Ea-nasir promised that these were good quality copper, and I do not have any reason to suspect otherwise. But I’ll have you know, if the copper is of inferior quality, I will make sure to send my messenger to complain. He will not hear the end of it!

Python

Good question. I had to modify my code to run more efficiently, since not throttling implies that the copper block reaches a steady state with very little temperature changes over time.

But, with the changes, I can say that there is no copper block length that would prevent throttling with a 120 W CPU. It seems the heat transfer within the block is slow enough over such long lengths that you get diminishing returns with longer and longer copper blocks. Here’s a graph I made summarizing the different block lengths that I tested

With a 65 W CPU, a 32 cm (double the original length) copper block is sufficient to prevent throttling, but it’ll reach steady state at 97 C

See, I thought about doing that, but then I realized: I don’t actually want to do that

I left another comment going into more detail about the model specifications, if you’d like to read into it. But briefly: I took the copper heat conductivity coefficient and the air heat transfer coefficient. I sliced the copper block into thin slices and modeled heat transfer between each slice, as well as heat transfer between each slice and the surrounding air.

It seems that both heat transfer and heat loss do actually matter quite significantly, but they just cancel each other out almost entirely.

If we assume instantaneous heat transfer, thermal throttling time goes up from 592 seconds to 703 seconds (about 2 minute difference).

If we assume no heat loss to the air, thermal throttling time goes down from 592 seconds to 500 seconds (about 1.5 minute difference).

Copper conductivity is fast, sure, but it’s not fast enough to have equal temperatures at the top and bottom for such a big chunk of copper. That does affect the time to thermal throttle pretty significantly, actually. If we assume completely homogeneous temperatures across the block (ie, instantaneous heat transfer), according to my model, it’ll take 703 seconds to thermal throttle. With heat transfer, the time drops to 592 seconds - a difference of about 2 minutes

Was intrigued, so made a simulation to figure it out.

TLDR: 592.2 seconds, or 9 minutes and 52.2 seconds. Very similar to the other comment - it appears temperature differentials and heat loss to the air have opposite effects on thermal throttle time and mostly cancel themselves out. For the most part, heat transfer and heat loss appear to affect the thermal throttle time less than the sheer heat mass of the block by several multiples

Assumptions:

• Copper’s heat conductivity is 400 W/m-K, and specific heat is 0.4 J/g-K, and density is 9000 kg/m^3, and these values do not change over the range of temperatures
• Air’s heat transfer coefficient is 20 W/m^2-K and does not change over the range of temperatures
• The surrounding air does not change in temperature and remains at room temperature (25 C)
• The input wattage is actually 120 W and not just random marketing bullshit
• The copper block’s size is 4 cm x 4 cm x 16 cm (same as other comment)
• The temperature within the copper block differs only by the vertical axis; it is assumed that temperature does not change if you move horizontally into the block

Modeling conditions:

• The block is sliced into 100 equally-sized slices, stacked vertically.
• Each slice starts off with a temperature of 25 C
• 120 W is input directly into the bottom slice
• Heat transfer is modeled between each slice
• Heat loss into the air is modeled for each slice (top slice has more heat loss due to more contact with the air)
• Temperature changes are calculated per millisecond
• Final time is calculated by the total number of milliseconds it takes for the bottom slice to reach a temperature greater than 100 C

Fun facts I found from playing around with the model:

• According to this model, at the time that the CPU thermal throttles, the top of the block should be 85 C
• If we assume instantaneous heat transfer, time to thermal throttle goes up to 703 seconds (11 minutes and 43 seconds). Difference is about 2 minutes.
• If we assume no heat loss to the air, time to thermal throttle goes down to 500.0 seconds (8 minutes and 20 seconds). Difference is about 1.5 minutes.
• The copper block should be able to prevent throttling as long as the CPU remains idle (30W for AMD CPU’s). The CPU should cap out at around 82-83 C.
• The copper block can prevent thermal throttling for a 170 W CPU for 368.1 seconds, or 6 minutes and 8.1 seconds

You’re confusing 2 different but related concepts. Blueshift and redshift does depends only on velocity. In the cosmological sense, redshift (the opposite of blueshift) occurs because everything is moving away from everything else due to the expansion of the universe, and so the distance of an object can be calculated based on how much redshift there is in the light. Basically, on a cosmological scale, distance and velocity are connected

Hmm, I think at minimum calculus will need to be involved here. Because we can’t just assume that the heat is spread evenly in the copper - it’ll likely be hotter at the bottom, leading to thermal throttling earlier than expected. On the other hand, there’s going to be heat dissipation into the air, which will help cool the block somewhat

Edit: made a program to model heat transfer and heat loss. It seems to only affect final time by a handful of seconds. So actual time in real life is probably somewhere in the ballpark of 10 minutes

That’s just how ERK looks like. It’s 44 kDa and 42 kDa, which makes it so that you either see 2 bands, or, more likely, you get 1 big fuzzy band

Freddy Fazbear’s Pizzeria finds a new animatronic