Why do you believe that temp is important for hard disks but not for
CPUs? Same silicon, isn't it?
That's just it, it's not "same silicon".
Drives are comprised of many other materials, mechanical
stress, wear, and dependencies in addition to power
regulation. Intel will be incorporating power regulation on
their CPUs in the future, and we may then see CPUs more
susceptible to heat too, but even so it's likely higher than
HDD limit mentioned previously of 55C. 55C is not a limit
seen on modern silicon, clearly the HDD limit is other
componentry. For the time being, the core logic chips on
CPUs are not generally seen to be the failure points, save
for some random manufacturing error like a bad batch of
epoxy in their casings.
this is in addition to the issue LM&C mentioned, that the
average lifespan of a CPU is far beyond that reasonable for
a system in general, that the CPU is among the parts
expected to be longest lasting while the drive is far from
it. Further, "many" people would suffer far less loss from
a CPU failure than a drive failure (even discounting a
presumption that people aren't making regular backups like
they should).