Going by the numbers for 40-45°C on that chart I shoud be starting to see CPU failures by now and it's not happening (knock wood).
There is absolutely no practical evidence to support any of those figures. Does anyone reading this know ANYONE who has had a CPU chip die on them -- before it was so totally obsolete that nobody cared any more?
Well figured are from manufacturers specs. Chip manufacturers do make a lot more tests and calculations than normal people will ever do.
Try seeing things from the opposite side (opposite to Wumpus question) would be: How many people has at normal load been running their AMD processor at no less than 78 C for more than 5 years without burning it out?
Anyone in this situation please reply to this note.
I guess that is hardly anyone at this forum that runs there chips on that high temps. We have already discussed constant server temps and it seems that the numbers seem to have a factor 4 security buffer in them.
If you have a computer that is more than 5 years old and it does die on you, do you even bother trying to figure out if it is the motherboard or the CPU that died?
Did you constantly monitor temps on anything? (most people never do).
I talked some to a computershop (that puts their own computers together) many years ago, and they did get a few customers with broken CPU's every year. But on the other hand they could have been broken by lost of reasons. E.g. physical abuse, massive overheating, electical shorted out and they didn't bother about checking anyway. Usually there was no guarantee left, so the reason the chip was broken was rather irrelewant.
I know this is not even close to a scientific evidence.