[cmeacham98]

Mining cards are run near always, while gaming cards are usually pushed only a small number of hours per day.

I have no data to back this up but anecdotally this makes a huge difference in wear.

[pantalaimon]

GPUs are not mechanical parts (well save for the fans but those can be replaced). I would imagine thermal stress from heating and cooling would be the biggest issue - you don't get that under constant load.

[iforgotpassword]

Heat = bad for silicon. Also electromigration. And probably a couple other effects I don't know about.

[R0b0t1]

Heat is bad, but MTTF at usually achievable temperatures is hundreds or thousands of years.

Electromigration matters on the order of 100 years.

[namibj]

Well, tell that to my chipset's SATA controllers (Sandbridge generation).

Intel messed up their life expectancy calculations, and thus they died after 2~3 years. I think 2 are still alive.

[pantalaimon]

The Sandy Bridge SATA issue did make big waves back then and Intel did a recall IIRC.

Only the B2 stepping of chipsets should be affected by this tough.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/4142/intel-discovers-bug-in-6...

https://techreport.com/news/20326/intel-finds-flaw-in-sandy-...

[namibj]

I guess I should have gotten a replacement board.

I'll probably just upgrade to Zen3 soon, so it'd not be worth the effort (the machine in question is off and in storage).

[o-__-o]

Looks like you should have put a fan on that chipset. Like your GPU, which runs at extreme temperatures for extended periods of time!

[namibj]

It was cooled by the OEM config. And the chipset did get nice airflow.

[locuscoeruleus]

Huge difference in wear, yes. But not in the direction you think, I think. Warming up an cooling down is more damaging for a card than running constant temperature. It 'jiggles' parts more.