Intel x299 cpu-s will not be soldered , crappy TIM again?

The 8 core that I referenced is only $600 - I don't personally have the need for more than 8 cores and remember the initial argument is "just get x399" Also I don't really consider the non-use of solder "lack of quality". For starters the TIM that everyone talks about being the issue was proven not to be an issue. The issue was the gap between the IHS and the die - delidding the CPU and removing the glue then using the same TIM dropped the temperatures to like 90% of what replacing the TIM itself did.

Also Intel swapped the TIM out in the first place due to the solder causing defects on the chip.

http://overclocking.guide/the-truth-about-cpu-soldering/

Either way you can't get the 1800x or any Ryzen chip that we know of past 4.0 and Intel's out of the box is above that. As long as the chip has a lifespan of 6+ years delidded or not, the IHS being glued on doesn't bother me as much as it bothers others.

 

The 8 core he is referring to is $599. Still an expensive piece of kit but not what you are trying to portray.

 

Dude, the 1600x has more quality than the entire x299 intel cpu-s , am I wrong in this?? the 1600x is soldered

 

1600x is soldered m8.. am i wrong??

 

you void your warranty if you do that, if you mess up you are screwed, there is no excuse for this, this is intel being garbage with their TIM as per usual..
the x99 is properly soldered

 

If I read the slides right the listed boost clocks were only for 2 cores.

I don't see this as a normal scenario for any end user.

 

The Athlon was preceded by the K6-3....which barely managed to compete with the Pentium 3. The Duron was a cut-down Athlon marketed as a "budget" processor and competed directly against the Celeron. The Sempron later replaced the Duron and in some instances, nearly competed with the Athlon itself....lol

AMD managed to outperform Intel for nearly 8 years during the Athlon run. They also managed to outperform Intel back in the days of the 4x86 series processors.

 

Don't get me wrong - I would obviously prefer a soldered CPU. I just don't think it's that detrimental that it's not. I've delidded quite a number of Intel CPU's for people now so I'm not bothered by it.

 

You should be bothered by it because the cheaper alternative has better quality, we should demand the same from a product that is more expensive

 

+1

my system's fully watercooled which allows me to contrast how the direct contact gpu and the tim+heatshield cpu... a bit of a difference oke but 20-25 god damn degree's's difference under load.

seems like AMD's time to shine.

 

I would be very surprised is intel didn't solder the really high end cpus.
If its true for the 165watt parts, they will run hotter than fire and brimstone.

Unless they improved the tim considerably, 165w tdp + intel tim seems like a bad idea.

 

Except again, the TIM makes little difference. The problem is the gap from the glue, which can easily be solved while continuing to use TIM. Also I'm pretty confident that Intel's engineers understand the thermal/fabrication limits of their manufacturing better than random people on Guru3D. There has been numerous engineers/industry people, and literally Intel itself, that commented on why Intel switched in the first place, I linked one on the last page; soldering the chips actually led to higher manufacturing defects. Also Intel had to retool it's fabs to support the adhesion/TIM method - so the idea that it saves Intel some money is a joke anyway.

 

Not entirely true.

With such a small die area, TIM has poor conductibility compared to liquid metal/solder.

I had significant improvements with liquid metal compared to the best TIM across several CPUs after delid + plus scraping off all glue.

 

It's possible it makes some difference on newer CPU's. My experience is with the 3770K, I went from Noctua NH-1 to Coollaboratory Liquid Pro and after two weeks of being on both the difference was within 1 degree in favor of Noctua lol.

 

I completely agree. They (almost) may as well stop selling K model CPUs. :bang:

 

...... Buying a 10core/20 thread proc and higher for gaming is mistake number one. If you're purely going to game, the higher core count/threads will be a waste.

Only reason I could see someone looking for more performance in gaming from an amd standpoint with x399 is quad channel ddr4, but even then again just for gaming? really?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzQWvvOTWy8

I don't really see the point here for a gaming rig. Production workstations where you will regularly be maxing out the CPU is a different story obviously, but for games, the CPU only hit the low 60s with a good cooler. My Ivy Bridge runs hot, and I'm only getting to the low 70s when I'm overclocked like crazy and playing a CPU intensive game.

Where exactly are temps a serious problem? And how hot are the temps getting that cause people concern? I could see if your CPU is reaching the 95c mark, but is that actually happening to people while running games, running decent air or AIO coolers?

 

I had a 3770k as well, i saw 15c drop with Gelid-Extreme and PK-3(both are better than NT-H1) and i saw a 28c with liquid ultra.

You probably had a poor application of it.

Granted i was OCed to 5ghz so more voltage/heat output.

Might not matter on low OC but liquid ultra definitely shines with a huge heat load.

 

I think if it was a simple glue problem intel would have fixed it by now, I think its more that tightening the tolerances of the package is too expensive for intel and makes too little of a difference under stock configurations(95% of configurations).

Engineers can create the best solution and the adequate much cheaper solution. Companies tend to look for the cheaper solution for obvious reasons.
I do not question intel's engineers competence, I question intels motivation to sell "extreme" overclockable cpus and insurance for it with a potential significant handicap.

Under normal operating conditions the tim is fine, im sure the 18 core parts works as intended not exceeding 80c under normal conditions , but once the heat load exceeds the intended spec thats where you run in to problems, that is where the tim vs solder will make a difference.

Anyway we wont know how much of problem it is until people actually get their hands on them, no point in speculating further.

 

We are on the verge a a new higher core count wave, in the next few years we are likely to see many games utilisung more threads more effectively. On top of that I want a board with more m.2 slots which these new boards will have, the quad channel ram is also a benefit, and my exusting cpu/motherboard has issues, so it would be absolutely stupid for me to buy another 4 core cpu and motherboard right now.

It would be like buying a dual core intel when the core 2 quads started coming out. I plan to make my next platform upgrade last 5 years as opposed to the 2 year cycle I have been on