Zen2 waterblock comparison - Page 3 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

Zen2 waterblock comparison

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #21 of 34 (permalink) Old 08-06-2019, 01:15 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
mongoled's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Ayia Napa, Cyprus
Posts: 375
Rep: 15 (Unique: 11)
Quote: Originally Posted by PhillyB View Post
snipp......In reference to the EK understanding of the Zen2 chip...Im not convinced that AMD support understands it. Too many variables to manage and not a lot of clarity on why bios voltages are so high when they work with such a low voltage.
Although im partially in agreement here,

this is the main reason (below response from them) I said that EK support staff are not well informed with regards to Ryzen 3000 series


Quote: Originally Posted by EK Support Staff Member - Email response
According to what you have sent us (screenshots) we can tell, that your Maximum voltage is 1.5V (too much) which then the cause of this can be the rise of the temperature like in your case 85.5°C.


As you mentioned already "Peak temperature of 85C @ 1.3 volts", this is not true, but you have this temperature with 1.5V.

Yup, the above is what they told me, I answered back to them to first educate themselves on how Ryzen 3000 series CPUs work with regards to PBO and PB2 and specifically with regards to voltages/temperature/frequency and how many cores were active

SeaSonic X750 Gold 750W
MSI X370 XPOWER Gaming Titanium | Ryzen 5 3600X 1924SUT
GSkill TridentZ F4-3600C15D-16GTZ @ 3800/1900 mhz | 1.40v | 16-15-15-15-28-46-288-1T
Asus GTX 780 DCII OC @ 1332/3522 mhz | 1.3v | Samsung 960 EVO 500GB
EK-FB MSI X370 XPower RGB Monoblock 1/2" ID | Swiftech D5 MCP655 | EK-XRES 100
Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 280 | 4 x Scythe GT AP-15 @ 5v
Thermochill PA120.3 | 1 x SST-FN123 | 2 x Scythe GT AP-15 | @ 5v

Last edited by mongoled; 08-06-2019 at 01:25 AM.
mongoled is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22 of 34 (permalink) Old 08-07-2019, 03:29 PM
⤷ αC
 
AlphaC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 11,111
Rep: 904 (Unique: 590)
You should be looking at CPU package power.


69% of 128W is 88W

► Recommended GPU Projects: [email protected] , [email protected] (FP64) (AMD moreso) ► Other notable GPU projects: [email protected] (Nvidia), GPUGrid (Nvidia) ► Project list


AlphaC is offline  
post #23 of 34 (permalink) Old 08-07-2019, 11:39 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
mongoled's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Ayia Napa, Cyprus
Posts: 375
Rep: 15 (Unique: 11)
Quote: Originally Posted by AlphaC View Post
You should be looking at CPU package power.

69% of 128W is 88W
Hi!

Sorry but im not entirely sure what you are eluding to.

Are you telling me that I should have told EK to look at the CPU power package ??

SeaSonic X750 Gold 750W
MSI X370 XPOWER Gaming Titanium | Ryzen 5 3600X 1924SUT
GSkill TridentZ F4-3600C15D-16GTZ @ 3800/1900 mhz | 1.40v | 16-15-15-15-28-46-288-1T
Asus GTX 780 DCII OC @ 1332/3522 mhz | 1.3v | Samsung 960 EVO 500GB
EK-FB MSI X370 XPower RGB Monoblock 1/2" ID | Swiftech D5 MCP655 | EK-XRES 100
Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 280 | 4 x Scythe GT AP-15 @ 5v
Thermochill PA120.3 | 1 x SST-FN123 | 2 x Scythe GT AP-15 | @ 5v
mongoled is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #24 of 34 (permalink) Old 08-08-2019, 09:49 AM
⤷ αC
 
AlphaC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 11,111
Rep: 904 (Unique: 590)
Yes the voltage is irrelevant. Nobody rates coolers based on voltage. It just happens that CPU's power normally scaled with the square of voltage with fixed voltage overclocks.


See article: https://www.computerbase.de/2018-08/...uch-amd-intel/


65W TDP 3rd gen Ryzen = 88W power limit , so you're basically similar to stock clocks.


For 2nd gen the TDP was obtained by 0,189 °C/W with a tCASE target around 60°C.

► Recommended GPU Projects: [email protected] , [email protected] (FP64) (AMD moreso) ► Other notable GPU projects: [email protected] (Nvidia), GPUGrid (Nvidia) ► Project list


AlphaC is offline  
post #25 of 34 (permalink) Old 08-08-2019, 10:53 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Kutalion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 310
Rep: 24 (Unique: 23)
Temperature also depends on power dispersion. If most of the TDP is centered around 2-3 cores, the thermal density will be very high, which is naturally hard to cool as it's 7nm process so every core is very small. And Ryzen only shows the hottest core temp.

If you have any question, EK has a forum rep with a good understanding on Ryzen 3000 if the support is not yet familiar with the complex mechanism it works on. Just poke @EKJake
Kutalion is offline  
post #26 of 34 (permalink) Old 08-08-2019, 01:48 PM
⤷ αC
 
AlphaC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 11,111
Rep: 904 (Unique: 590)
If you mean power density, as long as the microfins have coverage I don't see why there would be a difference. All of the microfins have contact with the working fluid/coolant and the fluid is in motion due to the pump.


The temperature may be higher because it's more concentrated, but I mean block to block the main thing is the microfin coverage.

► Recommended GPU Projects: [email protected] , [email protected] (FP64) (AMD moreso) ► Other notable GPU projects: [email protected] (Nvidia), GPUGrid (Nvidia) ► Project list


AlphaC is offline  
post #27 of 34 (permalink) Old 08-09-2019, 12:34 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
mongoled's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Ayia Napa, Cyprus
Posts: 375
Rep: 15 (Unique: 11)
Quote: Originally Posted by AlphaC View Post
Yes the voltage is irrelevant. Nobody rates coolers based on voltage. It just happens that CPU's power normally scaled with the square of voltage with fixed voltage overclocks.

See article: https://www.computerbase.de/2018-08/...uch-amd-intel/

65W TDP 3rd gen Ryzen = 88W power limit , so you're basically similar to stock clocks.

For 2nd gen the TDP was obtained by 0,189 °C/W with a tCASE target around 60°C.

Thanks for clarifying.

I really hope that these BIOS are very immature and that we will see improvements in the way PBO and PB2 work.

As it seems (apart from the few erroneous results floating around with regards to temps) either the Ryzen 3000 series chips with current BIOS implementation are running 'hot' or all our water blocks are doing a poor job in cooling the CPU's.


** EDIT **
Forgot to say, my CPU is a 3600x, which is 95W TDP.

So from what you have said above, my CPU is not even using its power limits 'correctly' .....

SeaSonic X750 Gold 750W
MSI X370 XPOWER Gaming Titanium | Ryzen 5 3600X 1924SUT
GSkill TridentZ F4-3600C15D-16GTZ @ 3800/1900 mhz | 1.40v | 16-15-15-15-28-46-288-1T
Asus GTX 780 DCII OC @ 1332/3522 mhz | 1.3v | Samsung 960 EVO 500GB
EK-FB MSI X370 XPower RGB Monoblock 1/2" ID | Swiftech D5 MCP655 | EK-XRES 100
Alphacool NexXxoS UT60 280 | 4 x Scythe GT AP-15 @ 5v
Thermochill PA120.3 | 1 x SST-FN123 | 2 x Scythe GT AP-15 | @ 5v

Last edited by mongoled; 08-09-2019 at 12:40 AM.
mongoled is online now  
post #28 of 34 (permalink) Old 08-09-2019, 01:02 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Kutalion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 310
Rep: 24 (Unique: 23)
Quote: Originally Posted by AlphaC View Post
If you mean power density, as long as the microfins have coverage I don't see why there would be a difference. All of the microfins have contact with the working fluid/coolant and the fluid is in motion due to the pump.


The temperature may be higher because it's more concentrated, but I mean block to block the main thing is the microfin coverage.
Because it's harder to pull heat away from small concentrated spots than when it's spread around across bigger surface. It's not the same if you have 40W of power on 2 cores, and 40W spread across 6 cores. I'd argue that you could probably have double the power consumption if it's spread across both CCDs and all cores and achieve almost the same temps as having 40W power consumption on 2 cores on let's say single CCD.
Kutalion is offline  
post #29 of 34 (permalink) Old 08-09-2019, 08:52 AM
⤷ αC
 
AlphaC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 11,111
Rep: 904 (Unique: 590)
Yet people are cooling on cheaper mainstream blocks such as Raystorm Neo and Eisblock XPX just fine with R9 3900X or R7 3800X (which has more cores per CCD). Also that is stock power limit (actually lower for than stock for R5 3600X). There goes that theory.


That's nearly stock cooler performance, yet you're defending it?


Click image for larger version

Name:	Temps.png
Views:	4
Size:	50.6 KB
ID:	287410
https://www.techspot.com/review/1871-amd-ryzen-3600/


The EK response reminds me of clueless tech support people that have never taken thermo or heat transfer. Might as well ask people if they turned on their pump too while you're at it. Did you go defend EK when they messed up their Threadripper block too?

► Recommended GPU Projects: [email protected] , [email protected] (FP64) (AMD moreso) ► Other notable GPU projects: [email protected] (Nvidia), GPUGrid (Nvidia) ► Project list


AlphaC is offline  
post #30 of 34 (permalink) Old 08-09-2019, 09:02 AM
Old dog, likes new tricks
 
Bart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 2,283
Rep: 77 (Unique: 64)
EK sucks, this is the conclusion I have come to after years of buying their crap. They are decent for radiators (not the best), decent for pump tops and reservoirs, but I will NEVER buy another EK CPU or GPU block again. Their quality control is an absolute JOKE, and has been for years. They're kinda like Corsair, making cheap products with high price tags, and they succeed because they have been VERY smart with product distribution. You can get their crap EVERYWHERE, while the good stuff like Watercool is harder to come by, depending on what country you live it. Plus, they are very good at being the FIRST to market with wide availability. Look at the Radeon 5700XT, EK had a water block out the door for that thing before AIB partners came out with their own air cooling solutions. It probably came with bad thermal pads, loose screws (or STRIPPED ones, that's an EK specialty), an awful suffocating back plate that looks pretty, costs tons, and makes things worse, etc. You just cannot trust their QC / QA.

Back on topic, my HeatKiller IV CPU block seems to be doing a *fantastic* job of cooling my 3900X, die design be damned. Watercool is quality kit, always has been.

Bart is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off