# Why Intel CPU's run at 95°C and why AMD's should, also



## mtcn77 (Feb 1, 2020)

The original study is from AMD's forum and it is a response to a hung up query.
Noctua, AMD and GN's technology journalists have attended to the question of why AMD runs hot. I'm going to prove it on a third party case study.
You can access individual company takes on the question in the hereby links:

Noctua:
AMD@reddit:
GamersNexus:
You can go look at individual threads to go into the specifics, but the crux of the matter is that cpu heat density is limited from sufficient heat conduction by the thermal paste performance.

AMD Community Forum



Spoiler: "AMD Community Forum" thread post






> After applying metal liquid between the cooler and IHS things improved by almost 20°C in the range of 65-80°, that was when the CPU draws from 80 to 120watts, (80° became 60 at 120watts!) but improved only by 3°C when the wattage jumps over 150watts, (90° instead of 93-94°), also frequencies improved accordingly.
> 
> Under 55°C it sits at 4350MHz all cores and occasionally some cores jump to 4.4
> @65°C it draws 80Watts and sits at 4150MHz all cores
> ...





Our envoy takes us into the mystical journey of why 250w-spec tower air cooler is necessitated to run at high heat in order to cool the cpu properly. Gamersnexus is the go to guide here. As ironic as it is, how TDP is calculated is totally different to what we have been used to;


Spoiler: AMD's take to GN:






> AMD defines HSF θca (°C/W) as: The minimum °C per Watt rating of the heatsink to achieve rated performance.
> 
> Its internal definition, for comparison, says “the minimum required heatsink resistance necessary to maintain the case temperature within specification for the thermal design power (TDP) and assumptions for the external ambient temperature and system temperature rise (Tsys).”
> 
> ...





As it stands, the under recognized limit to cooling performance, the heat conductance through the IHS, is the dominant overclocking performance determinant.
AMD keeps reference to _'°C/*W*'_, thermal resistivity, while _'W/*°C*'_(thermal conductivity) - how much temperature gradient you can maintain between the ihs and heatsink plates - maintains how much heat capacity you can specify for the TDP of their cpus. This is inverse to what AMD has been saying, you get improved cooling by first maintaining a high gradient, not a lower temperature.


Spoiler: Noctua's response@reddit:






> From Noctua:
> 
> Due to the small size of the CPU-die, the heat density (W/mm²) of this chip is very high. For example, a 120W heatload at a chip-size of 74mm² results in a heat-density of 1.62W/mm², whereas the same heatload on an older Ryzen processor with a chip-size of 212mm² gives a heat-density of just 0.57W/mm².
> 
> ...





7nm dense architectures can only extract enough heat from the cpu die integrated heatsink, once temperature reaches safety limits.
The difference of liquid metal is, it provides the best conductance to the heatsink plate under normal operating temperatures.
Nonconductive low tier pastes can only operate within the same conductance at the highest TjMax. The cpu is making the best of available thermal gradient when liquid metal is applied, jumping from 80w>120w while cooling below 80°C>65°C.
Since AMD, GN, or Noctua hasn't mentioned in anyway how the Zen 2 architecture would be served best either with nickel plated air coolers that work with liquid metal in stock settings, or aio coolers that work cooler than 90°C needs the same liquid metal application, I think this requires a reevaluation. We don't see any observable difference to overclocking these cpus under normal conditions because the ihs is the conduction limit and the sole solution being upgrading to liquid metal interface materials.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 1, 2020)

> you get improved cooling by first maintaining a high gradient, not a lower temperature.


It eliminates big "spikes" in temps. That's a given.
The issue is, people rely on the SenseMi quite a bit and run higher voltages than normal. 

Ideally these chips should be run 70c or less, not 70c or more with high gradient. The cpu High Temp Alert signal to the board is 70c. You konw this while running a stock system and when the temp reaches this figure, the cpu fan is at 100%.
The TDP figure that's advertised is for max P-state load. Not max turbo load. That's why we see 160w pulls with PBO (example wattage) Also, the TDP figure can have a 5% swing.
Also, running almost any x86 architecture hotter causes more leakage, thus needs more voltage. Up and Up we go in temps. Such a bad way to "cool" a processor.

Plate to Plate contact.....

The surfaces are roughly flat. Not exactly lapped flat. So having a decent paste and using as little as possible would be a great way to go. This helps heat transfer evenly across the surfaces while most IHS plates are slightly concave in the middle. Any one that's ever lapped any AMD IHS Plate know this first hand while the outer edges, the nickle plating is removed first.
And speaking of Nickle plating, it's very poor in conductivity compared to Copper. This is another reason lapping is a good thing, we don't see it much, people are just lazy.

Nobody thinks of cold plate size and mass. I've done some testing in this area with lidded and de-lidded Zen +. I know this isn't Zen 2, but it's the cold plate concept I want to address, not the cpu type as to keep the talk strictly about cooling, not the Cpu itself.
Most cold plates on AIO and tower coolers are very small and thin. This is not a good approach if we are trying to achieve this "high gradient" while you don't have enough mass to maintain a good temperature. This heat is stored before removal. It's not an instant action. You only see the CORE TEMP or perhaps the motherboard temp. But I don't see people running around probing the heatsink plates..... This is an issue. How do expect to maintain a high gradient if you can't or don't monitor your cold plate temps?? It just make any sense to talk about having a higher temp gradient with most under par cooler. 

Now back to what I had quoted.... 

Not a lower temperature is interesting. I found a lower temperature reduced leakage by a very considerable amount. 
For example, Try running 4Ghz(static) under 1.2v @ 90c, It's just not gonna happen. You want to be closer to 10c for that. Not 90c.

Efficiency gets lost in heat and high voltage. I do understand the concept of reducing temp swings and spike having a higher temp gradient, but 90c is just too F'n hot. Address your cooling issues.....


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 1, 2020)

What I bring the plot to is, as conduction is improving as the cpu warms up, you can transmit more heat and actually improve cooling by the consequentially higher thermal transmittance.
There is a pttl setting, but my guess is, it isn't connected(just runs at base clock) to pb2.
If it is, then great - AMD=Intel. However, if not, that means you cannot overclock through sense m.i. pb2-xfr without liquid metal interface.
What else, if it is, then there is the problem of undervolting at high temperature - we know for sure sense m.i. don't apply a poole & frenkel rectifying undervolt at the same speed bins as temperature elevates. Then, you need liquid metal for sure, otherwise the cpu won't overclock past 80w due to temperatures issues. Eventhough it is safe, it can work at 2x TDP by a simple trick, thus AMD should provide necessary sense m.i. directions at such high TjMax by tapering voltage and temperature parameters not to burn the cpu while keeping TIM practical life in use, running within inches of liquid metal's performance frame.

If it can output the same high heat at a slightly lower voltage while overclocking which we know is possible looking at undervolt study results of ryzen that are wildly different than pb2 voltage bin selections between 1.325v-1.4v, its temperature maintenance will prove itself by the gradient's now higher role in the same tdp equation. Personally, to pull that off at 90°C, someone needs to study how much undervolting offset is present at stock. I'm not certain how the sense m.i. software can be made aware of transmittance(we know they use an exponential moving average of °C in order to keep a steady tdp profile), but if it includes 'instantaneous power use in comparison to gradient temperature' that will give a close cut view of how much headroom there is.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 1, 2020)

Stability comes with cooler temps, not hotter temps. In this aspect, AMD = Intel.

This is an example of what I was talking about earlier with running Cold vs Hot and leakage.

Do Note the Cpu v-core is 1.188v @ 4ghz , 300mhz past base clock and static clocked to the stock max all core boost state for SenseMi. (actually 1/4 multi higher)

So From this experience, It is very, super, really really, super duper to the 10th power, Difficult to agree with running a cpu hotter vs colder.

..... I agree to disagree while I totally understand your direction and point of view.... however I have evidence that it's not a good way to run a cpu.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 1, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> Stability comes with cooler temps, not hotter temps. In this aspect, AMD = Intel.
> 
> This is an example of what I was talking about earlier with running Cold vs Hot and leakage.
> 
> ...



The A6-3650 I just cleaned recently did not linke running at 78C, max for it is 72C.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 1, 2020)

eidairaman1 said:


> The A6-3650 I just cleaned recently did not linke running at 78C, max for it is 72C.



Luckily the Ryzen chips have a much higher max operating temp. But 90c is throttle for Zen/+ and 95c for Zen 2.  Basically the no go zone. Gotta have headroom for ambient temp swings.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 1, 2020)

My 8350 could handle 75 without shutting down so idk


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 1, 2020)

eidairaman1 said:


> My 8350 could handle 75 without shutting down so idk


Thermtrip for FX 8350 is 110c. Max operating temp is a throttle point. 
If the board shuts down... It may or may not have just saved the chip.



eidairaman1 said:


> My 8350 could handle 75 without shutting down so idk



Also I had an Opteron 165 that would handle 80 to 90c. It did degrade fast though as I was running is 3.2ghz.


----------



## Vya Domus (Feb 1, 2020)

Heat rarely kills a CPU under normal circumstances if ever, by that I mean no overclocking record attempts.

It's the voltage that gets it, more specifically the voltages that have to be applied when running at higher clocks, that's the real reason degradation occurs. You can run a stock CPU right at it's temperature shutdown limit 24/7 and it'll likely be fine even after decades. Run in at plus 30% more voltage, it probably wont be.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 1, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> ..... I agree to disagree while I totally understand your direction and point of view.... however I have evidence that it's not a good way to run a cpu.
> 
> View attachment 143781


I cannot just insert another paragraph. The gradient plays a more pronounced factor here than stated in AMD's thermal design point calculation. AMD measures resistance as a die cast value. It is not. Let us see what it is;


Spoiler: "GamersNexus" are the technology journalists






> AMD expands and says the following of its formula: “The TDP formula is straightforward: TDP (Watts) = (tCase°C - tAmbient°C)/(HSF θca)”
> 
> AMD says this in its guide: Using the established TDP formula, we can compute an example in the form of the 105W AMD Ryzen™ 9 3900X: (61.8-42)/0.189 = 104.76 TDP, [with] tCase°C [as] 61.8°C optimal temperature for processor lid.”





This is the _thermal resistance series _formula. What is correlated is the gradient and what is inversely related is the resistances of individual plate materials. If we increase the gradient, the resistance drops by default _instantaneously;_
Thanks, 'thermtest'


Spoiler: Thermtest to the rescue






> The heat flow, or boundary temperatures of the system, can also be determined when an object’s resistance is known. In series, the heat flux through a composite material is considered constant, and the different series are equivalent to:
> 
> R = R_{1} + R_{2}R=R1+R2
> 
> ...





All this mumbo jumbo just means, you can keep resistances, add them and when you put their sum in the denominator, it still is outweighed by the gradient difference at the nominator field of the fraction.
What we can do differently is keep an artificially high gradient, using less heat in the process, playing around with the voltage. True dat, I still don't understand what you mean by your cinebench postie, shrimpbrime, but consider this;
The solid piece of copper slab can only conduct 400W/m*°C, TIMs are 10, liquid metals are 100, so TIM on copper is 0.1025 m*°C/W while liquid metal on copper is 0.0125 m*°C/W and unless you keep the gradient steady, maximum per ambient, the cooler just won't get passively hot enough until air convection takes it away. I recon, once heat generation stops, a hot cooler will cool its coldplate faster than its coldplate could heat it. So, it will be more heat & voltage stable as the cooler warms up in the artificial heat gradient stage.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 2, 2020)

Mtcn77 wheres your system specs?


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 2, 2020)

I'm not using my system as of this moment. I have a spare 2400g setup that I don't use.

I had it all filled in over at OCN.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 2, 2020)

This is not ocn though


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 2, 2020)

There is a similar perk mentioned over at here: https://physics.stackexchange.com/q...tivity-provide-a-smaller-temperature-gradient
Let's go back to Noctua's fly by;


Spoiler: Noctua@reddit:






> From Noctua:
> 
> Due to the small size of the CPU-die, the heat density (W/mm²) of this chip is very high. For example, a 120W heatload at a chip-size of 74mm² results in a heat-density of 1.62W/mm², whereas the same heatload on an older Ryzen processor with a chip-size of 212mm² gives a heat-density of just 0.57W/mm².





There is a constant reference of cpu die area which brings us into crossroads with _thermal transmittance_.


Spoiler: "Thermal transmittance":






> Φ = A × U × (T1 - T2)
> 
> A is area m².
> U is transmittance W/m²*°C.
> ...





You see, the only changes to the ihs is always the same. Temperature gradient between the plates play a huge role in this.



eidairaman1 said:


> This is not ocn though


And I'm not banned here for being pushed around by nvidia loyalist moderators.


----------



## Bones (Feb 2, 2020)

Vya Domus said:


> Heat rarely kills a CPU under normal circumstances if ever, by that I mean no overclocking record attempts.



You are correct here, under most circumstances as described it's not an issue to worry about and I seriously doubt any of us would run a chip for decades before upgrading anyway making it a non-issue.



Vya Domus said:


> It's the voltage that gets it, more specifically the voltages that have to be applied when running at higher clocks, that's the real reason degradation occurs. *You can run a stock CPU right at it's temperature shutdown limit 24/7 and it'll likely be fine even after decades.* Run in at plus 30% more voltage, it probably wont be.



