Time for a new build

dmanthree

Veteran Member
Messages
12,098
Solutions
1
Reaction score
8,165
Location
(USA), MA, US
After taking a look at the Mac side of the fence, and deciding that Apple doesn't take desktop seriously, I'm getting ready to build a new Intel-based PC. The plan is to use a new X99 MOBO with one of Intel's latest i7 processors. But they don't come with a cooler/fan any more.

Question: has anyone built a PC using the new CPUs? If so, is a liquid cooler really necessary? I don't overclock, so is a standard 'air' cooler OK?

PS: no disrespect to Apple, but as nice as their hardware is, the lack of a mid-level "headless" Mac is a fatal flaw for me.
 
Question: has anyone built a PC using the new CPUs? If so, is a liquid cooler really necessary? I don't overclock, so is a standard 'air' cooler OK?
Air coolers can work too but go for something better than "standard" if you can. Also, keep in mind that liquid coolers are quieter so if fan noise bothers you...
 
I use a Zalman cooler ( air) in my build. It has worked flawlessly for 5 months now and is not loud.

Best Regards,

Guido
 
Question: has anyone built a PC using the new CPUs? If so, is a liquid cooler really necessary? I don't overclock, so is a standard 'air' cooler OK?
Air coolers can work too but go for something better than "standard" if you can. Also, keep in mind that liquid coolers are quieter so if fan noise bothers you...
Ah, good point about noise. I prefer quiet, so I'll probably spring for the liquid cooler. Going to order parts next week for a June build. Time to upgrade the 5 year old PC.
 
Liquid cooling comes in 3 different flavors.

1. Full system with separate components (I have it) means radiator, pump, tank, block on CPU all installed in to separate locations.

2. Self enclosed external system where radiator pump all in one unit and the tank might fit in to 5 1/4 slot or something like that and a block on the CPU.

3. Internal self enclosed system recommended if not overclocking or for mild overclock. These are usually the cheapest too. Small radiator and fan mounts in the back fan location and the tubes are already attached to the block. 5 minutes installation.

For air cooling you can get decent cooler but these are usually very large and hard to fit in to case plus they stress on the motherboard and require supporting plate on the back. I don't like these because if your place is dusty it will deposit dust on the fans and fins.
 
Unless you're overclocking water-coolers are a problem in search of a solution. Intel knows more about cooling their processors and proper thermal management than the geeks on computer web sites that also think plastic panels look cool. Also realize the fan on your water cooler is just as likely to fail as on your CPU. It's location though being mounted near the side of the case is typically less critical than a CPU fan.

There's another possible issue related to water coolers being effective, and that's the actual movement of heat away from the core of the machine. When you take a stock computer build that's designed for basic fan based CPU and onboard video, and you mount some 300watt GPU inside it you have changed the dynamics of the thermal environment significantly. Now the CPU is eating air from the GPU that's quite a bit warmer than the original design, and the addition of a water helps because the water cooler is moving the heat from the CPU directly to the side of the case and removed.

So, it's really GPUs that have crappy thermal management causing most of the issues.
 
Unless you're overclocking water-coolers are a problem in search of a solution. Intel knows more about cooling their processors and proper thermal management than the geeks on computer web sites that also think plastic panels look cool. Also realize the fan on your water cooler is just as likely to fail as on your CPU. It's location though being mounted near the side of the case is typically less critical than a CPU fan.
Somehow I don't think Intel know more than people who are actually using it.

Hence, need for CPU lapping on some CPUs, Devil's Canyon with better internal thermal grease etc... Few years ago someone (in Japan) actually shaved the top of the CPU and got better cooling by attaching block directly on to the chips. And if the fan is going to fail on the water cooling system (external) with dual radiator there is nothing going to happen to the CPU as long as water is kept moving. CPU will run hotter and that is it. Besides I have 4 fans on the radiator. All can't fail at the same time. Pump failing is another story.

Intel is also supplying water cooling solution but it is made by someone else.

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/107147-intels-liquid-cpu-cooler-is-water-worth-the-cost
There's another possible issue related to water coolers being effective, and that's the actual movement of heat away from the core of the machine. When you take a stock computer build that's designed for basic fan based CPU and onboard video, and you mount some 300watt GPU inside it you have changed the dynamics of the thermal environment significantly. Now the CPU is eating air from the GPU that's quite a bit warmer than the original design, and the addition of a water helps because the water cooler is moving the heat from the CPU directly to the side of the case and removed.
This whole paragraph does not make sense. How is it a possible issue and not a solution? Unless you are talking about internal water cooler like the one in the link above.

Another solution would be to install another fan or two on the case. One on the side and one on the top. They don't have to be fast loud fans. I have very slow quite fans but designed to move a lot of air. So even though I have 6 fans running my system is barely audible.
So, it's really GPUs that have crappy thermal management causing most of the issues.
Depends. Some video card designs have secondary cover with fans that throw heat out of the case and since there is no heat coming from CPU with water cooler installed, inside the case is very cool.
 
Last edited:
Unless you're overclocking water-coolers are a problem in search of a solution. Intel knows more about cooling their processors and proper thermal management than the geeks on computer web sites that also think plastic panels look cool. Also realize the fan on your water cooler is just as likely to fail as on your CPU. It's location though being mounted near the side of the case is typically less critical than a CPU fan.

There's another possible issue related to water coolers being effective, and that's the actual movement of heat away from the core of the machine. When you take a stock computer build that's designed for basic fan based CPU and onboard video, and you mount some 300watt GPU inside it you have changed the dynamics of the thermal environment significantly. Now the CPU is eating air from the GPU that's quite a bit warmer than the original design, and the addition of a water helps because the water cooler is moving the heat from the CPU directly to the side of the case and removed.

So, it's really GPUs that have crappy thermal management causing most of the issues.
I won't be installing anything but a mid-level video card, so hopefully that won't be an issue. I'm not a gamer, so I have no need for cutting edge video.
 
Somehow I don't think Intel know more than people who are actually using it.
Uh, I tend to trust people who are engineers, have degrees, do data center design, understand what case -vs- ambient temperature coefficients mean, etc. That's my world. Not seen a water cooler in a production server or workstation I've ever worked on.

Chip makers understand more about thermal management and the thermal efficacy of their products more than people who put LED fans in cases, talk about over clocking and 'skateboard' in the same sentence, etc.
Hence, need for CPU lapping on some CPUs, Devil's Canyon with better internal thermal grease etc...

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/107147-intels-liquid-cpu-cooler-is-water-worth-the-cost
Interface materials are some of the biggest ripoffs in the industry and have been consistently debunked by engineer after engineer. Again, I rarely see these materials in production class computers and servers, and hence don't take it seriously. At best lithium grease. The best thermal interface is otherwise a non interface. Adding a few milligrams of flake silver to grease doesn't make it a better thermal conductor either.

The article (if English is your primary language) doesn't conclude anything about the necessity about water coolers. They are just 'there'.
This whole paragraph does not make sense. How is it a possible issue and not a solution? Unless you are talking about internal water cooler like the one in the link above.
What are you, my senile English teacher? The biggest producers of heat in a computer are those systems that use the most current. Once again, basic physics. Add on enthusiast GPUs consume orders of magnitude more power than CPUs and therefore produce far more heat. If you aren't using one of these GPU's then thermal issues are likely not a problem. Conventional CPU's at stock settings are designed to work with the fan that's shipped with them.
Another solution would be to install another fan or two on the case. One on the side and one on the top. They don't have to be fast loud fans. I have very slow quite fans but designed to move a lot of air. So even though I have 6 fans running my system is barely audible.
Again, production / stock computers don't typically need augmented air flow because the engineers who design them use pretty good models to keep them cool. It's when you start adding multi hundred watt GPU's that multiply the thermal factor by an order of 5x that problems start.
So, it's really GPUs that have crappy thermal management causing most of the issues.
Depends. Some video card designs have secondary cover with fans that throw heat out of the case and since there is no heat coming from CPU with water cooler installed, inside the case is very cool.
Very few GPUs do this, and again, not everybody needs a 300watt GPU in their computer along with LED fans, over clocking, a plastic side panel, and parents yelling upstairs about taking the garbage out.
 
Last edited:
After taking a look at the Mac side of the fence, and deciding that Apple doesn't take desktop seriously, I'm getting ready to build a new Intel-based PC. The plan is to use a new X99 MOBO with one of Intel's latest i7 processors. But they don't come with a cooler/fan any more.

Question: has anyone built a PC using the new CPUs? If so, is a liquid cooler really necessary? I don't overclock, so is a standard 'air' cooler OK?

PS: no disrespect to Apple, but as nice as their hardware is, the lack of a mid-level "headless" Mac is a fatal flaw for me.

--
-------------------------------------------------
http://www2.pmc.org/profile/DM0363
I built a 5960X workstation for video and photo editing a few months ago.

Water cooling is not necessary, if you don't plan on overclocking. But those new Haswell-E CPU's are totally made to be overclocked and it would be a waste not to take advantage of that (especially considering how expensive the 5960X is.) BTW, Intel offers an overclocking warranty for a nominal fee (about $30, IIRC), so it becomes absolutely risk-free.

If you only edit photos, such a system would be truly like trying to crack a nut with a sledgehammer, but if you plan on editing 4K, then an overclocked 5960X can reach the performance of a good XEON. Maybe you don't want to exert it 24/7, because supposedly it's not as "reliable" in the long run. Quite frankly, I've been using it quite intensively for six months or so, and never had a single issue.
 
Last edited:
First of all you missed the fact that OP is talking about X99 motherboard.

Second of all you missed the fact that OP never mentioned GPU.

Third of all I overclock and don't skateboard. So don't insult skateboarders. :-D

Now, x99 means 2011 socket and since OP wants powerful CPU that might not come with a cooler OP is asking. Even without overclocking at 135w DPT and processing a lot of large RAW files like from D800 can get CPU very, very hot.

You on the other hand went off tangent about GPU which OP never asked.

And I have seen workstations running of the server that is inside refrigeration room. And I have seen liquid cooled workstations too including liquid cooled CPU and GPU.

And no, I am not your senile English teacher maybe a little senile. :-D
 
Uh, I tend to trust people who are engineers, have degrees, do data center design, understand what case -vs- ambient temperature coefficients mean, etc. That's my world. Not seen a water cooler in a production server or workstation I've ever worked on.
In fairness, acoustic noise isn't typically much of a consideration in those industrial settings. Heck, if you work around racks full of disks and servers every day your hearing is probably already shot :-)
Very few GPUs do this, and again, not everybody needs a 300watt GPU in their computer along with LED fans, over clocking, a plastic side panel, and parents yelling upstairs about taking the garbage out.
Yeah, we don't need no stinking GPUs :-)

Seriously, with on-board graphics getting better and better, I really wonder how many folks other than gamers and video editors really need a separate GPU?

CS6 runs fine on my laptop with HD4000 graphics. I don't have much use for transparent/animated UI's (Windows or Linux) but they're fine too.
 
After taking a look at the Mac side of the fence, and deciding that Apple doesn't take desktop seriously, I'm getting ready to build a new Intel-based PC. The plan is to use a new X99 MOBO with one of Intel's latest i7 processors. But they don't come with a cooler/fan any more.

Question: has anyone built a PC using the new CPUs? If so, is a liquid cooler really necessary? I don't overclock, so is a standard 'air' cooler OK?
Heat dissipation: Most water coolers are much more effective in this. But that does not mean air coolers are not effective for the 59xx series. Check this ... If you don't overclock then there are several air coolers that will have no problem keeping your cpu cool enough. Still if you plan to overclock modestly (~4Ghz) then you can find some air coolers that can do it very well. For extreme overclocking then you are definitely going to need a water cooler.

Noise: Air coolers can be much more quiet than liquid coolers that other than the fans need also a pump. There are several sites that provide noise levels of different coolers.

Keep in mind that for good air cooling and low noise you will need large fans, large heat sinks and a large case.
 
After taking a look at the Mac side of the fence, and deciding that Apple doesn't take desktop seriously, I'm getting ready to build a new Intel-based PC. The plan is to use a new X99 MOBO with one of Intel's latest i7 processors. But they don't come with a cooler/fan any more.

Question: has anyone built a PC using the new CPUs? If so, is a liquid cooler really necessary? I don't overclock, so is a standard 'air' cooler OK?

PS: no disrespect to Apple, but as nice as their hardware is, the lack of a mid-level "headless" Mac is a fatal flaw for me.

--
-------------------------------------------------
http://www2.pmc.org/profile/DM0363
I built a 5960X workstation for video and photo editing a few months ago.

Water cooling is not necessary, if you don't plan on overclocking. But those new Haswell-E CPU's are totally made to be overclocked and it would be a waste not to take advantage of that (especially considering how expensive the 5960X is.) BTW, Intel offers an overclocking warranty for a nominal fee (about $30, IIRC), so it becomes absolutely risk-free.

If you only edit photos, such a system would be truly like trying to crack a nut with a sledgehammer, but if you plan on editing 4K, then an overclocked 5960X can reach the performance of a good XEON.
Even converting from RAW thousands of file would be much faster with overclocking.

I have 3930K overclocked from 3.2Ghz to 4.5Ghz. To convert 10 RAW files from D810 it takes 52 seconds at 3.2Ghz and 36 seconds at 4.5Ghz. Improvement of 44%. I do thousands of files all the time.
Maybe you don't want to exert it 24/7, because supposedly it's not as "reliable" in the long run. Quite frankly, I've been using it quite intensively for six months or so, and never had a single issue.
I enabled Intel Power Management so most of the time it runs at 1.2Ghz and only when needed it jumps to 4.5Ghz.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top