Tom's Hardware is hilarious

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Tom's Hardware is hilarious. They've refined the art of *BS'ing* to a
fine state. It's their pseudo-technical explanations that always try to
be mindful of large advertisers are their biggest classics: techno-spin
as an artform.

Tom's is doing some kind of longevity endurance runoff test between an
AMD and an Intel system. So far the test has run 5 days, and so far the
Intel system has suffered two reboots, a failed power supply, and
close-to-overage temperatures. The AMD system hasn't even had a hiccup.

Listen to their explaning:

> Wednesday, Dec. 22, 2004: After we had replaced the failed Tagan power supply through an Antec device, we noticed yet another problem. The temperature of the Intel system increased from 65 degrees Celsius to a concerning 75 degrees celsius (analysis of the temperature diode of the CPU). At the same time, the fan speed slowed from 4000 to 3500 rpm. What happened? During the exchange of the power supply, the cooler's position on the CPU moved by a shade and reduced its contact pressure. As a result, thermal resistance increased, while cooling performance was decreased. Since there is an additional temperature sensor on the CPU's cooler that notices a decrease in temperature, the motherboard automatically reduced the fan speed. To put it simple, The sensor of the cooler reacted to reduced heat flow.
>
> These statements only concern motherboards with Socket 775 and 4 pin connector. In comparison, this problem does not occur with boards with Socket 478, since the cooler ist not directly connected to the board (because of the rentension module). Therefore it is less likely that actions as described above will show any impact. Additionally, there is no active controlling of the fan. Similar experiences were reported to us from our readers several weeks ago.
>
> We have little to say about the AMD system. All components have been running now for five days without problems.

Tom's Hardware Guide Processors: Update 3 Live from the THG Lab: We
"Stress Out" AMD and Intel - First Outage After Three Days
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041217/index.html

You get the feeling that their techno-spin muscles are stretched to the
point of pulling. 🙂

How can we declare the Intel system the winner when it keeps dying like
that?

Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

cluck, cluck, cluck...
My Intel system... 3 months running, no reboots and only rebooted 3 months
ago to update software...


"Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote in message
news:egryd.28223$GK5.1373881@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Tom's Hardware is hilarious. They've refined the art of *BS'ing* to a
> fine state. It's their pseudo-technical explanations that always try to
> be mindful of large advertisers are their biggest classics: techno-spin
> as an artform.
>
> Tom's is doing some kind of longevity endurance runoff test between an
> AMD and an Intel system. So far the test has run 5 days, and so far the
> Intel system has suffered two reboots, a failed power supply, and
> close-to-overage temperatures. The AMD system hasn't even had a hiccup.
>
> Listen to their explaning:
>
> > Wednesday, Dec. 22, 2004: After we had replaced the failed Tagan power
supply through an Antec device, we noticed yet another problem. The
temperature of the Intel system increased from 65 degrees Celsius to a
concerning 75 degrees celsius (analysis of the temperature diode of the
CPU). At the same time, the fan speed slowed from 4000 to 3500 rpm. What
happened? During the exchange of the power supply, the cooler's position on
the CPU moved by a shade and reduced its contact pressure. As a result,
thermal resistance increased, while cooling performance was decreased. Since
there is an additional temperature sensor on the CPU's cooler that notices a
decrease in temperature, the motherboard automatically reduced the fan
speed. To put it simple, The sensor of the cooler reacted to reduced heat
flow.
> >
> > These statements only concern motherboards with Socket 775 and 4 pin
connector. In comparison, this problem does not occur with boards with
Socket 478, since the cooler ist not directly connected to the board
(because of the rentension module). Therefore it is less likely that actions
as described above will show any impact. Additionally, there is no active
controlling of the fan. Similar experiences were reported to us from our
readers several weeks ago.
> >
> > We have little to say about the AMD system. All components have been
running now for five days without problems.
>
> Tom's Hardware Guide Processors: Update 3 Live from the THG Lab: We
> "Stress Out" AMD and Intel - First Outage After Three Days
> http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041217/index.html
>
> You get the feeling that their techno-spin muscles are stretched to the
> point of pulling. 🙂
>
> How can we declare the Intel system the winner when it keeps dying like
> that?
>
> Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Sounds like those folks need some help. Whatever.

;-)

>>>>> "Yousuf" == Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com> writes:

Yousuf> Tom's Hardware is hilarious. They've refined the art of
Yousuf> *BS'ing* to a fine state. It's their pseudo-technical
Yousuf> explanations that always try to be mindful of large
Yousuf> advertisers are their biggest classics: techno-spin as an
Yousuf> artform.

Yousuf> Tom's is doing some kind of longevity endurance runoff test
Yousuf> between an AMD and an Intel system. So far the test has run 5
Yousuf> days, and so far the Intel system has suffered two reboots, a
Yousuf> failed power supply, and close-to-overage temperatures. The
Yousuf> AMD system hasn't even had a hiccup.

Yousuf> Listen to their explaning:

>> Wednesday, Dec. 22, 2004: After we had replaced the failed Tagan
>> power supply through an Antec device, we noticed yet another
>> problem. The temperature of the Intel system increased from 65
>> degrees Celsius to a concerning 75 degrees celsius (analysis of
>> the temperature diode of the CPU). At the same time, the fan speed
>> slowed from 4000 to 3500 rpm. What happened? During the exchange
>> of the power supply, the cooler's position on the CPU moved by a
>> shade and reduced its contact pressure. As a result, thermal
>> resistance increased, while cooling performance was decreased.
>> Since there is an additional temperature sensor on the CPU's
>> cooler that notices a decrease in temperature, the motherboard
>> automatically reduced the fan speed. To put it simple, The sensor
>> of the cooler reacted to reduced heat flow. These statements only
>> concern motherboards with Socket 775 and 4 pin connector. In
>> comparison, this problem does not occur with boards with Socket
>> 478, since the cooler ist not directly connected to the board
>> (because of the rentension module). Therefore it is less likely
>> that actions as described above will show any impact.
>> Additionally, there is no active controlling of the fan. Similar
>> experiences were reported to us from our readers several weeks
>> ago. We have little to say about the AMD system. All components
>> have been running now for five days without problems.

Yousuf> Tom's Hardware Guide Processors: Update 3 Live from the THG
Yousuf> Lab: We "Stress Out" AMD and Intel - First Outage After Three
Yousuf> Days http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041217/index.html

Yousuf> You get the feeling that their techno-spin muscles are
Yousuf> stretched to the point of pulling. 🙂

Yousuf> How can we declare the Intel system the winner when it keeps
Yousuf> dying like that?

Yousuf> Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Judd wrote:
> cluck, cluck, cluck...
> My Intel system... 3 months running, no reboots and only rebooted 3 months
> ago to update software...

It's probably not a Socket 775 Prescott system though, right?

Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

>>>>> "Yousuf" == Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com> writes:

Yousuf> Judd wrote:
>> cluck, cluck, cluck... My Intel system... 3 months running, no
>> reboots and only rebooted 3 months ago to update software...

Yousuf> It's probably not a Socket 775 Prescott system though, right?

At least mine is not. My old northwood with dp875 motherboard runs and
runs and runs 24/7. Very stable and cool.

Looks like the intel line is going backward and not forward. Anyway
I'm sure intel will work the bugs out, but when is the question.

Later,

Alan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:34:11 -0600, Alan Walpool <awalpool@onzedge.net>
wrote:

>
>Sounds like those folks need some help. Whatever.

B-b-b-b-but I though the were "experts" - no?

OTOH why the hell would anyone use a separate sensor on the heatsink/fan to
govern the fan speed, when what matters is the die and its err, sensor?

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Alan Walpool wrote:
>>>>>>"Yousuf" == Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com> writes:
>
>
> Yousuf> Judd wrote:
> >> cluck, cluck, cluck... My Intel system... 3 months running, no
> >> reboots and only rebooted 3 months ago to update software...
>
> Yousuf> It's probably not a Socket 775 Prescott system though, right?
>
> At least mine is not. My old northwood with dp875 motherboard runs and
> runs and runs 24/7. Very stable and cool.
>
> Looks like the intel line is going backward and not forward. Anyway
> I'm sure intel will work the bugs out, but when is the question.
>
> Later,
>
> Alan
>

Yes, my Northwood is also the most stable system I've owned (24/7,
reboots once a month due to XP installing critical security patches or
crashing).

Previous computers have included an intel 486DX and a Celeron (P-III)
that never needed a reboot except for screwy software locking the OS,
and an AMD 5x86 that rebooted randomly and eventually this happened so
often that it wouldn't finish a boot to linux before starting another
reboot cycle. My family has had trouble with every AMD and Cyrix system
they've had (4 or 5 computers), but never had trouble with an intel.
That's my reason for sticking to intel (that doesn't mean I can't bash
them for insane power consumption and heat generation).

Alex
--
My words are my own. They represent no other; they belong to no other.
Don't read anything into them or you may be required to compensate me
for violation of copyright. (I do not speak for my employer.)
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote :

> How can we declare the Intel system the winner when it keeps dying
> like that?

its easy :
Uptime: 1 days, 6:39
Downtime: none
Reboots: 2

Intel downtime doesnt count.

Pozdrawiam.
--
RusH //
http://randki.o2.pl/profil.php?id_r=352019
Like ninjas, true hackers are shrouded in secrecy and mystery.
You may never know -- UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

George Macdonald wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 23:34:11 -0600, Alan Walpool <awalpool@onzedge.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Sounds like those folks need some help. Whatever.
>
>
> B-b-b-b-but I though the were "experts" - no?
>
> OTOH why the hell would anyone use a separate sensor on the heatsink/fan to
> govern the fan speed, when what matters is the die and its err, sensor?

To respond quickly to changes in case temp before the CPU changes? To
avoid driving the fan like mad if a quick load on the CPU causes a temp
spike but the heatsink is still as cool as it's going to get?

I wonder if the control is the diff between the case temp and heatsink
temp? Once the heatsink is a cool as the case, more fan buys nothing.

Clearly I'm speculating, these are reasons why it might be done, they
may all be wrong, although I like the idea of heatsink vs. case temp.

--
bill davidsen (davidsen@darkstar.prodigy.com)
SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
Project Leader, USENET news
http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"Yousuf Khan" <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote in message
news:lUsyd.28324$GK5.1417179@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Judd wrote:
>> cluck, cluck, cluck...
>> My Intel system... 3 months running, no reboots and only rebooted 3
>> months
>> ago to update software...
>
> It's probably not a Socket 775 Prescott system though, right?
>
> Yousuf Khan

We have 3 Socket 775 Prescotts, first purchased 3 months ago from 2x3.4,
1x3.6. No reboots, no temp problems.

Dave
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 14:05:48 GMT, Bill Davidsen
<davidsen@darkstar.prodigy.com> wrote:

>To respond quickly to changes in case temp before the CPU changes? To
>avoid driving the fan like mad if a quick load on the CPU causes a temp
>spike but the heatsink is still as cool as it's going to get?
>
>I wonder if the control is the diff between the case temp and heatsink
>temp? Once the heatsink is a cool as the case, more fan buys nothing.

But if the heatsink was seated poorly, wouldn't it make matters worse
when the heatsink decides the fan can go slower?

--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me :)
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"The little lost angel" <a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com> wrote in
message news:41cb0b15.266442671@news.singnet.com.sg...

> But if the heatsink was seated poorly, wouldn't it make matters worse
> when the heatsink decides the fan can go slower?

Nope. It would have little to no effect. If the heatsink is seated
poorly, the temperature of the heatsink will make little to no difference,
and that's the only thing the fan speed can effect. What matters is the
temperature of the ambient air, the amount of heat the CPU is generating and
the thermal resistance between the CPU and the ambient air.

The only variable fan speed can affect is the thermal resistance between
the heat sink and the ambient air. This would be totally swamped by the
thermal resistance between the CPU package and the heat sink, if the heat
sink is improperly mounted.

DS
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:52:12 -0800, "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
wrote:

>
>"The little lost angel" <a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com> wrote in
>message news:41cb0b15.266442671@news.singnet.com.sg...
>
>> But if the heatsink was seated poorly, wouldn't it make matters worse
>> when the heatsink decides the fan can go slower?
>
> Nope. It would have little to no effect. If the heatsink is seated
>poorly, the temperature of the heatsink will make little to no difference,
>and that's the only thing the fan speed can effect. What matters is the
>temperature of the ambient air, the amount of heat the CPU is generating and
>the thermal resistance between the CPU and the ambient air.
>
> The only variable fan speed can affect is the thermal resistance between
>the heat sink and the ambient air. This would be totally swamped by the
>thermal resistance between the CPU package and the heat sink, if the heat
>sink is improperly mounted.

That all depends on how "poorly seated" is interpreted - obviously there
are varying degrees of "improperly mounted". In the case at hand -- which
I'd assume was under *some* CPU load at a "normal" temp of 65C -- there was
only a 10C change in die temp, of which 5C or so could be due to the fan
speed change... IOW most likely just a disturbance of the TIM. Obviously
turning the fan speed down is not a good move.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:13:38 -0500, Alex Johnson <compuwiz@jhu.edu> wrote:

>Alan Walpool wrote:
>>>>>>>"Yousuf" == Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com> writes:
>>
>>
>> Yousuf> Judd wrote:
>> >> cluck, cluck, cluck... My Intel system... 3 months running, no
>> >> reboots and only rebooted 3 months ago to update software...
>>
>> Yousuf> It's probably not a Socket 775 Prescott system though, right?
>>
>> At least mine is not. My old northwood with dp875 motherboard runs and
>> runs and runs 24/7. Very stable and cool.
>>
>> Looks like the intel line is going backward and not forward. Anyway
>> I'm sure intel will work the bugs out, but when is the question.
>>
>> Later,
>>
>> Alan
>>
>
>Yes, my Northwood is also the most stable system I've owned (24/7,
>reboots once a month due to XP installing critical security patches or
>crashing).
>
>Previous computers have included an intel 486DX and a Celeron (P-III)
>that never needed a reboot except for screwy software locking the OS,
>and an AMD 5x86 that rebooted randomly and eventually this happened so
>often that it wouldn't finish a boot to linux before starting another
>reboot cycle. My family has had trouble with every AMD and Cyrix system
>they've had (4 or 5 computers), but never had trouble with an intel.
>That's my reason for sticking to intel (that doesn't mean I can't bash
>them for insane power consumption and heat generation).

You know every time that tired old story gets trotted out, you're going to
get contradicted.

I've had 5x86 & 6x86/MII at home and K6s in the office - never any trouble
due to the Cyrix-ness or Amd-ness. I've also got/had Intels in both places
and I don't see any correlation between CPU mfr and "trouble". They've all
had "trouble" with OS/driver/PnP issues but I put that down more to MS's
ill-defined goal-posts than the fault of the chipset, CPU or mbrd. It was
a mistake to allow M$ to hi-jack how hardware functionality is defined &
specified.