I must disagree with this.
The defined thermal limit for a chip is _what it can tolerate and still live without dying on the spot in short order_, does not mean it will not be affected and this thermal limit was never meant to "Say" it's always 100% OK at that temp sustained.

Heat has always been an enemy of electronics period, it's the nature of it and while it isn't required to cool one down to subzero temps throughout it's useable life it's better to keep it away from it's defined thermal limit if possible. 

An aircraft is one example of this.
Although during it's operational life it may never actually be stressed to it's defined limits it will eventually suffer from material fatigue even though it had never endured stresses at or around 100% of it's rating each and everytime it flew for 100% of the time it was up in the air.

Same thing if you take a small piece of wire and start bending it over and over again, it will eventually break and this can be felt as you keep bending it - Becomes easier to bend as you go until it just breaks in two.
Even though you didn't place enough stress to break it right from the start (Which would have been at or exceeding 100% of it's strength) it was enough over time to affect it and like all things it will suffer from the effects of this continued stressing.
Heat can and does "Work" on a chip too except it's not going to literally break in half, instead it's functionality is affected over time and like everything else it will fail one day but in this case failure will occur sooner.

In short:
Running it at the limit all the time, while doable if you want just isn't a good ideal.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 2, 2020)

Bones said:


> Heat has always been an enemy of electronics period, it's the nature of it


Yes, we call it poole frenkel effect. As it heats up, it needs less charge for that band conduction. A seperate voltage profile can work around that, I assume.
I don't even want AMD to change their exponential moving average temperature algorithm. It is just that, lower thermal resistance of the heatsink at a higher temperature will instantly catapult their tdp designation by 2x higher budget. Rather than calculate its return to the mean temperature, instead its return to gradient temperature in response to current heat(make shift transmittance formula) that would switch its cooler estimation by a much clearer approximation. Sense M.I. can be made cooler aware if it variates voltage in response to keep the same thermal transmittance between the cpu and the cooler plate. If it gets hot, granted, you are dealing with a potential hot aio water cooler situation waiting it to cool down for a long time, however our intention was never to expect it to cool the cpu faster than the cooler reached steady state.
Poole frenkel here works by lowering voltage requirements as a safety net against electromigration and sense m.i. crossects its highest bin with what poole frenkel voltage limit at that temperature is.

OK, you don't have to increase voltage to heat up; you can introduce hysteresis, too, delaying the onset of cooler's acceleration slope. That should be safer and not require seperate voltage bins.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 2, 2020)

Bones said:


> must disagree with this.
> The defined thermal limit for a chip is _what it can tolerate and still live without dying on the spot in short order_, does not mean it will not be affected and this thermal limit was never meant to "Say" it's always 100% OK at that temp sustained.


Cpus have two thresholds... where it throttles and where it shuts down. So long as the cpu isnt throttling to protect itself that means intel/amd are ok with those temperatures. If you are throttling and hit thermal shutdown, that is too hot. In our overclocking endeavors over the years, we found occasionally some chips can lose stability a bit before that. This is why we usually say, for Intel chips with 100C throttling point (105C+ shutdown) to keep it under 90c. For headroom under throttling point. I'd gladly pound and have pounded chips in this manner. 

While i understand the underlying point of your wire analogy, metal fatigue by mechanical movement and temperature with silicon is quite different.


----------



## Vya Domus (Feb 2, 2020)

Bones said:


> I must disagree with this.
> The defined thermal limit for a chip is _what it can tolerate and still live without dying on the spot in short order_, does not mean it will not be affected and this thermal limit was never meant to "Say" it's always 100% OK at that temp sustained.
> 
> Heat has always been an enemy of electronics period, it's the nature of it and while it isn't required to cool one down to subzero temps throughout it's useable life it's better to keep it away from it's defined thermal limit if possible.



The only real way a CPU degrades is through electromigration, that process is accelerated by larger voltage drops across conductors. Hence when you overclock a CPU and apply higher voltages that will be by far the main reason it degrades over time, incidentally when that happens the heat output also increases, but that's the side effect. The thermal limit on processors is imposed more for stability purposes rather than fear of damage. I mean think about, if it's supposed to be the maximum temperature after which the chip dies on the spot then that means it really should die once it hits that temperature.

But they don't, think of the plethora of laptops with crappy cooling that cause shutdowns or run pretty much right at the limit of thermal shutdown, despite that the chips pretty much never die. It's exceedingly difficult to kill a chip, you either have to apply insane voltages to it or disable all safeties and run it without a cooler. And you need really, really high temperatures to damage it beyond working order. In other words it's unrealistic to expect that something like this would happen.

Voltage and temperature can both kill semiconductors but in different, slower or faster ways. You're probably thinking of electronics in general where temperature can lead to damage in a much more nuanced and obvious way across time but with IC's due to the way they are used it doesn't really occur in the same way.


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 2, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> Cpus have two thresholds... where it throttles and where it shuts down. So long as the cpu isnt throttling to protect itself that means intel/amd are ok with those temperatures. If you are throttling and hit thermal shutdown, that is too hot.





Vya Domus said:


> The only real way a CPU degrades is through electromigration, that process is accelerated by larger voltage drops across conductors. Hence when you overclock a CPU and apply higher voltages that will be by far the main reason it degrades over time. The thermal limit on processors is imposed more for stability purposes rather than fear of damage. I mean think about, if it's supposed to be the maximum temperature after which the chip dies on the spot then that means it really should die once it hits that temperature.
> 
> But they don't, think of the plethora of laptops with crappy cooling that cause shutdowns or run pretty much right at the limit of thermal shutdown, despite that the chips pretty much never die. It's exceedingly difficult to kill a chip, you either have to apply insane voltages to it or disable all safeties and run it without a cooler, that's pretty much the only way you can kill it with high temperatures.


As ZEN2 for all I understand, Its ok to operate close/under throttling limit of 95C for long periods of time, BUT when in stock settings and not OCed. Only then SenseMI or silicon FITness controller can adjust clock and voltage according to temp to preserve silicon longevity and avoid electromigration. Because even tho throttle begins at 95C the cut down of boosting and voltage starts way back. Running CPU (all core loads) with temps 90C and 60C would have a difference of around 250~300MHz and difference for voltage too.

------------------------
On OP topic

While higher CPU temps keep temp gradient higher, hence higher heat transfer, I dont think its wise to deliberately keep CPU temps high to achieve high heat transfer. The further cooling down of cooler's or block's cold plate is the right way to do it and when this hits the limit, of the given system (air, water, water chiller... etc) the only other wise choice is to reduce thermal resistance between CPU and cooler if and when its possible...
...hence TIM.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 2, 2020)

Graphene nanoribbons illuminate at 2500°C if I recall correct. I think we will have a different class of categorization for these nanotechnology devices that work at their fundamental limits.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 2, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> I dont think its wise to deliberately keep CPU temps high to achieve high heat transfer.


Agreed. This idea seems quite off to me. I'm running it as cool as things allow for my settings. No way would way should we run warmer for better heat transfer.  

Everything equals out. Someone earlier mentioned block thickness or something helps... and while that is true, a larger copper block will hold more heat than a smaller, one, the larger one gets saturated as well and then its down to the metal properties again. This is akin to adding more water to a water loop thinking it will be cooler. Once things hit the saturation point, it is what it is. It doesn't change the temps, just longer to reach the equilibrium.

The problem with today's processors is the tiny die and density trying to get the heat out.


----------



## moproblems99 (Feb 2, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> This is another reason lapping is a good thing, we don't see it much, people are just lazy.



Keep in mind that some plates (blocks, etc) are purposefully convex because the tightening process brings them flat.  Lap the block and you have just done f'ed that up.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 2, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> There is a similar perk mentioned over at here: https://physics.stackexchange.com/q...tivity-provide-a-smaller-temperature-gradient
> Let's go back to Noctua's fly by;
> There is a constant reference of cpu die area which brings us into crossroads with _thermal transmittance_.
> You see, the only changes to the ihs is always the same. Temperature gradient between the plates play a huge role in this.
> ...



The cpu die area is split into pieces on Ryzen 3000 chips. Zen+ and previous only had a single die. 
Which die area is Noctua referencing? the I/O chip? 

I liked the point you brought up earlier about Tim 10 Wm2K vs LM 100 Wm2K thermal transmittance. 

You'd think the solder I removed and replaced with TIM would had made a HUGE difference. Nah, not like you think.

I'm running a De-lidded 2700x, solder replaced TIM with the stock cooler and it changed the effects of the processor none. 

It's not the IHS plate, or the TIM / LM..... It's the density of the transistor count on small die. This is where the "temp spikes" come from.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 2, 2020)

I've also given up on the voltage modulation idea. Currently, it is heat vs sense m.i. cooler fan modulation. If there has ever been any doubt, we never advise testing above silicon FITness thresholds during any time. I just need some more clarity on how sense m.i. can pace cooler speed with heat buildup from the negative inverse plane, triggering just when cpu temperature gradient is about to hit throttle perimetry.
Do we go by cooler steadystate measurements? There has to be a linear estimation to fit this into a binary domain to wreak maximum havoc to case ambients. Not safe for atx cases with psus on top.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 2, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> I've also given up on the voltage modulation idea. Currently, it is heat vs sense m.i. cooler fan modulation. If there has ever been any doubt, we never advise testing above silicon FITness thresholds during any time. I just need some more clarity on how sense m.i. can pace cooler speed with heat buildup from the negative inverse plane, triggering just when cpu temperature gradient is about to hit throttle perimetry.
> Do we go by cooler steadystate measurements? There has to be a linear estimation to fit this into a binary domain to wreak maximun havoc in case ambients. Not safe for atx cases with psus on top.



Start with the Max wattage draw and convert that into BTU first.

Example, 160w is 545 BTU/hr. This should help your mathematics during thermal resistance and displacement.

Not all the cpu heat is dissipated to the heat sink. A great deal of it yes, but some is dissipated through the board as well. (this needs to be accounted for.)


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 2, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> The cpu die area is split into pieces on Ryzen 3000 chips. Zen+ and previous only had a single die.
> Which die area is Noctua referencing? the I/O chip?
> 
> I liked the point you brought up earlier about Tim 10 Wm2K vs LM 100 Wm2K thermal transmittance.
> ...


I think that 74mm² is the 8core chiplet.
I can agree for the density of those small dies, but having high thermal resistance (TIM over LM) would only make things worst.
Not having any difference from delidded 2700X I think its because of soldered IHS on the die, over other CPUs that only having "regular" TIM under the hood by stock (and not soldered).



ShrimpBrime said:


> Not all the cpu heat is dissipated to the heat sink. A great deal of it yes, but some is dissipated through the board as well.


Yes yes... Thats one reason (among others) there is a difference between TDP and max power draw.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 2, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> I think that 74mm² is the 8core chiplet.
> I can agree for the density of those small dies, but having high thermal resistance (TIM over LM) would only make things worst.
> Not having any difference from delidded 2700X* I think its because of soldered IHS on the die*, over other CPUs that only having "regular" TIM under the hood by stock (and not soldered).
> 
> ...



response to in bold.....
I'm running LIDLESS PGA 2700x - means no solder. I physically removed it, replaced it with TIM.

Thermal Design point is for your max P-state.
Do note a cpu-z txt pull will give you absolutely NO boosting specs at all. (This differs from past chips such as the FX line, the Boost states are listed as P-states)

You can convert electrical wattage to BTU.
The reason they use say 105w TDP, is because this number is much lower than the BTU per hour you need to remove, 358 BTU/hr. (stock max p-state)

_P_(BTU/hr) = 3.412141633 × _P_(W) // 1W = 3.412141633 BTU/hr (the P = power)


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 2, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> The cpu die area is split into pieces on Ryzen 3000 chips. Zen+ and previous only had a single die.
> Which die area is Noctua referencing? the I/O chip?


Their reference is to the zen 2 dies, 7nm, not the matisse 14nm IF port. 


ShrimpBrime said:


> I liked the point you brought up earlier about *Tim 10 Wm2K vs LM 100 Wm2K* thermal transmittance.
> 
> You'd think the solder I removed and replaced with TIM would had made a HUGE difference. Nah, not like you think.


That note was really illuminating, me included. Copper practically plays no part, since it far outpaced the rest and is playing the least significant part in the thermal resistance series calculation, therefore, ironically.



ShrimpBrime said:


> I'm running a De-lidded 2700x, solder replaced TIM with the stock cooler and it changed the effects of the processor none.
> 
> It's not the IHS plate, or the TIM / LM..... It's the density of the transistor count on small die. This is where the "temp spikes" come from.


I'm not 100% clear if it will resolve temperature spikes, however if a graphene led meets steady state at 2500°C, you get to wonder if thermal transmittance is making a fool out of 250w tower coolers for never meeting their crossection up to a temperature higher than pb2 ever permits. Now that would be an industry insider joke.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 2, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> Their reference is to the zen 2 dies, 7nm, not the matisse 14nm IF port.
> That note was really illuminating, me included. Copper practically plays no part, since it far outpaced the rest and is playing the least significant part in the thermal resistance series calculation, therefore, ironically.
> 
> 
> I'm not 100% clear if it will resolve temperature spikes, however if a graphene led meets steady state at 2500°C, you get to wonder if thermal transmittance is making a fool out of 250w tower coolers for never meeting their crossection up to a temperature higher than pb2 ever permits. Now that would be an industry insider joke.



