And I do mean the heatspreader was removed, delidded. Which is a gnarly job as that thing is soldered on there. ... Intel Core i9-10900K gets decapitated and cooled with Liquid Metal
I think that thickness of chip this time is nice. Not too thin to risking cracks. Not too thick, to slow down heat transfer. But there was plenty of solder and apparent space in melted plastic around edges. So, maybe with bit of luck, IHS can sit bit closer to chip itself and thermals can be better. It is some time since I have seen direct die cooling for practical reasons of pressure/cracks/socket obstructions. But I would like to see results if IHS was thinned by 50% or 75% of its thickness. I have feeling that he has access to machinery which can do it safely and precisely.
Yeah, after all he "created" that tool and it was introduced in 2018 or 2019. Can't send you a link right now (at work), but iirc it can be bought on amazon and in some hardware shops / online retailers like Caseking in Germany.
He meant to remove thickness and level the IHS. Sandpaper, a steady hand and a lot of measuring. Could probably make a tool with a drill stand and a sander or something in that line.
Exactly, as he mentions at the end of the video they have one on the way, much better option than to reuse the IHS. For air there are custom IHS's made out of copper, copper + nickel etc. Not sure how much temperature difference those apply to make it worth it.
I bought one of those copper IHS for my bro and he always brags about getting 60C temps on his delidded 8086K lol
in the same topic wafer back-grinding (talking about the die here not IHS) is done with heavy machinery https://cdn.caeonline.com/images/accretech-tsk_pg-300-rm_572225.PNG a lot of vertical pressure slow downward movement but (not too) fast spinning (or you burn the silicium) and nowadays slurry at the last stage https://www.syagrussystems.com/images/syagrus diagram-Nov2.jpg so you get a finish so flat and perfect it becomes a mirror thinning the die more for intel would pose many problems, 1st on a 12" you can't go that low the risk of breakage becomes too big and back-grinding dicing is at the end of the process where the wafers have the maximum cost just a guess but I can imagine an Intel 10xxx wafer costing an easy 100'000$ at that stage you don't want to break one (dicing, picking you lose a few dies, back-grinding the wafer is usually scrap) if a thicker die allows you to save even 1 wafer/year it's worth it for the manufacturer this I'm sure plays a big role in why dies aren't super thin, final product cooling performance comes after not losing hundreds of thousands of dollars
Had a 4790k I got in 2014. Hit 95~100C in seconds of any bench test on stock intel cooler. What a rip-off (knew the cooler was bad going in but gave it a test anyway, wow, how could they get away with this?). Prime95 out-right crashed the system with a BSOD due to motherboard fail-safe procedure in about 5 seconds, if that. Yes, I know you shouldn't run Prime95 on those, I just wanted to see how long it would last. It was at stock settings, stock 4ghz speed... for five seconds TOPS it lasted. Not a good show of a reliable product with company standing firmly behind what they sell. TRASH. Pig of a chip. Couldn't go over 4.5ghz even with a window AC unit pumping directly into the case, even that didn't turn out to last. Needed delidding (and a delid tool), liquid metal under and over the IHS. Needed a 100$ air cooler (okay I spent 20~30$ extra to get one with 'designer colors' having dumped that much into it already) to even run properly and not be throttled below 4ghz stock speed all the time. After all that, I could run all-core at the 4.4ghz turbo speed. That was it. Asus Maximus Hero z97 board, 2400mhz cl-11 memory, big case, plenty of fans. Has I known it was going to be all for nothing, I would have just got a non-K sku and a mainstream basic motherboard. All that extra money spent and couldn't even upgrade the CPU unless I wanted to spend 350~400$ on a 5775C which wasn't really an 'upgrade' but maybe a few % here or there. While I will admit for it's time it was no slouch, I'd have rather shaved 250$ off extra costs and gotten still most of the speed boost I originally did. I don't miss paying all that money for little to no extra gain. So when I needed a new system I built AMD w/x570 chipset (on a cheapo ASRock motherboard!) and 3700x with a yes-you-guessed-it stock cooler - a stock cooler that's functional! I opened up the boxes, tested/verified the parts, assembled the system, set XMP in BIOS to it's ho-hum bargain-bin 3000mhz cl-15 settings, and was onto installing the OS. Love it, impressed many times over, way better than my experience with an intel chip. I'm almost 40 here, as I've stated before, I 'Don't want to mess with that stuff anymore', 'I just want to be productive' when I sit here, not play Mr. Wizard with the thing. "Set it and forget it" is the idea here. --Combo price 7/2019 for intel and AMD (this is when I had purchased all parts) : AMD get 50$ off motherboard with qualifying Ryzen 3xxx purchase. This dropped the cheapest x570 Asrock board from 154.99$ to 104.99$ 3700x Box CPU 329.99$ motherboard 104.99$ for Asrock x570 Phantom Gaming 4, both new. 434.98$ pre-tax. Stock cooler included free in price as it 'works fine' - still using it, too! Intel (no discount!) 