Why Pentium?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Talal Itani
  • Start date Start date
I feel sorry for you not being able to even pick a fan properly,

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

I CLEARLY SAID REPEATEDLY THAT I USE THE BOXED
FAN THAT THE CPU MANUFACTURER SUPPLIES.

The cpu manufacturer also has enough of a clue to include
thermal shutdown in the cpu so that IF THAT fan fails,
you dont lose the most expensive component in the system.
as that has to be the case given this insistance that it'll fail prematurely.

That last is a bare faced lie. Getting desperate now, child.
 
It is truely amazing that so many people don't even know the
basics of setting up a reliable system. Fan tech is not new
and it is truely ludicrous that some resist learning how to
do it right and instead just continue arguing. Let us know
if you eventually tire of having to replace fans and feel
guilty about causing system downtime.

Have fun explaining how come even amd includes thermal shutdown now.

AFTER they decided to supply the fan as well as the cpu too.
If you fit a fan not expected to last > 10 years you are the
CAUSE of a failure. I don't mean expected on average,
on average the lifespan might be twice as long.

Pathetic, really.
 
I feel sorry for you not being able to even pick a fan
properly, as that has to be the case given this insistance
that it'll fail prematurely.

I don't think anybody can guarantee a mechanical device like a fan
does not fail unexpectedly within a short time frame. Insisting that
you can obtain such a model that will NEVER fail within say the 2~3
years a system is useful, is really stretching it.

I've seen one case of Intel fan fail within two weeks. I'm pretty sure
Intel did not pick a fan for their boxed processor expecting the
useful lifespan of the system to be less than 10 days. :P
 
but when speaking of good
quality fans, they are rated for 50-100K hours and there is
no reasonable expectation that such a fan will fail within a
decade.

The MBTF hours are not meant to imply any single fan will not fail
within 50K hours. It is just a statistical tool to allow estimation of
the expected failure rate within a period of time for a number of
installations. If you have 10 servers with 5 such 50K MTBF fans
inside, you will expect to see on the average, 1 fan failure every 42
days or so. Although if I didn't misunderstand it, most failures will
cluster towards the beginning and end. But in no case would it be
reasonable nor realistic to expect to see zero or minimum fan failure
for the next 5years or so.
 
If intake fan suck dust from the dusty room, all fan sooner or later will be
clogged with dust and stop working. Also, as I know, if you do not clean
inside of de box with the "leafblower" regularly, radiator on the cpu will
be also clogged and useless.

Boba Vankufer
 
Boba & Ilinka said:
If intake fan suck dust from the dusty room, all fan sooner or later will be clogged
with dust and stop working.

Wrong. The bigger fans never stop working
because they are clogged with dust.
Also, as I know, if you do not clean inside of de box with the "leafblower" regularly,
radiator on the cpu will be also clogged and useless.

Thats why any decent cpu has a thermal shutdown, stupid.
 
If you fit a fan not expected to last > 10 years you are the
CAUSE of a failure. I don't mean expected on average, on
average the lifespan might be twice as long.

10 to 20 years???!!!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!
 
I don't think anybody can guarantee a mechanical device like a fan
does not fail unexpectedly within a short time frame. Insisting that
you can obtain such a model that will NEVER fail within say the 2~3
years a system is useful, is really stretching it.

With 100% certainty? No. With enough certainty that I
don't need an overheat shutdown mechanism? Yes. With
enough certainty that there are many other failure points.

I will note again that I did not suggest NOT to have a
shutdown mechanism though, and have repeated that multiple
times already. My statement was that it should not be
considered _before_ selection of high quality fans.
I've seen one case of Intel fan fail within two weeks.

I've never suggested Intel's fans were good. It's actually
rather bizarre that Intel contracts out to decent fan
manufacturers but redoes their excellent work to the end of
an inferior fan. There is another reason though, that Intel
would rather provide a mediocre hunk of metal under the fan
such that the fan has to run at higher RPM. Only more
recently had they even moved to a thicker fan, not as a
matter of ensuring lifespan but that they simply needed the
higher air pressure to continue using mediocre 'sinks.
I'm pretty sure
Intel did not pick a fan for their boxed processor expecting the
useful lifespan of the system to be less than 10 days. :P

Certainly not, but it doesn't change the issue of choosing
quality fans, rather demonstrating it evermoreso.
 
"Sooner or later" ALL parts of a computer will fail.
Key is that the failure is not unexpected, premature when
the system is needed and still within it's viable lifespan.
It's rather easy to make choices that allow this instead of
downtime, but one has to make those choices actively. Any
kid can put part A in slot B but any kid is not competent to
build systems reliable for serious use. Fans and other
mechanical parts are a necessary concern.

Let's do an experiment, shall we? Given my audience here, I'll try to dumb
this down as much as I can.

You specify a fan that you are sure will run for 5 years without failure.
I'll buy 10 of them, and connect them to a test fixture. This test fixture
will supply 12 volts to all 10 of the fans; for the sake of argument,
let's say that the 12 volts is infallible. There is a circuit (also
infallible) that monitors the RPM of all 10 fans, and will output a signal
that triggers a radio transmitter upon any one of the fans having failed.
This radio transmitter sends a special encrypted signal that activates a
small explosive device that has been embedded in your walnut-sized brain.

While this may have little effect on your cognitive abilities (such as
they are) will you take the challenge?
 
So you too lack the basic knowledge to set up a reliable
system. Failing eventually is not the issue, it's the total
lifespan, whether than failure occurs while system is in use
or has been replaced. Nobody cares if the fan might've
failed had it ran another 4 years if the system was already
so old that it's been retired and sent to the dump. The
importance is then fan selection such that the fan does not
fail while system was needed. This is not a hard thing to
do but apparently you never bothered to try.

He didn't get it. I'll summon a tattoo artist, stat. When he's done,
dimwit, proceed to the nearest mirror and read your sloped forehead of
yours till enlightenment penetrates that thick cranium of yours.
 
10 to 20 years???!!!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!


Yes!!!

I know WTF I'm doing when it comes to fans. Used to sell
them too and haul off dead systems/fans from the PC shops I
sold 'em to, so I also gained a lot of experience about
what DOESN'T work so well, but it's beside the point- If
you want longer lived fans you need to start using lower
RPM, thicker fans, dual ball-bearing fans for non-vertical
orientations and higher heat areas, certain brands, etc,
etc.... these and other tips I've given for many years
because they do promote long fan lifespan. I didn't just
put these details on a dart board and type out whatever I'd
hit, they actually WORK... at least for CPU fans, the space
constraints on chipsets and video cards make them shorter
lived but still the same techniques can yield multiple times
the lifespan you'd have otherwise.

You'd have to make the effort though, instead of thinking
nothing can be done. Oh well.
 
kony said:
a?n?g?e?l@lovergirl.lrigrevol.moc.com (The little lost angel) wrote
With 100% certainty? No. With enough certainty that I
don't need an overheat shutdown mechanism? Yes. With
enough certainty that there are many other failure points.
I will note again that I did not suggest NOT to have a
shutdown mechanism though, and have repeated that
multiple times already. My statement was that it should
not be considered _before_ selection of high quality fans.

Been there, done that, by choosing to use the boxed fan thanks.
I've never suggested Intel's fans were good. It's actually
rather bizarre that Intel contracts out to decent fan
manufacturers but redoes their excellent work to the end of
an inferior fan. There is another reason though, that Intel
would rather provide a mediocre hunk of metal under the
fan such that the fan has to run at higher RPM. Only more
recently had they even moved to a thicker fan, not as a
matter of ensuring lifespan but that they simply needed the
higher air pressure to continue using mediocre 'sinks.

AMD didnt even bother to supply a boxed fan for a long time,
WHEN THEY DIDNT HAVE THERMAL SHUTDOWN.
Certainly not, but it doesn't change the issue of choosing
quality fans, rather demonstrating it evermoreso.

Out in china yet, child ?
 
kony said:
Yes!!!

I know WTF I'm doing when it comes to fans. Used to sell
them too and haul off dead systems/fans from the PC shops I
sold 'em to, so I also gained a lot of experience about
what DOESN'T work so well, but it's beside the point- If
you want longer lived fans you need to start using lower
RPM, thicker fans, dual ball-bearing fans for non-vertical
orientations and higher heat areas, certain brands, etc,
etc.... these and other tips I've given for many years
because they do promote long fan lifespan. I didn't just
put these details on a dart board and type out whatever I'd
hit, they actually WORK... at least for CPU fans, the space
constraints on chipsets and video cards make them shorter
lived but still the same techniques can yield multiple times
the lifespan you'd have otherwise.

You'd have to make the effort though, instead of thinking
nothing can be done. Oh well.

Or you could have enough of a clue to include a
thermal shutdown in the cpu so that it doesnt
get killed when a less than ideal fan gets used.

Thank christ you get no say what so ever on cpu design, ever.
 
The MBTF hours are not meant to imply any single fan will not fail
within 50K hours. It is just a statistical tool to allow estimation of
the expected failure rate within a period of time for a number of
installations. If you have 10 servers with 5 such 50K MTBF fans
inside, you will expect to see on the average, 1 fan failure every 42
days or so.

First, you'd have to be assuming the failure rate was
independant of the number of operating hours which it won't
be. Second you have not calculated for a MTBF of 50K above.
Third if the bathtub curve you propose next holds true, the
majority of failures would be clustered towards the 50K hour
mark rather than dispersed inbetween. Forth I hardly ever
use 50K fans, they're almost always 100K. Fifth you'd be
assuming 24/7 operation which isn't necessarily applicable
to anything but a server, but many servers tend to use two
distinctly different fan setups- either 120mm in the PSU
exhaust or in shorter rackmounts, arrays that "could" be
small diameter fans. I will grant you that in all my
projections about fan lifespan thus far, I have completely
ignored the small diameter fans in rackmounts that run at
very high RPM. On these particular fans, they should be
swapped out every year or two, even more often on a valuable
(function) system.
Although if I didn't misunderstand it, most failures will
cluster towards the beginning and end.

With some gear it's possible, though with good QC and sample
testing this can be mitigated.
But in no case would it be
reasonable nor realistic to expect to see zero or minimum fan failure
for the next 5years or so.

Depends on sample size, it could indeed be reasonable if for
example, any fans making a strange noise or vibration were
immediately discarded. Another real example, a few years
back I bought three cases of a specific NMB fan, a model I'd
not bought previously nor since then so they are known
unique and can be discriminated against other NMBs I've
bought, and none of which have failed yet AFAIK... but quite
a few of the systems they're in have been brought back for
other reasons like spyware/viri removal, OS or hardware
upgrade, etc., plus I have several of the fans here in
systems too. I can't be 100% certain that none have failed,
but there is no evidence of it and I do tend to hear about
sytems... usually spyware but occasionally the ones with
popped caps because I got stung on a bunch of Gigabyte
boards from the P3 era, ended up selling 3 different
versions of their boards at the time, all with the bad caps.
@#$% Tom's Hardware liked them, I should have known not to
trust a quick review.

What I know about fans I know from real world experience
with good, and bad, brands. I've hauled off enough dead PCs
and relubed enough fans to have a really good grasp of which
ones stand the test of time. That doesn't mean I can expect
a 100.00% success rate, but where is there a guarantee of
100% in ANY part you'd buy? I'd be a lot more comfortable
guaranteeing against CPU fan failure than motherboard, PSU,
video card (excluding the fan, or rather, presuming fan
didn't fail).

I can understand when someone doesn't believe it, but not
when someone doesn't try to attain long fan lifespan if
they're only getting 2-3 years as mentioned previously in
the thread because that is a very short span of time even
running 24/7.
 
Ed said:
I think Intel's slowdown feature is a joke, sure it might be useful but
to me it seems more like they were just covering up a flaw in a badly
designed CPU.

Any CPU will burn up if it loses all external cooling, so providing
for CPU shutdown if the temperature climbs too high makes perfect
sense, and is an essential feature.
 
Conor said:
You'd only lose more than 10 minutes or so work.

That depends on what you've been doing.
Decent software autosaves periodically.

If you don't need automatic shutdown for overtemperature, why do you
need automatic saving of files?
 
Don't worry. Factory testing is done at higher temperatures than
you'll ever use, unless your heatsink fan stops.

In that case, there's no reason for me to heat-stress to processor to
see if it still works, even if it won't hurt the processor.
 
David said:
It's also interesting to note that when speaking of ion migration texts
will point out it can occur 'at modest temperatures of 100C', well outside
our 'lock up' discussion, but maybe not outside an internal hot spot. And,
of course, the Mil Spec temperature range goes to 125C.

The default alarm termperature on the GPU of my Nvidia graphics card
is 125° C, which somewhat surprised me (seems awfully high). It
usually idles at 47° C, at gets up to around 60° when some games run.
 
Back
Top