10700KF hits 90 degrees with Hyperthreading enabled, on CPUz stress test

[g67575]

This is too high, right?

The temps are better with HT off, maxing at 84 degrees Ran it for longer and it eventually hit 90 Celsius.

The cooler is a Hyper 212 Evo.

EDIT - With turbo boost enabled, all core @4.6-4.7ghz.

 

[g67575]

Gonna try reducing the voltage (was upto 1.243v under load) and stress testing it, 1.15v seems to boot.

Update - Cores ranging between 78-82 Celsius so far.

 

[g67575]

Seems fine at 1.15v, it's maxing out at 82 Celsius. I might restrict the AVX ratio if needed.

I may upgrade the cooler if temps exceed 85 degrees under load.

Doesn't thermal throttling generally occur on Intel CPUs at 100 Celsius?

 

[g67575]

CPU-Z is nothing, if you're hitting 90c in that you're going to need a much better cooler, unless all you do is play games, try encoding a video and watch what your temps do then....

I ran it in Prime95 with AVX and it (unsurprisingly) gets really hot, ~90 Celsius.

I had my 'Tau Limit' set to double in the ASRock Bios, which didn't help.

I found that my CPU was using a max of 94 watts while running a stress test in CPUz.

So, I capped my PL1 and PL2 limits to 100 watts in my BIOS. This is basically what happens while running Prime95:

https://i.imgur.com/vb4iPXI.jpg

If I don't do this, Prime95 uses the full TDP of my CPU, upto 125w...

So, a 100w power limit seems sensible for my CPU + cooler. Setting an AVX limit in the BIOS didn't really work properly...

 

[g67575]

Out of curiosity, how much power do the 10900 and the 10900K (at turbo speeds) use under full load in programs like CPUz?

 

[g67575]

I'm running it at 4.7Ghz all core, using the turbo boost feature. The fan on the cooler is quite a good one and runs at 2700RPM on load.

 

[g67575]

I'm still running Prime95 tests, lol it's pretty tedious. I'm running the CPU with a 100w power limit to keep temps under control. I've returned my RAM settings to default XMP.

Here's what I've found out:
CPU at auto / stock voltages with turbo boost off is stable
CPU at auto / stock voltages with turbo boost (all cores) on isn't stable

1.2v + turbo boost (all cores) isn't stable
1.3v is stable + turbo boost (all cores) is stable
1.25v is stable + turbo boost (all cores) is stable (5 hours)

Lowest stable voltage:
1.21v + turbo boost (all cores) is stable (5+ hours)

What I don't know:
Does running the RAM at 4133mhz, 1.5v effect stability

It's ridiculous that the CPU isn't stable at auto voltages with turbo (all cores) enabled. I can see the CPU voltage dipping a bit at default / auto settings, from the BIOS.

But when the CPU voltage is set manually, level 1 Load line calibration is enabled and the voltage remains constant in the BIOS.

The weaknesses of Intel's 14nm CPUs and their high power consumption are clearer than ever...

I wonder what the max power consumption of Alder Lake will be, at turbo?

 

[g67575]

If under normal usage, the power doesn't exceed 100w, I don't see a problem. I'm not going to use an AVX offset, because it doesn't seem to be reliable.

I may buy a better cooler, but only if the voltage pushes the power usage above 100w during normal use and gaming.

 

[g67575]

Oh well, maybe Zen 4 will probably bring down power consumption significantly (5nm EUV can reduce by 30% vs standard 7nm), so maybe we will see 8 core CPUs with max power consumption (Prime95) of 100w-110w. According to this, the overclocked 5800x consumes upto 160w of power in Prime95:
https://tpucdn.com/review/amd-ryzen-7-5800x/images/power-stress.png

I'm doubtful Intel will reduce power consumption to similar levels with Alder Lake, given the approx. 220w max usage of the 10700K in Prime95.

Would be nice to get a stock cooler that can actually handle this kind of power usage (110w).

Update - This is pretty crazy, upto 433w (temps upto 110 celsius) for the 11900K with adaptive boost enabled:
https://tpucdn.com/review/intel-core-i9-11900k/images/power-stress.png

And the Ryzen 5600x consumes just 134w in Prime95!

 

[g67575]

You can run Prime95 with a super duper cooler, doesn't mean it will be stable, even at default / auto CPU voltage settings (as I've found out).

I'll get a better cooler if I need one - with Alder Lake / Zen 4 out next year, buying an expensive new cooler might not be the best decision long term.

 

[g67575]

S** it, now I'm running at 4.6 ghz, all core @1.21v and it's working nicely capped at 100w.
I can upgrade the cooler if I need that extra 0.1ghz

My advice for people running Prime95 is not to turn off Intel thermal protection unless you have a beefy cooler.

If you turn it off, your CPU core multipliers won't reduce under load and your power consumption will be consistently high as a result (and get super hot).

 

[g67575]

Could've done, but a preowned 10700KF was only £10 more than a new 10700

Don't the 'K' CPUs tend to run at slightly lower voltages at the same clock frequencies? Or, is that just a myth?

My DDR4 4133mhz overclock always fails in Prime95, but not the Aida64 memory benchmark... Guess I'll just run it at the default XMP setting.

An option to set Power Limit 1 to 105w/110w would've been nice, then I could run the CPU reliably at 4.7ghz on all cores.

Update - Lol wut, I have to run the RAM above 1.35v for stability in prime95, with the XMP 4000mhz profile...

 

[g67575]

Do most people use the stock cooler with the 5600X? If so, what are the temps like in stress testing?

Just wondered if that's a better option for most people once prices come down a bit, since it maxes out at around 134 watts.

The 10900f apparently consumes upto 224 W at 4.6 GHz on all cores, which seems like hell of a lot to me. The stock cooler is rated for just 95W tdp!

Is the idea that you don't enable turbo boost with a stock cooler, or are Intel just very stingy with stock coolers these days?

 

[g67575]

Cheers, good to know.