It likely is an industry joke. I cannot recommend a better cooler over the stock because the Cpu is already maxed boosted to it's stability point under throttle 95c. The rest just doesn't matter while sensemi is a temp driven algorithm, while user slight changes only give slight effects. 

You said copper practically plays no part, I say the copper mass plays a part. Most tower coolers lack it. 

I've thermally tested down to -30. SenseMi boosting did not change without user input.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 2, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> You said copper practically plays no part, I say the copper mass plays a part. Most tower coolers lack it.


You are right, I was just looking at its inverse corollary, the thermal resistance difference of tim from liquid metal to fit the equation.
I try to tie things with the OP. In this instance, the original study is where it is mentioned - 4th in the list of things.
15°C delta is what it translates to and not because it pulls any less heat, in fact is using 50% more. Sometimes I wonder how people do these things better than its vendor.

How difficult could it be to get your cpu to steadystate at 90°C and see if it passes a test there at that voltage&MHz... pttl permitting, I think we can benchmark this manually.

Undervolting study@90°C, no less.


----------



## Grog6 (Feb 2, 2020)

This is a ridiculous take on cooling, IMHO.

Yes, Math and thermodynamics state that maximum cooling and heat transfer takes place at the highest temperature gradient, the one at issue is to ambient air, so as high as is theoretically possible is best.

This is not a case for longevity or stability, however.

As low as possible while delivering maximum performance is what drives LN2, chillers, and other extreme cooling solutions; I would postulate that their success obviates the paper at issue in every way.

Every CPU degradation mechanism increases with increasing temperature; at 125C, the diffusion process actually reverses, changing the actual die properties.

Leakage was mentioned; this is the primary driver, in conjunction with capacitance, with heat production in modern dies.

I've done this to a wide range of mosfet and bipolar devices in my career, none were improved by the treatment.   Most died spectacularly.
Silicon Carbide is an outlier; it's going to eventually replace Silicon, IMHO, but it will be a decade or more.

Gallium and Nickel are not a great heatsink combo; nickel is a piss-poor conductor.  The gain in thermals you get is offset by the layer of nickel you need to protect your shit.
Check out a bar of stainless steel for comparison, it's mostly nickel. 
You can put a torch to one end of a 2 foot bar, and hold the other end for a long time; don't try that with copper or aluminum.

Gallium forms a compound with copper, eats the hell out of aluminum, and is a pretty nasty metal to work with in conjunction with any metal in most cases.

If you want to be bleeding edge, go straight to NaK; it's better, and won't eat the heatsink.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 2, 2020)

Grog6 said:


> This is a ridiculous take on cooling, IMHO.


Yes, we are in for a crazy ride however hear me out, please.


Grog6 said:


> Gallium forms a compound with copper, eats the hell out of aluminum, and is a pretty nasty metal to work with in conjunction with any metal in most cases.


Last night, got a good readout on it about its electrochemical battery series once applied to graphite(seriously am I the only one who hoped it will work with graphite heatsink fixation?) and its amalgamation when met with copper. It also creates convective currents as heated by such cpu heat sources. What a weird set of features.



Grog6 said:


> If you want to be bleeding edge, go straight to NaK; it's better, and won't eat the heatsink.


'NaK', good joke. You had me considering there for a moment.

If the cooler slope took heat vs. rpm, instead of °C vs. rpm as its two variables we possibly could do it, although case temperatures will incrementally work against our gradient temperature difference once the fan rpm picks up pace. Though, this too can have its steadystate and unit measure in a series.


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 2, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> response to in bold.....
> I'm running LIDLESS PGA 2700x - means no solder. I physically removed it, replaced it with TIM.
> 
> Thermal Design point is for your max P-state.
> ...


I know what you did with the CPU and that is lidless...
What Im saying is that you did not saw any benefit by going lidless because IHS was solderd and not just TIMed...

I know one can convert watt to BTU and vice-versa because its different names of same thing. Power. My primary education and first job(s) was refrigerant and air condition applications.
TDP, Thermal Design Power is heat translated into Watt and its what a CPU is expected to dissipate towards IHS and cooler. For Intel is at base clock and for AMD its for avg boost clocks (above base clock).
This is from recent GN extensive review and research video.

-------------------------------------
To everyone...

Want to see how R5 3600 behaves from just 2~3C change?

Case 1.
PBO auto (PPT:88W, TDC:60A, EDC:90A, PBOscalar:auto)



-2~3C


Case 2.
PBO manual (PPT:95W, TDC:60A, EDC:63A, PBOscalar:X2)


-2~3C


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 2, 2020)

But this information is useless as these processors have no change in frequency scale from temps be it high or low.

The transistors are at max operating frequecy from the box.

As stated, you're good to max throttle temp.

Thus my argument, high temp gradient makes no more difference in frequency or very minor variations in overclocks.

We are talking about maintaining a 65c idle temp and a max load temp of 90c.

Why would there be a benefit if the idle temp is nominally higher?

Answer.... Is no benefit.


----------



## Bones (Feb 2, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> Cpus have two thresholds... where it throttles and where it shuts down. So long as the cpu isnt throttling to protect itself that means intel/amd are ok with those temperatures. If you are throttling and hit thermal shutdown, that is too hot. In our overclocking endeavors over the years, we found occasionally some chips can lose stability a bit before that. This is why we usually say, for Intel chips with 100C throttling point (105C+ shutdown) to keep it under 90c. For headroom under throttling point. I'd gladly pound and have pounded chips in this manner.
> 
> *While i understand the underlying point of your wire analogy, metal fatigue by mechanical movement and temperature with silicon is quite different*.


That's true but what I was getting at is _if you push something to it's limits for too long it won't end well_.
At least we can agree on that.


----------



## cdawall (Feb 2, 2020)

Doesn’t matter what TIM you use there are not coolers that can handle the specific heat output of current HEDT. The smaller and smaller dies are causing larger issues since the surface area to dump the heat off keeps shrinking. While not a major issue with these little baby 200w chips those of us living with chips pulling 800w are seeing major problems.


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 2, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> But this information is useless as these processors have no change in frequency scale from temps be it high or low.
> 
> The transistors are at max operating frequecy from the box.
> 
> ...



I'm not trying to back-up the title of this thead by any means. I'm against running CPU hotter for high temp gradient. This indeed has no real benefit (other than some heat transfer numbers), CPU is running hotter uneccessary, and in ZEN2's case it would hurt performance by a respected amount.
What I demonstrate above with those screenshots is real and mesurable. That was only 2~3C reduction by cooling increase. Imagine going from 90+C down to 60~65C or lower if possible. Depending the 3000 SKU it would boost +150~250MHz, if not more, from that kind of temp reduction.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 2, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> I'm not trying to back-up the title of this thead by any means. I'm against running CPU hotter for high temp gradient. This ideed has no real benefit (other than some heat transfer numbers), CPU is running hotter uneccessary, and in ZEN2's case it would hurt performance by a respected amount.
> What I demonstrate above with those screenshots is real and mesurable. That was only 2~3C reduction by cooling increase. Imagine going from 90+C down to 60~65C or lower if possible. Depending the 3000 SKU it would boost +150~250MHz, if not more, from that kind of temp reduction.



Do that all the time. Running max pstate 3.7ghz 1.2v. 60c load (ish - depending on ambient) fans are always nice and quiet, very efficient processing figures. 

Max clocks 1.250v is what Id seek with Zen 2. The boosting is nice, but not really necessary. 

Yes I agree, its about heat transfer performance than it is about processor performance, but we still have to measure that as well. I get it.

Just seems overly thought into..... 

If we wanted to transfer heat more quickly we'd use silver. If slower Aluminum.

I believe good testing would come from passively cooled heat sinks, not tower coolers, but who am I to judge. I can confirm these chips can be run with direct TEC cooling under a water block. Just no one has really tried it yet with a proper configuration. (Example ideas)


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 2, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> I can confirm these chips can be run with direct TEC cooling under a water block. Just no one has really tried it yet with a proper configuration. (Example ideas)


How thick that TEC plate would be? Any directions?


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 2, 2020)

cdawall said:


> Doesn’t matter what TIM you use there are not coolers that can handle the specific heat output of current HEDT. The smaller and smaller dies are causing larger issues since the surface area to dump the heat off keeps shrinking. While not a major issue with these little baby 200w chips those of us living with chips pulling 800w are seeing major problems.



And see this is where the IHS plate plays a huge role. Its not thick enough. A percentage of BTU is stored. 
The reason is because we only apply cooling to a single side of a  3 dimensional surface.


----------



## Grog6 (Feb 2, 2020)

A CPU, or any semiconductor, (or anything else) really has a finite lifetime.

An equation of state, based on Arrhenius' equation, defines that.






						Arrhenius equation (for reliability) | JEDEC
					






					www.jedec.org
				




These guys write the standards, so they are the Law, in my book, for design.

I break these laws for personal use, but my employers would have serious problems if I incorporated my overclocked CPU into a design for a customer, lol.

Basically shit dies faster if it's hotter. I can't say it easier than that.

Diffusion, which all IC's are based on, is reversible.

The closer you run to ~125C for Silicon, the faster the stuff that makes it N and P type silicon leaves the building; when Elvis has left the building, it's no longer a semiconductor, but a Silicon Resistor.

Silicon resistors have no switching characteristics, so the first transistor in a critical path that loses Elvis, bricks your processor.
These are usually in clock circuits, that may run up to 8 or more times faster than most of the silicon.

In short, love Elvis, keep him cool, and life will be wonderful.

Do the equation of thermal transfer when you think about using Liquid metal; there are always disadvantages; a thick layer of nickel does not help with overclocking.
It's just keeping your thermal compound from eating your heatsink.

I wasn't joking; NaK isn't worse than Gallium, IMHO. It just burns if you mess up, as opposed to eating your heatsink.
NaK is a viable alternative; you just have to put a bead of silicone caulk around the edge of the CPU, and clean up the excess after you torque it down.
Don't miss any, lol.
As long as it never sees air or water while it's hot, it works great.
Nuclear Reactors have been cooled with it for a half century. 

I have cooled Semiconductors with NaK; it's not easy to work with, but it doesn't eat most metals.


EDIT: these are Peltier coolers that can cool around 200W; take a look.
Realize, the peltier devise is ~50% efficient; If you're cooling 200W, it eats over 400W.









						comapact thermoelectric air conditioners with up to 250 watts capacity
					

thermoelectric panel coolers protect electronics, cool and heat enclosures in variety of industries like communications and transit boxes, outdoor control panels, outdoor kiosks, security alarm housing, incubators, gloveboxes




					www.thermoelectric.com
				




I made a LN2 replacement with Peltiers, for a camera; to cool a 10 gram device using 10 W, it took me over 1200W to do it.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 2, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> How thick that TEC plate would be? Any directions?



All I can say is the IHS plate replaced with a cold plate twice the size and mass gave amazing results.

I can take a picture of a couple cold plates I have used and rough numbers.



Zach_01 said:


> How thick that TEC plate would be? Any directions?



OK Zach, here's an example picture of a couple of cold plates I use.

The big one (top), It fits most motherboards I've come across. I have one that is larger and has only fit a couple boards throughout the last decade+.

The one on the right (bottom) is similar to performance of the IHS plate and is very poor for holding any kind of heat.

I am not interested in setting this cooling up for testing higher vs lower temp gradients again for die hard figures, you'll have to take my word on it.

That IHS plate came from a soldered Ryzen 3 1200.

EDIT: The picture on the right is a lapped Morgan silver dollar.


----------



## Grog6 (Feb 2, 2020)

When you say "Cold Plate" do you mean copper shim, or a plate with coolant running thru it?

That copper plate would really help cooling, if that's all it is.

Take a water block, fill with NaK, put that on top, and cool conventionally, and it would be awesome with no water.
The fine scarf cut fingers would do awesome heat transfer.


Can you tell I have a fixation on potentially explosive cooling materials? 

EDIT: What did you attach the Morgan Silver to the HS with?

There's always this:








						Aquacomputer cuplex kryos NEXT with VISION AM4, nickel/.925 silver
					

The cuplex kryos NEXT marks a new milestone in CPU water block development. Every detail has been analyzed, optimized and tested to achieve perfection in cooling performance, installation procedure and product features. The result is not...




					www.aquatuning.us


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 2, 2020)

Grog6 said:


> When you say "Cold Plate" do you mean copper shim, or a plate with coolant running thru it?
> 
> EDIT: What did you attach the Morgan Silver to the HS with?



I mean a plate of copper. What's cooling that plate is a matter of choice, I mainly use something that large to transfer heat, but not above 0 heat, more so the aim is sub zero heat, but has the same effect when running warm, this plate would run a higher temperature gradient than the IHS plate because it stored more BTU which then needs less time for transfer or dissipation.  You can take more time to transfer heat or dissipate. (I'm not finding the proper wording for the transaction. It's late o'clock)

When the waterblock and Silver plate where lapped to 3000 grit, I could pick the coin off the table without anything except the direct contact. In the picture, thermal paste.



Grog6 said:


> EDIT: these are Peltier coolers that can cool around 200W; take a look.
> Realize, the peltier devise is ~50% efficient; If you're cooling 200W, it eats over 400W.



Oh for sure Peltiers are horrible for efficiency. I only play with them as a hoby and far from being an electric engineer of any kind lol. 
However, I know enough to get me by. A very good understanding of metals coming from the Iron workers industry, I've smelted a few things.

