Quote:
Originally posted by unregistered
pHaestus
you are correct in your assumptions and extrapolations
a suggestion: ignore comments from those w/o (some form of) credentials
- such as a technical education and/or testing experience
you are needlessly 'debating' with people who simply do not know much about which they are pontificating
truly minimal lateral dispersion,
but excellent crush resistance
|
Right… I have a degree in electronic engineering and have a lot of experience in electronic prototype testing. From what I have been taught and have seen for myself especially with heat in electronics is that you always allow for a little extra heat dissipation and a little extra power consumption. Maybe the best way to get a good C/W of a block would be to take measurements at five different points (at the same time) and the average of those points be assigned as a true C/W for the block. Measuring only one point IMHO seems like running optimized drivers – sure it looks good but is it really a fair measure of performance? Now I don’t want to read again that we are simulating a newer CPU because with only the die size you are only simulating a die. If you want to get an over all C/W take readings at more than one point on the block. Again I know I am adding a little extra work and all those extra “if” that could happen – Hey no one said trying to simulate a constantly changing CPU was easy. –
Have to go this new form of simulation is catching on, My plane in my simulator no longer flys but only races around on land because it is easier to simulate.
