LOL, you also could use your own brain and look at the contact area and figure out it isn't working in any scale of efficiency like a properly sized surface would.
See the hot spot and see the thermal trail off? You're getting highly inefficient thermal transfer if you don't have anything contacting the surface immediately above the heat source (dies). This is why the center of mass and the internal fins are directly in the center of all of the AIO water cooling contact plates. They are designed for one die dead center not 2 dies spaced out and at a diagonal. This is inefficiency on inefficiency. Also, think about covering half of the above heat source with a heatsink... Now tell me, where does the heat flow across to get up into the heatsink? Back across a max'd our thermal region .. multiplying the heat that's in it.
Sure it works and that is likely not under persistent heat stress. God knows what this manifests in the long run.. At the temperature processors run at when max'd out, I'm sure you're going to get warping and all sorts of issues down the road. A freshman in college out of physics could tell you this. I can't believe actual people who do this for a living are lying to people and saying otherwise.... I'm not sure what type of fools they think people are.
Or ya know, lap it...yeah it can cause the soldier to break from uneven thermal expansion, i think in the mean time you can always solder the AIO contact plate to make larger surface area, maybe it will make the cooling performance worse but at least it will spread the heat evenly, and prevent uneven thermal expansion.
Or ya know, lap it...
I don't think it'll be a huge issue for the small cooler contact area since metal conducts heat more effectively, should better than intel's tim lol
We also need to remember it isn't direct die, the ihs itself acts like a heatsink in a sense.Well let's see.
5 w/mK vs ~380 w/mK, yeah I think copper wins.
Actually LN2 is between 63K and 77K, the perimeter must be cooled with liquid hydrogen to reach 20K.On second look, it appears totally bogus as it pertains to CPUs. The perimeter is apparently cooled by LN2 while the center is hotter than an oven.
Althrough you are underestimating the 7900X. IF not considered the gaming perf if oced its damn fast. The 12C TR generally is not a competitor. Ther 16C is, but for pure MT its faster.One thing I have noticed recently is FUD merchants attempting to whip up as much FUD as they can around this heat sink issue while completely ignoring thread rippers architecture, the actual physical position of the dies and the materials used to construct the CPU. It's just a pattern I have noticed. Some idiot on another forum was claiming that thread ripper isn't being shipped with an air cooler because it is impossible to make a heat sink that could cover thread ripper in all it's glory.
When it comes to FUD he was clearly doing it wrong.
I have no concerns at all. I could have bought a 7900X but it's overpriced and the performance is inferior. Thread ripper will be replacing an i7 5820k which was seriously overclockable and is still serving me well. The 5820k replaced an FX-8350 which the 5820k taught some manners but the thread ripper blows the 5820k away. Oh well. Whatever.
Althrough you are underestimating the 7900X. IF not considered the gaming perf if oced its damn fast. The 12C TR generally is not a competitor. Ther 16C is, but for pure MT its faster.
I can not wait till I test the 16C TR with my CFD calculations.... Good job AMD!
Yeah. I won't argue with that. I did initially pre-order the 16 core TR but decided it was overkill for my needs. So I went with the 12 core. I am looking forward to upgrading my 5820k.
It's only $200 more for the 1950X. You get 4 more cores, 8 more threads, and 2MB more L2 cache. Already spending $799, whats $200 more?
It's only $200 more for the 1950X. You get 4 more cores, 8 more threads, and 2MB more L2 cache. Already spending $799, whats $200 more?
Yeah, that's basically why I opted for 1600s, rather than 1700s.I think exactly the same way.....
..... until I open my wallet and look at the void....
That line of thinking always applies to anything, and the more you've spent in total the less as a percentage of that total any "upgrade" becomes.
Prices are different where I live dude. the 1920X is not 799$ and the 1950X is not 999$. They are 1150$ and 1499$ respectively but yeah. It's not a monetary consideration......just a do I really need that many cores one?
Which I suppose in turn does relate to what I am spending. I took the left over cash and put it towards the 64GB of RAM I bought. Of course the price of everything else is similarliy scaled a Gigabyte AIO gtx 1080Ti will run you 1500 bucks. It sucks but what are you going to do?
It also comes down to how often you upgrade. Not sure how much that applies to these CPU's as both the 12 core and 16 core are going to last at-least 5 years if not more.
Given what I am paying for this setup. Not that often. Especially once I buy the new graphics card which will probably be the Gigabyte AIO gtx1080Ti. I have been running my 5820k & Fury X setup for years. The CPU is still going strong. It helps that it over clocks well but the fury Xs are starting to fall behind. That having been said I don't know if this build will last for 5 years. Time will tell.....
Speaking of lying, or more accurately spreading misinformation, I want interested forum members to take note of the name of the second image,open it in a new tab if that helps. What you will see is "kiln_temperature.gif." It's a representation of temp deltas in a simulated kiln, Not exactly CPU related.LOL, you also could use your own brain and look at the contact area and figure out it isn't working in any scale of efficiency like a properly sized surface would.
See the hot spot and see the thermal trail off? You're getting highly inefficient thermal transfer if you don't have anything contacting the surface immediately above the heat source (dies). This is why the center of mass and the internal fins are directly in the center of all of the AIO water cooling contact plates. They are designed for one die dead center not 2 dies spaced out and at a diagonal. This is inefficiency on inefficiency. Also, think about covering half of the above heat source with a heatsink... Now tell me, where does the heat flow across to get up into the heatsink? Back across a max'd our thermal region .. multiplying the heat that's in it.
Sure it works and that is likely not under persistent heat stress. God knows what this manifests in the long run.. At the temperature processors run at when max'd out, I'm sure you're going to get warping and all sorts of issues down the road. A freshman in college out of physics could tell you this. I can't believe actual people who do this for a living are lying to people and saying otherwise.... I'm not sure what type of fools they think people are.
Don't see the TR 1900X listed for pre-order anywhere, is it's release delayed? Having an upgrade path to a 7nm CPU might be a nice thing to have.