Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Intel Core i5-4670K at 90degrees

Tags:
  • Core
  • Intel
  • Intel i5
  • Gaming
  • CPUs
  • Motherboards
  • Memory
  • Graphics Cards
  • Monitors
  • Hard Drives
Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 17, 2014 8:41:09 AM

I get 90 degrees after 1 hour of a stresstest on my Intel Core i5-4670K I was wondering if it is a safe temperature and if anyone has any tips to get it cooler?

More about : intel core 4670k 90degrees

a b à CPUs
January 17, 2014 8:44:52 AM

It won't get damaged in an hour, but it's too hot/unacceptable for longer periods. I would say 70 is the maximum for long periods of time, but i'm not 100% sure.

To get it cooler: Better airflow + better cpu cooler + low ambient temperature
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a b 4 Gaming
a c 86 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
a b } Memory
January 17, 2014 8:48:49 AM

90C for a Haswell chip will split the life of the chip in half. Since Haswell is 22 nm technology, a lot of people (engineers that know stuff about this) have come to the conclusion, that the chip is less resistant to damage from high temperature, then, lets say Sandy - which is 35 nm. If you are using the stock cpu cooler you should change it.
m
0
l
Related resources

Best solution

a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
a b U Graphics card
January 17, 2014 8:48:50 AM

I would get a liquid cooler and also some extra fans for your case to increase airflow throughout your system. After installing the water cooler you will see a massive decrease in temperature on idle. My temps dropped 15degrees from stock headsink to liquid cooling!
I would recommend you get the Hydro Series™ H60 High Performance Liquid CPU Cooler.

Hope this helps
Share
January 17, 2014 8:51:40 AM

Trimax said:
I would get a liquid cooler and also some extra fans for your case to increase airflow throughout your system. After installing the water cooler you will see a massive decrease in temperature on idle. My temps dropped 15degrees from stock headsink to liquid cooling!
I would recommend you get the Hydro Series™ H60 High Performance Liquid CPU Cooler.

Hope this helps


How much is the liquid cooler and is it easy to install? Could you link me where I can buy it in the UK!?

Cheers
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
a b U Graphics card
January 17, 2014 8:54:38 AM

NvidiaFanboy123 said:
Trimax said:
I would get a liquid cooler and also some extra fans for your case to increase airflow throughout your system. After installing the water cooler you will see a massive decrease in temperature on idle. My temps dropped 15degrees from stock headsink to liquid cooling!
I would recommend you get the Hydro Series™ H60 High Performance Liquid CPU Cooler.

Hope this helps


How much is the liquid cooler and is it easy to install? Could you link me where I can buy it in the UK!?

Cheers


All you have to do is follow the instructions which come with the product It will be easier then you think!
Here is the cheapest place I found it online: http://www.dabs.com/products/corsair-hydro-series-h60-2...

Hope this helps :p 
m
0
l
January 17, 2014 8:56:02 AM

Trimax said:
NvidiaFanboy123 said:
Trimax said:
I would get a liquid cooler and also some extra fans for your case to increase airflow throughout your system. After installing the water cooler you will see a massive decrease in temperature on idle. My temps dropped 15degrees from stock headsink to liquid cooling!
I would recommend you get the Hydro Series™ H60 High Performance Liquid CPU Cooler.

Hope this helps


How much is the liquid cooler and is it easy to install? Could you link me where I can buy it in the UK!?

Cheers


All you have to do is follow the instructions which come with the product It will be easier then you think!
Here is the cheapest place I found it online: http://www.dabs.com/products/corsair-hydro-series-h60-2...

Hope this helps :p 


Thanks so much, I will order it now.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 17, 2014 8:56:54 AM

The i5-4670 is specified for up to 100°C. I have run my 4670 for several hours with all four cores being constantly at 100°C, and there was no problem whatsoever, so there is no reason for you to worry. Many people here in this forum keep claiming your CPU should not exceed 70°C, but it is simply not true. They argue so out of a feeling, not out of hard facts.

Just make sure the heat your CPU emits is properly blown away, i.e. ensure good airflow in your case. I did have temperature-related issues, but it was not my CPU. It was my northbridge (an important chip on the mainboard). There was not enough space for a bigger northbridge cooler, but I managed to fix the problem anyway by replacing the thermal pad of the northbridge cooler with a good thermal grease.

May I ask exactly how you stresstested your CPU? The best stress-test I know is the torture-test of Prime95 in its SmallFFT setting. I would be surprised if you could not bring your CPU to 100°C if you let it run that for an extended period of time - and still there will be no damage whatsoever. At 100°C your CPU throttles itself on automatic so that it never gets hotter than that. You can disable this throttling feature in BIOS, but doing so is not a smart step for obvious reasons.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a b 4 Gaming
a c 86 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
a b } Memory
January 18, 2014 3:38:10 AM

Safe operating temperature IS NOT EQUAL to optimal temperature. By running at 80+ degrees on Haswell chip you will, inevitably, shorten it's life. YOU CAN continue using your chip at 90, but it will die sooner than expected. If you are going to replace the CPU in 2 years or so, go ahead. If you want to keep using it for longer - get that heat down. A lot of people here DO NOT understand that safe temperature and optimal temperature of operation are 2 entirely different things.

A lot of people have experienced memory controller failure running Haswell chips after prolonged exposure to high temps. A statement that 90C is safe is false. It is safe for short periods of time. In the long run, it is damaging.

Liquid cooling is an overkill, unless you want extreme overclock. Make yourself a favor, get a Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo for 25 bucks. It dropped my I7 2700k from 80-85 down to 50/52. On a Haswell chip, it should decrease temps with at least 20C, considering proper installation.

Cheers.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
a b U Graphics card
January 18, 2014 5:07:44 AM

Before you rush out to buy an aluminium dumbbell, have you checked how hot it gets when under typical workloads? The stock cooler is not designed to effectively dissipate the sort of energy that you're generating, but I doubt you bought your computer to run stress tests. Given that you're in the UK I assume that your ambient temperature isn't particularly high, but remember that this directly affects all other temperatures.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 18, 2014 5:23:10 AM

Shneiky said:
Safe operating temperature IS NOT EQUAL to optimal temperature. By running at 80+ degrees on Haswell chip you will, inevitably, shorten it's life. YOU CAN continue using your chip at 90, but it will die sooner than expected. If you are going to replace the CPU in 2 years or so, go ahead.

With emphasis on "or so". How many specific CPUs do you personally know about that stopped working after 2 years, with it being absolutely clear that the CPU and not another part - such as the mainboard or the CPU cooler- being faulty?

Prove it, or it didn't happen!

Stop spreading these rumors, even if you believe in them! CPUs do not die after 2 years, not even at 100°C (provided they are designed for that temperature, such as the current Intel ones). In fact in my many years as computer expert, I have not seen a single CPU ever die from old age! CPUs can die from being overclocked too hard, CPUs can die from an improperly mounted cooler, CPUs can possibly die from a CPU fan failure (although even that is not very likely, seeing that the throttling usually saves the CPU). But although in theory there is electromigration limiting a CPU's life, in practice they do not die from old age. The lifetime of a CPU always exceeds the time for which its owner wants to keep that CPU.

Shneiky said:
A lot of people here DO NOT understand that safe temperature and optimal temperature of operation are 2 entirely different things.

Other people keep quoting and spreading rumors that sound plausible to them, even though they have never personally verified them.

Shneiky said:
A lot of people have experienced memory controller failure running Haswell chips after prolonged exposure to high temps.

Such as who? I rather bet my money on prolonged exposure to excessive voltages due to exaggerated overclocking.

12470178,0,550730 said:
A statement that 90C is safe is false.

No, it is not.
[/quote]
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a b 4 Gaming
a c 86 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
a b } Memory
January 18, 2014 10:18:14 AM

DeathAndPain do you have any computer science, electronics, electrical engineering or related education of a bachelor or a higher level? Or basic knowledge of physics? Anyway, are you even of a legal drinking age?

Well I kind of do have an idea what I am talking about. And I don't know for how long you are computer experts, but i do have close to 2 decades. Let me explain few things.

1 - Higher temperature makes the possibility of micro defects appearing in the structure in the chip a lot higher. Any disruption of the integrity of the chip itself could lead to electromigration. Google it. As well as Joule heating.

2 - Higher temperature leads to higher consumption. Higher temperatures increase resistance(Physics 101), so the chip compensates by using more power. Speaking from practice - I did a test on my I7 when I got it. At 85C it consumes 87W at stress test. At 52C it consumes just 71W. That is around 23% difference. The less power passing through the chip - the longer the lifespan.

3 - There is no magic silicon that runs forever. Ask any electronics/hardware specialist, or even here at Tom's.

4 - Speaking from practice. The memory controller is the most easy to damage part in modern Intel CPUs. It is a lot less resistant to heat or voltage than the actual CPU cores. Why do I say this - in the past 2 and a bit years I had colleagues and family members with failing CPUs due to prolonged exposure to high temperature (but below throttling point). 5 Ivys and 3 Haswells died prematurely - none of them were K series so no OC involved. 6 were a clear memory error (RAM was tested and retested in each case, was never the problem, motherboards are still operational up to this day), 2 were suspected for the same cause, but not a definitive answer.

5 - Current Intel CPUs are not "designed" to run at 100C. That is their TjMAX. It is maximum temperature of operation. Any higher temperature will result in inevitable damage to the chip. Anyway Haswell has a TCASE of 72.72°C. That is the maximum allowed temperature on the heatspreader. Any thermal monitoring software reports the temperature only of the cores, and not on any of the other components inside the CPU itself. Your posts were showing, that you make no distinction between CPU temperature and Core temperature.

6 - There is something called designed failure or at least that is how i call it. Maybe more appropriate is planned obsolescence. Google it.

I got a key holder made out of 20 CPUs ranging from Pentium I up until Sandy I3/I5/I7s which died prematurely, due to heat. Took them from my dad's box of "failed memories". He does computers for living. He is an electrical engineer with major in electronics, with an experience of over 30 years. He tough me a lot and I am trying to pass down some knowledge if you wish to listen. If not - have it your way.

Cheers.

m
0
l
a b à CPUs
January 19, 2014 1:27:46 PM

Shneiky said:
DeathAndPain do you have any computer science, electronics, electrical engineering or related education of a bachelor or a higher level? Or basic knowledge of physics? Anyway, are you even of a legal drinking age?

Well, let's see... I am 40+ years of age... both my private and business activities have been centered around computers since 5th grade in school... I have studied computer science at the Technical University of Berlin... I used to be a network administrator for several years... I am a software specialist right now... yes, I think I do qualify.

Shneiky said:

1 - Higher temperature makes the possibility of micro defects appearing in the structure in the chip a lot higher. Any disruption of the integrity of the chip itself could lead to electromigration. Google it. As well as Joule heating.

So far the theory, yes. Estimated lifetime of a CPU is ~12 years of constant operation. If this is reduce to 8 or even 6 years (which would be 50%), the owner will hardly care.

Shneiky said:

2 - Higher temperature leads to higher consumption. Higher temperatures increase resistance(Physics 101), so the chip compensates by using more power.

A pretty weird logics, seeing that higher resistance usually means lower and not higher currents, and power consumption is defined as the product of voltage and current.

Either way, there is an upper limit to this, which is the throttling temperature, at which the corresponding mechanisms of the CPU will intervene and make sure things do not go the wrong way.

Shneiky said:

3 - There is no magic silicon that runs forever. Ask any electronics/hardware specialist, or even here at Tom's.

See my response to 1.

Shneiky said:

4 - Speaking from practice. The memory controller is the most easy to damage part in modern Intel CPUs. It is a lot less resistant to heat or voltage than the actual CPU cores. Why do I say this - in the past 2 and a bit years I had colleagues and family members with failing CPUs due to prolonged exposure to high temperature (but below throttling point). 5 Ivys and 3 Haswells died prematurely

Wow, you must really have a lot of computer fanatics among your colleagues and family members... Haswell is on the market for barely 6 months, and you not only know three persons who own one, but even three whose Haswell died prematurely. How many other colleagues and family members do you have that own a Haswell? 100? Or would you say that Haswell CPUs die like the flies, indicating a major mis-design?

I believe in something different here. It is known as major bs.

Shneiky said:
5 - Current Intel CPUs are not "designed" to run at 100C. That is their TjMAX. It is maximum temperature of operation. Any higher temperature will result in inevitable damage to the chip.

That is what you keep repeating like a mantra. That does not make it any more true though.

As a side remark, Intel offers warranty for their products. In some countries, they are even forced to provide some warranty. This warranty exceeds the 6 months of Haswell market presence by a large margin. If it was not in accordance to the chip design to run a Haswell at its throttling temperature for an extended amount of time, don't you think Intel would include a corresponding rule in their specifications to protect themselves from countless warranty claims? In fact every single of the 8 CPUs in your vicinity that allegedly died from high temperature would be a valid case of warranty, because if your words are to be believed, these CPUs were always operated within their specifications.

Shneiky said:

Anyway Haswell has a TCASE of 72.72°C. That is the maximum allowed temperature on the heatspreader. Any thermal monitoring software reports the temperature only of the cores, and not on any of the other components inside the CPU itself. Your posts were showing, that you make no distinction between CPU temperature and Core temperature.

Perhaps it would be a good idea if you looked into this document. You may even know it already, seeing that this is the document where your 72.72°C originate from. Beginning on page 75, the thermal self protection mechanism of the Haswells is described. There are two of them, named TM1 and TM2, and they activate in escalating order to keep the CPU within its limits.

If you read the last paragraph of page 76, it reads:

"If TM2 is unable to reduce the processor temperature, then TM1 will be also be
activated. TM1 and TM2 will then work together to reduce power dissipation and
temperature. It is expected that only a catastrophic thermal solution failure would
create a situation where both TM1 and TM2 are active."


So the thermal self-regulation of the CPU is so good that only a catastrophic messup of the cooler, such as the cooler falling off the CPU, could possibly cause these self-protection measures to kick in.

Some time earlier Intel states:

"An underdesigned
thermal solution that is not able to prevent excessive activation of the TCC in
the anticipated ambient environment may cause a noticeable performance loss, and in
some cases may result in a TCASE that exceeds the specified maximum temperature
and may affect the long-term reliability of the processor."


I suppose this is what you base your stuff upon. However, the temperature difference between heat spreader and CPU cores is directly related to the quality of the cooling solution. If you have a good cooler, you can run your cores at a constant 100°C without the heat spreader (TCC) ever exceeding those 72.72°C, because the cooler is dissipating the heat efficiently enough. Of course, if you are employing a crappy cooling solution, then the heat will accumulate in the heat spreader area, causing the ambient to grow too hot in the long term.

I never suggested running the CPU with a crappy or improperly-mounted cooler. But I consider it equally silly to deduct from the heat spreader temp that your core temp is too hot when Intel, employing multiple heat-protection mechanisms, explicitly allows it. Especially when you demand a maximum of 70°C for the cores when even the heat spreader, divided from the cores by Intel's poor thermal grease, is officially fien to be hotter than that.


Shneiky said:

6 - There is something called designed failure or at least that is how i call it. Maybe more appropriate is planned obsolescence. Google it.

I am well familiar with the concept, but there has never been any need for it in the CPU area. CPUs grow obsolete so quickly that there is no necessity to make them fail prematurely. All Intel could achieve here is major damage to their reputation. And if Ivys and Haswells failed as frequently as you claim it to be the case among the people that surround you, the forums would be full of complaints and people warning against Intel CPUs for reason of poor reliability.

The truth, however, is that countless people keep overclocking and overvolting their Ivys and, to a somewhat lesser extent, also Haswells with good success and no problems whatsoever, even though power consumption and heat dissipation rises linear with clock speed and even square with voltage, causing even a small amount of overclocking to have a high impact on heat dissipation.

Shneiky said:
I got a key holder made out of 20 CPUs ranging from Pentium I up until Sandy I3/I5/I7s which died prematurely, due to heat. Took them from my dad's box of "failed memories".

Then your dad must have been sloppy on properly mounting adequate coolers. As I said before, I have administered a network with hundreds of CPUs (both Intel and AMD) before, many of them in cramped cases with poor airflow, and never saw a single of them fail.

Shneiky said:
He does computers for living. He is an electrical engineer with major in electronics, with an experience of over 30 years. He tough me a lot and I am trying to pass down some knowledge if you wish to listen. If not - have it your way.

As you may have noticed by now, my qualification is not unlike that of your father. Perhaps it pays listening to a second opinion now and then rather than taking anything he says for granted. I can see him not willing to admit - perhaps not even to himself - that his work concerning proper CPU cooler installation was blunderish at times.
m
0
l
July 15, 2014 6:43:04 AM

DeathAndPain said:
12472321,0,550730 said:
DeathAndPain do you have any computer science, electronics, electrical engineering or related education of a bachelor or a higher level? Or basic knowledge of physics? Anyway, are you even of a legal drinking age?
said:

Hell yeah buddy! I'm tired of people talking about CPU's dying.... I have had many computers, friends, family members and co- workers who never had witnessed a cpu failure. Usually a power supply, motherboard in most cases. In fact.. I had several computers from high school, given to me once the school upgraded after running the PC's for 6 years. upgraded parts and re sold them to friends after high school 12 years ago and they still work. I went to friends to get them re-cycled, to my astonishment.. they still worked running windows 98.

Thanks for informing people of the truth.

When people say "google it" to verify information they claim... It just shows how facebook and internet media influence what people claim as "facts" versus validation. People really do believe what they read on the internet.... I find personal experience more rewarding then reading what some "joe shmo" claims in his parents basement with a GED.
m
0
l
!