Here is my Dangerden 5970 Final Version.. Result tommorow
http://i620.photobucket.com/albums/t...-02_143351.jpg
Printable View
Here is my Dangerden 5970 Final Version.. Result tommorow
http://i620.photobucket.com/albums/t...-02_143351.jpg
pictures of the underside...before intalling..
The additional water channel looks so much like an afterthought.
Honestly. You dont really need the water over the VRM.. the block I got now doesnt. and my VRM stay cool enough....
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilClocker
let us know what you find out compared to the numbers you previously have...Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilClocker
I found out that putting my spotcool blowing on the back of the card made a 10c drop on the VRM
does the new block perform better?Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilClocker
Yes it does.. Here are the results this is 850core 1200mem 1.165 vcore and 1.15 on the Ram
http://i620.photobucket.com/albums/t...ttle/58702.jpg
Good results. Dangerden block you say?
Nice results but the blocks are hideous they could put some effort into the looks.
Unless you have a certin orientation you don't really see much of the block :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Onoff312
most li-li are inverted though =( i would see it, and i agree it looks awful lol. but hey functionality over performance...Quote:
Originally Posted by RADCOM
(although id go switfy komodo or ek)
Nice temps :up:
Hi Evilclocker! Can you post a screen of maximum OC load temps on the revision 2 block?
Sure..
You should try running fullscreen and without aa. The draws more current in those conditions. My card will draw around 70 amps. See what temps you get then.
I have a Koolance AR-597 on my 5970... GPU temps are good, under 45+C with 1.25V/1ghz running Furmark, but the VRMs getting really hot... up to 130C.
With no overclocking/overvolt they get up to 75C, idling around the same as the GPUs, 35C.
I need to tear it apart and check for bad contact I think.
nusihb, I getting the koolance block friday to do some test.. anything close to 100c on water is not good.. Report back.. I have my testing done by friday nite
Thanks EvilClocker, we will then know if the Koolance is junk or not.
I personally would like the Swiftech block, but it's not out yet...
@ EvilClocker: Sorry to ask again, but this is the second thread you have ignored my request in. Your card is drawing a lot less current than mine and possibly a lot less than nusihb too. I think it would be useful for us all if we could see your blocks performance when under proper stress.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dude_Person
Dude Person.. I havent had a chance to test again yet, Been busy with holiday. I get you the result you want tonight.
Are you and evil the same person? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by X2beach
Regardless, I understand if your busy. No hurry. It's just that no response was made to my comments in either thread (I would have accepted you telling me to :banana::banana::banana::banana: off ;)).
Thanks
Heh, I wonder this alsoQuote:
Originally Posted by Dude_Person
I remember seeing 70-74A powerdraw reported by Furmark... didn't look in GPU-Z logs though, but I still have them, so I'll check tonight after work.
I checked GPU-Z log, the worst number I could find was:
VDDC - 74A
Phase 1 temp - 149C
Phase 2 temp - 155C
Phase 3 temp - 146C
GPU 1 temp - 39C
GPU 2 temp - 42C
Running Furmark full screen, 1920x1200 8AA, 1.25v 900mhz core 1200mhz mem.
Seems like I need to check VRM contact with the water block...
dude i dont think VRMs are suppose to reach those temps. the gpu should have throttled i hope
Crazy temps! You'll kill your card @ these temps!!!
Don't you think this is maybe a bug with GPU-Z? Because the ''1'' before the 49, 55 and 46 seems to be a non wanted guest. And your GPU temps are normal...Hope this is not bad contact with the block. Did you have some lockups? Because @these temps... check asap the contacts on your card.Quote:
Originally Posted by nusihb
What is the block you're using?
Here are my temps after 1h30 of Furmark with standard watercooling and EKWB block:
http://free0.hiboox.com/images/5009/...fd7b3c6118.png
Definately a bug or total lack of contact. My cut up P2 heatsink cools better than that... If those are the real numbers your lucky your card isn't cooked.
It would be hard to believe those temps! Check contact for sure or a a different version of GPU-Z ASAP!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by nusihb
I'm using the latest version if GPU-Z... 0.3.8.
And yes, it throttled after a few minutes at that speed.
Temps when not overvolting are more decent though, around 75-80 when running at 800/1200.
Anyways, it's coming apart tomorrow...
75-80 is what my chopped P2 sink gets at stock, so your block should do much better.
I removed the Koolance wb to see if the VRMs had bad contact or something, and looking at the pads it seems like that's what it is - but you can't tighten the wb anymore so it doesn't matter.
Tried some other pads as well, no improvement.
This block is heading for the junkpile... on to the DD.
hmm. You could try sticking a copper plate with some solder or TIM in there... Not sure if it'd work, or if you are willing to try it. Maybe koolance has some insight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dude_Person
A thin copper plate + adhesive TIM is great for these sort of things, not optimal but works very well :) Done this on motherboard pwn coolers before, where the mosfets where soldered uneven.
But imo you shouldn't have to do it on a card-specific block like this...
Evilclocker is going to test the same Koolance block later today (or tomorrow), it will be interesting to see if he has the same problem.
The VRMs looks pretty unevenly mounted on my card though, so maybe its more my card than the wb itself.
I tried with different TIM pads, some with copper embedded but they were just too thin to work on this block - the mounting mechanism prevents the block from being 'over tightened'.
Just cut a thin aluminum plate to bridge the gap between the vrm and the heatsink. Im sure you could make it work.
I got my Koolance Mounted Last Nite.. I post some pics tonight.. The mount is PERFECT! I was really Impressed with the block so far... I do some testing this weekend.. When I looked at my TEMPS on VRM with GPUZ I was at 25C on the cores and 35C on the VRM.
MAKE SURE YOU US THE PINK/WHITE PADS AND REMOVE THE FILM FROM THE BACK.
More soon
nush.. do a test for me.. Put Some Cheap o white paste on top of the pink pad where the VRM are.. and do a mount then remove the block. and check contact.. take a pic and post it on here
I have the same temps... until I start to load with Furmark (and overvolt).
It's cold in my 'computer room' (around 60F/16C), so my watercooling system is indirectly 'chilled' :)
As I said above, I tried already with different TIM pads - no difference.
What Brand 5970 do you have.. I have found they are NOT all the same componet wise..
Powercolor... with a really low serial number.
Send me some pics of your card... so I can compare to mine
I'll do that when I rip it apart again tonight.
The problem (I think) with the Koolance block I have, is that the 'nuts' on the wb itself has a flange(?) on it, helping when you mount it but also limiting how much you can tighten it.
I guess if I grind them down a bit, I could tighten it a little bit more and increase the pressure over the VRMs...
Got a pic of load temps @ 1.3v?Quote:
Originally Posted by Scaniris
http://www.bibliognome.com/pictures/1.3vmsaa.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by jaredpace
Thats my XFX 5970 @ 1000/1225 1.3 with an EK block. MSAA is on like the previous furmark screenshots. Looks good right? Now lets see what happens with MSAA turned off.
http://www.bibliognome.com/pictures/1.3v.jpg
32c cores and 140c VRMs. That screams bad contact but the pads have very strong imprints and been checked over half a dozen times now. The side of the block by the vrms also measures extremely high temperatures with an ir temperature gun. What really stands out to me is the VDDC current, 90 and 94 amps? :shocked: I haven't found any other results to compare that against so I'm not sure whats up.
Furmark power results:
313w idle (209w no cpu oc)
346w 1 prime95 thread (simulating furmarks 100% one thread load)
590w stock load - 48a typical -244w gpu draw
700w 5970 spd - 68a typical - 354w gpu draw
848w 1000 1.3v - 88a typical - 502w gpu draw
I will not be doing long periods of Furmark Testing on my 5970.. It Puts Way to much load on them....
So I'm not the only one with a space heater then :)
Romir, could you try the following settings:
Core: 1.25v/900mhz
Mem - no overvolting - 1200mhz
..and see what VRM temps you get?
weird, wonder why 0x MSAA is making vrms goto 120c and only 75c with 4x MSAA @ 1.3v. Couple questions:
What happens to temps @ 1.3v 4x MSAA if it runs longer than 100 seconds?
What temps do you get at stock voltage 0x MSAA?
And finally, are those 120-140c temperatures real (verified with your Temp IR gun on back of card or block)? Just making sure it isn't a sensor glitching.
nusihb and jaredpace, I'll get back to you two later tonight when I can run the system without tripping the breaker.
I can say the stock temps and vddc draw, without MSAA, are within 10% of the 1.3v MSAA results. There's a 10~ degree rise on the gpus and gpu1s vrms go into the upper 50s and low 60s. The temperatures peak very quickly and remain flat. I currently have the system in an unheated room with two PA120.3s and a MCR320 dedicated to the GPU, hence the 20c~ idle and 30c~ load.
Romir.. Be carefull running furmark and 1.3 Vcore on you 5970.... The VRM Get Hot very hot... Doesnt matter how well u cool them.. I had my Water Temps down to 15C the block was COLD.. adn the VRM still get very close to 120C Just so much heat coming out of such a small spot..
I Currently have (3) 5970 in my hands Sapphire, XFX, HIS and they are all little different.. componets different heights ect ect
How is it possible to have differences as normally (as far as I imagine...) all OEM's are using the reference design at the product launch. Is it because OEM are responsible for some components integration? Or is it because ATI works with different providers to build the cards?
I suspect it's memory bandwidth bottleneck. Furshading and multisampling is very bandwidth intensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaredpace
I can tell you the Xbrackets on the back are not all the same. And VRM hightS are little different..
I'm definitely looking for the lowest voltage I can run 850/1200 at and settling there. I got what I wanted, a quieter water cooled 5970 @ 5870 speeds for less than the cost of two of those.Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilClocker
Interesting note on the component differences, thanks. I didn't expect that from such early batches.
1. Here are the temps after 35m. (4x MSAA Furmark @ 1.3v 1000/1225). The GPU load never comes close to being maxed out with MSAA.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaredpace
http://www.bibliognome.com/pictures/...urmarkMSAA.jpg
2. GPU-Z stopped showing vrm temps on the second card again so here's 30m of fullscreen furmark with the stock gpu1 results:
http://www.bibliognome.com/pictures/stock_30m.jpg
3. At 1.2v 900 core I measured 90c on the acetel above gpu2s vrms. Gpu1's vrms were 98c avg at the time so figure at least 10c higher for gpu2s. The little uncovered silver bumps/components to the right of the second gpus VRM (right edge of the block) also get quite hot. The second group down were hitting 80c with the others mostly in the 60s.
Overvolting my memory doesn't seem to help me, or is worth so little it wouldn't be worth the hassle. My card can't handle go beyond 1230 or so without errors.Quote:
Originally Posted by nusihb
I tested 20m at 1.2v 900/1200, sorry I had the wrong voltage. I'm sticking with 1.14v or whatever my card can run at 850/1200 from here out.
http://www.bibliognome.com/pictures/...0-1200_20m.jpg
It often does this with my card when I open two GPU-Z instances. You could just flip one back and forth? You loose the chart then though...Quote:
Originally Posted by Romir
It was at 1.25v 900core/1200 mem I got close to 150C on the VRMs, so you definitely are doing better than me.
I'll try a DD block next week, it'll be interesting to see if my temps will improve.
Thanks for the that testing and the results Romir. I see now that 4xMSAA Furmark is only using ~60% of the gpu, that's why vrm temps are lower. So at 1.2v, 100% gpu usage, after 20 mins of furmark, vrms are @ 100c. AFAIK, they say keep them below 105c and worry around 120c, while the gpu has a much lower threshold - keep them below 90c, and worry around 105c
I still think they need to make waterblocks concentrated on cooling these vrm areas. The gpu cores aren't even reaching 50C completely maxed out, while the vrms can still go to the 120c range on water. And that is verified on like 3 or 4 different blocks by different people.
I swapped the Koolance block to a DD block, and now my VRM temps are better... upper 70s when overvolting, where I had up towards 150C with the Koolance block.
When I asked the Koolance tech support if they're seeing anything similar in their testing, they told me 'we don't have a testbed here for checking temps'... hm.