Core i7-8700K Reviewed by Lab501

[EarthDog]

You can overclock plenty... just not as close to the silicon's limit.

 

[cadaveca]

So you are saying that Intel sells unlocked processors and Z series chipsets (both at a premium) advertising how they support overclocking, and then cripple their processors so that we cannot overclock and risk killing our processors?

It's not that way at all. Core i9-7900X is a 140W CPU, but can do about 275-300W before overheating with decent AIO. 95W 7700K chips usually go 150-175W. Both chips use paste. How is letting a CPU draw double it's rated power consumption "crippling" it?

Also, I'd call allowing chips to draw twice their rated power, while still not dying, supporting overclocking. They could have easily designed CPUs so that they cannot do this at all, which is technically the case with the non-"K" or -"X" SKU CPUs. Do also keep in mind that BIOS is programmed with power use limits, and some CPUs also offer reduced power use modes. The truth of the matter could not be further from what you are suggesting.

 

[opt33]

Using solder would allow user to push CPU hard enough that it would die. Using paste makes CPU overheat before this is possible. It saves them RMA hassles from users that do not know how to OC properly.

In past thread I linked a video with Intel staff saying they needed a way to make CPU fail testing, but not damage itself, so they could examine those failures and figure out how to overcome them. I believe that using this paste is how they do so, as CPU will overheat faster. Temperatures do not kill CPUs anyway. Current does. So they make CPU overheat BEFORE current reaches dangerous levels, using traditional cooling methods. The paste is like a rev limiter.

And if an enthusiast wants to push harder, delid is pretty easy, especially if you have one of the many tools on the market for this.

There is no reason to attach nefarious or in your case "beneficial" reasons to intel's business decisions, ie intel using tim to cause overheating at higher current... that was likely jagjitnatt's intent by summarizing your post. If solder was same cost as paste, intel would still use solder. Some get annoyed that intel is using cheaper paste and overstate its detriment, others get annoyed at those overstating the effect of paste and resort to "defending" intel's business decision by attaching nonsensical benefits, as if intel needed defending from running a business for profit. Solder costs millions more per year vs paste, is not required to meet thermal specs even with a modest overclock, and is currently not a determining factor in competitive edge with AMD, so solder doesnt make business sense. No bizarre, beneficial, altruistic or conspiracy theories on either side of the argument need apply.

The one good thing from intel (likely via competition) is 8 core mainstream cpus will be coming next year. So I can go from broadwell e soldered 8 core, to mainstrean as I have less issue deliding those than $1K-2K enthusiast ones, both from economic (though unlikely oops can happen) and just principle.