- Joined
- Nov 12, 2002
- Location
- Rootstown, OH
Im sticking with the power density theory myself.
Why? Color me curious.
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Im sticking with the power density theory myself.
Why? Color me curious.
power density plays a role, trigate, and solder vs tim would play a role, only issue is how much for each.
But regarding wattage earlier post between sandy and ivy, you cant go by total watts dissipated to figure difference in core temps when comparing across a die shrink, even though total heat output the same, what matters is power density, ie power per cm2, and only the area/size where power is actually consumed or heat "originates" matters.
150 watts consumed over a large area, the temperature would not be very hot.
150 watts consumed in a .001 micron area would exceed temp of a nuclear reactor.
See intels slide that everyone uses when explaining power density increase with die shrinks. Same wattage originating from smaller area = higher core temps.
The heat only makes sense, increase the transistor count from 1.16 billion on SB to 1.4 billion on IB and shrink the die from 216mm2 to 160mm2. That and I have confidence that Intel knows what they are doing with TIM..
What kind of sauce would you like,honey mustard,sweet and sour or just plain old ketchup replace popcorn with hat please.Lol if someone does 6Ghz on air because they removed the IHS Ill eat my friggin hat.
LINK: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4830/intels-ivy-bridge-architecture-exposed/1The heat only makes sense, increase the transistor count from 1.16 billion on SB to 1.4 billion on IB and shrink the die from 216mm2 to 160mm2. That and I have confidence that Intel knows what they are doing with TIM..
Thanks.
I also have confidence that Intel knows what they are doing with TIM. I also have confidence that every solution they choose is a balance between what is technically ideal and what is realistically appropriate. They could give us 6GHz on air processors by the end of the year - they have the resources skills, and ability to execute. I don't doubt at all that it could be possible if they dumped enough money into achieving that goal - but maybe they won't do that because making it a reality is too expensive, difficult, or otherwise bad for business.
If using an inferior TIM is sufficient and cheaper/quicker/easier/etc... Despite knowing a different solution would keep things cooler, I could see how they could make a decision to use an inferior cooling solution that was good enough due to balancing priorities.
The 6GHz thing is only intended to draw out a point. What they could do, what is best, and what they actually do can very realistically be different things. And if they are different, it isn't because they are dumb.