How best proceed with overheating i7-4790K?

[REnso1]

I have an i7-4790K in a GA-Z97MX Gaming 5 mobo latest F4 BIOS.

I used a Noctua NH-L12 cooler rated at 95W for cooling the processor rated at 88W in a Lian Li PC V354 with 4 fans, 2 in 2 out, case closed and case open, ambient is 27-30°C.

Temperatures in BIOS and memtest86+ were high so I decided to try stress testing and in Prime95 small FFT cores 1&2 overheated to 100°C using Core Temp.

I tried reseating the heatsink and renewing the NT-H1 TIM and opening the case but it made no difference. I have a photo of the contact pattern here.

When I tested using the OCCT benchmark I was unable to complete a test due to the processor overheating so I underclocked the processor to 3.6 GHz, disabled turbo and manually set vCore to 1.1v.

With an underclocked processor I was able to get a heating and cooling curve using the OCCT auto capture, to enable me to study the problem.

Even when underclocked the processor was reaching high temperatures, rapid fluctuations in temperature with work load suggest a bottleneck in the thermal pathway. When I tested with the intel retail cooler which came with the CPU the cooling was much less effective than the NH-L12 (even when underclocked taking just over a minute of OCCT to reach the 85°C cut off point see below) indicating the NH-L12 was doing a good job of removing heat, which meant the processor was making the heat or the source of the bottleneck.

I have discussed it http://forums.hexus.net/cpus/327593-4790k-overheating-nh-l12.html elsewhere. Advice was to contact Intel due to an absence of information relating to my retailer's testing procedures. I have asked about these but am still waiting for a reply.

So my question is how should I proceed from here? Does this qualify for an RMA? If so is it possible to negotiate this with Intel direct or do I have to go through my retailer?

I have done my best to make sure I am not doing anything wrong and I would be grateful for any pointers to any mistakes I may be making.

[APark7]

How about that. Good call on checking the web archive.

I'm curious though, if you are reconsidering this CPU for your build, what would you use instead? I honestly think I'd still buy this CPU again if I did it all over ; I would just have made sure to get a CPU cooler that was half-way decent. I'm getting really good results with the Hyper 212 EVO.

I do believe there are still some issues with some of these CPUs (as evidenced by the OP here), with some having significant issues. It really does seem to be a bit of a crap shoot though, and even with a good example, the stock cooler is still garbage.

[WMoor1]

I already have an Hyper 212 EVO on my AMD FX-8350 and was going to use it with the i7-4790K, but I've read reports of people getting temps of 90C+ even with that cooler. Granted some (like you) don't, but I've read a few specific complaints and it really bothers me. Then this thread came along and it doesn't make comfortable reading.

I've had so many problems with my AMD system that I want to dump it forever, and I would like to replace the motherboard, CPU and RAM with the confidence that I won't have more battles to fight once I've got them. The i7-4790K appealed because of the similar clockspeed. Even though it's a much better chip than the FX-8350 for other reasons, it still feels somehow wrong to switch to a CPU with a lower turbo speed, but that's probably what I will end up doing.

[MCout5]

@fauxtronic: I also switched over from an AMD CPU with a Hyper 212 (e.g. the FX-6300, installed in a motherboard that had issues), and the cooler works fine with the 4790K. However, as I posted before, I have to disable the Turbo option and run the processor at 4Ghz.

This makes me sad as I was told that Intel CPUs offered better performance and stability (all while costing a LOT more). I will most probably switch back to AMD when its next generation of processors come out. Heat was NEVER a problem with the FX line, and I could push the CPU to its limits without breaking a sweat. My only gripe was some games crashed on me when overclocking, and that compelled me to look at the alternative. I almost wish I didn't do it...

[WMoor1]

Yeah, if you're gotta disable the turbo then you might as well have got the non-K version for less. 4GHz in turbo mode with all of those features (virtualization support and instruction set extensions) that the K version doesn't have. Even the 4770K looks like a better deal than the 4790K if you've got to disable turbo.

[MMcCu6]

Looking for some advice on whether my 4790k is faulty.

I initially installed it with a Corsair H80i, but when I ran a OCCT stress test the temps flew over 85C in just a few seconds from about 30C idle. I remounted the fan and replaced the paste, but with no improvements. I also updated my bios (Asus Hero VII), but this had no effect.

After that I installed the stock fan and idle temps were about 35-40C, but the OCCT resulted in the same thing, shoots to 85C and the test shuts itself off. The same thing happens when playing games. Thermal throttling kicks in and I have to shut the game off. No overclocking at this point, turbo boosts to 4.4Gz and voltages look normal.

[REnso1]

That is too hot, according to http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cooling/2012/12/17/noctua-nh-l12-review/2 BitTech the H80i is at least 10°C cooler under load than the Noctua NH-L12 I am using.

Using default settings with RAM SPD (1333 1.5v) and 4x44 turbo my OCCT test with a good replacement CPU and NH-L12 is as follows, as posted /message/253168# 253168 in this thread # 36.

It is maxing at 79°C. If yours exceeds this with the H80i then there is something wrong but you need to eliminate the cooler seating.

My advice is,

• Check you have latest OCCT.
• Check seating of the CPU block. Corsair are known to be tricky to seat on many motherboards and I read the fix is to add non conductive spacer washers to the backplate to pull the block in closer.

[nsato4]

I just got a replacement I7 4790k from microcenter today.

I can happily report that I can run OCCT 4.4.1 for more then 30 seconds now. With the previous cpu the program errored out due to cpu temps going above 85C. I'm 4 minutes in @ 100% load. Cores are averaging around 75C and power is ~112watts!

I'd highly suggest getting a replacement if yours is exhibiting high temps like mine was. After ruling out cpu heatsink seating issues and other type issues.

[SBuck1]

Trust me I'd love to get it replaced. Newegg won't take it back without original packaging, and Intel doesn't think there's anything wrong with it.

[SElwa]

Nsato333

Could you please tell me what is your CPU VCore? If it auto tell me the range

[nsato4]

Everything is back to default so set to auto currently.Looks like coreTemp is reporting VID = 1.2766v, OCCT is reporting VID=1.27v, gigabyte's Hardware Monitor via APP Center is reporting 0.18-1.296v under 'cpu', and CPU-Z is reporting 1.272v

Again this is a Gigabyte GA-z97mx gaming 5 with a cooler master seidon 120v

[BBere2]

Hello Nsato333, I'm really interested in this topic because I bought one last week but i can't assemble until other pieces arrive. My processor is L420B771, what batch is your? and you are using the stock heatsink? Thanks.

[nsato4]

Looks like my working CPU is batch L426B936. I don't remember the batch# of the one I returned, but it was started with L4 as well.

And I'm using the water cooled, cooler master seidon 120v, though it didn't matter with heatsink I tried to use with the one that was giving me high temp issues. For me the difference was VERY obvious. 100% load was @ 100C on the former and now this one isn't even breaking 80C @ 100% load.

[SElwa]

Nsato333

You said you tested the new CPU with cooler master seidon 120v but did you test it with the stock cooler and if yes what is the full load temperature?

[nsato4]

I did not. Once I saw it working with the cooler master I didn't want to reseat another heatsink.

[SElwa]

Nsato333 I think if cooler master seidon 120v give you average 75C at full load, then by logic the stock cooler would give you above 90C and if so I can't see how is that solved, I hope the Intel team tells us is it the CPU or the stock cooler or something else cause as you see some people solved the problem by updating the bios others by modifying bios settings others by replacing the CPU others by using aftermarket coolers.

[BBere2]

Yeah, I dunno. I bought asus maximus VII ranger for this CPU but i'm really worried about overheating issue and the silence from intel. I'm going to use the stock heatsink like my q6600 but the temperatures in this topic exceed my temps with q6600 at full idle with stock HS by 15+ ºC.

[nsato4]

Obviously it's hard to assume the stock HS temps, I've read that the cooler master 120v is good, but not that great. I'm just happy that I can run at 100% load without this thing crapping out. Though

actually looking at AnandTech's testing, it looks pretty much on par with what they're reporting.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8227/devils-canyon-review-intel-core-i7-4790k-and-i5-4690k AnandTech | Devil's Canyon Review: Intel Core i7-4790K and i5-4690K

They used a Corsaid H80i with 2 fans in push pull config where I only have one fan.

More interesting that they were able to get Vcore down to 1.2v for the same freq.

[SElwa]

Update: I returned my CPU for replacement, but before that the maintenance guy tested my CPU on my board (GA-Z97X-UD3H) and the CPU temp in bios was between (51c to 64c) then he tried another thermal paste (Noctua NT-H1) and the result was the same, then he tried my CPU on a different board named (Asus Z87-C) and the CPU temp in bios was ~41c, he told me that is not normal too, it should be between 30c to 35c then he agreed to the replacement, I am getting the new CPU after 6 days from now.

Update 2: you said "More interesting that they were able to get Vcore down to 1.2v for the same freq." why is it interesting? I managed to do the same "to get Vcore down to 1.2v for the same freq"!

[nsato4]

Just that the default vcore makes the temps reside just under 80C for 100% load. While the 1.2v vcore drops the temps to ~72 at 100% load. I would figure Intel would be less conservative with the default vcore.

[IHomb]

I'm also facing problems with my 4790k, just noticed that it is hitting 100c under load and this is really worrying, as I never had any issues with my previous builds and I have already re-ensured that the thermal compound and heat sink are correctly applied and placed.

I hope intel can get back to us soon regarding this as it seems that we have all done everything correctly but the chip is not performing as spec-ed.

I think we would all appreciate it if Allan could give up a periodic update on the progress on this issue.

Thanks!

[JVene1]

I've read about this overheating issue for the past few days, including this entire thread.

We've all read reviews comparing the 4790k to the 4770k (and others) relative to heat, with promises that the "new" thermal compound is doing better than the old material. I've yet to read a review, mostly dated several months back, which observed this temperature problem (100C at stock speeds under load, throttling, etc). This is also true of the heatsink / water cooling system reviews which include the i7 line in their comparisons. It just doesn't come up.

Yet, we are seeing it happen. Not every CPU, and it appears to be widely variant.

There are some unintentionally hilarious "tutorials" on Youtube and blogs involving hammers, wood, vices and drastic measures. The more tame versions use razors, but all revolve around one central theme. They theorize that the IHS is not touching the CPU die, and/or the thermal compound inside is junk.

Now, these are anecdotal at best, but taken as a whole, once the laughter subsides from watching someone kinetically launch their CPU toward a canopy, they do seem to demonstrate there's a problem of varying manufacture of the final assembly of the IHS, and that corrective measures (which are risky for anyone with sense) are actually simple in their basic form. If the IHS were to make better contact with the die, and/or the thermal material were more carefully chosen, there wouldn't be as many (or any) reports of such high temperatures.

Now, in reality, there's only one reason to purchase a "K" chip, and that reason theoretically voids the warranty, so these drastic measures aren't really as crazy as they appear, yet there IS a failure rate of about 25% for those attempting it. It would appear there are knowledgeable enthusiasts with 95%+ success at this, but we should really hope for a better solution from a multi-billion dollar company. This echoes the Pentium 3-600 (it was overclocked from the factory, infamous for failure), and the NVidia melting GPU's, or the XBox 360 melting GPU's from a few years ago. It seems there's a simple, preventable and easily corrected error in the choice of materials and/or fabrication.

For example, those intrepid, brave experimenters, after having sent their i7 through a guillotine, discovered the black glue holding the IHS onto the PC board is really thick. Thick enough, and likely of a type of adhesive that expands slightly when it cures, that it may be lifting the IHS upward, separating the plate from the die. Some report seeing evidence of an air pocket within the TIM, which would thoroughly explain heat transfer problems.

It is entirely possible that this glue settles. Some have reported odd and sudden changes, or improvements, which they may explain as adjustments in BIOS settings, but it could be that after some time, some heat and the constant pressure of a mounted heatsink, the IHS squeezes on the glue, moving the IHS toward the CPU die, some fraction of a mm, making the critical difference in physical contact and therefore thermal transfer.

I assume that big name makers are seeing this in their production lines, but notice the bad chips, replace them - and thus we have SOME reason to suggest that i7 based systems for consumers may well be best purchased from name brand assemblers like HP, Dell, Apple and the like.

That's not an i7 "K" customer. We're left with a problem. We're going to have to gripe, return, RMA and hope for a decent performer on the Nth attempt, and a correction to what appears to be genuinely a manufacturing problem. Or, we're going to take a hammer to the thing!

I doubt there will be a mae culpa published on a forum like this, until an official response can be designed.

The design problem, with less impact, apparently dates back through Sandy and Ivy Bridge parts. The Devil's Canyon parts are already a "correction" to the 4770K, and it's not working.

Temperatures in the 88W I7 are higher than we see in other 125 watt CPU's using the same HSF, which makes no sense - unless it is a fabrication problem.

For years the IHS was soldered onto the die. There are some current parts built that way, but not these. Maybe it really isn't necessary to solder, I don't know - but it is absolutely necessary to make CONTACT, because TIM just doesn't convey heat like contact does, and every microscopic amount of additional space between the die and the IHS gives dramatic climbs, and variances, in thermal transfer effectiveness.

It's just too obvious now at these speeds, power and generation.