Jump to content

Windows Aero can be dangerous on chip?


Vistaboy

Recommended Posts

I have a laptop with Vista and a Nvidia Geforce Go 7400 (a series most famous for its factory defects than its performance) stumbled several times in overheat trouble resolved with reballing or replached chip.

So, my question is: disabling Windows Aero can prevent or minimize the risk of breaking once again the chip?

More generally: how much Aero layout impact on GPU stress?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites


As a side note, I remember repairing a couple of laptops with those stupid Nvidia boards, and had to reflow them (it only worked once), but it happened on DELLs running (from factory) a plain enough XP (BTW used mostly for office work/web browsing, not gaming or other form of high speed/resources graphics), and they "burned" nonetheless, and I believe XP required less graphic resources than Vista (Aero or not Aero).

jaclaz


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Jadaz, your XP experience could be a big indication of innocence for W.Aero, despite that terrible Nvidia Series are too much frail to exclude 100% that greater resource demand of W.Aero could have no impact at all on GPU/Chip lifespan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Vistaboy said:

Thanks Jadaz, your XP experience could be a big indication of innocence for W.Aero, despite that terrible Nvidia Series are too much frail to exclude 100% that greater resource demand of W.Aero could have no impact at all on GPU/Chip lifespan.

As always when it comes to those stupid chips, there may be an issue also with the "thermal pad" that is used to connect to the cooler, maybe (have no idea) there are better quality (with higher heat transmission capacity) than the standard ones (just like there is better and worse thermal paste). :unsure:

And of course taking care of the fan and of the duct to be clean and open usually helps, I seem to remember that those "burned" DELLs had *anything* in the duct (hairs, dust, grease, etc.).

jaclaz
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The paradox is that laptop (a ~18")  was in their mind designed as a multimedia kickass, but that chip set on fire with ridicolous office work. 

Do you think a GPU Temp of 72-73° in normally browsing is allarming?

Just some day before i-ve done a deep clean inside according to your advices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Vistaboy said:

The paradox is that laptop (a ~18")  was in their mind designed as a multimedia kickass, but that chip set on fire with ridicolous office work.

Do you think a GPU Temp of 72-73° in normally browsing is allarming?

Just some day before i-ve done a deep clean inside according to your advices.

Naah, 72-73° is HOT in itself, but not as hot as it will be needed to damage the chip or - as in this case - the tin balls soldering, and most probably around what you can expect from one of those GO 7200/7400 cards.

Notwithstanding what (hear-hear) Nvidia says about their GPU's being heat resistant up to 105°:

http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/2752/~/nvidia-gpu-maximum-operating-temperature-and-overheating

I would say that until you go over 85-90° it is fine, though the issue on the specific card, from what I could understand (and that I can remember) was about "prolonged" times at high temperatures, there is nothing to tell us whether the heat that is "sucked or blown away" from the cooler (top) doesn't somehow remain in the underside of the chip (please read as the stupid BGA) that couold even be at a higher temperature, simply because extracting heat from under the chip is more difficult :unsure:.

jaclaz
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...