No. It used to be fairly common
way back in the day because case makers did not design in or build in good case cooling to keep up with the growing cooling demands of the newer hardware that was going inside those cases. Many cases back in the day had support for just a single 80mm case fan to move air through the case. In really budget systems, cases relied only the PSU fan!
Wow, I can't even imagine! I'm sure there was a lot more creativity involved in making a high-powered build work when things were like that, back when it was fringe to build machines like that. What timeframe are we talking? Even my first midrange pre-built in ~2003 had an 80mm exhaust and side panel fan (maybe 120mm?) I know my first real build in 2005 or 2006 had TWO 80mm exhausts and a 120mm side intake, and that was a crappy $30 cheepo depot Apevia. God those cases were awful, too!
Would love to see how people got around that. A few things come to mind. But whichever way you went, there had to be some real effort and risk involved. Makes me really question the validity of common complaints these days. Maybe we just don't know how good we have it... to be at a point where you can pick from an impossibly large number of cases from really cheap to high-end, toss in an inexpensive aftermarket cooler, a few decent fans, dial in your max overclock, and never worry. It's so routine that I can't even fathom things ever having been any different. Cooling is a really simple thing to get right now... to the point where even if you get it kind of wrong, it usually still works. I wonder just how many builders today could work under those sorts of limitations?
But you know... that really makes me think active VRM cooling is antiquated all the more. It's an option if you water cool I suppose, but wouldn't you rather still have a board with good heatsinks and a substantial enough VRM that your case flow covers it? I don't know. I feel like a VRM section that's adequate for what it's powering probably should never need a loud little fan. Basic cooling should be enough - which is probably why even with the chunky, oft inefficient heatsinks we have now, you never hear of VRM's cooking.
Just seems gimmicky to me. Perhaps the time for such solutions has passed? Maybe it's because I'm not a hardcore overclocker. But then, those types come up with their own methods anyway. I just wonder who dinky integrated VRM fans would be for. If your aim is to push the limits, you're probably already very comfortable and interested in modifying your setups anyway. For everyone else, it's just a silly bit of peace-of-mind. IMO, anyway.
Just want to add, it's always interesting to hear how things were from someone who was really in it before my time. I appreciate your posts as a way of gleaning information too far back to easily dig up on my own.
Back to this rumor... I'd be curious as to why this would be done. It's hard to imagine there being a need... especially if it does turn out that older boards will accommodate new Ryzens. If those, with the VRM's people love to criticize could handle the top-end ones perfectly adequately (which you could argue it's bad practice to drop a high-end chip into a basic board - I definitely wouldn't do it, but still - it won't actually cook,) why would Ryzen 3 be any different? It's not like we're suddenly going to be back in the FX era. Sticking to what we do know, there's not much reason to believe the new Ryzen lineup will be any more power-hungry than the current ones. Why assume that the power needs are gonna be that much higher that somehow branching off on VRM solutions is necessary? I know mobo manufacturers tend not to want to cut into margins when they can help it. Why go through the trouble when current designs have already proven sufficient? Even the under-built ones tend to work okay, even for the 2700's. I can only really see this happening with the stuff beyond the regular consumer lineup... but even the ones we have now tend not to need such measures.
And I mean... when you do see hardcore overclocking and high-end motherboards, AMD OR Intel, they tend to overbuild the power sections instead of going harder on cooling than they do with any other board, with only a handful of exceptions. Still the same blocky heatsinks (well, sometimes they're better designed with more expensive machining work + more RGB...) just more complex, cooler-running VRM's underneath. I suppose they figure that better ensures proper operation under a wider variety of conditions and loads. Personally, I'd rather that than a VRM that's going to operate closer to the max power it can safely deliver and then be cooled down after the fact. Just seems more intuitive to me for them to not heat up as much in the first place. If you're going to build an overkill board, make sure it's distributed where it counts. Even if a weaker VRM could work and be cooled, it's much nicer to have real operational headroom than mere temperature headroom. Latter case just means you're no longer temperature limited. Doesn't mean you can't be held down by sheer power delivery capabilities. VRM's often overheat because they're not cooled adequately... but what about if they're simply being worked too hard? Cooling can't fully cover that.
I guess when we're talking overbuilt boards it makes sense. Just a "might as well" thing at that point. But for the consumer lineup, I'm not seeing it. Or at least I kinda hope not to. Though honestly aside from the PCIE changes and maybe a few minor refinements, I don't see X570's turning out very different from X470's or X370's. You'll get many of the same components and layouts, only with current gen features.
