thanks for an awesome work vapor! :up: would like to see more TIMs though
Printable View
thanks for an awesome work vapor! :up: would like to see more TIMs though
IC7 is a massive disappointment. Will have to try some PK1 though, Im struggling with MX3 and MX4. Such a shame OCZ Freeze was binned, I got great consistent results with that and never saw evidence of any cure time either.
@thegcpu - Balls of steel to go through that just for what, 2c at most? Absolutely no way am I trying that, thanks for dispelling my curiosity :).
Checked your other vids out too - some good stuff there dude :up:
Well i'm about to try some CL Liquid Ultra as the CPU will sit basically for several years on the same motherboard under the same waterblock... I found out i only change every few years of so, and if i do i replace everything anyway. So i dont mind the side effects of liquid metal pastes. I am curious about performance of other pastes though, still using them for everything else.Quote:
Originally Posted by churchy
very good review
I'm not sure how PK1 is vs MX4 or other new pastes, but I can tell you that Vapor (and whoever else that did the tests) hit the nail on the head with this one. It can be hard to notice the good performing TIM's with the hundreds that are on the market. So hats off to the folks @ Skinnee Labs for shedding some light on the PK1 paste.
Vinas: well, at least with good methodics it IS possible to notice. If testing methodics are flawed, at best you can compare only TIM pastes from different performance groups, but line up between close performing ones is more left to luck, as margin of error because of flaws in methodics is much bigger then said difference between paste performance. So many TIM tests seen out there, and in almost each of them line up of same pastes always is different. Therefore i usually end up with using skinneelab results. Even if it's not about 50 or 100 pastes, at least i can trust their tests a bit more. I can only hope that skinneelab's testbeds will last long so that more and more entries can be added to this roundup without branching another all anew.
Vapor, is it possible for us to get a short video or a set of pictures showing exactly how YOU apply TIM to your cpu...
you know, so i can check that i amdoinitrite
Anyone thinking about trying that coollaboratory pro stuff, just remember your block will forever be changed. I've used the coollaboratory liquid ultra and had only dropped ~1C from X23-7783D. So I've just switched back to using X23-7783D. Maybe the mount was bad? Though I had remounted I believe 4 times to try to get better temps. One great benefit from using it was I ended up lapping my Apogee XT to remove the silvery color. Well turns out that my Apogee XT had two dips in the base that was affecting cooling. After my lap job, I had dropped ~4C. I should have taken some pictures, but there was absolutely no way for me to have caused it by incorrectly lapping unless I had tried lapping with a dremel :)
I agree with zeropluszero. I'd love to see how you applied the TIMs. Not so much for the IX, but the others I'd love to see what was the best application for the different contacts.
PK 1 is interesting!!!
By dropped 4c, do you mean improved 4c (i.e., temperatures dropped) or got worse by 4c (i.e., performance dropped)?Quote:
Originally Posted by DumpALump
I would never lap a bowed block (which the Apogee XT is)--the bow is there to improve contact. If you improved by 4c though, hmmm, not sure what to make of that.
Also, not sure what pictures of me putting a blob of TIM on an IHS would offer? There's no magic or voodoo to it, just point the tip of the syringe at the center of the IHS and dispense the amount you want (generally, the thicker the paste, the more I apply--I don't change quantity with different contact settings, however), then put the block on. The only 'tip' I can give is don't let the block lift off while mounting. If a TIM has a different way of applying it in the instructions, then follow the instructions. If you're wondering if you're doing it right, you're probably overthinking it.
i had a dtek fusion block mounted on my CPU with its IHS taken off, ended up warping the block and left a huge dent ~2mm deep in the center. so the contact was horrible for the next cpu i put it on
weird stuff does happen
Updated with Coolink Chillaramic, Nanoxia Heat Buster, and Nexus TMP-1000 data, link to review, and added Poor/Moderate/Great contact charts.
Nexus TMP-1000 failed :eek:
Agreed with others here, nice video :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by thegcpu
It is time I finally give up AS5. About to order some of that prolimatech pk1 and see how it works out :cool: Might have to strip my rma'd gpu after a few benchmarks and see how well it works on that as well.
probably, but everyones concept of eyeballing a 'small amount' is different :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
The temps actually improved 4c. I've known since I got the apogee XT that you aren't supposed to lap it, but I think I just got a bad base on mine. You could clearly see while lapping that there were two recessed areas that weren't being touched by the sandpaper. I spent a pretty long time to get rid of those areas. It was basically two areas like in the picture (sorry on my laptop using the touchpad). The black areas were recessed and not getting lapped at all. I could understand if my technique was off, but I couldn't really see how as every other part of the base was getting sanded. The center of the block is above the bottom black area, so it wasn't from tipping the base.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/555/apogeedips.jpg
Yeah I pretty much do the same thing for application method. I just wasn't sure if you were putting on differing amounts based on the type of contact you were getting. I was thinking that with a much better contact, you would possibly require less as more of it will be spread away from the center.
Wow, 4c improvement with X23-7783D or CLP means seriously bad contact (both are great TIMs)...that's a surprise letdown from a Swiftech block (they've been big on the performance-through-contact thing for years now).
Remembered another tip: keep the tip of the syringe against the surface of the IHS when applying; don't let an airpocket form in or under the bead of TIM. If my Great Contact block were less bowed, I'd probably use less, but because of the severe bow (which flattens at the point of contact at the center), the pastes tend to still stay on the IHS but just nearer the edges. I could see how, with a different set of blocks meant to do basically the same thing (just with slightly different implementations of each contact tweak), I'd need to vary amounts, but I haven't so far :shrug:
Updated the first post with MX-3 and MX-4!
Something suddenly came up with AS5 and Ceramique, so I'm doing the Deep Cool trio now (Z3, Z5, and Z9).
Back to MX-3 though, I found something alarming in testing....major discrepancies in performance across production batches.
http://skinneelabs.com/wp-content/uploads/PoorAvg2.png
I only had enough original batch for the five Poor Contact mounts, so I don't know how it performed across the full range of contact, but the new batch MX-3 is just awful in comparison to original batch and was generally really bad on all three contact settings.
I finally got around to trying my IX kit and it went bad. The reflow did not happen like it should have and in fact most of the liquid metal ended up somewhat off the IHS. I am using a MM horizontal setup and was surprised at how the liquid flowed. It also left a big hole in the middle which I assume was where the block was actually making contact. I was very careful to follow the placement instructions, but when I tried the reflow process it did not go well. I also found the metal stuck to the IHS and the block and had to scrape it off using my finger nail, which was disturbing. I am very hesitant to try the second kit included since the process allows my chip to hit 100c. Obviously, I did something wrong and it's a shame since this stuff costs quite a bit. I went back to using MX4 for the time being. I was really hoping the IX would fix my huge temp spread I have amongst my cores, 14c at idle and 8c during load. Any advice would be great, like do I need to leave the block a little loose or crank it down completely for the reflow process?
I've used a few IX kits over the past year plus on several builds/rebuilds. I had not messed one up until I got to work on my MM case. But the mistake was mine. I new better than to tighten the mounts as hard as I did, and even thought about correcting it before starting, but decided to go full steam ahead. Only have of it flowed, and the rest pooled up. The funny part was the way it flowed. It went in a diagonal line from one corner to the next and left the opposite corners bare. Really odd bow and mounting pressure on my XT block. to get that effect, and I had used it with IX on a previous build with no problem. So I chalked it up to me not paying attention to the mount. I used the second app and it worked like a charm after a good cleaning and remount. Half a kit right down the drain and it was my fault. But I did go on here to XS and ask about IX in MM cases, and got some good and obvious advice. I use the stanard vert mount with my case. I didnt want to rool that big ol cube over and risk bending something. So I got some spare tubing (ton of old masterkleer) and pulled my boot drive out. Then I hooked up the spare tubing with extra length and pulled the mobo try out and set it flat next to the case. Hooked up extra PSU and did my reflow outside the case. When I was done, I drianed the loop, tossed the extra tubing, and placed everything back in, then put my LRT Green on and filled the loop. It all worked out, but I dont think it was worth the effort as I'm rebuilding yet again after only a few months. I just dont think that MM cases and IX are a good combo for the extra couple of degrees. I'm gonna stick with Liquid Ultra from now on as I could care less about the way it makes the block and IHS look. It works well, its easy to work with and its cheap.
My towers on the other hand will still get IX as its simple enough to lay them over for the reflow and well worth the return. The best advice I can give is to double check you mounting pressure and make sure you case is level. You shouldnt have to do the reflow out of the case as your say you have a horizontal mobo mount. I normally wouldnt suggest this in this day and age, but if you are really getting some out of wack core temps you might want try and check the depth of the concave surface of you IHS. It might be bad enough to warrant a lapping, but thats kinda rare on a i7. Maybe your block wasnt machined quite to spec or maybe even you mounts are warped by a hair or two. Do a test mount with a cheap TIM and really inspect the spread. If its just goofy then you know your problem is hardware related and not just bad pressure mounting or an uneven case during reflow. Good luck with it.
Great work Vapor!
Just waiting for the Shin-Etsu vs. MX-4 vs. PK-1 final round for us non-Indigo peeps!
Great work Eric...I really appreciate the time you're putting into this. :yepp: For those who do not know or realize...this is expremely time consuming...bravo my friend! :clap:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utnorris
I've tried IX twice, both times the reflow fails...these pictures are from the first attempt:Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain_Harlock
http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t...h_P1000335.jpg http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t...h_P1000336.jpg http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t...h_P1000337.jpg http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t...h_P1000338.jpg
I spoke with the IX rep afterward and he suggested I make absolutely sure the board was level and try again.
I did as instructed and used a construction type bubble level to ensure the surface was totally level. I also was extremely careful to follow the instructions to a tee....but the reflow failed again. While its obvious this product works very well when applied correctly...that process is too unreliable for mass use IMO :shakes:
Prolimatech PK-1 has been working great for me over the past few months, looks like I'll continue to use it :up:
Sample variance...I guess it's possible in just about anything.
Thanks for putting so much work into this though, great stuff..:up:
PK-1 and MX-4 are already done, PK-1 was a knockout winner. :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by LagunaX
Shin-Etsus are months away, I'm trying to alternate batch sizes of 2 and 3...Shin-Etsu will be a 3-TIM batch. If I'm on batch 0 right now, Shins are going to be batch 6, roughly 3ish months away. I'm curious to see if X23-7783D can keep up with PK-1 at moderate contact, my hunch is "no" based on how well PK-1 thinned out. I have no idea what to expect from X23-7762 and G751, but based on Shin-Etsu's own data, I'm not expecting much.
And thanks guys, each TIM takes 150 hours of CPU loading, so it's good to hear people are appreciating it :)
As for the IX issues, make sure the board is level, make sure your block isn't on too tightly (about the same pressure you'd get from a stock Intel heatsink or an Apogee XT or an EK Supreme HF Easy Mount, I suppose), and make sure your heatsink/block has a smooth base (no steps, no HDT, avoid superbows). I do two reflows every 7-10 days for my CPU block tests, and I don't do any tricks to get it to work. I'd say 5 out of 6 reflows are completely successful on blocks I've never done before....and basically a 100% success rate with ones I have done prior.
Miah, the one in your pictures is almost certainly from not being level. :(
Utnorris, yours does sound like too much mounting pressure. I make sure I tighten down the same amount on all four corners, then the non-bulge side I'll loosen slightly if there's a bow and tighten it when the PCMA (solder) is liquid. Considering the mounting pressure and bow I used for Great Contact setting, I wasn't expecting it to work, but it did (a look at the used ETIs looks bad, but temps were right on).
I don't really think there's any trick to it....but I got it right the first time and since then I've just tried to stay the course. Occasionally I'll try to do something a little differently, but I never find any benefit when I do. I can imagine if I didn't do it right the first time I'd be trying to overcorrect and be generally uncomfortable with it. Fortunately the Apogee GTZ I did it with first was very amenable to the process (right amount of pressure, copper base is a little more reflow friendly, bow wasn't too extreme). It's definitely the hardest TIM application out there and if you know you have really good contact, I don't know if I would say it's worth it over a PK-1 (or X23-7783D from my other tests).
I'm surprised no one else is very alarmed by the MX-3 batch differences. Assuming IX is .5c away from 'perfect,' new batch MX-3 (both tubes purchased when MX-4 released) is 125% worse than original batch MX-3 (purchased at MX-3 launch) with Poor Contact. I've used (with full-on monitoring) multiple batches of Shin-Etsus, MX-2, Ceramique, PK-1, IX, and AS Matrix and there hasn't even been a hint of a difference. Original batch MX-3 was the best of any paste with Poor Contact, new batch MX-3 was one of the worst. Even more alarmingly, the TIM prints made me think pump out was only a few thermal cycles away from happening.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain_Harlock
Thanks for the advice, lots of good info. And it sounds like maybe I put too much pressure on it. Not sure, but I swap gear enough I will stick with paste as my temps are not anything to worry about anyway. I just hate having something here and not using it.
Thanks for the pics, looks like how mine went. I may give PK1 a try once my MX4 runs out, till then it is working.Quote:
Originally Posted by miahallen
http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/4...ag0493q.th.jpg