And talking with two friends, I think the evidence points there.  Two
friends had blown Athlons after one month.  Both had fan problems, one
quit altogether and burned it out within minutes.  (Smoke)  Second I
think the fan was just not cool enough.

Rick

Wednesday, June 05, 2002, you wrote:

BC> Agree with most of the stuff below, but there is one difference between
BC> the Intel and AMD chips you might find important. We put a fair amount
BC> of effort into the Pentium 4 to have it self-monitor its temp. If it gets
BC> too hot, the processor throttles its own performance until it has cooled
BC> down. The idea is that if a fan fails, or the cooling vents are blocked,
BC> it's better for the machine to keep running than to take a chance on the
BC> CPU becoming permanently damaged. Reading Tom's HW page, I get the distinct
BC> impression AMD did not provide this same facility.

BC> -BobC

BC> -----Original Message-----
BC> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BC> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael
BC> Toomim
BC> Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 2:04 PM
BC> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BC> Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] OT CPU Fans


BC> Tom Browne wrote:
>> The 0.13s dissipate much less heat than the widely available AMDs...
>> 
>>>According to these specs, my athlon XP 1600+ has a typical power 
>>>consumption of 56.3W.  A 1.6G pentium 4 has a spec of 60.8W.
>> 
>> Why compare to the old pre-0.13 chips?
>> 
>> Celeron 1.2A is rated at 30W.... P4 1.6A is rated at 38.7W.

BC> Yeah, well my point is not that you can find a pentium that is cooler 
BC> than an athlon if you compare certain models of chips across particular 
BC> generations of manufacturing -- it's that blanket statements like 
BC> "athlons are hotter than pentiums" aren't true.

BC> When *I* bought my CPU, there weren't any 0.13 chips, and the AthlonXP 
BC> was genuinely cooler than the P4!  Intel has moved to a new process that 
BC> gives them better power specs, but soon enough AMD will do the same and 
BC> then their chips will be cooler instead, and then the cycle will repeat 
BC> again...


Reply via email to