Thanks for the explanation. I didn't read GPs post as a call for charity on OP. Looking at this phrase.. > I don't think that anybody could reasonably read top

Thanks for the explanation. I didn't read GPs post as a call for charity on OP. Looking at this phrase.. > I don't think that anybody could reasonably read top speed being a function of heat as top speed only being a function of heat .. I still don't see it this way. My post wasn't meant to be an attack on OP, rather I wanted to expand some points about chip performance that seemed to me weren't clear. The post I'm quoting however did read uncharitable to me.