Ivy Bridge Temperatures Could Be Linked To TIM Inside Integrated Heatspreader: Report

So, wait for the next revision that uses flux-less solder (wishful thinking probably)?
 
Thanks for the direct link ironwolf.

We'll have updates once we hear further from Intel. Hopefully it will be good news.
 
Could someone explain to a newb like me what I need to know going into an IB build given this new development? If I order the retail package (assuming nothing changes) what else will I need? Do I need to buy Arctic Silver, and/or an aftermarket cooler?
 
It wouldn't impact you. In your case you'd still be working with the the IHS (integrated heat spreader) as the contact point for your heatsink. The retail package comes with a stock heatsink with TIM (thermal interface material) already attached. If you want better cooling you would need to still buy an aftermarket heatsink and optionally another TIM (if the heatsink you get does not come with any or you prefer another brand). So no different than previous CPUs.

This would only have an impact on "extreme" users who perhaps want to remove the IHS. Or perhaps if you want to hold out for possible future revisions which switch back to flux-less solder and possibly better cooling before buying.
 
jth182 said:
Could someone explain to a newb like me what I need to know going into an IB build given this new development? If I order the retail package (assuming nothing changes) what else will I need? Do I need to buy Arctic Silver, and/or an aftermarket cooler?
Click to expand...

Pretty much any aftermarket cooler is going to come with thermal paste, and they are all more or less the same. So no point buying anything extra unless you are really searching for every last Mhz. I would buy an aftermarket cooler though, even something as low-price as the CoolerMaster Hyper 212+ will be a good investment.

As for the use of TIM instead of solder - even if it makes a big difference, which I doubt, there isn't anything we can do about it anyway. So it is what it is.
 
An interesting test that could be done now for those who have access to an IB chip,

Take a current SB and remove the heat spreader and compare it to an IB with the heat spreader removed.

If the temperatures for IB are better then SB at higher overclocks then we would know that the tim is the culprit.
 
Silly suggestion but after reading that article, would it be possible to replace that TIM with something better?

For example, something like: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835186020 ?

I remember the old days with my AMD AthlonXP 2600+ and 2800+ there were optional "copper sleeves" you could buy as a heat spreader for the CPU. Or, just don't use it and put the thermal paste directly on the die itself as normal.

Obviously, putting a heatsink directly on the die would be ill-advised and more like idiotic but seeing that naked die brought back memories of the "old days." So, why not pop the lid, remove the TIM paste and replace it with something a lot better, then pop the lid back on, and you're back in business. Then, you still have that nagging issue of how to reattach and adhere the heat spreader back on the wafer though...

Well, if anyone can figure out a better solution, I'm sure someone will. Or, just get a better aftermarket cooler as suggest above or move to liquid cooling.
 
Makes me glad i got sb.

20 degrees is alot and it is strange to use tim if its that much inferior to solder....
 
Do you know your Intel reps name MeanBruce? If its Chris, I talked to him the other day on Overclockers forums, and he wasn't able to assist on this issue at the time. I had to go through their press contact to find out about their "secret sauce", then I had to ask again telling them what I was writing in order to get it looked into further.
 
Wow I was going to buy a 3770k but now.. what if they have TIM then in 3 months solder the same as SB.

I hope Intel lets us know because I am holding off now for sure unless they tell us retail are like SB under the hood.
 
IMOG said:
Do you know your Intel reps name MeanBruce? If its Chris, I talked to him the other day on Overclockers forums, and he wasn't able to assist on this issue at the time. I had to go through their press contact to find out about their "secret sauce", then I had to ask again telling them what I was writing in order to get it looked into further.
Click to expand...

yeah I know his name, Christian Wood, which has always sounded like an oxymoron to me. (Don't worry it's cool, he doesn't like me and I really don't care for him, so no big stress there). I guess my beef is he is mostly condescending to the enthusiasts here, completely unlike the Corsair rep and the Asus rep who are extremely helpful and even joke around with members.
 
Last edited:
This is a pretty interesting development. I was thinking about taking the plunge in the next couple weeks for an IB cpu but I think I'll hold off for a while to see if anything happens as a result of this discovery.

I don't live near a Microcenter :( otherwise I probably would have gone there and cashed in on some of their awesome deals instead of waiting for IB.
 
CpuMan said:
An interesting test that could be done now for those who have access to an IB chip,

Take a current SB and remove the heat spreader and compare it to an IB with the heat spreader removed.

If the temperatures for IB are better then SB at higher overclocks then we would know that the tim is the culprit.
Click to expand...

You can't take the IHS off a SB without messing up the die - because it's soldered. ;)

Did review sites get retail chips, or engineering samples? Has anyone tested an early-released retail chip yet? Maybe retail chips will be different. If Intel did make this switch, there must be a reason - the temperature thing can't be a surprise to them.

Now that Overclockers has the IHS off, maybe they'll test the chip naked and see how it performs. Wouldn't be definitive, but it would certainly be instructive.
 
I think Ivy was intel's experimental project.

i think its better to be on the safe side by sticking with SB if you are upgrading.

Ivy's improved gpu is nothing to be excited over.
 
Forceman said:
You can't take the IHS off a SB without messing up the die - because it's soldered. ;)
Click to expand...
I thought the whole idea is that it isnt soldered, its put on with paste.;)

Forceman said:
Did review sites get retail chips, or engineering samples? Has anyone tested an early-released retail chip yet? Maybe retail chips will be different. If Intel did make this switch, there must be a reason - the temperature thing can't be a surprise to them.
Click to expand...
Definitely, that is the problem for now. If intel couldnt do the normal Sandy Bidge style connecting of the IHS, there must be a reason. But it doesnt mean there isnt a solution which may come in a future stepping. It may just be that there wasnt time to find the solution and they figured a little Elmer's glue would do the trick for the initial release.
 
Forceman said:
You can't take the IHS off a SB without messing up the die - because it's soldered. ;)

Now that Overclockers has the IHS off, maybe they'll test the chip naked and see how it performs. Wouldn't be definitive, but it would certainly be instructive.
Click to expand...

It can be done, but it's more involved and it means melting the solder without damaging the die, not for the faint of heart.

I agree on testing IB with the IHS off would be instructive.
 
Curious overclocking reviews from this site, too bad it is so short on details. Maybe not all chips have TIM?

Using the automatic overclocking features of the Asus P8Z77-V Deluxe motherboard, we were able to easily overclock our test chip to 4.63GHz using the Intel XTS100H air cooler, while maintaining solid system stability. During our initial stability testing, running the processor at 100 percent load for over 10 minutes, the chip’s temperature peaked at 65 degrees Celsius. Compare that with last year’s test of the Core i7-2600K; that chip's temperature reached 81 degrees with the same cooler while overclocked to 4.5GHz.
Click to expand...

http://computershopper.com/components/reviews/intel-core-i7-3770k/(page)/4#review-body
 
Only 10 minutes on load and they used this

intel_XTS100H_akiba.jpg
 
Hopefully "secret sauce" TIM was only used on the engineering sample IB.


If the retail IB cpus use fluxless solder on the Integrated Heat Spreader then the temps should be much better. That is hoping for the best.


If TIM is still on the retail Intel IB IHS then I believe it was purposely done to save money in production costs and to gimp down IB performance so it doesn't steal thunder from SB-E processors.


I hope the Intel representative will chime in and address this problem.
 
pelo said:
Only 10 minutes on load and they used this
Click to expand...

10 minutes is more than enough time to heat up the chip - my SB stablilizes in a minute or so when running Prime/Linx, and it is close to top temps in just a few seconds. That cooler looks to be on par with the Hyper 212+ or other mid-range air coolers (although the fan does look beefier, and there is no indication of speeds, etc).

In any case, the significant piece is that when tested the same way (presumably) their SB chip hit 81C at 4.5.
 
Forceman said:
Curious overclocking reviews from this site, too bad it is so short on details. Maybe not all chips have TIM?
Click to expand...



I'm hoping it was only the engineering samples and freebie review ones. :D


Now I'm getting excited for retail IB again. :)
 
ShuttleLuv said:
remove the ihs and change cooler
Click to expand...

Problem with this may be finding a cooler that has the perfect surface spacing to make up for the missing IHS. Does seem like a good solution but removing the IHS could also possibly ruin the warranty on it.
 
CpuMan said:
IB isn't soldered. All other Intel chips have had soldered IHS's as far as I know including SB.
Click to expand...

It sounds as if this is just speculation. Do we know for a fact that SB IHS was soldered on? Any documentation out there? It would make a big difference to know without a doubt that they are.

The thing I can't figure out is why Intel would go with something so inferior (thermal grease - if it is indeed vastly inferior to solder) when the performance of the chip would be so directly effected and thus the reception from consumers would likely be bad. I mean, it can't cost that much more if they were using solder on SB right? It just seems silly for them to take that type of chance. You'd figure the engineers would object or something.
 
SonDa5 said:
I'm hoping it was only the engineering samples and freebie review ones. :D


Now I'm getting excited for retail IB again. :)
Click to expand...

It wouldn't make any sense for Intel to give reviewers the bad OCing chips purposely if it means they get worse reviews than they would have if they'd sent them the actual retail chips.

This really does appear to be a case of Intel saving money but I'm not sure it's affecting temperatures. I guess we'll see in the following week. Furthermore, Asus also issued a statement that said they too saw that IB ran hotter than the SB chips and they're less tolerant of voltages.

I think it'll be interesting for sure but I'm not sure how much it's going to matter in the grand scheme of things. People likely aren't willing to go to such extreme measures to decrease their temperatures.
 
pelo said:
It wouldn't make any sense for Intel to give reviewers the bad OCing chips purposely if it means they get worse reviews than they would have if they'd sent them the actual retail chips.
Click to expand...


If Intel wants to gimp a review to help protect SB-E performance then they could have gimped the performance with the TIM. To me it seems intentional. Intel is at the top of their game and they know very well how using TIM instead of fluxless solder would effect overall performance.
 
I have noticed the results are very skewed. There are some that oc very good like at Hardocp, yet others barely manage 4.6 at skyrocketing temps. This tells me either some of them have the flux and some have the TIM or that some have the TIM applied very goopy or with bad contact.

I think this will be resolved and I'm having a feeling that come next week or so we're all going to love Ivy Bridge. :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top