Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
The use of TIM vs. Solder won't make a difference on the life of the chip. Before intel started soldering the die to IHS there was lots chips used TIM. There are plenty of chips running for 10+ years with TIM. Since Intel hasn't said anything it is unfair to say that intel didn't solder the chips just to save money. There maybe something else which may have to do with the 22nm fab or tri gate transistors... etc. Just playing devils(intel's) advocate here.
but IMO intel used TIM to cut costs and boost profit.
Don't know about older CPUs but if it is correct that it is to save a few pennies on K versions, then its criminal of Intel. I can see the logic of using TIM instead of solders on CPUs with locked multipliers but to do so in K version, ie for over-clocking is insane, especially when I have paid a premium over the non-K IB i5.
A 3.5gm syringe of AS5 cost under US$7 at a major online store and will cover 6-10 large CPUs. That makes under US100c per IHS...even cheaper if buying wholesale! Intel cannot be that tight-A**ed to save 100 pennies, right?
i assumed the CLP would be orite after a year. i swear its only aluminium it eats through? The copper and nickle on the ISH shouldnt have any issues. Does anyone know what material the surface of the core actually is?
So has Intel sold 1 billion Ivy Bridge cpus thus far?