Another waterblocks on i7 thread

[Hondacity]

are you guys using sub second sampling time when acquiring temps? realtemp's lowest sampling time is 1sec

[HESmelaugh]

Do you have a robot doing your mounts? I could never keep them that consistent! This tells me that none of the blocks are bowed...

No, but I tested a bunch of different programs for loading the cores and found out that CoreDamage delivers higher temps with greater stability than any other program. Prime95 at fixed 8K is less hot and has slightly more fluctuations in temperature. Ultimately, this makes a big difference for repeatability.

Also, I thinly spread out the thermal paste over the whole surface of the IHS for each mount, since this is the method that gives me the most repeatable results.

Finally, I use MX-2 as thermal grease because again, this is the grease that showed the least variation accross five mounts out of a sample of four or five greases that I tested.

So basically, I put a lot of work into making sure that variations between mounts are minimal. And it pays off. In my prior testing on 775, I had huge deviations between mounts...

I don't, log every 1 second. But I do average out over 1800x4 data points to get my average core temps on a run. 1800x3 for average rad air in temp.

andyc

I log every 5 seconds and use the data of the last 20 minutes of the run.

So that's 240x3 for ambient and 240x4 for water temps.

[Hondacity]

No, but I tested a bunch of different programs for loading the cores and found out that CoreDamage delivers higher temps with greater stability than any other program. Prime95 at fixed 8K is less hot and has slightly more fluctuations in temperature. Ultimately, this makes a big difference for repeatability.

Also, I thinly spread out the thermal paste over the whole surface of the IHS for each mount, since this is the method that gives me the most repeatable results.

Finally, I use MX-2 as thermal grease because again, this is the grease that showed the least variation accross five mounts out of a sample of four or five greases that I tested.

So basically, I put a lot of work into making sure that variations between mounts are minimal. And it pays off. In my prior testing on 775, I had huge deviations between mounts...



I log every 5 seconds and use the data of the last 20 minutes of the run.

So that's 240x3 for ambient and 240x4 for water temps.

yep i agree with the thin tim all over the surface...thats how i do it too...good choice...its repeatability is better than putting a dot in the center...

also i know you did 6 mounts so i'm assuming you took the best 3? which results to low deviation? good job nonetheless