You see, this is why I have that large cooler. Sure the intel jobby is fine for your dual core, but I have a quad core. Under full load with the dinky intel heatsink I was seeing temps in the upper 60's in AC and that fan was ramping up to the point of making noticable noise.
What is the spec temp for that CPU? Did it ever go over that temp?
Go find the specified operating temperatures on the Intel site for your specific model. Then use the stock cooler and see if the temperature every goes out of the spec under any circumstances. I highly doubt that it will. If it does, and the parts are installed properly, then it's a defective CPU or cooler, and you should get Intel to honor their warranty.
I do believe you that the CPU was running in the high 60s with the AC on. But if the fan was making noise, and it wasn't the GPU, something could be wrong. I have never heard any noise from a stock Intel CPU fan. Are you sure it wasn't clogged with dust or some such? Does your case have positive pressure? Are your PSU and motherboard providing the correct voltages? Did you overclock or tweak in any way shape or form?
If you turned off your AC, I imagine what would have happened is the RPMs of the fan would have increased even more, and the CPU temperature would likely have stayed in the high 60s, which is perfectly acceptable.
Think about this for a second. There are plenty of pre-built computers you can buy out there from Dell, and other companies. They have crazy CPUs in them. The same quad, and even more than quad, core CPUs that everyone else has. Look at the new Apple Mac Pro for god's sake. Do any of these pre-built computers that are not specifically marketed towards enthusiasts, use any sort of weird gigantic coolers? No, they use boring stock coolers. Only the really shitty ones overheat and haev issues. Why would the computer you build yourself be any different? The main thing is that the pre-built computers almost all have positive pressure because they were engineered by professionals.
Go find the specified operating temperatures on the Intel site for your specific model. Then use the stock cooler and see if the temperature every goes out of the spec under any circumstances. I highly doubt that it will. If it does, and the parts are installed properly, then it's a defective CPU or cooler, and you should get Intel to honor their warranty.
Why would I want to go through that hassle when I can just buy a better CPU cooler?
If you turned off your AC, I imagine what would have happened is the RPMs of the fan would have increased even more, and the CPU temperature would likely have stayed in the high 60s, which is perfectly acceptable.
Maybe I don't like the noise?
Think about this for a second. There are plenty of pre-built computers you can buy out there from Dell, and other companies. They have crazy CPUs in them. The same quad, and even more than quad, core CPUs that everyone else has. Look at the new Apple Mac Pro for god's sake. Do any of these pre-built computers that are not specifically marketed towards enthusiasts, use any sort of weird gigantic coolers? No, they use boring stock coolers. Only the really shitty ones overheat and haev issues. Why would the computer you build yourself be any different? The main thing is that the pre-built computers almost all have positive pressure because they were engineered by professionals.
Back in my computer repair shop days, I worked on several high powered Dells running Pentium Ds. They didn't use the stock intel heatsink, but an enormous heatsink of their own design.
Why would I want to go through that hassle when I can just buy a better CPU cooler?
Because you probably won't have to go through the hassle. It probably isn't defective.
Maybe I don't like the noise?
If there is noise, you are doing it wrong.
Back in my computer repair shop days, I worked on several high powered Dells running Pentium Ds. They didn't use the stock intel heatsink, but an enormous heatsink of their own design.
Pentium D was a piece of shit. Don't mention Pentium 4 either. A shitty CPU is a shitty CPU no mater what cooler you got on there.
Scott, I have double the CPUs you have on one die. It's simple math that the same CPU cooler (and it is exactly the same as the dual core models) is going to have to work harder to dissipate twice the heat.
Pentium D was a piece of shit. Don't mention Pentium 4 either. A shitty CPU is a shitty CPU no mater what cooler you got on there.
And the Pentium D being a piece of shit is relative to this debate how? It does not change the fact that Dell decided they would use a larger CPU cooler and a larger fan than Intel spec'd. And in terms of heat dissipated, most Pentium D's had a TDP of 95 watts, which is the same as my CPU.
Scott, I have double the CPUs you have on one die. It's simple math that the same CPU cooler (and it is exactly the same as the dual core models) is going to have to work harder to dissipate twice the heat.
This logic is obviously flawed. If double the cores was double the heat, how come your CPU wasn't 120 degrees while mine was 60? The stock CPU fan that is included with the CPU is designed by Intel to be able to cool the CPU it is bundled with. Actual operating temperature varies based on many factors, but if setup properly a retail CPU with the retail cooler will run within spec no problems.
And the Pentium D being a piece of shit is relative to this debate how? It does not change the fact that Dell decided they would use a larger CPU cooler and a larger fan than Intel spec'd. And in terms of heat dissipated, most Pentium D's had a TDP of 95 watts, which is the same as my C
The Pentium D was such a piece of shit that it needed a gigantic stupid cooler on it. Pretty much everything between the Pentium 3 an the Core Duo was crap, and Intel had serious issues. Their modern CPUs are not shit, and they work just fine.
First of all, Scott, twice the heat output with the same cooling capacity would mean, for example, 95 degrees C vs 60 degrees C.
Also, the heat output depends on the circumstances, but if you run something like, say, Prime95 on 4 cores vs 2 cores with the same microarchitecture and clock speed, the heat output will indeed be nearly doubled.
First of all, Scott, twice the heat output with the same cooling capacity would mean, for example, 95 degrees C vs 60 degrees C.
Ok, you got me.
Also, the heat output depends on the circumstances, but if you run something like, say, Prime95 on 4 cores vs 2 cores with the same microarchitecture and clock speed, the heat output will indeed be nearly doubled.
Yeah, theoretical stuff like that really doesn't matter. What matters is how it behaves under actual real world usage. If a quad core is running at the same temp as my dual core in a real world scenario, that's pretty damn impressive.
This logic is obviously flawed. If double the cores was double the heat, how come your CPU wasn't 120 degrees while mine was 60?
ARGH! That's not how it works Scott. Energy transfer is dependent on the thermal gradient. Because my CPU runs hotter, it transfers more heat out of the same heatsink. And as I said earlier, it has to work hard, hence the fan winds up to a noticeable volume.
The stock CPU fan that is included with the CPU is designed by Intel to be able to cool the CPU it is bundled with. Actual operating temperature varies based on many factors, but if setup properly a retail CPU with the retail cooler will run within spec no problems.
It did it's job, yes, but it made a lot of noise.
The Pentium D was such a piece of shit that it needed a gigantic stupid cooler on it. Pretty much everything between the Pentium 3 an the Core Duo was crap, and Intel had serious issues. Their modern CPUs are not shit, and they work just fine.
The pentium D had the same heatsink that you have on your dual core and the same heatsink that intel shipped with my quad. Is it possible that Intel is using an undersized heatsink to benefit from the economy of scale of only having to build one heatsink?
The pentium D had the same heatsink that you have on your dual core and the same heatsink that intel shipped with my quad. Is it possible that Intel is using an undersized heatsink to benefit from the economy of scale of only having to build one heatsink?
Show me a stock Intel CPU that goes over the spec temperature with the stock heatsink in normal every day use with no faulty equipment or installation. If Intel's heat sink is undersized, you should be able to do this.
ARGH! That's not how it works Scott. Energy transfer is dependent on the thermal gradient. Because my CPU runs hotter, it transfers more heat out of the same heatsink. And as I said earlier, it has to work hard, hence the fan winds up to a noticeable volume.
See, it's proportional, and so you have twice the temperature difference for twice the heat output assuming all else remains equal. Scott's mistake was that the temperature is relative to room temperature, not zero, hence my prior correction.
However, running the fan faster would reduce the temperature.
Yeah, theoretical stuff like that really doesn't matter. What matters is how it behaves under actual real world usage. If a quad core is running at the same temp as my dual core in a real world scenario, that's pretty damn impressive.
Well, given Intel's power gate transistors, the newest quads can just switch off two cores and hence their heat output would indeed be in line with a dual core in some situations. However, there are applications that will nearly fully load dual cores and quad cores alike; video encoding in particular.
Show me a stock Intel CPU that goes over the spec temperature with the stock heatsink in normal every day use with no faulty equipment or installation.
You ignored my first two points that said it worked but was noisy, you fail.
I doubt it. I've got the world's shittiest computer case (it's from an HP Pavilion) and I added a Nvidia GeForce 9800 gt to it. I think everything in there is a little hot.
Is this yet another case of works for Scott, but not for anyone else?
There's also a chance it's doesn't work for George, but works for everyone else. Lord knows this wouldn't be the first time I've had a computer problem like that. >_>
There's also a chance it's doesn't work for George, but works for everyone else. Lord knows this wouldn't be the first time I've had a computer problem like that. >_>
Steam is the worst offender. Always works for me, not for anyone else.
Yes it is. The prices are not very accurate though, as I've already bought some of the things cheaper, and I can probably get the ones I haven't yet cheaper somewhere else.
Ok, go here, and download the supported memory list. The memory you currently have selected is not listed as supported. Only get memory that is supported by your MB when you're looking at an overclock speed like 1600. Ask me how I know. This for example is supported and cheaper at that.
Second, 4GB is really all you need. I know 8GB sounds like a ton of fun, but unless you're running many virtual machines it's simply unnecessary.
EDIT AGAIN: Also, I'd strongly suggest not going with DDR3 1600, and going with DDR3 1333 instead. I don't think Intel officially supports 1600, and that could create problems.
Thanks for the info. Why is it that motherboards only support certain specific RAM? Shouldn't a motherboard that says it supports DDR3-1600 RAM just support any DDR3-1600 RAM?
Thanks for the info. Why is it that motherboards only support certain specific RAM? Shouldn't a motherboard that says it supports DDR3-1600 RAM just support any DDR3-1600 RAM?
It usually will, but you never know. It's better to be safe than sorry and buy some RAM that is specifically listed as supported by your motherboard.
Welcome to RAM, it's fuck all weird. Even if you buy RAM from the supported list, it may still tell you to fuck off when you stick in that motherboard.
Someone in Newegg reviews says it works lol. Close enough?
It will probably work. Here is how I buy RAM. It has never failed me.
First I check to see the fastest speed memory my motherboard/CPU will support. If that's DDR-800, then I get DDR-800. If it's DDR-9000, I get DDR-9000.
Next I figure out whether the motherboard has dual, or in Rym's case, triple channel. That determines how many sticks you need. With dual channel you need either two or four sticks. With triple channel you need three or six. Do they do quad channel these day? IDKWTF.
Once I know how many sticks, I can figure out the capacity. If it's dual channel I'd probably get 2x2G sticks for a 4G total. If it's triple, I'll get 3x2G sticks for 6G total. No reason to spend money on excessive amounts of RAM, but also make sure to get a gig or few more than you'll ever use as a safety buffer. Since it's so cheap, just do it.
Lastly, I go to Newegg, I punch in the speed, capacity, and number of sticks. Then I buy the cheapest one whatever it is. I might buy the second or third cheapest if there are a bunch of really bad reviews or something.
Comments
I do believe you that the CPU was running in the high 60s with the AC on. But if the fan was making noise, and it wasn't the GPU, something could be wrong. I have never heard any noise from a stock Intel CPU fan. Are you sure it wasn't clogged with dust or some such? Does your case have positive pressure? Are your PSU and motherboard providing the correct voltages? Did you overclock or tweak in any way shape or form?
If you turned off your AC, I imagine what would have happened is the RPMs of the fan would have increased even more, and the CPU temperature would likely have stayed in the high 60s, which is perfectly acceptable.
Think about this for a second. There are plenty of pre-built computers you can buy out there from Dell, and other companies. They have crazy CPUs in them. The same quad, and even more than quad, core CPUs that everyone else has. Look at the new Apple Mac Pro for god's sake. Do any of these pre-built computers that are not specifically marketed towards enthusiasts, use any sort of weird gigantic coolers? No, they use boring stock coolers. Only the really shitty ones overheat and haev issues. Why would the computer you build yourself be any different? The main thing is that the pre-built computers almost all have positive pressure because they were engineered by professionals.
Also, the heat output depends on the circumstances, but if you run something like, say, Prime95 on 4 cores vs 2 cores with the same microarchitecture and clock speed, the heat output will indeed be nearly doubled.
However, running the fan faster would reduce the temperature. Well, given Intel's power gate transistors, the newest quads can just switch off two cores and hence their heat output would indeed be in line with a dual core in some situations. However, there are applications that will nearly fully load dual cores and quad cores alike; video encoding in particular.
In related news, this happened yesterday.
Second, 4GB is really all you need. I know 8GB sounds like a ton of fun, but unless you're running many virtual machines it's simply unnecessary.
EDIT AGAIN: Also, I'd strongly suggest not going with DDR3 1600, and going with DDR3 1333 instead. I don't think Intel officially supports 1600, and that could create problems.
First I check to see the fastest speed memory my motherboard/CPU will support. If that's DDR-800, then I get DDR-800. If it's DDR-9000, I get DDR-9000.
Next I figure out whether the motherboard has dual, or in Rym's case, triple channel. That determines how many sticks you need. With dual channel you need either two or four sticks. With triple channel you need three or six. Do they do quad channel these day? IDKWTF.
Once I know how many sticks, I can figure out the capacity. If it's dual channel I'd probably get 2x2G sticks for a 4G total. If it's triple, I'll get 3x2G sticks for 6G total. No reason to spend money on excessive amounts of RAM, but also make sure to get a gig or few more than you'll ever use as a safety buffer. Since it's so cheap, just do it.
Lastly, I go to Newegg, I punch in the speed, capacity, and number of sticks. Then I buy the cheapest one whatever it is. I might buy the second or third cheapest if there are a bunch of really bad reviews or something.