Intel i7-4970K Temperatures

InfernoxCJC

Honorable
Sep 21, 2014
143
0
10,690
Hi Toms,
This is a follow on from my previous thread (http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/answers/id-2345906/cpu-clock-speeds.html) that I said was solved before realising this was a problem.

I have just finished my new Build as follows:
i7-4790K
ASUS Z97-A
MSI GTX 970 Gaming 4G
16GB Kingston Hyper-X Beast (2133MHz)

Anyway, I thought I'd try overclocking up to around 4.5GHz seeing as the Turbo Clocks are already 4.3GHz but saw temperatures hitting the high 80s low 90s (according to HWMonitor) after just a minute or so of Prime95's "In-place large FFTs" test despite running with a Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO in a Push/Pull config (I'm fairly sure my thermal paste is properly applied)
As such, I entered the BIOS and loaded the "Optimised Default" settings, turning off Q-Fan to help keep the system cool. Despite Intel SpeedStep being enabled, both CPU-Z and Task Manager show my CPU to be running at its Turbo Clock of 4.3GHz despite being at only 2-3% Utilisation.

Does anyone have any suggestions as to how to lower my temperatures to actually allow for an overclock amd how to fix this SpeedStep issue?

Thanks,
Conor

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Update:

- I now know why SpeedStep wasn't working, I had Windows' "High Performance" enabled
- Still a little concerned about my temperatures
 
Solution
1.The 4790k is a 4 Ghz Processor however it has turbo boost 2.0 - Read below what I took from the Intel Website.

Intel® Turbo Boost Technology 2.01 automatically allows processor cores to run faster than the rated operating frequency if they’re operating below power, current, and temperature specification limits.

Intel Turbo Boost Technology 2.0 is activated when the Operating System (OS) requests a frequency higher than the rated frequency of the processor. Whether the processor enters into and the amount of time the processor spends in the Intel Turbo Boost Technology 2.0 state depends on the workload and operating environment.

Maximum turbo frequency indicates the highest possible frequency achievable when conditions allow the...

InfernoxCJC

Honorable
Sep 21, 2014
143
0
10,690


Thanks for your reply.
That doesn't explain why SpeedStep doesn't seem to be working dispite the BIOS being set to DEFAULT and SpeedStep being enabled.

Also, a very similar setup kept my old i5-2500K below 80C during Prime95 tests with a 4.5GHz overclock and that ran at 3.3GHz stock. Why would my temperatures be so much higher with the new CPU?

Thanks again,
Conor
 
I usually run my i7-920 @ 3.8GHz during the late fall unitl early spring (stock is 2.67GHz).

From late spring until early fall, I can't really go past 3.33GHz as I have no air conditioning in my house... I live next to the beach. The ambient temperature rise in my house in those months is enough to make my OC a bit unstable. I see people saying they run their i7-920 @ 4.0-4.5GHz. That has never been obtainable by me.... at least not what I would consider stable.

What are your ambient temps like going into your PC?
 

InfernoxCJC

Honorable
Sep 21, 2014
143
0
10,690


I live in the UK so it is almost winter here. I have my window wide open so it can't be more than 20C in my room.

I figured out why SpeedStep isn't working (I think) - Windows High Performance is enabled.

But yeah, running at a pretty constant 4.3GHz (Turbo Clock) I am getting 29-32C idle temps which seem a tad high. I think I'll brave a Prime95 overnight test at stock (with Turbo) and check for stability as it is. What would the maximum safe temps for a 4790K be?

I'll buy some more thermal paste and try reseating the cooler when I get the chance.
 

InfernoxCJC

Honorable
Sep 21, 2014
143
0
10,690
Okay, having done some Prime95 tests, here are my results.
Using Default BIOS settings with max fan speeds and Intel SpeedStep enabled:

~ 25-32C when Idle
~ 55-65C during Prime95 "In-place large FFTs" with a few random spikes into the mid 70s
~ 69-75C during Prime95 "Small FFTs

I did note however that during the tests the CPU maxed out at 4.0GHz while during gameplay and general usage it does reach its 4.4GHz Turbo Clock.

Are these temperatures acceptable for an i7-4790K until I can get hold of some Thermal Paste?

Furthermore, will the i7-4970K at stock speeds (possibly without Turbo) still offer more GAMING performance than the i5-2500K (4.5GHz) I had to leave at home when I went to Uni? I know the i7 will still be better in multi-tasking and editing situations but I'm not sure about in a gaming situation.

Thanks once again!
 

mr91

Distinguished


 

InfernoxCJC

Honorable
Sep 21, 2014
143
0
10,690


I'm not sure, at the moment I am just running the Default settings of the BIOS. I will check the voltages now.
 

mr91

Distinguished
That's the problem! You need find the lowest stable voltage for your cpu to get lower temps.

Default auto settings often set the voltage too high however there is no guarantee that your cpu will run at 4.5 at a low voltage.

This depends on the how well you do in the silicon lottery, I would try to set the voltage for 1.2-122 for 4.5 ghz with an air cooler...
 

InfernoxCJC

Honorable
Sep 21, 2014
143
0
10,690


That would make sense!
I guess I did do well in the silicon lottery with my old 2500K as that hit 4.5GHz happily on "Auto" voltages.
If I do decide to try overclocking again, how do you tell straight away if the voltage is too low/high, surely you don't require an overnight Prime95 test for each little change?
 

mr91

Distinguished
Don't do Prime 95 for the new Haswell processors.

Try Aida 64 & if your system doesn't freeze and your temps are okay you can use the voltage.

Because in the real world usage you probably won't push your computer the way synthetics benchmarks would.

According to the Asus guy Prime 95 is not designed/certified for testing Haswell processors.

" According to The Asus guy Aida 64 is certified however not necessary "

If you're a gamer or you use your cpu for video editing than you need to make sure the cpu is stable when doing those activity's.

Overclocking is changing and getting easier, good luck!
 



There isn't much performance difference between an i5 and an i7 within the same generation, while gaming. Marginal at best in nearly every game available.
 

mr91

Distinguished


I upgraded from a 3570k @ stock to a 4790k @ 4.6 & there is a significant difference in many but not all games...


 
You went from a i5 3.4GHz Quad core to an i7 4.0GHz @ 4.6GHz. A net 1.2GHz gain per core. This would be a significant performance increase for a single threaded game. The i7 had little to do with it as you would have come very close to the same performance increase if you had OC'd your i5 to, 4.0-4.5GHz (assuming it was achievable).
 

mr91

Distinguished
The 3570k had a turbo boost of 3.8 and I OC'd it to 4.0/4/2 ghz on all cores for testing however there wasn't a big difference in performance so I left it at stock..

The I7 has more threads and more cache, Games like bf4 Multiplayer will take advantage of an i7...
Certainly the massive gain per core was more beneficial than the extra cache and extra virtual cores however some new games are taking advantage of these resources and this trend will continue...

Look at the new Rumored AC UNITY requirements, Wolfenstein also recommended an i7.

Intel Core i5-2500K @ 3.3 GHz
AMD FX-8350 @ 4.0 GHz
AMD Phenom II x4 940 @ 3.0 GHz
Recommended:
Intel Core i7-3770 @ 3.4 GHz
AMD FX-8350 @ 4.0 GHz
or better
 


One of the BF4 patches in the last couple months actually started showing use on my virtual cores(i7). That wasn't the case when it was released. This game was coded for PC first and is a reliable platform for testing. I agree, this is the way going forward but only for games developed for PC.

AC: Unity is a console game and they have no interest in optimizing for PC. That is Par for the course with Ubisoft.
 

mr91

Distinguished
Are you talking about single or multiplayer?

Wofenstein is a console port however an I7 is still recommended by the developer.

Since AC 3 apparently Nvidia has been working with Ubisoft on the PC version and making it more of a pc game.

This Generation of Consoles are basically PC's and they have 8 threads.
 


Multiplayer: haven't played single in a long time so I don't know.

Ubisoft has demonstrated multiple times that they do not care for the PC market, numerous times. Their products are not PC friendly.

I don't know much about Wolfenstein development but I am very skeptical of console ports requiring the highest end PC hardware. Indeed, a PC version will be way more taxing due to... if nothing else, resolution.

Do you think it is really reasonable for a console with dual quad core APU's @ 1.6-1.8GHz, shared cache & 800MHz memory getting 30FPS @ 900p to then require an i7 @ 3.4GHz(3.8GHz w/ Turbo) and a GTX 780 for 1080p @ 30 FPS?

Sorry OP, not intentionally trying to derail your thread.
 

InfernoxCJC

Honorable
Sep 21, 2014
143
0
10,690
Although CPU-Z is saying my Core Voltage is 1.154V during a Prime95 test (I know you said to not use Prime95 but I just threw it on quickly to see 100% voltages) Are VCORE and Core Voltage the same thing?
Also, any idea why the CPU maxes out at 4.0GHz during the tests but uses the full 4.4GHz when necessary during normal computing?
 

mr91

Distinguished
I thought bf4 MP was utilizing more than 4 threads before the update.

I think there challenges but I enjoy there games and my system has no problem playing them...

I'm not sure why Wofenstein has such high system requirements but it's a great game.
I played both BF4 MP and Wofenstein on 3 different machines...

As you said earlier the PC games offer the opportunity for higher resolutions and they and some games offer extra graphical enhancements to use the extra power of the PC.

Because the Console spec's developers are trying to use everything thing they have & that's is why many new games are coming out with ridicules vram requirements...

I heard that they want to make AC unity 30 fps on pc to keep them in line with the consoles.