*Official Benchmark Thread* - Post it here or it didn't happen :D

[Etern4l]

On 3/6/2023 at 8:38 PM, Mr. Fox said:

My impression is that something is not right with the AIO. You will certainly see improved results with a delid and liquid metal if the fit is good, so that is something worth considering regardless of the root cause. I would do that now and see where it leads and it will be out of the way and ultimately provide a benefit even if it doesn't solve the problem you are having.

 

If fit is poor and doesn't make good enough contact for liquid metal, you should see improved temps after delid using thermal paste between the IHS and cold place. I would start with the idea that the AIO is the problem if I were in your shoes, but still do the delid first.

 

One thing I discovered quickly is that the contact was poor on the top 25% of the IHS. I was able to correct that to near perfection by varying the tightness of top vs bottom contact frame screws (over a couple of time consuming iterations), and this resulted in significant temp improvements (10C?), however, not enough to restore performance to the initial state where I was able to pull 320-330W in CB.

 

My current hypothesis is that because of essentially incorrect mount, the solder under the IHS sustained some sort of damage over time, truly necessitating a delid, which does actually seem like a reasonably straightforward process.

I am assuming that Rockit is still the best tool to use at this time, and this seems like the only place to get it from:

https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/copper-upgrade-kit-intel-12th-gen

 

BTW am I correct in assuming that the Rockit copper IHS will not fit the contact frame? They advertise it as having 9% larger contact area (something Intel should have considered, in addition to using a less ****** ILM and general IHS design). 

If that's the case, would filing the interior of the contact frame to make it fit the larger IHS work, or would it just destroy the frame? Failing that, I would have to go back to using the ILM (if I wanted to benefit from the larger IHS), potentially risking further bending issues. 

 

On 2/18/2023 at 4:29 PM, Papusan said:

 

@Tenoroon Did you bake in the liquid metal?

 

What do you mean by that? Reapplying shortly after the first application (in case of any copper surfaces)?

 

BTW @Papusan I'm assuming you delided your 13900K. Which tool and IHS (if any) did you use?

[Mr. Fox]

4 hours ago, Etern4l said:

One thing I discovered quickly is that the contact was poor on the top 25% of the IHS. I was able to correct that to near perfection by varying the tightness of top vs bottom contact frame screws (over a couple of time consuming iterations), and this resulted in significant temp improvements (10C?), however, not enough to restore performance to the initial state where I was able to pull 320-330W in CB.

 

My current hypothesis is that because of essentially incorrect mount, the solder under the IHS sustained some sort of damage over time, truly necessitating a delid, which does actually seem like a reasonably straightforward process.

I am assuming that Rockit is still the best tool to use at this time, and this seems like the only place to get it from:

https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/copper-upgrade-kit-intel-12th-gen

 

BTW am I correct in assuming that the Rockit copper IHS will not fit the contact frame? They advertise it as having 9% larger contact area (something Intel should have considered, in addition to using a less ****** ILM and general IHS design). 

If that's the case, would filing the interior of the contact frame to make it fit the larger IHS work, or would it just destroy the frame? Failing that, I would have to go back to using the ILM (if I wanted to benefit from the larger IHS), potentially risking further bending issues. 

Rockit delid tool works, but it's less than perfect. I don't have one to prove it yet, I believe the one from der8auer (available from EKWB) is superior without the risk of knocking off the SMDs or physically denting the left side of the IHS like a Rockit delid tool does with 12th and 13th Gen. The copper IHS will fit if you take time to grind away part of the "wing" on the left side of the IHS. It took me about 5 minutes of gentle trimming with my Dremmel tool to make it work.

 

If you use the Rockit delid tool, do it in baby steps and check your progress. For some reason you have to watch and make sure the IHS does not start rotating clockwise while it is getting pushed off. If you just go in with guns blazing and push it off like a bull in a china cabinet you might end up with all of the SMDs on the lower  right corner torn off.

 

I need to buy one of the der8auer delid tools.

[Papusan]

5 hours ago, Etern4l said:

 

One thing I discovered quickly is that the contact was poor on the top 25% of the IHS. I was able to correct that to near perfection by varying the tightness of top vs bottom contact frame screws (over a couple of time consuming iterations), and this resulted in significant temp improvements (10C?), however, not enough to restore performance to the initial state where I was able to pull 320-330W in CB.

 

My current hypothesis is that because of essentially incorrect mount, the solder under the IHS sustained some sort of damage over time, truly necessitating a delid, which does actually seem like a reasonably straightforward process.

I am assuming that Rockit is still the best tool to use at this time, and this seems like the only place to get it from:

https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/copper-upgrade-kit-intel-12th-gen

 

BTW am I correct in assuming that the Rockit copper IHS will not fit the contact frame? They advertise it as having 9% larger contact area (something Intel should have considered, in addition to using a less ****** ILM and general IHS design). 

If that's the case, would filing the interior of the contact frame to make it fit the larger IHS work, or would it just destroy the frame? Failing that, I would have to go back to using the ILM (if I wanted to benefit from the larger IHS), potentially risking further bending issues. 

 

 

What do you mean by that? Reapplying shortly after the first application (in case of any copper surfaces)?

 

BTW @Papusan I'm assuming you delided your 13900K. Which tool and IHS (if any) did you use?

Nope. Not delidded. This 13900K and motherboard will be sold on the used market here home. None buy delidded Cpu's. They want warranty over better temps. 

 

The 9% larger contact area is just dumb. You won't gain anything from this.

 

The orginal Intel lid is prefered for desktops. Custom IHS if slightly higher is prefered for LGA laptops.

1 hour ago, Mr. Fox said:

Rockit delid tool works, but it's less than perfect. I don't have one to prove it yet, I believe the one from der8auer (available from EKWB) is superior without the risk of knocking off the SMDs or physically denting the left side of the IHS like a Rockit delid tool does with 12th and 13th Gen. The copper IHS will fit if you take time to grind away part of the "wing" on the left side of the IHS. It took me about 5 minutes of gentle trimming with my Dremmel tool to make it work.

 

If you use the Rockit delid tool, do it in baby steps and check your progress. For some reason you have to watch and make sure the IHS does not start rotating clockwise while it is getting pushed off. If you just go in with guns blazing and push it off like a bull in a china cabinet you might end up with all of the SMDs on the lower  right corner torn off.

 

I need to buy one of the der8auer delid tools.

From what I have seen... The der8auer branded EKWB delidder is weak and will break in pieces. A fragile Alu piece of metal. Some need to try delidde the Cpu +5 times and the delidder is useless afterwards. If you was lucky enough to fix the delidde before it breaks in pieces.

 

The (der8auer branded) EKWB delidder is prefered I think for use with 12th gen due the caps around the die.

[electrosoft]

5 hours ago, Etern4l said:

 

One thing I discovered quickly is that the contact was poor on the top 25% of the IHS. I was able to correct that to near perfection by varying the tightness of top vs bottom contact frame screws (over a couple of time consuming iterations), and this resulted in significant temp improvements (10C?), however, not enough to restore performance to the initial state where I was able to pull 320-330W in CB.

 

My current hypothesis is that because of essentially incorrect mount, the solder under the IHS sustained some sort of damage over time, truly necessitating a delid, which does actually seem like a reasonably straightforward process.

I am assuming that Rockit is still the best tool to use at this time, and this seems like the only place to get it from:

https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/copper-upgrade-kit-intel-12th-gen

 

BTW am I correct in assuming that the Rockit copper IHS will not fit the contact frame? They advertise it as having 9% larger contact area (something Intel should have considered, in addition to using a less ****** ILM and general IHS design). 

If that's the case, would filing the interior of the contact frame to make it fit the larger IHS work, or would it just destroy the frame? Failing that, I would have to go back to using the ILM (if I wanted to benefit from the larger IHS), potentially risking further bending issues. 

 

 

What do you mean by that? Reapplying shortly after the first application (in case of any copper surfaces)?

 

BTW @Papusan I'm assuming you delided your 13900K. Which tool and IHS (if any) did you use?

 

I ordered the Rockitcool kit so it should be here hopefully this week. I need to finish testing and binning a few 12th gens for the NH55 laptop and desktop.

 

Price went up I see. Basically it is $64.99 now as the "$43.99" one is perpetually out of stock. I just went ahead and splurged on the one with the Copper IHS to play around.

[Mr. Fox]

1 hour ago, Papusan said:

Nope. Not delidded. This 13900K and motherboard will be sold on the used market here home. None buy delidded Cpu's. They want warranty over better temps. 

 

The 9% larger contact area is just dumb. You won't gain anything from this.

 

The orginal Intel lid is prefered for desktops. Custom IHS if slightly higher is prefered for LGA laptops.

