Saturday, May 12th 2012
TIM is Behind Ivy Bridge Temperatures After All
It's proven: the thermal interface material (TIM) used by Intel, inside the integrated heatspreader (IHS) of its Core "Ivy Bridge" processors are behind its higher than expected load temperatures. This assertion was first made in late-April by an Overclockers.com report, and was recently put to test by Japanese tech portal PC Watch, in which an investigator carefully removed the IHS of a Core i7-3770K processor, removed the included TIM and binding grease, and replaced them with a pair of aftermarket performance TIMs, such as OCZ Freeze and Coolaboratory Liquid Pro.
PC Watch findings show that swapping the TIM, if done right, can shave stock clock (3.5 GHz, Auto voltage) temperatures by as much as 18% (lowest temperatures by the Coolaboratory TIM), and 4.00 GHz @ 1.2V temperatures by as much as 23% (again, lowest temperatures on the Coolaboratory TIM). The change in TIM was also change the overclockability of the chip, which was then able to sustain higher core voltages to facilitate higher core clock speeds. The report concluded that Intel's decision to use thermal paste inside the IHS of its Ivy Bridge chips, instead of fluxless solder, poses a very real impact on temperatures and overclockability.
Source:
PC Watch
PC Watch findings show that swapping the TIM, if done right, can shave stock clock (3.5 GHz, Auto voltage) temperatures by as much as 18% (lowest temperatures by the Coolaboratory TIM), and 4.00 GHz @ 1.2V temperatures by as much as 23% (again, lowest temperatures on the Coolaboratory TIM). The change in TIM was also change the overclockability of the chip, which was then able to sustain higher core voltages to facilitate higher core clock speeds. The report concluded that Intel's decision to use thermal paste inside the IHS of its Ivy Bridge chips, instead of fluxless solder, poses a very real impact on temperatures and overclockability.
219 Comments on TIM is Behind Ivy Bridge Temperatures After All
Why woulld I want the customer to think I product is weak and not built well? Why would I want my customers to break their new toy and get frustrated when told it isn't covered?
your point is idiotic
and no the point was not idiotic. the point was that cpu companies DO NOT put an "internal heat spreader" on a die to protect the die from customers crushing them. they'd be called a protective shim or something like that. to call somebody an idiot because of ignorance.....now thats troll'n!!!
ive been reading through some ihs american patent aps today and one thing that comes up often is the term "hotspots"...certain parts of the die get much hotter than others and there is a need to have a medium that evens (spreads) the heat out.
Why do you think its called an Integrated HEAT sink, its integrated and just like a mounted HS its a Heatsink by your reckoning i should maybe get a solid water block with side ports and then mount a third fan heatsink on top ot the WB and IHS to increase again my thermal POwers
3s better then two right, two's better then one and maybe ill fit some wheels on the outside of my cars wheels so ig goes faster , cos itll grip better:slap:
it's good there is oneandonly of you....you keep slipping into this land of make believe stuff..
what you're describing is not too far from a coolermaster v10 though(worst purchase ever btw)
just a guess oneandonly.....you think 94octane gas burns hotter and faster than 87 dont you....
there is only one of me :cool: , their are many like me and a many better then me but thats not you on the topic of thermodynamics apparently, and im an engineer not a phycisist or anything all that technical, just good old hands on tried it type inteligence with enough maths to keep my brain working, if you can carry away more heat you remove more heat and the discrepencies you speak of between an enthusiast fitting his own lid correctly verse the same plus intel fitting one inbetween a bit shit dont exist.whats this mock nameing me shit lmao
i think you should read this then as it clearly states im no chemist and since the only contact i have with fuel is putting the overpriced shit in my car why would i care which is better i put the soddin cheapest in obviously ,, helo engineer not phycisist
im fully aware of hotspots onchip btw ,did you know intel and ibm are messing with on die peltiers , micro peltiers in silicone
no.....article??? thats interesting
www.technologyreview.com/computing/22016/
im not hunting all night but theres one
www.hardocp.com/news/2012/05/18/pop_top_on_your_i73770k_for_better_temps63
Guess Ivy-bridge doesnt report temps like in the past according to ASUS. Monitoring software needs to be compatible.
Saved many cpus.
Actual voltage is 1.128 V (via digital multi-meter).
Relatively speaking, temps could be considered hot, but given clocks, it doesn't seem so. Same thing as SB for me, but with lower voltage. FAR lower voltage. The i7 3820 is running similar temps @ 4.5 GHz, but with 1.35 V.
Can't say there's much reason to complain...?
Sure, you wanna OC to the max, pull the lid, slap on some coolaboratory pro, and get what you want...
If ya want a warranty, live with it? Not gonna matter what's in between in that case, is it? If you wanna clock within warranty, spend tha extra $25, and forget about it? That'll be MY option...
;)
:roll:
Oh come on, take one for the team. lol
I look at it this way
Regular Joes will never remove the IHS- Works fine for them
Ones who are overclockers- remove the IHS and put a better TIM on and just use the IHS cuz they feel they need it to ensure they dont damage the CPU
Extreme overclockers- Understand the full risk of direct HS contact and crushing of core- have money to back it up
Who is right? I dunno. What I do know is that the reported 11c temp on the 4th core is impossible, and AIDA does not report that low, although overall, AIDA reports lower temps, and as the temps increase, that difference of max temps widens...You and I both know that how the TIM is applied, what TIM is used, and a myriad of other factors can each play their role. Because removing the IHS requires removing the retention bracket, and I'll be using this chip for reviews, I will not remove the IHS, but, if the other chip I am expecting shows up, I will definitely pop the top on that one, and see what's what. I cannot do so until i have a backup chip.
I get about 25C-32C idle and 57C-61C with prime95 max heat test.
Is that good for an Ivy?
Edit: I didnt pop the IHS
That is a 33% increase in speed(from 3.5 GHz), for a 100% increase in current drawn.
Hrm...:wtf:...my CPU pulls just 50 W at stock...I guess you are very much right. However, at the same time, I'm using just under 1.2 V for that 4.6 GHz, when most are using jsut under 1.3 V that I have seen.
That's when comparing to SB, which ran 4.6 GHz @ 125 W, and increase of ~50% from stock(which was ~ 80 W), for the same roughly 33% increase in clocks...
:confused: