3 ms·

The article has a case study suggesting that is not true. It also says that real laptops with this are due this year. It also has an explanation of why it can e

The article has a case study suggesting that is not true. It also says that real laptops with this are due this year. It also has an explanation of why it can extract more heat from a smaller surface area than a traditional heatsink in the video. The diagram says 'flowing air reaches the same temperature as the heat spreader' so this is apparently not a limitation at all. Of course, who knows if all these things are true, but this is a shallow dismissal.

FpUser 4y ago
>"The diagram says 'flowing air reaches the same temperature as the heat spreader' So both will happily stay at CPU melting point. They say that - "The Mini can dissipate up to 5 Watts of heat, while the larger Pro models can dissipate up to 10 Watts." which is definitely not enough to run performance laptops on sustained load. >"but this is a shallow dismissal." See the above. I think it is not dismissal that is shallow.
- stubish 4y ago
  The PCWorld video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGxTnGEAx3E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGxTnGEAx3E) discusses how a vapor chamber should be used between the heat source and the cooler to distribute heat evenly to the device. And that performance laptops are targeted for future generations of device, requiring upwards of 100 watts of cooling.
  - FpUser 4y ago
    I know how vapor chamber etc works what is your point? It all comes down to having X square centimeters to dissipate X watts at Z temperature and scaled to some number. As for what they plan to have in the future - it will be believable when they show how they're going to achieve it
    - stubish 4y ago
      You can apparently cool better using this device than traditional fans and heatsinks. Per the video, the high velocity air hitting the cooling surface vertically at high speed is much more efficient at removing heat than low speed blowers, as it punches through the layer of insulating air that forms on the surface of traditional heat sinks and the air takes away heat at almost its maximum thermal capacity, so you need much less cooling surface area.
      - FpUser 4y ago
        >"You can apparently cool better using this device than traditional fans and heatsinks" Traditional fans and heatsinks have no problem dissipating 100's of watts. Wake me up when this contraption will do the same. >"high velocity air hitting the cooling surface vertically at high speed is much more efficient at removing heat than low speed blowers" Except that traditional blowers operate on immense surface are hence dwarf the efficiency of this gizmo. Anyways we do not have to agree. The future will tell. Wake me up in a year.

FpUser 4y ago

>"The diagram says 'flowing air reaches the same temperature as the heat spreader' So both will happily stay at CPU melting point. They say that - "The Mini can dissipate up to 5 Watts of heat, while the larger Pro models can dissipate up to 10 Watts." which is definitely not enough to run performance laptops on sustained load. >"but this is a shallow dismissal." See the above. I think it is not dismissal that is shallow.

stubish 4y ago
The PCWorld video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGxTnGEAx3E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGxTnGEAx3E) discusses how a vapor chamber should be used between the heat source and the cooler to distribute heat evenly to the device. And that performance laptops are targeted for future generations of device, requiring upwards of 100 watts of cooling.
- FpUser 4y ago
  I know how vapor chamber etc works what is your point? It all comes down to having X square centimeters to dissipate X watts at Z temperature and scaled to some number. As for what they plan to have in the future - it will be believable when they show how they're going to achieve it
  - stubish 4y ago
    You can apparently cool better using this device than traditional fans and heatsinks. Per the video, the high velocity air hitting the cooling surface vertically at high speed is much more efficient at removing heat than low speed blowers, as it punches through the layer of insulating air that forms on the surface of traditional heat sinks and the air takes away heat at almost its maximum thermal capacity, so you need much less cooling surface area.
    - FpUser 4y ago
      >"You can apparently cool better using this device than traditional fans and heatsinks" Traditional fans and heatsinks have no problem dissipating 100's of watts. Wake me up when this contraption will do the same. >"high velocity air hitting the cooling surface vertically at high speed is much more efficient at removing heat than low speed blowers" Except that traditional blowers operate on immense surface are hence dwarf the efficiency of this gizmo. Anyways we do not have to agree. The future will tell. Wake me up in a year.