Those dents are from the pair of vice grips used to rip the plate off the chip. Not literally, but a great handle for a delid. I heat the plate with a soldering torch for removal.
Yessir, I am completely aware we are not talking about the same thing. lol. I knew that when I told you a second time my reason to quote you in the first place.
... so why on earth did you continue discussing this, if you knew we weren't talking about the same thing? Is that how you generally discuss things with people, by inventing your own parameters for whatever is being discussed just so that you can invent a scenario in which you're right, rather than discuss the matter at hand?
Simply can't take Der Bauers word on the plate being to thick, or too small or too large without testing with other plates, It's simply an opinion made statement and nothing more.
But ... he never said that. He said
it's too thick.
Given its other dimensions. Not "assuming all variables are in play, this is universally too thick in all situations". He was talking about an actual AM5 CPU in an actual AM5 socket with an actual AM5 IHS. Within those parameters, a thinner IHS would be better. It's possible that a
larger IHS would
also be better, but
the socket can't fit a larger IHS, so that is entirely irrelevant.
My point is that I've tested various sized plates and don't think thinner would suffice given the nature of current gen chips and the very heavily packed transistor area which the die sizes are getting smaller and smaller. This makes less surface area, a thicker or perhaps just larger in general might actually work better.
Not relevant to this discussion.
No, you don't need to use an IHS plate to increase how tall a CPU sticks out from a board. They could force cooler manufacturers to accommodate this minor issue, which isn't AMD's issue, but the end users. I've not read any statement from AMD concerning the design. Again, these are mostly assumptions.
I mean ... can you read at all? Are you trying to?
In order to maintain cooler compatibility, they needed to make the CPU taller, which was done through a thick IHS. Yes, they could have forced cooler manufacturers to adjust their designs. That would have broken compatibility with AM4 coolers.
That is the whole damn point.
Unless someone can slap a statement here (From AMD themselves) as to WHY the IHS plate is thicker, then it's all fake news. After a quick google search, there's just a bunch of guessing going on there.....
It's not guesswork. We know they kept Z-height the same despite moving to a lower profile LGA socket. We know they made an unusually thick IHS for the socket size. We know they kept Z-height the same specifically to maintain cooler compatibility. This is not guesswork, this is putting together a two-piece puzzle with an instruction manual and arrows indicating where the pieces fit together.
CPU doesn't consume hardly any power a all. Super inefficient really. Most of the energy is dissipated as a heat, not being used.
An engine for example on average is about 30% efficient. All that fuel used and the rest dissipated by heat and cooled 3 ways. Water, Air and Oil.
This is utter and complete nonsense, and the comparison is fundamentally invalid. A CPU is not a combustion engine, nor does it produce kinetic energy. This is not comparable. A CPU is always close to 100% efficient, as its work output is not a meaningful physical change in anything else (save for signalling to RAM, storage and other I/O, which are all very low power compared to the power draw of a CPU (yes, RAM, SSDs and AICs consume their own power, but that power does not come from the CPU - the only power leaving the CPU as electricity is it's I/O signals)). For a CPU to be inefficient in this way, it would need to turn its electricity into something else than heat, as heat is a byproduct of the computation process. The specific ways we convert electric energy into thermal energy is how computation takes place.
A combustion engine is inefficient because we're unable to extract all the energy from the combustion process as kinetic energy, useful work - mainly because there are multiple forms of energy conversion going on, with fuel energy converted to both kinetic and thermal energy at the same time. As you say, that balance stops around 30% kinetic (though it could theoretically be increased through recapturing heat and turning it back into electricity and powering an ancillary electric engine or similar). The heat is waste, i.e. inefficiency, because the heat isn't useful, and isn't a result of the kinetic energy being converted further, but is explicitly
energy converted into a not useful form. In a CPU, the only energy conversion happening is electric to thermal - but crucially, we don't care about the energy conversion - we're not looking to produce a useful form of energy. That's not the desired output. The desired output is computation. Thus, even when
all that energy turns into heat, it's still near 100% efficient - because the fact that the energy turns into heat
doesn't play into the question of efficiency. We're not looking to produce any other form of energy than thermal energy. Movement is what you want from a combustion engine, making any waste heat
not movement, and thus inefficient. Computation is what you want from a computer, and as heat is a byproduct of computation, the two do not factor into an efficiency relation in the same way - it's not a question of
either getting computation
or heat, but both at the same time. Efficiency for a CPU is
purely about
how much power you need to do a given amount of computation - how much work you can get out of your energy, not how much of it is creating some waste byproduct.
AMD's TDP is utterly meaningless to power consumption
Yes, by design. It's not meant to describe power consumption at all. The problem is that it's used as a "power draw class" designation for marketing, despite this not being what the term actually means. I'd blame AMD's marketing, but, well, we all know just how baffling their decisions can be at times.
) making testing more problematic. I'm not on the latest BIOS/UEFI at the moment and maybe I need to be in order to do this properly.
