Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (40833)	5/22/2001 12:37:00 AM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Jim,"It really depends on when and why it kicks in..." You are right. That's why I conducted a little experiment with P4-1400, with the boxed heat sink (fairly huge one). In open air at 23 deg.C, the whole thing runs relatively hot, 45 deg.C, every part of the mainboard, including RIMMs, when running BURNBX, but the throttling was not engaged. To make it happen I had to block the air flow from the heat sink fan. The throttling kicked off when the base of P4 heat sink was about 60-63 deg.C, a condition that is hard to get in a real case, IMO. The throttling itself was engaged for 1ms, and pulses followed pseudo-randomly with a main period of about 5ms, which means that the average slow down was about 10%. The total board consumption on 12V power was about 5A, so the P4 was running at about 50W (assuming 0.8 -0.9 efficiency coefficient for the core power converter). When running regular Windows stuff like Media Player, or Bytemark, it consumes less than 3A. So, with the Intel stock heat sink, it seems like it serves an emergency purpose only. Regards, - Ali P.S. Forgot to add that the throttling was perfectly reversable. Sorry about that.