- Sep 9, 2010
- 2,572
- 248
- 106
Im sure everyone knows that Nvidia uses them on the top end chips, but maybe someone with more knowledge on the electrical end of things can explain the exact reasoning.
For example, G80, GT200, GF100/110 (GF104/114 too) use the heat-spreader whereas their smaller G92, GF106,116 and smaller do not.
AMD doesn't use them on any of their chips.
Obviously the size of the chip is probably a factor as they are used on the big chips, but not the small ones and AMD chips are smaller.
However, does the heat spreader dimensions directly correlate to die size. I thought that if you looked at a CPU die for example, that the heatspreader itself is actually bigger than the processor die?
So is it possible that Nvidia's high end chips are smaller than the heatspreader allows us to see? I mean the point of it is to help dissipate and spread heat evenly away from the chip so if the actual die was as big as the heat-spreader wouldn't the heat-spreader just be getting in the way of the heatsink being able to cool it off instead of helping?
Thoughts?
For example, G80, GT200, GF100/110 (GF104/114 too) use the heat-spreader whereas their smaller G92, GF106,116 and smaller do not.
AMD doesn't use them on any of their chips.
Obviously the size of the chip is probably a factor as they are used on the big chips, but not the small ones and AMD chips are smaller.
However, does the heat spreader dimensions directly correlate to die size. I thought that if you looked at a CPU die for example, that the heatspreader itself is actually bigger than the processor die?
So is it possible that Nvidia's high end chips are smaller than the heatspreader allows us to see? I mean the point of it is to help dissipate and spread heat evenly away from the chip so if the actual die was as big as the heat-spreader wouldn't the heat-spreader just be getting in the way of the heatsink being able to cool it off instead of helping?
Thoughts?