From what I have seen... The der8auer branded EKWB delidder is weak and will break in pieces. A fragile Alu piece of metal. Some need to try delidde the Cpu +5 times and the delidder is useless afterwards. If you was lucky enough to fix the delidde before it breaks in pieces.

 

The (der8auer branded) EKWB delidder is prefered I think for use with 12th gen due the caps around the die.

You last sentence seems to contradict the first paragraph. Do you mean the der8auer delidder that is NOT sold by EKWB is preferred? Are they different products (EK vs non-EK)? Or do you mean only for 12th Gen? The Rockit delidder has to be used with caution or the IHS will twist and tear off SMDs next to the IHS on the outside, not those under the IHS.  And, so far every 12th and 13th Gen CPU I have delidded with the Rockit tool sustained damage to the IHS. It is poorly designed. You need the copper IHS because the original will be damaged in the process. It will require lapping to remove the damage caused by the delidder. The push block needs to be larger (longer) and not allow the IHS to rotate on top of the die.

 

Warranty is becoming worthless at this point because there is always a lame excuse to shirk responsiblity and some fine print that nobody ever reads that tells them their warranty is worthless. I wonder if those same idiots know they will need to lie to Intel (or AMD) in the rare event they need the warranty? If they admit to overclocking the CPU or memory, Intel  automatically denies the warranty now, just like AMD. Monkey see, monkey do. Honesty is no longer good policy. You'll end up screwed for doing the right thing because the people screwing you are dishonest.

 

Geez, kids these days... I'd rather have a system that malfunctions with a warranty than one that works right with no warranty. Stupid is a nice way of putting it. Those same numbnuts love their BGA filth that overheats, so go figure. When stupidity is so common, the new normal always sucks. Good luck using the worthless warranty, silly kids.

[Papusan]

1 hour ago, Mr. Fox said:

You last sentence seems to contradict the first paragraph. Do you mean the der8auer delidder that is NOT sold by EKWB is preferred? Are they different products (EK vs non-EK)? Or do you mean only for 12th Gen? The Rockit delidder has to be used with caution or the IHS will twist and tear off SMDs next to the IHS on the outside, not those under the IHS.  And, so far every 12th and 13th Gen CPU I have delidded with the Rockit tool sustained damage to the IHS. It is poorly designed. You need the copper IHS because the original will be damaged in the process. It will require lapping to remove the damage caused by the delidder. The push block needs to be larger (longer) and not allow the IHS to rotate on top of the die.

 

Warranty is becoming worthless at this point because there is always a lame excuse to shirk responsiblity and some fine print that nobody ever reads that tells them their warranty is worthless. I wonder if those same idiots know they will need to lie to Intel (or AMD) in the rare event they need the warranty? If they admit to overclocking the CPU or memory, Intel  automatically denies the warranty now, just like AMD. Monkey see, monkey do. Honesty is no longer good policy. You'll end up screwed for doing the right thing because the people screwing you are dishonest.

 

Geez, kids these days... I'd rather have a system that malfunctions with a warranty than one that works right with no warranty. Stupid is a nice way of putting it. Those same numbnuts love their BGA filth that overheats, so go figure. When stupidity is so common, the new normal always sucks. Good luck using the worthless warranty, silly kids.

The EK-Quantum Velocity² IHS Removal Tool is fragile. And you need more tries to get of the lid. In the process you break the the tool and make it useless afterwards. You can't sell it and you risk have to pop of the lid with a another tool. 

 

The EK-Quantum Velocity² IHS Removal Tool is better for the 12th gen that have the caps around the die. And the 12th gen is easier to pop of the lid.

 

Edit. The der8auer EK delidder work the opposite way of etc Rockit-cool delidder. None is happy with the EK quality of the delidder.

[Etern4l]

7 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

Rockit delid tool works, but it's less than perfect. I don't have one to prove it yet, I believe the one from der8auer (available from EKWB) is superior without the risk of knocking off the SMDs or physically denting the left side of the IHS like a Rockit delid tool does with 12th and 13th Gen. The copper IHS will fit if you take time to grind away part of the "wing" on the left side of the IHS. It took me about 5 minutes of gentle trimming with my Dremmel tool to make it work.

 

If you use the Rockit delid tool, do it in baby steps and check your progress. For some reason you have to watch and make sure the IHS does not start rotating clockwise while it is getting pushed off. If you just go in with guns blazing and push it off like a bull in a china cabinet you might end up with all of the SMDs on the lower  right corner torn off.

 

I need to buy one of the der8auer delid tools.

 

Jay wasn't impressed with the EK delidder, might not be the same as advertised by derBauer:

 

 

I'm not sure anything is available directly from derBauer (as a rule of thumb, very little is ever actually in stock). Will check later. 

 

6 hours ago, Papusan said:

The 9% larger contact area is just dumb. You won't gain anything from this.

 

Care to elaborate? In my case the coolant is cold-ish, meaning there is not enough heat exchange happening. Additional IHS and coldplate surface areas should help with this? If I look at the Xeon and EPYC, and even Threadripper IHSes, they are substantially larger than LGA 1700, while the CPUs don't necessarily push that much more power by default. Similarly, CPU water blocks typically have much larger coldplates than most AIOs. 

 

5 hours ago, electrosoft said:

 

I ordered the Rockitcool kit so it should be here hopefully this week. I need to finish testing and binning a few 12th gens for the NH55 laptop and desktop.

 

Price went up I see. Basically it is $64.99 now as the "$43.99" one is perpetually out of stock. I just went ahead and splurged on the one with the Copper IHS to play around.

 

Nice, good luck and please keep us posted. 

 

5 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

 

Warranty is becoming worthless at this point. 

 

Good luck using the worthless warranty, silly kids.

 

Yeah I'm not sure warranty would help me here. "Oi Intel, used to be able to pull 330W in CB23, now 2 cores are hitting 100C and unable to pull more than 240W". I doubt this would be an acceptable claim. Even if the warranty is honoured in this case, how long will it take to process, and what will be the quality of the replacement CPU? 

 

Warranty would probably help in case of the CPU dying, which is something there has been no recorded case of in the last 40 years or so ;) 

[Papusan]

12 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

Care to elaborate? In my case the coolant is cold-ish, meaning there is not enough heat exchange happening. Additional IHS and coldplate surface areas should help with this? If I look at the Xeon and EPYC, and even Threadripper IHSes, they are substantially larger than LGA 1700, while the CPUs don't necessarily push that much more power by default. Similarly, CPU water blocks typically have much larger coldplates than most AIOs. 

Its already tested that the slighly bigger surface on some custom IHS don't provide better results. And the difference in size area isn't that big. 

 

I prefer the orginal lid if I use the Cpu in desktops. Also in LGA laptops if the mounting pressure was good enough. But that's not the case for laptops. Hence a thicker custom lid works best in LGA laptops.

12 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

Yeah I'm not sure warranty would help me here. "Oi Intel, used to be able to pull 330W in CB23, now 2 cores are hitting 100C and unable to pull more than 240W". I doubt this would be an acceptable claim. Even if the warranty does get accepted, how will it take to process, and what will be the quality of the  replacement CPU? 

 

Warranty would probably help in case of the CPU dying, which is something there has been no recorded case of in the last 40 years or so 😉

How is the temp spread within the cores? And can the CPU run within 13900K PL2 specs (253w)?

[Tenoroon]

15 hours ago, Tenoroon said:

This adapter is just plain WEIRD...

It refused to give a picture by itself and I don't have any motherboards that leave the iGPU on when a dGPU is installed sadly. I had to tear down my SFF Optiplex 990 as it's the only motherboard I have with 2 PCI-e slots. I put my Quadro 600 in the main x16 slot and the 860m in the secondary x4 slot. I finally got everything working, but the 860m gave a code 10 and GPU-Z was brought to its limits. GPU-Z said I had an 860m with a GK104 core, 640 CUDA cores (like the GM107 860m), and 53 TMUs (??????). I had to re-install Win7 on the SSD I was using so I just planned on attempting to install drivers after stuff updated. Finally, during one of the final batches of updates, I noticed Windows automatically installed drivers for both the Quadro and 860m. I immediately switched the DP cable from the Quadro to the adapter and it displayed a picture. I then tried to install drivers via NVCleanInstall and despite me modding the .inf and everything, the "new" drivers would revert the GPU back to a code 10 and display nothing when plugged in. I gave up on driver installation and did a system restore to go back to what I originally had. I then ran Unigine Heaven and the 860m refused to pull over 30 watts. What made this weird was that in GPU-Z, during the benchmark, it always said the GPU was "idle" and hadn't reached its power limit.

After failing at the benchmark, I tried taking the Quadro out to see if it would POST with just the 860m. Something else I noticed was that the 860m would NOT show a picture until Windows loaded and the drivers for it loaded. (This reminds me when people upgraded non-pascal laptops with pascal+ GPUs and finding that everything worked, but they would lose BIOS access.) With only the 860m in and in the x16 slot, the motherboard would beep 32 times and then proceed to boot normally without a picture at all. I still can't figure out what the beeping indicates for this proprietary board, but it doesn't really matter. I then went back to 860m in x4 slot and Quadro in x16 slot and checked event viewer and Windows did say it booted and loaded correctly whenever I had only the 860m in. I then tried putting the 860m in the x16 slot with the Quadro in the x4 slot, but that produce the same problem, only this time, the Quadro was able to display an image, but drivers weren't loaded for both GPUs.

I also noticed the very bottom DP port on the adapter doesn't work, but that may be because the 860m was never intended to be able to output on 4 displays.

This adapter is weird, but good enough to test things. Hopefully NorthwestRepair can work his magic whenever it gets sent to him, maybe he can figure out how this adapter works too. Only time will tell.

 

1080 doesn't work 😞

It detects, but code 10 again and the drivers that windows install do not work with neither the 1080 or 1070 (I tested both.) I'd assume this because they are newer.

I might try Windows 10 to see if that can fix any problems, but I'm lazy and the adapter should provide enough information to tell if a card can POST or not. I will probably message the seller and see if they respond...

[Raiderman]

11 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

https://hwbot.org/submission/5230241_

Looks like you flashed the vbios? I have not done anything yet, been too busy. How'd it go for you? No issues? 2800 boost clocks are pretty good arent they? Not sure what the defaults are on the 6900xt, but in wattman the sliders go to 2150 mem, and 2800mhz clock. I have never been able to bench anything above 2670mhz. Anything above that will artifact heavily and crash.

The Sapphire Pulse version,  I think,  is a slightly lower binned chip. For most runs, it has to be around 2600mhz.

[Etern4l]

46 minutes ago, Papusan said:

Its already tested that the slighly bigger surface on some custom IHS don't provide better results. 

 

Apart from the fundamental physics, if not common sense, which dictate that a larger IHS is strictly preferable (when matched with an appropriate coldplate, sorry Arctic), the opposite has also been shown:

 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3238-custom-copper-ihs-tested-on-intel-i7-8700k-cpu-rockit-cool

 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3295-ryzen-custom-copper-ihs-tested-on-raven-ridge-apus

 

BTW This is an interesting thread: https://linustechtips.com/topic/1448543-psa-the-rockit-cool-copper-ihs-for-the-i9-12900ks-will-make-your-cpu-incompatible-with-most-custom-socket-upgrades/

 

People are saying that the Rockit copper IHS is not compatible with contact frames (how could it be if its 10% larger? The frame fit over the original IHS is very tight). The the Rockit owner presumably shows up (around March 2022) and says they developed a new IHS which is compatible with frames. People then ask for data on whether the new smaller IHS + frame performs any better than the old larger IHS and get crickets. Perhaps what @Mr. Fox used was the new shrunk IHS? 

 

Edit: yeah, looks like Rockit deprecated the larger IHSes. What people have been getting lately is the standard size IHS (which apparently still doesn't fit well!), defo the IHS size discussion is academic with regards to LGA1700. 

[Papusan]

38 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

 

Apart from the fundamental physics, if not common sense, which dictate that a larger IHS is strictly preferable (when matched with an appropriate coldplate, sorry Arctic), the opposite has also been shown:

 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3238-custom-copper-ihs-tested-on-intel-i7-8700k-cpu-rockit-cool

 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3295-ryzen-custom-copper-ihs-tested-on-raven-ridge-apus

 

BTW This is an interesting thread: https://linustechtips.com/topic/1448543-psa-the-rockit-cool-copper-ihs-for-the-i9-12900ks-will-make-your-cpu-incompatible-with-most-custom-socket-upgrades/

 

People are saying that the Rockit copper IHS is not compatible with contact frames (how could it be if its 10% larger? The frame fit over the original IHS is very tight). The the Rockit owner presumably shows up (around March 2022) and says they developed a new IHS which is compatible with frames. People then ask for data on whether the new smaller IHS + frame performs any better than the old larger IHS and get crickets. Perhaps what @Mr. Fox used was the new shrunk IHS? 

 

 

 

If you get the Copper IHS be sure that the cold-plate on the AIO is sanded completely flat.

[Mr. Fox]

46 minutes ago, Raiderman said:

Looks like you flashed the vbios? I have not done anything yet, been too busy. How'd it go for you? No issues? 2800 boost clocks are pretty good arent they? Not sure what the defaults are on the 6900xt, but in wattman the sliders go to 2150 mem, and 2800mhz clock. I have never been able to bench anything above 2670mhz. Anything above that will artifact heavily and crash.

The Sapphire Pulse version,  I think,  is a slightly lower binned chip. For most runs, it has to be around 2600mhz.

No, I cannot flash it. Still has the stock vBIOS. It runs out of core voltage to go higher that 2800 (1.200V is not enough). It is not a 100% stable product when overclocked beyond a little bit past stock. Sometimes it runs smoothly and other times using the same MPT profile it is totally unstable. Very odd and frustrating, but this has been what I have always experienced with AMD products, so I am not complaining or surprised by it.

 

What does make me surprised and want to complain is lack of Windows 7 functionality. If I attempt to boot Windows 7 with the 6900 XT it not only fails miserably, it wreaks all sorts of havoc with my Windows 10/11 installations. After Windows 7 fails to boot, I have a somewhat difficult time getting the other two OSes to boot again. Something with the ASROCK vBIOS is really messed up in this respect.  It takes multiple chkdsk operations on each OS (individually when they are attempting to load) to get them to boot again.

 

Out of curiosity, I pulled out the 6900 XT and dropped in the 3060 Ti and *BOOM* Windows 7 runs like a top again. No issues whatsoever. This really rubs me the wrong way. ASROCK did something wrong with the firmware, but I don't know what or why.

39 minutes ago, Etern4l said:

 

Apart from the fundamental physics, if not common sense, which dictate that a larger IHS is strictly preferable (when matched with an appropriate coldplate, sorry Arctic), the opposite has also been shown:

 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3238-custom-copper-ihs-tested-on-intel-i7-8700k-cpu-rockit-cool

 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3295-ryzen-custom-copper-ihs-tested-on-raven-ridge-apus

 

BTW This is an interesting thread: https://linustechtips.com/topic/1448543-psa-the-rockit-cool-copper-ihs-for-the-i9-12900ks-will-make-your-cpu-incompatible-with-most-custom-socket-upgrades/

 

People are saying that the Rockit copper IHS is not compatible with contact frames (how could it be if its 10% larger? The frame fit over the original IHS is very tight). The the Rockit owner presumably shows up (around March 2022) and says they developed a new IHS which is compatible with frames. People then ask for data on whether the new smaller IHS + frame performs any better than the old larger IHS and get crickets. Perhaps what @Mr. Fox used was the new shrunk IHS? 

 

Edit: yeah, looks like Rockit deprecated the larger IHSes. What people have been getting lately is the standard size IHS (which apparently still doesn't fit well!), defo the IHS size discussion is academic with regards to LGA1700. 

If you have a dremmel tool grinding off a small portion of the "wing" on the left side of the IHS allows it to fit perfectly with the Thermalright CPU frame. The new copper IHS design is *almost* identical to stock. Had they made the left side wing exactly the same dimensions as stock it would not have any issues serving as a direct replacement with no modding needed to use the CPU frame.

 

Since your stock IHS is probably going to get the left side dented if you use the Rockit delid tool, it can also be fixed and used with lapping. The damage can be corrected, but you'll have a "ruined" stock IHS when all is said and done. Not a deal breaker in the grand scheme of things, but inexcusable and distressing for anyone that is not technically savvy. 

[Raiderman]

29 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

No, I cannot flash it. Still has the stock vBIOS. It runs out of core voltage to go higher that 2800 (1.200V is not enough). It is not a 100% stable product when overclocked beyond a little bit past stock. Sometimes it runs smoothly and other times using the same MPT profile it is totally unstable. Very odd and frustrating, but this has been what I have always experienced with AMD products, so I am not complaining or surprised by it.

 

What does make me surprised and want to complain is lack of Windows 7 functionality. If I attempt to boot Windows 7 with the 6900 XT it not only fails miserably, it wreaks all sorts of havoc with my Windows 10/11 installations. After Windows 7 fails to boot, I have a somewhat difficult time getting the other two OSes to boot again. Something with the ASROCK vBIOS is really messed up in this respect.  It takes multiple chkdsk operations on each OS (individually when they are attempting to load) to get them to boot again.

 

Out of curiosity, I pulled out the 6900 XT and dropped in the 3060 Ti and *BOOM* Windows 7 runs like a top again. No issues whatsoever. This really rubs me the wrong way. ASROCK did something wrong with the firmware, but I don't know what or why.

