• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

would this most definetely fry a cpu?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

pummer

Member
Joined
May 21, 2003
Location
buffalo ny
My friend, more in tune with the software side of things, decided he was going to take his compaq's hardware and move it into a new Xoxide case. The proprietary motherboard, he tells me, is too long to fit into the case correctly. So, he sort of jury-rigged it in there. Problem is, the holes for the cooler for his 2.4ghz P4 didn't line up correctly. Last time he was involved with computer hardware was way back in the day, when coolers were optional and/or not needed in the short term.

SO, he decided to boot it up. It started to slow down, he reports, and finally turned off. So he booted it up again another time with the same results before calling me. I promptly informed him he really needed that cooler on there.

I can't get over there until tommorow or sunday to check it out and clean it up and put on some AS3, so i'm wondering: do you think what he did fried his chip?
 

tio

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2003
Location
Hyrule
Nope, he probably didn't fry it. The older P4s have "thermal throttling" built in, meaning that once they reach a certain temperature, they start skipping clock cycles in order to cool down on their own. If they get too hot, even while throttling, they just shut down the whole computer.

I'm not certain, but I believe the newer P4C chips just go straight to shutting down the computer if they get too hot.
 

stan03

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2003
well if he started it up again.... i would guess it wouldn't fry a second time... but i think the thermal shut down thing saved him... and when were heatsinks optional? before i was born? :D
 

arklab

Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2001
... and when were heatsinks optional? before i was born?

Back during when Intel CPU's were multiplier UNLOCKED.

Yes, there really WAS such a time! <sigh>
 
OP
pummer

pummer

Member
Joined
May 21, 2003
Location
buffalo ny
good news all, it lived :D

a little goof off, isopropyl alcohol, lint-free cloth and of course ceramique goes a long way :D
 

Albuquerque

Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Location
North America
arklab said:


Back during when Intel CPU's were multiplier UNLOCKED.

Yes, there really WAS such a time! <sigh>

Actually, the days when cooling wasn't needed were also the days when multipliers didn't even exist. Even a 486/33 required a simple passive heatsink, but all of the 386's and the 486/16's and 20's didn't usually. In those days, your bus ran just as fast as your processor, which meant your ram operated at the same speed too.

And actually, if you want to get technical, the first "multiplied" Intel chips (and AMD chips) were locked. You couldn't change the 2x multiplier on a 486/DX2 chip anymore than you could change the 3x multiplier on a 486/DX3 (or DX4) chip.

The actual multiplier unlocked chips started with the original Pentium series.
 

Cornel

Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2003
Location
Fl
Definetely a little late, but here you have the link to a video made buy Tomshardware. Download and watch THG video 1. Trust me, it's fun:D
 

RoadWarrior

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Location
Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada
Ummm actually, if you want to get REALLY technical. There were several 486es with flexible multipliers. The 3.3V DX2s were the same core as DX4s, and could be set between 2x and 3x, the pentium overdrives could be set between 1.5x and 2.5x, the Cyrix 5x86 could be set between 2x and 3x, and the AMD 5x86 could be set between 3x and 4x. However there were 3 different ways of changing multis on 486 chips and this combined with poor documentation of the multiplier jumpers on 486 era boards leads to the impression that changing the multi was not possible at this time. The most common implementation on 486 mobos was the one used by AMD and Cyrix thus their CPUs were most known to be multi flexible.

In the Pentium era, the first P5 socket 4 chips (The real original Pentium) were locked to a 1:1 multiplier, the first crop of P54 chips were 1.5x only and then the later P120, P133 were initially locked at 2x only, however, with later C0 stepping cores, the chips were available with 1.5 AND 2x multiplier enabled, thus later C0 P75s could run as P133s with a good heatsink on, and P133s could be set to P75 speeds. I think the earliest MMX chips were locked but then with later steppings as with the P54 became unlocked. We were just getting used to the potential of unlocked Pentium MMXs when the new and expensive Klamaths came out, which initially were unlocked, this only lasted about 6 months though and by the time anyone could afford them they were multiplier limited initially (limited to a max multi according to speed rating, but lower multis worked) then fully locked when the 100Mhz bus CPUs came out.

In my view, there really was no golden age of unlocked intel CPUs, since mostly you were limited to one of 2 multipliers. The P MMX only had 2.5 and 3 until the 233 came out and remapped 1.5x to 3.5x, and only after that a few downbinned P200s could be persuaded to 3.5x

As far as heatsinks on 486es goes, intel 486SX chips didn't really need one whatever the speed in moderate climates, DX33 and above did. However there are probably a few laptops around with heatsinkless low power DXL chips at up to 75Mhz. Fanless machines with oversize heatsinks however continued to be common among OEMs up to around 500Mhz or so chips. Compaq being a notorious for their fanless heatsinks.

regards,

Road Warrior