Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 17:43:55 02/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 13, 2000 at 16:28:41, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On February 13, 2000 at 11:05:08, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On February 13, 2000 at 03:15:12, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >> >>>On February 12, 2000 at 19:53:12, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>I don't believe they are doing this. They are applying -40c to the cpu, but >>>>the heat it is producing prevents the cpu from getting to -40 during operation, >>>>I'd bet. I'd bet the real cpu temp is well over 0c, if it has a temp >>>>thermocouple as my xeons. do. My xeons run at about 106F under heavy load, >>>>for a reference. >>> >>>Possibly. I wouldn't know. If they aren't getting the CPU down to -40, then I >>>don't see why they would be taking such precautions against condensation. >>>(Somebody else posted about this yesterday.) >> >> >> >>quite simply. The "cold box" attached to the cpu is removing heat by spraying >>freon into a small chamber where it evaporates and takes the temp down to about >>-40c. The cpu is providing enough heat that this temperature is never reached, >>which is the point of the device. If you shut the cpu off, you have a block of > >If it takes the temp down to -40, then how is this temperature never reached? > Simple physics. You have two devices... one trying to reach -40c, the other trying to hit +80c. You will _never_ cool the 80c device to -40. _ever_. To get it there, you have to have the ability to cool to way below -40. The thermal stresses would likely be impossible. But in any case, a -40 device can never cool a device that wants to run at +80, all the way down to -40. There is no perfect thermal conductor for one thing. Particularly not the plastic used for chip carriers. >>>Regardless of the actual temperature, it's obviously going to be much cooler >>>than a normal computer. And that makes switching times go down. And that's what >>>matters. >> >>I'd bet that the difference is in picoseconds, not nanoseconds, which doesn't >>help a whole lot. What matters is that they can up Vcc without burning the >>thing up. > >Only a few days ago you didn't even realize that temperature affected switching >times. Now you are willing to bet about how much they are affected? I think this >is suspect. > >Do you know for a fact that they are increasing Vcc? Maybe they aren't. I'd like >to see a quote from AMD or Kryotech. > >-Tom
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.