Quote Originally Posted by Revv23 View Post
DFI May have done it right but thus far what you say about digital PWM isn't true, it runs hotter, is less stable, is hard too cool, and easy to burn out. This holds true for abit's, dfi's, you name it... digital PWM so far is not for extreme clocking. not to mention it seems to only be avialable on expensive boards so i would assume that it adds cost without reason.

Like i said in an earlier post, one of the most stable PWM circuits out there (and coolest running) is on abit's AW9D, which happens to be a 4-phase analouge solution.
You have to understand the technical benefits of each solution. Analogue is less accurate than digital, is considered less reliable due to the fact that is uses caps, and makes the socket area much more cluttered which is bad for those who wish to use very large heat sinks or phase-change/dry ice/ln2.

However, digital PWM is limited by it's phases, meaning if a digital solution has however many phases to deliver however many amps to the cpu, it will deliver up to that much and absolutely no more. An analogue solution is much more flexible and can generally extend far beyond the power requirements it was originally designed for. Again though, when pushing an analogue solution like this to it's max, you're running the risk of blowing a capacitor or suffering serious voltage fluctuations.

Digital in the end I would say is better because of it's accuracy and space saving. As for it's thermal characteristics, it should get better, especially if board designers decide to go even more overkill with the phases.