Personal computing discussed
Moderators: renee, Starfalcon
Eventually, I compromised and set a 5-GHz all-core speed with a -2 AVX offset, good for 4.8 GHz on all cores under AVX workloads. Incredibly, that configuration was happy even under Prime95 loads with an observed 1.284-1.296V using dynamic Vcore on our Aorus motherboard, so it wasn't difficult to cool at all— 80° C or so was the order of the day with a Corsair H115i on top.
Wren wrote:since those heatpipes are likely just solid metal
Lore wrote:A couple of days ago i put together my new computer. A MSI Z370-A Pro, 16GB of DDR4 2666 crucial ram, Samsung 960 EVO 500GB, and a non k I7 8700, a 65W processor. My old computer was a I5 4670k, a 84W processor cooled by a Akasa Nero 3, your run of the mill 12cm fan 4 heatpipes with direct base contact tower cooler. Reached around 75C when stress testing from memory.
I used the same type of cooler on the new one, but a different unit since I had two of them. When testing with prime95,occt or just using handbrake temp jumps from 32C idle to over 70 in a heartbeat. It then quickly continues to 90C in a minute, and 100C in a little while, and then the I7 will throttle back a little bit, from 4.3 down to oscillating between 3.8/4.2. I of course tried another cooling paste, and then the pathetic stock cooler that came with the processor. That just gave me more noise and the same high temps. Motherboard bios is updated.
The base of the akasa gets so hot you can hold your finger there for less then a second. The heatpipes barely get body temp, and the fins feel cool, this may be to the fan ramping up to max from the heat, or has this cooler somehow run dry of whatever is in the heatpipes from lying around in storage for 4 years ? Another explanation may be the core voltage being as high as 1.4V reported by occt, since I have a non k processor I get no control over this in bios. The strange thing is that it is stable at this temp, no faults if you disable the automatic stopping of testing over 85C in occt. Still, it feel very wrong to continue like this.
https://imgur.com/a/DkjQr
The product design has been refined to ensure ultra quiet and exceptional cooling for CPU’s up to 150W TDP (Thermal Design Power).
[...]
Fan dimension 120 x 120 x 25mm
Fan speed 500-1500 RPM (PWM controlled)
Max airflow 50.54 CFM
Max air pressure 1.32 mm H2O
Noise level 24.6 dB(A)
Voltage rating DC 12V
Bearing type EBR
Fan life expectancy 40,000 hours
Fan connector 4pin PWM
Product code AK-CC4013EP01
mcarson09 wrote:But you are running to high of voltage for Air and expecting good temps. The cooler is rated for 150watts and under load you are probably well over that. You need something like a kill-A-watt metter to see what the system is using under full load.
You could replace the stock fan with something that does a static pressure of 8 mmH2O or higher but your ears will bleed.
Really if you want to use that kind of voltage you should build a water cooler setup that can handle 300 watts of power for cool and "quiet." The Quiet being totally subjective.
DancinJack wrote:FWIW, that's how the ASUS UEFI works too. There is a dropdown for pre-set values and then an open box that you can type into. It takes a minute or two to get used to, but once you know it's there it can be pretty easy to get things set up properly.
(not my PC)
DancinJack wrote:mcarson09 wrote:But you are running to high of voltage for Air and expecting good temps. The cooler is rated for 150watts and under load you are probably well over that. You need something like a kill-A-watt metter to see what the system is using under full load.
You could replace the stock fan with something that does a static pressure of 8 mmH2O or higher but your ears will bleed.
Really if you want to use that kind of voltage you should build a water cooler setup that can handle 300 watts of power for cool and "quiet." The Quiet being totally subjective.
No way is his 65W CPU, even at 1.4V, pulling OVER 150W. No way dude. Might want to rethink your math there.
curtisb wrote:Wren wrote:since those heatpipes are likely just solid metal
Heat pipes don't work that way. They are actually copper tubes (or pipes if you will) that have a liquid in them. This is why they have the soldered point on the end of the pipe. The liquid used has a low boiling point so that it circulates through the pipe. So the liquid goes down to the bottom when it's cool, cooling the plate touching the CPU. The CPU heats it up, liquid boils and moves as a gas up through the pipe to the fin area of the HSF where it gets cooled back to a liquid and moves back to the plate area. Wash, rinse, repeat.
mcarson09 wrote:The system can be pulling over 150 Watts under full load while overclocking, the 65 watt spec is for stock.
mcarson09 wrote:That changes once you start overclocking and changing voltages.
mcarson09 wrote:he said that the heatsink was hot to the touch which means he outputting more heat than the heatsink can handle.
mcarson09 wrote:The only real difference between the 8700K and 8700 is that the former is full unlocked while the latter is not.
Wren wrote:curtisb wrote:Heat pipes don't work that way. They are actually copper tubes (or pipes if you will) that have a liquid in them. This is why they have the soldered point on the end of the pipe. The liquid used has a low boiling point so that it circulates through the pipe. So the liquid goes down to the bottom when it's cool, cooling the plate touching the CPU. The CPU heats it up, liquid boils and moves as a gas up through the pipe to the fin area of the HSF where it gets cooled back to a liquid and moves back to the plate area. Wash, rinse, repeat.
Really? I didn't know that! Learn something new every day I guess. I honestly thought they are just solid metal pipes that conduct heat.
curtisb wrote:And if they were solid, they wouldn't really be pipes then.
curtisb wrote:That's like oversimplifying it and saying the only difference between an i5 and an i7 is Hyper-Threading. While that is true, there are other things to take into account. The 8700K has a 500MHz higher base clock, and a 100MHz higher turbo clock, and is therefore rated for a 95W TDP instead of 65W TDP.
mcarson09 wrote:curtisb wrote:That's like oversimplifying it and saying the only difference between an i5 and an i7 is Hyper-Threading. While that is true, there are other things to take into account. The 8700K has a 500MHz higher base clock, and a 100MHz higher turbo clock, and is therefore rated for a 95W TDP instead of 65W TDP.
Techspot has done third party testing showing the S (65W )chips run at the same power draw as the normal models (84W).
Third party testing is showing that the spec sheet is likely wrong and thus pointing to a spec sheet that is likely incorrect is not much of an argument.