Cooling problems persist on LGA1700

[ir_cow]

Must learn XTU before calling it bad. It's the only software that actually works correctly. Yes, must be used at defaults. It holds because have checked to start with windows. Unchecked that, should solve this minor issue.

I'll say it. It works better than the other vendor software. The biggest annoyance is your OC stays even if you're not using the program upon Boot. I even come across times by uninstall the program, yet the overclock stayed until I reinstall the program and applied defaults.

Luckily I do all my overclocking on trash os disk that I don't care against corrupted or if I have to reinstall

I like using the scary x oc tools because at least when I typed stuff in there I know it applies and when it's not open it doesn't run

 

[ShrimpBrime]

I'll say it. It works better than the other vendor software. The biggest annoyance is your OC stays even if you're not using the program upon Boot. I even come across times by uninstall the program, yet the overclock stayed until I reinstall the program and applied defaults.

Luckily I do all my overclocking on trash os disk that I don't care against corrupted or if I have to reinstall

I like using the scary x oc tools because at least when I typed stuff in there I know it applies and when it's not open it doesn't run

Yeah that's strange. First time I used XTU was back in 2013 with a 3770K. And since have used it without that sort of particular problem you've shared. It must be the only OC software installed though. Never install with the motherboard software.

Also, I like the benchmark. Which is actually challenging. If it's not stable, it'll tell you.

 

[fusseli]

I have only ever used XTU for ram and cpu stress testing, not for lazy tweaking. I must be much more old school than you all, I still do any and all tweaks via a system restart and bios. I have never trusted software to do that reliably, MB software or otherwise. The only exception is for gpu OC.

Why not just leave the Intel Defaults in place?

Also XTU is bad news. It holds your PC even when it's "off" ive found. Only solution I had was to load default and apply. If you uninstall, it should remove whatever is applied. I suggest not using any software to OC. They all suck and can easily kill the CPU. Not the first time this has happened to someone.

The other option is to put a contact frame on. It will drop your temps 5-10,c. But no matter what you do, the CPU will try to go to 100c or hit the wattage limit (PL1/PL2). Whatever comes first.

If you want to get extra mad, set it all to defaults and run prime95. Watch it go to 100c.

For troubleshooting, I would first see if one core is pretty far off while running Cinebench R24. Since that goes for 10 min, you can see where the temp issue is. If all the cores are equally getting to 100c at default power limit, you have mounting problem or cooling.

Lastly you can change the max temp to 115c. The KS CPUs have this by default. Same silicon. Of your hitting 115c, than I would say your cooling's broken.

Intel defaults in place doesn’t help. Something persisted in my OS environment that destabilized everything, which had been working before up until this point. Realizing I was still railing out to 100C and throttling at my old 5.6 all-core OC is what started all of this. My best guess is I have a mediocre 14700k and that GB mobo quality has gone down from what it once was: this build has been ungodly unstable for a freaking year, and when it was stable it was hot and throttling, and it didn’t last a week running cool with an UV applied before permanent instability manifested with basic shit like iCue and GCC— which was not recoverable even after bios reset and Intel defaults. Rage!

 

[ShrimpBrime]

I have only ever used XTU for ram and cpu stress testing, not for lazy tweaking. I must be much more old school than you all, I still do any and all tweaks via a system restart and bios. I have never trusted software to do that reliably, MB software or otherwise. The only exception is for gpu OC.


Intel defaults in place doesn’t help. Something persisted in my OS environment that destabilized everything, which had been working before up until this point. Realizing I was still railing out to 100C and throttling at my old 5.6 all-core OC is what started all of this. My best guess is I have a mediocre 14700k and that GB mobo quality has gone down from what it once was: this build has been ungodly unstable for a freaking year, and when it was stable it was hot and throttling, and it didn’t last a week running cool with an UV applied before permanent instability manifested with basic shit like iCue and GCC— which was not recoverable even after bios reset and Intel defaults. Rage!

I'd love to try your CPU. I bet she's a good clocker, you just have cooling issues.

I tried a HeatKiller IV (non pro, plated, not full copper) on my loop, retro fitted. It was not good for results.

Only have 2 waterblocks that actually handle the cpu. 1 is a modded ThermalTake block from bigwater SE and the other from my 1366 which is a EKWB HF CU full nickel plated all copper block. On ambient with 120.3 thick boy rad.

Anything else, seems to do poorly.

Or I do the chilling deal. The screeny above is ambient.

 

[fusseli]

I'd love to try your CPU. I bet she's a good clocker, you just have cooling issues.

I tried a HeatKiller IV (non pro, plated, not full copper) on my loop, retro fitted. It was not good for results.

Only have 2 waterblocks that actually handle the cpu. 1 is a modded ThermalTake block from bigwater SE and the other from my 1366 which is a EKWB HF CU full nickel plated all copper block. On ambient with 120.3 thick boy rad.

Anything else, seems to do poorly.

Or I do the chilling deal. The screeny above is ambient.

If you say so. Wanna buy it?

 

[Dr. Dro]

I'm a couple of weeks late and admittedly haven't read the whole thread, but have you thought of grabbing a contact frame? I've a sneaky suspicion your ILM there isn't doing too good, if there's even a 0.5mm gap between the CPU and the heatsink, your CPU is gonna heat up a ton. Those temps aren't exactly normal, and you seem to know what you're doing

 

[ShrimpBrime]

If you say so. Wanna buy it?

You ask as if it's still worth 550 US$. Lol.

I offer 225$ for the 100c baked chip with shipping. Otherwise Can get new 319$ at Walmart a fresh new 14700KF.

That 14700K is just hot bro. Contact frame, I use not. The ambient screen shots I show you, had that load been more than 5 minutes, it would have hit 100c. Promise. That's full custom loop, open bench.

Nothing will take away from the fact that 100% load is 100c temps with these chips. Just how they are.

Anything short of de-lid is the only way to cool the shit. Everyone in the world may say a top AIO can deal with the transistor density is full of shit. It's not even making it through the IHS plate by the time it hits 100c.

Gaming hits 80c or less. It's fine, just use it. Hits 100c AVX2 extreme 100% load without ramp up hammer spikes Fkn 100c... well yeah. Thermal energy moves a lot slower then the electrical energy put in.

Maybe try warming your cooler up with a 50% then 75% then to 100% load and see if the cooler operates more efficiently once the coolant and rad is warmed up.

860-btu/hr XD

 

[fusseli]

I'm a couple of weeks late and admittedly haven't read the whole thread, but have you thought of grabbing a contact frame? I've a sneaky suspicion your ILM there isn't doing too good, if there's even a 0.5mm gap between the CPU and the heatsink, your CPU is gonna heat up a ton. Those temps aren't exactly normal, and you seem to know what you're doing

Yep I have a thermalright. It’s not a cooling problem it’s just a mediocre 14700k and a poorly implemented Z790 MB. This is why I’ve provided the info on my 13900KS build that runs 6.1ghz without heat problems, on a very similar 360mm AIO, without a contact frame, for reference.

You ask as if it's still worth 550 US$. Lol.

I offer 225$ for the 100c baked chip with shipping. Otherwise Can get new 319$ at Walmart a fresh new 14700KF.

That 14700K is just hot bro. Contact frame, I use not. The ambient screen shots I show you, had that load been more than 5 minutes, it would have hit 100c. Promise. That's full custom loop, open bench.

Nothing will take away from the fact that 100% load is 100c temps with these chips. Just how they are.

Anything short of de-lid is the only way to cool the shit. Everyone in the world may say a top AIO can deal with the transistor density is full of shit. It's not even making it through the IHS plate by the time it hits 100c.

Gaming hits 80c or less. It's fine, just use it. Hits 100c AVX2 extreme 100% load without ramp up hammer spikes Fkn 100c... well yeah. Thermal energy moves a lot slower then the electrical energy put in.

Maybe try warming your cooler up with a 50% then 75% then to 100% load and see if the cooler operates more efficiently once the coolant and rad is warmed up.

860-btu/hr XD

That contradicts what everyone was saying a few days back. 100C and throttling is not normal with real cooling. And the instability is the hell no no-go to “just run it”

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Yep I have a thermalright. It’s not a cooling problem it’s just a mediocre 14700k and a poorly implemented Z790 MB. This is why I’ve provided the info on my 13900KS build that runs 6.1ghz without heat problems, on a very similar 360mm AIO, without a contact frame, for reference.


That contradicts what everyone was saying a few days back. 100C and throttling is not normal with real cooling. And the instability is the hell no no-go to “just run it”

There's a reason why a 14700K is faster than a 13900K. It's the exact same architecture. What do you suppose makes a 14700K faster? Lower temps? I think not.

And 6.1ghz 13900K all core? I'm not dummy, tell it again like it is.

6.1ghz single core is not the same as the all core load. The all core load will be at the lowest set multiplier. So to say. (I know this isn't your exact config)

P cores 1 to 4 are 6.1ghz.
P cores 5 and 6 5.7ghz.
P cores 7 and 8 is 5.4ghz.

The all core load will be 5.4ghz. Not 6.1ghz as you try to deceive everyone with.

‐--------

This is what 6.1ghz all core looks like. ALL Cores.
And there's not a person on the planet that achieved it on an AIO. (At ambient)
Dont believe that, try it for yourself. Take note,
5ghz E-cores back up 6.1gbz P-cores.

That's 400 watts.....
6.1ghz AIO, gimme a break man.

 

[JustBenching]

There's a reason why a 14700K is faster than a 13900K. It's the exact same architecture. What do you suppose makes a 14700K faster?

It's not.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

It's not.

OK, I'll entertain that. It's not.

The 13900K has 4 more e-cores. Yes it's faster in this aspect only. And maybe the single core boost clocks for your single threaded super PiMod runs.

But we aren't going around talking 6.1ghz single core boost as viable mention that an AIO can do that. Shit I can do 6.1ghz on air cooling, and then fail to mention that's 8 threads only.

On the topic

Countless threads of Under-volt 13900K and under-volt 14700K. Why is this one different suddenly?

Here's a good read. Maybe this will help. Maybe not.

Intel Core i7-14700K Review - Catching the 13900K

Intel Core i7-14700K is the only processor released today with an upgraded core configuration. Thanks to an additional four E-Cores, more cache and a 200 MHz frequency bump, the 14700K reaches performance quite close to the 13900K, at much better pricing.

www.techpowerup.com

I would just tune the LLC lvl really low. That's how I oc mine within the power envelope and leave v-core auto. But for OC, I increase the LLC only.

The other way I lower the v-core is just by lowering the cpu multipliers for either or both P and E cores. This helps shave wattage the board and cpu simply lower the power output accordingly. At least that's my experience with MSI and Asus boards in total over maybe 10 or more Alder Lake and Raptor Lake processors running each on various types of cooling.

I've also discovered that the original firmware and bios release for my 14700K is very stable and typically runs the cpu hotter than perhaps it should. But when I really want it to go fast, there's no other choice than chilling or other extreme measures such as de-lidding.

Just so you know, I am only trying to share my experience and want to help. But there's only so much you can do with high transistor count processors clocked well over 5ghz. For certain, it is evident that a working v-core and the actual effective clock rate isn't measured by most people. How to obtain 5.8ghz? 1.45v. And people freak out seeing this for 13900K single core boost. Why? It's well within the power envelope, it's using 1 core.

Temp gradient. So learning the rate at which a temperature can be passed through a solid, such as copper is a must.

Some people like a low idle temps, but 100% cpu load AVX2 is 253w at that second and no less. Copper cannot move that much thermal load in that short amount of time.

They designed it to throttle at 100c.
But my board will allow me a 115c cap.
But everyone worries about 100c. Lol.
Use the link above where TPU lifts the thermal limits.

But ya!! If it's not 100c at stock while gaming, just use it. Of you want Cinebench tips, I'll tell you to dunk the rad in a bucket of ice water and try again.

"Heat is the bane of all electronics"

 

[fusseli]

There's a reason why a 14700K is faster than a 13900K. It's the exact same architecture. What do you suppose makes a 14700K faster? Lower temps? I think not.

And 6.1ghz 13900K all core? I'm not dummy, tell it again like it is.

6.1ghz single core is not the same as the all core load. The all core load will be at the lowest set multiplier. So to say. (I know this isn't your exact config)

P cores 1 to 4 are 6.1ghz.
P cores 5 and 6 5.7ghz.
P cores 7 and 8 is 5.4ghz.

The all core load will be 5.4ghz. Not 6.1ghz as you try to deceive everyone with.

‐--------

This is what 6.1ghz all core looks like. ALL Cores.
And there's not a person on the planet that achieved it on an AIO. (At ambient)
Dont believe that, try it for yourself. Take note,
5ghz E-cores back up 6.1gbz P-cores.

That's 400 watts.....
6.1ghz AIO, gimme a break man.

View attachment 389896

I never once claimed or suggested my 13900KS is 6.1 all core. I have it set for ST and run 5.6/5.8 for p cores.

 

[Wales]

If you overclock your CPU, then a drastic increase in power consumption is definitely expected.


I recommend installing CoreTemp so you can check your CPU's current power consumption!

If your AIO 360 cooler is properly installed, but your CPU temperature still hits 100°C, then CoreTemp will likely show power consumption exceeding 280W.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

I never once claimed or suggested my 13900KS is 6.1 all core. I have it set for ST and run 5.6/5.8 for p cores.

It's all good. I figure you have this handled on your own accord from here.

But, just so you know, my 14700K and 14900K are both seemingly as hot as each other with defaults, both processors seem to hit 100c quite easily with most ambient cooling methods I've tried. (Yes I has a 14900K, is a 6ghz boxed processor)

 

[grammar_phreak]

This makes me think back to a 4790k I bought on the local 2nd hand market. In my local area, a number of people were upgrading from Haswell to Zen 2, and I was buying Haswell parts off of these people for a good price.

At stock settings, that particular 4790k had a core that was hitting +90c and at times it was nearly 20c hotter than the 3rd hottest core. This was from running the CPU-Z stress test which isn't the most stressful app in the world. I ended up delidding this processor, replacing the TIM, and the temps went back to normal.

Late last year, I used the 14700k in a couple of other rigs. (I did not deploy them until the BIOS fix was released.) If I was to run 10mins of Cinebench r23, Arctic LFIII 360mm cooler, and a contact frame, the CPU would hit +90c with the power limits laxed. If it was just gaming then the temps would hit the 70's.

 

[JustBenching]

Some liquid metal and a U12A, my 13900k peaked at 85c during cbr23 (41.150 score) @ 270 watts.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Some liquid metal and a U12A, my 13900k peaked at 85c during cbr23 (41.150 score) @ 270 watts.

It's just not good representation of a timely load. I mean your 13900K is doing CBR23 in under a minute I suppose. Thats the same score my 14700K hit with considerable OC.

 

[JustBenching]

It's just not good representation of a timely load. I mean your 13900K is doing CBR23 in under a minute I suppose. Thats the same score my 14700K hit with considerable OC.

That's the score at completely stock, figured no reason to oc with a single tower air cooler

 

[ShrimpBrime]

That's the score at completely stock, figured no reason to oc with a single tower air cooler

Is interesting. Looked up the specs for NH-U12A cooler is good to handle 210w.

Amazing you can squeeze another 45w from it!!

Would that be with a high temp gradient? Or just nice low ambient temps?

That's the score at completely stock, figured no reason to oc with a single tower air cooler
View attachment 390207

Oh a screeny. The score is invalid. Something wrong with file integrity? Unstable system? Corruption on the file system? Maybe started the bench before benchmate was ready?

 

[JustBenching]

Is interesting. Looked up the specs for NH-U12A cooler is good to handle 210w.

Amazing you can squeeze another 45w from it!!

Would that be with a high temp gradient? Or just nice low ambient temps?


Oh a screeny. The score is invalid. Something wrong with file integrity? Unstable system? Corruption on the file system? Maybe started the bench before benchmate was ready?

Any cooler can handle any amount of watts. Can do over 330 watts with this one on a 13/14900k. Score is invalid cause it was day one I got the system, benchmate didn't have an update for 13th gen. 327w @ 95c

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Any cooler can handle any amount of watts. Can do over 330 watts with this one on a 13/14900k. Score is invalid cause it was day one I got the system, benchmate didn't have an update for 13th gen. 327w @ 95c

View attachment 390208

Not sure about any cooler handle any wattage. Seems like a broad statement!!

Similar results over here. Just less cores...

 

[JustBenching]

Not sure about any cooler handle any wattage. Seems like a broad statement!!

