Randum:Northwood is 55+, and right now the 3.06 has reached a scorching 80. Most AthlonXP's are within the 60-80 range. At the same performance level, on the same instruction set, CPU's will probably put out the same level of heat.
But isn't that 3.06 ghz P4 with HT enabled or not? At the same performance levels (PR rating), AMD CPU's are still hotter (for one thing, they run at a higher core voltage). That is a fact.
The 3.06ghz P4 is alone at the top right now. If you compare a 2800+ XP and a 2.8ghz P4, the AMD is still hotter.
I still don't understand why AMD fanboys are in denial about this. You can make an argument about ,like, it really doesn't bother me. Or AMD XP's are still cheaper at the lower end. And on price point on CPU's like the 1600+ XP, the low price justifies the slightly higher heat output. These are all valid arguments. But when arguing on the basis of heat per clock speed ( or by PR rating, which is what AMD fanboys want), AMD CPU's will always runs hotter UNLESS they manage to run them at a lower voltage (then, we see what happens).
If the integrated heat spreader is such a 'big factor' in the P4's lower temps like somebody alleged, they why doesn't AMD put them on their own CPU's then? Here's why I think Intel can come up with a cooler running CPU: lower core voltages, better thermal management, little additions like the heat spreader (protects the core from cracking too) and better overall manufacturing. Don't get me wrong, if I'm building a PC on a budget, I wouldn't hesitate on getting an AMD system. but once you start moving up the upgrade path where cost and quality begin to blur, Intel systems are more attractive. And this is from a guy whose last Intel system until recently was a 486DX33.
