• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Very Poor

Andy7

Andy7

Andy7

Associate
Joined
3 Jul 2014
Posts
626
Location
Cheshire
Why do Intel put terrible thermal paste on their processors?

Why do people have to take them apart and put better stuff on?

Shocking state of affairs from a so called "Huge Company"

Thoughts?
 
Andy7 said:
Why do Intel put terrible thermal paste on their processors?

Why do people have to take them apart and put better stuff on?

Shocking state of affairs from a so called "Huge Company"

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
the devils canyon are fine now. it was haswell and ivy bridge that were bad.
 
Jumper118 said:
the devils canyon are fine now. it was haswell and ivy bridge that were bad.
Click to expand...

Devils Canyon are not fine at all. Intel promised 5.0ghz on air with these chips and they fail big time. The average is 4.6 at best. Still using poor tim.
 
Shivy011 said:
They still aren't particularly great, sandy bridge was where it was at with soldered ihs
Click to expand...
i know ;)
Andy7 said:
Devils Canyon are not fine at all. Intel promised 5.0ghz on air with these chips and they fail big time. The average is 4.6 at best. Still using poor tim.
Click to expand...
that 5ghz on air thing was marketing bs. it was obvious that they weren't going to be that good. my pentium does 4.9ghz on air so i'm not complaining
 
Last edited:
Andy7 said:
Devils Canyon are not fine at all. Intel promised 5.0ghz on air with these chips and they fail big time. The average is 4.6 at best. Still using poor tim.
Click to expand...

A 30% overclock is "poor" these days? Bloody hell, I remember when 25% was considered a major achievement.
 
Aftermarket sales and keeping the rrp down.

If they fitted the best the, rrp would be higher and we wouldn't be able to 'mod' things.
 
Well whats the point in them doing a better job? They work good enough for the mild-moderate overclock, some will go higher some lower. They will still get bought regardless, after all, there is no competition.
 
At the end of the day, Intel could use chewing gum and their CPU's would still utterly annihilate AMD's cpu's, there is no competition at the moment, nor has there been since 2008.

All we can hope for is for Zen (AMD's next CPU architecture) to be amazing and destroy all intel's current offerings, though we'll have to wait for 2016 for these new CPUs's.
 
troops said:
I guess its more cost effective for them.
Click to expand...

It's not about cost. It's about die size.

I5 2500k die was big enough to solder. Ivy and on are not, not unless they are 6 core or more which gives a larger surface area.

They may use poor quality TIM but it's tested to last for years. Some TIMs dry out and fail to work properly after some time as they are fluid based and it dries out.

X79 are soldered also. Funny, didn't know the 4960x and 3970x were no longer good gaming chips....... :D
 
Dave2150 said:
At the end of the day, Intel could use chewing gum and their CPU's would still utterly annihilate AMD's cpu's, there is no competition at the moment, nor has there been since 2008.

All we can hope for is for Zen (AMD's next CPU architecture) to be amazing and destroy all intel's current offerings, though we'll have to wait for 2016 for these new CPUs's.
Click to expand...

And what in the name of all that is holy does that have to do with soldering/not soldering chips?

Jesus, any old chance for a rub eh? :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom