1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Are my i7 3930k temps too high?

Discussion in 'Overclocking & Cooling' started by Rogue666, Jul 15, 2013.

  1. Rogue666 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    8 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    I was lazy this time around and had a system built for me with an i7-3930k conservatively overclocked to 4000MHz. I've been testing my temps with real temp and prime and they seem very hot to me. The system is water cooled with an Asetek 570LC, which is a closed system with two 120mm fans running push/pull at a fixed(3-pin connectors) 1400rpm. See below for the temps. The manufacturer is telling me the temps are fine, but 86'C o/c and 77'C stock seems very hot for water cooling. At idle the hottest core is around 39'C. The ambient room temp is around 23'C.

    Are these temps ok? If not, what do you suggest? Remount the heatsink with new thermal paste? Faster 4-pin fans with controllable speeds? Recommendations for paste and fans would be welcome if that's what you think I need.

    The system is built on an ASUS Rampage IV Extreme with Win7 64 Pro.

    Thanks for any advice.

    Here is Real Temp calibration with Prime run at small FFT and my 3930 overclocked to 4000MHz:
    [​IMG]

    Here is the same with the 3930 run at stock for comparison:
    [​IMG]
     
  2. EarthDog

    EarthDog

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    3,561 (1.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    803
    Seems fine for the sub par cooler... yep. Its a Hex core 125W CPU with a 120mm rad. Faster fans will help, but to what end? More noise, more money, for a couple less C? If that is worth it to you, go get some new fans. :)
     
    Rogue666 says thanks.
  3. drdeathx

    drdeathx

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,132 (1.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    479
    Location:
    Chicago burbs
    A dumb question. What voltage?
     
  4. Rogue666 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    8 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Thanks for the reply. So the thermal compound is probably ok? Will this amount of cooling be ok for gaming and maybe some video encoding work assuming I stay with the conservative overclock?
     
  5. drdeathx

    drdeathx

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,132 (1.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    479
    Location:
    Chicago burbs
    Sandybridge E should be kept under load 80 or less to be safe.
     
    Rogue666 says thanks.
  6. Rogue666 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    8 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Probably should have included that. Only running at 1.22V.
     
  7. drdeathx

    drdeathx

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,132 (1.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    479
    Location:
    Chicago burbs
    Thats high IMO even with your cooler. Is the heatsink applied correctly including TIM plus where is the rad. Take a photo.
     
  8. MxPhenom 216

    MxPhenom 216 Corsair Fanboy

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    10,132 (6.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,322
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    His temps aren't that high. My friend ran a 3930k around those speeds with little higher voltage I think with an H80 with the similar temps. Right around 80 which is okay. OP what you could do is get faster fans with higher static pressure, since that 120 radiator is probably getting VERY saturated. Or upgrade to something like the H100i or H110 if you are that concerned with temps.

    His temperatures will never really hit the temps that he gets in Prime95, during normal usage, in gaming or whatever other usages. SO I think he is okay, but temps could be improved for sure.
     
    Rogue666 says thanks.
  9. Rogue666 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    8 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    I would like to think they applied it correctly. They used the thermal compound that was already applied to the heatsink. Fans are at the top of the case.

    [​IMG]
     
  10. Rogue666 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    8 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    An H100 size cooler won't fit in this case unfortunately. Better fans seem like an easy fix if it will yield some improvement, but I'd like to stay somewhat quiet, which the system currently is. Would you recommend fixed rpm fans like I currently have, or something I can control with the MB or speedfan?
     
  11. EarthDog

    EarthDog

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    3,561 (1.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    803
    For sure something that is controllable. Though I can't imagine a huge improvement either if you are already running a push pull setup...

    TJMax is 91C iirc, so anything under that is good. The further away the better and to shoot for 80C is fine. I wouldnt go over the 86C you have while stress testing, that is for sure. That said, and was already said above, stress testing with P95 usually yields ~10C higher temps than any other non stress testing application.
     
  12. drdeathx

    drdeathx

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,132 (1.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    479
    Location:
    Chicago burbs
    TJ is measured at center of chip which is immeasureable. Actual readings are about 10 degrees cooler with the sensors thus the 80 degrees. DO NOT TAKE IT ABOVE 80 OR YOU MAY SEE DEGRDATION. It has happened to many. Better to be safe on a chip that costs over $500
     
  13. EarthDog

    EarthDog

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    3,561 (1.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    803
    Well aware how TJmax is measured and subsequent statement(s), and you more or less have it. I had a 3930K for several months and it topped out at around mid 80s when stress testing, and never touched 80 doing everything else. Zero degredation... though better safe than sorry, I agree.

    That said, when I did hit 91C in RealtempGT. It did throttle anyway.
     
  14. Rogue666 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    8 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Thanks for all the input guys. Gave me a little piece of mind, since I doubt I'll go over 80'C while running something other than prime95.

    I'm leaning towards trying out a better pair of fans to see if I can get a slightly larger buffer.
     
  15. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    14,098 (4.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,282
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    temps are fine, and voltage is low. Intel's turbo is built for throttling, anyway, and these chips are fine running up to the throttle point, just keep voltage within 10% of stock, which by what you've listed, is well within that(mine hits 1.25V at stock).


    Next, people will tell you that IVB is 77 W chip, and Haswell is 84W, and Haswell is hotter because it pulls more power.

    Sadly, both are 95W chips, TDP refers to cooling needed. IVB needs 77W under normal usage, Haswell needs 84W.


    Some aren't aware what "TDP" and "Power Envelope" are to Intel.
     
    Rogue666 says thanks.
  16. EarthDog

    EarthDog

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    3,561 (1.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    803
    I would be interested to see an official article or so on the 95w value of both gpus. I've never seen that value pinned down before.

    You right of course in tdp, but its a fair enough ballpark for most things to estimate power by that...again not assuming utmost accuracy.
     
  17. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    14,098 (4.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,282
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    You can HEAR it out of Intel reps mouth on Newegg videos. SNB, IVB and Haswell are all 95W chips. Also explains the early 95W IVB chips too, eh? Remember that Intel changed the listed number on IVB after reviewer/consumer response, so IVB is MOST DEFINTELY a 95W design.


    It's actually explained in decent enough detail to make ya happy with me posting that.;)

    [yt]ylNT1Co-Q6k[/yt]

    Also mentioned is that the higher TDP on Haswell is due to FIVR, but overall PLATFORM power is down.


    Also, Haswell is 154 W MAX. or maybe 158...150-something anyway, and that's listed in the Intel whitepapers.


    I'll let the Intel dude explain their reasoning. ;)
     
    EarthDog says thanks.
  18. EarthDog

    EarthDog

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    3,561 (1.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    803
    Ick.. mobile and it doesn't show.. will check it out in a min. Thanks!

    Edit.. yeah. It would make sense, certainly. Just never heard it pinned down to specific values before. ;)
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page