Raptor Lake’s Heat Problem

[Michael-EGV]

Can you imaged how many people would RMA stuff after damaging the MB if it was endorsed by the motherboard manufactures????

With quality { written instructions in the User Manual and a video demonstration }, no increase in RMAs.

Like the ILM assembly, manufacturers would protect the socket with a plastic cap along with the TermalRight assembled.

Think of all the money manufacturers could save by getting rid of the ILM .

 

[ir_cow]

With quality { written instructions in the User Manual and a video demonstration }, no increase in RMAs.

Like the ILM assembly, manufacturers would protect the socket with a plastic cap along with the TermalRight assembled.

Think of all the money manufacturers could save by getting rid of the ILM .

OR...just not even go through the hassle and leave it as a unsupported feature. Really you don't need it.

 

[Michael-EGV]

Of course you can. You can go both ways.. you can have high performance, medium, and low. It depends on how well you can cool it.

Performance-core Minumum Frequency :

Here is the Intel® Core™ i5-13600K Processor 24M Cache, up to 5.10 GHz .

A " Performance-core Base Frequency " is specified.
However, a " Performance-core Minumum Frequency " is NOT specified.

How low can it go ?

Does Performance Testing test for this condition ?

 

[freeagent]

How low can it go ?

Beyond the point of regression.

Does Performance Testing test for this condition ?

Not that I’m aware of..

 

[ir_cow]

It's 800 MHz because that is the lowest multiplier.

If your CPU isn't in safe mode doing thermal protection stuff the lowest for normal operations is 3.5Ghz. says it in the spec sheet as base clock

 

[P4-630]

It's 800 MHz because that is the lowest multiplier.

Not sure about the i5 13600K but my i7 12700K goes all the way down to 500MHz.

 

[freeagent]

Noice.. none of my AMDs dip that low..

 

[ir_cow]

Not sure about the i5 13600K but my i7 12700K goes all the way down to 500MHz.

Hmmm. That's odd, only ever seen 8x as the lowest. But I can see c-stated being lower.

To clarify for @Michael-EGV if you don't have power saving features enabled like C-State the lowest clock should be the base clock listed in the specifications for that CPU. But most systems will be using C-State because it's enabled by default. This means cores can be turned off completely resulting in zero clock.

 

[P4-630]

Hmmm. That's odd, only ever seen 8x as the lowest.

Here's a screenie

 

[Michael-EGV]

The Solutions seem to have arrived.

1) To prevent bending the CPU,
the solution is the ThermalRight Anti-Bending Buckle.

2) To optimize for lower Idle CPU Temperatures,
The solution is to buy the ' K ' Processor and tweak it like a ' T '.
First verify " C-State " is enabled.
Then set the P-Core, Performance-core Base Frequency, by setting
this frequency to the ' T 's Performance-core Base Frequency specification.
For example, Compare i5-13600K and i513600T

February 2023 : 13'th Generation Intel Core Datasheet, Volume 1 of 2
See Page 52, Section 2.7, Clock Topology
'' Processor reference clock or base clock (BCLK). 100MHz with SSC. ''
'' BCLK drives the following clock domains : { Core, Ring, Graphics (GT), Memory Controller (MC), System Agent (SA) } .''
( Notice PCIe and USB Type-C reside in other domains and therefore, will not be affected / slowed. This is good. )

Remember to first update the UEFI to the latest version.
Then, Configure the UEFI while referencing the motherboard manufacturer's Support > User Manual [ or BIOS Setup Guide document ].
Search it for BCLK . . . probably under OC Tweaker > Advanced Screen > CPU Configuration.

Related Information / Convenience Links :
Search : UnderClock UnderClocking CPU
Search : UnderClock UnderClocking GPU
Search : UnderClock UnderClocking LapTop
Search : UnderClock UnderClocking Phone

 

[Deleted member 185158]

Here's a screenie

View attachment 290219

Man that's great!!

Mines stuck at 53x multi.
There's no contact frame, bracket or buckle either.

 

[Michael-EGV]

Has anyone tweeked a 12'th or 13'th generation Intel
processor's Performance-core Base Frequency, BCLK,
to a ' T 's frequency ?

If yes, please report the Idle CPUs' / Cores' temperatures
reported in the BIOS / UEFI.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Michael-EGV]

The likelyhood of having difficulties configuring the BIOS / UEFI is relatively high.
Therefore, I'm writing a Test Strategy [ before buying a motherboard ].

Once the BIOS / UEFI posts to a monitor, make a note of the UEFI Version Number.
If a newer BIOS / UEFI is available, then update the BIOS / UEFI and note the new version number .

Then Configure the UEFI, iteratively [ and test iteratively ].

The iterations are the subsections in the User Manual [ or Software/BIOS Setup Guide ].

If an Iteration Test fails to post [ or the UEFI '' BCLK Frequency '' fails to accept a value of '' 50 MHz '' ], then . . .
1) Turn Power Off.
2) Unplug the power supply [ from the motherboard ? ].
3) Clear the CMOS values by pressing the Clear CMOS Button, CLRCBTN1. [ See ASRock Taichi User Manual p.7, No. 23. ]
4) Start all over again and Tweak the ' K ' processor like a ' T ' processor.
5) Verify the CPU Configuration's '' C-State '' is Enabled.
6) Lower the CPU Configuration's '' BCLK Frequency '' from '' 100 MHz '' to '' 50 MHz '' .

In addition to the ThermalRight device, I suspect this is the solution to Raptor Lake's Heat Problem.
Most PC customers only killer application is Backups, backing up the [ bloated and wasteful ] Microsoft Windows Operating Systems.
Enjoy the speed of NVMe over PCIe 5 and USB Type C.
A standard Intel CPU Cooler Fan should suffice.

Please share your Idle CPU Temperatures as reported in the UEFI here.

( To lower the Stress and Load CPU Temperatures, additional UEFI parameters " may " require customization. )

 

[chrcoluk]

So the problem is, it seems like the majority of people, users, yourself included mix and match tribal knowledge from different CPUs and different series, and different manufacturers.

Contact Frames:

Contact frames work, but only in some cases. On some boards, and some cooler combos. They are means to correct a curvature problem that stems from a combo of, socket clam, backplate and cooler torsion. The issue came to light with 12th gen, but not every board was affected. those affected worked fine with some coolers. With the 13th gen I have found no credible widespread information regarding it as a problem, and even if I did, it would still suffer structurally from the variables mentioned above.

Heat:

That video really. We do not live in Intel 11th gen land. Or Zen 2 land. Or the Core 2 era. People do 90c to F conversion in google realize they can boil water and get scared they are going to set on fire. We are way past 60 and 70C load temps. Thermal density and physics doesnt allow this. We live in a world of element consideration and refinement when we carve and create micro architectures. We push stability to the brink of what the physical material can handle.

The 13th gen CPUs as shown above are meant to bump the limiter. They will continue to do so. This is how performance metrics are judged now. push as hard as you can for a few seconds then back off. Thats the formula. They are engineered as such.

The bigger question to ask is what you will put up with. Bigger coolers, water cooling etc serve a purpose sure. They dump heat. How hot do you want your office to get from that heat? Energy consumption is all the rage in reviews now. Much more than it was a decade ago. This is the new era. With advancements in silicon, process and architectures the temps only become an issue when pushing OCs. a stock 13th gen will happily push 90C at its target freq.

The elephant in the room is how much heat do you want to xfer, and how much energy do you want to burn? Controlling package power is not new but it is certainly getting more attention and is starting to become IMO from what it looks like, the preferred way to tame heat on the new CPU line.

Even AMD does this with Eco mode.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=AMD+eco+mode

In short, no one is implementing a fix because it isn't as wide spread as you think, and silicon makers aren't implementing a fix because its the way its meant to run now. What needs to start changing is the users thinking. Much like the turbo button or FSB overclocks, 60-70c all core loads and 65w brisbanes are the way of the dinosaur. Computing has changed. and the goal posts are different now.

Indeed its very informative, industry is moving into "performance is everything" mode now, but personally not sure I would be happy with my cpu routinely hitting high 90s.

 

[Space Lynx]

I have two of these thermalright ones. Can't speak for all motherboards but it works fine on the ASUS Z790 Sonic up to the ASUS Z790 Apex. Only used it on 5 or so motherboards so far.

They are cheaply made, so it's possible the one that person got has a different z-height making the screws not work.

Contact frame helps with those last few degrees for me and pushing ram to the limits. Need it to go above DDR5-8200. Doesn't mean this will be the same for everyone.

do you mean asrock sonic? i dont think asus has a mobo sonic the hedgehog themed

 

[Michael-EGV]

Thank you chrcoluk .

Keep it Cool, Tweak it like a ' T ' and enjoy all of the other capabilities.

​

 

[phanbuey]

get a kryosheet and a thermalright peerless assasin 120 and call it a day.

Man that's great!!

Mines stuck at 53x multi.
There's no contact frame, bracket or buckle either.

View attachment 290240

you can get your volts way lower

The reason I use the kryosheets these days is that the 90+C temps that both AMD and intel seem to hit, especially intel at high wattage tends to dry out/pump out paste in quiet setups. So istead of changing it every few months it's better to go with something like PTM7950 or a thermal pad.

 

[ir_cow]

do you mean asrock sonic? i dont think asus has a mobo sonic the hedgehog themed

Yeah. Just a typo

 

[P4-630]

you can get your volts way lower

Deleted member 185158​

Guest​

Seems a banned member no longer able to reply...

 

[Michael-EGV]

Out of the box, after idling in UEFI for 30+ minutes, CPU Temperature is 36 C, 96.8 F .
Then I lowered the Processor Speed to 2,000 MHz and that only lowered the CPU Temperature to 34.0 C, 93.2 F .

1) Raptor Lake’s Heat Problem Solution
1.1) CPU C States Support : Section 3.4.1, CPU Configuration, page 59 [ pdf page 63 ]
Allows you to enable CPU C States Support for power saving.
It is recommended to keep C3, C6 and C7 all enabled for better power saving.
note: Section 3.4.1 is ADVANCED > CPU Confifuration page.
'' CPU C States Support '' = Enabled. By default.
'' CPU C6 States Support'' = Auto. Changed to Enabled.
'' CPU C7 States Support'' = Auto. Changed to Enabled.
EXIT > Save Changes and Exit. [ Automatically reboots and initializes the hardware ].
TEST THE CHANGE : No Affect. Temperatures are still high.

1.2) CPU P-Core Ratio : Section 3.3, OC Tweaker Screen, page 30 [ pdf page 34 ]
The CPU speed is determined by the CPU P-Core Ratio multiplied with the BCLK.
Increasing the CPU P-Core Ratio will increase the internal CPU clock speed without affecting the clock speed of other components.
Configuration options: [Auto] [All Core] [Per Core] [Specific Per Core]
CPU P-Core Ratio = Auto. By default. Changed to '' All Cores ''.
Then '' All Cores '' appears with a value of 51. Changed to 20.
EXIT > Save Changes and Exit. [ Automatically reboots and initializes the hardware ].
TEST THE CHANGE :
EZ Mode page shows '' Processor Speed: 2,000 MHz '' After 30+ minutes, snapped picture of EZ Mode page and HW Monitor page [ with Farenheit ].

Intel i5-13600k has 14 cores, { 6 Performance Cores + 8 Efficiency Cores}.
https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...3600k-processor-24m-cache-up-to-5-10-ghz.html

The CPU was assembled using the ThermalRight Contact Frame.
I'm just sharing my observations.
( I don't mean to imply this is a problem. )

 

[chrcoluk]

I got the contact frame and was 50/50 on installing it, my board is a Z690 board paired with a 13th gen CPU.

What made me go with it is the huge amount of pressure on the latch lever, feels like due to the new shape of the CPUs they now have to apply more downward pressure to ensure the top and bottom of CPU make good pin contact. I wasnt comfortable with that so the contact frame went in.

I took photos of it during installation and wow the board looks so much cleaner as well vs the stock latch mechanism. Mine is the black contact frame which also worked well with color theme of my board.

As to temps, yes my chip gets hot at stock out of the box config in full multi core loads, hottest CPU I have ever owned I think.

However some pointers here, some of which have already been mentioned.

Assuming you dont get a flawed bios like I did, then the bios should be capping the operating temp to 100C, which is within Intel specifications, the video linked in this thread doesnt give huge confidence it would be good long term (the intel guy admitted it wasnt tested), but the main point is its within the spec of the product so warranty covers it, and I havent seen any reports on the net of failed chips.
Under typical consumer operating conditions even at stock bios config, the chips shouldnt be routinely hitting those terms, so e.g. gaming, browsing net, and watching media.
Some board vendors dont honour Intel specification on TDP out of the box (or at least was the case at one point), if this is honoured then the high temps will only be for short bursts, not sustained when under a extreme load. As the chip shoudnt be running at 253w constantly.
If using a cooler where you are uncomfortable with the temp (and maybe the power usage), then TDP can be capped and some TPU members do that as well as others on the internet. Even at something like 175w, the difference is very low to peak performance. TPU has ran tests at various power limits. My bios does have a cooler type option, where depending on what you select it sets a TDP limit.

When gaming I typically have sub 45C temps (usually even below 40C).

 

[Michael-EGV]

Observations Summary, Idle UEFI after 30+ minutes :
Processor Speeds :: CPU Temperatures . . .

• Processor Speed 5,100 MHz :: CPU Temperature = 96.8 F .
• Processor Speed 2,000 MHz :: CPU Temperature = 93.2 F .
• Processor Speed 1,000 MHz :: CPU Temperature = 92.3 F .

I removed the Case-Top-Panel-Dust-Filter . . .

• Processor Speed 1,000 MHz :: CPU Temperature = ~ 87.4 F .

 

[Dr. Dro]

I got the contact frame and was 50/50 on installing it, my board is a Z690 board paired with a 13th gen CPU.

What made me go with it is the huge amount of pressure on the latch lever, feels like due to the new shape of the CPUs they now have to apply more downward pressure to ensure the top and bottom of CPU make good pin contact. I wasnt comfortable with that so the contact frame went in.

I took photos of it during installation and wow the board looks so much cleaner as well vs the stock latch mechanism. Mine is the black contact frame which also worked well with color theme of my board.

That's interesting. I had no idea this was the case as I removed the original ILM from my motherboard the moment I first installed my processor. My Thermalright BCF is black as well,

 

[sLowEnd]

That's interesting. I had no idea this was the case as I removed the original ILM from my motherboard the moment I first installed my processor. My Thermalright BCF is black as well,

Same here lol

 

[P4-630]

If it was a 100% problem, intel wouldn't have released these CPU's or the motherboard manufacturers would standard have a contact frame.