What do you guys think of this?

Ive seen this done before on a few other videos, I have also seen rumors about the mishap in the manufacturing process at Intel, but by all acounts these cases are rare and you shouldnt have anything to worry about.

If you look at this guys temps they are way off showing a huge difference in core temps so in his case it was worth his risk but also as he states he had never attempted it before.

I would say that for the majority of us i5 owners we dont have to worry.

personally i see around 6 degrees difference in my core temps at load and for me that difference isnt worth the risk of having to buy a new chip if i c##k it up.
 
bandyleg said:
Ive seen this done before on a few other videos, I have also seen rumors about the mishap in the manufacturing process at Intel, but by all acounts these cases are rare and you shouldnt have anything to worry about.
Click to expand...

I am not worrying about anything at all, just wondering about the reason and why you would choose that solution if it's a production faulty from the manufacturer?
 
Last edited:
legraudal said:
I am not worrying about anything at all, just wondering about the reason and why you would choose that solution if it's a production faulty from the manufacturer?
Click to expand...

Sorta. The thermal interface between the CPU and the lid is quite poor on some Intel's. Something isn't quite right when you can drop your temps by ten degrees, and also reduce core temp anomalies, just by replacing the Intel gunk with cheap but high-grade thermal paste. A little goes a long way on such tiny electronic surfaces.

Intel should really do better at improving their 'K' CPU's ability to overclock, but it's not something they are really that keen in the first place anyway.
 
olivier renault said:
Sorta. The thermal interface between the CPU and the lid is quite poor on some Intel's. Something isn't quite right when you can drop your temps by ten degrees, and also reduce core temp anomalies, just by replacing the Intel gunk with cheap but high-grade thermal paste. A little goes a long way on such tiny electronic surfaces.

Intel should really do better at improving their 'K' CPU's ability to overclock, but it's not something they are really that keen in the first place anyway.
Click to expand...

It can be poor yeah, but it's not because of the TIM. It's the black adhesive which holds the IHS on the chip's board which adds a bit too much height and thus too much distance between the IHS and the die, making the TIM less effective for heat transfer.
 
The TIM used is garbage, same thing happened with ivybridge. It's not the black glue strip below the ihs. Haswell cpu's have a few extra transistors on the die. But the heat both generations fire out is down to intel using shoddy paste. Solder all the way like sandybridge and sandy E. The i5/i7 ib and haswell chips are factory gimped. The potential is there for massive oc's, but intel cut that out with the paste job. Scared to see something that will run faster than their higher priced chip.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom