(Solved) I7 3820 is not stable anymore on the Stock frequency

[xorbe]

pretty sure that its a motherboard issue,
Intel processors are well know for a [common] fact, they work or they dont work at stock settings...

Regards,

My 2500k system no longer works at stock settings (dynamic speed/voltage), it simply freezes up. I had to set it to 4.0 GHz constant / no turbo. But that was after 3 years of heavy overclocking abuse.

Hey that's an idea op, what happens if you disable turbo in the bios and lower the cpu speed / bump the voltage a bit like +0.1v?

 

[vmidov]

I removed mobo, checked capacitors (seems to be nothing wrong with them) then reinstalled CPU. But still no freaking way (only accept Windows but cannot handle Prime95).

That's how my luck works.

I really don't have anything else to offer other than what has been suggested. If might try to find a very trusting friend with a compatible CPU, you can try that just to make sure it is not your CPU.

Don't mind man thank you anyway for your willing for support.

pretty sure that its a motherboard issue,
Intel processors are well know for a comun fact, they work or they dont work at stock settings...
Regards,

Do not know really what to do, but I didn't got what you mean with the fact?

My 2500k system no longer works at stock settings (dynamic speed/voltage), it simply freezes up. I had to set it to 4.0 GHz constant / no turbo. But that was after 3 years of heavy overclocking abuse.

Hey that's an idea op, what happens if you disable turbo in the bios and lower the cpu speed / bump the voltage a bit like +0.1v?

As you said you was OCed for 3 years which for sure effect the stability for the stock setting, while I didn't OC it before.

I disabled Turbo -Spread Spectrum - Step Speed, But I didn't try to downclock CPU before ..... should I?

 

[peche]

Do not know really what to do, but I didn't got what you mean with the fact?

check CPU with a compatible motherboard
Regards,

 

[Bill_Bright]

I disabled Turbo -Spread Spectrum - Step Speed, But I didn't try to downclock CPU before ..... should I?

You shouldn't have to down or underclock, but you should make sure all your clock settings (RAM, bus and CPU) have been reset to the defaults by resetting the BIOS back to the factory defaults. When doing that, make sure you verify your date and time are correct, then select "Save and Exit" to boot normally. Same with the graphics. I know you said you reset your BIOS before, but just to make sure... .

Note a lot of folks with HTPCs (home theater PCs) underclock to make sure the CPU stays nice and cool so the passive (no fan) cooler is all they need, or if using active (fan and heatsink) cooling, the fan turns on late (hopefully only during loud movie passages) and spins slow (quietly).

 

[xorbe]

I disabled Turbo -Spread Spectrum - Step Speed, But I didn't try to downclock CPU before ..... should I?

You should try anything at this point to get an angle of what might be wrong with your system. I would underclock the cpu and ram and gpu in search of any sort of possible base line.

 

[peche]

You should try anything at this point to get an angle of what might be wrong with your system. I would underclock the cpu and ram and gpu in search of any sort of possible base line.

he laready did that too... the unique thing as far we know he hasn't test is cpu in a diferrent motherboard... pretty sure that is a f*cked motherboard..

 

[Caring1]

BTW, I guess my 3.4GHz i7 3770 pushed to 4183GHz with its stock cooler, with ambient temps of 74°F is about to burn up too!

Not at practically ZERO LOADS!
Try ramping it up doing some intensive computing at 100% load or gaming, then come back and tell us how f'n brilliant stock coolers are.

 

[xorbe]

he laready did that too... the unique thing as far we know he hasn't test is cpu in a diferrent motherboard... pretty sure that is a f*cked motherboard..

Yah that's the problem, most don't have an extra mobo or cpu for swapping. I concur probably motherboard.

 

[peche]

Yah that's the problem, most don't have an extra mobo or cpu for swapping. I concur probably motherboard.

there are several PC stores arround the world... you can take it there for a check up!

Regards,

 

[Bill_Bright]

Not at practically ZERO LOADS!

That's because I was nearly idle at the time of the SS. Note the maximum temps! As I have noted many times before, I don't let my CPU temps sit above 60°C for more than few seconds and when that happens, it is typically a signal for me to clean my air filters.

I say again, it is the responsibility of the case to provide enough cool air flowing through the case. If you are not doing extreme overclocking, your CPU fan is spinning normally, your case interior is clean of heat trapping dust, your room (ambient) temp is in the normal "room temperature" range, and your CPU is still getting too hot, then your case is failing to do its job!

It is pointless debating this with you for you have blinders on. By far, that vast majority of computer users (factory or self-built) use OEM coolers and if your claims were even remotely true, tech sites (and my shop) would be awash with heat related problems - but that is NOT happening. I say again, your exceptions don't make the rule. For example, even with hard core gaming, it is rare for CPU usage to reach 100%, let alone sit there. And surprise! - most computer users are not hard-core gamers either. And FTR, Prime95 and the like do not simulate real-world scenarios but instead, purposely stress components to their breaking points. Hardly realistic for the typical user (that is, non-extremists).

It is ludicrous to imply both AMD and Intel would market their CPUs for gaming, warranty them for 3 years when used with the supplied cooler, then bundle in an inadequate cooler. Since you refuse to accept that, so I am done here.

 

[cadaveca]

but that is NOT happening. I say again, your exceptions don't make the rule.

You've not been paying attention then. Since the 3770K launch, enthusiasts the world over have been complaining about cooling offered by Intel's stock cooler, and have been delidding chips to change TIM just to get decent cooling with AFTERMARKET coolers.[/quote]

It is ludicrous to imply both AMD and Intel would market their CPUs for gaming, warranty them for 3 years when used with the supplied cooler, then bundle in an inadequate cooler. Since you refuse to accept that, so I am done here.

The thing is... both AMD an Intel CPUs have throttling built in, and most users won't recognize it for what it is. Even VGAs these days do not always run their rated speed...TitanX, for example, NVidia's new flagship...throttles after extended usage.

However, it's been a joy to read your posts, so please, keep at it.

 

[peche]

That's because I was nearly idle at the time of the SS. Note the maximum temps! As I have noted many times before, I don't let my CPU temps sit above 60°C for more than few seconds and when that happens, it is typically a signal for me to clean my air filters.

I say again, it is the responsibility of the case to provide enough cool air flowing through the case. If you are not doing extreme overclocking, your CPU fan is spinning normally, your case interior is clean of heat trapping dust, your room (ambient) temp is in the normal "room temperature" range, and your CPU is still getting too hot, then your case is failing to do its job!

It is pointless debating this with you for you have blinders on. By far, that vast majority of computer users (factory or self-built) use OEM coolers and if your claims were even remotely true, tech sites (and my shop) would be awash with heat related problems - but that is NOT happening. I say again, your exceptions don't make the rule. For example, even with hard core gaming, it is rare for CPU usage to reach 100%, let alone sit there. And surprise! - most computer users are not hard-core gamers either. And FTR, Prime95 and the like do not simulate real-world scenarios but instead, purposely stress components to their breaking points. Hardly realistic for the typical user (that is, non-extremists).

It is ludicrous to imply both AMD and Intel would market their CPUs for gaming, warranty them for 3 years when used with the supplied cooler, then bundle in an inadequate cooler. Since you refuse to accept that, so I am done here.

dude ... come on ... give us a break about stock coolers... the post is about problems with an i7 proceesor and possible problems related to other hardware... cooler tests were made and shown the same results, stop annoying with your craps about stock coolers please...

You've not been paying attention then. Since the 3770K launch, enthusiasts the world over have been complaining about cooling offered by Intel's stock cooler, and have been delidding chips to change TIM just to get decent cooling with AFTERMARKET coolers.

has not being considered by many people....

he thing is... both AMD an Intel CPUs have throttling built in, and most users won't recognize it for what it is. Even VGAs these days do not always run their rated speed...TitanX, for example, NVidia's new flagship...throttles after extended usage.

best argument related to stock craps so far!
Thanks dave!

Regards,

 

[Bill_Bright]

No, you are not paying attention! Come on! For Pete's sake, you are not even paying attention to your own words!!!!!!!!!

enthusiasts the world over

Enthusiasts are but a tiny fraction of the total users out there. You taking enthusiasts - people who overclock and run extreme benchmarking programs so they can claim bragging rights - exceptions to the norm - and attempting apply their findings to the remaining 95% of the users.

It is a DISSERVICE to the masses and general readership to make "blanket statements" as done in this thread that say or even suggest OEM coolers cannot keep the CPUs they come with adequately cooled. 15 years ago, I might have agreed with you, but not today.

The thing is... both AMD an Intel CPUs have throttling built in, and most users won't recognize it for what it is. Even VGAs these days do not always run their rated speed...TitanX, for example, NVidia's new flagship...throttles after extended usage.

This is really sad!!! Now you are suggesting and trying rationalize your argument and convince ... I don't who... that they build this feature in because the OEM fans are inadequate. That is totally wrong. The throttling is used to (1) conserver energy (and battery run time in portable devices) because energy conservation is a big deal these days and (2) to reduce fan noise because the fans are, by design, meant to ramp up speed when CPUs are tasked.

stop annoying with your craps about stock coolers please...

NO DUDE! If you don't want to hear any more about this, then you and buddies need to stop piling on with BS about stock coolers and stop pretending enthusiasts and their extreme setups and exceptions set the rules for the masses. You stop and then I will stop. Your comment about "best argument" proves you and others don't know what you are talking about! Now you suggest that AMD, Intel and now NVIDIA all throttle down their processors because their OEM coolers are inadequate? Total BS!!!!

 

[cadaveca]

then you and buddies need to stop piling on with BS about stock coolers and stop pretending enthusiasts and their extreme setups and exceptions set the rules for the masses. You stop and then I will stop. Your comment about "best argument" proves you and others don't know what you are talking about! Now you suggest that AMD, Intel and now NVIDIA all throttle down their processors because their OEM coolers are inadequate? Total BS!!!!

You are mostly right. But the fact of the matter is that most users here on TPU are in fact enthusiasts, so any commentary provided here is going to reflect the opinion of those users. TPU works to bridge that gap between normal users and enthusiasts and we are more than aware of the reality of how these devices work in most contexts. In your context, a stock cooler is adequate, but from our perspective here, as enthusiasts, it's not. That doesn't make either side of this argument wrong... you are simply arguing different aspects of the same device.

I live in a place that is considered "high altitude", in such a way that even furnaces and hot water heaters get de-rated in their abilities. The same applies to CPU and GPU coolers, and for YEARS I have been complaining about poor stock cooling while other users say that the fault is mine. This has confounded my job here on TPU as a reviewer, since this is obviously going to affect the experiences I relate in my reviews, yet most users will have a very different environment, and when cooling is considered, most definitely so. There is simply no arguing the science. Gigabyte listened to feedback exactly like this, and now has a testing facility at high altitude so they can cover for situations like mine.

Now you suggest that AMD, Intel and now NVIDIA all throttle down their processors because their OEM coolers are inadequate? Total BS!!!!

No, the suggestion is given that OEMs are doing the best they can given the space provided, while considering profit margins. In fact, the entire silicon industry is predicated by this fact. AMD has watercooling as the ONLY option for 295X, for example. Device design, including cooling, is not always the same as it is marketed.

 

[Bill_Bright]

But the fact of the matter is that most users here on TPU are in fact enthusiasts,

No they aren't! Most of the "regulars" may be, but not most the users. I don't have near as many posts as you, but I've been lurking about for just as long.

so any commentary provided here is going to reflect the opinion of those users.

The issue is about technical facts. NOT opinions.

It is MY OPINION when MY overclocked i7 3770 runs over 60°C for longer than few seconds that that is too hot. But it is a technical fact, that I still have lots of headroom before stability becomes an issue and even more headroom (105°C) before the CPU shutsdown out of self-protection.

And it is a technical fact the OEM cooler adequate cools my overclocked CPU, even when stressed.

Opinions given should reflect the opinion of the person saying it. It is not anyone's right to expect their opinion applies to all.

Again, keeping the CPU adequately cooled is critical - not argument there. But 40° is not "better" than 50° in terms of stability, performance, or longevity. That's not opinion, but fact.

FTR, I lived in Albuquerque for many years as a radio technician for USAF air traffic facilities. Albuquerque sits a mile high (considerably higher than Edmonton) and I was responsible for maintaining critical communication systems on top of Sandia Crest (10,660 ft) so I am very familiar with the struggles in keeping electronics cool in high-altitude environments and it is STILL an issue of getting enough cool air flowing through the chassis that matters most - that is case cooling.

If the CPU cooler fan is blowing hot air onto the CPU heatsink, then of course, the CPU will run hot. But that is NOT the fault of the cooler.

 

[cadaveca]

I hear where you are coming from. But I might interject that temperatures are not important, and what is really important is when the throttle point is reached. This is where temps are an issue, and only then, and not because they would do any damage to the CPU, but because it negatively impacts performance. Intel has directly stated that there is no such thing as "too hot" under stock cooling and stock frequencies.... throttling is entirely all about ensuring that things do not get too hot as stated earlier.

However, when performance of a product is important, avoiding throttle is NOT possible with Intel's stock cooler on nearly every modern "K"-SKU CPU. While you've been lurking, it's been me posting the memory, CPU and motherboard reviews here on TPU for the past 4+ years, so I do understand how important sticking to facts really is, and I've tested multiple CPUs from every platform and posted many of the results to the front page here.

Where I differ from your opinion, is that for many users, their expectations and how things really work are not equal, and as such, if throttle has ever been reached with a CPU under stock cooling, then it is sub-par. Yet the defacto answer given... is that you need aftermarket cooling, and the existence of such predicates the existence of such issues.

I personally have 3770K, 4770K (x2), and 3x 4790K which all throttle under their stock coolers. All are retail CPUs purchased locally.

 

[Bill_Bright]

I hear where you are coming from. But I might interject that temperatures are not important, and what is really important is when the throttle point is reached.

Now we are starting to get somewhere!

throttling is entirely all about ensuring that things do not get too hot as stated earlier.

Ummm, no. While certainly that is a factor, and a critical one, throttling most often occurs simply because the CPU does not need to work at full speed for many tasks, so it throttles down to conserve energy consumption. Throttling came out of the notebook world where battery consumption and heat (due to the small confines and lack of case fan support in tiny notebook cases) are critical concerns. Tree huggers brought it to PCs.

http://www.qwhatis.com/what-is-cpu-throttling/

And I have read many, if not most of your reviews and I think your motherboard reviews are top rate. And your CPU reviews are very informative. But frankly, I think using an aftermarket cooler on a CPU that comes packaged with an OEM cooler is doing a disservice to your readers and to AMD and Intel. It does not tell your readers the facts, and provides no feedback to AMD or Intel so they can fix noted problems.

And IF both Intel and AMD CPUs fail (with default clocks) with their supplied AMD and Intel coolers, you should be down grading their scores! I say "IF" because you don't show where that is happening!

A product should meet or exceed published specs but you don't test them. In fact, in looking at several of your recent CPU reviews, I don't see where temperatures or heat is even mentioned or rated as test criteria. A CPU should remain stable until it hit published thresholds. And IF a CPU comes packaged with an OEM cooler, the cooler should allow it to perform to those specs when operated as in a "normal" environment with a properly configured case. But you don't test for that.

I have to say there is a similar problem with PSU testing. If maker rates a 600W PSU at 50°C, it should be tested at 50°C. Not 40°C.

I do note in your i7-4790 review you report the stock cooler works just fine in that "portable gaming rig".

Of course, for enthusiasts, both CPU makers have OEM versions of many of their CPUs that don't come packaged with OEM coolers. And those cases, you must use aftermarket cooling.

 

[MrGenius]

What is throttling? Answered.

How does it differ from Dynamic TDP Management?

Answer: AMD PowerTune Technology

Do CPUs even have Dynamic TDP Management? Seriously, I wasn't aware they did, if they do.

 

[cadaveca]

Of course, for enthusiasts, both CPU makers have OEM versions of many of their CPUs that don't come packaged with OEM coolers. And those cases, you must use aftermarket cooling.

They both also sell "OEM" coolers for those CPUs. The 4790 is not a "K"-series CPU, so is excluded in my perspective and opinion on this subject in particular. It's the "K"-series CPU, which come "unlocked for overclocking" that in my experience are inadequately cooled.

If a CPU failed with stock cooling, I'd simply return it for a new one, honestly, however, the whole point of the "K"-series CPUs is to clock them (that's why they come "unlocked"), and the stock cooler; is NOT capable of doing THAT, which is a selling feature of the CPU. So, Intel says "here, we support OCing, we sell unlocked CPUs, and we sell a warranty that covers damage from basic OC", then packages a cooler that is barely capable at stock.

My 4790K installed into the ASRock M8 that I use on a daily basis throttles when encoding video, under the stock cooler.

Also, throttle in current CPUs is only possible under high load. Power-saving clock reductions utilize different power states and a different criteria for the clockspeed than what throttling does. These are different technologies present within the same device, not the same technology.

Oh, and by the way, that link is horribly wrong. Turbo and SpeedStep/EIST are NOT the same thing, although it relates it as such.

It's a very confusing path for users to look into things like this since many "official" sources have info that is incorrect or outright mis-leading. That's not to say I don't make mistakes myself,.

 

[MrGenius]

Something like the Dynamic TDP Management used for GPUs? Perhaps? Which is called what again? Are you teaching me something here or not? Because I'm actually calling BS, in case you hadn't noticed.

Yeah...you wise guy. Don't make me quote your ass.

 

[cadaveca]

Heh. you need to quote. ROFL.

 

[Aquinus]

If a CPU failed with stock cooling, I'd simply return it for a new one, honestly, however, the whole point of the "K"-series CPUs is to clock them (that's why they come "unlocked"), and the stock cooler; is NOT capable of doing THAT, which is a selling feature of the CPU. So, Intel says "here, we support OCing, we sell unlocked CPUs, and we sell a warranty that covers damage from basic OC", then packages a cooler that is barely capable at stock.

I don't know why people are arguing about stock coolers. The OP never got a cooler with the CPU if he has a 3820. The OP has a 3820 which isn't just not a mainstream platform but it also means the CPU didn't come with a stock cooler because it's a skt2011 CPU which doesn't come with a cooler. If the OP decided to buy a "stock" Intel cooler for skt2011, then... my condolences. Intel's stock coolers are fine at stock for <95-watt TDP CPUs but anyone who gets a stock cooler for skt2011 clearly didn't do research ahead of time. Also, Intel's stock cooler doesn't take much dust to make it suffer.

Side note for the OP: Was the CPU ever re-seated like I had recommended earlier?

 

[xorbe]

Did you guys scare OP away? His PC is dead anyway, oh well!

 

[MrGenius]

Heh. you need to quote. ROFL.

You're not the best of teachers. You know that right? Yet you speak of things like miscommunication as if you weren't a master of it.

Gee...what do we have here?

Have a nice day!

 

[cadaveca]

You're not the best of teachers. You know that right? Yet you speak of things like miscommunication as if you weren't a master of it.

Gee...what do we have here?

Have a nice day!

Oh yeah, you bet. I'm DEFINITELY not a teacher in any way. But miscommunication is not my game... simply put, we are a community built with members from around the world, and differences in culture and native language can cause all sorts of confusion. Really, if you want to objectify what MY problem is, it's that I don't care if I'm wrong, or right. Let's just have a chat, OK? Maybe we agree, maybe we don't, but I'm not one to hold a grudge, so it's no big deal to have a discussion with some emotion.

And yes, to answer your question...Nvidia GPUs have Boost technology and throttle just like CPUs, AMD has PowerTune. These things, to me are construed as "features", but to me, they are ways to deal with problems in silicon quality. Power-saving? What for? Maybe in large-scale deployments...but not in personal PCs...my PC pulls like1100W when gaming...the heater at my feet pulls twice that.

Now, I said specifically, the HIGH-END "K" CPUs and GPUS are horribly cooled at stock configurations. And then you bring up the 4790 non-K. Really? Don't answer that...I might be a BIT TROLLISH AT TIMES.

I don't know why people are arguing about stock coolers. The OP never got a cooler with the CPU if he has a 3820. The OP has a 3820 which isn't just not a mainstream platform but it also means the CPU didn't come with a stock cooler because it's a skt2011 CPU which doesn't come with a cooler. If the OP decided to buy a "stock" Intel cooler for skt2011, then... my condolences. Intel's stock coolers are fine at stock for <95-watt TDP CPUs but anyone who gets a stock cooler for skt2011 clearly didn't do research ahead of time. Also, Intel's stock cooler doesn't take much dust to make it suffer.

Side note for the OP: Was the CPU ever re-seated like I had recommended earlier?

Bumps through discussion. :-0