So the neat thing about running a Peltier is it's actually (often times) more difficult to cool it than the device it's trying to cool.
Then you have a target temp you're after. So with your case, lacking specifics, 1200w to cool 10w makes absolutely no sense to most people, While I feel you where aiming for some pretty low temps.

Low deltas. The key to any cooling device.

I've seen tower coolers outside them Canadian windows. -10c tower cooler with a TEC may yield -70c on the cold plate and -50c at the cpu. (just random numbers)

NaK, melting temperature of -12.6c but only 22.4 W/mK - 
Water at 90c is a whopping 672.88 W/mk -

Why don't we just use water for TIM? lol.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 2, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> I say the copper mass plays a part. Most tower coolers lack it.


it does play a role, but again, it simply delays the same end result (saying just increasing copper mass of a block). Think about it in an ln2 capacity. Remember when the higher core chips came out and suddenly the lighter pots couldn't hold temperatures as steady? The answer was to be a great pour bitch (lol) or move to a heavier pot. What this yielded was temps being more stable during runs. However, if you let it run temps will end up right back in the same place. Do your math... in this case it just takes a longer time to saturate a larger item.

So yes, mass matters, but only manages to delay the same end result in the case of thicker water blocks or base plates.

You dont want a thick/thicker ihs.. otherwise it would compound the problem we currently have (getting the heat out of the small die)... that is until it is heat saturated. Part of lapping the die has to do with getting the coating off AND thinning out the surface for better transfer. It takes less energy to saturate a 1.5" x 1.5x" x 0.05 IHS than a 0.25" thick plate. Once the plate is saturated then it's simply the metal properties in play. I'd bet good money says if you tested with a thick plate and thinner plate end temps would be the same after the system saturates (and to be clear, we're talking ambient cooled aio/air, water).

Edit: now this is within reason, obviously. If you add 250ml of water to  a loop 1L loop, temps in the end wont change (just take longer to saturate). But if your resivior turns into a pool, clearly the meager loads wont heat that up to where it can 1L. Or throw a piece of copper the size of a cinder block, that may change. But the differences we are talking in blocks is largely irrelevant for normal cooling methods.

Edit2: Also something to consider... the grit. The finer the grit the more mirror like finish and the more smooth surface. However, surface area plays a role too. There is a point of diminishing returns though. The more mirror finish it is, the less surface area it actually has (less/finer ridges). So I wonder if it is really the finish or if additional sanding yields an even thinner ihs/base which improves results.....


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Feb 2, 2020)

The chips are not built using the same process , the different manufacturers do use similar tools to build their individual IP but the end result is they do some things slightly different.


Temperature reporting being one of these.

Before getting into the weed's on how hot a processor runs to effectively dissipate heat without damaging itself consider what's actually happening more.


These chips are very effectively tested and simulated to wear within a range while used within spec already, the research was done ,this Is how they scientifically resolved the best specs from the silicon.

Also the temperature shown the user means absolutely nothing, the actual Tdie temp is always higher and has an offset applied to it to stop user hysteria , they're already at their peak as many an overclocker can testify and those same types tend to know what degrades a chip.

HEAT and POWER not one in isolation , they're conducive to each other.


----------



## freeagent (Feb 2, 2020)

I think they are just selling the CPUs pretty much maxed out from the factory, at least from Intel, and probably AMD too. In 2007/08 I was barely able to hit 4900mhz on my E8600 ES (Wolfdale). On my 3770K I can barely hit 4900mhz. On my X5690 I can run 4800, and barely hit 4900. Now you can go buy a CPU from them that will hit 4600-5000MHz out of the box, and maybe get a 200-300mhz overclock out of it, if you can tame the heat. Same goes for AMD, looks like you can get a few hundred MHz out of them, just like the old San Diego and Toledo chips where you got 300-500mhz out of them.  So they give you some dividers so at least you can play with your ram to keep yourself entertained.. So maybe its a couple of things holding modern CPUs back. Die size being one, but that in conjunction with a CPU that is already near its maximum potential would be a logical explanation as to why these new CPUs are a bear to tame when it comes to thermals. My CPU is very easy to cool until I get to the end of its capabilities, and when I get to that point is where it sounds like a lot of guys are when they describe stock or mildly overclocked scenarios. In my limited experience CPUs became difficult to cool when the switch from 32nm to 22nm came, at least on the Intel side.. or maybe it was the switch from 22 down.

Don't mind me, I'm just an outsider looking in when it comes to new tech. To combat evil thermals I rely on big heatsinks, big fans, and brute force when needed, because some things don't change when it comes to overclocking.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 2, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> it does play a role, but again, it simply delays the same end result (saying just increasing copper mass of a block). Think about it in an ln2 capacity. Remember when the higher core chips came out and suddenly the lighter pots couldn't hold temperatures as steady? The answer was to be a great pour bitch (lol) or move to a heavier pot. What this yielded was temps being more stable during runs. However, if you let it run temps will end up right back in the same place. Do your math... in this case it just takes a longer time to saturate a larger item.
> 
> So yes, mass matters, but only manages to delay the same end result in the case of thicker water blocks or base plates.
> 
> ...



I agree.

And thus why I mention a larger cold plate in place of the IHS plate to be able to maintain a higher temp gradient...... The entire point of the Original post.
The rest, perhaps I was making examples more so than "doing the math" based on experience.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Feb 2, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> I agree.
> 
> And thus why I mention a larger cold plate in place of the IHS plate to be able to maintain a higher temp gradient...... The entire point of the Original post.
> The rest, perhaps I was making examples more so than "doing the math" based on experience.


This is why I like EK full cover block's, I found a large block of copper to be more effective than some other types I tried with a machined thin coldplate in a housing, full mobo blocks exemplify this with liquid metal Tim in that they work well.

Oh and as someone who has run various crunching ,folding and mining machines long term at as high an efficiency as could be conveniently run that tends to equate to between 60-80% of maximum load 24/7 for consumer electronics effectively cooled to run below 80°C(typically 70-80°C in my case at all times including the rig in my specs).
More than this will create issues sporadically and death earlier.

They spec pro and server parts lower apparently for a reason.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 2, 2020)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> This is why I like EK full cover block's, I found a large block of copper to be more effective than some other types I tried with a machined thin coldplate in a housing, full mobo blocks exemplify this with liquid metal Tim in that they work well.
> 
> Oh and as someone who has run various crunching ,folding and mining machines long term at as high an efficiency as could be conveniently run that tends to equate to between 60-80% of maximum load 24/7 for consumer electronics effectively cooled to run below 80°C(typically 70-80°C in my case at all times including the rig in my specs).
> More than this will create issues sporadically and death earlier.
> ...



And this further backs my point about NOT having a high temp gradient, Full cover waterblocks to keep a system running cool vs running the system warm.

Overclocking memory, you actively cool. This is generally a passive design, works well.... Cpus aren't quite there yet.

Larger 15w Ryzen mobo chipsets, the manufacturer puts a fan on the heat sink to keep costs down rather than using a larger heat sink or changing the material type to copper vs Aluminum .

Have done some number crunching(F@H). When I use the Cpu, I pick a lower power state for cooler temps and less worries. It does get the WU done a little slower, but that's cheaper than coming home to burnt hardware that was running a high temperature gradient.

Ryzen chips don't really "need" to run fast and hot. Nor Intel. That's something the consumer market seeks. But this time around, they just handed it to us at purchase. Overclocking, even stated by AMD, is a thing of the past, this is an accurate description. We only "tweak" what AMD has already accomplished with very small variances.

Any ways,
My take, unless I need a hot processor, I just don't run mine that way. I don't need 4.2ghz to browse and light gaming. Heck I can even still play triple A titles right off the max P-state with boost PBO CPB XFR disabled.

---------

Wish I had a 3000 series chip. I'd de-lid that too lol.. would be interesting for me, I've got some ideas for them naked chicks,  Chips* (sorry spelling is off today)


----------



## Grog6 (Feb 2, 2020)

You've got me wondering if using a slab of water as TIM on a LN2 rig would be more effective...

Hard to test, and messy if it fails, but Hmmmmm.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 2, 2020)

Grog6 said:


> You've got me wondering if using a slab of water as TIM on a LN2 rig would be more effective...
> 
> Hard to test, and messy if it fails, but Hmmmmm.



I've run LN2 without paste. A single drop of water. The cpu pot freezes to the cpu instantly. Best effect is with lapped surfaces.

Like EarthDog mentioned, with LN2 you want big copper mass and lots of holes (I guess) for surface area.

The movement of heat is the opposite direction, your heating towards the motherboard vs away from it.


----------



## R-T-B (Feb 2, 2020)

Grog6 said:


> Do the equation of thermal transfer when you think about using Liquid metal; there are always disadvantages; a thick layer of nickel does not help with overclocking.
> It's just keeping your thermal compound from eating your heatsink.



Is it really that much of a factor?  I ask not because I use liquid metal (other than under the CPU heatspreader once long ago, where Nickel is present no matter), but because my present Noctua heatsink is Nickel coated.  Pretty thin layer, but present all the same.

Keep in mind, I have a little thermal understanding, but you guys are way over my head here.


----------



## Grog6 (Feb 2, 2020)

You know, I'm actually wrong about pure electroplated nickel; stainless is *much much* worse than Nickel.

Nickel is about 100W/mK, and stainless is about 20.

The Gallium/Indium liquid metals are in the 20-40 range, so the Nickel layer isn't that bad, other than the roughness, which would have been easier for me to lap smooth than remove completely.

Another discovery today is that the solder can be better than the Liquid metal, depending on lead and indium content.


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 2, 2020)

Grog6 said:


> You know, I'm actually wrong about pure electroplated nickel; stainless is *much much* worse than Nickel.
> 
> Nickel is about 100W/mK, and stainless is about 20.
> 
> ...


Conductonaut is stated as 73W/mk. Is that a lie or do they mean something else than you?


----------



## Grog6 (Feb 2, 2020)

73 would mean there's a lot of indium in it; gallium is 20, so that's a lot of indium.

Indium is about 140+, so it's probably not as liquid as others.


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 3, 2020)

Grog6 said:


> 73 would mean there's a lot of indium in it; gallium is 20, so that's a lot of indium.
> 
> Indium is about 140+, so it's probably not as liquid as others.


Indeed, it is stated on package... "Increased Indium content"
It's great stuff IMO, even in un-delidded applications. I'm using it for about 25days now with H110i 280mm AIO.
Needs some caution tho on the apply process, but its not rocket science...

As for liquidity look the video on 1:24...


----------



## Wickedt (Feb 3, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> The cpu die area is split into pieces on Ryzen 3000 chips. Zen+ and previous only had a single die.
> Which die area is Noctua referencing? the I/O chip?
> 
> I liked the point you brought up earlier about Tim 10 Wm2K vs LM 100 Wm2K thermal transmittance.
> ...




It's the density of the transistor count on small die.  <--This

As the die sizes get progressively smaller, with a higher concentration of transistors, your getting much less cooling surface. I think this is one of the reasons my nzxt x62 is doing so well, its the placement of there water channels at the exact best spot for maximum cooling of the cpu dies.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 3, 2020)

Wickedt said:


> It's the density of the transistor count on small die.  <--This
> 
> As the die sizes get progressively smaller, with a higher concentration of transistors, your getting much less cooling surface. I think this is one of the reasons my nzxt x62 is doing so well, its the placement of there water channels at the exact best spot for maximum cooling of the cpu dies.



Right. Makes it damn near impossible to run a high temp gradient. 1.45v and idles 37c. lol.


----------



## Wickedt (Feb 3, 2020)

Id love to see a user replaceable cover for the Ryzen's, pure copper, that envelops all the dies, including the sides. We stopped using pennies in Canada, i know there's tons of them out there waiting for this. Penny for your thoughts? lol


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 3, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> Right. Makes it damn near impossible to run a high temp gradient. 1.45v and idles 37c. lol.


The cpu heatsink material having an aluminum base with nickel coating on top could play a part. We can do this, although I have to decipher the 3d model conductance formula. At first, I was trying to tie things with thermal conductance, instead it looks more feasible with thermal transmittance. I still don't get what the denominator means in the alternative thermal conductance formula: (cal/sec)(cm2C/cm)
Copper looks suspiciously like its unit measure with 0.99.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 3, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> The cpu heatsink material having an aluminum base with nickel coating on top could play a part. We can do this, although I have to decipher the 3d model conductance formula. At first, I was trying to tie things with thermal conductance, instead it looks more feasible with thermal transmittance. I still don't get what the denominator means in the alternative thermal conductance formula: (cal/sec)(cm2C/cm)
> Copper looks suspiciously like its unit measure with 0.99.



Well I'm trying a few side experiments. Using the stock cooler. However the fan is upgraded. I set manually 2700x to 3.5ghz and running 1.155v with a 20% fan curve to 100% at 75c. The bios will not allow me to change the max RPM any lower than 100% past 75c.

This effort is going to be difficult to control with high clock speeds and voltage. I'm already at 72c a few minutes in OCCT Linpack AVX2 16 threads. The fan is about to be loud. lol.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 3, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> The bios will not allow me to change the max RPM any lower than 100% past 75c.


This is easier than thought. In the bios there is a smart q-fan option. Once you limit it to 70/60°C & 60/30% you have just reestablished a new 100% threshold in windows.

