What processor is easier to cool silently AMD or Intel ?

aderyn · Post by **aderyn** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 5:57 am

Hi

What processor is easier to cool silently Intel 2.8 Ghz or AMD 2800+ Mhz ?

Thx

/aderyn

POLIST8 · Post by **POLIST8** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 6:09 am

It really is a matter of personal opinion, but you can search the forums regarding their specific thermal output.

Both can be cooled with a Zalman Flower cooler, which is quiet.

Both can be cooled using a heatsink that fits an 80mm fan, which can also be very quiet.

Kostik · Post by **Kostik** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 6:36 am

According to this page :

Typical power consumption for AMD Barton 2800+ : 53.7W.
Typical power consumption for P4 2.8Ghz : 68.4 - 69.7W depending on exact version.
They have no data for the TBred 2800+.

I don't think the Zalman "flower" cooler (AKA CNPS7000) exists for socket A.

I just made a computer for a friend, with a Barton 2800+ at 1.575v vcore, AS3, SLK-800, Noiseblocker S2. At 1500rpm, temp was 48°c while folding. I have no personnal experience with modern Intel processors, but according to what I have read, they tend to run a bit hotter.

miker · Post by **miker** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 6:44 am

Well the CNPS6000 is a flower, and it works for Socket A. Also, Zalman just released a CNPS7000A variant, for socket A.

On topic, I like the Intel's heat spreader jobbie, it makes things a little more dummy proof. BUt my heart lies in AMD-land. With all your savings from AMD, you could buy a watercooling kit

Kostik · Post by **Kostik** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 6:53 am

I'm not sure the 6000 can cool a 2800+. But if there's a CNPS7000 for AMD, is there any reason left to buy intel ?

DryFire · Post by **DryFire** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 7:17 am

slk 900 fits on both processors but i would go with amd cause it folds better. and it's cheaper.

POLIST8 · Post by **POLIST8** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 7:18 am

No, unless you spend $50,000 on a car and need the "best" name in everything...

bluehat · Post by **bluehat** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 9:24 am

-Intel processors have a heatspreader connected to core with thermal paste, and 2 thermal interfaces (between core and heatspreader, and heatspreader and heatsink). With hq paste and careful installation amd processor can be cooled more effectively.

-Athlon/duron processors run stable at internal core temperatures of 90 - 95 C, but Intel processors start reducing speed somewhere at 70 C, so amd cpu heatsink can be 20C more above ambient temp -> slower fan / smaller heatsink is required.

I don't have any experience about p4 undervolting, but tbreds can be heavily undervolted with a suitable mb -> reduced psu and case fan speeds.

Beyonder · Post by **Beyonder** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 11:26 am

Intel processors have a heatspreader connected to core with thermal paste, and 2 thermal interfaces (between core and heatspreader, and heatspreader and heatsink). With hq paste and careful installation amd processor can be cooled more effectively.

One thing: the heatspreader results in a reduction of the efficiency of thermal transfer, although it does provide benefits against damaging your cpu (IE: crushed athlon cores from heat sinks applied too tight) and can make it easier to apply thermal paste and heatsinks.

But, in the end, a well applied HS on an AMD is always going to be *slightly* (whether or not the difference is significant is debatable) more efficient in conducting heat away from the core simply because of the lack of the intermediary layer providing thermal resistance (IE: the "heat spreader").

Beyonder · Post by **Beyonder** » Mon Jul 28, 2003 11:35 am

whoops, you were agreeing with me. My bad.

With thermal paste and carful installation, AMD CPUS can be cooled more effectively. Ditto.

pingu666 · Post by **pingu666** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 3:39 am

yep another for amd here

dunno why some ppl think the heatspreader helps, yeah it spreads the heat thru a ineffecient layer. yay

DryFire · Post by **DryFire** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 7:47 am

i kinda wish the a64 wouldn't have a heatspreader.

miker · Post by **miker** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 8:50 am

DryFire wrote:i kinda wish the a64 wouldn't have a heatspreader.

Same here. AMD is under pressure though since the P4 had it, and people like it. OEM's will appreciate it as well. The enthusiast crowd will largely hate it, but that's not where most of the money is, unfortunately.
Plus, it protects the PCB from people doing stuff like hooking bridges on the chip, etc.

DryFire · Post by **DryFire** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 9:21 am

yeah enthusiasts are like 5-10% of the market. I guess we don't really count.

POLIST8 · Post by **POLIST8** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 9:33 am

I don't know how many crushed cores there will be since the AMD64 is moving to the screws instead of the clips.

But you have noobs I guess...

DryFire · Post by **DryFire** » Tue Jul 29, 2003 9:54 am

i might do it myself. havn't used screws in a long time.

CoolGav · Post by **CoolGav** » Wed Jul 30, 2003 1:22 am

Kostik wrote:According to this page :

Typical power consumption for AMD Barton 2800+ : 53.7W.
Typical power consumption for P4 2.8Ghz : 68.4 - 69.7W depending on exact version.
They have no data for the TBred 2800+.

I don't think the Zalman "flower" cooler (AKA CNPS7000) exists for socket A.

Kostik wrote:I'm not sure the 6000 can cool a 2800+. But if there's a CNPS7000 for AMD, is there any reason left to buy intel ?

I have recently upgraded from a T-bird 1.33GHz to an XP2400+, both of which have a higher power usage than the barton 2800+. I use a Zalman flower CNPS6000 without any problems. And using a 120mm fan @ 5v it really is quiet.

Answering the original question, I don't think either AMD or Intel is easier to cool silently at 2800+/2.8GHz. It's more what you want in your system. With both P4 skt478 and socket-A nearing the end of thier life there is no longer a current motherboard that will take a significant CPU upgrade (ie 1.5 to 2x speed improvment).

What processor is easier to cool silently AMD or Intel ?

What processor is easier to cool silently AMD or Intel ?

Re: What processor is easier to cool silently AMD or Intel ?