And that is an impossibility in most of the world today and it will be even more like that going forward.

no they don't. in some countries in europe (maybe in all of them?), installing airconditioning is frowned upon because it is considered a waste of energy. if you want government subsidies for replacing your heating system with a more energy efficient one you are not allowed to have airconditioning. and in the rest of the world only people/countries well of, that don't consider their energy usage, do it. airconditioning is luxury.

using to much airconditioning is also not comfortable. i used to live in singapore. we used to joke that singapore has two seasons: indoors and outdoors. because the airconditioning is powered so high that you had to bring jacket to wear inside. i'd frequently freeze after entering a building. i don't know why they do it, because it doesn't make sense. when i did turn on airconditioning at home i'd go barely below 30. just a few degrees cooler than the outside so it feels more comfortable without making the transition to hard.

> installing airconditioning is frowned upon

Seattle was like this a couple of decades ago when I moved there. People sneered at me when I talked about having air conditioning installed at my house. Having moved from a warmer part of the country, I ignored their smug comments and did it anyway. The next few years I basked in the comfort of my climate-controlled home while my coworkers complained about not being able to sleep due to the heat.

Europe not having some kind of air conditioning (even if heat pump based) is stupidity in my opinion. It lowers productivity

It should be noted that most office building will have some form of air conditioning, as well as many other indoor public spaces. It's just in people's homes it's uncommon.

No they dont. They don't have the money. I remember my childhood when gaming in summer holidays in India, my PC would run at full tilt because my room was at 36C (and outside was 48C).

So you're saying that if you go even 3 degrees Celsius over that temperature range you should expect your CPU to fry itself? Even when the CPU throttled itself to exactly 100°C?

> So you're saying that if you go even 3 degrees Celsius over that temperature range you should expect your CPU to fry itself? Even when the CPU throttled itself to exactly 100°C?

It is actually 2.9999, precisely.

  coretemp-isa-0000
  Adapter: ISA adapter
  Package id 0:  +40.0°C  (high = +80.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
  Core 0:        +38.0°C  (high = +80.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
  Core 1:        +39.0°C  (high = +80.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)

Are they saying this is bad? This Intel CPU has been at it for over a decade. There was a fan issue for half a year and would go up to 80 C for... half a year. Still works perfectly fine but it is outdated, it lacks instruction sets that I need, and it has two cores only, and 1 thread per core.

Maybe today's CPUs would not be able to handle it, I am not sure. One would expect these things to only improve, but seems like this is not the case.

Edit: I misread it, oops! Disregard this comment.

That is your CPU temperature, not ambient (room) temperature.

Oh, I misread. My bad!

Just to add, I moved into a house where it is almost always between 27-30 C. It is AWFULLY hot for me. :( Sadly it will not go below this during winter either because they will start up the heating and it cannot be turned off.