[SOLVED] Are 9900k tempteratures really that extreme?

[Molda_22]

I am building new system and i am curious if those extreme 9900k temps that people are talking about are really that crazy? Is it not possible to have reasonable temps with great air cooler and good amount of quality fans?
I don't plan to overclock and if yes, then only slightly not anything extreme.
I use the PC for gaming but also often for editing videos, rendering, streaming and multitasking, adobe premier, adobe photoshop etc.
My whole system would be :
9900k CPU
MSI RTX 2070 Gaming Z
Fractal Define R6 case
Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro motherboard
Be Quiet Dark Rock Pro 4 massive air cooler
32 GB DD4 Ram (2x16)
few SSDs and HDDs and one NVME m.2 drive

How big temps should be ok with 9900k and if they became higher, how much trouble can i have then?

(i know new ryzens are coming soon but i don't like to buy newly released CPUs and for XY reasons i need to get new system quickly. And also i am more comfortable with intel builds. Not hating on ryzen though, i like what AMD are doing) thanks for replies

 

[13thmonkey]

So it's a 95W CPU that is specced to need a 130W cooling solution, but really needs a much bigger one. Treat it like a 180W processor that'll guide the acceptability of your cooling solution and hence temps.

 

[NightHawkRMX]

Yup. The 9900k will draw close to 200w at stock, double its rated tdp, so yes, its a beast.

But, if you buy a good quality air or water cooler, thermals can be kept in check.

 

[ElectrO_90]

(i know new ryzens are coming soon but i don't like to buy newly released CPUs and for XY reasons i need to get new system quickly. And also i am more comfortable with intel builds. Not hating on ryzen though, i like what AMD are doing) thanks for replies

You like to buy ones that still have bugs in from 10 years ago

 

[NightHawkRMX]

That lose performance daily.

 

[ElectrO_90]

So it's a 95W CPU that is specced to need a 130W cooling solution, but really needs a much bigger one. Treat it like a 180W processor that'll guide the acceptability of your cooling solution and hence temps.

Intel lie about their power draw. They only measure when its running at lowest clock speed, not when it maxes out - Just blatant misleading customers
AMD quote max TDP when running all cores max speed. - Honesty

 

[NightHawkRMX]

Intel doesnt lie, you just have to disable some features to get rid of half of your performance. Oh wait mds patches already did this.

 

[Molda_22]

i hoped i will be able to keep this thread without all the usual INTEL vs AMD war nonsense. So if someone is willing to converse without it and be a bit more to the point as to my questions and help me, it would be much appreciated.

 

[NightHawkRMX]

With a $75 air cooler and great case airflow, temps will be ok, but not great.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now some opinions:

Buying the I9 9900k is just a terrible idea. It has major security flaws that have been patched killing performance. It gets way too hot and lies about tdp. It is overpriced and requires about another $75 for a cooler. Should I go on?

Ryzen 3900x comes with a decent stock cooler and gaming performance should be similar. AMD has hardware mitigation for spectre and is unaffected by other flaws that required intel to lose performance. Also AMD's 3900x has 4 more cores and 8 more threads. Also, the latest windows update helps ryzens performance, so performance may be even better than AMD showed.

 

[13thmonkey]

i hoped i will be able to keep this thread without all the usual INTEL vs AMD war nonsense. So if someone is willing to converse without it and be a bit more to the point as to my questions and help me, it would be much appreciated.

Treat it like a 200W CPU and you'll manage temps, temp is a result of power in vs cooling power vs ambient temp that's all.

There were the same issues with 67007700/8700K's where the cooling spec was 130W but everyone was treating it like a 95W CPU. For a 95W CPU a 150W cooler would be fine, great even, for a 130W CPU a 150W cooler would be just about adequate, and then you can't OC and/or you'll have high (but safe) load temps.

 

[nuke20ar]

i hoped i will be able to keep this thread without all the usual INTEL vs AMD war nonsense. So if someone is willing to converse without it and be a bit more to the point as to my questions and help me, it would be much appreciated.

To be fair, the first two replies already did answer your question. Did you not read them before you posted this?

Also, to be fair, a simple Google search of: dark rock 4 pro 9900k produced your answer from a multitude of angles, including previous forum posts on this very forum.

 

[Molda_22]

Treat it like a 200W CPU and you'll manage temps, temp is a result of power in vs cooling power vs ambient temp that's all.

There were the same issues with 67007700/8700K's where the cooling spec was 130W but everyone was treating it like a 95W CPU. For a 95W CPU a 150W cooler would be fine, great even, for a 130W CPU a 150W cooler would be just about adequate, and then you can't OC and/or you'll have high (but safe) load temps.

The Dark Rock Pro is supposed to be able to cool CPUs up to 250W so it should be ok - but as seen in multiple tests and reviews etc the temperatures are still quite high under load even with good cooling. i was used to having max 55C temps under load with my previous CPU so i am not used to such high temperatures (80-110C that people report having with this cpu) and thus i am not sure what those high temperatures can cause to the system, to the CPU itself etc.

To be fair, the first two replies already did answer your question. Did you not read them before you posted this?

Also, to be fair, a simple Google search of: dark rock 4 pro 9900k produced your answer from a multitude of angles, including previous forum posts on this very forum.

i have read and seen many topics, reviews, tests and i have of course googled, but since answers to my specific issue were very different everywhere (some people saying its fine, some people say its impossible to cool and many other different opinions) i decided to go here where i was hoping to find helpful people with vastly bigger knowledge and experience than i have and thats what i did. Your post is completely not needed and irelevant. So save yourself some time and don't reply with more useless comments.

 

[NightHawkRMX]

Dark rock pro4 will cool that CPU pretty well.
So would a Noctua NH-d14
Or Corsair H100i pro

 

[Molda_22]

Dark rock pro4 will cool that CPU pretty well.
So would a Noctua NH-d14
Or Corsair H100i pro

i was also considering noctua, perhaps d15 but from what i've found, it has very little clearence for RAM modules unless you mount the cooler fans way up (which in result worsens the cooling capability i think). Even some low profile DDR4 have 40mm height and with slightly adjusted fans noctua have only 37 mm clearence for RAM (32 mm in stock fan position). As for Dark rock pro i've seen pictures with it mounted without problems even with 44mm gskillz RAMs.
Do you think that CPU being constantly in the 80-100C temperature range is dangerous or its not really a problem these days?

EDIT: sorry i was blind and i thought you said the usual D15, but you said d14 which has smaller fans and therefore no problems with RAM modules i guess

 

[NightHawkRMX]

Yea those temps are pretty bad even today. At 100c the CPU will slow itself down to prevent damage, not something you want happening. Hurts performance a lot.

You could buy the H100i if you want best ram clearence.

 

[13thmonkey]

with only 2 sticks of ram you may not have a clearance problem, is it not only the closest slots that suffer?

 

[SgtScream]

I can't wait to get my hands on the deep cool assassin III. It's going to be for my test bench. If that can't tame the i9 9900k, then I don't know what will.

 

[Phaaze88]

This may not help you, but I wanted to try anyway. I've got a 7820x(also 8c/16t, like the 9900k) with a D15S and 2 NF-A14 IPPC 3000s mounted on top of it.
Let it be known that this cpu draws even more power and pushes out even more heat than the 9900k when overclocked.
With a 4.3ghz overclock on mine(default all core turbo is 4.0) running Asus Realbench, gets me between 70-80C. Thermal headroom should be much lower with 9900k, and thus will have more overclocking headroom.
So no, it's(9900k) not as bad as you've heard. Just ensure you have a high end cooler, and you'll be fine. The already suggested coolers are top of the line(for air cooling) at the moment.

 

[Molda_22]

Thanks a lot to everyone for your answers and help. My reply is quite late because i had big problems with the forum last few days. Most of the time i cannot login and if i do, its not showing me new replies even though the main page says there should be new comments in the topic. Some maintenance was going on so i understand. But i am finaly here And thanks to everyone. I do remember that 4 or 5 years back i was also little bit paranoid and cautious when i was doing big PC overhaul but in the end everything worked out great so i think it will be the same now and If i don't mess up the airflow and have a quality cooling and fans it should be ok and i will go for the 9900k. But as some of you suggested i will maybe wait a bit and see what the new ryzens bring.
Now - only one last thing that bothers me - https://forums.tomshardware.com/thr...ctal-r6-without-removing-hdd-section.3489348/

 

[NightHawkRMX]

I think everyone had forum issues yesterday.