If you have a dremmel tool grinding off a small portion of the "wing" on the left side of the IHS allows it to fit perfectly with the Thermalright CPU frame. The new copper IHS design is *almost* identical to stock. Had they made the left side wing exactly the same dimensions as stock it would not have any issues serving as a direct replacement with no modding needed to use the CPU frame.

 

Holy crap batman....You just described what I go through on a daily basis with this build. Constantly having to do chkdsk on the Windows 10 install. I was going to post what happened to me yesterday, and decided not to. Now that you described what you are going through, I think I will.

@Etern4lhad me try out the Indigo benchmark, and I was impressed with how it stressed the cpu, however, shortly after running it, I experienced BSOD's in Windows 10. I couldnt stay in the OS for more than a few seconds, so I reduced everything to stock in the bios, and still had the same issues. So I thought I would try the Windows 7 disk, and it was BSODing before entering the OS, so I was left with nothing to boot to. I thought for sure I cooked the cpu or the ram, so I did a memtest, and it came back normal, I was like wtf! So, finally I went into the bios and disabled XMP, and bam, it booted to both OSes??? After booting back into both OSes, I have since enabled XMP, and my undervolt curve, and have not had issues yet. Another thing is, this build does not like to restart, or shutdown from either OS. The OS itself shuts down/restarts normally, but I think its hanging via the bios or something. Windows will shutdown, screen is blank, but all the power is still on, and the EZ debug LED is stuck on yellow, meaning its hanging. Usually at start up, I get two LED's, red, and Yellow. Yellow off first, then red off, then post... To say the least, I am frustrated. In order to get it to power down completely I must hold the power button, and push it again. Not sure if its the MB, or a flaky bios.

 

But I feel your pain when it comes to chkdsk...I have to run it from within windows 7 to fix my windows 10 disk.

 

Uploading video

[Mr. Fox]

16 minutes ago, Raiderman said:

Holy crap batman....You just described what I go through on a daily basis with this build. Constantly having to do chkdsk on the Windows 10 install. I was going to post what happened to me yesterday, and decided not to. Now that you described what you are going through, I think I will.

This is common in a multiboot with Windows 7/10/11 because one uses "LFS" and the other does not. They do not need to and it is not necessary. Try this and it may stop the problem. 

 

Create this reg file and merge in in Windows 10/11 registry.

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\FileSystem]
"NtfsDisableLfsDowngrade"=dword:00000000
"NtfsDisableLfsUpgrade"=dword:00000001

 

[Raiderman]

 

[Mr. Fox]

12 hours ago, Raiderman said:

 

Maybe my suggestion above will work for you. I hope so.

 

Things are as they should be again...

 

Now, out of sheer curiosity, I need to boot into Windows 7 with the 3090 KPE on the other computer, confirm it still works, then install the 6900 XT and see if it immediately fails.

 

 

[electrosoft]

1 hour ago, Etern4l said:

 

Apart from the fundamental physics, if not common sense, which dictate that a larger IHS is strictly preferable (when matched with an appropriate coldplate, sorry Arctic), the opposite has also been shown:

 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3238-custom-copper-ihs-tested-on-intel-i7-8700k-cpu-rockit-cool

 

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwreviews/3295-ryzen-custom-copper-ihs-tested-on-raven-ridge-apus

 

BTW This is an interesting thread: https://linustechtips.com/topic/1448543-psa-the-rockit-cool-copper-ihs-for-the-i9-12900ks-will-make-your-cpu-incompatible-with-most-custom-socket-upgrades/

 

People are saying that the Rockit copper IHS is not compatible with contact frames (how could it be if its 10% larger? The frame fit over the original IHS is very tight). The the Rockit owner presumably shows up (around March 2022) and says they developed a new IHS which is compatible with frames. People then ask for data on whether the new smaller IHS + frame performs any better than the old larger IHS and get crickets. Perhaps what @Mr. Fox used was the new shrunk IHS? 

 

Edit: yeah, looks like Rockit deprecated the larger IHSes. What people have been getting lately is the standard size IHS (which apparently still doesn't fit well!), defo the IHS size discussion is academic with regards to LGA1700. 

 

Boiled down, a larger IHS or even cold plate must also have a dissipation rate that can take advantage of the increased size else it will just eventually saturate and you end up almost with the efficacy of the smaller IHS and/or cold plate. Of course the idea is to make sure you primarily have proper coverage of the surface needing heat dissipation in the first place (Looking at you Arctic and 13th gen).

 

I have a collection of Rockitcool delidders from 6th through 10th gen (they skipped 11th for several reasons) and they all worked great. I tend to think when I see issues or problems with end users using them it ends up being a problem with their usage and not the actual device itself. Almost every time I check they did something wrong.

 

The one upside of the newer copper Rockitcool IHS for my use is it is slightly taller than the stock Intel IHS for better laptop pairing pressure (if needed) down the road. I have a lot of tinkering ideas planned for this NH55 to extract as much performance as possible from 12900k in it and remove thermals as the main issue. I'm not sure if this was a conscientious design decision (Compensate for width with height for mass equalization) or just a byproduct of the design itself.

 

Outside of that, with my former Silicon Lottery 10900k and LTX 10900k, I actually found I got equal or better results from just using the stock IHS in my X170SM-G and desktop with pairing pressure being a non issue in both scenarios since my original X170SM-G from ZtecPC had all types of mods done to it to allow it to really clamp down on the CPU. My replacement one lacked all the mods (along with my own done) and the difference is immediate and noticeable. If I had held onto it, I was going to slowly re-create the wheel to implement all of them again. The upside was everything inside was fresh and brand new.

 

 

[ryan]

did you guys @Mr. Fox @Papusan see what happened to (hertzian) this is pitiful. I take it he got warning points. this is unacceptable. he did nothing wrong. the members are being treated like fecal matter. you guys are immune but people are being treated like crap for expressing their opinions in a place the should promote opinions. we are here to discuss good and bad. we want a voice. this has to stop, Hertzian did alot of work for the gaming section and NBT in general. can someone speak up.

 

people building the forum, warn them? 

Edited March 20, 2023 by Reciever
Language

[Mr. Fox]

16 hours ago, Mr. Fox said:

Things are as they should be again...

Check the W7 physics score, with NO performance tweaks, at a lower clock speed compared to Winduhz 10/11 filth.

15 hours ago, ryan said:

did you guys @Mr. Fox @Papusan see what happened to (hertzian) this is pitiful. I take it he got warning points. this is unacceptable. he did nothing wrong. the members are being treated like fecal matter. you guys are immune but people are being treated like crap for expressing their opinions in a place the should promote opinions. we are here to discuss good and bad. we want a voice. this has to stop, Hertzian did alot of work for the gaming section and NBT in general. can someone speak up.

 

people building the forum, warn them? 

Hmm... that forum name is... unacceptable. I am surprised it was allowed to exist.

[Raiderman]

7 minutes ago, Mr. Fox said:

Check the W7 physics score, with NO performance tweaks, at a lower clock speed compared to Winduhz 10/11 filth.

Hmm... that forum name is... unacceptable. I am surprised it was allowed to exist.

Wish you could get windows 7 going on that 6900. I get 3300 more physics points in Win 7, but can not come close in the graphics.

 

[ryan]

his name was hertzian. hes done alot for us. we owe him a thanks. not a warning. he will most likely be banned for that name

[Raiderman]

5 minutes ago, ryan said:

his name was hertzian. hes done alot for us. we owe him a thanks. not a warning. he will most likely be banned for that name

What was the warning for?

[electrosoft]

16 minutes ago, ryan said:

he posted and then like 4 hours later posted again to spice things up and then laughed at reciever. with the thumbs up feature. I added a laugh and got 5 warning points. it was completely justified. everyone except you guys get treated like poop. bad day for me as I truely appreciated his posts and what he has done, up to and including a picture thread. very intelligent and nice, down to earth guy

 

not a joke' just a little backdrop on fascism and narcissism. alot of people respect freedom of speech, others do not. I think its funny someone living in the states holds a view such as is evident. we are all entitled to our opinion even if it feels like an attack. he will be missed. I have schizoeffective disorder and have amounted to more. sad when you have no excuse

 

 

Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences.

 

I've been using forums since back in the BBS days (Think 1980s) and acting and behaving in a certain way is required to keep a civilized discourse flowing across all subjects.

 

In the end, these are private forums being offered for free by @Reciever to keep alive the NBR spirit and beyond. It really is a, "If you don't like it, don't use it," approach on the Internet. Many users there (and across every forum I've ever used) have received warnings and many were banned for various infractions.

 

Why am I and most others able to use various forums and go our entire existence never having recieved (pun intended) so much as a warning while others seem to continually be warned, suspended and banned?

 

Why is that?

 

Just something to chew on.

 

 

[ryan]

ill move on but its not good. Iv'e invested 1500 posts