die simulator - flawed?

[big_bertha]

i was just thinking. is the die simulator flawed with the P4 benchmarks on overclockers.com or what. when i looked at the test on the page http://www.overclockers.com/tips263/index02.asp i saw that the copper block uses a contact area the same size as an athalon cpu. a p4 has that massive heat spreader. if the die simulator is smaller than an actual p4 chip isnt that going to skew the results. shouldnt there be a seperate copper block with a p4 sized contact area to test p4 heatsinks. maybe there is and i'm an idiot (remind me if i am. only way i will learn)

im not good with words but you know what i mean.

discuss?


also, if you put the p4 heatsink on the die simulator that had the surface area of an AMD would that advantage certain designs over others. can this account for various differences in the heat dispersion reported on the benchmarks as opposed to "real world" situations.

also. one last thing. how can one effectively compare a heatsink that gets .20 with a 70cfm with one that gets .34 with a 20cfm fan. reviews are good with the exception of comparisons being hard to make

 

[Caffinehog]

Your logic is good. The die simulator should be covered with the IHS off of an intel chip for socket478 testing. This would be easy to do.

Obviously, heatsink comparisons with different fans are flawed, however each heatsink should be tested with its stock fan. Few people are willing to change fans on heatsinks. If the heatsink does not have a stock fan, it should be tested with a range of fans. It seems that most heatsinks of this type are tested in this mannner, at least on this website.

 

[BillA]

This post deleted by its "derogatory and insulting" author so that it will not be (so) necessary
"to defend the little guys against the tyranny of the know-it-alls."

 

[Monaco]

Yah, the die simulator is flawed if you assume it is supposed to represent a real CPU. It used to , but now, with so many different CPUs out, it doesn't. It's simply a heat source that approximates a CPU in terms of heat and size. All the die simulator tests are comparable to each other.

Otherwise, Joe'd need several different fake dies, each with it's own resistor network, to accurately simulate teh different sizes and heat output of different CPUs. What a pain in the ***! As it is, teh simulator provides a very good idea of the relative cooling power of each HSF, as related to each other.

BillA: What? Are you saying P4s are throttled all the time, maybe I misunderstand? The throttle temp is incredibly high- you aren't going to see your P$ speed throttle under normal conditions at all.

 

[BillA]

This post deleted by its "derogatory and insulting" author so that it will not be (so) necessary
"to defend the little guys against the tyranny of the know-it-alls."

 

[safemode]

die simulators aren't really supposed to emulate cpus. They just emulate the effects of a heat source the size of a certain cpu die. Other than the size, it has nothing in common with a cpu.

 

[Diggrr]

I'd trust the die simulator well over and above a wattage database program to calculate c/w anyday. It's the only way to know the real wattage going into the heatsink to get the calculations right.

As for the heatspreader, that really should be named a core protector, because that 1/2mm (or less) of aluminum won't spread heat for beans. Honestly, I think Intel just wants to save themselves from the phony RMA claims that AMD must suffer through. "No really, it came out of the box with that big crack in the core"...uh huh...sure.
Of course, if AMD used them there'd be no unlocking, and thus a decline in their popularity/market share.

Just my $.02.

 

[Monaco]

BillA- yes, I read that article. It's more than a year old now, not exactly recent news. The P4 throttle issue has been beaten to death- gating, throttling, whatever you call it. Just one more reason I'm sticking w/ AMD for now.

 

[CrystalMethod]

The CPU die simulator is meant to test the heatsinks themselves. To give a baseline that you can't achieve by using actual overclocked CPU's. Overclocked CPU's don't provide a good base for heatsink comparison. Remember the trick is to test the heatsink alone. Not the heatsink with XXX CPU, on XXX motherboard. The CPU die simulator is as close as you can get to controlled testing. The only way it would be any better is to have a dedicated room where ambient temperature could be controlled.