AMD to Include AIO Liquid Coolers with Ryzen Threadripper Processors

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
All-in-one liquid coolers will supposedly come bundled with Threadripper CPUs. I don’t know whether this affects pricing, but the decision is unlikely to change the notion that AMD’s 12/16-core processors are a pretty nice value. The company actually did something similar with its FX-series 8-core processors (certain high-TDP SKUs included a cooler in the package).

…AMD is reportedly including all-in-one liquid CPU coolers with its two upcoming Ryzen Threadripper processor models, the 12-core/24-thread 1920X and the 16-core/32-thread 1950X. While in its recent reveal of its first two Ryzen Threadripper SKUs besides Ryzen 3 series, the company did not specify the TDP of its Threadripper chips, older rumors pin the TDP of the 12-core part at 125W, and the 16-core part at 155W, both of which could run comfortably under liquid cooling.
 
I am hearing August 10th as the release date for these CPU's. Will be nice to see since they did not rush this out if they ironed out most of the bugs that the X370 ran into initially.
 
I wonder how the quality of these will stack up to ones you can buy aftermarket...or if you will have options for radiator size...
 
AMD only include liquid cooling when they cant keep power consumption in check. Fiji, Vega, FX9xxx.

And the 2 parts got a 180W ACP..ehm TDP ;)
 
Shintai said:
AMD only include liquid cooling when they cant keep power consumption in check. Fiji, Vega, FX9xxx.

And the 2 parts got a 180W ACP..ehm TDP ;)
Click to expand...

And both of them will be much easier to cool, certainly less power hungry and cooler than 7900X. If AIOs have no trouble cooling [email protected] at which point power draw is nearly double than stock one, I see no problem in cooling CPU with twice the surface area.

Also Fury was pretty cool on air, even Nano with its single fan cooler did fine. If you're already paying whole lot of money, mind as well get decent cooling. *looking at you Titan XP*
 
Last edited:
Cha0s said:
And both of them will be much easier to cool, certainly less power hungry and cooler than 7900X. If AIOs have no trouble cooling [email protected] at which point power draw is nearly double than stock one, I see no problem in cooling CPU with twice the surface area.

Also Fury was pretty cool on air, even Nano with its single fan cooler did fine. If you're already paying whole lot of money, mind as well get decent cooling. *looking at you Titan XP*
Click to expand...

Nano was notoriously known for its throttle. And the air Fury was a sword length with 3 fans or so while beign a cutdown chip.

AIO is when you got a problem. Vega FE is the latest example of that.
 
I think they are providing the cooler because that chip is going to be incompatible with pretty much nothing on the market right now the surface area is so high. At the price they are charging maybe they felt an air cooler would look like they are skimping out.
 
Shintai said:
Nano was notoriously known for its throttle. And the air Fury was a sword length with 3 fans or so while beign a cutdown chip.
Click to expand...

1080Ti's are huge as f*** as well, also easily doing well above 300W when OCed, you don't have a problem with that. Besides that, Fiji PRO ran very cool and air would handle full chip without any issues.

And Nano was designed that way, hence the "up to" and it still does well in ITX case. https://images.hardocp.com/images/articles/1446526873afwlDtt3r8_5_1.gif

In fact with 1000MHz steady clock speed it still did 84C (ITX 970 hit the same temp), isn't that the usual throttling speed that stock Titan XP and 1080Ti hits? https://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/11/03/radeon_r9_nano_small_form_factor_video_card_review/14
 
Last edited:
Modern RX including of course Vega, AMD and/or partners did not take the time to optimize voltages, so that can and has cause higher than should have temps as well as throttling it is a double edged sword, while the higher volts will more or less gaurantee every single one of them (running reference clocks) will have no problem with crashing or whatever (in theory anyways) higher volts higher temps, higher temps can cause throttling and crashes as well.

Nv knows this full stop, chop things away to ramp clock speeds, and use fancy voltage controls instead of high temp spec components. Vega FE sure it gets hotter as did Fry/FuryX but they CAN handle the temps, Vega FE is anything but an underbuilt design.
Last I heard, even the 1080/1080Ti/Titan/TitanX/Titanxp/Titan Black have had their fair share of not holding high clock rates in more than one case or another, they are supposedly "the best of the best" certainly the cost makes you think so, relying on fancy voltage gating instead of proper thermal design is always a recipe for crud happening.


Fom what I have read rumor mill so far, Ryzen chips including Threadripper and EPYC do not have a temperature issue, if anything they are actually quite excellent considering the "TDP" certainly not a throttling have a chance of putting the chip into an early grave one. unlike the crazy high priced Intel alternatives which feature less pci-e lanes and hit very high temps for the core i9/x299 many of the lower priced parts as well, if it burns up, mehh you can just buy another huh.

Hell if you are planting $700+ on a cpu, at least AMD is more or less ensuring the cooling/thermal interface/pci-e is not an issue. Guess Intel did not get that "be fair to your $$$ customer" memo.


The one thing I KNOW is AMD builds their stuff very well, not counting if a partner misuse the name of the product in question and "trims it" to save a few $ at the end customer's expense. Wish they would take a wee bit more time to tune the stock voltages or whatever so will still be stable but not run hotter than should be either, moreso in the case of "custom" cards or "Founders editions ones, you know, the ones you are usually paying a fair to much more than reference versions.

I suppose as long as it stays a reasonable temperature, Air or Liquid no matters (we know they are not going to be budget friendly that is for damn sure) quite sure the size of the die/heatspreader will allow them to have excellent cooling, maybe even have some embedded vapor chamber or something?.

AMD very disruptive to their competitors plans these last 2 years ^.^
 
Cha0s said:
1080Ti's are huge as f*** as well, also easily doing well above 300W when OCed, you don't have a problem with that. Besides that, Fiji PRO ran very cool and air would handle full chip without any issues.

And Nano was designed that way, hence the "up to" and it still does well in ITX case. https://images.hardocp.com/images/articles/1446526873afwlDtt3r8_5_1.gif

In fact with 1000MHz steady clock speed it still did 84C (ITX 970 hit the same temp), isn't that the usual throttling speed that stock Titan XP and 1080Ti hits? https://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/11/03/radeon_r9_nano_small_form_factor_video_card_review/14
Click to expand...

Here’s the thing, the 1080Ti shits on everything else on the market. The Fury X did not. You can always get a regular 1080 and use a bit more power than an RX 580 while performing MUCH better.
 
MV75 said:
I wonder which oem got that sweet contract for the aio? :)
Click to expand...

Same company that makes the corsair aoi's.

Either way smart move since it adds more value and gives a better option given I'd bet there aren't many air cooled heatsink manufactures willing to venture into the tr/i9 market.
 
-Strelok- said:
Here’s the thing, the 1080Ti shits on everything else on the market. The Fury X did not. You can always get a regular 1080 and use a bit more power than an RX 580 while performing MUCH better.
Click to expand...
The FuryX wasn't meant to crap on everything though and neither was the RX580, both were much cheaper than a 1080Ti too.

Why are you comparing products targeted at different market segments like that? You know almost no one even buys 1080Ti's too right? Its a high end halo product meant more for bragging rights and brand prestige.

Its certainly true a 1080Ti will whoop a RX580 or FuryX for less or similar power, which is impressive from a technical standpoint, but it also costs heaps more and energy costs aren't a major factor for many. Its card costs vs performance that are the determing factor for many. And neither than RX580 or FuryX was or is bad at all from that standpoint.
 
mesyn191 said:
The FuryX wasn't meant to crap on everything though and neither was the RX580, both were much cheaper than a 1080Ti too.

Why are you comparing products targeted at different market segments like that? You know almost no one even buys 1080Ti's too right? Its a high end halo product meant more for bragging rights and brand prestige.

Its certainly true a 1080Ti will whoop a RX580 or FuryX for less or similar power, which is impressive from a technical standpoint, but it also costs heaps more and energy costs aren't a major factor for many. Its card costs vs performance that are the determing factor for many. And neither than RX580 or FuryX was or is bad at all from that standpoint.
Click to expand...

Then what was the point of the FuryX? Of course it was meant to be the best, otherwise it wouldn’t have cost $550. And you completely missed the point of my post, since my post was a reply to someone else. I never said the RX580 and GTX 1080 compete with each other, I just said the 1080 uses a little bit more power than the 580 while performing much better. The point is Nvidia has high end options for those wanting lower power consumption.
 
Interesting, flashbacks of FX-9590 chips (or whichever ones came with AIO). But that cooler doesn't look too beefy, looks like it's in H60 class. Maybe quiet but I bet it sucks for OC.
 
-Strelok- said:
Then what was the point of the FuryX?
Click to expand...
It was meant to be the highest performing AMD card not the highest performing card period at the time, that was obvious even given the paper specs of the GPU itself.

-Strelok- said:
And you completely missed the point of my post, since my post was a reply to someone else. .... The point is Nvidia has high end options for those wanting lower power consumption.
Click to expand...
I got what you were shooting for the problem is you simply flat out can't compare products like that.

If you want to highlight a given technical advantage of a product you should do just that then by itself without resorting to apples vs. oranges type comparisons. If you would've compared the 1080Ti to Vega or the FuryX alone your post would've made a lot more sense.
 
