[SOLVED] Can I replace the gpu cooler?

magzzy124

Prominent
Aug 11, 2019
111
3
585
0
I have a sapphire r9 280x dual x cooler.
And I want to replace it with sapphire a r9 280x toxic cooler.
Will that be possible?

If that is not possible, can you suggest me best solutions for cooling my gpu?
 
Last edited:

kiss-method

Commendable
Oct 26, 2018
401
19
1,365
104
Why do you want to mess with it? What are your temps?

Both cards have quite a difference in size from what I saw, I don’t see a point to messing with it if it works. If you’re having issues with card cooling, you can set up an extra fan to direct more air towards the gpu, or clean up your wiring, making a nice and tidy pc case to help with airflow. Get rid of dust bunnies regularly
 
Reactions: Omeggga

kiss-method

Commendable
Oct 26, 2018
401
19
1,365
104
Why do you want to mess with it? What are your temps?

Both cards have quite a difference in size from what I saw, I don’t see a point to messing with it if it works. If you’re having issues with card cooling, you can set up an extra fan to direct more air towards the gpu, or clean up your wiring, making a nice and tidy pc case to help with airflow. Get rid of dust bunnies regularly
 
Reactions: Omeggga

magzzy124

Prominent
Aug 11, 2019
111
3
585
0
Why do you want to mess with it? What are your temps?

Both cards have quite a difference in size from what I saw, I don’t see a point to messing with it if it works. If you’re having issues with card cooling, you can set up an extra fan to direct more air towards the gpu, or clean up your wiring, making a nice and tidy pc case to help with airflow. Get rid of dust bunnies regularly
Yeah, at the end I will just place 2 x 120mm fans on it.. and hope for the best.
 

kiss-method

Commendable
Oct 26, 2018
401
19
1,365
104
I think you should review hardware monitor or hwinfo64 to check your temps, generally 1 decent 120mm will provide up to 10c reduction in temps on a gpu ( varies by card and Pc case)

Are your fans dead?
 

magzzy124

Prominent
Aug 11, 2019
111
3
585
0
I think you should review hardware monitor or hwinfo64 to check your temps, generally 1 decent 120mm will provide up to 10c reduction in temps on a gpu ( varies by card and Pc case)

Are your fans dead?
Kind of a long story, but on my current gpu I have 3 molex fans... they are quite but I cant utilize my gpu to 100% without going over 90C... That is why I am buying 2 120mm pwm fans..
 

mossi

Distinguished
Feb 27, 2013
178
4
18,685
0
I have a sapphire r9 280x dual x cooler.
And I want to replace it with sapphire a r9 280x toxic cooler.
Will that be possible?

If that is not possible, can you suggest me best solutions for cooling my gpu?
Not sure if it helps you but i've recently purchased 2 used GPUs (AMD 7770, AMD R7 260X) for 2 side projects. I took out the shroud of the GPU cooler and replaced it with a decent 120mm fan on each. And replaced the thermal paste. I literally strapped it on with cable ties and a bit wonky.

The temps are great and the noise levels are minimal.
For my main rig my EVGA GTX 1070 FTW is virtually silent and cool so didn't feel the need to do that.
But in older GPUs I wouldn't think twice about replacing the stock cooler of the GPU with just a fan.
It's a mental obstacle to overcome I think.
If you think about it most fans are quite small on stock GPU coolers so replacing it with a bigger one ain't a problem.
 

kiss-method

Commendable
Oct 26, 2018
401
19
1,365
104
Broke your fans while cleaning? There are replacement fans that you could get. But will probably have a bit of lobby shipping or you could look into pciE fan card.

A used rx580 might be a better option for you
 

magzzy124

Prominent
Aug 11, 2019
111
3
585
0
Not sure if it helps you but i've recently purchased 2 used GPUs (AMD 7770, AMD R7 260X) for 2 side projects. I took out the shroud of the GPU cooler and replaced it with a decent 120mm fan on each. And replaced the thermal paste. I literally strapped it on with cable ties and a bit wonky.

The temps are great and the noise levels are minimal.
For my main rig my EVGA GTX 1070 FTW is virtually silent and cool so didn't feel the need to do that.
But in older GPUs I wouldn't think twice about replacing the stock cooler of the GPU with just a fan.
It's a mental obstacle to overcome I think.
If you think about it most fans are quite small on stock GPU coolers so replacing it with a bigger one ain't a problem.
So while on low rpm you were getting good temps? I am definitely doing it now!
 

magzzy124

Prominent
Aug 11, 2019
111
3
585
0
Broke your fans while cleaning? There are replacement fans that you could get. But will probably have a bit of lobby shipping or you could look into pciE fan card.

A used rx580 might be a better option for you
I did not break them while cleaning... when I bought the gpu It already came with 3 molex fans. And I was told that the gpu with molex fans maxed out at 75C... And that was clearly not the case... And I dont have money rn for any decent used gpu...
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
but I cant utilize my gpu to 100% without going over 90C
You do Not want to utilize your gpu to 100%. That's part of the issue, understanding the difference.

Your gpu already runs at 100%, always has. Usage is the amount of resources the gpu has to use in order to Get that 100%.

Think of it like this. You want to put some nails in a piece of wood. Got a regular nail, a regular hammer. You'll hit that nail as fast as you are able to, but you do not use both hands, you do not need to overhead swing and hit it as hard as you can. That's usage. You'll only need to use 1 hand and just hit it decent. 100% usage is getting a giant sledgehammer, using both hands, both arms, your back, legs, everything for that massive blow to drive a little iddy-biddy nail. Same for a gpu, it only needs to use a certain amount of resources in order to produce as many frames in a second as it can. Frames take time to produce, adding usage does nothing. Get 100% usage and when a more complex frame comes along, fps goes in the toilet because the gpu has no room to give more.

You'll get better fps and better playability by optimizing your in-game settings. There's multiple settings that visually do extremely little, but to a gpu add massive amounts or work. Like cloud detailing, lighting etc.

When you snap-scope kill someone in CSGO, it's so fast you don't register any real portion of the details, yet the gpu will painstakingly replicate the shadow affects and lighting coming from the Zit on the side of the enemy's nose. You didn't see it, you didn't care if you missed it, don't care if it was there or not, but gpu will for sure add it, and has to work all those affects. All that work, usage, heat for nothing.

So optimize your settings for what's best for you and the pc, just slapping Generic Ultra - Elite settings doesn't always work and isn't something needed.
 

mossi

Distinguished
Feb 27, 2013
178
4
18,685
0
So while on low rpm you were getting good temps? I am definitely doing it now!
Yeah obviously you won't use here a really low RPM fan(like some Scythe ones that go below 1000) but something that runs up to 2000RPM they usually end up being quieter. One of mine is a Corsair high FCM one. The other one is an Arctic Cooling one (Arctic F12 Case Fan) which works like a charm and goes to 1350rpm at full speed constantly. If you get 2 of those you'll cover the whole heatsink easily I would think.
https://www.arctic.ac/en/F12/AFACO-12000-GBA01
 

magzzy124

Prominent
Aug 11, 2019
111
3
585
0
You do Not want to utilize your gpu to 100%. That's part of the issue, understanding the difference.

Your gpu already runs at 100%, always has. Usage is the amount of resources the gpu has to use in order to Get that 100%.

Think of it like this. You want to put some nails in a piece of wood. Got a regular nail, a regular hammer. You'll hit that nail as fast as you are able to, but you do not use both hands, you do not need to overhead swing and hit it as hard as you can. That's usage. You'll only need to use 1 hand and just hit it decent. 100% usage is getting a giant sledgehammer, using both hands, both arms, your back, legs, everything for that massive blow to drive a little iddy-biddy nail. Same for a gpu, it only needs to use a certain amount of resources in order to produce as many frames in a second as it can. Frames take time to produce, adding usage does nothing. Get 100% usage and when a more complex frame comes along, fps goes in the toilet because the gpu has no room to give more.

You'll get better fps and better playability by optimizing your in-game settings. There's multiple settings that visually do extremely little, but to a gpu add massive amounts or work. Like cloud detailing, lighting etc.

When you snap-scope kill someone in CSGO, it's so fast you don't register any real portion of the details, yet the gpu will painstakingly replicate the shadow affects and lighting coming from the Zit on the side of the enemy's nose. You didn't see it, you didn't care if you missed it, don't care if it was there or not, but gpu will for sure add it, and has to work all those affects. All that work, usage, heat for nothing.

So optimize your settings for what's best for you and the pc, just slapping Generic Ultra - Elite settings doesn't always work and isn't something needed.
I dont think I really get your point... IF my gpu can run a certain game at ultra with decent enough fps.. why not?
I am just saying I cant do that because of the temps.
 

magzzy124

Prominent
Aug 11, 2019
111
3
585
0
Yeah obviously you won't use here a really low RPM fan(like some Scythe ones that go below 1000) but something that runs up to 2000RPM they usually end up being quieter. One of mine is a Corsair high FCM one. The other one is an Arctic Cooling one (Arctic F12 Case Fan) which works like a charm and goes to 1350rpm at full speed constantly. If you get 2 of those you'll cover the whole heatsink easily I would think.
https://www.arctic.ac/en/F12/AFACO-12000-GBA01
I dont think arctic f12 case fan is optimized for pressure... I was planning to buy arctic p12(optimized for static pressure) 120mm fan... I saw the reviews, and it was amazing. (close to noctua).
 

magzzy124

Prominent
Aug 11, 2019
111
3
585
0
Piece by piece, getting the full story 😂

I suggest that you get at least 1 high static pressure fan (used to heat sinks)... Such as
ph-f120
Nf-f12

Comes mind, but there are others
Would arctic p12 120mm fan be good? I saw the results of both I think... Basically the same noise level, but 2-3 degrees worse cooling. The price is amazing. Correct me if I am wrong!
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
I dont think I really get your point... IF my gpu can run a certain game at ultra with decent enough fps.. why not?
I am just saying I cant do that because of the temps.
And what I'm saying is that Ultra in many cases is a waste. It's extra power and temps required by the gpu that are realistically unnecessary. Lighting is the worst offender. You could turn down some of the post processing affects, never see any difference to Ultra, but the gpu wouldn't work nearly as hard. There's a LOT more to settings than Full game Ultra, High or Medium settings.

It's the difference between the gpu having to render every single rock, pebble and shadow on a mountain in the very far distance, and the gpu only putting enough shadow to see the biggest rocks.

You can make the game look almost exactly like Ultra, no realistic difference, and yet use less power to do so, meaning you have lower temps. One click Ultra vs Custom Ultra is intrinsically the same thing to your eyes and gaming, but very different for the gpu.
 
Last edited:

magzzy124

Prominent
Aug 11, 2019
111
3
585
0
And what I'm saying is that Ultra in many cases is a waste. It's extra power and temps required by the gpu that are realistically unnecessary. Lighting is the worst offender. You could turn down some of the post processing affects, never see any difference to Ultra, but the gpu wouldn't work nearly as hard. There's a LOT more to settings than Full game Ultra, High or Medium settings.

It's the difference between the gpu having to render every single rock, pebble and shadow on a mountain in the very far distance, and the gpu only putting enough shadow to see the biggest rocks.

You can make the game look almost exactly like Ultra, no realistic difference, and yet use less power to do so, meaning you have lower temps. One click Ultra vs Custom Ultra is intrinsically the same thing to your eyes and gaming, but very different for the gpu.
I agree that some of the settings do not have a huge impact on graphics. But some do, like anti-aliasing, terrain quality, texture quality.. even shaders. Those are gpu intensive settings that bring up a lot of quality and TEMPS.
I agree that there is a waste to some of the settings(like post processing, I truly dont see a difference). But on the other hand I want to fully utilize my gpu on the settings that have a great impact on image quality, and if gpu is not fully utilized, why not put it into other settings with less impact on image quality?(with stable fps) I hope you get what I am trying to say!
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
Yes, I get what you are saying, but those settings don't work like that as far as usage goes. Usage/utilization, isn't a scale, at Full Ultra on some games it might be 50%. Others might be 60%. Using 4k DSR might put it to 99%. Setting to very high doesn't change usage all that much either.

Usage is the amount of resources the gpu needs to use to complete a frame. It's not the amount of gpu used. By increasing / decreasing settings, you aren't using more or less of the gpu, you are requiring the gpu to use more or use less.

There's absolutely no, nada, zero difference between the gpu using 1% of its bandwidth and 99% of its bandwidth. It's all the exact same. Huge difference between a gpu needing 99% of its resources and a gpu needing 100% of its resources.

It's like driving a car at maximum speed, it doesn't matter if you are on the left side of the lane, the right side of the lane or sitting in the middle of the lane. It does matter if the car is so wide it takes up every last inch of the lane, there's no room for changes, errors, mistakes. Doesn't change the speed a bit.

If using higher set settings just because you feel that there's room, and not getting any real visual improvement you find necessary, the only real result is higher temps for no gains. You aren't using more of the gpu, you already use 100% of the gpu, what you are doing is nothing more than forcing the gpu to use more ram per frame, more bandwidth per frame, higher floating point calculations per frame, more physX per frame, higher voltages and higher amperages to maintain all of that extra per frame. Etc.
 
Last edited:

magzzy124

Prominent
Aug 11, 2019
111
3
585
0
Yes, I get what you are saying, but those settings don't work like that as far as usage goes. Usage/utilization, isn't a scale, at Full Ultra on some games it might be 50%. Others might be 60%. Using 4k DSR might put it to 99%. Setting to very high doesn't change usage all that much either.

Usage is the amount of resources the gpu needs to use to complete a frame. It's not the amount of gpu used. By increasing / decreasing settings, you aren't using more or less of the gpu, you are requiring the gpu to use more or use less.

There's absolutely no, nada, zero difference between the gpu using 1% of its bandwidth and 99% of its bandwidth. It's all the exact same. Huge difference between a gpu needing 99% of its resources and a gpu needing 100% of its resources.

It's like driving a car at maximum speed, it doesn't matter if you are on the left side of the lane, the right side of the lane or sitting in the middle of the lane. It does matter if the car is so wide it takes up every last inch of the lane, there's no room for changes, errors, mistakes. Doesn't change the speed a bit.

If using higher set settings just because you feel that there's room, and not getting any real visual improvement you find necessary, the only real result is higher temps for no gains. You aren't using more of the gpu, you already use 100% of the gpu, what you are doing is nothing more than forcing the gpu to use more ram per frame, more bandwidth per frame, higher floating point calculations per frame, more physX per frame, higher voltages and higher amperages to maintain all of that extra per frame. Etc.
I am not sure I get your point... If gpu is using 50% of its resources then its 50% utilized? Right?
By increasing the settings the gpu is required to use more of its resources thus more of the gpu is being utilized...

I dont understand why is there no difference between 1% and 99% bandwith.. and why is there a big difference between 99% and 100%? You mentioned the example of a car, which I understood like this... if my gpu is working near 100% then if in any point in time a more demanding frame needs to be processed the gpu will not have room to increase its resource usage and the frames will drop. (if that is what are you talking about then I agree)

Lets not bring up again that higher settings is a waste of gpu resources, for some it is not...
I dont agree that you always use 100% of the gpu. IF the gpu is not using all of its resources then its not fully utilized. Some frames require less resources, I agree on that.
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
I am not sure I get your point... If gpu is using 50% of its resources then its 50% utilized? Right?
No. The gpu is 100% utilized but only requires 50% of supporting resources to get that 100%.

It's going to work at full speed, it's going to put out/finish render as many frames as it possibly can, it just only requires a one handed hammer to do so, it doesn't require a 2 handed sledgehammer. Some graphics require more resources, so more gets used, or less resources so less gets used. If you max 100% usage, there's no room to move, nothing more the gpu can use, so fps slows down until resources become available.
 
Reactions: magzzy124

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
Imagine your hero is running through town, headed for enemy lines. Gpu is sitting at 60%. He rounds a corner and a couple nazi's open fire with submachine guns and between the ricochets and brick particles flying around, usage goes upto 70%. You duck into a building that's been gutted, usage goes to 40%. Then a Panzer bursts through the wall and that massive detailing of the wall exploding, dust, particles, chunks falling etc puts the gpu to 98%.

Now imagine if the gpu had started out at 90% instead, your hero would be running in slow motion and fps would be in the toilet when that tank comes through the wall.
 

magzzy124

Prominent
Aug 11, 2019
111
3
585
0
Imagine your hero is running through town, headed for enemy lines. Gpu is sitting at 60%. He rounds a corner and a couple nazi's open fire with submachine guns and between the ricochets and brick particles flying around, usage goes upto 70%. You duck into a building that's been gutted, usage goes to 40%. Then a Panzer bursts through the wall and that massive detailing of the wall exploding, dust, particles, chunks falling etc puts the gpu to 98%.

Now imagine if the gpu had started out at 90% instead, your hero would be running in slow motion and fps would be in the toilet when that tank comes through the wall.
Hahahah, nice explanation! :)
I get it, I get it... But some of the games are consistent, especially e-sports games. I can run a benchmark and determine if the fps is stable to my liking. If it is then I raise the quality and benchmark it again. etc etc.

You dont have to waste your time anymore! Thank you!
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
Heh. By all means bump up the quality if it's available, e-sports are actually quite low graphics generally because of lack of such things as the need for physX and particle vector analysis etc. Even AVX doesn't have much use, very few explosions or Panzers bursting through walls etc 😂
 
Reactions: magzzy124

ASK THE COMMUNITY