Polishing doesn't soften metal. Could you post a picture of what happened or have you already lapped it out?
Printable View
Polishing doesn't soften metal. Could you post a picture of what happened or have you already lapped it out?
i see 2 IC Diamond at petratech- the 7 and 24 carat, does it matter?
It does if the size of the tube matters to you :)Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptMorgan
The 24-carat tube is about 3 times bigger.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptMorgan
That's good to know. :up: I'll be buying the 24 carat tube.Quote:
Originally Posted by Martijn
So this is the best thermal paste to use right now? No longer Artic Ceramique or AS5?
shaolin95 I stopped buying ceramique and as5 a year ago.
This stuff works a lot better IMO
shaolin95, I'll confirm what littleowl is saying, best stuff I've used.
Wesley
+3 here. It's the only stuff I use now. I get reliable mounts that last a very long time....
Bob
EDIT: looking at the date of my first post on this thread, I have some mounts that are about to turn 1 year old. :up:
I have a small giveaway going with some laptop guys that adds a little different viewpoint to application potentials for those that have an interest.
Laptops
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...ults050209.jpg
Also lost this post for reference so reposting
Some edits coming over the next couple of days on the following report
I am starting a compilation of all forum test data that has been acquired from the forum giveaways to date. Some compounds are used so rarely it is impossible to break them out of the pack. In any event with the number that that has added up to date I can start to combine results with the other giveaways and break those out of the pack and will add those chart comparisons also.
More credence should be given to larger sample sizes, smaller less so.
1-5 samples 1 or two tests can flip results either way so usually get thrown onto the miscellaneous group.
6-10 samples may start to indicate trends but can be heavily influenced by outliers and so are lightly weighted other than a general trend indicator
11-20 samples - Starting to develop more of a confidence in the trend direction.
20-30 samples - Confidence level improves to around 95% at this point.
Some edits coming over the next couple of days-
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...NAL81-358C.jpg
What is different in this final report is I am combining results from all forums to date (with the exception of AMDZONE they reworked their site and deleted the thread before I had a chance to copy all data) and breaking out some of the individual compounds.
These are of course preliminary and more of a snapshot as data is being added every day and so is subject to revisions, changes and corrections as needed. All data are independent user results and IC treatment is limited to Averaging and plotting the charts. All data is publicly available for review at Overclockers.com,Overclock.net, Overclockers Austraila, Anandtech, xtremesystms, HardewareLogic and HardwareCanucks.
First up is the generic white compounds and unidentified pastes that shipped with the installed sink.
Generic white or stock paste- 26 users 7 forums
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...ericapril8.jpg
Next AS5 -125 users from 7 forums
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...sAS5april8.jpg
Next MX2 - 36 users from 7 forums
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...MX-2april8.jpg
Next OCZ Freeze -11 User results from 7 forums
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...sOCZapril8.jpg
Next TX-2 -3 User results from 7 forums, 3 results from review sites
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...X-2april13.jpg
Next ShinEtsuX23 -7 User results from 7 forums, 3 results from review sites
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...X23april13.jpg
Next Ceramique -9 User results from 7 forums
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...queapril13.jpg
Next Thermalright -6 User results from 7 forums
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...ightapril8.jpg
Next Misc -11 User results from 7 forums
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...iscapril13.jpg
Preliminary, some edits, corrections to be added Later
I harp on reliability on all the forums but mostly I am ignored on the subject. For those that focus only on temps take a look what can happen in just a month.
The more liquid type pastes have more of a tendency to pump out or bake out. Though they wet well and give good performance out of the gate, if stressed you can run into this problem
Another Review For those that have an interest
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...D2_576x288.jpg
Just ordered a tube today from Frozen CPU. Guess I made the right choice. Just hoping I don't get addicted to the "stuff."
once tried , there's no way back , it's that good :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Zucker2k
I am updating all forum results to date for the website 10 forums 336 user tests.
I thought you might be interested in our progress as you guys were one of the first to test IC Diamond
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...ls336users.jpg
Thanks for the update! Nice results.
wow i never knew some one was working his butt off on this thing
nice man rather awesome stuff there
Thermal paste roundup @ lab501.ro
Q6600@ 3.5Ghz / 1.4V
http://lab501.ro/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/tim3.png
Thanks I have not seen that one. What is interesting to me is the ones with the more exotic materials; liquid metals, Diamond consistently place at the top end and probably portends what's in for the future.Quote:
Originally Posted by Micutzu
Single tests are tough to draw conclusions on while I am sure each reviewer takes care hierarchical flips are common between reviewers. Take the Scythe Thermal Elixer , OCZ and Prolimatech and I have IC Diamond on a couple of charts doing the same with liquidpro on my website (just scroll down. Review samples gets large enough I'll average that out too although it's taken me 2 years to get roughly 10 and compounds are being obsoleted faster than the review cycle, :D
That why I prefer the forum tests as I get the data from Independent users in a sample size that filters out a lot of the anecdotal results.
http://baltichw.com/naujiena/n/a/the...art_three.htmlQuote:
IC Sampling Vs. Individual Tests
Single tests generated by review site, individual or even IC are anecdotal in nature subject to limitations of methodology. While most pursue the most rigorous test procedure possible they still encounter fluctuations of several degrees C between reviews.
Why does every review come to a different conclusion? The problem is that their sample size = 1.
Even collecting multiple readings the cluster size is = 1. An individual can collect all the data readings off one system, and will still have almost no statistical power (In statistics this is known as "Intra-Sample Cluster Correlation")because the test set up is dominated by methodology. This is a problem not only in paste reviews, but in other hardware reviews, heat sinks, etc. as well.
In the final analysis methodology ends up defining the final placement of all compounds- All test methodologies fail to take into account things that have a major impact on paste performance. For example the mounting system along with mechanical contact between IHS and sink as evidenced with our independent contact/pressure testing. Variability was very high on the contact results with perhaps 1 in 10 having any thing near what you might call full contact, even on those with lapped components.
In considering pressure related to mounting hardware some pastes perform relatively better under poor mounting, others perform relatively better under good mounting (viscous ones such as ICD). Considering ICD - people that had poor results with ICD had very poor mounting. Once they improved that mounting, ICD did considerably better. Of course, so did their old paste. But ICD improvement >> old paste improvement. Generally, this resulted in ICD>old.
The debates that any one review is the final word are of little substance. However multiple reviews serve an important function along with observations of user experiences allow individual users to either consciously or unconsciously mentally benchmark results.
In summary, sample size = 1 tells little. . Sample size matters!
ICD has been extensively tested by 391 independent users in 11 forum groups data that is compiled with real world, real users test results
I'm thrown a bit off by this statement. We want as little goop in between the surfaces as possible. If the excess slowly creeps out, why is that a bad thing? We'll just be left with an ever-thinner layer until all there is are the two surfaces and a minimum compliment of thermally conductive filler.Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
This is a well understood problem with lots of documentation, papers. reports articles etc. Thermal expansion and contraction "pumps" the liquid out of the joint - You are right to a point but the pump system goes beyond the point you describe leaving voids, air gaps that cause compound failure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle
The curing or settling in process that many observe with their temps improving a couple of degrees some period of time after installation is the compound resolving down to the average particle size generally in a couple of hours or days depending on the pressure, heat.
Most OEM's recommend bulk loading's above 90% for the simple reason that the more solid a compound is, the harder it is pump out. It is hard to make a compound with high bulk loadings (reliable) and great performance. The hyper competitive retail compound market has many 'thin" type pastes that provide good performance out of the gate but "fail" in just a couple hundred hours. So much for instant gratification
An example here for you
IC Diamond initially settles to bond line thickness Then hardens a bit over a couple of weeks becoming kind of crayon like in consistency, still pliable it is too thick at this point to be pumped out. This was by design on our part for extended reliability.
I am now about roughly 3 years on an office system with no change in temp from the initial install.
Latest update
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...teaugust12.png
NOTE ON COMPARISONS
When comparing results more credence should be given to larger sample sizes, smaller less so.
1-5 samples 1 or two tests can flip results either way so usually get thrown onto the miscellaneous group.
6-10 samples may start to indicate trends but can be heavily influenced by outliers and so are lightly weighted other than a general trend indicator
11-20 samples - Starting to develop more of a confidence in the trend direction.
20-30 samples - Confidence level improves.
30+ Samples - High degree of confidence
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...CDImprovem.png
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...results13U.png
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...oGenericWh.png
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...Results40U.png
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...Results146.png
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...redtoOCZ-I.png
http://www.innovationcooling.com/Shi...12%20users.PNG
http://www.innovationcooling.com/The...t%20august.PNG
The laptop tests are from Notebook Review and help illustrate the expanded range of IC Diamonds use in in different applications. The VC/GPU tests across multiple forums I am in the process of breaking out and including those done here will be added as a final chart here at some point. The higher delta temps is due to no IHS and a smaller die contact, providing higher heat fluxes, hence the higher temp differences along with other factors such as compound failure due to the high thermal loads
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...ewaugust11.jpg
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...encytest-1.png
Bell Curve Notes
About half the data is reported in round numbers and approximately 50% of the total numbers were fractional numbers, so to include all numbers in the set I rounded the fractional numbers to the nearest ½ degree. This had a minimum impact on the overall numbers, for instance the mean dropped less than 2/100ths of a degree.
Notes: IC Sampling Vs. Individual Tests
Innovation Cooling elected to use this more or less unique method to introduce our products as the review cycle runs like molasses for thermal compounds, 10 -12 for ICD in the last 2 years with many comparisons already obsoleted due to new product cycles.
Hardware reviews serve an important function along with observations of user experiences allow individual users to either consciously or unconsciously mentally benchmark results. Our problem was there were not enough reviews to to make comparisons on as compound comparisons are notoriously tedious vs. heat sink or other hardware.
Single tests , individual or even those done by Innovation Cooling are anecdotal in nature subject to limitations of methodology. While most pursue the most rigorous test procedure possible they still encounter fluctuations of several degrees C between tests/reviews.
Why does every test come to a different conclusion? The problem is that their sample size = 1.
In the final analysis methodology ends up defining the final placement of all compounds- All test methodologies fail to take into account things that have a major impact on paste performance. For example the mounting system along with mechanical contact between IHS and sink as evidenced with our independent contact/pressure testing. Variability was very high on the contact results with perhaps 1 in 10 having any thing near what you might call full contact, even on those with lapped components.Quote:
Even collecting multiple readings the cluster size is = 1. An individual can collect all the data readings off one system, and will still have almost no statistical power (In statistics this is known as "Intra-Sample Cluster Correlation")because the test set up is dominated by methodology. This is a problem not only in paste reviews, but in other hardware reviews, heat sinks, etc. as well.
In considering pressure related to mounting hardware some pastes perform relatively better under poor mounting, others perform relatively better under good mounting (viscous ones such as ICD). Considering ICD - people that had poor results with ICD had very poor mounting. Once they improved that mounting, ICD did considerably better. Of course, so did their old paste. But ICD improvement >> old paste improvement. Generally, this resulted in ICD>old.
In summary, sample size = 1 tells little. . Sample size matters!
ICD has been extensively tested by 391 independent users in 11 forum groups data that is compiled with real world, real users test results
Another review for the "mental" averagers
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l.../gilgamesh.png
Here's my review I posted a couple weeks ago:
Main Review: http://vapor.skinneelabs.com/TIM/IndigoX/IndigoX.html
MX-3 and Ceramique added: http://vapor.skinneelabs.com/TIM/IXS...nt/IXSupp.html
http://vapor.skinneelabs.com/TIM/IXS...Supplement.png
http://vapor.skinneelabs.com/TIM/IXS...Supplement.png
Nice charts, looks like a pressure or contact issue from the data.
Why does every test come to a different conclusion? The problem is that their sample size = 1.
Even collecting multiple readings the cluster size is = 1. An individual can collect all the data readings off one system, and will still have almost no statistical power (In statistics this is known as "Intra-Sample Cluster Correlation")because the test set up is dominated by methodology. This is a problem not only in paste reviews, but in other hardware reviews, heat sinks, etc. as well.
In the final analysis methodology ends up defining the final placement of all compounds- All test methodologies fail to take into account things that have a major impact on paste performance. For example the mounting system along with mechanical contact between IHS and sink as evidenced with our independent contact/pressure testing. Variability was very high on the contact results with perhaps 1 in 10 having any thing near what you might call full contact, even on those with lapped components.
In considering pressure related to mounting hardware some pastes perform relatively better under poor mounting, others perform relatively better under good mounting (viscous ones such as ICD). Considering ICD - people that had poor results with ICD had very poor mounting. Once they improved that mounting, ICD did considerably better. Of course, so did their old paste. But ICD improvement >> old paste improvement. Generally, this resulted in ICD>old.
In summary, sample size = 1 tells little. . Sample size matters!
80% see a positive result out of the gate ICD. 16 % that did not were determined based on our sampling were determined to have insufficient contact or Pressure. So from our data we can account for 96% of users results.
A single test is anecdotal, even my own with $100,000 in thermal test equipment at my disposal is still a sample of one.
Testing is always relative, you can compare thermal compounds one on one which is commonly done or you can test against absolute limits for a reference point. I thought this might be another interesting viewpoint for some.
Notes On The Limits Of Thermal Grease Performance
The best possible performance for any thermal grease would be 100% heat transfer from the CPU to the heatsink which is impossible. We have measured thermal performance for the best possible case directly soldering the CPU to the heatsink. In this extreme case using a solder joint, the difference between the CPU and the heatsink was 0.5 degrees C.
Based on test results from 391 users among 11 PC Forums and IC tests, IC Diamond Thermal Compound showed 0.8 0.9 C difference between the CPU and heatsink a difference of only 0.4 C compared to the solder joint.
User results showed other thermal compounds ranging from 1.1 C to 4.7 C difference less performance than IC Diamond, as shown on the performance graph, a difference due to the ingredients in the thermal compound used. Twenty years of thermal compound development have reduced the difference between using a solder joint to about 0.4 C. Further development may reduce this difference by a few tenths of a degree.
http://www.innovationcooling.com/Con...%20Results.PNG
In our final market analysis before we launched ICD to market, IC tested the most competitive retail compounds and performed the solder test. These tests gave us the confidence to incorporate the giveaway's for forum testing/market introduction as we were confident ICD would transition well into real world user testing and that at best a competitor may match our performance but will never definitively outperform ICD. IC Diamond and has since been proved out so far with 400+ independent tests on 11 forums with experienced users nationally, internationally in a comprehensive sampling of hardware, software and environmental conditions.
It's still the only paste I use....:up:
Hope you're doing well,
Bob
Quote:
Originally Posted by 123bob
Same here. It is the best thermal paste I've tried both in initial performance and longevity. :up:
It's been about 1.5 years at this point so the compound it holding up long term?Quote:
Originally Posted by David_L6
The best group to date out of the 11 test groups so far. Looking back through the other 10 forums with out a doubt also the one that really put me through the wringer.
I use nothing but this stuff now. I am very happy with it! I just got a system back from when you first gave this stuff to me. The fan was so clogged with dirt that it didn't even spin anymore. Yet the CPU was still keeping cool enough to run for a few hrs. :)
When I get a chance, I'll take some data from the rigs I tested in the thread. I think they are all running very close to the original temps. I have not had to mess with them. The clocks, etc are identical to what I had a year and a half ago. You should have seen the dust bunnies when I added cards for GPUGrid and folding over the last couple of months...:eek:
Bob
Hmm... makes me wonder why I didn't read this thread BEFORE I bought my 13 dollar tube of MX-3.... :shakes:
Should I even bother looking for a side-by-side comparison... or will that make me regret my decision even more?
There a ton of data in this thread. Even against the top Shin Etsu stuff. For it's performance, both initially and particularly over the course of a year and a half running 27/7/365, I'm a believer....Quote:
Originally Posted by artemm
Don't beat yourself up too bad. We all learn new stuff everyday. You may want to consider it for your next tube.
Regards,
Bob
Still happy with IC D7 here , just a small remark :
ICD7 tends to leave an imprint behind on my cpu's. Anyone else seen this?
It is indeed hard to get off. Most of the time I'm not able to read the text on the CPU anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaco
I have got 3 years on one of my office PC's at this point with no change although it not run as hard as your systems. It's nice to get that feed back.
To remove it I would add a few drops of acetone and let it soak in for a minute or 2, re-wetting should make for an easier Job along with an acetone moistened cloth.Quote:
Martijn It is indeed hard to get off. Most of the time I'm not able to read the text on the CPU anymore.
Any new or revised data is always good and I am always happy to get it.Quote:
123 bob When I get a chance, I'll take some data from the rigs I tested in the thread. I think they are all running very close to the original temps. I have not had to mess with them. The clocks, etc are identical to what I had a year and a half ago. You should have seen the dust bunnies when I added cards for GPUGrid and folding over the last couple of months..
Sometimes there is an oxidation ring outside the area of contact. I do not see it personally but I have seen a couple if of picture examples, hard to troubleshoot from a distance. Maybe a reaction to some cleaner? Could use a little of the residue paste to buff it out if you like good cosmetics.Quote:
Jaco Still happy with IC D7 here , just a small remark :
ICD7 tends to leave an imprint behind on my cpu's. Anyone else seen this?
is the general WCG consensus that the ICD7 is the best thermal paste?
i've not changed mine for so long now i'd be supprised if there was actually any on my cpu!
I have this on all my cpu's still. The E6300 has not been changed in over a year & still getting the same temps from when I 1st applied it.
Good Stuff! :up:
I apologize for taking so long to reply.....Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
Yes, it is holding up just fine. I have not had to replace it on any of the three computers that I used it in and still have (sold a couple other computers). I am using it on a QX6700 and two Q6700s. All have TRUEs.
Heh, I almost used up my sample that Dave kindly sent me way back, and I must confess I couldn't really do a comparison yet. Since I just got a few tubes of the new MX-3 in (that is supposedly very good) I am curious to see which one performs better.
i've decided to splash out and get some to replace the TIM on my cpu/NB/gfx. - hopefully ill get it before saturday but i doubt it :(
I've decided to give this a try, most of my gear is using mx2 or ceramique. How does this perform if using phase or chilling..... anyone know?
While I'm asking questions...what do you make of a qx9650 under a gtz which crunches at 4x deg on all cores but 55 deg on 2 cores and 95 deg on the other 2 when running LinX
Sounds like fuxd sensors.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldChap
Ok...Idle one sticks at 27, LinX the temps fluctuate in the 50's on 2 (high load) but 50-95(max) on the other 2...I'm guessing here that I should go with the higher temp but as this is my only running 45nm (@4.0) do you agree? or is this a case of forget it cos these temps are wild
I have been meaning to get some of this, but been too lazy and keep forgetting....please forgive me:rofl:
Can anyone tell me where the best place to get this is in the US:shrug:? EDIT: nevermind, seems to be the same price everywhere. will order online or see about going to MC
Hey, question - I still can not get a hold of this stuff anywhere in Europe, which makes it kinda hard to use commercially. Any plans to sell IDC7 in Europe?Quote:
Originally Posted by tastymannatees
Also, is there such a thing as too high mounting pressure for this paste? I read something about "optimum pressure at 90-100psi" on the first page of this thread... now, I usually use HK 3,0 waterblock mounts with backplate, which usually get to a lot more pressure (160-180 PSI). Will that affect performance in a bad way?
Get some Coollaboratory Liquid Pro. It's expensive and hard to apply but it keeps my 3.6 X4 955 @ under chipset temps (40°C boinc loaded)
Yeah, it also can't be removed without using metal polish :rolleyes:
OldChap, I would tend to not trust the sensors. As long as you have decent cooling (which you do), and use reasonable volts (which you are), whatever you do is safe. Those cpu are extremely hardy.
Are you guys using this stuff on mosfets and chipsets too? or only cpus?
Should I allow the mount to sit X amount of time before firing up the rig?
Should I store the stuff in the refrigerator?
Thanks.
Good question as I am ordering some tonight, and do not know if it differs from as5. will have to research. any special things about IC D& that we should make note of?
Quote:
Originally Posted by my87csx481
i changed all of mine to as5 or mx5 before so ill be doing the same here ;)
I noted this a year and a half ago about how manufaturers should put a focus on mounting hardware and was pleased to see Thermalright efforts in that direction.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=716
Quote:
I have learned alot from this group on the hardware side as I have not really looked hard at hardware mounting and will be very useful in some sink development I am doing. An odd point here, a manufacturer could not have the best performing sink in a range of sinks but with a good hardware mount design could run the web site review circuit and average out better with good contact and balanced pressure than better performing sinks. I would imagine a best hardware mount should be a priority for the competitive sink market.
As noted the spread on these results run about 9C the difference between a great mount and a marginal one is the difference between a high end sink and an average one.
Taking a repetitive holistic approach. Temp results can range 9C factoring out the heat sink and just considering compound/contact/pressure on it's own.....Non trivial with the whole picture in mind.
Not sure I agree with the convex feature from the contact side of the test resultsQuote:
Features
* All new patented multiple support pressure vault bracket system, allow users adding pressure to the bracket system (40~70 lbs.), and have a more efficient and secure mounting.(1366 / 1156 / 775).
* Mirrored copper base increasingly upgrade the quality and the performance of the heatsink.
* Special bent winglet design, allows hot air to pass the heatsink more rapidly.
* Heatsink are all nickel plated to ensure the best quality and performance and could last for years.
* Soldered heatpipes, copper base and fins, to ensure the best thermal conducting efficiency.
* Six sintered heatpipe design, all heatpipes are nickel plated.To slow the oxidation deterioration to the heatpipe, to ensure longer usage and performance of the heatsink for the cpu.
* Including 2 sets of 120 x 25mm fan clips and Chill factor II thermal paste.
* Convex copper base design, to ensure the Highest thermal conducting thermal efficiency between the cpu and the heatsink.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=716
We have incorporated a new label design on our syringes -tried to add on some racing stripes but they didn't fit
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...ICD24carat.png
I will be sending out the reformulated Perihelion end of next week, we went through 7 iterations before we were finally satisfied it was stable.
You still have my vote for the best TIM I've used.:up:
I am all Mac now but LittleOwl is my bud and I can test your TIM on my woodcrest to clovertown conversion when I get the fundage if you want to send him some with a ear mark for me.
This thread is pretty well cooked on the testing front how ever I do have a giveaway of 24's going on you could sign up for.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] mysticmerlin
I just ran out of AS5 after replacing the factory tim on my H50.
So far, after two days of thermo cycling the new AS5.
AS5 Day3
4 BB sized dots near the inner quadrants.
Corsair H50-Dual fans-flat out.
i5 750@3.6GHz 1.3vid 1.29vtt
LinX-all memory-Load temps at 40 minutes 100% CPU
Idle-36c
Load-72c
The temps should drop a bit after a few more days. This is AS5 after all.
I'll have to get some of this stuff to try.
With that application method I would expect it to start to climb again soon. You will have a bunch of air trapped in the spaces between spots.
I always apply AS5 that way. I have never gotten Air trapped in there and the pattern looks good. I always check. It hurts nothing to have a look before you screw it down.
There is not that much space between the dots. Usually none at all. It's fine. I don't think I will use that method when I get the IC diamond TIM.
Wait ... you put it together and then separate the interface again before you screw it down? Seriously???
go to ic diamond website and actually look at the slides with the different application methods... you would be surprised how the air bubbles actually do get in there
and, yes, it DOES hurt to have a look after you apply it and then put it back
Updating my charts this weekend and hit the 500+ user tests milestone. Raw data chart, haven't broken out he individual competition compounds yet, getting a little crowded
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...ultsupdate.png
Lots of notebook people on the re-paste track these days
http://forum.notebookreview.com/asus...success-2.html
Quote:
From my post at notebookreview
In any event below chart is not final as all results are lumped together, GPU/CPU will be broken out on final.
What is interesting is I would categorize any improvements 10 C and over as catastrophic failure of the stock compound. I count 12 out of 42 roughly 25%
That's a real high number vs the standard PC which are more like 1-2%.
This would translate to early component failure, reduced life expectancy, increased returns/costs of owning a laptop etc.
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...bookreview.png
I must admit that I have been a slacker when it came time to test the newest paste. I had tried MX-2 on the i7 920 that I got for Krunching and my temps were very high even after a re-mount. I am now using the 24c paste and my temps after cure-in time have lowered considerably.
I always had great success with 7carat but the new paste is even better, great job! :clap:
I've been using the Diamond i7 since Mr.Tastymannatees first came to XS.
Always been happy with it and now you tell me they have a better one?:eek:
.....and there was me thinking that the difference between ic7 and ic 24 was the tube size.....:shrug:
You people were the 2nd group survey we did and and a lot of good stuff came out of it. So now at 20 giveaways the most recent from OCUK
This set of data that separates OCUK from all the 20 or so groups tested by us.
In the past water cooling is usually less than 5% of the sampled results, on OCUK at this point we are 30% water cooling(marked in red), 70% air.
What made it readily obvious was the statistical cluster of 20% water in the marginal-zero-negative result category. The other 10% is mostly the H50 in the performed as expected group. Might be linked to compound mix but I have a sense that it may have an overall edge in C/P for the H50.
In any event The air cooler group (marked blue) has it over the water with pretty much positive results across the board.
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...pdatechart.png
hit 700 milestone you guys were in the first 100 or so
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...ersmarch30.png
I'm pretty sure it is. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by OldChap
Just started using this on my GPUs for LN2. Very nice paste! Just requires heating the pot up a bit to thin out the material before dropping temps :up:
Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] gomeler
Way to go with subZero
My man in the UK gilagamesh at overclockerstech uses a hairdryer otherwise you could cold cure.
I ran a test with a couple of glass slides, some binder clips (60 psi)and a micrometer.
After about 2 hours it was 95% of bond line thickness (BLT) overnight 98%
You can not just slap it on and go directly to zero paste will harden before before BLT is optimum.
Improve your numbers? How much?
Imagine my surprise a couple of weeks ago when I found out I distantly related to Movieman:shocked:Quote:
Originally Posted by D_A
1 Carat = .2 gm
I am thinking we are going to drop gm from the labeling and go to ml/cc. too much confusion for people as they compare gram weight when they are buying volume.
We have been doing a IC Diamond Reliability Survey over at Notebook Review with some interesting results, although only halfway through the survey a major factor in long term reliability relates to Contact and Pressure as we went through the process here with C/P and performance same applies to long term use.
When you have full contact with thermal and mechanical loads in sync with each other fully/evenly distributed across the entire processor and would be a likely canidate for long term use.
Quote:
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...2012UPDATE.png
Just some quick notes
Looking at the data to date it looks to be trending that if you hit a year with no change you are probably clear for extended 1.5- 2- 3 year use. A temp rise above +5C within the first year is a pretty good indicator that you will hit + 20C by year 2.
A kind of a go- no go indicator, those that hit in the 20C range I would call a failure and would repaste and while you have the system apart consider lapping the sink or some mod as TanWare's to improve contact. To note I have a couple of retailers that have agreed to test market the Contact and Pressure indicating film and should retail around $5-$8. Note that we are not selling the product and will not profit from it, we are only promoting it's general use for end users as a tool for improving performance/reliability
I am assuming a 5C +/- error on these tests as most are sloppy about reporting ambients.
As noted in my previous post there does not appear to be any correlation yet as to higher initial temps leading to a failure. Technos started with an initial temp of 58 C and at close to the one year mark ended up 19.25 C while Karamazovmm whose initial temp was 95C ended the year at 90C basically unchanged. There are other examples but this happens to be one of the more extreme. This was a suprise to me as typically notebooks runan average of 15C higher than the overclocked systems so I was expecting some indication in that direction at this point perhaps needs more time.
Applied thermal compound is simple stuff as things go, two mating surfaces with some goop in between and there are not too many avenues to explore to explain a difference in results other than amount of compound applied (we assume everbody gets this one right) Then the contact and pressure between the two joining surfaces.
As we discovered with the C/P testing the weak point in this simple setup is in the contact and is a reasonble cause for good result or bad result or something in between.
Note below yknyong1 contact area being worst case most of the heat transfer would be in the corner/edge area, a significat heat concentration more like a soldering Iron this edge corner/area would be the part of the joint to fail first and as the remaing paste is lightly contacted would then run at higher temps baking out initially then delaminating with further thermal cycling. This kind of contact is a likely canidate for early failure
The following BlazeSempai example at the other end is full contact with thermal and mechanical loads in sync with each other fully/evenly distributed across the entire processor and would be a likely canidate for long term use.
This is as simple as it gets.
yknyong1- Apple Macbook Air13 i5
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll300/ICD7/2lllw.png
BlazeSempai p 8700
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...empaip8700.png
From the testing I did with this I can say that you need a bowed heatsink or waterblock on 1155 and a less bowed version on 2011.
The reason being that the edges of the ihs are invariably higher than the center and it is the center that needs the contact most.
The normal springs one gets in a water block kit could do with being upgraded for stronger ones or if you feel you want to really get good contact pressure maybe consider torquing the nuts down onto bound springs.
interesting results, any testing with 3rd party air/water cooled gpu's?
Putting together a nice library I have another couple of WB that Gilgamesh has tested which I will add later. Getting great contact not as easy as you would think. Most WB have terrible contact. Koolance below is OK
I am not sold on the bowed sink concept as IHS contact profiles vary from concave, convex, or some combination of the two and to match the varity of IHS profiles you are not going to get many ideal contact situations perhaps only 20% of the time, flat will trump bowed when faced with a spectrum of profiles with contact as a priority.
This is from a survey we did over at OCUK. Poor C/P homongenizes the temps between compounds.
ThermalRightUltraExtreme120Quote:
I thought this was an Interesting breakout of the numbers Delta' between compounds on the Water Cooling shrink considerably about 2C on the MX2 and MX3 and 2.75C on the MX4.
The only one cooler that bucked the trend was the Corsair and perhaps the EK block with better mounting schemes.
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...finalFINAL.png
Below is a data sort of the test results The blue bars are air cooling all others are water cooling.
The Corsair results are marked in green and follow the usual distribution
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...ASORTFINAL.png
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...Extreme120.jpg
LARKCOOLER ISKY WATER 300 CPU BLOCK
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...00CPUBLOCK.jpg
BigWater760i
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...ater760i-1.jpg
Ultra120Extreme
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...0Extreme-1.jpg
xspcRASAWB
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...pcRASAWB-1.jpg
Heatkiller30CU
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...suretest-1.jpg
DTsniperWaterBlock
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...WaterBlock.jpg
koolance37
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...nce370-2-2.jpg
AntecKHLER
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...AntecKHLER.jpg
ek full wb
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...7/ekfullwb.jpg
CorsairH50
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...CorsairH50.jpg
/DTSniper Water Block rotated
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...ockrotated.jpg
Larkcooler CPU WB 500
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...erCPUWB500.jpg
Corsairh100
http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/l...orsairh100.jpg
EK Supremacy FULL NICKEL courtesy of Gilgamesh
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphoto...82929601_n.jpg
My 2600K and EK HF Full Copper gave me this before lapping:
http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/7...1108221846.jpg
Clear to see is the fact that the edges of the IHS are high and therefore not allowing good contact pressure where it is needed
Andrew's decision to use pressure film as part of this testing was a moment of pure inspiration.
I am liking that image of the Heatkiller30CU contact area :up:
Good advice here is a guy who used a precision torque wrench.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldChap
What's interesting is he got improved results on a re-torque after an initial warm up - My assumption is the screw height initialy was set by the thickness of the compound and as the system warmed up the compound continued to flow leaving a gap or light contact in the joint ,kind of like tightening the bolts on the old engine head gaskets after 1,000 mile break-in.
Thanks for that link tasty. I have a small 1/4" drive torque wrench that I had plans to use in a sequence of tests but with a house move imminent it is something that has ended on the back burner
:) you maay be showing your age if you have experience of old engines like that :D
Intuitively you would think so, in fact earlier in this thread we had 123bob lap his CPU to get that exact same profile as an experiment with a negative result.Quote:
Originally Posted by OldChap
My thinking on it is that at a macro level water blocks provide reduced temperatures but on the micro point you are at a threshold of thermal choking.
Quote:
Key thing to remember - increased contact does not increase pressure, but generally increased pressure will increase contact. Pressure is the more dominant of the two.
Let's flip the problem, In engineering a common device used to limit heat flow to sensitive components in an assembly is a ?Heat Dam? shown here in figure #3 Where the heat flow is ?thermally choked? by reducing the contact area to material limitations. Restricted heat flows with misaligned contact, too little contact, too little pressure, too little compound anything that can restrict flow creates a heat dam.
Heat flows on a differential from hot to cold but if you are thermally choked at a point in the thermal cascade downstream improvements in thermal conductivity offers little difference in performance and shows up as reduced deltas of only a degree or so between compounds or what I sometimes refer to as homogenized test results. So water blocks or just poor contact in general is a poor vehicle for comparison testing thermal compound.
These are the thresholds or tipping points and all your ducks need to lined up in detail to squeeze the most out of your systems.
http://innovationcooling.com/images/heat_dam.png
Quote:
Thanks for that link tasty. I have a small 1/4" drive torque wrench that I had plans to use in a sequence of tests but with a house move imminent it is something that has ended on the back burner
you maay be showing your age if you have experience of old engines like that
Back in the 80's I was looking at a Maserati Mistral for $6,000USD, the owner had died shortly after rebuilding the engine and the brother had driven it for a month or two before he started expericening engine problems so the family was selling it. I nearly bought it being 75% sure it was the head gasket but hesitated on the chance that I was buying into a bigger problem and it was sold out from under me before I could decide. Still kicking myself on that one.
:eek: Just noticed, I must be old my memory runs into the decades
Hmmmm. You just described what happened to me around 1980 but for me it was a Lamborghini Espada.
They are so low I doubt I could get in and out of one now :rofl: