[KingMachiavelli]

Why? 100c is typically the max nominal safe operating temp for CPUs. It would be a waste of resources to add additional cooling to computers not intended to run these type of workloads.

Prime95 is basically a synthetic workload so it makes little sense to optimize for it.

[bserge]

Yeah, the thing is it doesn't only happen in prime95. Nowadays it's any prolonged use where the CPU is fully used, like video editing or gaming. Give an inch and they'll take a mile, as the saying goes.

Temperature junction throttling is a last resort. No laptop should rely on it in normal operation. Of course, both HP/Dell/Lenovo/etc and Intel benefit from increased sales so they don't care.

[d110af5ccf]

Counterpoint - during typical (consumer) usage hardware spends most of the time idle. Hardware capable of sustaining the maximum workload indefinitely is likely to have a lower maximum in practice. Unsustainable bursts are likely to provide higher overall performance for typical workloads, so it makes sense to optimize the hardware design for those.

[bserge]

I guess, but workstation class laptops still overheat, so again, piss poor design.

[brokenmachine]

I'd be willing to bet that a "workstation class" laptop that had sufficient cooling to run continuous benchmarks without overheating would be quite unpopular in the market, because of the weight/size burden.

[gear54rus]

How did you determine that 100c is safe?

[icefo]

The manufacturer did and put it in the datasheet of the CPU

[j605]

In extension to what the other commenter said, critical temperature that is listed is usually higher than the maximum operating temperature so it is safe to run at the maximum.

[bserge]

It is safe only because it throttles heavily. Shutdown temperature is just 5 degrees higher btw.

At 100 the processor is at high risk of damage, which is why there's a built-in throttling mechanism.

Just imo, if it was safe it would be running at full speed (or at least max base clock) at that temperature.

As someone else said, they're made for burst operation these days, but again, that does not excuse manufacturers using subpar cooling.

I can see the majority is fine with it, but I'm not. A 15-25% failure rate in 2 years would make any other product a rotten lemon. But somehow it's acceptable for computers. Probably because people replace them every 2 years regardless, which is another insanity on its own.

[bick_nyers]

I personally run my hardware for longevity (larger PSU, good temperature ranges, minimal overclocking, etc.) and upgrade every two years but I migrate my tech. downwards. Example: Gaming Rig -> Misc. Project/Guest PC -> NAS/Media Box. Working in tech. you very often make a salary that allows you to upgrade all of these rigs every year with no real consequences, but I think if nothing else we should be trying to reduce tech. waste. Semiconductor manufacturing has a large carbon footprint just like everything else.