Thermalright Unveils True Copper Ultra-120 Extreme Coolers

Regarding all this debate over copper vs. aluminum.. let me tell you from years of my fetish with customizing my own heatsinks... I've customized them in so many different creative (unique) ways that none of you guys have ever done that I've gotten so close to patenting a few of the designs.

In short words:

Copper fins are better for high-speed air flow.
Aluminum fins are better for low-speed air flow. (EDIT: cheaper and lighter, plus the difference from copper is not really noticeable)



I know for a fact that copper is more efficient at heat transfer as long as the air flow is fast enough. Say, if copper can transfer heat more quickly from the base to the heatpipes than aluminum, the copper fins might just as well transfer more quickly via HIGH air pressure/flow. Many of us only pay attention to the CFM of air flow, while overlooking another important aspect of the inch or mm-H20 (or Hg) of the air pressure. For example, Thermaltake's Volcano 12 fan (which is 80mm x 32mm and has only 3 blades -- http://www.thermaltake.com/product/C...il/A1745/a1745 http://www.thermaltake.com/product/C..._image/fan.jpg) exerts higher pressure than a similar 5-blade fan operating at the same RPM. It actually gives lower CFM than a 5-blade fan would, but the pressure more than makes up for it (given that the fan is 38mm thick rather than 25mm). The noise generated remains pretty much the same.

It is very important for the copper fins to remain as thin as possible and also as close together as possible, while being optimally soldered to the heatpipes. As long as the dust does not build up, it is what made Thermalright's XP-90c perform better than the larger XP-120, at 2000+rpm fan speeds.

Although aluminum fins do pretty well with heatpipes, copper is just better if you have at least a 2000+ rpm fan blowing directly on it. I do not know exactly what the threshold would have to be (airflow CFM and air pressure) in order for copper fins to be more efficient than aluminum, but let's just say 2000 rpm for most heatpipe heatsinks out there. Zalman's hugely popular CNPS9700 would be nowhere nearly as good if the fins were aluminum instead of copper. On that heatsink, aluminum fins would perform just as well as copper only if it came with a super-quiet fan (say, 1500 rpm max). For fan-less heatsinks, aluminum is a god-send!

Best New Information

True Copper Ultra-120 Extreme Coolers The weight is 1.8KG

before wrong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sxs112

Best New Information

True Copper Ultra-120 Extreme Coolers The weight is 1.8KG

before wrong

---

lol :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sxs112

Best New Information

True Copper Ultra-120 Extreme Coolers The weight is 1.8KG

before wrong

---

Bah!

There goes my plan to become a Copper dealer :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bo_Fox

Although aluminum fins do pretty well with heatpipes, copper is just better if you have at least a 2000+ rpm fan blowing directly on it. I do not know exactly what the threshold would have to be (airflow CFM and air pressure) in order for copper fins to be more efficient than aluminum, but let's just say 2000 rpm for most heatpipe heatsinks out there. Zalman's hugely popular CNPS9700 would be nowhere nearly as good if the fins were aluminum instead of copper. On that heatsink, aluminum fins would perform just as well as copper only if it came with a super-quiet fan (say, 1500 rpm max). For fan-less heatsinks, aluminum is a god-send!

---

At any fan speed, copper is a better material for heat transfer vs aluminum. I have done term papers on this, it's thermodynamic fact. My Zalman did come with a low speed fan(1500rpm is in no way at all super-quiet, you don't see that until you go below 1000rpm), and it worked fine. Unless you can show us some testing results proving your assertion, it's just wrong to make these kind of claims about copper v. aluminum. The heat transfer from the material to the air is a function of the air and temperature delta, not a function of the material.

Hi Rob,

All of that is just speculation right now under planning.
No definite date has been released yet as it is still in pre-production
stage.

Best Regards,
Hank Peng
Customer Relations/ Product Marketing/ Public Relations
: www.thermalright.com

from my understanding of just basic principles

1)copper gives you lower cpu temps while causing your case to heat up more quickly under load
2)alluminum gives you a higher cpu temp but heats your case up more slowly
3)under a constant load with inadequate ventilation both sinks will even out eventually (after the internal case temperature stabilizes, this should happen faster on the copper which might be why people think its worse)
4)under constant load with adequate vetilation (including cool air intake) the copper cooler will perform better

My take on the Copper Vs Aluminium argument:

Alternative way of visualising things, working backwards (I find this easier):

Let’s consider the computer as a single unit. It has energy going in from the power cable, and energy leaving in the form of hot air.

No matter what is going on inside with different heat sinks etc, we have the same energy going in. Also, for the same case, we have the same amount of airflow produced by the fans, and so the same volume of air leaving the case.

For a steady state, the energy entering and leaving the system must be the same. Therefore, for a fixed energy input, and a fixed airflow, we must stabilise at a fixed temperature of the air leaving the case, no matter what we have changed inside.

How does this affect our CPU? The heat sink provides a temperature gradient between the CPU and the case air. The better at conducting heat the heat sink is, the shallower this gradient can be (i.e the closer in temperature the CPU can be to the air). This means that, as case air temperature is fixed for a given heat input and airflow, a heat sink with higher conductivity will give a lower CPU temperature, as there will be a lower temperature gradient between the CPU and the air.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

I was just reading thru this thread and I've come to a few conclusions:
1) Lots of people like to argue any point at all just for the sake of arguing!
2)A great many of you people are a hell of a lot smarter than I am.
3) I always thought copper was used for the base and alum used for the fins as copper transferred heat faster but aluminum dispersed the heat faster.
That's what I think not know and reading here I may well be wrong.
4) Pretty looking heatsink.
5) We'll find out how effective it is when someone here tests it and not before.
:up:

---

The key thing to keep in mind is that aluminum is way, way cheaper, easier to work with, and the performance increase going from a hybrid design (Al fins w/ copper where it really counts like the base) to pure copper really doesn't give that much of a difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryboto

At any fan speed, copper is a better material for heat transfer vs aluminum. I have done term papers on this, it's thermodynamic fact. My Zalman did come with a low speed fan(1500rpm is in no way at all super-quiet, you don't see that until you go below 1000rpm), and it worked fine. Unless you can show us some testing results proving your assertion, it's just wrong to make these kind of claims about copper v. aluminum. The heat transfer from the material to the air is a function of the air and temperature delta, not a function of the material.

---

I think you misunderstood him. Cause you're both saying the same thing.
Copper is better. You just have to have more airflow, to be able to notice the difference...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

An aluminum heatsink doesn't conduct as much, so its fans can remove the heat from the case without becoming overburdened. So this gradual temperature increase would take a lot longer. On a copper heatsink like the TRUE, which is designed extremely well, this gradual increase in temperature would take a lot less time, and while for the first hour or so, it would cool rather well, the ambient temp would start to "choke", and things would go down hill from there.

You CANNOT expect a copper heatsink to cool well if you aren't removing that excess heat from the case. That's all I'm saying.

And for ^^^ to happen, you need better cooling. If you already have good cooling, this is obviously not an issue. Just don't waste money on a $100 heatsink only to slap on some weak ass 800rpm "silent" fans on it.

---

You sir, should go back to school. :ROTF:

You also say that when you use better GPU cooler(neither blowing heat out), your CPU temperature lowers as the card doesn't put so much hot air in the case because the GPU temperature is lower? :clap:

Edit: Some of the reasons why copper is better:
The bottleneck might lie in heat transferring between fins and heatpipes. Using copper will help this a little.
The another bottleneck might lie in the fact that alu fins are too thin. The heat doesnt transfer to the center of the fins. The temperature in the center of the fin is lower than nearby the heatpipes. This means that heat doesn't conduct to the air as well as what it conducts at the edges(near the heatpipes). Actually, if the delta between ambient and the spot temperature halves, the heat dissipation halves aswell.

I am not sure how thin the fins are(IIRC they are 0.4 mm, but I might be wrong, correct me if necessary), but if the fins were 0.53 mm, the heat should(in theory) transfer as well to the middle of the fins as with 0.4 mm copper fins. They could've used a lot thicker alu fins, but the costs would've gone up, with the weight and "FULL COPPER HEATSINKS OMG" sells better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

Remember, since copper's thermal conductivity is much MUCH higher than aluminum's, you need really good fans + air flow in your case to cool this baby down and get rid of all the heat it stores.

---

epic fail... seriously...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

Buddy, copper has the 3rd highest thermal conductivity on Earth, behind diamond and silver. That means that whatever heat was transferred to the aluminum was dependent on the aluminum's ability to conduct heat energy. Now, since copper's conductivity is HIGHER, much MUCH higher (401 vs 237 W/(m·K)). That means that at any given time, it will be transferring and thus storing more heat energy than the aluminum version. Soooo that means that in order for the heatsink to not become overpowered by its own thermal conductivity, it needs to GET RID of the heat it conducts at a faster pace as well. Hence, the reason for more powerful fans.

---

whats it with the word 'store' - theres thermal conductance & thermal resistance

u make it sound as if a Alu HS doesnt need as powerful fans :shakes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

That is purely theoretical.

---

what a crock of poo - I guess its only known as the Laws of Physics in a lab too then? :rofl: :down:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

You forget that the heat transfer that occurs between the CPU and the copper heatsink is greater than that of the heatsink and the air. Although copper's heat capacity is a lot bigger than aluminum's, eventually, if the fans aren't getting rid of the heat at a greater rate than the heatsink is absorbing it, then the copper will start getting hotter and hotter and become useless.

---

lol. so do tell what would happen to the Alu HS? :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

That's why just looking at thermal conductivity doesn't tell the whole story. In a lab, yeah it does, but in real life it does not.

---

I sense... fail

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

An aluminum heatsink doesn't conduct as much, so its fans can remove the heat from the case without becoming overburdened.

---

repeat that ^ to urself a few times, till u realise what u have said....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

You CANNOT expect a heatsink to cool well if you aren't removing that excess heat from the case. That's all I'm saying.

---

I fixed that sentence for u ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

First off, yeah a copper heatsink will be removing more heat but at the cost of ambient temperature rising IF YOU DON'T HAVE GOOD AIR FLOW.

---

u say that like its a bad thing... we want/need the air surrounding/passing the HS to rise in temp - it lets us know we are being successful in transferring heat from HS to air :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

don't have close to the perfect air flow you seem to think exists. Again, consumer PC's are not a lab. We don't live in a vacuum, figuratively speaking. I think you're applying absolute scientific laws in a chaotic environment without thinking outside the box and realizing that there are a few important factors that kill this naive thinking.

---

pfft. let me repeat it for u: Laws of Physics (in this case, thermal dynamics)
I'm afraid they apply all the time, everywhere, everyday
they are not askew just cause they have been proven in a lab.. air flow is air flow, 'perfect' or not - it will have the same affect, relative to its amount, so the Laws still apply, the formulas are still true, fair'n'square - the only thing that has changed are the numbers that are plugged in to their corresponding symbols, thus changing the answer, thats all..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

...it's traumatizing.

---

the only thing traumatizing is the lack of knowledge displayed by a few pplz, esp. RE: Cu vs Al & thermal properties etc..



*unbelievable*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pyroe_Inc

I think you misunderstood him. Cause you're both saying the same thing.
Copper is better. You just have to have more airflow, to be able to notice the difference...

---

No, you really don't. Copper will conduct faster, at the same air flow rates. NotFred made a very good point here. The copper version will transfer the energy at a faster rate than Al, so it might increase the bulk/ambient air temperature, so to combat that, you raise fan speeds, but in reality, the same amount of energy is released using an Al heatsink, so at steady state your energy balance is the same regardless of heatsink. Either you have a warmer CPU, or you release the energy to the air at a higher rate, and increase your air temperature. You've reduced the resistance to heat transfer from the heat source, so you're cooling it more effectively.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tiro_uspsss

*unbelievable*

---

I think his lack of response to my posts suggest he might have seen the light, I just wish this was common knowledge among the community.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryboto

At any fan speed, copper is a better material for heat transfer vs aluminum. I have done term papers on this, it's thermodynamic fact. My Zalman did come with a low speed fan(1500rpm is in no way at all super-quiet, you don't see that until you go below 1000rpm), and it worked fine. Unless you can show us some testing results proving your assertion, it's just wrong to make these kind of claims about copper v. aluminum. The heat transfer from the material to the air is a function of the air and temperature delta, not a function of the material.

---

Wrong, it is also a function of the material. The air/material temperature delta also holds true, as you claim.

Sorry, I should have said 1000rpm instead of 1500rpm-- I was just making an example by saying "a super quiet fan (1500rpm MAX, which is far quieter than the 2800rpm fan that it comes with).. and I said that I was not sure exactly what the fan threshold would be where you would start *noticing* a difference between aluminum and copper. For really noticeable results, it would have to be in the generic 2000+rpm ballpark. It's like having 0.5 degree difference, which would be within the margin of error (of course, your term papers would not include the margin of error that comes with real-life testing that I have done for many years). If the difference is so slight at low fan rpm speeds, aluminum is the obvious choice since it's far more cost-efficient and much lighter. That's why aluminum is a god-send for fan-less heatsinks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pyroe_Inc

I think you misunderstood him. Cause you're both saying the same thing.
Copper is better. You just have to have more airflow, to be able to notice the difference...

---

Thanks, Pyroe.. you said it all.

Lol sorry if I haven't seen YOUR light. Copper does STORE more heat at any point in time. Just because because the electrons move from one orbit to another doesn't mean they aren't IN ONE PLACE AT ONE TIME DURING THIS TRANSFER OF ENERGY. The one guy's long ass post is pretty crap. Only insecure people need to break down a post sentence by sentence to make themselves look special. You just look retarded imo anyway.

The point I have been making since the start is that THE COPPER TRANSFERS MORE HEAT FROM THE CPU. YES, IT'S OBVIOUS TO A CHILD THAT THE HEAT PRODUCED BY THE PROCESSOR IS THE SAME REGARDLESS OF HEATSINK, BUT THAT EXCESS HEAT THAT ISN'T TRANSFERRED BY LESS CONDUCTIVE MATERIALS SUCH AS ALUMINUM IS DISPERSED IN A CHAOTIC AND UNPREDICTABLE MANNER, TO LOCATIONS UNKNOWN TO USE SINCE NOBODY HERE HAS DONE TESTS TO SEE WHERE THE HEAT IS GOING. THE SAME HEAT BEING TRANSFERRED BY THE COPPER HEATSINK IS GOING IN THE CASE, RESULTING IN A POTENTIALLY HIGHER AMBIENT TEMPERATURE IF MORE POWERFUL FANS AREN'T PUSHING THE HEAT OUTSIDE THE CASE. THAT IS ALL I'M SAYING FFS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

Lol sorry if I haven't seen YOUR light. Copper does STORE more heat at any point in time. Just because because the electrons move from one orbit to another doesn't mean they aren't IN ONE PLACE AT ONE TIME DURING THIS TRANSFER OF ENERGY. The one guy's long ass post is pretty crap. Only insecure people need to break down a post sentence by sentence to make themselves look special. You just look retarded imo anyway.

The point I have been making since the start is that THE COPPER TRANSFERS MORE HEAT FROM THE CPU. YES, IT'S OBVIOUS TO A CHILD THAT THE HEAT PRODUCED BY THE PROCESSOR IS THE SAME REGARDLESS OF HEATSINK, BUT THAT EXCESS HEAT THAT ISN'T TRANSFERRED BY LESS CONDUCTIVE MATERIALS SUCH AS ALUMINUM IS DISPERSED IN A CHAOTIC AND UNPREDICTABLE MANNER, TO LOCATIONS UNKNOWN TO USE SINCE NOBODY HERE HAS DONE TESTS TO SEE WHERE THE HEAT IS GOING. THE SAME HEAT BEING TRANSFERRED BY THE COPPER HEATSINK IS GOING IN THE CASE, RESULTING IN A POTENTIALLY HIGHER AMBIENT TEMPERATURE IF MORE POWERFUL FANS AREN'T PUSHING THE HEAT OUTSIDE THE CASE. THAT IS ALL I'M SAYING FFS.

---

oh, is that all ur trying to say? wow... & to think u had to SHOUT to get that across... u wouldnt think it would be so difficult in the host of sentences i picked out of ur posts that seemed to portray u more as a misplaced fountain/water feature @ a sewer plant (spouting bs as such)... & to think u were the one telling others to construct proper sentences:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bo_Fox

Wrong, it is also a function of the material. The air/material temperature delta also holds true, as you claim.

Sorry, I should have said 1000rpm instead of 1500rpm-- I was just making an example by saying "a super quiet fan (1500rpm MAX, which is far quieter than the 2800rpm fan that it comes with).. and I said that I was not sure exactly what the fan threshold would be where you would start *noticing* a difference between aluminum and copper. For really noticeable results, it would have to be in the generic 2000+rpm ballpark. It's like having 0.5 degree difference, which would be within the margin of error (of course, your term papers would not include the margin of error that comes with real-life testing that I have done for many years). If the difference is so slight at low fan rpm speeds, aluminum is the obvious choice since it's far more cost-efficient and much lighter. That's why aluminum is a god-send for fan-less heatsinks.

---

I didn't say anything about the accuracy or error margins, whether or not copper outperforms Al outside a margin of error. I'm just saying based on Heat transfer, and the governing energy balance equations, heat transfer from a material to the air or fluid is not a direct function of the material, but a function of the properties of the fluid, and the driving force for heat transfer, temperature difference. If anything, this alone would make copper a better choice for passive heatsinks, or fanned heatsinks. The copper will be warmer because it has a higher thermal conductivity, the greater temperature difference will increase the rate of heat transfer to the air. I posted the governing equations earlier.

Considering the heatpipes are already copper, and they transfer heat incredibly fast, having thin copper fins vs thin aluminum fins for this specific heatsink might show hardly any difference. If you were comparing a finned block of cu vs al, the differences would probably be more noticeable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

IT'S OBVIOUS TO A CHILD THAT THE HEAT PRODUCED BY THE PROCESSOR IS THE SAME REGARDLESS OF HEATSINK, BUT THAT EXCESS HEAT THAT ISN'T TRANSFERRED BY LESS CONDUCTIVE MATERIALS SUCH AS ALUMINUM IS DISPERSED IN A CHAOTIC AND UNPREDICTABLE MANNER, TO LOCATIONS UNKNOWN TO USE SINCE NOBODY HERE HAS DONE TESTS TO SEE WHERE THE HEAT IS GOING. THE SAME HEAT BEING TRANSFERRED BY THE COPPER HEATSINK IS GOING IN THE CASE, RESULTING IN A POTENTIALLY HIGHER AMBIENT TEMPERATURE IF MORE POWERFUL FANS AREN'T PUSHING THE HEAT OUTSIDE THE CASE. THAT IS ALL I'M SAYING FFS.

---

How can the copper heatsink disperse the heat to the case and alu cannot? The alu
disperses the heat to locations "unknown". Wtf, case maybe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

You need to cut your hair and learn to construct proper sentences that make sense.

Anyway, I don't think you understand what I was saying (or anyone else for that matter, seeing as how your grasp on the English language is total :banana::banana::banana::banana:), so it's not worth responding to you.

---

So that is your counter argument? At least I am willing to discuss this.

You are really saying that Alu works better than Cu? Why don't they use brass or cast iron instead? They must work SO well. :clap:

I wonder why Thermalright doesn't employ you, since you are so much ahead of their engineers... :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kiikkuja

How can the copper heatsink disperse the heat to the case and alu cannot? The alu
disperses the heat to locations "unknown". Wtf, case maybe?

---

Indeed...the "unknown" mysterious location might be inside the case....since the CPU is placed inside the case :shrug:

LOL

Ill just say that cooper cools better, in any aspect/condition. Unfortunately, the misconception is not dead yet...

There are a variety of materials in a case, and heat can be trapped which is why there is such a thing as hot spots. To think that because copper is a better thermal conductor automatically makes better cooling is foolish. It isn't that simple...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kiikkuja

How can the copper heatsink disperse the heat to the case and alu cannot? The alu
disperses the heat to locations "unknown". Wtf, case maybe?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tonucci

Indeed...the "unknown" mysterious location might be inside the case....since the CPU is placed inside the case :shrug:

LOL

Ill just say that cooper cools better, in any aspect/condition. Unfortunately, the misconception is not dead yet...

---

Probably through the PCB, surrounded materials the chip is in contact with, etc, etc, etc.

If the Al won't wick away the heat fast enough from the CPU, it'll disperse with whatever else it is in contact with.

That makes total sense. Baron's point does make sense, though it's a bit .. confusing in presentation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

There are a variety of materials in a case, and heat can be trapped which is why there is such a thing as hot spots. To think that because copper is a better thermal conductor automatically makes better cooling is foolish. It isn't that simple...

---

it is that simple. Copper is better at cooling a surface than Aluminum. That is what you were arguing against. Now you're modifying your argument to say that because copper allows for lower thermal resistance of heat transfer from the CPU it's heating the ambient air faster(true), and causing hot spots and this makes copper not as acceptable. Well, it's cooling the CPU better, and I really don't think it's going to be of the magnitude that we'll see even a 2-3C increase in case temps, unless of course you're trying to use this in an extremely quiet system, which I'm assuming no one will do.

If your CPU puts out 50 watts of heat, and say with a copper cooler it runs at 35*C, and with an aluminum it runs at 45*C, and those are steady temperatures, they don't increase at all after that point. 50 watts is 50 watts, whether it is at 35*C or 45*C. You put the copper cooler on the CPU, it simple is able to take the heat away from the CPU faster, but the same 50 watts of heat is still being dumped into the case from the aluminum heatsink.

There is no such thing as a free lunch. If 50 watts is being dissipated by the alu sink, 50 watts is going to be dissipated by the copper sink. With the copper sink you will get more cooler air, while with the alu sink you get less hotter air. It all works out the same in the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cegras

Probably through the PCB, surrounded materials the chip is in contact with, etc, etc, etc.

If the Al won't wick away the heat fast enough from the CPU, it'll disperse with whatever else it is in contact with.

That makes total sense. Baron's point does make sense, though it's a bit .. confusing in presentation.

---

No, what happens with Al as opposed to Cu is that the rate of heat transfer is lower, so instead the CPU is hotter as a result. Sure, you'll have some heat transfer to the socket, and to other places, but the surface area for heat transfer in those directions are much much smaller, so their resistance to heat transfer is much much greater that they don't really do much in the grand scheme.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cegras

Probably through the PCB, surrounded materials the chip is in contact with, etc, etc, etc.

If the Al won't wick away the heat fast enough from the CPU, it'll disperse with whatever else it is in contact with.

That makes total sense. Baron's point does make sense, though it's a bit .. confusing in presentation.

---

Yes, I got the point, I was just kiddin. He obviously knows that the "location" is inside the case lol. I understand that the real point is, "where" in the case.

Its an matter of heat distribution inside the case, since the heat source output the same watts regardless of the heatsink material.

With cooper, you get colder hot spots, therefore you get hotter surrounding air. This is ideal, it makes easier getting the heat out of the case by using fans.

With alu the inverse is true. More heat build up in the different materials, like the cpu itself, socket area etc, rather than surrounding air, so its harder to get the heat out of the case.

Yes, an better thermal conductor automatically makes better cooling. Its that simple. Colder hot spots, in detriment of surrounding air, is obviously better than the opposite.

My english is not the best, so dont take it too literally :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryboto

it is that simple. Copper is better at cooling a surface than Aluminum. That is what you were arguing against. Now you're modifying your argument to say that because copper allows for lower thermal resistance of heat transfer from the CPU it's heating the ambient air faster(true), and causing hot spots and this makes copper not as acceptable. Well, it's cooling the CPU better, and I really don't think it's going to be of the magnitude that we'll see even a 2-3C increase in case temps, unless of course you're trying to use this in an extremely quiet system, which I'm assuming no one will do.

---

You are totally off...show me one post where I said Aluminum is better than copper at transferring heat. What I've been saying all along is that with greater heat transfer comes the risk of greater ambient temps IF you don't have good fans (which HAS been my point all along...the need for powerful fans to offset copper's much great heat transferring ability).

Gentleman:
Lets remember to keep this friendly and also remember my last point from my post:
We will find out the truth ONLY when one of us has tested this here at XS.
Until then all is speculation..
But it really is pretty! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

You are totally off...show me one post where I said Aluminum is better than copper at transferring heat. What I've been saying all along is that with greater heat transfer comes the risk of greater ambient temps IF you don't have good fans (which HAS been my point all along...the need for powerful fans to offset copper's much great heat transferring ability).

---

Earlier you said-

Quote:

---

That means that at any given time, it will be transferring and thus storing more heat energy than the aluminum version. Soooo that means that in order for the heatsink to not become overpowered by its own thermal conductivity, it needs to GET RID of the heat it conducts at a faster pace as well. Hence, the reason for more powerful fans.

---

You didn't mention anything about case fans, just a fan for the heatsink itself. Here's what I don't get, you're saying we should have higher speed case fans if we use Cu heatsinks, well, what happens if we use Al heatsinks? Should we need less airflow?

In reality, if you use Al, your CPU is warmer, so, you'd use a higher speed fan to force convection from the heatsink faster. You don't need to offset anything. How much of an increase in case temps do you think a copper version is going to give you?

I don't mean to put you on the spot, but looking through it seems like you've expanded and changed your initial stance on the subject.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Gentleman:
Lets remember to keep this friendly and also remember my last point from my post:
We will find out the truth ONLY when one of us has tested this here at XS.
Until then all is speculation..
But it really is pretty! :D

---

I'm doing my best to be polite, I like constructive arguments. If I'm coming off as overly negative towards anyone, I apologize.

Man, anyone who reads my posts from my 1st to my last in this thread will realize what I've been saying. You don't need to try and make me look like a back peddler just cause a couple of ppl said they get what I'm trying to say and that I may have a point. Sheesh.

Just drop it....:shakes:

why are you guys arguing, i have the email from thermalright directly that says this post is speculation, and there isnt even an official release date yet as its in pre-production

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

Man, anyone who reads my posts from my 1st to my last in this thread will realize what I've been saying. You don't need to try and make me look like a back peddler just cause a couple of ppl said they get what I'm trying to say and that I may have a point. Sheesh.

---

Well, I disagree, but that's how it's just going to be. I did ask you some questions in my last post, but if you don't want to discuss it anymore, that's fine too.

lol

I don't care about thermal conductivity or the laws of thermal dynamics or even who is making the most convincing argument in this thread.... I just want 20 units of this heatsink to start my copper dealership!!!

:D

ps. Ok. I admit it. One of these beauties might just sort of accidentally get mounted on top of my CPU..... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Gentleman:
Lets remember to keep this friendly and also remember my last point from my post:
We will find out the truth ONLY when one of us has tested this here at XS.
Until then all is speculation..
But it really is pretty! :D

---

Agreed. Teh massive and/or shiny is always gonna sell me. :rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spawne32

why are you guys arguing, i have the email from thermalright directly that says this post is speculation, and there isnt even an official release date yet as its in pre-production

---

Well... speculation or not, i believe thermalright need to come with a new product, not a yet again another TRU's version, we have the alu version, and the xtreme one, than we have the black one, now... perhaps a copper one...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Gentleman:
Lets remember to keep this friendly and also remember my last point from my post:
We will find out the truth ONLY when one of us has tested this here at XS.
Until then all is speculation..
But it really is pretty! :D

---

+1 Attachment 85399

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frananta

Well... speculation or not, i believe thermalright need to come with a new product, not a yet again another TRU's version, we have the alu version, and the xtreme one, than we have the black one, now... perhaps a copper one...

---

Yea, I hope we see some refreshing and innovative air coolers, the current designs are great, but there's always room for improvement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryboto

Yea, I hope we see some refreshing and innovative air coolers, the current designs are great, but there's always room for improvement.

---

I would love to test one.

I promise not to melt it down and sell it back to China! :D

This thread started out pretty badly anyway, with the 3kg claim and all.. I dont blame some of you guys since there were quite a number of review sites giving the wrong idea that aluminum fins cool better than copper fins.

Too much is being said on this thread, and not enough facts/numbers/statistics being shown. As Movieman said, only tests (benchmarks) will show the proof.

We could just look up the old comparisons of Thermalright's XP-90 vs. Xp-90c:

XP-90's weight: 360g
XP-90c's weight: 690g

(note: The copper version is not even twice the weight of the aluminum version.)

By looking at behardware's test, the aluminum XP-90 actually performs identically to the copper version when a low-speed fan is being used at o/c speeds, the delta temperature is 29.9 degrees for both versions, see: http://www.behardware.com/articles/5...u-coolers.html

Oh man this thread is packed full of fail.. the cpu heat goes to places "unknown" bahahaha!!

Alu dissapates heat to air better than copper? Umm no.

As ryboto said, the rate as which the heat transfers to the air is caused by the temperature delta between the ambient air and the heatsink, assuming others things constant like rate of airflow etc. It's complete bull:banana::banana::banana::banana: that aluminium does this better than copper and you're an idiot if you believe it. Copper is ALWAYS better than than aluminium for thermal and electrical applications, period.

its heavier than my laptop!!:yepp:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

You are totally off...show me one post where I said Aluminum is better than copper at transferring heat. What I've been saying all along is that with greater heat transfer comes the risk of greater ambient temps IF you don't have good fans (which HAS been my point all along...the need for powerful fans to offset copper's much great heat transferring ability).

---

which is total bs
a 50W chip doesn't pump more heat into the case because you put a better cooler on it
the point you are implying about more heat being transferred to the PCB when you have a poorer heatsink doesn't change that

since the rate of heat transfer between air and a surface is dependant only on the rate of air-flow and temperature difference between the surface and the air i think if you were to say "the copper and aluminium heatsink versions would be the same temperature in the same conditions (same air flow, air temperature, and cpu load), but the temperature difference between the heatsink and CPU would be lower with the copper heatsink" you'd be 90% correct (there'd be slight differences, eg with the copper heatsink the base would be cooler due to the cooler CPU underneath, while the heat on the fins would be less concentrated around the heatpipes)

Have we all completely ignored my post previously where I demonstrated that for a given power draw, and a given airflow, the ambient temperature inside the case is the same? No matter what cooling is going on inside the case.

The heat from the CPU cannot disappear into mysterious magical places; it all has to leave the case once the system is in steady state. The only way to do this is via the airflow (the case itself will never get hot enough to start radiating heat).

If anyone can point out the flaw in this argument I’d appreciate it…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baron_Davis

3) Conversely, if an aluminum heatsink is less thermally conductive, and it transfers LESS heat to the CPU area through the heatsink, where does the rest of the heat go? (this is a big one, if you feel faint, just let this one go and let the big boys take a stab at it)

---

If it's less thermally conductive, the surface it's cooling will become hotter, that's where the "heat" or heat energy goes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotFred

The heat from the CPU cannot disappear into mysterious magical places; it all has to leave the case once the system is in steady state. The only way to do this is via the airflow (the case itself will never get hot enough to start radiating heat).

If anyone can point out the flaw in this argument I’d appreciate it…

---

Spot on!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotFred

Have we all completely ignored my post previously where I demonstrated that for a given power draw, and a given airflow, the ambient temperature inside the case is the same? No matter what cooling is going on inside the case.

The heat from the CPU cannot disappear into mysterious magical places; it all has to leave the case once the system is in steady state. The only way to do this is via the airflow (the case itself will never get hot enough to start radiating heat).

If anyone can point out the flaw in this argument I’d appreciate it…

---

Hot air moves up, you can not stop it. So yeah even with 0 airflow hot air will find a way to escape your case. These things are not air tight. BUT the question is how quick it does it? That's where airflow is getting in to play, if you got good airflow that warm air will go out the case faster thus lowering the overall temperature.

I just voted this thread with a 1-star "terrible" rating. Nobody seems to be reading each other's posts (including my posts). It's an overly bloated thread anyways. I do not want to be thread-crapping but honestly that's what I voted for 150+ argumentative posts on this thread. Next time, more statistics and less drama please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Katanai

Hot air moves up, you can not stop it. So yeah even with 0 airflow hot air will find a way to escape your case. These things are not air tight. BUT the question is how quick it does it? That's where airflow is getting in to play, if you got good airflow that warm air will go out the case faster thus lowering the overall temperature.

---

I agree with everything you just said, but fail to see how it invalidates anything I said. I was talking about a situation with constant case airflow (be it through fans moving air around or from air escaping out the top through convection). If you increase airflow then yes, case temperature and thus component temperature. will drop. This will affect things equally no matter what heat sink is being used however.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bo_Fox

I just voted this thread with a 1-star "terrible" rating. Nobody seems to be reading each other's posts (including my posts). It's an overly bloated thread anyways. I do not want to be thread-crapping but honestly that's what I voted for 150+ argumentative posts on this thread. Next time, more statistics and less drama please.

---

I disagree.

All of my posts were humurous and non-argumentative... so that makes it only 145+ argumentative posts :D

Edit... whoops.... that was an argumentative post, wasn't it?

:eek: :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biker

I disagree.

All of my posts were humurous and non-argumentative... so that makes it only 145+ argumentative posts :D

Edit... whoops.... that was an argumentative post, wasn't it?

:eek: :D

---

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl: :up:

Big bump but Scan.co.uk has received a sample
http://forums.hexus.net/scan-care-he...my-cooler.html
Yes I want one :D :D

Model︰Ture Copper Ultra-120 Extreme
Weight︰1.8KG
Price︰99USD
Sell Date:the Month
new Limited qty 1000

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3065/...6a26e9eb_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3191/...37487fb9_o.jpg
Left：Ture Copper Ultra-120 Extreme,Right:Ture black Ultra-120 Extreme

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3222/...1b954eae_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3059/...92ef61b8_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2091/...16649cb1_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3072/...91db53d7_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2156/...41f919e5_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3223/...c7da428f_o.jpg

base finish looks to have machining marks :s

hopefully its at least flat

just a 1000 ?? great.. what are chances of actually being able to buy 2 of these now..

when available ??

Toms says there be 2000 produced and they be out "this month"

Source: Toms

sxs112

test please

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biker

I disagree.

All of my posts were humurous and non-argumentative... so that makes it only 145+ argumentative posts :D

Edit... whoops.... that was an argumentative post, wasn't it?

:eek: :D

---

Sorry I didnt mean 150.. i meant 100+.. LOL :D Most of yours were good, IIRC!

wow is this the only pure copper HSF so far? must be heavy...

I predict a re-release after initial run at $20 less...

What do I know though.

And this price is ridiculous i hope it gives significant improvement..

To me this looks more like a marketing experiment to see if the community will accept a $100 cooler.

If its $100, we're going into a cheap watercooling setup...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhiteFireDragon

wow is this the only pure copper HSF so far? must be heavy...

---

Thermaltake had an all copper one a few years back called the tower 112. It's a heavy beast, weighs over 2 lbs, but works well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darks0ulz

If its $100, we're going into a cheap watercooling setup...

---

$100 won't get you a watercooling setup worth a crap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xVeinx

Thermaltake had an all copper one a few years back called the tower 112. It's a heavy beast, weighs over 2 lbs, but works well.

---

There was also the Hyper6 years back, I've still got one somewhere heavy little sob.

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1...mke2910ak1.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotFred

Have we all completely ignored my post previously where I demonstrated that for a given power draw, and a given airflow, the ambient temperature inside the case is the same? No matter what cooling is going on inside the case.

The heat from the CPU cannot disappear into mysterious magical places; it all has to leave the case once the system is in steady state. The only way to do this is via the airflow (the case itself will never get hot enough to start radiating heat).

If anyone can point out the flaw in this argument I’d appreciate it…

---

There are three ways to transfer thermal energy.


If there is a completely sealed case and components generating heat inside, the air inside will will heat. As the hot air goes up, the heat from the air transfers to the metal case because the casing metal is cooler than the air in the case. This then creates delta between the metallic case and the ambient room temperature. The bigger the delta is, the more heat is being transfered off from the case. Method like this, of course, is very inefficient when compared to a case coolers, but it works to a some degree. Better with hot components.

Well, as I said, the method is inefficient. But however, the case CAN heat up. It can burn your fingers. It can cause a fire in your room etc. Of course, the components would die before such an accident would happen, but nothing prevents that from happening if the components inside the sealed case generate enough heat. Enough being more than the case can radiate or conduct heat until the case temperature is high enough to e.g. start a fire.

Just a note for some people here:

If you have a isolated case, with 400 W(static, measured from the wall plug) "worth" (;)) of hardware, the ambient air in the room will be heated with 400 W, no matter how many fans or coolers it has. Same with water cooling. Same with peltier elements(as long as the 400 W is drawn from the wall.) Even if you had no fans, no coolers, 6 CPUs and 4 GFX cards with 64 GB of RAM and the system draws 400 W, it will not heat up the room any more or less than a single 400 W hair drier, or any other household item which draws the 400 W from the wall.

For some it seems that if you have a passive CPU heatsink(80C), it will heat the case more than a active(same heatsink with a fan attached) heatsink(45C) would. Same goes with GFX cards, unless the air is blown out of the case due to added fan/increased RPM. Some people keep thinking that if you have e.g. HD4850 with 15 % fan RPM and the card tops at 95C under load, it will heat the case more than it would with 100 % fan. Which is false(more RPM translates to more energy needed by the rotor of the fan, which means more heat).

anyone have an idea of how this limited release is going to be distributed? or what retailers are going to get them?

i thought 1000 pieces

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xVeinx

Thermaltake had an all copper one a few years back called the tower 112. It's a heavy beast, weighs over 2 lbs, but works well.

---

I was using 112 till 1 week ago when i got my new pc :D Damn sexy cooler, biggest fans was 92mm though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SparkyJJO

$100 won't get you a watercooling setup worth a crap.

---

Nope, but it buys a ddc and some tygon tubing :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LOE

useless and too heavy, if people want lower temps there are far better ways than breaking your mobo :D

---

Such as? +$200 water cooling + all the hassle for (more) unrelaible (than air cooling) cooling system?

If it gives at least a 4C average temp difference it's worth it. Since the original true is just as good as a entry water kit this might take some market back from the badwater.

http://forums.hexus.net/scan-care-he...ml#post1549940

Quote:

---

Lee @ SCAN:
After speaking to the guys downstairs about the cooler they have stated that in a few tests it has been a massive 10 degrees cooler than the standard TRUE 120 edition and about 7 degrees cooler than the TRUE 120 black edition cooler.

Therefore it does appear to be very good at cooling, but a bit on the heavy side which is causing them to stroke their chins and hum a lot

---

pinch of salt, I always thought the TRUE and TRUE black were identical in temps

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Calmatory

If you have a isolated case, with 400 W(static, measured from the wall plug) "worth" (;)) of hardware, the ambient air in the room will be heated with 400 W, no matter how many fans or coolers it has. Same with water cooling. Same with peltier elements(as long as the 400 W is drawn from the wall.) Even if you had no fans, no coolers, 6 CPUs and 4 GFX cards with 64 GB of RAM and the system draws 400 W, it will not heat up the room any more or less than a single 400 W hair drier, or any other household item which draws the 400 W from the wall.

---

:shakes:

This is not true. A large majority of that 400W is converted to "work" (either mechanical or electrical). Inefficiency and resistance leads to heat generation, but it is nowhere near the full 400W that the system is drawing at the wall.

10C says nothing. Is it from 190C to 180C under -120C ambient?

The delta between ambient(case) temperature and the CPU temperature would help more. If the delta for TRUE is e.g. 33C, and this drops it to 23C..... :D :) Then again, if the delta is 95C and this drops it to 85C, then the performance increase isn't THAT remarkable.

Oh and for the hypocrites, and as you can see, my values are intended not to be practical, so don't even think about picking on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vinas

If it gives at least a 4C average temp difference it's worth it. Since the original true is just as good as a entry water kit this might take some market back from the badwater.

---

This would depend on the load but i bet that possible...

low power cpu's obviously wont need this however a high clocked quad might see some gains.

nice True... expensive ...any bench ??? i like more the look of the ninja cooper, but performance dindt increased to much from alu to cu in that case....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by halo112358

Nope, but it buys a ddc and some tygon tubing :D

---

I had some time ago water cooling setup for about 80$ :) Alphacool Nexxxos XP Light, Cooltek CPS 750 pump and Alphacool Nexxxos Xtreme 2x120mm radiator :D Cheap (used parts), but probably better than all air coolers ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LexDiamonds

:shakes:

This is not true. A large majority of that 400W is converted to "work" (either mechanical or electrical). Inefficiency and resistance leads to heat generation, but it is nowhere near the full 400W that the system is drawing at the wall.

---

Work like what? Do you know what word "efficiency" means in this context?

Inefficiency? What does the energy turn into? Sound waves? Fotons which show up as a visible light inside the CPU core? :ROTF: Even if so, what does light turn into when it collides a solid object? Some of it will reflect, and the rest will turn into heat. Same goes with the sound. Everything turns into heat.

Even if the energy was stored as kinetic energy to the rotating blades of a fan, the rotating blades would cause friction inside the motor of the fan and some friction between the air and the surface of the blade. Some of the energy would be drained due to the air resistance, and that would make air move. Kinetic energy again. Which would later turn into heat thanks to the viscosity of air, friction again.

Here is something for you to think about: If not all of the 400 W goes to the heat, where does it go? Where does THAT energy store itself?

IF it is possible to store energy that way(in your opinion), please share! That would be major breaktrough.

it's only going to perform significantly better than its predecessor when the heat load is huge, passing the break-even point and then when awesome fans are used to remove that heat.

like the XP-90c. it's got potential due to it's capacity, but a great amount of airflow is a must.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Calmatory

Work like what? Do you know what word "efficiency" means in this context?

Inefficiency? What does the energy turn into? Sound waves? Fotons which show up as a visible light inside the CPU core? :ROTF: Even if so, what does light turn into when it collides a solid object? Some of it will reflect, and the rest will turn into heat. Same goes with the sound. Everything turns into heat.

Even if the energy was stored as kinetic energy to the rotating blades of a fan, the rotating blades would cause friction inside the motor of the fan and some friction between the air and the surface of the blade. Some of the energy would be drained due to the air resistance, and that would make air move. Kinetic energy again. Which would later turn into heat thanks to the viscosity of air, friction again.

Here is something for you to think about: If not all of the 400 W goes to the heat, where does it go? Where does THAT energy store itself?

IF it is possible to store energy that way(in your opinion), please share! That would be major breaktrough.

---

obviously not a physics buff. heat is just one form of energy. a lot turns into heat eventually, of course, but your reasoning is flawed.

just consider the energy needed to ride a bicycle. if everything went into heat, how would you move forward?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by biohead

obviously not a physics buff. heat is just one form of energy. a lot turns into heat eventually, of course, but your reasoning is flawed.

just consider the energy needed to ride a bicycle. if everything went into heat, how would you move forward?

---

Maybe I made it unclear a bit. But thats exactly what I am talking about. All the consumed energy will turn into heat. It will heat the room with the same amount of energy which is taken from the wall.

Well, you are right. I put it in a bad fashion. Of course, if the case is completely sealed and isolated, it will not necessarily heat the room with the 400 W at any given time, but eventually all the energy taken from the wall will turn into heat and thus the room will be heated with the same amount of energy.

Should be a tad more clear now. :)

Calmatory-

Pick up a book man.. In your universe, I can pump 10 gallons of fuel from the pump into a can, place the can into the back of my truck and take the fuel home to heat my house-- and my car magically drives itself with no gas just by virtue of holding those 10 gallons in the can on the drive home.

That is the arguement you are trying to prove here. Work is always being done in any system.. This takes some % of the watts. Watts are a measure of work done over time.

Get a haircut too....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LexDiamonds

Calmatory-

Pick up a book man.. In your universe, I can pump 10 gallons of fuel from the pump into a can, place the can into the back of my truck and take the fuel home to heat my house-- and my car magically drives itself with no gas just by virtue of holding those 10 gallons in the can on the drive home.

That is the arguement you are trying to prove here. Work is always being done in any system.. This takes some % of the watts. Watts are a measure of work done over time.

Get a haircut too....

---

Oh the irony! You tell me to get a book, when you obviously haven't read yours.

If you do X amount of work, you will also eventually generate X amount of heat, no matter what. How is this different inside a sealed computer case?

You were talking about efficiency. Let's take a simple example: Take a 60W lightbulb and let it light your room. Now, the efficiency of the particular bulb is, let's say, 5,86 %. 5,86 % of the energy consumed is visible light. That would mean that (60*0.0586=)3.51 watts goes into visible light. Now, do you think that (60-3,51=)56.49 watts goes into heat and sound due to the bad efficiency? What happens to the light energy when it collides with something? Does it disapprear? Does it go somewhere we can't see? Under your bed? No. Some of it will reflect. Some of it will be absorbed by the matter it collides with. All that absorbed energy now turns into heat. Same happens with sound. When all the light the bulb emits eventually turns into heat, it means that all the energy consumed by the bulb indeed turns into heat. Eventually.

Edit: This somehow reminds me of the "Cu vs. Alu" discussion in this same thread. :rolleyes:

Ok, so what about a computer. If a computer was pulling 400 W for an hour long, and all of that energy (0.4 kWh) would eventually turn into heat... how does that work? The efficiency is say 80%, so 80 W is turned into heat while the computer is running. The other 320 W is turned into other forms of energy for all the hardware to function. Now, after an hour the computer is shut down. Your logic says 0.32 kWh must now be turned into heat, because everything turns into heat eventually. But the computer isn't doing anything, it's not suddenly going to give off more than a kilojoule of heat because it has to. So, enlighten me.

I think you misunderstand efficiency, which I assume you refer to the PSU?

If the computer needs 400W, then at 80% efficiency the PSU will pull 500W from the socket, its that 20% that is lost via heat.
I might be wrong though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by biohead

Ok, so what about a computer. If a computer was pulling 400 W for an hour long, and all of that energy (0.4 kWh) would eventually turn into heat... how does that work? The efficiency is say 80%, so 80 W is turned into heat while the computer is running. The other 320 W is turned into other forms of energy for all the hardware to function. Now, after an hour the computer is shut down. Your logic says 0.32 kWh must now be turned into heat, because everything turns into heat eventually. But the computer isn't doing anything, it's not suddenly going to give off more than a kilojoule of heat because it has to. So, enlighten me.

---

How hard is it to understand that all the power hardware takes is released as heat? If you think otherwise then please tell me what kind of energy is it if not heat? Kinetic? Sound? Light? Even if so, all that kinetic, sound and light energy will be released as heat at some point. Thus the 400 W will turn into heat eventually.

How can I make a point across when the opposing person do not have basic understanding about energy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LuckyNV

I think you misunderstand efficiency, which I assume you refer to the PSU?

If the computer needs 400W, then at 80% efficiency the PSU will pull 500W from the socket, its that 20% that is lost via heat.
I might be wrong though.

---

Excactly. :clap:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by biohead

Ok, so what about a computer. If a computer was pulling 400 W for an hour long, and all of that energy (0.4 kWh) would eventually turn into heat... how does that work? The efficiency is say 80%, so 80 W is turned into heat while the computer is running. The other 320 W is turned into other forms of energy for all the hardware to function. Now, after an hour the computer is shut down. Your logic says 0.32 kWh must now be turned into heat, because everything turns into heat eventually. But the computer isn't doing anything, it's not suddenly going to give off more than a kilojoule of heat because it has to. So, enlighten me.

---

Don't confuse power with energy, the Watt is Joules per second, simply a rate of energy conversion. The Watt-hour is a unit of power, a rate of energy use.

Only consider the system for a single slice in time, an instant. 400W in, some is lost through inefficient conversion. 400x0.8=320, so 80W of energy instantly lost. The current flows though conductors with resistance, convert to heat. Each voltage step or regulation releases heat. The cpu transistors pass current and change state, convert to heat. The fans convert electrical (electromagnetic) to kinetic with friction losses at the bearing, also moving air which imparts momentum which then slows from friction. To simplify say its a well insulated room (no radiation can escape) so a closed system. The energy in must equal energy out. With no energy out, the total energy must increase at the rate of 400 Joules/s. All of the energy used in that instant is either stored or converted. Assuming none is stored mechanically or electrically. As energy can't be lost, the net effect is a rise in room temperature from radiation (which includes direct heat as infra red, also other electromagnetic frequencies e.g. light and radio), convection (hot air) and conduction (the PC gets warm). Now in reality the room leaks energy, you left the door open, the walls absorb infra red and radio noise gets out. Once temperatures stabilize you've reached the point of equilibrium that's where the energy leaving the room equals the energy being used by the computer, otherwise the room would just get hotter and hotter.

The subject to read up on is the conservation of energy and the first law.

Preorder: http://www.frozencpu.com/products/83...ml?id=hPQ4xkJY

Will ship on October 30th my birthday :D.

In for 2

dood! that's my birthday too! yayy thermalright.

Will this fit for a nehalem socket???

I think it would fit but you need the back bracket right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Slovnaft

dood! that's my birthday too! yayy thermalright.

---

and my girlfriends birthday ;P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fornowagain

Don't confuse power with energy, the Watt is Joules per second, simply a rate of energy conversion. The Watt-hour is a unit of power, a rate of energy use.

Only consider the system for a single slice in time, an instant. 400W in, some is lost through inefficient conversion. 400x0.8=320, so 80W of energy instantly lost. The current flows though conductors with resistance, convert to heat. Each voltage step or regulation releases heat. The cpu transistors pass current and change state, convert to heat. The fans convert electrical (electromagnetic) to kinetic with friction losses at the bearing, also moving air which imparts momentum which then slows from friction. To simplify say its a well insulated room (no radiation can escape) so a closed system. The energy in must equal energy out. With no energy out, the total energy must increase at the rate of 400 Joules/s. All of the energy used in that instant is either stored or converted. Assuming none is stored mechanically or electrically. As energy can't be lost, the net effect is a rise in room temperature from radiation (which includes direct heat as infra red, also other electromagnetic frequencies e.g. light and radio), convection (hot air) and conduction (the PC gets warm). Now in reality the room leaks energy, you left the door open, the walls absorb infra red and radio noise gets out. Once temperatures stabilize you've reached the point of equilibrium that's where the energy leaving the room equals the energy being used by the computer, otherwise the room would just get hotter and hotter.

The subject to read up on is the conservation of energy and the first law.

---

That makes a lot more sense, thanks. With 0.4 kWh I of course meant 400*3600 = 1.44 MJ. When the system is eventually back to the point of equilibrium, this total amount of electrical energy taken from the wall socket has indeed been turned into heat over its complete time span.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LuckyNV

I think you misunderstand efficiency, which I assume you refer to the PSU?

If the computer needs 400W, then at 80% efficiency the PSU will pull 500W from the socket, its that 20% that is lost via heat.
I might be wrong though.

---

I meant power pulled from the socket. 400 watts means the hardware is using 320 watts with 80% PSU efficiency.

Thermalright must consider to hire watercool engineers to build motherboard waterblock instead of these crap copper heatsinks. What a waste! There are 4 things I don't like this heatsink are :
1) Will generate too much dust in the case.
2) Will generate more heat when playing game.
3) Will crack the motherboard someday with that 1kg weight.
4) With that price, I can buy a MCR 320 QP & D-Tek Fuzion V2.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by damtachoa

1) Will generate too much dust in the case.

---

:confused::shrug:

Quote:

---

2) Will generate more heat when playing game.

---

:confused::shrug::rolleyes:

Quote:

---

3) Will crack the motherboard someday with that 1kg weight.

---

wus. motherboards are tough.

Quote:

---

4) With that price, I can buy a MCR 320 QP & D-Tek Fuzion V2.

---

or a pair of shoes. what's your point. Copper rules!

work doesn't allways turn into heat calmatory.

your right in the sense that there's alot of work or "interaction" between different surfaces that end up as heat. but your also forgetting the issue with atoms combining changing the structure. ei: chemical, radioactive and physical through other work.

heat is just a measurement of how "active" molecules are in a given medium.


explain this then, if heat is the one thing everything turned into what's the cause of heat?

i would LOVE to have one of these, unfortunately... these things are wayy too damn expensive for air. You could get a CPU water kit for the cost of this thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by exhausted mule

work doesn't allways turn into heat calmatory.

your right in the sense that there's alot of work or "interaction" between different surfaces that end up as heat. but your also forgetting the issue with atoms combining changing the structure. ei: chemical, radioactive and physical through other work.

heat is just a measurement of how "active" molecules are in a given medium.


explain this then, if heat is the one thing everything turned into what's the cause of heat?

---

In this case that can be ignored as matter does not change it's state. Thus the 400 W in, 400 W out applies.