Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

hes talking about between the block and the IHS - this goes back to his concern about busting the CPU having the CPU and the block stuck together.

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

I agree with the statement above since the Corsair HydroCool pre-production and review cold-blocks, being 1.70mm in base thickness, warpped making a concave base after the braze process. We had to quickly scramble to change the braze process and the silver-solder material to maintain flatness for the production run of parts.

However, those blocks were made for the early P4 478's and AthlonXP's loadings.

Today's 70-90lbs of force for the latest processors would require a circular step(s) to add strength to the thin base thickness.

I can understand, all to well, how a think base can flex on a cold-block.

Stev

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

This is PRECISELY what I think is happening with the TTV... now if a core temp was ALSO attainable with the TTV...

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Right. But its not attainable, and neither are TTV's themselves according to Bill. But basically the talk earlier in the thread was toward a heat die with and IHS with BOTH temps known, so we could quantify this (although it would only be representative of a CPU or TTV if the edges of the IHS were supported as well).


The conclusion of that thought process? Method too complicated?



Have to think more but may be advantageous of two different setups:
Setup A: CPU with stock IHS, modified for a temperature measurement at the IHS surface. In theory both IHS and core (ondie) temp are known.

Setup B: Heat die with separate IHS, temp sensor in both die and IHS surface.

If results correlated between the two setups with the IHS on, the blocks could also be tested on the heat die without the IHS to indicate both IHS and bare-core perfomance?

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Wrong (mostly); the heat flux flows through the IHS regardless of the cooling solution. The heat flux however may take a bit of a variable path, but in no way significant to the effect of the IHS itself; the IHS is pretty good at smoothing things out, as is the baseplate of the water block itself.

Specifically, if the heat flux is concentrated within a smaller area, then there's a "hot spot" and conversely, if the heat flux is spread out, then the overall temperature is lower, but the flux remains the same.

The size of the area through which the heat flux flows can have an impact on the performance of a water block. As we've demonstrated though, it's not significant.

Al, agreed, comparing the two would be interesting, just to put out this issue. FYI, Storm's design would be most susceptible to the difference. The big Q though; can it be compensated with an offset?

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Note I was refering to Socket A cpus on the 25lbs not anything above that being that is what I was setup for.

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Many problems:

1) the power level would have to be matched (*very* hard to do)

2) you're not likely to be able to mount a temp probe within the heat die, to replicate what a CPU would return, due to physical limitations.

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Concerning issue three. You could set up ihs to be removable per mount. I am considering doing this myself.
1) Remove ihs.
2) Coat the top and outside edge of ihs with wax.
3) Now remount ihs.
4) Use JB Weld or some other epoxy to form a ring around ihs. This insures ihs will be placed in same spot through frequent removals.

This would negate testing bare die. But guess you could also have a small jig machined to keep ihs in same place also.

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Think I like the idea of flossing the CPU much better than putzing with the IHS. Gotta test it out though when I can get a spare hour.

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

As was mentioned, A64 tim joint degrades over several mountings. I think they use Shin etsu compound for the tim. Most certainly is not a glue or epoxie. As much as I hate Intel, they have by far the better ihs mounting...

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Hmmm, just straying back to the main topic... knew Swiftech had replaced Storm in the kits, but didn't know they'd completely discontinued it...

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=426899

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Why use fishing line, use Glide floss tape ?

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Why would they keep it in their lineup when it performs worse and costs much more?

Only it doesn't on all CPUs; only for sure on the TTV.

//edit for 100% less speculation

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Did you get around to testing them? Don't tease us man... post some data.

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Demand is still there for it no matter what at the moment, therefore there is still money to be made from it.

Marketing BS - force users over to Apogee by removing the alternative. Sucks.

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Is that a qualified statement pHaestus?

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

much worse than BS, more like productcide
they had a "best product' for a kit no less (group buys on hOCP !), now they have an argument

an idiotic segue

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

TTVitus or CPUitus ?

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

edited for less speculation.

I would be EXTREMELY surprised to the the Apogee perform better than the Storm on my Socket A testbed. Comment was based upon my own testing results on that system

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Ooooh here's a good Apogee and Storm perform similarly post

Probably an MCW6000 and the Storm would also perform pretty similarly in such a system, eh?

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Please take a look at that picture.
The scracthes on pins shows the block is not milled but sawed:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6.../MoreFlash.jpg

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

See... that is what I thought when I cracked mine open too. The edges are sawed anyway.

Perhaps the middle grid array is milled, but I doubt it. Would be cheaper and faster to saw it.

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

a spiral should do as well with that mounting access

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Sure looks like it. Needs to be brushed or blasted after cutting, by the looks of it.

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

Looks milled to me anyway. Also maybe Swiftech is lying.

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

'cnc machined' doesnt have to be milled (end milled, at least). CNC is computer numeric control, a laser is a CNC device...

It would be extremely foolhardy to injection mould a top, and then use standard mill bits to make the bottom - removes any savings in the top, by adding more machining time to the bottom (and greater replacement of bits, more chance of breakage and machine down time...)

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

It is CNC machined, bu that doesn't mean it is milled. It is CNC sawed with special tools.

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

If it isn't an endmill then not sure what it is. I have not seen a saw of any kind leave a tailing like that only endmills running at the wrong feed rate/RPM ratio. Saws usually leave a clean cut. They are usually not that precise either.

Anyway I digress.

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

It's milled with a saws train (don't know the exact english term), several saw wheels spaced on a single axis. One saw :
http://www.meca-carbure.com/administ...0129115823.jpg
A lot faster than end milling...
Could have some little defects on edges due to the milling way and copper thickness/weakness, not disturbing.

Re: Apogee from Swiftech...
 

In carpentry we call it a stacked dado blade, not sure about metalworking though, never heard of a metal cutting dado.

Not sure how you could use any kind of dado blade to cut groves that small....the blades would have to be too thin and hence fragile.

For whatever reason you wouldnt catch me anywhere near a machine trying to run something like that through metal, its bad enough sometimes in wood.