Lets discuss 105º on Ivy

Small FFT (64Bit) I might hit 98 on one core but that is about it and one core never gets over 87 either and the span between the core max temps bother me a bit. So I will have two cores floating in the low 90s and two in the high 80s

@4.7 I am not going to complain though.


Now I don't want to get into it with anyone here but the fact is Intel says the IB is safe up to 105º. They engage the hard core shut down at 130º.

So if you have complete overclocked stability at 99º doing some of the most stressful testing you can what is the problem? @ 105º the CPU will throttle anyway.

I am being serious here I am not looking for an argument or opinion here. Intel say 105º then throttle to keep it away from the 130º point. What studies have been done outside of Intel that say 99º @ 100% hardware stability is an issue?

Also I am in no way recommending running that hot I am just asking a question and to me the cooler you can keep it the better.

EDIT. OOPS: 90-99-99-93

I mean really http://www.techreaction.net/2012/07...-m3-a-new-weapon-for-your-gaming-conquests/6/ these temps were recorded with this OC

EDIT: Also Intel techdocs can be written in legalese. Like P.41 last paragraph http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/3rd-gen-core-lga1155-socket-guide.html It almost seems like they are saying don't worry about the HSF because we have it covered.

Well I have been looking and I get a little more confounded here. Tcase can not accurately be measured as the temperature of the package on IB does not relate well to the cored due to poor thermal conductivity or I would simply say go with that.

Got your PM, but I am afraid I cannot help much here. That Tom's dude, bubba-hotepp or someshhng like that started a thread about AMD's issue with TCase, TJmax etc that was incredibly informative, but not sure if that would translate to this at all.

Subscribed though...

Interesting topic. I'll stick to worrying about 60C though

EarthDog said:

Got your PM, but I am afraid I cannot help much here. That Tom's dude, bubba-hotepp or someshhng like that started a thread about AMD's issue with TCase, TJmax etc that was incredibly informative, but not sure if that would translate to this at all.

Subscribed though...

Click to expand...

Yeah there are 3 things to look at here and Core temp is only part of it. For me it it not such a big issue (I am in a constant state of component flux) but I would hate to tell somebody one thing, going by one set of published specifications, but missing an and/or - either/or - and/and -if/and/or or any other type of situation. There must be a balance but, what it is, I do not know. 105º is fine for the core but there is more than just a core in the package, I am not worried about the GPU either but in the substrate there is more. Can it be damaged? Common sense tells us no permanent damage will occur but resistance caused by heat at an atomic level can cause other issues that can lead to permeant instability in overlocking as has been seen by many with older chips that will no longer hold high clocks.

ATMINSIDE said:

Interesting topic. I'll stick to worrying about 60C though

Click to expand...

Generically, in the past when we have KNOWN values, I still said to keep 10C less than that. At times, you will find instability close to that value, so less than that should remove that variable.

With AMD and Intel, since the values are not concrete anymore it seems, I still keep the same advice going... Keep AMD under 60C(55C is better), and keep IB 90C or less.

EarthDog said:

Generically, in the past when we have KNOWN values, I still said to keep 10C less than that. At times, you will find instability close to that value, so less than that should remove that variable.

With AMD and Intel, since the values are not concrete anymore it seems, I still keep the same advice going... Keep AMD under 60C(55C is better), and keep IB 90C or less.

Click to expand...

I do not disagree here though I have passed stability testing banging 105 and even throttling. Throttling is a bad thing because it kills performance though.

It seems to be more of an AMD phenomenon, but I have experienced instability due to temps on Intel prior to TJmax as well...

Sure does... on IB, at least this CPU, it throttled without stability issues.

Well I have been running prime since (this run) 12:55 and temps have gotten up to 104 with no errors at 4.6-4.7Ghz (usually 4.7). I really do not see a stability issue with the temps alone.

Archer0915 said:

Well I have been running prime since (this run) 12:55 and temps have gotten up to 104 with no errors at 4.6-4.7Ghz (usually 4.7). I really do not see a stability issue with the temps alone.

Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity is that using the stock cooler?

No it is not. I have heard of people getting into the 90s on stock coolers though.



At the moment I am on a mATX board and it is cramped. I mount my HSF pipes perpendicular to the ram slot which crosses the core which runs parallel to the memory slots. This creates some tight spaces on mATX boards.

you know. I am on the same camp on Vcore and Temp.
everyone tells you there's a problem with vcore above 1.45 and temp above 80'C

however, there's VERY little written reports of actual problem above, and this ceiling set forth by traditional understand of previous generations of chips remains uncontested. Many talk about degradation, but ALL CHIPS degrade no matter what Voltage you run it at, the speed of the degradation seems to have more relation to 'patch of chip made', then actual Vcore used. (that's my finding.. so very subjective, sorry if I offended anyone)

as such. for temps, use TjMAX as your guiding point. Similar to Earthdog, I will recommend trying to stay 10'C under TjMAX, and just overclock the ***** out of it as long as your temps are good.

I've seen 100c be stable on gulftown. I've also seen 100c stable on a 9550 I believe there is a happy medium, and you can run it to the max and it should be ok after the reboot I'm not saying that one should venture to the redline and leave it there.. But these chips are pretty tough! If ib can take 130, then that's impressive lol

also, watch your VRMs.

Well I have been all over the Docs and in my view the best safe 24/7 max temp for the IB is this:

me said:

As for 24/7? If you want to play it safe use Tcase Max. If you want to push a little harder keep it under 105 and if you really want to push it just disable the 105 safety and run up to 130.

80 is just a number as 72.6 (Tcase_Max) is a number but 105 is the throttle point to prevent the jump to 130 and a hard shutdown. So pick a number. Tcase_max and the throttle point just do not jive so. It would be just as easy for me to say the safest 24/7 max for IB is 72.6+105=177.6/2=88.8 and calling 88.8 the magic number. Actually 88.8 core temp sounds good and it is easy to measure.

Click to expand...

Banging 105 in benches is fine as long as you are stable and voltage is very dependent on the type of OC you do:

A strait OC (manually setting everything with all power savings off) will severely hamper your max OC on IB.

An offset OC will yield you higher clocks with a tad more volts and lower temps than the strait OC.

A completely dynamic OC (everything in auto, offset + auto, all power savings on, speed step on, turbo on, adjusting the multi and turbo up, adjusting Turbo TDP up and lowering the A below 112) will generally give the better temp to performance and it will run higher volts at the same time.

I declare the max safe 24/7 temp fo IB to be: 88.8 core temp as this should be a good balance. Now back to my 104º OC because I dont believe a word of what I just said! JK .

I dont understand why an offset type of overclock will get you higher clocks...I mean its just two different ways of getting to the same thing. In the end, the votlage needed shouldnt change so... what am I missing on that point?

EarthDog said:

I dont understand why an offset type of overclock will get you higher clocks...I mean its just two different ways of getting to the same thing. In the end, the votlage needed shouldnt change so... what am I missing on that point?

Click to expand...

Dynamics. You need dynamics to use the offset on boards I have worked with. This keeps temps down and that means more clocks per degree. An offset means something is running dynamically allowing the CPU to cool.

Right, but, if I need 1.4v to hit 5Ghz it doesnt matter how it gets there. When it gets there, its the same voltage. This matters at idle certainly, but not under load.

My Z77 Professional won't set high multis on static vcore, only dynamic.
No clue why.

EarthDog said:

Right, but, if I need 1.4v to hit 5Ghz it doesnt matter how it gets there. When it gets there, its the same voltage. This matters at idle certainly, but not under load.

Click to expand...

Exactly my point. You will have cooling cycles almost always unless you are stressing. Those cycles play an integral pert in keeping the CPU cooler that cooler CPU can translate to higher clocks.