Intel will need to change their TIM if they want to fix the heat problem....

 

http://www.legitrevi...article/1924/1/

What a ridiculous fumble. :Doh: This will be the upgrade to skip.

I think they (Intel Marketing) may have done this deliberately since they have no competition, they can afford to go slow in drips.

 

Manny

And how about this from 2/2012 PC Perspective. What are the implications of increased TDP?

 

 

'Haswell; however, will move to (yet another) socket LGA 1150 on the desktop, and will bring incremental improvements over Ivy Bridge. . . . Unfortunately, Intel will be returning to an increased TDP (thermal design power) with Haswell compared to the lower TDP from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge.'

I read that Intel might be doing this on purpose, to loose their supply of Sanby Bridges.

I read that Intel might be doing this on purpose, to loose their supply of Sanby Bridges.

 

Their plan works. They lost one to me a few days ago and very nice it is too :dance:

I read that Intel might be doing this on purpose, to loose their supply of Sanby Bridges.

 

I wonder if Haswell might be any better at OC'ing than thr SB chips. I am crossing my fingers.

 

Perfect scenario would be a 15% boost clock for clock over SB and you would be able to send these chips to 6GHZ on 1.25volts. :Drooling:

I wonder if Haswell might be any better at OC'ing than thr SB chips. I am crossing my fingers.

 

Perfect scenario would be a 15% boost clock for clock over SB and you would be able to send these chips to 6GHZ on 1.25volts. :Drooling:

 

Ben, do you think when they say they are increasing TDP for Haswell they are admitting TDP for IB was too low? In other words they didn't anticipate the cooling it would take to deal w/ its poor thermal performance?

Their plan works. They lost one to me a few days ago and very nice it is too :dance:

 

Yes sir, it worked well on me too! It certainly represents one of my less risky, yet better decisions.

Stephen,

 

Would you mind giving me the voltage and clock speed of your GTX?

 

Thanks hope you all are doing well...!

Ben, do you think when they say they are increasing TDP for Haswell they are admitting TDP for IB was too low? In other words they didn't anticipate the cooling it would take to deal w/ its poor thermal performance?

 

Not sure. Remember, the TDP is measured only at stock clocks. If only they can find some ways to dissipate heat more effectively, that would be wonderful for us over-clockers. :Big Grin:

Not sure. Remember, the TDP is measured only at stock clocks. If only they can find some ways to dissipate heat more effectively, that would be wonderful for us over-clockers. :Big Grin:

 

Sure. TDP is supposed to reflect the amount of power to dissipate w/ typical application use, not constant full power as you see w/ FSX demands, let alone overclocked FSX. The comment from the article makes me think Haswell WILL NOT function w/ lower thermal management needs, but higher, and that does not bode well for over clocking or FSX. I'm kinda thinking maybe I should grab a 2700 now before they disappear. I am tempted to get a 6-core CPU though in case someone develops a FS that can exploit 6 cores.

I am tempted to get a 6-core CPU though in case someone develops a FS that can exploit 6 cores.

 

SB-E also is a good overclocker.

SB-E also is a good overclocker.

 

Ben, does only the extreme SB-E have the unlocked multiplier?

Ben, does only the extreme SB-E have the unlocked multiplier?

 

Yes. Non-extreme SB-E chips only OC to about 4GHz with turbo + Bclk adjustments.