• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

The Truth About CPU Soldering

Should Intel be using better thermal paste?


  • Total voters
    79
Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,371 (3.55/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
We've had this conversation before...

They don't "throttle". That's a totally inaccurate and misleading word to use to describe what really happens. Since it implies a reduction in speed. As in backing off the throttle in your car to reduce engine/vehicle speed. Nothing like that actually happens. They run, at whatever speed they've been set to run at, until Tj Max is exceeded and then immediately shutdown. The processor shutting itself off is not reducing its speed. You can't reduce speed to 0MHz. 0MHz is not a speed. 0MHz is the absence of speed.

Intel doesn't help matters by referring to it as "throttling". Further spreading the myth and misconceptions. But at least they include the part about the shutdown that actually happens instead.

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000005597/processors.html
@MrGenius - We did go over this before. IIRC, we pointed out CPUs throttling (lowering clockspeed) at a set point and didnt hear from you again in that thread. The thermal shutdown point is higher.

Nobody said 0 Hz. Ever.

Also, that statement you quoted from Intel, it is two different sentences. You would think Intel is intelligent enough to know what Thermal Throttling is and thermal shutdown. Assuming you think they have a handle on those things. The two sentences describing two different actions makes sense. ;)

Here is a shot of it in action...please note all thermal throttling functions in the BIOS have been set to off.
ovht1.pngovht2.png

You should be able to note from both the XTU screen and the Coretemp windows the processor speed lowered as well as the voltage in order to keep temperatures below that 100C point. If I managed to get it to 110C, I would be it would shut off. But, with the AIO block on and the pump not running, it managed to drop to around 2.63GHz with voltage around .7V before I plugged it back in.

Edit: whats funny...i looked back on that conversation. I quoted you that intel passage and bolded both the throttling part and shutdown. A couple of posts later, someone else came in and quoted what Reeves did below.
Post 45 on -https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/can-pcs-overheat.237739/page-2#post-3737459

I wonder if you'll reply this time......
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 2, 2015
Messages
90 (0.03/day)
Location
Nova Scotia
System Name Old Old Old.
Processor AMD X2 5200+ 2.6Ghz @5665+ 2.83GHz 1.4v
Motherboard ASUS M2NPV-VM
Memory Corsair XMS2 PC6400 Dual channel 1GBx2 CL5-5-5-15-20 @ 944MHz DDR2
Video Card(s) ATI Radeon 2600XT 256MB core@857MHz ram@1179MHz GDDR4
Storage alot of 'em
Display(s) ASUS 23" VC239H 1920x1080 IPS 5ms
Audio Device(s) Diamond 5.1
Power Supply Enermax Liberty 400w dual rail
Mouse Logitech MX518
Keyboard Logitech G11
"Tjunction Max (TjMax) is different than the TCC Activation Temperature. TCC offset represents where the processor starts to throttle, relative to the TjMax value. Tjunction can be the same temperature as TCC if the TCC offset equal to zero."
Why can't people understand this simple paragraph from intel. TCC can be ANYTHING they choose it to be if they introduce an offset. And some oem setups have appx 20c offset. So TCC kicks in around 75-80. :banghead:
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000005597/processors.html

@EarthDog most do throttle at 100c and have a 0c offset, like your setup, but for some it's not 100c some throttle pretty much anywhere between 70-90 depending on the offset. Ive seen a few "not many" desktops that i have repaired that would throttle at random temps above 70. From what I read over the years, some just do that, and when you ask mobo manufacturers why, they wont say, they inevitably link you to the link above and quote TCC activation offset. From what i can tell imho they just do it to reduce warranty claims, running 90c+ 24/7 will damage a processor as we all know, oem's use subpar bins also, cheapo oem's don't want to have to replace expensive cpu's and they don't want their products failing prematurely on the world stage, so they build in a temp buffer in the form of TCC offset. I just want people to know that the 100c magic number isn't always the magic number. :)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,371 (3.55/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
You'll want to link where you found that passage Reeves. :)

Note if it was 20C offset, I would have throttled at 80C. I started throttling at 100C. I guess Coretemp is reading/listing TJmax wrong if I am throttling at 100C (or it and realtemp are listing tcc). We know tjmax is a shutdown point.

