Tom's Hardware is hilarious

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
54 answers Last reply
More about hardware hilarious
  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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??
  6. 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.)
  7. 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.
  8. 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
  9. 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
  10. 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
  11. 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
  12. 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??
  13. 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??
  14. 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.
  15. 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
  16. 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
  17. 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.
  18. 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??
  19. 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??
  20. 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
  21. 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??
  22. 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??
  23. 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
  24. 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.
  25. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    Johannes H Andersen wrote:
    >>Let me guess, he was one of those "my work is too important and valuable
    >>to trust to AMD processors" types? %^)
    >
    > Where did I say that? Quote please.

    Just tweaking you. :-)

    Besides, if you said it in response to JK, then anything goes. :-)

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

    George Macdonald wrote:
    >
    > 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?

    Agreed with all of this. I just tried it and found no ill effect. On the
    other hand, the practical gain is also very small, so I'll probably take
    it off. The system is well cooled with the Zalman duct fan and the winter
    climate also helps keeping temperatures down. My worry was really the memory
    since it is only DDR400; serious overclockers would use a higher spec, but
    the Crucial memory worked fine. In another news group you almost get mobbed
    for not overclocking, so you can't keep everybody happy :-)
  27. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    Johannes H Andersen <johs@sizefitter.com> wrote:

    >Agreed with all of this. I just tried it and found no ill effect. On the
    >other hand, the practical gain is also very small, so I'll probably take
    >it off.

    Exactly. Why bother?
  28. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >
    > 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

    Yes, where are all those 64 bit softwares that will make my humble 32 bit
    processor obsolete? I'm still waiting...
  29. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    In article <41D02A5B.334F57BD@sizefitter.com>, johs@sizefitter.com
    says...
    >
    >
    > Yousuf Khan wrote:
    > >
    > > 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
    >
    > Yes, where are all those 64 bit softwares that will make my humble 32 bit
    > processor obsolete? I'm still waiting...
    >
    I'm not. ;-) Linux runs 64bit just fine.

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

    On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:27:52 GMT, Johannes H Andersen <johs@sizefitter.com>
    wrote:

    >
    >
    >Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >>
    >> 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
    >
    >Yes, where are all those 64 bit softwares that will make my humble 32 bit
    >processor obsolete? I'm still waiting...

    Hmmm I thought you were selling software yourself though. For numerically
    intensive work, which I believe is your niche(?) the extra registers, with
    a well written compiler which uses the addressable FP registers could bring
    a significant performance boost. The CAD vendors are certainly getting
    "on-board" - take a look here:
    http://www.ptc.com/partners/hardware/current/itanium_letter.htm

    Rgds, George Macdonald

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

    George Macdonald wrote:
    >
    > On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:27:52 GMT, Johannes H Andersen <johs@sizefitter.com>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >
    > >Yousuf Khan wrote:
    > >>
    > >> 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
    > >
    > >Yes, where are all those 64 bit softwares that will make my humble 32 bit
    > >processor obsolete? I'm still waiting...
    >
    > Hmmm I thought you were selling software yourself though. For numerically
    > intensive work, which I believe is your niche(?) the extra registers, with
    > a well written compiler which uses the addressable FP registers could bring
    > a significant performance boost. The CAD vendors are certainly getting
    > "on-board" - take a look here:
    > http://www.ptc.com/partners/hardware/current/itanium_letter.htm

    Thanks for interesting link.

    If you think about my sizefitter project; lots of downloads yes but not a
    single genuine sale unfortunately. But I think that at this time it serves
    more as a vehicle for other things. The program was prompted by a an urban
    planner who was fed up messing about with a spreadsheet for finding ad hoc
    solutions.

    Potentially I have ideas for simulation and have worked to this end. The
    target users by-and-large runs traditional company PCs that are a couple of
    years old or so. That's a fact of life. Hence 64 bits is not an essential
    requirement.
  32. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 11:11:49 GMT, Johannes H Andersen <johs@sizefitter.com>
    wrote:

    >
    >
    >George Macdonald wrote:
    >>
    >> On Mon, 27 Dec 2004 15:27:52 GMT, Johannes H Andersen <johs@sizefitter.com>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >> >
    >> >
    >> >Yousuf Khan wrote:
    >> >>
    >> >> 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
    >> >
    >> >Yes, where are all those 64 bit softwares that will make my humble 32 bit
    >> >processor obsolete? I'm still waiting...
    >>
    >> Hmmm I thought you were selling software yourself though. For numerically
    >> intensive work, which I believe is your niche(?) the extra registers, with
    >> a well written compiler which uses the addressable FP registers could bring
    >> a significant performance boost. The CAD vendors are certainly getting
    >> "on-board" - take a look here:
    >> http://www.ptc.com/partners/hardware/current/itanium_letter.htm
    >
    >Thanks for interesting link.
    >
    >If you think about my sizefitter project; lots of downloads yes but not a
    >single genuine sale unfortunately. But I think that at this time it serves
    >more as a vehicle for other things. The program was prompted by a an urban
    >planner who was fed up messing about with a spreadsheet for finding ad hoc
    >solutions.

    Hmm, that's a shame that nobody wants to cough up.:-( The standard model
    for "free" downloadable software seems to be to follow up with a major
    improvement with addition of a nag and limited functionality.

    >Potentially I have ideas for simulation and have worked to this end. The
    >target users by-and-large runs traditional company PCs that are a couple of
    >years old or so. That's a fact of life. Hence 64 bits is not an essential
    >requirement.

    OK I see what you mean... but it does depend on perceived corporate value
    of the total solution. I know of people running "solves" which take two
    days on a P4/Xeon system and they'd be glad to get that down to 1.5 days.

    Rgds, George Macdonald

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

    The little lost angel wrote:
    > 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?
    >
    If the heat sink is the same temperature as the air in the case, more
    fan won't matter.

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

    The little lost angel wrote:
    > 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?

    You are right that temperature diference is a major factor, heat flow is
    delta temp over resistivity (why home insulation has an "R value"). But
    in any decent case, particularly ATX type, it's flow through the case
    which most affects case temp.

    Also note that if you have multiple drives and mount them low (in a
    tower) with a fan pulling air out next to tehm, their heat goes out the
    front, not over the CPU. If you then have one of the cases with the
    glass side and side fan, pulling air in, you move the coolest air
    available over the CPU. People laugh at my ugly blue neon fan, but it is
    FUNCTIONAL!

    Oh, and while giving advice, I use dual 80mm back fans instead of a
    single 120mm, so that if one fails the CPU stays cooler. That may be
    paranoia.

    --
    bill davidsen (davidsen@darkstar.prodigy.com)
    SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
    Project Leader, USENET news
    http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com
  35. 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? %^)

    A fair bit of my work is too I&V to run on non-ECC memory. Server boards
    and memory add about $200 to system price, typically. However, memory is
    far better than it was a few years ago, and running a good memory test
    at boot is enough for non-critical use in many cases.

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

    On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 03:52:37 +0000, Bill Davidsen wrote:

    > 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? %^)
    >
    > A fair bit of my work is too I&V to run on non-ECC memory. Server boards
    > and memory add about $200 to system price, typically. However, memory is
    > far better than it was a few years ago, and running a good memory test
    > at boot is enough for non-critical use in many cases.

    That begs the questio "how much memory". Santa brough a couple of sticks
    of crucial 512MB registered/ECC PC3200 memory for my K8WS at about $120
    per. That's not *that* much of a premium over their
    unbuffered/non-parity. In fact I've found over the past five years or so
    (my 5yo Tyan 1598 has all ECC memory in it), that generally ECC memory has
    the expected 11% premium over non-parity (sometimes less). $200 may be a
    little high.

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

    keith wrote:
    > On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 03:52:37 +0000, Bill Davidsen wrote:
    >
    >
    >>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? %^)
    >>
    >>A fair bit of my work is too I&V to run on non-ECC memory. Server boards
    >>and memory add about $200 to system price, typically. However, memory is
    >>far better than it was a few years ago, and running a good memory test
    >>at boot is enough for non-critical use in many cases.
    >
    >
    > That begs the questio "how much memory". Santa brough a couple of sticks
    > of crucial 512MB registered/ECC PC3200 memory for my K8WS at about $120
    > per. That's not *that* much of a premium over their
    > unbuffered/non-parity. In fact I've found over the past five years or so
    > (my 5yo Tyan 1598 has all ECC memory in it), that generally ECC memory has
    > the expected 11% premium over non-parity (sometimes less). $200 may be a
    > little high.
    >
    I fail to see an option to enable ECC on many budget boards, so there's
    some cost there as well. The last SuperMicro board I had gave me the
    choice of nothing, parity, ECC and 2-way, 2+4way or no interleave. Don't
    know if my current common board lack the option or the capability.

    I ran all ECC memory for a while, but building to a price point I don't
    see the option.

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

    What does running a good memory test at boot have to do with anything?

    Transistors can burn out at any time.


    "Bill Davidsen" <davidsen@darkstar.prodigy.com> wrote in message
    news:9wJCd.5023$8U5.1515@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
    > 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? %^)
    >
    > A fair bit of my work is too I&V to run on non-ECC memory. Server boards
    > and memory add about $200 to system price, typically. However, memory is
    > far better than it was a few years ago, and running a good memory test at
    > boot is enough for non-critical use in many cases.
    >
    > --
    > bill davidsen (davidsen@darkstar.prodigy.com)
    > SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
    > Project Leader, USENET news
    > http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com
  39. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 20:46:39 -0800, "e" <DoNotRespond@fake.net> wrote:

    >What does running a good memory test at boot have to do with anything?

    I dunno whether he meant build time but running memory stress tests is an
    essential part of a system build; with a repeat of this at regular
    intervals it gives some confidence level. Given a reasonable operating
    environment, I've rarely seen any memory chips/modules degrade with time &
    use... and certainly not in the past 10 years or so.

    >Transistors can burn out at any time.

    Detecting that is not the main purpose of ECC memory though.

    >"Bill Davidsen" <davidsen@darkstar.prodigy.com> wrote in message
    >news:9wJCd.5023$8U5.1515@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...

    >> A fair bit of my work is too I&V to run on non-ECC memory. Server boards
    >> and memory add about $200 to system price, typically. However, memory is
    >> far better than it was a few years ago, and running a good memory test at
    >> boot is enough for non-critical use in many cases.
    >>
    >> --
    >> bill davidsen (davidsen@darkstar.prodigy.com)
    >> SBC/Prodigy Yorktown Heights NY data center
    >> Project Leader, USENET news
    >> http://newsgroups.news.prodigy.com

    --
    Rgds, George Macdonald
  40. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    e wrote:
    > What does running a good memory test at boot have to do with anything?
    >
    > Transistors can burn out at any time.

    While that statement is true, the implication that failure is equally
    likely at all times isn't. Like lightbulbs, failure on power cycle is
    more likely because the system is subject to both electrical and thermal
    transients not present at other times. So unless you run a memory test
    all the time (you could think of ECC that way), right after power on is
    a good time to do the test.

    And I'm told that memory failure in dynamic memory is usually a
    breakdown in the little capacitors, not the transistor. Random failures
    are often one-time alpha particle hits, modern memory is far better in
    that regard as well, due to smaller structure and better substrates.

    Nothing is perfect, the question is how reliable can you afford to be?

    >
    >
    > "Bill Davidsen" <davidsen@darkstar.prodigy.com> wrote in message
    > news:9wJCd.5023$8U5.1515@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
    >
    >>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? %^)
    >>
    >>A fair bit of my work is too I&V to run on non-ECC memory. Server boards
    >>and memory add about $200 to system price, typically. However, memory is
    >>far better than it was a few years ago, and running a good memory test at
    >>boot is enough for non-critical use in many cases.


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

    In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips e <DoNotRespond@fake.net> top-posted:
    > Transistors can burn out at any time.

    They're _not_ lightbulbs. Look up the bathtub failure curve.

    Another datum for the correlation: top-poster=ignoramus.

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

    On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 22:33:25 -0500, keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:

    >On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 03:03:31 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
    >
    >> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
    >>> Well, to be fair... Lightbulbs fail in a bathtub fashion too.
    >>> They fail even faster in a bathtub. ;-)
    >>
    >> Doh! <smacks forehead> Quite correct. I guess the phrase
    >> "transistor burnout" just makes me see red. I think most
    >> electronics fails from electrolytic capacitor leak/dry-out.
    >>
    >> We have some 486s and RS4000s that have been in continuous
    >> use for 15 years. What is that, 125,000 hrs? You're lucky
    >> to get 1-2000 hr from a lightbulb.
    >
    >Ok, but one's forced to ask; What's an RS4000?

    A now elderly MIPS RISC system, perhaps?

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

    keith wrote:

    >> We have some 486s and RS4000s that have been in continuous
    >> use for 15 years. What is that, 125,000 hrs? You're lucky
    >> to get 1-2000 hr from a lightbulb.
    >
    >Ok, but one's forced to ask; What's an RS4000?

    I think it's on old IBM Power-based computer, usually running AIX.
  44. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
    > Ok, but one's forced to ask; What's an RS4000?

    Sorry, RS6000 - 60 MHz Power2

    > That works. Its surprising how the more one learns,
    > the less one knows.

    Precisely true, and a mini-intelligence test.

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

    In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips Stuart <xyz@hotmail.com> wrote:
    > In fact the life of a light bulb depends

    Of course.

    > In unusual conditions such as a 135 volt lamp burning
    > continuously at 115 to 120 volts several years is not unusual.

    20,000 hrs? I would have thought tungsten sublimation
    would have killed a std 135V/2000h bulb long before then.
    Unusual conditions like halogen fill for redeposition?

    > In more extreme circumstances such as a 230 volt lamp operated
    > at 125 volts for use as an indicator (as opposed to providing
    > illumination) with a limited number (less than 5) of on/off
    > cycles per year the life is in the twenty to thirty year range.

    I've run Euro bulbs. They hardly give off enough light at
    115V to qualify as indicators except in darkened surroundings.

    I didn't think cycles mattered that much on tungsten-filament
    bulbs with good design for thermal expansion & filament
    support. Las Vegas signage certainly gets hammered.

    > In contrast a photo flood lamp under normal use is
    > rated in tens of hours.

    Of course. So do Japanese 100V bulbs at 115V. Voltage ratings
    are a bit of a farce. Filaments have a resistance curve and
    reach a particular temperature at a given voltage.

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

    On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 19:24:49 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:

    > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
    >> Ok, but one's forced to ask; What's an RS4000?
    >
    > Sorry, RS6000 - 60 MHz Power2

    Ok. ;-) ...but I didn't think the Power2 was quite *that* old. Dunno,
    before "my" time. ;-)


    >> That works. Its surprising how the more one learns, the less one
    >> knows.
    >
    > Precisely true, and a mini-intelligence test.

    OTOH, don't confuse mastery of trivia for "learning". ...either way.

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

    keith <krw@att.bizzzz> writes:

    > On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 19:24:49 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
    >
    > > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
    > >> Ok, but one's forced to ask; What's an RS4000?
    > >
    > > Sorry, RS6000 - 60 MHz Power2
    >
    > Ok. ;-) ...but I didn't think the Power2 was quite *that* old. Dunno,
    > before "my" time. ;-)

    Thre may have been an RS6000 based on Power2, but I never heard about
    it -- the original RS6000 was a POWER.
    >
    --
    Joseph J. Pfeiffer, Jr., Ph.D. Phone -- (505) 646-1605
    Department of Computer Science FAX -- (505) 646-1002
    New Mexico State University http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~pfeiffer
  48. Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

    In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
    > OTOH, don't confuse mastery of trivia for "learning".
    > ...either way.

    "Never confuse ignorance with stupidity.
    The former can be cured.
    The latter is forever."

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

    On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 23:25:55 -0700, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:

    > keith <krw@att.bizzzz> writes:
    >
    >> On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 19:24:49 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:
    >>
    >> > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
    >> >> Ok, but one's forced to ask; What's an RS4000?
    >> >
    >> > Sorry, RS6000 - 60 MHz Power2
    >>
    >> Ok. ;-) ...but I didn't think the Power2 was quite *that* old. Dunno,
    >> before "my" time. ;-)
    >
    > Thre may have been an RS6000 based on Power2, but I never heard about
    > it -- the original RS6000 was a POWER.

    Sure. I had a 590 under my desk in '94.
    http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/pseries/hardware/whitepapers/power2_models.html

    --
    Keith
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Tom's Hardware Intel Product