Don't worry, 110°C is "expected and within spec" for AMD's RX 5700 series

[WYP]

AMD's "hotspot" temperatures live up to the name.



Read more about 110°C "hotspot" temps being "expected and within spec" for AMD's RX 5700 series GPUs.

 

[grec]

Yeah for anyone wondering it's almost impossible to damage the silicon with most transistor designs below 125 C in terms of actual physical temperatures (Obviously traditional temp readings are often a fair bit below actual temps because they couldn't traditionally embed the sensor in the chip itself).

While of course most damage from thermals is from thermal cycling (Quick heating and cooling cycles expanding and contracting the silicon) rather than stable high temps which are no problem at all really.

 

[demonking]

Im sure they would have tested this and been confident the software knows how to handle the clock/temp situations or we would not have seen a release or driver updates if they had been concerned at all since release.
The media would have been all over this had there been high failure rates due to heat and thats the sort of publicity AMD does not need right now and they know it.

 

[NeverBackDown]

While it's fine I still feel like AMD should have better stock coolers or at least a more expensive non air blower style card.

 

[Zoot]

Think of it this way -

They offer a 3 year warranty on these cards. That means they have to guarantee the worst case scenario for 3 years otherwise they can't be confident that they won't be inviting a slew of RMAs. That would mean 100% usage at the max allowed temperature for 3 years 24/7/365.

Most concerns with temperatures (at least at stock) are misplaced, usually the manufacturer has done all the hard work before they release it.

 

[Excalabur50]

GN has done a great piece on this and is well worth a watch and the AIB cards don't get anywhere near that hot!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQjTYbqG1CI&t=1194s

 

[WYP]

Think of it this way -

They offer a 3 year warranty on these cards. That means they have to guarantee the worst case scenario for 3 years otherwise they can't be confident that they won't be inviting a slew of RMAs. That would mean 100% usage at the max allowed temperature for 3 years 24/7/365.

Most concerns with temperatures (at least at stock) are misplaced, usually the manufacturer has done all the hard work before they release it.

Just think of it this way. A lot of people are still using their reference RX 290X graphics cards. They ran both hot and loud and stayed at 90 degrees constantly.

AMD's new designs have more temp sensors. IE, the older cards may have ran hotter than they claimed depending on which part of the GPU was worked hardest.

I agree with GN when they say that AMD could have done better with their cooler, that's obvious. That said, Steve overblows the issue here completely. The reference cards are fine, AMD knows what they are doing when they make the specs and they say that these cards run in spec. This should only be considered an issue if there are widespread RMAs.

AMD could have gotten these cards to run cooler with faster fan RPMs, but if I am honest I'd rather allow the card to run hotter (if the heat is within spec) and have the card run quieter. The reference RX 5700 series is a lot quieter than the Vega cards they replace.

TBH, the popular thing to do in reviews these days is to go crazy with your complaints. Make yourself seem like the voice of the people by sticking it to the manufacturers by making mountains out of molehills.

 

[grec]

TBH, the popular thing to do in reviews these days is to go crazy with your complaints. Make yourself seem like the voice of the people by sticking it to the manufacturers by making mountains out of molehills.

Yeah the PC community has got to the point now where often the endemic whinging essentially amounts to "These people had the cheek to design a product for a target audience that wasn't my exact situation right now". People whinge about all sorts of design choices that were good compromises when you look at the whole picture. It's almost as if they've forgot the production triangle:

(Well lets pretend's it's that rather than facing the reality that a for-profit company creating advert revenue driven reviews is incentivised to stoke controversy and bash on things due to our psychology being naturally drawn to that stuff)

 

[WYP]

(Well lets pretend's it's that rather than facing the reality that a for-profit company creating advert revenue driven reviews is incentivised to stoke controversy and bash on things due to our psychology being naturally drawn to that stuff)

TBH, it is sad that things have come to this. Ultimately, reviewers need clicks to keep going, but there is a lot o needless stoking of the flames of controversy. This is especially true on YouTube.