I5 6600k goes hotter than FX 8320E ?

[Kriptonac]

First, i want to sorry for my bad English.

I compared 2 proccesors.

•First is INTEL i5 6600K with Hyper evo 212x cooler

•Second is AMD FX 8320E with stock wraith cooler


I know I5 6600k is better than AMD FX 8320E, but how is possible to i5 have 40c on idle with that cooler, and FX have just 25-30.

In gaming and load, GTA V ULTRA got similar fps, but after same ammount of time, I5 get near 80c and FX just 60 maximum.

Is there a problem with my friends I5 or some other stuff???

P.S: I used HWMonitor application for temperatures and pc case where is i5 got better Air Flow than my with AMD, this is a discussion, every opinion is welcome.

 

[Dunlop0078]

Well if your FX chip was hitting 80c it would likely die. AMD recommends FX chips not exceed 62c core temp, intel cpu's can hit about 100c before they start throttling. The AMD CPU is 32NM and sucks 95watts of power so it should still have more volume of heat dissipated into the air then the intel chip even though the intel chip is running much hotter.

No problem, the only problem is that people read everything AMD is a furnace online then go around repeating it having never used an AMD cpu themselves. Some of their older gpu's got very hot, I wouldn't say thats a problem anymore and it was never really a problem with their cpu's.

 

[13thmonkey]

FX start to struggle at around 65C? perhaps, i5's don't until 90 odd. They are on different processes and hence temps. It's like comparing the boiling point of water and lead, they are just different.

 

[Kriptonac]

So why then all says Intel i5 6th gen is more cooler than AMD 8320E ? This isn't correct and its unfair..

 

[Dunlop0078]

So why then all says Intel i5 6th gen is more cooler than AMD 8320E ? This isn't correct and its unfair..

It probably does technically put more heat into the air than a modern intel chip, but in terms of core temp AMD FX CPUs run much cooler and they always have all the way back to 1st gen i5s and i7s. Who says 6th gen intel cpu's run cooler in terms of core temp than AMD FX? I would love to tell them otherwise.

But like 13thmonkey said they aren't directly comparable, very different architectures and manufacturing processes.

 

[Kriptonac]

So why then all says Intel i5 6th gen is more cooler than AMD 8320E ? This isn't correct and its unfair..

It probably does technically put more heat into the air than a modern intel chip, but in terms of core temp AMD FX CPUs run much cooler and they always have all the way back to 1st gen i5s and i7s. Who says 6th gen intel cpu's run cooler in terms of core temp than AMD FX? I would love to tell them otherwise.

Oh, just type in forums, those intel funboys always says against AMD and if it is lie.. I dont know what peoples have against AMD, i used processor 10years, bought new pc but old one still works... I know its worser, but it is much cheaper and for this money u got better performace , whatever thanks for answering, and i you can tell me where i can start thread about PC CASE MODING ? I want to mod my pc case but i want to know basics and listen for other opinions .

 

[synphul]

They're simply different. Intel cpu's have a diode at each cpu core reading the core temp directly so on a quad core i5 it can produce 4 actual thermal readings. Amd chooses to read temps a bit differently by using a single thermal reading and averaging for the cores using an alogrithm, it doesn't have a thermal reading directly at each of the cores or modules.

An i5 does surpass an fx cpu in performance in just about every category except zip compression. It does so using half the cores, even if each core is a little hotter 8 cores means 8 sources of heat contributing to overall thermal dissipation. The intel quad core (even mainstream i7's are still only quad cores) don't produce the same volume of heat as the fx chips do.

Consider it this way, a candle vs a radiator heater. Place a piece of paper over both and see which one catches fire, the pinpoint heat from the flame will light the paper on fire. However a candle flame won't heat a room much, a radiator heater on the other hand will.

Many people will overclock an 8320e which pushes it up higher, the tdp rating is thermal dissipation measuring the heat output in watts. So the 8320e is a 95w tdp design while the faster clocked 8350 is a 125w tdp design. Overclocking basically renders the stock tdp an inaccurate measurement, it's only valid at stock. It's also just an estimation by the manufacturer (amd or intel) and not a finite value. More of a guideline. The much faster clocked fx 9590 is a 220w tdp cpu so if as an fx 8350 is overclocked and pushed faster/harder it's actual tdp will fall somewhere between 125w and 220w.

An fx nearing 60c is almost to the brink of thermal throttling, an i5 close to 80c isn't. It's not unfair and it is accurate that i5's don't run as hot as 8 core amd cpu's. It shouldn't, it's got half the processing cores and half the heat generating components. The only reason the fx 8xxx and i5's are compared is based on price and performance. No one would rationally compare a quad core i5 to an 8 or 10 core enthusiast i7, they're worlds apart. The fx octo cores would be more fairly compared to an octo core i7 but they typically aren't because there's a massive price and performance difference.

 

[Kriptonac]

Okay

 

[Ecky]

Better to say, you simply can't compare the temperatures of them because they have sensors in different places reading different things. An FX at "60c" may well be hotter than an i5 at "80c", or it might not be, because their temperature sensors are in different places.

What you can say for certain is that the i5 produces half the heat.

 

[Kriptonac]

Thanks guys, I really appreciate your answers. Now i have cleaner vision about heat of processors

 

[13thmonkey]

also if an FX naturally runs at 60C but throttles at 65C (for example), I would say that this is hotter than an intel chip that naturally runs at 65C but throttles at 100C, now technically i'm wrong, it is obviously cooler, BUT the thing that matters is the headroom, to say that FX operates within 5C of it's throttle temp, vs intel running with 30-35C gap to its throttle temp. In this way the absolute values are ignored and replaced with relative values, with those being relative to a notional maximum temp, this then takes account of manufacturing processes and architectures as they are relative to the failure point of that arch and process.

 

[Ecky]

Right, except they're all relative values. AMD has publicly stated that "degrees" on their CPUs are not real degrees, just an arbitrary scale.