The grumpy bastard was correct on a few points but wrong on many others.

We sell to both AMD and Intel users (although we only use Intel ourselves). We are aware of the heat problems associated with AMD CPUs (amongst many other problems) and we are aware that a TEC130 isn't suitable for ALL CPUs and as time goes by then we will have to switch to higher power units. This is why we're making arrangements to purchase devices upto 280 Watts from a Russian manufacturer.

The TEC130 has given very good performance since we first began selling it some time ago.

The performance data shown was based on an Intel CPU overclocked from 2.4 to 3.2

In case you hadn't noticed.. The website is new and the shop has only recently opened. This is the reason the stock-list is very small at the moment.

Those higher wattage peltiers are a priority 'yes'.
We will be adding them to our site 'yes'.
We will be selling 220W or higher pelts in future 'yes'.

It's interesting that UNREGISTERED (aka BillA) has chosen a SWIFTECH chart with which to make his point.

Swiftech went to some considerable expense to develop their air-cooled peltier heatsink (based on 220W pelt) only to discover that it's performance vs noise vs cooling was unacceptable (I know this from personal contact with Swiftech). No doubt BillA would have launched a similar attack on Swiftech for wasting time on such a flawed design?

"your site is a SALES site" - In your opinion. It's a sales site because it has a shop, right?

Do you seek to elevate your status within this community with that particular observation, Bill?

Or are you simply the next in line trying to establish dominance?

I suggest you learn to ease off and don't make too many assumptions.................

I am not going to apologise for owning a site which dares to sell computer hardware.

BigBen:

"The "products" I was referring to, is what you are selling: you should demonstrate that you are aware of the thermal limitations (and properties) of the processors which your product proposes to cool." - I can certainly agree with that. I am certainly aware that nothing remains the same for very long in this industry. I have worked very hard over the past few years.. Advertising, research, testing, contacting companies, acquiring new hardware, answering customer queries, preparing customer orders etc.. As I've said: The TEC130 has been selling for some considerable time but I am well aware that we can no longer recommend it for CPU cooling (I actually don't need a pompous ass to tell me that - BillA). Why don't we have these higher wattage peltiers available NOW? For the above reasons of workload and schedules. The site only went active last month. The shop only went active from March 1st. Since I am contact with different peltier suppliers then the decision has to be made as to which supplier best suits our needs. Coupled to this we are making arrangements to sell a new line of professional watercooling parts.

I should also point out for any other pompous arses out there that we don't only supply to computer users. Since we began selling peltiers several years ago we have been selling to universities and research labs. It is only over our more recent history that the emphasis turned to computer cooling.

(From this point on I will ignore any replies (such as BillA's) where the postee makes it clear that he is only interested in starting a fight. I don't have a problem with someone who raises issues in a helpful manner (always helps to add a touch of humour as well). I do have a problem with posts like yours BillA Unregistered. Even though you raise some relevant concerns - it is done solely with the intention of maintaining/elevating your status within the community).

I certainly welcome ideas, suggestions from well intentioned, friendly, lighthearted individuals.

I suggest you dig through some old threads to find out why BillA has swiftech data readily available...and why he is qualified to be in such a position? I don't think he's one to get into a pissing contest to stroke his ego. (Although it is kinda funny to see someone lecturing Bill on swiftech products... :D ) Personally, I am much more worried about my own objectivity and methodology than Bill's. I'm not saying one should hang on his every word and data point or some such...but he's worth paying attention to. The day he endorses the testing methodology of one of those "9/10 stars editors choice" articles full of marketing fluff is the day I give away my watercooled pc and switch to an iMac.

Feathers, you may find these links helpful...
peltier engineering data
kryotherm software
intel p4 technical specs
p4 thermal design guidelines

Bill and Ben are right...130 watt pelt on a 80-90 watt heat source is not the best plan. If they're wrong, run the numbers and show them where they messed up. If there's a discrepancy between your experimental results and theoretical results, you should be able to pin down exactly where the two diverged. These theories you dismiss so readily were not simply pulled out of some engineer's ass. "Well, I got different results testing so you must be mistaken" is just not a convincing argument without a very clear and detailed writeup of the (sound) testing methodology that produced them. You will learn a lot if you try to understand the tech docs and do the math...I've still got a lot to learn, but I know I'm glad I spent the time trying to wrap my head around that first url I linked. The forums here are also a very helpful resource.

Perhaps the thread should be moved? Whether we have a constructive discussion or not, it doesn't seem to belong in the heatsink/fan fourm.

BillA may have valid points but he also jumped to some wrong conclusions about me. I guess he's a 'shoot first kind of a guy'. I'm not too concerned about his background when his foreground attitude sucks.

Ok.. 130 W on an 80-90 watt heat-source works very well thank you (highest temp=ambient)

The 130W gives great performance for a 60W heat-source (ie P4 2.4ghz HT 800 and even when O/Cd to 3.2ghz) = 19c after 10 x CPU burn-in cycles on Sisoft Sandra.

The 130W gives good results on an 80W core and acceptable (sub-ambient to ambient) on a 90W core.

Where I concur with Bill & Ben is that beyond 90W the peltier struggles.

I have taken measurments for the 130W from a core power range of 60W to 120W.

I use Sisoft Sandra's CPU+Multimedia Burn-In test to establish the effectiveness of the peltier. I run the Burn-in for at least 10 cycles generally.

What's important to understand is that the Sisoft Sandra Burn-in for CPU puts the CPU through a much tougher assault course than your average 3d computer game.

I have loads of Burn-in tests on my system extending back over the past 12 months. All tests conducted on the 130W peltier with the CPU overclocked to 3.2 or higher and with core voltages from default upto 1.9 volts.

I have more recent tests recorded by a CPU logging program.. Tests which show the CPU temps during some of the latest 3d games (Chaser, UT2003 etc). CPU= 3ghz P4 800 HT O/Cd to 3.5ghz. If memory serves me correct then it's core will generate approx 70w at the default voltage? The highest temp recorded during gameplay was 14.xx celsius. Not bad for a 130W pelt, right?

If anyone would like to see all of these performance tests then I can upload them or send them out in zipped archives?

"These theories you dismiss so readily were not simply pulled out of some engineer's ass. "Well, I got different results testing so you must be mistaken" is just not a convincing argument without a very clear and detailed writeup of the (sound) testing methodology that produced them. You will learn a lot if you try to understand the tech docs and do the math.." - Agreed.. I think the wording on my site needs to be changed. Also the comments about "Watercooling being a waste of time without peltier" - was too extreme.

It's ironic that while some of you interpret my site simply as a sales site from someone with no regard for facts and figures.. I actually do follow theory, data and rules to some extent.

My wording (icetec site) suggests that I don't place any value on rules or guidelines. What you should understand is that the site isn't just a means to sell products.. It was born out of a genuine determination to cut through some of the bullshit out there.. But as you can clearly see.. I have taken this desire to break free - too far in many ways!

Your comments (the genuinely helpful, positive ones) will certainly be listened to and used to make the website more accurate in some areas.

What I won't be doing is feeding others with endless warnings about the dangers of peltier cooling (or any form of extreme cooling!).

The point about the 130 w peltier is certainly a priority issue for me (it was an issue even before I came to the forum.. Why? Because I actually DO research the latest CPUs in order to learn about their O/C capability and their wattage!).

I value constructive criticism and your words will have an impact on my website (and on my own approach as well).

If anyone wants to see the test data? Just ask.

EDIT: I do have some of last year's Sandra data on my website. The charts and CPU temps are clearly shown (there are two links on my site which show that data!)

EDIT x 2: "I use Sisoft Sandra's CPU+Multimedia Burn-In test to establish the effectiveness of the peltier. I run the Burn-in for at least 10 cycles generally." - This is the point I try to make on my site about "wishy-washy theory" (It seems
that you now have the impression that I regard all testing/data as useless).

What I actually meant was that if all you do is theorise.. You're not likely to get very far (and certainly the negativity surrounding peltier cooling would suggest that this is so). What I DIDN'T MEAN TO SUGGEST is that testing and performance data are useless. I spend MANY HOURS TESTING and recording the data. You will find some of that data on my website (I have much more on my Hdisk!).

The bottom line is that the icetec site is now too extreme and too anti-establishment (too many personal feelings and bitter resentment directed at those peltier scaremongers (they used to scare the crap out of me).

The performance fiqures I quote in this reply are not theory or make believe. They are measurements I have taken myself over a long period of time.

EDIT x 3: I have looked into Phase-Change cooling in the past. I would love to try it at some stage. Also interested in those cascade waterblocks (purely for their clever design and beautiful workpersonship).

From your website...

The TEC130W is ideally suited for CPU cooling due to it's power rating and current requirements. Even with the latest high-performance computer systems and extreme overclocking - the TEC130W is able to take the CPU to zero celsius and below.

From your posts...

The 130W gives good results on an 80W core and acceptable (sub-ambient to ambient) on a 90W core.

The point about the 130 w peltier is certainly a priority issue for me (it was an issue even before I came to the forum.. Why? Because I actually DO research the latest CPUs in order to learn about their O/C capability and their wattage!).

We sell to both AMD and Intel users (although we only use Intel ourselves). We are aware of the heat problems associated with AMD CPUs (amongst many other problems) and we are aware that a TEC130 isn't suitable for ALL CPUs and as time goes by then we will have to switch to higher power units. This is why we're making arrangements to purchase devices upto 280 Watts from a Russian manufacturer.

end quotes...



Instead of spending your time getting free advertising here, you should be updating your site to remove the BS. I don't know peltiers, but I know who NOT to learn about them from. You should be a politician feathers.

Your turn again is it?

(Nice to see you're still making regular visits to the site).

Thanks for the quotes.. Yes.. As u can see.. Some parts of the website do need to be changed. I have said this will be taken care of. I suggest you find something else to do other than bitch at me.

Some of you seem very nice and amiable while others show the more typical 'clique mentality'.

Is there anyone else who wants to step forward and echo the antibling's words?

Thanks but no thanks, I'm enjoying bitching at you. Do you have a garage full of underpowered peltiers you need to unload on noobs like me? Now go fix your website!

Special discount for blings.

What's your current CPU temp? I'll bet mine is lower than yours (therefore I must be superior to you and you will be my bitch).

Bill.
Your graph is reminiscent of the ancient ""Radiate Calculated"CPU Load v "In Socket" DeltaTcpu - water " compilation.
http://www.jr001b4751.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/SLAJa.jpg

However, in the light of the work by Incoherent and pHaestus , I tend to think that 100% Radiate(type) calculated Wattages maybe closer than 70%..
Not sure,but think your graph represents an "Insulated Die"(Ri=15 c/w) . Would suggest that the graph for a "Board-mounted Die"(Ri=1 ish?) would have a similar gradient to that for a CPU(using Radiate(type) Wattage).
An illustration of Kryotherm predictions:
http://www.jr001b4751.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/SLAJ1.jpg

Interesting.. Those graphs seem to indicate only marginally better expected performance over the actual performance data from our TEC130s run at 12 volts. Or to put it another way.. Based on the actual performance obtained from our TEC130s.. The above 172W indicates very poor performance.

If i have learned one thing about extreme cooling, is that temperature that you see:
-first is not accurate;
-second it ONLY means the thermal diode is being cooled better, not the CPU.

Why did Cathar's wc system beated an vapochill?
I would say because it cools better hotspots then the vapo.

So, i ask pros 1 question: does this happen with peltiers also?
Or is it just another 'vapochill' ?

"-second it ONLY means the thermal diode is being cooled better, not the CPU." - That's right.. However.. My own system places the peltier over the CPU itself and bypasses the Thermal diode. What this means is that although the thermal diode reads a temp of 68 celsius at idle.. The working CPU is actually cooled to -15c by the 40W peltier.

I really can't comment on Vapor cooling but I've heard it's a complete waste of time (if the cold vapor leaks then you will die within 60 seconds because it tends to suck the air from the room).

No no no, i mean the on-die thermal diode, the one that is inside the CPU, and that one is never as hot as the part of the cpu that makes the calculations (Hot-Spots)

What i meant by vapo is Vapochill, a phase-change unit weaker than Prometeia, but that everibothy thought it was powerfuller then any water system.

Cathar proved them wrong, i wounder if he can do the same about peltiers?

:-)

I was joking...

Who is this Cathar? Is there a link to his piece on phase change vs water?

Regular water or chilled water?

I can't really imagine ordinary water being more effective than phase-change (but then I've never owned such a system and so my doubts would merely be speculative doubts based on rumours and theory without any absolute grounding in reality).

Of course you where...

Ok, I was serious - but not about the 40W peltier.

I see.. I looked at the cascade last night. It's a nice looking waterblock!

Thanks for the link.

http://forums.overclockers.com.au/sh...hreadid=202666

Edit:
You have to register, but those are also good forums.
Cathar is the developer of cascade, the best wb ATM.

What about a cascade + chilled water? :drool:

you are flying blind kiddo, talk with someone, you haven't a clue as to the who, what, and why

Yes, of course Unreg.

Thanks for your kind input.

Would you care to share your own experience of peltier systems with me?

(I am generally interested to hear what people have to say).

If it's any help... Bill is THE pioneer of testing. Dismiss him all you want, but he's more than qualified to talk about what he does. That aside, yes, he'll occasionally jump to conclusions, but there's always something wise in his words, if you can put the negativity aside, as all people who run a Forum have done (hence the warning: "Beware, he's grumpy!").

Bill's left his testing days behind, as he was invited to join the Swiftech team last year (and now tests for them). Whatever Swiftech did before Bill joined, is irrelevant here.


The other reason that referred you to the testing Forum (you have to dig up the older threads) is because you can quickly find out that motherboard temperature readings are grossly innacurate. Testing is a LOT more complicated than it looks like.

In this particular case, you could use a heat die (and temp probe) as well as a temp probe within the cold plate, and a controlled cooling solution. You can compare the results to your TEC's expected response curve, and see for yourself the real results: the actual efficiency, then compare it to a water cooled solution.


I haven't even come close to approaching TEC testing, but I started a website for water cooled testing (in my sig).


Let me put everyone's comments into a perspective that would give you a better idea of why ProCooling is around: Would you be able to control the TEC so that it maintains a CPU temp of say, 5 deg C, no matter what the CPU is doing? ;)

VP of Engn at Swiftech
for starters, look here at some TEC devices
the MCX4000-T™ is listed on the front page dropdown
- we just finished a run of several hundred air cooled TEC heads for an industrial client
note that having experienced competent engineers as customers permits the effective utilization of devices that are 'too complicated' for the typical DIY market
(did I say that gently enough ?)

your attention is drawn to the MCW-CHILL, about which pHaestus had a little thread here

the graph posted above is one of 20 or 30 related to TEC device testing

YOUR qualifications will be evaluated when you post your first data set
(so we can evaluate just how well you understand, and can execute a test program)

EDIT: yes Ben, we sell those too

Are You sure You´ve grown thick hide yet?
At least You´re going to get an answer well based on experience. Quite a lot of experience, in fact. Pay heed.
regards
Mikael S.

"Bill is THE pioneer of testing. Dismiss him all you want, but he's more than qualified to talk about what he does." - Well if he ever finds the 'right stuff' to talk about what it is he does, then I might be inclined to listen. If all he does however - is make judgements and assumptions then he will be wasting his time with me. I don't care how many disciples jump to his defense.. If the man is really that smart then I might also expect him not to write someone off in such a pompous way. Bottom line is that he doesn't know the amount of testing that's been done here. We've been selling these things for several years and never had a single one returned due to 'poor performance'. We've had nothing but positive comments from customers.

Now I fully accept that things are changing rapidly and that the 130W has had it's day as far as cooling goes for the latest designs. We already knew this anyhow.. It's just that we are still in the process of completing the website and also acquiring a new range of stock.

Would I be able to maintain a TEC's temperature at a set value? If I put my mind to it, yes. I have a workshop full of electronic components, testing gear, design books, PIC programming tools along with a number of years experience with digital and analog circuit design. Perhaps we will offer a system which maintain's the TEC's temp at ambient for some customers or one which keeps the temp at zero. I don't know at this stage, but there are plenty of options.

I have been more than ready to accept criticism or advice from people on this forum. I draw the line however, at miserable sh*ts (and this isn't aimed solely at Bill) who stand in line to jump on someone for entertainment.

So, I'm wrong about Bill, am I? Well perhaps he's wrong about me too..

I want to see if he is capable of positive output as well as negative?

EDIT:

"note that having experienced competent engineers as customers permits the effective utilization of devices that are 'too complicated' for the typical DIY market
(did I say that gently enough ?)" - So you're saying the average joe is too dumb to use a Swiftech MCX4000-T without frying his CPU?

EDIT-2:

"for starters, look here at some TEC devices
the MCX4000-T™ is listed on the front page dropdown" - I looked and I have seen it before. I actually have a Swiftech MCX4000 which is essentially the same as the 'T' but without the peltier+coldplate. As heatsinks go it's very nice but your advertising suggests an 80CFM to cool it. I happen to know from experience that an 80CFM fan to cool even a 130W peltier yields poor results. I wonder how it is then that your ad can recommend an 80CFM fan (not very powerful) for a 226W peltier?

Your most recent comment about the MCX4000-T being 'too complicated' for chimps probably serves to illustrate my point better. We have some customers who use the 130W cooled by Thermalright SLK heatsink with dual coldplate (mod). The reported temps are pretty similar to that displayed in your MCX462-T's chart. Since the customer in question is using a 130W pelt then I'm just wondering how it is that your 226 pelt is able to deliver the same temps with a fan which is absolutely and utterly inadequate? We know from experience that a heatsink such as the 462-T or MCX4000-T can only perform satisfactorily with the addition of a custom air-delivery system! Is this what you delicately refer to in your 'too complicated for DIY market' ?

Are you going to insist that the MCX4000-T with 226W pelt cooled by an 80CFM fan can perform satisfactorily?

show us a image of your MCX4000 after you converted it to a MCX4000-T please

yes feathers,
I am directly questioning YOUR ability to EFFECTIVELY add a TEC to the MCX4000
no words please, just the images of the assembled TEC unit
(and if my suppositions are shown incorrect by your images (no words, eh ?), I will retract those incorrect statements I may have made)

your questions about temperatures are revealing:
"Since the customer in question is using a 130W pelt then I'm just wondering how it is that your 226 pelt is able to deliver the same temps with a fan which is absolutely and utterly inadequate?"

perfectly clear to me
you need to do some testing at high heat loads to reveal the specifics of the individual components' temperature gradients
- when I said you did not have a clue I was not joking, now you are demonstrating the 'depth' of your knowledge

start posting hard data, shit can the words

Nevermind. I don't want a part of this thread.

"show us a image of your MCX4000 after you converted it to a MCX4000-T please" - Nowhere in my text did I state that I converted the MCX4000 to the 'T' variant. What I said was: 'the MCX4000 is essentially the same heatsink as the 'T' (with an integrated coldplate/insulation and 220W TEC). Are you going to tell me that the MCX4000 as described on your site is an entirely different heatsink? If you intend to do that then please explain why both heatsinks have the same designation code?

Uhhh.. You didn't answer my questions/observations about the 462-T or the 4000-T? How can Swiftech claim that an 80CFM fan is sufficient to cool these units with a 220W peltier? I know from testing that it isn't. So.. Will you or will you not explain your comment about the MCX4000-T now being sold only to industry?

The issue here isn't what we have done with an MCX4000. It is how Swiftech can claim on their website that an 80CFM fan is sufficient to cool the MCX4000-T with 220W peltier!?? I suspect you have avoided answering this question because we both know that an 80CFM can't cool an MCX4000-T with 220W peltier.

I put it to you sir, that this is why you made the comment about the 4000-T being sold only to industry/professionals. I very much doubt those 'professionals' are cooling the heatsink with an 80CFM fan! I suggest that this was the reason Swiftech withdrew the mcx4000-T from sale to the 'ordinary user'.

yea redleader, I screwed up

last run feathers:
numbers, quote specific test results
words don't count (look how easily I mis-understood you to have tested a Swiftech TEC product)
be assured that few here may care what you think, but ALL will have an interest in actual test data

got that ?
data, numbers, defined relationships

"(look how easily I mis-understood you to have tested a Swiftech TEC product)" -

You misunderstood because you so full of it (That's kind of what I've been trying to tell you from day 1 !)

You made the same pompous judgements about me in your very first message!

You misunderstand so easily because you act like a jerk. Simple as that! :-)

Let the record show that AKA BILLA refused to answer the questions concerning the Swiftech MCX4000-T and 80CFM Fan.

(I know I can be pompous as well.. It's just that you seem to do it on a much grander scale!)

I suggest that you avoided answering that question because you know that you/swiftech: f*cked up!

:-)

I may be an ignorant schmuck as far as you're concerned.. But you can hardly point your little pointy-finger at me when you have such glaringly false and inaccurate garbage on your own site!

Duh!

Ladies and gentlemen.. I put it to you that said heatsink (MCX4000-T) could in no way be cooled by a conventional fan rated at 80CFM!

I guess your fan-club will stay silent on that one, hey?

:-)

Ummm, right off their webpage:

What exactly is the mis information?

As I have asked Mr AKABILLA to explain: Why is it then that such a simple and effective design is no longer for use by 'ordinary people' ?

The man was clearly suggesting that it was sold to professionals/industry only - because it was too complicated to be used by an ordinary pleb.

It do seem that you people are mighty good at quoting information posted on websites. right down to the patent number and individually machined pins.

So.. It's capable of dissipating the heat load from a 226W peltier & >=60W cpu core using an 80CFM fan?

"What exactly is the mis information?" - The misinformation is that Swiftech stated to me that the unit was no longer available due to design/performance issues.

Therefore I would like AKABILL Unreg to explain how such a simple design is now beyond the grasp of the ordinary user?

Would the man care to answer my questions?