News Intel Revamps Boxed Coolers for Comet Lake Processors, New Blacked-Out Design

salgado18

Distinguished
Feb 12, 2007
604
49
19,020
4
A 65W-max cooler for Intel cpus is as good as not including one. It can keep the processor up to base clocks? They desperately need more capable coolers.

(I won't joke that the bundled cooler should be an AIO, but... well, just did, sorry)
 

Pat Flynn

Distinguished
Aug 8, 2013
231
15
18,765
42
These coolers are the exact same as they've always had for years. The reduced Z height will obviously cause reduced TDP cooling capacity.

FYI - Intel's used this exact cooler since the Sandy Bridge (Intel 2000 series) era. The copper slug was always in the higher TDP models (77-91W), and since they've reduced the Z height on the new coolers, they will be even more pointless to use on an enthusiast machine.

Basically, these coolers should only be used for anyone not taxing their computer - not needing to turbo more than say, 10 seconds max.
 
FYI - Intel's used this exact cooler since the Sandy Bridge (Intel 2000 series) era. The copper slug was always in the higher TDP models (77-91W), and since they've reduced the Z height on the new coolers, they will be even more pointless to use on an enthusiast machine.
Intel has rated pretty much all of their locked CPUs at 65w since sandy bridge. This meant they didn't get the copper slug. Even CPUs like the 8c/16t i9 9900 got the pathetic little heatsync. You can imagine how bad a tiny aluminum heat sync on an i9 9900 would be. Not acceptable.
 

Deicidium369

Permanantly banned.
BANNED
Mar 4, 2020
390
59
290
5
A 65W-max cooler for Intel cpus is as good as not including one. It can keep the processor up to base clocks? They desperately need more capable coolers.

(I won't joke that the bundled cooler should be an AIO, but... well, just did, sorry)
the unlocked K Series never come with a cooler
 

King_V

Distinguished
Intel has rated pretty much all of their locked CPUs at 65w since sandy bridge. This meant they didn't get the copper slug. Even CPUs like the 8c/16t i9 9900 got the pathetic little heatsync. You can imagine how bad a tiny aluminum heat sync on an i9 9900 would be. Not acceptable.
I thought I'd variously seen them at 95W (Sandy Bridge) for the locked and unlocked CPUs (at least i5 and i7), and Haswell at 84W locked, 88W unlocked. Not counting the T and S processors, of course. Skylake (original) seems to have gone with 65W locked, 91W unlocked.
 
I thought I'd variously seen them at 95W (Sandy Bridge) for the locked and unlocked CPUs (at least i5 and i7), and Haswell at 84W locked, 88W unlocked. Not counting the T and S processors, of course. Skylake (original) seems to have gone with 65W locked, 91W unlocked.
Yea you are right. The cooler wasn't much of an issue until the heat outputs went up and the coolers didn't. Like coffee lake and newer.
 
Reactions: TJ Hooker

Deicidium369

Permanantly banned.
BANNED
Mar 4, 2020
390
59
290
5
They used to before intel cheaped out.
2500k and 2600k had a copper core hsf.

I believe some 8700k owners reported their cpu came with a stock cooler despite intel saying it doesn't come with one. I believe the retailer could at one point ask for their k cpus witk a stock cooler.
I had the 2600K with a stock cooler - still running that stock cooler. I do not over clock. 2500/2600/2700 were an awesome generation.

The i8700 (non K, not unlocked) was available with a cooler (box). Prior to my i9900K systems I had the i8700K and even if it did come with a stock cooler would have never used it. The Evo 212 did a decent job at the time, later to be swapped out with a be quiet! Shadow rock of some sort.

K versions generally do not include a stock cooler. Not a question of cheaping out - Intel knows that most people buying the K versions are going to want to install a better aftermarket cooler.
 

King_V

Distinguished
Yea you are right. The cooler wasn't much of an issue until the heat outputs went up and the coolers didn't. Like coffee lake and newer.
Thus: redefine what TDP represents. :LOL:


I had the 2600K with a stock cooler - still running that stock cooler. I do not over clock. 2500/2600/2700 were an awesome generation.

The i8700 (non K, not unlocked) was available with a cooler (box). Prior to my i9900K systems I had the i8700K and even if it did come with a stock cooler would have never used it. The Evo 212 did a decent job at the time, later to be swapped out with a be quiet! Shadow rock of some sort.

K versions generally do not include a stock cooler. Not a question of cheaping out - Intel knows that most people buying the K versions are going to want to install a better aftermarket cooler.
It is cheaping out because the only cooler they were willing to provide was barely adequate for even the non-K CPUs. Fewer people would buy aftermarket coolers if Intel was not cheaping out. AMD's coolers for Ryzen are pretty good. Are they perfect? Of course not. But, with them, you can operate the CPUs at good speeds without running too hot, and without being as loud as the Intel coolers.
 

TJ Hooker

Glorious
Ambassador
6th gen Skylake is when Intel stopped bundling coolers with their mainstream K CPUs I believe. They didn't bundle any with their HEDT CPUs for some time before that though, maybe ever?

I agree with what was said above, from what I remember Intel stock coolers were generally considered adequate, if maybe noisy, until Coffee Lake where they started ramping up cores and (boost) clock speeds without adjusting TDP and bundled coolers. This also corresponded to an increasing gap between base and boost clocks.
 
Last edited:

Shadowclash10

Proper
May 3, 2020
105
35
110
0
It is cheaping out because the only cooler they were willing to provide was barely adequate for even the non-K CPUs. Fewer people would buy aftermarket coolers if Intel was not cheaping out. AMD's coolers for Ryzen are pretty good. Are they perfect? Of course not. But, with them, you can operate the CPUs at good speeds without running too hot, and without being as loud as the Intel coolers.
This. As others have said, the stock coolers for locked processors in recent years have performed badly. For the first few gens they were fine, but when you consider that for what, 9 gens now (?), Intel has been using the same coolers, it makes sense that they will do a shoddy job cooling. Plus they looked bad :). And Intel messed up not providing stock coolers for unlocked chips. I am a last-gen Ryzen owner (2700), and the stock cooler that AMD provided does its job fairly decently, allowing some light to medium OC'ing, and it looks nice doing its job.
 
Reactions: JarredWaltonGPU

King_V

Distinguished
This also corresponded to an increasing gap between base and boost clocks.
Kind of a side-note/digression, but I've often wondered why base clocks aren't even lower still. I mean, they'd just ramp up to whatever they needed to, right?

Or is it that CPUs, when idle (or under particularly low demands) drop to speeds even lower than their base clocks?
 

escksu

Prominent
Aug 8, 2019
140
35
610
0
AMD went from crap to great for their coolers....... Intel doing the reverse......lol

Back then during Athlon XP/64 days, AMD coolers were crappy looking. Even the AMD sticker on the fan is always not in the center....Now, the Ryzen cooler looks and perform very well. Awesome screw mounting with great clamping force. Back plate prevents board from warping.

Back then, Intel had well engineered and beefy coolers. Starting with their LGA775....Steel brackets. Copper center inserts. Looks good, performs ok. Then it got smaller and smaller......It became a small block of alu..No copper center, nothing.....
 
Back then during Athlon XP/64 days, AMD coolers were crappy looking. Even the AMD sticker on the fan is always not in the center....
I wouldn't say they were great looking, but they didn't exactly look bad either. They were pretty much just a small case fan with a rectangular heat sink underneath, which was par for the course at the time. And when the system was running, the sticker would be a blur anyway, so positioning didn't actually matter much. Plus, windowed cases were not quite as common then, and those that were in use generally had relatively small acrylic windows, rather than the full tempered glass side panels popular now, so the internals of a PC typically weren't as visible.

And of course, the Athlon 64s were somewhat more efficient than the Pentium 4s, so they didn't need their coolers to be quite as large. Of course, that changed as Intel made a comeback with their Core-series, while AMD got stuck on the underwhelming Bulldozer architecture for much too long. Perhaps that's why they felt the need to reinvent their coolers for Ryzen though, since their bulldozer-era processors got a reputation for running hot and loud.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS