[EarthDog]

From the looks of IB (top), its about a 1/3. From looking at SB, seems around 1/4 (bottom).

[wagex]

Originally Posted by EarthDog

Cant we just solder the heatsink to the core already and call it a day?

thats what i said lol some one send me their cpu il give it a shot i would but saving moneys for the baby on the way lol. and the mancave relocation because my baby is gonna get my computer room

[Ivy]

Originally Posted by MattNo5ss

Something I try to keep in mind is that CPUs are designed to run safely up to their TJmax. So, if a CPU has a TJmax of 105C, then running at 40C load versus 100C load doesn't matter to the CPU. In my opinion, we've just become so accustomed to being able to run our CPUs so far from the TJmax (even when OC'd in some cases) that we've forgotten that the CPU doesn't care about temps as long as it's under that TJmax; and we have seemingly decided upon a threshold of when temps are "high" based on what we're used to seeing, and not based on when temps are actually high.

So, as long as CPUs run under their TJmax I'm not concerned about them.

I feel its half the truth but not full.

Half because indeed we are used to much lower temps. When i tell a enthusiast that im fine when my CPU is running at 70°, many of those are telling me "what... omg what a bloody heat, i run my stuff max 60°", im worried that your CPU goes boom". Then i simply can answer "what a overly paranoid sense"... up to 70-80° is still pretty safe and when it goes far to high, a CPU will protect itself.

However, its not fully true when it comes to the matter of "that the CPU does not care". Because when its running permannently very high the lifespan is decreased and the stability can get a bad impact aswell. So its possible for it to cause some negative effects. However, a CPU wont get burned down by it... all of a sudden. They have a protection mechanism for, so, being overly paranoid is simply wrong.

CPUs in my history are pretty endurable stuff. I never had any CPU ever burned down in my whole life. Its always stuff and junk such as HDD or SSD or motherboard or capacitors, but NOT the CPU. Thats why i sometimes are even willing to "invest" 1000$ for a CPU because... it does serve me well for a eternity, thats almost foolproof.

[diaz]

Originally Posted by MattNo5ss

Something I try to keep in mind is that CPUs are designed to run safely up to their TJmax. So, if a CPU has a TJmax of 105C, then running at 40C load versus 100C load doesn't matter to the CPU. In my opinion, we've just become so accustomed to being able to run our CPUs so far from the TJmax (even when OC'd in some cases) that we've forgotten that the CPU doesn't care about temps as long as it's under that TJmax; and we have seemingly decided upon a threshold of when temps are "high" based on what we're used to seeing, and not based on when temps are actually high.

So, as long as CPUs run under their TJmax I'm not concerned about them.

True. I agree fully with this... since Intel isn't scared to mention that the Tjmax is higher now, to me this says that there nothing wrong with hitting it. I work with many servers and desktops that run with stock solutions, usually operating in the upper range of the temperature envelope, and often toying with 90C+ temperatures. Several times I have serviced desktops where the dust was piled up so high that there was no airflow - therefore the CPUs would constantly hit throttling temps. CPU was fine everytime, the fans were just really loud.

Most GPU's I have owned have operated in the 80-90C range as well.. Those didn't worry me either. I don't see why a CPU running at ~90C during stress test worries anyone..

[Ivy]

Well, i mean, its a stress test. On such a test i did reach up to 80 C and i had in mind, all fine! I mean, what to expect? You got a SFF system, a cooling which comes close to stock cooling, and then you create a abnormal and pretty unnatural load to the system? What to expect? I feelt safe and i even had in mind... there is still some headroom for a OC... and the cooling was not special at all.

So finally, its good to have a cool running system but it doesnt hurt the CPU to run a bit hotter than usual, thats indeed true.

Although, i still enjoy to stay 20 C below TjMAX (at 101 C max it means not to exceed 81 C) during stresstest. So that means in term of IB 85 C is fine for me. However, using SFF and IB, this time i may have to come closer to the TjMax... which isnt the stuff im used to it, but it should work still fine.

Reaching TjMax, which was until now extremely hard (even on SFF), is not causing destruction, but it would hurt the performance, so its surely very important to clearly stay below it. 90 C is already a bit at the upper edge because 15 C away from TJMax and as soon as the CPU gets older (electro migration) and the fan gets weaker (some dust) the temperature can go up a fair deal. So thats the main reason to clearly stay below TjMax. I may however correct the distance to 15 C this time, which is unfortunately closer than i wish it to be.

[mjw21a]

Makes my overclocked FX-8120 look cool. It tops out at 61C

[Ivy]

With the difference that it will need twice the power for lesser performance.

Still weird that IB cant have lesser temp because 22 nm is not the entire issue, nope. There is some other problems such as TIM and maybe a IGP which tends to add additional heat. In that term, a IGP free CPU of IB could be the freezer...

I still wish to know how is the share of transistor count between CPU and IGP. I do believe, because the CPU power barely increased at all, the real transistor count for the CPU is probably equal to the one a SB got. That means, they pumped all the headroom of the 22 nm manufacturing into the IGP. I dunno what to say in term its true. But finally, they dont have to worry, no one gonna beat theyr CPU. All they had to execute is to upgrade theyr IGP, so, lesser customers of "super low end GPUs". Of course Nvidia and AMD should be mad at them (because of the fact that the HD 4000 can compare with some of the very low end GPUs) but thats how the cookie crumbles. Intel can pretty much wipe out the low end GPU market and the CPU market will be dominated aswell.

In future, as long as the CPU (power) demand keeps that criticaly low as its used to be, i could guess that Intel is just slowly increasing the IGP over and over and over, while the CPU power will barely change. Why they should? AMD cant compare, nor anyone else. So they try to set the value at some other spots.

The final question is, if the entire matter is good or bad for IT environment? Well, the efficiency can be increased but the CPU power will be delayed, and many users may have a IGP constantly leeching around, without the need for it. A 100% DISABLE mode is critical. Im not sure about because the heat still stays same when its disabled, according to some rumours, which is amost impossible. All those disabled transistors should cool down the CPU, just by common sense. Intel should give the power users a FAIR PRICED alternate CPU WITHOUT IGP but some increased CPU power. Obviously not gonna happen unless we buy a 6 core CPU with twice the price and half the application support (which is in many terms ineffective and therefore to pricy).

So, does a CPU have FPU? Yes, indeed, but its soon mainly located at the IGP, instead it could be located at the CPU itself. Obviously, the only users who do care are enthusiasts, and are probably blind fated because CPU is still better than anything they ever saw. But how good could it truly be when all ressources only focused on CPU? Good question. Intel and Nvidia, both share something in common: They both are delaying theyr own progress for the sake of secondary possibilitys and marketing related strategys.

And AMD? Well AMD, is kinda reaching out for special solutions in some way. They try to please Apple (which is of course a very powerful deal) and are increasing GPGPU power (GCN architecture, 1D shaders), which comes at the cost of gaming-power to a certain extend. And they try to create server CPUs which are somewhat inferior for desktop (to much cores, most mainstream applications doesnt like it, but server does) but much better for server. On top of that the market of many mini system solutions, including console market, which can be totaly dominated by AMD next year.

[mjw21a]

Pft, GCN and GPU compute is the future dude. If you think otherwise you're deluding yourself. Intel's IGP has only just managed DX11 and still has no support for GPGPU compute. These solutions will be the ones to watch in the supercomputing space in the medium to long term future. Should have a trickle down effect with mainstream computing also.

Intel tried to buy out nVidia a while ago however nVidia's wonderful leader decided to try block the deal and succeeded.

AMD's current solutions are stepping stones to where they need to be, the current FX's laid the basics to build upon. PD will improve that slightly but the really interesting stuff looks to be coming in 2013-2014. Interesting times ahead.

[Ivy]

I didnt say that GPGPU is bad, dont get it wrong and i own a Radeon myself. Still have to express that it certainly did create some impact on gaming. But its not that critical and Radeon is still a very good gamer GPU, especially for its price, i do recommend. Although for those who want raw gaming power, Nvidia surely got some advantage, but that comes at a price. Anyway, this topic is about IB, so i guess im kinda going OT here. All i said was a rather objective view about the current development of the competition, not to defame them.

[Robert17]

I guess I'll stuff this post in here, more appropriate than other threads.


IB seems to be the way to go for my next build, thanks to OCF mainly, as there are so many things going on with IB + heat, mobos, ram, sata 3, usb 3, cooling options. Man, there is sure a lot to take in. But Intel is going to introduce some higher clocked IB's in the third quarter which is just around the corner. No way to know today if they have any intentions on soldering the next issue of chips or stick with TIM. Buy now? Hold off ?


Gotta believe that perhaps some solder creators are working their mojo to turn in a solution whether Intel has requested them to or not. Would make a great sales pitch if the current solders don't offer a solution, if that is even the problem. And howzabout the cooling solutionists ? (is that even a word ?) Mo better heat sinks, water blocks, rads?


Anybody got a crystal ball? What's the word on the street?

[mjw21a]

Lol, I think we're talking about different things here. GCN is a different, vector based architecture made specifically for compute type tasks. I doubt it would provide any benefit whatsoever in gaming. Once varies programs are rewritten to use the GPU side of things you're generally looking at a minimum of a 10x performance boost in those apps. The GPU as a co processor rather than something for video.

[Ivy]

The FPU power of a GPU is the most powerful processor, however, its hard to make it understand "different languages", while a CPU got no problem with. Now the GCN did boost the possibility to make them understand. On the other hand, many of those changes are not beneficial for gaming, thus, some wasted ressources. Anyway, your indeed correct.

[mjw21a]

Cool, we're on the same page then.

I hope Intel succeeds in buying out nVidia sometime down the track otherwise if AMD succeeds Intels going to be left behind. I don't care which company it is that's on top, we just need to have competition to bring down pricing and drive performance up.

Besides, it's not like AMD is EVER going to beat Intel on pure x86 performance.

[alinosa]

Originally Posted by satandole666

So I still have my trusty Storm Rev.2 from the AMD64 days. I'm wondering how a 3770K would do delidded and WCed for 24/7...

This was my first thought when I read the thread with the guy that de-lidded his IVB. "My cathar storm block was designed for a bare die, I could make this proc a bare die...." Prolly shouldn't plan on destroying (with my luck) an expensive part that I don't even own yet.

Then I saw the post talking about impingement and had flashbacks to my research in buying my storm g4 block. Good times.

[bing]

This situation reminds me of an old method to protect cpu die from crushing or chipped corner when mounting and during fastening the cooler base above it.

Details here -> Protecting IHS-less Core !

[MattNo5ss]

Hmm... another possible use for art eraser. It would be very similar to insulating the motherboard up to the top of the IHS for sub-zero cooling, except this is on a smaller scale. Seems like a good idea

[xrror]

Maybe replace the paste with Coollaboratory Liquid Pro under the IHS instead. It's about as close as you're going to get to simulating what a soldered TIM would be...

http://www.sidewindercomputers.com/colipro1.html

This would be rather nice to see tested... The Coollaboratory Liquid products can be a bit of a PITA to use, but for bare dies like GPU's and such with copper heatsink (bases) I've had really good luck with them.

[zkAry]

Thanks for suggesting a testable method to simulate a soldered IHS.

I would like to establish how hot a tri-gate chip is with a soldered IHS.

If a soldered IHS doesn't make Ivy Bridge significantly cooler I'm less inclined to wait for Haswell for the reason that it might reintroduce the soldered IHS.

[66racer]

Originally Posted by Janus67

The temps can be very high depending on the chip. Last night I booted up my system running at stock volts and speeds and was idling in the mid-40s. That was with only 1.1v. Now some people have managed to get 4.5ghz out of just 1.2v, it took 1.23 for me to be able to boot and it wasn't stable up to 1.25v (haven't tried higher yet) and was hitting temps in the low 80s. Now this is with a venomous-x cooler (which I attached two higher powered panaflo fans that I normally used on my 2600k) and not your modded kuhler, but just to give you an idea.

Thanks for the info. Its tempting! Everyone is out of the 3770k and was thinking the 3570k but microcenter has the 2700k for $280 so kinda leaning that way right now. Aside from ipc I think the 2700k would be a better choice from the 3570k but the 3770k if kept cool for 24/7 at 4.8ghz would be great

[BeerHunter]

does it matter how hot it runs? I saw a review which was benchmarking at 5Ghz and over 100C but does that matter? Why or why not?