Putting a de-lid at the same level as buying a CPU without the IHS. They're not comparable.
De-lidding isn't too hard, with the right tools. Effectively cooling a de-lidded processor
is more challenging and delicate than cooling one with the IHS. If someone can do the latter, removing the IHS shouldn't be much of a problem for them. If removing the IHS is too burdensome, then they're probably better off leaving it intact.
I think your criticism is misguided. Instead of criticizing their IHS solution, you want them to do something you haven't asked Intel to do. That's inconsistent, at best.
No, it shoes someone doing something really stupid for science and clicks.
The article didn't indicate what clocks he was running at. I assume he tried to reduce clock speeds, or had other reasons to believe his experiment was safe.
My point was that if anything is wrong with the cooling solution, running a de-lidded CPU has much less margin for error than if you've at least got an IHS. The IHS will help even out heat distribution, lessening thermal stresses.
As for the "science" part, his photographs tell us more about how these CPUs are assembled and operate.
While the thermal density of CPUs has increased and power consumption along side it (kind of), you will still get better thermal transfer with an exposed die and have the same risks as back then.
No. Increased thermal density means greater thermal stresses, and the die shaving they do these days means the dies are more fragile.
Physics doesn't change with time, so the risk for both Intel or AMD of selling exposed dies is the same.
Physics doesn't change, but technology improves by pushing ever closer to the limits. That reduces margins for error. You can't just blindly apply whatever was true of tech from 20 years ago and expect it to apply equally, today.
Well, if you would only watch der8auer, a YT'er, you would know what I mean in more detail. He has created several parts to complement his de-lidding tools for CPUs and to great success
People have broken their de-lidded CPUs, even using all of his tools and shims. It's more risky, no matter what you think.
The whole EXPO thing has showed that these companies run into a lot of trouble, when they try to limit warranties. From their perspective, it's simply not worth the risk to sell de-lidded CPUs.
It's similar to why people can tune cars for better performance than they come from the factory. There were good reasons why the automotive engineers "held back", including safety, reliability, and warranty liabilities.
It's perfectly fine for there to be an aftermarket for CPU cooling, delidding, etc. What AMD should do is design a better IHS solution, to lessen the benefit of de-lidding.
Laptops use de-lidded CPUs as well, so I do not see why (going back to your previous argument) is such an outlandish thing to say or ask;
Laptops also run at lower power and thermals. That might make it much less risky than high-performance desktop CPUs, where
the whole point would be so that people can overclock them to extremes!
For all we know, the laptop CPU dies aren't shaved (as much), specifically to make them more durable.
Also, last I checked, end-users aren't building laptops. Even modular laptops, like Framework, probably have the thermal solution pre-installed on their CPU modules.
I doubt it.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram