Hey everyone, ive been posting alot on this but im stumped. I have 2 AMD FX 8350s that ive been doing temp test on. On the older one says on 70-80% load its at a wopping 70c but on the new one it seems to max out its temps at 55-57c (While playing Crysis3 with a GTX 680 OC to 1200, 8gb ram 1333mhz)
Im using the stock cooler to get vanilla readings on it but im stumped. Ive applied fresh thermal paste on each and scrapped the old stuff off before hand. I have amazing airflow. Ive even took the side off of my computer and done testing like that which suppringly didnt do that much of a difference.
Anyways I need some Help on this one guys.
I'd say re-seat the heatsink, but the stock AMD mounting option is pretty fool-proof and the other chip isn't having issues. I'd do it anyway, and if the temps are still rediculous, return the CPU. My guess would be that the heat-spreader isn't on properly.
I reseated it and the heat spreading is fine. My only though it ive been running the old 8350 pretty hard in the past. Personaly i think the heat sensor on it is either busted or my Speedfan readings arnt right.
Well, the head spreader is different than the heatsink. The metal portion of the CPU that makes contact with your cooler is the heat spreader. If that isn't on properly, which would be AMD's fault, then it doesn't matter how your CPU cooler performs, and that would explain the absurd temperatures. When Ivy Bridge first came out, it was criticized amongst enthusiasts and overclockers because Ivy Bridge kicked up more heat than Sandy Bridge-E when overclocked. This was because Intel used cheap thermal paste instead of the standard solder to connect the headspreader to the actual die, which decrease thermal conductivity. Some reviewers at a japanese tech site pried off the heat spreader, replaced the stock paste with high quality thermal compound, and saw dramatic temperature reductions.
From Tom's Hardware:
Increased density and new transistor technology can certainly give rise to more heat. But we've seen these things before, and each time, cooling and packaging technology manage to cope with the resulting output. What could be holding Ivy Bridge back? It could be the fact that Intel decided to use thermal paste instead of the usual fluxless solder(you'll need to have a solid grasp of Japanese to understand the original article, or use Google Translate) between the CPU die and heat spreader.
Using a box knife (we do not recommend doing this at home), the author of the linked story pried the heat spreader away from the chip and was able to replace the cheap paste Intel used, trying out both OCZ Freeze Extreme and Coollaboratory Liquid Pro thermal pastes. The OCZ offering allowed for 1.55 V at 4.9 GHz, while the Coollaboratory material ramped up to 5.0 GHz, operating stably. This was accomplished even with air cooling, although the author did not use a stock heat sink, opting for a Thermalright Silver Arrow SB-E instead (Ed.: this information was pulled from the original Impress PC Watch site with Google's rather shaky translation of Japanese). If there is a smoking gun in this equation, we think this is it, especially considering that the researchers at Impress PC Watch managed 20% more efficient cooling.
So your saying that the metal is attatched correctly so it is not conducting correctly?
If the metal is attached incorrectly, yes, that could explain the heat issue. I'm not saying 100% that is the issue, rather, just a possibility. Has the chip always had temperature issue? I'm under the impression that this was a newish chip.
No the one with the insane heating had a bit of a "burp" awhile back and wouldent work for alittle while but a day later it worked fine but the heating was higher then normal. After appling new thermal paste the temps sky rocketed to what ive said before 65-70 on 50% load (ive been testing this and trying new things as weve spoken)
Well, that changes things. I would run Prime95 Small FFT to test stability, and keep an eye on temps, and by that, I mean occasionally touch the heatsink and make sure it doesn't feel hot. If it's hot, the chip is indeed overheating. If it's lukewarm, then the sensor may be busted, or some other obsure problem. I'd start the test with just one worker/thread, and gradually add more until you can load all threads without overheating.
Ah i ran Prime 95 on it and the temps where just too scary for me to handle, like almost 80c but then i just ended it and man my computer dident like me for that. Im gunna do more work on this tonight. Thanks for all the help and input. I made notes of what you've said.
I am making this post due to the issue being resolved.You must use HWMonitor.The reason for this is the tempeture senseor is in fact incorrect.This is due to the new processor in an older motherboard.The BIOS must be reupdated.Developers of hardware are hard at work trying to address this issue.As it stands.The AMD FX-8350 does not in fact overheat.It is a bugged issue that is being addressed.
Tempetures with the case fan are in fact 28c-32c given your computer case.They are not overheating.This also pertains to the newer AMD chips coming out an being used on older motherboards.I would throw around names but.This pertains to all new processors from AMD.Motherboard Sensors will be updated please be patient.
There is a very strong possibilty that the metal on the chip can warp, say if there has been an aftermarket heatsink attached that has been unevenly tightened down, what i mean to say is that there has been too much pressure down on one side of the chip, before the opposite side has been screwed down. Instead of small increments of tightening going opposite side to opposite side around and around the heatsink. This happened on my q6600 years ago that i gave to a mate, complained that 2 of the cores were really high with temps. He then showed me what he had did and whammo, he had tightened one side up completey then the screw beside it.