Overclocking Site Solves Mystery Behind Higher Ivy Bridge Temperatures

[Brink]

Intel stepped up to the plate and seemingly hit a homerun with its Ivy Bridge architecture (which, by the way, is now showing up in retail). It's the first commercial processor to boast a 22nm manufacturing process and 3D transistors, a combination that ultimately leads to better performance with less power consumption than previous generation processors. At the same time, some have reported higher temps with Ivy Bridge compared to Sandy Bridge, and it could have to do with the way Intel attached the Integrated Heat Spreader (IHS).

Read more at:
Maximum PC | Overclocking Site Solves Mystery Behind Higher Ivy Bridge Temperatures

 

[linnemeyerhere]

I would be very leery of an extra 20c anywhere in the processor chain. That bothers me and will keep me away from these chips no matter how well they perform. Seems odd that they use less energy but run so much hotter.

 

[smarteyeball]

I was looking for an excuse not to upgrade my 2500K - this will do

Upgraditis averted

 

[FuturDreamz]

Would it be possible to replace the thermal paste with a better type?

 

[stormy13]

Would it be possible to replace the thermal paste with a better type?

Not without removing the IHS and completely and totally voiding any warranty on the CPU, and even then it likely wouldn't help any. The way I understand it, it isn't the type of TIM used but that TIM was used in the first place and not solder.

 

[GeneO]

Would it be possible to replace the thermal paste with a better type?

I think Intel would use the best paste they could muster and their process for applying it would be more optimized than you could do. The real difference may be between using fluxless solder and paste TIM, for which you can do nothing about.

 

[linnemeyerhere]

Then that begs the question of how much if it's a savings at all going away from solder and to TIM is costing. It would seem if they could lower the temps even half of the difference then we would gladly pay a few more dollars for lower temps? Hell make two models a soldered model for X amount more and a TIM model and lock down it's cores.

 

[GeneO]

The temps are lower for non-overclocked, which is most of the market. If the higher temps are due to just the change from solder to paste TIM, then it makes no sense for Intel to not solder the k series, though it would require different manufacturing. I think there must be more to this than just the TIM.

 

[Dave76]

They will get a lot of bad press for not using solder in the K versions.

After reading on the subject, there are a few that claim certain settings can reduce the temps a bit, still not ideal for an OC'ing version.

 

[Britton30]

Intel bally-hoos over-clock-ability, makes a chip that overheats when done and voids the warranty if you do it.
In reality even when I use software that kicks in the Turbo-boost my temps are well within reason, less than 60C. It is Prime95's and IBT's fault.
In my experience it is only stressing that raises CPU temps, YMMV.

I was looking for an excuse not to upgrade my 2500K - this will do

Upgraditis averted

LOL, that was easy.

 

[pparks1]

I was looking for an excuse not to upgrade my 2500K - this will do

Upgraditis averted

I have to wonder whether an upgrade from a Core i5-2500k to a new Ivy Bridge would really justify the cost anyway for the small performance gain achieved.

Sure, it uses less power, but we are talking pennies per day if the machine runs under load 24x7. (I calculated approx $1.50 savings per MONTH).

It really is a bummer on the lack of overclockability on these chips. I know many enthusiasts who simply won't touch it if they cannot push it.

 

[sygnus21]

What's up smarteye?

I was looking for an excuse not to upgrade my 2500K - this will do

Anyway though many enthusists will publically trash Intel for their gaff, privately they've already honed their excuse for why they upgraded...

3- Hey I'm just checking out the chip
2- A friend bought my old system
1- I got it for free

At any rate I'm sure the "overheating" issue will be fixed promptly, and business will be back to usual.... chips flying off the shelves

 

[simmo]

Anyone who is running X58 or SB would be foolish to "upgrade" to IB. I sold my X58 rig early this year but when I build a "new" rig it will be a SB based (2600K) as I have seen "gem" chips that unlock to 5.6/5.7ghz for sale on OCAU and the new IB chips it appears are for the most part only OC'ing to 4.8ghz.
I read somewhere that you can (possibly) remove the "cap" from these new chips and shim them resulting in lower temps but don't know that I would want to risk that.
This is an Intel "tic" step so I'm thinking I'll wait for the next "toc" step. Maybe then Intel will go back to a solder instead of paste when they realise a lot of people simply won't buy a chip that underperforms compared to a previous release aka SB.

 

[FuturDreamz]

I don't think it underperforms, simply that it runs hotter. That's like dissing a liquid cooled computer system.

 

[Dave76]

I've read that the actual GHz isn't as high as SB but the performance is higher, they showed benchmark scores to back up the claim.

More testing results will confirm or disprove.

 

[linnemeyerhere]

In my humble opinion this is what happens when the only competition to Intel is squeezed out. Now Intel can take shortcuts to profitability at the expense of the small minority of enthusiasts. AMD always understood this as the underdog and produced products with outstanding overclocking potential and bang for the buck and is hopefully fighting to re-enter and we this time should all be pulling for both companies because competition breeds true advancements and controls runaway costs!