ainarssems

Distinguished
Mar 4, 2008
723
1
19,010
The article is from 2003 when CPU's where open without IHSF and there was risk of shorting something when using conductive paste inproperly or too much.
 

spuddyt

Distinguished
Jul 21, 2007
2,114
0
19,780

Ok, and now explain to us why you are quoting from an article from 2003... Unless you are trying to be the antithesis to thunderman and enigma?
 
First of all I never seen it before. Secondly, I doubt many people here have and I really doubt that most people would believe that substituting your own paste, that kept temperatures lower, would invalidate a warranty. How much you want to make a bet that what was then, is now ?
 

enigma067

Distinguished
Jun 29, 2007
208
0
18,680




Tiger
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/Category/category_cpu.asp?name=CPUs
Ci7 920 / 2.66GHz LGA1366 4.8 GT/s $279.99
Ci7 965EE/3.2GHz LGA1366 6.4 GT/s $1079.99

Fortunately the Deneb isn't listed at Tiger now. It must have sold out!

Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition 965 Nehalem 3.2GHz
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115200
$999.99

Intel Core i7 940 Nehalem 2.93GHz
$559.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115201

Deneb 3.0Ghz
$215.00
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103471

The logic is simple. There won't be any software on the market for approximately 3-5 years that will push a Phenom II beyond its limitations. Therefore, what's the point of wasting $800 or even $60 on an over priced Intel chip?

The prices are right there and I even link to them.

All these chips play the games just as well as the others. But only ONE does it for less money!

DO THE MATH!!

Intel ignores their customers by continuing to produce chips that cost their customers the most money.
AMD does the opposite. The proof is in the pricing!

When comparing the price/performance ratio between Intel's offering and AMD's offering, AMD beats Intel.
AMD saves their customers money. And that's what counts the most.

AMD chooses not to produce a faster chip then Intel does and for good reason. A faster chip is more expensive and does not sell in large quantities because people cannot afford it. Especially in today's economy. That translates into lower sales. The company ends up taking a bigger loss then if it produced
a more economical product. Do you think this is why the Deneb (3.0Ghz) is currently sold out on Tigerdirect and the Core i7's are still available? THINK ABOUT IT.

Intel fanbois have more money then brains!
 

pat mcgroin

Distinguished
Nov 21, 2007
1,687
0
19,960
Here is the line that gets you out of the problem.
"No thermal grease is recommended for anything other than temporary evaluation purposes."
How will they know?

And what does the above rant on the cost of Intel processors have to do with thermal grease?
 

The_Blood_Raven

Distinguished
Jan 2, 2008
2,567
0
20,790


Dude, both Intel and AMD did it. Back in 2003 thermal paste was much more CONDUCTIVE than even the conductive crap we have now. If the thermal paste dripped off the top in ANY way the CPU was almost certainly dead. There was a good reason, that is all we are saying.
 

The_Blood_Raven

Distinguished
Jan 2, 2008
2,567
0
20,790



Intel i7 965 $999.99:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115200

Via C3 600Mhz $19.99:
http://surpluscomputers.stores.yahoo.net/viac3600mhzcpu.html

DO THE MATH!!
 

Dekasav

Distinguished
Sep 2, 2008
1,243
0
19,310
I just have to point this out, under the VIA chip linked, in its description, it says this:

" Industry leading 0.13 & 0.15 micron manufacturing process"

Made me smile.
 


LMFAO................................