News Delidded Core i9-14900KS PCs on sale with Intel approval and warranty - Maingear among first partners

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Admin said:
Intel is working with select PC makers like Maingear to offer warranty-backed systems featuring delidded Core i9-14900KS processors.

Delidded Core i9-14900KS PCs on sale with Intel approval and warranty - Maingear among first partners : Read more
Click to expand...
They should charge $50 less for this, with half the warranty period of the with-IHS chip. The risk is with the customer and Intel is spending less on material and one step less in assembling.

They shelved their TEC coolers too soon. This edition should have come with that cooler bundled, now that would be worth paying 200 extra for.
 
Intel says Liquid Metal usage that causes stains on the IHS voids warranty. Now they’re giving warranty on delidded systems? Must come with some very strict terms and conditions that include no opening of the pre-installed cooler.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NinoPino
I remember when CPUs didn't use heat spreader at all. I never thought I'd miss those days but with the temps on current gen CPUs getting so high with heat spreaders on...I have begun to long for the days of old where you the user had to apply thermal paste and mount your cooling directly to the die. Yes it required you to be more careful mounting your cooler/water block so not to break the silicon with too much pressure, that you apply your thermal compound properly to avoid cooking your CPU or didn't apply enough mounting pressure for proper thermal transfers. Yes I know smaller nodes, hotspots, etc etc being issues but I'd prefer have a warrantied choice for delidded CPUs even if I understand why Intel/AMD are hesitant to do so.
Roland Of Gilead said:
$200 for the delid, and another $200 for the appropriate cooling. Eh, no thanks. But each to their own.
Click to expand...
Yeah I'd be willing to pay an extra 50 bucks for a delidded CPU with a warranty but 200? Yeah not so much, I am with you there. Cooling wise...I already run an over kill custom loop with a 360 by 80mm thick rad so cooling capacity is a non-issue for myself. I do question though the need of a 360 aio or better cooler for a delid (though I wouldn't run anything less personally). I'd think anything capable of cooling a CPU with a heat spreader on would also be fine for a delid (thermally speaking and assuming proper contact of course) as you still need to flush X amount of heat from the system regardless of the mounting process. I am curious if someone more eduacated in heat disappation might have something to add to this conversation as I could well be wrong. Regardless though if your running a delid I'd think you'd want the best cooling capacity one could afford.

leoneo.x64 said:
They shelved their TEC coolers too soon. This edition should have come with that cooler bundled, now that would be worth paying 200 extra for.
Click to expand...
I've seen TEC coolers since the 90s and generally speaking they haven't been worth it or matured as I would have hoped. They are either implemented in a fashion where they are to weak to cool the chip properly so you thermal throttle at full load or they are so strong they double your CPU power usage (CPU wattage plus equivalent or better TEC wattage...200 watts of tec to cool 200 watts from the CPU) at which point you have to prep your system for sub-ambient cooling (condensation to outright sub zero freezing). I would like to see someone fix these TEC issues so your chip runs cool yet above ambient temps. I find it unlikely to be accomplished in the near future, if at all given the rate of progress thus far, as I would have expected this to already to have been done considering how long TECs have been around in one form or another in the experimental/ultra enthusiast niches. Maybe as chips get hotter and hotter someone will iron these wrinkles out for main stream or at least make things more palpable for the average user.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Roland Of Gilead, Sluggotg and bit_user
AMD, please take note.

Hell, I won't even say fully delided, but just thin/scrub/remove some of that chonker IHS crappy metal you have on your dies and allow HSF/Cooler makers help you with support. Keep some stock of chonky IHS for OEMS and fullfill their orders, but for DYI just sell some thin out versions, please. Ideally delidded!

Regards.
 
atomicWAR said:
Cooling wise...I already run an over kill custom loop with a 360 by 80mm thick rad so cooling capacity is a non-issue for myself. I do question though the need of a 360 aio or better cooler for a delid (though I wouldn't run anything less personally). I'd think anything capable of cooling a CPU with a heat spreader on would also be fine for a delid
Click to expand...
Yes. As long as the waterblock is designed to use direct-die cooling, then whatever radiator you use with the IHS intact should easily be good enough for direct-die.

With direct-die cooling, the water temp should be higher, downstream of the waterblock. The larger the temperature difference, the easier it should be for a radiator to cool down.

atomicWAR said:
I would like to see some fix these TEC issues so your chip runs cool yet above ambient temps.
Click to expand...
Newton's law of cooling is also why I think it would make sense to have TEC integrated into the end-stage of a radiator. In a normal radiator, you get very little additional cooling, near the outlet. That's exactly where TEC could have the biggest impact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sluggotg and atomicWAR
-Fran- said:
AMD, please take note.

Hell, I won't even say fully delided, but just thin/scrub/remove some of that chonker IHS crappy metal you have on your dies and allow HSF/Cooler makers help you with support. Keep some stock of chonky IHS for OEMS and fullfill their orders, but for DYI just sell some thin out versions, please. Ideally delidded!
Click to expand...
Essentially, I think you're asking AMD to make an AM5 rev. B socket spec that's a bit shorter. I'd agree, especially if Zen 5 manages to scale performance better at higher frequencies (though I don't think that's a given).
 
leoneo.x64 said:
They should charge $50 less for this, with half the warranty period of the with-IHS chip. The risk is with the customer and Intel is spending less on material and one step less in assembling.

They shelved their TEC coolers too soon. This edition should have come with that cooler bundled, now that would be worth paying 200 extra for.
Click to expand...
I was thinking about this yesterday and I reckon they are not saving on any material or assembly as I believe these highly binned chips are tested when fully assembled(going through the same standard package and testing as the rest of 12/13/14 desktop chips). Which would mean Intel is delidding them is adding an extra step and perhaps shipping them out to OEM in modified trays.

I may be wrong about the chip build and test flow, and maybe they are able to cut out attaching IHS. Being nimble/opportunistic by changing process flows is not something Intel has historically been known for. But this new Foundry effort is going to challenge them on that front and largely their success or lack of success in Foundry will be a good metric to measure whether they are able to adapt to customers and the market demands. Can this laggard regain the crown?
 
bit_user said:
Newton's law of cooling is also why I think it would make sense to have TEC integrated into the end-stage of a radiator. In a normal radiator, you get very little additional cooling, near the outlet. That's exactly where TEC could have the biggest impact.
Click to expand...
Interesting idea. I thought of using a TEC to basically turn a loop into a chiller. Are you talking something similar? I'd love to hear more on y our idea. My concern was again creating sub-ambient temps freezing my fluid but I assume if your TEC was rated for a lower wattage and you implemented it correctly you could be close to or just over ambient. Though I would think you'd need a software sensor interface to ensure your TEC powers up/down according to CPU usage and temps (both CPU and water). I am aware of some air cooler TEC hybrids that attempted as much with temps updating the TEC to cool accordingly though the left much to be desired as the TECs in and of themselves were under-powered for most CPU to avoid throttling during extended full loads.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bit_user
BillyBuerger said:
This was my exact thought. Apparently I must be really old that this isn't a new thing to me.
Click to expand...

I know how you feel. I sound more and more like my old man.

All the same I think Intel and AMD both should be offering their higher end SKUs without lids even if for a small premium. Geezers like us should have no problems applying thermal paste to the die properly while mounting our cooling without cracking our chip, most times at least. And that's where the fifty dollar premium comes in paying for the times users screw up so as not to hurt a companies bottom line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sluggotg
atomicWAR said:
I thought of using a TEC to basically turn a loop into a chiller. Are you talking something similar? I'd love to hear more on y our idea. My concern was again creating sub-ambient temps freezing my fluid
Click to expand...
I'm not imagining a big stack of TEC, like you'd need for dropping temps by so much.

atomicWAR said:
I would think you'd need a software sensor interface to ensure your TEC powers up/down according to CPU usage and temps (both CPU and water).
Click to expand...
I think it should also be doable to integrate a thermostat, so the water leaving the radiator isn't below ambient. It's only when temps drop below ambient that you have to worry about condensation and for sure we're not talking about freezing anything! If you integrated a hygrometer into the system, you could even have it compute the dew point and potentially cool it to just above that temperature.

I'm sure I'm not the only one to have such ideas. So, presumably it's either been locked behind a wall of patents or it's just not a very cost-effective way to add further cooling capacity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atomicWAR
@atomicWAR , I thought of a way to prototype something like this. If you already have a custom loop, then take a 120 mm tower cooler and mount it on a spare water block, so the (ordinarily) CPU-facing surfaces on each are together. Between the two, put a TEC layer. You could either run open case and prop it up on a test bench, or you could zip tie it to an exhaust fan port in a roomy case with plenty of clearance.

Just to be clear: this second CPU waterblock is not directly attached to the CPU. We're just using it as a way for using a TEC device to extract additional heat from the water loop, in between the radiator and the main waterblock that's mounted on the CPU.

I don't plan on trying it, myself, since I've never done anything with water cooling and have enough other projects and things I should be doing.
 
Last edited:
bit_user said:
Yes. As long as the waterblock is designed to use direct-die cooling, then whatever radiator you use with the IHS intact should easily be good enough for direct-die.

With direct-die cooling, the water temp should be higher, downstream of the waterblock. The larger the temperature difference, the easier it should be for a radiator to cool down.
​
​


Newton's law of cooling is also why I think it would make sense to have TEC integrated into the end-stage of a radiator. In a normal radiator, you get very little additional cooling, near the outlet. That's exactly where TEC could have the biggest impact.
Click to expand...
Faster, yes, but with a hit to efficiency. TECs are notoriously inefficient. Koolance makes a fairly small vapor phase change system for use at the end of a loop that will do what you're talking about and more efficiently... though arguably less reliable than a TEC.

Still overall ambient is the most efficient and at least fast enough for the vast majority of cases. I use a radiator passively until water temp get to 32C, and then turn the fans on. That uses no extra energy until I have a sustained heavy load.
 
atomicWAR said:
I remember when CPUs didn't use heat spreader at all. I never thought I'd miss those days but with the temps on current gen CPUs getting so high with heat spreaders on...I have begun to long for the days of old where you the user had to apply thermal paste and mount your cooling directly to the die. Yes it required you to be more careful mounting your cooler/water block so not to break the silicon with too much pressure, that you apply your thermal compound properly to avoid cooking your CPU or didn't apply enough mounting pressure for proper thermal transfers. Yes I know smaller nodes, hotspots, etc etc being issues but I'd prefer have a warrantied choice for delidded CPUs even if I understand why Intel/AMD are hesitant to do so.

Yeah I'd be willing to pay an extra 50 bucks for a delidded CPU with a warranty but 200? Yeah not so much, I am with you there. Cooling wise...I already run an over kill custom loop with a 360 by 80mm thick rad so cooling capacity is a non-issue for myself. I do question though the need of a 360 aio or better cooler for a delid (though I wouldn't run anything less personally). I'd think anything capable of cooling a CPU with a heat spreader on would also be fine for a delid (thermally speaking and assuming proper contact of course) as you still need to flush X amount of heat from the system regardless of the mounting process. I am curious if someone more eduacated in heat disappation might have something to add to this conversation as I could well be wrong. Regardless though if your running a delid I'd think you'd want the best cooling capacity one could afford.


I've seen TEC coolers since the 90s and generally speaking they haven't been worth it or matured as I would have hoped. They are either implemented in a fashion where they are to weak to cool the chip properly so you thermal throttle at full load or they are so strong they double your CPU power usage (CPU wattage plus equivalent or better TEC wattage...200 watts of tec to cool 200 watts from the CPU) at which point you have to prep your system for sub-ambient cooling (condensation to outright sub zero freezing). I would like to see someone fix these TEC issues so your chip runs cool yet above ambient temps. I find it unlikely to be accomplished in the near future, if at all given the rate of progress thus far, as I would have expected this to already to have been done considering how long TECs have been around in one form or another in the experimental/ultra enthusiast niches. Maybe as chips get hotter and hotter someone will iron these wrinkles out for main stream or at least make things more palpable for the average user.
Click to expand...
Practically speaking TECs are tough to implement. The physical size has to be an exact match to the IHS. If larger you risk cold edges and condensation without insulating the socket well. The insulation has to be perfect - completely covering the TEC with no gaps and not covering anything around the socket (like power FETs). Even on properly sized TECs there's still a risk of cold edges along the small gap between IHS and primary heatsink during idle times.

And all that comes before get the electrical sizing just right.

Beyond that, rule of thumb for TECs is doubling the heat output of a CPU, so at some point you just end up with a bigger problem to deal with down the line - meaning double the radiator size, air speed, or somehow increasing delta T (cold air supply).
 
  • Like
Reactions: atomicWAR
cyrusfox said:
I may be wrong about the chip build and test flow, and maybe they are able to cut out attaching IHS. Being nimble/opportunistic by changing process flows is not something Intel has historically been known for.
Click to expand...
yeah this is my question… are they DElidded, or UNlidded. There doesn’t seem to be a reason Intel couldn’t produce the latter, and there should be some efficiencies there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cyrusfox
newtechldtech said:
Just sell it bare without lid intel ... it is a special edition after all . notebooks CPU are without lid as well ...
Click to expand...
Notebook CPUs have a completely difference PCB though [BGA 1744] Which never have an IHS, compared to the desktop chips on LGA1700 PCB which is designed to always accommodate a IHS. I would imagine the PCB's here are different due to this requirement (potentially layers as well as stiffness/flexibility spec).

Can you imagine Intel creating a whole new SKU for No IHS, some sort of end modifier, say X, 14900KSX. I am all for it but they already have way too many SKUs...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom