Intel recalls Xeon...

[GamerDude]

On 11/16/2019 at 9:14 PM, NumLock21 said:

I think that's only for the $999 extreme editions.

My Intel i7 3960X Extreme Edition (bought in late 2011, early 2012) most certainly did not come with a cooler, should I write to Intel about it?

[leadeater]

3 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

ok, but weren’t we talking about coolers not CPUs?  

True, though in my original reply the comment about TDP having zero value was around the CPUs, probably wasn't clear enough that was the case. There's quite good standards on both sides but neither of them align and they disagree on what TDP is and how it should be used, it's even more fuzzy when on the device side there isn't agreement between competing vendors. Coolers on the other hand there is a lot more standardization because those are not isolated to CPUs, GPUs or computers in general and you can easily test the specification and convert it to energy (Joules) representation meaning if said manufactures tries to fiddle the numbers or set different targets or what ever you can work backwards and math/equations don't lie. The only real thing that would prevent you from proving a lie is not knowing the air flow used during the test.

 

I think what you are wanting is Joules per Second specification for coolers, because we are talking directly about energy higher is better and lower is worse always irrespective of things like airflow or temperature targets etc. Which if we are talking energy over time we can just use Watts because that is what the unit of Watts is, traditionally in cooling/air-conditioning BTUs were used (1 W is equal to 3.41 BTU/h).

 

So if we circle all the way back around all a cooler needs is a Watt rating, that's it. Then all you are left with is measurement error or flaws in procedure where you're not correctly controlling or isolating temperatures. Either way you can independently test this and you should come to the same value or very close to, and you can bet competitors are doing this to each other. Lying about a specification like that is a bad idea because of how easily you can prove or disprove it which then becomes a legal problem if someone wishes to carry it that far.

 

Thus I suspect is why TDP is used and not Watts, you can in a way hide behind TDP but you cannot for Watts.

[Herman Mcpootis]

20 minutes ago, GamerDude said:

My Intel i7 3960X Extreme Edition (bought in late 2011, early 2012) most certainly did not come with a cooler, should I write to Intel about it?

that was for the Extreme Edition LGA 1366 CPUs, like the 980x and 990x.

[mr moose]

21 minutes ago, leadeater said:

True, though in my original reply the comment about TDP having zero value was around the CPUs, probably wasn't clear enough that was the case. There's quite good standards on both sides but neither of them align and they disagree on what TDP is and how it should be used, it's even more fuzzy when on the device side there isn't agreement between competing vendors. Coolers on the other hand there is a lot more standardization because those are not isolated to CPUs, GPUs or computers in general and you can easily test the specification and convert it to energy (Joules) representation meaning if said manufactures tries to fiddle the numbers or set different targets or what ever you can work backwards and math/equations don't lie. The only real thing that would prevent you from proving a lie is not knowing the air flow used during the test.

 

I think what you are wanting is Joules per Second specification for coolers, because we are talking directly about energy higher is better and lower is worse always irrespective of things like airflow or temperature targets etc. Which if we are talking energy over time we can just use Watts because that is what the unit of Watts is, traditionally in cooling/air-conditioning BTUs were used (1 W is equal to 3.41 BTU/h).

 

So if we circle all the way back around all a cooler needs is a Watt rating, that's it. Then all you are left with is measurement error or flaws in procedure where you're not correctly controlling or isolating temperatures. Either way you can independently test this and you should come to the same value or very close to, and you can bet competitors are doing this to each other. Lying about a specification like that is a bad idea because of how easily you can prove or disprove it which then becomes a legal problem if someone wishes to carry it that far.

 

Thus I suspect is why TDP is used and not Watts, you can in a way hide behind TDP but you cannot for Watts.

 

Or they could use the industry standard of thermal resistance,  however I imagine seeing as most people struggle with TDP that most end users would just lose their marbles trying to get their head around degree/W given the figure is inverse to cooling capacity.

[Bombastinator]

54 minutes ago, leadeater said:

True, though in my original reply the comment about TDP having zero value was around the CPUs, probably wasn't clear enough that was the case. There's quite good standards on both sides but neither of them align and they disagree on what TDP is and how it should be used, it's even more fuzzy when on the device side there isn't agreement between competing vendors. Coolers on the other hand there is a lot more standardization because those are not isolated to CPUs, GPUs or computers in general and you can easily test the specification and convert it to energy (Joules) representation meaning if said manufactures tries to fiddle the numbers or set different targets or what ever you can work backwards and math/equations don't lie. The only real thing that would prevent you from proving a lie is not knowing the air flow used during the test.

 

I think what you are wanting is Joules per Second specification for coolers, because we are talking directly about energy higher is better and lower is worse always irrespective of things like airflow or temperature targets etc. Which if we are talking energy over time we can just use Watts because that is what the unit of Watts is, traditionally in cooling/air-conditioning BTUs were used (1 W is equal to 3.41 BTU/h).

 

So if we circle all the way back around all a cooler needs is a Watt rating, that's it. Then all you are left with is measurement error or flaws in procedure where you're not correctly controlling or isolating temperatures. Either way you can independently test this and you should come to the same value or very close to, and you can bet competitors are doing this to each other. Lying about a specification like that is a bad idea because of how easily you can prove or disprove it which then becomes a legal problem if someone wishes to carry it that far.

 

Thus I suspect is why TDP is used and not Watts, you can in a way hide behind TDP but you cannot for Watts.

Heh. I like it.

[Bombastinator]

32 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

Or they could use the industry standard of thermal resistance,  however I imagine seeing as most people struggle with TDP that most end users would just lose their marbles trying to get their head around degree/W given the figure is inverse to cooling capacity.

Let em.  Linus can shove em back in again.  He’s good at that.  It’s why I like his channel.

 

might take some stuffing of course.