Liquid cooling really NEEDED?

[Djuntas]

I'm running a small air cooler, literally cheapest on the market, and non-OC I5 CPU I never see temp's above 60.

The only reason why I would ever buy water is, if its truely is quieter

[Tikaru]

That's a wonderful and beautiful CPU cooler and I still wish sometimes that I'd gotten it a long time ago.

However, I'm very happy I now have a Noctua NH-D15. ^_^

- - - Updated - - -


OP already has a heatsink that is better than the 212 Evo if you checked his second link...

Also, @Tikaru, why do you want to upgrade to that CPU anyways?

Been wanting to play some newer games (specifically Doom and the upcoming Battlefield), but using the site "can you run it" keeps saying my current GPU+CPU setup needs updating.

[DeltrusDisc]

Been wanting to play some newer games (specifically Doom and the upcoming Battlefield), but using the site "can you run it" keeps saying my current GPU+CPU setup needs updating.

Do you have a problem with Intel?

[Ghâzh]

You notice he is running it at stock clocks? Notice it hits 74c under a stress test? Notice it hits 64c avg on WItcher3 Ultra?

Now guess what the AMD specified Max User Temps is? 57c..once it passes that, it goes outside the 220w TDP listed for those models, and they state that is Ok until you hit 61c, and you should not go above that.

So that air cooler does not cut it.

AMD doesn't specify ANY temperatures for the FX 9590. That 61c is for FX-8150. And the point still remains, if you can't cool it down with the top of the line air cooler you will be pretty much screwed with water cooler as well (at least if you use AIO). Custom loops will do better but only marginally.

[Lightwysh]

Mine on load is 30-40 when playing intense games and other stuff. 212 Evo is arguably one of the best aftermarket coolers out there.

I idle at 40c with my 212evo. Ive never seen it breach 60 though even during stress tests. We also keep our room temp around 78f in the summer. Im sure this winter when the house is around 68-70f Ill see normal temps.

I should add that i have an i5-4690k at 3.9 and a 390x so im sure my temps will be a bit higher

[Blueness]

Wife got me this fan/heatsink for my AMD FX 8950 (something or another) with the stock cooler, WoW would crank it up to 150-170F.

With this cooler... it stays at 80F.

https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B005O65JXI/

[Tikaru]

Do you have a problem with Intel?

Would mean that I need a new mobo, plus they are more expensive.

In a couple years when I'm done with school I'm planning on building a completely new system, and the plan is to go with an Intel+Nvidia build then.

For now, I just want to spend as little as possible, but still play newer games for another 2-3 years.

[DeltrusDisc]

Would mean that I need a new mobo, plus they are more expensive.

In a couple years when I'm done with school I'm planning on building a completely new system, and the plan is to go with an Intel+Nvidia build then.

For now, I just want to spend as little as possible, but still play newer games for another 2-3 years.

The whole "more expensive" thing is mostly moot and I wish people would stop spreading that lie.

You don't need Intel's 6 or 8 core, you don't even need an i7, and I also question why you feel like you need the 9590, it's also expensive and doesn't perform comparably.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1289?vs=1646

It's getting beaten by an Intel i5-6600, $13-$23 more expensive, and less than a THIRD of the TDP wattage! That's INSANE. That means the Intel will also run A LOT COOLER. You won't need to worry so much about cooling. Want to spend another $30? You could overclock the i5-6600K and just absolutely trounce the FX-9590 then.

I guarantee you, the whole Intel being so much more expensive thing is not a realistic thing to live by anymore. There was a time where it was seriously a problem, that time isn't anymore. When you have Intel's mid-range i5s beating AMD's top of the line FX CPU or being comparable, then you have a problem.

Do you want to worry about having to spend the money on the best cooler upgrade or worrying about watching your heat, or do you want peace of mind?

Your choice. I guarantee you though, you'd be better off in the long run going for Intel, or stick to your current AMD CPU, wait a couple more years, then upgrade fully to Intel. Trust me, you'll be happy!

What games do you play? What tasks do you do? Like photo/video rendering? Anything like that?

- - - Updated - - -

btw, who told you you needed liquid cooling in the first place? O.o

[Gorgodeus]

AMD doesn't specify ANY temperatures for the FX 9590. That 61c is for FX-8150. And the point still remains, if you can't cool it down with the top of the line air cooler you will be pretty much screwed with water cooler as well (at least if you use AIO). Custom loops will do better but only marginally.

Try again.

After much discussion with AMD Customer Care, AMD has updated the maximum user CPU temps for a number of the later model FX desktop processors that did not have temps listed in their specification box online since they were released for sale.

