Anyone seen the D-Tek Fuzion yet??

[IanY]

TAT will run about 5-10C higher than anything else you throw at your CPU.... anything else.

And it still doesn't equal 62 degrees, but I will go try.

[[XC] DragonOrta]

IanY, what were you reading your temps with before?

F@H usually ran about 3-4c less than running 2 instances of Prime95 for me from Coretemp.

My E6600 B0 runs about 65c running TAT @ 1.58 Vcore using an MP-05 LE.

[IanY]

well.. Asus Booster... comes with the mobo, so I just used it. I have Intel TAT now, and I will see the temps for myself. Like I said, keep in mind that I'm loading four cores instead of two.

[nikhsub1]

I don't mean to be argumentative, nor did I mean to upset you. My C2D cannot run at 3.85, so kindly excuse me. 3.72 is all I can manage, but I have a space heater with four cores which puts out 130 watts of heat at stock speeds.

God knows how much heat is put out at 3.72 Ghz. Its hotter than I ever remembered for any cpu I've owned, and I've owned plenty of them.

All I know is that my ambients in my room are also about 22 degrees. The system still doesn't have a DeltaT of 43 degrees.

I will tell you that I don't know how taxing TAT is, but I have had all four cores loaded at 100% for more than a week now 24/7 without rebooting. It may not be TAT, but 100% load is still 100% load (using Folding@Home, which is pretty darn taxing), and at times Orthos on top of that, or some game. The system temps are not 62 degrees though.

I will go find TAT and try.

In case you don't know, I fold, have for 6 years now. The temp difference between FAH and TAT is ~10-13C. Here is an example.
This is FAH
20:34:33: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 51°C ]
20:34:35: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 52°C ]
20:34:41: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 50°C ]
20:34:43: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 51°C ]
20:34:43: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 51°C ]
20:34:45: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 52°C ]
20:34:47: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 50°C ]
20:34:49: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 51°C ]
20:34:51: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 50°C ]
20:34:53: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 51°C ]
20:35:05: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 50°C ]
20:35:05: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 51°C ]
20:35:07: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 51°C ]
20:35:07: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 52°C ]
20:35:13: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 50°C ]
20:35:15: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 47°C ]
20:35:17: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 51°C ]
20:35:21: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 50°C ]
20:35:21: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 50°C ]
20:35:23: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 51°C ]
20:35:23: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 52°C ]
20:35:25: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 50°C ]
20:35:27: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 51°C ]
20:35:31: Workload power level: 100%
20:35:32: ** Workload Started (Processor 0) **
20:35:32: Workload power level: 100%
20:35:32: ** Workload Started (Processor 1) **
This is TAT load
20:35:33: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 59°C ]
20:35:33: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 63°C ]
20:35:35: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 60°C ]
20:35:41: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 64°C ]
20:35:43: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 63°C ]
20:35:47: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 64°C ]
20:35:49: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 63°C ]
20:35:51: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 64°C ]
20:35:53: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 63°C ]
20:35:59: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 64°C ]
20:36:03: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 55°C ]
20:36:03: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 59°C ]
20:36:05: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 60°C ]
20:36:05: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 64°C ]
20:36:09: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 63°C ]
20:36:11: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 64°C ]
20:36:13: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 58°C ]
20:36:15: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 64°C ]
20:36:23: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 63°C ]
20:36:25: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 64°C ]
20:36:33: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 63°C ]
20:36:35: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 64°C ]
20:36:38: ** Workload Stopped (Processor 0) **
20:36:39: ** Workload Stopped (Processor 1) **
TAT load off, FAH load
20:36:39: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 53°C ]
20:36:39: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 55°C ]
20:36:41: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 52°C ]
20:36:41: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 52°C ]
20:36:43: Processor 0 : DIGITAL TMP[ 51°C ]
20:36:43: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 53°C ]
20:36:45: Processor 1 : DIGITAL TMP[ 52°C ]

See what I mean?

[IanY]

See what you mean perfectly.

I stand corrected!

[Helmore]

So as it stands now, the Fuzion actually is better then a Storm on a single die IHSed CPU, right? Or is that really way to early to tell?

[MaxxxRacer]

Anyone have any conclusive data regarding the Fuzion's performance, that is not obtained via onboard sensors?

[h20 frag-monger]

Anyone have any conclusive data regarding the Fuzion's performance, that is not obtained via onboard sensors?

I'm contemplating bringing the storm, apogee and fuzion to work with me and putting them on my test bench...i have an intel TTV and will be able to get pressure drop vs flow and thermal performance vs flow....will take me a day or two

[nikhsub1]

Anyone have any conclusive data regarding the Fuzion's performance, that is not obtained via onboard sensors?

Onboard sensors? Using TAT or Coretemp bypasses any onboard sensors...

[Helmore]

I'm contemplating bringing the storm, apogee and fuzion to work with me and putting them on my test bench...i have an intel TTV and will be able to get pressure drop vs flow and thermal performance vs flow....will take me a day or two

An Intel TTV is comparable to a bare die, isn't it?

[nikhsub1]

An Intel TTV is comparable to a bare die, isn't it?

Sigh, no. The TTV, well, there has been enough on the TTV. In short it is not designed for anything other than to VALIDATE HSF's on. Then, you must revalidate on a real system.

[h20 frag-monger]

my test bench at work consists of a Lytron chiller to pump water and keep it at a constant temp, Intel presler TTV or a 30x30mm simulated die to add heat, two pressure transducers to calculate pressure drop, a flowrate sensor, and a load cell to make sure the right about of force is applied to the block....

i normally measure the case temp on the ttv or simulated die heater and i also embed a tc into the bottom of the test block ( i will not be doing that with my own water blocks so i will just use the case temp)

...anyway i recored everything to a dataloger and can build a pressure vs flow curve, and a thermal resistance vs flow curve for each waterblock

i will bring these in tommorw

[BillA]

h f-m
you are on the right track, just N.B. that presler is specific to presler (why Intel makes new TTVs for each new 'class' of processors)
- and 30x30 equates to no desktop processor (even assuming it is 'reasonably' isothermal, most difficult to demonstrate/prove)

no Scott, use your own words:
"validate" means exactly that

[nikhsub1]

no Scott, use your own words:
"validate" means exactly that

I don't follow. What I mean is that the TTV is not designed to determine WB effectiveness It is not built for that.

[BillA]

a sink is a sink is a sink; a source is a source is a source
(transients are not addressed directly with any resistive heater)
http://www.ocforums.com/showpost.php...91&postcount=8
the function of HSFs, WBs, and evaporators is quite the same, and they all do such "work" the very same way (hot -> cold)

[h20 frag-monger]

h f-m
you are on the right track, just N.B. that presler is specific to presler (why Intel makes new TTVs for each new 'class' of processors)
- and 30x30 equates to no desktop processor (even assuming it is 'reasonably' isothermal, most difficult to demonstrate/prove)

no Scott, use your own words:
"validate" means exactly that

yeah i work at SUN and our IHS is 30x30mm....hence the size of my test heater...it's a pretty good for apples to apples comparisons of heatsinks or waterblocks but as far as replicating the actual heat flux of a core 2 duo it sux....but it does tell me what is the best water block at cooling my uniformly heated 30x30 heat source

as far as the TTV goes i only have this old pressler one kicking around so that also will not simulate a C2D ....



with that being said, If you guys want me to do a shoot out and tell you which one cools a 30x30mm heat source the best i can get you some results tomorrow

[cdelong]

I don't really care what kind of test's you guy's do, this is the best block I've owned based on my own observations.

It idles 2-3C lower than any of my other blocks and is anywhere from 6-12C lower under load- depending on what load it is you're putting on it- Prime, Orthos, TAT, etc.....

I can't wait to dump this BIX-II for my PA120.2 that's on the way

I'm not a computer testbed engineer, but I do have a BS in Nuclear Engineering and know quite a bit about heat transfer and fluid flow... if I didn't, there would be all sorts of "bad things" floating around the atmosphere instead of inside the reactor core.

All I know is that if the core temp is lower at idle and under load then it must be a more efficient block- assuming all other things remain the same.

[nikhsub1]

It idles 2-3C lower than any of my other blocks and is anywhere from 6-12C lower under load- depending on what load it is you're putting on it- Prime, Orthos, TAT, etc.....

Those are fantasy numbers, it is just not physically possible. Perhaps you get a better mount? But Between the storm, Fuzion and whatever else, there won't be nearly that big of a difference.

[cdelong]

call 'em what you will. you're not sitting here at my desktop.

[SiGfever]

Somebody pass the popcorn, this stuff is getting very interesting.

Keep up the great work guys, we await all your results.

Edit: You guys are killing me, I just ordered a Fuzion.

[mion]

Cdelong can you post the temps and cpu speed and vcore

[cdelong]

I'll light off Orthos now and run it for a few hours. Then I'll post the both screenshots of the FuZion vs. my last block- MP-05 SP LE... both at 1.45v by bios settings. You can compare the screenshots and call 'em bull if you want. I'm not getting in a pissing match, I'm just showing you what "I" see on "MY" system.

MP-05 ran at 56C by core temp after 5 hours of Orthos. I never saved screenshots of TAT, but that was 62C with the MP-05. It had a good mount with Ceramique. I took it off a few times to reroute tubing and my t-line. It had good contact on the IHS.

I'll be back in a few hours

[mion]

I'll light off Orthos now and run it for a few hours. Then I'll post the both screenshots of the FuZion vs. my last block- MP-05 SP LE... both at 1.45v by bios settings. You can compare the screenshots and call 'em bull if you want. I'm not getting in a pissing match, I'm just showing you what "I" see on "MY" system.

MP-05 ran at 56C by core temp after 5 hours of Orthos. I never saved screenshots of TAT, but that was 62C with the MP-05. It had a good mount with Ceramique. I took it off a few times to reroute tubing and my t-line. It had good contact on the IHS.

I'll be back in a few hours

One more little question that you didn't answer, what is you CPU speed.

[serialk11r]

Hmmm... I was looking, and saw that *some* people use the motherboard sensors to measure temps... very bad, very naughty... (asus aibooster and ai probe are off by like 10C!!! Core temp gives me 34C, and the aibooster gives me 23... very screwed up)

[cdelong]

Here's the screenshot with the MP-05 just over a week ago. It was @ 3525mhz and 1.45v. The Orthos run in progress right now is 3504mhz, but still at 1.45v. I don't think the 20mhz less on this run will make any huge difference, but if you want, I'll reboot and restart the Orthos run.

It's just all fantasy anyways??... right??

MP-05......


FuZion.....