using no HSF on my VENICE!!!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
GVX said:
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/200...wnload_the_first_toms_hardware_test_lab_video
the video on that link will show you that taking the heatsink off of an active CPU will destroy it in seconds.

What needs to happen is for the OP to get some kind of camera, lay his PC down in front of his monitor (with his monitor displaying the temps and the CPU in sight). We can check to see if it's "photoshopped" by using a Hex editor to check the signature of the image.

Then, and only then, will anyone believe you.
Click to expand...

Well, that video shows what happens to older processors. Not newer ones. The newer AMD's are supposed to throttle down (Cool and Quiet might need to be active) like the early ass Pentium 4's could. Or at least lock up to prevent damage like the Pentium III's and early Palamino chips could.

lockheed2266 said:
Press print screen

Open paint - then go to file>paste

There you go...
Click to expand...

That's not going to help. He already mentioned that. We shot that down as not proving that he is running the thing without a HSF.

But as for your suggestion of proof, that's the best thing he could do. You can still even fake that though.

Captin Insano said:
Ok guys.. All of you chill. Now I may not be there in person But ANYTHING could be possible..I do happen to know Newls1 personally and know he is not the type of person to lie or pull bullshit thats not true. He is not some lil kid here screwing around and he is probably older then most of you in this thread. anyhow.. Have any of you tried this??? From the sounds of it i guess not.. Instead of slamming and flaming newls1 how about trying to PHYISCALLY DISSPROVE IT!!.. Your just stating bullshit that it cant be done is bullshit without real self trial and error factual proof. Unless you have done it yourself and had it fail then you cant say bullshit.. here is an example. How does a 75 watt light bulb not burn up instantly. hmm the wattage output on a 3000 venice is probably less then even that and overclocked fairly close to that spec of 75 watts. So anybody a taker to his suggestion to try it. If i had a 3000 venice core i would do it myself. Its not like you will kill the chip. it does have a shut down threshold that will keep that from happening. Also even if its throttleing down its still pretty kick ass that the energy consumption is working that low and well to allow it to run at that. but come on guys dont be haters about it.. Prove it and if it works like he says thats even better for us AMD guys!!!
Click to expand...

No. I am going to have to disagree. When you understand the technology, you understand that anything is NOT possible. I called bullshit because even with an ambient 61 degree room temperature as he claims to have, the Venice core operating at 2.5GHz PLUS will NOT run at 47C idle. If Cool and Quiet is enabled, the CPU is likely throttling to cut back the heat. That's what P4's have always done. Even the cool running Northwoods that were able to run at those temps or lower at full speed. Also bear in mind the inaccuracy of motherboard thermal probes and sensors. Some boards read 10 or 20C lower than they should. Asus being one prime example of that.

The Athlon 64 cores, Venice or not, simply do not run that cool. If they did, it's likely that only passive cooling would be needed for the majority of them. This is clearly not the case.

I would try the experiment to prove it wrong if A I had a Venice 3000+, or if B I could afford to lose one if I did have it. So, until I see some proof, from him and or someone else proving it can be done, I will continue to call a turd a turd, and bullshit bullshit.
 
do u mean you are running venice without a fan on top of the heatsink or running venice with no heatsink what so ever?
 
swatX said:
do u mean you are running venice without a fan on top of the heatsink or running venice with no heatsink what so ever?
Click to expand...

If you go back and read his first post, he clearly states that he is running with no cooling of any kind. Bare chip. If he were claiming to run the machine with those temps on heatsink alone, I might believe him. No cooling whatsoever, I seriously doubt. Maybe one of the engineering types needs to responde to this thread with some data concerning heat buildup and dissapation given material composition of the heatspreader and given surface area.

One of those terribly smart individuals might be able to change my mind without screen shots, if they can point me to some data that can lead me to a conclusion that would be inline with what the original poster is claiming. At this point, I don't see how his claims can be possible. I seek validation.
 
even my Venice 3000+ would croak after 5 minutes of being IDLE with the stock cooler with no fan running (it died)
 
Where did the op go ? He never answered the question posed, bare chip or just no fan on the heatsink ? I would never believe a bare chip could run for more than a dozen seconds without smoking itself without seeing it with my own eyes.
 
GVX said:
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/200...wnload_the_first_toms_hardware_test_lab_video
the video on that link will show you that taking the heatsink off of an active CPU will destroy it in seconds.

What needs to happen is for the OP to get some kind of camera, lay his PC down in front of his monitor (with his monitor displaying the temps and the CPU in sight). We can check to see if it's "photoshopped" by using a Hex editor to check the signature of the image.

Then, and only then, will anyone believe you.
Click to expand...


That link refers back to the old XP cpu that had zero thermal protection on it. Yes that particular cpu would cook in mere seconds with the HSF off of it. Not todays Processors though. The Intel and AMD cpu's for some time now have had built in cpu shut down for just such reasons of failed HSF or user error. Now Im not fessing and saying that newls1 shouldnt bring forth Video or pics or what not cause he probably should and needs to.I to am a firm beliver in seeing is beliving. BUT even if he did prove it. and shows it can be done how many of you would reverse you judgement and flames? probably very few if any. BUT for all of you guys that are flaming rethink it. None of you have factual proof of a video to back your side either with the same things he has in his possesion. There are always 2 sides to proving eveidence not just calling bullshit.

Thats said all I am saying is until one of the others here cough up and try the experiment and see if it can be done how can you slam the OP. Not very fair or right. Just my opinion. and just cause someone has lots of post and been on a forum for sometime and is 30years of age doesnt mean they know every aspect of using the forum like posting pics,ect or have had the need to even own a Digital Camera. Hell i know some people that dont own any camera's.. so dont be personal about it.
 
this thread made me laugh.

im sure newls is chuckling too... unless hes actually being serious, which i cant imagine he is. its plain idiocy if hes being serious.
 
lithium726 said:
this thread made me laugh.

im sure newls is chuckling too... unless hes actually being serious, which i cant imagine he is. its plain idiocy if hes being serious.
Click to expand...

nice... u just gave him an outlet of saying "hahah fool ya! i was just kidding! u guys get worked over the stupidest things..." and get away with it
 
Captin Insano said:
That link refers back to the old XP cpu that had zero thermal protection on it. Yes that particular cpu would cook in mere seconds with the HSF off of it. Not todays Processors though. The Intel and AMD cpu's for some time now have had built in cpu shut down for just such reasons of failed HSF or user error. Now Im not fessing and saying that newls1 shouldnt bring forth Video or pics or what not cause he probably should and needs to.I to am a firm beliver in seeing is beliving. BUT even if he did prove it. and shows it can be done how many of you would reverse you judgement and flames? probably very few if any. BUT for all of you guys that are flaming rethink it. None of you have factual proof of a video to back your side either with the same things he has in his possesion. There are always 2 sides to proving eveidence not just calling bullshit.

Thats said all I am saying is until one of the others here cough up and try the experiment and see if it can be done how can you slam the OP. Not very fair or right. Just my opinion. and just cause someone has lots of post and been on a forum for sometime and is 30years of age doesnt mean they know every aspect of using the forum like posting pics,ect or have had the need to even own a Digital Camera. Hell i know some people that dont own any camera's.. so dont be personal about it.
Click to expand...
Who wants to be the guinea pig?
 
what if his running an uber 10,000rpm 120mm fan as a side intake to his CPU :D but then again he said no cooling :p
 
I can believe it since today I was able to unlock my 9700pro to 24 pipes.
 
pincho said:
what if his running an uber 10,000rpm 120mm fan as a side intake to his CPU :D but then again he said no cooling :p
Click to expand...

wouldn't matter, not enough surface area to make a diff imo
 
GVX said:
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/200...wnload_the_first_toms_hardware_test_lab_video
the video on that link will show you that taking the heatsink off of an active CPU will destroy it in seconds.

What needs to happen is for the OP to get some kind of camera, lay his PC down in front of his monitor (with his monitor displaying the temps and the CPU in sight). We can check to see if it's "photoshopped" by using a Hex editor to check the signature of the image.

