EPTIt seems there is a bit of a controversy surrounding the 3rd generation architecture, as well as claims that Intel cheated their customers out of potential performance by using cheaper thermal paste on the new processors.
At the same time Intel essentially claims that the architecture differences account for the increased temperature, and say that the new architecture handles temperature better.
All of this came out from the fact that sandy bridge processors seem to be able to handle higher voltages while operating at lower temperatures, whereas the ivy bridge processors seem to be able to operate at higher frequencies while using lower voltage, which supports the fact that ivy bridge processors do consume less power than sandy bridge processors
Interestingly Intel also cites that people who overclock using extreme cooling like liquid nitrogen or even liquid cooling are able to get much higher frequencies on ivy bridge processors than those possible on sandy bridge.
My question is if anyone here has anything to add to the discussion about the change in architecture and the temperature problems the average user seems to be facing with the new ivy bridge architecture, that they didn't have while overclocking their sandy bridge processors. I also wonder about the actual speed differences between say a 4.5ghz ivy bridge processor vs a 4.5 ghz sandy bridge processor.
Sandy bridge
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/iUpQc.png)
Ivy Bridge
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Kw1rG.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oBcsH.png)
Ivy Bridge