The size of the die is way more important than the cooler itself. u14s for example can cool over 500w on big xeon W cpus.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

The size of the die is way more important than the cooler itself. u14s for example can cool over 500w on big xeon W cpus.

That was one of my points many posts ago now. Transistor density.

As you can see, active v-core for me was 1.31v and yours was 1.29v.

Maybe that Gigabyte board is too high on the v-core.

We'll never really know. This reminds me of the eating Jam guy. He utilizes a 240 rad and is stuck using under-volting.

The size of the die is way more important than the cooler itself. u14s for example can cool over 500w on big xeon W cpus.

Just walked in the door. Fired up PC, set all defaults, XMP enabled (Asus Tweaked) and set Asus power scheme to enforce limits.
Then went to windows power plan and set to default which is Balanced.
W11 24H2 that nobody likes.... but full OS no tweaks.

This is with Wraith Prism no mount (that's correct just set on top.)
Ambient temp reported by the S22 Ultra is 66.7F (19.3c)
Peak V-core is 1.412v to accomidate the single core 6ghz boost.
Maximum Temperature hit 90c, this is after a cold start up also by the way.

Effective clock drooped at what looked like 5.210ghz Pcore 4.1ghz E-core.
Board LLC is probably set to Lvl 3 or 3rd lowest for Asus.
LLC does change when set to auto, I've noticed it go from Lvl 2 to Lvl 3 for w/e reason.

As you can see, the limits are strictly enforced here.
This is the release bios for the board 14th Gen CPU. version 1604
The score is only 38,461 pts because of the enforced limits (253w)
So there was droop on the effective clocks while being reported as 5.7ghz by CPU-z, P-core which would be a lie.

At least this is pretty modern to date software concerning the OS, the benchmark tool and validation software.
Best I can do for comparisons. yes you can cool anything with anything, Doesn't mean the bios configuration is set up for it.
But for all intensive purposes, I'd say the OP's board power limits are lifted and maybe double check windows settings too.

Take all this for what you want.

 

[fusseli]

The new MB and 14900k run better without a doubt, used Noctua NT-H2 and the contact frame instead of TF7 paste on this go.

This is with intel Extreme defaults, TVB and DTB enabled, and most other bios settings on auto/enabled with asus-enhanced XMP loaded. It appears to be 5.1 all-core and repeatedly only boosting to 5.6 on core-4, so the cpu-z scores are a little low. Temps are much much better, however! No more 100C spikes, in fact I can't even get it over 90C.

Asus Strix Z790-A reports these scores:
SP 95 (102p, 81e)
Cooler score 175
p vcore for 5.7 1.387v

 

[ShrimpBrime]

The new MB and 14900k run better without a doubt, used Noctua NT-H2 and the contact frame instead of TF7 paste on this go.

This is with intel Extreme defaults, TVB and DTB enabled, and most other bios settings on auto/enabled with asus-enhanced XMP loaded. It appears to be 5.1 all-core and repeatedly only boosting to 5.6 on core-4, so the cpu-z scores are a little low. Temps are much much better, however! No more 100C spikes, in fact I can't even get it over 90C.

Asus Strix Z790-A reports these scores:
SP 95 (102p, 81e)
Cooler score 175
p vcore for 5.7 1.387v


View attachment 390556View attachment 390557

Same settings, OC on the memory
That's Enforced 253w power limit
Windows in Balanced mode.
Even installed core temp for better comparisons. (not that I think core four really got that hot?? false reading??* haven't used this in years.)

Your score looks fine, but wattage is high still. Should be able 253w enforced 5.7ghz (leave it all auto) 6000Mhz boost, 4.4 E-cores and 5ghz cache boost. Should hit close to 16800/16900 pts area, but actually be using less wattage than you are now. Wattage = heat dissipated. Try the stock enforced power limit settings under the Asus Core Performance Enhancement or w/e it's called. Should look better then. Just do your memory tweaks otherwise.

*****No reason to loose performance at a higher wattage (If Core Temp is accurate for that?)*****

EDIT: Update.

I flicked the chiller on to test the core temps vs hwinfo64. Looks close enough to me.

Here's a couple more screenies.

This is with LLC manually set to Lvl 2 Asus Bios. Score went up.
Temps went down, but that's my fault. I just know what it gets down to in temp on hwinfo64. (2c)