4790K - getting 88C on stock cooling in Crysis 3.

[litwicki22]

Hi. Are this too high temperatures even for stock cooling? I am getting max 88C in Crysis 3 on Welcome to the jungle level. I am using stock cooling, no oc. 4790K is stock ( auto turbo 4.4 ghz ).

 

[videogames101]

It is warrantied at that temperature if you are not overclocking, so I'd leave that question for Intel.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Its fine. Your mobo may do autooverclocking in turbomodes using Multicore Enhancement.

 

[Justinbaileyman]

That seems a tad bit to high there you might wanna back off the overclock or lower your volts a bit untill you can get some better cooling. Hyper212 evo's are only like $30 bucks these days,Would be well worth the investment.

 

[Headfoot]

That seems a tad bit to high there you might wanna back off the overclock or lower your volts a bit untill you can get some better cooling. Hyper212 evo's are only like $30 bucks these days,Would be well worth the investment.

It's stock

 

[aaksheytalwar]

For a 3770k that would be a very cool temp indeed. Don't know about 4790k.

 

[alcoholbob]

Stock cooler is pretty bad. I ran high 70s while playing Diablo 3 back when I used the stock cooler. Now it doesn't go above low 60s on a noctua d14 with the low noise adaptor.

 

[Arachnotronic]

I have a stock cooler on my 4790K...it's loud and awful. I need to get an aftermarket cooler on that thing ASAP.

 

[Techhog]

That seems a tad bit to high there you might wanna back off the overclock or lower your volts a bit untill you can get some better cooling. Hyper212 evo's are only like $30 bucks these days,Would be well worth the investment.

Did you read the post? He said that it's at stock.

 

[Puffnstuff]

The stock cooler is horrible especially if you enable onboard graphics and add to the heat.

 

[escrow4]

Stock cooler is utter junk. I slapped an aftermarket on my 5930K at stock and temps are less than 50 celsius load. Granted its going into winter here, but still. Slapped an aftermarket on my 4770K too and temps are 35 degrees or less doing basic stuff. I'd upgrade asap.

 

[LTC8K6]

I went in and manually dropped the voltage down in steps until my 4790K ran at 4.4 without touching 80C running Intel Burn Test.

I ended up at 1.030 volts.

I am stable with all 4 cores at 4.4

I have a Hyper 212 Evo for it, which I have used before, but it currently has a TX3 on it.

Nothing cured my heat problem until I lowered the voltage manually.

Now the temperature and the wattage stays reasonable.

I expect I can now put the 212 Evo back on and go for more.

 

[you2]

There is a huge thread @ intel about this issue:
https://communities.intel.com/thread/54032?start=405&tstart=0

It is common. I contacted intel and they said it was hot but under warranty as long as I did not overclock.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Stock cooler is utter junk.

Raises fingers, why Intel is doing that. The K parts should all come with better heatsinks, or come without. That extra cost they could rather move on to better tim, like solder.

 

[sm625]

I went in and manually dropped the voltage down in steps until my 4790K ran at 4.4 without touching 80C running Intel Burn Test.

I ended up at 1.030 volts.

This is a very... interesting way of determining the optimal voltage.

 

[LTC8K6]

This is a very... interesting way of determining the optimal voltage.

It took a long time and lots of work to get it to run in the mid-70's on air under high load.

I tried dozens of combinations, and many, many suggestions.

I always saw the watts climbing very high, according to Core Temp. I saw 140 watts at times with the mobo let loose. No way was I keeping that amount of power cool.

Reducing the voltage always reduced the watts, and always brought temps down.

So I started to reduce it in steps until it became unstable, then went up a notch.

I don't go above about 95 watts now.

BTW, I have just recently returned to building computers after a very long break that began when the P4 was still popular.

I have had to do a lot of catching up!

I was in the AMD /Intel wars here back then. :biggrin:

 

[bonehead123]

Well FWIW, my 4790k @4.4/1.024v rarely goes over 65c under prime/full load & 30c idle using an evo212 & 5 case fans...... and my Xeon 1240v3 @3.6/1.065v usually stays around 50c loaded/24c idle

granted both are well within Intel specs, but I would much rather have my cpu's chillin than burning up ......

 

[LTC8K6]

Well FWIW, my 4790k @4.4/1.024v rarely goes over 65c under prime/full load & 30c idle using an evo212 & 5 case fans...... and my Xeon 1240v3 @3.6/1.065v usually stays around 50c loaded/24c idle

granted both are well within Intel specs, but I would much rather have my cpu's chillin than burning up ......

Yes, I will put the 212 Evo back on now that I have things under control.

I should be much cooler with it instead of the TX3.

I wish I had figured out the voltage deal before taking the 212 Evo off. D:

 

[escrow4]

Raises fingers, why Intel is doing that. The K parts should all come with better heatsinks, or come without. That extra cost they could rather move on to better tim, like solder.

Cost. If they included the equivalent of a Coolermaster Hyper, it wouldn't fit in many cases for one, and secondly would reduce profit. Sure Intel could absorb the cost without blinking and I suppose they could re-jig a half decent not so big cooler but after all this time, I doubt it. The stock cooler is sufficient for the i3 (just) and below. Interesting to see if Broadwell changes this.

 

[Joepublic2]

Intel's stock coolers are imo criminally insufficient (can't reach advertised performance when using it depending on the code you're running). My 4670k would peak to 100C in about 6 seconds when running linpack with the stock cooler (yes, it was seated correctly). The cooler that came with my core 2 duo had at least 2x the mass/surface area despite having a lower TDP than my i5 does.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Intel's stock coolers are imo criminally insufficient (can't reach advertised performance when using it depending on the code you're running). My 4670k would peak to 100C in about 6 seconds when running linpack with the stock cooler (yes, it was seated correctly). The cooler that came with my core 2 duo had at least 2x the mass/surface area despite having a lower TDP than my i5 does.

If you cant run at max baseclock with the stock cooler. And you are sure you mobo doesnt do any autooverclocking of the turbobins. Then you should simply RMA it to Intel.

 

[RussianSensation]

Intel's stock coolers are imo criminally insufficient (can't reach advertised performance when using it depending on the code you're running). My 4670k would peak to 100C in about 6 seconds when running linpack with the stock cooler (yes, it was seated correctly). The cooler that came with my core 2 duo had at least 2x the mass/surface area despite having a lower TDP than my i5 does.

This. Intel's stock coolers have been total junk since Core i7 920/i5 750 days. Even if they can maintain your temps < 90C, they sound like jet engines while keeping a modern i5/i7 cool. It's amazing how people buy $225-340 CPUs and use the $1 included Intel CPU cooler when you can buy a solid $20-40 cooler that can be re-used for 5+ years and will drop your temps 20-30C, and result in a much quieter system.

My stock i7 860 would go to 88-93C when all 8 threads were loaded to 99% in Seti@Home. Bought a Megahalems cooler for $60 and have been using it since Sept 2009, which means $10 per year by the time this Sept hits.

Top of the line air coolers today cost just $40 with an included 140mm fan, a far cry from the expensive $70-90 you had to pay 5-6 years ago. There are no excuses today to not buy a $20-40 after-market heatsink that will drop temps and result in a much quieter system for years to come! Bargain investment.

There is a huge thread @ intel about this issue:
https://communities.intel.com/thread/54032?start=405&tstart=0

It is common. I contacted intel and they said it was hot but under warranty as long as I did not overclock.

It's not really a new issue. Intel's stock heatsinks were not adequate for 6 years since the original Nehalem for anyone who actually loaded all the cores to 99%. For those users never maxed out their CPU, the stock heatsink was sufficient but for power users, Intel's stock i7 coolers are not even worth taking out of the box. I agree that Intel shouldn't be stingy and include a $20-30 cooler like the Hyper Evo 212, but then they also know that most users never load 8 threads to 98-99%, while those who do would be buying an after-market cooler anyway. I can kinda understand Intel's logic in a way, although it is disappointing that a $340 i7 4790K ships with such a garbage cooler given the price.

 

[ithehappy]

It all depends on your ambient temp mate. Where I live that temp is very normal and in actual summer days it's more than normal.

I am hitting 86-87°C continuously with mine, when Overclocked, and mine is running with a Hyper 212+ or something with a push pull setup. However I haven't even changed the TIM in more than 10 months now, and the dusts are creeping in too. So lazy.

In any case, just get a custom cooler, that Intel cooler is for, well people who buy a CPU and never go online to read stuffs

 

[skipsneeky2]

For a 3770k that would be a very cool temp indeed. Don't know about 4790k.

My 3770 non k hits about 81 cel in demanding games like BF4/Crysis 3/GTA5.About 85cel with something like IntelBurn with the stock copper cored cooler+Artic silver 5.

My board does clock it to 3.7ghz fully loaded.Stock is 3.4ghz.

I heard that sometimes people aren't getting the copper cored models and just the thinner all aluminum models typically on the pentiums and i3 chips which is bothersome.

 

[B-Riz]

After reading the Intel thread, before I bought my 4790k (that is waiting to be fiddled with), the common setup option missed by the boards was setting the total thermal package to 130 watts; or something like that.

So the *motherboards* are actually over volting the chips by default.

The FIVR has changed how these behave / tweaking options, compared to Sandy and Ivy.