I think go with Gelid, it is getting some good figures and would be good to include in this round.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
I think go with Gelid, it is getting some good figures and would be good to include in this round.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Sounds great Vapor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Gelid-Extreme isn't really ground moving.
How about IC Diamond 7 ? Zalman ZM-STG2 ? Feser TIM ?
IC Diamond I already tested and I think, in as few words as possible, it's snake oil.
STG2 I can't find, but I was curious about it as well. I kind of wish it were in the same format as STG1 (i.e., a brush applicator) as I've never used it, but alas I can't find it stateside.
H-Bridge sounds interesting, especially when you consider this is likely the exact same stuff, just at half the price (the 9.24W/m-k has to be more than a coincidence).
That said, I've already ordered the Gelid GC3/Extreme...I haven't seen a review where it didn't give a boost over everything else, so should be interesting :)
I can get you ZM-STG2 if you like.
If your not in a big hurry I will order some from here and send it to you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
What?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
Edit: http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.ph...1&limitstart=1 :shocked:
My usage of the term snake oil: "The expression is also applied metaphorically to any product with exaggerated marketing, but questionable or unverifiable quality or benefit."Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathWalking
Probably a bit harsh, but I really see little quantifiable advantage to IC Diamond over other TIMs I tested (let alone the massive selection of TIM worldwide, as shown by that 80 TIM review [as an aside, that would take me 200 days to complete with 0 minutes of break and 0 power outages, not an undertaking I ever want to do, that's for sure :eek:]).
I couldn't remotely verify their temperature claims...and their rebuttal of "not enough pressure" is misguided misdirection. A bowed block and a slightly convex IHS (as 95%+ of LGA1366 IHSs are) is the surest way to get high pressure between the two surfaces (and still not break Intel spec for overall pressure on the socket/pins/board). If the scenario is that it doesn't do well on two convex surfaces, then it doesn't do well for the majority of people in this section and, in turn, the community I do my testing for.
It's performance was marginally better than MX-2, a significantly less expensive and more readily available TIM that's easier to use and doesn't polish your CPU.
Their "better than ________ by 3.65C" marketing is the biggest flaw in their product, IMO. If that weren't there, I'd have less disdain for their product (but if it weren't there, the product would have likely never existed with such a presence in the market and I'd have never tested it). The marketing claim is based on data that are incredibly imprecise...they're using data points that have no temperature logging, probably no ambient measurement (let alone cooler-intake temperatures), no scientific method and from very subjective sources.
Take this scenario: most of their data are from crunchers. Crunchers, by and large, have their systems loading the CPU 24/7. When they power down for an hour, their ambients go down noticeably (especially in their PC's case, which many use), then they power up with ICD with cooler room and case temperatures and a "I hope I see the same 3-4C gain others did and I hope this was worth my time" mentality in their head. They load up their CPU with BOINC (which has WUs with variable loads on the CPU) and observe for a few minutes and report back. The number of flaws the process of data collection basically makes it useless.
My testing and data are not perfect, but it's as good as I know how to get it without spending 10s of thousands of dollars. My methodology is totally automated too--I boot up, hit 3 buttons on the screen (one to log into windows, the next to start OCCT and the next to start logging with my temp probes), and come back 12 hours later with my data done. From there, I put the files on my NAS and load them on my laptop when I enter Excel and run two macros to import the data. All the data processing is completely automated, even the graphing is almost completely automated. The next frontier for me is to acquire a ASTM D5470 testbed or access to a lab that can do it (both of which are way out of my budget, lol).
And in that vein, they DID have ASTM D5470 testing done with it and that data lines up almost perfectly with my data.
Basically, their marketing claims are footing my disdain for the product. The product itself, in my testing, is acceptable and performs adequately, but that's about it :shrug:
I'm testing out a few different TIMs myself (AS:5, MX-2, Ceramique & ICD7) and ICD7 hasn't gotten me excited yet, that's for sure. I will be doing more tests, but to start, I wanted to see what each one did immediately after installation at idle and loaded for 1/2 hour (with the exception of MX-2, which was already on the CPU for about two weeks).
Here are those initial results, all normalized to 24c ambient (per Vapor, whom I trust over pretty much anyone for this type of thing, ambient:cores on i7 are 1:1). The CPU is an i7 860, overclocked to 3.8GHz w/ HT on at 1.305 Vcore loaded, cooled as part of this loop: MCP-355 w/ XSPC Res Top -> Swiftech MCR-320 -> D-Tek Fuzion v.2 -> Swiftech MCW-60. The load is being applied by Prime95 using Small FFTs.
http://www.myalbumbank.com/albums/us...Idle_Graph.jpg
http://www.myalbumbank.com/albums/us...hest_Graph.jpg
http://www.myalbumbank.com/albums/us...0min_Graph.jpg
Because of that MX-2 anomaly, I'm going to be giving the three others at least 24hours to get some curing completed (IIRC, Vapor's review saw the biggest drops after an hour on AS:5 and a pretty steady drop for ~12 hours on ICD7). If results are not remotely in line with others' testing, I'll try multiple mounts of the anomalous ones. I do think the MX-2 application had to be almost perfect to show such a drastic drop.
Anyway...I'll be posting more detailed results whenever I have time to get done with the further testing, complete with all screenshots showing the data above and all subsequent data.
So far, it seems like Vapor is on to something with the above post. I'm sitting here loading ICD7 right now and after over 48 hours, it is still at least 1/2 degree worse than MX-2. I will be giving it another application to make sure it is properly applied.
Vapor, why you haven't included the OCZ freez ?
OCZ Freeze = MX-2 / MX-3 depending on version. At least I'm 99% sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Salamndar
NO!! :shocked: Really, I've never knew that!Quote:
Originally Posted by EnJoY
dont even say that, i have high hopes for mx-2, and freeze is :banana::banana::banana::banana:.
Hmm, did you have issues with the freeze ? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by zeropluszero
If that's the case, strange AC lists it in their graphic showing how much better MX-3 is to everything else:Quote:
Originally Posted by EnJoY
http://www.arctic-cooling.com/catalo...rt_MX-3(1).gif
:shrug:
And from what I've been reading and hearing the reeze is better than AS5 but not on that graph !!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Ketzer7
Freeze isn't MX-2 or MX-3...but I didn't really consider it for three reasons: I have to limit my tests to only six TIMs; it's slowly fading out of the stateside market (only FCPU and Newegg carry it now, from what I can tell); its late-in-life reviews haven't been impressive (reviews that use poor test procedures often have unrealistically good results for the newest/feature product being tested).
If I'm going to do a 7th TIM, it will be TIM Consultants 0098, which AS Matrix is based on. The testing will be to determine performance differences, if any.
issues in the sense that i dont like its consistancy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Salamndar
i'm looking for a TIM that's a paste, and not a clay.
examples being as5 is a paste, and mx-3 is a clay.
i dont have any mx-2 at the moment, but im holding out hope that its a paste.
Guys. I used MX2 for a long time. And I got MX3 last week. My temps dropped by 1 degree.
@Vapor:
You can try Nanoxia Heatbuster TIM.
Never heard of it...Googled it and the first result is your post in this thread :wth:Quote:
Originally Posted by OLDcomer
Brand new stuff?
EDIT: if you're talking about TF-1000, it's a clone of Coollaboratory Liquid Pro and I won't test it due to its interaction with copper.
Yes, he is talking about TF-1000...Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
http://www.nanoxia-europe.com/index....-compound.html
...however, their site says that it is safe for use with Copper but not Aluminium. :confused:
Here's the stuff:
http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/4...2723421.th.jpg
http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/3...2723431.th.jpg
EDIT:
The Packing is the Same like the TF1000 the Text on the Backside of the Packing is from the TF1000 Series.
The Heatbuster Compound Paste is an extra designed Paste for universal use. This Paste can be used on
every Material, Copper, Nickel, Aluminium, Gold or Silver.
The Heatbuster is the Leading Thermal compound Paste based on Metall Oxyd Material. The Aluminium-Zinc Oxyd is
mixed with Nano-Aluminium Particle and make it possible the reach that great Performance on 10,4 W/mk.
It's 'safe' in that it doesn't dissolve copper (it does with aluminum), but it does embed itself into copper, thus permanently changing the block (something I cannot and will not do to my testing equipment).Quote:
Originally Posted by dejanh
Interesting that's available for sale somewhere but there's no sign of it via Google (one post on PCGH says it has over a 10w/mK thermal conductivity rating). Google failed! :shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by OLDcomer
Anyway, because I'm already at my limit of 6 TIMs and because Heat Buster is basically non-existent via my retail channels, I'm not going to add it to this test.
I believe AS Matrix is based on the Matrix II tim from TIM Consultants from what David told me about the tim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vapor
This is the specs listed there.
Quantum Thermal Grease
* Achieves a <1 mil bondline. Ideal for Cu and/or polished heat sinks.
* Silicone Backbone, Aluminum, Aluminum Oxide, Zinc Oxide filler
* Performs 44% better than the 0098 / Matrix Formulation
* Very reliable - will maintain functionality under extreme conditions
source
http://www.tim-consultants.com/matrix2.html
Maybe they reused the packaging from TF-1000, but Heat Buster just got 10x more interesting if it's a gallium paste! That would solve one of the big deficiencies of TF-1000 (it's nickel/tin-phobic and is really hard to apply/spread on the IHS). I'm genuinely intrigued now...gotta keep my eyes peeled for it here stateside the next month (testing is slated to happen late November and early December).Quote:
Originally Posted by OLDcomer
Interesting! Is David a TC or AS guy? Anyway, TIM Consultant's stuff his highly vaunted and AS has a grab on the retail market like no one else, so it's great to see them working together :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ar3s
David is a TC guy.