Intel Reviews - no temp comparisons

S

SoulWind

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Messages
132
Anyone noticed that virtually every review of Ivy Bridge has no/little information on temps? other than you can't OC as high? (i.e. anand, toms, etc)

Power consumption is well documented, but nothing comparing load, idle, etc temps vs 2600k/2700k/etc

The hardocp review is one of the few that even mentions the temps they are seeing

Intel dictating what reviewers are allowed to write?
 
TroyX said:
that link doesnt work.
Click to expand...

Works for me.

And yeah, if temps are really that high it makes sense for Intel to want to keep it on the down low.

It's the reviewer's fault for complying.
 
If overclocking is heat limited (reviews talk about throttling) then why do you need temp data? It's also kind of meaningless with different cooling solutions and room temperatures.
 
deathBOB said:
It's also kind of meaningless with different cooling solutions and room temperatures.
Click to expand...

It's probably more to do with this then with some kind of conspiracy that Intel is preventing them from posting it. Several sites mention hitting throttling when overclocking, so it's not like they are hiding the fact that the chips get hot.
 
JBark said:
There's a separate Anand article regarding overclocking and temps, short but quite good:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5763/undervolting-and-overclocking-on-ivy-bridge

Basically, easy on the voltage this time around. Which makes sense, smaller process will be affected more by voltage increases due to leakage.
Click to expand...

Doesn't show much though still no comparisons

something like this would be nice

http://www.maximum-tech.net/intel-core-i7-3770k-3-5-ghz-ivy-bridge-review-12192/?page=18

it just seems odd that everyone seems to be stepping around the topic
 
SoulWind said:
Doesn't show much though still no comparisons

something like this would be nice

http://www.maximum-tech.net/intel-core-i7-3770k-3-5-ghz-ivy-bridge-review-12192/?page=18

it just seems odd that everyone seems to be stepping around the topic
Click to expand...

I don't find it odd, I find it down right suspect. The other thing about every review I have looked at so far is that they are all just regurgitating the Intel line on the procs being 77W TDP. Even though pictures of the actual retail box clearly show 95W TDP. I know, I know, I have heard Intel's "reasoning" behind this but it seems like a lot of crap to me.
 
I may wait for the next IB refresh with improved "stepping" to fix the heat problem. I wouldn't want the heat problem to ruin the release of IB if I worked at Intel. Makes sense to have reviewers not focus on high temps.

[H]OCP review did state the use of high end water block along with voltages/temps/clocks. I found the temps in the review to be acceptable at release. Also could be that MB BIOS is screwed up. I wouldn't put all of the blame on the CPU and hopefully the heat problem gets fixed in the form of MB BIOS fix or at a IB improved "stepping" refresh.
 
beto said:
I don't find it odd, I find it down right suspect. The other thing about every review I have looked at so far is that they are all just regurgitating the Intel line on the procs being 77W TDP. Even though pictures of the actual retail box clearly show 95W TDP. I know, I know, I have heard Intel's "reasoning" behind this but it seems like a lot of crap to me.
Click to expand...

Plenty of reviews have power consumption, and they are all below SB chips, sometimes significantly so (70W less for Anandtech review when overclocked). So I really don't see how you get that people are regurgitating the Intel line.
 
I'm confident that the chip runs damn hot when pushed, so I'm avoiding it. I own a SB 2600k that oc's to 5.1 ghz on air rock stable, so no worries. If Ivy was able to be pushed like we initially thought, I would be all over it.
 
Well using Anand as an example I do not see a temperature comparison or section for their Sandybridge or Bulldozer reviews. Same with Tom's Hardware Sandybridge and Bulldozer review.
 
Interestingly enough, when the chip is supercooled by liquid nitrogen, it overclocks more than Sandy Bridge.

Could it be possible that the 3D nature of the transistor is allowing the chip to produce a lot more heat in a smaller two-dimensional surface area?
 
here you go dudes, from Eggy88 at OCN/XS


16k9v80.jpg


600x460px-LL-ff1dd25b_Thermal.jpeg
 
jaredpace said:
here you go dudes, from Eggy88 at OCN/XS
Click to expand...

Question is what voltages do you need for reasonable overclocks. If you can get 4.6 or so (equivalent to 4.8 on SB) with 1.1V like Anand did, then you are still looking pretty good. It's only when you have to start ramping voltage that the temps really soar, and from early reports it doesn't look like adding voltage helps all that much (the returns on the extra voltage are lower than with Sandy). Is anyone really going to run 1.4V in a 22nm processor?
 
Unless you were using special cooling, I think that you would be running into problems at anything over about 1.3v with temperatures (at least that was my experiance last night).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top