Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
beejay
Apr 7, 2002

But there's no evidence that Haswell will change that.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

hobbesmaster posted:

I don't think that many gamer machines are Sandy Bridge E.

What? The article implies that "low end" chips will be soldered. Gaming PCs are generally not low end chips. Either way, there is no solid information out there and Intel went out of their way to quash the BGA thing once already. So I'd think we should probably wait and see.

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

bobfather posted:

Max recommended core temp is ~70, 70-90 is too hot and 90-105 is getting to be dangerously hot.

Note that core temps are different than the overall CPU temperature, which is reported as a different (and usually lower) number.

However, it's voltage that kills these chips, not necessarily heat. They're all designed to throttle back if they become unsafely hot. It's probably just the difference between a chip that lasts for 10 years before dying and one that lasts for 7 (under higher heat).

Besides, very little that a computer does will load cores like Prime 95 does. I'd be surprised if the computer got higher than 70C under the most demanding of "real" applications.

My post was more of a "WTF, Intel" post than anything else, since replacing the stock TIM with halfway decent stuff was able to drop temperatures by 15+C.

Dude, no. The processor should be low 70s under Prime95, not 90s. You have done something wrong. Heat will most definitely gently caress up processors. Please get thee to the overclocking thread.

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

Uhh... what 3570K's are running at 85C at 3.5ghz :psyduck:

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

Martello posted:

It's definitely actually hitting 98. I ran Windows Experience Index because it maxes CPU load (as far as I can tell). Core Temp said 98 plus or minus on all cores during the operation. I checked my CoolerMaster V8 cooler. The fan is running fine, and I sprayed it out with canned air. The cooler seems to be sagging a little, presumably just from its own weight and hanging on the board for so long. Because I'm dumb and don't fear electrocution I kept the case open and actually held the cooler tight against the board and the chip to make sure it was making contact. The temperature still hit 98. I have a CoolerMaster Hyper 212 lying around, should I try swapping that in and see if it fixes it? Any other suggestions?


Sabretooth. It looks the coolest. That's why I bought it, at least. :downs:

It would certainly be worth it to swap in the Hyper 212. If you are still seeing weird temperatures, give us a screenshot (maybe in the overclocking thread?)

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

Factory Factory posted:

Tocks get socks is how it goes.

Can you link this, I've heard it a couple times but can't find official word.

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

That's a bummer. Sorry, I didn't doubt you, I just was hoping there was some chance... but alas.

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

Haswell uses less power especially under idle which can cause some power supplies to freak out. It's best to find one that is Haswell-ready.

As to the rest of your post, I don't know if you are talking about Haswell or the next iteration (Broadwell), but there probably won't be socketed versions of Broadwell, and it may or may not use DDR4.

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

Haswell Refresh is not Haswell-E and might be available earlier. I think it's kind of murky right now.

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

No, it's not a huge deal at all. At worst you just disable the new power state. I just figure if you are buying a new system with Haswell, and you have the choice between two quality power supplies with similar prices, one "Haswell-ready" and one not, might as well go for the one that is.

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

Looks like the 4690 is 3.3/3.9 where the 4670 was 3.4/3.8, so it loses 100mhz on the "Normal" clock but gains 100 on the "Turbo" side.

edit: The 4690K however is 3.5/3.9

beejay fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Mar 27, 2014

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/intel_devil%E2%80%99s_canyon_delayed_to_late_september_2014.html

Rumors that the launch is "paper" only and the processors won't be available for a while. I don't see anyone else reporting this though, and they have basically no sources.

beejay fucked around with this message at 03:22 on May 24, 2014

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

Let's hope Intel has been working on whatever is the successor to silicon.

Edit: This is an interesting read: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2038207/intel-keeping-up-with-moores-law-becoming-a-challenge.html

beejay fucked around with this message at 15:25 on May 26, 2014

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

Skylake should bring DDR4.

Honestly, if you want to upgrade, there is not really any reason not to do it now. It's not like Broadwell will be a massive jump over Haswell refresh. You will get big gains over a Core 2 regardless. If I had to make a best guess based on how things are looking now, I'd expect Broadwell next spring and Skylake maybe early 2016. That's based on nothing but gut feelings though. I'd just say upgrade now for you.

beejay fucked around with this message at 15:42 on May 26, 2014

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

Agreed posted:

total disregard for the life of the product required to yank more performance out of a product engineered for efficiency at a given node.

What? I have no clue what's going on in your post in general but especially this part about the "life of the product" stuff.

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

I see! Yeah I have been overclocking for a long time and it's fun, it always feels good to get "something for nothing" in a way. I was kind of thinking I made a mistake with an Ivy Bridge K processor, and they would come out with better overclocking stuff afterward, but it looks like that may not be the case. I thought you meant the processors would face lifetime concerns at stock with stock coolers, and I was thinking that would be bad.

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

HalloKitty posted:

For some reason I hadn't thought of Xeons, but I think people definitely should, is there some reason this hasn't featured more prominently in the parts picking thread?

Same reason that i7's aren't "featured" in the parts picking thread - most people building general use/gaming machines are fine with an i5 which is still ~$50 cheaper than that Xeon.

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

Couldn't Intel have given them a heads-up about the soldering? Although it may just be done for website hits, it is a striking image after these years of non-soldered heatspreaders.

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

http://spectrum.ieee.org/semiconductors/devices/the-status-of-moores-law-its-complicated

Chenming Hu, the coinventor of the FinFET: “Nobody knows anymore what 16 nm means or what 14 nm means.”

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

beejay
Apr 7, 2002

Or you could just read the article I posted in the post directly above yours.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply