Printable View
Thanx guys. Hey where can I get that Gold Palladium Comet dust TIM? They sell it at the Mercedes dealership along with the Disc brake stuff. Or do I get the Comet Dust at the Palladium night club in NYC? I'll ad them to the round-up.
I must diagree with what your saying Spicey, of course it makes a differnce. Sure Lap the heatsinkl, and CPU, BUT why not then add the best thermal paste you can find as well and gain another 3C-4C?
Agreed.
Btw, im about to lap my p4, thanks for the guied liquid, looks like it should give me some good results.
Liquid3D,
If you have the PCM+ and you've read the reviews that it performs better than the top competitive TIMs, and you can figure that a "liquid" will most likely fill in the surface imperfections and more effectively gap the air out of the thermal junction (moreso than a powder, thick grease or "plumbers-putty" equivalent), then why wouldn't you test it and see how it performs?
I want to get some of this stuff, but every resaler want's over $7 for shipping, when the stuff is only $9 to begin with!. That is just stupid. I don't need anything else from any of the stores either to justify the shipping cost, and I am not letting them make profit off of my shipping. Funny cause I stuck in a $15 120mm just to see, and the shipping stayed the same. Guess I will stick to AS3 for now.
i get 3-5C drop from AS3 with PCM+ and my P4s but really you have to measure the rooms at the time to be accurate i.e. my day and night room temps vary from 16C night to 23-28C dayQuote:
Originally posted by Dexter
Hey,
I recently got myself a sample of the ESGN Nanotherm EXP now know as Nanotherm PCM+. I was very hessitant to try this TIM because it was extremely watery. But when i finnaly tried it I was amazed.
here are my results, results recored after one week of use on a epox 8k9a2+, with a 1800 t'bred at 1.7v @ 1900Mhz. Volcano 7+ on low was the heat sink. All temps are load.
AS3 - 43
Nanotherm blue II - 44
Nanotherm Silver XTC - 40
Nanotherm PCM+ - 37
Thats a whopping 6 degree drop, from AS3. i re tested the AS3 and got the same temps.
I was very surprised at these results. Just thought you might be interested in this stuff. Of it is xtremely easy to apply as well.
Check your PM for more info ;)Quote:
Originally posted by LikwidKool
I want to get some of this stuff, but every resaler want's over $7 for shipping, when the stuff is only $9 to begin with!. That is just stupid. I don't need anything else from any of the stores either to justify the shipping cost, and I am not letting them make profit off of my shipping. Funny cause I stuck in a $15 120mm just to see, and the shipping stayed the same. Guess I will stick to AS3 for now.
Heh... that .80 or whatever stuff looks surprisingly familiar.......................
Liquiid + concave/convex P4 heatspreader = bad.
Liquid + flat AMD core/lapped P4 heatspreader = super good contact.
Damn you mean macci and me can get even better temps with all these Glorified metal tims.
The best contact surface is the one with the least amount of interference between the two opposing objects.
fill the pores in the metal surface with copper dust if you want the best heat transfer. If thats to out there for ya.
Just use the white stuff:)
Its al or nothing man!
Of course this is just my opinion;)
Spicy does have a valid point...that's part of the reason that the Nanotherm PCM works so well, it gives you the best contact between the die and HS. That seems to be it's biggest difference from the others. :D
alright I ordered some from ithinkpc.com they had it for $9.99 and free delivery. They also sell internationally for you guy's across the pond. I guess we will see what it does when it comes in.
Hmm... it beat AS3 by .5 degrees idle and a few degrees load, where arctic silver ceramique (Arctic Silvers high end product) was not tested... Ceramique usually beats AS3 by 3 or so degrees.Quote:
Originally posted by Dexter
Hey,
I spose with testing all TIM there are a heap of variables which can alter the results.
Here are some results from other sites, no one else scored 6 degree difference, but it was clearly the winner in most cases.
http://www.8ballshardware.com/articl...ts_celcius.gif
Thats from 8 Ball hardware
http://www.techangel.co.uk/reviews/nanotherm/graph.jpg
From tech angel
and another graph here
http://www.pcreviewspot.com/reviews/...rm/results.gif
Thank you - we appreciate your support.Quote:
Originally posted by LikwidKool
alright I ordered some from ithinkpc.com they had it for $9.99 and free delivery. They also sell internationally for you guy's across the pond. I guess we will see what it does when it comes in.
no prob Nano, just look so damn interesting I wanted to try it! Plus I like your involvment here;)
I finally had time to try the nanotherm PCM+ on a problem temp pc. With ambient room temps staying exactly the same, temps went down 3c right away as measured in MMB5. I will be watching it to see if it drops any more. I am very happy with that.:D
UPDATE: Several hours later, temp has not changed, still 3c lower, just by changing paste...I don't remember what used to be on it...it was gray and thick. That's a big deal...this pc runs hot as hell...going to change HS next.
