.13 2400+ and up T'bred AMD XP coming out with Heat Spreader

[CheapTOFU]

I don't know if this is true..
but I already have read about this somewhere and there is a link..
and a guy who works for AMD posted this..(click on the link)
HERE


Well, I think this will be interesting as AMD will introduce T'bred XP with heat spreader like Intel..
AMD solved the heat problem by placing a small metal on the top of T'bred core..
Finally AMD is doing something right if this is true

I'm guessing that if this is true, we should be able to OC T'bred very well!!!
As everyone know, P4 has some problems with high voltage( 1.7 and up)...
but it seems that there is no reported voltage problems with AMD XP T'bred...
It seems to work just fine..
Lets hope it overclocks like P4 with heat spreader!!!

I think this is why AMD has lowered the price of all current XP CPUs..
If the heat spreader comes out, ppl may not buy many old XP CPUs

 

[Duvie]

That sounds like the smartest amd has done in awhile...Probably more for the RMA and returns due to ppl cracking the cores....

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

FWIW, the heatspreader is actually bad for heat dissipation if you're using a good heatsink... It is definetly a good thing to help prevent cracked cores, though.

AMD's heat problem doesn't stem from the lack of heatspreader; rather the tiny (81 sq. mm, I think) die area is what's causing problems and adding a heatspreader doesn't solve that.

-Ice

 

[Duvie]

If it is true, which most things on the internet are hard to determine...look at the enquirer who post all the time with sources in amd and half of their crap never comes true or is right....


It makes sense to me on the Barton and something I reiterated in several hammer threads....


Also the 2400-2600 thing was posted in an adul thread about 2-3 weeks ago announcing amd figured out what the hell they were doing finally with the .13 micron process....

The 2400+ will be able to compete with the 2.53ghz p4 and the 2600+ likely will compete with the 2.66ghz p4...Lets remeber only in amd world does 66mhz equate to 100mhz pr rating which should finally prove to half you morons they must be talking about comparison to the older tbird core.

The P4 2.8ghz will still be in the lead even with these chips....

You ppl keep thinking an amd pr rating which jumps 100 pr points per 66mhz is going to keep up with intel...AMD chips do not scale like that, period...


www.tomshardware did the test and oc'd an 2380xp and it did not win a majority of the test versus the p4 2.4 (533fsb)...I will go out on limb to say 2.53ghz 533fsb will likely be 50/50 versus the 2600+ chip....

If they were able to incorporate the 333fsb in them now then they could definitely beat their p4 counterparts at speed.

Won't the 2700+ if it has 333fsb make the pr rating change??? I mean same speed now would be faster then a tbred and thus even faster then a tbird...sense the confusion of the consumer getting wider and wider...

 

[Wingznut]

Originally posted by: CheapTOFU
..and a guy who works for AMD posted this..(click on the link)
HERE

Actually, the guy is a buyer for some computer store (sounds like a chain of stores).

Integrated Heat Spreader... Sounds like a good idea and it wouldn't surprise me if they implemented one. Does an IHS ensure that "we should be able to OC T'bred very well!!!"? Not hardly.

I'm not sure that having issues with running a P4 overvolted by more than .2v can be considered "problems." How many people are running their T-breds at 1.90v+? I'm guessing they wouldn't fare so well.

 

[mechBgon]

If this is in fact correct, at least pump-out of thermal grease should be less of a concern, given a large contact area. I wonder if AMD will stick with PCTC for the interface between the IHS and the heatsink...

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Wingznut, what is your opinion on the benefits vs drawbacks of IHSs' ?

As I said earlier, I can't see them increasing the efficiency of heat dissipation over a good copper-based heatsink and a good thermal grease. I mean, the more layers you add, the more potential inefficiences there are, right?
The main benefit of the heat spreader, as I see it, is to protect increasingly small cores from increasingly large and heavy heatsinks. To a lesser extent, I guess an IHS can improve heat dissipation for a cheap heatsink.

Are there any other reasons why IHSs' are used?

-Ice

 

[Wingznut]

To be honest... I don't know much about the IHS.

My initial reaction is the same as yours... It obviously is an excellent idea for protecting the core.

But also that adding material between the silicon and hs can't help heat dissapation, unless your hs is of lesser quality (thermodynamics) than the IHS.

Apparently they are doing something right, though. I've read a couple of articles about people removing the IHS, and saw zero gain in cooling performance.

I think that cost is the sole reason that AMD hasn't been using them on their Athlons... But I'm not positive on that.