Actually you don't understand.
You make a true statement, but fail in two regards. The biggest thing is your assumption about how much waste energy it consumes.
There are some references to Cobalt out there you can find. Bottom line though, it is a better conductor at sub 20nm than copper. This is because of the electro migration problem, basically that loss becomes an issue.
Less resistance = less heat which means greater density can be achieved.
Now, it may be that a chip running at 250W still produces the same heat. However, if that chip is getting 30% more work done, that is the win.
The argument that it is going to produce the same heat is sort of like the EPA / HP argument I see about cars these days. Cars are not getting significantly more MPG than they did in the mid to late 80s, that's a fact. However, they get slightly better MPG and have double the power. So yes, they are far far more efficient, we are just using that efficiency to make them go faster, not to save gas.
The same thing is likely to be true of Cobalt.
It is not a "Maybe"
It is a fact.
A chip consuming 250W IS giving 250W of heat
There is no physical work done inside the CPU
ALL energy eventually change into heat inside your magic cobalt CPU.
And cobalt also has 1/4 of thermal conductivity of copper
So the heat produced inside the CPU will be much more "trapped" within.
It is Physics.
You cannot deny Physics.
You pack 250W into a smaller die
The heat density goes sky high
Your magic cobalt won't save you there
These new CPUs will most likely suffer with temperature spikes causing frequency drops.
Just like how Ryzen 3000 series suffered when they implement N7 node for the very first time.
How Intel's gonna use that 250W of energy is another story.
You might
HOPE Intel suddenly produces the most efficient CPU on the planet.
But look at Intel's track record.
They DO NOT tune their mainstream CPU towards the efficient side.
But instead,
They pump whatever current they could find.
Yes. But when you make "wires" out of a material that is a better conductor, you can get by with running less voltage through it.
Agreed
I think the voltage headroom are most likely to be used to compensate the frequency lost going 14nm to 10nm.
They will suffer the hotspot problem same as Ryzen 3000/5000
Combined with the trash windows scheduler (Already proven by how bad the EOL Lakefield performed)
I don't have high hopes for their first gen 10nm desktop parts.
