Issues with Ryzen 5 thermals overclocking
Issues with Ryzen 5 thermals overclocking
Hey guys. So I purchased a Ryzen 5 1600 about three weeks ago. In my UEFI, from MSI I noticed an option for "easy overclock," which I enabled. After a few weeks, I realized my CPU was running at 1.440V. That surprised me a lot. So I decided to try overclocking myself. Since I already had a stock cooler, I wasn’t expecting great cooling performance, but it wasn’t this bad either. At 3.8Ghz and 1.35V it functions, though the thermal performance is terrible and I’m not sure why. While idle, the PC stays around 35–40 degrees Celsius—which isn’t too bad, but could be improved. However, during a stress test like Prime95, after about 20 minutes it reached around 96 degrees Celsius.
I have some ideas about what might be causing this, but I still value your opinions.
When I first installed the cooler, I did it incorrectly three times, so I had to remove and reattach it three times again (without changing the thermal paste). Do you think that’s why?
It’s fine now because I’ve been gaming on the 1.440V CPU for three months and it never got so hot that the PC had to shut down due to overheating. And during a stress test, the temps would rise to about 100 degrees in just five minutes.
Should I be concerned?
No, your CPU isn't at 15 - 20°C when idle, as you can't cool your CPU lower than ambient without some sort of phase change cooling, and normally won't even get exceptionally close to ambient.
Thermal measurements for CPUs get more accurate as they get closer to TJMax as this is the important temperature to know. There's little reason to try and get great calibration at both ends of the thermal spectrum (even if they could) as it's highly unlikely anyone will ever cool their CPU to death. Nobody talks about it much, but it's the same for Intel CPUs. People are just more aware of it when it comes to AMD. Take idle or low end temperatures on CPUs with a grain of salt.
While the 20°C offset doesn't apply to the Ryzen 7 1700, I have read...
The 1.440V is quite high for this CPU, causing thermal throttling and reduced performance at 100 degrees. The standard cooler isn't suitable for that overclock. Lower the voltage to about 1.37 and aim for a stable OC. Keep an eye on temperatures and try to stay below 80 degrees, or consider a larger cooler. Reapplying thermal paste would also be a good idea. ;-)
RSxx :
The 1.440V setting is quite high for this CPU. At 100 degrees you're seeing thermal throttling and reduced performance. The standard cooler isn't designed for that overclock. You should lower the voltage to about 1.37 and aim for a stable OC. Keep an eye on temperatures and try to maintain them below 80 degrees, or consider using a larger cooler. Also, refreshing the thermal paste wouldn't hurt. ;-)
(renewing the thermal paste would be a good idea.)
MFG RSxx
Repaste the cooler and if you prefer to overclock, consider an aftermarket CPU cooler.
Repaste the cooler and if you want to overclock, consider an aftermarket CPU cooler. I've noticed some people achieving 4 GHz with the stock Wraith cooler using good thermal paste. My question is, why do my thermal paste look different from others?
As scout_03 mentioned, repaste and attempt once more. Also, not every CPU is identical and the thermal conditions in the case matter too.
From what I've understood, your processor should include a 20°C margin in temperature readings. It should also reduce its speed at around 75°C, as exceeding this can reduce its lifespan. If you're observing 96°C, it's likely the actual temperature is closer to 76°C, which is already excessively high and may indicate problems with maintaining the lower end of the throttle range.
Why are others achieving better results than you despite using the same cooler? Are you replicating their exact setup? Repeating identical conditions is essential for consistent outcomes. Assuming similar equipment but different results isn't scientifically reliable.
To clarify further:
- Do you own the same chip? Not necessarily, and during early production there can be significant quality differences.
- Is your motherboard identical? Possibly.
- Are you using the same BIOS with matching settings? Unlikely.
- Do you share the same ambient conditions? Probably not.
- Are your add-in components identical and contributing the same heat load? Unlikely.
- Are you using the same case configuration for cooling? Maybe, but probably not.
In summary, consider verifying each factor—chip, board, BIOS, environment, components, and case—to ensure accurate performance and longevity.
bigpinkdragon286 :
From what I've read, your processor should have a 20°C offset to temperature readings.
Your processor should also throttle at an actual 75°C, because going over can shorten the chip's lifespan.
If you're seeing 96°C, your chip is most likely at an actual 76°, which is already too hot, and is probably having issues keeping the temperature down with the amount of throttling it's performing.
Why are others getting better thermals than you with the same cooler?
Are you running an identical setup to the other people? If you want to repeat their results, you need to replicate their conditions. Expecting the same results from similar but different equipment is not scientific.
To expound on this:
Do you have the same chip? No, and early in production you can see a lot of variation in quality.
Do you have the same motherboard? Maybe.
Are you using the same BIOS with identical settings? No.
Do you have the same ambient temperatures? No.
Do you have the same add-in components, adding the same amount of heat to your system? Probably not.
Are you running the same case with identical ventilation configuration? Maybe, but probably not.
Are you running with an open or closed case? Were the other folks you're comparing against?
The long and the short of it, it's like scout_03 said. Re paste the cooler. Also, if it took you three tries to mount the cooler, are you positive you have it correctly mounted at this point? Lastly, if you want to bring your temperatures down, buy a more effective cooler. Nothing wrong with the stock cooler, it simply wasn't designed to handle the work load you're subjecting it to. You're welcome to keep bumping your CPU into it's TJmax temps and throttling, but you may not get a full lifespan or the best utility out of the CPU. Keeping it cooler will give you more stable performance.
I thought the 20 degree offset is only on 1700x and 1800x chips. That would mean that my CPU while Idle is at 15 - 20 degrees? that's quite unrealistic.
Thank you all for your help. This was my first time actually building a PC so that's why I did some stupid mistakes. I'll try to re apply the thermal paste, and see if that makes a difference.
No, your CPU doesn't stay at 15 - 20°C when idle because you can't lower its temperature below ambient without special cooling methods, and it rarely approaches that level. Thermal readings become more reliable as the temperature nears TJMax, which is crucial to understand. Pushing for perfect calibration at both extremes isn't practical since such low temperatures are rare. People usually focus more on AMD than Intel, though idle temps are often discussed. Be cautious with the 20°C adjustment—it might apply to some models but not all.