Swiftech Releases Komodo HD5800 F/C Waterblock For ATI

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

03-06-2010, 08:15 PM
Badfastbusa

I am 100% happy with my Komodo as well, and I am using the paste on the VRMs with excellent results... Even at full load with furmark or MSI Kombustor my loaded temps never get over 32*C on the core and 52*C on the VRMs running it at 1181/1274 with 1.35v... In game (BFBC2 and COD4) my VRMs never get over 42-44c, and my core never gets over 30*c.
03-07-2010, 10:08 AM
Boulard83

Quote:

Originally Posted by Badfastbusa

I am 100% happy with my Komodo as well, and I am using the paste on the VRMs with excellent results... Even at full load with furmark or MSI Kombustor my loaded temps never get over 32*C on the core and 52*C on the VRMs running it at 1181/1274 with 1.35v... In game (BFBC2 and COD4) my VRMs never get over 42-44c, and my core never gets over 30*c.

Room ?

I guess ~20
03-07-2010, 01:29 PM
Badfastbusa

75*f
03-08-2010, 08:54 AM
dejanh

Quote:

Originally Posted by gabe

sorry for not being able to get back to you faster, but I am in China right now, and facing very hectic schedule.

You are essentially correct: the key here is standoff height. So please make sure that all standoffs are completly fastened tight, particularly in the VRM's area. One or two more turns of fastening the standoff will make the difference between poor contact and good contact. We are indeed dealing with very small distances here, of the order of 0.1 to 0.2mm. anmd since we do not want to warp the PCB in excess, tolerances are tight indeed.

I officially implemented the "no pad" tweak after successfully testing it myself with 5850, 5870 and 5970, so I felt very comfortable recommending it.

BUT making sure that all standoffs are fastened tight is something that I do automatically without even thinking twice about it, and in hindsight I should have added this in the instructions. Using pads gave us sufficient margin to allow for larger tolerance gaps, but not using pads is obviously reducing the margin of tolerance that we have, and therefore absolute repect of the specified standoff height relative to PCB becomes obviously critical.

The conendrum we find ourselves into is this: using standoffs to prevent excessive warpage of the PCB, in other words user safety, and the desire to provide a perfect TIM between VRM's and copper plate. In theory, these two goals are mutually incompatible. In practice, they are possible, but reserved to advanced users who have a solid understanding of the underlying difficulties associated with this kind of mechanical challenge. This is the very reason why I included the tweak in an "advanced users" section of the installation guide.

Other vendors (who do not use standoffs) do provide a better TIM, but this is at the cost of safety. The users of these competing solutions typically qualify themselves as advanced, and so they do not really mind taking the risk. We on the other hand, want to provide safety as well as performance, and it would appear that we still have either some tweaking or better maybe explaining to do in order to accomplish this.

Doing a hard mount (without pads) is quite possible with the Komodo's, I have done it, and I'll stick to my guns about it. Performance is exceptional, and pcb warpage was minimal. Should I revise my standoff heights and therefore reduce the tolerance gap without pads is something I now need to consider carefully.

Hi Gabe, thanks for taking the time to quickly reply. Unfortunately I have automatically done exactly what you have suggested. All of the observations and measurements that I have provided have been taken after tightening the standoffs as much as physically possible on the whole block, and as I have indicated previously, even replacing "longer" standoffs for "shorter" standoffs in critical areas by swapping around standoffs on the block. There is simply no way to make the VRM contact the plateau with paste. Furthermore, maximum compression of the block to the card was done in that there were no gaps at all between any standoff and the PCB, or simply put the card was as flush to the Komodo block as it can physically get.

I agree completely that you should try to revisit the standoff heights to lower the tolerance gap without pads. As it is now you have a fair amount of tolerance, at least in my testing. Furthermore, I would ensure that the machining height deviation tolerances on standoffs and VRM plateau areas be virtually eliminated as not doing so results in potential problems with contact due to the fine measurements we are dealing with here. Basically, you should strive to have all standoffs be the exact or as close to exact height that they need to be as possible as well as ensuring even and correct height of the VRM cooling plateaus of each block.

I am waiting for the RMA MSI R5850 to come back as well was for an Asus EAH5850 card to arrive. I will repeat my testing with those cards as well to ensure that this was not just a rare occurrence with some MSI R5850 cards. However, having said that this should not be taken as a reason to not address this at all. I realize that you have successfully tested this method in house, but both you and I know that not all cards will be identical with identical heights and to recommend a blanket method based on a gross assumption that it would work in every case is unrealistic at best. Even with reduced tolerances there should be a notice indicating that the performance may not be as desired.

Finally, one option that you do have is to include some longer fasteners that could be used to mount the block without standoffs and indicate that this is considered advanced installation with higher risk of damaging the card but would still leave the option for those people who may want to mount the whole block without pads and standoffs to do so. After all, in terms of its thermal design Komodo is really a great block and can pretty well be a top performer if it were not for a few of these issues.

It is imperative as you already know to be extremely careful here, no matter which path is chosen, as crushing digital VRMs is very easy to do and that's the last thing you want people to do after trying to get better temperatures out of their VRMs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaredpace

Hello,

The indention you have marked, "Bad contact, no compression" with a red line with two arrows on each end, can you remove the pad sitting inside that indention to give your block more height/clearance to successfully cover the components on the pcb marked by the white sticker, "CPL2-3". Then you may have greater compression/pressure on the 5 VT1165 slaves to the left which are not being touched by your cooling block. Also, can you make your cooling block mount tighter to that area of vrm slaves?

Why not use a highly conductive thick thermal pad of good quality to mount on those 5 components. These 5 slaves need *MUCH* more cooling than the parts under the white sticker CPL2-3, which require little cooling, and are not even touching the stock cooler.

I think you misunderstood what the issue here is actually. Komodo has no problem contacting the VRMs with the stock pad or with any other pad thicker than (I believe) about 0.3mm-0.5mm. However, as of recently Swiftech has revised their mounting instructions to include an advanced step that involves removing the thermal pads from the VRM cooling areas and replacing the same with paste for better thermal interface. However, unlike in Swiftech testing, I have not found it possible to use this method with at least one HD 5850 and two Komodo blocks as the dimensions of the standoffs do not allow for proper contact to be made between the block and the card even if fully compressed.

In terms of removing pads to give more clearance, I have already responded to this earlier, and then Gabe responded to it as well. The clearance on Komodo is not controlled by pads, it is controlled by standoffs. The only way to make the block more flush to the card is to use smaller standoffs or to file down the existing ones, both of which requires a physical change to the current design.
03-10-2010, 06:16 AM
gabe

Quote:

Originally Posted by dejanh

Finally, one option that you do have is to include some longer fasteners that could be used to mount the block without standoffs and indicate that this is considered advanced installation with higher risk of damaging the card but would still leave the option for those people who may want to mount the whole block without pads and standoffs to do so. After all, in terms of its thermal design Komodo is really a great block and can pretty well be a top performer if it were not for a few of these issues.

Excellent suggestion, I will look into it. I am still quite puzzled by your problem. Do you want a set of reduced height standoffs? I can't do it til i get back next week, but it's feasible. email me at gabe@swiftech.com if you do.
03-10-2010, 08:09 AM
dejanh

Quote:

Originally Posted by gabe

Excellent suggestion, I will look into it. I am still quite puzzled by your problem. Do you want a set of reduced height standoffs? I can't do it til i get back next week, but it's feasible. email me at gabe@swiftech.com if you do.

Email sent. In terms of the problem it is very well possible that this was, is, and will be one of those rare outlying cases, that the card was just not quite the same as other reference HD5850 cards. There are variations between manufacturers sometimes as was for example the case with HD5970 cards. Some of those had some components higher on some PCBs than others creating a contact issue. I will redo all the tests as soon as I have the new card(s) in hand to verify the problem with other cards. In the meantime, those standoffs would be helpful since it would (a) allow me to do a proper mount even if I still have the same problem, and (b) directly compare the result with stock standoffs to reduced standoffs.
03-13-2010, 04:47 AM
hoodlikegaza

any updates?
03-13-2010, 02:49 PM
dejanh

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodlikegaza

any updates?

Are you asking me? If so, not yet. I am supposed to receive another MSI R5850 end of this coming week and the other card is still not certain when it will arrive.

I will definitely post updates as soon as I have cards in hand to test. Hopefully Gabe gets me some shorter standoffs or something like it in the meantime as well so that I can try that too.

:)
03-17-2010, 02:23 AM
hoodlikegaza

Quote:

Originally Posted by dejanh

Are you asking me? If so, not yet. I am supposed to receive another MSI R5850 end of this coming week and the other card is still not certain when it will arrive.

I will definitely post updates as soon as I have cards in hand to test. Hopefully Gabe gets me some shorter standoffs or something like it in the meantime as well so that I can try that too.

:)

yeah, lol. Thanks, I'm waiting to see what your results are before I buy my waterblock.

I have the older reference asus 5850.
03-17-2010, 07:01 AM
dejanh

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodlikegaza

yeah, lol. Thanks, I'm waiting to see what your results are before I buy my waterblock.

I have the older reference asus 5850.

One new card should be delivered today, next one Friday or Monday. I will do the tests as the cards come. :)

Edit: New card delivered. Testing already done and the results are the same. I will post details in a few minutes. I have another card coming in 2-4 days but I won't bother redoing the tests for the 3rd time with that card. This is now two cards, two blocks, all randomly selected both with the exact same issue.

Edit 2: "Few minutes" will be a bit longer. I am in the middle of doing some testing on the Cat. 10.3a release.

Edit 3: Here are the pics. I did not bother circling anything on them this time. It is pretty obvious that no contact is made. I accidentally scratched one of the pads on one block but that's not really relevant :)

No contact with the main VRM...

http://img.techpowerup.org/100318/P3170572.jpg

Single VRM, contact is there as was the case with the other card...this is the only VRM that makes contact with paste and it shows how contact should look like. First the card...

http://img.techpowerup.org/100318/P3170574.jpg

...then the block

http://img.techpowerup.org/100318/P3170577.jpg

And now the second block...again no contact with the main VRM...

http://img.techpowerup.org/100318/P3170578.jpg

And as anticipated before, second block does not even make contact with the single VRM (see my earlier post(s) where I said this will be the case)...first the card...

http://img.techpowerup.org/100318/P3170581.jpg

...and then the block...

http://img.techpowerup.org/100318/P3170583.jpg
03-17-2010, 07:38 PM
dejanh

And the conclusion...

Taking into account the second set of tests and the fact that these were randomly sampled cards and blocks and that there is no way to make either fit the other properly when using paste I can confidently conclude that the paste method does not work for MSI R5850 and quite possibly other HD 5850 cards. I cannot comment on HD 5870 as I do not have any to test though if somebody wants to send me some to test I would gladly do it :) Therefore, I have to make a personal recommendation against using paste with the Komodo and HD 5850 cards until an adequate solution is found.

As I have identified before, the problem are basically the standoffs, they are simply too high/not accurately enough machined. Reducing standoff size may also require slightly shorter fasteners as they need to get bolted in fully. As it stands right now it is impossible for the VRM to make contact with the block properly.

I will keep everyone updated if I have any new results, new tests, etc., to report.
03-17-2010, 11:48 PM
Boulard83

Thx dejanh ! Great post :)
03-19-2010, 05:09 PM
hoodlikegaza

looks like i'll be looking at a different block.... Anyone know if the dangerden or ek blocks have this same problem?
03-19-2010, 11:16 PM
gergregg

You can mount the EK block with no stand-offs at your own risk and use the paste method.
03-20-2010, 12:30 AM
Boulard83

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodlikegaza

looks like i'll be looking at a different block.... Anyone know if the dangerden or ek blocks have this same problem?

My VRMS hit ~70°c (950/1300 1.175v) under Furmark with the stock thermal pads. Its something with the MSI/KOMODO combination that dont work. Maybe with other cards.
03-20-2010, 09:38 AM
dejanh

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoodlikegaza

looks like i'll be looking at a different block.... Anyone know if the dangerden or ek blocks have this same problem?

They may all exhibit the same type of problems unless you do not use standoffs or standoffs are machined more accurately. This is not necessarily a Swiftech only issue and it is also not necessarily an issue with every card/block combination. I made my recommendation primarily for MSI R5850 and as a secondary note suggested that problems may occur with other HD 5850 cards as well so users should be aware of it.

Note that paste installation is an advanced installation method and this block works great with the pads as well, and most importantly it does an exceptional job cooling the actual GPU core.
03-20-2010, 11:22 AM
Church

Hmm. I have simple idea. - orderable standoff sets customised for those a bit different PCB cards. Can it work? Should be _way_ cheaper customising block. Or at least instructions of measurements about how much one should dremel from height of shipped ones?
03-22-2010, 10:38 AM
dejanh

Quote:

Originally Posted by churchy

Hmm. I have simple idea. - orderable standoff sets customised for those a bit different PCB cards. Can it work? Should be _way_ cheaper customising block. Or at least instructions of measurements about how much one should dremel from height of shipped ones?

I'm going to be testing reduced standoffs in the next week to two weeks. I will post results back as I have them. :)
03-25-2010, 10:53 AM
Prometheus2010

It's way too late now. I found this thread after I installed everything "advance users" way. :(

I'm having the same exact bad VRM temp problem during overclock.

Asus 5850 Voltage tweak edition

http://i577.photobucket.com/albums/s...prom/WC003.jpg

http://i577.photobucket.com/albums/s...prom/WC009.jpg

@ Dejanh

Are you getting the shorter standoffs from Gabe or DIY?
03-26-2010, 06:50 AM
Badfastbusa

maybe its just 5850's???
03-26-2010, 07:42 AM
johnnymossville

I've got a 5870 at home and a komodo waiting to go on it. I've been reading this thread with a lot of interest, to put it mildly.

I've got some more parts coming for this build so it'll be a couple weeks before I can find out how it works.

Good thread guys.
03-26-2010, 07:53 AM
Boulard83

WIch brand is your HD5870 ?

Your going to try the Paste mount or not ?
03-26-2010, 09:49 AM
johnnymossville

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boulard83

WIch brand is your HD5870 ?

Your going to try the Paste mount or not ?

Powercolor 5870, and I'm going to Paste mount it.
03-26-2010, 10:08 AM
Boulard83

Thanks. Come back with results :)
03-27-2010, 10:34 AM
dejanh

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prometheus2010

It's way too late now. I found this thread after I installed everything "advance users" way. :(

I'm having the same exact bad VRM temp problem during overclock.

Asus 5850 Voltage tweak edition

@ Dejanh

Are you getting the shorter standoffs from Gabe or DIY?

Well, I am getting them from Gabe but they are only a test run. I will actually be testing several different sizes. I will post back results once I have them in hand and a chance to try. I think that if my tests are successful they will probably be offered mainstream :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Badfastbusa

maybe its just 5850's???

Could very well be, though I am not sure how much difference between the layouts there is...I never owned a reference HD5870. :shrug:

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnnymossville

Powercolor 5870, and I'm going to Paste mount it.

Curious to hear the results. Make sure that you actually check for proper compression (pics would be good like the ones I posted in this thread) and watch your VRM temps carefully :up:

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page