Tejas In Depth.
Posted by: Newsfactory on: 05/08/2004 01:26 PM [ Print | 6 comment(s) ] · 1232 views
Why did Intel stop their Tejas plans, what's behind it all? What will come instead?
Datafuse takes a look at the past from Intel's Pentium 4 4th generation CPU and see where things went wrong.
Datafuse takes a look at the past from Intel's Pentium 4 4th generation CPU and see where things went wrong.
Comment
|
MagamiAKO Unregistered |
#53519 Posted on: 05/08/2004 03:56 PM
In depth? It's just this guy's personal ranting about how "Intel sucks because they were going to roll out BTX and Tejas!" First of all, it's well known that ATX simply was not designed to handle the types of systems we have right now. Just look at how many fans you need and the kinds of heatsinks you need within the system. It's incredible. I mean we're moving to combined heatpipe/fan solutions, water cooling, we went from basic aluminum to solid copper. It's simply amazing the kinds of cooling setups that are coming out. We need a solution to this. I think BTX is a good move period because they've taken time to research different methods of helping our systems cool down through airflow dynamics as opposed to throwing more fans into a case. |
Comment
|
BetrayerX Unregistered |
#53523 Posted on: 05/08/2004 06:30 PM
The only reason a BTX solution is good is because you can place a 1Kg cooper heatsink on the motherboard without causing much stress on it. Airflow wise, ATX is better. |
Comment
|
MagamiAKO Unregistered |
#53526 Posted on: 05/08/2004 07:09 PM
How so? From the previews I've seen on anandtech, Intel had spent quite a bit of time researching how airflow affects parts within a system. ATX was simply not designed for what we do with it today. |
Comment
|
danny Unregistered |
#53529 Posted on: 05/08/2004 09:32 PM
What??? BTX is designed for Presshot no other CPU need BTX today and since Netburst is dying nobody is going to need it in the near future either |
Comment
|
FaaR Unregistered |
#53533 Posted on: 05/08/2004 11:21 PM
ATX was created almost 10 years ago. Back then, a hot CPU burned maybe 15-20W, it could be cooled PASSIVELY with a pretty small heatsink by today's standards and the only fan you had as a rule in a chassis was in the power supply. Graphics cards weren't any major power hogs at all, they needed no more than a couple watts at most. ATX has no solution whatsoever in its design to cool today's GPUs, there are no air inlets anywhere near them in standard specs. BTX is meant to address this, as well as a host of other issues and improvements, including small form factor support and such. Strapping a kilogram of copper as a CPU cooler is not the ONLY reason for going for BTX, don't be silly. ATX has served out its usefulness, just as AT had all those years ago. |
Comment
|
danny Unregistered |
#53545 Posted on: 05/09/2004 06:17 PM
You are!!! BTX is actually making it harder to cool the GPUs not the opposite!!!!!!!!!!!!! beacuse the CPU its the first thing to get cooled with fresh air its a Intel solution to cool theres dying netburst CPUs do you think Intel gives a shit about hot GPUs its all about cooling Presshot And dont compare 10 year old ATX specs with a modern ATX chassi moron!! |
