Partial specialization of single type template parameter class template using non-type template parameter through a dependent type
As far as I can tell, the first snippet is ill-formed (and a diagnostic is required); compilers should reject the program because of the partial specialization (2).
[temp.deduct.type]/18 applies here:
If
Phas a form that contains<i>, and if the type ofidiffers from the type of the corresponding template parameter of the template named by the enclosing simple-template-id, deduction fails. [...]
The associated example in the Standard uses a function template, but is otherwise very similar.
So the template argument of the partial specialization (2) can never be deduced, and [temp.class.spec.match]/3 applies:
If the template arguments of a partial specialization cannot be deduced because of the structure of its template-parameter-list and the template-id, the program is ill-formed.
Interestingly, I couldn't find a compiler that diagnoses this issue, not even EDG in strict mode. We could speculate that most compiler writers consider the benefits of having a diagnostic here not to be worth the effort of implementing the checks. This could mean that we might see the requirement in the paragraph above change in the future from ill-formed to ill-formed, no diagnostic required. However, this is pure speculation. In any case, I don't see it ever changing to well-formed; I can't think of a valid use for a partial specialization that never matches.
The wording of [temp.deduct.type]/18 was clarified by the resolution of CWG2091.