Comparison of AS5 vs. MX-4 on Haswell i7-4790K

Discussion in 'Overclocking, Cooling & Modding' started by graysky, Nov 20, 2014.

  1. graysky

    graysky ARP Reviewer

    I compared Arctic Silver 5 to MX-4 between my new i7-4790K and my NH-14D. In short, I ran mprime (Linux64,Prime95,V28.5,build 2) using large FFTs with 8 threads and logged the temps throughout the run once per second using a shell script. Ambient temp which is very important to consider did not vary more than 2 F since the system was placed in my basement where it is very consistent. The digital thermometer showed 59F as the low and 61F as the high which is approx 1 C.

    Run 1 was Arctic Silver 5 which had cured for approx 52 hours. I ran mprime as noted above for 4 hours.
    Run 2 was with MX-4. I ran mprime as noted above for approx 1-1/2 hours.

    Histograms in blue show the temperature distributions for AS5 and those in pink show the same for MX-4. The solid black line for each core is the average temp for each core. You can clearly see differences between the two of 2-4 degrees (allow for +/-1 C due to the ambient temp range). AS5 was the superior TIM in the test experiment.

    Test system
    Processor: i7-4790K @ 4.40 GHz (vcore 1.232 volts under load)
    HSF: NH-14D with 120mm and 80mm fan running at max
    Motherboard: MSI Z97 MPOWER MAX AC


    EDIT: I have to totally invalidate my findings based on a configuration oversight: it seems that $HOME/prime.txt on linux dictates what size FFT mprime uses. I have found that using "large FFTs" as I did the the experiment allows for values of 128k-1024k which is a range that causes a given CPU various levels of stress. The trend is for smaller values to give more stress and as a result, higher heat. In short, I have no way to go back and see which FFT size prime was using when I compared these two. Here are my findings using the same TIM, but varying the FFT size. Each run is a average of 20 min of running.

    [​IMG]

    I have since locked the FFT size to 400k and will repeat this experiment.
    Code:
    V24OptionsConverted=1
    WGUID_version=2
    StressTester=1
    UsePrimenet=0
    MinTortureFFT=400k
    MaxTortureFFT=400k
    TortureMem=0
    TortureTime=3
    OutputIterations=10000
    ResultsFileIterations=999999999
    DiskWriteTime=30
    NetworkRetryTime=2
    NetworkRetryTime2=70
    DaysOfWork=5
    DaysBetweenCheckins=1
    NumBackupFiles=3
    SilentVictory=0
    AskedAboutMemory=1
    
    [PrimeNet]
    Debug=0
    
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2014
    1 person likes this.
  2. Chai

    Chai Administrator Staff Member

    That's interesting. Didn't know AS5 is still the king. I still have some lying around.
     
  3. Adrian Wong

    Adrian Wong Da Boss Staff Member

    Yeah, I still have some here too. :D
     
  4. graysky

    graysky ARP Reviewer

    Dunno if it's still the king but it did beat MX-4 at least in this comparison.
     
  5. Chai

    Chai Administrator Staff Member

    I have some MX2 lying around which I thought was better than AS5. But it is really hard to get consistent results, since each mount with the same TIM can give different results.
     
  6. Max_87

    Max_87 huehuehue

    Exactly... I can get up to 2-3 degrees difference between each mount. Also most heatsink/waterblock base nowadays are bowed... so the results are even more inconsistent.
     
  7. graysky

    graysky ARP Reviewer

    Sounds like you guys have voluenteered to do this multiple mount/dismount experiment. I think 4 times per TIM should be good ;)
     
  8. Chai

    Chai Administrator Staff Member

    What software do you use to measure per core temperature?
     
  9. graysky

    graysky ARP Reviewer

    The Linux kernel. On my Z97 it's simply:
    Code:
    #!/bin/bash
    in0=$(cat /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon1/in10_input)
    cpu0=$(cat /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon0/temp2_input|cut -c1,2)
    cpu1=$(cat /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon0/temp3_input|cut -c1,2)
    cpu2=$(cat /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon0/temp4_input|cut -c1,2)
    cpu3=$(cat /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon0/temp5_input|cut -c1,2)
    fan4=$(cat /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon1/pwm4)
    fan5=$(cat /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon1/pwm5)                            
    FAN4=$(cat /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon1/fan4_input)
    FAN5=$(cat /sys/class/hwmon/hwmon1/fan5_input)  
    
    echo
    echo "CPU  : $cpu0/$cpu1/$cpu2/$cpu3 °C @ $(echo "scale=3; $in0/1000"|bc -l) volts"
    echo "HSF  : $FAN5/$FAN4 RPM [$fan5/$fan4] (120mm/80mm)"
    
    Example with a VM running mostly idle:
    Code:
    % temps
    
    CPU  : 34/33/36/34 °C @ 1.216 volts
    HSF  : 710/621 RPM [127/127] (120mm/80mm)
    
    You can also use lm-sensors but it just read the same outputs:

    Code:
    % sensors
    coretemp-isa-0000
    Adapter: ISA adapter
    Physical id 0:  +37.0°C  (high = +80.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
    Core 0:         +37.0°C  (high = +80.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
    Core 1:         +34.0°C  (high = +80.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
    Core 2:         +34.0°C  (high = +80.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
    Core 3:         +32.0°C  (high = +80.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
    
    nct6792-isa-0a10
    Adapter: ISA adapter
    in0:               +0.94 V  (min =  +0.00 V, max =  +1.74 V)
    +5V:               +5.04 V  (min =  +4.76 V, max =  +5.24 V)
    AVCC:              +3.30 V  (min =  +3.14 V, max =  +3.47 V)
    +3.3V:             +3.30 V  (min =  +3.14 V, max =  +3.47 V)
    +12V:             +12.19 V  (min = +11.42 V, max = +12.58 V)
    CPU system agent:  +0.86 V  (min =  +0.00 V, max =  +0.00 V)  ALARM
    CPU ring:          +1.02 V  (min =  +0.00 V, max =  +0.00 V)  ALARM
    3VSB:              +3.41 V  (min =  +3.14 V, max =  +3.47 V)
    Vbat:              +3.31 V  (min =  +3.14 V, max =  +3.47 V)
    in9:               +1.01 V  (min =  +0.00 V, max =  +0.00 V)  ALARM
    CPU vcore:         +0.91 V  (min =  +0.00 V, max =  +0.00 V)  ALARM
    Gfx vcore:         +0.01 V  (min =  +0.00 V, max =  +0.00 V)  ALARM
    in12:              +1.01 V  (min =  +0.00 V, max =  +0.00 V)  ALARM
    in13:              +0.75 V  (min =  +0.00 V, max =  +0.00 V)  ALARM
    VCCIN:             +1.84 V  (min =  +0.00 V, max =  +0.00 V)  ALARM
    fan3:                0 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
    fan4:              616 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
    fan5:              710 RPM  (min =    0 RPM)
    SYS Temp:          +36.0°C  (high =  +0.0°C, hyst =  +0.0°C)  ALARM  sensor = CPU diode
    CPUTIN:            +42.0°C  (high = +91.0°C, hyst = +91.0°C)  sensor = thermistor
    AUXTIN0:           +26.0°C    sensor = thermistor
    CPU Temp:          +36.5°C  
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2014
  10. Max_87

    Max_87 huehuehue

    I tried to do it many years ago (and failed), wouldn't attempt it again :haha: Takes insane amount of time and dedication.

    Fortunately, someone out there had already done it for us.
    2011 Thermal Compound Roundup – Results Compilation | Skinnee Labs

    I just pick any of the top 20 thermal paste and call it a day :D
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2014
  11. graysky

    graysky ARP Reviewer

    Great link, according to its authors, variability introduced as a function of mounting technique can be ignored in my opinion so long as moderate to great contact is achieved. They showed that variance of <1 degree C can be achieved, so I think these data and the conclusion stands as valid.
     
  12. graysky

    graysky ARP Reviewer

    Consider the results I presented invalid. I did not control for the FFT size (thought I did but later realized the defaults define a range). I edited the first post of this thread and will repeat.
     
  13. Adrian Wong

    Adrian Wong Da Boss Staff Member

    Thanks for the update, and let us know how the retest goes. :thumb:
     
  14. You still have As5 lying around , lol , From when?
    Pre - build? I was just discussing with someone on another platform about certain products being overenthused in the product market by companies that decide to back up their processors , cooling paste etc with paid for reviews for sale in the online arena.
    Establishing their product with false marketing to an endearing public , heightening their companies public purchase ratio.
     

Share This Page