8700k idle temps for watercooled R7 and R8 owners?

@amstel78    I'm curious...

OK, I will go first. As you know I am not and I am i9-9900K, but still TDP is 95 watts.

I think your 32C is a good place to be. Below is the 1st water loop with the PSU swing out contraption still in place. TIM is IC Diamond 7 Carat Diamond

pretty much idle

turning on some scans and videos

@AnonymousI'm wondering if it'd be advantageous sanding down the heatspreader; it's slightly concave in the center but not by much.  Or, if it'd be more beneficial running a thicker 120 rad? I've got the extra room since removing the stock Nidec fan and replacing it with an ML120 Pro.

@amstel78   if it'd be more beneficial running a thicker 120 rad?

Disclaimer: I am not an expert.

More radiator will generally mean more cooling. For my temps above I am using an external 120mm x 360mm x 45mm copper radiator with 6 push-pull fans. This loop is cooling both the CPU and graphics card.

If you've got the room and the inclination, I would go as big as possible.

Personally, I would be reluctant to sand down the IHS. "Slightly concave" should be compensated by the TIM. On my current mod I am using Phobya NanoGrease Extreme because of its reported 16W/mK thermal conductivity (non-conductive). I have not yet had a chance to test this TIM in action.

I've never ran MX4 on the stock aio (since mine didnt come with it) but I run the L freezer 120 with MX4 and it seems to sit around 28-33 depending on how hot the room is. To be fair usually it's around 72f and I get about 30c idle. Never really seen above 65-70ish under load at 5.0ghz on the 8700k. Honestly I think it was a bad design to only have a 120 slot and not a 240. Even if you have to make a case a bit bigger 240 would of been better.

I agree that Dell could have easily fit a 240 rad across the top by raising the height of the case about 2" and losing the optical drive.  But I suspect that the desire for $profit$ overrode any considerations of designing a superior product.  Basically, what is the least amount of money that can be spent to output a product that will function for the average user.  

I have an 8086K (i.e., a binned 8700K), mx4, and corsair H60 with a push/pull configuration. This is where I am at idling with just a couple browsers and youtube running, room at 72*F.  But note I run an aggressive fan curve. 

RESPONDING TO: 

Honestly I think it was a bad design to only have a 120 slot and not a 240. Even if you have to make a case a bit bigger 240 would of been better.

@MarkWatney    Honestly I think it was a bad design to only have a 120 slot and not a 240.

"rule of thumb" (for what that is worth) in water cooling world is 120mm per component in the loop. So 120mm for a CPU loop would fit that convention. Add a GPU then that is 240mm radiator. However, what this convention does not consider is the piss-poor, air-starved case design of the Aurora and XPS products. So you are correct, a 240mm radiator would have somewhat compensated for poor case design.

B..b..b..b..but it has a swing out PSU contraption!!!       

The TDP for an Corsair H60 is 150W.  The Corsair (i.e., single fan, asetek pump, and slightly thinner 120 rad) is about as comparable an aftermarket AIO as you can find to the Dell AIO.  So I suspect the Dell AIO has a comparable TDP ~ 150W.  Now, run an OC'ed 9900K with multithread load and you should be able to easily burn 175 to 200 watts.  Combine that with the claustrophobic interior and you're paddling upstream.  Luckily, you don't have to worry about any of this anymore 

I think everyone here is on the same page that roughly a 120x150x27mm radiator for 1 component at ~150W TDP. There are 2 main issues with keeping this assumption:

1. Swing arm PSU starving the bleep out of the airflow. Can't say how many case mods/ transplants this has motivated but I can say almost all of us are herre because of this, one way or another.

2. 150W TDP goes out of the window for CPU once you start playing with OC especially on AVX workload. My 9600K draws 170W on FFT @ 4.5GHz without Vcore offset. A -110mV drops it down nearer to 150W. So with the i9-9900K, 16 threads firing, it's definitely north of 200W.

The points above are just rehashing what @Anonymous and the others mentioned. It is my reminder to myself that 9600K and perhaps a 2070 Super is my upper limit for this chassis. A build with 9900K + 2080 Ti that is silent would have to move to the "dream build".

The R9 is a possibly candidate to bust open top of the casing using a Dremel to fit a 240mm radiator. However, the new bezel construction looks more complex than the R5-R8. Someone in this forum also installed a H80i (not sure if it's v2) but only using 1 of the 2 fans. That's about as thick as you can go and still able to close the swing arm.

@r7201927C?!?!?! Wow.  I've never seen my 8700k dip below 32C.  Ambient air temps in the room are about 76F though. What paste are using?

What width is the stock rad again? 

Can't really draw a direct line between idle temps and paste/ fan curves. Let's also look at idle voltage and power draw. I believe that "binned" 8700K (8086K) is a good as it gets when it comes to the process curve.

See photo.  Indoor temp is 72*F (it doesn't get hotter than 75 in here).  Nothing running except 5 browsers and some misc programs AWCC, hwmonitor, paint, word. 

I use Arctic MX4.  I think the corsair H60 radiator is slightly thinner than oem.  H60 is 27mm.  Oem dell (mh0hn) is 30mm, I believe?   

I suspect that ambient air temps would play a role to the extent that CPU temps are unlikely to fall below air temps (unless you added a water chiller to your AIO setup).  For example, one of my cores is at 24*C (75*F), which I suspect it would be unlikely to go that low if room temperature was 78*F as with @amstel78. 

UPDATE:  So after it's been idling for a little while, notice that min core temps never fall below 23*C (73*F) when room temperature is 72*F.  

At idle about 10 min ago

I've always considered @amstel78's 8700K as a silicon lottery winner due to great OC numbers, with the exception of offset killing off the CPU at low voltage. 

Now that I think more about this, could it be the concaved IHS that is doing more good than harm? Remember that the 8th gen CPUs are still using paste-TIM and not soldered. So in effect, a concaved IHS could minimize the gap between the die and the IHS. Of course there's the other side of the equation where the AIO plate meets the IHS but there's more surface area on that front and coupled with enough TIM to "plug the gap", it's pretty good. 

Interesting.  I hadn't noticed any obvious curves on my IHS ... not that I was even looking for that sort of thing at the time.  But I'm pretty sure the AIO plate was flat (not convex so as to close any gap) as I manually wiped off the supplied paste with a Q tip.  Another note, the MX4 ran like gravy whereas the Corsair supplied paste was very thin and dry like old toothpaste.. so definitely not conducive to closing curve-causing gaps.  

Unfortunately . . . 24 hours is insufficient time for the forum moderators to approve your photo. 

I'm thinking that the approval is done partially by artificial intelligence and some people gets their photos approved faster than others. When I first started out here, you would have to wait a day for my photo to post. Recently it has become as fast as 2 hours. I think we're all being watched and "ranked" by AI. Needless to say, posts against forum rules like ahem... criticism, will downvote a person?