|
|
Water Block Design / Construction Building your own block? Need info on designing one? Heres where to do it |
Thread Tools |
03-30-2003, 08:27 PM | #76 | |
Cooling Neophyte
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: OR/CA/NY
Posts: 81
|
Quote:
|
|
03-31-2003, 08:02 AM | #77 |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 112
|
I think the real problem with my measurements is that people don't like the idea of this tiny little block working at all because it goes against all the things they believe.
|
03-31-2003, 08:25 AM | #78 |
Responsible for 2%
of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002
Location: Texas, U.S.A.
Posts: 8,302
|
Oh quit taking it personal!
I for one am very impressed with the performance (even though I still don't approve of the mount). I think that using a 3mm baseplate will give interesting results, and I just can't wait to see it. There is however something to be said about accuracy. We all know that a mobo probe can be off by 10 degC, and although AMD specs are nice, we've demonstrated that the actual/real wattage can be off too. It's just hard to say for sure, that's why we have BillA. |
03-31-2003, 09:46 AM | #79 | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 112
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
03-31-2003, 10:08 AM | #80 |
Responsible for 2%
of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002
Location: Texas, U.S.A.
Posts: 8,302
|
It should be delivered to me today or tomorrow. (including the stock copper for my CPU and HDD blocks).
|
03-31-2003, 10:47 AM | #81 | |
Pro/Guru - Uber Mod
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Indiana
Posts: 834
|
Quote:
Is that the "typical" power consumption or the "maximum" power consumption? What is the spec'd difference between "typical" and "maximum" power consumption? Where does your particular processor fall on the (probably) Guassian curve for power consumption of these CPU's? What constitutes maximum load? (Hint: Folding is not it.) How much heat is traveling down the CPU pins to the motherboard? Trust me, I'd like to believe that a block this simple is as good as White Water. You certainly haven't provided evidence for it though. |
|
03-31-2003, 11:09 AM | #82 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Portugal, Europe
Posts: 870
|
just some info.
http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/cont...docs/25175.pdf
Edited : This is a better one, page 34. And going forward it gives a brief discription on the oscillations of the core voltage. And some thermal calculations on Appendix A.
__________________
"we need more cowbell." Last edited by TerraMex; 03-31-2003 at 11:17 AM. |
03-31-2003, 11:39 AM | #83 | |||||
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 112
|
Quote:
Document page 22. PDF page 34. Max is 67.9, typical is 61.7, giving a difference of 6.2W Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
An un-sinked AMD burns up in 3 seconds. All secondary heat routes are, therefore, insignificant. Quote:
|
|||||
03-31-2003, 12:12 PM | #84 | |
Pro/Guru - Uber Mod
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Indiana
Posts: 834
|
Quote:
|
|
03-31-2003, 12:28 PM | #85 | |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: in my chair
Posts: 574
|
Try using the program Cpu Burn-in. With processors using cached routines, you need a program that uses most of the instruction sets to generate the heat of a 100% cpu load. Try it out and see.
Quote:
__________________
-winewood- |
|
03-31-2003, 12:31 PM | #86 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 112
|
Quote:
I didn't realize that measuring the heat transfer through 462 tiny pins was an operation that hobbyist commonly perform. My mistake. |
|
03-31-2003, 01:03 PM | #87 | |
Pro/Guru - Uber Mod
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Indiana
Posts: 834
|
Quote:
You don't know the amount of heat that is conducting through the base of your waterblock, and you don't actually know the temperature of your CPU. Therefore your C/W calculation is meaningless in any absolute sense. Better? |
|
03-31-2003, 01:50 PM | #88 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 112
|
Quote:
First, this appears to be a single processor application. I *was* able to start two instances, and both my processors were at 100%. However, I don't know of this is okay. Only the developer will know. Anyways, after 20 minutes of this app running, my temperature dropped by 1C. In my own strange way, this makes sense to me. When FAH starts up, you see it consume about 2 megs for the console and about 5 meg of RAM for the core. However, the system memory usage increase by 65MB! I believe that there is a *tremendous* amount of I/O being performed by FAH. As we know, I/O occurs at twice the voltage of core processing. Well, that's my dime-store analysis. In any case, the bottom line is that this program did not increase my CPU temperature at all. But it's also very likely that the dual processors had something to do with it. |
|
03-31-2003, 02:02 PM | #89 |
Big PlayerMaking Big Money
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: irc.lostgeek.com #procooling.com
Posts: 4,782
|
I see about 5-6C temperature increase running K7Burn at high priority vs folding @ home. Both applications report 100% CPU usage
By now you guys SURELY have known that you can't compare temps among each other right? And the dual motherboard that reads the diode temp? Asus by any chance? http://www.voidyourwarranty.net/revi...cop/index.php3 Ok carry on |
03-31-2003, 02:12 PM | #90 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 112
|
Quote:
While running the CPU Burn-in software that winwood suggested, my temperature seemed to drop by a degree. I shut that down and started folding again. Now my temperature is back up by a degree. This tells me that I'm running at a very high usage, so I know that the power consumption is somewhere between typical (61.7) and max (67.9) watts, probably much closer to max. Will using the average of the two make you happy. Probably not. I go by the internal die diode because I have no other way. However, most people use the same method. That makes our results *relatively* comparable. I never said my results are absolute. If you had bothered to read the previous postings, you'd know that I was simply posting the numbers in response to a suggestion given by bigben2k. I was not trying to make some out-of-the-blue claim to being the best waterblock available. I know that it isn't. How about making some constructive comments? |
|
03-31-2003, 02:19 PM | #91 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 112
|
Quote:
I have a Tyan MPX 2466S-4M board with two model 680 2200+ XPs (L5 Mod) |
|
03-31-2003, 02:26 PM | #92 | |
CoolingWorks Tech Guy Formerly "Unregistered"
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106
Posts: 4,440
|
Quote:
your numbers are but script having no real basis in fact "By now you guys SURELY have known that you can't compare temps among each other right?" and the simple reason is that the temps are 'bogus', and the Watts are make-believe and the product of bogus X make-believe = bullshit constructive: compare YOUR "A" to YOUR "B" thats all you can do and the fact that 'everyone else does it that way' should tell you immediately that you are wrong spend a couple of hours reading pHaestus' past posts, then you will give this a rest |
|
03-31-2003, 02:37 PM | #93 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 112
|
Quote:
constructive: learn the dynamics of the discussion before commenting. |
|
03-31-2003, 02:37 PM | #94 |
Responsible for 2%
of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002
Location: Texas, U.S.A.
Posts: 8,302
|
Yeah... what Bill said.
If you had another block, one that Bill's tested before (preferably), and you measured temps with it, we'd be in a much better position to tell you how well you're actually doing. |
03-31-2003, 02:41 PM | #95 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 112
|
Quote:
|
|
03-31-2003, 02:53 PM | #96 |
CoolingWorks Tech Guy Formerly "Unregistered"
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106
Posts: 4,440
|
again, noooo
making wbs is one thing and comparative testing quite another testing won't make your, or anyone's, wb any better testing will, if done with a modicum of intelligence, show one how their wb compares with another but if the 'testing' is done without understanding the limitations of the equipment, AND knowledge of the assumptions made and their consequences, then the results are crap you do not seem to have a grasp of this (yet ?) |
03-31-2003, 03:04 PM | #97 | |
Responsible for 2%
of all the posts here. Join Date: May 2002
Location: Texas, U.S.A.
Posts: 8,302
|
Quote:
I almost picked up a Swiftech block, a couple of months back, just to be able to measure what Radius can do... but I still need a block, for comparative purposes: it's either that, or send it to BillA, which would be a far better investment. |
|
03-31-2003, 03:47 PM | #98 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 112
|
Quote:
But you didn't read the thread...did you? You know alot about watercooling, but you have tons to learn about civility. *That* is something that you need to get a grasp of. |
|
03-31-2003, 04:05 PM | #99 |
Cooling Savant
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 247
|
Argh - lost my first almost complete post due to my mouse having a "back" button that I always misclick. Anyways - here's the condensed version of the original post.
If you look at waterblocks from a different point of view, you see that copper is actually insulating your cpu from the water. So - you want as little copper as you can get (thin baseplate) between them, with only the bare-minimum required for strength/mounting/etc. and enough surface area to get all the heat that the copper aborbs from the CPU into the water. I think the block could be improved by adding more surface area on the base, which would also have the side effect of increasing turbulence - though I would predict that the boundary layer in such a thin channel is already very small, and that the turbulence from the 90 degree bend and narrow opening where the water enters the block may already be enough to disturb that layer. I'd like to see it with some channels etched into the bottom running parallel to the flow. If you can do them deep enough with a knife, perhaps even tiny fins bent-up from the bottom (still parallel) as in a skivved-fin HS. |
03-31-2003, 04:54 PM | #100 | |
CoolingWorks Tech Guy Formerly "Unregistered"
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Posts: 2,371.493,106
Posts: 4,440
|
Quote:
you do not understand what you are babbling about what ever gave YOU the idea you know the CPU's power output ? and what ever gave YOU the idea that the presumed CPU power output is the same as the heat input to the wb ? I will take the luxury of repeating myself: you do not know what you are posting about and you're getting pissed at people telling you so this whole CPU power quantification has been discussed at great length that you are ignoring this issue means you are ignorant of it, or think you know better - in which case you are foolish also you may take my word for it, -> EVERY time you use the word Watt you tell everyone that you do not understand the issue all you can 'measure' are temps, with whatever accuracy your equipment can achieve Watts are unknowable to you (indeed, from a CPU, to almost anyone) you have confused correction with civility ? |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|