MagicBox

I don't think the need for solid aircooling and extending overclocking range with watercooling will go away on the smaller process processors.

It may seem like that at this moment, simply because the current CPU architecture hasn't changed much apart from some more cache and architecture optimizations. The Penryns and Yorkfields are just Conroes 'n Kentsfields on a smaller, more efficient manufacturing process.

This however, will change with the upcoming generations of Intel processors. The Nehalem is going to be an entirely new, modular architecture that would allow for easy core expansion up to 8 cores for the planned top model.

A smaller process allows for more transistors per mm2 die space. This simply translates to being able to put way more functionality onto the same space. You bet Intel is not going to use the saved die space just to keep dissipation down. No. They will use it to slam 16... 32... eventually 80 cores onto that die. I've lost the link, but on premature feature chards of the next gen Intel processors still show a TDP of a whopping 130 watts on stock! Just imagine if you're going to overclock that.

No.. air and watercooling is here to stay for the performance segment of the processor market.

Masterchief3k

HA HA! Penryn FAIL!


I've still got my single core 90 nm proc though....i want a 65 nm.

__________________
NewEgg WISH LIST (For completing a new build)
CompTIA A+ Certified Professional Since May 30, 2007.
New CPU-Z Validation
GPU-Z Validation
I did Latty's Linux Challenge and I now love Linux!

GigaByte

Sorry but that is not true, dispite the stuck DTS and picky voltage tolerances these chips are made of gold.

__________________
IHS Removals, How to do it, Should I do it, and the Facts!
How To: Get more from your X1900XT(X) OCZ RAM owners club!Intel Penryn (45nm) Thread
GIGABYTE P35-DS4 Thread ß₤ứə Çřёώ

terraprime

question is if they can do this for cpus...then why in the hell is it that GPU are getting hotter and more power hungry if cpus are going in the opposite direction?

__________________
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=156653 CPUz Validated 2.91 ghz @ 1.39Vcore and a crazy HTT of 1290+ lol

Rebuild OLD sys: A64 3200+ @ 2.4ghz in a ECS A939 V1.0 MB with 1gb of PC3200 ran at PC3800.


http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=376310
My FIrst Quad @ 3.2ghz with a .75Vcore increase.

Alfwich

$ $ $,

Thats my guess.

Me_XMan

Running E8400 4.05GHz at 1.4V

__________________
REP+ me if you feel my post is worthy. Thanks.

Infinitegrim

There is no reason to go above 3.6Ghz. Which also means there is no reason to go above 1.28vcore I have set my e7200 between 3.6Ghz and 4.0Ghz and there is absolutly no difference other then in benchmarks

__________________
Thinking of buying Microsoft Hardware? Think Again!
My 6800PPD Folding Rig!

VCheeZ

i loled a little

__________________

Selling/Trading DLP Projector, 360, coolers!

sgtdisturbed47

Running my E8400 at 4.3 GHz with 1.33v, I say that's pretty nice. I'm not too worried about voltage limits, since this is as fast as I need it to go.

__________________
Using G.Skill DDR3 1066 OCed to 1443 @ 9-9-9-21
*-Demystifying the 4870 X2-*
Carlos Slim has officially killed CompUSA. Oh, thanks for ruining one of my favorite stores. I will never forget you, CompUSA. Newegg.com is now my PRIMARY source for computer parts.
My Crysis Benchmark Results
3Dmark06: 18,616
"I guess this is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object."