2 ms·
I’m guessing that at some point in time, these graphics cards are going to have to fit a temperature sensor next to that connector, to safely shut the card off
by dmitrygr 2y ago
I’m guessing that at some point in time, these graphics cards are going to have to fit a temperature sensor next to that connector, to safely shut the card off if the connector is overheating. A wire of a given thickness will easily carry the calculated current so wires generally don’t need sensors. Connectors are more complicated. Dust, crumbs, or oxidation can significantly increase resistance, causing rapid heating, so a temperature sensor there would actually make sense.
Actually, given the past history of these connectors melting, I’m surprised NVIDIA didn’t do this already.
- katmannthree 2y agoYes but that would increase the BoM by several cents on these $1k+ GPUs so it's not likely to happen.
- tliltocatl 2y agoMaybe just go 24V (or even higher, it's not like the GPU connector sees a lot of switching so contact arching is not a problem). Yes, that's a new PSU, but at that rate it's going to happen anyway.
- eqvinox 2y agoYeah, more likely that'd be 48-55V, much larger space of existing solutions for that (Telco DC power, PoE and LED lighting) and likely also more efficient.
- tliltocatl 2y agoUltimately yes, but that would imply changing designs a lot more. I. e. CSD95372BQ5M (TI's VRM switch) doesn't go beyond 24V. Most PMICs/controllers are designed to interface those low-voltage switches so those will need to be redesigned. That would involve the board vendor, PMIC vendor and processor vendor (Nvidia/AMD/Intel). 24V might or might not be available to the board vendors right now by changing some caps and inductors.
- eqvinox 2y agoI don't think a change to 24V is doable like that, even if the parts theoretically support it - it'll be at a different efficiency point (= also thermal issue) for one, but also the regulator feedback loops might become unstable without reengineering.