Overclock.net banner

Cryorig M9i will be enough for 8700K stock?

4K views 29 replies 7 participants last post by  ciarlatano 
#1 ·
Hi. I bought 8700K and Cryorig M9i. I know its cheap cooler but it will be enough for 8700K ( no oc, stock )?
I just safe extra cash to get 1080 ti .
 
#3 ·
I will buy but not buyed yet. But like i said i must safe cash for 1080 ti.

Really appreciate it for help. Question.

HEATSINK SPECIFICATION Dimension ( with fan )L87 mm x W102 mm x H124.6 mmWeight ( with fan )425 gWeight ( without fan )345 gHeat pipes6mm heatpipe x 3 unitsFinT = 0.4 mm ; Gap = 1.6 mmFin Pcs40 pcsCopper BaseC1100 Pure copper nickel platedRAM Height LimitLimitlessTDP120 W

FAN SPECIFICATION DimensionL92 mm x W92 mm x H25.4 mmWeight80 gRated Speed600 ~ 2200 RPM ±10 %Noise Level26.4 dBAAir Flow48.4 CFMAir Pressure3.1 mmH2OAmpere0.11 A

http://www.cryorig.com/m9.php

My case is Define R5
The Define R5 supports:
CPU coolers up to 180mm in height

It will fit or not to Define R5: ) ?
 
#4 ·
It should fit, yes. The cooler is 124.6mm high and the case clearance is 180mm.

If you'd like, check out the Cryorig Fan and Cooler Club to get specific questions answered about your proposed cooler purchase.
 
#7 ·
i think you will be fine. thermal power is 95watts on the cpu and cooler is "rated" 120watts. it may get a tad warm but still cooler then a stock intel heat sync. i think i got one of these on my old computer i gave to my sister last year that was a i7 870 that was 95watt. it will be fine just make sure you have decent airflow threw the case.
 
#9 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by sew333 View Post

Hi. I bought 8700K and Cryorig M9i. I know its cheap cooler but it will be enough for 8700K ( no oc, stock )?
I just safe extra cash to get 1080 ti .
If it was me, I would return the M9I and get a cooler that uses a 140mm fan. Better cooling and less noise. but U9I will cool 8700K at stock speed just fine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sew333 View Post

I will buy but not buyed yet. But like i said i must safe cash for 1080 ti.

Really appreciate it for help. Question.

HEATSINK SPECIFICATION Dimension ( with fan )L87 mm x W102 mm x H124.6 mmWeight ( with fan )425 gWeight ( without fan )345 gHeat pipes6mm heatpipe x 3 unitsFinT = 0.4 mm ; Gap = 1.6 mmFin Pcs40 pcsCopper BaseC1100 Pure copper nickel platedRAM Height LimitLimitlessTDP120 W

FAN SPECIFICATION DimensionL92 mm x W92 mm x H25.4 mmWeight80 gRated Speed600 ~ 2200 RPM ±10 %Noise Level26.4 dBAAir Flow48.4 CFMAir Pressure3.1 mmH2OAmpere0.11 A

http://www.cryorig.com/m9.php

My case is Define R5
The Define R5 supports:
CPU coolers up to 180mm in height

It will fit or not to Define R5: ) ?
Define R5 has enough CPU clearance for the biggest coolers made to fit.
 
#10 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by sew333 View Post

Ok last question. My rams 2x8 Hyperx 2133mhz Kingston. I must sell them and buy 2666-3000mhz+ rams? somebody said on other forum yes,because 2133mhz will block 8700k performance
I will clarify what was said for you again. Yes, 2133 MHz RAM will give you less performance. The same is true for your current i7-6700K system, which also would like RAM speeds around 3000 MHz to 3200 MHz. You don't have to change RAM. You can overclock your RAM to get additional performance. Even if you buy a kit rated for 3000 MHz, it's still overclocking RAM. You might as well attempt to overclock the kit you already have instead of buying another kit to overclock.
 
#11 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by sew333 View Post

Last question. Somebody said that i will be have unnormal temps on this cooler on 8700K even with stock. So i dont know , cancel my order? Like i said i must safe some cash.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sew333 View Post

Ok last question. My rams 2x8 Hyperx 2133mhz Kingston. I must sell them and buy 2666-3000mhz+ rams? somebody said on other forum yes,because 2133mhz will block 8700k performance
"Somebody said" is the downfall of Gen Z.
 
#12 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by chessmyantidrug View Post

I will clarify what was said for you again. Yes, 2133 MHz RAM will give you less performance. The same is true for your current i7-6700K system, which also would like RAM speeds around 3000 MHz to 3200 MHz. You don't have to change RAM. You can overclock your RAM to get additional performance. Even if you buy a kit rated for 3000 MHz, it's still overclocking RAM. You might as well attempt to overclock the kit you already have instead of buying another kit to overclock.
Could you tell us how much difference you are talking about .. how much longer a process will take with slower RAM? For example, if doing a 2mb Excel spreadsheet how much difference will users see between using 2130MHz RAM and using 3200MHZ RAM?
 
#13 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by doyll View Post

Could you tell us how much difference you are talking about .. how much longer a process will take with slower RAM? For example, if doing a 2mb Excel spreadsheet how much difference will users see between using 2130MHz RAM and using 3200MHZ RAM?
Are we talking about using the same CAS? Or is the additional speed going to be offset by higher latency?
wink.gif
 
#14 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by ciarlatano View Post

Are we talking about using the same CAS? Or is the additional speed going to be offset by higher latency?
wink.gif
I'm trying to find out how much difference a stock 8700K system running 2133MHz RAM versus running 3200MHz RAM. No overclocking, not tweaking, just build, load OS/software and use.
 
#15 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by doyll View Post

I'm trying to find out how much difference a stock 8700K system running 2133MHz RAM versus running 3200MHz RAM. No overclocking, not tweaking, just build, load OS/software and use.
I understand that, but the actual performance of RAM is not dictated simply by its operating speed. The latency plays a huge part, as well. As RAM speed goes up, latency tends to worsen, sometimes to the point where the speed increase is completely nullified, or even has the "faster" RAM working slower. We've seen it many times. So....it is very possible that the 2133MHz RAM could actually be functionally faster than the 3200MHz RAM depending on the latency.
 
#16 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by ciarlatano View Post

I understand that, but the actual performance of RAM is not dictated simply by its operating speed. The latency plays a huge part, as well. As RAM speed goes up, latency tends to worsen, sometimes to the point where the speed increase is completely nullified, or even has the "faster" RAM working slower. We've seen it many times. So....it is very possible that the 2133MHz RAM could actually be functionally faster than the 3200MHz RAM depending on the latency.
That was basically my point ..

that 2133 MHz RAM functional speed in most applications we use RAM for is not much different than 320MHz RAM functional speed in daily use.

Same can be said for someone with 6x core 12x thread 3.4GHz CPU versus a 6x core 12x thread 3.8GHz CPU. 0.4GH looks like a lot ..but when we use 2 machines that are identical except for 0.4GHz CPU speed difference we will see little to no difference in normal use. Sure, if we are encoding a video that takes 34 minutes on 3.8GHz machine it will take about 38 minutes on 3.4GHz machine .. just enought time to get another cup of coffee.
tongue.gif
 
#17 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by doyll View Post

That was basically my point ..

that 2133 MHz RAM functional speed in most applications we use RAM for is not much different than 320MHz RAM functional speed in daily use.

Same can be said for someone with 6x core 12x thread 3.4GHz CPU versus a 6x core 12x thread 3.8GHz CPU. 0.4GH looks like a lot ..but when we use 2 machines that are identical except for 0.4GHz CPU speed difference we will see little to no difference in normal use. Sure, if we are encoding a video that takes 34 minutes on 3.8GHz machine it will take about 38 minutes on 3.4GHz machine .. just enought time to get another cup of coffee.
tongue.gif
Which was my point in asking about the latency.....
wink.gif
 
#18 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by ciarlatano View Post

Which was my point in asking about the latency.....
wink.gif
I don't think some readers would have gotten your point without explanation.
thumb.gif

Some still will not, but instead claim their unicorn egg shells give better performance.
 
#19 ·
I am talking purely for gaming from a frames per second standpoint. That's what sew333 has been talking about in their threads: upgrading to an i7-8700K and saving up for a GTX 1080 Ti so they want to save money with cheaper RAM. No idea how many times I have said "you can overclock your RAM" in their threads. I'm not the only person who has said this.
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by chessmyantidrug View Post

I am talking purely for gaming from a frames per second standpoint. That's what sew333 has been talking about in their threads: upgrading to an i7-8700K and saving up for a GTX 1080 Ti so they want to save money with cheaper RAM. No idea how many times I have said "you can overclock your RAM" in their threads. I'm not the only person who has said this.
Yeah, because the difference is huge.....an so visible to the naked eye. I know that it really throws me off when I am playing Batfield Front IV: Attack of the Garden Gnomes Revenge and my FPS is 61.4 using 2133 RAM instead of 63.2 using 3200MHz. Because, you know, I can see that difference.
tongue.gif
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by ciarlatano View Post

Yeah, because the difference is huge.....an so visible to the naked eye. I know that it really throws me off when I am playing Batfield Front IV: Attack of the Garden Gnomes Revenge and my FPS is 61.4 using 2133 RAM instead of 63.2 using 3200MHz. Because, you know, I can see that difference.
tongue.gif
I tried to see the difference, I really did, but couldn't. I figured some of all the fairy dust bowing around was obstructing my view.
 
#23 ·
The difference will depend on the game, obviously. I never said it was an earth shattering level of difference, just that it was a difference. If you want to claim there is no difference, go ahead and be wrong. The fact remains sew333 can attempt to overclock the RAM kit they currently own in lieu of replacing it with another kit. I'm not saying replace the RAM. I'm saying the exact opposite. Not sure why people insist on trolling.
 
#24 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by chessmyantidrug View Post

The difference will depend on the game, obviously. I never said it was an earth shattering level of difference, just that it was a difference. If you want to claim there is no difference, go ahead and be wrong. The fact remains sew333 can attempt to overclock the RAM kit they currently own in lieu of replacing it with another kit. I'm not saying replace the RAM. I'm saying the exact opposite. Not sure why people insist on trolling.
I was actually agreeing with you. So was @doyll. Changing the RAM makes little sense since it is highly unlikely to make any perceptible difference. Sorry if that was unclear, wasn't trolling you at all.
 
#25 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by chessmyantidrug View Post

The difference will depend on the game, obviously. I never said it was an earth shattering level of difference, just that it was a difference. If you want to claim there is no difference, go ahead and be wrong. The fact remains sew333 can attempt to overclock the RAM kit they currently own in lieu of replacing it with another kit. I'm not saying replace the RAM. I'm saying the exact opposite. Not sure why people insist on trolling.
What ciarlatano said, perceptible and perceivable difference is key, not numbers or graph lines .. if I can't notice a difference in my daily uses, it's not enough to worry about .. or spend time changing / overclocking to get.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top