Question Has anyone tried totally-UN-lidded air or water cooling for an i9-9900 or 10900 K CPU?

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
15,722
1,452
126
Just curious. I'm only now coming up to speed about last year's high-end processors from Intel, and I see that they stock-clock to between 5.0 to 5.3. But . . . the temperatures!

Has anyone tried installing an AiO waterblock on an unlidded Gen-10 K processor? Better -- has anyone tried it with air? I'd think if you did it with an air-cooler, you'd want to mount the fans on the case and keep them off the cooler . . .
 

john3850

Golden Member
Oct 19, 2002
1,436
21
81
I only use a D5 with a 360 with 6 2400rpm fans plus a small ac a few feet from the front of the case at 5.0 to 5.1 in CINEBENCH the temps hit 80c at 49 MHz it is ok after that the temps get too high and wont cool off quick enough at 100% load. I would not trust most AiO waterblock even at stock because of the impellers are to small plus the inside of the water lines may loose water if the sealant cracks off of them while bending the lines on the install. Now for games that use multiple cores the temps are very good even with 20 tabs open in Chrome at the same time with a d5 and 360.
 

TheELF

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2012
3,973
730
126
Just curious. I'm only now coming up to speed about last year's high-end processors from Intel, and I see that they stock-clock to between 5.0 to 5.3. But . . . the temperatures!
Which stock-clock and which temps? There are the stock settings that intel suggests and there are stock settings that mobos use.
For intel you will only reach 5.3 if the software uses at most 250W, if the software uses more than that it will be reduced to 250W by using lower clocks, same goes for 5Ghz same goes for all core clocks, and always only for 56 sec max with long term usage being cut off at 125W.

Motherboard vendors on the other hand increase the maximum W and turbo time by as much as they want causing much higher temps then they should.

Running the CPU at 5Ghz+ all core for every type of software is a huge giant overclock and not stock.
 

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
15,722
1,452
126
That was quite illuminating. Even so, it doesn't seem like the demonstration added much in the way of overclock changes to the processor speed, but the processor runs toasty as it is, and the direct-die mod definitely lowered the temperatures. In fact, I could not imagine increasing the default multiplier for that chip.

So I guess if anyone builds a computer with these processors, they can pretty much count on the processor throttling without removing the IHS?

Thanks for providing the link.

Also, now looking at TheELF's link, I have an even better idea about what is going on with the boards and the processor. Could it be either "The End of Over-Clocking", or the "Beginning of CHilled-Water AiO Coolers"? I guess I'm in no hurry to find out.

Of course, as John3850 points out, the processor is not going to set your case on fire with gaming and normal applications.

Just for "being an enthusiast" or feeling belittled as a member of the "27%-Four-Core-Club", I can see that maybe an i5-10600K is about the limit for anything I could contemplate.

I had to look into the prospects. Anything over six cores -- will be limited to my apple pies! :grinning:
 
Last edited:

TheELF

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2012
3,973
730
126
Also, now looking at TheELF's link, I have an even better idea about what is going on with the boards and the processor. Could it be either "The End of Over-Clocking", or the "Beginning of CHilled-Water AiO Coolers"? I guess I'm in no hurry to find out.
Don't base your opinion on terrible auto configs of mobos that have to use the values for the worst possible CPU on the market to cover everybody.
Go by people that actually overclock to make a living and know what they are doing.
The 10900k has a base clock of 3.7 at 125W TDP and can be overclocked to 4.7-4.8 with 210W and that's the worst tier of CPUs, 100% of CPUs they got where able to do this.
You have to go for an unrealistic overclock like 10 cores at 5ghz + to get the power draw that reviews show you with those incredibad mobo settings.
Comet LakeAll Core SSE FrequencyAll Core AVX2 FrequencyPer Core FrequencyAll Core Die Sense VcorePower Limit% Capable

10900K4.80GHz4.70GHz6C+100MHz
3C+200MHz
1.130V210W100%
 
  • Like
Reactions: john3850

BonzaiDuck

Lifer
Jun 30, 2004
15,722
1,452
126
Don't base your opinion on terrible auto configs of mobos that have to use the values for the worst possible CPU on the market to cover everybody.
Go by people that actually overclock to make a living and know what they are doing.
The 10900k has a base clock of 3.7 at 125W TDP and can be overclocked to 4.7-4.8 with 210W and that's the worst tier of CPUs, 100% of CPUs they got where able to do this.
You have to go for an unrealistic overclock like 10 cores at 5ghz + to get the power draw that reviews show you with those incredibad mobo settings.
Comet LakeAll Core SSE FrequencyAll Core AVX2 FrequencyPer Core FrequencyAll Core Die Sense VcorePower Limit% Capable

10900K4.80GHz4.70GHz6C+100MHz
3C+200MHz
1.130V210W100%
Nothing to contend about your remarks on that. I was just telling John3850 that any new build for me would use an i5-10600K hexa-core -- more than I could use even with that. But I'm always curious about "new things".

Once back around 2005, I was up in Tacoma going to church one sunday with my cousin, who introduced me to an Australian engineer who had just quit his job with Intel. He was somehow overwhelmed with the direction of the technology, and I quote: "It's gettin' down to the MO-LECK-U-LAR Level, Mate!!" I wouldn't know about the next die-shrink, but what can one imagine less than 14nm?

All the younger folks can do that. These days I feel like the retired and crippled lawman in the wheelchair at the end of "No Country For Old Men". "More is goin' out the door every day, and ya jus' try to get a tourniquet on it!"