i7-4770k overheating?

[Dave3000]

I recently bought an i7-4770k and a new motherboard and returned both items and went back to my i7-4820k. The reason I returned the i7-4770k was because I think it was overheating during Intel Burn Test whether I used the stock cooler or my Hyper 212 Evo. In about 3 minutes into Intel Burn Test the hottest core reached 83C with the Hyper 212 Evo installed. With the stock cooler installed the hottest core reached 100C in about 1 minute and then throttled down from 3.7GHz to 3.6 then down to 3.5GHz and basically just stayed at 3.5GHz with 100C core temp as checked with the Intel Turbo Boost Monitor. I thought to myself that it should not get this hot with the stock cooler installed especially when it is hitting boiling point very quickly. So I just RMA'd both items back to the store. Does it sound like I had a bad CPU?

My i7-4820k does not go over 57C during Intel Burn Test with my Hyper 212 Evo and same thermal paste used, for the record. Also I used a CM Blademaster fan for my Hyper 212 EVO which I find it to slightly better cooling than the stock fan that came with the Hyper 212 EVO With 2 of those fans on my Hyper 212 EVO, still the 4770k that I had hit 83C in Intel Burn Test within a few minutes.

 

[tweakboy]

I can tell you 83c is safe. As long as you dont put a long stability test.

 

[Headfoot]

It was a sidegrade, and everyone in your earlier thread said as much. Haswell chips overclock like crap compared to Sandy and even Ivy, especially if you have Ivy-E which to my knowledge uses solder between the IHS and die. Those temperatures you are seeing are normal. Haswell is hot as hades. It is good you returned it. Just overclock your 4820k. If you are intent on spending money, upgrade your graphics. Any CPU change short of getting a 6 core chip will be a sidegrade and wasted time and money.

 

[ChronoReverse]

I don't think he's overclocking, it's just turbo working as expected.

The chip is guaranteed to work at 3.5GHz and when it's not too hot, it'll try to run up to 3.9GHz.


Haswell does run a lot hotter though with specific loads (like IBT) which don't occur anywhere else in computing. As for overclocking, the later batches seem to be getting more than the earlier ones.

 

[JimmiG]

Don't know why you'd get a 4770K + mobo if you already have a 4820K..

Was it the AVX2 version of IBT or the old AVX version? Those temps seem a bit high for stock, but then again I never did use the stock cooler with my 4770K so I don't know what to expect.

 

[john3850]

The first question I ask my shelf before I buy any cpu I is how am I going to cool it.
Without decent cooling these chips are made to be throttled down when there hot.
Many posters claim that 80-90c is alright and doesnt hurt the chip which I agree but it will hurt your oc by needing more vcore as the temp goes up.
The only way to solve this temp problem is to delid and or a very good cooling solution.

 

[blackened23]

I cannot believe you got a 4770k while owning a 4820k. What a sidegrade.

Stop wasting time with rubbish coolers. Get a NH-D14 or a Corsair H100i. AVX instructions will increase the 4770k's voltage by +.1V, this will only happen in intel burn test and and Prime 95. Use real applications to judge stability, because AVX instructions with unrealistic workloads will skew your voltage and cause high temps. This doesn't happen in real world use.

I still CANNOT believe you went to a 4770k from a 4820k....I also can't believe you would put yourself through the hassle. You should also verse yourself on the intricacies of Haswell overclocking and AVX instructions in prime95 BEFORE buying...

 

[krumme]

Some people in these forums go babling about desktop haswell and oc to the sort of 4.8 even thoug its just plain way out. Hw is grosely overrated on the desktop.

And sorry to say this but it was Anand that didnt take a firm stand against hw on the desktop. Only Dustin and others of the staff have done so.

I understand the need to be gentle with new products and your relations and that job is best done by the master himself because its a difficult task. Especially for the big players like Intel and nv. They get treated just a pinch more gentle. But if its to gentle it will lead to bad decisions like this.

 

[ChronoReverse]

The later batches of Haswell seem to overclock better than the original batch that led to the idea of Haswell not overclocking well.

Still, 4.8GHz is a bit out there. My 4770k that I just picked up can go to 4.3GHz on stock voltages (maxes at 1.180V when Prime95AVX or IBT) and on air while my friend's really early Haswell can't do 4.3GHz without over 1.3V even on water cooling.


Also, 85C under IBT or Prime95AVX is normal. Those tests stress the CPU far past any real world load (which would load it up to only 60C if you're getting 85C in IBT). Just run AIDA64 overnight if you want a more realistic load test.

 

[blackened23]

Some people in these forums go babling about desktop haswell and oc to the sort of 4.8 even thoug its just plain way out. Hw is grosely overrated on the desktop.

And sorry to say this but it was Anand that didnt take a firm stand against hw on the desktop. Only Dustin and others of the staff have done so.

I understand the need to be gentle with new products and your relations and that job is best done by the master himself because its a difficult task. Especially for the big players like Intel and nv. They get treated just a pinch more gentle. But if its to gentle it will lead to bad decisions like this.

Yeah, a chip being able to OC to 5ghz while having lower IPC than the stock speed Nehalem - such as the FX 8350 is clearly the way to go...right?

 

[JimmiG]

The later batches of Haswell seem to overclock better than the original batch that led to the idea of Haswell not overclocking well.

Still, 4.8GHz is a bit out there. My 4770k that I just picked up can go to 4.3GHz on stock voltages (maxes at 1.180V when Prime95AVX or IBT) and on air while my friend's really early Haswell can't do 4.3GHz without over 1.3V even on water cooling.


Also, 85C under IBT or Prime95AVX is normal. Those tests stress the CPU far past any real world load (which would load it up to only 60C if you're getting 85C in IBT). Just run AIDA64 overnight if you want a more realistic load test.

From what I've read, there's still a lot of variability even with CPUs from the same batch. It's the same 22nm manufacturing process that Intel used with IB so they're probably as good as they're going to get at this point. Buying a Haswell is still very much a lottery.

There's nothing terribly wrong with Haswell. People tend to view IB with rose-tinted glasses but it's actually a pretty bad overclocker too, compared with Sandy Bridge. A lot of IB's maxed out at 4.5 GHz on air.

 

[rtsurfer]

Yeah, a chip being able to OC to 5ghz while having lower IPC than the stock speed Nehalem - such as the FX 8350 is clearly the way to go...right?

Really could you please link to some benchmarks demonstrating said behaviour.

As far as I was aware Piledriver around 4.8 Ghz can somewhat keep up with Sandy Bridge in threaded workloads. Not so much in Single threaded, but slower than Nehalem....???

 

[inf64]

Yeah, a chip being able to OC to 5ghz while having lower IPC than the stock speed Nehalem - such as the FX 8350 is clearly the way to go...right?

Ugh IPC and "stock speed" Nehalem, you have no clue what you are talking about right?

@ OP
Bad "upgrade" choice, but you learned your lesson. 4820K is a nice CPU, it will server you well.

 

[guskline]

I'll chime in with my 2 cents of observation on heat and Overclocking. You can see from my sig that I'm running rigs with a 3930k at 4.4Ghz and a 3770k at 4.5 Ghz. My third rig is a FX 8350 at 4.6 Ghz. For cooling I'm using a custom water cooling for the 3930k (SWiftech Apogee HD cpu block and 2 360 rads as I am also watercooling 2 GTX 670 FTWs) a Kraken X60 AIO for the 3770k and a Corsair H100 for the FX 8350. Is this cooling overkill for these cpus? Some may say so but I found that once you start overclocking and cranking up the vcore thermals tend to take off exponentially. Especially with certain tests. I ALWAYS run IntelBurnTest at least 20x, Prime95 torture test at least a few hours and AIDA64 stability test on a overclocked chip.

For example, with my 3930k on my Asus X79 Sabertooth, I watched the Asus X79 overclock video (quite good and detailed) and used the recommended settings for a 4.8 Ghz clock. It booted and ran well but the temps, even with the Corsair SP120 HP fans on full were in the very high 70s to low 80s (actually pretty good). This was with a fixed voltage of 1.410. I decided for every day use an offset setting of + .075 and a mutiplier of 44 made the most sense. It was still very fast (yes I know not 4.8 Ghz but 4.4 is FAST). I can run prime 95 torture for hours and the highest temp never exceeds 72C with most in the 60s. In every day use even with gaming I'm in the high 50s with fans on low speed.

Here's the point. Be VERY wary of posters who claim very high OCs. Ask what their temps are for a 20x run of IBT or an hour of Prime95 torture. Blackened23 has a point that in most situations your computer won't be stressed with situations such as IBT and Prime95 in most cases.

For me, I run a bit conservative knowing that even though I have a decent OC I can stress my cpu to the hilt and the tempts will be OK.

Stock cooling on the 4770k is sad. Spend some $$ on a decent cooler. The Hyper 212+ is OK but is limited when the heat starts to build up.

BTW, on the Intel download site they have software called Intel Extreme tuning utility. Great software for Intel cpus that has a stress test component with plenty of temp read outs etc. I also use it to measure OC results.

 

[blackened23]

Ugh IPC and "stock speed" Nehalem, you have no clue what you are talking about right?

@ OP
Bad "upgrade" choice, but you learned your lesson. 4820K is a nice CPU, it will server you well.

Cinebench R10 single threaded test:

i7-920:
3846

FX-8350:
4319

i7-4770k:
7491

These are all @ stock speeds from Anand's CPU bench 2013. So I do think I have a clue what i'm talking about, the 8350 may not be slower IPC wise but it is about the same speed in terms of IPC as the i7-920 which was released in 2008 - in fact, the 8350 is within 1% of Nehalem's IPC. Conversely, the 4770k is nearly ~51% better than Nehalem and the FX-8350 in terms of IPC.

I'm not the one that brought up "HW is grossly overrated" for the desktop and mentioned anything about overclocking. Haswell doesn't need a 5ghz overclock to perform well.

 

[inf64]

IPC means instructions per clock. Clock speed is the frequency. IPC is independent of the clock speed. I hope you understand that.

I see you edited your original post as it was basically nonsense. This is what your originally wrote before your ninja-edit:

Yeah, a chip being able to OC to 5ghz while having lower IPC than the stock speed Nehalem - such as the FX 8350 is clearly the way to go...right?

 

[tweakboy]

There is no such thing as a 3820k


Its 3820 . You can use multipliers from 36 to 40. Or give her a free OC. Just up the blck and go to 4Ghz no voltage touching is safer. gl

 

[tweakboy]

I suggest you first off buy the best thermal paste in the world. Arctic Silver MX-4

So buy that. Clean your heatsink and cpu with alchohol make it shine. Both very shiny.

Take the artic and start in the middle and go around couple times in a circle,, then you need to make sure paste is on the whole CPU and its even everywhere,, might need something thin to use on paste making it even everywhere.

Put your heatsink on and make sure it clicks or the screws are tight everything is tight tight....... Now boot up,,,,,,,, your temps will fall 30c ......

 

[rtsurfer]

Cinebench R10 single threaded test:

i7-920:
3846

FX-8350:
4319

i7-4770k:
7491

These are all @ stock speeds from Anand's CPU bench 2013. So I do think I have a clue what i'm talking about, the 8350 may not be slower IPC wise but it is about the same speed in terms of IPC as the i7-920 which was released in 2008 - in fact, the 8350 is within 1% of Nehalem's IPC. Conversely, the 4770k is nearly ~51% better than Nehalem and the FX-8350 in terms of IPC.

I'm not the one that brought up "HW is grossly overrated" for the desktop and mentioned anything about overclocking. Haswell doesn't need a 5ghz overclock to perform well.

I would love to get the calculator you are using, because mine shows that the 8350 is actually 10.95% faster than i7-920.

Also this is all at stock speeds. The Grossly overrated 5Ghz hasn't been accounted for yet.

Although, I will give you this,the 4770K is 73.44% faster than the 8350 at stock.

 

[webmaster1]

Hello,
i7 :hmm: well i don't have experience of it because i am only using i3 it is far much better and speedy...

 

[sniffin]

So I do think I have a clue what i'm talking about

Seeing as how you've confused basic terminology more than once in this thread already, I think you may be overestimating your abilities. I don't even know why you started rambling on about Piledriver in the first place