Regards to THG Video no.1

[Mr_Nuke]

If you haven't yet seen the movie go to <A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/site/videos/thg_videos-01.html" target="_new">this</A> page.
It shows what happens if the CPU cooler is removed. Pentium III and IV survive, but the Athlon and Athlon XP get fried up, even damaging the mobo.That can be prevented(with some mobo's only). Some mobos have a nice setting:Shutdown Temperature, usually found in PC Healt Status in the BIOS Setup. So if you set the temperature to something else than disabled(I have it set at 70C) you can remove the cooler w/o burning the CPU.
So don't take out the Athlon/Athlon XP from your shopping list, but change the mobo if it can't perform well.

 

[Era]

Now take a Ferrari, rip off the heatsink and start racing.
Then write a column about Ferrari's inadequacy with cooling.

That's the way THG is proving things, and then they brag about it!!

It's so sad.

 

[ChipDeath]

This problem was solved ages ago - AFAIK all new Socket A mobos have thermal protection solutions built in. It's been in AMD's official chipset guidelines for years.

So if you set the temperature to something else than disabled(I have it set at 70C) you can remove the cooler w/o burning the CPU

A word of warning - Some older motherboards implemented the shutdown as a function of the BIOS, so although it would save the chip by killing the power if the temperature rose, if you then powered it straight back on it would still fry because the BIOS would not be initialized in time. the official solution has always been a hardware one though, so this is the fault of the board makers taking shortcuts, not the fault of AMD.

Like I said though - this should not be a consideration for anyone buying a NEW AXP system.

---
Epox 8RDA+ rev1.1 w/ Custom NB HS
XP1700+ @205x11 (~2.26Ghz), 1.575Vcore
2x256Mb Corsair PC3200LL 2-2-2-4
Sapphire 9800Pro 420/744

 

[ChipDeath]

That's the way THG is proving things, and then they brag about it!!

They never bragged about it - they pointed out that there was a problem, and AMD took action. good example of how publicity can force companies to change things.

Seriously, this is <i>ancient</i> news. it's really a non-issue.

---
Epox 8RDA+ rev1.1 w/ Custom NB HS
XP1700+ @205x11 (~2.26Ghz), 1.575Vcore
2x256Mb Corsair PC3200LL 2-2-2-4
Sapphire 9800Pro 420/744

 

[pitsi]

Are you serious? Did you even see the date on that article? It's 2 1/2 years old! What's your point with this thread anyway? I sure can't see it!

 

[Crashman]

Yes, because in spite of what you believe (your opinion), the fact is this happens quite frequently, not like you see in the video, but by cases getting knocked over or handled "roughly" in shipping. The point is, why do system makers worry about such things? Because they usually ship their systems. The thermal protection was not quick enough to shut the system down before meltdown. You chould have been an average joe, just got his Gateway PC by UPS, plugged it in without checking the parts (there is that warranty seal), turned it on, and smelled smoke.

You see, Tom's was trying to prove the thermal protection WOULD work, but it failed. YOU would have them throw out the results and abandon the article because it didn't prove their theory that the thermal protection would protect the system. But any HONEST journalist would say "oops, proved me WRONG, I'll publish the article anyway". You want them to be less honest, I'm sorry but that would imply a lack of integrity usually found only on AMD fansites like [H].

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[jihiggs]

get your facts straight before opening your mouth.

wpdclan.com cs game server - 64.246.52.144:27015
now featuring (optional) cheating death!

 

[Era]

I admit thermal protection is a great thing.
Ferrari's should have them too.

 

[Era]

Facts? What facts?
Do you always write before you think?

 

[pIII_Man]

oh if anyone is wondering, the new amd thermal pertection system does work...

I was putting on a heatsink in a pretty tight case, from the angle i was working i couldnt see the back of the heatsink...although it was secured properly, when i powered on the mobo (nf7) i didnt even get a post, the system was known to be working just a few minutes earlier. I figured I had somehow screwed up putting on the heatsink and may have even cracked the core. Turns out there was a CD audio cable resting under one of the back cornors of the heatsink causing it to sit slanted. Thank god i didnt crack the core and thanks to abit i didnt fry the chip.

If it isn't a P6 then it isn't a processor
110% BX fanboy

 

[jihiggs]

the fact that you are a moron. no, i dont usually write before i think.

wpdclan.com cs game server - 64.246.52.144:27015
now featuring (optional) cheating death!

 

[Crashman]

LOL, raidators don't fall off Ferraris in shipping, nor when you go over a pothole.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[IIB]

never the less, I do think ferrari has thermal protection. for instanse in case it runs out of water, or the raditor has a hole (it happens). I mean with a ferrari like engine it would couse permiment damage real fast.
I dont think I ferrai would start of without a radiator...

This post is best viewed with common sense enabled

 

[Era]

Ouch. That hurt, real bad. Ouch ouch ouch.

 

[Era]

Think of it, crash, how's fault is it. The CPU maker or the deliverers.
Now sit down and think about it.

 

[pIII_Man]

actually its the cpu manufacturer's...because they are the ones who spec the heatsink mounting mechanism. It is not uncommon by any stretch for the heatsink mounting tabs to break off when a case is moved roughly...

If it isn't a P6 then it isn't a processor
110% BX fanboy

 

[Era]

That is your opinion about the matter.But is it really AMD's fault?
They make CPU's, not the mobos, or delivery systems like "UPS, sorry about
that".
Keep that in mind next time you try to blame somebody.

 

[IIB]

This is AMD's problem becouse there are a lot of shiping companys and a lot of mobo makers and such a problem is to be expected...
in any case the end result is that an Intel system is more fault tolerante...


This post is best viewed with common sense enabled

 

[Era]

So CPU manufacturers are to blame?
Get real man.

 

[IIB]

Let me put it this way - if you assume nothing will go wrong in the process of the chips life - you would need no protection at all. and the subject would be irrelevent.

is it AMD's fault? perhaps.
is it AMD's problem - yes. becouse at the end line people chose intel becouse of that missing feature.

This post is best viewed with common sense enabled<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by iiB on 03/27/04 11:59 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[jihiggs]

this is funny, a bunch of idiots using analogies that make no sense, using absolutely no common sense, with no information at all, arguing about somthing that doesnt even matter AT ALL. era is a fan boy. end of story.

wpdclan.com cs game server - 64.246.52.144:27015
now featuring (optional) cheating death!

 

[Crashman]

I think a Ferrari would start with no coolant, get hot, and shut down. Engine management. Old cars would burn up, but being a "state of the art" car, I'd hope engine management would shut it down when it overheated.

Unlike my Ford that overheated and continued to run till it seized, engine management ingnored the heat!

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[Crashman]

Fault? The test wasn't to find a fault, it was done to prove a feature. Too bad it didn't work out that way. But it turned out to be a combination of factors that didn't allow the system to shut down quickly enough. As far as I know this issue has been solved.

It's a problem for AMD if boards don't shut down quickly enough, simply because the system makers don't want to deal with processor replacement. But like I said, boards were improved after the article was published. Perhaps the process was expediated because of that article, perhaps not, but chances are THG did you a favor by publishing that article.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[Mr_Nuke]

Are you serious? Did you even see the date on that article? It's 2 1/2 years old! What's your point with this thread anyway? I sure can't see it!

But people still use THAT OLD OR OLDER computers, so, why not let them know?

 

[Mr_Nuke]

it would still fry because the BIOS would not be initialized in time.

Some would, some would not, but it's still usefull!