Since there can be some confusion over the difference in max user temp between the 125w FX-8000 series which has a 61C limit and the FX-9000 series, 220w CPUs which have a 57C limit, I will address that matter in this post.

In my experience and that of many other FX-9000 users the FX-9000 series CPUs which are factory overclocked FX-8000 series CPUs, seem to be completely stable at 61C the same as the FX-8000 series CPUs. The reason for the lower 57C temp specified for the FX-9000 series CPUs is to keep the TDP within the AMD specified 220w figure. As a CPU heats up the internal resistance increases and thus more power is required to overcome that resistance. By setting the FX-9000 series CPU temp to 57C the CPU remains inside the 220w TDP listed for those models. Nothing bad will happen if your FX-9000 series CPU runs up to 61C other than it will require more electrical power.

https://community.amd.com/thread/197299

[Tikaru]

The whole "more expensive" thing is mostly moot and I wish people would stop spreading that lie.

You don't need Intel's 6 or 8 core, you don't even need an i7, and I also question why you feel like you need the 9590, it's also expensive and doesn't perform comparably.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1289?vs=1646

It's getting beaten by an Intel i5-6600, $13-$23 more expensive, and less than a THIRD of the TDP wattage! That's INSANE. That means the Intel will also run A LOT COOLER. You won't need to worry so much about cooling. Want to spend another $30? You could overclock the i5-6600K and just absolutely trounce the FX-9590 then.

I guarantee you, the whole Intel being so much more expensive thing is not a realistic thing to live by anymore. There was a time where it was seriously a problem, that time isn't anymore. When you have Intel's mid-range i5s beating AMD's top of the line FX CPU or being comparable, then you have a problem.

Do you want to worry about having to spend the money on the best cooler upgrade or worrying about watching your heat, or do you want peace of mind?

Your choice. I guarantee you though, you'd be better off in the long run going for Intel, or stick to your current AMD CPU, wait a couple more years, then upgrade fully to Intel. Trust me, you'll be happy!

What games do you play? What tasks do you do? Like photo/video rendering? Anything like that?

- - - Updated - - -

btw, who told you you needed liquid cooling in the first place? O.o

Right now, my desktop is for light gaming and school (MS Office products).

My issue is current costs. I'm prepared (and planning) to drop a decent amount of cash on a brand-new build when I'm done with school. For now, I'm looking to just get another few years.

New RX 480 + AMD FX-8350 Black Edition (people were right, the 9590 is overkill and really defeats the "spend as little as possible" approach to extend the life of my current build in order to play current games at high settings) = $410

The Intel Core i5-6600 is $230. While the price is not as bad as I thought it would be, I would still need:
- A new MoBo
- A new CPU cooler (I've never used the one that comes in the box)

Will I get better performance with the i5? Of course, but the CPU alone is $70 more than FX-8350 (plus I need a new MoBo, CPU cooler, and possibly new RAM).

--UPDATE--

Just to show what I'm working with compared to what I want to replace:

MoBo: ASUS Sabertooth 990FX AM3+
CPU: AMD FX-6100
GPU: SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 5870 2GB 256-Bit GDDR5 Eyefinity 6 Edition
PSU: CORSAIR HX Series CMPSU-1000HX
RAM: G.SKILL Ripjaws Series DDR3 1600 (16GB)

[Ghâzh]

-snip-

Alright then, I was wrong.

I'd still argue that you don't need the water cooler though. You'll be around the same temperature range with an AIO unless you go custom loop.

[DeltrusDisc]

Right now, my desktop is for light gaming and school (MS Office products).

My issue is current costs. I'm prepared (and planning) to drop a decent amount of cash on a brand-new build when I'm done with school. For now, I'm looking to just get another few years.

New RX 480 + AMD FX-8350 Black Edition (people were right, the 9590 is overkill and really defeats the "spend as little as possible" approach to extend the life of my current build in order to play current games at high settings) = $410

The Intel Core i5-6600 is $230. While the price is not as bad as I thought it would be, I would still need:
- A new MoBo
- A new CPU cooler (I've never used the one that comes in the box)

Will I get better performance with the i5? Of course, but the CPU alone is $70 more than FX-8350 (plus I need a new MoBo, CPU cooler, and possibly new RAM).

--UPDATE--

Just to show what I'm working with compared to what I want to replace:

MoBo: ASUS Sabertooth 990FX AM3+
CPU: AMD FX-6100
GPU: SAPPHIRE Radeon HD 5870 2GB 256-Bit GDDR5 Eyefinity 6 Edition
PSU: CORSAIR HX Series CMPSU-1000HX
RAM: G.SKILL Ripjaws Series DDR3 1600 (16GB)

Your CPU cooler that you linked in the OP would work fine with the Intel!

HOLY MOLY. HD 5870?!

Dude... replace the GPU, RX 480 or NVidia, I don't care, but replace that ancient GPU and watch as games suddenly look amazingly better! Even WoW. That's an old GPU by today's standards, even a cheaper GPU would give it a run for its money.

Before you buy a new CPU, replace that GPU, if you're still not impressed (I highly doubt it) then buy a new CPU, but the AMD CPUs all are pretty weak for gaming, so I'd say try to stick it out and save your money.

[Schattenlied]

I have a H100 or h100i on a 8150. Trust me you need it. Do not go air.

Wrong


http://www.frostytech.com/articlevie...ID=2796&page=4

Not even slightly necessary - the difference between OP's air cooler (Thermalright Silver Arrow) and an H100i for example is a whopping 1.4 Celsius... totally worth him having to shell out another $100 or more for that water cooler eh?

[araine]

I would stay away from this CPU at all cost it is just extremely unstable and frequent reports of the chip just dying after 4-5 months at factory speeds with liquid cooling.

you will find a better result from overclocking an FX-8350 which is the base chip used for this chip anyway.

- - - Updated - - -

Wrong


http://www.frostytech.com/articlevie...ID=2796&page=4

Not even slightly necessary - the difference between OP's air cooler (Thermalright Silver Arrow) and an H100i for example is a whopping 1.4 Celsius... totally worth him having to shell out another $100 or more for that water cooler eh?

Dont think 125W data applies here since the CPU in question is running at 220W 220W is a massive increase in energy ==>> heat that needs to be removed

[Tikaru]

Your CPU cooler that you linked in the OP would work fine with the Intel!

HOLY MOLY. HD 5870?!

Dude... replace the GPU, RX 480 or NVidia, I don't care, but replace that ancient GPU and watch as games suddenly look amazingly better! Even WoW. That's an old GPU by today's standards, even a cheaper GPU would give it a run for its money.

Before you buy a new CPU, replace that GPU, if you're still not impressed (I highly doubt it) then buy a new CPU, but the AMD CPUs all are pretty weak for gaming, so I'd say try to stick it out and save your money.

My wife is getting me the RX 480 (8GB) later this month

[DeltrusDisc]

My wife is getting me the RX 480 (8GB) later this month

Sweet! Save your money.

[Schattenlied]

I would stay away from this CPU at all cost it is just extremely unstable and frequent reports of the chip just dying after 4-5 months at factory speeds with liquid cooling.

you will find a better result from overclocking an FX-8350 which is the base chip used for this chip anyway.

- - - Updated - - -




Dont think 125W data applies here since the CPU in question is running at 220W 220W is a massive increase in energy ==>> heat that needs to be removed

The percentage difference will still be roughly equivalent... The difference is negligible.

[Mormolyce]

Wraith is definitely better than the Haswell or previous gen stock coolers that is for sure. I'd say that and the Skylake one are on par both noise and performance wise.

I meant the way it looks :P

[araine]

The percentage difference will still be roughly equivalent... The difference is negligible.

Thats not how physics work. Air cooling can only keep up for so long and the more energy you need to remove the worse it gets. a quick example where we make a fridge cooled system and with tiny loads this fridge cooler actually will lower your CPU temps but as you increase it, it will fail totally to remove the heat generated and the in fridge temperature will slowly increase and as a result the CPU temp will also increase over time.

Not saying this is a case of fridge cooling nonsense but it is there to highlight the physics behind heat and that what works for a lower amount of heat generated will totally fail when the cooling needs increase beyond what it is capable of handling.

[Schattenlied]

Thats not how physics work. Air cooling can only keep up for so long and the more energy you need to remove the worse it gets. a quick example where we make a fridge cooled system and with tiny loads this fridge cooler actually will lower your CPU temps but as you increase it, it will fail totally to remove the heat generated and the in fridge temperature will slowly increase and as a result the CPU temp will also increase over time.

Not saying this is a case of fridge cooling nonsense but it is there to highlight the physics behind heat and that what works for a lower amount of heat generated will totally fail when the cooling needs increase beyond what it is capable of handling.

When the difference is 125 to 220, no, it's not going to make a very noticeable difference... If we were talking like, GPUs and going from 125TDP to something closer to 300, then sure, it might start to matter, but not here... Also the guy already decided not to get a 220watt CPU anyways, so why was this even brought up?