'AMD vs Intel: Which CPU Cooks Better Pancakes?' - Tom's

[UsandThem]

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-amd-hedt-pancakes,6366.html

Spoiler

In short: if you want to use your HEDT chip to make pancakes, go Intel.

@Markfw Have you made pancakes with any of your Threadrippers?

Now that things like toothpaste, eggs, and pancakes have been tested on CPU thermals, what's the commodity item that will get its own "review"? I've always personally wondered how well peanut butter would do as a thermal interface.

 

[Markfw]

I disagree with one part. When my Enermax AIO's failed, it still ran, just at 500 mhz. Theirs they said shut down. I think the reason the Intel cooks better, is that it takes more power and produces more heat at stock.

 

[ClockHound]

Although... expect AMD's pancakes will taste better - courtesy of ATI's maple syrup influence.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Although... expect AMD's pancakes will taste better - courtesy of ATI's maple syrup influence.

ati was a Canadian Company....

 

[UsandThem]

I wish I was a fly on the wall where this article was green lit.

Boss: "Hey Andrew Freedman, since there is really no new CPU news until November, what do you think we should write about to fill the time and drive reviews?".

Andrew Freedman: "I want to make pancakes on HEDT processors!".

Boss: In 80's Keanu Reeve voice "NO WAY, THAT'S TOTALLY RADICAL!".

ati was a Canadian Company....

Hence the reference to maple syrup.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I wish I was a fly on the wall where this article was green lit.

Boss: "Hey Andrew Freedman, since there is really no new CPU news until November, what do you think we should write about to fill the time and drive reviews?".

Andrew Freedman: "I want to make pancakes on HEDT processors!".

Boss: In 80's Keanu Reeve voice "NO WAY, THAT'S TOTALLY RADICAL!".


Hence the reference to maple syrup.

Great minds dude.....

 

[Markfw]

Well, since we are talking about HOT HEDT processors, what do you think about the new Cascade Lake-X line ? The 10,000 series ? Wouldn't they cook even better ? But the new threadrippers will not be hotter, they will be cooler than the last due to 7nm, so now they will be unusable to cook with !

 

[Kenmitch]

Well, since we are talking about HOT HEDT processors, what do you think about the new Cascade Lake-X line ? The 10,000 series ? Wouldn't they cook even better ? But the new threadrippers will not be hotter, they will be cooler than the last due to 7nm, so now they will be unusable to cook with !

Under the circumstances I'm sure AMD would have no issues conceding victory to Intel.

 

[UsandThem]

Well, since we are talking about HOT HEDT processors, what do you think about the new Cascade Lake-X line ? The 10,000 series ? Wouldn't they cook even better ? But the new threadrippers will not be hotter, they will be cooler than the last due to 7nm, so now they will be unusable to cook with !

We'll have to wait and see, but based on what specs Intel and AMD have given us so far concerning their upcoming HEDT lineup, I would imagine the Cascade Lake-X CPUs should be the winner when it comes to using the most power. There is only so much Intel can do at this point with 14nm++++ (I forget how many "+" we are on at this point ).

I bet the old AMD FX 9590 space heaters CPUs would have made a wonderful pancake as well.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/8316...the-fx9590-and-asrock-990fx-extreme9-review/5

 

[DooKey]

Yawn. Worthless article.

 

[Thunder 57]

We'll have to wait and see, but based on what specs Intel and AMD have given us so far concerning their upcoming HEDT lineup, I would imagine the Cascade Lake-X CPUs should be the winner when it comes to using the most power. There is only so much Intel can do at this point with 14nm++++ (I forget how many "+" we are on at this point ).

I bet the old AMD FX 9590 space heaters CPUs would have made a wonderful pancake as well.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/8316...the-fx9590-and-asrock-990fx-extreme9-review/5

Those 9000 series FX may have been the most pointless CPU's ever made. The 7740X was also pretty pointless. Any other nominees?

 

[TheELF]

Under the circumstances I'm sure AMD would have no issues conceding victory to Intel.

If you read the "article" you will notice that this is not about how hot the chips get but about how much heat the CPUs can stand before not functioning anymore,intel CPUs will work even at 105°C as long as the other components don't fail while AMD CPUs can't, they shut down at around 70 if I'm not mistaken.

These kind of things are why people consider AMD CPUs to be "hotter" they just fail (shut down) due to heat much more often than intel CPUs do.

 

[Elfear]

If you read the "article" you will notice that this is not about how hot the chips get but about how much heat the CPUs can stand before not functioning anymore,intel CPUs will work even at 105°C as long as the other components don't fail while AMD CPUs can't, they shut down at around 70 if I'm not mistaken.

These kind of things are why people consider AMD CPUs to be "hotter" they just fail (shut down) due to heat much more often than intel CPUs do.

What the crap are you going on about? AMD CPUs do not shut down at 70C. Many users have reported 90+ temps with no system shutdown. I imagine shutdown temps are largely determined by the parameters set by each motherboard bios.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

What the crap are you going on about? AMD CPUs do not shut down at 70C. Many users have reported 90+ temps with no system shutdown. I imagine shutdown temps are largely determined by the parameters set by each motherboard bios.

Yeah was going to say this, isn’t 70c the goal not the limit?

 

[Markfw]

If you read the "article" you will notice that this is not about how hot the chips get but about how much heat the CPUs can stand before not functioning anymore,intel CPUs will work even at 105°C as long as the other components don't fail while AMD CPUs can't, they shut down at around 70 if I'm not mistaken.

These kind of things are why people consider AMD CPUs to be "hotter" they just fail (shut down) due to heat much more often than intel CPUs do.

As I said above, mine do not shut down when they get hot, they run@500 mhz. And yes, they don;t do that until about 95c.

Nice try, trying to make Intel look good, at this point, its useless....

 

[Kenmitch]

If you read the "article" you will notice that this is not about how hot the chips get but about how much heat the CPUs can stand before not functioning anymore,intel CPUs will work even at 105°C as long as the other components don't fail while AMD CPUs can't, they shut down at around 70 if I'm not mistaken.

These kind of things are why people consider AMD CPUs to be "hotter" they just fail (shut down) due to heat much more often than intel CPUs do.

Your mistaken.

Really? Obviously pilot error involved.

I've never exposed my 3xxx series to anything beyond 90c for long., but 80's will run as long as liked. 70c is more of a max temp for most end users.

 

[VirtualLarry]

What the crap are you going on about? AMD CPUs do not shut down at 70C. Many users have reported 90+ temps with no system shutdown. I imagine shutdown temps are largely determined by the parameters set by each motherboard bios.

I was (unfortunately, foolishly) running my Ryzen R5 3600 @ 117C, according to Ryzen Master. (Cue: Keanu "Whoa!")

Edit: Running PrimeGrid load on CPU, with a fixed-clock OC of like 4.0 or 4.1Ghz @ 1.35V or maybe slight higher for "stability". Yeah, it was toasty. For like a couple of hours, until I determined that the temp monitoring was NOT faulty or offset, then I cranked it down and was like "WTF was I doing with my brand-new CPU?" (Cue: Mortal Kombat "Toasty!")

 

[Kenmitch]

I was (unfortunately, foolishly) running my Ryzen R5 3600 @ 117C, according to Ryzen Master. (Cue: Keanu "Whoa!")

Edit: Running PrimeGrid load on CPU, with a fixed-clock OC of like 4.0 or 4.1Ghz @ 1.35V or maybe slight higher for "stability". Yeah, it was toasty. For like a couple of hours, until I determined that the temp monitoring was NOT faulty or offset, then I cranked it down and was like "WTF was I doing with my brand-new CPU?" (Cue: Mortal Kombat "Toasty!")

You should challenge Tom's and show them how it's done. You could make toast, eggs, and brew coffee with those temps.

It's probably best to believe the software until it's proven wrong. I guess you have ballz of steel allowing your questionable judgement call the shots. Best to err on the side of caution.

 

[scannall]

IBM's zEC12 could fry some bacon at the same time.

 

[TheELF]

As I said above, mine do not shut down when they get hot, they run@500 mhz. And yes, they don;t do that until about 95c.

Nice try, trying to make Intel look good, at this point, its useless....

Eh,AMD states 68 as max temp so I was close with 70,if that's not shut off temps then if you know any site or doc were AMD states shut off temps please link.

https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-ryzen-threadripper-2990wx

Nice try, trying to make Intel look good, at this point, its useless....

Challenge Flamebait accepted.
Intel is 10% faster than Ryzen at 4Ghz with another 25% to go in clocks.

 

[Topweasel]

With BPO on doing Prime 95 it would keep the CPU at 90 while fluctuating the speed (throttling). The turning off or any thermal protecting weirdness seems to be based in the old Thunderbird days where after the first time Intel included Thermal protection Toms removed the HSF from an Athlon and watched it "poof". That was a dark era for Toms. So many articles that weren't "conspiracy theory biased" but full blown biased. God that 7 days powered on test they ran was a disaster.

 

[DrMrLordX]

If you read the "article" you will notice that this is not about how hot the chips get but about how much heat the CPUs can stand before not functioning anymore,intel CPUs will work even at 105°C as long as the other components don't fail while AMD CPUs can't, they shut down at around 70 if I'm not mistaken.

The CON chips had a temp limit of 72C I think. Matisse can run all the way up to 95C. No idea how @VirtuaLarry got his 3600 to run @ 117C but he did it.

Eh,AMD states 68 as max temp so I was close with 70

Not for Matisse they don't.

https://www.legitreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/ryzen-master-3900x.jpg

Flamebait accepted.

Seriously? A post like that in this thread? Good grief.

 

[Topweasel]

Even then. It doesn't matter what the upper limit is as long as you can use the rated cooler to keep it within spec easily. There was a time 70c seemed crazy, then a certain company started using tim with terrible contact and terrible properties and they had to adjust max temps to cover up the crappy thermal transfers.

Hot not hot, likes high temps doesn't like high temps. Doesn't matter as long as A.) It has protection for what its limits are hit B.) That it can reasonably stay within those limits with coolers rated within its TDP.

 

[Thunder 57]

I wouldn't take anything @TheELF says seriously. His bis is rather clear. Funny how he has posted a lot less since Zen 2 came out... And come on, at least look crap up before you claim nonsense. Every CPU I know of going back to the P-III/Athlon could run at 90C, it just wasn't advised. It still shouldn't be.

 

[Atari2600]

I wouldn't take anything @TheELF says seriously. His bis is rather clear.

I usually spread his posts over the fields. Really helps bring the grass on.

None of the Zen CPUs "shut off" at 70 deg. They throttle.

When (like Mark), I had an Enermax failure*, the CPU just throttled clocks down to ~500 MHz. No shut off, no damage, no problem. Replace the broken cooler and away you go back to 16 Cores of 4.2 GHz goodness.


*mk2 Enermax working away very nicely bar a rattly for anyone looking at TR3 coolers