pazsion :
Just because you don't know something and didn't bother to look for the answer...doesn't mean that person is wrong or meant to be misleading...
I never said you meant to be misleading, though you are wrong.
There is often many specifications for the devices inside a pc...an ambient room temperature, for say a power source Or a Hard drive.
You said PC, not component. Each component's tolerances will be vastly different. Not a single one will tell you to keep it below 70F ambient temperature, because those temperatures are totally unrealistic.
IDC what temps you've accepted as normal...but cpu/gpu/chipset/ram and several other devices that heat up...ALL should be kept below 130*F.
No. You're just wrong here. Go look up the thermal limits for a modern graphics card, they're much, much higher than 130F. Also, different components respond differently to heat, so why would they all have the same limit?
On top of that, I don't think there's a single high end GPU in the world that operates that cool. I can only get my dual fan 6950 down to about 140F if I max out every fan in my system. I'm sorry, but you just have no idea what you're talking about.
For optimal speeds and durability. Anything hotter can cause serious issues. And is indicative of serious errors/flaws in the device itself.
Again, incorrect. Video cards typically run 70-80C if you've got
good temps. 90C isn't uncommon or worrisome on many cards. 100+ is when you start getting into trouble.
You haven't heard of thermal oils or nano composites have you?
And you apparently haven't heard that the difference between these supposedly high tech compounds and good old silver based paste is on the order of ~1C under full load. I didn't say they didn't exist, I said they weren't any better.
GPU's being sent out without thermal paste...Yes it has been my personal experience that this happens. Yes it would save them hundreds of dollars.
How would it save them "hundreds of dollars"? It's only a few cents worth of paste used on each chip, and the price of the vast majority of GPUs sold is in the very low "hundreds of dollars." If you're trying to say the savings add up to hundreds, and they probably would, you've got to consider the scale of things. A few hundred bucks is nothing to a company with millions or even billions a year in operating revenue.
The damage done to their reputation and lost sales they would experience from deciding not to use thermal compound vastly exceeds "hundreds of dollars." It would be an absolutely idiotic business decision. They use cheap, shitty paste, sure, but no paste at all? It's just a horrible, horrible idea. Anyone who proposed a company stop applying paste to its cards to save money would probably be fired on the spot.
How many Gpu's have you taken the heatsink off of??
Plenty. Off the top of my head, an x1950 Pro, 5200 FX and HD 4870. In fact, I'm looking at the 4870 right now, which is still without its fan (it burned out, waiting for a replacement to arrive).
Please if you wish to continue debateing this..PM me...don't fill peoples posts with bickering...
There is no debate, you're simply saying things that aren't true. 70C is absolutely in no way dangerous to a video card. Ambient temperature does not need to be 70F (in some parts of the world you'd spend enough on cooling in a year to buy a whole new computer). GPUs are not sold without thermal paste to save "hundreds of dollars."
I'm not trying to bicker, I'm just trying to prevent people following astoundingly bad advice, like setting your AC to 70F to prolong the life of your computer.
I'll be testing eggs, bacon, and many breakfast items!! I am still debating if i want to buy a gtx 480 and try cooking food on there, or use my radeon 5450 silent.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram