If it weren't for the fact that I can see some 3950x cpus under Linux getting RAC's as high as 516,000~ and I am currently thrashing along at 479,000~ I would agree. Set up everything except maybe CPU voltage under "auto" and go about my business.
That's not much of a difference. And the faster you run them the faster they wear out.
Tom M wrote:
The good news is I may have gotten
That does amuse me when Americans say gotten. We ditched that word in the UK a long time ago :-P I just say got for anything past tense and get for present and future tense.
Tom M wrote:
my CPU temperature down near the mid to upper 70C's. At the same OC it was running as high as 91-93C with the possibility of creeping higher into cpu overheat/shutdown.
I got to 100C with thermal throttling on one. Bought it a bigger heatsink. Although as the old heatsink wasn't getting very warm at all, maybe someone/thing stole/ate the transfer gunk? I've never known gunk to need replaced, but there was hardly any in there, can it evaporate?
If this page takes an hour to load, reduce posts per page to 20 in your settings, then the tinpot 486 Einstein uses can handle it.
I got to 100C with thermal throttling on one. Bought it a bigger heatsink. Although as the old heatsink wasn't getting very warm at all, maybe someone/thing stole/ate the transfer gunk? I've never known gunk to need replaced, but there was hardly any in there, can it evaporate?
I've never seen it evaporate but have seen it get all squished out before, someone told me that means it needs "lapping" but I've never done that so in the end that system hit the road.
It wasn't squished out, there was no sign of it. To be honest I may not have put much in, just used what was stuck to the CPU and heatsink previously from previous machines. But it did look like less than the amount I would have deemed acceptable. I think it got hotter recently as I started using the built in Intel GPU aswell as the CPU part of it.
I've never had to adjust gunk before. I assume "lapping" means rearranging it back towards the centre?
If this page takes an hour to load, reduce posts per page to 20 in your settings, then the tinpot 486 Einstein uses can handle it.
Lapping in this context means carefully sanding the IHS of the CPU and/or coldplate of the heatsink to be more flat. This can improve thermal transfer between the two surfaces.
Lapping in this context means carefully sanding the IHS of the CPU and/or coldplate of the heatsink to be more flat. This can improve thermal transfer between the two surfaces.
Seriously? The CPU from a big manufacturer hasn't had this done by machine?
If this page takes an hour to load, reduce posts per page to 20 in your settings, then the tinpot 486 Einstein uses can handle it.
mass production = less strict quality control for things like this. it's not worth the cost for Intel and AMD to make their IHS perfectly flat and smooth. reducing the tolerance to be extra flat takes exponentially more time and effort and gets expensive for mass production when extrapolated to millions of units.
they are already fairly flat from the factory, and I'm sure they have some acceptable tolerance for flatness in their manufacturing process, but some people are always chasing more and more performance and this is something that's pretty commonly done among overclockers. it'll make the most difference on chips with IHS that have worse flatness, so the results can vary.
I've only done it once, on a Q6600 that I ran at 4.0GHz back in 2007. it's not really that hard, just get a nice flat surface like a piece of glass, attach sand paper to it, and wet sand with increasingly finer grit, up to about 2000 grit until you get to a nice mirror finish.
but to the issue at hand, thermal pastes do degrade, and simply cleaning the CPU paste and applying a new/modern inexpensive paste like AC MX-4 will do wonders.
If you apply the thermal paste correctly, it should last at least 3 years.
And if you always use the cheap pastes that are available on Amazon or Newegg, you probably wouldn't see any change in performance. Do you know what the Watt per Meter Kelvin rating is of the Thermal Paste you're using?
For instance:
Thermaltake TG-8 Thermal Grease has a performance of (or Thermal Conductivity) 4.7 W/Mk
Corsair’s TM30 has a performance of 3.8 W/Mk
Corsair’s XTM50 has a performance of 5.0 W/Mk
Thermal Grizzly Hydronaut has a performance of 11.8 W/Mk
Kingpin’s KPx has a performance of 13.8 W/Mk
The cheaper ones won't even tell you what the performance rating or Thermal Conductivity is in W/Mk.
If you apply the thermal paste correctly, it should last at least 3 years.
And if you always use the cheap pastes that are available on Amazon or Newegg, you probably wouldn't see any change in performance. Do you know what the Watt per Meter Kelvin rating is of the Thermal Paste you're using?
For instance:
Thermaltake TG-8 Thermal Grease has a performance of (or Thermal Conductivity) 4.7 W/Mk
Corsair’s TM30 has a performance of 3.8 W/Mk
Corsair’s XTM50 has a performance of 5.0 W/Mk
Thermal Grizzly Hydronaut has a performance of 11.8 W/Mk
Kingpin’s KPx has a performance of 13.8 W/Mk
The cheaper ones won't even tell you what the performance rating or Thermal Conductivity is in W/Mk.
I refuse to watch any American instructional video, as 80% of the words are superfluous. Why do you guys have to begin every sentence with "now what you're gonna wanna do next is"?
I use the cheap gunk, it lasts way more than 3 years, and nothing overheats. I will not be conned by this nonsense of adding silver and so forth. Since the gunk is a fraction of a mm thick, the conductivity of it isn't that important.
If this page takes an hour to load, reduce posts per page to 20 in your settings, then the tinpot 486 Einstein uses can handle it.
Tom M wrote: If it weren't
)
That's not much of a difference. And the faster you run them the faster they wear out.
That does amuse me when Americans say gotten. We ditched that word in the UK a long time ago :-P I just say got for anything past tense and get for present and future tense.
I got to 100C with thermal throttling on one. Bought it a bigger heatsink. Although as the old heatsink wasn't getting very warm at all, maybe someone/thing stole/ate the transfer gunk? I've never known gunk to need replaced, but there was hardly any in there, can it evaporate?
If this page takes an hour to load, reduce posts per page to 20 in your settings, then the tinpot 486 Einstein uses can handle it.
Peter Hucker of the Scottish
)
I've never seen it evaporate but have seen it get all squished out before, someone told me that means it needs "lapping" but I've never done that so in the end that system hit the road.
It wasn't squished out, there
)
It wasn't squished out, there was no sign of it. To be honest I may not have put much in, just used what was stuck to the CPU and heatsink previously from previous machines. But it did look like less than the amount I would have deemed acceptable. I think it got hotter recently as I started using the built in Intel GPU aswell as the CPU part of it.
I've never had to adjust gunk before. I assume "lapping" means rearranging it back towards the centre?
If this page takes an hour to load, reduce posts per page to 20 in your settings, then the tinpot 486 Einstein uses can handle it.
Lapping means carefully
)
Lapping in this context means carefully sanding the IHS of the CPU and/or coldplate of the heatsink to be more flat. This can improve thermal transfer between the two surfaces.
_________________________________________________________________________
Ian&Steve C. wrote: Lapping
)
Seriously? The CPU from a big manufacturer hasn't had this done by machine?
If this page takes an hour to load, reduce posts per page to 20 in your settings, then the tinpot 486 Einstein uses can handle it.
mass production = less strict
)
mass production = less strict quality control for things like this. it's not worth the cost for Intel and AMD to make their IHS perfectly flat and smooth. reducing the tolerance to be extra flat takes exponentially more time and effort and gets expensive for mass production when extrapolated to millions of units.
they are already fairly flat from the factory, and I'm sure they have some acceptable tolerance for flatness in their manufacturing process, but some people are always chasing more and more performance and this is something that's pretty commonly done among overclockers. it'll make the most difference on chips with IHS that have worse flatness, so the results can vary.
I've only done it once, on a Q6600 that I ran at 4.0GHz back in 2007. it's not really that hard, just get a nice flat surface like a piece of glass, attach sand paper to it, and wet sand with increasingly finer grit, up to about 2000 grit until you get to a nice mirror finish.
_________________________________________________________________________
but to the issue at hand,
)
but to the issue at hand, thermal pastes do degrade, and simply cleaning the CPU paste and applying a new/modern inexpensive paste like AC MX-4 will do wonders.
_________________________________________________________________________
How do you hold the CPU lid
)
How do you hold the CPU lid exactly parallel to the sandpaper?
I've never found changing paste helps. I've had them in past running for several years without degrading.
If this page takes an hour to load, reduce posts per page to 20 in your settings, then the tinpot 486 Einstein uses can handle it.
Peter Hucker of the Scottish
)
Since you apparently don't watch many videos online, I'll connect you with two in particular about lapping a CPU:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AgBgTTsdT4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVtIjgbkE-U
If you apply the thermal paste correctly, it should last at least 3 years.
And if you always use the cheap pastes that are available on Amazon or Newegg, you probably wouldn't see any change in performance. Do you know what the Watt per Meter Kelvin rating is of the Thermal Paste you're using?
For instance:
Thermaltake TG-8 Thermal Grease has a performance of (or Thermal Conductivity) 4.7 W/Mk
Corsair’s TM30 has a performance of 3.8 W/Mk
Corsair’s XTM50 has a performance of 5.0 W/Mk
Thermal Grizzly Hydronaut has a performance of 11.8 W/Mk
Kingpin’s KPx has a performance of 13.8 W/Mk
The cheaper ones won't even tell you what the performance rating or Thermal Conductivity is in W/Mk.
Proud member of the Old Farts Association
GWGeorge007 wrote: Peter
)
I refuse to watch any American instructional video, as 80% of the words are superfluous. Why do you guys have to begin every sentence with "now what you're gonna wanna do next is"?
I use the cheap gunk, it lasts way more than 3 years, and nothing overheats. I will not be conned by this nonsense of adding silver and so forth. Since the gunk is a fraction of a mm thick, the conductivity of it isn't that important.
If this page takes an hour to load, reduce posts per page to 20 in your settings, then the tinpot 486 Einstein uses can handle it.