QUOTE(X.E.D @ Jun 24 2007, 02:02 PM)
Which is even more puzzling when there's rumours on a mobile Penryn quad core for desktop replacements.
Penryn QC mobile will come into existence soon.[WTF] barcelona delayed.
|
|
Jun 28 2007, 12:52 AM
Return to original view | Post
#1
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,966 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: No longer hanging by a NUS |
|
|
|
Jun 28 2007, 10:35 AM
Return to original view | Post
#2
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,966 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: No longer hanging by a NUS |
QUOTE(edwin3210 @ Jun 28 2007, 10:20 AM) im nt sure about that, but it is not "why AMD want to measure max", u shuld ask, "why intel dun measure max". IMO, intel dun wan measure max coz that figure is nt very "marketable". Intel's reasoning is your processor won't be running at 100% all the time. If it is then the program you're running is either over-taxing your proc or is very poorly written. So they measure TDP as around 80% of the max (need to verify this).TDP is not exactly a good way to measure heat generated by a proc. TDP is more of a yardstick for engineers to know how much heat can be safely dissipated by a cooling solution. i.e. target TDP is 20W + other variables (junction temp etc) Based on some formula they need to use certain heatsink material (alu or cu) and certain dimension. This whole TDP as defined by Intel/AMD is just a PR gimmick. |
| Change to: | 0.0172sec
0.44
6 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 21st December 2025 - 04:43 PM |