Quote:
Originally posted by bigben2k
You didn't answer my question.
Let me put it another way: what is it about the IHS that makes it so different, that we'd have to resize the die?
Obviously, as the name implies, it spreads heat. However, it's really thin, so the heat isn't going to spread very far at all. What we know for sure, is that the IHS can have a gradient of up to 3 deg C. So the IHS spreads heat, so that the cooling solution (water block, HSF) can handle the heatload a little easier, but at the cost of a gradient.
I have to assume that Intel didn't do something stupid here. Obviously the IHS also protects the core from being crushed, so the gradient is a sacrifice?
If you want to know the actual temp that you can expect from running a tested block, on a P4, then it's an added difficulty, but isn't that the case regardless?
As for the water temp measurement, that's a discussion in progress. If you want to infer that standards have been established, then I can tell you that you're wrong.
|
I clearly stated in my post why I would justify using the heatspreader. Anyone should be able to distinguish that I suggested to make a new test die when the core size of real processors change, like with the new AMD's coming.
I in no way said or implied to resize the die to the size of the IHS, I said add the IHS on top of the test die (just like the real mcCoy). And I know you know I know what a heatspreader does.
