"So why is Ivy Bridge hot?"

[Divenow]

Is this bad? I guess i am a bit dissapointed.

Intel is using TIM paste between the Integrated Heat Spreader (IHS) and the CPU die on Ivy Bridge chips, instead of fluxless solder.

http://www.overclockers.com/ivy-bridge-temperatures

[Acebmxer]

I just posted something about this in another thread.

Here is some more good read on this. http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...preader-Report

[profJim]

All the Ivy Bridge "toohot" cpu threads missed the point....
..... Intel has a sweetheart deal with home air conditioning manufacterers.

[profJim]

Check out Ivy Bridge Overclocking Guide (Extreme LN2 Section Guide Included)
There is a lot of useful information in the guide.

[Acebmxer]

Check out [PCEvaluation] Intel i7 3770K Temperature Measured Without IHS

[ChaosMaster]

I read that review and this is what I thought of it (as posted on OCAU):

Hmm, very interesting, although that may not be the most accurate of testing. What I mean is that with the solder flux, the core is connected to the IHS using metal, which has a bigger surface area to touch the HSF via TIM, so more heat can be transfered. While in the case of the testing, sure the IHS has been removed, but then the surface area is also much smaller, and heat transfer is still through the same area size. The only difference it's really made is that there is only 1 layer of TIM instead of 2 layers. Where as with the solder flux, it would have doubled the surface area....

Hmmm, it's a bit hard to explain, let me try using numbers:
Assume Core area = 1, TIM transfer = 5w, Solder Flux = 50w, IHS = negligible

Stock = Core Area x TIM -> IHS x TIM -> HSF = 1 x 5 -> 2 x 5 (however as the core can only get 5w to the IHS, then the IHS can only transfer max 5w to HSF) -> HSF = 5w transferred
so max transferable heat is 5w due to the small size of the core area and the TIM's low transfer
Sandy Bridge way = Core Area x Solder->IHS x TIM -> HSF = 1 x 50 -> 2 x 5 -> HSF = 10w transferred
Note that the Core is able to transfer 50w to the IHS via the solder, and because the IHS area is easily more than twice that of the core, 10w is transfered or double that of using TIM.
In that review = Core Area x TIM -> HSF = 1 x 5 -> HSF = 5w transferred.
Of course, since we've removed the IHS and extra TIM, we've removed a layer of resistance, so it'll perform better than Stock, but still won't be anywhere as close to using Solder Flux.

The only reason I can think of why Intel has done this is because SB-E wasn't able to differentiate itself far enough from SB, so in doing this, Intel will be able to make IV-E (assuming they will use SolderFlux on the IV-E instead of TIM) the true enthusiast choice.

[Acebmxer]

After keeping my eye on this thread over at XS 3770k IHS Removals - CPU temp dropped from 79C to 71C I am thinking about replacing the Intel stock TIM with some MX4 and dropping a 10c on my core temps. Just wondering if anyone else is thinking about it or willing to try it.

[wazza300]

you need to go for the best tim,mx4 isnt that great from my experience,not much better than arctic silver 5

[Acebmxer]

well best or not from what I read anything is better then the intel crap. The best would be a liquid metal stuff. Maybe break off a piece of the indgo stuff.

As much as I really want to do it... Do I really need to? After solving my cooling issue (clogged jet plate in cpu block) I can safely push the system stable to 4.8 with ht off. If I did the mod and shaved 10c for what 200mhz more overclock.

It would be fun to do just see the temp difference.

[wazza300]

i wouldnt risk it if your on custom water and temps are fine,worth doing if on air though