I don the opinion that somehow lining a good conductor next to a bad one from the start should increase the temperature and serve as a one way valve to increase the heat flow in a specific direction, if it wasn't copper all throughout on the motherboard side. If it makes a temperature gradient - let's face it aluminum will always run hotter to meet the same transmittance as copper - does it keep the motherboard cool, as it does because higher conductance mean copper will return to gradient faster, or spread farther than aluminum? I'm shot.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 3, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> This is easier than thought. In the bios there is a smart q-fan option. Once you limit it to 70/60°C & 60/30% you have just reestablished a new 100% threshold in windows.



I don't use software tuning. 
One app for monitoring, OCCT does the stress and the monitoring. Less conflicts accurate readings. 

Prefer to follow the guidlines according to what I read in the white papers. I aim for cold temps. 75c is hot enough, I alarm at 80c. Anytime I see these high numbers is generally only benchmarking and stress testing.

Not sure how you are going to accomplish the high idle temperature to achieve high temp gradient thresholds.

So a thermal paste that is less conductive when at a cooler temperature and then becomes more conductive at a higher temperature would be one approach. Water is an example of this. The thermal conductivity gets better as it warms up. (This is an example, perhaps a paste designed around these types of properties?) 






						Water - Thermal Conductivity vs. Temperature
					

Figures and tables showing thermal conductivity of water (liquid and gas phase) with varying temperature and pressure, SI and Imperial units.




					www.engineeringtoolbox.com


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 3, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> Not sure how you are going to accomplish the high idle temperature to achieve high temp gradient thresholds.


The software won't allow for it but it is simply by zerofan setting taking off only when the heatsink thermal load is max and the cpu is about to thermal throttle if not.



ShrimpBrime said:


> Water is an example of this. The thermal conductivity gets better as it warms up. (This is an example, perhaps a paste designed around these types of properties?)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Water is a good example: high specific heat, low conductance. If we line it next to aluminum, aluminum will always work at a deficit to water.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 3, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> The software won't allow for it but it is simply by zerofan setting taking off only when the heatsink thermal load is max and the cpu is about to thermal throttle if not.



Well, I was able to passively cool, but that's around sub 3ghz (at least with my Zen+) about 1 volt. barely maintain under 90c. adjusted VRM fan for assistance.

I ran an AM2 Sempron (one core) once completely heatsinkless (it did have the IHS plate however) and a small 80mm fan just a few inches away. 1.2ghz 0.75v Sub 50c temp loaded.



mtcn77 said:


> Water is a good example: high specific heat, low conductance. If we line it next to aluminum, aluminum will always work at a deficit to water.



Most passive heatsinks are aluminum and very large.

Please note this is not a high wattage passive heatsink. Only handles 47w. Pretty much the max output anyone could passively cool. This is the figure I aim for using HWinfo64.

Once I get closer to 60w usage, gotta have a fan.









						ARCTIC COOLING ACALP00022A Alpine AM4 Passive, Silent AMD CPU Cooler - Newegg.com
					

Buy ARCTIC COOLING ACALP00022A Alpine AM4 Passive, Silent AMD CPU Cooler with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




					www.newegg.com


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 3, 2020)

We could just replace the aluminum ihs with a vapour chamber and call it a day.



> In a coarse calculation or CFD simulation, it is not uncommon that a uniform and isotropic thermal conductivity, say 10000 W/m-K which is 25 times the thermal conductivity of copper, is assigned to the entire volume of the vapor chamber.


We need some sort of directionality to force heat into a one way shunt. Placing it one with a vapour chamber would bring both the temperature gradient and necessary thermal transmittance crossection in short order. If it expands 25 times, it is like making a 7nm die's features 5 times wider, like 22nm.
Basically place an aluminum heatsink and it won't perform a lot different because apart from density, the chips don't actually use a lot of power.

74mm² consuming 120w with liquid metal applied - that is 160w/cm². Remember, 300w is the vapor chamber. That is 25x better than copper.
Now, in the chart at 95°C. That is 170w/0.74cm²= 230w/cm²! I think we are getting somewhere.


> *Design Guidelines for a Vapor Chamber Heatsink*
> The following table shows the suggested operation conditions for typical applications. They are not necessarily the maximum capabilities of vapor chambers.
> 
> Vapor Chamber Ambient temperature0 - 85 ºCPower20 - 300 WHeat FluxUp to 300 W/cm2




Since the cpu is an active heat source the same gradient trick doesn't work here and we are necessitated to work from heat flux. Otherwise it would incur a nonstop temperature gradient between the cpu and the ihs unless it throttles.

Anybody with experience in vapour chamber cpu heatsinks at the cold plate? ID-Cooling involves us with their 2015 creation, however it is 130w tdp specified. It is neat, though. I like neat.








						ID-Cooling Releases Vapor Chamber CPU Cooler for Mini-ITX Systems
					

ID-COOLING, a cooling solution provider focusing on thermal dissipation and fan technology research and production for over 10 years, releases a newly developed Vapor Chamber CPU Cooler for Mini-ITX system: IS-VC45.  When small PC systems get more and more power hungry and house much more...




					www.techpowerup.com
				




This article describes the temperature gradient as "conduction loss".








						Vapor Chamber Heat Sink Design Guidelines - More Advanced
					

This article is intended as a follow-on to a couple of posts we made in the past about using vapor chambers rather than heat pipes. If you haven’t read those and are not familiar with designing with vapor chambers, we suggest you reference this link before continuing.




					www.linkedin.com
				



I'm interested in using a vapour chamber for ihs, or dynatron r25 for that matter. Apparently, the vapour chamber bulges outward, if specified heat output is surpassed, so they structurally strengthen it using an outer exoskeleton in the form of skived fin layer of solid copper.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 3, 2020)

Well the vapor chamber isnt a bad idea. 130w should get you to throttle at max load depending on what you use to build heat. Obviously WPrime 1024m wont build as much heat as Prime95 or OCCT.

Not a bad idea.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 3, 2020)

I had forgotten about amd's own stock cooler, the wraith 'spire' having a copper vapor chamber base. It would be a simple understudy to test with some liquid metal paste.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 3, 2020)

It really doesn't matter what goes on top of these CPUs.... the problem is getting the heat out of the dense die and small space. It can only put out so much heat no matter what is on top.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 3, 2020)

Forcing the issue is probably not a good idea. I'm less than thrilled about heat reflected onto the motherboard vrms. It's not nice when underreported temps kill a device suddenly. Why let it happen, given a choice.
I concede the notion on previously stated motherboard vrm safety. Still, if zerofan will enable temps to go high, vapor chambers have instructions manuals that go as far as 85°C.
I did bring down the shutters on one so infamous cnps9500 when I tried to protect it from rust by *oven-dessication*. Let's just leave a word out to the wise - don't try to go overboard with boiling temp.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 3, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> Let's just leave a word out to the wise - don't try to go overboard with boiling temp.



And why I was mentioning to run passive, get down about 50-60w and work your way up from a safe "er" place.

Who said you had to push air onto the heat sink? Flip the fan over homie.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 3, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> Who said you had to push air onto the heat sink? Flip the fan over homie.


If you unplug the fan, I think the motherboard gives you the graceful exit.

This is a stupid idea. We are trying to push 250w just to justify aftermarket coolers. I am still not totally satisfied by the overall absence of vapor chambers in cpu coolers. Just attach to lower tier models for further reduction in thermal resistance opening up a brand new mid tier.


----------



## Grog6 (Feb 3, 2020)

Doing the thermal calculation is hard;  but thermodynamics is hard.

If you want to be totally accurate with your calculation, you have to instrument each layer of material in your stack.

So: CPU die, liquid metal, copper shim, liquid metal, layer of nickel on HS, HS thermal spreader, fins or water (or LN2) temperature, ambient air.

Every layer comes into the equation. 

If you do w/m/ degree K on each material, you can make it all come out reasonably easy. 
Thickness in meters is easy, degrees k is easy; Watts is not because of the varying area the thermal flux is passing thru is not constant, and it's not evenly spread across the entire area of a layer either.

Measuring it all at various loads with thermocouples and a NI card, and dumping it into Excel is pretty easy.

If you treat the stackup of thermal resistances as a series electrical circuit with the thermal difference of the CPU die to ambient as the overall Thermal driver, you can see where in the stack the highest thermal gradient is, and that's your limiting material.

Get rid of it and try again, until you can't get rid of anything else. 

If the biggest gradient is the cooling fin or water to ambient, you need more fin, more radiator, or more cowbell. 

I have to say; the only real reason we do this whole execrcise is the more cowbell thing; I consider myself ripping off intel or AMD when I manage a real OC over the "advertised" clocks.

Fuck those assholes, that want to charge us Serious precious dollars for meager incremental gains. 

I'll wait a few years, and rock my x58 system with a previously $3k processor, you bastards.

Now I'm rockng my x97 system the same way.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 4, 2020)

Grog6 said:


> If you do w/m/ degree K on each material, you can make it all come out reasonably easy.


You know what came out when I did it? It turns out you are super cool.



Grog6 said:


> If you treat the stackup of thermal resistances as a series electrical circuit with the thermal difference of the CPU die to ambient as the overall Thermal driver, you can see where in the stack the highest thermal gradient is, and that's your limiting material.


You are a good aid and an inspiration. Now, I got to think what it makes sense for this formula;








						What is Thermal Insulation - Thermal Insulator - Definition
					

Thermal insulation is the process of reduction of heat transfer between objects in thermal contact or in range of radiative influence. Thermal Insulation



					www.thermal-engineering.org
				



The blank in the statement is how much heat flux expands at each in the series. I need to calculate heat flux density from transmittance, get a gradient toward the next in the chain and reach a total outlier between that and the core temperature.
I had the simple notion of conductance*gradient gives the magnitude of heat flux, but there is also the area in the proposition.


----------



## Grog6 (Feb 4, 2020)

I love you, in the sense of physics.

The whole thermal problem is realizing the problem has not been solved to an exact number by* anyone.

Everyone* has tried; all the names have taken their hack at it.

To quote a movie I like, "It remains" 

"Easy" is not a word that ever comes out in physics, if you are sharp. 

*Let the dweebs say easy.*

The only real solution you will ever achieve, even with massive instrumentation, is an approximation.

If you *ever* reduce it to an equation, I will worship you. 

I will not discourage you; do this, and get a Nobel Prize.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Feb 4, 2020)

I also encourage you to run your chips 90c!!



Temp gradient.
Can passively cooler here.

Pretty straight forward numbers.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 5, 2020)

K, so as it happens we have the necessary data inbound.
The OEM BoydCorporation is also measuring in accordance with the thermal resistance formula. 130W with a vapor chamber vs. a copper core makes for the same gradient difference. If we go by their, same as above, conclusion we should reach their gradient numbers.


Spoiler: BoydCorporation:






> The spring-loaded thermocouple in the base minus the ambient temperature divided by the over power resulted in the resistance reported.







This is just the airflow bench. Not the normal conductivity bench.


> The Thermabase solution shows a 21% increase in performance over the copper base of the same thickness when the CPU is centered on the heat sink. The gain increases to 27% when the CPU is offset from the center of the heat source by 20 mm (in the direction perpendicular to the airflow).





They seem to be uptick about them having missed experimentally by 10%. I know what it is, they calculated the resistance right from conductance, there is also the convection in some formulas.
My take on it is, they have a weird rounding factor. When you factor, you don't subtract, you reciprocate and when it comes up as 1.279: it is "28%", not 27%.
Gradient numbers are similar to what our original test references outline.
Vapor chamber puts out a 10.4°C temperature gradient next to the copper core. 40.3°C is right on target. What's more we have air convection data.

I still want to test this between liquid metal vs. graphenegraphite to see how high flux densities affect graphenegraphite pads. They certainly be getting some flak, however what they are good at is acting like a flat vapor chamber. Their vertical heat conductance is 28 W/mK, however laterally it is 400 W/mK.




So, there is also the issue of depth affecting conductance.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

The heatsink constitutes a punitive amount in the total convective heat transfer formula. It is just 45% of the total resistance while the plate distribution is 30% and the thermal paste is 10% - almost equal in total.
Slipping in a vapor chamber underneath the heatsink and filling both surfaces with liquid metal has some backing in the electronics cooling association.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 10, 2020)

Overclocking in any way was never guaranteed, it was a bonus, people are not greatful for any bonus they get.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

I think temperature throttle limit, pttl, does not work when pb2-pbo is off, in the manual setting. Some user is reporting higher than 96°C even in a stock 3600.
Granted, there is also another predicament. Vapor chamber shims work worse than standard copper coldplates when the gravity vector is pointing upside down.
It will be interesting to point out that only extreme overclockers use their motherboards horizontally in open benchtops.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> It will be interesting to point out that only extreme overclockers use their motherboards horizontally in open benchtops.


Oh? There are plenty of cases where the Mobo is laying flat.


----------



## JackCarver (Feb 10, 2020)

Flat mobo will be needed by any extrreme liquid cooling (nitrogen/helium)


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> Oh? There are plenty of cases where the Mobo is laying flat.


If it works to increase ventilated temperature, I don't think we can market the accompanied worse temperatures of this idea in restricted environments to htpc crowds. The airflow is a limited resource & exit temps of 45°C vs. 65°C is all the rage.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2020)

Not going down your rabbit hole (doesn't matter what is on top if using ambient cooling when the heat can't get out of the die............. do all the math you want!)... just saying there are plenty of chassis which have the motherboard laying flat.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

I still think the market is going to be huge for advanced contact thermal interface materials in the near future.


----------



## JackCarver (Feb 10, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> there are plenty of chassis which have the motherboard laying flat



Mostly HTPC cases, wouldn't buy such a case for another use case. It's for the Hifi-Rack living room ambience.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2020)

JackCarver said:


> Mostly HTPC cases, wouldn't buy such a case for another use case. It's for the Hifi-Rack living room ambience.


There are plenty of others as well, Jack......



mtcn77 said:


> I still think the market is going to be huge for advanced contact thermal interface materials in the near future.


Sure, if the real issue is resolved... otherwise, this is simply a fun math exercise. Again, it isn't the TIM, nor the IHS, nor the cooler on top. It is the silicon's ability to get the heat out through its density and lack of surface area.


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 10, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> Again, it isn't the TIM, nor the IHS, nor the cooler on top. It is the silicon's ability to get the heat out through its density and lack of surface area.


Sure its very restrictive, such a small die surface. But creating colder IHS or applying faster heat transfer TIM is improving silicon heat dissipation, but not as much as one would expect.


----------



## JackCarver (Feb 10, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> Again, it isn't the TIM, nor the IHS, nor the cooler on top. It is the silicon's ability to get the heat out through its density and lack of surface area.



Why is it possible to improve heat dissipation only by delidding a CPU and replacing the Intel TIM by liquid metal? I achieved 15 degrees lower temps. And with my waterblock on top another 5 degrees compared to the Intel TIM with air cooling. So in my opinion you can achieve a lot here with better materials.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2020)

JackCarver said:


> Why is it possible to improve heat dissipation only by delidding a CPU and replacing the Intel TIM by liquid metal? I achieved 15 degrees lower temps. And with my waterblock on top another 5 degrees compared to the Intel TIM with air cooling. So in my opinion you can achieve a lot here with better materials.


Think about it. 

Like zach said, were at the point of diminishing returns already. All this change will end up netting little over the already over the top (for non benchmarking individuals) deliding. Unless you go subambient, not much will make a difference because of the inherent constraints of the silicon. Even under subambient, these chips can get hot! Especially the higher core count CPUs.

Intel chips have solder again... delidding and reapplying there yields a couple of C.


----------



## JackCarver (Feb 10, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> Think about it.


Because the Intel TIM is rubbish, at least till the first coffee lake generation, the new ones are soldered. And I achieved more than I expected. So everyone can think different here, but with Intel CPUs, delidding was the place to go to get stable overclocks.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2020)

JackCarver said:


> Because the Intel TIM is rubbish, at least till the first coffee lake generation, the new ones are soldered. And I achieved more than I expected. So everyone can think different here, but with Intel CPUs, delidding was the place to go to get stable overclocks.


Keyword... WAS. Any of these that are soldered barely show an improvement. Things can help, but there is a point of diminishing returns is my point... and this discussion is at that point. Not to mention one of every 1000 pc owners would even consider any kind of deliding the first place. Even at a so called 'enthusiast' site like tpu, few do it.

Intel also stated this was an intentional design consideration...so there is that. The K series that overclock use it. Not sure if the locked ones do... but they are locked...so that isn't relevant.

Edit: to be clear, when I said it isn't the tim, nor the ihs or cooler on top, this is assuming a cpu that overclocks with solder tim. You can strap on a 480mm cooler versus a 240... the deltas are closer than one may expect compared to yesteryear with larger dies, etc. Certainly, some improvements can be made, but, to what end, Jack? A few C isn't 100 Mhz on an overclock...


----------



## JackCarver (Feb 10, 2020)

As far as I know, the die of the new coffee lakes is larger and thicker than that of the old ones. The thickness may here also a factor why the new coffee lakes run that hot, der8auer made a video here, where he smoothened the die with sand paper to get better temps here after delidding.

So result? Whatever cooler, heatsink, TIM/ water/air cooling you are using is pointless as the problem is the silicon? Won’t believe that...


----------



## infrared (Feb 10, 2020)

Respectfully, I still don't grasp the concept of this thread..

If you aren't overclocking almost any cooler will do (meaning any deep thinking on the subject is a waste of time/energy).. Or if you are overclocking cooler is always better with almost no exceptions.. I'm not going to gain anything by allowing my processor to run near it's thermal limit, why tf would you want to do that??


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2020)

JackCarver said:


> As far as I know, the die of the new coffee lakes is larger and thicker than that of the old ones. The thickness may here also a factor why the new coffee lakes run that hot, der8auer made a video here, where he smoothened the die with sand paper to get better temps here after delidding.
> 
> So result? Whatever cooler, heatsink, TIM/ water/air cooling you are using is pointless as the problem is the silicon? Won’t believe that...


Be careful, you're putting words in my mouth...or maybe I wasnt clear. My context is with Intel CPUs that can overclock/unlocked. Those that have the sTIM. Because, as was mentioned just above, the locked chips will be just fine and run as they were designed to. Same with the K series. The OPs original point (I'm not entirely sure what it is either, honestly) is to run the cpu hotter...is just jenky snake oil to me. The results gained from such seem, to me, not worth the effort. I wouldnt call it pointless... just a large time sink for what amounts to little gains.

The concept of killing the temp spikes as discussed earlier seems limited by the silicon... not the cooler. Its just too intense too quick. And no amount of a few C difference isnt going to prevent the spike from happening.


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 10, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> Be careful, you're putting words in my mouth...or maybe I wasnt clear. My context is with Intel CPUs that can overclock/unlocked. Those that have the sTIM. Because, as was mentioned just above, the locked chips will be just fine and run as they were designed to. Same with the K series. The OPs original point (I'm not entirely sure what it is either, honestly) is to run the cpu hotter...is just jenky snake oil to me. The results gained from such seem, to me, not worth the effort. I wouldnt call it pointless... just a large time sink for what amounts to little gains.


The "idea" of hotter CPU is that its increasing the temp gradient/delta between silicon and all parts after towards the cooler, whatever that may be (air, water, chiller, LN2) Because of higher delta the heat transfer increases.
But for me (sorry @mtcn77) its completely dumb, because it contradicts the idea of silicon cooling and preserve its integrity along with highest clocks and voltage possible. If you want high temp delta, find a way to further cool the IHS or cooler's cold plate, and not keep CPU temp high...

Conventional cooling hits the ambient temp.
Or use a TEC with extra W consumption.
Or use a chiller which will hit the water icing temp.
Or a special chiller with sub-zero (°C) liquid temps.
Or LN2

There is no other way around it. And Intel does not "run" its CPU's at 95°C on purpose because of high delta. Its because users choose to do so, by wanting more clock, and those CPUs can usually operate safely at these temp levels. 7nm will change this mindset.

2 videos should all watch closely...


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

infrared said:


> Respectfully, I still don't grasp the concept of this thread..


I understand that. That is what is striking about it. Heat transfer coefficient is limiting a 250w cpu cooler, such as BeQuiet! Dark Pro 4, from operating up to its thermal specification.
We have 2 alternatives to make up for lost heat transfer coefficient;

at thermal transmittance level, higher thermal gradient makes up for lower thermal resistance,
at heat transfer coefficient level, higher thermal conductivity of better than copper transfer media make up for lower thermal resistance.
You have missed a sizable portion of the OP, but GN walks you through the explanation perfectly - AMD's TDP calculation is analogous to thermal series resistance formula. You get thermal resistance lower and get instantaneously better performance. This is how this overclocking algorithm operates.


Spoiler: AMD Community post, verbatim:






> After applying metal liquid between the cooler and IHS things improved by almost 20°C in the range of 65-80°,* that was when the CPU draws from 80 to 120watts, (80° became 60 at 120watts!)* but improved only by 3°C when the wattage jumps over 150watts, (90° instead of 93-94°), also frequencies improved accordingly.


----------



## infrared (Feb 10, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> I understand that. That is what is striking about it. Heat transfer coefficient is limiting a 250w cpu cooler, such as BeQuiet! Dark Pro 4, from operating up to its thermal specification.
> We have 2 alternatives to make up for lost heat transfer coefficient..



In a hypothetical universe where the best coolers we had were barely enough, then yes, in that scenario running the silicone as hot as it could endure would allow the highest amount of heat to be transferred. However back in the real world there's plenty of extremely good coolers so we have the luxury of being able to cool to lower temperatures which results in higher clock speeds, slighly less power consumed and longer life span.


----------



## John Naylor (Feb 10, 2020)

ShrimpBrime said:


> You said copper practically plays no part, I say the copper mass plays a part. Most tower coolers lack it.



Thermal mass plays a part but not with regard to overall heat removal rates.  PC components deal with varying loads.  With small mass, the cooling system will immediately respond to increases in thermal load often leading to the fans 'chasing their tail .... load rises.... heat rises ... fans spin up ... component cools ... fans sow down.  With larger coolanyt capacities, or larger tower mass, this effect is mitgated against.   Typically, most cooling systems are limited by the surface area of the block.  Heat conductivity is the major factor here and that's why copper excels in this application with almost twice the thermal conductivity coefficient.  However .... in the tower, the process of heat transfer is called convection and to a lesser extent, radaiation 

From engineering toolbox

"Conduction as heat transfer takes place if there is a temperature gradient in a solid or stationary fluid medium. "
"Heat energy transferred between a surface and a moving fluid with different temperatures - is known as *convection*. "
"Heat transfer through radiation takes place in form of electromagnetic waves mainly in the infrared region. " ... emissivity coefficient

When transferring heat to a fluid (liquid or gaseous) .... the thermal conductivity of the material is not in play here, but the transfer of the surface to the fluid is what determines heat transfer.   With the same fluid, the material properties are not even in the equation


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

infrared said:


> In a hypothetical universe where the best coolers we had were barely enough, then yes, in that scenario running the silicone as hot as it could endure would allow the highest amount of heat to be transferred. However back in the real world there's plenty of extremely good coolers so we have the luxury of being able to cool to lower temperatures which results in higher clock speeds, slighly less power consumed and longer life span.


Well, it is your hardware. If you like getting 80w cooling from 250w hardware, I won't be the judge of that. I'm not preaching to the choir. I made it clear that this is a patch up job; however it is with the best intention this is something people don't know about it, since it has been addressed by both vendor, journalist and aftermarket oem levels, so it is on emphasis. I cannot be the only one making this up.


----------



## infrared (Feb 10, 2020)

I mean... can't you see that you _don't want_ to end up using _all_ of the cooling potential. That's the wrong place to have a bottleneck imo. Having cooling headroom is a good thing, not a wasteful thing.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> But for me (sorry @mtcn77) its completely dumb, because it contradicts the idea of silicon cooling and preserve its integrity along with highest clocks and voltage possible.


It is okay, the gist is practically a joke at this point. However if it works, give it a shot.
To make it work, run it manually and make a custom fan curve to run only near 80-90°C. It shouldn't be too difficult to enter the necessary values in the bios. You run it at undervolt and under restricted cpu airflow.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Feb 10, 2020)

I'm starting to feel people just like to sound smart without considering, the wheels already invented, many thousands of scientists worked millions of man hour's all to be down played by Dave( hypothetical smart person).


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

infrared said:


> I mean... can't you see that you _don't want_ to end up using _all_ of the cooling potential. That's the wrong place to have a bottleneck imo. Having cooling headroom is a good thing, not a wasteful thing.


Yeah, but the heat transfer coefficients are skewed in the chip's favor. I won't go in the details at this post; however if it heats up 4 times faster than the transmittance level of your coldplate, a temperature gradient will develop irregardless of your total heat load transfer capacity.
TL;DR: if the heatpipes, or fluid in the loop doesn't get hot - until they are at thermal equalibrium(equal temperature) with your chip; you aren't making the most of your precious little cooler. Ouch.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Feb 10, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> Yeah, but the heat transfer coefficients are skewed in the chip's favor. I won't go in the details at this post; however if it heats up 4 times faster than the transmittance level of your coldplate, a temperature gradient will develop irregardless of your total heat load transfer capacity.
> TL;DR: if the heatpipes, or fluid in the loop doesn't get hot - until they are at thermal equalibrium(equal temperature) with your chip; you aren't making the most of your precious little cooler. Ouch.


See with talk like this I'm getting a mindset that you just use your pc casually like gaming, my PC has sat at a thermal equilibrium temperature of 68-82 since it was bought, if you use it then it will naturally utilitize it's cooling system and therefore won't be wasting the time money and effort your putting into cooling your (and running) pc.


To have a CPU sat at a high thermal point at all times A LOAD needs to be present, some power has to be burnt.

For what, exactly to run a HSF effectively or just to kill the planet for naught.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> I'm starting to feel people just like to sound smart without considering, the wheels already invented, many thousands of scientists worked millions of man hour's all to be down played by Dave( hypothetical smart person).


There is truth to your objection. There has not been a _single_ successful mainstream exotic cooler in the market. I have interspersed the issues that go along with those as best as I could without naming any names; however I have been a naïve chump, I will concede that.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Feb 10, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> There is truth to your objection. There has not been a _single_ successful mainstream exotic cooler in the market. I have interspersed the issues that go along with those as best as I could without naming any names; however I have been a naïve chump, I will concede that.


That's not right either though, a few have brought to market unconventional approaches to cooling see coolzone freezit for one, I nearly bought one , a HSF with a Tec built in and thermostatic control.

As I also said and V many skipped passed.

Both/all afaik chip manufacturers use a temperature offset value, when the temperature says 95 the Tdie would be between 100-115°c as the actual typical limit. 

Which makes for a happy you since they're already doing this to a small degree.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> See with talk like this I'm getting a mindset that you just use your pc casually like gaming, my PC has sat at a thermal equilibrium temperature of 68-82 since it was bought, if you use it then it will naturally utilitize it's cooling system and therefore won't be wasting the time money and effort your putting into cooling your (and running) pc.
> 
> 
> To have a CPU sat at a high thermal point at all times A LOAD needs to be present, some power has to be burnt.
> ...


This is definitely the kind of health scepticism I appreciate, nothing good has ever come out of blind zealots.
You see, your intro;



theoneandonlymrk said:


> See with talk like this I'm getting a mindset that you just use your pc *casually* like gaming,


'Casually' is the keynote here. Of course, an advanced user does NOT default to precision boost 2 & its bigger brother precision boost overdrive.
This is the merit of this thread, I'm sure you aren't having any difficulty hiding that fact from your intellect with much conscientious scrutiny.
It is the default settings of the general community and how these default settings are presented in bios is the point of debate here.
You cannot have that healthy 82°C operability with precision boost 2, or precision boost overdrive - they max out at 61.8°C is the problem.
It wasn't long until I found out manual clocking is the only setting that drops all temperature controls. That overrode the whole original statement - that this could be approximated by default settings if pttl was set at a high threshold without overriding pb2/pbo. This is a work in progress definitely, but I'm just here to make a head way, fortunately.



theoneandonlymrk said:


> That's not right either though, a few have brought to market unconventional approaches to cooling see coolzone freezit for one, I nearly bought one , a HSF with a Tec built in and thermostatic control.


You see tec has a higher thermal transmittance, but you cannot limit yourself to pure copper. Heat transfer coefficient is best served with vapor chambers, comparatively diamond is the best 'solid' conductor 3x better than copper.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Feb 10, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> This is definitely the kind of health scepticism I appreciate, nothing good has ever come out of blind zealots.
> You see, your intro;
> 
> 
> ...


You can't best physics , you might think you can game the situation somewhat but your setting up a hypothetical nonsense in that your just priming a system to run in a particular way without any goal or point other than how it runs.
That's not going to end up being a viable general use pc on one of the other fronts your then forgetting about.
total cost of ownership.
Efficiency.
Ease of use.
Surrounding room air temp.

You should try living in the same room as two mining rigs, a few crunching rigs, a big gaming pc, in summer.

Heat is Always the enemy, but sometimes it's personal.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> You can't best physics , you might think you can game the situation somewhat but your setting up a hypothetical nonsense in that your just priming a system to run in a particular way without any goal or point other than how it runs.
> That's not going to end up being a viable general use pc on one of the other fronts your then forgetting about.
> total cost of ownership.
> Efficiency.
> ...


It is always welcome to see the gears are starting to turn. We are, at last, starting to convince people to speak up about mitigating the progressively incremental heat loads. That is what eventually evokes a lower temperature target down the line of thought. I have always anticipated for better air flow efficiency being contested in debate. The time has come! Let the overclocking diaries begin...


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 10, 2020)

@mtcn77 there is no point for users to run their CPUs hot just to utilize the all of the cooling capacity of their coolers. Users, including me wants to keep their CPU and GPU and every other chip that matters as cool as possible. Its useless to dissipate and transfer high amounts of heat if I cant keep the CPU as cool as possible. I dont want to transfer high amounts of heat just for the bragging rights, by keeping CPU temp high!
There in no point, no benefit in CPU operation, function and longevity...

You want to keep temp gradient high? Try to further cool the IHS and/or the cooler it self . If ambient temp is a ristrictive point, accept it and move on, or pay for sub-ambient/sub-zero cooling solution, and keep your CPU cool and happy...

We are going circles...
Farewell!


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 10, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> @mtcn77 there is no point for users to run their CPUs hot just to utilize the all of the cooling capacity of their coolers. Users, including me wants to keep their CPU and GPU and every other chip that matters as cool as possible. Its useless to dissipate and transfer high amounts of heat if I cant keep the CPU as cool as possible. I dont want to transfer high amounts of heat just for the bragging rights, by keeping CPU temp high!
> There in no point, no benefit in CPU operation, function and longevity...
> 
> You want to keep temp gradient high? Try to further cool the IHS and/or the cooler it self . If ambient temp is a ristrictive point, accept it and move on, or pay for sub-ambient/sub-zero cooling solution, and keep your CPU cool and happy...
> ...



Heat damages parts, end of story.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> You should try living in the same room as two mining rigs, a few crunching rigs, a big gaming pc, in summer



You are only misconstrued in doubting the chip will run hot because we let off cooling too easily; the contrary is true, imo.
A better heatsink will make your room hotter likewise by extracting more effective heat. We are only emulating that, through a temperature gradient higher than what is preset. Heat just follows through.


Zach_01 said:


> Users, including me wants to keep their CPU and GPU and every other chip that matters as cool as possible.


Yes, we _are_ forfeiting temperature transient load up interval voluntarily, however it is with the overriding condition of *reaching the steady state* faster. Best use practices versus the default, it is an argument of essentially what overclocking has come to in the ryzen 7nm generation, whether we like it or not.
I don't think you are damaging parts if you have enough ventilation in the case to let the cpu heatsink idle for a bit longer.


----------



## JackCarver (Feb 10, 2020)

Interesting approach is what CaseKing make, together with der8auer and their King Mod Team. It's a shop in Berlin and they delid Intel or AMD CPUs, select the best and make a new IHS from silver. You get a guarantee that it runs at a given max clock speed, but you have to pay a lot more for this service. But silver has best heat coefficient


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2020)

JackCarver said:


> Interesting approach is what CaseKing make, together with der8auer and their King Mod Tea, It's a shop in Berlin and they delid Intel or AMD CPUs, select the best and make a new IHS from silver. You get a guarantee that it runs at a given max clock speed, but you have to pay a lot more for this service. But silver has best heat coefficient


That isn't anything new... It was done with an all copper IHS too. Funny part is that alone, it doesn't yield much over all copper or the nickel-plated IHS already on there.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

eidairaman1 said:


> Heat damages parts, end of story.


That is a generalization. We are only in it for usability, not misusing parts. We can do much better than stock, both cooling-wise and performance-wise. It is only rational to test it out. You are, after all, pacing at your own leisure. If you want to hit the nail on the head and facts are I'm talking up overclocking to non-overclockers, it suits me.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2020)

Is there a language barrier here? Some of these posts are so difficult to read.


----------



## JackCarver (Feb 10, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> Funny part is that alone, it doesn't yield much over all copper or the nickel-plated IHS already on there.



Yes but you simply get the best here, so if you have the money and are willing to pay, this service is really good and der8auer is one of the best overclockers out there. They also make conductonaut liquid metal on the die which is also better than Intels solder...


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> Is there a language barrier here? Some of these posts are so difficult to read.


Both language and physics training. I cannot break down big subjects other than make up stuff for you guys' inquiry.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> Both language and physics training. I cannot break down big subjects other than make up stuff for you guys' inquiry.


Gotcha, so ESL. It isnt the physics, lol. 



JackCarver said:


> Yes but you simply get the best here, so if you have the money and are willing to pay, this service is really good and der8auer is one of the best overclockers out there. They also make conductonaut liquid metal on the die which is also better than Intels solder...


Again, enjoy that 100 mhz difference if you're lucky! This isnt for the average enthusiast, even...


----------



## infrared (Feb 10, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> I'm talking up overclocking to non-overclockers


No lol, almost all of us in this thread are hardware enthusiasts and very much into overclocking. Because of that we all understand the benefits of running cooler, which is why we are all confused as to why you think higher temps are better..


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

infrared said:


> No lol, almost all of us in this thread are hardware enthusiasts and very much into overclocking. Because of that we all understand the benefits of running cooler, which is why we are all confused as to why you think higher temps are better..


Well, first of all heat transmittance and second of all _7nm_. I really understand it, point taken, that you are a _very_ light-handed person - I don't think this goes against your perspective. _Obviously, you don't do this with a closed aio waterloop._
Waterloops aren't for the general userbase. It sounds like I'm going off topic not reserving myself to argumentation, but I like the exercise.



EarthDog said:


> Again, enjoy that 100 mhz difference if you're lucky! This isnt for the average enthusiast, even...


You might be surprised about the effect of your scepticism on my responses. Nothing fans my flames like a good pinching penny challenge.


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 10, 2020)

@mtcn77 what is your current CPU?


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> You might be surprised about the effect of your scepticism on my responses. Nothing fans my flames like a good pinching penny challenge.


ok...

Here is a custom copper ihs -  https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3238-custom-copper-ihs-tested-on-intel-i7-8700k-cpu-rockit-cool


> Don’t expect great things out of the Rockit Cool IHS, but it does decently. Certainly well enough to be worth buying for someone who already has a thermal objective in mind: Maybe you want to reduce fan speed by 100-300RPM (thereby reducing noise), or maybe you’ve got some numerical OCD about thermal numbers, or you just think it’d be fun to play with computer parts for an hour. These are all good reasons to make the purchase. *Pushing for higher overclocks or exceptionally lower temperatures would not be reasons to buy the IHS; if that’s what you’re after, you’d be better off buying a higher-end cooling system. Any bit helps when it comes to thermals, but other components can help more.*
> 
> We liked the product for its affordability, machining quality, and value as a time-passer. *Again, this isn’t something that’ll get you more frequency or lower voltage (meaningfully)*, but it is something that’s kind of fun to work with.












						Der8auer Replaces i7 8700K Stock IHS With Silver IHS for Caseking Ultra Edition – Gamers Navy
					

A veteran overclocker from Germany known as Roman "Der8auer" Hartung is onto something special with the Intel's latest 8th generation i7 processors.   Der8auer i7 8700K Silver IHS Utra Edition:   Der8auer is a name that comes across to those interested in overclocking scene many times. And just...




					www.pgrepublic.com


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> @mtcn77 what is your current CPU?


Not about the point I'm making and not about yours too, if you are slow to make the 7nm jump.



EarthDog said:


> ok...
> 
> Here is a custom copper ihs - https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3238-custom-copper-ihs-tested-on-intel-i7-8700k-cpu-rockit-cool


It must upset you that you are only referring to my strong suit. I am not sporting an eagerness for better conductors. I'm fancying best practices, so I'm not so easy to be dismissed... I'm crafty.
[Why it seems like you've misses my point on #79]


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> Not about the point I'm making and not about yours too, if you are slow to make the 7nm jump.
> 
> 
> It must upset you that you are only referring to my strong suit. I am not sporting an eagerness for better conductors. I'm fancying best practices, so I'm not to easily dismissed... I'm crafty.
> [Why it seems like you've misses my point on #79]


Crafty... lulz. Too much theory, not enough applied physics is all I see here. Why dont you stop posting and make it happen with your confidence and craftiness? Otherwise, we're just spinning our tires trying to understand w/e TF it is you are trying to really say.

Also, for jack again... silver ihs does little here  - http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/silver-7700k-ihs-prototype-testing.809218/#post-10606102

For the couple/few C thus may make a difference, simply doesnt yield anything real-world. People have tested a copper ihs, silver ihs... and while there are improvements, it isnt worth it for an overwhelming majority of the enthusiast crowd.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> Crafty... lulz. Too much theory, not enough applied physics is all I see here. Why dont you stop posting and make it happen. Otherwise, we're just spinning our tires.
> 
> Also, for jack again... silver ihs does little here  - http://forum.notebookreview.com/threads/silver-7700k-ihs-prototype-testing.809218/#post-10606102
> 
> Silver.


Silver is only 425w/m*k. Vapor chambers are 10000-50000. I'm sure you get the picture.
This isn't to denigrate intel followers, but you are really misinterpreting mTr/mm2 density of these parts.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2020)

What is the difference between a vapor chamber here versus those that have already been in use on gpus???



mtcn77 said:


> Silver is only 425w/m*k. Vapor chambers are 10000-50000. I'm sure you get the picture


Build it or can it is where I'm at...


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 10, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> Not about the point I'm making and not about yours too, if you are slow to make the 7nm jump.


Lets put all this to a good use... enough about the theory...
I would like to see your 7nm CPU working at 95°C and 75°C. To compare values of clock, voltage, wattage and current of the 2 temps I mention, and see what short of benefits will both give...
Up to it?


----------



## JackCarver (Feb 10, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> Again, enjoy that 100 mhz difference if you're lucky! This isnt for the average enthusiast, even...



I wouldn‘t buy this but to come back to the topic here:
Liquid metal on the die along with an silver IHS would be one of the best solutions for a good junction to case heat dissipation. The case to ambient belongs to the user and his or her heatsink


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> Build it or STFU is where I'm at...


I can; however are you sure we on the same page? First post, I make no text walls to keep the paragraphs flowing. One just has to read;


Spoiler: Totally new reddit:






> Intel has frequency problems with their 10nm because of the 2.7x density scaling factor over 14nm. Zen 2's density is below 60 MTr/mm2 and more akin to Intel's 14nm than regular N7. Contrast that with Ice Lake which is more than 50% denser than N7 HPC, and it's pretty impressive that it can hit 4.1 GHz single core turbo. That would translate to around 4.3-4.4 GHz in AMD advertised clock speeds.





[I think this is the same reddit thread]
You notice same old same old if the push comes to shove with N7-10nm.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2020)

JackCarver said:


> I wouldn‘t buy this but to come back to the topic here:
> Liquid metal on the die along with an silver IHS would be one of the best solutions for a good junction to case heat dissipation. The case to ambient belongs to the user and his or her heatsink





mtcn77 said:


> I can; however you sure we on the same page? First post, I make no text walls to keep the paragraphs flowing. One just has to read;
> [I think this is the same reddit thread]
> You notice same old same old if the push comes to shove with N7-10nm.






Good luck, gents. I'm just too slow for this thread I guess..


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Feb 10, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> I can; however are you sure we on the same page? First post, I make no text walls to keep the paragraphs flowing. One just has to read;
> [I think this is the same reddit thread]
> You notice same old same old if the push comes to shove with N7-10nm.


There are many ways to cook an egg, it's how it sits in a belly that matters.

I'm just simplifying the debate here on to save time and brain.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> Lets put all this to a good use... enough about the theory...
> I would like to see your 7nm CPU working at 95°C and 75°C. To compare values of clock, voltage, wattage and current of the 2 temps I mention, and see what short of benefits will both give...
> Up to it?


Well, I have grasped your perspective. It is my contention that you haven't grasped whether I highlight latent heat, just not sensible heat. So you aren't taking me at my word when narrowing it down to a temperature differential. We are on different pages.



theoneandonlymrk said:


> There are many ways to cook an egg, it's how it sits in a belly that matters.
> 
> I'm just simplifying the debate here on to save time and brain.


Totally, which is why you eat it poached.

Okay, I have to make it spin using the Fourier Law of Conduction:
q=k*dT, q=Q/A.
7nm is twice the q, because area(A) is twice smaller. Hence you need to make dT twice higher, or use a higher heat absorbing(-2q) coldplate. It essentially will reach thermal equalibrium, we are negotiating our terms favourably.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Feb 10, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> Well, I have grasped your perspective. It is my contention that you haven't grasped whether I highlight latent heat, just not sensible heat. So you aren't taking me at my word when narrowing it down to a temperature differential. We are on different pages.
> 
> 
> Totally, which is why you eat it poached.
> ...


Try it ,ie crack on , but do report back, see if YMMV because as I told you been here done that, didn't pan out, and could be pointless.
Especially if you're just gaming two hours a night.
But please do crack on.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 10, 2020)

infrared said:


> No lol, almost all of us in this thread are hardware enthusiasts and very much into overclocking. Because of that we all understand the benefits of running cooler, which is why we are all confused as to why you think higher temps are better..



My rig is an example, 55 under gaming, 75 under blender, Air Cooled on a thinner cooler.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 10, 2020)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Try it ,ie crack on , but do report back, see if YMMV because as I told you been here done that, didn't pan out, and could be pointless.
> Especially if you're just gaming two hours a night.
> But please do crack on.


You wouldn't suspect, although I know how horrid a better gpu cooler that surpasses ambient flow restrictions can bring temperatures sky high, but don't quote me on that. I'm wise to the act now. You just don't have to beat a square peg in a round hole - you can produce the same heat load and just expel it more slowly. The temperature will level at a higher threshold. Same heat, lower volume of air, higher exhaust temperature, same case ambients. It is only an orchestration of various parameters using the same airflow.
Notice the tdp limit? We aren't circumventing it any time soon. We are back in square one forever more.









I cannot underestimate CoolerMaster's investment into the development of vapor chamber technology. They are the trend setters in using the latent heat transfer function of working fluids.


----------



## JackCarver (Feb 11, 2020)

This graph is from 2014....is it yet a technique to think about? Would be interesting how the 2020 graph AiO vs Vapour Chamber will be looking. There is also another technique, where the whole chip is set under liquid, when I understand right, it‘s called phase shift cooler.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 11, 2020)

JackCarver said:


> This graph is from 2014....is it yet a technique to think about? Would be interesting how the 2020 graph AiO vs Vapour Chamber will be looking. There is also another technique, where the whole chip is set under liquid, when I understand right, it‘s called phase shift cooler.


I haven't found any good examples. It is a good irony, they are only now on the verge of significance yet nowhere to be found.


----------



## JackCarver (Feb 11, 2020)

Will definitely be interesting what cooling technique will be the best in the near future or will replace the classic techniques like air or water cooling. But for me, most brands out there invent new AiOs, nearly every day you can read about it. Also CoolerMaster has new AiOs in program, one with two pumps as I read. So AiOs seem to be still a big point out there in cooling, especially cpu cooling. Personally I‘m a water cooling fan, mostly because of the look of a custom loop with hard tubes and because you get really good temps, especially for the GPU. In my opinion water cooling a GPU makes much more sense than water cooling a cpu, only look at their power dissipation of about 250-400W, if you use a 2080 or 2080Ti, in benchmarks or games.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 11, 2020)

JackCarver said:


> my opinion water cooling a GPU makes much more sense than water cooling a cpu, only look at their power dissipation of about 250-400W, if you use a 2080 or 2080Ti, in benchmarks or games.


I agree with your point, but for a more detailed reason.

As a side note, those GPUs are 215W and 250W cards. Power limits are typically set around 5-10% with outliers on the edge there. 400W out of these cards wont happen without at least a modded bios for significantly increased power and voltage limits.

As noted somewhere previously, the GPU temps are typically a lot lower with water. To the point where they can run before the card stops dropping boost bins due to temperatures (55C??). The difference between a few C isnt much, but when you able to run full boost due to 25C+ differences... a performance bump is there.


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 11, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> Well, I have grasped your perspective. *It is my contention that you haven't grasped whether I highlight latent heat, just not sensible heat.* So you aren't taking me at my word when narrowing it down to a temperature differential. We are on different pages.


Are you trying to deliberatly confuse us?
What latent heat has to do with running a CPU at 95°C instead of 75 or 60.
Yes vapor chambers, heatpipes, chillers, LN2... all working on the latent heat principal. They absorb large amounts of heat by changing a liquid to vapor. Water cooling is working on sensible heat. *SO?*
Can you tell us what benefit will a CPU see in its actual function and operation by working on 95°C instead of 75°C. You cant! Because there isnt any...

*Dont you understand what are you telling us here?
Its like heating the interior of your refrigerator beyond its nominal levels "just" to maximize the heat absorption and dissipation of its heat pump system. What actual benefit does this have, other than sour food?*


----------



## trickson (Feb 11, 2020)

Intel Because someone has to cook the eggs!


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 11, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> Are you trying to deliberatly confuse us?
> What latent heat has to do with running a CPU at 95°C instead of 75 or 60.
> Yes vapor chambers, heatpipes, chillers, LN2... all working on the latent heat principal. They absorb large amounts of heat by changing a liquid to vapor. Water cooling is working on sensible heat. *SO?*
> Can you tell us what benefit will a CPU see in its actual function and operation working on 95°C instead of 75°C. You cant! Because there isnt any...
> ...



The A6 3650 did not like running at 78C it would auto shutdown, low and behold max is 72C


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 11, 2020)

eidairaman1 said:


> The A6 3650 did not like running at 78C it would auto shutdown, low and behold max is 72C


Yes I understand this and I'm with you... Other(s) suggest to run CPUs as hot as possible for the best heat dissipation(by amount, and latent or sensible) but eventually cant tell us simple things like how is this actually can improve the performance of it.
Sorry @eidairaman1, but are you following this discussion? (God make it one, because its not...)


----------



## JackCarver (Feb 11, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> As a side note, those GPUs are 215W and 250W cards. Power limits are typically set around 5-10% with outliers on the edge there. 400W out of these cards wont happen without at least a modded bios for significantly increased power and voltage limits.


 
Yes I meant the power hungrier cards out there, like the 2080Ti Lightning. But also my card (ASUS 2080 ROG STRIX) consumes up to 280W in Firestrike. The cards with default power limit are less hungry.




EarthDog said:


> The difference between a few C isnt much, but when you able to run full boost due to 25C+ differences... a performance bump is there.



Absolute agree here


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 11, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> Yes I understand this and I'm with you... Other(s) suggest to run CPUs as hot as possible for the best heat dissipation(by amount, and latent or sensible) but eventually cant tell us simple things like how is this actually can improve the performance of it.
> Sorry @eidairaman1, but are you following this discussion? (God make it one, because its not...)



Yes I am and I find running any electronic at max temperature is ridiculous and shortens its life and causes more rma and shortened mtbf. Look at gpus used for mining...

Avionics bays in aircraft use forced cooling even


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 11, 2020)

eidairaman1 said:


> Yes I am and I find running any electronic at max temperature is ridiculous and shortens its life and causes more rma and shortened mtbf. Look at gpus used for mining...
> 
> Avionics bays in aircraft use forced cooling even


Yeah, tell me about it...
I work in a Oil Refinery as a ControlRoom and field operator (Cycling on seven different Duties, 2 CR and 5 Field). The Complex functions under a DCS (Distributed Control System) with a couple of dozens of PC like computers as Input/Output that implies hundreads of microcontrollers placed in racks, server like, in tall cabins, in a large room with an industrial size air conditioner keeping room temp under 18C at all cost.


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 11, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> What latent heat has to do with running a CPU at 95°C instead of 75 or 60.


It is to demonstrate how your cooler can operate at a more efficient profile. You don't run any cpu, just ryzen 3000 cpus as they are the only group included in this topic to demonstrate heatsink transmittance issues.
 Temperature as you know, has thermal equilibrium in its basis and every heat transfer works according to the temperature vector. Ideal conductors would run at equal heat density, a.k.a temperature - with the ihs on contact. That does not mean run it ideally at maximum heat.
Just run it with a supposedly better contact interface and see if it has the required provisions whenever you might need it. It is better to have a constant boost cpu than throttly throttly, no?



Zach_01 said:


> Yeah, tell me about it...
> I work in a Oil Refinery as a ControlRoom and field operator (Cycling on seven different Duties, 2 CR and 5 Field). The Complex functions under a DCS (Distributed Control System) with a couple of dozens of PC like computers as Input/Output that implies hundreads of microcontrollers placed in racks, server like, in tall cabins, in a large room with an industrial size air conditioner keeping room temp under 18C at all cost.


This is not a live demonstration. You do it under supervision in controlled settings. This is to see cooler thermal sufficiency and running the cpu, that would be ryzen 3000 exclusively, being served by the cpu cooler as required by heat pressure to have a linear heat dissipation work efficiency. It is strictly mission critical averse. Only for exploring cooler capability headroom.


----------



## MaDhAtt3R (Feb 11, 2020)

This thread is still open? 

obvious troll is obvious really TPU? @mtcn77 you're talking trash and disguising it with semi-intelligent ramblings, well done to you sir


----------



## XL-R8R (Feb 11, 2020)

Having just read every post for the entire 6 pages (yes, it's unbelievable this debate went on so long), the biggest question I'm left wondering after all this text... is why this thread is even still continuing?


The topic is stupid and the arguments provided are flawed even in logical terms.....




Let it die, folks... let it die.


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 11, 2020)

mtcn77 said:


> It is to demonstrate how your cooler can operate at a more efficient profile. You don't run any cpu, just ryzen 3000 cpus as they are the only group included in this topic to demonstrate heatsink transmittance issues.
> Temperature as you know, has thermal equilibrium in its basis and every heat transfer works according to the temperature vector. Ideal conductors would run at equal heat density, a.k.a temperature - with the ihs on contact. That does not mean run it ideally at maximum heat.
> Just run it with a supposedly better contact interface and see if it has the required provisions whenever you might need it. *It is better to have a constant boost cpu than throttly throttly, no?*


In order for my CPU to have constant high boost I keep it as cool as possible. If I let it get hot from 62C max than it is now to 75C that it was back in August I will loose about 150MHz of all core boost. if I let it even near 90C I will loose another 150MHz. So... I keep it cool to keep it boosty, and not throttly... Do you get it?



XL-R8R said:


> Having just read every post for the entire 6 pages (yes, it's unbelievable this debate went on so long), the biggest question I'm left wondering after all this text... is why this thread is even still continuing?
> 
> 
> The topic is stupid and the arguments provided are flawed even in logical terms.....
> ...


Wait... we are about to hot up our brains at 95C and see if we can dissipate more thoughts in the form of heat. You know, enegry never dies into nothingness or either born out of nothing... only changing form...


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 11, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> If I let it get hot from 62C max than it is now to 75C that it was back in August I will loose about 150MHz of all core boost.


You must have a selective bias when I tried to make up for the software's shortcoming. You don't need 1.3v for base performance and you don't need 1.4v to achieve your boost. Don't hold me responsible for your every contrivance, it is only my compassion offer you are turning down. I cannot be the target of your rising inferno, point it at its source.


----------



## MaDhAtt3R (Feb 11, 2020)

Snake oil salesmen


----------



## mtcn77 (Feb 11, 2020)

There is some proof in saying ryzen 3000 is different than previous generations. The proof is in the pudding;

__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cdslyf/_/ev4x3ie
Have a good look, folks. Past experience won't meet the field.


----------

