Why would anyone care what size process it uses?
Maybe because it has something to do with the temperature and power usage of the cpu? If we are starting to ask questions, why would anyone reply to a thread about which they know nothingWhy would anyone care what size process it uses?
It just seemed like a strange question. I buy a router based on its features, availability and price. The size of the process used to create one of the chips inside it is not a consideration for me.
I understand that. It just one of those things I want to know after purchasing any tech products. Also there were numerous people posting their concerns about the temperature of their CPU inside of their router, particularly with BCM4908, so I was wondering if this will happen to BCM4916 as well in the summer, if it use the same process, with higher clock speed (compare to BCM4912) and with fan-less design (ASUS BE98)
www.broadcom.com
This could be true, but after I saw ASUS advertise that the BE98 has 18% better heat dissipation, I started to think that Broadcom might still be using 16nm.Broadcom has always been very secretive with their specs, often only providing them on a need-to-know basis to actual customers. The only information publicly available is their specs sheet:
BCM4916 | Quad-core ARM v8 compliant 64-bit Processor
Wi-Fi 7 doubles the bandwidth of Wi-Fi 6 and 6E with the introduction of 320 MHz channels. BCM4916 is a quad-core ARM v8 compliant 64 bit Processor for residential access point (AP) applications.
Based on the significant clock increase between the BCM4912 and BCM4916 while still using the same B53 cores, it would make sense to assume they also went through a node shrink. However any improvement in their power budget was most likely reallocated to the increased clock and increase in the available 10 Gbps interfaces, so I would expect thermals to be fairly similar to the BCM4912.
The CPU Temperature I got for my BE98 (BCM4916) is 61.021 at idle, using the command :Broadcom has always been very secretive with their specs, often only providing them on a need-to-know basis to actual customers. The only information publicly available is their specs sheet:
BCM4916 | Quad-core ARM v8 compliant 64-bit Processor
Wi-Fi 7 doubles the bandwidth of Wi-Fi 6 and 6E with the introduction of 320 MHz channels. BCM4916 is a quad-core ARM v8 compliant 64 bit Processor for residential access point (AP) applications.
Based on the significant clock increase between the BCM4912 and BCM4916 while still using the same B53 cores, it would make sense to assume they also went through a node shrink. However any improvement in their power budget was most likely reallocated to the increased clock and increase in the available 10 Gbps interfaces, so I would expect thermals to be fairly similar to the BCM4912.
My GT-AXE16000 sits at 75C, however that doesn't necessarily say much since there's often been a lot of variance in temperatures between routers of a same model.
Thanks. Yes, I know there are quite a lot of variables, but it's still good to see that the temperature of my BE98 is lower, rather than higher, thanks to the new thermal design and possible node shrink.
Thanks for sharing. I assume you are on stock firmware? Merlin is using his custom firmware, so I won't be surprised that his CPU temperature is higher than normal.
no I always run Merlin FW
Hmmm, interesting. Maybe it has something to do with the workload of his router. But I guess if you are getting 64c, it’s still quite possible that Broadcom has moved to a newer node to manufacture the BCM4916.
It's just there's a high variance between devices, as the QA isn't the best it could be. Quite a few people discovered that in their specific router the thermal pads weren't properly installed, leading to their router having a 10-15C temperature delta with other people with the same model.
yes I have seen huge differences in thermal pads or whatever in routers GPU and computers I have taken apart . QC is not what it should be
Thank you! That’s roughly 60°C if the ambient temperature is at 25°C. It’s surprising to see your AX88U Pro is cooler than the AXE16000 posted by the others earlier, as the latter is bigger and in theory should have better thermal performance.
