Tuesday, September 5th 2017
Intel Skylake-X HCC CPU Delidded by Der8auer, also not Soldered
Overclocking poster-boy Der8auer has seemingly gotten his hands on some early samples of Intel's Skylake-X high core count (HCC)HEDT CPUs. The upcoming 12 to 18-core enthusiast-class CPUs are being launched on the same X299 platform on socket LGA 2066 that Intel has already launched 4 (Kaby Lake-X), 6, 8 and 10-core parts already, and are supposed to bring Intel towards a level playing field - and then some - with competitor AMD's Threadripper CPUs, which boast of up to 16 cores.
From this delidding process with Der8auer's own delidding tool, Delid-Die-Mate-X, seems to result a die that is much larger - as expected - than Intel's 10-core i9-7900X. At the same time, it seems that Intel is still opting, again, for not soldering its enthusiast-targeted CPUs, which would result in better temperatures and, potentially, overclocking potential. The fact that Der8auer managed to delid the i9-7920X and didn't recommend against doing it likely means that there is minimal risk of damaging your CPU while subjecting it to this process. This is something the renowned overclocker did do when he recommended that users shouldn't delid their Ryzen or Threadripper CPUs looking for better temperatures, since the fact that these were soldered would likely result in both catastrophic damage and a much diminished chance of operating temperatures improvement through the application of special purpose thermal compounds. The Facebook post from Der8auer with the delidded 7920X likely serves as an appetizer for an upcoming delid video on YouTube, as has been the overclocker's MO.
Sources:
Der8auer's Facebook, via Overclock 3D
From this delidding process with Der8auer's own delidding tool, Delid-Die-Mate-X, seems to result a die that is much larger - as expected - than Intel's 10-core i9-7900X. At the same time, it seems that Intel is still opting, again, for not soldering its enthusiast-targeted CPUs, which would result in better temperatures and, potentially, overclocking potential. The fact that Der8auer managed to delid the i9-7920X and didn't recommend against doing it likely means that there is minimal risk of damaging your CPU while subjecting it to this process. This is something the renowned overclocker did do when he recommended that users shouldn't delid their Ryzen or Threadripper CPUs looking for better temperatures, since the fact that these were soldered would likely result in both catastrophic damage and a much diminished chance of operating temperatures improvement through the application of special purpose thermal compounds. The Facebook post from Der8auer with the delidded 7920X likely serves as an appetizer for an upcoming delid video on YouTube, as has been the overclocker's MO.
171 Comments on Intel Skylake-X HCC CPU Delidded by Der8auer, also not Soldered
I don't NEED a tool, you are right, but ensuring that I'm not wasting my time if I kill the CPU does add some security to doing it that I do need, yes, because of the aforementioned complexity. I don't want to accidentally pull the IHS, and then pull the smaller substrate with it.
Certainly we would like to have seen 'optimal' TIM(solder), but, again, I can understand the market, most aren't overclocking #1, and #2, those that are overclocking 99% of them are not looking to max the chip out to the edge of stability (as dave said).
So, sure, sub optimal. But, its really not a big deal considering the big picture. It isn't something to be upset about, again considering the big picture and real world results with 'average joe' type cooling. Its like throwing in a raciing radiator in a car when nearly nobody uses that type of vehicle to race...it isn't a racecar. The capacity isn't needed. (yay for a likely failed car analogy!).
- The AMD vs Intel discussion matters because a comparison must be made, and has been made. Ryzen is soldered, and considered 'better to buy' because of that by some.
- Intel does perhaps cheap out here. And so does every other company all over the world, somewhere with something. Its business, this is why the comparison also matters - if you have the best product at any given time, you win the race.
Honestly, is this all so hard to grasp? Is this really to be seen as an attack, or merely an observation to serve this discussion? If something is hard to swallow for you, that usually means it has a truth to it that you haven't accepted yet.
Intel knows that (despite the so-called "cheap" TIM) the chip will perform to the factory specifications and be stable while doing so. If you so choose to want to push the chip farther, that's on you.
It's also not just about stability; max TDP and overall power used play a very significant role in this too. CPUs are electrical devices, and it is electrical properties that determine what each chip ends up as.
The analogy's okay, but a better one might be like using a $300 racing head gasket on your grocery-getter minivan - it won't ever blow out, but the $100 gasket will also work great, and you're probably not going to get in a street race on the way home from soccer practice anyway. If you do get a little crazy one day and challenge a Mustang, it still (probably) won't blow the gasket, it'll just run a bit hotter. So save the $200 and get some better tires or something...
again with the amd attacks....why do you think that matters when they have not been cheaping out with the heat transfer ability of their chips? as said by more than one person they might even need to solder them to attain the speeds they are right now? we are talking about how intel used to solder their top chips and have now stopped. you are the one who is now rehashing outlandish claims in an attempt to justify the comment.
"best" is a subjective term. for most people paying for their cpu price : performance has a massive impact on how they define it, so which chips win that race? for some being able to attain the biggest % of overclock and gain the most "free performance" is the best, which the lack of solder hinders. to others just the feeling that the item they buy is as good as anybody is able to make right now is best. how does cheaping out on the tim effect that "best"?
also if intel did not care about overclocking do you think it would have dedicated platforms just for the ability to overclock?
would they sell different sku just so that people can pay for that ability?
could it be they really do care about overclocking, to the point at which they want to have more control over how much people are able to do it? i feel much the same dude, i have seen ivy and haswell chips behave much the same and my current 67k is equally limited.
idk maybe when you buy these things to try and squeeze as much performance out of them as you can get 24/7, the little details like this matter more?
And while you may think Intel sells "K" SKU CPUs for overclocking, again, this is an affect of the community. "K" SKUs are ALREADY OC'ed for you. The power and cooling needs are increased already, and that should have been the first sign that THAT is what Intel is supporting... they have pre-OC'd the "K" SKUs for you. That's why many of these chips come without a cooler... you need to buy better than what Intel provides with the other chips, and the power increases considerably 65W - 95W is a near 50% increase in power consumed.
Unfortunately, marketing and reviewers have portrayed this differently than what it really is, but the truth of the matter is printed right on the box. Sure, you do also get "unlocked" multipliers, but do keep in mind that those multis already have VIDs programmed. If Intel truly wanted you to OC as you'd like to define it, they'd not have to waste their time doing things like programming the multipliers above stock with VIDs.
As we said, most dont care. Its not a big deal. I like to push things to the limit and this frankly doesnt bother me. I mean, what is 200 mhz more IF IM LUCKY (we went over it at this end of overclocking you arent gaining much..even gave my results).
Again, even with the 'not optimal tim' its still overclocking way further than the competition.
I also agree it has very lite to do with the upgrade cycle by gaining 200 mhz with better TIM. Seriously, 200 mhz isnt going to let you keep your processor for much longer...
And yes, I still have a Kaby Lake CPU, I'm just not a fanboy.
The 9700 pro wasn't made by AMD!
Thats like calling me a General Motors fanboi because my name on some other forum is "Turbo9000"(hands down this is the best car analogy in this thread.)