Are they heading the right way.

LukeyKid · 22-07-2014 03:22PM #1

Basically me and a couple of my friends were having a chat about Water cooling systems/CPU heating.

And my friend said why make a CPU that need to be cooled why not make one that does get hot. I said that wouldn't be possible, be he did have a good idea.

Basically if you were to increase the size of the CPU like say to the size of the phone be keep everything inside the CPU the same size just spread them out so the resistance is less so it does heat up as much.

That's what i'm asking would this work, if you where to increase the size of a CPU, by lets say x4, and then just spread everything out, so we now have less resistance, would this decrease the average temperature of the CPU, and also increase the performance of overclocking considering it is already running cooler then what it should be, because to be honest the size of the CPU to me doesn't bother me at all yes the motherboard will have to increase and yes the cost will increase but, just forgetting about all of that would the increased size help temperature ?

All comment are much appreciated.

Thanks Luke.

ZENER · 22-07-2014 03:34PM

There's a lot more to it than just heat, the biggest enemy after heat is capacitance and inductance which effect signal quality. Keeping surface areas small and tracks short cuts these effects down. Shorter tracks also means less resistance which equals less volt drop which means lower operating voltages thus less power thus less heat. If we were to make a CPU like a Pentium 2 work reliably at 2GHz the heat would be phenomenal !

It's because of miniaturisation we've been able to take processors into the GHz range compared to MHz back in the large cpu days.

Ken

draiochtanois · 22-07-2014 03:36PM

This post has been deleted.

Overheal · 22-07-2014 04:32PM

LukeyKid wrote: »

Basically me and a couple of my friends were having a chat about Water cooling systems/CPU heating.

And my friend said why make a CPU that need to be cooled why not make one that does get hot. I said that wouldn't be possible, be he did have a good idea.

Basically if you were to increase the size of the CPU like say to the size of the phone be keep everything inside the CPU the same size just spread them out so the resistance is less so it does heat up as much.

That's what i'm asking would this work, if you where to increase the size of a CPU, by lets say x4, and then just spread everything out, so we now have less resistance, would this decrease the average temperature of the CPU, and also increase the performance of overclocking considering it is already running cooler then what it should be, because to be honest the size of the CPU to me doesn't bother me at all yes the motherboard will have to increase and yes the cost will increase but, just forgetting about all of that would the increased size help temperature ?

All comment are much appreciated.

Thanks Luke.

THC is a hell of a drug

Besides all the reasons already mentioned, if you just "spread things out" you're effectively doing the job of the existing heat-spreader/heatsink/cooler, without the aforementioned benefits from making the transistors as tiny as possible.

For smaller builds you can always under-clock a processor to make it more thermally viable.

LukeyKid · 22-07-2014 06:14PM

ZENER wrote: »

There's a lot more to it than just heat, the biggest enemy after heat is capacitance and inductance which effect signal quality. Keeping surface areas small and tracks short cuts these effects down. Shorter tracks also means less resistance which equals less volt drop which means lower operating voltages thus less power thus less heat. If we were to make a CPU like a Pentium 2 work reliably at 2GHz the heat would be phenomenal !

It's because of miniaturisation we've been able to take processors into the GHz range compared to MHz back in the large cpu days.

Ken

draiochtanois wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Overheal wrote: »

THC is a hell of a drug

Besides all the reasons already mentioned, if you just "spread things out" you're effectively doing the job of the existing heat-spreader/heatsink/cooler, without the aforementioned benefits from making the transistors as tiny as possible.

For smaller builds you can always under-clock a processor to make it more thermally viable.

Well thanks for your answers i'm nothing special when it comes to how it all works and whats better and not it was just a discussion we had none of are experts on the subject, just want to no would it help with the heat.

From what i gathers from what ye said the reason we have CPU so fast is down to there size and how compact they are correct ?

Are they heading the right way.

Comments