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

[Vya Domus]

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]

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]

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]

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?

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.

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]

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]

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]

*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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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



Get a TR setup

Says the AMD employee.

 

[EarthDog]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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?

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]

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?



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.

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]

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]

"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.

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]

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.