Does E8400 need aftermarket cooling for normal usage?

shebalord

Weaksauce
Joined
Oct 13, 2005
Messages
65
Hi ppl,

Does the E8400 cpu need aftermarket cooling if I only use it for web surfing, converting videos (uses about 60% ~ 70% load), and hd movie playback? I'm using the stock cooling that came with the cpu box.

I want to prolong the life of the cpu for as long as I can, and I won't be overclocking. My rig specs are in the sig.

Thanks in advance!
 
If you won't be overclocking, then the stock cooling is fine.

If you plan to overclock, then an aftermarket heatsink would be recommended.
 
No, for the tasks you specified, it does not. The stock heatsink though pretty wimpy will be more than adequate for regular usage
 
Its a low power CPU so copes very well with the stock cooler.
You can overclock a little with the stock cooler if you wish or lower the core voltage for even less heat.
 
Intel does thousands of hours of testing on their processors and coolers before they ship them. They would not include the cooler that came with your cpu if it could not cope with the heat. Your cpu will most likely be obsolete before it dies unless you get a lemon.
 
If the lifespan of the CPU is that important, a third-party HSF can have a significant effect. Just look at some HSF comparisons/reviews here on HardOCP. HSFs like the True are still a prime choice, and not that expensive for the large drop in idle/load temperatures over the Intel stock HSF.
 
The main advantage of the aftermarket is not so much extending the lifespan of the CPU as keeping temperatures down when increasing the voltage/frequency and overclocking. It helps to achieve a more stable overclock and keeps the CPU cooler at higher voltages.
 
If the lifespan of the CPU is that important, a third-party HSF can have a significant effect.
Not really. A CPU will be outdated to the point of obsolescence before it dies from heat while under the stock heatsink.
 
wow thanks for the info guys...not trying to start anything here :)

i guess why i asked was because in the past when i used my Intel P4 3.0 HT the stock cooling wasn't very good, so i had to upgrade to a XP-90...
 
The stock cooler won't necessarily get you very far while overclocking, but it is sufficient for normal use and full load usage at stock clocks. So if you aren't overclocking you are good to go. If you are overclocking, you'll probably want something better. You can overclock with the stock cooler, just don't expect to be hitting high clocks with it.

Under even heavy load, the only time the stock cooler is insufficient is when the ambient temperatures inside the case, or the room the computer is located gets outside a reasonable range. When that happens the stock cooler won't be able to handle the extra heat load. There is always some wiggle room on this and your mileage may vary, but really the stock Intel coolers are always adequate 95% of the time so long as the processor is being operated at stock speeds. However, with that said, high heat loads due to heavy CPU load, or higher ambient temperatures will cause the fan on the stock Intel cooler to run at higher speeds. This is where many people find the stock cooler to falter. It can and does get quite load under these types of circumstances. Prolonged use of the system with the fan at close to full speed may be unpleasant for many people. I know I find it incredibly annoying to listen to for long periods. Mainly due to the relatively high pitch noise it makes.
 
Not really. A CPU will be outdated to the point of obsolescence before it dies from heat while under the stock heatsink.

That doesn't invalidate my statement. With the stock heatsink the CPU may only last 10 years, with the third-party it may last 15. I have PCs still in use which are 10+ years old. I would not like to see them die just yet.

Sure, if you will discard the system after 2-3 years, you may not care about it that much.
 
That doesn't invalidate my statement. With the stock heatsink the CPU may only last 10 years, with the third-party it may last 15. I have PCs still in use which are 10+ years old. I would not like to see them die just yet.

Sure, if you will discard the system after 2-3 years, you may not care about it that much.


as long as you stay within the rated voltage.. the odds of a cpu ever dying using the stock cooler due to heat are slim to none.. i mean hell i still have an athlon xp 1700+ @ 2000+ speeds.. sits at a constant 50C idle and its been going like that for 5+ years..
 
That doesn't invalidate my statement. With the stock heatsink the CPU may only last 10 years, with the third-party it may last 15. I have PCs still in use which are 10+ years old. I would not like to see them die just yet.

Sure, if you will discard the system after 2-3 years, you may not care about it that much.
The lifespan of the CPU will be reduced, but 10 years is a very conservative estimate. Chances are that even with stock cooling, a modern CPU will last considerably longer than that. I have CPUs as old as Pentium IIs that are still in perfect working order after being run on nothing but passive cooling throughout their use, although nowadays they are too slow to be of real use. So although your statement is technically correct, its actual implications are all but nonexistent in terms of real-world situations.
 
The lifespan of the CPU will be reduced, but 10 years is a very conservative estimate. Chances are that even with stock cooling, a modern CPU will last considerably longer than that. I have CPUs as old as Pentium IIs that are still in perfect working order after being run on nothing but passive cooling throughout their use, although nowadays they are too slow to be of real use. So although your statement is technically correct, its actual implications are all but nonexistent in terms of real-world situations.

I have used PI and PII systems with passive cooling (Socket A coolers work great ;) ) for quite a while, in routers for one, so I know what you're talking about :)

Using a bigger, better HSF could be seen as a kind of insurance, I guess.
 
As I already mentioned, the main advantage of a heatsink is in the area of overclocking, not so much in prolonging the life of the CPU.
 
I want to prolong the life of the CPU for as long as I can

The interesting thing about that statement to me is that the CPU in stock running configuration, even with the stock heatsink, is one of the most reliable components of the system. It is highly likely the motherboard with its hundreds if not thousands of components will fail long before the CPU. Ditto the video card if one is installed. You mention no budget constraints etc. but I think if I wanted a system to last as long as possible my first step would be to ensure great case airflow (120mm fans front and a back, side fan for the CPU ) before I was concerned with the CPU heatsink.

Another reason to be concerned with overall case airflow is that many aftermarket heatsinks do a great job of providing extra cooling for the CPU but eliminate the down and out "blow by" air movement the stock Intel heatsink supplies to the CPU voltage regulation components surrounding the CPU. Those filtering caps are likely the most stressed components in the entire system.

Of all the electrical components in/on the motherboard the capacitors have the most limited life. The increasing use of solid caps helps a lot but even they are affected by heat. So again reducing the overall temp inside the case should be the first priority and this can be done cheaply by opening up stamped into the case fan grills, more or better fans, making sure the front fan can "breath" easily by opening up fascia vents in the front plastic panel, neat wire management, careful placement of hard drives, etc. etc.

So if it where me I would be looking at overall system cooling first (the CPU stock heatsink will benefit from a cooler ambient case temp) and then after that was taken care of if one day an Arctic Freezer Pro, my personal favorite for a high quality low cost HS/fan was to go on sale at around $25 I would jump on it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top