Then, and only then, will anyone believe you.
Click to expand...
As other people have said, that is a very outdated video. Here's a more recent one, which includes a socket 754 Athlon 64 3200+
http://www.systekonline.com/users/eric/randomcrap/thg_athlon64_nocooling.avi
no cooling = system shutdown



Captin Insano said:
That link refers back to the old XP cpu that had zero thermal protection on it. Yes that particular cpu would cook in mere seconds with the HSF off of it. Not todays Processors though. The Intel and AMD cpu's for some time now have had built in cpu shut down for just such reasons of failed HSF or user error. Now Im not fessing and saying that newls1 shouldnt bring forth Video or pics or what not cause he probably should and needs to.I to am a firm beliver in seeing is beliving. BUT even if he did prove it. and shows it can be done how many of you would reverse you judgement and flames? probably very few if any. BUT for all of you guys that are flaming rethink it. None of you have factual proof of a video to back your side either with the same things he has in his possesion. There are always 2 sides to proving eveidence not just calling bullshit.
Click to expand...
The Athlon XP does have thermal protection. If it gets too hot, the system will shut down. Either THG is retarded and used older hardware when they made the video, or maybe it was before any motherboards supported it. I don't know.
 
You wouldn't be albe to boot windows without an HSF. Your Venice would quickly turn into a keychain.
 
When I first put my winnie into my machine, I was using an IHS that someone sent me with the CPU, and both the CPU and the IHS had all of the sealant for the IHS, so the IHS wasn't making any contact whatsoever witht the core. I could run for a 10 minutes or so until temps got out of control, and it shutdown. I know the IHS wasn't making any contact, because when I took the HSF off and checked the contact with the core and IHS, none of the TIM from the IHS was on the core. Now when I OCed it, it would shutoff from temps before it got into Windows. I've since got all of the sealant off botht the IHS and CPU, so everythings running nice and cool @2.8ghz.
 
dragonorta said:
When I first put my winnie into my machine, I was using an IHS that someone sent me with the CPU, and both the CPU and the IHS had all of the sealant for the IHS, so the IHS wasn't making any contact whatsoever witht the core. I could run for a 10 minutes or so until temps got out of control, and it shutdown. I know the IHS wasn't making any contact, because when I took the HSF off and checked the contact with the core and IHS, none of the TIM from the IHS was on the core. Now when I OCed it, it would shutoff from temps before it got into Windows. I've since got all of the sealant off botht the IHS and CPU, so everythings running nice and cool @2.8ghz.
Click to expand...

:confused:
 
Oline61 said:
You wouldn't be albe to boot windows without an HSF. Your Venice would quickly turn into a keychain.
Click to expand...

We've stated already that the NEWER AMD CORES will throttle themselves down or lock up to make sure that doesn't happen. Read the whole thread next time please =).
 
ChingChang said:
As other people have said, that is a very outdated video. Here's a more recent one, which includes a socket 754 Athlon 64 3200+
http://www.systekonline.com/users/eric/randomcrap/thg_athlon64_nocooling.avi
no cooling = system shutdown




The Athlon XP does have thermal protection. If it gets too hot, the system will shut down. Either THG is retarded and used older hardware when they made the video, or maybe it was before any motherboards supported it. I don't know.
Click to expand...

It was older processors. Specifically an original T-Bird core Athlon, and a Palamino Athlon. The latter Palamino was supposed to be able to lock up and shutdown the same way the Pentium III in that video does. However the thermal protection fails, and that CPU burns up as well. Yet, the old ass Socket 423 Pentium 4, manages to throttle down and keep going. The performance tanks badly though.
 
dragonorta said:
When I first put my winnie into my machine, I was using an IHS that someone sent me with the CPU, and both the CPU and the IHS had all of the sealant for the IHS, so the IHS wasn't making any contact whatsoever witht the core. I could run for a 10 minutes or so until temps got out of control, and it shutdown. I know the IHS wasn't making any contact, because when I took the HSF off and checked the contact with the core and IHS, none of the TIM from the IHS was on the core. Now when I OCed it, it would shutoff from temps before it got into Windows. I've since got all of the sealant off botht the IHS and CPU, so everythings running nice and cool @2.8ghz.
Click to expand...
First off, that can't be english you just spat out.

And secondly, it's WAY off topic to the thread
 
i have a 3000+ venice, running a 24/7 OC at 2.1 ghz, with stock cooler idle temp is like 38-40 degrees celcius alrdy.
 
hero123 said:
i have a 3000+ venice, running a 24/7 OC at 2.1 ghz, with stock cooler idle temp is like 38-40 degrees celcius alrdy.
Click to expand...

Right. A 2.5GHz 3000+, would be MUCH MUCH hotter than that at full speed with nothing but a heat spreader to cool it.
 
I personally have no problems with anybody, but you just might want to set the record straight for a lot of the inquiring minds seen in this thread.

Just a hint.
 
the throftling wont happen, without a heatsink the temperature will go very high very quickly and the system will shutdown. Dont try doing this allthough the CPU maybe fine.

case closed.
 
wow...still not even a CPUZ screenie...he must be lieing...he could get that no prob even if his computer did have a HS...there is no excuse for not posting a CPUz...

This is bogus...lock the thread i say.

EDIT: He is probably laughing at all of us, saying "these idiots have 4 pages of talking about my LIE" lol
 
TehRoflcopter said:
We've stated already that the NEWER AMD CORES will throttle themselves down or lock up to make sure that doesn't happen. Read the whole thread next time please =).
Click to expand...
heh. no they don't. amd doesn't have any thermal throttling like intel. there's cool and quiet, but that only runs when you enable it, and it's load based, not temp based.

to those people who are blabbering about a 75w light bulb, but i remind you that many revE cpu's put out ~25-40w at idle?
also, with the ihs, this gives a surface area of .0016m² (i measured my own ihs), assuming a perfectly flat surface, which it isn't, so it's actually a bit more
now, let's assume he has a surprisingly cool cpu, puts out 30w at idle. that's 625w/m²

now, he said ~46c in a 62f room, which is 16.6c. assuming the temp sensor is right, that's a ~30c delta with a 625w/m² thermal density. at these temps, heat dissipated with radiation is effectively zero (2.2x10^-8 w fwiw), so all the heat must be conducted away by the zif socket to the motherboard and by convective cooling by air.

for convection:
q=h*A*(T2-T1)
where h is the heat transfer cooefficient. this is where trouble comes in, because it is dependant on the amount of airflow, however, given that we know what his temps are, and we're assuming some heat output value, we can find the approximate h

30w = h * .0016m² * (46c-16c)
h = 625 w/(m² * K)

this is where i have to stop though, and someone more knowledgeable comes in. i'm not sure how to find air velocity based on the material and h value.
however, i will say that it's possible, given enough cfm over the heatspreader. the real question is not if it's possible, or bullshit, but how much air is needed to keep those temps.
 
(cf)Eclipse said:
heh. no they don't. amd doesn't have any thermal throttling like intel. there's cool and quiet, but that only runs when you enable it, and it's load based, not temp based.

to those people who are blabbering about a 75w light bulb, but i remind you that many revE cpu's put out ~25-40w at idle?
also, with the ihs, this gives a surface area of .0016m² (i measured my own ihs), assuming a perfectly flat surface, which it isn't, so it's actually a bit more
now, let's assume he has a surprisingly cool cpu, puts out 30w at idle. that's 625w/m²

now, he said ~46c in a 62f room, which is 16.6c. assuming the temp sensor is right, that's a ~30c delta with a 625w/m² thermal density. at these temps, heat dissipated with radiation is effectively zero (2.2x10^-8 w fwiw), so all the heat must be conducted away by the zif socket to the motherboard and by convective cooling by air.

for convection:
q=h*A*(T2-T1)
where h is the heat transfer cooefficient. this is where trouble comes in, because it is dependant on the amount of airflow, however, given that we know what his temps are, and we're assuming some heat output value, we can find the approximate h

30w = h * .0016m² * (46c-16c)
h = 625 w/(m² * K)

this is where i have to stop though, and someone more knowledgeable comes in. i'm not sure how to find air velocity based on the material and h value.
however, i will say that it's possible, given enough cfm over the heatspreader. the real question is not if it's possible, or bullshit, but how much air is needed to keep those temps.
Click to expand...

He was claiming that no cooling of any type was being used. So I doubt there would be any active airflow over the heatspreader. Meaning he is likely lying. Either by ommission or simply flat out.

I hear what your saying, but I think even an 80 or 120mm fan blowing over it probably wouldn't be enough simply because there still wouldn't be enough surface area to dissipate the heat.
 
pstang said:
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=968292
read the 1st post then the 10th one
Click to expand...
that was a fun thread, wasnt it?
biggrin.gif
biggrin.gif
biggrin.gif
 
I'd gladdly test this, I'm sure someone might have a spare A64 they would send me to do so. :D


I can believe that no hsf and the cpu survive, but run and be oced... no way...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top