Pro/Forums - View Single Post

Brians256 · 12-29-2005, 01:57 AM

Bill, you say tech and not science, but I have to play devil's advocate. Some people here are interested in the science and modelling.

Les, thanks for running the numbers to show how a centered power source distributes heat across a 101mm^2 silicon die (I hope I'm reading your graphs correctly). I'm not sure how they can help, though. We don't have a case of even a single hot spot. A P4 die has several potential hot spots that shift as the instruction mix changes.

Would a waterblock do significantly better if it was designed to focus on known hotspots of a particular CPU? Better, meaning better overclock or increased stability (e.g. better stability despite equal or worse/higher temperatures measured at some arbitrary location like the P4 diode)?

12-29-2005, 01:57 AM	#21
Brians256 Pro/Staff Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Klamath Falls, OR Posts: 1,439	Re: Die Simulator vs. CPU Article Discussion Bill, you say tech and not science, but I have to play devil's advocate. Some people here are interested in the science and modelling. Les, thanks for running the numbers to show how a centered power source distributes heat across a 101mm^2 silicon die (I hope I'm reading your graphs correctly). I'm not sure how they can help, though. We don't have a case of even a single hot spot. A P4 die has several potential hot spots that shift as the instruction mix changes. Would a waterblock do significantly better if it was designed to focus on known hotspots of a particular CPU? Better, meaning better overclock or increased stability (e.g. better stability despite equal or worse/higher temperatures measured at some arbitrary location like the P4 diode)?