The truth about CPU soldering

[Lays]

Absolutely amazing article / demonstration about present day cpu soldering, and why Intel hasn't been doing it.

Written by Der8auer, a professional overclocker and extreme overclocking supplier/engineer/"guru"

http://overclocking.guide/the-truth-about-cpu-soldering/

[The Official Czex]

Absolutely amazing article / demonstration about present day cpu soldering, and why Intel hasn't been doing it.

Written by Der8auer, a professional overclocker and extreme overclocking supplier/engineer/"guru"

http://overclocking.guide/the-truth-about-cpu-soldering/

 

Thanks for the article, @Lays!

[JAKEBAB]

Probs should change the Title since i thought you were talking about SOC

 

Edit: Decent article btw thanks.

[Lays]

Probs should change the Title since i thought you were talking about SOC

Wat

[JAKEBAB]

Wat

 

I used the wrong abbreviation but i still thought you were talking about something like a BGA socket.

[Samfisher]

I thought this was the image below when I read the title...

 

[Nena Trinity]

It does not run on magic?

[Jumper118]

i was going to post this. is it in the news section? it should be on the wan show!

[DXMember]

you mean the same reason why nVidia's 400 series had such a high failure rate?

 

and yeah at 14nm the hot solder burns out these miniature transistors even during application

[Guest]

i was going to post this. is it in the news section? it should be on the wan show!

Agree'd, Me being me and barely understanding it, but i'd definitely love to hear Linus's interpretations of it.

Also, Is there any reason why we still have the heatspreaders on the chip at all? since you know, direct dye contact = transfer 

[MageTank]

I'll go ahead and post this here, since I refuse to let @Dan Castellaneta walk away from the beatdown i was going to give him in the other thread that got locked. 

 

 

Surely they can throw a cooler in that can actually cool the CPU, you know, what AMD did with their FX 9590.

Terrible comparison. AMD does not include a cooler with the retail 9590's. The only ones that include the water cooler are $100 more expensive. 

 

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=8591477

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113347

 

With your broken logic, you want to pay $100 more for intel to include the CPU cooler, rather than you save that $100 and buy one of your choosing? You are silly. "Intel should include a stock cooler that can cool it!". Yeah, they do, on their locked versions. The 6700 and 6600 both come with stock coolers. However, the unlocked ones do not, for obvious reasons. Once you overclock them, the stock cooler is not enough to properly cool them. Intel decided it would save them money, and waste less metal for people to just buy a cooler to overclock it. You already spent the extra cash on a Z series board over an H series to overclock. You already sprung for the K SKU over the non-K SKU. Clearly you don't mind spending extra money for performance. Now you want to cheap out on your cooling solution to try to save money? If money was a concern, you already lost by buying overclocking hardware in the first place. Spend that extra cash on a cooler capable of getting the real performance out of that hardware. Or, go buy that FX 9590 and be disappointed. Whatever floats your boat.

 

[iamdarkyoshi]

Very interesting article. My CPU has a soldered IHS. 

[FruitBasketSilex]

Very good read.

[Dabombinable]

Think of it this way. Intel could no longer use Iridium as a TIM, so they went in the opposite direction and used some of the worst TIM you can get.