Question Can i run an i9-9900kf with a semi passive cpu cooler?

May 24, 2020
8
0
10
0
Hi.
I was planning on building my first entry level gaming pc, but i received for a mistake a way more powerful cpu that i was thinking (basically i've ordered an i5-9600kf and end up with an i9-9900kf).
The complete build is this at the moment: https://it.pcpartpicker.com/list/qfXzdm
Can i run that cpu with that cpu cooler without overheating problems (not overclocking for sure), or i have to buy a better one to even use it?
Thanks
 
Last edited:

RealBeast

Titan
Moderator
Hi.
I was planning on building my first entry level gaming pc, but i received for a mistake a way more powerful cpu that i was thinking (basically i've ordered an i5-9600kf and end up with an i9-9900kf).
The complete build is this at the moment: https://it.pcpartpicker.com/list/qfXzdm
Can i run that cpu with that cpu cooler without overheating problems (not overclocking for sure), or i have to buy a better one to even use it?
Thanks
You may limp by if you don't stress it as it is only rated as a 150W cooler, but I would spend the extra to get a 250W rated air cooler like the beQuiet Dark Rock Pro 4 (or Noctua NH D15) if your case will allow it to fit. Then no worries and peak temps around 60-70C. I have the beQuiet and it is very quiet but really cools with two big fans (120mm and 135mm). Take a look HERE for a performance review on a lot of coolers.
 
Reactions: mctrader07
That is one heck of an entry build!!
If you received the 9900KF at a 9600KF price, you scored.
For testing purposes, that cooler will work.
But, you had best plan on a top end twin tower air cooler like the noctua NH-D15s

Do not worry too much about heat.
The cpu will monitor it's temperature and will throttle or shut down to protect itself if it detects a dangerous temperature.
That is around 100c.

With any sort of a load at all expect throttling
 
Reactions: mctrader07
May 24, 2020
8
0
10
0
You may limp by if you don't stress it as it is only rated as a 150W cooler, but I would spend the extra to get a 250W rated air cooler like the beQuiet Dark Rock Pro 4 (or Noctua NH D15) if your case will allow it to fit. Then no worries and peak temps around 60-70C. I have the beQuiet and it is very quiet but really cools with two big fans (120mm and 135mm). Take a look HERE for a performance review on a lot of coolers.
Thanks for the reply. Yes i was watching on the dark rock pro 4 because i don't think the noctua can be the answer for my case.
 
May 24, 2020
8
0
10
0
That is one heck of an entry build!!
If you received the 9900KF at a 9600KF price, you scored.
For testing purposes, that cooler will work.
But, you had best plan on a top end twin tower air cooler like the noctua NH-D15s

Do not worry too much about heat.
The cpu will monitor it's temperature and will throttle or shut down to protect itself if it detects a dangerous temperature.
That is around 100c.

With any sort of a load at all expect throttling
Thanks for the reply, but yeah i was just worried i couldn't even start it. I'm thinking on some liquid cooler too, don't really mind spending a few more for be safe.
 
Hi.
I was planning on building my first entry level gaming pc, but i received for a mistake a way more powerful cpu that i was thinking (basically i've ordered an i5-9600kf and end up with an i9-9900kf).
The complete build is this at the moment: https://it.pcpartpicker.com/list/qfXzdm
Can i run that cpu with that cpu cooler without overheating problems (not overclocking for sure), or i have to buy a better one to even use it?
Thanks
You may limp by if you don't stress it as it is only rated as a 150W cooler,
If it's a 150w TDP cooler you will be more than fine,you probably will even get very close to 5Ghz in most games.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhKOHKOSa6Y
 

RealBeast

Titan
Moderator
If it's a 150w TDP cooler you will be more than fine,you probably will even get very close to 5Ghz in most games.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhKOHKOSa6Y
Actually, no. While the published TDP is 95W -- that is only at base frequency of 3.6GHz. It runs over 200W under a real load, even without an overclock. Even Intel's detailed product sheets acknowledge that fact.

It would have thermal throttle issues without a high end air cooler like the beQuiet or Noctua mentioned or a good water loop. 150W air cooler would run too hot and throttle frequently. This is not only what reviews say, but I've tested the one sitting next to me under many different coolers, which is why I got my 9900KF for $250.
 
May 24, 2020
8
0
10
0
Actually, no. While the published TDP is 95W -- that is only at base frequency of 3.6GHz. It runs over 200W under a real load, even without an overclock. Even Intel's detailed product sheets acknowledge that fact.

It would have thermal throttle issues without a high end air cooler like the beQuiet or Noctua mentioned or a good water loop. 150W air cooler would run too hot and throttle frequently. This is not only what reviews say, but I've tested the one sitting next to me under many different coolers, which is why I got my 9900KF for $250.
I'll probably get the bequiet! then. But i don't know if it would fit in my case. The case can take up to 17 cm cpu coolers and the bequiet! is 16.2 .
 

RealBeast

Titan
Moderator
Actually, no. While the published TDP is 95W -- that is only at base frequency of 3.6GHz. It runs over 200W under a real load, even without an overclock. Even Intel's detailed product sheets acknowledge that fact.

It would have thermal throttle issues without a high end air cooler like the beQuiet or Noctua mentioned or a good water loop. 150W air cooler would run too hot and throttle frequently.
He tested with a 47W TDP cooler and got 4Ghz on cinebench which is already a decently heavy task,4 is higher than 3.6 as far as I know,and that's with one third the cooling TDP of the cooler the OP has.
With a 150W TDP cooler he would not have thermal throttling,he would be able to run anything at above 3.6Ghz and games easily at 5Ghz.
OP is not talking about overclock here,he wants stock performance.
This is not only what reviews say, but I've tested the one sitting next to me under many different coolers, which is why I got my 9900KF for $250.
If you have a motherboard that uses too much juice and pushes the CPU without reason you should really look into that,there is no reason for it.
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
He tested with a 47W TDP cooler and got 4Ghz on cinebench which is already a decently heavy task,4 is higher than 3.6 as far as I know,and that's with one third the cooling TDP of the cooler the OP has.
And went straight to 100°C in R20, with that passive heatsink mounted to a testbench with ambient cooling and not mounted inside a case. Not exactly healthy for any cpu, and the test was not conducted with any length of time. If that was a gaming time test, you could expect some serious throttle such as the p95 test which throttled back to 2.6GHz and still maintained 100°C at 54w.

It's a 9900k. It'll push 250w without issue. If you do not use cooling equitable to the output need, you will not get the performance you paid for and running a cpu at 100°C for extended periods of time will cause massive amounts of electromigration and resultant damage. I'd not expect a 9900k to last longer than a few months at those temps.
 
Reactions: RealBeast

Phaaze88

Splendid
Ambassador
That's a 9900K Engineering Sample though... the base, boost, cache and all core clocks aren't even the same - they're all lower than the retail!
Would that not mean that Der8auer's ES runs cooler than the retail by default?

Also... only Far Cry 5 for a gaming sample? I guess one game covers all games, eh?
Plus it wasn't in a chassis, which the average user is going to have this cpu in.

🤦‍♂️
 
It's a 9900k. It'll push 250w without issue.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4th6YElNm5w

you will not get the performance you paid for
Well he didn't pay for it but that's neither here or there.
and running a cpu at 100°C for extended periods of time will cause massive amounts of electromigration and resultant damage. I'd not expect a 9900k to last longer than a few months at those temps.
Yeah that's why offices only buy intel ,because they easily break down when you haven't cleaned the cooler for twenty years and the PC is running 24/7.

Games will run at 70-80W max which will not cause any problems for a 150TDP cooler.
That's a 9900K Engineering Sample though... the base, boost, cache and all core clocks aren't even the same - they're all lower than the retail!
Would that not mean that Der8auer's ES runs cooler than the retail by default?

Also... only Far Cry 5 for a gaming sample? I guess one game covers all games, eh?
Plus it wasn't in a chassis, which the average user is going to have this cpu in.

🤦‍♂️
Doesn't matter, the only important part here is that the CPU automatically adjusts to whatever cooler you have,with a 150W TDP cooler you will have a max of 150W draw on average.
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
Games will run at 70-80W max which will not cause any problems for a 150TDP cooler.
CM Hyper212 on a 9900k used for gaming. Good luck with that.

Doesn't matter, the only important part here is that the CPU automatically adjusts to whatever cooler you have,with a 150W TDP cooler you will have a max of 150W draw on average.
And a cpu at 100°C constant in order to maintain the 150w usage, just like the cpu throttling back in the video to maintain the 54w draw on the 47w cooler.

You cannot expect thermal wattage output to equal electrical wattage used on a one to one basis. That only works with some cpus, not all. Even under gaming loads at stock, you can expect multiple cores in the mid 90's or more, depending on core usage, with a 150w cooler.
 
Reactions: RealBeast

Phaaze88

Splendid
Ambassador
...

Doesn't matter, the only important part here is that the CPU automatically adjusts to whatever cooler you have,with a 150W TDP cooler you will have a max of 150W draw on average.
But then the cpu is going in circles throttling and boosting back up over and over... if there's no thermal headroom, like the above example you gave, then the cpu is pretty much thermal throttling.
It doesn't matter? It was bad enough on Der8auer's weaker ES sample. It's going to be even worse on the retail part. There's a whopping 500mhz between the 2 chips.

CM Hyper212 on a 9900k used for gaming. Good luck with that.
Well... there is a member here that has that exact combination, and claims that temps are fine... >_>
They likely aren't pushing the cpu though.
 
CM Hyper212 on a 9900k used for gaming. Good luck with that.


And a cpu at 100°C constant in order to maintain the 150w usage, just like the cpu throttling back in the video to maintain the 54w draw on the 47w cooler.

You cannot expect thermal wattage output to equal electrical wattage used on a one to one basis. That only works with some cpus, not all. Even under gaming loads at stock, you can expect multiple cores in the mid 90's or more, depending on core usage, with a 150w cooler.
But then the cpu is going in circles throttling and boosting back up over and over... if there's no thermal headroom, like the above example you gave, then the cpu is pretty much thermal throttling.
It doesn't matter? It was bad enough on Der8auer's weaker ES sample. It's going to be even worse on the retail part. There's a whopping 500mhz between the 2 chips.


Well... there is a member here that has that exact combination, and claims that temps are fine... >_>
They likely aren't pushing the cpu though.
https://www.computerbase.de/2020-05/intel-core-i9-10900k-i5-10600k-test/3/#diagramm-test-performancerating-fuer-anwendungen-single-core
Let's try this again ,maybe this is going to be easier to understand.

A "thermally throttled" 9900k at only 95W, max boost at 119W,both significantly lower than 150W is just 5% away from stock in a range of games.

The KS model is at 127 and max boost of 159,still within what this 150W TDP cooler is capable of but with "bad" temps.

It's not worth it, changing the cooler will make no difference in gaming.
 
The cooling you need is determined by the voltage your processor needs to run at the desired multiplier.
The higher the voltage, the more heat is generated.
Processors vary in quality, and the better bins can run at a higher multiplier for a given voltage.
Not much you can do about that.
But later steppings in the product cycle will usually do better.
As of 2/6/2019 from silicon lottery:
What percent can get an overclock at a somewhat sane vcore in the 1.275v to 1.312
And AVX offset = 2.

I9-9900K
4.8 100%
4.9 86%
5.0 39%
5.1 8%

Your case is a very good one for an air cooler.
The DRP4 and noctua NH-D15 or D15s are both dual tower coolers with 140mm fans.
They will perform about the same as a 240/280 aio liquid cooler.
Think about it. The only difference is where the heat exchange takes place.
To do better, you would need a 360 aio with essentially 3 radiators.
The expense might be tolerable(we are getting out of a budget build here) but an aip presents a catch 22 for mounting.
If you mount the radiator to take in cool outside air, the cpu will be cooled best, but at the expense of using heated air for the motherboard and graphics card.
If you mount to expel heated air, the cpu will not be cooled optimally since the radiator is using warmed case air.

At the end of the day, the I9-9900K is such a strong processor that you do not need to aggressively do any overclocking. Just enjoy your mistake.
 
Last edited:

Phaaze88

Splendid
Ambassador
*sigh
A series of graphs is going to solve and prove everything - which, by the way, were revised a little sometime after your post, but I guess it doesn't matter.

I give up. I realized a few weeks ago that there would be some things you and I would never see eye to eye on - involving Intel, go figure...
"There's a time to hold 'em, and there's a time to fold 'em... and right now, it's folding time."

I should give you a holler for anyone having Intel system cooling woes.
 

Karadjgne

Titan
Ambassador
It's not worth it, changing the cooler will make no difference in gaming
You can't use that as a basis for temps. That's a frame time comparison between cpus, not an output of heat or even wattage use. Coolers don't work on a linear scale, it's logarithmic. At a certain point that ability to functionally cool a cpu starts reaching saturation and °C becomes exponential to wattage. You'll see most 150w coolers have a slow rise to @ 70% which starts to curve up more sharply and by @ 90% is almost vertical. So after @ 100w ± temps will not gradually climb but steeply for every watt absorbed and by @ 140w are skyrocketing.

A 150w cooler on a 9900k might work as if it would be considered a 'stock' cooler, but like any 'stock' cooler, that's only based on base temps with no boost and no hyperthreading. Using a 9900k at stock configuration for gaming, you will see cores in the upper 90's to 100°C as a 150w TDP cooler has neither the capacity nor the efficiency to affectively absorb such high thermal wattage.

Run that cpu at Tjunction if you want to, nothing saying you can't, but don't expect value-performance ratio to be decent, you'd get better results with a lower wattage 9700k more consistently than with a shackled 9900k that spends most of its service life throttling cores.
 
Last edited:
You can't use that as a basis for temps. That's a frame time comparison between cpus, not an output of heat or even wattage use.
They have both frame times and frame rates.
It is with the cpu running LOCKED at 95W TDP, it will not go over it except for the few seconds of boost where it will not go above 119W TDP, NO MATTER WHAT.
That's why it's a separate measurement from the stock 9900k that doesn't have anything written besides it and it loses one whole whopping % of performance.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS