Stock CPU Coolers

[Tekno Venus]

EDIT NOTE - Post's have been split from this thread: https://www.sysnative.com/forums/wi...windows-7-ultimate-64-bit-random-freezes.html

---

A $20 cooler? IMO, (besides voiding your warranty - if it came with an AMD OEM cooler) you replaced a superior OEM cooler with an inferior aftermarket cooler! Not a good thing!

It is CRITICAL to understand that both Intel and AMD provide excellent cooling solutions with their CPUs (this in spite of what many may think or try to convince us). They have to as they are the ONLY coolers that are warrantied to protect their CPUs for 3 years. No aftermarket cooler warranty covers the CPU!

I do not want to start an argument here at all, but calling the stock coolers superior to the CoolerMaster TX3 EVO is complete and utter nonsense.

Yes, the AMD cooler is better than the Intel one. However, the TX3 is a pretty decent cooler and will do a better job and be much quieter than the AMD one.

Every time anyone states they put a 3rd party cooler on their CPU you will reply saying that it voids the warranty. Whilst you may technically be true, I do not know one PC enthusiast who cares about his/her hardware who recommends the stock cooler so much as you. If voiding the warranty was such a huge deal, how to companies such as Noctua, Corsair, Coolermaster to name just a few sell so many of their CPU coolers.

I have never once heard a warranty case refused due to the installation of a 3rd party cooler. Not once.

@Last1Devil - Those temps look very good to me, I'd be happy with those temps. Whilst loading the CPU to 100% will obviously push them up, those are perfectly good enough and therefore temperature would not be the cause IMHO.

Also, note the orientation of that CM cooler. It blows sideways, not down. Motherboard designers intentionally cluster heat sensitive and heat generating
devices around the CPU socket so they can take advantage of the "expected" CPU fan's flow patterns.

Perhaps that may be true, but some CPU's (2011 socket springs to mind) don't even sell with a stock cooler! Motherboard manufacturers design boards with the user using a 3rd party cooler in mind. PC enthusiasts use 3rd party coolers because they don't want to cook their components. I've seen environments where at stock clocks, the Intel cooler reached 100C when the CPU was at 100% load.

I feel that you are giving bad advice here. Whilst voiding the warranty may technically be true, I don't think Intel or AMD really care about that any more. It has become the norm to use 3rd party coolers, and they do offer significantly better temps.

I know for a fact that I will not be using the stock cooler when I build my PC in the future. I value my expensive components too much for that.

Again, I do not want to turn this into an argument.

Stephen

 

[Digerati]

Re: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit random freezes

Whilst you may technically be true, I do not know one PC enthusiast who cares about his/her hardware who recommends the stock cooler so much as you.

There's part of the problem. You seem to be assuming that everyone who posts is an "enthusiast". That is simply not true. The fact of the matter is, many users are very concerned about their warranties.

But that is not the point. Folks need to be aware of the potential consequences of their actions. I hardly see informing users of those potential consequences as "bad" advice.

I personally know of many users who fully believed (and believe) OEM coolers were and are lousy. That is simply false. They "may" be a little louder, and they may not move as much air as "some" aftermarket coolers. But again - cooler temps does not automatically mean better - as long as they are not high to begin with. For example, there is no evidence whatsoever to indicate running a CPU at 50° (which is well within the "normal operating range" of most CPUs) is less stable, increases aging, or is otherwise harmful, degrading or bad compared to a CPU running at 45°C or even 35°C.

I have never once heard a warranty case refused due to the installation of a 3rd party cooler. Not once.

I have! Though not common, it has happened on multiple occasions. And most importantly, it can again. I have seen this with both AMD and Intel. Granted, it happened to users (and at least one shop owner) who had an established history with both companies for returning CPUs.

While it is true, both AMD and Intel want your future business thus will likely honor return requests, I always tell the tech a 3rd party cooler was used. This issue is an issue of morality and willful deceit. Is it "right" to omit pertinent information when seeking a RMA CPU just because you can "get away with it"? No! In fact, it is deceit with intent to defraud - a criminal offense!!!

Is it right to advise your readers about using aftermarket coolers on retail CPUs WITHOUT telling them they may void the warranty? IMO, NO! It is wrong to NOT inform users of consequences - regardless how remote, or our personal feelings about them.

I feel that you are giving bad advice here.

I fully disagree and frankly, you saying it is "bad advice" is disappointing, if not a bit hurtful. "Bad" advice is advice that makes matters worse, compromises security, or endangers people or equipment.

Providing "bad advice" is NOT something I do!

Our jobs here are to provide users "all" the information they need to make an informed decision. You seem intent in blocking information based on your personal information - not on fact - regardless if the fact is something users need, or not.

For the record, I personally don't care if users use an aftermarket cooler, as long as (1) they are aware it voids the warranty, and (2) they properly apply TIM. And I would not say I "recommend" OEM coolers over aftermarket. But I do recommend users try the OEM coolers first, check their temps, and if within the normal operating range, then there is no need for an aftermarket cooler (unless "silent running" is desired - perhaps in a HTPC, as I have done myself). And if the temps are not good with the OEM cooler, then I recommend looking at case cooling first - as again, it is the responsibility of the case to provide an adequate supply of cool air flowing through the case.

I've seen environments where at stock clocks, the Intel cooler reached 100C when the CPU was at 100% load.

If a CPU with the OEM cooler running at 100% utilization and default clock speeds over heats, the problem is NOT the OEM cooler! The problem is the USER! The user has failed to (1) buy a good case and (2) configure case cooling properly or (3) failed to apply a proper layer of TIM, or (4) has failed at keeping the case interior clean of heat-trapping dust.

Every time anyone states they put a 3rd party cooler on their CPU you will reply saying that it voids the warranty.

You betcha! And I will continue to do so until it is no longer a fact.

I know for a fact that I will not be using the stock cooler when I build my PC in the future. I value my expensive components too much for that.

Now that makes no sense as CLEARLY you assume OEM coolers do not provide sufficient heat extraction and thus, put your "valuable components" at risk. And that is simply not true.

With all that being said, please note I said repeatedly that this is about heat and that Last1Devil's CPU temps are fine. Or at least his CPU temps are fine.

 

[Tekno Venus]

Re: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit random freezes

Ok, look, I'm having a bit of a bad day and I think I came across the wrong way in my previous post. Sorry. Calling your advice 'bad' may have been unjustified.

I personally know of many users who fully believed (and believe) OEM coolers were and are lousy. That is simply false. They "may" be a little louder, and they may not move as much air as "some" aftermarket coolers. But again - cooler temps does not automatically mean better - as long as they are not high to begin with. For example, there is no evidence whatsoever to indicate running a CPU at 50° (which is well within the "normal operating range" of most CPUs) is less stable, increases aging, or is otherwise harmful, degrading or bad compared to a CPU running at 45°C or even 35°C.

The AMD cooler is better than the Intel cooler, but for me, the Intel cooler is pretty bad. Just look at some tests comparing 3rd party coolers and you'll see why!

Cooler Master Blizzard T2 CPU Cooler Review | Hardware Secrets

Review: Noctua NH-D15 - Cooling - HEXUS.net - Page 3

Read More:

Be Quiet! Dark Rock Pro 3 Review - Testing and Results | bit-tech.net

All of those offer the specs of their test beds in the articles to view.

I have! Though not common, it has happened on multiple occasions. And most importantly, it can again. I have seen this with both AMD and Intel. Granted, it happened to users (and at least one shop owner) who had an established history with both companies for returning CPUs.

Ok, you got me. I've not seen that myself.

If a CPU with the OEM cooler running at 100% utilization and default clock speeds over heats, the problem is NOT the OEM cooler! The problem is the USER! The user has failed to (1) buy a good case and (2) configure case cooling properly or (3) failed to apply a proper layer of TIM, or (4) has failed at keeping the case interior clean of heat-trapping dust.

The 100 degree figure came from a Hardware secrets test. Although, when I read the review again it was from a few years ago, I am unaware of major changes to the intel cooler design in recent years.

Now that makes no sense as CLEARLY you assume OEM coolers do not provide sufficient heat extraction and thus, put your "valuable components" at risk. And that is simply not true.

I would rather have my systems running as cool as possible. I do not personally feel that the stock coolers keep my components cool enough. Whilst they may be perfectly safe that hot, I feel more comfortable when they are cooler.

As I said, I may have come across a bit harsh in my last post, no offence was meant. I wish for this discussion to remain constructive and useful for people to learn from! :)

-Stephen

 

[Digerati]

Re: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit random freezes

I would rather have my systems running as cool as possible. I do not personally feel that the stock coolers keep my components cool enough. Whilst they may be perfectly safe that hot, I feel more comfortable when they are cooler.

I cannot argue with that logic - except to say "that hot" is a very subjective term, and in this case, a totally undefined term! Certainly, anything near 100°C is WAY too hot. IMO, they (electronics) should never get "hot". In fact, I am in panic mode if CPU temps touch 70°C - yet many CPUs will chug along endlessly at those temps without ever skipping a beat.

A quick look at the last line in my sig hopefully suggests I take electronics cooling very seriously - which I do. I start to get "nervous" when CPU temps sit at or above 60°C. On my own system (i7-3770 3.4GHz pushed to 4.10Ghz), I am currently sitting at 38-40°C with the OEM cooler and ambient temp at 76°F. When my temps start sticking in the 50sC, that is usually a signal to me it is time to clean my air filters. The only thing not stock is the TIM as I personally don't like OEM TIM "pads".

I agree that there have been a LOT of improvements in OEM HSF assemblies in recent years, not just in CFM, but noise as well. But I disagree that AMD coolers are better than Intel - as a blanket statement. This one may be better than that one, but on the whole, they are all good. Maybe not "excellent" but good. That said, my experience with both is the Intel's, as a whole, are quieter than AMDs, but just as effective at keeping CPU temps well within the "normal operating range", and "my" comfort levels - and default clock speeds.

FTR, I much prefer Intel CPUs, but feel both provide good, if not excellent cooling solutions.

While 30°C CPU temps may provide you more peace of mind, they don't improve performance or increase life expectancies over 40 or 50°C temps. I realize there is a enthusiasts group who strive for the coolest temps possible, but all it really does is give you bragging rights.

I also note that CPUs have become MUCH more efficient in recent years too - thus generate much less heat than their predecessors and that changes the requirements for the cooling a great deal too - again, with some notable exceptions - but exceptions don't make the rule.

Again, I am NOT saying don't use aftermarket coolers. But I am saying give the OEM a chance first - ESPECIALLY if you have NOT properly configured your case. And by all means, know and understand the consequences, should you decide to use an aftermarket cooler on a CPU that came packaged with an OEM cooler - or when giving advice on the subject.

And BTW, while you can buy both Intel and AMD OEM CPUs that require you supply your own aftermarket cooler, do note most are only warrantied for 1 year - vs 3 years for the full retail with cooler version. That too is a significant factor for many users.

Lastly, and again, I emphasize it is the case's responsibility to provide enough cool air flow through the case so the CPU's HSF assembly is not blowing hot air in a hot case. Remember, no amount of CFM can cool a component cooler than ambient (room or case interior) temps. The "wind chill effect" only applies to living tissue.

I generally recommend at least two large (120mm or larger), top-quality case fans, one in front drawing cool air in, and one in back exhausting hot air out. This does NOT include the PSU fan(s). "Blowhole" (top) fans are excellent at taking advantage of the "heat rises" property of thermal dynamics. Additional case cooling may be required with single-slot (and some dual-slot) graphics cards that do NOT exhaust hot air directly out the back, but instead, toss the GPU's heat into the case's innards.

As I said, I may have come across a bit harsh in my last post, no offence was meant. I wish for this discussion to remain constructive and useful for people to learn from! :)

We're good! :smile9:

 

[Tekno Venus]

Re: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit random freezes

A quick look at the last line in my sig hopefully suggests I take electronics cooling very seriously - which I do. I start to get "nervous" when CPU temps sit at or above 60°C. On my own system (i7-3770 3.4GHz pushed to 4.10Ghz), I am currently sitting at 38-40°C with the OEM cooler and ambient temp at 76°F. When my temps start sticking in the 50sC, that is usually a signal to me it is time to clean my air filters. The only thing not stock is the TIM as I personally don't like OEM TIM "pads".

You have an OC on the stock cooler?

Now, I actually own a Laptop rather than a desktop, and cooling on laptops is pretty poor when compared to desktops due to the physical size restraints. I stress tested the system a while back, and, errr.. well.... Yeah. The laptop is well ventilated (I never use it on my lap, it's on a desk) and pretty dust free, but Dell didn't really do a good job with the thermals. It's a real, real pain to take apart, so a TIM change isn't really possible, but I may consider it because the temps were well into the 90+ range.

The numbers I am discussing and my preferred temp range is where I like to see Desktops.

I also note that CPUs have become MUCH more efficient in recent years too - thus generate much less heat than their predecessors and that changes the requirements for the cooling a great deal too - again, with some notable exceptions - but exceptions don't make the rule.

Agree, Haswell has made some improvements, and especially the new Devil's Canyon chips should be much cooler because Intel have improved their internal TIM.

Again, I am NOT saying don't use aftermarket coolers. But I am saying give the OEM a chance first - ESPECIALLY if you have NOT properly configured your case. And by all means, know and understand the consequences, should you decide to use an aftermarket cooler on a CPU that came packaged with an OEM cooler - or when giving advice on the subject.

Understood :)

I generally recommend at least two large (120mm or larger), top-quality case fans, one in front drawing cool air in, and one in back exhausting hot air out. This does NOT include the PSU fan(s). "Blowhole" (top) fans are excellent at taking advantage of the "heat rises" property of thermal dynamics. Additional case cooling may be required with single-slot (and some dual-slot) graphics cards that do NOT exhaust hot air directly out the back, but instead, toss the GPU's heat into the case's innards.

Yeah, I agree. I would aim for positive air pressure myself to minimise dust - 2x front intake with 1x rear exhaust. Top exhaust fans come next - but side mounted fans tend to have very little impact on actual temps IMO.

 

[Digerati]

Re: Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit random freezes

You have an OC on the stock cooler?

Yes. I have not used an aftermarket cooler on any of my personal systems since 2009.

But it is not a serious overclocking. I use Gigabyte's (my motherboard maker) EasyTune wizard set to medium. Plus, while a desktop, it is dynamic - not always running full speed, rarely, actually (since I don't game, or do CAD/CAE work, or serious graphics editing). I am not really a fan of overclocking because I have seen too much damage done by those who did little-to-no homework first, never a thought of any additional cooling requirements (and maybe power supply too). I keep CoreTemp running in my system tray at all times - overclocking or not.

I like Gigabyte's EasyTune because they've done the homework for you, if you choose to use one of the 3 presets. Or advanced users can really go tweak happy, but that does not interest me. In the olden days, when you had to move and resolder hardwire jumpers following schematics you hoped were right - that was when overclocking was fun.

But really, I can't say that I noticed any difference from the stock 3.4GHz. 16Gb of RAM helps that - so does the SSD.

... and cooling on laptops is pretty poor when compared to desktops due to the physical size restraints.

Now this is why I really dislike marketing weenies who market some of their notebooks as "desktop replacements" and "game machines". They can sure pack serious PC horsepower in a notebook but they cannot pack in the cooling. And that should be no surprise since many standard tower (mid ATX and larger) PC cases are challenged to keep the innards cool. For those "gaming" notebooks that come close, they sure are not the lightest, or thinnest notebooks around. And I know of no notebook that allows for easy user access to the interior, like a PC case does.

Oh, BTW, even though both AMD and Intel discuss overclocking capabilities, neither cover damage "when used with voltages not specified" or "abnormal voltages". And that make sense to me. If you take your brand new Porsche to a race track and blow up the engine while racing, pretty sure that would not be covered either - even though the Porsche is a "sports" car.

I used to bother with all this positive and negative air pressure stuff, then decided it was not worth it. Just strive for good front to back "flow" of cool air and you will be fine. That said, I'm 62 and I don't like tearing my PCs down and lugging my PCs outside and down to the driveway to blast out the dust with my air compressor any more than I have to. So I have not for years, and never will again buy a PC case that does not have removable, washable air filters.

but side mounted fans tend to have very little impact on actual temps IMO.

I agree. In fact, we did some experiments with this and found that a side fan can actually cause temps to increase. We theorized that the side fans in our test cases created turbulence in the desired front-to-back flow through the case, causing a build up of heat.

However, side fans that fired into a tube that channeled the side fan's flow directly onto the CPU (or GPU - depending on case) improved cooling - but only by a degree or two.

Intel have improved their internal TIM.

To avoid confusing others, that is not "internal" as in integrated to the CPU. But what they will include pre-applied on new CPUs instead of the old pads. And yes it is supposed to be some good stuff. I expect it will be marketed separately soon.

 

[Tekno Venus]

But it is not a serious overclocking. I use Gigabyte's (my motherboard maker) EasyTune wizard set to medium. Plus, while a desktop, it is dynamic - not always running full speed, rarely, actually (since I don't game, or do CAD/CAE work, or serious graphics editing). I am not really a fan of overclocking because I have seen too much damage done by those who did little-to-no homework first, never a thought of any additional cooling requirements (and maybe power supply too). I keep CoreTemp running in my system tray at all times - overclocking or not.

I like Gigabyte's EasyTune because they've done the homework for you, if you choose to use one of the 3 presets. Or advanced users can really go tweak happy, but that does not interest me. In the olden days, when you had to move and resolder hardwire jumpers following schematics you hoped were right - that was when overclocking was fun.

I do see the appeal of software OC - and they can work very well for some people as you have proven. On occasion I've seen them be less stable than doing the OC manually in the BIOS, and I think that'd be how I'd personally do it. However, the ease of use of software OC's cannot be ignored, and they are normally just as stable.

But really, I can't say that I noticed any difference from the stock 3.4GHz. 16Gb of RAM helps that - so does the SSD.

I wouldn't really expect you to - the benefits are most noticeable with rendering and gaming. I agree wholeheartedly on the SSD, best £120 I've ever spent! It's made such a difference to my laptop, I'd never want to go back to mechanical drives for my OS again.

Oh, BTW, even though both AMD and Intel discuss overclocking capabilities, neither cover damage "when used with voltages not specified" or "abnormal voltages". And that make sense to me. If you take your brand new Porsche to a race track and blow up the engine while racing, pretty sure that would not be covered either - even though the Porsche is a "sports" car.

You may be interested in these: Home Page. Intel will replace your processor once if it dies due to damage caused by OCing and operating outside normal voltages:

Intel has received feedback from customers who want to implement overclocking on eligible processors, that because of the lack of any replacement coverage for the eligible processors, the risk of overclocking is too great. We understand this position, and while we cannot endorse overclocking, we want to provide a limited remedy if issues arise as a result of their decision to enable overclocking. The limited remedy consists of a replacement processor (i.e., replacing the processor damaged solely as a result of the overclocking).

They're pretty cheap ($35 in the US), and the peace of mind from it would justify the price for me!

To avoid confusing others, that is not "internal" as in integrated to the CPU. But what they will include pre-applied on new CPUs instead of the old pads. And yes it is supposed to be some good stuff. I expect it will be marketed separately soon.

Actually, you're wrong there! Devil's Canyon CPU's contain Intel's new TIM between the CPU dies and the heatspreader on top of the CPU. It has nothing to do with the CPU coolers/pads. Many extreme overclockers have 'de-lidded' their CPU to replace that TIM because it was notoriously bad, but the new TIM in Devil's Canyon should rectify that. Of course, some people will still want to 'de-lid' their CPU's, but the new TIM is pretty good.

Anandtech give a bit of information on the new TIM:

The first upgrade is a new thermal interface material (TIM), which Intel is stating as a ‘next-generation polymer’. This would inevitably imply that the base material is silicone monomer, unless Intel has decided to do something fancy with a carbon-polymer based suspension. With this in mind, users looking to delid their CPUs might see a material the same color as the normal Haswell CPUs, but Intel is stating that this is a new material. One could estimate that another 5-15C shift might occur, allowing those CPUs that were temperature limited to get another 100-200 MHz than they would under the old system. However the issue regarding the height of the heatspreader above the die due to the binding agent has not been mentioned, which would lead me to suggest that it might not have been changed. Until we get a sample in house to test we will not know for sure, but I could perhaps hope that the amount of TIM under the heatspreader has also increased in order to facilitate heat transfer.

AnandTech | Intel Launches Devil?s Canyon and Overclockable Pentium: i7-4790K, i5-4690K and G3258

-Stephen

 

[Wrench97]

The problem with Intel cooler design lies in the attaching hardware, if you are swapping a stock Intel push pin cooler with a aftermarket cooler with the same attaching design you have not fixed the problem, Lenovo, Dell HP and many others do not use the stock coolers for this very reason(too many warranty claims from them poping up loose when the unit is shipped or moved by the end user).

The problem with aftermarket bolt on coolers and warranty is only if the CPU appears crushed from the cooler being installed incorrectly, this would follow the same guide lines as a AMD CPU having broken/bent pins and a warranty claim being denied.

 

[Digerati]

My mistake about the new TIM with the new Intel's and TIM. That IS the internal TIM used inside the CPU die package - not the user-replaceable TIM that sits between the die and heatsink mating surfaces. But it really has nothing to do with this topic - EXCEPT that it should make the OEM stock coolers even more efficient! :smile9:

So my advice remains the same. I recommend trying the OEM coolers first (the ones designed for that line of CPUs) - before automatically plunking down more cash for an aftermarket cooler that is designed for "universal applications". Instead, use the extra money in the budget for more graphics horsepower, more or faster RAM, or a faster CPU - something that will actually improve performance for your money! Or use the extra money for more, larger, and/or quieter case fans. Or maybe towards a larger or better (or 2nd) monitor or some quality speakers.

On occasion I've seen them be less stable than doing the OC manually in the BIOS, and I think that'd be how I'd personally do it. However, the ease of use of software OC's cannot be ignored, and they are normally just as stable.

This is true with any overclocking scheme. Push it too hard in any one direction, and stability issues will occur. In fact, in overclocking circles, that's how you determine how far you can push it. Push until stability (or excessive heat) issues arise, then back it off until stable.

I'm 62. I got "into" (figuratively and literally) computers in the mid-70s. 15+ years ago, I used to be an overclocking and super-cooling freak. Not as a gamer. And not even as a computer "enthusiast". But as a long-time electronics technician who wanted to see what my hardware "could do". In other words, "been there, done that!". I've done extreme overclocking. And I've done water, refrigeration!, and Peltier cooling - all when there were no pre-made kits, wizards, menus or simple BIOS "settings" that you could easily back out of. Back when you had visit your local hardware store for parts, manually move and lay (solder in) new wire jumpers on motherboards to change clock settings and voltages. Updating the BIOS required swapping out PROMs - later "burning" EPROMs with UV light. I've cut holes in cases for cooling tubes and hoses, determined the best coolant formula (after discovering mold in system ) and more.

I even paid a small fortune for a 80mm hole saw to cut "blow holes" in the top of cases to mount top fans - way before any manufactured case came with top fan mounting.

Then I started to see all the problems caused by overclockers who failed to do their homework. These include warped and disfigured CPU sockets due to sustained high temps, shorts from water leaks and ESD damage too. A common problem with alternative cooling implementers is they often forget other heat sensitive and generating devices in the computer and on the motherboard need cooling too - in particular, the chipset, RAM and graphics.

Lax and waning preventative maintenance is a recurring problem with water cooling users. In the beginning, they check for leaks and water levels, perhaps on a daily basis. But as time and the novelty wear off, these inspections become fewer and further between - when the reality is, inspections should increase as the system ages, parts become fatigued and brittle (especially flexible hoses) and connections and fittings vibrate loose.

To be sure, overclocking issues has been good for my little computer repair business! :grin1: But I'm retired now and don't need the money. I would much rather teach users how to have a lasting, enjoyable, safe and secure computing experience. And that comes from making sound, AND INFORMED decisions.

Frankly, overclocking has become boring. Safer :smile9:, but boring . Thanks in part to programs like Gigabyte's EasyTune and ASUS' AI overclocking utilities. I really see no purpose for it today - EXCEPT for bragging rights in benchmarks and at review sites (*). I feel it is MUCH BETTER (safer, more stable) to just buy more horsepower (noting the cost for more performance just keeps dropping significantly year after year). And it is not just that CPUs are becoming more powerful, they are also much more efficient - that is, they consume less power and waste less power (in the form of heat) than their predecessors, while providing much better performance.

Also, game developers have changed their methodologies too. They now realize that not all gamers are overclockers, computer enthusiasts, nor do all gamers have deep pockets. So they design their programs to provide good "game play" on lessor systems. Also, today's computing environment is MUCH MORE graphics intensive than it was 10 years ago. So the importance of a good graphics solution is greater than it used to be.

The more capable the graphics solution, the more tasks the CPU can hand off to the graphics solution - and it takes very little CPU horsepower to hand off tasks.

So yeah, I OC a little contradicting myself - but just because it was so easy (thanks to Gigabyte's EasyTune) and my temps are good.

And finally, I don't care if folks use aftermarket coolers or if they overclock - AS LONG AS they do their homework first, keep CONSTANT watch on temps, and maintain a disciplined preventative maintenance routine that includes regular (monthly, if not more often) visual inspections, and cleaning of heat trapping dust as necessary. And most important, that they understand ALL the consequences of using aftermarket cooling and/or non-default voltage and clock settings.

* As to benchmarking utilities and review sites - I am not a big fan - even with undeniably professional sites like AnandTech. They try, but the tests that measure performance are NOT representative of the real-world scenarios most "normal" users will encounter. That said, I prefer the professional review sites to "user reviews" at sites like Newegg. With user reviews, it is important to note happy users don't complain and most don't come back to write good reviews. Also, users typically don't have comparable products to compare with for proper side-by-side (A-B) comparisons, nor do they have properly equipped testing facilities or the necessary technical training for a proper evaluation. So if I am considering a product, I read the user reviews but I don't put a lot of stock in them, UNLESS there are several complaining about the EXACT SAME THING.