I'll add that when I did my 486-to-5x86 upgrade, I was able to get very
close to the performance of the P5s Intel was selling at the time for a
fraction of the price. The price of a complete system back then was still
in the $3000. range.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:13:38 -0500, Alex Johnson <compuwiz@jhu.edu>
wrote:

....snip...
>
>Previous computers have included an intel 486DX and a Celeron (P-III)
>that never needed a reboot except for screwy software locking the OS,
>and an AMD 5x86 that rebooted randomly and eventually this happened so
>often that it wouldn't finish a boot to linux before starting another
>reboot cycle. My family has had trouble with every AMD and Cyrix system
>they've had (4 or 5 computers), but never had trouble with an intel.
>That's my reason for sticking to intel (that doesn't mean I can't bash
>them for insane power consumption and heat generation).
>
>Alex
Previous computers have included i486DX33 - died and took with it
Intel-branded mobo (or the other way around - be that as it may).
Since that time, no Intel inside my computers.
Am486DX2-80 - never a problem except the ones caused by Win3.1. AMD
5x86-133 OCed to 160 - never a problem. K6/2 266 OCed to 337.5 - never
a problem. K6/2+ 500 OCed to 600 - still alive and running days
between reboots (not due to a problem - I turn it off when not
needed). Duron 700 OCed to 800 - never a problem. Current dual
Opteron 242 - never a problem.
OTOH, I had my fair share of problems with whatever Intel-based
systems I had at work. My current one - IBM NetVista P3-866 - just
needs to be rebooted every now and then. One of these reboots took
the mobo (IBM replaced it with the same model - how come they still
keep the stock for 2000-ish system in late 04?). Yet nothing changed
- after a few hours of work it becomes unresponsive and needs
ctrl-alt-del. One of our servers - dual P3-700 - was so notorious for
random reboots, that everyone got a feeling of relief when it was
decommissioned recently.
Is that a representative sample? I guess not, one needs to survey
hundreds, if not thousands, of cases to make a conclusion.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:52:12 -0800, "David Schwartz"
<davids@webmaster.com> wrote:

> Nope. It would have little to no effect. If the heatsink is seated
>poorly, the temperature of the heatsink will make little to no difference,
>and that's the only thing the fan speed can effect. What matters is the
>temperature of the ambient air, the amount of heat the CPU is generating and
>the thermal resistance between the CPU and the ambient air.
>
> The only variable fan speed can affect is the thermal resistance between
>the heat sink and the ambient air. This would be totally swamped by the
>thermal resistance between the CPU package and the heat sink, if the heat
>sink is improperly mounted.

But if the fan is turning slower, the ambient air temperature will
rise to a higher level compared to if the fan was faster. No matter
how badly or how slightly the mounting is off, higher ambient
temperature will make things worse no? Whether it's core to ambient
air, or heatsink to ambient air, since the temperature difference is
one of the key parameter for heat transfer right?

So having the fan run at full speed due to high core temp despite low
heatsink temp will at least help move hot air out of the way which
would in turn help cool the CPU even if the heatsink is not doing
much, right?


--
L.Angel: I'm looking for web design work.
If you need basic to med complexity webpages at affordable rates, email me :)
Standard HTML, SHTML, MySQL + PHP or ASP, Javascript.
If you really want, FrontPage & DreamWeaver too.
But keep in mind you pay extra bandwidth for their bloated code
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"The little lost angel" <a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com> wrote in
message news:41cc7a64.360473171@news.singnet.com.sg...

> But if the fan is turning slower, the ambient air temperature will
> rise to a higher level compared to if the fan was faster.

Not likely. The heatsink fan is not a significant factor in the air
circulation in a typical case.

> No matter
> how badly or how slightly the mounting is off, higher ambient
> temperature will make things worse no?

Tes.

> Whether it's core to ambient
> air, or heatsink to ambient air, since the temperature difference is
> one of the key parameter for heat transfer right?

Right, but the room is not going to change temperature based on the heat
sink fan. Neither is the case temperature going to be significantly
affected.

> So having the fan run at full speed due to high core temp despite low
> heatsink temp will at least help move hot air out of the way which
> would in turn help cool the CPU even if the heatsink is not doing
> much, right?

Not likely. I don't think the heat sink fan is a significant factor in
the case air circulation. The power supply fan draws air through the case
and the hot air pushes itself out. I doubt you would see even a measurable
difference. The air circulation pattern set up by the heat sink fan is
mostly within the case.

DS
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Yousuf Khan wrote:
>
> Tom's Hardware is hilarious. They've refined the art of *BS'ing* to a
> fine state. It's their pseudo-technical explanations that always try to
> be mindful of large advertisers are their biggest classics: techno-spin
> as an artform.
>
> Tom's is doing some kind of longevity endurance runoff test between an
> AMD and an Intel system. So far the test has run 5 days, and so far the
> Intel system has suffered two reboots, a failed power supply, and
> close-to-overage temperatures. The AMD system hasn't even had a hiccup.
>
> Listen to their explaning:
>
> > Wednesday, Dec. 22, 2004: After we had replaced the failed Tagan power supply through an Antec device, we noticed yet another problem. The temperature of the Intel system increased from 65 degrees Celsius to a concerning 75 degrees celsius (analysis of the temperature diode of the CPU). At the same time, the fan speed slowed from 4000 to 3500 rpm. What happened? During the exchange of the power supply, the cooler's position on the CPU moved by a shade and reduced its contact pressure. As a result, thermal resistance increased, while cooling performance was decreased. Since there is an additional temperature sensor on the CPU's cooler that notices a decrease in temperature, the motherboard automatically reduced the fan speed. To put it simple, The sensor of the cooler reacted to reduced heat flow.

I run a Northwood 2.8 P4 overclocked to 3GHz with a Tagan 380W PSU. CPU cooler
is a Zalman duct HS fan, speed is 2000 rpm. Prime95 no problems whatsoever.
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 03:19:02 GMT, Johannes H Andersen <johs@sizefitter.com>
wrote:

>
>
>Yousuf Khan wrote:
>>
>> Tom's Hardware is hilarious. They've refined the art of *BS'ing* to a
>> fine state. It's their pseudo-technical explanations that always try to
>> be mindful of large advertisers are their biggest classics: techno-spin
>> as an artform.
>>
>> Tom's is doing some kind of longevity endurance runoff test between an
>> AMD and an Intel system. So far the test has run 5 days, and so far the
>> Intel system has suffered two reboots, a failed power supply, and
>> close-to-overage temperatures. The AMD system hasn't even had a hiccup.
>>
>> Listen to their explaning:
>>
>> > Wednesday, Dec. 22, 2004: After we had replaced the failed Tagan power supply through an Antec device, we noticed yet another problem. The temperature of the Intel system increased from 65 degrees Celsius to a concerning 75 degrees celsius (analysis of the temperature diode of the CPU). At the same time, the fan speed slowed from 4000 to 3500 rpm. What happened? During the exchange of the power supply, the cooler's position on the CPU moved by a shade and reduced its contact pressure. As a result, thermal resistance increased, while cooling performance was decreased. Since there is an additional temperature sensor on the CPU's cooler that notices a decrease in temperature, the motherboard automatically reduced the fan speed. To put it simple, The sensor of the cooler reacted to reduced heat flow.
>
>I run a Northwood 2.8 P4 overclocked to 3GHz with a Tagan 380W PSU. CPU cooler
>is a Zalman duct HS fan, speed is 2000 rpm. Prime95 no problems whatsoever.

Huh? You overclock? I thought your work was "valuable"? Don't tell me
this is a new approach to Stochastic Programming!🙂

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

George Macdonald wrote:
>
> On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 03:19:02 GMT, Johannes H Andersen <johs@sizefitter.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Yousuf Khan wrote:
> >>
> >> Tom's Hardware is hilarious. They've refined the art of *BS'ing* to a
> >> fine state. It's their pseudo-technical explanations that always try to
> >> be mindful of large advertisers are their biggest classics: techno-spin
> >> as an artform.
> >>
> >> Tom's is doing some kind of longevity endurance runoff test between an
> >> AMD and an Intel system. So far the test has run 5 days, and so far the
> >> Intel system has suffered two reboots, a failed power supply, and
> >> close-to-overage temperatures. The AMD system hasn't even had a hiccup.
> >>
> >> Listen to their explaning:
> >>
> >> > Wednesday, Dec. 22, 2004: After we had replaced the failed Tagan power supply through an Antec device, we noticed yet another problem. The temperature of the Intel system increased from 65 degrees Celsius to a concerning 75 degrees celsius (analysis of the temperature diode of the CPU). At the same time, the fan speed slowed from 4000 to 3500 rpm. What happened? During the exchange of the power supply, the cooler's position on the CPU moved by a shade and reduced its contact pressure. As a result, thermal resistance increased, while cooling performance was decreased. Since there is an additional temperature sensor on the CPU's cooler that notices a decrease in temperature, the motherboard automatically reduced the fan speed. To put it simple, The sensor of the cooler reacted to reduced heat flow.
> >
> >I run a Northwood 2.8 P4 overclocked to 3GHz with a Tagan 380W PSU. CPU cooler
> >is a Zalman duct HS fan, speed is 2000 rpm. Prime95 no problems whatsoever.
>
> Huh? You overclock? I thought your work was "valuable"? Don't tell me
> this is a new approach to Stochastic Programming!🙂

I wouldn't call that small step overclocking. I have a good cooling system;
the temperature is hardly affected, so I see no problem. If I set the bus
to 214, memory will run at 428 MHz. If I set the bus to 215, memory drops
down to 357 MHz, so I stay with 214.

Stochastic Programming. I know what you are thinking of, but I'm not in
that field since I left the institute 1994/95. 🙂

> Rgds, George Macdonald
>
> "Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

George Macdonald wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 03:19:02 GMT, Johannes H Andersen <johs@sizefitter.com>
> wrote:
>>I run a Northwood 2.8 P4 overclocked to 3GHz with a Tagan 380W PSU. CPU cooler
>>is a Zalman duct HS fan, speed is 2000 rpm. Prime95 no problems whatsoever.
>
>
> Huh? You overclock? I thought your work was "valuable"? Don't tell me
> this is a new approach to Stochastic Programming!🙂

Let me guess, he was one of those "my work is too important and valuable
to trust to AMD processors" types? %^)

Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 10:46:35 GMT, Johannes H Andersen <johs@sizefitter.com>
wrote:

>
>
>George Macdonald wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 03:19:02 GMT, Johannes H Andersen <johs@sizefitter.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >Yousuf Khan wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Tom's Hardware is hilarious. They've refined the art of *BS'ing* to a
>> >> fine state. It's their pseudo-technical explanations that always try to
>> >> be mindful of large advertisers are their biggest classics: techno-spin
>> >> as an artform.
>> >>
>> >> Tom's is doing some kind of longevity endurance runoff test between an
>> >> AMD and an Intel system. So far the test has run 5 days, and so far the
>> >> Intel system has suffered two reboots, a failed power supply, and
>> >> close-to-overage temperatures. The AMD system hasn't even had a hiccup.
>> >>
>> >> Listen to their explaning:
>> >>
>> >> > Wednesday, Dec. 22, 2004: After we had replaced the failed Tagan power supply through an Antec device, we noticed yet another problem. The temperature of the Intel system increased from 65 degrees Celsius to a concerning 75 degrees celsius (analysis of the temperature diode of the CPU). At the same time, the fan speed slowed from 4000 to 3500 rpm. What happened? During the exchange of the power supply, the cooler's position on the CPU moved by a shade and reduced its contact pressure. As a result, thermal resistance increased, while cooling performance was decreased. Since there is an additional temperature sensor on the CPU's cooler that notices a decrease in temperature, the motherboard automatically reduced the fan speed. To put it simple, The sensor of the cooler reacted to reduced heat flow.
>> >
>> >I run a Northwood 2.8 P4 overclocked to 3GHz with a Tagan 380W PSU. CPU cooler
>> >is a Zalman duct HS fan, speed is 2000 rpm. Prime95 no problems whatsoever.
>>
>> Huh? You overclock? I thought your work was "valuable"? Don't tell me
>> this is a new approach to Stochastic Programming!🙂
>
>I wouldn't call that small step overclocking. I have a good cooling system;
>the temperature is hardly affected, so I see no problem. If I set the bus
>to 214, memory will run at 428 MHz. If I set the bus to 215, memory drops
>down to 357 MHz, so I stay with 214.

Jacking up the clock rate is overclocking - 14MHz... that's a lot of extra
cycles... your FSB data strobe clocks are jacked up by 28MHz+DDR
signalling! Have you ever seen the effects of overclocking the memory on
a graphics card? If you don't work it hard -- say, just normal everyday
activities like browsing, e-mail and word processing etc., you'll barely
notice any effect, even if you push the clock way past what the "breaking
point" is.

You will see the odd pair/group of pixels the wrong color but not often and
not many; in 3D graphics you're not likely to notice anything because
everything is moving/changing too fast. If you work it a bit harder -- a
game of solitaire is very revealing IME (seems odd but makes sense when you
think about it, since the background is persistent in the graphics card
memory) -- you will get many very obvious pixel defects. If you then back
off the clock (I'm talking 20-30MHz here), you can reach the point where it
looks OK for a while but occasionally you'll get the odd defect. IOW the
defects become more subtle and are highly dependent on how fast you can
play.

The question here is: what is tolerable?... how fast can you play solitaire
before it breaks? Is defect free at your, or my, fastest good enough? Now
apply this effect to your main memory. When you say Prime95, how long did
you run the Torture Test?

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 01:05:51 -0500, Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@ezrs.com> wrote:

>George Macdonald wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 03:19:02 GMT, Johannes H Andersen <johs@sizefitter.com>
>> wrote:
>>>I run a Northwood 2.8 P4 overclocked to 3GHz with a Tagan 380W PSU. CPU cooler
>>>is a Zalman duct HS fan, speed is 2000 rpm. Prime95 no problems whatsoever.
>>
>>
>> Huh? You overclock? I thought your work was "valuable"? Don't tell me
>> this is a new approach to Stochastic Programming!🙂
>
>Let me guess, he was one of those "my work is too important and valuable
>to trust to AMD processors" types? %^)

Well it wasn't quite as blunt as that and it was likely in repsonse to JK
so.....🙂

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

George Macdonald wrote:
>>Let me guess, he was one of those "my work is too important and valuable
>>to trust to AMD processors" types? %^)
>
>
> Well it wasn't quite as blunt as that and it was likely in repsonse to JK
> so.....🙂

Oh yes, JK, the one that makes AMD'ers defensive about Intel.

Yousuf Khan
 
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

Yousuf Khan wrote:
>
> George Macdonald wrote:
> > On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 03:19:02 GMT, Johannes H Andersen <johs@sizefitter.com>
> > wrote:
> >>I run a Northwood 2.8 P4 overclocked to 3GHz with a Tagan 380W PSU. CPU cooler
> >>is a Zalman duct HS fan, speed is 2000 rpm. Prime95 no problems whatsoever.
> >
> >
> > Huh? You overclock? I thought your work was "valuable"? Don't tell me
> > this is a new approach to Stochastic Programming!🙂
>
> Let me guess, he was one of those "my work is too important and valuable
> to trust to AMD processors" types? %^)
>
> Yousuf Khan

Where did I say that? Quote please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom