Our German lab went the extra mile for drilling down into power consumption, cutting the braiding from our power supply's cables to give us the same measurement capabilities you've seen in our graphics card launch coverage. The readings are based on the four-channel HAMEG HMO 3054 oscilloscope.
Consumption is measured at two different points, allowing us to, for the first time, quantify how much power is lost to the voltage regulators. This amount isn’t negligible; we’re providing infrared measurements as well to drive that point home.
| Power Measurement Platform | |
|---|---|
| System | Intel Core i7-5960X MSI X99 Gaming 7 16 GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR4-2666 (4 x 4 GB) Samsung 850 EVO 512 GB Raijintek Water Cooling be quiet! Dark Power Pro 1200 W Microcool Banchetto 101 |
| Method | No Contact Current Measurement at All Rails Direct voltage measurement IR real-time monitoring |
| Equipment | 1 x HAMEG HMO 3054, 500 MHz four-channel oscilloscope with data logger 4 x HAMEG HZO50 current probe 4 x HAMEG HZ355 (10:1 probe, 500 MHz) 1 x HAMEG HMC 8012 DSO with data logger 1 x Optris PI450 80 Hz Infrared Camera + PI Connect |
Infrared Measurements with the Optris PI450
Interestingly, we’ve identified a method to confirm what our sensors tell us in the form of the PI450 by Optris.
This piece of equipment is an infrared camera that was developed specifically for process monitoring. It supplies real-time thermal images at a rate of 80 Hz. The pictures are sent via USB to a separate system, where they can be recorded as video. The PI450’s thermal sensitivity is 40 mK, making it ideal for assessing small gradients.
In order to overclock our CPU even more aggressively, we’re using a new water cooling solution by Raijintek. Consequently, we’re not just interested in the CPU temperature, but also the water temperature, which stays constant after the heat-up phase.
Additionally, the Banchetto 101 allows us to switch the system to a vertical orientation with the use of two angled brackets. This way, we can shoot interesting videos of the back of the motherboard as well. For this, we speed up 20 minutes of HD video so that it completes in two minutes. We record the back of the CPU socket and the voltage regulators to document the heat generation and transmission.
Intel Core i7-5960X at 3.0 GHz with Turbo Boost
Core Voltage
The first experiment involves core voltage. Our measured average of 1.0 V is a bit higher than the motherboard's setting, but we're getting an average of 3.2 GHz from this eight-core processor, so there's hardly room for complaint.

Power Draw
Next, we compare the values measured through the voltage regulator's sensor to those measured at the motherboard's input (at the same time). This tells us how much power is lost to factors other than the Core i7 processor. These findings will come in useful later, since losses attributable to voltage regulation needs to be taken into consideration when deciding on an optimal system setup.

The eight-core CPU looks pretty good, demonstrating 15 W (19 W, given VRM losses) at idle and 93 W (106 W, considering the VRM) under load.
| Power Consumption | Average, Idle | Maximum, 100% Load | Average, 100% Load |
|---|---|---|---|
| CPU 12 V In | 19 W | 122 W | 106 W |
| CPU Package | 15 W | 96 W | 93 W |
| VR Loss | 4 W | 26 W | 13 W |
Temperatures
Due in no small part to our liquid cooling system, idle temperatures are pleasantly low. The processor interface reading was 32 degrees Celsius, and the core temperature average 27 degrees. That was only five degrees above ambient.

Let’s take a look at the time-lapse video mentioned earlier.
| Temperature T | Idle | Maximum, 100% Load | Average, 100% Load (Heated Up) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Core | 27 °C | 44 °C | 41 °C |
| Package | 27 °C | 45 °C | |
| Water (In / Out) | 24 °C / 27 °C | 31 °C | |
| VR | 34 °C | 44 °C |
Now, what happens when the CPU is overclocked, and how much can be saved by utilizing two cores less? Those questions are answering by varying our efforts to tune Intel's new flagship.
For an eight-core processor that runs stable at 3.2 GHz with all cores at full load, 93 W (or 106 W with VR losses taken into account) isn't bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Three New CPUs For Enthusiasts
- X99, LGA 2011-3 and DDR4: Get Ready For A Big Upgrade
- How We Tested Core i7-5960X, -5930K, And -5820K
- Synthetic Benchmarks
- Real-World Benchmarks
- Battlefield 4, Grid 2, And Metro: Last Light
- Star Swarm, Thief, Tomb Raider, And WoW
- Power, In Depth: Stock Clock Rates
- Power, In Depth: Eight and Six Cores at 3.5 GHz
- Power, In Depth: Eight and Six Cores at 4 GHz
- Power, In Depth: Eight and Six Cores at 4.5 GHz
- Power, In Depth: CPU Health at 4.8 GHz
- Measuring DDR4 Power Consumption
- Power Consumption Through Our Benchmark Suite
- Intel Keeps Enthusiasts On Its Most Modern Design With Haswell-E






1000$ is affordable to you ?
Though you have a point here, the guy buying such CPUs most likely will game at above 1080p .. but this would have implied using 2 GPUs at least in the test.
Bit disappointed to not see a comparison with the Xeon E5-1650v2(or 1660v2), as the 2600 is a bit overkill comparing prices. Some of us just need a workstation with ECC ram and not just a free-for-all(ie someone else is paying) Xeon 2600 fest.
1000$ is affordable to you ?
Though you have a point here, the guy buying such CPUs most likely will game at above 1080p .. but this would have implied using 2 GPUs at least in the test.
I have a hunch that we will never see anything like this in the comment sections of AMD reviews. Not sure why
Er, no. No it's not the first eight core processor. It is the first eight-core consumer or Core iN series processor though.
I also don't know of any unofficial 8-core processors either.
Intel Core i7-5960X, -5930K, And -5820K CPU Review: Haswell-E Rises : Read more
I was wondering how often you writers read the comments? Just wondering.
Gee. DDR4 save about 5 W with 4 modules. And i was worried of pwer consumption when i overclocked my FX 8350 at 4.7 GHz
Ya, the 5820K really stands out, especially in comparison to Intel's previous lowest SKU processors on X79. For the first time the x820 actually looks like a great option to go with. It's the same as a 3960X in clock speed and core count, except it's Haswell which seems to result in a 10-15% performance boost, and it's over $600 cheaper. The only drawback might be if you have a lot of high bandwidth PCIe cards, but I doubt that'll be an issue for most enthusiasts.
And omg that price:
http://www.microcenter.com/product/437203/Intel_Core_i7-5820k_33_GHz_LGA_2011_V3_Tray_Processor
... I love Microcenter.
THe improvement in multi-threaded workloads are good. It is the biggest improvement per generation we have seen since gulftown
I'm running a 780 ti and Gskill Ripjaw 1600 RAM.
How would the cost of said systems compare, assuming we could create them as equal as possible? Would the performance benefits of the 5820 justify the additional cost?
I'm still running on my old x58 i7 920, but it's starting to BSOD on CPU intensive games (although I suspect its my mobo that's the issue)...
I wanted to build a new system this year, but don't want to make the same mistake I did with the x58 and be left with something that simply can't be upgraded after a year or so. At the same time, I don't want to buy into old tech if that too won't last..
I have had a good run with my x58 mind, but am wary Intel may do what they did with my Gen 1 i7, and change something fundamental with the platform/DDR4 to mean I'll be 'stuck' with whatever I buy now...