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
Add your own comment

219 Comments on TIM is Behind Ivy Bridge Temperatures After All

#1
1nf3rn0x
This actually might be a deal breaker for me. I might go the 2500k route not the 3570k.
Posted on Reply
#2
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
Dent1 said:
Where is Trickson? He has spent years in every AMD Forum and thread bashing AMD. Now where is he when Intel are looking like a bad choice.
Stop trying to start a flame war, I mean Trickson hasn't even posted so your obsession with his fanboy-ism is kind of disturbing. Grow up and stop mentioning Trickson every time Intel appears to do something incorrect, but correct me if I'm wrong but IVB is still faster than anything AMD has got so I wouldn't even start on this battle considering it isn't what this thread is about. I'm sick and tired of your fueling every AMD flame war that shows up on TPU and you really need to learn when enough is enough.

As far as the TIM, people who have IVB already have it so a stepping won't do them any good. Going on, if Intel is planning on releasing another stepping, replacing the TIM might not be a bad idea, but honestly, if an enthusiast want to OC higher, the user might just try replacing the TIM them-self.
Posted on Reply
#3
Completely Bonkers
blibba said:
I feel I should point out that a change in load temperature from 61 degrees Celcius (334K) to 50 degrees Celcius (323K) is a change of 3.29%, not 18%.
pædagogans!
Posted on Reply
#4
jamdox
Meh. Ivy isn't supposed to be given more than 1.35 volts anyway. All the action came at 1.4+, really 1.5/5GHz.

Would Ivy have better thermals with a soldered IHS? Sure. But do bad thermals impair the OCability of the chip?

That's a question for the lawyers. I'll bet you dollars to donuts they'll argue that electromigration is more damaging to Ivy Bridge than heat. So:

Intel put the paste on because it was good enough.

The paste is good enough because Ivy can't handle high voltages.

End of story. According to Intel's lawyers. I don't know how it works in reality, but I'm satisfied getting my 3570k up to 4.7.
Posted on Reply
#5
RejZoR
blibba said:
I feel I should point out that a change in load temperature from 61 degrees Celcius (334K) to 50 degrees Celcius (323K) is a change of 3.29%, not 18%.
Actually the decrease is 19,355% (going from 62°C to 50°C)
Posted on Reply
#6
jihadjoe
blibba said:
I feel I should point out that a change in load temperature from 61 degrees Celcius (334K) to 50 degrees Celcius (323K) is a change of 3.29%, not 18%.
Since you're being pedantic, I'd like to point out that we should be comparing delta Ts, i.e. temperature difference from ambient which was 24°C according to the first image.

So the change was from (61-24) 37°ΔC to (50-24) 26°ΔC , or a change of 29.7%
Posted on Reply
#7
Bjorn_Of_Iceland
Imo, I'd remove the IHS and place my block directly on that chip oldschool. That would definitely give me better temps.
Posted on Reply
#8
RejZoR
The main problem with direct contact is that you can actually crumble the chip if you apply too much pressure or you apply the pressure on one edge too strongly.
Posted on Reply
#9
Laurijan
What a pity that they use TIM. I wonder why? Gonna get an Ivy even with the temps - I want PCIE 3.0 for my next GPU upgrade.
Posted on Reply
#10
Widjaja
Strange TIM is indeed placed under the IHS on these chips.

They could have at least place TIM under the non K chips.
Posted on Reply
#11
nikko
TIM is easier to use with MCP package chips that haswell and broadwell will be I guess. So get used to it. Besides the cpu doesn't need any more oc headroom. Anyway the scaling is bad above 1.2V with only 100Mhz for each 0.1V so I don't like it.
Posted on Reply
#12
SuperSonic X 316
NC37 said:
Exactly. You'll need to buy a new board for Haswell. Might as well get as much out of Ivy as you can.
Thing is, for the people who don't want to touch their CPU it's a bad thing tbey decided to use the weaker material. I am interested in removing the IHS if it's safe when done correctly but not yet. This is really the first chip and board I got to bothee to OC with and it looks like I'll have to go that route eventually.
Posted on Reply
#13
Dent1
Aquinus said:
Stop trying to start a flame war, I mean Trickson hasn't even posted so your obsession with his fanboy-ism is kind of disturbing. Grow up and stop mentioning Trickson every time Intel appears to do something incorrect, but correct me if I'm wrong but IVB is still faster than anything AMD has got so I wouldn't even start on this battle considering it isn't what this thread is about. I'm sick and tired of your fueling every AMD flame war that shows up on TPU and you really need to learn when enough is enough.
May I say that I never mentioned the word AMD in a defensive way or insinuated performance results or a consumer choice. So Maybe the fanboy or flame war starter is closer to home.


Aquinus said:

As far as the TIM, people who have IVB already have it so a stepping won't do them any good. Going on, if Intel is planning on releasing another stepping, replacing the TIM might not be a bad idea, but honestly, if an enthusiast want to OC higher, the user might just try replacing the TIM them-self.
I've been looking to upgrade my rig to Ivy for weeks now. This TIM stuff has put me off. I'm hoping Intel has something in the works otherwise my money is staying in my wallet.
Posted on Reply
#14
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
Dent1 said:
May I say that I never mentioned the word AMD in a defensive way or insinuated performance results or a consumer choice. So Maybe the fanboy or flame war starter is closer to home.

I've been looking to upgrade my rig to Ivy for weeks now. This TIM stuff has put me off. I'm hoping Intel has something in the works otherwise my money is staying in my wallet.
I'm not talking about AMD, I'l talk about you trying to start a flame war with Trickson for what he believes. Stop getting on his case when he isn't around.
Posted on Reply
#15
zomg
who care about i5/i7 with attached overpriced crappy video chip

big question is what they will put in Xeon parts (which have HT, no vga, and better priced)

we will know after 14th may 2012 (xeon ivy release date)


zomg said:
best value Ivy Bridge model is Xeon E3-1230 v2 (3.3 GHz, 3.7 GHz turbo, 4C/8T, Hyper-Threading, 8mb cache, $215)

Core i5-3550 vs Xeon E3-1230 v2 (same socket, same base/turbo frequency, same price)
Xeon have more cache (8mb > 6mb), less TDP (69w < 77w), HyperThread (8threads > 4 threads), no crappy gpu (thx for lower tdp)

you can also save $70 on i7 and got gpu-less version with lower tdp:

Core i7-3770 vs Xeon E3-1240 v2

paying $70 for intel gpu is insane, you can get better external card for this price.
Posted on Reply
#16
dicobalt
If only Intel would say WHY they decided to use TIM instead of solder. Maybe they are retooling and didn't want to delay Ivy, so they used TIM in the meantime? Was there a technical problem using solder on Ivy? They could have went on Newegg and ordered some better TIM. The whole situation seems totally unnecessary and a result of carelessness during planning.
Posted on Reply
#17
20mmrain
Well if Intel is true hopefully they will do something about this.

I just bought an IB CPU.... serves me right for adopting early. Well I can sell this and my SB and buy a SB-E setup!
Posted on Reply
#18
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
zomg said:
who care about i5/i7 with attached overpriced crappy video chip

big question is what they will put in Xeon parts (which have HT, no vga, and better priced)

we will know after 14th may 2012 (xeon ivy release date)
Not if you want to overclock. If you leave your hardware stock, it might be faster for the same price, yes.
Posted on Reply
#20
zomg
if you want overclock - it is better to use sandy bridge
ivy i5/i7 is useless for everyone except fans of intel gpu
sandy for overclockers
xeon ivy to take advantage of new tech - for stability performance and temperatures
Posted on Reply
#21
radrok
zomg said:
ivy i5/i7 is useless for everyone except fans of intel gpu
Ivy Bridge still has better IPC than Sandy Bridge and the temperatures aren't THAT bad, you can reach high clocks with adequate cooling so why would you say that it is useless?
Posted on Reply
#22
RejZoR
Can you even get CPU's without stupid GPU being integrated in the die?
Posted on Reply
#23
blibba
zomg said:
if you want overclock - it is better to use sandy bridge
ivy i5/i7 is useless for everyone except fans of intel gpu
sandy for overclockers
xeon ivy to take advantage of new tech - for stability performance and temperatures
IB is faster clock for clock. An IB typical max OC ends up performing better than a SB typical max OC despite the clockspeed deficit, and uses less power in the process.

RejZoR said:
Actually the decrease is 19,355% (going from 62°C to 50°C)
a) You've missed my point.
b) Where did you get 62°C from?

jihadjoe said:
Since you're being pedantic, I'd like to point out that we should be comparing delta Ts, i.e. temperature difference from ambient which was 24°C according to the first image.

So the change was from (61-24) 37°ΔC to (50-24) 26°ΔC , or a change of 29.7%
The article text references temperatures rather than temperature deltas, but as it happens I think you make a good point. 29.7% should probably be the headline figure.
Posted on Reply
#24
bmwmaster
Hahahahaa !

I sucessfully shaved IHS off from my 3570k.
Removed socket holder and directly mounted the Heatkiller waterblock on it !

I now have 15 °C better Temps !

Before i had 4,6 Hhz @ 1.32 V @ 80°C

Now i have the same config @ 65 °C.

So its a nice drop !!!:)
Posted on Reply
#25
reverze
same temps / voltage / clocks as my i2500k on air
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment