Innovation Cooling's Diamond 7 TIM test results

One thing that some waterblock manufacturers realized with the introduction C2D and the sudden switch to LGA775 from s939 by most enthusiasts was that they had to match their waterblocks to the platform the user was using. The blocks that ruled s939 weren't as effective on LGA775, and new methods were formed.

Just because somethings works best on one platform, does not make it the best for all platforms.

1) an stock aluminum heatsinks suffer from heatsoak. Bad for testing thermal conductivity of thermal paste.
2)get a torque driver to set your mounts at a specified pressure consistantly. don't use springs for mounting pressure they are inconsistant.
3)use your temp sensor in the cpu and a thermal probe in the heatsink to test temperture drop across the tim. Never use just one source for temperture information.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Das Capitolin

How can we presume that the supplied Intel cooling solution is a limiting factor? It cools down to 67C with AS5, but only to 77C with another paste. So it seems that it's not limited at all based on output.

If you use an aftermarket cooler, you lose the ability to have a wider delta. You also lose the 1" contact area which will remain consistant in every test, and you'll lose the level mounting pressure.

---

If you insist on your test platform as being the most suitable there is, then that's fine. Stay with your platform as you please, and your results will be taken for what they are worth.

DDTUNG:cool:

Oh, BTW coretemp 0.97.1 gives the temps for each individual core on my quad.

Capoliton: It is a cornerstone of Thermal analysis. The rate of Heat conductance of a material is proportional to the delta of the temperatures between the hot and cold points. A stock 478 is not an ideal cool point in this case.

In actual fact what I suggest as a pure measure of conductance is to take the TIM's away from PC applications, and measure its effectiveness on between a heat loaded alumnium, and refrigerated copper. And push the evelope in to a delta of at least 100C at what ever wattage it takes to maintain this delta. Now. That would be interesting.

Now that would be too scientific, riptide.

DDTUNG:cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DDTUNG

Now that would be too scientific, riptide.

DDTUNG:cool:

---

Well Vic, to extrapolate more clearly for the intended target(s) here, some fo us can appreciate with metals for example that as the TDelta gets bigger, the Heat Conduction increases rather linearly for a wide range of temperatures.

However. TIM is not a metal, and I'm am not conviced TIM would exibit such ideal relationships between TDelta and conductance.

So to give any such TIM test the rigour it so plainly deserves, one would have to look at the conductance of the TIM at different steady state temperatures. We all know that here on XS, there guys cooling 160W processors at -50C and others cooling 160W processors at +50C. The question that you may ask is well, how does the conductance of the TIM vary, as operational steady state temps vary. Will the TIM at -50C work better than TIM at 50C?

So.... this brings us back to the Test setup. If you use a STOCK 478 HS, you will only get temps that are on the high end of the spectrum. ANd you results will only matter to those who run STOCK 478 coolers. Or at least crap coolers that maintain TIM at high temperatures, becasue, like I said, TIM may behave differently at different temperatures.

:cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DDTUNG

If the heatsink you use is not capable of moving enough heat, then the best TIM in the world will not have a chance to perform. I hope that's clear enough for you.

DDTUNG:cool:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Das Capitolin

So in your mind it would be better if I used a super-efficient cooler? You do realize that the core temps would have very little difference between TIM products at that point, right?

Right now I can see a difference in products by almost 1~2 degrees using the overclocked P4 at 3.61 GHz and a stock cooler. If I used your suggestion, I would see .1~.2 difference, and reduce the consistency in TIM amounts because of enlarged surface. It wouldn't be feasible to use an after-market cooler with this kind of test, because the mounting method would come into play.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Das Capitolin

How can we presume that the supplied Intel cooling solution is a limiting factor? It cools down to 67C with AS5, but only to 77C with another paste. So it seems that it's not limited at all based on output.

If you use an aftermarket cooler, you lose the ability to have a wider delta. You also lose the 1" contact area which will remain consistent in every test, and you'll lose the level mounting pressure.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] riptide

Capoliton: It is a cornerstone of Thermal analysis. The rate of Heat conductance of a material is proportional to the delta of the temperatures between the hot and cold points. A stock 478 is not an ideal cool point in this case.

In actual fact what I suggest as a pure measure of conductance is to take the TIM's away from PC applications, and measure its effectiveness on between a heat loaded aluminum, and refrigerated copper. And push the envelope in to a delta of at least 100C at what ever wattage it takes to maintain this delta. Now. That would be interesting.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] riptide

Well Vic, to extrapolate more clearly for the intended target(s) here, some fo us can appreciate with metals for example that as the TDelta gets bigger, the Heat Conduction increases rather linearly for a wide range of temperatures.

However. TIM is not a metal, and I'm am not convinced TIM would exhibit such ideal relationships between TDelta and conductance.

So to give any such TIM test the rigor it so plainly deserves, one would have to look at the conductance of the TIM at different steady state temperatures. We all know that here on XS, there guys cooling 160W processors at -50C and others cooling 160W processors at +50C. The question that you may ask is well, how does the conductance of the TIM vary, as operational steady state temps vary. Will the TIM at -50C work better than TIM at 50C?

So.... this brings us back to the Test setup. If you use a STOCK 478 HS, you will only get temps that are on the high end of the spectrum. ANd you results will only matter to those who run STOCK 478 coolers. Or at least crap coolers that maintain TIM at high temperatures, because, like I said, TIM may behave differently at different temperatures.

:cool:

---

Wow, where to go with all this. After a good nights sleep and reading thru this I have my own thoughts.
1) Das Capitolin: Your measuring or looking to measure the differences in temps using different TIMS while we're looking for the best obtainable temps.
One would think it's the same but it isn't.
You are limiting your tests to that stock Intel HS to show a greater literal degree between the TIM's and although I understand your reasoning for doing so I disagree with the results as they pertain to a pursuit of lowest temps on a working system.
2) Over the past 2+ years I have learned to listen when certain people speak here.I always considered myself a pretty smart guy but like that old EF Hutton commercial( or was it Smith Barney?) When certain people talk, I listen.
Why? Because over and over I've seen their comments to prove to be true and not just opinion.
3) There was a comment made here that made me think a little:
"If the heatsink you use is not capable of moving enough heat, then the best TIM in the world will not have a chance to perform."
This really is the point to dwell on.
We have a heat source and we want to remove as much of that heat, as quickly as possible so the options in play are the TIM, the HS and the fan on that HS. Case fans also play a part but to a lesser degree.
We want the best possible solution possible and cost usually isn't a factor.(within reason)
4) Some here haven't grasped your logic for using the stock HS and thats created some of the problems here. I understand it, I just think it flies in the face of what we're trying to accomplish.
You mentioned that the differences would be down in the point 1-point3C area if you used a top HS so you used a stock one to show a greater temp" difference between the TIM's and at that point1,etc it would be effected by the way the TIM was laid in. That is always a factor and we live with it.
5) Thin skin.
Don't let attacks against your data be taken personal.
Cripes if I let something like that get to me I'd be out hunting people down with a shotgun. It isn't personal or at least it should not be.
I tried last night to calm this down but I don't have the ability to silence people nor would I want to do so.
Remember, it takes two to have a fight and be the bigger man and ignore any comments that irritate you and attack back against the argument, not the person.
Now for me personally, I greatly appreciate the time and effort you put into this testing and I can see that you did all you could to make it as scientific as possible but for this group that testing would have made more impact had you used a TRUE HS and not the stock Intel HS.
These guys work machines that are tweaked to the top tier my friend.
The only time you'd see a stock HS on their systems is when a TRUE was backordered and that is really why you ran into difficulty here.
It wasn't that your data was wrong, it was the parts used.
That's not a slam as I do not pick on or at people but just my observation.
Yes, you are still welcome to come to dinner and thats my way of saying please don't take this all so personally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tastymannatees

For the pressure film testers- I sent out the stuff today. Got everybody from all forums except 2 as I was a little overzealous on my own testing I ran short and had to order more, so some are getting 5 and some are getting 4 test strips.

2 or 1 can be sent back for digital analysis and the balance you can use on your own account, troubleshooting, comparison etc.

I will email you guys with generalized instructions in the next day or two.

I included a couple extra tubes to compensate for the remounts.

I know it sounds stupid but this was the most complicated mailing I have ever done. You each get six envelopes. 2 donor/print, 2 sample , 1 return, 1 to hold it all...

---

I'm taking the rest of the week off so I'll have plenty of time to do some testing on this. I'll try and find my digi-cam to take some picts of my setup, mounting and spread of the TIM on my first mount. I'll also be posting my 1.5 to 2 week temp of cure for D7. After the pressure test I will remount using D7 again and report the temps after a few mins of cure.

I hope the data I'm providing is enough to help in some way shape or form, if you need or would like more from me please let me know and I'll do my best to help.

Thanks for the opportunity to help test your TIM, so far the results I've seen and experienced have been great. :up:

Wesley

WoW! I laugh at all this. :rofl: :ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] riptide

I suggest as a pure measure of conductance is to take the TIM's away from PC applications, and measure its effectiveness on between a heat loaded alumnium, and refrigerated copper. And push the evelope in to a delta of at least 100C at what ever wattage it takes to maintain this delta.

---

This is something that I have discussed with others in the past, but do not have the test equipment to accomplish. I agree with this test method completely, and it was my first wish and desire. But then I began to feel it out, and after a while I was resigned to keeping the tests more "real-world" so that the "reader" would be able to make a connection to familiar equipment.

My first design was to run a C2D 6320 with a stock Intel fan, as to find the widest thermal delta between the two components. There wasn't much heat generated by this processor, but at the same time it hit home with most readers. The real problem was in the stock cooler, which uses push-pin mounting clips. The surface is ideal (1.5" round copper core) and would allow a consistant material spread in every test, but the mounting force would not be even because of four-corner push-pins. This is what led me down the road to the socket 478 setup with swing-arm coolers that equalize contact compression. I also liked the smaller contact area, which focuses the contact conductivity measures to a 1" radius.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] riptide

To extrapolate more clearly for the intended target(s) here, some fo us can appreciate with metals for example that as the TDelta gets bigger, the Heat Conduction increases rather linearly for a wide range of temperatures.

However. TIM is not a metal, and I'm am not conviced TIM would exibit such ideal relationships between TDelta and conductance.

So to give any such TIM test the rigour it so plainly deserves, one would have to look at the conductance of the TIM at different steady state temperatures. We all know that here on XS, there guys cooling 160W processors at -50C and others cooling 160W processors at +50C. The question that you may ask is well, how does the conductance of the TIM vary, as operational steady state temps vary. Will the TIM at -50C work better than TIM at 50C?

So.... this brings us back to the Test setup. If you use a STOCK 478 HS, you will only get temps that are on the high end of the spectrum. ANd you results will only matter to those who run STOCK 478 coolers. Or at least crap coolers that maintain TIM at high temperatures, becasue, like I said, TIM may behave differently at different temperatures.

---

My ultimate goal is to hit the middle of the target audience with the most accurate information I can get. Polls have shown me that most users who purchase aftermarket TIM usually overclock their CPU and cool with an aftermarket air cooler. This data is my driving force towards remaining realistic in approach. I am trying to remain on the high-side of temperatures, because most enthusiasts run in the 45-55C range when fully loaded, and not the negative inverse. My own tests on the 478 platform reach into the 70's C, but only to arrive at a wider thermal delta.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

There was a comment made here that made me think a little:
"If the heatsink you use is not capable of moving enough heat, then the best TIM in the world will not have a chance to perform."
This really is the point to dwell on.

---

While this is a true statement Movieman, I would be more willing to accept the arguement if there was some data to prove the point. Just because the Intel cooler is not the most ideal, does not automatically make it unable to perform the duty Intel designed it for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Now for me personally, I greatly appreciate the time and effort you put into this testing and I can see that you did all you could to make it as scientific as possible but for this group that testing would have made more impact had you used a TRUE HS and not the stock Intel HS.
These guys work machines that are tweaked to the top tier my friend.
The only time you'd see a stock HS on their systems is when a TRUE was backordered and that is really why you ran into difficulty here.
It wasn't that your data was wrong, it was the parts used.

---

Ahh, the TRUE. This is getting off topic, but I've never seen so many people hellbent on learning thermal dynamics and yet idolize one of the worst specimens of thermal cooling I've found. Nickel plated heat-pipe rods? Better look up the thermal conductivity of nickel people, because it's essentially trapping the heat inside the rod and doesn't transfer as well as bare copper to the heatsink fins. Surface finish? I've seen roads that were smoother. Seriously, it's a scientific marvel that it could ever be held so popular, which makes it all the much better than I've found six other coolers that all perform on a higher level. But I digress, your point is taken. If they'll adore the TRUE, then who knows what else they'll buy into.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Das Capitolin

While this is a true statement Movieman, I would be more willing to accept the arguement if there was some data to prove the point. Just because the Intel cooler is not the most ideal, does not automatically make it unable to perform the duty Intel designed it for.

---

Very true, but here at Xs and specifically at this team we don't run machines as "Intel designed".
I'm probably the least 'Xtreme" person on this team running essentially workstation systems and mine ran at 3157 when Intel was having heating issues at stock 2667.
I guess what I'm trying to say that this crowde isn't afraid to experiment to find that "sweet" spot and the best I've found so far for my Q6600 rig is the D7 applied in a cross pattern.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Das Capitolin

Ahh, the TRUE. This is getting off topic, but I've never seen so many people hellbent on learning thermal dynamics and yet idolize one of the worst specimens of thermal cooling I've found. Nickel plated heat-pipe rods? Better look up the thermal conductivity of nickel people, because it's essentially trapping the heat inside the rod and doesn't transfer as well as bare copper to the heatsink fins. Surface finish? I've seen roads that were smoother. Seriously, it's a scientific marvel that it could ever be held so popular, which makes it all the much better than I've found six other coolers that all perform on a higher level. But I digress, your point is taken. If they'll adore the TRUE, then who knows what else they'll buy into.

---

My take on the TRUE:
A piece of garbage mount attached to a magnificent cooler.
The cooler works in spite of the fact that you really can't get a good tight attachment to the cpu.
I can wiggle mine back and forth with no more than 3-5lbs pressure on the fins. Sucks but still does an effective job of transferring the heat and better than the others we've tried.
I do mostly dual socket boards.
My dual clover orginally used the stock Intel solid copper HS.
Then I changed to Dynatron H46G and modded with 80mm Vantec tornadoes.
Instant 13C gain
Then later changed to TR HR-01X which is essentially a slightly smaller true and although they sucked to install and can be moved side to side they are more effective overall than the Dynatrons.
TR issue is all in the mounts and in quality control on the flatness of the HS bottom.
We live with the mount issue and when come across a non flat HS bottom we lap it..

Oh, this is a little tongue in cheek but I don't want to learn thermal dynamics, I just want good temps on my systems and I have that now.
To me to run a Q6600 at 3600mhz in a 70F room at 46-46-46-45C is sweet and temps that leave enough "wiggle" room that come August when this room is at 72-74F my machine will still be in a very acceptable temp range.

6 heatsinks better than the TRUE ?

I must have missed something ... please enlighten us

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Das Capitolin

Ahh, the TRUE. This is getting off topic, but I've never seen so many people hellbent on learning thermal dynamics and yet idolize one of the worst specimens of thermal cooling I've found. Nickel plated heat-pipe rods? Better look up the thermal conductivity of nickel people, because it's essentially trapping the heat inside the rod and doesn't transfer as well as bare copper to the heatsink fins. Surface finish? I've seen roads that were smoother. Seriously, it's a scientific marvel that it could ever be held so popular, which makes it all the much better than I've found six other coolers that all perform on a higher level. But I digress, your point is taken. If they'll adore the TRUE, then who knows what else they'll buy into.

---

i dont recall there are reviews that claims six other heatsinks are bettter than the TRUE. but if i remember correctly, there one or two might performs similar to the TRUE.

Best CPU Cooler Performance - Q1 2008

It's hyper-linked, so all you have to do is click on it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Das Capitolin

Best CPU Cooler Performance - Q1 2008

---

I meant Other reviews othan than yours. Who knows if your data is true or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bail_w

I meant Other reviews othan than yours. Who knows if your data is true or not.

---

Why would I make up results? Why would you make such a statement?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Das Capitolin

Why would I make up results? Why would you make such a statement?

---

i make such statement because there aren't another single reviews claims the same results as yours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bail_w

i make such statement because there aren't another single reviews claims the same results as yours.

---

Well, there aren't other reviews with the same new coolers as my review. But there are plenty of other reviews showing the TRUE farther from the top position.

http://www.frostytech.com/top5heatsinks.cfm as an example.

You sound very closed-minded, so impressing you is the least of my concerns.

C'mon guys, this just isn't productive and also plain classless.
People don't put this much work into something and then falsify the data.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Das Capitolin

You sound very closed-minded, so impressing you is the least of my concerns.

---

I am not closed-minded. It just one review is not enough to shows that the six heatsinks you claim outperforms the TRUE. thats why i ask for other reviews.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Das Capitolin

Well, there aren't other reviews with the same new coolers as my review. But there are plenty of other reviews showing the TRUE farther from the top position.

http://www.frostytech.com/top5heatsinks.cfm as an example.

You sound very closed-minded, so impressing you is the least of my concerns.

---

Good Morning.
Beautiful day isn't it?
I think you'll find a lot of people disagreeing on the TRUE as here at XS there have been MANY tests of it's effectiveness vs other HS and it always comes out on top.
Now I do think that Xigmatek(SP?) has a new one out that may be as effective and maybe Scythe aslo but that is to be seen yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bail_w

I am not closed-minded. It just one review is not enough to shows that the six heatsinks you claim outperforms the TRUE. thats why i ask for other reviews.

---

So here's a longer list, and then you can apologize for accusing me of fabricating data.

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.ph...id=45&Itemid=1
http://www.frostytech.com/top5heatsinks.cfm
http://www.anandtech.com/casecooling...spx?i=3268&p=5
http://www.neoseeker.com/resourcelink.html?rlid=166004
http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=get...96&articID=633
http://www.overclockersclub.com/revi...ndetta_2/4.htm

Even the article you linked to shows the HDT cooler performing the same. That review doesn't even show the finish of the TRUE, so we don't know if it was lapped or polished.

Most of the sources are pretty old, and HDT coolers have only been around less than a year. But worry not, I'm sure you'll be proven wrong time and time again as other sites review the newer products.

Guys, this started out as being a good thread. It's quickly deteriorated. This discussion is not productive in any way.

If all of you want to talk about CPU coolers, I suggest you move the discussion to the Air Cooling section.

LOL why do you think everyone should apologize to you for question you? This is a forum that is what forums are all about questioning and finding answers. :)