They don’t. It’s retaining heat that’s the issue.
Smaller saturation area means more heat stays at the APU for example, thus increasing the temperature. Only way to counter this is run the fan faster.
Anyways the new heat sink will most likely be fine, it’s just shock factor so much of it was cut away. Worst case the new PS5 will be more audible from a further distance
edit: spelling
You're making the assumption that the APU, memory chips, Nand chips and other heat-producing components all produce the same heat.
That's not a safe assumption. You'd need to measure the power consumption of the two versions of the console under the same computational load to see any differences. If they exist, any assumptions about heat produced and thus the justification for the changes in cooling solution go out the window.
As I've stated already previously in the thread, Sony's PS5 components are sourced and binned against certain max voltage thresholds. The voltage (consider as a proxy for power consumption) versus clock-speed characteristics of each semiconductor-based component in the console are not uniform but randomly distributed across all parts coming off the production line.
Sony designs its power delivery system and cooling solution of the console based on the max voltage threshold limits of each of the major components of the device, plus some safety and design margin. Since the console first went into production, the semiconductor processes would have matured, such that the voltage thresholds for binned parts could have been tightened, meaning newer console APUs/memory/SSD chips could be more power-efficient. So reductions in cooling system materials can be possible without sacrificing reliability because the chips in these new units consume less power and thus produce less heat overall.
There were very likely other considerations involved with the cooling solution changes, e.g. removal of the copper plate to save on copper costs, but given the reports on the lack of change in fan speed, I'd argue the most likely reason is the peak TDP of the components of this new console revision has reduced.
Here's the interesting bit from Eurogamer's article:
"So if PlayStation 5 can work just fine with a cheaper, leaner cooler, why not just ship with it in the first place at launch? Without word from Sony, we can't say for sure but in terms of the production process, it's important to realise that when a console first comes to market, the separate components of the machine are created at the same time - in parallel, not in series. As the silicon rolls off the production line, the heat sinks are also being made. Nobody wants another red ring or yellow light of death, so it makes sense to build redundancy into the design."
"There is a documented example of this in Microsoft's original Xbox One - the hardware architects saw that there was headroom in their thermal solution so increased the core clocks on the processor itself. The GPU went from 800MHz to 854MHz, while the CPU enjoyed a bump to 1.75GHz from the original 1.6GHz. Would it have made the machine hotter? Probably. Did it matter? Clearly not. Perhaps with the benefit of more exposure to production silicon and all of the telemetry from the millions of units out there, Sony is confident enough to shrink the cooler and bring down the build cost of the machine."
The new CFI-1100 series revision of PlayStation 5 is now making its way to market, bringing with it a wave of controver…
www.eurogamer.net
Building safety and design margin into the design of systems critical to either safety or reliability (as in this case) is just engineering design 101.
It doesn't have anything to do with RROD or YLOD which were a result of the change to lead-free solder, not even poor cooling. Had the systems been allowed to ship with leaded solder these issues wouldn't have been seen. DF embarrasses themselves yet again with this revisionist history... which is stunning given Eurogamer were themselves the ones who first broke the story about the REAL reason for the Xbox RROD and lesser occurring PS3 YLOD failures.
From Digital Foundry:
The crux of the controversy surrounding Evans' video stems from his view that the new PS5 is worse than the old one - it's his contention that a smaller cooler made from less efficient materials produces a hotter machine. It's not an outlandish theory by any means when you look at the mass and material reductions but the question of whether it's hotter or not cannot be determined by measuring the heat output of the exhaust alone and even if it does run a few degrees hotter, it may well still be within manufacturer's tolerances.
WTF is he on about with "less efficient materials"?
In both versions of the console, the main heat sink finned area and heat spreader directly located on the APU are aluminium (alloy-possibly). In both, the heat pipes are copper.
The only difference is the larger copper plate on the launch unit, which appears to be intended for heat dissipation, but it's not really clear what components if any it's covering (possibly the SSD and/or GDDR6 chips).
Removing this copper plate probably had close to zero effect on the operation of those components. As a big chunk of the heat produced by them is dissipated into the PCB on the other side. Additionally, assuming those components are the same, in terms of voltage and power characteristics isn't a safe assumption at all. Sony could have sourced components from a different supplier with better voltage/power profiles for the chips, meaning they inherently require less cooling in the first place.
So trying to make any broad sweeping assumptions about the overall thermal performance of the console without investigating every angle is just straight-up idiotic.