KVR Audio

rcat · Post by **rcat** » Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:56 pm

Or, why am I not suprised. Google "Ivy bridge heat issues" to find out the details. I hate it when companys pull this sh*t. It wouldn't be so bad except that these are their flagship products. Intel says it "should be ok unless you run sustained heavy loads or overclock", WTF? What do you all think?

filter303 · Post by **filter303** » Fri Jun 01, 2012 10:31 pm

I am glad I didn't wait for the IB but went with the Sandy-E instead. Impatience can be useful sometimes.

ATS · Post by **ATS** » Fri Jun 01, 2012 10:33 pm

rcat wrote:Or, why am I not suprised. Google "Ivy bridge heat issues" to find out the details. I hate it when companys pull this sh*t. It wouldn't be so bad except that these are their flagship products. Intel says it "should be ok unless you run sustained heavy loads or overclock", WTF? What do you all think?

If that's true they should not sell processors that can be overclocked (and charge extra for them).

xh3rv · Post by **xh3rv** » Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:13 pm

It's a screw-up, but also a clear sign they're moving away from blazing desktop/server stuff towards low CPU, more portable or mobile types of things IMO.

I sort of wonder, was it a known or an unknown screw-up? The fabrication changes in Ivy Bridge are fairly radical even in the world of hardware, creating more problems than usual for the Intel strategy of keeping fabrication and CPU design on a 'tick/tock' cycle. The thermal paste stuff may be a complete mistake for this specific configuration of fab and CPU, but might not be for the next or next several things. I can sort of imagine scenarios where that would present some ugly decisions.

camsr · Post by **camsr** » Sat Jun 02, 2012 12:01 am

Ivy Bridge's thermal paste was a bad decision. There is very little market for it as a consequence.

Some people have removed the stock thermal paste and replaced it with aftermarket paste. The result was amazing, cutting heat by several celsius. Also, Ivy Bridge has been successfully clocked to over 7ghz. The chip itself seems to be a winner.

But the situation had me asking questions about their decision to use a different conductor. Cost cutting is not so ludicrious, but this screams of cheap. They could be hiding something related to the chip's durability or electrical sensitivity, but it wouldn't make sense to use paste that made the processor run hotter, effectively shortening it's life span. It really is a brain boggler.

The decision could have been an effort to use green materials, but seriously, the quantity is so small. Maybe they saved money bureaucratically by using it. No idea myself, but it's something to check on.

mandolarian · Post by **mandolarian** » Sat Jun 02, 2012 5:20 am

Although they could have selected a better performing TIM, the sloppy, inconsistent application that is most upsetting. The tolerances between the heatspreader and chip need to be better. Might just be a teething issue in their process. Or a trend.

On the conspiracy front, some claim that Intel deliberately created IvyB as a hot overclocker so she wouldn't embarrass the X79 family.

jupiter8 · Post by **jupiter8** » Sat Jun 02, 2012 8:11 am

I think this is going to be a very expensive mistake for Intel. Just looking at myself i might hopefully get a new CPU soonish. I noticed the Ive Bridges were pretty much the same price as the Sandy Bridges so might as well get an Ivy, cause they run cooler,right ? Or do they ? So the way i see it either they fix this (costs a lot,recall and possibly even exchanging the ones they already sold) or they don't in which case i suspect the sales will take a big hit.

So what would you do if you were looking for a new CPU ? Hold off until they fix the problem ? Get a Sandy Bridge instead ? Maybe even wait for the next gen Ivy (or whatever it's called then) ? None very pretty prospect for Intel.

egbert · Post by **egbert** » Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:03 am

This could be something that is improved with later steppings but I agree that Ivy Bridge is pretty disappointing. It may <ahem> Haswell reign until September. The sooner the next gen gets here the better.

camsr · Post by **camsr** » Sun Jun 03, 2012 6:37 am

Haswell will have instruction level code that makes convolution faster, so it is probably best to hold out a little longer unless you must have Ivy Bridge.

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Wed Jun 06, 2012 8:42 pm

I guess they should have called it the thorny bridge.

It's been a while since I've even looked at computer stuff but what a pisser for those in need to a new machine.

Intel cuts corners on Ivy Bridge to save money. Suprise!