be quiet! Announces Pure Rock Slim 2 CPU Cooler and MC1 Series M.2 SSD Heatsinks

[dyonoctis]

I think the answer to that is "don't but the TX3 in France", then

There are cheap dual/triple heatpipe 92mm towers from Aerocool, Antec, Alpenfohn, Akasa, Arctic, Deepcool, Jonsbo, Raijintek Silverstone, Zalman. One of them must be available.

Hell, I found this comically-cheap cooler for £7.99 that's supposedly rated for 95W CPUs! That's not an endorsement, just something I found unusual

https://www.scan.co.uk/products/dee...atpipe-cpu-cooler-with-92mm-fan-for-intel-amd
View attachment 192015

Starting to look in other countries is becoming quite an hassle if dirt cheap is what you are after sometimes the increased shipping cost might end up negating the benefits, or the country you're buying from might not ship to your country at all. (Amazon Netherlands got the best price but don't ship to France)

But overall, in this age of mainstream 6/8 core pushed to their limits even at stocks, I feel like 92nm are becoming a niche product more about space constraints, than absolute low price. Even a 92nm noctua with 5 heatpipes is barely cutting it, so I can't imagine 3 heatpipes will be able to provide a confortable experience for anyone not using a low power sku

 

[Valantar]

Zen3 preferring to boost up to 90C (to extract the most boost headroom the cooling can provide)

Just felt like responding to this as I test fit my new Asrock PG B550 ITX/5800X setup yesterday: running OCCT (AVX2 AFAIK) on all threads it was running at 4.625GHz all-core at 64-66°C tDie. The cooler? An old Hyper 212 Evo, defaulting to the motherboard's silent fan profile (nowhere near 100% fan speed). Of course single core transient loads will spike higher - I've so far seen peaks around 72°C - and this is running open on my desk, but... your description does not match my reality.

As for there being cheaper alternatives: sure, obviously. This will also likely sell for less than MSRP over time. Its likely that this will be among the better coolers in this price bracket though, given its design, fan quality and the company behind it. That obviously doesn't mean there aren't good alternatives, but that's a good thing, no? More choice = more betterer?

 

[Chrispy_]

Just felt like responding to this as I test fit my new Asrock PG B550 ITX/5800X setup yesterday: running OCCT (AVX2 AFAIK) on all threads it was running at 4.625GHz all-core at 64-66°C tDie. The cooler? An old Hyper 212 Evo, defaulting to the motherboard's silent fan profile (nowhere near 100% fan speed). Of course single core transient loads will spike higher - I've so far seen peaks around 72°C - and this is running open on my desk, but... your description does not match my reality.

As for there being cheaper alternatives: sure, obviously. This will also likely sell for less than MSRP over time. Its likely that this will be among the better coolers in this price bracket though, given its design, fan quality and the company behind it. That obviously doesn't mean there aren't good alternatives, but that's a good thing, no? More choice = more betterer?

Interesting!
TBH I have no idea how Zen3 handles AVX2. It's not a realistic workload for consumers.

 

[Valantar]

Interesting!
TBH I have no idea how Zen3 handles AVX2. It's not a realistic workload for consumers.

Definitely not, but it should represent a reasonable worst-case scenario given how power intensive AVX tends to be. And so far I see no trace of the fabled hot-running 7nm Ryzens (Same goes for the 4650G in my HTPC, though that very rarely sees any significant load.)

 

[Mussels]

Its only the 5800x that runs that hot due to single CCX and 8 cores - all the other zen 3s run a lot colder

 

[Valantar]

Its only the 5800x that runs that hot due to single CCX and 8 cores - all the other zen 3s run a lot colder.

Yet mine is a 5800X and seems to run cool. My 1600X seems more difficult to cool than this chip.

 

[Mussels]

Yet mine is a 5800X and seems to run cool. My 1600X seems more difficult to cool than this chip.

i'm sure i've already covered it, but you have to mention your settings

All core OC? cold
stock settings? warm
PBO on? it's gunna run hot

 

[Valantar]

i'm sure i've already covered it, but you have to mention your settings

All core OC? cold
stock settings? warm
PBO on? it's gunna run hot

Mine is bone stock, haven't touched a single setting related to the CPU. Yet it boosts far past spec (I think I've seen 4.9GHz single core, and as mentioned all-core loads boost to 4.625), and I wouldn't call 64-66°C under a 212 Evo at ~66% fan speed warm. So either I've got a golden chip or your generalizations are off.

 

[Mussels]

Mine is bone stock, haven't touched a single setting related to the CPU. Yet it boosts far past spec (I think I've seen 4.9GHz single core, and as mentioned all-core loads boost to 4.625), and I wouldn't call 64-66°C under a 212 Evo at ~66% fan speed warm. So either I've got a golden chip or your generalizations are off.

65C is totally considered warm for one of these chips, it sure aint hot

PBO on boosts those temps quite a lot, i get 5050Mhz at quite a heat cost

 

[Valantar]

65C is totally considered warm for one of these chips, it sure aint hot

PBO on boosts those temps quite a lot, i get 5050Mhz at quite a heat cost

Warm overall, sure. But what constitutes warm, hot etc. must take into account the cooler used, no? If this was with a 240mm AIO or hefty air cooler I would agree with you, but not with a 212 Evo.

 

[Mussels]

Warm overall, sure. But what constitutes warm, hot etc. must take into account the cooler used, no? If this was with a 240mm AIO or hefty air cooler I would agree with you, but not with a 212 Evo.

eh? no the temps would be judged by the maximum the CPU can handle before it throttles
something like the FX chips that had TJmax at 70C, 60C is redlining it

 

[Chrispy_]

eh? no the temps would be judged by the maximum the CPU can handle before it throttles
something like the FX chips that had TJmax at 70C, 60C is redlining it

Zen3 is a bit different though. AMD confirmed 90-95C is typical and by design, so Valantar's 65C is relatively cool and looking to be an exception to the rule. I haven't moved my 5800X to water yet, I'm still using a 3900X on that machine, but with decent air cooling I can hit 4.95GHz at 95C without even enabling PBO. That's just bone-stock, stock everything, with stock cubes, wooden stocks, stockings, and investment stocks thrown in for good measure, just to emphasise how stock it's running

If you want more sources, just google "amd responds to ryzen 5000 temperature" and you'll get a whole page of different articles citing this source and others.

 

[Mussels]

I mentioned those exact temps a few posts ago

one key difference with the 5800x is that it has no stock cooler, so there is no real baseline other than <90C

 

[Valantar]

I mentioned those exact temps a few posts ago

one key difference with the 5800x is that it has no stock cooler, so there is no real baseline other than <90C

But again, a baseline without a cooler is meaningless. Pretty much any CPU (perhaps except for a Raspberry Pi at stock clocks) can hit 90°C with a sufficiently poor cooler. When talking about whether a chip runs hot or not, there are two reasonable meanings:
1: whether it draws a lot of power, necessitating hefty cooling, as with recent Intel CPUs, and
2: whether it is difficult to keep cool compared to other CPUs consuming a similar amount of power.
The latter meaning is typically the one discussed when disucssing 7nm Ryzen, with this being due to thermal density as well as the off-centre hotspots created by the chiplet layout. (Of course the ability for the "105W" chips to consume up to 144W also matters.) But regardless of that, you can't discuss this without including the cooler, as the cooler is fundamental to any such discussion even where there isn't a commonly agreed-upon baseline, as the statement is fundamentally comparative, necessitating inclusion of the conditions being compared. If I was hitting 65°C with a large AIO or beefy tower cooler I would agree that that qualifies as running hot. But with those temps on a relatively low-end 212 Evo? Not even close. It does seem like I might have a better than average chip going off what I've seen around the internet, but it's still a cool-running chip. Heck, my 1600X doesn't stay much below these temperatures on water cooling.

As for increasing TjMax and letting the chips boost higher - aren't CPUs with TjMax <100°C quite rare in the grand scheme of things? Don't most laptops bounce off their ~100°C throttle points constantly under load? I know Ryzen chips have had low throttle points, but increasing TjMax actually means the chip runs cooler relative to its capabilities after all. It might run hotter in absolute numbers, but those don't matter whatsoever - it's what the chip can safely handle that matters. So if one CPU has a TjMax of 75°C and one has 95°C, the former runs at 65°C and the latter at 80°C, the latter still has more thermal headroom and is running further from its limits, despite the higher absolute temperature. Of course if both are bouncing off the thermal throttle point, then they're running equally close to their throttle points, making them equal. One number might be more comfortable to look at than the other, but the difference for the chips is zero.

After all, we got into this due to people saying the cooler this thread is actually about is of less value due to Zen 3 being difficult to cool. In other words, the question is how difficult it is to keep cool with a given cooler. I would have no problem running a 65W current-gen Ryzen under a cooler like this, that's for sure.

 

[Chrispy_]

I know Ryzen chips have had low throttle points, but increasing TjMax actually means the chip runs cooler relative to its capabilities after all. It might run hotter in absolute numbers, but those don't matter whatsoever - it's what the chip can safely handle that matters. So if one CPU has a TjMax of 75°C and one has 95°C, the former runs at 65°C and the latter at 80°C, the latter still has more thermal headroom and is running further from its limits, despite the higher absolute temperature.

I think this is the key point; TjMax of Zen3 is probably 95C and you only have to go back to 1st Gen Ryzen to find TjMax of 68C.

 

[Valantar]

I think this is the key point; TjMax of Zen3 is probably 95C and you only have to go back to 1st Gen Ryzen to find TjMax of 68C.

Yeah, I could never quite wrap my head around that number - especially with those temperature offsets and all that shenanigans AMD was operating with at the time. But I can't imagine that was actually a silicon limitation - I've never heard of silicon being damaged by temperatures below 100°C, and often well above that. AMD must have been really worried about thermal density or something - which they seem to have solved with more dynamic thread allocation and other mechanisms. FWIW, Buildzoid recently posted a video on intentionally degrading his 3700X, in which he had run it at 1.5V vCore (~1.44 when accounting for vdroop) and ~104°C for 67 hours straight and lost ... 25MHz of all-core clock stability. Not that a sample size of one tells us anything much that's representative, but at least that's one example of recent-gen Ryzen handling high voltages and temperatures quite nicely.