If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Why all the concern over heat?
After reading thousands of posts here and elsewhere regarding overclocking
amd cpus, it seems to me that most overclockers (and pc builder/enthusiasts) are too concerned about heat - or at least their concerns about particular heat ranges are off the mark. Mind you, I'm by no means an expert, but I've overclocked many cpu/mobos and graphics cards, and I often run cpus in heat ranges that a lot of people seem to consider undesirable or even dangerous. Is there any real danger running an athlon at 60+ degrees C under load? Doesn't AMD consider anything under 80-90C "safe?" It seems like the consensus is that desirable temp ranges are 40-50C, with the upper end of that giving a lot of people concern, and causing many to go to greater lengths for cooling. I've seen people brag about temps under 40C, as if they've really accomplished something. Have they? We're only going to use these cpus a couple years (at most) anyway, so any supposed shortening/lenthening of life seems irrelevant to me. On this particular pc, I'm running a mobile 2500 at 2.3ghz using a TR2M1. I have two 80mm case fans that I leave off most of the time because of the noise. If I can believe Sandra, I idle at about 54C, and top out around 64C after 30 minutes of gaming. My 9800Pro g-card is slightly oc'ed and puts off a bit of heat itself. The computer runs great, and I see no evidence that my temp range causes any negative consequences. Just looking for a little discussion. Thank you, jakesnake |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 15:39:36 +0000, jakesnake66 wrote:
After reading thousands of posts here and elsewhere regarding overclocking amd cpus, it seems to me that most overclockers (and pc builder/enthusiasts) are too concerned about heat - or at least their concerns about particular heat ranges are off the mark. Mind you, I'm by no means an expert, but I've overclocked many cpu/mobos and graphics cards, and I often run cpus in heat ranges that a lot of people seem to consider undesirable or even dangerous. Is there any real danger running an athlon at 60+ degrees C under load? Doesn't AMD consider anything under 80-90C "safe?" It seems like the consensus is that desirable temp ranges are 40-50C, with the upper end of that giving a lot of people concern, and causing many to go to greater lengths for cooling. I've seen people brag about temps under 40C, as if they've really accomplished something. Have they? We're only going to use these cpus a couple years (at most) anyway, so any supposed shortening/lenthening of life seems irrelevant to me. On this particular pc, I'm running a mobile 2500 at 2.3ghz using a TR2M1. I have two 80mm case fans that I leave off most of the time because of the noise. If I can believe Sandra, I idle at about 54C, and top out around 64C after 30 minutes of gaming. My 9800Pro g-card is slightly oc'ed and puts off a bit of heat itself. The computer runs great, and I see no evidence that my temp range causes any negative consequences. Just looking for a little discussion. Thank you, jakesnake Jakesnake: I agree wholeheartedly! I have said similar things on posts to this newsgroup in the past: many overclockers spend so much time and effort and worry over heat when it has been shown that there is a huge variability between motherboards, reporting software, heat sensors, heat sensor postions, BIOS reporting, etc, - in other words there is no ACCURATE basis to compare heat reports between various installations. Secondly, it appears most overclockers are also keen techos - and thus they change their systems frequently as you said - so why bother worrying about your precious CPU when you'll probably replace it in 2-3 years! If I were to be cynical I would propose that perhaps the whole heat issue has been blown out of all proportion by the marketing machines of the computer cooling industry! Are we being sold a "bill of goods" to keep our economies ticking over? I have always maintained that many overclockers also do not pay enough attention to their ambient room temperature issue first - before going out and spending a ****load of money on fans and even fancier and pricier cooling solutions. Secondly, they also often have a tendency to put too many fans in their boxes, thus unnecessarily increasing airflow turbulence inside the case (rather than creating a nice easy continuous unturbulent flow of air from the front lower case up through the back upper part of their case). I would suggest that any CPU temperature from 35-65 or perhaps even 70 (for shorter periods of time) is not an issue for overclockers. Larry Gagnon, A+ certified tech. -- ******************************** to reply via email remove "fake" |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Word.
"Larry Gagnon" wrote in message news On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 15:39:36 +0000, jakesnake66 wrote: After reading thousands of posts here and elsewhere regarding overclocking amd cpus, it seems to me that most overclockers (and pc builder/enthusiasts) are too concerned about heat - or at least their concerns about particular heat ranges are off the mark. Mind you, I'm by no means an expert, but I've overclocked many cpu/mobos and graphics cards, and I often run cpus in heat ranges that a lot of people seem to consider undesirable or even dangerous. Is there any real danger running an athlon at 60+ degrees C under load? Doesn't AMD consider anything under 80-90C "safe?" It seems like the consensus is that desirable temp ranges are 40-50C, with the upper end of that giving a lot of people concern, and causing many to go to greater lengths for cooling. I've seen people brag about temps under 40C, as if they've really accomplished something. Have they? We're only going to use these cpus a couple years (at most) anyway, so any supposed shortening/lenthening of life seems irrelevant to me. On this particular pc, I'm running a mobile 2500 at 2.3ghz using a TR2M1. I have two 80mm case fans that I leave off most of the time because of the noise. If I can believe Sandra, I idle at about 54C, and top out around 64C after 30 minutes of gaming. My 9800Pro g-card is slightly oc'ed and puts off a bit of heat itself. The computer runs great, and I see no evidence that my temp range causes any negative consequences. Just looking for a little discussion. Thank you, jakesnake Jakesnake: I agree wholeheartedly! I have said similar things on posts to this newsgroup in the past: many overclockers spend so much time and effort and worry over heat when it has been shown that there is a huge variability between motherboards, reporting software, heat sensors, heat sensor postions, BIOS reporting, etc, - in other words there is no ACCURATE basis to compare heat reports between various installations. Secondly, it appears most overclockers are also keen techos - and thus they change their systems frequently as you said - so why bother worrying about your precious CPU when you'll probably replace it in 2-3 years! If I were to be cynical I would propose that perhaps the whole heat issue has been blown out of all proportion by the marketing machines of the computer cooling industry! Are we being sold a "bill of goods" to keep our economies ticking over? I have always maintained that many overclockers also do not pay enough attention to their ambient room temperature issue first - before going out and spending a ****load of money on fans and even fancier and pricier cooling solutions. Secondly, they also often have a tendency to put too many fans in their boxes, thus unnecessarily increasing airflow turbulence inside the case (rather than creating a nice easy continuous unturbulent flow of air from the front lower case up through the back upper part of their case). I would suggest that any CPU temperature from 35-65 or perhaps even 70 (for shorter periods of time) is not an issue for overclockers. Larry Gagnon, A+ certified tech. -- ******************************** to reply via email remove "fake" |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Jakesnake: I agree wholeheartedly! I have said similar things on posts to
this newsgroup in the past: many overclockers spend so much time and effort and worry over heat when it has been shown that there is a huge variability between motherboards, reporting software, heat sensors, heat sensor postions, BIOS reporting, etc, - in other words there is no ACCURATE basis to compare heat reports between various installations. Secondly, it appears most overclockers are also keen techos - and thus they change their systems frequently as you said - so why bother worrying about your precious CPU when you'll probably replace it in 2-3 years! If I were to be cynical I would propose that perhaps the whole heat issue has been blown out of all proportion by the marketing machines of the computer cooling industry! Are we being sold a "bill of goods" to keep our economies ticking over? I have always maintained that many overclockers also do not pay enough attention to their ambient room temperature issue first - before going out and spending a ****load of money on fans and even fancier and pricier cooling solutions. Secondly, they also often have a tendency to put too many fans in their boxes, thus unnecessarily increasing airflow turbulence inside the case (rather than creating a nice easy continuous unturbulent flow of air from the front lower case up through the back upper part of their case). I would suggest that any CPU temperature from 35-65 or perhaps even 70 (for shorter periods of time) is not an issue for overclockers. As you mention in the second last paragraph, its all relative. CPU temps 35-45C above 20C room temps in winter are OK but when summer hits and the outside temps are in the mid to high 30s C then 35-45C on top of a room temp in the low to mid 30s C can be a cause for concern, and crashes! Today, with a room temp of about 27C, my CPU hit 57C - no crashes but because this is 30C above room temp I AM concerned as I have not seen it that much above room temp. I suspect the exhaust fan on the back is on the way out, its pitch hase been varying and it made a funny startup noise yesterday. It happens when you recycle old fans from other machines. The 30C CPU temp above room temp will have me more concerned if it is not the exhaust fan and every thing else is OK. My room temp is in the low to mid 30s C during summer and that is coming up next - spring here at the moment. Xp2000+ Tbred B (12.5*133, 1.6V) @ 13x166, 1.85V with 2x256MB PC2100 @ 166FSB + 1x512MB PC3200 @ 166FSB on an ABIT NF7-S V2 that I got about a week or two ago. Right now, the room temp is 24-25C and the CPU temp is 33C as I write this. Dave |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Today, with a room temp of about 27C, my CPU hit 57C - no crashes but because this is 30C above room temp I AM concerned as I have not seen it that much above room temp. I'm not an expert, as many in this group are, but I really don't follow the line of thinking regarding the relationship of cpu temps to room/case temp, other than as an indicator of what's causing the heat. And your comment is precisely what I was getting at with my original post. Again, I'm not being critical; I'm trying to understand. What's the relevance of your cpu hitting 57C, especially given that in your own words, "no crashes but because this is 30C above room temp I AM concerned as I have not seen it that much above room temp?" Where did you get that standard of measurement? Why is 30C above room temp a relevant figure? The way I see it, your cpu is functioning perfectly well at that temp. End of story, other than - like I said - as an indication that something else is going wrong. What got me thinking about all this was a review I read on Newegg the other day. A guy had written a negative review of a cpu cooler, because his temps were running 45C-50C, and he, to quote, just is "not comfortable with that." He then said, "I sleep better at night when my temps run in the 30s." First of all, the dude needs other things in his life if cpu temps are what determines the quality of his sleep. Secondly, why would one care? As for the issue of room temp to cpu temp, are we saying that if I turn on the air conditioner in my office and lower my room temp by 10 degrees, then the 55C cpu temp is suddenly unacceptable or a reason for concern? Why does it matter if 55C is perfectly acceptable for stability? What does the cpu care if the room is cooler? Just wanting to know. jakesnake |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"jakesnake66" wrote in message ... Today, with a room temp of about 27C, my CPU hit 57C - no crashes but because this is 30C above room temp I AM concerned as I have not seen it that much above room temp. I'm not an expert, as many in this group are, but I really don't follow the line of thinking regarding the relationship of cpu temps to room/case temp, other than as an indicator of what's causing the heat. And your comment is precisely what I was getting at with my original post. Again, I'm not being critical; I'm trying to understand. What's the relevance of your cpu hitting 57C, especially given that in your own words, "no crashes but because this is 30C above room temp I AM concerned as I have not seen it that much above room temp?" Where did you get that standard of measurement? Why is 30C above room temp a relevant figure? The way I see it, your cpu is functioning perfectly well at that temp. End of story, other than - like I said - as an indication that something else is going wrong. It is spring at the moment where I am and 27C room temp is about average for that time of year in the room where the computer is used. When summer hits, it not uncommon for the room temp to be over 35C on a regular basis - no air conditioning. There have a few times when the room temp was nearly 40C. With my CPU temp being 30C above room temp during hard work, which is frequently, the final temp of the CPU could be as high as 70C - in the CPU socket. The core of the CPU would be much higher, puting the CPU on the limit of its heat capacity, possibly leading to its destruction. So I have to watch the CPU temps. My CPU is overclocked and various voltages have been increased to keep its performance stable. The extra voltages cause extra heat in the system because the current (Amps) is also increased in proportion to the voltage increase, so the total wattage increase is also increased by the square of either the volt or amps increase. Increase the volts by 10% would result in about 21% extra watts used. What got me thinking about all this was a review I read on Newegg the other day. A guy had written a negative review of a cpu cooler, because his temps were running 45C-50C, and he, to quote, just is "not comfortable with that." He then said, "I sleep better at night when my temps run in the 30s." First of all, the dude needs other things in his life if cpu temps are what determines the quality of his sleep. Secondly, why would one care? Its all relative, temperature wise. The 45-50C CPu temp above could be good or bad, depending what the CPU was doing - at idle or working at max and the variation of room temp in which it is working and if the system is overclocked. So, without stating the room temp and how hard the CPU was working, those temps are just meaningless drivel, as could be the reviewer's comments you quoted. As to why someone would care, to it put into perspective, re-read my previous paragraph. As for the issue of room temp to cpu temp, are we saying that if I turn on the air conditioner in my office and lower my room temp by 10 degrees, then the 55C cpu temp is suddenly unacceptable or a reason for concern? Why does it matter if 55C is perfectly acceptable for stability? What does the cpu care if the room is cooler? If your CPU was running at 55C before the air-con was on and the work it was doing is unchanged, switching on the air-con and dropping the room temp 10C would see the CPU also drop about 10C temp, with a bit of a time lag. The main concern with CPU temps is:- will it reach its maximum; how does it perform as it reaches its maximum rated temp - does it crash or give errors; does the heat output affect or damage other components - causing other probems, etc. Some CPUs give lots of errors well before they reach their rated max temp and others don't. Thus, by keeping the CPU and other temps down on a heavily stressed system, they avoid crashes and errors when the system is pushed hard and highly overclocked. The final thing for some is, of course, bragging rights. For others, like me, they try to be helpful and offer advice to newcomers so they don't suffer the frustration of a poor performing or bad system set-up. Dave |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Brain Washing!! Say it often enough and it becomes a fact.CPU's are designed to
be able to handle up to 85C. A normal system rarely gets too hot to run unless there is either some hardware installed incorrectly,like the heatsink or it's being overclocked without adequate care,or even clogged or dead fans. Most people aren't even aware of the temps of there systems unless they are overclocking. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"YanquiDawg" wrote in message ... Brain Washing!! Say it often enough and it becomes a fact.CPU's are designed to be able to handle up to 85C. A normal system rarely gets too hot to run unless there is either some hardware installed incorrectly,like the heatsink or it's being overclocked without adequate care,or even clogged or dead fans. Most people aren't even aware of the temps of there systems unless they are overclocking. Only 70C for Athlon 64. Over 60C is risking errors. Corruption. Have you run prime95 torture test for hours at, say, 70C with no errors? It's possible, of course, but a risk. -- Ed Light Smiley :-/ MS Smiley :-\ Send spam to the FTC at Thanks, robots. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"jakesnake66" wrote in message ... After reading thousands of posts here and elsewhere regarding overclocking amd cpus, it seems to me that most overclockers (and pc builder/enthusiasts) are too concerned about heat - or at least their concerns about particular heat ranges are off the mark. Mind you, I'm by no means an expert, but I've overclocked many cpu/mobos and graphics cards, and I often run cpus in heat ranges that a lot of people seem to consider undesirable or even dangerous. Is there any real danger running an athlon at 60+ degrees C under load? Doesn't AMD consider anything under 80-90C "safe?" It seems like the consensus is that desirable temp ranges are 40-50C, with the upper end of that giving a lot of people concern, and causing many to go to greater lengths for cooling. I've seen people brag about temps under 40C, as if they've really accomplished something. Have they? We're only going to use these cpus a couple years (at most) anyway, so any supposed shortening/lenthening of life seems irrelevant to me. On this particular pc, I'm running a mobile 2500 at 2.3ghz using a TR2M1. I have two 80mm case fans that I leave off most of the time because of the noise. If I can believe Sandra, I idle at about 54C, and top out around 64C after 30 minutes of gaming. My 9800Pro g-card is slightly oc'ed and puts off a bit of heat itself. The computer runs great, and I see no evidence that my temp range causes any negative consequences. Just looking for a little discussion. Thank you, jakesnake Hi, IMHO it comes down to stability, the same cpu will be stable at a low(er) temperature for a certain overclock. I don't aim to run my (amd) system cool for an extended cpu life but for a higher overclock. I'm running a mobile 35w XP2400 at 220 x 12, 1.85v. Above 45-48C I get prime errors within a few minutes, it usually runs around 35-37C under load from seti and is 24hr prime stable. The temps quoted are socket not core so you could say that above 55-58C core temp I get instability. HTH -- Apollo |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Apollo" wrote The temps quoted are socket not core so you could say that above 55-58C core temp I get instability. That's what Gigabyte tech support told me -- over 60c is no-man's land. -- Ed Light Smiley :-/ MS Smiley :-\ Send spam to the FTC at Thanks, robots. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
R9800NP - overclocking problem | power_ranger | Overclocking | 20 | April 19th 04 08:08 AM |
Processor Heat Sink Repair/fine tuning | Overclocking AMD Processors | 1 | January 17th 04 11:27 PM | |
heat pad or heat sink compound? | Larry Gagnon | Overclocking AMD Processors | 1 | November 16th 03 07:38 PM |
Opteron Overclocking? | Adrian Richards | Overclocking AMD Processors | 9 | October 5th 03 03:20 PM |
rather straightforward heat problem | Jan Biel | General | 3 | August 25th 03 08:14 PM |