Heat issues 5950X and 240mm AIO
- Thread starter DMC
- Start date
NoddyPirate
Grand Master
I'm really susrpised at your HWInfo numbers OP. I'll put it down to some lack of understanding on my part, but there are heap of unexpected values in there. Rather than write an essay - your CPU is running really lean to my eye - so there is no doubt for me that you should see markedly improved thermals with an upgrade.
I assume you are referring to the OC scenario here Spyder? I think it's a bit of a misnomer that the 5950X is a power hungry beast when running stock. The 5950X draws less power than the 3950X, and incidentally the 5900X, and even the 5800X (!) when running an all core boost at stock settings believe it or not. And the higher single core boost is never thermally limiting as it only draws about 20W for that single core boosted to 5 GHz - for a measly total CPU draw of around 50W. That whopping boost frequency then drops off rapidly as additional cores load up.....
When fully OC'd it will beat everything of course, drawing around twice the power vs it's stock state, still only marginally hungrier than the 5900X, but in the lead nonetheless.....
I assume you are referring to the OC scenario here Spyder? I think it's a bit of a misnomer that the 5950X is a power hungry beast when running stock. The 5950X draws less power than the 3950X, and incidentally the 5900X, and even the 5800X (!) when running an all core boost at stock settings believe it or not. And the higher single core boost is never thermally limiting as it only draws about 20W for that single core boosted to 5 GHz - for a measly total CPU draw of around 50W. That whopping boost frequency then drops off rapidly as additional cores load up.....
When fully OC'd it will beat everything of course, drawing around twice the power vs it's stock state, still only marginally hungrier than the 5900X, but in the lead nonetheless.....
SpyderTracks
We love you Ukraine
Not sure where you're getting those figures? Unless you're getting confused with TDP, TDP is really just a marketting thing, generally has no relation to actual usage
The 5950x draws about 140 - 150W at stock, 3950x draws about the same, the 5800x is an absolute misnomer, I'll totally grant you that, it's just a power mad beast that need serious taming compared to the 3800x before it which was a 65W TDP part vs the new 105W TDP
Source: https://www.anandtech.com/show/1621...e-review-5950x-5900x-5800x-and-5700x-tested/8
But overclocking aside, to maintain optimal boost clocks on the 3950x, even AMD admitted that you'd want a minimum of a 280mm Radiator, it wasn't possible on air.
On the product page for the 3950x it states "optimised for watercooling", and AMD had a page that suggested 280mm as a minimum for normal usage, although I can't find it now, it's possible they've edited that when the 5000 series were released
Here is a Tom's Hardware review that references the AMD suggestion though:
Source: https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/reviews/amd-ryzen-9-3950x-review
And that was fully backed up by almost every single 3rd party reviewer at the time.
SpyderTracks
We love you Ukraine
Just further, aside from the above, I can't really think of any use case where you wouldn't apply at least a PBO overclock with this chip, it's really a multicore workhorse for production and the 5 - 10% improvement overall by applying a simple PBO would almost always be worth it if it's in the right application usage.
So my case above is moot anyway really.
So my case above is moot anyway really.
NoddyPirate
Grand Master
Don't misunderstand me @SpyderTracks - I'm not suggesting that a beefy cooler isn't required - I'm just saying that you'd want the same solution on all four of those of those chips. And we have talked loads elsewhere that to maximise performance you need it as cool as possible - that's the same for all Ryzen Zen 3's really too - just the gains to be had are greater the further up the food chain you go. So the cooler advice is all perfectly sound in my view.
Also, don't worry I'm not confusing TDP - Ryzen 105W TDP CPU's all have the same power limits - which includes a 142 W max draw. None of them can go over that in stock clothing.
But your graph is showing the peak power draw not the all core power draw - the 5950X hits this peak value during an 8 core boost (first core complex fully loaded) but then actually reduces it total power draw slightly as the remaining cores are loaded up and the boost frequency plummets. This leaves is slightly behind the 5900X and 5800X in total power draw with all cores loaded. Not by much mind you - just a few watts - but it most certainly is not more - which is really what I was getting at originally.
Many see 16 cores and think it will be a blow torch but it just isn't. It's an incredible chip when you look at the numbers - it uses about half the power per core, when fully loaded, than my measy 5600X needs. It's some remarkable engineering really.
And yes, before you say it, it is all a bit moot - because you have to allow for the worst case scenario of course!
All my numbers come from a heap of sources and an unhealthy amount of reading, but see the GN reviews of each chip if you want a trusted and reliable source for all the above.
NoddyPirate
Grand Master
Actually - I just realised Spyder - you got your first graph from AnandTech - have a look at their Per-Core Power charts in that same review for some interesting reading!
NoddyPirate
Grand Master
Yeah I totally agree with that. Absolutely spot on - those that actually really need this chip will see a huge benefit from it. And when applying a PBO the power draw goes bananas very quickly.
So can we agree that our last few interactions here were interesting but ultimately utterly moot?
If you OC a 5950X in any way, you need (not should have or would like to have) the best cooling solution to get proper value from your high price paid?
NoddyPirate
Grand Master
D
Deleted member 17413
Guest
PCS do similar with some of the cases though, for example, they do the Lian Li Dynamioc 011, but you can only get it with a liquid cooled build.
Feels a bit like they reserve some parts to build formats that PCS feel "need" them most kinda thing...
Feels a bit like they reserve some parts to build formats that PCS feel "need" them most kinda thing...
I have already suggested it before. I am certain i saw a spec the other day though, where someone had a H150 on a regular build. I guess if you phone up, they will accommodate the change.That's a great point really @Ash_
NoddyPirate
Grand Master
Yes I wonder if that't it - if there was more margin on those higher value builds then you might try to protect that business stock wise perhaps?
I think what is more likely is... they have workstations set up and have their stock as near to them as possible and my guess is... threadripper is absolutely nowhere near regular intel and AMD builds - same for liquid.
Tomahawk motherboards, 360mm radiators more Noctua air coolers is what we want 🤣
Tomahawk motherboards, 360mm radiators more Noctua air coolers is what we want 🤣
SpyderTracks
We love you Ukraine
Completely agree, it's really frustrating. I wouldn't want anything less than a 360mm Radiator on a high end Ryzen.
NoddyPirate
Grand Master
Agreed!
And then ponder that a stock 11900K uses over 20% more power than a fully OC’d 5950X too!
DMC
Member
Side Q....So I don't know much about AMD OC hence I got PCS to do it.....but i've been looking into it ...so going by what i know so far do I just turn down the "CPU Core Ratio" multiplier down from 44 to say..40 for now to get better temps and I'll turn it back up to 44 after getting a bigger AIO? or is it more complex then that..and I will need to change other settings in bios..i can take some pics of my bios pages if that helps.
But going back to what this thread is about I too wish they had better options..considering I now know they offer them to other builds..would of def got me a 360mm for my build if it had been an option... instead of beleiving the TDP on the lists and going with 240mm...they also need to fix those TDP discrepancies in that Cooler list.
But going back to what this thread is about I too wish they had better options..considering I now know they offer them to other builds..would of def got me a 360mm for my build if it had been an option... instead of beleiving the TDP on the lists and going with 240mm...they also need to fix those TDP discrepancies in that Cooler list.
Last edited:
NoddyPirate
Grand Master
Yes, you likely could just reduce the multiplier in BIOS - if that’s the way the OC has been implemented. (See caveat below however)
But temps in the 70’s are not going to come close to damaging your CPU. Maybe you are used to older Intel CPU’s which had max temp operating temperatures in the 60’s, but honestly, I personally see no need to reduce anything - your temps may be higher than you expected, but they most certainly are not dangerous. The max safe temps for these CPU’s are way above what you are seeing.
Have read of this for example.
High voltages will hurt your CPU and would be the most concerning, even if your temps are fine - and your voltages seem absolutely deep in the safe zone to me. Personally, I think you are worrying over nothing.
We say lower temps give better boosts - but that’s for stock operation or for PBO overclocks. If your machine has a locked in overclock value - which it sounds like it does - then getting cooler temperatures will not give you higher boosts - because you would have to also turn up the OC for that to happen. (And btw that doesn't mean just increasing the multiplier as it's more complicated that that.)
Where better cooling will help is to give you more ability to turn up those clocks of course - but also to have a much quieter system overall.
Finally, (here’s the caveat from earlier) I do think it’s important to say one last thing - I could think of nothing more fun than to help you tweak all your BIOS settings to get your CPU boosting higher - but I wouldn’t do it for two reasons:
1) I have neither enough knowledge nor experience with OC.
2) I do not fully understanding the peculiarities of your PCS warranty for an overclocked machine. Tweaking the wrong thing, or the right thing the wrong way, could invalidate your cover.
So if you want guidance then you need someone that ticks both those boxes - which means you really should talk to PCS first if you are not happy with your machines overclock performance and see what they say about it.
After that I would suggest you can read up yourself about the different ways to push your CPU harder or softer if you wish - there are some threads about it on this forum and plenty elsewhere too - but I don’t think it would be helpful for PCS customers, or for PCS themselves, for anyone here to suggest any changes to your OC at this stage.
Last edited:
NoddyPirate
Grand Master
Jeez - I waffle so much sometimes! Let me have one more stab at what I'm getting at:
1) If you are happy with 4.4 GHz, then you already have it with a perfefctly safe setup as far as I can tell. Warmer than some, yes, but not dangerously so at those voltages.
2) A 360mm AIO will of course give you a cooler and quieter machine which can only be a good thing and is strongly recommended.
1) If your OC is locked in, then strapping on a 360mm AIO will not give you more than 4.4 GHz without also changing settings somewhere.
4) If you aren't happy with 4.4 GHz, or the current behaviour, then talk to PCS before you change any settings so you understand what you can safely do, and what you can only do at your own risk.
1) If you are happy with 4.4 GHz, then you already have it with a perfefctly safe setup as far as I can tell. Warmer than some, yes, but not dangerously so at those voltages.
2) A 360mm AIO will of course give you a cooler and quieter machine which can only be a good thing and is strongly recommended.
1) If your OC is locked in, then strapping on a 360mm AIO will not give you more than 4.4 GHz without also changing settings somewhere.
4) If you aren't happy with 4.4 GHz, or the current behaviour, then talk to PCS before you change any settings so you understand what you can safely do, and what you can only do at your own risk.
NoddyPirate
Grand Master
Pomdering a bit more here - I feel compelled to qualify my statement earlier about the TDP ratings that PCS provide for coolers....
TDP for a CPU and for a Cooler are not directly comparable numbers. The former is more directly linked to electrical energy while the second is realated to thermal energy dissipation. Despite 'Watts' bascially meaning the same energy content in both cases, it quickly becomes a marketing angle anyway, so you can't just strap a 105 W Cooler onto a 105 W CPU and hope for the best. Equally strapping a 180W Cooler onto that same CPU might equally fail to function correctly. It's a messy process trying to figure it all out. So in fairness to PCS it is a more complicated topic than it appears.
What I don't like though is that PCS are providing TDP's that seems to contradict data from manufacturers in some cases, but in general they give them for coolers that the manufacturers themsleves don't even provide TDP's for in the first place.
The majority of cooler manufacturers have moved away from TDP ratings exactly because it is so confusing for consumers. Instead they are using compatible CPU lists - which don't really help much as it just confirms that a CPU on the list can operate as advertised without hitting it's thermal limit. You still can't tell how much headroom you'll really have.
That's why advice from forums like this one is so valuable. People who actually undestand and know the differences between AIO's is a great place to figure it out. Particualrly given that CPU temperature is only part of the puzzle really.
To anyone else reading this - use a high level of caution when picking any cooler based only on it's TDP rating. There lurks much more than meets the eye me thinks.
TDP for a CPU and for a Cooler are not directly comparable numbers. The former is more directly linked to electrical energy while the second is realated to thermal energy dissipation. Despite 'Watts' bascially meaning the same energy content in both cases, it quickly becomes a marketing angle anyway, so you can't just strap a 105 W Cooler onto a 105 W CPU and hope for the best. Equally strapping a 180W Cooler onto that same CPU might equally fail to function correctly. It's a messy process trying to figure it all out. So in fairness to PCS it is a more complicated topic than it appears.
What I don't like though is that PCS are providing TDP's that seems to contradict data from manufacturers in some cases, but in general they give them for coolers that the manufacturers themsleves don't even provide TDP's for in the first place.
The majority of cooler manufacturers have moved away from TDP ratings exactly because it is so confusing for consumers. Instead they are using compatible CPU lists - which don't really help much as it just confirms that a CPU on the list can operate as advertised without hitting it's thermal limit. You still can't tell how much headroom you'll really have.
That's why advice from forums like this one is so valuable. People who actually undestand and know the differences between AIO's is a great place to figure it out. Particualrly given that CPU temperature is only part of the puzzle really.
To anyone else reading this - use a high level of caution when picking any cooler based only on it's TDP rating. There lurks much more than meets the eye me thinks.
DMC
Member
That is interesting..good find..ok so my chip has a higher tolerance to heat..glade to know..i feel i little bit better now..but what about everything else around it..the Mobo and AIO i'm sure are not built for long life at those temps. as this just sounds crazy to run a chip at 95C without problems arising down the line..i hope to get many years out of this chip and not have to replace it in a few or the new AIO under that,
yep I'm def falling on the side of caution here i know, but alot of what peeps do with a PC can't be as demarding as 3d animation where the PC is run at 100% for pos days at a time, a simple stress test just dosen't cut it as a real world test for me..and as such i've always tried to keep my PC's cool and have mild OC's if pos and not go for the highest just coz i have the head room...my last PC lasted 10 years and still going as i didn't stress the OC and had good cooling...but yes new rig/tech new worries
Oh I don't want any more OC..4.4 with a new AIO is fine for me..prefer stable to crazy bouncing up and down like PBO will
didn't want higher...hehe wanted to lower it to 4ghz but thank you ....yes you are right that would be bad to help someone try and boost it higher without me first contacting PCS..i understand that
As to your last post..I completely agree..now ....after messing up my build a little bit......but learning from the process...ive learned AMD make sexy hot chips that need extra care, and best not to cheap out if one is after a stable longlife workhorse
and ill phone PCS next week as to the best way to downclock for now. cheers again..oh and don't trust TDP's
Last edited: