i7-4790k (Max Temp/Avg Temp)

vonlehmden7

Reputable
May 24, 2014
69
0
4,630
Hey guys!

Thanks in advanced for your input!

So I was curious on if Max Temp or Average Temp was more important. The reason why is I have an i7-4790k with a Hyper 212 Evo and when running AIDA64 it hits about 85C on the hottest core. This is at the base 4.4Ghz boost clock with no overclocking besides the turbo boost (if you count that). On the other hand, however, the average temps on each core doesn't exceed 70C.

I figure it's fine, but was wondering.

Thanks for all your help!
 
Solution
vonlehmden7,

Good job on tweaking your Vcore. Manually tuning Vcore is always advisable rather than relying on Auto settings, which supplies considerably more voltage than necessary for stability. My 4770K requires 1.283 for stability at 4.7.

As long as your Vcore is under 1.300 and your Core temperatures are under 80C, then 4.7 will be fine. Since you decreased the Vcore, it would be interesting to know what your Core temperatures actually are with Prime95 v26.6 Small FFT's.

Although AIDA64 is fine for STABILITY testing, I'm not a big fan of AIDA64 for THERMAL testing for two reasons:

(1) There are too many test variables to allow for apples to apples comparisons here on the Forums, since almost no one bothers to be specific...

vonlehmden7

Reputable
May 24, 2014
69
0
4,630
@Ironsounds,

Thank you for the information! I do appreciate it! Just for future reference, which temperature should I pay attention to if/when I attempt to overclock the CPU?

Thanks!
 

vonlehmden7

Reputable
May 24, 2014
69
0
4,630
@Ironsounds,

1) The Idle Core Temps are high 20s and at most low 30s.

2) The room temp is about 22C.

Additionally should I pay attention to the max temp or the average temp?

Thanks!
 

vonlehmden7

Reputable
May 24, 2014
69
0
4,630
Thanks for the response guys! and I apologize for not responding. I have been busy as of late and haven't been able to get on.

@CompuTronix,

I've read the Intel Temp Guide a couple times before. So I guess my real question is, since I do a lot of Encoding, I am curious on if a constant temp of ~75-79 (79 max) is okay for this CPU. I usual encode videos up to 12-18 hours straight and I don't want to burn it out. I also was able to get my hands on the Corsair H100i for $44.00 so I will be replacing the Hyper 212 EVO today or tomorrow. I kind of just want to know what a safe temp is when running it that hot for a extended period of time.

Thanks again!

@Ironsounds,

Thank you for the input. I kind of hoped for better AIDA64 temps from the Hyper 212. I suppose that since I never used the stock cooler, I didn't have anything to compare it to. When encoding my temps are about 75-79 with 79 being the max temp.

Thanks guys!!!
 

CompuTronix

Intel Master
Moderator


Yes, your Core temperatures are safe, but right at the edge of spec. Tcase for the i7 4790K is 74C, which is CPU temperature, not Core temperature. Since Core temperatures run 5C higher than CPU temperature, Tcase +5 makes the corresponding Core temperature 79C.

Also, if you remember the following from the Intel Temperature Guide:

"Recent versions of Prime95 such as 28.5 run AVX code on the Floating Point Unit (FPU) math coprocessor, which produces unrealistically high temperatures. The FPU test in the software utility AIDA64 shows similar results."

So I have three questions;

(1) When you ran AIDA64, was the box checked next to "FPU Test"?
(2) What are your Core temperatures with Prime95 v26.6 Small FFT's?
(3) What was your ambient temperature when the tests were run?

The H100i will definitely reduce your temperatures by several degrees, so you'll be able to encode at comfortable Core temperatures.

CT :sol:
 

vonlehmden7

Reputable
May 24, 2014
69
0
4,630
@CompuTronix,

Thanks for all the help.

(1) Yes the FPU Test box is checked =)
(2) I tried Prime95 v26.6 and it caused my temps to shoot up to the 90s so I laid it to rest. It was v26.6 as I downloaded it from your link in another post.
(3) My ambient temperatures always range from 21-23C on a normal day.

I did end up doing some tinkering and realized my stock voltage was at 1.27. So I did some tests and found the CPU was stable at 1.115V at 4.4Ghz (about 8hrs of AIDA64 stable). Temps were awesome when I lowered the voltage.

On a side note, I decided to see how fast the CPU could go at the "stock voltages" and got it to 4.7Ghz @ 1.258V. I probably could have pushed it further but I decided to stop as I had company coming over.

Also I did install the h100i. Current idle temps are in the mid 20s and temps only get to like 72 when using AIDA64 (66 when using handbrake). This is also with a 4.6Ghz @1.210 O/C.

I'm going to do some more tests to see the actual gains from having it at 4.6 rather than 4.4. If there aren't many I'm going revert it to 4.4 and take the 1.115V O/C and much nice, cooler, temps.

Thanks again!
 

CompuTronix

Intel Master
Moderator
vonlehmden7,

Good job on tweaking your Vcore. Manually tuning Vcore is always advisable rather than relying on Auto settings, which supplies considerably more voltage than necessary for stability. My 4770K requires 1.283 for stability at 4.7.

As long as your Vcore is under 1.300 and your Core temperatures are under 80C, then 4.7 will be fine. Since you decreased the Vcore, it would be interesting to know what your Core temperatures actually are with Prime95 v26.6 Small FFT's.

Although AIDA64 is fine for STABILITY testing, I'm not a big fan of AIDA64 for THERMAL testing for two reasons:

(1) There are too many test variables to allow for apples to apples comparisons here on the Forums, since almost no one bothers to be specific about what tests they've selected, which creates inconsistencies and much confusion concerning Core temperatures.

(2) The only "Steady-State Workload" test which yields "Steady-State Core Temperatures" is the CPU test, only IF it's individually selected, and not run concurrently with any other test selections. Even so, AIDA64's CPU test runs well below TDP, and is therefore an insufficient "Thermal" test workload.

For the benefit of other Members, as well as Tom's ever-present silent readers in the background, what's so critical about "Steady-State"? Take a look:

Prime95 Small FFT's is the standard for CPU thermal testing, because it's a steady-state 100% workload. This is the test that Real Temp uses to test sensors. Version 26.6 is well suited to all Core i and Core 2 variants.



NOTE: (Do NOT run any versions of Prime95 later than 26.6. Here's why:

Core i 2nd, 3rd and 4th Generation CPU's have AVX (Advanced Vector Extension) instruction sets. Recent versions of Prime95, such as 28.5, run AVX code on the Floating Point Unit (FPU) math coprocessor, which produces extremely high temperatures. The FPU test in the stability testing utility AIDA64 shows similar results.

Prime95 v26.6 produces temperatures on 3rd and 4th Generation processors more consistent with 2nd Generation, which also have AVX instructions, but do not suffer from thermal extremes due to having a soldered Integrated Heat Spreader and a 35% larger Die).



Prime95's default test, Blend, is a cyclic workload for testing memory stability, and Large FFT's combines CPU and memory tests. As such, Blend and Large FFT's both have cyclic workloads which are unsuitable for CPU thermal testing.

Other stability tests such as Linpack and Intel Burn Test have cycles that peak at 110% workload, and are also unsuitable for CPU thermal testing. The software utility OCCT runs elements of Linpack and Prime95.

Shown above from left to right: Small FFT's, Blend, Linpack and Intel Burn Test.

Note the steady-state thermal signatures of Small FFT's, which allows accurate measurements of Core temperatures.

Shown above from left to right: Small FFT's, Intel Extreme Tuning Utility CPU Test, and AIDA64 CPU Test.

The "Charts" in SpeedFan span 13 minutes, and show how each test creates different thermal signatures. Intel Extreme Tuning Utility is also a cyclic workload. Although AIDA64's CPU test is steady-state, the workload is below Thermal Design Power (TDP), which is insufficient.



This is why I always recommend Prime95 v26.6 Small FFT's for THERMAL testing.

CT :sol:
 
Solution

vonlehmden7

Reputable
May 24, 2014
69
0
4,630
@CT,

Thanks so much for the information! I actually have to wait for a new monitor as I had some odd color issues. But for the science behind it, when I get the monitor, I will try prime95 Small FFTs to test the thermals on it.

For O/Cing how do you suggest testing stability? Running Prime95 Small FFTs for 20 minutes for temp limits and then AIDA64 for several hours for actually stability? I may try to push the chip a little further to see how high of a O/C I can get.

Thanks!

Best answer selected too!
 

CompuTronix

Intel Master
Moderator
For stability testing, any apps, games, stress tests and benchmarks such as CineBench, RealBench, IBT and Intel ETU should be run. Small FFT's and Blend should be run for at least 2 hours.

Although it may not seem obvious, even graphics stress tests and benchmarks such as those from Futuremark and Unigine are great for testing CPU stability, since the physics segments of those tests will expose any weaknesses in a CPU overclock.