No, I don't have access to them. I am extrapolating from data available -- if we know that the IVR has better performance at stock
They'll be "molested" even more when under passive heatsinks, or -- most commonly -- when not under a heatsink at all.
Furthermore, not every stage of voltage regulation is being integrated. The IVR will be recieving power that is already filtered.
There s no such thing as "higher quality VRMs" or rather mosfets ,
they are always a compromise between switching speed and
high conductance.
Either they can withstand high currents and have low on resistance ,
but then they will have awfull parasistic capacitances that will command
high command currents to make them switch fast enough or they
will be fast but you ll have to give up on the conductance front.
In the first case dynamic losses will be higher than static ones
while it will be the contrary for the second type of device.
On overclocking dedicated MBs manufacturers will tend
to use slower but more rugged devices given the expected
usage , power dissipation being left out of the equation.
That is for the technical discussion.
While my arguments may be driven by a wish to see Haswell succeed, your skepticism is a result of your desperate wishes to see it fail. I'm not afraid to come clean on this -- are you?
Only religious people have no doubts...
Facebook
Twitter