Is it bad to have an Intel CPU?

[MageTank]

@MageTank Oh look you can quote words that are almost the same as the ones under disscusion .

By the way the word you want to quote the definition for is efficiency not efficient

 

None of that says as efficiency increases heat production goes up.

No, I am quite certain I was correct in my use of the word "efficient". 

 

I believe you are going to need a visual representation for you to understand this. Don't worry lad, I can help you out with this. Download linpack. Run it with AVX enabled. Then run it without AVX enabled. Look at your temperature, and look at your GFLOPS. You will notice that with AVX disabled, your temperature is much cooler, but your GFLOPS has been crippled vastly. Now tell me, of that scenario, which is more "efficient". The cooler running CPU that performs 75% slower? Or the CPU that runs hotter, but has 75% more performance? 

 

Should start charging tuition for how many times I school people on this forum. Wouldn't need a day job.

[Xenhat]

light bulbs are tremendously inefficient yet produce lots of heat

Light bulbs are efficient at what they do. They were designed to transform electrons into photons using the best price:performance ratio they had at the time (which is pre-LED era) using a tungsten wire.

An electron travels at about  2,200 kilometers per second, 1% of the speed of a photon ( 299791.819 kilometers per second in a vacuum, converted from miles). Maths aren't my strong suit, but you can see how much faster the outputted energy is going after travelling through the tungsten wire, which was chosen for it's ability to heat up fast.

 

I'm not going to bother enumerating why Silicon is a good component for computers, you can look at it yourself.

 

CPUs aren't making light, and you can't compare apples to kiwis. Comparing lightbulb and cpu efficiency to make a point is just plain stupid.

 

Edit: KM vs KM

 

EDIT2: Moderator zeal is exactly why I have a low post count here. The Censorship just doesn't make me want to stay around.

[Sauron]

Other way around, Intel CPU's are generally cooler. I think....

 

No, the dies are smaller and harder to dissipate, not to mention the stock cooler is worse. However they can take much higher temperatures than amd cpus. Current amd cpus start throttling above 64c, intel won't care until you reach 96c.

[soup]

which is more "efficient". The cooler running CPU that performs 75% slower? Or the CPU that runs hotter, but has 75% more performance? 

 

 

Completely depends on how much power it draws to do these alloted tasks.

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting on tutoring cheques

[MageTank]

ompletely depends on how much power it draws to do these alloted tasks.

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting on tutoring cheques

AVX adds about 50w of TDP when using AVX efficiently, so you can round 88w Haswell up to 90w, and with AVX, call it 140w. 56% higher TDP, for roughly 75% more performance. Heat being produced is also drastically increased, which is why people recommend using non-AVX/FMA3 Prime95. Heat scares people. 

[soup]

Light bulbs are efficient at what they do.

Yeah, 'cos 5% efficiency is so high /s

 

From:- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incandescent_light_bulb

 

incandescent bulbs convert less than 5% of the energy they use into visible light

 

[Sauron]

You seem to like Memes. Allow me to express my feelings using the same communication method.

 

[inappropriate memes]

 

Memes aside, 

Light bulbs are efficient at what they do. They were designed to transform electrons into photons using the best price:performance ratio they had at the time (which is pre-LED era) using a tungsten wire.

An electron travels at about  2,200 kilometers per second, 1% of the speed of a photon ( 186,282 miles per second in a vacuum). Maths aren't my strong suit, but you can see how much faster the outputted energy is going after travelling through the tungsten wire, which was chosen for it's ability to heat up fast.

 

I'm not going to bother enumerating why Silicon is a good component for computers, you can look at it yourself.

 

CPUs aren't making light, and you can't compare apples to kiwis. Comparing lightbulb and cpu efficiency to make a point is just plain stupid.

 

Efficiency = (power put to good use)/(total power used). In the case of a heater, efficiency is measured by heat produced over power drawn, however in a lightbulb it is measured as light produced over power drawn and heat is simply a waste or byproduct. Tungsten doesn't emit light because it's hot. It emits light because it's one of the ways it can dissipate the energy that is flowing through it in the form of electrical current. The more heat a 100W light bulb produces, the less efficient it is and the less light it will emit. High efficiency bulbs are able to provide the same light with drastically lower power draw (also) because they put out much less heat.

 

In a cpu, efficiency is measured by (operations)/(power drawn). How much heat it puts out is relatively irrelevant, since it's not part of the equation, however heat output can be an INDICATOR of how efficient a cpu is, as it is related to how much power it is drawing - the higher the heat, the more likely it is to be wasting a lot of energy.

 

Simply put, the purpose of a cpu is not to produce heat - therefore its efficiency cannot be measured by its tdp.

 

I hope the situation is clearer to you now.

[MageTank]

Efficiency = (power put to good use)/(total power used). In the case of a heater, efficiency is measured by heat produced over power drawn, however in a lightbulb it is measured as light produced over power drawn and heat is simply a waste or byproduct. Tungsten doesn't emit light because it's hot. It emits light because it's one of the ways it can dissipate the energy that is flowing through it in the form of electrical current. The more heat a 100W light bulb produces, the less efficient it is and the less light it will emit. High efficiency bulbs are able to provide the same light with drastically lower power draw (also) because they put out much less heat.

 

In a cpu, efficiency is measured by (operations)/(power drawn). How much heat it puts out is relatively irrelevant, since it's not part of the equation, however heat output can be an INDICATOR of how efficient a cpu is, as it is related to how much power it is drawing - the higher the heat, the more likely it is to be wasting a lot of energy.

 

Simply put, the purpose of a cpu is not to produce heat - therefore its efficiency cannot be measured by its tdp.

 

I hope the situation is clearer to you now.

You described that much more eloquently than I did. When I said that heat could be a byproduct of efficiency, I meant it exactly as you described it. When less resources are being wasted (cores being used, rather than idle) then more heat is also produced, because more of a component is being used. If a software is not utilizing all of a CPU (meaning not every core is being used) then less heat will be produced, as less of the component is being used. 

 

When less components are being used, you are potentially losing performance, meaning less performance:watt efficiency.

 

I should have been more clear in my definition of efficiency, as you were. Thank you for that clarification.

[Sauron]

AMD will always be the hottest for both CPU'S and GPU's.

 

people forget so easily...

[Sauron]

You described that much more eloquently than I did. When I said that heat could be a byproduct of efficiency, I meant it exactly as you described it. When less resources are being wasted (cores being used, rather than idle) then more heat is also produced, because more of a component is being used. If a software is not utilizing all of a CPU (meaning not every core is being used) then less heat will be produced, as less of the component is being used. 

 

When less components are being used, you are potentially losing performance, meaning less performance:watt efficiency.

 

I should have been more clear in my definition of efficiency, as you were. Thank you for that clarification.

 

good, hopefully we can end the nonsense now

[rektrobin]

people forget so easily...

I know, and that picture LOL.

[Theminecraftaddict555]

Thank you moderators for clearing of any answers that were deemed unimportant to my paranoic question

 

So the clear answer in the end is that I shouldn't be paranoid about intel being more hotter than amd because they were meant to withstand that much heat correct?  And that having an i7 with an aftermarket cooler (case doesn't support hyper 12 evo but probably other compatible cpu-coolers) should do the trick correct? <<just in case I plan to upgrade to it.  

[gunmaster1173]

I looked around the web and saw that Intel cpus get hotter in temps compared to AMD...Especially the i7's with the stock cooler (feel free to correct me on any of this)

Since I own an intel cpu, my paranoia of it overheating has skyrocketed....My case is an fbm 01 <<<if that matters anyway just in case you guys want an idea of the airflow and my cables are tucked into the empty hard drive bays above my HDD (which doesn't overheat, stays 30-40 degrees celcius)

The AMD cpu's get much hotter than Intel cpu's, Intel is well known to have cooler temperatures than AMD cpu and AMD is always the hottest in cpu and gpu temperatures so remember that when u buy a cpu or gpu

[Theminecraftaddict555]

The AMD cards get much hotter than Intel cards, Intel is well known to have cooler temperatures than AMD cards and AMD is always the hottest in cpu and gpu temperatures

We're not talking about cards

[gunmaster1173]

We're not talking about cards

I just edited my post, I accidentally put card instead of cpu

[Jumper118]

*points at Pentium D and GTX 480*

indeed to pentium d on 1.5v uses more power than the q6600 at 1.5v

[Theminecraftaddict555]

I just edited my post, I accidentally put card instead of cpu

oh alright then