Replies to post #26355 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[Tim Fowler]

No mas, the laugh is on you and the rest of the fanboys. Even Opteron is now using an IHS.

My understanding is that the main reason for it in the Opteron is to physically protect the expensive processor from getting chiped or crushed, not to help dissipate heat.

Tim

[mas]

You obviously do not have the faintest clue what purpose the pipeline of a processor serves in limiting clockspeed. Here educate yourself on some basics.

http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=50

Two more clues, it is temperature and voltage dependent.

So today's heatsinks can't dissipate 120W you say, well I guess Prescott owners are in a bit of trouble then. :-)

EVERY known case of removing an IHS has resulted in a drop of die temperature, but keep the faith one day your ship may come in :). You know it is common scientific practise to observe data and then develop a theory not the other way round. :-)

Hmmm re Fanboy, let me see now, who's got the ra-ra cheering logo in their signature, have you got a nice pretty skirt to go with that ? :-)

[j3pflynn]

calbiker - Are you suggesting that somehow "the great calbiker" is free of the laws of physics that the rest of us have to adhere to? Regardless how much you deny it, when you add a relatively inefficient thermal junction(die-to-IHS or any other similar junction) between the die and the ultimate "sink" for the thermal transfer - that is, the air - you lose efficiency. Period. This inefficiency can be minimized, which from the early post I saw on vr-zone.com, is what I suspect Intel did with Prescott, but it is still there. It is inescapable. Drop it, you'll never convince anyone who has any knowledge of physics or thermodynamics. You might want to search back through the SI moderated AMD forum, if you have access. There was a substantial discussion on it once. Mani, who established the forum there is an expert in the field.

Paul