sethmatrix7Their net income is down year over year over year over year. www.investing.com/equities/intel-corp-financial-summary

Losing apple wasn't good, and responding by making even more inefficient processors relative to their competition couldn't have helped.

phanbueySo the reason they use a huge amount of power is if they're trying to cool something the pelt isn't really kitted to handle (like a 300W processor). -- if you use it say on a larger area on the side of the rad -- or somewhere else in the loop -- like separate area/block in the loop that's hooked up to a heatpipe cooler etc. -- essentially giving you another 100W or so of chiller effect when needed, and more surface area for cooling, and the ability to chill water on demand to keep it just above the dew point.

The problem with trying to cool a 300W cpu with a pelt is it will use a monsterous amount of power, and it will still suffer from the "shim" effect (where the transfer of double thermal paste makes it even less effective). As it gets saturated it does the pelt thing where it becomes basically useless.

Actually the CPUs that would benefit the most from a 125W pelt on the chip is a 7800X3D -- something that doesn't generate more than 90W of heat load but LOVES getting a colder contact plate.

trsttteThe efficiency calculus is the same, if you add it to the radiator it will still consume a stupid ammount of power for the cooling it will provide even if you change the scale from 300W to 100W or 10W, the thing is that using it on the cpu it can work as a negative thermal resistence facilitating thermal transfer, using it on the rad why not just use a bigger rad?

And if your answer is for going sub ambient, just use a chiller that uses far less power

unwind-protectIn all seriousness. To get a clocking advantage you have to go way below zero (either F or C, ideally to -100). But if you go below water freezing point you have to deal with condensation, and that kills the fun for most people and most applications.

AssimilatorThere's nothing wrong with cutting divisions that have zero chance of ever being profitable or useful, or are only tangentially related to your primary product focus. Far too many megacorporations have suffered the death of a thousand cuts from the impact of having far too many R&D departments that are mostly each someone's pet project. TEC's usefulness is inherently limited by the laws of physics and there's not much Intel can do to change those, so really the question that should be asked is why the company ever went down this path in the first place - and apparently someone in Intel management finally did.

Six_Times"was not widely embraced"

yet another great engineering technology ignored. sad