Because I'm an Idiot Savant.Quote:
Originally posted by Nanotherm
Liquid3D,
If you have the PCM+ and you've read the reviews that it performs better than the top competitive TIMs, and you can figure that a "liquid" will most likely fill in the surface imperfections and more effectively gap the air out of the thermal junction (moreso than a powder, thick grease or "plumbers-putty" equivalent), then why wouldn't you test it and see how it performs?
By the by I'd enterd the wrong values from my "round-UP" on Pg.2 of this thread. I found where I'd written them down. I was reading screen shot temps from the Epox 4PCA3+ (Doh). And during those measurments I was using Q320A287 2.4C. It doesn't run as cool as my L310A735 2.4C, and most likely this is the reason it's not as stable at 300FSB 3.6GHz. I'tmay also be the Epox NB-silicon.
Unfortunately I hadn't seen the reviews on the PCM+. However as soon as I stop typing I'm switching out the paste for the liquid. [B]I belive I mistakingly surmized paste would more effectively displace any air, and fill imperfections. I was concerned under the very heavy SLK900U, it's clamping mechanism, and with high temperaturs, a liquid might simply be forced out from under the heatsink, leaving a sporadic coverage. This is because as temp rises, viscosity increases, however; as pressure is applied viscosity is lowered. Given the cancellation effect, and the following quote;
"In liquids the intermolecular forces are stronger. No simple theory is available to predict the behaviour of liquid properties. In most cases, we find that dk/dT < 0. Water is an exception, with dk/dT > 0. As the liquid is nearly incompressible, pressure has very little effect on conductivity."
I now realize, my ignorance in this matter was the sole reason for my procrastination.
On a side-note. It's so dam difficult to accurately measure the true on-die temp's, given the large discrepencies among temperatue diodes. For example the temps on Pg.2 were acheived on the Abit IC7-G. My Epox 4PCA3+ happens to be reporting slightly higher (2C-6C+). The temps below using Winbond's DrHardware software, at 3.6GHz @ 1.575Vcore (this was prior to my realizing my 2.4C could attain the same speed at 1.525Vcore) are further proof of these discrepencies;
Gathering reasonably accurate temp measurements from a PC based test rig can be a daunting task. I've made a few posts about measuring Die Temp and Ambient Temp (at the intake of your HSF or right around your Waterblock) to derive Delta T (Temp Rise above Ambient) in order to eliminate the variability and direct effect that Ambient Temp has on Die Temp. I don't have the exact posts bookmarked, but I'm sure you're getting the gist of what I'm about to say.
It really doesn't matter how inaccurate your Die Temp sensor is because it will be equally as inaccurate on every test you do (hopefully). Just make sure you get a good, standalone temp sensor to measure Ambient Temp (not the Mobo mounted System sensor either). Place the probe at the intake of HSF, note your Ambient Temp and Die Temp at the same time and then subtract Ambient from Die Temp at each measurement point to derive Delta T. Then plot the Delta T data every "x" minutes for "y" period of time - and do the same for each compound you test.
This will provide you with a fairly accurate "relative" profile of temperature data (Delta T, once again, not Die Temp) and will also provide a solid means for comparing the performance of TIM vs. another. The Temp data will all be "relative" to your specific system and will include the inherent inaccuracies of the sensors employed. BUT, the results will be consistently inaccurate from one test to the next, therefore, the actual comparison data will be quite relevant - "relatively" speaking. ;)
Thanx xgman that's the type of article I just love to read. I've read breifly about Carbon, and Diamond type materials, and their potential for cooling. Yet due to the prohibitive costs, few manufacturers would attmept to make such materials. They'd be fighting an up-hill battle against habit. Poeple have been conditioned to pay low prices for thermal materials, and change is difficult, especially when it's an increase in price. Personally I'd be happy to pay the price if the performance was there. Would i pay $20 for a few grams of thermal paste? I've paid $80 for a 1.5oz bottle of Colonge. Hell I'd buy my Processor all the Colonge it wants, and give it my Fortex watch if it perform better for me.
I have to say Nanotherm, I for one am happy your here at Xtremesys. I hope you remain. Your wisdom is appreciated, and I don't see you bashing other brands, just mentioning yours. I tried the PCM+ and I'm very impressed. One critical aspect of the article link above, (and of course the most important), was contact between surfaces. I knew I was on the right track in investigating attributes such as viscosity, but didn't know enough to understand what comprises a better thermal transfer material. . Your PCM+ is unique, in that it seems to have ameliorated the contact issues which plague other materials. I have a new found respect for your R&D. Looks like your goal was to produce a low cost material, the properties of which eliminated the larger particles found in most paste's, which create, and even increase gaps between surfaces. I was slightly perplexed at whether the blue "solid" in the liquid base, should be made to cover th entire surface, or just the clear base itself? I used a few extra drops, and took more time ensuring the "blue" was at 100% coverage, tobe safe. I wonder if next time, I should simple spread till moistened, not concerning myself in spreading the "blue" as well? Irregardless, my temps have dropped significantly. And even if my temp monitor is inaccurate in reporting the actual on die, there's still accuracy in the consistency from one measurement to the next. See what I mean? Because I used the same software to verify temps prior to the change-out, it's the one constant among the variables.
Agreed, nanotherm makes good points and is a generous contributor to the forums. Thanks man!
But, what I want to know is, where can I get carbon black, ethyl cellulose and polyethylene glycol? :D
Shame it can't be bougth nowhere here in Portugal :( , still using ASII i've bougth some years ago, wondering what improvements I could get!
btw great thread :D
Why do want want these components? Do you plan on trying to simulate the work that Dr. Chung has done?
From my experience, the only thing that may be unique to the good Dr.'s formula that might make this TIM patentable (and maybe not) is the addition of some type of specially engineered carbon black into the formulation - and perhaps a special method for processing the material. Carbon black is nothing special - burn a piece of paper and you've got carbon black.
Carbon black is readily available on the market (and has been for years) and factors little or nothing in terms of the performance of the TIM. Sure, carbon black has some thermal conductivity to it - and it also has some electrical conductivity to it. If you want thermal conductivity and you're not concerned about electrical conductivity - then use silver powder, not carbon black - it will perform better. It will also be less "dirty."
Look guys, I've read the research paper - I've read the "Carbon Black" posts and threads on this and other forums - I've even met with Dr. Chung personally on a few occasions. I've held off until now about saying anything. Mainly because I find it amusing about what a big deal everyone is making about this "Carbon Black TIM."
What I'm going say now may startle you a bit, but what we're talking about here is not an earth-shattering, new TIM technology, despite what everyone seems to think. To her credit, Dr. Chung is a very smart lady and is an awesome Materials Engineering person, but she's got several more unique and innovative research projects going on than this.
Now, I've never seen this material, nor did I know anything specifically about it until just recently. What I can tell you is that you may be better off looking at some of the other new TIMs on the market than trying to recreate what she is doing with this TIM. First of all, you don't have the processing equipment that she has available to her and, secondly, why would you want to put a highly engineered, electrically conductive "soot" on your CPU? You need to ask yourself this - seriously.
Of course, this is just my own humble opinion based on the overall concept of the work - and I may be completely and entirely wrong in my assumptions. This is not intended in any way to slight this new invention or the wonderful work that Dr. Chung does for the venerable University of Buffalo, for industry and for the community at large. Her achievements are many and large - and I hope this new product challenges the Thermal Management Industry as we know it today and drives the technologies and performance benchmarks of tomorrow.
Carbon black is easy - soot from a kerosene lamp is easy enough to collect. Unless I read the paper incorrectly the carbon black used was simply that, carbon black - nothing was specially engineered. The others I'll probably search for, and see if they're available to the general public.
Why? For fun, that's why :) And, because I'm curious. The same curiosity pushed me into buying some PCM+ yesterday. Can't wait for it to get here :D
(Edit) Not worried about electrical conductivity, I used to use (and still re-try it, from time to time since I still have it) CCW conductive silver paste. At one time it was the bestest around and if applied carefully doesn't cause any problem.
You may find this thread interesting.
Good read, thanks!
You're right, Mr. Thompson, is was an interesting thread.
sjohnson,
I'm certainly not trying to deter you from trying it and satisfying your curiousity. By all means... have fun with it. :p:
Believe me, I've experimented with many different forms of carbon - and I've experimented with PEG, also. Let me just say that the carbon black idea - try it for a filler if you like - but it's not magic pixie dust by any means. As a matter of fact, carbon black would be on the bottom of my list of the forms of carbon that I would choose to use a thermally conductive filler. Take that for what it is - my own opinion.
If you're not worried about electrical conductivity, which most people are, then you might come up with some interesting combinations if you play around with other types of carbon fillers. Carbon is a funny animal, though, expecially when used as a filler material. You should look into different "sizing" agents that essentially serve as a surfactant to help the carbon be more efficiently and effectively introduced into fluid matrix you plan on using. Perhaps that is what the ethyl cellulose is used for, but I couldn't say for sure. The proper "sizing" of the carbon is a very important factor to consider and it will vary from from to form (fiber, particle, crystal, nanotube, sheet or what have you).
Hope this helps with your experiment ;)