Radeon RX 5700 Series Thermal Issues Points To AMD and NOT AIB Partner Designs!

erek

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
4,614
Bad AMD designs are the seeming culprit to all the thermal pressure issues for AIBs like ASUS STRIX

"As a result, all ROG Strix Radeon RX 5700-series graphics cards shipped from January 2020 forward feature new screws that increase cooler mounting pressure to 50-60 PSI, resulting in improved heat transfer from the GPU to the heatsink.

Of course, we are committed to supporting our customers. We would like to offer the same benefits of the new mounting screws to users that have already purchased an ROG Strix Radeon RX 5700-series graphics card. If you already have one of these cards and would like it modified to use the new mounting screws, please contact your nearest ASUS service center starting in March of 2020* and we’ll happily perform the upgrade for you.

To determine whether your graphics card is eligible for this free upgrade, please consult the following table of model numbers. For further assistance or information, please contact your local ASUS customer support team."


https://rog.asus.com/articles/gamin...g-strix-radeon-rx-5700-series-graphics-cards/
 

sc5mu93

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 11, 2018
Messages
176
From the ROG link
Initial batches of ROG Strix 5700-series graphics cards were built following AMD’s guidelines. After receiving user reports regarding temperature issues, we performed extended R&D testing to find the optimal PSI range for our graphics cards without compromising GPU reliability.
You do this BEFORE you ship your custom cooler, not after.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
21,254
Posting another link that repeats the exact some thing as your initial post doesn't make it any less BS.
If you actually read what ASUS says AMD provided guidelines for mounting pressure in the range of 30-40 PSI, which is what early ROG batches followed. Let's not automatically assume the White Knight position for AMD whenever an issue for them pops up.
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2017
Messages
540
If you actually read what ASUS says AMD provided guidelines for mounting pressure in the range of 30-40 PSI, which is what early ROG batches followed. Let's not automatically assume the White Knight position for AMD whenever an issue for them pops up.
I see that, it is also very apparent that ASUS didn't "make sure" their own GPUs didn't have issues and overheat, they just flat out trusted without testing...
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
18,778
If you actually read what ASUS says AMD provided guidelines for mounting pressure in the range of 30-40 PSI, which is what early ROG batches followed. Let's not automatically assume the White Knight position for AMD whenever an issue for them pops up.
Maybe if ASUS had bothered to test their cards (which they clearly didn't) they wouldn't have had a problem or have needed to pass the buck. Shitting on ASUS for not performing proper QA before releasing isn't "White knighting" AMD.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
21,254
I see that, it is also very apparent that ASUS didn't "make sure" their own GPUs didn't have issues and overheat, they just flat out trusted without testing...
Video cards are just tested if they power on. Aside from possible minor changes to the cold plate and placement of thermal pads, cooler and heatsink design is not changed for different video cards. The AIB partner would have no reason to not believe the specification guidelines provided by the chip manufacturer.
Maybe if ASUS had bothered to test their cards (which they clearly didn't) they wouldn't have had a problem or have needed to pass the buck. Shitting on ASUS for not performing proper QA before releasing isn't "White knighting" AMD.
Shitting on ASUS for QA is an internet meme and considered acceptable. Putting just a little responsibility on AMD is taboo because they're considered the good guy underdog.
 

erek

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
4,614
Video cards are just tested if they power on. Aside from possible minor changes to the cold plate and placement of thermal pads, cooler and heatsink design is not changed for different video cards. The AIB partner would have no reason to not believe the specification guidelines provided by the chip manufacturer.

Shitting on ASUS for QA is an internet meme and considered acceptable. Putting just a little responsibility on AMD is taboo because they're considered the good guy underdog.
who should ultimately be held accountable? AMD or ASUS? who needs to take the fall for this?
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
18,778
Shitting on ASUS for QA is an internet meme and considered acceptable. Putting just a little responsibility on AMD is taboo because they're considered the good guy underdog.
Yes because I didn't shit on AMD for their fuck up with the 5600 XT BIOS, or their driver issues, or anything else they've done bad. I'm totally a person that gives a flying fuck about what is or isn't considered taboo by a bunch of morons.
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
18,778
who should ultimately be held accountable? AMD or ASUS? who needs to take the fall for this?
ASUS, mostly. Tension doesn't seem to be a problem with other AIBs. So even if AMD's guidelines aren't great (I'd imagine they're based on using a thermal pad on the GPU die vs paste, since that's what the reference model uses) it seems like everyone else has figured out how to do it correctly.
 

GoodBoy

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
1,747
Plenty of blame to go around, both can be considered at fault.

At least ASUS is making it right.

If the cards in question are reference clocked, this does feel more to me that it would be AMD's screwup, but more on ASUS if these are overclocked versions.
 

IcePickFreak

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
1,272
ASUS, mostly. Tension doesn't seem to be a problem with other AIBs. So even if AMD's guidelines aren't great (I'd imagine they're based on using a thermal pad on the GPU die vs paste, since that's what the reference model uses) it seems like everyone else has figured out how to do it correctly.
Interesting that ASUS's NV cards consistently rate as a top brand and don't appear to have similar issues. Clearly they're trying to tarnish AMDs good name. :rolleyes:
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
18,778
I dunno, I'm kinda on Asus side with this one. MSI and XFX had temperature issues that were improved with increased mounting pressure.
The Evoke wasn't improved by increasing mounting pressure. It was improved by not using garbage thermal pads that didn't cover the entire GDDR6 die, weren't shoved onto parts of the die that get the warmest, and by adding thermal pads to the backplate. Now, those changes do effect mounting pressure, but it's a bit much to say that the Evoke was improved solely due to changing mounting pressure. There have also been reports of people seeing similar issues with MSI Nvidia cards, so it's not just their 5700s that had problems.

The THICC II had a really bad cooling implementation. To quote Gamers Nexus' article:

The GDDR6 thermals are poor by comparison as a result of XFX’s usage of a stainless steel GDDR6 plate, which is connected only via thermal pad to some of the copper heatpipes. Typically, good coolers would use a copper plate to sink the GDDR6 memory, then would weld that plate to the copper coldplate for the cooler, or would minimally run it standalone with its own finstack (like the Pulse does). For reference, copper’s thermal conductivity is roughly 400W/mK at 25 degrees Celsius, Aluminum is roughly 205W/mK, and stainless steel is about 50W/mK. If you prefer BTU, it’s more like 8 for stainless and 239 for copper. Either way, the bigger offense here is the fact that this plate is functionally isolated from the rest of the cooler: It doesn’t have its own fins, and so can’t benefit from direct airflow through the cooler, and it also doesn’t have a welded or soldered connection to the rest of the cooler. Some of the thermal pads don’t even properly contact the heatpipes, reducing effectiveness of the plate closer to nothing. The copper coldplate for GPU contact also has a small air pocket on the outer edge of it and, although we can’t see or accurately measure how deep it goes, this is an indicator of other issues where air will get heated and bake rather than transferring heat surface-to-surface.
XFX might have also royally fucked up on their initial VBIOS as well. GN ran into all of these issues in their review:

  1. Can’t drop fan RPM back down sometimes, but minimally have to wait 5 minutes with load running to reduce fan RPM once set to a higher value than the newly desired value
  2. Can’t get the fans spinning under no load – zero RPM overrides manual overrides
  3. Even worse, the fan RPM is literally ignored and sometimes seemingly random. I’m not exaggerating when I say we spent 8 hours trying to understand how the fan speed works. With a fixed RPM target set, cycling the same application would result in a speed of 2000 sometimes, 1900 others, 1100 in some (and then overheating before boosting), 1400, and so forth. It was completely inconsistent and we could not reliably reproduce a fan speed. It almost seemed like the card was rolling dice to figure out what speed to run.
  4. We also ran into issues where the fans would adjust based on load despite being manually overridden. This only seemed to be an issue at lower RPMs, whereas max RPM would basically always work. If you wanted to set a 40dBA noise level, for instance, it would never really hold
  5. While doing noise testing from 30% to 100%, we noticed that the fan RPM would set to a fixed RPM at each interval – e.g. 60% at 2215RPM – but then we noticed it’d increase slowly as the testing went on, even though the card was not close to thermal throttling. For example, 70% plotted 2460RPM initially, but turned into 2550RPM after about 60-90 seconds. 80% plotted 2720RPM initially, but turned into 2850RPM over time. These gaps massively impact noise levels at each junction and reduce any confidence that the PWM or fan control are working properly
  6. The fan read-out sometimes reports as 0RPM despite actually being spinning
  7. This one is an AMD API issue, but fans will report the last-known RPM before spinning down to 0
Compounding with the card's usual driver issues, all of that would definitely cause temp problems that can't be fixed simply with mounting pressure. XFX seems to have fixed everything in future revisions and according to some comments they changed the heatsink so it's not using cheap as hell stainless steel.

The mounting pressure being the sole/primary cause of cooling issues seems to be exclusive to ASUS, at least as far as I can tell.
 

vegeta535

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
3,798
It is on the board partners for not doing proper testing. Sure you don't need to test every card but take a final production sample and run it through all the test. Making assumptions just makes you look like the asshole. Really does it cost that much to have one guy test a final product? Even if they follow/trust AMD's specs still no reason to not test a card.
 
Last edited:

erek

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
4,614
How thin can the blame be spread before it's ineffective at driving proper benefits to the the end customer ?? :(
 

vegeta535

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
3,798
who would you blame? ASUS, AMD, both, and or some other party also like manufacturing such as TSMC?
TSMC doesn't have any part in this. They just make the chips. Other Chinese factory actually put the thing together.
 

Brackle

Old Timer
Joined
Jun 19, 2003
Messages
7,328
Since the mounting pressure issue was ONLY on Asus cards, then you can blame them. Sure AMD sent out a recommendation on the mounting pressure, but no other AIB had mounting pressure issues on the 5000 series video cards.

When is the last time an AIB followed the recommendation that a company tells them? I mean aren't all these AIB video cards custom built?

I am a huge Asus fan, but this is all on them and not AMD. 1 company has this mounting pressure issue, so lets blame AMD! Seriously....Asus needs to do more testing on their own products and not be lazy.
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2017
Messages
540
Since the mounting pressure issue was ONLY on Asus cards, then you can blame them. Sure AMD sent out a recommendation on the mounting pressure, but no other AIB had mounting pressure issues on the 5000 series video cards.

When is the last time an AIB followed the recommendation that a company tells them? I mean aren't all these AIB video cards custom built?

I am a huge Asus fan, but this is all on them and not AMD. 1 company has this mounting pressure issue, so lets blame AMD! Seriously....Asus needs to do more testing on their own products and not be lazy.
Asus seems to be going downhill lately...
 

titan97

Gawd
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
517
So if my card has a peak core temperature of around 65°C (and I purchased it from newegg in mid-January) (under FurMark), odds are that I have the "fixed" version with the tighter screws?
 

SeymourGore

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
2,919
The Evoke wasn't improved by increasing mounting pressure. It was improved by not using garbage thermal pads that didn't cover the entire GDDR6 die, weren't shoved onto parts of the die that get the warmest, and by adding thermal pads to the backplate. Now, those changes do effect mounting pressure, but it's a bit much to say that the Evoke was improved solely due to changing mounting pressure. There have also been reports of people seeing similar issues with MSI Nvidia cards, so it's not just their 5700s that had problems.

The THICC II had a really bad cooling implementation. To quote Gamers Nexus' article:



XFX might have also royally fucked up on their initial VBIOS as well. GN ran into all of these issues in their review:



Compounding with the card's usual driver issues, all of that would definitely cause temp problems that can't be fixed simply with mounting pressure. XFX seems to have fixed everything in future revisions and according to some comments they changed the heatsink so it's not using cheap as hell stainless steel.

The mounting pressure being the sole/primary cause of cooling issues seems to be exclusive to ASUS, at least as far as I can tell.
Yar, my bad. Not sure why I was thinking mounting pressure as well, but - yeah, my opinion is veering to this being an ASUS issue and not AMD now.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,562
So if my card has a peak core temperature of around 65°C (and I purchased it from newegg in mid-January) (under FurMark), odds are that I have the "fixed" version with the tighter screws?
Temps don't seem bad so probably.... is their a manufacture date anywhere on the box with the UPC or something. If you can't find that I would think a email to Asus support with your serial number should be enough info for them to let you now one way or the other.
 

