Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Sat, 5 Apr 2003 12:23:44 -0500 |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
AMDs have come a long way in the heat dept...
Once you get past soc 5, soc 7, and Slot "A"s,
all the others (soc 462) have been rated 85*-90C* max...
Since mine runs easily at 37C*, I consider AMD heat a
non-issue...
Looking at a chart from Tom's Hardware Guide, the Intels
seem to be the ones that can't take the heat in the soc 478
series (Willamette 67-77C*, Northwood 68-70C*), and the
soc 370 series (Coppermine variable from 70-82*C or 77-85*C,
Tualatin at 69*C max.)
I'd say the Intels put the internal heat sensors (the ones that do)
because they needed them more than AMD.
A side note: In reading my logs, I just noticed my "AMD Retail
Box" fan has gained 100RPM since I installed it over a year ago...
It must be getting broken in... <grin>
Rick Glazier
From: "Justin Marzello" <[log in to unmask]>
> Well, I'm not sure about the AMD burning easy. I know they do run hot. I'm a
> 100% AMD guy and currently running a 1.4 T-Bird at 1.8GHz 166 FSB @ 57
> degrees C. AMD burn out at about 70C. I doubt it's a virus in the bios,
snipped...
PCBUILD maintains hundreds of useful files for download
visit our download web page at:
http://freepctech.com/downloads.shtml
|
|
|