 20C gradient from loaded core to idle core, which demonstrates high gradient through die substrate, like pic below in slide from ESL.


You could get ~10C better temps (assuming 150W tdp and 30C gradient from core to IHS temps) by removing IHS, If you then solder on a waterblock with 80w/mk solder assuming you could avoid voids like intel, and assuming the same bondline thickness of ~20 microns). Then the waterblock is the heatspreader + eliminate user tim. The IHS isnt just protection, but for spreading heat to a much larger area at 80W/mk through only 20 microns thickness then at 400w/mk via copper, ie relatively rapidly to a relatively large surface area....before the end user puts on relative crappy 3-4W/mk tim paste at thickness higher than 20 microns, then tries to cool it with water 0.6w/mk or air, even worse. 

But removing 80w/mk solder and replacing with 3-4 w/mK paste at a stage when heat is still confined to relatively small surface area, is a disaster that will result in 10-15C+ higher temps at stock alone.


These results DO NOT point at - IHS=lower temps 

they point out a bad decision coupled by poor implementation on Intel's part


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 15, 2012)

Random Murderer said:


> i know the SB-E has fluxless solder under its hat and not TIM, but i don't think that's what you're asking.
> would you mind elaborating a little on what it is you're asking? i'm sure between cadaveca, Aquinus, and me we'll be able to answer.



What I meant is Skt 2011 have IVB aswell correct?





badtaylorx said:


> physics....thats funny.
> 
> thats not what the physics say at all!!!
> 
> ...






probably because your HS cant directly touch the CPU itself. there is not enough depth to the screws youre using


----------



## largon (May 15, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> physics....thats funny.
> 
> thats not what the physics say at all!!!


Hoping for a sensible post... 
*reads on*


> here...this is from XtreemSystems......there are some seriously smart mf'rs on this site....



Err... 
Hello! 


badtaylorx said:


> Some people will read get 10-25C better temps by removing the IHS, then do so, and get disappointed when they see 15+C higher temps and realize they ruined their cpu.
> 
> Nobody gets 10-25C better temps by removing the IHS on a modern high power density 100W+ cpu, though a few claimed it without proof. I have removed the IHS on a few and my temps were worse as has another person that posted pics in previous thread with before/after temps. Old 40w cpus that just used paste, yes, those you could remove the ihs and get better temps, since replacing paste with paste and removing a layer.
> 
> ...


But I get a wall o' quoted text. 


If someone uses a "relatively crappy 3-4W/mk tim paste" after removing the IHS and sees temps soar it only proves that certain someone is _plain stupid_. Sensible person would obviously use a proper TIM such as Coollaboratory Liquid Pro (82W/(m·K)). Add to that, average IHS is slightly convex (bulging out in the middle) or even worse, concave (depression in the middle). Average heatsink/waterblock base is way more flat. Silicon chip is _quuuuuite_ flat. 

Seriously, did I _really_ have to post this? Or are you just trolling?


----------



## badtaylorx (May 15, 2012)

as part of xtreme im surprised which way you're leaning here


the only part i was after was the " soldered on ihs > no ihs....

there are many more threads that have gotten ppl all exited about ihs removal only to end in disappointment. 

i was going to post a thread about all of the 1366&sandybridge ihs removal success stories but.....lol


----------



## largon (May 15, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> the only part i was after was the " soldered on ihs > no ihs....


And some notable conditioning. 
I admit removing a soldered IHS makes no sense in every case, but given the cooling system  is capable of handling a bare die (like most modern waterblocks) it should be clear without-IHS > with-IHS. Air cooling of course makes little sense without-IHS as modern HSFs' extensive use of heatpipes ie. sinks' bases have pipes side by side.


----------



## Wile E (May 16, 2012)

My temps are always better lidless with a water block. Never went lidless on air with a modern cpu.


----------



## Mussels (May 16, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> These results DO NOT point at - IHS=lower temps
> 
> they point out a bad decision coupled by poor implementation on Intel's part



results? all you've done is speculate.


----------



## Binge (May 16, 2012)

Mussels said:


> results? all you've done is speculate.



Just surfed XS a bit and here's a thread with proof and success stories about TIM reapplication and one with IHS removal entirely.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...IHS-Removals-CPU-temp-dropped-from-79C-to-71C

...so I'm with you.  What is this guy talking about IHS removal is bad?


----------



## largon (May 16, 2012)

This latest (off topic) debate is about whether a soldered IHS is better than no IHS at all. 
That thread is about Ivy Bridge, whose IHS is not soldered.


----------



## badtaylorx (May 16, 2012)

Binge said:


> Just surfed XS a bit and here's a thread with proof and success stories about TIM reapplication and one with IHS removal entirely.
> 
> http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...IHS-Removals-CPU-temp-dropped-from-79C-to-71C
> 
> ...so I'm with you.  What is this guy talking about IHS removal is bad?





there was no direct die ap there???

all ive been going on about is USING the ihs with new paste...which is getting great results...if you spent that much time looking around xs than you've seen first hand what im talking about


----------



## erocker (May 16, 2012)

Anyone else notice a lack of 3770K's available for purchase? Anyone know why? Just wondering if Intel is changing anything with the chip (possibly going from TIM to solder?)


----------



## EarthDog (May 16, 2012)

arterius2 said:


> i'm sure someone will come up with the idea to mount the HSF directly to the bare chip (without the IHS) and lower the temps even further


Been there, done that, like 8 years ago. 



erocker said:


> Anyone else notice a lack of 3770K's available for purchase? Anyone know why? Just wondering if Intel is changing anything with the chip (possibly going from TIM to solder?)


This happened with SB as well. 3570K's are available everywhere, and have the same TIM not solder sooooooooooo, doubt its that.



> probably because your HS cant directly touch the CPU itself. there is not enough depth to the screws youre using


Yay! Thinking cap enabled! 


Anyway, I voted No, they dont need to change anything. I dont give a hoot about the warm temps b/c Im not overclocking the 3770k past 4-4.2Ghz which the H100 and just about any air cooler can handle. Its when you push further than that, usually around 4.5ghz that things start to ramp up. hen I push past 5-6Ghz, I will be on Dry Ice/LN2 anyway so I do give a hoot.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 16, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> Nobody gets 10-25C better temps by removing the IHS on a modern high power density 100W  cpu, though a few claimed it without proof. I have removed the IHS on a few and my temps were worse as has another person that posted pics in previous thread with before/after temps. Old 40w cpus that just used paste, yes, those you could remove the ihs and get better temps, since replacing paste with paste and removing a layer.




Afaik all IHS's are a bit shit, every single processor ive had in the last 6 years has been lapped after a period of ocing(to set precedents) and every single time i reduced the idle temp by 6-10 degrees and the load temp by 3-8 degrees, and thats just with a bit of fine sandpaper , and you were saying IHS's are great because??

ive not delidded a cpu ever(not poss on the cpu's ive had) but you clearly are doing something wrong if it ends up hotter, as that makes no sense at all , if you have a waterblock direct on a chip it will convect just as efficiently as the IHS but there will be less thermal insulation between the heat source and the cooling surface/water ,so it will in effect cool quicker/ better stronger longer.


----------



## badtaylorx (May 16, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Afaik all IHS's are a bit shit, every single processor ive had in the last 6 years has been lapped after a period of ocing(to set precedents) and every single time i reduced the idle temp by 6-10 degrees and the load temp by 3-8 degrees, and thats just with a bit of fine sandpaper , and you were saying IHS's are great because??
> 
> ive not delidded a cpu ever(not poss on the cpu's ive had) but you clearly are doing something wrong if it ends up hotter, as that makes no sense at all , if you have a waterblock direct on a chip it will convect just as efficiently as the IHS but there will be less thermal insulation between the heat source and the cooling surface/water ,so it will in effect cool quicker/ better stronger longer.



one would think that'd be true but---

sorry...thats just not how it works.  one of the most important thing with thermodynamics is surface area....

and what i posted was not something i did,,, as i said in said post it was a copy/paste from xtremesystems....

but yes....lapping does help emensly....rare are flat ihs's....i take mine all the way down to 2000wg on a flatbench.....ive wanted to have one decked slightly but i dont trust my machine shop that much


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 16, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> but yes....lapping does help emensly


 not just because you flatten the IHS, also because(in a very small way) you also remove one other slight thermal barrier i forgot and thats the plateing on the IHS



badtaylorx said:


> sorry...thats just not how it works. one of the most important thing with thermodynamics is surface area....



is it  , is it now  , molecular density would probably credit that statement to me but as you wish

your still wrong , AN IHS has very very marginaly (just the edges around)  more contact, then a waterblock direct fitted but without the IHS you have two less thermal barriers that insulate the processor to some degree (IHS and chip>IHS tim) , the laws of thermodynamics are on my side here mate, and said waterblock removes heat from the copper block faster leaving the block and chip at a lower temp or a higher OC, unless that is, YOU fitted it

how on gods green planet are you finding enough additional surface area that this magic IHS of yours is in contact with,  if i were to fit a block to a chips core direct, id use the best non conductive gel strip cut around the chip(correct depth obv) onto the interface pcb(which would do very little but you gota try, then a skim of the best(not blob) tim i could find /buy so yes the chips very tiny edge wall would not be in contact but , why the, im out your clearly jus trollin


----------



## badtaylorx (May 16, 2012)

your playing the "in the land of make believe id do this" card

and in the end the best you can do is to call troll....nice

so if ihs is soooo egregious tell me prey-tell why intel and amd spend extra manufacturing dollars on them in the first place???


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 16, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> so if ihs is soooo egregious tell me prey-tell why intel and amd spend extra manufacturing dollars on them in the first place???



to save on warranty claims due to chipped and broken chips(many other chips on a board often dont have them as you dont typically touch them NB GPU etc) and it serves as an emergency cooling medium in the event of a user fitting error such as you might have done this saves many a chip and  yes even the odd one of mine as instead of just popping, the chip gets to temp and shuts down

essentially they became neccessary when we all started building and messing with our pc's and what chip do people mess with most .

oh and im not arguin that anyone should do this just that your wrong


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 17, 2012)

I voted no because there really isnt any reason to change it because Intel had their reason to do it.  

Ya know there is really no point to arguing about this anymore, this is just like beating a dead horse. Intel had their reasons to do it. If you really want anything to change, stop the damn bitching here and write a Letter to Intel R&D, Engineering, Marketing, CEO.

And FYI the IHS was purely only designed so dumb people dont crush the cores of CPUs.


-End Rant Unsubscribed!-


----------



## Wile E (May 17, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> one would think that'd be true but---
> 
> sorry...thats just not how it works.  one of the most important thing with thermodynamics is surface area....
> 
> ...


Surface area of an IHS doesn't help. The surface area of the cooler is what is important in dissipating heat. An IHS acts as a thermal barrier vs direct die contact.

You need to do more research pal. The only people that see higher temps with a removed IHS are those that installed their block or cooler improperly or suffer from poor cooler to die contact (which can be due to incompatible heatsink/block design, or user error).

Every single chip I ever delidded saw better temps without the IHS. I even lost 5C under load on a 6400+ with a measly Freezer 64 Pro, which had a soldered IHS.


----------



## Mussels (May 17, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> one would think that'd be true but---
> 
> sorry...thats just not how it works.  one of the most important thing with thermodynamics is surface area....



theory vs reality. thats certainly not the whole story, and wildly incorrect with what you're saying regarding the IHS.


the IHS is purely there to prevent damage to the CPU, its not there to help temps.


----------



## Kantastic (May 17, 2012)

Mussels said:


> theory vs reality. thats certainly not the whole story, and wildly incorrect with what you're saying regarding the IHS.
> 
> 
> the IHS is purely there to prevent damage to the CPU, its not there to help temps.



Plus, the heat-producing die is only so big and the IHS doesn't touch the entire processor. What's the difference between having an IHS and not having an IHS? With the former, you have a layer of metal in between the die and the surface of the heatsink inhibiting heat conduction. It's not so much theory vs. reality, but more common sense.

Most (if not all) laptop processors don't have IHSs to yield more effective cooling with limited amounts of space designated for the heatsink. If IHSs helped temperatures, Intel/AMD would include them, especially when thermal efficiency is an imperative part of laptops.


----------



## Widjaja (May 17, 2012)

erocker said:


> Anyone else notice a lack of 3770K's available for purchase? Anyone know why? Just wondering if Intel is changing anything with the chip (possibly going from TIM to solder?)



Hm.....

Maybe there have been complaints.

If there is a revision on the IHS to make the K series soldered at least I am sure my Brother will be selling his 3770K....

None the less he is getting 20+degC idle temps using an H60.
hasn't mentioned anything about the max temp but then again he feels he doesn't need to check until he starts to OC.


----------



## Octopuss (May 17, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> one would think that'd be true but---
> 
> sorry...thats just not how it works.  one of the most important thing with thermodynamics is surface area....
> 
> ...


You know, a sentence starts with capital letter and ends with period.
Your ghetto typing doesn't give your posts much credibility.


----------



## badtaylorx (May 17, 2012)

oh realy....has intel or amd EVER warranted physical damage??? 

now were up to putting a giant piece of metal on the chip so the unsteady-handed dont break their new toy.... wow....

last one then i'll give up i apologise for not being smart enough convince you guys of the truth.

IF its only there to prevent damage and does NOTHING thermally....why does AMD put a FULL and rather larger IHS on their cpu's.    but only uses a shim arround their (cooler) gpu chip???

same with Nvidia???

anyone...


----------



## Mussels (May 17, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> oh realy....has intel or amd EVER warranted physical damage???
> 
> now were up to putting a giant piece of metal on the chip so the unsteady-handed dont break their new toy.... wow....
> 
> ...



because most systems sold use onboard video and not dedicated GPU's.

Also because video cards simply cant spare the cooling capacity - unlike CPU's, they cant afford a 5-10C heat increase.


this forum is not easy to troll. please stop wasting your time.


----------



## badtaylorx (May 17, 2012)

troll...nice try 
i know you're a modderator but http://lmgtfy.com/?q=troll

this is on topic and fairly unemotional.....
not a troll

oh well i suppose you can lead a horse to watter


----------



## n-ster (May 17, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> oh realy....has intel or amd EVER warranted physical damage???



your point? I don't cover fans in the warranty I give when I sell my custom builds, but I still put a fan grill if needed so that exposed fans are protected from wandering fingers, pens etc

Why woulld I want the customer to think I product is weak and not built well? Why would I want my customers to break their new toy and get frustrated when told it isn't covered?

your point is idiotic


----------



## Wile E (May 17, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> troll...nice try
> i know you're a modderator but http://lmgtfy.com/?q=troll
> 
> this is on topic and fairly unemotional.....
> ...



How many cpus have you run delidded?


----------



## badtaylorx (May 17, 2012)

one (c2d e6400)

and no the point was not idiotic. the point was that cpu companies DO NOT put an "internal heat spreader" on a die to protect the die from customers crushing them. they'd be called a protective shim or something like that. to call somebody an idiot because of ignorance.....now thats troll'n!!!

ive been reading through some ihs american patent aps today and one thing that comes up often is the term "hotspots"...certain parts of the die get much hotter than others and there is a need to have a medium that evens (spreads) the heat out.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 17, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> but only uses a shim arround their (cooler) gpu chip???



because hardly anyone bar the manufacturer touches the shroud and hence gpu but , the cpu is almost allways handled in some way and built by man is built by man and Amd use a bigger IHS as i said as a save a chip measure as light tim and HS contact on said bare chip with load would pop it ,but with said IHS it wont pop( most of time it will shutdown) in fact read my last post again would yah i mentioned low refit chips like NBs and Southbridges Gdamn it



badtaylorx said:


> ive been reading through some ihs american patent aps today and one thing that comes up often is the term "hotspots"...certain parts of the die get much hotter than others and there is a need to have a medium that evens (spreads) the heat out.



as does a well fitted HS on a bare chip

Why do you think its called an Integrated HEAT sink,  its integrated  and just like a mounted HS its a Heatsink by your reckoning i should maybe get a solid water block with side ports and then mount a third fan heatsink on top ot the WB and IHS to increase again my thermal POwers

3s better then two right, two's better then one  and maybe ill fit some wheels on the outside of my cars wheels so ig goes faster , cos itll grip better


----------



## badtaylorx (May 17, 2012)

how would adding another hsf on top of the waterblock NOT help as long as it has access to ambient air???

it's good there is oneandonly of you....you keep slipping into this land of make believe stuff..

what you're describing is not too far from a coolermaster v10 though(worst purchase ever btw)

just a guess oneandonly.....you think 94octane gas burns hotter and faster than 87 dont you....


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 17, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> what you're describing is not too far from a coolermaster v10 though(worst purchase ever btw)



i appreciate you auto answering your self , its worse because the fan HSF would possibly pull heat into the water in a poorly vented ,rad front case but wouldnt really cool any better anyway and wtf , i was being sarcastic

there is only one of me  , their are many like me and a many better then me but thats not you on the topic of thermodynamics apparently, and im an engineer not a phycisist or anything all that technical, just good old hands on tried it type inteligence with enough maths to keep my brain working, if you can carry away more heat you remove more heat and the discrepencies you speak of between an enthusiast fitting his own lid correctly verse the same plus intel fitting one inbetween a bit shit dont exist.



badtaylorx said:


> just a guess oneandonly.....you think 94octane gas burns hotter and faster than 87 dont you....


 whats this mock nameing me shit lmao

i think you should read this then as it clearly states im no chemist and since the only contact i have with fuel is putting the overpriced shit in my car why would i care which is better i put the soddin cheapest in obviously ,, helo engineer not phycisist

im fully aware of hotspots onchip btw ,did you know intel and ibm are messing with on die peltiers , micro peltiers in silicone


----------



## badtaylorx (May 17, 2012)

you brought cars into this. not me

no.....article??? thats interesting


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (May 17, 2012)

badtaylorx said:


> you brought cars into this. not me
> 
> no.....article??? thats interesting



dude the cars bit was sarcasm but fair enough, i Read about that ages ago so sorry no link , il try my googlefoo an update if lucky.

http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/22016/

im not hunting all night but theres one


----------



## Xzibit (May 18, 2012)

If this is true.  This is an interesting twist to the Temp issue.

http://www.hardocp.com/news/2012/05/18/pop_top_on_your_i73770k_for_better_temps63

Guess Ivy-bridge doesnt report temps like in the past according to ASUS.  Monitoring software needs to be compatible.


----------



## erocker (May 18, 2012)

Xzibit said:


> If this is true.  This is an interesting twist to the Temp issue.
> 
> http://www.hardocp.com/news/2012/05/18/pop_top_on_your_i73770k_for_better_temps63
> 
> Guess Ivy-bridge doesnt report temps like in the past according to ASUS.  Monitoring software needs to be compatible.



Interesting... So what are the temperature differences? Higher, lower?


----------



## cadaveca (May 18, 2012)

erocker said:


> Interesting... So what are the temperature differences? Higher, lower?



I'll post screenshots tonight. I mentionedin this thread or another I thought there were reported wrong, but haven't ahd a chip to comfirm. WIll have 3570k in a couple of hours. I am nearly 99% sure temps are reported higher than they are, and many people that think it's running hot, are jsut using the wrong software.


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (May 18, 2012)

Relying on any software for such inherently sucks...


----------



## n-ster (May 19, 2012)

damn if its software I was baited into buying SB-E  I don't exactly regret it though


----------



## RAJOD (May 19, 2012)

That is another way of looking at it.  Direct contact with the core is the best.  But OMG so many people are going to crack off the corner of the chip.  That was an issue in the past and one of the reasons they went with a soldered IHS.
Saved many cpus.





DualAmdMP said:


> I think you are wrong about Intel. I'm actually glad that they used TIM instead of solder on the core. You need to try to put a waterblock directly on the core (once in your life) and you will be surprised how well it conducts heat into water compare to IHS + waterblock. XS forum has a lot of info on this topic.
> 
> I has few Athlon X2 (65nm/90nm) running with waterblock directly on the Core. No matter how much voltage i pumped into the CPU, the temperatures were always great!
> 
> ...


----------



## cadaveca (May 20, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> I'll post screenshots tonight. I mentionedin this thread or another I thought there were reported wrong, but haven't ahd a chip to comfirm. WIll have 3570k in a couple of hours. I am nearly 99% sure temps are reported higher than they are, and many people that think it's running hot, are jsut using the wrong software.



So...








Actual voltage is 1.128 V (via digital multi-meter).

Relatively speaking, temps could be considered hot, but given clocks, it doesn't seem so. Same thing as SB for me, but with lower voltage. FAR lower voltage. The i7 3820 is running similar temps @ 4.5 GHz, but with 1.35 V.


Can't say there's much reason to complain...?


----------



## Wile E (May 20, 2012)

Now delid it and run it again to put the argument to bed once and for all. lol.


----------



## cadaveca (May 20, 2012)

Wile E said:


> Now delid it and run it again to put the argument to bed once and for all. lol.



Meh. What argument? It's undeniable temps seem high, but whther thats software, the TIM, or what, doesn't really matter to me when temps are at those levels.

Sure, you wanna OC to the max, pull the lid, slap on some coolaboratory pro, and get what you want...


If ya want a warranty, live with it? Not gonna matter what's in between in that case, is it? If you wanna clock within warranty, spend tha extra $25, and forget about it? That'll be MY option...


----------



## Wile E (May 20, 2012)

No, I mean the guy saying that removing the lid results in HIGHER temps than putting it back on with good tim.

Oh come on, take one for the team. lol


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 20, 2012)

Wile E said:


> No, I mean the guy saying that removing the lid results in HIGHER temps than putting it back on with good tim.
> 
> Oh come on, take one for the team. lol



Of Course only time Higher temps occur is if the Die doesnt make full contact with the Heatsink or left the TIM/Thermal Compound off.

I look at it this way

Regular Joes will never remove the IHS- Works fine for them

Ones who are overclockers- remove the IHS and put a better TIM on and just use the IHS cuz they feel they need it to ensure they dont damage the CPU

Extreme overclockers- Understand the full risk of direct HS contact and crushing of core- have money to back it up


----------



## MetalRacer (May 20, 2012)

Xzibit said:


> If this is true.  This is an interesting twist to the Temp issue.
> 
> http://www.hardocp.com/news/2012/05/18/pop_top_on_your_i73770k_for_better_temps63
> 
> Guess Ivy-bridge doesnt report temps like in the past according to ASUS.  Monitoring software needs to be compatible.



Before Ivy Bridge was released I ask uncleweb if RealTemp was reading temps correctly and this was his reply: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2601104&postcount=993


----------



## cadaveca (May 20, 2012)

MetalRacer said:


> Before Ivy Bridge was released I ask uncleweb if RealTemp was reading temps correctly and this was his reply: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2601104&postcount=993



There are differences between CoreTemp, Realtemp, and AIDA, as "stated by ASUS":






Who is right? I dunno. What I do know is that the reported 11c temp on the 4th core is impossible, and AIDA does not report that low, although overall, AIDA reports lower temps, and as the temps increase, that difference of max temps widens...



Wile E said:


> No, I mean the guy saying that removing the lid results in HIGHER temps than putting it back on with good tim.
> 
> Oh come on, take one for the team. lol



You and I both know that how the TIM is applied, what TIM is used, and a myriad of other factors can each play their role. Because removing the IHS requires removing the retention bracket, and I'll be using this chip for reviews, I will not remove the IHS, but, if the other chip I am expecting shows up, I will definitely pop the top on that one, and see what's what. I cannot do so until i have a backup chip.


----------



## Wile E (May 21, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> There are differences between CoreTemp, Realtemp, and AIDA, as "stated by ASUS":
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=47176&stc=1&d=1337529624
> 
> ...



I look forward to results if you do get that backup chip. I want to see some more examples of how much it helps (or doesn't).


----------



## Laurijan (Jun 2, 2012)

I am currently running a i5-3570K with a Noctua NH-D14 cooler at stock bios settings. 
I get about 25C-32C idle and 57C-61C with prime95 max heat test.
Is that good for an Ivy?

Edit: I didnt pop the IHS


----------



## beck24 (Jun 2, 2012)

The problem with IVY is that it as relatively poor over clocker, not that its bad at stock speeds.


----------



## cadaveca (Jun 2, 2012)

beck24 said:


> The problem with IVY is that it as relatively poor over clocker, not that its bad at stock speeds.



I dunno, i hit 4.6 GHz with jsut under 1.2 V, and the CPU pulls ~ 100 W.

That is a 33% increase in speed(from 3.5 GHz), for a 100% increase in current drawn.


Hrm......my CPU pulls just 50 W at stock...I guess you are very much right. However, at the same time, I'm using just under 1.2 V for that 4.6 GHz, when most are using jsut under 1.3 V that I have seen.

That's when comparing to SB, which ran 4.6 GHz @ 125 W, and increase of ~50% from stock(which was ~ 80 W), for the same roughly 33% increase in clocks...


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 2, 2012)

beck24 said:


> The problem with IVY is that it as relatively poor over clocker, not that its bad at stock speeds.



thats not the way im seeing it

im intel for a min.

Im top of the pile for a few years with nehalem and sandybridge stomping my main competitor's best effort, 3 years in i bring out ivybridge which again increases performance JUST AS EXPECTED(by me) and actually very good(talking unlidded oc ability and raw IPC) , but their is no real reason at the minute to pass the consumer that much more and much to gain from holding a bit back ,ie performance per watt and lower Tdp's/ higher stock reliability and the knowledge that somethings in the back pocket for closeing season sales and smacking the competition back down,  they put shit tim on, on purpose imho, as it was cheaper and kept the product within an envelope they liked(Tdp/temp) it is still better then sandy its just not the leap some expected

if all the Amd flamers had grown up and not slated them so much intel might now have a market competitor pushing them along still , but intel like me a chillin


----------



## WhoDecidedThat (Jun 26, 2012)

*Ivy Bridge Extreme*

Am I the only one waiting for x79 Ivy Bridge Extreme with 8 cores of cpu sweetness with quad channel memory?  
I do hope they use fluxless solder in these CPUs.


----------



## EarthDog (Jun 26, 2012)

beck24 said:


> The problem with IVY is that it as relatively poor over clocker, not that its bad at stock speeds.


It is with ambient cooling... however get some DI/LN2 on it like the big boys, and a lot of these scream a lot louder than SB ever did (talking 6Ghz+).


----------



## Octavean (Jun 26, 2012)

blanarahul said:


> Am I the only one waiting for x79 Ivy Bridge Extreme with 8 cores of cpu sweetness with quad channel memory?
> I do hope they use fluxless solder in these CPUs.




Only one,…..?

Not likely but if the price is significantly higher as is the case with Sandy Bridge-E / LGA2011 with fewer options then you’re likely going to be among the few willing to pony-up for it. Actually the quad core Sandy Bridge-E Core i7 3820 is about ~$229.99 at Microcenter but most want the 6 core version Core i7 3930K at least. 

I will point out I have seen no definitive evidence that Intel will upgrade the X79 / LGA2011 platform with Ivy Bridge-E. Even if they did Intel would likely upgrade the chipset to something like X89 given that they upgraded the prominent P67 / Z68 + line when they introduced Ivy Bridge.  

 The X79 chipset seemed rushed in order to get the Sandy Bridge-E line out in late 2011 and dropped a lot of expected features.  So in retrospect the X79 chipset needs replacing more so then the current Ivy Bridge line needed it. Also since the Sandy Bridge-E / LGA2011 platform was supposedly the higher end option it has no business with a feature deficit with the lower-end (comparatively speaking) Ivy Bridge LGA1155 platform.    

BTW, right now I have a Sandy Bridge-E Core i7 3930K / Asus P9X79 Deluxe and its a great platform.  Intel Thunderbolt and native USB 3.0 would be nice though,.....


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 26, 2012)

EarthDog said:


> It is with ambient cooling... however get some DI/LN2 on it like the big boys, and a lot of these scream a lot louder than SB ever did (talking 6Ghz ).



look, were all mad overclockers on tpu, but i doubt anyone on here runs Ln2 Di 24/7,
and your both backin intel whilst agreeing its a shit ocer at ambient temps and HSF cooled odd.


----------



## EarthDog (Jun 26, 2012)

Its not a 24/7 solution, no. it doesnt overclock as well on ambient type cooling correct. But for those that play with extreme cooling, its a beast and can overclock much farther than SB.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jun 27, 2012)

EarthDog said:


> those that play



right so that be 0.00000000001% of us then

fair enough dude i know what your saying but imho its irelivant, to this thread,

 If i were going to Oc with Ln2 , i would be very very happy intel put a shit removable tin lid on, as id remove it and strap my joy bucket straight to the chip..

but either way ^ghz does not impress no one when Amd cpus on silly scenarios go faster, and this is also irelivant i know..

to me these chips are perfectly as designed by intel, few more quids in their pockets ,imho they are happy sat on a bigger potential performance gain next gen due to clever tdp evaluation and validation

i wish some mofo would sort me a shot at Ln2 clocking id sweep records away i tell thee, i spend all my working days tuneing for performance on mass spectrometers, that and fixin em, i could do some damage im sure.


----------



## Chewy (Jun 27, 2012)

How "smart" is this chip anyway? Thermal paste anyone? how about some grey poupon.

 Well I do hope they come out with a revision, in a few months. I would like an Ivy bridge chip, and future overclockability is pretty important to me !


----------



## Irony (Jun 27, 2012)

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/printpage/Thermal-Compound-Roundup-October-2011/1396

Lulz, I'm rooting for a mayonaise upgrade.


----------



## EarthDog (Jun 27, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> right so that be 0.00000000001% of us then


Yeah, I said that... Extreme overclocking is not TPU.  


EDIT: Actually, I didnt say that in THIS thread... 



> i wish some mofo would sort me a shot at Ln2 clocking id sweep records away i tell thee, i spend all my working days tuneing for performance on mass spectrometers, that and fixin em, i could do some damage im sure.


Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. Come get some... put your money where your mouth is and all that. It takes a more than you know (and I know for certain) to break records.


----------



## Ravenas (Jun 27, 2012)

Among a few issues, people got awfully made about this same thing in terms of the "bulldozer" proccesor.

The "piledriver" will be the answer. Intel will give consumers an answer to this problem as well. A company worth 130.83 billion doesn't get there without making their customers happy.


----------



## kostarum (Jul 7, 2012)

Hi, I have one question, maybe someone help me. Is it smart to use this method of removing IHS from my Athlon X3 445 and apply Cool Laboratory Liquid Ultra paste on processor core ?

I don't have problems with overheating, but I would like to try limits, that's why I have this idea. Any suggestion, please ?


----------



## Mussels (Jul 7, 2012)

kostarum said:


> Hi, I have one question, maybe someone help me. Is it smart to use this method of removing IHS from my Athlon X3 445 and apply Cool Laboratory Liquid Ultra paste on processor core ?
> 
> I don't have problems with overheating, but I would like to try limits, that's why I have this idea. Any suggestion, please ?



are you willing to kill the chip? if not, dont do it.


----------



## kostarum (Jul 7, 2012)

Mussels said:


> are you willing to kill the chip? if not, dont do it.



Please explain me better, what to do then ?  But I don't see any problem here, I just need to remove IHS from my AMD X3 445, put Liquid Ultra thermal paste, close down IHS, just like the japanese do it with Ivy Bridge.

Or I missing something, please tell me much more detail. Thank you.


----------



## fullinfusion (Jul 7, 2012)

Any news on a revision yet?

And I think Dave has a cherry chip that's all


----------



## Mussels (Jul 7, 2012)

kostarum said:


> Please explain me better, what to do then ?  But I don't see any problem here, I just need to remove IHS from my AMD X3 445, put Liquid Ultra thermal paste, close down IHS, just like the japanese do it with Ivy Bridge.
> 
> Or I missing something, please tell me much more detail. Thank you.



if you make a mistake, your CPU is dead. if you cannot afford a new CPU, dont risk it.


----------



## kostarum (Jul 7, 2012)

Mussels said:


> if you make a mistake, your CPU is dead. if you cannot afford a new CPU, dont risk it.



Ok, but I am aware of it. When I buy thermal paste I will do it. I can afford new CPU so it's no big problem.

Tell me this, please, is there some differencies to AMD IHS or it's the same like on 3770K ? If the procedure got right, what I can expect, 10 degrees lower temperature on 4 GHz ?


----------



## Mussels (Jul 7, 2012)

kostarum said:


> Ok, but I am aware of it. When I buy thermal paste I will do it. I can afford new CPU so it's no big problem.
> 
> Tell me this, please, is there some differencies to AMD IHS or it's the same like on 3770K ? If the procedure got right, what I can expect, 10 degrees lower temperature on 4 GHz ?



sorry i cant help you there. you'll need to find out specific details regarding that CPU, if its soldered on good luck getting it off.


----------



## Velvet Wafer (Jul 7, 2012)

it should be soldered, good luck with getting it off working, you will more than probably pry the chip from the substrate when you try to remove the IHS.


----------

