this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2025
278 points (95.7% liked)
Technology
75223 readers
3266 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Looks like they didn't have adequate cooling for their CPU, killed it... Then replaced it without correcting the cooling. If your CPU hits 3 digits, it's not cooled properly.
If your CPU hits 3 digits, then throttling isn't working properly, because it should kick in before it hits that point.
The article (or one of the linked ones) says the max design temperature is 105°C, so it doesn't throttle until it hits that.
Which makes me think it should be able to sustain operating at that temperature. If not, Intel fucked up by speccing them too high.
I'd expect it to still throttle before getting to 105C, and then adjust to maintain a temp under 105C. If it goes above 105C, it should halt.
Then you misunderstand the spec. That's the max operating temperature, not the thermal protection limit. It throttles at 105 so it doesn't hit the limit at 115 or whatever and shut down. I can't find a detailed spec sheet that might give an exact figure.
The chip needs to account for thermal runaway, so I'd expect it to throttle before reaching max operating temperature and then adjust so it stays within that range. So it should downclock a little around 90C or whatever, the increase as needed as it approaches 105C or whatever the max operating temp is. If it goes above that temp, it should aggressively throttle or halt, depending how how far above it went and how quickly.
No it shouldn't slow down at 90C, it should clock up until it can sustain exactly 105C and stay there. That's the optimal performance point.
Again, you misunderstand. The max operating temperature is where Intel has stated that the CPU can safely operate for extended periods of time, including accounting for situations like thermal runaway (though ideally they engineer the chip that that doesn't happen in the first place).
If that situation does occur, the chip attempts to throttle at 105, and if that fails then it presumable halts at whatever the protection threshold is before it hits the actual damage point, as I said.
Interesting, so it only throttles at that temp? That'd a bit different than how AMD handles it IIRC, which think stops boosting around 80C or so and throttles around 90C, and the max operating temp is closer to 100C.
It's not really that different, the exact temperatures are slightly higher but most intel processors will boost up to 105C, then start throttling to maintain that 105C as a maximum, and if that's not possible they'll halt at 110C.
AMD does the same, just the temps are (for the one specific CPU I remember them for) 80-85C for starting dialing down the boost, 90C for throttling below the normal freq, and 95C for TjMax which either halts the system or just drops the power usage so low it doesn't matter - I'm not about to take a heatgun to my CPU to see what it does as it wasn't capable of hitting that on its own.
But it shouldn't be possible to break your CPU from over temperature, no matter what those temps are, because they should be capable of protecting themselves, even if that means dropping to 386 speeds when you are running them in the Death Valley with not cooler whatsoever.
The 7000 series had the Intel behavior of just clocking up until like 95C and staying there indefinitely
That's why people thought the 9000 series was disappointment - AMD went back to balancing power efficiency and performance
Yes.
Whether Intel fucked up by saying "oh yeah works great up to 105" if that isn't actually true is another question, as I mentioned.
Why? It’s designed to run up to 105c.
I think it was when AMDs 7000 series CPUs were running at 95c and everyone freaked out that AMD came out and said that the CPUs are built to handle this load 24/7 365 for years on end.
And it’s not like this is new to Intel. Intel laptop CPUs have been doing this for a decade now.
CPUs should throttle as they approach the limit to prevent thermal runaway. As it gets closer to that limit, it should adjust the frequency in smaller increments until it arrives at that temp to keep the changes to temps small.
105c is the max operating temperature. It's not going to run away the second it hits 106.
Your CPU starts throttling at 104c so that way it almost never hits at 105c for long If it can't maintain clocks then it drops them until 104c can mostly be maintained.
If you have an improperly mounted cooler, you could very well get to 105C incredibly quickly, and 115C or whatever the halt temp is shortly after.
My intel mac's cpu (i5-5250U) throttles to maintain 105 C
That's not the case. 100% for new CPUs, but also for old ones too.
My father's old CPU cooler did not make good contact, got lose in one corner some how, and the system would throttle (fan at 100% making noise and PC run slow). After i fixed it, in one of my visits, CPU was working fine for years.
System throttles or even shuts down before any thermal damage occures (at least when temperatures rise normally).
Pretty much anything with a heat spreader should be impossible to accidentally kill. Bare die? May dog have mercy on your soul.
What if it hits around 90°C during Vulkan shader processing? 😅 Otherwise like 42–52 idle. How's that? I'm wondering if my cooling is sufficient.
This is an AMD 9950X3D + 9070 XT setup, for reference.
Any way to do Vulkan shader processing on the GPU perhaps, to speed it up?
It's fine, modern CPUs boost until they either hit amperage, voltage, or thermal constraints, assuming the motherboard isn't behaving badly then the upper limits for all of those are safe to be at perpetually.
If you're talking about the Steam feature you can safely turn it off, any modern hardware running mesa radv (the default AMD vulkan driver in most distros) should be sufficient to process shaders in real-time thanks to ACO.
What does it mean to "process shaders in real-time"? Wouldn't it be objectively faster to process them ahead-of-time? Even if it's only slightly faster while running the game?
I mean processing takes like a minute or so, so it's no big deal. I'm just curious for the fun of it, if I can compile it on the GPU. Not sure it's even possible.
Processing them as they're loaded, quickly enough that there's no noticeable frame drop. Usual LLVM based shader compilers aren't fast enough for that but ACO is specifically written to compile shaders for AMD GPUs and makes this feasible.
Pre-compilation would in theory always yield higher 1% lows yes, but it's not really worth the time hit anymore especially for games that constantly require a new cache to be built or have really long compilation times.
I think the one additional thing Steam does in that step is transcoding videos so they can be played back with Proton's codec set but using something like Proton-GE, Proton-cachyos or Proton-EM solves this too.
Disclaimer: I don't know how the deeply technical stuff of this works so this might not be exact.
Huh.
Well like I said it only takes like a minute with half of my 32 threads utilized at 100 % (so all of my cores I guess?). Might as well keep doing it I suppose.
How far back does that go? My AMD 6000 series GPU probably doesn't need it, but what about my old laptop APU (3500U?).
AMDs 7000 series CPUs were designed to boost until they hit 95c, then maintain those temps. 9000 series behaves differently for boosting, but the silicon can handle it.
Okay cool, then I feel more confident. This is only my second build, ever, so I'm a little bit nervous. I didn't buy any extra fans apart from the ones that came with my case. But I did get that beasty Noctua gen 2 air cooler, and it seems to be holding so far, even in the hot summer air.
damn.. its sitting at 301 Kelvin currently..