Carzy Zarx’s PC Gaming Emporium - Catch Up on All the Latest PC Gaming Related News

[Bofferbrauer2]

Cyran said:

vivster said:

Is there any good monitoring software that can show me CPU utilization, temp and clocks over time? Ideally in graph form.

I'm getting slightly concerned with my CPU, specifically the temps. What concerns me is that I'm apparently sitting at 45° in idle and going up to 75° in a normal gaming load, but with fans ramping up noticeably and well above 1000RPM. I didn't check my old CPU (6850k) much for temps but I remember it was much cooler at both idle and load.

One thing to look at is if you running precision boost (it AMD adapted OC that constantly adjust clock speed base on temperature).  If you not sure, you can use RYZEN Master software (https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/ryzen-master) which will show under Control mode as Precision Boost Overdrive if it being used).

My experience with Precision Boost is that even Idle temperature raise when using it since it rare your CPU stay 0% usage for long period of times even when doing nothing there 1% usage jump here and there and Precision Boost make those quick jump in speed higher for each of those.

Even more noticeable there be much bigger Delta between Idle and Load with Precision Boost enable since it going to keep raising clock under load until temps hit certain levels.

Bofferbrauer2 said:

250W and 98 Degrees Celsius are a solid yikes from a 8 core

It may well be the best gaming CPU, but you better have a direct line to the next power plant to supply it and it's cooler with enough energy.

A little overstated what 250W requires.  I running a CPU that will go over 300 watts when being stressed (It 32 cores (Threadripper 3970x) so more justified but it don't change the fact how much electricity it needs).  My electric bill gone up a little since moving from a CPU that never ever reached 100W but we talking a few dollars a month.  Maybe $25 over a whole year.

Cooling 98C does seem high for a 360 AIO but I would need to look more into what going on there to make a judgement there.  Also there a lot of factors with AIO watercoolers other then radiator.  Need something like a game nexus waterblock contact analysis to see what going on.  Could just be bad heat transfer from cpu to waterblock or at least not enough to keep up with this cpu.  Don't matter how large radiator is if that the case.

I cant really do a comparison with my CPU since am on custom water cooling and my waterblock probably cost more then the entire AIO they using.  I Idle around 35C and if am running an all out stress test using 100% on all 32 cores I hit low 60's.  I did hit 70's when I did my hour long stress test after first building but I cant think of any situation in real life I be running all 32 cores(64 threads) at a constant 100% for a entire hour.  Maybe if I doing some major rendering but I needed the cores for VM's not rendering.

From the discussion thread on Chiphell where the leak comes from, the bencher stated that his AIO was practically running at 100% fan speed. As such, I doubt the problem was with the contact of the AIO. Even for a low-end AIO that tough and sounds like RL will be pretty hard to cool.

Threadripper and Epyc have much larger bases and heat spreader to transfer the heat than Rocket Lake does, so they can handle a much higher heat production than RL does.

VMs normally don't come near pulling the maximum of a chip. If they do, then it's high time to upgrade the CPU. Rendering, compiling or stuff like that however do need all the performance they can get, and will generally get the CPU to run at near 100% on all cores at all times .

You mention that after one hour of stresstest you barely hit 70°C. Unless running close to 100°C is by design like with Zen 3, getting up to 98 degrees within a 2-3 minutes sounds really unhealthy by comparison. And while I think the low-grade 360mm AIO has at least something to do with it, most of it is due to the Chip.

Also, Rocket Lake both pulling more power and heating up even more than Comet Lake despite having 2 less cores are not a good sign either way. If you calculate it, then you come up with ~30W per core @4.8Ghz. So if Intel would enforce the 125W limit (or some testers, like PC Games Hardware does) that would mean the chip could really only run 4c/8t effectively at that speed and need to throttle quite a bit if the PL2 limit is enforced.