Unrelated to that point, I also know, and have shown, in two different threads now, throttling of the CPU (before the abrupt shutdown described)...but many apps seem list tjmax when its really reading tcc. As when i hit those values, across multiple generations of cpus, they have always throttled with the prochot.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
2,840 (0.57/day)
I am not spreading wrong information. Maybe you need to learn how solder and TIM works.
You may not see it but, I wrote at same size means same surface area. At same area Solder with high thermal conductivity will perform better than the best TIM, even better than liquide TIM.
And about burning chips, that happen faster with crappy TIM than solder.(And don't give the crappy Xbox soldering(different kind of soldering) problem as example).
And about cost, i5, i7 and i9 are not cheap cpus. They are mid-high to high end cpus. According to intel fanboy intel has best foundary, that means less chip get wested. Also intel's i5 and i7 are samll cpu, which has less chance of being deffective. So how it would cost to intel to solder a cpu? I bet its negligible. Its not like intel is not making any profit.

?

I'm going to speak in what might sound condescending, but I'm going to have to make sure the words are clear.

1) The two surfaces that matter are the IHS and processor. The processor produces heat, and the IHS dissipates it to the surrounding environment.
2) TIM could be foregone entirely if the IHS and processor were smoothed infinitely. In effect, the surface area of contact between processor and IHS is increased with TIM. Mathematically, a 10mm^2 processor contacts an IHS in far fewer places than two smooth surfaces, and effectively transfers heat on only a small portion of the surface.
3) Even the best TIM is an insulator compared to metals. It's a trade-off between massively increasing contact area and providing a mild resistance to heat flow. Check those figures again, and you'll see that thermal energy transfer, via conduction, is expressed in surface area and material thickness. (Q/t = k*A*(T2-T1)/d. This means a minor change to d and A (thickness of material and contact area) will quickly outstrip any minor increase in k (the thermal constant). Thus, my recommendation to minimize d and increase A through deformation.

4) You seem to not understand costs. Let's review. The cost to apply a thermal paste is, at most, a precision injector and the material. A couple of cents maybe. Soldering requires flux, solder, heating, cooling, testing, and QC to demonstrate the process is in control. In raw materials the cost may be minor, but Intel manufactures these parts. It's like complaining that a banana costs more than the water and fertilizer required to grow it, despite having to travel thousands of miles and be harvested. The lack of understanding seems to be bridging manufacturing cost with material cost.
5) Why exactly are you bringing up the Xbox? I didn't use it as an example. As a point of discussion it had poor thermal management, and over time the internal stresses from heating and cooling cycles caused issues. It wasn't about poor TIM, but a design flaw of thermal management. The technique of baking the board reseated components, and allowed minor reflow. Replacing the TIM on it was a stop-gap, as you'll note that better thermal management (read: bigger coolers and less heat output) solved the issue in subsequent releases without replacing the TIM. Sometimes poor designs are just poor designs.
6) For the purposes of business, Intel's largest client base, an i3 and i5 is cheap. Allowing you that point for kicks, imagine your $200 processor suddenly costing you $250. TIM allowed for better yields, less scrap, and a cheaper process. Intel didn't exactly pay it back to consumers, but you'd better bet they'd charge a premium, and earn back the same margins. Maybe you'd be willing to pay a 25% upcharge for a processor, heck the k series already asks for 10-20 USD more anyways. I'd gladly pocket the difference and invest in a good aftermarket cooler. Those extra 500 MHz of overclocking aren't worth the problem, as demonstrated by the miniscule percentage of delidding.

7) Buy AMD. It solves your problems. They solder. If your next response is "but AMD isn't leading performance," then go weep in a corner. This is the real world, either speak with your wallet, or stop talking. The way we get Intel to solder is to support AMD. When their sales take a hit they'll listen, until then their profits are large. Why would you invest in expensive and risky things if you're already fat and happy?
 
Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Messages
8,253 (1.19/day)
System Name money pit..
Processor Intel 9900K 4.8 at 1.152 core voltage minus 0.120 offset
Motherboard Asus rog Strix Z370-F Gaming
Cooling Dark Rock TF air cooler.. Stock vga air coolers with case side fans to help cooling..
Memory 32 gb corsair vengeance 3200
Video Card(s) Palit Gaming Pro OC 2080TI
Storage 150 nvme boot drive partition.. 1T Sandisk sata.. 1T Transend sata.. 1T 970 evo nvme m 2..
Display(s) 27" Asus PG279Q ROG Swift 165Hrz Nvidia G-Sync, IPS.. 2560x1440..
Case Gigabyte mid-tower.. cheap and nothing special..
Audio Device(s) onboard sounds with stereo amp..
Power Supply EVGA 850 watt..
Mouse Logitech G700s
Keyboard Logitech K270
Software Win 10 pro..
Benchmark Scores Firestike 29500.. timepsy 14000..
my coffelake chip at 5 gig.. running the furmark cpu burner 12 threads.. only one core is hitting the magic 100C.. the chip is just beginning to throttle.. not much but it is only just hitting 100 C

the last three intel chips i have had.. 4790K 7700K and now my 8700K... have all behaved in exactly the same way when they hit the magic 100 C..

prime 95 small blocks would have them throttling down by 300mhz or maybe 400mhz.. at no point will the chip go over 100 C.. cpu Z hits about 90 C with my chip.. gaming would be no more than 70 C..

my cooling is set to silent mode.. jet engine mode would drop the temps some but i dont run at 5 gig and dont like noisy fans..

this is very easy to reproduce.. quite why its in any doubt i havnt a clue..



trog
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,371 (3.55/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
Lol, ive already showed it, and clearly (see thumbnails). Yours doesnt show anything trog buddy, sorry. A 3mhz variance is spread spectrum doing its thing. ;)

Shut off the pump and watch the magic happen. :)
 
Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Messages
8,253 (1.19/day)
System Name money pit..
Processor Intel 9900K 4.8 at 1.152 core voltage minus 0.120 offset
Motherboard Asus rog Strix Z370-F Gaming
Cooling Dark Rock TF air cooler.. Stock vga air coolers with case side fans to help cooling..
Memory 32 gb corsair vengeance 3200
Video Card(s) Palit Gaming Pro OC 2080TI
Storage 150 nvme boot drive partition.. 1T Sandisk sata.. 1T Transend sata.. 1T 970 evo nvme m 2..
Display(s) 27" Asus PG279Q ROG Swift 165Hrz Nvidia G-Sync, IPS.. 2560x1440..
Case Gigabyte mid-tower.. cheap and nothing special..
Audio Device(s) onboard sounds with stereo amp..
Power Supply EVGA 850 watt..
Mouse Logitech G700s
Keyboard Logitech K270
Software Win 10 pro..
Benchmark Scores Firestike 29500.. timepsy 14000..
i could make the magic happen more obviously by clocking at 5.1 or 5.2 or simply running prime 95 on its max heat generation setting.. in fact i just did.. the clock drops to around 4.6 gig to maintain the 100C max with prime 95 small block running..

the chip is doing the downclocking i didnt have any offset in the bios for this run.. i am now going back to 4.8 gig with a 200mhz offset which is my normal running speed..

but you and i should both know by now.. folks believe what they want to in these threads.. there aint no changing their minds.. he he

trog
 
Joined
Mar 18, 2015
Messages
2,963 (0.83/day)
Location
Long Island
1. The article is 2.5 years old so 1st question is relevance.

2. There's real world temperature impacts and imagined impacts. Prime95 and other synthetic utilities don't provide real world impacts ... only in the imaginary world for 99.97% of the population who aren't dedicating a PC to finding the next Merseene Prime. If ypou are usoing real world apps, then test tem[ps on real wporld apps. If ya not sire what ya might use, then use an application based stress test like RoG Real Bench

3. In my experience, my OC limits are being determined not by temperature but by voltage limits. Everyone has to set their own numbers based upon what they use their PC for and how importanbt it is that it run xx hours per day/ y days per week for z years with * hours of downtime.

4. So with voltage (1.3875 in BIOS for me) being the limiting factor, at least for what we are building (1.42 max average over 10 seconds, 1.51 instantaneous spikes). I don't much care what they are using as it is not impacting anything.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,371 (3.55/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
1. The article is 2.5 years old so 1st question is relevance.

2. There's real world temperature impacts and imagined impacts. Prime95 and other synthetic utilities don't provide real world impacts ... only in the imaginary world for 99.97% of the population who aren't dedicating a PC to finding the next Merseene Prime. If ypou are usoing real world apps, then test tem[ps on real wporld apps. If ya not sire what ya might use, then use an application based stress test like RoG Real Bench

3. In my experience, my OC limits are being determined not by temperature but by voltage limits. Everyone has to set their own numbers based upon what they use their PC for and how importanbt it is that it run xx hours per day/ y days per week for z years with * hours of downtime.

4. So with voltage (1.3875 in BIOS for me) being the limiting factor, at least for what we are building (1.42 max average over 10 seconds, 1.51 instantaneous spikes). I don't much care what they are using as it is not impacting anything.
1. Plenty.
2. Sure it does. For anything that uses AVX instructions... Blender is one application. PoVRay for rendering also does.
3. Its a crapshoot... but mostly temps... it does depend on the cpu though. If you artificially lower the voltage for your needs, I suppose there is a glass ceiling at that point.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
21,514 (3.40/day)
System Name Pioneer
Processor Ryzen R9 9950X
Motherboard GIGABYTE Aorus Elite X670 AX
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 + A whole lotta Sunon and Corsair Maglev blower fans...
Memory 64GB (4x 16GB) G.Skill Flare X5 @ DDR5-6000 CL30
Video Card(s) XFX RX 7900 XTX Speedster Merc 310
Storage Intel 905p Optane 960GB boot, +2x Crucial P5 Plus 2TB PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSDs
Display(s) 55" LG 55" B9 OLED 4K Display
Case Thermaltake Core X31
Audio Device(s) TOSLINK->Schiit Modi MB->Asgard 2 DAC Amp->AKG Pro K712 Headphones or HDMI->B9 OLED
Power Supply FSP Hydro Ti Pro 850W
Mouse Logitech G305 Lightspeed Wireless
Keyboard WASD Code v3 with Cherry Green keyswitches + PBT DS keycaps
Software Gentoo Linux x64 / Windows 11 Enterprise IoT 2024
Intel doesn't help matters by referring to it as "throttling". Further spreading the myth and misconceptions. But at least they include the part about the shutdown that actually happens instead.

I don't know what Intel's on, but as someone who has met TJ max, they do indeed throttle.
 

las

Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
1,693 (0.38/day)
System Name Meh
Processor 7800X3D
Motherboard MSI X670E Tomahawk
Cooling Thermalright Phantom Spirit
Memory 32GB G.Skill @ 6000/CL30
Video Card(s) Gainward RTX 4090 Phantom / Undervolt + OC
Storage Samsung 990 Pro 2TB + WD SN850X 1TB + 64TB NAS/Server
Display(s) 27" 1440p IPS @ 360 Hz + 32" 4K/UHD QD-OLED @ 240 Hz + 77" 4K/UHD QD-OLED @ 144 Hz VRR
Case Fractal Design North XL
Audio Device(s) FiiO DAC
Power Supply Corsair RM1000x / Native 12VHPWR
Mouse Logitech G Pro Wireless Superlight + Razer Deathadder V3 Pro
Keyboard Corsair K60 Pro / MX Low Profile Speed
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
I hope Intel fixes the issue with Ice Lake - Or AMD Ryzen will keep gaining market share as clocks go up. Intel is hitting a brick wall around 5 GHz with no delid.
 

dorsetknob

"YOUR RMA REQUEST IS CON-REFUSED"
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
9,107 (1.26/day)
Location
Dorset where else eh? >>> Thats ENGLAND<<<
I hope Intel fixes the issue with Ice Lake - Or AMD Ryzen will keep gaining market share as clocks go up. Intel is hitting a brick wall around 5 GHz with no delid.

THE GHz WALL has been known and talked about for some time
Both Intel and AMD privately accept this and hence the push with more core's on Mainstream CPU's

Software writes/coders are also aware of this and also hense why New Software is generaly written and coded to use more core's
More Core's and more threads is the Future ( for the moment ). and not ever higher GHz's
 
Last edited:

las

Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
1,693 (0.38/day)
System Name Meh
Processor 7800X3D
Motherboard MSI X670E Tomahawk
Cooling Thermalright Phantom Spirit
Memory 32GB G.Skill @ 6000/CL30
Video Card(s) Gainward RTX 4090 Phantom / Undervolt + OC
Storage Samsung 990 Pro 2TB + WD SN850X 1TB + 64TB NAS/Server
Display(s) 27" 1440p IPS @ 360 Hz + 32" 4K/UHD QD-OLED @ 240 Hz + 77" 4K/UHD QD-OLED @ 144 Hz VRR
Case Fractal Design North XL
Audio Device(s) FiiO DAC
Power Supply Corsair RM1000x / Native 12VHPWR
Mouse Logitech G Pro Wireless Superlight + Razer Deathadder V3 Pro
Keyboard Corsair K60 Pro / MX Low Profile Speed
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
THE GHz WALL has been known and talked about for some time
Both Intel and AMD privately accept this and hence the push with more core's on Mainstream CPU's

Software writes/coders are also aware of this and also hense why New Software is generaly written and coded to use more core's
More Core's and more threads is the Future ( for the moment ). and not ever higher GHz's

Most games that perform worse on Ryzen is because they prefer high clocks over many cores.

This is why high refresh rate gamers still choose Intel, but Ryzen clocks will improve over time. Ryzen at 4.5ish will be on par with Intel at 5ish in these games tho. AMD is catching up clockspeedwise AND performs better clock for clock.

Future is looking bright for AMD. Unless Ice Lake is a homerun, like Sandy Bridge was back then..
 

dorsetknob

"YOUR RMA REQUEST IS CON-REFUSED"
Joined
Mar 17, 2005
Messages
9,107 (1.26/day)
Location
Dorset where else eh? >>> Thats ENGLAND<<<
Most games that perform worse on Ryzen is because they prefer high clocks over many cores.

This is why high refresh rate gamers still choose Intel, but Ryzen clocks will improve over time. Ryzen at 4.5ish will be on par with Intel at 5ish in these games tho. AMD is catching up clockspeedwise AND performs better clock for clock.
That may be true at the moment but as Desktop Core Count increases and more Software is written to use those extra core's and threads Shear GHz loses its Relevence
and do not forget most CPU's are Sold for Desktop Productivity and not Gaming

Intel and AMD's Market is DESKTOP and not Gaming
and on the Desktop Core Count will Rule
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,371 (3.55/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
AND performs better clock for clock.
Its still a few percent behind IPC. I believe what you meant to say was that it has more efficient SMT/HT than Intel. ;)


...but what does this have to do with solder? :)
 

las

Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
1,693 (0.38/day)
System Name Meh
Processor 7800X3D
Motherboard MSI X670E Tomahawk
Cooling Thermalright Phantom Spirit
Memory 32GB G.Skill @ 6000/CL30
Video Card(s) Gainward RTX 4090 Phantom / Undervolt + OC
Storage Samsung 990 Pro 2TB + WD SN850X 1TB + 64TB NAS/Server
Display(s) 27" 1440p IPS @ 360 Hz + 32" 4K/UHD QD-OLED @ 240 Hz + 77" 4K/UHD QD-OLED @ 144 Hz VRR
Case Fractal Design North XL
Audio Device(s) FiiO DAC
Power Supply Corsair RM1000x / Native 12VHPWR
Mouse Logitech G Pro Wireless Superlight + Razer Deathadder V3 Pro
Keyboard Corsair K60 Pro / MX Low Profile Speed
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Its still a few percent behind IPC. I believe what you meant to say was that it has more efficient SMT/HT than Intel. ;)


...but what does this have to do with solder? :)

This has everything to do with the crappy paste Intel is using. Better paste with no gap or solder would bump up clockspeeds with 200 MHz easy. Intel is tapped out, meanwhile AMD is gaining higher and higher clocks. Zen refresh should do 4.2-4-3 easy.

Ryzen is even more powerefficient. Intel needs to step up their game or lose marketshare. CFL was a panic-release.

I expect 10nm Ice Lake 8C/16T for mainstream 2H 2018.

BTW. I have delidded ~10 CPU's since Ivy Bridge came out. All delivered a HUGE temp decrease under load. Anywhere from 15c to 30c. Gaining a few hundred MHz more in the process. Up to 400 MHz more. And less system noise because of lower fans/pump RPM...
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 12, 2017
Messages
2,207 (0.80/day)
Hasn't that link been posted in debates like a million times already?

It basically argues it's bad for small dies. It doesn't mean it's bad for big ones like modern 6-core+ CPUs tend to be, however.

And Intel COULD be using better thermal paste, but honestly? They have no real economic reason to do so.

If you still feel bored in hearing the same thing, I also have been working on a hybrid cooling solution for some time. Under the IHS is Liquid Metal Compound between die & IHS. But also under the IHS is "Thermal Pads".

The Thermal pads come into contact with the IHS & CPU PCB' ie it's not on the die. The die has Liquid Metal Compound. The idea here is the thermal pads spread heat across the IHS faster but also send heat though the CPU pins, dissipating the heat though the motherboard PCB.

This experiment is not fully working yet & there are problems to solve which I have partly fixed. The only differences between two identical CPUs is the weight. It's much heavier than normal.

watch this space for improvements.

Note: Not all experiments work here & some do fail.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,371 (3.55/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
This has everything to do with the crappy paste Intel is using. Better paste with no gap or solder would bump up clockspeeds with 200 MHz easy. Intel is tapped out, meanwhile AMD is gaining higher and higher clocks. Zen refresh should do 4.2-4-3 easy.

Ryzen is even more powerefficient. Intel needs to step up their game or lose marketshare. CFL was a panic-release.

I expect 10nm Ice Lake 8C/16T for mainstream 2H 2018.

BTW. I have delidded ~10 CPU's since Ivy Bridge came out. All delivered a HUGE temp decrease under load. Anywhere from 15c to 30c. Gaining a few hundred MHz more in the process. Up to 400 MHz more. And less system noise because of lower fans/pump RPM...
Yeah, we know the paste can be better, but its clearly good enough to overclock their chips quite a bit. Im sorry you are bitter a couple hundred mhz were left on the table. Even with that paste, the intel cpu overclocks more. AMD is whose clearly tapped out currently. Their cpus can get past their own xfr and like 200 mhz past their own all core boost. Intel can with their 'crappy' paste.

I dont care about power efficiency too much. Id rather have a 95w chip at 5 ghz (or 4.8 in your world) than a 65w chip locked at 4.1. That refresh is really pushing the envelope gaining an extra 100-200 mhz, lol! I bet they wont be able to overclock much (100-200 mhz) past their xfr until Zen2 is released in 2019.

Amd still has some work to do too. Competition is nice, but make no mistake about it, in some areas, including IPC and overclocking, they have some work to do. :)

watch this space for improvements.

Note: Not all experiments work here & some do fail
id start a thread of your own. ;)
 
Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Messages
8,253 (1.19/day)
System Name money pit..
Processor Intel 9900K 4.8 at 1.152 core voltage minus 0.120 offset
Motherboard Asus rog Strix Z370-F Gaming
Cooling Dark Rock TF air cooler.. Stock vga air coolers with case side fans to help cooling..
Memory 32 gb corsair vengeance 3200
Video Card(s) Palit Gaming Pro OC 2080TI
Storage 150 nvme boot drive partition.. 1T Sandisk sata.. 1T Transend sata.. 1T 970 evo nvme m 2..
Display(s) 27" Asus PG279Q ROG Swift 165Hrz Nvidia G-Sync, IPS.. 2560x1440..
Case Gigabyte mid-tower.. cheap and nothing special..
Audio Device(s) onboard sounds with stereo amp..
Power Supply EVGA 850 watt..
Mouse Logitech G700s
Keyboard Logitech K270
Software Win 10 pro..
Benchmark Scores Firestike 29500.. timepsy 14000..
I hope Intel fixes the issue with Ice Lake - Or AMD Ryzen will keep gaining market share as clocks go up. Intel is hitting a brick wall around 5 GHz with no delid.

intel is hitting a brick wall at around 5 gig and that is with pretty good cooling .. its a heat thing nothing else.. kind of reminds me of the old P4 days.. the chips are now end of line and clock speeds are now ramped up about as far as they can go.. they have had a good run with them though.. he he

what comes next is more cores at lower clock speeds.. which is exactly what happened ten years ago.. a safe bet cos most of the extra cores sit there doing bugger all.. it does look good in the benchmarks though..

and for what its worth my asus motherboard allows me to set my own throttle offset point in the bios.. i have never bothered using it buts the option is there.. the intel default is 100C though which makes me think 100C is safe..

trog

ps.. which goes back to what i said earlier.. a relid is good for a couple of hundred mhz extra clock speed.. its only being able to hit the magic 5 gig clock speed that makes it even worth thinking about..
 
Last edited:

las

Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
1,693 (0.38/day)
System Name Meh
Processor 7800X3D
Motherboard MSI X670E Tomahawk
Cooling Thermalright Phantom Spirit
Memory 32GB G.Skill @ 6000/CL30
Video Card(s) Gainward RTX 4090 Phantom / Undervolt + OC
Storage Samsung 990 Pro 2TB + WD SN850X 1TB + 64TB NAS/Server
Display(s) 27" 1440p IPS @ 360 Hz + 32" 4K/UHD QD-OLED @ 240 Hz + 77" 4K/UHD QD-OLED @ 144 Hz VRR
Case Fractal Design North XL
Audio Device(s) FiiO DAC
Power Supply Corsair RM1000x / Native 12VHPWR
Mouse Logitech G Pro Wireless Superlight + Razer Deathadder V3 Pro
Keyboard Corsair K60 Pro / MX Low Profile Speed
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Amd still has some work to do too.

And so has Intel. Too many fanboys are defending their crappy pastejob tho. Accepting 90c load temps, just lol. Several reviews are showing 90c load temp on high end AIO's with no delid. After delid 300-400 MHz more and lower temp.. Ever been in OCN forum? Tons of people with same results; Lower temps (and more stable across cores), 200-400 MHz gained, a more quiet system. WIN/WIN/WIN.

My own 6700K could barely do 4.7 before delid. After delid it was a breeze and temps are lower at 5 GHz than 4.7 with lid. Bad? Yeah I would say so. Acceptable? For some it seems. Many went Ryzen because of these problems.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,371 (3.55/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
If many went ryzen because of those 'problems' as you say then they were clueless as all they got was a slower cpu by hundreds of mhz!!! If its speed they want, intel still has that crown.

....oh, but it has more cores (we cant take advantage of).

90c temps are ok. Intel says so. AMD and intel substrates are not the same!!!! Dont let your ignorance continue to precede you las!

It's amazing how you are hanging on to the inferior paste job when AMD, with solder, cant get past its own boost. I'd rather have intel's issue than AMD. At least it can be resolved with solder as opposed to an overhaul of the CPU architecture. ;)


Shouldn't you be tripping right about now? There are still a few brain cells that need jump started it seems. :p

EDIT: Why do you still have an Intel CPU if AMD's are so great??!! Its awfully ironic to see you trumpeting AMD here, but still rocking that Intel CPU from 3 years ago.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 22, 2013
Messages
1,317 (0.31/day)
System Name Gamer/ HTPC
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 2600
Motherboard ROG Crosshair VI
Cooling Alphacool Eisbaer 420 AIO
Memory G.Skill TridentZ RGB 2x8GB 3333 CL14
Video Card(s) Gigabyte Aorus RX 580
Storage Corsair Neutron 480 GB
Display(s) Samsung 42" 1080p
Case Phanteks Enthoo Luxe Tempered Glass
Power Supply Corsair 750
Software Win10 Pro
Benchmark Scores http://hwbot.org/user/johan45/
And so has Intel. Too many fanboys are defending their crappy pastejob tho. Accepting 90c load temps, just lol. Several reviews are showing 90c load temp on high end AIO's with no delid. After delid 300-400 MHz more and lower temp.. Ever been in OCN forum? Tons of people with same results; Lower temps (and more stable across cores), 200-400 MHz gained, a more quiet system. WIN/WIN/WIN.

My own 6700K could barely do 4.7 before delid. After delid it was a breeze and temps are lower at 5 GHz than 4.7 with lid. Bad? Yeah I would say so. Acceptable? For some it seems. Many went Ryzen because of these problems.
I highly doubt people switched to AMD because of the paste that Intel uses. More likely for core count at a better price.
 
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Messages
1,191 (0.27/day)
Processor AMD Ryzen 3700x
Motherboard asus ROG Strix B-350I Gaming
Cooling Deepcool LS520 SE
Memory crucial ballistix 32Gb DDR4
Video Card(s) RTX 3070 FE
Storage WD sn550 1To/WD ssd sata 1To /WD black sn750 1To/Seagate 2To/WD book 4 To back-up
Display(s) LG GL850
Case Dan A4 H2O
Audio Device(s) sennheiser HD58X
Power Supply Corsair SF600
Mouse MX master 3
Keyboard Master Key Mx
Software win 11 pro
And so has Intel. Too many fanboys are defending their crappy pastejob tho. Accepting 90c load temps, just lol. Several reviews are showing 90c load temp on high end AIO's with no delid. After delid 300-400 MHz more and lower temp.. Ever been in OCN forum? Tons of people with same results; Lower temps (and more stable across cores), 200-400 MHz gained, more quiet system.

My own 6700K could barely do 4.7 before delid. After delid it was a breeze and temps are lower at 5 GHz than 4.7 with lid. Bad? Yeah I would say so. Acceptable? For some it seems.
Intel the kind of company that will tell you to not overclock your K cpu if it get too hot. I doubt that they'll ever see this as something to actively work on.

And yhea, Before coffe lake AMD was just so much better for the price when you needed core count.
But now the 8700 got clock so high that it's more or less even with a 1700x in those task, while being way faster in single thread. The price is where AMD ultimately win if you need multithread.
 
Last edited:

las

Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
1,693 (0.38/day)
System Name Meh
Processor 7800X3D
Motherboard MSI X670E Tomahawk
Cooling Thermalright Phantom Spirit
Memory 32GB G.Skill @ 6000/CL30
Video Card(s) Gainward RTX 4090 Phantom / Undervolt + OC
Storage Samsung 990 Pro 2TB + WD SN850X 1TB + 64TB NAS/Server
Display(s) 27" 1440p IPS @ 360 Hz + 32" 4K/UHD QD-OLED @ 240 Hz + 77" 4K/UHD QD-OLED @ 144 Hz VRR
Case Fractal Design North XL
Audio Device(s) FiiO DAC
Power Supply Corsair RM1000x / Native 12VHPWR
Mouse Logitech G Pro Wireless Superlight + Razer Deathadder V3 Pro
Keyboard Corsair K60 Pro / MX Low Profile Speed
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
90c temps are ok. Intel says so.

Intel says so, because their garbage TIM is making their CPU's hot. I'd never accept such high load temps, driving all fans up and heating internals.

Why are you mad? :D Relax dude

How long before Ryzen 7 is beating 6c CFL in games?

Ryzen 5 1600/1600X is already beating i5-7600/i5-7600K in many AAA games, because of too low core count.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,371 (3.55/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
Intel says so, because their garbage TIM is making their CPU's hot. I'd never accept such high load temps, driving all fans up and heating internals.

Why are you mad?
What you accept and what they deem acceptable are, quite obviously, two different things. no offense, I'm going with the guy who made the CPUs telling me what is an acceptable range, versus some random forum member and what he thinks is 'acceptable'. Not to mention, those high temps are only seen during stress testing for all intents and purposes.

Again, I am whisper silent here with a stock chip running a static fan speed of 800RPM on my 3x120 radiator. A stock 16c/32t chip running at 4.5GHz. I'm literally in the upper 50's when gaming. The 8700K I use for reviews sits under a Corsair 2x120mm AIO and hits 5 GHz without a delid. Its a quiet as can be unless I am stress testing with AVX, when the fans ramp up. Again, that can be changed as well.


Mad? LOL, you got me all wrong. I am not mad in the least. Honestly, its comical for me to sit back here and read your posts. The straw man arguments are getting quite ridiculous at this point. :)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top