BrotherMichigan

Limp Gawd
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
217
This is 100% on ASUS. They either didn't test the cooling solution before shipping it, or, potentially worse, shipped it knowing it was shit. Add that to the fact that AMD's recommended mounting pressure is only relevant for the stock cooler and this just looks bad for ASUS.
 

Ranulfo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
1,820
Didn't the reference 5700XT cards have issues with mounting pressue and needed the washer fix on the mounting screws? That said, Asus has not been doing a good job lately and I'd place most of this on them for not testing their cards for basic thermal issues before shipping.
 

Auer

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 2, 2018
Messages
1,521
Didn't the reference 5700XT cards have issues with mounting pressue and needed the washer fix on the mounting screws? That said, Asus has not been doing a good job lately and I'd place most of this on them for not testing their cards for basic thermal issues before shipping.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,562
But there are people saying the slightly higher return rate on 5700s... is because of the drivers. ;)

Asus MSI and XFX all fucked up their 5700 cards in one way or the other. They cheeped out on stupid shit like thermal pads and screws... a few extra cents.

I mean even if we accept that AMDs min spec for pressure was low.... Asus is saying the fix is 2 screws that cost 0.5 cents more then the ones they choose. Someone there made that call. Where I guess every other AIB decided to go above and beyond and use properly sized and matched mounting screws. Sure I agree with Asus screw AMD. lol Seriously though I am sure the... its AMDs fault was suggested text added by Asus legal.
 

DogsofJune

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
3,668
The Asus Strix 5700xt 90YV0D90-M0AA00 is the one I have.... Hmmmm At least it's North American....... yeah

Anyone else own one of these? Did you ever touch the backplate at idle? Not gaming, idle. Mine gets pretty warm to the touch. Warmer than anything I have had in a PC before. App said it idled around 50*c and could get into the 80's gaming, but that backplate radiated heat. Even with a fan blowing on it.
I was going to check it with an infrared thermometer, but yanked it instead.

I guess I will sell it, mod it, or send it in for warranty. Maybe... There is this to consider,

"*The ongoing effects of the COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak (aka 2019-nCoV) may affect shipments of necessary components to local ASUS service centers. This time frame is an estimate and may change without notice. We appreciate your patience and understanding in this matter. For the most up-to-date information, please contact your local ASUS customer support team."
 

VoloxitySF

Gawd
Joined
Apr 26, 2005
Messages
644
I got my reference Visiontek 5700 non-xt for 280 from dell a couple months ago. It was a deal posted here on [H]. I originally had a good amount of weird issues running it on my OC'd 4670k system. heavy FPS dips on certain games, like PUBG. It was worse than when I had my GTX970 installed. This was without thermal issues, even unmodified. I know I can do the simple screw/washer mod that GN mentioned but I wanted to hold off. Built a 3800x system with a Gigabyte X570 Aorus elite and installed Win10 enterprise. Installed the Enterprise Radeon GPU drivers. Big surprise, all my issues are gone for the time being. Haven't seen any temperature issues before the CPU/MB upgrade and I still don't see them after BUT my gaming perfomance shot wayyyyyyyyyyyy up and I don't get any more black screen issues. Everything seems great now.

I also installed the chipset drivers from the AMD website instead of Gigabyte website. AMD support page had a newer version than Gigabyte did. Same for the Intel network drivers.
 
Last edited:

sabrewolf732

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
4,177
So powercolor and sapphire magically developed good coolers?

Asus' cooler is bad in far more ways than just mounting pressure..it doesn't even make contact with much of the card. It's a piss poor design.
 

Ready4Dis

Gawd
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
774
Well, to rehash what everyone else said, this seems a fail for Asus and trying to point blame. Test your cooling solution before shipping cards. Not every card, but you should have had to final QA the design on a production card. "But the spec from AMD said X for their design, but we used different fans, different blocks, and different thermal pads..." You can't expect nothing to change when you change all those things out.
 
Top