Okay, people really need to get their heads removed from their rear ends. I am tired of hearing all of this crap about the prescott's thermal output. I must have seen at least a hundred articles criticizing the prescott, calling it an oven, too hot, blah blah.
To put an end to this crap from these AMD geek boys, here is some nice hard evidence.
From AMD's site, the Athlon 64, which includes models FX51, FX53, 3000+ through 3800+, all have a maximum thermal output of 89.0 watts.
source:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/cont...ec_Rev_ENG.pdf
http://www.amd.com/gb-uk/assets/cont...on_Rev_ENG.pdf
From Intel's site, the Intel 2.8E, 3.0E, 3.2E, (prescotts) all have a maximum thermal output of also 89.0 watts. The higher end chips, including the second revision 3.2E and 3.4E have a maximum thermal output of 103.0 watts.
source
ftp://download.intel.com/design/Pent...s/30056102.pdf (page 64)
So what was that you moron prescott critics? Oh you didn't know that your worthless 64 bit processors are exactly the same as the prescotts? And since the people who would be bashing the prescott's thermal output couldn't do the math, 103 watts is only a 15% increase for the higher end prescotts. (Which also have the performance increase of far more than 15%)
Another interesting point, AMD says flat out that any one of their crappy processors are going to die within seconds of being powered on without a heat sink. I wonder what Intel did about this; ignore the problem like AMD just did?
source:
http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/cont..._Rev05_ENG.pdf (page 4)
Of course not, how could you forget about the Thermal Monitor Feature from Intel. The PROCHOT# signal, in both the prescott and new LGA socket processors, is a feature that specifically prevents the chip from overheating. This feature throttles down the frequency of the chip to prevent any and all damage from occurring, even in a catastrophic failure of a heat sink. (it falling off)
source:
ftp://download.intel.com/design/Pent...s/30056401.pdf (page 24)
ftp://download.intel.com/design/Pent...s/30255301.pdf (page 30)
For now, I only have one question for all of the prescott heat bashers out there, what are you bashing morons? Processors get hot, they always have. AMD processors are exactly, to the watt, as hot as prescotts are. If any of you have any evidence to refute what is here, I would very, very gladly like to see it.
