I've been studing Heating and cooling at school for a few semesters now, and noticed a flaw in the new btx design. If you look into the history of furnaces, you will see they used to make them with the hottest point making contact with the coldest air. After years of research they realized it was most efficient to warm up the air gradualy. The warm part of the furnace made contact first, and the hottest point made contact last. This gave the greatest heat output , therefore giving the greatest efficiency. As you have probably already guessed where I am going with this, the btx design will not give the greatest heat output. Having the hottest point (the processor) make contact with the coldest air, and the reast the the components make contact last, is the LEAST efficient way to cool the computer. The current ATX setup is the most efficient way. Even though the processor gets cooled better (with btx), the fan will have to blow faster and louder to cool the rest of the system. The reason btx is being introduced is to have a quieter pc, but they are doing the oposite! Anyway just had to get that out of my system! Post your comments.
New btx cases are NOT efficient
- Thread starter LeftSide
- Start date
I don't have all that much experience with heat transfer and the like, however it seems to me like they got it right.
It sounds like that would be a better furnace design because you are looking to get the maximum heat output from the device. On the other hand, with a computer, you are looking to get the minimum internal temperature. By "preheating" the air before it hits the point of maximum heat, you are able to pull it higher. You will be heating some air already at the lower temperatures around the hottest point, and bringing it up above the temperature of the rest of the furnace. On the other hand, if you bring the coldest air past it, you will only be heating it up to the temperature of the rest of the furnace. (Note: I know that this is grossly oversimplified, but it's easier to wrap my mind around with balanced equations)
On the other hand, in a computer, your object is to keep the hottest point (the processor) cool. By feeding it cooler air, you allow it to radiate more heat into the air charge, which in turn brings down the temperature of the hottest point. (Remember that cooler air will absorb more heat from a conductive body) This is a bad thing in furnaces, but good in computers.
AnthraX101
It sounds like that would be a better furnace design because you are looking to get the maximum heat output from the device. On the other hand, with a computer, you are looking to get the minimum internal temperature. By "preheating" the air before it hits the point of maximum heat, you are able to pull it higher. You will be heating some air already at the lower temperatures around the hottest point, and bringing it up above the temperature of the rest of the furnace. On the other hand, if you bring the coldest air past it, you will only be heating it up to the temperature of the rest of the furnace. (Note: I know that this is grossly oversimplified, but it's easier to wrap my mind around with balanced equations)
On the other hand, in a computer, your object is to keep the hottest point (the processor) cool. By feeding it cooler air, you allow it to radiate more heat into the air charge, which in turn brings down the temperature of the hottest point. (Remember that cooler air will absorb more heat from a conductive body) This is a bad thing in furnaces, but good in computers.
AnthraX101
But then all your other components have to deal with all of the extra heat. A hard drive might up the case temperature 2 degrees. Big deal. But the cpu will up the temp at least 10 degrees (expecialy the new presscots!) . Now the hard drive temps go up not down, and you will need a faster fan at the front of the case to cool the hard drive. btw this is just one example, not to mention the video card or ram.
The key point is that it doesn't matter that the rest of the case is slightly warm. What matters is that the CPU is as cool as possible with as small and cheap a heatsink as possible - and that means the air flowing over it needs to be a cool as possible.
No other component has the concentration of heat output that the CPU does, which means that they can be satisfactorily cooled with small heatsinks - if they have to be a little bigger, then it's no great loss.
No other component has the concentration of heat output that the CPU does, which means that they can be satisfactorily cooled with small heatsinks - if they have to be a little bigger, then it's no great loss.
Sorry, but I don't think Intel is that stupid to change the current ATX spec and spend millions on doing so.
The processor is the most important part that needs to be cooled. It doesn't matter if Hard Drives go up in temp by 10 degrees because we can easily manufacture hard drives that can tolerate that sort of heat.
HDDs have a case temperature limit of 50 to 55 degrees Celsius. All of them. So if you put them into the exhaust air stream of a 100W processor, they're GOING to overheat, and you won't even have to wait for a hot day.
That was a business decision. Technically, RDRAM was the better choice, just turns out Rambus had no friends in the industry, and was in no rush to aquire any...
As for BTX, this isn't some theory Intel never tested. They also don't have idiots working for their research teams. No offense intended, but it is highly unlikely that you found a tragic flaw in their years of research.
Please go visit some HDD manufacturer sites, and read the specification sheets. www.maxtor.com www.hitachigst.com www.samsung.com www.excelstor.com ... and so on. Try to find JUST ONE hard disk drive that is specced higher than 55 degrees Celsius.
Fine. Look at Seagates ATA line. They suggest Op temp of 0-60C, with a max of 69C.
Don't forget these temps are for liability/support. This isn't the manufacturers outreach program to protect data. Just a way of saying "we tested to this, don't expect miracles"
Don't forget these temps are for liability/support. This isn't the manufacturers outreach program to protect data. Just a way of saying "we tested to this, don't expect miracles"
Indeed, Seagate have moved up to 60. Good spot there, buleyb! That'll give industrial computers some extra margin.
Industrial? Seagate has good business in the desktop world too...
Anyway, it should be noticed that if the time comes to supply drives with higher thermal tolerances, they can do it.
Besides, it still isn't easy to bring ambient case temps up to 55C
Anyway, it should be noticed that if the time comes to supply drives with higher thermal tolerances, they can do it.
Besides, it still isn't easy to bring ambient case temps up to 55C
Sorry messed up there.... Although it is hard to bring case temps up to hard drive thresholds, I still don't want my drive to be any hotter than it already is. Hard drives fail, and the best way to keep them from failing is keeping them cool. Btx does not leave room for this.
actually, the best way to keep them from failing is not using them at all.
I think you are missing the point. The new standard is supposed to improve airflow in the case. You likely won't have any more heat problems than you do now. hotter internal temps, but better cooling, opposed to lower temps but worse airflow.
Don't like it, fine, get an external enclosure for your drives and leave the rest of us the nice improvements BTX brings.
I think you are missing the point. The new standard is supposed to improve airflow in the case. You likely won't have any more heat problems than you do now. hotter internal temps, but better cooling, opposed to lower temps but worse airflow.
Don't like it, fine, get an external enclosure for your drives and leave the rest of us the nice improvements BTX brings.
OK, personally I don't see HD temperatures as being a problem. Check out the layout for the cooling flow here.
Notice how there is only one fan there. What is stopping case manufacturers from putting another intake fan in front of the HDs? This would allow there to be two channels of flow in the case... The primary one that cools first the CPU and then the graphics card, and a secondary one that flows over the HDs and out the power supply. This should provide enough airflow to keep the rest cool as well. Is there an error with this reasoning?
And as others have mentioned, the goal isn't necessarily to maximize the heat coming out the back of the system, but to minimize the heat on the key components. CPU first, graphics second, and probably HDs third, since DDRII should raise the heat tolerance of memory. The rest of the components are definitely fine with a slightly higher ambient temperature.
Also, on the subject of drives, it might be interesting to see any special layouts for drive bays in full BTX cases. It doesn't look like there's a lot of room for the number of drive bays that come in cases today. It's possible that we'll see some different layouts that might solve the problem in different ways.
Notice how there is only one fan there. What is stopping case manufacturers from putting another intake fan in front of the HDs? This would allow there to be two channels of flow in the case... The primary one that cools first the CPU and then the graphics card, and a secondary one that flows over the HDs and out the power supply. This should provide enough airflow to keep the rest cool as well. Is there an error with this reasoning?
And as others have mentioned, the goal isn't necessarily to maximize the heat coming out the back of the system, but to minimize the heat on the key components. CPU first, graphics second, and probably HDs third, since DDRII should raise the heat tolerance of memory. The rest of the components are definitely fine with a slightly higher ambient temperature.
Also, on the subject of drives, it might be interesting to see any special layouts for drive bays in full BTX cases. It doesn't look like there's a lot of room for the number of drive bays that come in cases today. It's possible that we'll see some different layouts that might solve the problem in different ways.
I think that in a computer case your not going to reach that big of a differential between cold air and hot air as you would see in a furnace design so the case is probably mute. Anyways on the heatsink design with all those pins the air will be warmed slightly by the time it reaches the hottest point in the heatsink so I suppose that helps.
And as far as harddrives go, don't forget that they are cooled on their sides much more so then on their tops and bottoms. On the top you have a thin cover that only comes in metal to metal contact at the far edges, on the bottom of the drive you mostly end up having circuit board. However the "meaty" part of the drive is the frame of it, and that is mostly exposed on the edges. And HD designers design for maximum amount of heat to be channelled to the sides. If you want to maximize cooling of the HD's make metal on metal contact on the sides as effective as possible and make sure the metal surrounding the drive is very beefy and has air blowing on it(or is well connected with the rest of the case). That way you use the case itself as the heatsink.
And as far as harddrives go, don't forget that they are cooled on their sides much more so then on their tops and bottoms. On the top you have a thin cover that only comes in metal to metal contact at the far edges, on the bottom of the drive you mostly end up having circuit board. However the "meaty" part of the drive is the frame of it, and that is mostly exposed on the edges. And HD designers design for maximum amount of heat to be channelled to the sides. If you want to maximize cooling of the HD's make metal on metal contact on the sides as effective as possible and make sure the metal surrounding the drive is very beefy and has air blowing on it(or is well connected with the rest of the case). That way you use the case itself as the heatsink.
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
I believe you're correct, to a degree, but you're ignoring several other factors, and ignoring other parts of the operation of a furnace. If the situation were simply x-volume of air will pass through - maximize the temperature of that air, then you would probably be correct. The higher the temperature of the air, the more thermal energy it has removed from the system. However, you're ignoring radiational cooling of the case. If the case temperature increases by 5 degrees, there will be more radiational cooling between the case and the surrounding air in the room. Cooling the case first will result in *all* of the cooling needed to be done by the air for a computer case. For a furnace, this is ideal - the air cools the surrounding furnace where it's warm - thus, the air gains the thermal energy from the warm area of the furnace before being heated further by the hottest part of the furnace. Thus, the furnace is more efficient at heating the air because it doesn't lose as much energy to the "warm parts of the furnace". The goal is to transfer the heat to someplace else via warm/hot air. Any thermal energy remaining on the furnace is wasted. If the furnace were in the middle of the room being heated, it would NOT MAKE ONE BIT of difference - law of conservation of energy. (excepting of course that in each case, the exhausted gasses would be the same temperature).
In the case of the computer, it IS in the same room that's being heated. Thus, your furnace example becomes somewhat irrelevant. The goal is to remove as much thermal energy as possible from specific components, not remove as much thermal energy via air only from the entire system.
Alot of good stuff here. With the all the trash talk over the Prescott and it's heat issues, this post is a classic. This is what I get out of the post:
1) furnace ====> Prescott.
2) Intel is making an ill advised move in forcing the industry to adopt BTX case standard that Prescott needs to survive.
3) We need to impliment better technology and an alternative case standard to better adapt the Prescott into a full fledged home heating unit.
4) Leftside will never be the public relations officer at Intel for starting a post equating the word "furnace" in any relation to a case standard that Intel needs for the Prescott to survive.
Good post, but I had to get the irony out of my system.
1) furnace ====> Prescott.
2) Intel is making an ill advised move in forcing the industry to adopt BTX case standard that Prescott needs to survive.
3) We need to impliment better technology and an alternative case standard to better adapt the Prescott into a full fledged home heating unit.
4) Leftside will never be the public relations officer at Intel for starting a post equating the word "furnace" in any relation to a case standard that Intel needs for the Prescott to survive.
Good post, but I had to get the irony out of my system.
Looks like you got nothing out of the thread, because the thread was about general heat issues regarding BTX. This has nothing to do with prescott, so stop trolling.
The move to BTX is an overall goal to design boards and cases for the best possible cooling at the best price to construct. Intel isn't making furnaces alone. Every single component is getting hotter as they are expected to do more. This happens outside of Intel's control, and it happens to every player in the industry. The reason Intel is going to get away with such high temps on the desktop isn't because they can't figure out better ways, its because it doesn't matter as much. Desktop users are RARELY concerned with heat (remember, the AT crowd is hardly the typical user). Heat/power draw matters more for processing density in demanding situations.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
Facebook
Twitter