9900k + Z390 or Z370 motherboard was ball-parked in the range of 489.99$ for the CPU + 150~400$ for motherboard, so at a min/max of 639~889$ USD + Cooler costs of 40~120$ depending on which you got. So that price could be 679$ at the start, ended up ramping up to around 1000$ for board, chip, and cooler! Not including extra costs for special thermal compound as you get some with the cooler (does anyone use that included stuff except 1st time builders?). Also not including the costs of a custom loop or any additional case-fans you might need with intel's heat. I am also not including the cost of an increase of 40~50$ in a bigger power supply you would need for the intel chip. I did not include RAM costs because I just snagged a pair of 16gb 3000mhz Crucial Ballistix sticks out of the bargain bin, which I would have done regardless of brand picked, it would have been equal. So *YES* those of you who built 9900k systems, I HOPE it's faster than this 3700x. For a little less than double to well over double the cost, I hope for your bank balance sake it IS faster. I just COULD NOT see to spending double for that 'last 3~8%' of speed. Even if it was 15~20% in everything, I would not have budged. After the miserable experience with my 4790k, fast or not, I likely wouldn't have gone intel if the price was equal. This coming from someone who almost always tried to have an intel system when possible - even in the Pentium 4 days (that, that was painful). That said, if I could do it over again, I would not change anything. This cheapo ASRock board has been great. The 3700x doesn't bog down even with everything running, as the scheduler (and amount of L3 cache) is so much superior to the 4790k - and the RAM bandwidth is somewhere in the ball-park of double the 4790k's stock bandwidth (this is something often overlooked, yes it does matter but not worth spending double your price on RAM for!). I have an aversion to water cooling - I don't care if a company like Corsair warranties the whole entire computer if their liquid cooler springs a leak and fails. I am NOT interested. If I cannot AIR COOL it, I do NOT want it in my system. If the manufacturer is so bad at the customer experience and quality of product that air cannot cool a home PC, I am not giving them my money. This is a production machine for which I do content creation for 3D video games on. Plus, when you have over 35,000$ worth of Oak flooring in your 8 year old house, you don't mess with water more than required. Money saved allowed me to quickly replace my Rx 480 8gb card that scrambled the desktop at login, on zero notice the following December, with an EVGA 2070 Super to the tune of 572$ off Amazon - too much - but that's the price one must pay (unlike the CPU / chipset) to avoid AMD GPU drivers in a production environment. Would have loved to pay half that for a 5600XT / 5700XT tier card, BUT, again, AMD GPU drivers + production environment DO NOT mix. I do not miss that goings-on one bit, and getting to play Quake II RTX for 5 bucks was awesome and mostly worth the difference to me (good game!). The AMD CPU / Chipset drivers, however, I've had zero issue with. No boosting issues (I used left-over liquid metal on my 3700x after removing heaps of too-much stock paste), or other issues, and still using release-day BIOS on the cheap ASRock board. If that isn't living dangerously, and asking for it (despite no issues), I don't know what is. So I hope this helps. This is just the typical person buying a Ryzen 3xxx and why I did not pick intel again. Save that money and spend it on a GPU or a bigger processor or more memory, or a bigger SSD. Try not to go too far beyond one or two paces past the point of diminishing returns, and not any past it if on a tight budget. I am not entirely sure that I could even look at pricing out a new intel system, until we end up in another AMD FX / Bulldozer era - an era I wish not to remember. Sorry for the book, but this is the first thing I thought of when delidding comes up. Why should we have to even do that?
no thanks it was an interesting read and I agree it's a step I never wanted to do delidding, buying a better cooler is one thing, destroying your component to improve it is not something I'm ready to do on a brand new item, build it better >< I fear you will get limited in your choices of cpus in the future, Intel and AMD are both going in the AIO/custom loop direction, the real "TDP" is only going up so expect 200watts cpus to become normal and at that stage liquid cooling is the only solution, air coolers size-wise can't really become bigger you can only increase fans speed aka noise but I get it we all have our limits and things we don't want to do (liquid metal is another one for me I use kryonaut) thats why manufacturers sell so many different products
I had a 4670k with the same heat issue as you and it wasn't a big hassle to fix. Took me around 45 minutes, the same amount of time you took to write this post. Now you're just making crap up. I just bought an i7-10700K for $387 and an Asus z490 Prime A for $199 (I could have got an Asrock for $149) before combo discount of $50 off. And any enthusiast who has a PC under 8 years old likely has a cooler thats adequate enough to work since lga1200 is compatible with 1150, 1155, and 1151. All i have to do is bend two new pieces of acrylic to upgrade my loop to work with the new motherboard/chip. Have you see the power draw from AMD 3900x when subjected to the exact same torture test? Notice how they dont compare overclocked Ryzen to overclocked comet lake? Only OC to not OC? This is why: Yep... 250+ watts from that ryzen CPU that has 105 tdp The absolute worst thing you can do to convince people to buy AMD is lie. And thats what you're doing. *SNIP* i was gonna respond to all of this but i have a life. one last thing though... And yet.... overclocked temps for Ryzen 3900x are even higher than 9900k overclocked. So many reviews of these new intel chips love to omit the power consumption and temps of the AMD chips. But here they are, scroll down: https://www.kitguru.net/components/...en-9-3900x-ryzen-7-3700x-zen-2-cpu-review/11/
Couldn't intel have done this, who works there, finally they solder those things again yet still they can't get it right...
I only mentioned overclocking in my disappointment about the 4790k. I never mentioned overclocking a 9900k or a 3700x, as I wished to do neither. Nor did I mention a 3900x, a chip you brought up out of nowhere. I'd rather not get baked out of a room in my new home that has central AC - AGAIN (as happened with the 4790k, made this the hottest room in the whole house). I don't have time to mess with "water features" or overclocking on a production system, I just want to use it, not play administrator when I could be being productive here or even enjoying a game now and then. Prices listed were from 7/2019 when I built the system - I did have that listed. Everyone else saw it; however, in your building of a hasty rushed defense, you must have missed that. It's okay this time, I understand. Please read more carefully next time to avoid that. But thanks for calling me a liar, I love it! Please keep up the name-calling enough so everyone else can see how maturely you conduct yourself. I just hope I am not kicked out of here before I get to see the results of you trying to blame the resultant [censored]storm on everyone but yourself. I am just glad I found a good deal when I did - and it sounds like you found a good deal, too. Everyone wins, normally... for most folks anyways. I just hope your system is faster than a stock 3700x with a stock cooler is, with all the extra money poured into cooling that was spent. Have a peachy day sugar, and thank-you oh-so-much dearie for selecting (out of all the people on the internet) ME, I feel so SPECIAL now just because of you! You've made my day - Thank-you! P.S. Please write back soon, so I can be entertained for the next 45 minutes (by your watch) spending it writing back to such a nice wholesome person such as yourself... Thank goodness THIS post only took me 44.65536 minutes to write. My apologies in advance to the rest of the forum users, but someone from WCCFTech must have got lost / taken a wrong turn, heh heh.
Why? Why can't people at least read text? Measurement is on wall socket. Then you have idle power draw right next to it. Non-OC 3900X has idle to load difference of 123W. That's after PSU efficiency and VRMs efficiency on MB. Actual idle to load difference on CPU itself would be maybe 105W. (Very power efficient PSU/VRMs. Practically more of energy would be wasted on VRMs and therefore expected difference in CPU would be like 85~90W.) So, statement like: "Yep... 250+ watts from that ryzen CPU that has 105 tdp" Looks like intentional misleading. Then graph itself shows quite high idle power draw in comparison to other CPU/MB combinations. I can't replicate such high idle power draw. And then there is that intel i9-9900K 95W (intel's TDP) system which idles at 51W and fully loaded has 228W. That's 177W difference and if we count in PSU/VRMs power efficiency, CPU itself may account for 150W of that change. So, what's bigger offender? R9 3900X with AMD's TDP of 105W which actually adds around 105W from idle to load on weirdly power inefficient MB. Or i9-9900K with intel's TDP of 95W which easily adds 150W from idle to load on very power efficient MB? As far as 3900X temperatures go. Maybe you should look at what is under IHS and how are today's heatpipes for air cooling placed over those parts. And through what places liquid flows in liquid cooling CPU block. I got my liquid cooling for this specific reason. Because CPU block can be rotated around at quite a few angles and I can pick best one. Worst case scenario is when someone buys air cooling and just one heatpipe goes above both CCD chiplets because it can't be rotated by 90°.
Yes, this *points up*... So, so THIS! Some people just are so quick to defend their purchase, hastily build a defense, and look worse than having said nothing at all. Let alone adding name calling / accusations, and then living up to those accusations themselves better than those who they accuse Thank-you for putting into words what shouldn't have to be placed into words (+like), due to it having been all over just about every review for the last almost-a-year. Gotta love when the 65 watt 3700x that I mentioned gets substituted with a 105 watt 3900x - a cpu with 50% more cores - because he'd have been (more) wrong if he used the 3700x (the one I spoke about) as an example. Poor Hilbert, who goes through all the trouble/out of pocket expense to give us good quality articles/reviews and news that is non-opinionated and covers all the bases 99 times out of 100 - and that guy had to cite some other - possibly much less accurate - competing news site. Thankfully, many of the decent air coolers allow us to rotate them in a few different ways, but sadly not all allow you to do this. I fully agree more should let you rotate them to fit more use-case differences. One of these days when I feel specifically more into self-loathing, I might see about trying to mount the Zalman 9900 Max I picked up for 24.99$ on sale new (and ordered free AM4 bracket for) fares on this, but I can't say with the temps I am seeing, that I am in any sort of hurry. In Zalman's defense, it only took a few days from sending an email to an AM4 bracket just showing up FREE on the doorstep in-lue of any confirmation via Email. Why a Zalman? It was randomly 24.99$ on Amazon, new, linked to me out of no-where. No surprise from one of the largest e-commerce sites out there. Still, just so sad my knight in shining horse-armor didn't write me back. I'm just heart-broken. Was it something I said? I guess the rest of us (possibly including me) will have to wait until this is on Sally Jesse Raphael or Phil Donahue to see how this pans out. *cries a poorly faked b-rate river, worth anything only to the likes of day-time drama on the Hallmark or Lifetime channel*
Actually, my 4970K @4.4K runs cooler under stress tests than my 3700X, both watercooled the Intel would max get to 65C while the AMD gets up to 72C, will have to try checking the blocks chamber layout and align it with the dies to see if that makes a difference. Although under both single threaded and multithreaded gaming and production they hit about the same 35-50C (24C room temperature). My 4790K can run stable at 4.6K but doesn't really seem to add any benefit and also gets hotter, as I recall it would need to push 4.8K and beyond before there is any noticeable performance gain anyway, but not all chips are the same. Doubt that all 10900K's can be overclocked equally either, some may be great some may not, same for AMD. So for someone that needs a lot of performance from their CPU without taking chances on how much the chip that arrives can be overclocked, best bet is to take the one that is the fastest @stock for what ever application the performance is needed. Apart from that there might be other features to take into consideration.
