# Intel Skylake-X HCC CPU Delidded by Der8auer, also not Soldered



## Raevenlord (Sep 5, 2017)

Overclocking poster-boy Der8auer has seemingly gotten his hands on some early samples of Intel's Skylake-X high core count (HCC)HEDT CPUs. The upcoming 12 to 18-core enthusiast-class CPUs are being launched on the same X299 platform on socket LGA 2066 that Intel has already launched 4 (Kaby Lake-X), 6, 8 and 10-core parts already, and are supposed to bring Intel towards a level playing field - and then some - with competitor AMD's Threadripper CPUs, which boast of up to 16 cores.

From this delidding process with Der8auer's own delidding tool, Delid-Die-Mate-X, seems to result a die that is much larger - as expected - than Intel's 10-core i9-7900X. At the same time, it seems that Intel is still opting, again, for not soldering its enthusiast-targeted CPUs, which would result in better temperatures and, potentially, overclocking potential. The fact that Der8auer managed to delid the i9-7920X and didn't recommend against doing it likely means that there is minimal risk of damaging your CPU while subjecting it to this process. This is something the renowned overclocker did do when he recommended that users shouldn't delid their Ryzen or Threadripper CPUs looking for better temperatures, since the fact that these were soldered would likely result in both catastrophic damage and a much diminished chance of operating temperatures improvement through the application of special purpose thermal compounds. The Facebook post from Der8auer with the delidded 7920X likely serves as an appetizer for an upcoming delid video on YouTube, as has been the overclocker's MO.



 

 



*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## T1beriu (Sep 5, 2017)

Is this a joke? 

We knew Skylake-X it's not soldered for 3 months already. der8auer was just confirming that his deliding tool works for HCC dies as well.

What's with the news recycling happening lately?


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 5, 2017)

Come on Intel, you lazy greedy f**kers.


----------



## Aldain (Sep 5, 2017)

Not apparently... They are not soldered...



RejZoR said:


> Come on Intel, you lazy greedy f**kers.



Get a TR setup


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 5, 2017)

If this continues, I most certainly won't go with Intel next time. I just hope AMD's Ryzen will keep up for when I'll have to upgrade my system (which might not be so soon considering what it is now).


----------



## trparky (Sep 5, 2017)

But if Intel closed the gap between the die and the IHS the fact that it isn't soldered shouldn't make any difference. In the past it wasn't the fact that Intel chips use TIM (and not solder) that was causing the issue, it was that there was a gap between the die and the IHS.

Why? Think about it. Do we have to solder our heatsinks and/or waterblocks to the IHS to get better heat transfer? Of course not! Don't be silly. We apply TIM to these components just like Intel does but the difference between what Intel did and what we do is we clamp the heatsync and/or waterblock down really tight against the IHS. The TIM really isn't there to be the heat transfer medium, it's really only there to fill in the microscopic imperfections in the metal to facilitate better transfer of heat.

Now if Intel were able to manage to close the gap between the underside of the IHS and the die then the heat transfer would be just as efficient as it is between the IHS and our heatsinks and/or waterblocks.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 5, 2017)

Looks like a smaller PCB riding on the back of a bigger PCB. Weird huh?


----------



## Aldain (Sep 5, 2017)

trparky said:


> But if Intel closed the gap between the die and the IHS the fact that it isn't soldered shouldn't make any difference. In the past it wasn't the fact that Intel chips use TIM (and not solder) that was causing the issue, it was that there was a gap between the die and the IHS.
> 
> Why? Think about it. Do we have to solder our heatsinks and/or waterblocks to the IHS to get better heat transfer? Of course not! Don't be silly. We apply TIM to these components just like Intel does but the difference between what Intel did and what we do is we clamp the heatsync and/or waterblock down really tight against the IHS. The TIM really isn't there to be the heat transfer medium, it's really only there to fill in the microscopic imperfections in the metal to facilitate better transfer of heat.
> 
> Now if Intel were able to manage to close the gap between the underside of the IHS and the die then the heat transfer would be just as efficient as it is between the IHS and our heatsinks and/or waterblocks.



Wishful thinking , if they did accomplish that then the 7900x would not have been a furnace tat it is now


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 5, 2017)

RejZoR said:


> If this continues, I most certainly won't go with Intel next time. I just hope AMD's Ryzen will keep up for when I'll have to upgrade my system (which might not be so soon considering what it is now).




TR 1950X would look great with your 1080Ti


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 5, 2017)

Aldain said:


> Wishful thinking , if they did accomplish that then the 7900x would not have been a furnace tat it is now


Mine's not a furnace at all. And guess what, my VRMs don't overheat, either! It's so shocking that I... I have to laugh at those that complain. Like, I'm sorry, but... your comment is great comedy to me.

My personal 7900X CPU loads @ 4.5 GHz on all cores @ 1.235V, at... 70-80c? Like, it's 10 cores, and a huge whack of cache, pulling well close to 300W... 275, actually. All managed quite well by a 280mm rad.


trparky said:


> But if Intel closed the gap between the die and the IHS the fact that it isn't soldered shouldn't make any difference. In the past it wasn't the fact that Intel chips use TIM (and not solder) that was causing the issue, it was that there was a gap between the die and the IHS.



Yeah, I am not sure that tidbit made the news rounds, so many did not see those results, and also, I have a feeling not many people that complain about X299 CPUs being hot actually have one, since you often end up pushing 300W through that TIM in order to be able to make it overheat. If the TIM was so bad, it would not be able to handle that 300W, but with an adequate AIO, it does, and quite well, I might add.


----------



## Aldain (Sep 5, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> Mine's not a furnace at all. And guess what, my VRMs don't overheat, either! It's so shocking that I... I have to laugh at those that complain. Like, I'm sorry, but... your comment is great comedy to me.
> 
> My personal 7900X CPU loads @ 4.5 GHz on all cores @ 1.235V, at... 70-80c? Like, it's 10 cores, and a huge whack of cache, pulling well close to 300W... 275, actually. All managed quite well by a 280mm rad.
> 
> ...



LOL

The only person I ever saw that actually defends the 7900x... Some people are just innately comical.. and not in a good way


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 5, 2017)

xkm1948 said:


> TR 1950X would look great with your 1080Ti



The OC'ed 5820K works just fine.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 5, 2017)

Aldain said:


> LOL
> 
> The only person I ever saw that actually defends the 7900x... Some people are just innately comical.. and not in a good way


I'm using one daily, not many others are, so yeah, I'm the odd man out. I even went and bought one, even after Intel sent me every CPU for the platform in ES form... because I got to see the real results for myself, and I don't buy into hype given by extreme OC guys.

Like for der8auer's uses, benching sub-zero, yeah, maybe not the most optimal, but that's not how I use my chips, so I could care less about that aspect of it. It's about reading the information within the proper context.


----------



## repman244 (Sep 5, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> Mine's not a furnace at all. And guess what, my VRMs don't overheat, either! It's so shocking that I... I have to laugh at those that complain. Like, I'm sorry, but... your comment is great comedy to me.
> 
> My personal 7900X CPU loads @ 4.5 GHz on all cores @ 1.235V, at... 70-80c? Like, it's 10 cores, and a huge whack of cache, pulling well close to 300W... 275, actually. All managed quite well by a 280mm rad.
> 
> ...



But maybe it would run even cooler if it was soldered? Just guessing here of course.


----------



## VSG (Sep 5, 2017)

T1beriu said:


> Is this a joke?
> 
> We knew Skylake-X it's not soldered for 3 months already. der8auer was just confirming that his deliding tool works for HCC dies as well.
> 
> What's with the news recycling happening lately?



This is for the high core count SKUs, we knew about the 4-10 core count SKUs before. I updated the title and body to reflect this.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 5, 2017)

repman244 said:


> But maybe it would run even cooler if it was soldered? Just guessing here of course.


Hard to say when you're pushing so much power through it. Like, sure, probably so, but not enough for it to matter for 24/7 use under normal circumstances. I mean, most boards can't even push 400W, because of single 8-pin, and sure, maybe you can push that much power through these chips after de-lid, but I don't exactly think pushing approximately 3x the default power consumption is that good of an idea... for 24/7 use. Benching, yeppers, no problem.


See, I see Intel CPUs with paste TIM and high overhead and think "wow, they made good chips", and then I see AMD's soldered chips and think "hey, they NEED that solder, because these chips have no overhead", and that's good enough for me.


----------



## Cool Vibrations (Sep 5, 2017)

repman244 said:


> But maybe it would run even cooler if it was soldered? Just guessing here of course.



Don't worry it's "not a furnace" so it's okay...

80c lmao what a joke


----------



## Tomgang (Sep 5, 2017)

So intel is on the way with there own ripper cpu and with ripper i mean walletripper 
And it isent even soldered to those prices.

Oh well dosent matter to me, i am staying on my trusty x58 pc. So amd as well as intel can suck it 

I al ready got all i need.


----------



## Vya Domus (Sep 5, 2017)

I cannot understand why some people insist on defending Intel's choice to use TIM , a choice that does no good no matter how you spin it around.

Anyway I am really curious to see how something like a 7980XE would be able to maintain clocks considering it is a massive die and it still uses TIM.


----------



## repman244 (Sep 5, 2017)

Cool Vibrations said:


> Don't worry it's "not a furnace" so it's okay...
> 
> 80c lmao what a joke



I don't own any of the new chips myself but I can tell you this: Temperature != heat.


----------



## Vya Domus (Sep 5, 2017)

repman244 said:


> Temperature != heat.



True , however taking into consideration how massive these dies are it doesn't take a genius to figure out that these things dissipate as much heat as a high end GPU and that 80c temperature figure does give some insight to that.


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 5, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> Mine's not a furnace at all. And guess what, my VRMs don't overheat, either! It's so shocking that I... I have to laugh at those that complain. Like, I'm sorry, but... your comment is great comedy to me.
> 
> My personal 7900X CPU loads @ 4.5 GHz on all cores @ 1.235V, at... 70-80c? Like, it's 10 cores, and a huge whack of cache, pulling well close to 300W... 275, actually. All managed quite well by a 280mm rad.
> 
> ...



So I agree with that... buuut there is like a 20C drop when you replace the tim with liquid metal, so there is something to be said for the solder.

Also the CPUs do eventually throttle at stock under avx load... or at least mine does.

Even with a -3 offset within a few minutes of priming the clock starts to dip.  Mine is sitting on a AIO at 1.16v @ 4.6 Ghz and while it's fine, i could definitely push higher with a delid.


----------



## Basard (Sep 5, 2017)

What is this blasphemy?!?  It looks glued together!!


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 5, 2017)

Basard said:


> What is this blasphemy?!?  It looks glued together!!



"uh sir? so you know those Skylake X's that we ordered from the fab... did we want those on 1151 or 2066?"

"2066... what kind of an idiot question is that... why would you even ask me that?"

"uhmmm... so we just got the shipment in, and uh, we might have a problem..."

"oh my god... those clowns... quick get the converter PCBs and just glue it on there."


----------



## cdawall (Sep 5, 2017)

RejZoR said:


> If this continues, I most certainly won't go with Intel next time. I just hope AMD's Ryzen will keep up for when I'll have to upgrade my system (which might not be so soon considering what it is now).



Oh good god are we about to start the vega nonsense all over again?


----------



## NicklasAPJ (Sep 5, 2017)

well is fine.

even the 7980 XE can do 4,5Ghz on water.

cant wait to buy it


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 5, 2017)

phanbuey said:


> So I agree with that... buuut there is like a 20C drop when you replace the tim with liquid metal, so there is something to be said for the solder.
> 
> Also the CPUs do eventually throttle at stock under avx load... or at least mine does.
> 
> Even with a -3 offset within a few minutes of priming the clock starts to dip.  Mine is sitting on a AIO at 1.16v @ 4.6 Ghz and while it's fine, i could definitely push higher with a delid.


Right, but as mentioned above, it has been shown that it's not really the TIM that gives those better temps.. it's the removal of the silicone that holds the IHS on, thereby making the IHS that much closer to the chip, that matters.

I require AVX at the same speed for what I use my PC for at times, so I have no negative offset and a relatively high voltage and low speed. I would guess based on your given settings that your chip is only pulling 185W-225W. How much is the offset from "tJ" core readings to "CPU" readings? Plus or minus? My "CPU" reads about 5c higher than the highest core... if yours is @ like 8c or something, that throttle you are seeing might just be PROGRAMMED in, and not really due to ACTUAL temps. Having a clamp-meter giving power use over the 8-pin is really eye-opening, personally. Reading full system power consumption from the wall isn't specific enough.


----------



## nemesis.ie (Sep 5, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> Like for der8auer's uses, benching sub-zero, yeah, maybe not the most optimal, but that's not how I use my chips, *so I could care less* about that aspect of it.



You mean you *couldn't* care less, right?


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 5, 2017)

nemesis.ie said:


> You mean you *couldn't* care less, right?



In American english, it is often used interchangeably.

Dumb I know.


----------



## nemesis.ie (Sep 5, 2017)

A bit like "anyways" instead of anyway, "prolly" instead of probably, "lay" down instead of lie down and likely a load of other stuff? Oh well.


----------



## FR@NK (Sep 6, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> I have no negative offset



Your chip is stable at 4.5 running AVX512 prime95 with no offset?

I plan on getting a 7920x once asus releases their apex board but I fear it will be slower then my current 6900k@4.5GHz.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 6, 2017)

FR@NK said:


> Your chip is stable at 4.5 running AVX512 prime95 with no offset?
> 
> I plan on getting a 7920x once asus releases their apex board but I fear it will be slower then my current 6900k@4.5GHz.


I find that my 6950X is faster, and it seems to have to do with the cache change and memory latency.  Seems. I need to do way more testing still on that one.

And yeah, that's how I ended up at this clock and voltage; I can actually run 4.6 GHz @ 1.2V perfectly fine but AVX, man, is it hard on these chips. Some boards offer offset for the TYPE of AVX, too, which is nice, so that might be something that interests you; not sure.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 6, 2017)

trparky said:


> But if Intel closed the gap between the die and the IHS the fact that it isn't soldered shouldn't make any difference. In the past it wasn't the fact that Intel chips use TIM (and not solder) that was causing the issue, it was that there was a gap between the die and the IHS.
> 
> Why? Think about it. Do we have to solder our heatsinks and/or waterblocks to the IHS to get better heat transfer? Of course not! Don't be silly. We apply TIM to these components just like Intel does but the difference between what Intel did and what we do is we clamp the heatsync and/or waterblock down really tight against the IHS. The TIM really isn't there to be the heat transfer medium, it's really only there to fill in the microscopic imperfections in the metal to facilitate better transfer of heat.
> 
> Now if Intel were able to manage to close the gap between the underside of the IHS and the die then the heat transfer would be just as efficient as it is between the IHS and our heatsinks and/or waterblocks.



its because of the small surface area.

Yes, the gap is definitely important - but anything reducing the heat transfer on such a small area drastically affects the maximum heat transfer.

This is a non issue for normal use of the chips, but these extreme CPU's (K chips, HEDT) really should cater to the enthusiasts... since that is their target market after all.


----------



## Kissamies (Sep 6, 2017)

xkm1948 said:


> Looks like a smaller PCB riding on the back of a bigger PCB. Weird huh?


Just like the socket 423 P4 Willamette CPUs back in the day


----------



## Hood (Sep 6, 2017)

trparky said:


> But if Intel closed the gap between the die and the IHS the fact that it isn't soldered shouldn't make any difference. In the past it wasn't the fact that Intel chips use TIM (and not solder) that was causing the issue, it was that there was a gap between the die and the IHS.
> 
> Why? Think about it. Do we have to solder our heatsinks and/or waterblocks to the IHS to get better heat transfer? Of course not! Don't be silly. We apply TIM to these components just like Intel does but the difference between what Intel did and what we do is we clamp the heatsync and/or waterblock down really tight against the IHS. The TIM really isn't there to be the heat transfer medium, it's really only there to fill in the microscopic imperfections in the metal to facilitate better transfer of heat.
> 
> Now if Intel were able to manage to close the gap between the underside of the IHS and the die then the heat transfer would be just as efficient as it is between the IHS and our heatsinks and/or waterblocks.


The left over Intel silicon glue looks very thick, cleaning it off and relidding using a tiny amount of glue and a good relid press should get things much closer together, and drop temps dramatically.


----------



## xkm1948 (Sep 6, 2017)

cdawall said:


> Oh good god are we about to start the vega nonsense all over again?



Haha, it will involve @RejZoR constantly prasing on RyZen2 and ends up getting a i9 8900K again. All talk of supporting AMD with no action from the wallet.


Back to topic. I assume liquid metal plus deliding service might be super popular. We might even see some modded 7980XE on flea bay with liquid metal resealed in.


----------



## phanbuey (Sep 6, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> I find that my 6950X is faster, and it seems to have to do with the cache change and memory latency.  Seems. I need to do way more testing still on that one.
> 
> And yeah, that's how I ended up at this clock and voltage; I can actually run 4.6 GHz @ 1.2V perfectly fine but AVX, man, is it hard on these chips. Some boards offer offset for the TYPE of AVX, too, which is nice, so that might be something that interests you; not sure.



I have noticed that OCing the mesh to the max makes quite a difference.


----------



## SARVAMANGALAM (Sep 6, 2017)

i dont now.. levave me cold booth(ryzaripper and 7980XEcognac))  
becouse _: Intel Xeon E5 2699 V4 ES QHUP 2.1Ghz 24 Core 55MB 145W LGA2011-3 CPU Processor
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-...e=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649
48 cores for 1200usd on 2200mhz(write2,1but is always bit more)  this ES xeon is it booth "cpu king" rit-reaper and it work on some cheap x99 asrock with ecc ddr4 memo 

i have ES xeons witch work 5+ years 24/7/365 100%load or newer x5xeons on avx prime finders or other apps and i7 920 witch work now 7 years on same load..lol soo dont tell me some shh about rma..
i will wait to spring 2018 for more cpus from booth cpu producers .. 18 core will proably king but more expensive as always from intel.  epyc will much more expensive,also mobo for epyc. so epyc its pic-out,
mobos for thripper X399 are expensive.. 250usd is enought.. why people need that 600usd asus primeros ?..show me why )) you get same preformance on cheaper

yes intel is one generation behind now and + kicked with glueing" . but amd must work hard becouse they cannot glue more..we dont need cpus like two men hand size )))) next time.. intel is on small process now, just look at this small 24 core, if intel start glueing   amd have not chance.. but intll go bit other way .. also bigger cores and more sockets on mobos  
more on serverhome..


----------



## Nephilim666 (Sep 6, 2017)

SARVAMANGALAM said:


> <snip>


Your post may have given me my first migraine. Are you using a language translator that ignores punctuation?


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 6, 2017)

It's exactly that situation where every little counts the most.


xkm1948 said:


> Haha, it will involve @RejZoR constantly prasing on RyZen2 and ends up getting a i9 8900K again. All talk of supporting AMD with no action from the wallet.
> 
> 
> Back to topic. I assume liquid metal plus deliding service might be super popular. We might even see some modded 7980XE on flea bay with liquid metal resealed in.



Ok smartass, how was I suppose to buy Ryzen when 5820K/6800K was a thing? But I guess only you have the power to buy non existent products. Jesus, some of you are really thick.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 6, 2017)

Mussels said:


> This is a non issue for normal use of the chips, but these extreme CPU's (K chips, HEDT) really should cater to the enthusiasts... since that is their target market after all.



Personally, I think that this idea could not be further from the truth. Most "enthusiasts", here on TPU even, can't afford HEDT for the most part. I mean, it's not like we have all sorts of users here with these chips, or X99, or X79, or even 1366. And I mean at launch. Like, with i7-920, at least, 1366 had an affordable chip for "enthusiasts", and then we clocked the crap out of them. But the market today is nothing like it was back then.

Like are you trying to imply that these HEDT CPUs are ONLY for enthusiasts? Then why are they priced at levels that most cannot afford?

I feel what you said is like saying that only enthusiasts buy high-end anything. I think, that those that have the money to afford such luxury are often NOT enthusiasts, purely by nature of who and what they are. Intel knows this, so what might seem to you as a snub to enthusiasts is Intel actually meeting the needs of the real people that buy such products, who, to me, clearly aren't enthusiasts.

What I see from most is "I AM ENTHUSIAST!!! I NO LIKE DIS, YOU SUCK, MAKE ME HAPPY!!!" and to me, that's fairly arrogant, because it ignores the rest of the world, who, actually, in this market, are the majority. NOT enthusiasts.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 6, 2017)

if you're going HEDT, you're not throwing a stock cooler on it. Cooling matters more there.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 6, 2017)

Mussels said:


> if you're going HEDT, you're not throwing a stock cooler on it. Cooling matters more there.


Absolutely, but at what point does the TIM actually impact these chips? How they are sold, and run at stock, or at OC only?


The problem with leaving a trail of crumbs is that the birds get fat and lazy, and then they expect more.




phanbuey said:


> I have noticed that OCing the mesh to the max makes quite a difference.



even going from 2400 MHz to 2700 MHz can have a significant impact on overall latency. But I found with my CPUs that there can be quite diminishing returns as you clock it up. You really need to see the change in power consumption over 8-pin from stock to manual settings that are exactly the same.


----------



## Tsukiyomi91 (Sep 6, 2017)

to those who have either TR 1950X or i9-7900X, I respect you guys for picking a side & settled with it. Folks who didn't bought any of those & spouting claims etc are plain jelly while not looking at the bigger picture. Once u settled at any sides, stay there please. Moving from one camp to another makes you no different than a vagrant or those nomadic folks who keep moving every few months to find "greener pastures" to "settle in".


----------



## Tsukiyomi91 (Sep 6, 2017)

Mussels said:


> if you're going HEDT, you're not throwing a stock cooler on it. Cooling matters more there.


There's your answer everyone. If you don't have the money to invest in a good cooling setup for your godly-level silicon, don't even think of OCing on air & expect it to hit the magical number you're expecting it to hit with an inferior cooling system.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 6, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> Absolutely, but at what point does the TIM actually impact these chips? How they are sold, and run at stock, or at OC only?
> 
> 
> The problem with leaving a trail of crumbs is that the birds get fat and lazy, and then they expect more.
> ...



if you're selling a ferrari, you dont sell it with $2 windscreen wipers and tires from K-mart (does american K mart do that? do they even exist? Walmart? whatever)


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 6, 2017)

Mussels said:


> if you're selling a ferrari, you dont sell it with $2 windscreen wipers and tires from K-mart (does american K mart do that? do they even exist? Walmart? whatever)


You're right, and that's why these chips don't come with a cooler.


Sadly though, you'll find many of those cars that are priced that high, do have many such "inferior" parts. Especially in the interior. Once again car analogy fails to meet the needs for the PC market.

BTW, you might not be able to buy pilot sport cup 2 tires at kmart, but those that have money... got it by not spending it on silly things like that in the first place. Most people that buy those cars don't buy them to drive them these days; they are purely for investment. In other words, you buy them to sell them later, at a higher price. You can't do that with PCs... only on launches when supply is limited... but then it gets unlimited. Super and Hyper cars never get "unlimited" in numbers, which is why such analogies fail.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 6, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> See, I see Intel CPUs with paste TIM and high overhead and think "wow, they made good chips", and then I see AMD's soldered chips and think "hey, they NEED that solder, because these chips have no overhead", and that's good enough for me.



As much as I disagree that good chips should be fed paste as a TIM material, I get what you are saying here.  It's sad but true:  AMD really needed the solder.  The Ryzen zeppelins are pretty thermally sensitive.



> Once again car analogy fails to meet the needs for the PC market.



I feel the sudden need to kick you into a nameless pit screaming "This is TPU!" to reply to this.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 6, 2017)

R-T-B said:


> I feel the sudden need to kick you into a nameless pit screaming "This is TPU!" to reply to this.


Meh. The proper approach to a car analogy for HEDT is to call them pick-ups, not Ferraris. Like, do you know what a dualie diesel costs? Anywhere from 3x to about 4-5 times the cost of a "normal" car. Normal mainstream CPUs cost $400 or so, right, HEDT costs what? 1200? 1400?

Do you see where I am going? That pick-up, does it come with steal wheels, or aluminum? Did you have to pay extra to get a color other than white, black or grey?


There are no Ferraris in the PC world.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 6, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> Meh. The proper approach to a car analogy for HEDT is to call them pick-ups, not Ferraris. Like, do you know what a dualie diesel costs? Anywhere from 3x to about 4-5 times the cost of a "normal" car. Normal mainstream CPUs cost $400 or so, right, HEDT costs what? 1200? 1400?
> 
> Do you see where I am going? That pick-up, does it come with steal wheels, or aluminum? Did you have to pay extra to get a color other than white, black or grey?
> 
> ...



I actaully agree the car analogies are weak, but they are part of our blood here now.


----------



## Valantar (Sep 6, 2017)

Cool Vibrations said:


> Don't worry it's "not a furnace" so it's okay...
> 
> 80c lmao what a joke


80C for a CPU under load is no problem whatsoever. 90-95, we'd be talking, but generally CPUs are perfectly happy at temps like that. We've become spoiled by the efficient, small CPUs of late. A decade ago, keeping an OC'd CPU below 90 degrees was impressive. Keeping a 300+W monster at 80 still is.


----------



## SIGSEGV (Sep 6, 2017)

Meh, don't wanna burn hundreds of dollar just for 'TIM' and do your own risk because you're ENTHUSIAST BS and you should delid words ffs !


----------



## Mussels (Sep 6, 2017)

lets put it another way

demand is there, so why the F arent they offering a higher priced model that includes it yet


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 6, 2017)

Because applying some toothpaste and calling it a day while asking a premium price is still easier. And idiots still just blindly rush for it coz it's ze INTEL. Among many reasons, going with HEDT was soldered IHS. Having two layers of TIM before heat even reaches a cooler is really not my cup of tea. Especially not on 6+ core CPU's which are a heat factory.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

Aldain said:


> LOL
> 
> The only person I ever saw that actually defends the 7900x... Some people are just innately comical.. and not in a good way


Mine is fine as well. 

Lets not forget AMD cant even get past its own boost.... with solder. Could you imagine intel with?


----------



## Kissamies (Sep 6, 2017)

I can't even remember how many Intel has shown us the middle finger this year.. let's see..

1. Those stupid 7600K/7700K remakes on LGA2066
2. No solder on those LCC 2066 SKL-X processors
3. "microtransactions" on X299
4. Coffee Lakes not compatible with 100/200 series motherboards
5. SKL-X HCC's also not soldered

Five "fuck you consumers" so far in 2017, I'm impressed and not in a good way.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

Dat spilled milk, the crying...


----------



## Kissamies (Sep 6, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> Dat spilled milk, the crying...


Nah, I just got 7600K today and I'm happy with this. Also easy to delid.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

Complains about intel shoving it up our rears, then bends over? How can you have that much conviction on the subject and still buy one?


----------



## ssdpro (Sep 6, 2017)

RejZoR said:


> Because applying some toothpaste and calling it a day while asking a premium price is still easier. And idiots still just blindly rush for it coz it's ze INTEL. Among many reasons, going with HEDT was soldered IHS. Having two layers of TIM before heat even reaches a cooler is really not my cup of tea. Especially not on 6+ core CPU's which are a heat factory.


I read this 3 page comment and have concluded this user is really annoying.  There is no reason to refer to everyone that buys product "A" as an idiot.  Do you have proof Intel applies "Toothpaste"?  After application of this "toothpaste" did the factory "call it a day"?  And what is "coz it's ze"?  Is that some german reference?  Do you have any data supporting purchase of a HEDT platform was based on solder as a primary reason for purchase?  That all just sounds like kid stuff.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 6, 2017)

ssdpro said:


> I read this 3 page comment and have concluded this user is really annoying.  There is no reason to refer to everyone that buys product "A" as an idiot.  Do you have proof Intel applies "Toothpaste"?  After application of this "toothpaste" did the factory "call it a day"?  And what is "coz it's ze"?  Is that some german reference?  Do you have any data supporting purchase of a HEDT platform was based on solder as a primary reason for purchase?  That all just sounds like kid stuff.



And you just sound like someone who has nothing of value to say other than dragging someone elses comment around. Because you had nothing of value to say in the first place. Also, context and synonyms are entirely foreign concepts to you...


----------



## Kissamies (Sep 6, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> Complains about intel shoving it up our rears, then bends over? How can you have that much conviction on the subject and still buy one?


Because I don't want to change platform? And like I said, I'm going to delid this right when I get a tool for rent from someone, so the TIM on this isn't a problem.

I understand that my 250eur CPU has crappy TIM under the IHS, but a 2000eur enthusiast HEDT CPU?


----------



## rtwjunkie (Sep 6, 2017)

Aldain said:


> LOL
> 
> The only person I ever saw that actually defends the 7900x... Some people are just innately comical.. and not in a good way


That's one of our premier reviewers. He tests dozens of CPU's and motherboards, and so is extremely qualified to speak on this subject.  

Your background is?


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

9700 Pro said:


> Because I don't want to change platform? And like I said, I'm going to delid this right when I get a tool for rent from someone, so the TIM on this isn't a problem.
> 
> I understand that my 250eur CPU has crappy TIM under the IHS, but a 2000eur enthusiast HEDT CPU?


i dont get the issue... works fine at stock and with an overclock. I mean apologies for not being able to overclock as far as you may want, but, its better than amds offering as fas as overclocking goes....with solder.


----------



## Vya Domus (Sep 6, 2017)

9700 Pro said:


> I can't even remember how many Intel has shown us the middle finger this year.. let's see..
> 
> 1. Those stupid 7600K/7700K remakes on LGA2066
> 2. No solder on those LCC 2066 SKL-X processors
> ...



Actually none of those are that bad , I mean it's their choice to do whatever dumb thing they want.

What is however mind boggling is how some people defend these dumb choices and even go as far as to call them "features".


----------



## vega22 (Sep 6, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> I'm using one daily, not many others are, so yeah, I'm the odd man out. I even went and bought one, even after Intel sent me every CPU for the platform in ES form... because I got to see the real results for myself, and I don't buy into hype given by extreme OC guys.
> 
> Like for der8auer's uses, benching sub-zero, yeah, maybe not the most optimal, but that's not how I use my chips, so I could care less about that aspect of it. It's about reading the information within the proper context.



it matters less for extreme clockers, in some cases it can help fight cold bug issues.

it matters most to the normal overclocker, running ambient cooling, that has limited cooling ability and require the most optimum heat transfer.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> Actually none of those are that bad , I mean it's their choice to do whatever dumb thing they want.
> 
> What is however mind boggling is how some people defend these dumb choices and even go as far as to call them "features".


who did that?


----------



## WaroDaBeast (Sep 6, 2017)

Still not using TIM? Who would've thought? (I'm being sarcastic.)



nemesis.ie said:


> A bit like "anyways" instead of anyway, "prolly" instead of probably, "lay" down instead of lie down and likely a load of other stuff? Oh well.



"Anyways" and "prolly" are just informal forms of "anyway" and "probably." On the other hand, "lie down" and "couldn't care less" respectively differ from "lay down" and "could care less" on a semantic level.

tl;dr: The first two words are just lazy pronunciations, while the two last ones mean something entirely different.


----------



## Vya Domus (Sep 6, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> who did that?



Not gonna name anyone , but someone on here insisted numerous time ( in other threads ) that the usage of TIM actually makes things "safer" and allows for "better QC and testing" because that's what Intel said.


----------



## vega22 (Sep 6, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> Not gonna name anyone , but someone on here insisted numerous time ( in other threads ) that the usage of TIM actually makes things "safer" and allows for "better QC and testing" because that's what Intel said.



i thought they claimed it was to reduce failures and it made sure that the ihs stayed flat?


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

Oh, dave... lol. Well, i wouldnt call it a feature per say, but considering the big picture, it certainly isnt a problem for 99% of people. 

Again, a 1.2ghz overclock (3.3 to 4.5ghz) vs 400 mhz (3.6 to 4.0ghz)...tim vs solder. I can reach 4.5 ghz on my purchased retail as well as es cpus too. That is with an h115i. With my custom loop, i can push that to 4.7 or so. Note those are fairly average cpus voltage wise.


----------



## Vayra86 (Sep 6, 2017)

Mussels said:


> lets put it another way
> 
> demand is there, so why the F arent they offering a higher priced model that includes it yet



Because 90% of the demand consists of screaming 18 year olds who never have the budget to back their demands up with a purchase. The remaining % actually just want a product that lasts. Then there is a small percent of Youtubers who need a soundbite, so they support the yelling 90% because those are the biggest target market for them.

Lets face it, Intel's already given a very sound explanation for their use of TIM, and it is by NO MEANS a simple process, if you consider this a cost advantage...well... let's say that is highly doubtful. Above all, nobody has backed up that rumor with actual numbers.

Skipping the top performing CPUs 'because no solder'... that's just silly

Note: der8auer is producing a very nice soundbite effect here on TPU right now with this article. Good money for him yo.



R-T-B said:


> I feel the sudden need to kick you into a nameless pit screaming "This is TPU!" to reply to this.



Look to the left. Did that just for you! Mad Paint Skillz


----------



## Solaris17 (Sep 6, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> Mine's not a furnace at all. And guess what, my VRMs don't overheat, either!



This. My board doesn't overheat. I dont mind him, but I think people seriously over stated there needs. You mean to tell me the professional overclocker that puts his motherboard on a cardboard box and breaks world records said his VRM design was bad because it got too hot doing what HE does?

Shocking.

Meanwhile my board in a ventilated case NOT pushing 2v to my CPU seems to be doing just fine.


----------



## Vya Domus (Sep 6, 2017)

And that "sound explanation" Intel gave it is most likely total BS.

Let's put some things in perspective. Vega dissipates up to 300W , what if they used an IHS with TIM ? Dumbest thing ever right ? Well , something like a 7900X gets very close to that figure as well yet they chose to cripple proper heat transfer by using TIM.

Nvidia ditched the IHS altogether on their GPUs some years ago , AMD never used it as far as I know to begin with.  And there's a very good reason they did that , this is simply about having proper heat transfer in a chip that's a power hog. Intel chose to do this for obvious reasons : cost , ease of assembly ( Yeah they make billions but what makes you think they still wouldn't aim for maximum profit and cut corner where they can ? )and to limit their chips artificially , all other explanations are total nonsense and I am surprised so many people bite onto them.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

Frankly, i dont care what intel says... look at our results... look at them compared to Ryzen with solder. Everyone is hung up in the rules, but missed the results of the race.


----------



## Vya Domus (Sep 6, 2017)

Except that has nothing to do with what I said.

As I explained this is about making a chip that can dissipate heat efficiently , and in that regard using an IHS with TIM is simply *not optimal*. Never was , never will be.


----------



## Vayra86 (Sep 6, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> And that "sound explanation" Intel gave it is most likely total BS.
> 
> Let's put some things in perspective. Vega dissipates up to 300W , what if they used an IHS with TIM ? Dumbest thing ever right ? Well , something like a 7900X gets very close to that figure as well yet they chose to cripple proper heat transfer by using TIM.



You've already been enlightened on that perspective - cadaveca's CPU with TIM pulls a similar number and tops out at 80 C. What temps does VEGA report now? And if I recall, Nvidia's 200-215 W OCd 1080's with a very solid shroud on them, still top out at 83 C and would go higher if the BIOS didn't stop them. So much for that IHS then...

And Ryzen, how cool does that run with a couple hundred mhz OC? (if you call it one)

All I see is angry feet stomping without substance. Put similar TDP soldered and TIM CPUs side by side and amaze yourself, then come back to continue the complaint. Or dont. Comparing a delid + high quality paste/TIM replacements to a factory stock product is not being realistic, but yet, that is somehow the metric used for this discussion. Its weird to say the least. The only reason we do this, is because you simply CANT delid a Ryzen to see what headroom you can create on that chip in the first place. Think on that for abit.

To circle back to 'optimal'... how is a delid with replacement tim and voiding your warranty anywhere close to optimal? How is not being able to do this on a Ryzen die optimal?


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> Except that has nothing to do with what I said.
> 
> As I explained this is about making a chip that can dissipate heat efficiently , and in that regard using an IHS with TIM is simply *not optimal*. Never was , never will be.


That may be true, but, the results speak volumes louder than it being 'not optimal'.

I mean, yeah, intel would be smart to put solder on it for that 1% who gives a hoot about overclocking every last Mhz out of the CPU. Again, no solder 1.2 GHz overclock. Solder 400 Mhz. Is the TIM _really_ the concern here??????? Really? Why arent we razing AMD's head for having literally ZERO overclocking headroom past boost/XFR.......... was it mentioned before they use solder? What good for the goose isn't good for the gander? That isn't how the saying goes.


----------



## Vya Domus (Sep 6, 2017)

Vayra86 said:


> You've already been enlightened on that perspective - cadaveca's CPU with TIM pulls a similar number and tops out at 80 C. What temps does VEGA report now? And if I recall, Nvidia's 200-215 W OCd 1080's with a very solid shroud on them, still top out at 83 C and would go higher if the BIOS didn't stop them. So much for that IHS then...
> 
> And Ryzen, how cool does that run with a couple hundred mhz OC? (if you call it one)
> 
> ...



This has nothing to do with what temperature figure something reports that it is running at. I am talking about heat that's being dissipated efficiently or not , that's the main issue in this case , temperature is the consequence of how quickly or slow that phenomena takes place. Come on , I know you can tell the difference. Whether it's Vega , Intel's HEDT CPUs , it's all the same , that was my point. Even if you want to cool a block of metal , doing it with a soldered heatsink will always be better.

Having two layers of TIM is not optimal for heat transfer , nothing beats direct contact through solder. This is a basic idea , no need for elaborate explanations.



EarthDog said:


> That may be true, but, the results speak volumes louder than it being 'not optimal'.



But what results , does a delided 7900X run hotter ? Is the TIM better ? Did I miss anything ?

I gonna put this into the most simply way imaginable , if you have the choice between 2 CPUs , one solderd and one that is using TIM , which one will you take ?


----------



## Vayra86 (Sep 6, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> I gonna put this into the most simply way imaginable , if you have the choice between 2 CPUs , one solderd and one that is using TIM , which one will you take ?



The one that's fastest, as evident by Intel's market share.

Now let's grab some numbers to make this discussion a bit more concrete

http://www.overclockers.com/forums/...yzen-7-overclocking-Voltage-to-Temp-statistic

Ryzen 1700	4.0Ghz	1.45	70	Asus pro prime	Dave
Ryzen 1700	3.7Ghz	1.35	85	B350 gaming 3	Spawn
Ryzen 1700	3.8Ghz	1.375 in BIOS	63.5	ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero	MNMadman
Ryzen 1700	4.0Ghz	1.375	72	asus x370 prime	sakul
Ryzen 1700	3.8Ghz	1.287	72	biostar x370 gt7	gg
Ryzen 1700X	3.9Ghz	1.37	83	MSI X370 Gaming Pro Carbon	Lee
Ryzen 1700	3.8Ghz	1.395	78	Asus Prime X370-PRO	deload
Ryzen 1700	3.9Ghz	1.3	63	Asrock fat4l1ty k4	Goober
Ryzen 1700	3.8Ghz	1.35	62	asrock x370 taichi	NB
Ryzen 1700X	3.9Ghz	1.375	65	Crosshair VI	TheWiredSoul
Ryzen 1800X	3.8Ghz	1.3375v	35	ASUS X370-PRO	Kim

Seeing an awful lot of temps closing on 80 C here, for meager OCs. Note: they ain't pulling 300w either.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> But what results , does a delided 7900X run hotter ? Is the TIM better ?
> 
> I gonna put this into the most simply way imaginable , if you have the choice between 2 CPUs , one solderd and one that is using TIM , which one will you take ?


Surely temps would improve... but to what end and for who??? Are you understanding how few this actually affects considering the results you have seen from people in this thread (3)? I mean sure, we agree it could be better, but the reality is it affects so few, the talking point is moot (to me). Especially considering the complete lack of overclocking from a soldered AMD CPU. 

Clearly I would take the soldered CPU. However, when put in context, it's a different story.


----------



## Mussels (Sep 6, 2017)

*looks at my wifes 2500K running 5,1GHz at 65C load on a H80*
(daily usage is lower since it left my tender care, but it definitely ran fast and COLD, as long as the fan speed was up)

yeah guys, soldered is good. Intel is good. We just want them together, like they used to be before the breakup.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

Who doesn't? Its the over dramatization of the situation that breeds frustration. 

I mean, with my 'not optimal TIM', which he is right, I am overclocking from base clocks to a much higher percentage than a CPU with solder..... oh, and that uses less power. So, my faster by clockspeed/overclocking, more power hungry chip has a problem with TIM.

Gotcha. It is clear as day now.


----------



## Vya Domus (Sep 6, 2017)

Vayra86 said:


> The one that's fastest, as evident by Intel's market share.



I'll be more exact , 2 identical CPUs , one with solder one with TIM. But I am sure you knew what I was asking  . You were just trying to circumvent valid points like most others in this thread. Whatever , I guess.



EarthDog said:


> Its the over dramatization of the situation that breeds frustration.



Not sure if this is dramatization , I am just surprised/baffled. We are one step away from thanking Intel for not using that horrible solder !


----------



## cdawall (Sep 6, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> I'll be more exact , 2 identical CPUs , one with solder one with TIM. But I am sure you knew what I was asking  . You were just trying to circumvent valid points like most others in this thread. Whatever , I guess.



With proper cooling of both silicon lottery will determine who clocks highest


----------



## Vayra86 (Sep 6, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> I'll be more exact , 2 identical CPUs , one with solder one with TIM. But I am sure you knew what I was asking  . You were just trying to circumvent valid points like most others in this thread. Whatever , I guess.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure if this is dramatization , I am just surprised/baffled. We are one step from thanking Intel for not using that damned solder !



No, I'm on the exact same page as @EarthDog in this - its the end result that matters. I will not deny that solder can be a better solution, but I'm one of those people who uses hardware for a practical thing, not some theoretical advantage. And the actual practice today, is that Intel's TIM CPUs clock better, do not overheat and have tremendous OC headroom even on stock volts.

Now, again, we can stomp our feet for ages, if you really think a giant like Intel will adapt its process to the wants of a few Youtubers and wannabe-enthusiasts, of which the vast majority will never buy said product, you're seriously deluded. We see cost-effective choices being made ALL over EVERY marketplace in the world, and yes, companies always try to get the most out of a dollar, this is exactly what Intel is doing here.

The ONLY fathomable way Intel will be going back to solder is when AMD releases Ryzen 2 with OC headroom to 5 Ghz on a soldered CPU, and on top of that, sells so many of them that it causes Intel to bleed more money than they do by altering their process.

Reality. ^


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> Not sure if this is dramatization , I am just surprised/baffled. We are one step away from thanking Intel for not using that horrible solder !


It is over dramatization IMO. Nobody is thanking Intel here or a step away from it. I am personally just saying it's not as big of an issue as many seem to make it out to be. I have had several of these in my hands. All ran just fine stock on an open air test bench. All also ran fine while overclocked, easily breaching 4GHz and able to get past their boost clocks.

I think we should take the blinders off and look around a bit at the big picture, both with results you have seen from trustworthy sources (putting my hat in there... I hope that is OK), as well as just seeing where AMD CPUs top out and where Intel's top out.

Who wouldn't love a couple hundred more Mhz (at most) with moving to solder? I get that. But we are shunning the fact that even it's 'not optimal TIM' is still leapfrogging the competition.


----------



## Vya Domus (Sep 6, 2017)

Vayra86 said:


> I will not deny that solder can be a better solution



Not only it can be a better solution , it *is* a better solution. Always will be. Even if you get no extra OC headroom it is still an advantage to have a chip that can be cooled more efficiently. That's my whole point , I am not talking toward a specific product even though I used some as examples.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 6, 2017)

Aldain said:


> Not apparently... They are not soldered...
> 
> 
> 
> Get a TR setup


Says the AMD employee.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> Not only it can be a better solution , it *is* a better solution. Always will be. Even if you get no extra OC headroom it is still an advantage to have a chip that can be cooled more efficiently. That's my whole point , I am not talking toward a specific product even though I used some as examples.


What advantage do we have with 10C lower temps? An 'atta  boy? A pat on the back? So long as temps are below throttling and not seeing any instability, it doesn't matter if its 80C or 90C.


----------



## Vayra86 (Sep 6, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Says the AMD employee.



Where would TPU be without your contributions  Every time I get that 'shoot from the hip' reflex but then I look at your profile pic and know not to take it too seriously.


----------



## Vya Domus (Sep 6, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> What advantage do we have with 10C lower temps? An 'atta  boy? A pat on the back? So long as temps are below throttling and not seeing any instability, it doesn't matter if its 80C or 90C.



Less fan noise ? Not having to use a huge rad ? You are still stuck at temperature , it's the *heat *that I am talking about which can be transferred more efficiently.


----------



## vega22 (Sep 6, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> What advantage do we have with 10C lower temps? An 'atta  boy? A pat on the back? So long as temps are below throttling and not seeing any instability, it doesn't matter if its 80C or 90C.



but that 10 or 20c reduction could be the difference between another 200 or even 500mhz overclock. which is really what they are trying to stop as with oc like that the end users upgrade cycle is shorter.


----------



## Vayra86 (Sep 6, 2017)

vega22 said:


> but that 10 or 20c reduction could be the difference between another 200 or even 500mhz overclock. which is really what they are trying to stop as with oc like that the end users upgrade cycle is shorter.



Shorter than what? I'm rocking an Ivy Bridge with shitty TIM and still see little urge to go bigger - urge as in, its really hard to justify the upgrade given the cost and performance I gain.

By comparison, if you ran a soldered FX at 5 Ghz, you'd have moved to an Intel alternative two years ago at least. 

Again, could-woulda-shoulda, versus reality - this is always the case with any AMD versus Intel discussion: dreams of a better future versus the actual market. Note that the dreamers are not successful here.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> Less fan noise ? Not having to use a huge rad ? You are still stuck at temperature , it's the *heat *that I am talking about which can be transferred more efficiently.


I dont have a huge rad.. I have a 2x120mm AIO accomplishing things that with temperature or heat transfer AMD cannot do with solder. In a vacuum, the TIM looks bad, no doubt. But, thankfully, we don't live in a vacuum and should use surrounding data to form a complete opinion. 


vega22 said:


> but that 10 or 20c reduction could be the difference between another 200 or even 500mhz overclock. which is really what they are trying to stop as with oc like that the end users upgrade cycle is shorter.


500 MHz more from 10C.. good one. If you are lucky you can get 200 Mhz. Chances are, it may not even be that. I have manually overclocked these one voltage notch at a time and can tell you when you get to that 4.5-4.7Ghz range and try to go over that, 10C is nothing. I have the results of my last chip I will lst.. 

4.2 GHz 1.125V / 67C / 243W
4.3 GHz 1.125V / 70C / 254W
4.4 GHz 1.175V / 77C / 272W
4.5 GHz 1.250V / 88C / 309W
4.6 GHz 1.325V / 95C / 345W

Now, if you are trying to put a cooler not meant to cool 300W loads, it can count. But you aren't getting 500 Mhz out of 10C temp difference.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 6, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> We are one step away from thanking Intel for not using that horrible solder !




I am thanking Intel for doing this and providing a situation that allows us to expose fact-ignoring BIAS for what it is. I personally DO NOT CARE what is under the heatspreader, other than the silicon, and how it performs. I DO NOT need to OC a chip within an inch of death so I "can render faster" or "get an extra .5 FPS". I mean, most often, when rendering videos, even (the one thing that actually uses all the cores of my 7900X CPU), I have found that using CUDA, and the GPU for that render, is actually faster. So what real benefit does those few extra MHz actually offer?



vega22 said:


> but that 10 or 20c reduction could be the difference between another 200 or even 500mhz overclock. which is really what they are trying to stop as with oc like that the end users upgrade cycle is shorter.



Not 500 MHz. 200 MHz, even, is pushing it. Yeah, some chips do well, but some do not, too.


Like listen; I did offer to get a de-lidder from der8uaer, pop the top off of ALL my CPUs, and happily verify his results. Unfortunately, I didn't get one, and they aren't really for sale (always sold out, or perhaps, not even being made in the first place). So whatever...


Like you also have to consider this: Here is a guy that sells a product to delid CPUs, telling you that you are being ripped off, and that you should delid. Oh and hey, buy HIS delidder to do it, too. 


It's bloody marketing for his products and everyone is taking it as gospel. FFS, I got to quit doing reviews. 



You all best send your applications into W1zz for my job here on TPU; and no, not joking at all.


----------



## Vayra86 (Sep 6, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> I am thanking Intel for doing this and providing a situation that allows us to expose fact-ignoring BIAS for what it is. I personally DO NOT CARE what is under the heatspreader, other than the silicon, and how it performs. I DO NOT need to OC a chip within an inch of death so I "can render faster" or "get an extra .5 FPS". I mean, most often, when rendering videos, even (the one thing that actually uses all the cores of my 7900X CPU), I have found that using CUDA, and the GPU for that render, is actually faster. So what real benefit does those few extra MHz actually offer?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Please no, I'll have to find another tech site for reviews and the vast majority sucks donkey balls, video reviewers convincingly leading that pack.


----------



## VSG (Sep 6, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> It's bloody marketing for his products and everyone is taking it as gospel. FFS, I got to quit doing reviews.
> 
> 
> 
> You all best send your applications into W1zz for my job here on TPU; and no, not joking at all.



I will personally come find you and tie you down in a gaming chair to make you continue writing motherboard reviews


----------



## efikkan (Sep 6, 2017)

"Der8auer" is the guy who called X299 a "VRM disaster", despite admitting there was nothing wrong with the VRMs themselves, just some motherboards with "bad" heatsinks.

This whole "TIM" issue is just nonsense. Of all the "issues" with X299, this would have to be a total non-issue. How many are going to do overlocking at this extreme level?
This is even more ridiculous than people boycotting X299 because of "missing" PCIe lanes they don't even need.



RejZoR said:


> If this continues, I most certainly won't go with Intel next time. I just hope AMD's Ryzen will keep up for when I'll have to upgrade my system (which might not be so soon considering what it is now).


So, is this _really_ a problem for you? These things still clocks way beyond anything from AMD.


----------



## Fasola (Sep 6, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> See, I see Intel CPUs with paste TIM and high overhead and think "wow, they made good chips", and then I see AMD's soldered chips and think "hey, they NEED that solder, because these chips have no overhead", and that's good enough for me.


Why don't you put it to the test? Delid some Ryzens and replace the solder with TIM similar to Intel's.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 6, 2017)

Fasola said:


> Why don't you put it to the test? Delid some Ryzens and replace the solder with TIM similar to Intel's.


Honestly? It's simply not worth the effort to me.

Like, I get hardware for free, yet still buy my favorite items because I want a warranty. I'm not the one disillusioned by hype. Everyone can really think what they want, but it's really not even worth my time to do reviews if people are so easily influenced by BS. Like why bother? Everyone will lthink whatever suits them, and they have every right to.. so who am I to try to correct anyone?



VSG said:


> I will personally come find you and tie you down in a gaming chair to make you continue writing motherboard reviews



Will you tell me what to write too? Whisper sweet nothings into my ear, deary....


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

So, we can put already proven science to the test? I for one have other things to do instead of that, like nothing.


----------



## Fasola (Sep 6, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> Honestly? It's simply not worth the effort to me.
> 
> Like, I get hardware for free, yet still buy my favorite items because I want a warranty. I'm not the one disillusioned by hype. Everyone can really think what they want, but it's really not even worth my time to do reviews if people are so easily influenced by BS. Like why bother? Everyone will lthink whatever suits them, and they have every right to.. so who am I to try to correct anyone?


It would be an interesting project, that, unfortunately, only a reviewer or someone with a lot of disposable income would be able to tackle due to the difficulty. I was thinking more about proving yourself right (or not) rather than changing the minds of others. You are of the opinion that AMD _needs _solder, while Intel does not after all.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 6, 2017)

Fasola said:


> You are of the opinion that AMD _needs _solder, while Intel does not after all.


Exactly. And since I am a reviewer, I do have extra CPUs to play with, too, but, man... why go to those lengths to show what's already obvious? I am pretty much the only review that measures CPU-only power consumption. So I see clearly what's going on with these CPUs, and the power they use, and how that affects the temperatures they run at, and I do feel that using full system power to try to see these sorts of things isn't the correct approach, nevermind it only takes spending $100 for a good clamp-on meter for the EPS connector, and that expense is a write-off for someone that does reviews... completely blows me away when people review CPUs and use full system power like it's actually relevant.


But maybe I'm just a overconfident snob. Anything is possible.


----------



## Fasola (Sep 6, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> Exactly. And since I am a reviewer, I do have extra CPUs to play with, too, but, man... why go to those lengths to show what's already obvious?


Unfortunately, to a lot of people, it is not that obvious, obviously. For me, it would be something fun to read that might actually spark an actual debate rather than this back and forth we have going on. At any rate, I understand why one wouldn't commit to a difficult pet project as this.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 6, 2017)

Because as he said, its obvious. We all know solder is better, it has been tested and proven. Why would anyone waste the time to prove something that is already known?


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 6, 2017)

Vayra86 said:


> The only reason we do this, is because you simply CANT delid a Ryzen to see what headroom you can create on that chip in the first place. Think on that for abit.



Actaully, you can.  It's even been done.  The reason it's not common is it a.) offers no thermal benefit and b.) is hard as heck to do and dangerous.


----------



## Th3pwn3r (Sep 7, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> Sadly though, you'll find many of those cars that are priced that high, do have many such "inferior" parts. Especially in the interior. Once again car analogy fails to meet the needs for the PC market.
> 
> BTW, you might not be able to buy pilot sport cup 2 tires at kmart, but those that have money... got it by not spending it on silly things like that in the first place. Most people that buy those cars don't buy them to drive them these days; they are purely for investment. In other words, you buy them to sell them later, at a higher price. You can't do that with PCs... only on launches when supply is limited... but then it gets unlimited. Super and Hyper cars never get "unlimited" in numbers, which is why such analogies fail.



Okay, car guy to car guy, what parts do you think are inferior? Interior materials are subjective in terms of what is inferior and what isn't. A super/hypercar is going to need a no frills interior for the most part, with a lot of kevlar and carbon fiber, perhaps some aircraft grade aluminum. Certainly won't be as luxurious either. As far as investment goes, cars are generally a bad investment all together, even a new super car will not hold its value. Older cars(antiques) will do a lot better on return after owning them another 20 or so years. But anyhow...



Valantar said:


> 80C for a CPU under load is no problem whatsoever. 90-95, we'd be talking, but generally CPUs are perfectly happy at temps like that. We've become spoiled by the efficient, small CPUs of late. A decade ago, keeping an OC'd CPU below 90 degrees was impressive. Keeping a 300+W monster at 80 still is.



80c doesn't leave much headroom though. If your processor is running at 80c stock clocks you can pretty much forget about any overclocking.




SIGSEGV said:


> Meh, don't wanna burn hundreds of dollar just for 'TIM' and do your own risk because you're ENTHUSIAST BS and you should delid words ffs !



What in the world are you trying to say? Can someone translate? Lol...



9700 Pro said:


> I can't even remember how many Intel has shown us the middle finger this year.. let's see..
> 
> 1. Those stupid 7600K/7700K remakes on LGA2066
> 2. No solder on those LCC 2066 SKL-X processors
> ...



1. Everyone does 'remakes'
2. Yeah, kind of lame
3. Don't pay anything? Just like games, there's nobody holding a gun for your head making you purchase anything.
4. OH NO MY CPU isn't compatible with X,Y or Z motherboard!! Welcome to computers buddy.
5. Solder it yourself 



EarthDog said:


> Complains about intel shoving it up our rears, then bends over? How can you have that much conviction on the subject and still buy one?





ssdpro said:


> I read this 3 page comment and have concluded this user is really annoying.  There is no reason to refer to everyone that buys product "A" as an idiot.  Do you have proof Intel applies "Toothpaste"?  After application of this "toothpaste" did the factory "call it a day"?  And what is "coz it's ze"?  Is that some german reference?  Do you have any data supporting purchase of a HEDT platform was based on solder as a primary reason for purchase?  That all just sounds like kid stuff.



Well, it's either toothpaste or peanut butter. Most claim it was the actual sealant that is the problem but some claims out there that the paste looks really bad under those lids. I may see for myself on Sunday, depends on how my automotive project goes Saturday if I have time to switch from Mr. Mechanic to computer geek.



RejZoR said:


> And you just sound like someone who has nothing of value to say other than dragging someone elses comment around. Because you had nothing of value to say in the first place. Also, context and synonyms are entirely foreign concepts to you...



Dude, I used to enjoy reading your posts, I used to thank most of them. Then a lot of things started happening with Vega and you just seemed to have changed and gone off the deep end. Not sure why but that's how it seems.



9700 Pro said:


> Because I don't want to change platform? And like I said, I'm going to delid this right when I get a tool for rent from someone, so the TIM on this isn't a problem.
> 
> I understand that my 250eur CPU has crappy TIM under the IHS, but a 2000eur enthusiast HEDT CPU?



If you don't want to change platform then don't, simple as that, it has always been as simple as that. There's no force making you change from one processor or board to another.



efikkan said:


> This whole "TIM" issue is just nonsense. Of all the "issues" with X299, this would have to be a total non-issue. How many are going to do overlocking at this extreme level?
> This is even more ridiculous than people boycotting X299 because of "missing" PCIe lanes they don't even need.
> 
> 
> So, is this _really_ a problem for you? These things still clocks way beyond anything from AMD.



It's not nonsense. It can be the difference between running cool or hot, overclocking 500mhz instead of 200mhz, I don't know. It's not nonsense though. As I'm sure you know, lots of people have gotten huge increases in performance just by delidding and applying new paste and *resealing* their CPU.


----------



## Hood (Sep 7, 2017)

Vya Domus said:


> Not only it can be a better solution , it *is* a better solution. Always will be. Even if you get no extra OC headroom it is still an advantage to have a chip that can be cooled more efficiently. That's my whole point , I am not talking toward a specific product even though I used some as examples.


Has anyone considered the fact with a soldered heat spreader, you're stuck with what you get; but with TIM, you always have the option to delid and replace factory TIM with liquid metal, which works as well as solder, also allows you to thin out the silicon glue, getting the heat spreader closer to the die, which is where you get the most advantage.  The only caveat is that you might have to redo the liquid metal every 3 or 4 years if it degrades (from extreme OCs).  The soldered ones can also degrade over time, and sometimes affect flatness of the heat spreader, but you can't fix them.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 7, 2017)

Th3pwn3r said:


> Okay, car guy to car guy, what parts do you think are inferior? Interior materials are subjective in terms of what is inferior and what isn't.


Switches, lighting fixtures, display screens (not on dash), the electronics in general, I guess. Many more affordable cars do it better. I did put "inferior" in quotes for a reason though... they are adequate, like the TIM under Intel's current CPUs.

Like, I see the power drawn though these chips and it amazes me how much they have been able to handle at times with normal cooling... Like, I really do feel Intel is doing a great job. I think AMD is doing a great job too, though. I don't expect AMD to match Intel in anything, even performance, though, so my perspective on much of this isn't going to be like what most think. At the same time, I do maybe have more info direct from the people that make these products, so maybe that's why I feel differently? I'm not sure. Like, I can look at a review on another site, see the stuff that some companies send asking we cover, and it makes me laugh. I toss those documents in the trash, and do my own thing. Just like I'm tossing in the trash any ideas that there are "issues" with the X299 platform.


----------



## Kissamies (Sep 7, 2017)

Th3pwn3r said:


> 1. Everyone does 'remakes'
> 2. Yeah, kind of lame
> 3. Don't pay anything? Just like games, there's nobody holding a gun for your head making you purchase anything.
> *4. OH NO MY CPU isn't compatible with X,Y or Z motherboard!! Welcome to computers buddy.*
> ...


Yeah but those first Coffee Lake chipsets are just rebrands since they have the same functionality, so that's another "fuck you" from Intel, since they've could have kept the compatibility.

Also the naming of the socket is stupid. Before it hasn't been a problem to snip out few pins or add them, so why it just couldn't be LGA1152 for example.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 7, 2017)

Intel has never really carried more than two generations of chipsets. Nothing new. Also, most people arent upgrading from a generation or two of cpus behind. You sont expect 3 generations of cpus to work on the same board, do you? By that time, like 5 years, you lose out on other things... like m.2 pcie 4x and otjer chipset improvements. 

Also, there are drop in upgrades for each set of chipsets. I mean, negligible/incremental upgrades, sure, but still.

Its probably to save money. It will be keyed, and there are notes on packaging as far as what chipset its compatible with. It could be easier, sure. I see a lot of crying over spilled milk to be honest. It just never was and never will be that kind of world. The only reason amd never did it was because its likely cheaper for them than seveloping incremental upgrades. Remember amd was lacking pcie 3.0 outside of a board or two or something until zen. Fast m.2... not without a pcie add on card. There are reasons for incremental updates besides greed.


----------



## Th3pwn3r (Sep 7, 2017)

Hood said:


> Has anyone considered the fact with a soldered heat spreader, you're stuck with what you get; but with TIM, you always have the option to delid and replace factory TIM with liquid metal, which works as well as solder, also allows you to thin out the silicon glue, getting the heat spreader closer to the die, which is where you get the most advantage.  The only caveat is that you might have to redo the liquid metal every 3 or 4 years if it degrades (from extreme OCs).  The soldered ones can also degrade over time, and sometimes affect flatness of the heat spreader, but you can't fix them.


Good point, however by the time that solder would wear out you're probably a few generations into new builds anyways.



cadaveca said:


> Switches, lighting fixtures, display screens (not on dash), the electronics in general, I guess. Many more affordable cars do it better. I did put "inferior" in quotes for a reason though... they are adequate, like the TIM under Intel's current CPUs.
> 
> Like, I see the power drawn though these chips and it amazes me how much they have been able to handle at times with normal cooling... Like, I really do feel Intel is doing a great job. I think AMD is doing a great job too, though. I don't expect AMD to match Intel in anything, even performance, though, so my perspective on much of this isn't going to be like what most think. At the same time, I do maybe have more info direct from the people that make these products, so maybe that's why I feel differently? I'm not sure. Like, I can look at a review on another site, see the stuff that some companies send asking we cover, and it makes me laugh. I toss those documents in the trash, and do my own thing. Just like I'm tossing in the trash any ideas that there are "issues" with the X299 platform.



Well, in some things I prefer the minimum , my 1989 Honda CRX has no interior at all other than dash and gauges, should be making over 600 horsepower at the wheels too, Dyno tuning tomorrow or Friday, yay. On the other hand I like nice car audio systems and navigation too.




9700 Pro said:


> Yeah but those first Coffee Lake chipsets are just rebrands since they have the same functionality, so that's another "fuck you" from Intel, since they've could have kept the compatibility.
> 
> Also the naming of the socket is stupid. Before it hasn't been a problem to snip out few pins or add them, so why it just couldn't be LGA1152 for example.



I understand where you're coming from but it's nothing new, they have been pushing new platforms on us for a long time. Got the top of the line board and processor? New platform released . Feelsbadman.jpg


----------



## Hood (Sep 7, 2017)

Th3pwn3r said:


> Got the top of the line board and processor? New platform released . Feelsbadman.jpg


Depends on how you look at it.  Your way is conditioned by a lifetime of admen playing on your love of the latest/fastest/coolest stuff (a fate we all suffer from to some degree).  My thinking is to wait for a platform to mature, to get the most reliable/stable hardware, often right before the new platform debuts, so as to get more choice of proven boards and lowest prices.  The new stuff is always coming, so the feeling that you have the best is always fleeting.  It's nice when it happens, but constantly chasing it is a mistake, or a hobby for bored rich kids with trust funds.  Take the long view and you'll enjoy your stuff more.  Stop feeling bad about something you knew would happen before you even bought it.


----------



## RejZoR (Sep 7, 2017)

@Th3pwn3r 
Well, then enjoy garbage overpriced products because no one is apparently allowed to be critical when appropriate. Usage of TIM on a freaking 1000€ CPU is just an absolutely unforgivable thing worthy of EVERY criticism. The situation with RX Vega was not even nearly this bad or worthy of criticism. All I was saying the entire time is, LETS WAIT FOR THE REVIEWS, don't piss on it in advance without any data. When cards were placed on the desk and revealed with reviews, Vega is what it is. You either take it for the price it has or you don't. There is no secret catch there, because for what it is, it is done properly. Unlike when you buy a freaking 1000€ CPU and later realize they use cheap goo instead of proper solder on IHS. That's the reason why I'm not pissing all over Vega and everyone sees it as me being a massive AMD fanboy. Maybe I haven't changed, but the products have. Intel has become a bunch of lazy motherf**kers because they were resting on laurels of past success for too long. And they are trying to continue doing that by increasing THEIR margins on YOUR expense. AMD forced them to lower their prices and instead of doing it properly, they'll skimp on freaking IHS materials. ON YOUR BLOODY EXPENSE. But hey, if you don't see that, go on and buy such Intel CPU. All you're telling them with this is "GO AHEAD GREEDY LAZY INTEL, I DON'T MIND IT". AMD screwed up with Bulldozer, but for what it was, they were still doing it properly. They weren't screwing around cutting bits from it to increase margins. That's why I didn't have problem with it either back then. Just like with RX Vega. You either take it or you don't. There was no secret catch there either. It was what it was. Where 1000€ CPU with some goo where you'd expect top notch components just "isn't what it is". I've criticized it on lower end products as well, but those are cheap(er) for a reason and on a CPU with 2 cores, it quite frankly doesn't even matter. But when you have 8 cores with 16 threads pumping out tons of heat, you want the very best. And goo just isn't. What I noticed is that people apparently entirely forgot how to read and understand. Relevancy of criticism and context is something no one seems to understand anymore. It's the whole paragraph above this line and all my criticisms in the last several weeks or few months...

But if this is the reason you don't want to read my posts anymore, then so be it. It'll be your loss, not mine, quite frankly.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 7, 2017)

I think the point @cadaveca is making but, y'all seem to have missed it is that AMD uses solder because it HAS TO. Intel doesn't because it's chips DON'T HAVE TO. Take away from that what you will but, his second point is with todays modern CPUs overclocking is redundant and unnecessary. Intel to spend extra on solder so less that 1% of its market wont bitch on a forum is bad business sense. Almost as bad as lying to reviewers about their real MSRP.......(looking at you AMD). Maybe AMD engineers can find a second job trolling tech sites trying to justify their poor job performance.


----------



## Kissamies (Sep 7, 2017)

Th3pwn3r said:


> I understand where you're coming from but it's nothing new, they have been pushing new platforms on us for a long time. Got the top of the line board and processor? New platform released . Feelsbadman.jpg


Well, I installed a 7600K for my Z170 board yesterday so there's no reason for me to upgrade for a couple of years.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 7, 2017)

9700 Pro said:


> Well, I installed a 7600K for my Z170 board yesterday so there's no reason for me to upgrade for a couple of years.


Weird... another intel chipset that works with 2 generations...


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 7, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> Weird... another intel chipset that works with 2 generations...


Pfft Im still rocking a 2600k which which my mobo was good all the way up to the intel 3770k. Two generations?! Who would figure?


----------



## trparky (Sep 7, 2017)

Hood said:


> It's nice when it happens, but constantly chasing it is a mistake, or a hobby for bored rich kids with trust funds.


That's why when I build a system I try to make it last a long time. I've been on my current system for close to five years and when I did build it I spent about $800 at the time. $800 over five years is $160 a year which isn't bad at all when it comes to spreading the cost out. I plan on spending about double that this time around because it'll be a complete system rebuild as versus just swapping out parts. New case, new power supply, new SSD, new monitor, etc. Yeah, it's going to cost a bit more this time but it'll be worth it in the end.



Hood said:


> Your way is conditioned by a lifetime of admen playing on your love of the latest/fastest/coolest stuff (a fate we all suffer from to some degree).


If you spread it out over four or five years it won't feel quite so bad and the generational improvements will actually be worth it.



TheMailMan78 said:


> todays modern CPUs overclocking is redundant and unnecessary.


I think what people don't take into account is that years ago we didn't need such extremely high clock speeds so Intel never sold their chips running at those high clock speeds. The so-called "huge" overclocking headroom that people oh so love to talk about here on this site existed quite simply because Intel was actually selling their chips at a far slower speed than they needed to because well... we didn't need those speeds back then. The huge overclocking headroom of the chips of yesteryear were because those chips actually could run at those speeds, they were just artificially ran at slower speeds. Fast forward to today and we need those high clock speeds so now Intel chips are being sold already clocked at a point where they're already running damn near the razor's edge. Yes, we have less overclocking headroom (this is true) but that's only because they're already running near the edge at stock.


----------



## Kissamies (Sep 7, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> Weird... another intel chipset that works with 2 generations...


But as said, Z370 has the "Kaby Lake" functions, and the "real new" chipset arrives later. So there's not a good reason why Coffee wouldn't work on 100/200 chipsets.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 7, 2017)

And? Its a money maker...its what they do. Two gens on 2 chipsets, moving along to the next. 

Nothing new.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 7, 2017)

9700 Pro said:


> But as said, Z370 has the "Kaby Lake" functions, and the "real new" chipset arrives later. So there's not a good reason why Coffee wouldn't work on 100/200 chipsets.


Actually, there IS a good reason... supplying power to 6 cores instead of 4 requires a different electrical pinout for the socket. It's not that current chipset is incompatible... it's the socket itself that is. You can't make circuits magically re-form themselves; at least, not yet.


----------



## Th3pwn3r (Sep 7, 2017)

9700 Pro said:


> Well, I installed a 7600K for my Z170 board yesterday so there's no reason for me to upgrade for a couple of years.



Personally I think most of us should be able to afford a new build every year easily. That being said I just keep my machines together and just get all new stuff.


----------



## INSTG8R (Sep 7, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> Actually, there IS a good reason... supplying power to 6 cores instead of 4 requires a different electrical pinout for the socket. It's not that current chipset is incompatible... it's the socket itself that is. You can't make circuits magically re-form themselves; at least, not yet.


Nice to see logic and a genuinely clear reason for it. It really is easy to bash Intel with their constant socket/chipset changes but your answer reasonably justifies it.


----------



## vega22 (Sep 7, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> Not 500 MHz. 200 MHz, even, is pushing it. Yeah, some chips do well, but some do not, too.
> 
> Like listen; I did offer to get a de-lidder from der8uaer, pop the top off of ALL my CPUs, and happily verify his results. Unfortunately, I didn't get one, and they aren't really for sale (always sold out, or perhaps, not even being made in the first place). So whatever...
> 
> ...



for sure, the gains vary quite a lot from chip to chip down to how big the gap is and how much tim is filling it. but at the same time oc headroom also varies and as such the voltage needed for one chip to gain 200mhz can see another gain 500. the ic lotto is still a thing but with these modern chips from intel there are more variables to take into effect now.

as for de8uaer, for sure part of his delid videos must be to promote his product, but not the amd one, right?

you say that like you need a tool to do it, like it's the only way. i have done a couple with just a vice and piece of 2 by 4...i know plenty that have just used a craft knife.

to go back to the tim and car guy stuffs, lsd vs live axle, disk brakes vs drums. one is adequate while the other is optimal. would you pay top dollar for a car with adequate brakes, or adequate drive train?

no it is expected to have optimal acceleration and breaking. the heat transfer from a HEDT cpu is much the same in my eyes. the mainstream platform i can understand. if they were to clock much higher it would for sure eat into their higher platform, but these are the top desktop platform.



Vayra86 said:


> Shorter than what? I'm rocking an Ivy Bridge with shitty TIM and still see little urge to go bigger - urge as in, its really hard to justify the upgrade given the cost and performance I gain.
> 
> By comparison, if you ran a soldered FX at 5 Ghz, you'd have moved to an Intel alternative two years ago at least.
> 
> Again, could-woulda-shoulda, versus reality - this is always the case with any AMD versus Intel discussion: dreams of a better future versus the actual market. Note that the dreamers are not successful here.



the upgrade cycle would be shorter if they if they're only able to reach smaller overclocks.

why do you feel the need to bring amd into a discussion about intel?

could-woulda-shoulda is what you seem to like talking about, what are you trying to achieve?

it is almost as if you think attacking something else will move the topic away from the fact intel are cheaping out by making their top of the line desktop with sub optimal heat transfer.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 7, 2017)

vega22 said:


> you say that like you need a tool to do it, like it's the only way. i have done a couple with just a vice and piece of 2 by 4...i know plenty that have just used a craft knife.


SkyLake-X is a complicated CPU with a secondary PCB under the IHS that the IHS attaches to (IHS attaches to both PCBs). Using blades to remove the top is not as easy as other chips, which I have done countless times, been doing delids myself since SKT754.

I don't NEED a tool, you are right, but ensuring that I'm not wasting my time if I kill the CPU does add some security to doing it that I do need, yes, because of the aforementioned complexity. I don't want to accidentally pull the IHS, and then pull the smaller substrate with it.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 7, 2017)

Is it really sub-optimal though? I mean, works fine at stock, and can handle some pretty beefy overclocking. Sure it may not be, 'the best' solution, so I guess by definition it isn't optimal, but, it really isn't holding much back, let's be honest here.

Certainly we would like to have seen 'optimal' TIM(solder), but, again, I can understand the market, most aren't overclocking #1, and #2, those that are overclocking 99% of them are not looking to max the chip out to the edge of stability (as dave said).

So, sure, sub optimal. But, its really not a big deal considering the big picture. It isn't something to be upset about, again considering the big picture and real world results with 'average joe' type cooling. Its like throwing in a raciing radiator in a car when nearly nobody uses that type of vehicle to race...it isn't a racecar. The capacity isn't needed. (yay for a likely failed car analogy!).


----------



## Kissamies (Sep 7, 2017)

Th3pwn3r said:


> Personally I think most of us should be able to afford a new build every year easily. That being said I just keep my machines together and just get all new stuff.


I think not. Pretty damn many are still kicking with Sandy Bridge to be honest. 



cadaveca said:


> Actually, there IS a good reason... supplying power to 6 cores instead of 4 requires a different electrical pinout for the socket. It's not that current chipset is incompatible... it's the socket itself that is. You can't make circuits magically re-form themselves; at least, not yet.


Agree, but perhaps something like making a Coffee Lake supporting BIOS only to "good" motherboards would maybe worked also..? At least in my thoughts.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 7, 2017)

9700 Pro said:


> I think not. Pretty damn many are still kicking with Sandy Bridge to be honest.
> 
> 
> Agree, but perhaps something like making a Coffee Lake supporting BIOS only to "good" motherboards would maybe worked also..? At least in my thoughts.


The info as to what is going on with unannounced platforms will come out in due time. I currently can't comment more.


----------



## Vayra86 (Sep 7, 2017)

vega22 said:


> the upgrade cycle would be shorter if they if they're only able to reach smaller overclocks.
> 
> why do you feel the need to bring amd into a discussion about intel?
> 
> ...



- Solder or not has absolutely zero to do with requiring to upgrade faster. The vast majority of people are not overclocking their CPUs at all, its not a market share Intel cares about. And at stock, all of these CPUs are still extremely competitive if not top of the line, while not throttling due to TIM. There is no reason whatsoever to prefer solder in the most common segments of the market, or even more than 90% of it.
- The AMD vs Intel discussion matters because a comparison must be made, and has been made. Ryzen is soldered, and considered 'better to buy' because of that by some.
- Intel does perhaps cheap out here. And so does every other company all over the world, somewhere with something. Its business, this is why the comparison also matters - if you have the best product at any given time, you win the race.

Honestly, is this all so hard to grasp? Is this really to be seen as an attack, or merely an observation to serve this discussion? If something is hard to swallow for you, that usually means it has a truth to it that you haven't accepted yet.


----------



## Th3pwn3r (Sep 7, 2017)

RejZoR said:


> @Th3pwn3r
> Well, then enjoy garbage overpriced products because no one is apparently allowed to be critical when appropriate.



Between this and reading your posts about how case manufacturers are also retarded, I feel like you should be making all of your own components and computers from scratch haha.



9700 Pro said:


> I think not. Pretty damn many are still kicking with Sandy Bridge to be honest.
> 
> 
> Agree, but perhaps something like making a Coffee Lake supporting BIOS only to "good" motherboards would maybe worked also..? At least in my thoughts.



If you can't afford a $2,000-$3,000 expense on top of all your other costs of living then I suggest a career or another career. I lived paycheck to paycheck for a part of my life, worked my ass off but a better career choice made all the difference much faster.



Vayra86 said:


> - Solder or not has absolutely zero to do with requiring to upgrade faster. *The vast majority of people are not overclocking their CPUs at all, its not a market share Intel cares about*. And at stock, all of these CPUs are still extremely competitive if not top of the line, while not throttling due to TIM. There is no reason whatsoever to prefer solder in the most common segments of the market, or even more than 90% of it.
> - The AMD vs Intel discussion matters because a comparison must be made, and has been made. Ryzen is soldered, and considered 'better to buy' because of that by some.
> - Intel does perhaps cheap out here. And so does every other company all over the world, somewhere with something. Its business, this is why the comparison also matters - if you have the best product at any given time, you win the race.
> 
> Honestly, is this all so hard to grasp? Is this really to be seen as an attack, or merely an observation to serve this discussion? If something is hard to swallow for you, that usually means it has a truth to it that you haven't accepted yet.



The problem is that we are not the vast majority so we cry about these things. We also tend to cry about them as if we were going to spend the $1,000+ on these objects in the first place knowing damn well we're not.


----------



## infrared (Sep 7, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> It isn't something to be upset about, again considering the big picture and real world results with 'average joe' type cooling. Its like throwing in a raciing radiator in a car when nearly nobody uses that type of vehicle to race...it isn't a racecar. The capacity isn't needed. (yay for a likely failed car analogy!).


That's one of the better car analogies imo. I still hate the fact that delidding is basically mandatory if you want to max the chip out, but what you said makes a lot of sense tbh. I'm changing my stance to 'on the fence'.


----------



## Th3pwn3r (Sep 7, 2017)

infrared said:


> *That's one of the better car analogies imo*. I still hate the fact that delidding is basically mandatory if you want to max the chip out, but what you said makes a lot of sense tbh. I'm changing my stance to 'on the fence'.



I disagree, a lot of race cars have 1/2 size radiators which are actually terrible for cooling lol. Size and weight restrictions suck.


----------



## trparky (Sep 7, 2017)

infrared said:


> I still hate the fact that delidding is basically mandatory if you want to max the chip out


They're already damn near maxed out as it is at stock speeds. What? Do you think Intel clocks these chips at a specific speed just for the lulz? No, they clock them at a specific speed because they know that that's the limit at which the chip is stable and will stay within the thermal limits of the design.

Intel knows that (despite the so-called "cheap" TIM) the chip will perform to the factory specifications and be stable while doing so. If you so choose to want to push the chip farther, that's on you.


----------



## Kissamies (Sep 7, 2017)

Th3pwn3r said:


> If you can't afford a $2,000-$3,000 expense on top of all your other costs of living then I suggest a career or another career. I lived paycheck to paycheck for a part of my life, worked my ass off but a better career choice made all the difference much faster.



2000-3000 euros/dollars?! Hell no, budget gamer since 2004! 



cadaveca said:


> The info as to what is going on with unannounced platforms will come out in due time. I currently can't comment more.


I guess it's the lovely thing called NDA?


----------



## trparky (Sep 7, 2017)

These new chips are already running at damn near max frequencies. These aren't the days of Ivy Bridge where your overclocking headroom was so huge that you could get a whole 1 GHz more out of the chip. The only reason why you could do that was because they were (at manufacturing time) clocked far lower than they were truly capable of being clocked at. Not all chips could clock that high, some only managed 500 MHz more. It depended upon if you won the silicon lottery on not.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 7, 2017)

9700 Pro said:


> I guess it's the lovely thing called NDA?




I try to not sign those things, and don't currently with Intel. I just know when to keep my lips together. As long as I do that, then I don't have to worry about signing, too. It's those that can't keep quiet that are forced to sign to get stuff.



trparky said:


> These new chips are already running at damn near max frequencies.



No, they aren't. That's AMD, unfortunately. For example stock speed for all cores on my 7900X is 3.3 GHz. I can clock it to 4.8 if I wanted to throw $$$ in WC gear if I wanted to.



trparky said:


> No, they clock them at a specific speed because they know that that's the limit at which the chip is stable and will stay within the thermal limits of the design.



No, actually they clock them at a speed that ALL of the chips will work at those speeds, and with a bit of overhead, because of Turbo 2.0/3.0. There will be some that can go higher, and some that go nowhere at all.

It's also not just about stability; max TDP and overall power used play a very significant role in this too. CPUs are electrical devices, and it is electrical properties that determine what each chip ends up as.


----------



## infrared (Sep 7, 2017)

trparky said:


> They're already damn near maxed out as it is at stock speeds. What? Do you think Intel clocks these chips at a specific speed just for the lulz? No, they clock them at a specific speed because they know that that's the limit at which the chip is stable and will stay within the thermal limits of the design.
> 
> Intel knows that (despite the so-called "cheap" TIM) the chip will perform to the factory specifications and be stable while doing so. If you so choose to want to push the chip farther, that's on you.



By 'max it out' I meant with high end water upwards and going beyond safe 24/7 voltages and going right to the edge of stability for no reason other than fun.. Not the tame 24/7 clocks. But even if I was talking about 24/7, I was stuck at 4.5ghz on my 6700k, de-lidding and sticking the waterblock on the bare die dropped temps dramatically and with thermals under control I could go another 300mhz on ambient cooling. No it might not be worth the effort to some, but since mine wasn't overclocking as well as I wanted, I was pretty damn happy afterwards. Even if it was a good clocker to begin with, knowing that 2-300mhz is there unavailable to me would drive me nuts. It's just how I think, I don't care if it's not particularly logical.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 7, 2017)

trparky said:


> These new chips are already running at damn near max frequencies. These aren't the days of Ivy Bridge where your overclocking headroom was so huge that you could get a whole 1 GHz more out of the chip. The only reason why you could do that was because they were (at manufacturing time) clocked far lower than they were truly capable of being clocked at. Not all chips could clock that high, some only managed 500 MHz more. It depended upon if you won the silicon lottery on not.


You have it backwards. Like these guys said, AMD is maxed out, not intel. Ryzen 7 maxes out at 400 mhz over its base clock, 7900x can get 1 ghz on high end air over its baseclock. Well over that with better cooling and silicon... even with TIM vs solder.


----------



## Hood (Sep 8, 2017)

Its like throwing in a racing radiator in a car when nearly nobody uses that type of vehicle to race...it isn't a racecar. The capacity isn't needed. (yay for a likely failed car analogy!).
The analogy's okay, but a better one might be like using a $300 racing head gasket on your grocery-getter minivan - it won't ever blow out, but the $100 gasket will also work great, and you're probably not going to get in a street race on the way home from soccer practice anyway.  If you do get a little crazy one day and challenge a Mustang, it still (probably) won't blow the gasket, it'll just run a bit hotter.  So save the $200 and get some better tires or something...


----------



## vega22 (Sep 8, 2017)

Vayra86 said:


> - Solder or not has absolutely zero to do with requiring to upgrade faster. The vast majority of people are not overclocking their CPUs at all, its not a market share Intel cares about. And at stock, all of these CPUs are still extremely competitive if not top of the line, while not throttling due to TIM. There is no reason whatsoever to prefer solder in the most common segments of the market, or even more than 90% of it.
> - The AMD vs Intel discussion matters because a comparison must be made, and has been made. Ryzen is soldered, and considered 'better to buy' because of that by some.
> - Intel does perhaps cheap out here. And so does every other company all over the world, somewhere with something. Its business, this is why the comparison also matters - if you have the best product at any given time, you win the race.
> 
> Honestly, is this all so hard to grasp? Is this really to be seen as an attack, or merely an observation to serve this discussion? If something is hard to swallow for you, that usually means it has a truth to it that you haven't accepted yet.



you seem unable to get the point. solder has an impact on the temp which in turn has an impact on the overclocking headroom. max stable overclock impacts the performance and the performance dictates the upgrade cycle. the more performance people can squeeze from their cpu, the long it takes for them to feel the need to upgrade.

again with the amd attacks....why do you think that matters when they have not been cheaping out with the heat transfer ability of their chips? as said by more than one person they might even need to solder them to attain the speeds they are right now? we are talking about how intel used to solder their top chips and have now stopped. you are the one who is now rehashing outlandish claims in an attempt to justify the comment.

"best" is a subjective term. for most people paying for their cpu price : performance has a massive impact on how they define it, so which chips win that race? for some being able to attain the biggest % of overclock and gain the most "free performance" is the best, which the lack of solder hinders. to others just the feeling that the item they buy is as good as anybody is able to make right now is best. how does cheaping out on the tim effect that "best"?

also if intel did not care about overclocking do you think it would have dedicated platforms just for the ability to overclock?

would they sell different sku just so that people can pay for that ability?

could it be they really do care about overclocking, to the point at which they want to have more control over how much people are able to do it?



infrared said:


> By 'max it out' I meant with high end water upwards and going beyond safe 24/7 voltages and going right to the edge of stability for no reason other than fun.. Not the tame 24/7 clocks. But even if I was talking about 24/7, I was stuck at 4.5ghz on my 6700k, de-lidding and sticking the waterblock on the bare die dropped temps dramatically and with thermals under control I could go another 300mhz on ambient cooling. No it might not be worth the effort to some, but since mine wasn't overclocking as well as I wanted, I was pretty damn happy afterwards. Even if it was a good clocker to begin with, knowing that 2-300mhz is there unavailable to me would drive me nuts. It's just how I think, I don't care if it's not particularly logical.



i feel much the same dude, i have seen ivy and haswell chips behave much the same and my current 67k is equally limited.

idk maybe when you buy these things to try and squeeze as much performance out of them as you can get 24/7, the little details like this matter more?


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 8, 2017)

vega22 said:


> idk maybe when you buy these things to try and squeeze as much performance out of them as you can get 24/7, the little details like this matter more?



That's an affect (no, not a typo) of the mentality represented by users that do so, that new users that start into this "overclocking" hobby adopt. I mean, after all, that's what overclocking really used to be, before it was turned into a selling point. And because it's an affect (again, not a typo), it might not be the actual right approach. So when it was turned into a selling point, this affect was considered, and now we have things like every single multiplier, PER CORE of a CPU, already having a pre-programmed VID.

And while you may think Intel sells "K" SKU CPUs for overclocking, again, this is an affect of the community. *"K" SKUs are ALREADY OC'ed for you*. The power and cooling needs are increased already, and that should have been the first sign that THAT is what Intel is supporting... they have pre-OC'd the "K" SKUs for you. That's why many of these chips come without a cooler... you need to buy better than what Intel provides with the other chips, and the power increases considerably 65W - 95W is a near 50% increase in power consumed.

Unfortunately, marketing and reviewers have portrayed this differently than what it really is, *but the truth of the matter is printed right on the box*. Sure, you do also get "unlocked" multipliers, but do keep in mind that those multis already have VIDs programmed. If Intel truly wanted you to OC as you'd like to define it, they'd not have to waste their time doing things like programming the multipliers above stock with VIDs.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 8, 2017)

vega22 said:


> maybe when you buy these things to try and squeeze as much performance out of them as you can get 24/7, the little details like this matter more?


Welcome to the 1%...

As we said, most dont care. Its not a big deal. I like to push things to the limit and this frankly doesnt bother me. I mean, what is 200 mhz more IF IM LUCKY (we went over it at this end of overclocking you arent gaining much..even gave my results).

Again, even with the 'not optimal tim' its still overclocking way further than the competition.

I also agree it has very lite to do with the upgrade cycle by gaining 200 mhz with better TIM. Seriously, 200 mhz isnt going to let you keep your processor for much longer...


----------



## Kissamies (Sep 8, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> The info as to what is going on with unannounced platforms will come out in due time. I currently can't comment more.





EarthDog said:


> You have it backwards. Like these guys said, AMD is maxed out, not intel. Ryzen 7 maxes out at 400 mhz over its base clock, 7900x can get 1 ghz on high end air over its baseclock. Well over that with better cooling and silicon... even with TIM vs solder.


Well, let's wait that AMD can optimize Zen. Coffee Lake is like Skylake v3 with more cores, so hell yes Intel had optimized their process.

And yes, I still have a Kaby Lake CPU, I'm just not a fanboy.


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 8, 2017)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I think the point @cadaveca is making but, y'all seem to have missed it is...



Hey, I didn't.


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 8, 2017)

9700 Pro said:


> And yes, I still have a Kaby Lake CPU, I'm just not a fanboy.


Should of waited for Coffeelake, could of picked up your quad core as a i3, and saved some money or gotten a six core no hyperthreading i5.


----------



## Hood (Sep 8, 2017)

9700 Pro said:


> And yes, I still have a Kaby Lake CPU, I'm just not a fanboy.


Okay 9700 Pro, as in RADEON 9700 PRO, you're obviously an AMD fan, you named yourself after one of their GPUs.  But okay, whatever you say, no fanboys here, keep moving...


----------



## FR@NK (Sep 8, 2017)

Hood said:


> RADEON 9700 PRO, you're obviously an AMD fan, you named yourself after one of *their* GPUs.



How dare you be so ignorant!

The 9700 pro wasn't made by AMD!

Thats like calling me a General Motors fanboi because my name on some other forum is "Turbo9000"(hands down this is the best car analogy in this thread.)


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 8, 2017)

So does that make @P4-630 a Intel fanboy then I presume since he named himself after the Pentium 4 630?


----------



## INSTG8R (Sep 8, 2017)

I have have always been into overclocking from my very first modern PC of course Sandy Bridge was the "Golden Age" but when I replaced my 2600K that ran 4.6 it's whole life(and still does as I sent it to a friend in need)with my current 4790K I just don't even feel the need to anymore. It's already at 4.4 even the best chips might get 4.7 I can't justify the effort anymore(Yeah it's still pretty "simple" to do)especially for such a small gain. Sure I wish it wasn't using TIM(tho it was said to be "better" TIM)I just don't see the need anymore. So I'm no longer in the 1%. What I have always wondered as it was Devil's Canyon they made claims of using better TIM well has every processor since been using that TIM or was it just a one time thing for DC and the rest use the bog standard stuff. I mean I hope at least they would with the HEDT if they have stopped soldering those as well.


----------



## biffzinker (Sep 8, 2017)

INSTG8R said:


> What I have always wondered as it was Devil's Canyon they made claims of using better TIM well has every processor since been using that TIM or was it just a one time thing for DC and the rest use the bog standard stuff. I mean I hope at least they would with the HEDT if they have stopped soldering those as well.


Ah yes Intel Corp.’s NGPTIM next-generation polymer thermal interface material plus revamped power supply circuity was suppose to lead to improved overclocking.

One sample i5 4690K









Source for graphs: KitGuru


----------



## INSTG8R (Sep 8, 2017)

biffzinker said:


> Ah yes Intel Corp.’s NGPTIM next-generation polymer thermal interface material plus revamped power supply circuity was suppose to lead to improved overclocking.
> 
> One sample i5 4690K


Yeah that is kinda what I figured. It was just a"minor effort" after the 4770K issues. I'm sure they've gone back to whatever they were buying in 45gallon drums for everything...I mean mine is idling at 27C and never passes 60C under load so it's not "terrible" but as I said I'm not pushing it either. It's just sad that it's really nothing cost wise to have not continued using superior solder at least on their HEDT chips...


----------



## Vayra86 (Sep 8, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> That's an affect (no, not a typo) of the mentality represented by users that do so, that new users that start into this "overclocking" hobby adopt. I mean, after all, that's what overclocking really used to be, before it was turned into a selling point. And because it's an affect (again, not a typo), it might not be the actual right approach. So when it was turned into a selling point, this affect was considered, and now we have things like every single multiplier, PER CORE of a CPU, already having a pre-programmed VID.
> 
> And while you may think Intel sells "K" SKU CPUs for overclocking, again, this is an affect of the community. *"K" SKUs are ALREADY OC'ed for you*. The power and cooling needs are increased already, and that should have been the first sign that THAT is what Intel is supporting... they have pre-OC'd the "K" SKUs for you. That's why many of these chips come without a cooler... you need to buy better than what Intel provides with the other chips, and the power increases considerably 65W - 95W is a near 50% increase in power consumed.
> 
> Unfortunately, marketing and reviewers have portrayed this differently than what it really is, *but the truth of the matter is printed right on the box*. Sure, you do also get "unlocked" multipliers, but do keep in mind that those multis already have VIDs programmed. If Intel truly wanted you to OC as you'd like to define it, they'd not have to waste their time doing things like programming the multipliers above stock with VIDs.



^This.

Its the same everywhere. Intel has been clock bumping the same junk for years now, and they stick a K on some of their chips to cater to a small percent of the market that wants to tinker with it - and they let them pay a premium for it which, combined with the required cooling solution, makes the net perf/dollar metric worse than any of their non-K options - the only gain you can extract is absolute performance. Nvidia: GPU Boost 3.0 eats almost all the headroom that's left in there at a given power target - its so horribly efficient at it, that it even has a positive effect on the perf/watt, and the AIBs then push the base clock a bit further, and we PAY for that OC being done for us.

Its so ironic really, TIM is the least of our problems when it comes to overclocking. Especially because those that really want the last 1% of performance are doing the delid anyway, solving the problem themselves. The rest of the world just wants someone else to do the work for them.

The whole thing is blown way out of proportion.


----------



## Hood (Sep 8, 2017)

biffzinker said:


> So does that make @P4-630 a Intel fanboy then I presume since he named himself after the Pentium 4 630?
> View attachment 91848


Probably.


----------



## Th3pwn3r (Sep 8, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> Welcome to the 1%...
> 
> As we said, most dont care. Its not a big deal. I like to push things to the limit and this frankly doesnt bother me. I mean, what is 200 mhz more IF IM LUCKY (we went over it at this end of overclocking you arent gaining much..even gave my results).
> 
> ...


Only real difference could be between a processor being a bottleneck or not, depends on which one we're talking about. 200mhz is a huge deal for a Pentium III


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 8, 2017)

200 Mhz doesn't make a PIII playable today. Maybe it did then, but, well, this is now.


----------



## Th3pwn3r (Sep 8, 2017)

EarthDog said:


> 200 Mhz doesn't make a PIII playable today. Maybe it did then, but, well, this is now.


That's the point, 200mhz won't make or break anything. It's more for bragging rights.


----------



## Valantar (Sep 8, 2017)

Th3pwn3r said:


> 80c doesn't leave much headroom though. If your processor is running at 80c stock clocks you can pretty much forget about any overclocking.


Considering those temps were claimed for a 10-core system running at 4.5GHz on all cores, I doubt there's much room for overclocking left at all, no matter what creates the bottleneck. As such, 80C is perfectly acceptable - I'd say it's pretty damn good. And it sure isn't going to damage anything (although voltage might, of course, but that's another story entirely).


----------



## trparky (Sep 8, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> And while you may think Intel sells "K" SKU CPUs for overclocking, again, this is an affect of the community. *"K" SKUs are ALREADY OC'ed for you*. The power and cooling needs are increased already, and that should have been the first sign that THAT is what Intel is supporting... they have pre-OC'd the "K" SKUs for you.


Yep. You basically said what I said earlier in this thread. The K chips are basically already pushed to the limits at the factory aka pre-overclocked.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 8, 2017)

trparky said:


> Yep. You basically said what I said earlier in this thread. The K chips are *basically already pushed to the limits at the factory* aka pre-overclocked.


But they arent... we said that. 

They easily reach past their boost and many past 5ghz (7700k/7740k) with good cooling. AMD doesnt get past their own boost. If intel is at the limit, you must feel amd is past its limit?

7900x will overclock 1 ghz and then some...



Th3pwn3r said:


> That's the point, 200mhz won't make or break anything. It's more for bragging rights.


Its my point as well...not sure why you brought the p3 up if you agreed. Seemed contrary.

Edit: i get you now... yeah. My reply to that is simply anyone can find a rare use case to disprove anything.


----------



## trparky (Sep 8, 2017)

I guess that we have a different idea what limits are. The K chips are pushed to what I would call "sane" limits. If you take a K chip and further overclock it you generally need far better cooling than your average person would ever think of putting into their rigs.


----------



## EarthDog (Sep 8, 2017)

I guess we do . Now that it is clearly defined, I still wonder what you think AMD's chips are. 

Seems we also have a different definition of what 'far better cooling than your average person would ever think of' is too. Many 7700K/7740K will reach 5GHz+ with an AIO. Many average people use AIOs these days. 

Hell, the 4.5GHz on my 7900X, a 1.2GHz overclock from base, I can cool with an AIO............ on that 'less than optimal' TIM.


----------



## trparky (Sep 8, 2017)

AMD's chips are pushed to the point where... They're balls to the walls.

I thought that at 5 GHz you needed custom cooling and no AIO would be able handle it.


----------



## Th3pwn3r (Sep 8, 2017)

Valantar said:


> Considering those temps were claimed for a 10-core system running at 4.5GHz on all cores, I doubt there's much room for overclocking left at all, no matter what creates the bottleneck. As such, 80C is perfectly acceptable - I'd say it's pretty damn good. And it sure isn't going to damage anything (although voltage might, of course, but that's another story entirely).



Yep, cooler is better but I'm not sure who said 80c would damage something. It's not a great starting point for over clocking though. There are plenty of people near or above 80c when shooting for 5ghz.  After a delid and new TIM and sealant temps drop and higher clocks are obtained on a lot of 7700k processors out there.



EarthDog said:


> But they arent... we said that.
> 
> They easily reach past their boost and many past 5ghz (7700k/7740k) with good cooling. AMD doesnt get past their own boost. If intel is at the limit, you must feel amd is past its limit?
> 
> ...



Yep, to each his or her own. I think too many people on here at grasping at straws just to be angry. I'm always on the fence for anything. 


trparky said:


> AMD's chips are pushed to the point where... They're balls to the walls.
> 
> I thought that at 5 GHz you needed custom cooling and no AIO would be able handle it.



Someone posted a build on Reddit saying he has 5GHZ stable on his 7700k with just a 120MM Corsair AIO.


----------



## Valantar (Sep 9, 2017)

Th3pwn3r said:


> Yep, cooler is better but I'm not sure who said 80c would damage something. It's not a great starting point for over clocking though. There are plenty of people near or above 80c when shooting for 5ghz.  After a delid and new TIM and sealant temps drop and higher clocks are obtained on a lot of 7700k processors out there.


Again: we're not talking about 80c as a starting point for OC'ing, but as the end result. Those are two radically different things. Now, I'm not talking about 7700Ks, nor am I saying that 7900Xs don't run hot, I'm simply pointing out the complete lack of logic of saying that a heavily overclocked 10-core running at 80c with all cores at 4.5GHz is a perfectly fine result.


----------



## trparky (Sep 9, 2017)

Valantar said:


> eavily overclocked 10-core running at 80c with all cores at 4.5GHz is a perfectly fine result.


You see, they're not supposed to be running at those speeds; they were never designed to me running at those speeds. Yes, Intel gives users the ability to overclock their enthusiast chips but the conditions that occur after user overclock them is completely up to the users to handle. Intel knows the limits of their chips, the fact that users overclock them is completely up to them.

Look at it this way, back in the days of Ivy Bridge their chips were clocked in the mid-3 GHz range and you were able to get some amazing overclocks out of them. I myself were able to get an extra 1 GHz out of it. Why? Because at the time the chips were clocked lower than what is needed today. Fast forward to today and Intel knows what is needed and already gives it to you in the form of the K chips, pre-overclocked chips. Any more overclocking than Intel has already done for you is completely up to you. Think of the K chips like the pre-overclocked video cards you often see. Yep, already overclocked, anymore overclocking and you risk damage to it.


----------



## Th3pwn3r (Sep 10, 2017)

Valantar said:


> Again: we're not talking about 80c as a starting point for OC'ing, but as the end result. Those are two radically different things. Now, I'm not talking about 7700Ks, nor am I saying that 7900Xs don't run hot, I'm simply pointing out the complete lack of logic of saying that a heavily overclocked 10-core running at 80c with all cores at 4.5GHz is a perfectly fine result.



Explain to me like I'm 5 please(ELI5).


----------



## StrayKAT (Sep 10, 2017)

trparky said:


> You see, they're not supposed to be running at those speeds; they were never designed to me running at those speeds. Yes, Intel gives users the ability to overclock their enthusiast chips but the conditions that occur after user overclock them is completely up to the users to handle. Intel knows the limits of their chips, the fact that users overclock them is completely up to them.
> 
> Look at it this way, back in the days of Ivy Bridge their chips were clocked in the mid-3 GHz range and you were able to get some amazing overclocks out of them. I myself were able to get an extra 1 GHz out of it. Why? Because at the time the chips were clocked lower than what is needed today. Fast forward to today and Intel knows what is needed and already gives it to you in the form of the K chips, pre-overclocked chips. Any more overclocking than Intel has already done for you is completely up to you. Think of the K chips like the pre-overclocked video cards you often see. Yep, already overclocked, anymore overclocking and you risk damage to it.



I'm just sticking stock and/or turbo myself. This whole de-lidding thing convinces me even more. I don't run anything that needs more than 4.5 anyways. Secondly, I don't want a big double tower to cool it. The lengths I have to go to OC are absurd. Should have never bought a K series probably.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 10, 2017)

Valantar said:


> I'm simply pointing out the complete lack of logic of saying that a heavily overclocked 10-core running at 80c with all cores at 4.5GHz is a perfectly fine result.



And why isn't it perfectly fine? The CPU can go higher, both in speed and temperatures. It could go lower in temperatures, if I wasn't using a fairly cheap AIO cooler. While many want 5 GHz CPUs, for me, the optimal speed for Intel's CPU design since Sandybridge has been 4.6 GHz, and until they change their core design, that won't change.


----------



## Th3pwn3r (Sep 10, 2017)

StrayKAT said:


> I'm just sticking stock and/or turbo myself. This whole de-lidding thing convinces me even more. I don't run anything that needs more than 4.5 anyways. Secondly, I don't want a big double tower to cool it. The lengths I have to go to OC are absurd. Should have never bought a K series probably.


It's not that my much work or hassle.

Check out the job I did yesterday-


----------



## Valantar (Sep 11, 2017)

cadaveca said:


> And why isn't it perfectly fine? The CPU can go higher, both in speed and temperatures. It could go lower in temperatures, if I wasn't using a fairly cheap AIO cooler. While many want 5 GHz CPUs, for me, the optimal speed for Intel's CPU design since Sandybridge has been 4.6 GHz, and until they change their core design, that won't change.


I apparently managed to turn an "isn't" into an "is" while writing that. So much for making myself clear, I guess. It is absolutely a perfectly fine temperature, which was my whole point (and what others were arguing quite strongly against).


----------

