5960X Cooling

[done12many2]

13 minutes ago, PeggersXtreme said:

Yeah I will miss the extra cores lol I did a test and disabled 4 cores to replicate a 4790K's performance and my average FPS was about the same but my minimums and max fps was much higher with 8 cores 16thread and also have a lot open in the background when I game so the extra cores help there too.

 

If you wan't to have some real fun with that chip, run a "per core" overclock and crank up your clock speed on 4 of the cores, while progressively stepping down in clock speed as core count increases.  Very high single-threaded performance, while maintaining awesome multi-threaded performance.

[done12many2]

14 minutes ago, pyrojoe34 said:

Right, the TDP is not the amount of power the CPU draws. The CPU uses more power than the TDP since some of the energy is used for actual processing, not just generating heat.

 

That's exactly what @Drak3 said.  He stated the rated TDP, but mentioned that when overclocked, the 5960x can draw in excess of 300w.

 

After rereading it again, I see what you are referring to now.  You were correcting the "The 5960X puts out 140W stock."

 

I understood what he meant, but what he said was technically incorrect.

[pyrojoe34]

5 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

That's exactly what @Drak3 said.  He stated the rated TDP, but mentioned that when overclocked, the 5960x can draw in excess of 300w.

We're now talking about different things. I'm saying that even when not overclocked, TDP does not represent the amount of power a CPU uses, only the amount of thermal energy generated by the CPU that needs to be dissipated. I don't know the actual numbers but let's say the efficiency of the CPU is 10%, that would mean that the total power drawn by the CPU at max (not overclocked) would be 155.5W (not 140W). A CPU that is 100% efficient (physically impossible IRL) would have a TDP of 0 but still use some amount of energy to process things.

[PeggersXtreme]

I might have to look at different case options there's probably a case that can fit everything I need in it that is smaller than the corsair 780t without too much modding I had to cut the optical drive out the 780t to fit a front 360mm rad

[done12many2]

11 minutes ago, pyrojoe34 said:

We're now talking about different things. I'm saying that even when not overclocked, TDP does not represent the amount of power a CPU uses, only the amount of thermal energy generated by the CPU that needs to be dissipated. I don't know the actual numbers but let's say the efficiency of the CPU is 10%, that would mean that the total power drawn by the CPU at max (not overclocked) would be 154W (not 140W). A CPU that is 100% efficient (physically impossible IRL) would have a TDP of 0 but still use some amount of energy to process things.

 

Agreed.  I amended my previous post.  

[done12many2]

13 minutes ago, PeggersXtreme said:

I might have to look at different case options there's probably a case that can fit everything I need in it that is smaller than the corsair 780t without too much modding I had to cut the optical drive out the 780t to fit a front 360mm rad

 

Definitely retain everything if you can.  There's too much untapped power in that 5960x to be giving it up so easily.  

[PeggersXtreme]

2 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

Definitely retain everything if you can.  There's too much untapped power in that 5960x to be giving it up so easily.  

I've noticed they have gone up in price a lot as well since Broadwell-e released I paid no where near what Amazon is asking for this chip now

[done12many2]

3 minutes ago, PeggersXtreme said:

I've noticed they have gone up in price a lot as well since Broadwell-e released I paid no where near what Amazon is asking for this chip now

 

Yeah, they seem to be holding their own on the used side as well.

 

One thing is for sure, the 5960x is a beast when it comes to overclocking.  Give the per core overclocking a chance.  I think you'll like it a lot.  Either that or try out the Asus TCT.  Either method will give you very high single-threaded performance without screwing up multi-threaded performance.

[PeggersXtreme]

3 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

Yeah, they seem to be holding their own on the used side as well.

 

One thing is for sure, the 5960x is a beast when it comes to overclocking.  Give the per core overclocking a chance.  I think you'll like it a lot.  Either that or try out the Asus TCT.  Either method will give you very high single-threaded performance without screwing up multi-threaded performance.

Asus TCT is that the same as the 5way optimisation I didn't have a lot of luck with that asus only put my cpu at 3.8ghz and manually I know my cpu can do 4.8ghz at 1.36v

[done12many2]

Just now, PeggersXtreme said:

Asus TCT is that the same and the 5way optimisation I didn't have a lot of luck with that asus only put my cpu at 3.8ghz and manually I know my cpu can do 4.8ghz at 1.36v

 

Asus Thermal Control Tool.  It has nothing to do with the Asus AI Suite.

 

You're CPU can probably run at 4.8 GHz, but it can't sustain a substantial load at 4.8 GHz on all cores with 1.36v.  That's where the Asus TCT or per core overclocking come in.

[PeggersXtreme]

2 minutes ago, done12many2 said:

 

Asus Thermal Control Tool.  It has nothing to do with the Asus AI Suite.

 

You're CPU can probably run at 4.8 GHz, but it can't sustain a substantial load at 4.8 GHz on all cores with 1.36v.  That's where the Asus TCT or per core overclocking come in.

Oh I haven't messed with much I just followed Linus' OC guide put the multiplier up to 45 and the voltage to 1.3 and then lowered the voltage to the lowest stable voltage and then set my rams XMP profile 2400mhz and then tested it was all stable again and it hasn't shown to have a problem for the year it's been running at 4.5ghz

[done12many2]

10 minutes ago, PeggersXtreme said:

Oh I haven't messed with much I just followed Linus' OC guide put the multiplier up to 45 and the voltage to 1.3 and then lowered the voltage to the lowest stable voltage and then set my rams XMP profile 2400mhz and then tested it was all stable again and it hasn't shown to have a problem for the year it's been running at 4.5ghz

 

So to give you and example.  

 

4.9 GHz is my high side when I use four or less cores, which is the majority of what you would use for simple things like gaming, web browsing and so on. You can run these lighter workloads at a higher voltage/multiplier and maintain perfect stability.  

 

As more cores start to get utilized, the multiplier and voltage automatically drops based on the amount of cores being used. 

 

Example of my setup. 

 

4.9 for 1 to 4 core usage. 

4.8 for 5 cores. 

4.7 for 6 cores. 

4.6 for 7 cores. 

4.5 for 8 cores. 

 

The transition from high multipler/voltage low core count usage with high single-threaded performance to lower muliplier/voltage for high core count with high multi-threaded performance is automatic.  Best of both worlds.

 

It's very similar to using Intel's own Turbo.

[PeggersXtreme]

1 minute ago, done12many2 said:

 

So to give you and example.  

 

4.9 GHz is my high side when I use four or less cores, which is the majority of what you would use for simple things like gaming, web browsing and so on. You can run these lighter workloads at a higher voltage/multiplier and maintain perfect stability.  

 

As more cores start to get utilized, the multiplier and voltage automatically drops based on the amount of cores being used. 

 

Example of my setup. 

 

4.9 for 1 to 4 core usage. 

4.8 for 5 cores. 

4.7 for 6 cores. 

4.6 for 7 cores. 

4.5 for 8 cores. 

 

The transition from high multipler/voltage low core count usage with high single-threaded performance to lower muliplier/voltage for high core count with high multi-threaded performance is automatic.  Best of both worlds.

Ah right I get what you mean.

[done12many2]

8 minutes ago, PeggersXtreme said:

Ah right I get what you mean.

 

Here's an example with no load and 4.9 multiplier/voltage and another with 100% load and 4.5 multiplier/voltage.  You'll note that voltage is high when there is little to light load, but as soon as all 8 cores get hit with a load, it drops substantially.  Very easy to control temps under load with this method.

 

 

 

 

[Drak3]

1 hour ago, pyrojoe34 said:

That's not quite how TDP works. TDP is the rated amount of heat energy that needs to be dissipated by a cooler for any given CPU, not the actual total power used by the CPU. So at stock it would be 140W of heat energy + the power of the actual CPU working (not 100% of the energy a CPU uses is converted to thermal energy, that would mean the CPU is doing nothing but generating heat).

 

1 hour ago, done12many2 said:

 

He's talking about how much power the CPU actually draws when overclocked, not TDP.

I'm talking about the heat output of the chips, which is what TDP measures for Intel chips (For some time, AMD marketed TDP as peak power draw, not sure if they're still doing that). The fact that "watt" is used as both a unit of thermal output and power consumption is freaking stupid. There should be a differentiation in terminology.

When overclocked, many people have found that overclocked X99 chips output roughly 300w of heat, not consume 300w, at load for a good OC.

It is true that there is a correlation between TDP and power consumption, and the power consumption will go up significantly, to say the least. According to Wikipedia, the peak power draw of an Intel chip is 1.5x the TDP, so the 5960X would theoretically be drawing 270w, and 450w when overclocked significantly.

[done12many2]

3 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

According to Wikipedia, the peak power draw of an Intel chip is 1.5x the TDP, so the 5960X would theoretically be drawing 270w, and 450w when overclocked significantly.

 

This is correct.  A 5960x at 4.4 GHz and greater can break 400w pretty easy with a heavy load.

[Drak3]

2 hours ago, Drak3 said:

The 5960X puts out 140W stock, that's the TDP of al Haswell-E and Broadwell-E CPUs.

Overclocked, it can easily output 300W.

Unless the 5960X generates electricity, I can't see how people thought I meant power draw then the words "output, and puts out" are present.

[Coaxialgamer]

a good dual 120mm should be fine honestly . Most processor cooling setups are limited by heat density , and the 5960x has a large die , so it shouldn't be a problem

[done12many2]

31 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Unless the 5960X generates electricity, I can't see how people thought I meant power draw then the words "output, and puts out" are present.

 

Yeah, I understood what you meant.

[PeggersXtreme]

The 7700k is looking interesting

[done12many2]

1 minute ago, PeggersXtreme said:

The 7700k is looking interesting

 

I think the 6700k is an awesome chip, so the 7700k is even better!

[PeggersXtreme]

Just now, done12many2 said:

 

I think the 6700k is an awesome chip, so the 7700k is even better!

Apparently it could have quite a large bump in ipc so single core performance is going to be even better. and one leak said it matches the multi core score of the 5820k whilst still only being a quad core.