Hey, that is cool! ;) :D There are already aftermarket air coolers for the processors that will be available upon release. Having this cooler in the box will be a good idea, nonetheless.
 
Shintai said:
Nano was notoriously known for its throttle. And the air Fury was a sword length with 3 fans or so while beign a cutdown chip.

AIO is when you got a problem. Vega FE is the latest example of that.
Click to expand...

Nope, there are already air coolers that will be available for the Threadripper processors. AIO is not a problem at all, they just happen to want to include something in the box that cools well compared to intel's empty box, sans the cpu itself.
 
Burticus said:
Interesting, flashbacks of FX-9590 chips (or whichever ones came with AIO). But that cooler doesn't look too beefy, looks like it's in H60 class. Maybe quiet but I bet it sucks for OC.
Click to expand...

The whole idea is to have something out of the box instead of having to track something down. Sure works better than the Intel cooler that they suppl..... oh, wait. :D
 
ManofGod said:
The whole idea is to have something out of the box instead of having to track something down. Sure works better than the Intel cooler that they suppl..... oh, wait. :D
Click to expand...

I dont think people would like the shipping charge had Intel included a heat sink on the 7900X, start getting into weight surcharges :ROFLMAO:
 
ManofGod said:
Nope, there are already air coolers that will be available for the Threadripper processors.
Click to expand...
MMmmmm depends on availability and supply though too. Its quite possible AMD and the HSF guys weren't sure of the volume they could supply so maybe AMD decided to take the safe route and supply TR's with a AIO water cooler.

If its a decent one it could even work out to providing better value that way since you wouldn't have to bother buying a better HSF or AIO radiator unless you really wanted to do a custom loop. I'm guessing its just a 1x120mm radiator though. Which isn't bad at all, but it won't be decent if thats the case.
 
hope they have a model without this... i dont use liquid cooling, i want a monster megatron transforming heatsink with quad fans
 
ManofGod said:
The whole idea is to have something out of the box instead of having to track something down. Sure works better than the Intel cooler that they suppl..... oh, wait. :D
Click to expand...

I was fine with that change. I haven't used an included CPU HSF since the mid 2000's lol. The Tuniq Tower 120 was my first aftermarket HSF purchase.
 
-Strelok- said:
Here’s the thing, the 1080Ti shits on everything else on the market. The Fury X did not. You can always get a regular 1080 and use a bit more power than an RX 580 while performing MUCH better.
Click to expand...

That's all well and good but it's also besides the point. Full fat Fiji can work with air just fine (Nano proved it), Vega can work just fine on air (Vega FE proved it). Hell, even FX 9590 probably does just fine on better air coolers, at least under gaming.

1080Ti sure is hella fast. Absolutely brilliant GPU, but it's also very power hungry.
 
It looks to have a similar radiator to the 295X2, which was capable of 500W dissipation no problem. Only question left is whether or not the pump is up to the job, but I don't see why it wouldn't be.
 
Cha0s said:
That's all well and good but it's also besides the point. Full fat Fiji can work with air just fine (Nano proved it), Vega can work just fine on air (Vega FE proved it). Hell, even FX 9590 probably does just fine on better air coolers, at least under gaming.

1080Ti sure is hella fast. Absolutely brilliant GPU, but it's also very power hungry.
Click to expand...

Nano throttled quite a bit. And Vega FE on air throttles quite a bit as well. They both need more to be stable.
1448950969Wt837aKPd1_2_1.gif

vegafewcclocks.png
 
Shintai said:
Nano throttled quite a bit. And Vega FE on air throttles quite a bit as well. They both need more to be stable.
Click to expand...

Nano fan profile can be easily tweaked, and like I said, It's an ITX card. I'd like to see 980Ti do better in that form factor.

As for Vega:

"Our peak power consumption is 442W during the stock test and 569W during the overclocked test. Thermally, we’re averaging 79.9C with the stock configuration and 75.1C with the overclocked configuration, which is lower because the fan is manually controlled to 3700RPM."

http://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/2973-amd-vega-frontier-edition-reviewed-too-soon-to-call/page-5

It's throttling alright, but it isn't because of the temp.
 
Any time they include AIO on an item that's not out yet... going to say there is some underlying issue sense it's AMD and they hope to hide it with the fact it ships with an AIO cooler.

It's not about adding "Value" it's about trying to hide a major issue. Unless they come out with two versions, one with, one without i'd be skeptical.

Then again.. I'm the person who apparently doesn't buy a 1080 Ti for performance.. but bragging rights.. as I have two 1080 Ti SC Black Editions incoming from my step up of 2 1070 FTW2's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top